Passion and responsibility go hand in hand.

Klara Sulce

Mr. Perez

English AP

27 October 2011

A frequently conveyed theme in literature is the classic war between passion and responsibility. William Faulkner’s novel As I Lay Dying displays forth this powerful clash between what one wants to do and what one needs to do. Most of the characters in this novel all face the challenge of deciding what is right to do and what they hope to accomplish. The most selfish person in As I Lay Dying is undeniably Addie and Anse’s daughter Dewey due to her unsympathetic attitude concerning her mother’s death and the fetus inside of her. Her actions show the predominance that one’s self-seeking passions hold against their obligations as a diligent person.

            Upon the death of her unfortunate mother, Dewey did not mourn as is expected to when one faces a dramatic loss such as this.  One of her goals in the novel should have been to abide her mother’s dying wish of being buried in Jefferson, however she becomes engrossed in her egocentric ways to accomplish this task. Although Dewey was going through a lot during her mothers’ illness being that a local farmhand left her pregnant, the reader is left feeling unsympathetic towards her. She portrays an immature and rash soon to be mother in distress and the struggles they face in modern day life. A moral duty of hers is to care for her youngest brother, Vardaman, be a mother figure to him, and to perhaps obtain some knowledge of how to take care of her own child.  However, she foolishly lets her own problems or rather; mistakes sojourn her from carrying out her responsibilities as the only woman left in charge of the Bundren residence.

            As a woman back in the 1930’s, Dewey should have taken over her mothers’ role in the family being that their family consists of five men.  Women are considered the caretakers of their families and have duties to live by such as cooking, cleaning, etc.  Dewey however, was not ready for this responsibility.  Conversely, she hopes to get rid of the fetus growing inside of her as soon as possible and demonstrates how uncivilized humanity becomes in order to fulfill their selfish needs. She is misled into exchanging sexual services at the local pharmacy in an effort to purchase abortion drugs. If Dewey had pursued help from one of her older brothers concerning her pregnancy; her outcome would have been extremely different. Ultimately, she seems to make one mistake after the other and displays the idea that once one stops being responsible, everything does downhill and leads to their decline.

            Not only did Dewey fail her responsibilities as a daughter, but she also was unsuccessful at being a potentially nurturing mother. Had she thoroughly thought things through, her life would have turned out better. She would struggle to provide for her brothers and child, but her life would hold a meaning behind it. She would have a reason to revitalize her life, her family. Consequently, Dewey’s selfish manner is significant of societies' way of acting upon their selfish needs and the consequences that follow their decisions.

Hamlet essay

Scene five initially unfolds with the two gravediggers discussing the burial of Ophelia.  Back in the day, if one committed a suicide, it was the ultimate sin and they were not worthy of a Christian burial in the churchyard. This conversation between the two gravediggers symbolizes how religious people were in the Elizabethan times and how sins were generally not overlooked. Shakespeare is attempting to stress the importance of religion in this scene and how even people that are not as important as others have a say concerning this matter.  He makes it apparent that the gravediggers serve a purpose in Act five due to the great themes they brings forth to the tragedy, specifically, economic irrelevance once one is deceased and existentialism.   

The main gravedigger commences to singing songs while he digs up a variety of skulls of wretched souls. Hamlet is shocked by the gravedigger’s lack of sympathy as he nonchalantly tosses the skulls around as if they are worthless compost.  He contemplates about whom these skulls might have belonged to. By displaying the throwing of the skulls, Shakespeare is making an effort to show that everyone dies, their economic status and place in society is irrelevant. Hamlet perplexedly states, “Why may not that be the skull of a lawyer? Where be his quiddities now . . . ?” (V.i.90–91). Hence, the lawyer and the courtier might have had an impact on someone’s life while they were alive, but once their bodies are buried, life goes on and does not stop for anyone.

Allusions play an important role in this scene; Shakespeare mentions legendary men such as, Adam, Alexander the Great, and Julius Caesar. Hamlet ultimately comes to the realization that all men eventually perish and no one is spared of death’s wrath.  In the beginning acts of the play, Hamlet deliberated committing suicide and in this scene it is evident he is glad he did not do so. By looking at the bodies and how people as insignificant as gravediggers can have an immense amount of supremacy over people that once were much more vital to society, Hamlet is repulsed. For someone who is looked upon so highly while he is living, he now knows that people will react inconsequentially years upon his death.

From a metaphorical perspective, the skulls represent the idea of existentialism. A British novelist once stated, “Existentialism is about being a saint without God; being your own hero, without all the sanction and support of religion or society.” By this she means, make your own legacy while you are living because once you are dead, nothing you have done will truly impact the world. This quote describes the characters of Hamlet, for they all wish to be heroes in the end of the play and keep their reputation flourishing, but once they die no one foresees them as protagonists. Their deaths were simply tragic and will be forgotten about rapidly. No one’s legacy or body lives on eternally.

Literary Terms Part 2

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0Bx4ZM8vIBfnbMjg4OTNhODMtZjlmMS00MzNjLWJjMTktYzk3YmMyMDcyYWI4&hl=en_US

Grendel Movie Project.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U242E5zOR1I

Literary Terms.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0Bx4ZM8vIBfnbODVkMjJlYzMtYTk1MS00MmJiLTkyYjMtM2ExMDk3NzU4NzNl&hl=en_US

Klara Sulce

Mr. Perez

English AP

26 September 2011

            A theme explored in literature throughout the twentieth century was representing teenagers as mistaken tragic heroes. In the extraordinary novel, “Grendel” it became quite evident who the antagonist was as the novel came to an end. Although the reader’s first instinct was to blame all of the murders that took place in the mead-hall on the “beast” Grendel, one might argue that this assumption is a misconception. The cliché saying, “There are always two sides to every story” proved to be accurate after reading both Anglo-Saxon pieces of literature, Beowulf and Grendel. It became extremely apparent that the blame should not have been thrust merely upon Grendel, but rather on society as a whole.

       The audience acquired a new sense of knowledge as to why Grendel set out to kill as many innocent people as he did as the novel progressed. His intentions were pure as the novel opened and he did not want to cause anyone any harm. However, the constant celebrations the Danes would take part in at Heorot drove him mad with rage and envy. He spent his nights in a dark, isolated cave with his useless companion of a mother. His main reason for attacking the mead hall was to cope with his human emotions of sadness, isolation and jealousy.

Grendel was indeed a sympathetic character and a lonely monster that attempted to understand the insignificant world around him. He was extremely troubled by the outside universe and strained to come up with an answer to his philosophical questions. Grendel never had a chance to make the best of his life because he became engrossed in contemplating the reason for his existence. The resolution of the novel, Grendel, left the reader feeling sorrow towards the misguided beast. Grendel did not accept defeat and stated that if he had not slipped on his own blood, he would have won the battle against Beowulf. Grendel did not die a happy or well-deserved death and therefore the resolution of the novel can be characterized as incomplete. The uncivilized humans continued to go on with their lives following the death of Grendel and failed to comprehend the reason for Grendel’s doings.

There was a great significance to Grendel’s failure to prosper in his endeavors in the novel. The goal he attempted to fulfill throughout the entire novel was to destroy the Danes and distinguish what the meaning of life was. In chapter seven, Grendel’s tone and sense seemed more mature and he transformed into an all-existential individual. His law was to destroy the thing that defined him. By accomplishing his goal of destroying the Danes, he no longer had a purpose in life. This in turn destroyed him and ultimately led to his paradoxical death.

 Almost all novels, short stories, and so forth include a protagonist and an antagonist. In the longest surviving Anglo-Saxon poem Beowulf, the monstrous beast, Grendel is exemplified as the antagonist. He terrorizes the men that make a massive amount of noise at night and dare to disrupt him. Although not directly stated in the poem, characters like Grendel exist to show the evils of everyday life and the consequences of killing someone. After the killing of Grendel, Beowulf also proceeds to killing his mother. Every person has emotions and even the beast, Grendel had a family of his own who suffered upon his death.  The author of the poem gave Grendel humanlike traits to symbolize the people in the world that take part in bad deeds.  He did it in an indirect way to catch the reader’s attention and show the similarity between Grendel and humans.  After the killing of Grendel, Beowulf also proceeds to killing his mother. There was no need for him to prove his pride once more, his killing of Grendel should have been enough to satisfy him and make him feel empowering and glorious. Beowulf’s actions show the savagery of men and how greedy they can be. Grendel’s mother was a prime example of a mother and her love for her child. In present day society, most mothers would stop at nothing to ensure their children’s safety and mourn if something was to happen to them.  Grendel’s mother wanted revenge upon her son’s murder and a mere reminder of him by taking his annihilated arm.  Evil lurks all over the world, but it is mostly present in uncivilized humans. Grendel went about murdering people in the wrong way; however Beowulf did the same by killing his mother. The actions of both characters united them and made them similar. Grendel and Beowulf thought they were doing right by murdering, but their reason behind the gruesome killings was merely selfish. Beowulf wanted to be seen as a hero, whereas Grendel found it entertaining to see people die. Hence, evil is evident in humans to this very day and Grendel and Beowulf embody the individuals whom commit malicious crimes or partake in other awful deeds.