Film Blog #3 (To Kill A Mockingbird)

I'm really happy to be watching this movie again, at this point in my life (I'm thinking of re-reading the book as well). The first, and only time, I read the book/watched the movie, was in seventh grade. While there are a lot of things I took away from the book at the time, I feel like I appreciate it more fully now. I imagine that will become more true the older I get, the more intolerance and injustice I see and experience. It just resonates really strongly (especially considering how the trial ends) with how I've been feeling the past couple of years, this year in particular with everything that's been happening. The fact that it is still so relevant today speaks to both how well it addressed certain themes, and how far we've actually come as a society.

On the topic of the movie itself, "To Kill A Mockingbird" uses a child's perspective in a remarkable way, to get the audience to see things a little simpler. It provides both the opportunity to have certain things directly explained (the use of the n-word) and to be able to understand things in a different, "naive" light (the way we experience Boo Radley, for example, is different in Scout's POV then an adults, and offers much more acceptance). It still preserves the complexity of racial inequality with the results of the trial, but frames it in such a way where it kind of becomes very obvious how wrong this all is (again, because the kids so easily understand something is wrong, so too does the audience).
Honestly it makes the most of how it was written, eliciting very visceral reactions from myself and my peers. It shows the trial for exactly as unfair as it was. There isn't a turn of heart in the jurors, Tom doesn't magically get away, there isn't some kind of immediate action. But, it shows us reality. And, it shows an unrest in the children, shows how upset they are, especially Jem, at seeing this injustice. I think seeing things like that, really seeing how badly POC were (and are) treated in America was such a huge part of the civil rights movement.

I imagine that because film and literature serves as both a reflection and creation of culture, this novel had a lot of impact, much like "Selma" very recently has. And while this movie/book is fantastic, and addresses racial injustice in a fantastic way, I find it tiring. For me, the movie draws forth some frustrations, not because of what it says, but because of how it says it. I feel like it reinforces the racial imbalance in our country (which, as a discussion point is fine, but as a piece of film that can impact the thinking of people, is not) because it is a white narrative. Again, this is not to discount the book, but it is to acknowledge that for our current purposes, it is less useful. Many people, including myself, are very tired of having to watch a movie about what Black Americans experienced, told from the white perspective. Especially because there are so many black narratives out there that we never get to see, or that never reach the same sort of fame. And for the time period, right in the middle of the Civil Right's movement, I can understand that a black narrative maybe wouldn't have gotten the same traction or respect, but it almost feels unfair that a major american novel that talks about race was done from a white perspective while there were so many people of color speaking out about it. I don't know, I just think we need a new American classic that can better reflect and shape our current national feelings.



Also, I was thinking about what you said earlier, about how people were banning a book they've never read, which is a very scary thought. But, maybe they have read it. Maybe they read it, and just don't get it, or just don't care, or can't remove their head from their ass. I think that's scarier to me, to think that these people did read the book, and see how that word was actually used, and just don't get it. Scarier still if they just don't care. I don't think there's much more to the thought, but yeah.

Film Blog #2 (Precious)

Man. Precious was a really heavy film (I don't cry very easily and I don't think I've ever cried during a movie but like honestly this movie had me on the verge of tears at some points like damn). It just paints such a real picture of what this situation is like. Like often when we see portrayals of abuse it either paints the victim as very like...pathetic? I guess, or makes everything seem a lot more straightforward (as does the internet, I have often seen people saying "why don't they just leave!!!"...because it's not that easy. That's not how abuse works. It's a cycle, and it's scary). However, this film makes it so much more complex, and it portrays it the way I feel like it needs to be portrayed, and shows both the abuser and victim (and surrounding parties) in really complex ways. Precious, for example, is a firecracker of a girl. She yells at a classmate for disrespecting a teacher she had a crush on and assaults a girl in her GED class for calling her fat. it seems like, on the surface, that she is someone who demands respect and acknowledgment. However, the scene with her mother show this deeper aspect to it, show how this fierce young woman can become small and docile and scared in front of her mother. And this is true for me- I have seen too many of my proud, demanding, firecracker friends be wittled down in front of their abuser. You fall into a pattern of hoping things get better.  It's just good to see victims/survivors as more than just these people who aren't "smart enough" to get out.
The same thing goes for Precious' mother. We see the whole film scenes of her abusing and bad mouthing and using Precious- but at the end we also get a very...I'd like to say heartbreaking, scene of her mother breaking down because she had to choose between the man she loved and her child. She is given a chance to show that she is a more complex character than what we might have given her credit for. Not that this means she's forgiven, and not that it means that I necessarily empathize or sympathize with her, but it shows her, and abusers for what they are- human. it's easy to paint them as unforgivable monsters, but these people are human, which makes these situations so much more difficult.
It also makes us think more, specifically for me in the way Sarah and you were discussing in class today. I know myself very, very well, which is why thinking about what I would do in that situation is difficult. If I didn't know myself it would be easy. I know that I am generally pretty vocal about my beliefs and how we treat others, and very loyal to my friends and loved ones, and I have very strong convictions. However, I also know that it's hard for me to let go of people, and that i try too hard to please other people, and that sometimes I'm too passive to stand up for myself for fear of confrontation. So it'd be easy at a surface level to say "Oh I wouldn't have let that happen because I have strong morals and stand up for what I believe in," but that's not all of my personality and that's not how humans work. We're complex. Again, this movie creates such a complicated scenario that I respect.

Film Blog #1 (Rebel)

Anthony's film was very, very well made, especially considering budget and length constraints. He managed to recreate and modernize a film that is almost two hours in only 40 minutes. No matter any "errors" just that fact is very impressive to me.
There were a lot of conscious coloring/filter decisions that I think worked really well, and were pretty aesthetically pleasing too. There were a lot of dark filters applied with a blue-ish tint that kind of added to the whole angsty/melancholic feel of the movie. it also helped to make the creepy scenes even creepier.
Along the same vein, there were other video affects that were really well done. One scene that comes to mind immediately is when Dan and Mark's characters are watching "They Shoot Horses, Don't They?" It's a medium shot of the two talking, and the part of "They Shoot Horses" where the woman is shot is over laid onto Dan's face while he's talking about death and happiness. One, it was just a really, really cool affect, and two, it helped emphasize what he was talking about and cast that event onto the characters itself (plus great foreshadowing). It was just a really smart choice.
The framing of shots was also impressive, as it helped increase the tension in the film, in my opinion. Often the people would be just slightly out of frame, and just slightly off from following the rule of thirds, or uncomfortably close, or from a strange angle, and it all helped the tense atmosphere created, and also the feeling fo something bein wrong and amiss.
The general feeling Anthony created through his different techniques communicated his message about angst really well, and made a very enjoyable film. Yeah, there were a few shaky parts, but how much was accomplished under the circumstances, and even out of context it was incredble. I thouroughly enjoyed it, and am very proud of my son for doing it!!

Blog Post #12 "The World is too Much with Us" by William Wordworth

The poem is basically the speaker saying that we're too focused on money and spending and on material things, and we don't have any grand reaction to nature anymore. We kind of take it for granted. Basically, we waste any power we have on us and advancing our lives and materials, without really caring too much about nature ("Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers," we just buy and sell, wasting all our potential and power that could be used with nature for better). It's all about the newest thing in the store. We don't know how to appreciate the simplicity and beauty of nature anymore, as we're too busy using it all up ("Little we see in nature that is ours,"implying that we see now value in nature, nothing we can own). The speaker also talks about how "we have given our hearts away," saying that nature no longer moves us, and that we've lost our souls in the process of increasing luxury, selling our hearts for whatever is on the market.
The poet uses a lot of imagery and figurative language to emphasize how he feels about the topic. He personifies the ocean to make it seem more powerful and more human, to try to create an element that can be sympathized with. He says that the wind will be howling at all hours, which kind of suggests a desperation/ loneliness coming from nature, helping to depict the affects that our withdrawal from nature has.
I think the poem is especially interesting because the speaker includes himself in the group of people who no longer appreciate nature (the use of "us" and "we"), and he decides to turn to paganism to try to remedy this. I find this interesting because it's not a hope to just enjoy nature in the last paragraph, it's a hope for nature to be more than it is, to have mystical creatures and more interesting sights, for it not to feel so lonely. It's like the speaker kind of recognizes how we treat nature, but can't fully bring himself to change this.

I do generally agree that we're kinda super not cool toward nature, and I feel like we forgot that we need to take care of our environment since we live here and it's keeping us alive. But rather than needing to turn to paganism, I want people to see the beauty nature already has (the world is super cool yo) and try to take a bit of a step back from the massive consuming we do (tho I think buying and spending is fine tbh we just can't lose sight of like other things, and maybe not focus as much on the latest trends, cause buying stuff can be fun and can help so ye compromise)

Blog Post #11 "To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time"

Poem:

Gather ye rose-buds while ye may,

   Old Time is still a-flying;

And this same flower that smiles today

   Tomorrow will be dying.

The glorious lamp of heaven, the sun,

   The higher he’s a-getting,

The sooner will his race be run,

   And nearer he’s to setting.

That age is best which is the first,

   When youth and blood are warmer;

But being spent, the worse, and worst

   Times still succeed the former.

Then be not coy, but use your time,

   And while ye may, go marry;

For having lost but once your prime,

   You may forever tarry.

Response:

From the title, I assume that the speaker is addressing Virgins (virgins in the sexual sense or virgins to the world?), and I guess "to make much of time" just means to use their time wisely.
The poem basically says time passes quickly and what you think you have now you wont have tomorrow, and youth is a terrible thing to waste so they should take advantage of it (and get married bc who would want to marry you when you're not young and pretty amirite ladies???)
There's a lot of imagery and metaphor used to amplify this message of not wasting time. "Flying time," for example, helps strengthen just how quickly time moves by.  "Gather ye rosebuds" is a good use of imagery to help the read conceptualize when the speaker is communicating, as is the imagery involving the sun, to better communicate the passage of time.
Now, this is all well and good, wanting people not to squander their youth, but by the final lines of the poem, we can see that all this talk was just about marriage. "Gather ye rosebuds," and the references to flowers in the poem, can be likened to marriage- the virgins only have but a bit of time to get married, as the rosebuds only have a bit of time to be plucked. (Alternatively, I think the flowers could be used to express female genitalia, as they often are used in literature. The virgins must gather their flowers before time runs out and no one wants their flowers anymore)(flower is also another name people use for vagina but like I don't know why?)
"For having lost but once your prime/ you may forever tarry" This last line really drives it home, basically saying that if you don't marry in your prime, you may never get married (from putting it off our because you're not young and beautiful anymore yay!!!).
So in summary: the poet uses a lot of great metaphors and imagery to demonstrate the passing of time, and encourage some virgins to get married.

(Side note: So like cool that part of this poem is all carpe diem but the fact that it's literally just about how if these virgins don't marry before they're out of their prime they never will is sooooooo gross.
and like I also recognize the time period it was written in but this poem didn't stop being read back then, people still read it now. We need to be conscious of how literature can shape our world, and in our current world, telling a woman she better get married now before she isn't pretty anymore and no one will want her is real messed up and rubs me the wrong way and makes me so confused as to how people don't understand how literature can be political??? And how they try to remove the text from the present day with excuses like "WELL WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN BLAH BLAH BLAH" like okay???That's great if your analyzing it purely New Historical. But that's not what our society is like right now. Ideas change, society changes, morals change. Anyway I'm sorry this was way off track and more political than I'd need to be on the AP test but I'm real heated about what's going on in baltimore right now  + having a white conservative family try to tell me about it lmaaaaaaooooooo so yeah I hope you're having a great night Bavaro)

Blog Post #10 "My Papa's Waltz" by Theodore Roethke

Poem:

The whiskey on your breath   

Could make a small boy dizzy;   

But I hung on like death:   

Such waltzing was not easy.

We romped until the pans   

Slid from the kitchen shelf;   

My mother’s countenance   

Could not unfrown itself.

The hand that held my wrist   

Was battered on one knuckle;   

At every step you missed

My right ear scraped a buckle.

You beat time on my head   

With a palm caked hard by dirt,   

Then waltzed me off to bed   

Still clinging to your shirt.

Response: 

To be completely honest, the first time I read this, I thought it was about the young boy being abused by his alcoholic father. the language that the poet uses to describe the scene is very violent and/or has a negative connotation. For example, the first line is "whiskey on your breath" which already sets the father up as someone who is drunk or has been drinking, and is followed by "could make a small boy dizzy," also showing that the father has been drinking enough to affect his son, either because he smells the whiskey, or the whiskey causes the father to act in such a way/do things that make the boy dizzy. Right after is also the line :hung on like death," the "death" part in particular adding to a dreary mood.
Then, there are the lines "The hand that held my wrist/ was battered on one knuckle." The fact that the father's knuckle is battered could suggest that he's violent/ gets into fights in order to have his knuckle damaged.
The two lines after, "my right ear scraped a buckle," could be seen as the son getting hit by a belt, like getting hit on his ears (I know some friends who used to be "disciplined" by being beat on the ears/head).  The next stanza starts with the line "you beat time on my head," with the word "beat" adding to this interpretation because it comes off as a very emphatic/strong way to put this, and could also be like the father beating him continuously over time.

However, I do think the poem can be read as just a very loud, rambunctious waltz session between a son and his father, where they're being super loud in the kitchen and mom disproves and whenever the missteps the son bumps his ear on his belt buckle because he's short and the dead is a little drunk so he's a bit careless with how he's keeping time on the kids head. It's just that the connotation of the words, and the diction, makes the scene seem very upsetting/violent/not like a super fond memory.

Update: I looked on shmoop and they talked about the poets history and how his dad died when he was young and that he still tends to write like a lost young boy and how even his memories that should be happy have been tainted with his father's death which could be why this scene came off as so morbid and I think that's really interesting!! Just because using the author's personal history to analyze a piece of literature sin't really something I'm super used to. I mean we've done it sometimes but it's never been super heavily emphasized/ ingrained in me to do it.

Blog Post #9, "Rites of Passage"

Poem:

Rites of Passage by Sharon Olds

As the guests arrive at our son’s party   

they gather in the living room—

short men, men in first grade

with smooth jaws and chins.

Hands in pockets, they stand around

jostling, jockeying for place, small fights

breaking out and calming. One says to another

How old are you? —Six. —I’m seven. —So?

They eye each other, seeing themselves   

tiny in the other’s pupils. They clear their   

throats a lot, a room of small bankers,

they fold their arms and frown. I could beat you

up, a seven says to a six,

the midnight cake, round and heavy as a

turret behind them on the table. My son,

freckles like specks of nutmeg on his cheeks,   

chest narrow as the balsa keel of a   

model boat, long hands

cool and thin as the day they guided him   

out of me, speaks up as a host

for the sake of the group.

We could easily kill a two-year-old,

he says in his clear voice. The other   

men agree, they clear their throats

like Generals, they relax and get down to   

playing war, celebrating my son’s life.

Response:

So this poem is basically about a first grade boy celebrating his birthday in a room filled with friends. From the title, it can be determined that the poem is about some kind of rite of passage, the transition from one phase of life to another. After reading the poem, I think this transition could possibly be the passage from boyhood into adulthood. This is odd to say, considering these are six and seven year olds, but their actions could be mirroring this transition, or at least be imitating it. The behavior the boys are displaying, particularly the description of this behavior, is resonant with males much older, drifting into becoming working adults. For example, "They clear their throats a lot, a room of small bankers, they fold their arms and frown" displays behavior that might normally be attributed to older people (especially with the help of "small bankers" as a descriptor). "Small bankers" especially adds to the feeling of these boys at least imitating this journey into adulthood, by assigning the boys a role that they're acting out, and the 'small" separates them from the occupation, makes them seem different from just a "normal" banker. The line "speaks up as a host for the sake of the group" also gives off a more "adult" feeling, as you have someone stepping out as leader and making their voice heard, and being a "host."I also think part of this passage communicates the propensity (I'd say more the inclination vs the natural tendency tbh bc I personally think a lot of it is nurture and society raising men to believe it's totally okay for them to be violent and in fact teaching them that it's manly to be violent) towards violence in men and this allowance of letting boys grow up believing that this is the behavior expected of them. Kids tend to mirror the behavior they see, hence their body language (the folding of the arms, clearing their throats), but also these ideas. They're surrounded by men all the time who probably also feel like they need to be violent or have been taught to be violent and the kids are mirroring that behavior and it shows boys being taught to be so violent and war hungry since a small age. This is their rite of passage, this violence is a sign of their growing up and embracing theworld around them. The line "they relax and get down to playing war" suggests further this passivity regarding violence and how lightly it's often regarded, hence the "relax." It is implying that playing war, war being an intensely emotionally, mentally, and physically violent environment, is relaxing for the boys. But yeah, I think the poem addresses how part of "growing up" for men often involves developing this violent nature that becomes regarded as normal, and that it is developed at a very young age, and is so normal in fact, that it is used as a "celebration" in this context.