Thank You, A Promise to Keep Program, for This Blog Post Idea

After finishing Othello, I can't help but think that there was a bit of phoniness in a rather large plot point. Admittedly, I think this was my favorite of Shakespeare's plays which I have thus far read; yet it rather irritated me how fake and shallow Othello's love for Desdemona was portrayed. In the beginning, it seems that Othello is head-over-heels in love with Desdemona and is so happy that he "cannot speak enough of this content./ It stops me here, it is too much of joy" (II.i.191-192). Yet within three days at the most, he has become so jealous that he wants to "tear [Desdemona] all to pieces" (III.iii.432). It could just be me, but a love that can change from "I've never been so happy before" to "I'm gonna kill that woman!" in a matter of a couple days seems rather shallow.

Perhaps Shakespeare only did this because he was under a time constraint (although a five-act play seems like plenty of time to draw out this progression), but it adds another aspect to Othello's flaws. This rapid volte-face indicates the likelihood that Othello's love for Desdemona was not actually love, but infatuation (If you really want to know the differences between love an infatuation, I've got an entire packet from my APTK lesson to offer. No takers? Hmph. Fine then). This infatuation was exacerbated by his paranoia and doubts, leading to insecure jealousy without even open-mindedly hearing Desdemona's defense. Desdemona genuinely loves Othello; he, on the other hand, does not. This disparity between emotions shows that in reality, Othello and Desdemona's marriage was doomed from the start.

Domo Arigato

Plot

The main change to the plot concerns Andrew's relationship with Portia Chancey, Little Miss' granddaughter. A romantic relationship between Andrew and any human never occurred. While Andrew sought to gain recognition as a human, it was out of his own desire of freedom. Yet in the movie, Andrew seeks recognition and to become fully human in order to marry Portia. Because the focus is on the relationship, the pace seems to be slower in the movie than in the book, where the focus is on Andrew's quests to gain rights. The screenwriters of the movie highly romanticize the plot, ignoring the story's main question of philosophy and replacing it with a shallower, yet highly emotional storyline. But more on that later...

Point of View

The point of view of the film remains largely unchanged in comparison to the short story. The film remains in third person, much like Asimov's story. However, the audience is given much more access to other characters' emotions, as opposed to Asimov's style of providing only Andrew's thoughts and feelings. In doing so, the screenwriters tell Andrew's story through the third person omniscient point of view. This occurs because the audience is able to observe other characters' reactions to situations themselves, as opposed to being limited to whatever Asimov chooses to allow them to observe. While this causes the reader to understand other characters better, it simultaneously causes him to lose some understanding of Andrew's initial inability to understand emotions.

Characterization

Overall, the styles of describing characters remains largely the same between the short story and the film. However, there do occur a few changes in actual characters. The most obvious character who is changed is Andrew, the protagonist. Andrew seems to be a much more emotional person/robot initially in the film than he is in the book. While Andrew in the story quickly grasps the ideas of freedom and human rights, he initially struggles with emotions. Yet while Andrew in the movie also deals with his own struggles with emotions, he seems to display natural emotions much earlier, such as when Andrew repairs the Victrola record player and listens to opera music within a few weeks of his "birth." Andrew's character is clearly made to seem more human from the start in order to gain the audience's sympathy. The character of Little Miss is also changed. While there is no indication of any possible romantic friction between Andrew and Little Miss in Asimov's short story, in the film, it is clear that Little Miss possesses strong romantic feelings toward Andrew, both before and even after her marriage. This is used to indicate Andrew's eventual relationship and marriage to Little Miss' granddaughter Portia.

Setting

The main difference between the settings of Asimov's story and the film lies within the specificity of each writer in dating events. Asimov is unclear on the timeline of his story; while it is obvious that the story is supposed to occur at some point in the future, Asimov is deliberate in never naming a specific time period. He does not seek to predict when such technology will become available; he only seeks to establish that such a situation could logically occur within the future. The screenwriters, however, see no problem with designating a specific time period, mainly because the audience does not particularly mind if a science fiction film is set to take place in a time period much too early for such technology to exist. For this reason, Andrew's story takes place in the early 21st century. As Andrew is dying, the Chairwoman of the Galactic Council mentions that Andrew was activated in 2005; thus, Andrew's life occurred from 2005 to 2205. Because the movie's purpose is not present some deep philosophy, the screenwriters have no problem in qualifying and dating the story's events. This ultimately leads to...

Theme

In truth, the short story and the movie have two very different focuses and, therefore, two very different themes. The theme of Asimov's story, as I discussed in my last blog post, mainly concerns the question of what makes a creature truly human. The story also discusses human rights and freedom. In the film version, however, these two themes are barely touched upon; the theme of the definition of humanity is especially neglected. Instead, the screenwriters pander to the Hollywood industry, cop out, and alter the theme to reflect on love. The movie is devoted almost solely to Andrew's attempts to discover the definition of love and to ascertain love. While this is still a very noble theme, it simply seems too hackneyed in the Hollywood scene. The screenwriters could have created a different kind of film, and important film that tackled a deep, philosophical question; instead, they backed down, dumbed down the story's theme, and changed the plot to fit the new theme. While the film is still exceptionally funny, quirky, and heartwarming, it simply is not on the same level as Asimov's original story.

"Personals" Ads Are Kinda Creepy...(Question 17)

"Lonely Hearts" by Wendy Cope is written in the form of a villanelle. This form is especially fitting in the speaker's imitation of a "Personals" ad in a newspaper. The repetition of the two lines which end alternating stanzas reflect the desperate hope of those who fill out personal advertisements. Each person, no matter how different they may be or from what walks of life they may come, simply seeks "someone [to] make [their] simple wish come true". By utilizing the villanelle, which allows her to repeat her two central lines, Cope is able to reflect (through the speaker) on plights for love in today's modern world. Despite our modern world, which prides itself on connecting others, people still struggle to find love. By writing as each advertiser, Cope attempts to bring to light this struggle to find the one who will answer affirmatively to that question of "Is it you?" Cope effectively employs the form of the villanelle to repeatedly emphasize the search for love in today's technological world.

Love's Labour's Lost

I always find the more modern poems to be especially interesting to analyze. It is simply expected that students will have to interpret poems with older diction and more sophisticated style; it is less expected by the students, however, to have to analyze the literary merits of a poem that uses modern diction and topic matter. In Cleopatra Mathis' "Getting Out," the speaker reflects upon the very real and very modern occurrence of a marriage gone wrong. The speaker hints that the couple's marriage simply fell apart; there is no bitterness in her tone, nor is there much of an explanation as to what caused the decline of the relationship. The only clue lies in the first stanza, where the speaker describes "another refusal, the silent work/ of tightening the heart./ Exhausted we gave up". The speaker indicates that some connection was broken between the couple, though the cause is never clearly stated.

The rest of the poem, however, does not focus on the cause of the fallout, but only focuses on the sorrow and grief that results from the fallout. According to the speaker, the fallout is mutual. Even as the couple is separated for good, the speaker and their spouse is described as "Taking hands/ [walking] apart, until [their] arms stretched/ between [them]. [They] held on tight, and let go." This mutual act is reluctant and sad, yet agreed upon as necessary. The speaker's intent of this poem, therefore, is not to express regret or bitterness toward her failed relationship, but rather to express sorrow that the relationship failed in the first place.

My Black-Wired Love (Question 8)

I think Shakespeare's "My mistress' eyes" is my favorite poem in this unit. Shakespeare's tone seems rather harsh and critical at first, yet it progresses into a tone of realistic yet loving sincerity. At first glance, however, this tone is not evident. After all, the first twelve lines contain several comparisons of the speaker's mistress' traits with things of beauty with the intent of stating that his lover's traits are inferior. Her eyes "are nothing like the sun", her hair is described as "black wires", and she is clearly described as not "a goddess". These statements and others directly oppose those statements usually used by poets to describe lovers or beauty. By doing this, the speaker points out the naiveté of making such exaggerated comparisons. At the end of the poem, the speaker's tone becomes less skeptical and more loving toward his mistress. Upon admitting his lover's humanity, the speaker affirms that his love for her is "as rare/ As any she belied with false compare." Instead of heaping false compliments upon his mistress, the speaker admits her imperfections and chooses to simply state that is love is as strong as any other love that requires such false compliments to survive. In comparison to the falsity of the others' love, the speaker's loving sincerity carries far more power because of its honesty.

This Is a Weird One, Alright...

Margaret Atwood's "February" definitely takes a dive off the deep end in terms of her subject matter. Atwood definitely seems to bear a rather pessimistic view of life, or at least of February, the "time to eat fat/ and watch hockey" (1-2). She states her belief that some people "should snip a few [of their own] testicles" (16). She then follows with her belief that the only thing stopping from mankind from doing the "sensible" (17) act of population control is the "love that does us in" (19). Whereas most people view love as a positive and wholesome emotion, Atwood views love as a roadblock, and obstacle to mankind.

At first, the reader feels rather confused by Atwood's pessimism, particularly her dislike of love. Yet we soon discover the true reason for Atwood's pessimism: it is Valentine's Day, and Atwood is alone: "February, month of despair,/ with a skewered heart in the centre./ I think dire thoughts" (25-27). Atwood's poem actually consists of her rather wandering stream of consciousness as she wallows in self-pity and defiance against the world. At the end, however, Atwood changes her tune. In an apostrophe to her cat which doubles as a self-address, Atwood tells herself to "Get rid of death. Celebrate increase. Make it be spring" (34). By the end, Atwood's self-pity and moping is gone. She has finally decided to move on with her life.

Considering her thoughts when she does not move on, I think her decision is most definitely for the better.

"Form"al Poetry (Question 17)

Before I begin to delve into the form of Keats' "Bright Star," I should state that I discovered most of the information from a site by Nelson Miller of the Cayuse Press Writers Exchange Board.

Anyway, Keats' poem is a rather typical example of an English (or Shakespearean) sonnet. All sonnets consist of fourteen lines, divided into an octet which presents one idea and a sestet which presents a different, often contrasting, idea. Really, the aspect of the Keats' poem which identifies it as English is its rhyme pattern. Keats' poem follows the English pattern of a b a b c d c d e f e f g g, meaning it can be subdivided into three quatrains with alternating lines rhyming and a final couplet. In Keats' poem, the first quatrain serves the purpose of describing the "bright star" (1) and its position and purpose in the sky. He describes the star as "steadfast" (1) in the sky, alone in "splendor" (2), simply "watching" (3). The second quatrain describes what the star observes, which also indicates the star's loneliness and distance from the beauty far below. Together, this octet depicts the aspects of the star which Keats does not desire to have: he does not want to be alone and unattached. In the sestet following the octet, Keats performs a turn and describes the aspect of the star which he does desire: Keats wishes to "feel forever [the] soft fall and swell" (11) of his lover, to stay "steadfast" with his love. Keats closes his statement of desire with a final couplet that states he wants to either "live ever" with his lover or else die at the peak of his love-to "swoon to death" (14). Overall, the division of the sonnet into the octet and sestet serves as a well-established boundary between what Keats desires and what he does not.

"Love"

“‘I’m a goner. I’m mad about the Romero boy. I’m in love with him, I think.’

‘I wouldn’t be if I were you.’

‘I can’t help it. I’ve never been able to help anything.’

‘You ought to stop it.’

‘How can I stop it? I can’t stop things.’”

-The Sun Also Rises, p 187

Reading this passage, it occurred to me that romantically, Cohn and Brett are actually remarkably similar. Both display a sort of romantic naïveté; upon meeting a person once or twice, they both believe they are in love. Cohn fell in love with his first wife because she was nice to him, then fell in love with Frances because she stayed with him. Now he is in love with Brett because of their vacation in San Sebastian.

Brett is not much better than Cohn; in many ways, actually, she is worse. First she is in love with Jake, and still claims to love him; yet she is also in love with Mike, despite her clear annoyance with him. Now she is in love with Pedro because he’s dangerous and graceful. Without knowing really anything about Pedro, other than the fact that he’s a bullfighter, Brett claims that she is “in love with him.” To me, it almost seems a bit unfair that only Cohn is being criticized for his romantic endeavors; Lady Brett has been doing the same thing for years.

Crazy Little Thing Called Love

“‘No, don’t come up,’ she said at the hotel. She had rung and the door was unlatched.

‘Really?’

‘No. Please.’

‘Good night, Brett,’ I said. ‘I’m sorry you feel rotten.’

‘Good night, Jake. Good night, darling. I won’t see you again.’ We kissed standing at the door. She pushed me away. We kissed again. ‘Oh, don’t!’ Brett said.

She turned quickly and went into the hotel.”

-The Sun Also Rises, p 71

I feel it is about time for me to vent my frustration over the rather annoyingly confusing relationship between Brett and Jake. It has been indicated that the two were once involved in some sort of romantic relationship. It has also been revealed that the two still love each other—or at least they claim to still love each other. Brett and Jake have also shared a total of four kisses within seventy-one pages. Despite these facts, Brett is engaged, and Jake does not seem to care.

Now, I can definitely understand former lovers remaining close friends with each other. I can also understand the statements that they still love each other. The kisses, however, contradict their current situation of separation. If Brett is engaged, and if Jake thinks Brett’s fiancé Mike is as great a person as he claims, then why do they insist on complicating these matters? They both have acknowledged the fact that nothing is going to happen between the two of them, so this romantic masochism seems utterly pointless.

Love and War (Stream of Consciousness)

In his wallet, Lieutenant Cross carried two photographs of Martha. The first was a Kodacolor snapshot signed Love, though he knew better…At night,sometimes, Lieutenant Cross wondered who had taken the picture, because he knew she had boyfriends, because he loved her so much, and because he could see the shadow of the picture-taker spreading out against the brick wall…He would always remember the feel of the tweed skirt and the knee beneath it…He remembered kissing her good night at the dorm door. Right then, he thought, he should’ve done something brave. He should’ve carried her up the stairs to her room and tied her to the bed and touched that left knee all night long. He should’ve risked it. Whenever he looked at the photographs, he thought of new things he should’ve done.

-The Things They Carried, p 3-4

The above passage is the second time that O’Brien follows Lieutenant Jimmy Cross’ stream of consciousness in the chapter. O’Brien alternates between Lt. Cross’ thoughts and matter-of-fact, objective descriptions of “the things they carried,” in which he also includes several references to Ted Lavender’s death without actually describing the event. Lt. Cross’ thoughts are explored in order to contrast between the facts and statistics of the Vietnam War, which too often are the only details the people know of the war, and the actual experiences and memories of those who fought in the war. While the reader is kept well-informed of the neutral and detached facts, he is at the same time given access to the facts that truly matter to the author: the lives of the men who fought.

At first, O’Brien keeps the two disparate ideas separate, dividing the objective from the subjective. After a few pages, however, O’Brien merges the two, beginning with an objective account on page 8, and then continuing into a description of events within Lt. Cross’ company. Fusing the two ideas together, he overlays Lt. Cross’ stream of consciousness onto the tangible facts of the war, culminating in a depiction of Ted Lavender’s death, which had been hinted at from the beginning. With this transition, O’Brien sets a tone for The Things They Carried, a matter-of-fact, yet emotionally-charged tone. Lt. Cross’ stream of consciousness preludes the reflections and emotions which will likely follow within the novel.