Responses to Course Material (10/27)

Along with The American Dream and Death of a Salesman, we have explored how to tackle the multiple choice section in general and with poetry. The key to looking at the passages is to get a sense of the piece and then do a closer reading. For poetry, you get a sense of the speaker, tone, images, figurative language, and situation. Then look further into each and find specific examples.

This process reminds me of how I do word searches. I always start by looking at the block of words and letting my mind notice words. Once I have hit a point where I cannot find nything else, I start to look at the block line by line and eventually, letter by letter. The clear break down of steps stops me from being overwhelmed, just as the steps for the passages are meant to do.

I have found through our practice that the only thing that hinders me from answering the multiple questions correctly is the use of vocabulcary that I am not used to. I understand the passage, but vocabulary in the stem or the alternatives confuses me, so I cannot answer the question with certainty. I have been using context of the stem and the other alternatives to help, but sometimes I cannot decide the answer. I need to look to other sources, like litereary articles, to help me extend my vocabulary.

When making a thesis statement for The American Dream, the hardest part was including all the aspects of the play. In the past, I have written papers on one motif, or one aspect of the theme. For instance I may write a paper for The American Dream on Albee's comment on dysfunctional gender roles, but I would not include every other aspect we had to work into our theme statement. Because I have never done this, I found it difficult to include everything in one statement. I am glad the entire class contributed so we could work it out, but by the time the AP exam comes around, I need to be able to do this on my own.

Open Prompt (10/20)

2003. According to critic Northrop Frye, “Tragic heroes are so much the highest points in their human landscape that they seem the inevitable conductors of the power about them, great trees more likely to be struck by lightning than a clump of grass. Conductors may of course be instruments as well as victims of the divisive lightning.” Select a novel or play in which a tragic figure functions as an instrument of the suffering of others. Then write an essay in which you explain how the suffering brought upon others by that figure contributes to the tragic vision of the work as a whole.

Essay LL’LL:

This essay is well written and easy to follow, so I was not surprised by its perfect score. The writer manages to use the necessary plot points of The Great Gatsby to convey his argument of Gatsby as a tragic character. Each big event is further explained with analysis, so the explanation and reason for the plot point is apparent. The essay also contains quotes central to the story that further improve the argument. The essay begins with Gatsby’s destruction in his own life and to himself. In the end, the essay connects Gatsby’s character to all the other characters as well as American society as a whole. It also shows how the characters are affected by Gatsby and how Gatsby is affected by society. The comparisons lock the argument in place, and focus the argument directly towards answering the prompt question. The writer also manages to use diction appropriate to the essay without falling into informal uses at all. With the discussion of society in relation to Gatsby in the introduction and then the same connection in the end, the essay comes full circle, making the connections stronger.

Essay C:

This essay also manages to convey a message that follows the prompt and does so with plot from the work. Still, the essay focuses more on summarizing than connecting in places, taking away from the overall essay. The diction is formal most of the time, but the writer uses words like “stupidly” at times, also taking away from the argument. The re-writing of the quote given in the prompt is unnecessary and only takes up space and time that could be used to further the analysis of the argument. In the end, the essay stays on task with explaining the tragic character and how that affects everyone in the story, still the writer could have gotten to this point further. The last paragraph raps up the point well and gives a well formed explanation while also summarizing the entire essay. Overall, the essay gives a good analysis and forms a sufficient argument, but further development could be made.

Essay FF:

While this essay focuses on how one tragic character negatively affects others, the essay does not manage to use convincing analysis. Most of the essay is a summary and the writer generally says because of the plot point just explained, people suffered. There is no connect through explanation that would make the argument persuasive and analytical. Though I have not read the book, the criticism by the AP board states that the essay fails to address the counter-argument of the tragic character also causing others happiness at times. With a complete lack of recognition of aspects of the book that are against the argument, the writer is not addressing the book as a whole, but choosing parts that are convenient. Because of this, the entire argument is flawed and even less persuasive. The essay also puts things like “tragic flaw” in parenthesis and expects that to act as an explanation for the whole summary of the plot. The language is relatively focused, but not as sophisticated as it could be.

The American Dream Summary and Analysis

The American Dream: A Summary

The American Dream is written by Edward Albee, a playwright that was young man at the time he wrote the play.

Characters:

Mommy is a controlling character who married Daddy for his money. As a young girl she did not have much money, but she now lives comfortably. She is always threatening Grandma with the “van man”.

Daddy is Mommy’s husband and recently had a sex change. He seems to be subordinate to Mommy, though he stands up for Grandma at times. He does not work, but is well off, alluding to him inheriting money.

Grandma is the mother of Mommy. Her husband died many years before, leaving her to take care of Mommy without working. She is constantly talking about boxes she has while she criticizes Mommy and Daddy. She is the most self aware character in the play and leaves in the end. She is often more gender neutral.

Mrs. Barker is the Chairman of the women’s club Mommy attends and she also volunteers for the Bye-Bye Adoption Service. Mommy and Daddy call her to their apartment, but no one can remember why. Mrs. Barker and Mommy are constantly fighting for dominance in the play.

Young Man is the last character introduced. He claims he is a shell of a human-being as he cannot feel anything. He also claims he has a twin that he was separated from. He is later “adopted” by Mommy and Daddy.

Setting:

Apartment in America in the 1950s

Only focuses in one room.

There is an archway, two chairs, and a couch in the room

Plot:

Mommy and Daddy are sitting in a room waiting for “them” to show up. While, they wait, they complain about the quality of their apartment and lack of satisfaction. Mommy even tells a story about the buying of a hat that she returns and then takes back again, all because the chairman of her women’s club said it was “wheat colored”.

Grandma then shows up with many boxes. Grandma proceeds to give wisdom on many aspects of life, but she focuses on how elderly people are treated.

Mommy begins to explain to Daddy how Grandma would wrap her lunches when she was younger and she would never open her lunch because they were so pretty. The other children would give her food because they thought she was prideful. Mommy and Grandma proceed to bicker at times with Mommy threatening to call the “van man” to take Grandma away. Then Mrs.Barker arrives, but it takes much coaxing from Mommy to get Daddy to work up the courage to open the door.

Mommy and Mrs. Barker throw barbs at each other, while Daddy sits by passively. Still, no one is sure why Mrs. Barker is there. The conversation steers towards husband and men in general. Mommy uses it to her advantage and she puts down Mrs. Barker’s husband. She also threatens Grandma with the “van man” whenever Grandma goes off on her spiels of thought about the role of elderly people in society.

Mrs. Barker feels like she is about to faint when Mommy insults her husband, so Mommy leaves to get her water, and Daddy goes to find Grandma’s television.

While they are gone, Grandma tells Mrs. Barker a story that relates to why she was invited to the apartment. Said in twisted words to defer any blame, Grandma tells a tale of Mommy and Daddy adopting a child that Mrs. Barker supplies for them. Mommy finds that the child does not meet her standards, so she “dismembers” the child until it eventually dies. Mrs. Barker is not sure what to think of the information.

The the Young Man shows up and he tells Grandma of his lack of feeling. Grandma realizes that he is the twin of the child adopted by Mommy and Daddy. Grandma then gives Mrs. Barker a plan to fix everything with Mommy and Daddy while the Young Man takes her boxes out.

Grandma becomes a part of the audience and Mrs. Barker offers the Young Man to Mommy and Daddy to fix any issues with the original child. Still, in the end, they all manage to complain about their drink before Grandma cuts off the play.

The American Dream: An Analysis

Tone:

The tone of the American Dream is often childish and innocent. Just the use of the characters names, like Mommy, Daddy, and Grandma, gives the entire piece a childish feel and makes the characters seem childish themselves. Later when Grandma describes how Mommy and Daddy ruined the baby, Mrs. Barker sounds casual about the entire story, and Grandma tells it matter of factly, even siding with Mommy’s and Daddy’s actions. This casual nonchalance makes them seem oblivious and innocent, but also dangerous. They are unaware that their actions are horrible.

View: 

Because the names Mommy, Daddy, and Grandma lead towards the presence of a child, the reader automatically imagines a child’s view. Even Mrs. Barker is an odd name from one adult to another. So, the reader is expecting the presence of a child, which is met when Grandma tells the story of the adopted child. The play also recognizes an audience as a point of view. In the end, Grandma even tells the reader or audience to be quiet so she can hear what is happening. Grandma breaks the fourth wall and sees the audience as a another viewer in the play.

Author:

Albee seems to be a more simplistic author. The play has little stage directions and ambiguous characters to make the readers draw the conclusions of the play themselves. The ambiguity also makes it more relatable to all of America. If Albee had named a specific city or name, the whole play would be less open and would say less about the whole society.

Symbols:

One of the largest symbols of the play is the original twin adopted by Mommy and Daddy. The twin is ripped apart literally by Mommy and Daddy, just because he did not fit their mold. The dismemberment of the child symbolizes the dismemberment of the traditional American values. Materialism replaces hard work and the Young Man replaces the original twin.

Mommy represents the old American Dream with her emphasis on how Mommy and Daddy are unfulfilled. She cares less about getting satisfaction and more about leaving the home. She also cares less about material things and appearances, and more about the substance of what is happening around her.

The Young Man symbolizes the new American Dream. He only has his appearance and lacks any depth or substance. The superficial need to get happiness through materials is what he shows when Mommy takes him in.

Imagery: 

The imagery of the play shows up when the description of the dismemberment of the child comes in. This part is set apart from the play in that it is more detailed and graphic than anything else. It brings more attention to how the child relates the the characters and overall message.

Thesis

Albee’s American Dream conveys that the new generation has created an American Dream that debases the traditional american values and is based on superficial materialism that causes a impossible need for constant and complete satisfaction with a small hope for possible future salvation.

From the beginning of the play, Mommy and Daddy are relying on the idea that meeting material goals will get satisfaction. Mommy says “Well, I got satisfaction” after she describes how she bought a “beige” hat and immediately took it back when the chairman of her women’s club tells her it is a “wheat” hat (Albee 61). Mommy is given the hat back and told it is beige and she accepts it. Buying things is what Mommy sees as happiness, though it may be short lived.

Mommy thinks that getting a child will make her happy, so she buys one. But, when the child has “eyes for its Daddy” Mommy destroys it eyes (Albee 99). This process continues until the baby has been mutilated so much, it just dies. Still, the superficial image of a child seems to be the most important thing to Mommy, and in the end she is not satisfied, which is why Mrs. Barker is there. The lack of happiness in one moment results in Mommy automatically doing anything to reach immediate satisfaction. She does not deal with the issue, she just looks for quick fixes. Even in the end, though Mommy says “Who says you can’t get satisfaction these days” She ends up disliking the drink and does not have happiness in the one moment.  Even her happiness does not go deeper than the surface. The satisfaction is not only material oriented, but also superficial. Mommy only focuses on the appearance of fixes because she cares more about perceptions. Mommy sees happiness in looking wealthy with a “beige” hat and having a child that perceives her as motherly. She is even obsessed with the way Grandma makes boxes look so pretty when she wraps them. Everything is judged by the surface, not the substance. Because superficial materialism is the means to achieving happiness, it becomes impossible to reach for Mommy as well as Daddy, the Young Man, and even Mrs. Barker at times.

The dysfunctional gender roles Mommy and Daddy fall into even displays how they are constantly searching for satisfaction. Mommy displays that she believes having a husband makes her happy when she says “then I married you, Daddy, and now we’re very rich” (Albee 66). The reliance on men for wealth may still be a part of old American Dream, but the need for wealth to achieve happiness is not. Mommy is not just happy she married Daddy for money, but he is completely subordinate to her. When she says something, he repeats it. He does what she says and wants to feel masculine, but only does when she tells him he is masculine. Even physically he is the women, in that he has had a sex change as he signifies when he says “the doctors took out something that was there and put in something that wasn’t there” (Albee 83). The gender roles may be reversed, but they are still dysfunctional and still being used to achieve satisfaction. Mommy and Daddy have a relationship that gives Mommy more power and Daddy less. This happens because Mommy finda content in being in charge and Daddy believes it will be better for him if he just gives into Mommy’s domineering nature. Still, the roles fail at least Daddy. He later states that he is having “definite qualms” about the operation and really his entire relationship with Mommy (Albee 82). Mommy even has to look elsewhere for happiness in men. She goes to the Young Man in the play and wants to get sexual pleasure from him. Though the gender roles were created to achieve happiness, the roles fail both Mommy and Daddy in giving them happiness.

Grandma and the Young Man in the play signify the old American Dream and new American Dream respectively. Grandma is less concerned with gender even giving herself with pseudonym “Uncle Harry” in a baking contest (Albee 111). This disregard for gender roles displays a more realistic response to finding happiness. She also shows how aware she is of what is going on around her. She knows why Mrs. Barker is there, who the Young Man is, and that the audience is present. This understanding causes her to focus more on herself and one big goal of leaving the house, rather than meeting little goals that mean nothing, like the new American Dream calls for. The Young Man is also self aware of his lack of feeling beyond his appearance. Still, his appearance is the most important thing to those around him, Mommy and Mrs. Barker for example. Mommy is enthralled by his looks and immediately accepts him, though he has no substance. His lack of content shows how the new American Dream is about perceptions. When things look good, they are good, though that is not always the case in the old American Dream. Overall, Albee displays the disconnect between the values of the new American Dream opposed to the old dream.

In the end, Grandma is able to step back from the play and join the audience. She gets away from the toxic nature of the new American Dream and has the possibility for actual happiness, not a constant need to feed satisfaction. Though she may not reach satisfaction, she reaches the chance for it. This possibility rises to a hope for the rise of the values displayed in the old American Dream, like hard work and understanding that constant satisfaction is not happiness.

"Khermican Food" (Close Reading 10/13)

http://lky.ph/post/49369673139/richard-parks-on-doughnuts

The article “Khmerican Food” by: Richard Park explores the mystery of the Cambodian owned Doughnut shops in America. Park goes all the way to Cambodia to explore what the doughnut market life is like with such a large impact in America. Overall the piece reveals the differences between the American and Cambodian culture and the effect in has economically on the production of doughnuts. To show all the aspects, Park exercises the use of detail, imagery, and diction.

Park stuffs a ton of information into the article. He seems like a complete expert on doughnuts, when he really just did his research. Still, certain details stick out in the entire piece. At one point, Park is describing the start of the industry with a Cambodian man named Ngoy, who has “no English skills, possessed of a wily entrepreneurial spirit” (Park). The inclusion of Ngoy’s lack of English and his “spirit” shows the reason that the doughnut industry grew in America. Because Ngoy really was able to influence a community to follow his lead. Soon many Cambodian refugees were following Nguy’s lead and opening their own shops. Without the inclusion of the “spirit” of Nguy, it would be harder to understand why he was able to succeed with knowing English, and why he had such an influence on the refugee community. Later, Park includes that there were about “2,400 Cambodian doughnut shops” at most in just California. Including this helps to show how prominent they are. Later, Park has an interview with one of the owners of the only doughnut shop in Phnom Penh. The shop is called USA Doughnuts. The entire conversation he included is about how little the shop makes. The American doughnuts is not popular in Cambodia because they do not like sweet food, according to the owner of the shop. The differences in the culture are well displayed by the differences in food and how well doughnuts do in each country. All the details conveyed the economic and cultural differences of America and Cambodia by just writing about doughnuts.

Park’s use of imagery is less common. At times, he uses visual description for things to display the Cambodian culture and sometimes the culture of an American doughnut shop. One special case of imagery, is when he describes the doughnut he has while in Cambodia. He says: “my knife gently crunched through the sugary granules of the deep brown settled icing before passing easily through the soft, aerated dough” (Park). The audience can connect quickly with the “crunch” of a good doughnut and know he is having one. He wants to show that though Cambodia may not have many doughnut shops, the one they have is good. He is almost sending a little praise to the owners of the shop in this part. Later, Park is back in America, at a doughnut shop,and  he describes his first glimpse with “a wide-smiling, aproned Cambodian woman” (Park). The image brings to mind a warm nature that is connected with a bakery or doughnut shop. The “aproned” aspect also brings a nostalgic feel to the sentence because the audience can imagine a baker making things in it and imagine the entire scene from that. He then goes on to point out a “golden Buddha statue with an American dollar bill hanging around its neck” (Park). The juxtaposition of this image brings both cultures together and gives the reader a sense of communion as well as contrast. The two cultures are both part of this industry, and this sentence truly shows that. Still, it also displays that the cultures are not nearly the same thing. The imagery in the piece pointed to a closer link with the culture of both America and Cambodia and how that translated into the doughnut shops.

The diction of the piece is really not too obscure. At times Park uses Cambodian words or phrases like “yam bai”. The inclusion of these few words helps to bring the audience into the Cambodian world. It is easier to connect when their language is used. Park also explains the words whenever he uses them to connect the ideas for the readers. The only time the language may be beyond colloquial is when Park is explaining the economic aspects of doughnut shops. The average person would not necessarily talk about “overhead costs” in an everyday conversation, but that does not mean that the language is foreign to the average person. Everything Park talks about is relatable and understood by an average person, but they reader is able to connect more with the culture of Cambodia when he relates things to understood words. Just dropping the Cambodian language in the piece would only accomplish something for himself. The extra explanation makes connections between cultures and also reaches many people. Overall, Park uses diction that is easily relatable and can show the reader what is going on without any confusion.