Journal 4/21

 Free entry on Feed! Write about anything that you want in Feed. This is your chance to sound off about any subject in the book as well as whether you liked the book. Please write something substantial that will  encourage discussion among your peers.

One thing that really stood out to me in Feed was the peeling skin. At first I thought it was just something that went along with the book's "the environment is ruined because of the companies' complete disregard for things that aren't extremely profitable/ as efficient as possible" sort of theme, but the seminar that we had really gave me some more ideas about it. This journal will go over two possibilities and rule one of them out. First is that the degradation of society goes hand-in-hand with the degradation of the population's physical condition. This adds some symbolism to the mix, but doesn't really make sense. This book takes place over the course of about a year, and the dumbing-down of society has definitely been going on for longer than that. I mean,Titus mistakes Spanish- a language spoken by millions today- for Mayan. Also, this book wouldn't make correlations that deep. It's full of clever satire, but I wouldn't expect it to make such an unimportant part of the Feed universe serve that purpose. For those two reasons I'm taking symbolism out of the question. 

The second idea, one which I think fits into Feed better, is that the peeling skin is somehow related to the lesions. The lesions are quite influential in the story, going as far as helping to portray the personalities and motives of the characters. They are even addressed by the president in a speech,  further attaching them to the main interests of the book's population. I think that the lesions are the first stage of what soon becomes extensive skin loss, which is a sensical progression. This could be environmental or caused by the feed- I'm not really sure, and the book doesn't give many details regarding their source. This was just the idea that, in my opinion, made the most sense and fit the most snugly into Feed's world.  

Journal 4/7

NOTE (for Ms. Harrison): I accidentally blended the second and third journal possibilities together, so I hope that's ok.

I created this fake advertisement to satirize products that are meant to simplify the process of doing something and claim to make everyday life easier (or ads in general).

 

You're on your way to work. Today is an important day for you-there's a big meeting for a project that could get you promoted! As you go through your papers, making sure you've got all your important work-related documents, you notice that you have nothing to hold them together. In today's busy world, there's no room to fumble with gangly staplers- that's why your friends at Red Dog Co. created the Paperclip™. The Paperclip™ uses a strong, reliable steel that has been regarded by metallurgists and people who know things as high-quality. But, you may ask, how does the Paperclip hold up against competitors? The Paperclip™ beats out both Glue® and Tape ®, which are both regarded as inferior by statistics we're not going to list. When you buy the Paperclip™, you can say goodbye to unorganized papers and yes to your boss when he offers you that promotion.*

* The Red Dog Company is not to be held liable for meetings with superiors that do not end in promotions. 

Did our reluctance to share data frustrate or anger you? If so, buy the consumer pack! At a half-reasonable price of $199, you will be able to obtain that information quickly and easily on the go.

Analysis: rhetorical devices and three appeals 

-I used exaggeration with the "trademarked paperclip", which takes the name of a product to an extreme by it being an everyday item that, in reality, no one company holds the rights to. The same go for "Glue" and "Tape".

-I used irony while listing affirmations on the product's usefulness/reliability by credible sources, which also involves ethos. You would expect to see credible names and titles, but instead get vague descriptions. 

-I satirized the proof to back up a product by refusing to list the statistics gathered about it, also involving logos. Not showing the proof also satirizes the greed of companies, as I later mention that the viewer can pay an unrealistic amount of money to see those stats. That could, at the same time, anger the viewer at the companies' expectation that you would spend lots of money to see those stats; this ties in pathos.

Why does Shakespeare end TMoV in the way that he did? Is it fitting for a comedy?

2) Why do you think that Shakespeare ends this comedy with lover's spats between Jessica and Lorenzo, Portia and Bassanio, and Nerissa and Gratiano? Does this fit in with what we expect from a comedic ending?

I think that The Merchant of Venice had a fitting ending. Although there are some loose ends-such as how the relationships play out- it adheres to the rules of a comedy. The one thing I noticed that bugged people about this being a comedy is the lack of celebration at the end. What some didn't understand is that not every comedy has to have this, it's just a common occurrence in works of the genre. That makes it passable as a defining characteristic. The way the play ended definitely fit in comedically (it was pretty funny to see the short transition between an intense argument and the bedroom), and I don't think I could see it ending any better. 

Shylock: Comedic Villain or Tragic Character?

Is Shylock a comedic villain or a tragic character? Please use what you have learned about tragedy and comedy as well as evidence from the text to support your answer.

I believe that Shylock's character is a mixture between a comedic villain and a tragic character. He definitely portrays the stereotype of the Jewish at the time, as he is bloodthirsty and (in the court scene) seems to be incapable of being merciful; but, at the same time, is able to be sympathized with. Being that there were so many negative connotations with the Jewish at the time, he was really set apart and hated by others- this is where the tragic character element comes in. He describes the injustice and his frustration with the system of things by saying:

“If you prick us, do we not bleed?

If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us,

do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?

If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that.

If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility?

Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his

sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge.

The villainy you teach me, I will execute,

and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.”

Shakespeare might not have made this character out to be sympathized with, and that little monologue could've been a way for the audience to laugh at his weakness or something. But, in a time so tolerant of different ethnicities and races as ours, we can't help but feel bad for his experience thus far. That is why I think he is a mixture of the two.

 

TMoV: Tragedy, Comedy, or Tragicomedy?

 I think that The Merchant of Venice is both a tragedy and a comedy, a combination better known by the portmanteau tragicomedy. For The Merchant of Venice to hold this title, it's got to have certain characteristics that define each genre. Tragedies have, well, tragic heroes. These are protagonists or main characters that seem to never be happy- a description that Antonio seems to fit well. Proof of this is easy to find ("In sooth I know not why I am so sad...", etc.) and is displayed quite early in the play. A comedy has a love interest, funny wordplay/metaphors, and a plot with many twists and complexities. These three characteristics show (respectively) through Portia, snarky comments regarding the Jewish, and the fact that we don't know who the true protagonist of the play is yet. It is quite clear that the The Merchant of Venice is a tragicomedy, and choosing one genre or the other to define it wouldn't do it justice. 

Antonio and Bassanio's Relationship

Analyze the relationship between Bassanio and Antonio. What is going on between them? What is the nature of their feelings toward one another? Please provide quote(s) from the text to support your position as well as its Kindle location(s).

Antonio and Bassanio's relationship is somewhat confusing. What I do know about it is that they are very close friends; Antonio gives a lot of money to Bassanio so he can make ends meet, and at another point Bassanio brings up his love life in a conversation with Antonio. From this point of view, they could just be a couple of guys who help each other out and discuss the many problems they have in their lives. Contrary to that set of information are some quotes that hint at a possible sexual relationship between the two. Antonio once says (partial quote), "My purse, my person, my extremest means, lie all unlock'd to your occasions(1.1.8)." It's pretty easy to understand what he's saying there, but it seems like Antonio's affections aren't being effectively reciprocated by Bassanio. In addition to this, Antonio is continuing to lend him money to support his endeavors- even when it comes to wooing other women. I think that Bassanio is trying to keep Antonio wondering about a potential sexual relationship between them so that he can use him for his money. If indeed he is doing this (which we'll find out soon enough), he'll be walking on thin ice if he continues to develop relationships with other women. If not, and Shakespeare is just adding in a taboo of his time period, this is an interesting way to do it.

NOTE: I had to restore my iPad over the weekend. I couldn't access my Kindle app during this time, meaning I couldn't add locations. 

Did the Renaissance Really Happen

Was the Renaissance 'a thing'? In John Green's video, he argues that the Renaissance was not really a thing (re-watch it if you forgot his argument). Do you agree? Make an argument for your side.

In the video, John Green formed his argument of how the Renaissance wasn't 'a thing' by saying that people didn't realize it was happening. He attempts to further strengthen his argument by comparing it to the climbing of the Berlin Wall, which was televised and considered a historically valuable event. This argument is pretty much invalid, because a period is known about through the events that take place within it. Of course people didn't know they were living in the Renaissance- it wasn't a singular event but a series of events spanning three centuries, which can't exactly be compared to the Berlin Wall's many scalings over the course of 20-ish years. The people who lived during that time recognized the individual events that occurred around them, such as the spread of the bubonic plague, but they didn't recognize that they were living in the Renaissance- although, thats only because the term originated in 1785. And if we're really going in-depth with this argument, what constitutes 'a thing'? 

In addition, he also adds that only a small population of Europe was really effected by the occurrences during the Renaissance, which apparently makes it completely insignificant. He is somewhat right in saying that not many were immediately effected by the changes that the Renaissance brought, but eventually many of those changes shaped art and literature in Europe. I did say somewhat right, and what sense would that make without an example of how wrong he was? An example of that is the Gutenberg printing press, which allowed the works of popular authors to be printed in the hundreds of thousands. The printing press was the groundwork for an era of mass communication, which allowed for information to be spread across Europe and increased the literacy percentages of the lower classes. The world would be vastly different had the events of the Renaissance not occurred. Most of the events that took place within this period (excluding the Black Plague) were influential in the molding of the arts, literature and technology of Europe into what they are today.