I Am Hungry!

My poor-minded self was unable to find a way to attach the document, nor find anyone who was willing to help me. I therefore post the answers in the old-school style.

 

1. A child narrates his childhood, and his point of view on nature, specifically frogspawn. The child describes the setting of flax that “had rotted there, weighted down by huge sods”, and remembers how Miss Walls would tell him about the “daddy frog” and the “mammy frog”. Miss Walls’ way of speaking is evidence that the narrator is young. The child later narrates how the frogs suddenly change and become aggressive.
2. The poem is set in two stanzas so that the change between the innocent frogs and the aggressive frogs is more noticeable and impacting. The tone changes between the two stanzas, as the first one is more innocent, childish, while the second one contains disgust and is aggressive.

 

1. “Bubbles gargled delicately” line 5
   ”green and heavy-headed/Flax had rotted there” line 2 and 3
   ”For they were yellow in the sun and brown/In rain.” Line 20 and 21 

 

1. In the first stanza, the boy looks innocent and playful with the frogs and their spawns, especially when he “fill[s] jampotfuls of the jellied/Specks to range on window-sills at home” (L. 11 & 12).

 

1. The words of the teacher show the innocence and the youngness of the child. The words such as “mammy frog” and “daddy frog” show that the teacher is an adult talking to children.

 

1. “Bubble gargled delicately” (L.5) “Wove a strong gauze of sound around the smell” (L.6) “warm thick slobber of frogspawn” (L.8)

 

1. “festered” creates an impression of disgust as it symbolizes rotting which gives a negative connotation. “heavy-headed” creates a similar impression since it gives a dullish idea of the flax, again with a negative connotation. Finally, the “rotted” shows the sense of decay. All these negative words work as a foreshadowing for the events to come.

 

1. “croaking” (L.25) “slap and plop” (L.29) This appeals to the senses first making the reader imagine the frogs in a gross way. Heaney decides to use these words in order to show a contrast between the innocence that the child originally had with the monstrous transformations that the frog went through.
2. The words work because they are part of representations of the battle war that is taking place between the boys innocence and that of his lose which creates him to be scared of what he had done in the past. This represents the sounds of guns shooting which goes back to the representation of the battle.

 

1. “pulsed like sails” (L.28) means that the necks of the frogs were inflating in a gross way that provoked disgust and fear to the reader. “poised like mud grenades” (L.30) shows an aggressive and violent idea of the frogs, especially by comparing the scene to a battlefield.

 

1. Heaney shows his feelings have changed by presenting the frogs in a disgusting way as well as comparing it to war and aggression. Words such as “invaded”, “sickened” and “vengeance” produce these images and feelings of disgust in the reader’s mind.

 

1. The title represents the death of innocence and how the narrator has a battle between his youth and childhood and what has become of him. It is not literally a death, but more like the disappearance of his naturalist self that used to love frogs, as well as his lost innocence.

 

1. The general lesson from the poem is that as one grows up, things change. What used to be this way is now different, sometimes better, other times worst, but it will never be the same. Time changes, people changes, things change, and we change. As one grows, the emotions and the way we perceive things change.

In one of my past journals I wrote a response to “Confessions of a Pilgrim Shopaholic” by Paul Rudnick, an interesting author whose short-stories often made fun of current cultural events. After reading another of his short stories entitled “Amen, Brother” and having a good laugh, I decided to write another journal on Paul Rudnick’s stories. In short, “Amen Brother” is a short story by Paul Rudnick that briefly narrates the life of a homosexual man. However, not any kind of homosexual, but a very Christian one, named Stan Belker. He lives in Nashville, and is the pastor there. As most of you will see, there is a deep, interesting paradox: Christianity and homosexuality going hand to hand peacefully. It is this irony, this sarcasm that is found in some of Rudnick’s works, that I enjoy the most. This author of short stories has the skill, and the courage, of bringing controversial topics in his stories. Since the theme is very controversial, I would like to say that I have nothing for or against homosexuality. In addition, I do not support the Church, God, homosexuality, or anything.

            Christianity and homosexuals (which I might refer to as “gay” from now on as it has the same meaning but shorter spelling) are currently two very opposing parties. Christians (not all, but many of them, especially those believing in the Bible) condemn homosexuality, while homosexuals have varying arguments. Some of them claim that “they are made that way”, that “homosexuality is of no harm to the participants or anyone else”, and that “if it feels right to those involved, it is nobody else’s business”. There is a huge debate and conflict between both parties, especially the extremists and activists. Now back to “Amen Brother”.

 

 

            The short story, consisting of 13 paragraphs, turns around Stan Belker and his internal conflict. This man is tormented between his apparent homosexuality and his deep faith. Although very religious, he is unable to stop his gay thoughts, ideas, or attitude. This does not bother him very much, apart from the fact that he is aware of it and is sad about the violation of his religious beliefs. Apart from that, Stan lives a happy life.

            The first paragraph is a single sentence: “What my therapist says is that I am a heterosexual with issues. —Ted Haggard.” This statement, by Ted Haggard, is the reason why Stan narrates his story. The short story is written in first person, from Stan’s point of view. This makes the reader sort of “listen” to Stan’s story as if he was close by, reading it. The second paragraph begins with Stan saying thanks to Ted and his therapist for the statement mentioned above. Stan thanks them because, although he is gay, he is Christian, and prefers the term “heterosexual with issues” rather than just “homosexual”. This paragraph serves as an introductory paragraph, and occurs in the present, before Stan begins telling his story.

The third paragraph describes Stan’s youth as a teenager, and begins with irony in a funny way, as Stan says he “was attracted both to serving Our Lord and to Jimmy Wiggins, the assistant coach”. Having this accepted reality of being gay, with this conviction of serving the Lord, is unexpected and fun, which makes it seem almost as a joke. This hilarity continues when expresses his love for God, but also complains on the fact that He created “Jimmy’s snug little soccer shorts”. Stan expresses his thoughts of his crush on the coach by comparing “Jimmy Wiggins’s firm, high buttocks” to Satan’s call. Through this comparison we can see that teenage Stan was confused, and afraid, of his sexuality, especially when he questions himself if he was “experiencing a completely normal phase of adolescent uncertainty”.

In the fourth paragraph, Stan says he wants to change; he wants to be a good Christian. The dilemma is that he cannot be both Christian and gay. To straighten his behavior (fun word choice hehe) he decides to go on dates with “virginal girls, who luckily often had strong, masculine jawlines.” It is fun, and ironic, to see that although Stan wants to be better, to change his habits, he unconsciously continues with his attraction to males. In a conversation with one of his female friends on St. Francis and St. Michael, Stan declares that St. Francis “to die for, but Michael should work on his calf muscles”, which further proves his unconscious homosexual behavior.

The fifth paragraph is more direct, as Stan immediately mentions his “first sexual encounter with a man—Brad Bicknell”. Brad flirted with Stan by with an indirect sentence, by saying that he has “absolutely no intention of allowing [their] eyes to lock over the bread basket, because that would only lead to the surprisingly roomy back seat of my Toyota Celica, where [they]’d be forced to grapple with each other’s moist, engorged man areas.” Curiously enough, Stan seems not to notice this very non-euphemistic (or perhaps he unconsciously just wanted it).

            In the sixth paragraph, Stan uses the excuse of wanting to know things so he could “be ashamed of it”. The irony goes on when Stan declares to Brad during their intercourse that although what they are doing “feels unbelievably good”, “it’s nothing compared with what [he] hope[s] to one day experience with [his] future wife, if she’s double-jointed.” Interestingly enough, this continues in the seventh paragraph, in which Stan finds out that what he’s been doing with Brad “is wrong, especially after the fifty-eighth time”. Stan ends the relationship, without forgetting to mention that Brad’s “mustache tickles”. Through this the reader can see that either Stan is very stupid, or he is really affected by his homosexual tendencies (which, I want to add, are neither right nor wrong). After finishing the relationship with Brad, Stan meets Stacy, and immediately notices the pictures of her “sturdy quarterback brother, Frank, at the beach in a Speedo”. Although wanting to engage in a heterosexual relationship, Stan’s gay tendencies are still present. After being together in a relationship for twelve years, without making love, they finally got married. Stan added to this thought that he wanted sex with his wife to be “sacred and special, and not just mindless, unending pleasure, like sex with a guy.” The reader, although laughing a lot, will feel sad or sorry for Stan, who apparently wants to get out of his sexuality problem, but doesn’t quite manage to.

            The eighth paragraph narrates Stan’s married life. Although married, Stan accept that he would occasionally “seduce a seventeen-year-old lad after choir practice”, to which he uses the excuse that he’s “not perfect”. In this paragraph, Stan also mentions that he goes to a therapist, who made him realize that his actions were inappropriate, even though they were listed in boldface on the daily church calendar, as ‘Nude Prayer,’ ‘Nude Prayer in the Basement,’ and ‘Nude Prayer with Mutual Body Scrub’.” This illustrates that Stan was really “blind” and could not realize nor recognize that his behavior, even as a pastor. The ninth paragraph also illustrates this idea when Stan misinterprets Jack’s “offer of drugs and orgies was just an expression of low self-esteem”, and accepts it, later realizing that Jack is “a drug dealer and a prostitute”, using the excuse that at that time, Stan was plunged in his innocence.

The last three paragraphs, although showing a possible solution, demonstrate that Stan is completely unable to resolve his conflict. However, Stan manages to calm his internal struggle when God tells him that he can “begin to truly know thyself, and therefore to know God”. In the discussion between Stan and God, the author includes an ironic humor present in many of his works (which makes me laugh), by making God say “Stan, put down that bottle and that copy of People’s Sexiest Man Alive issue with Hugh Jackman on the cover, because he’s never going to write back.” The last paragraphs show that Stan cannot solve his problem because, although he says that he is not perfect and “he’s never going to be perfect”, he accepts that he would “offer Keanu Reeves a papal blessing in exchange for his underpants.” which demonstrates his still present homosexual desires.

In the last paragraph, Stan finished narrating the story of his life throughout the different ages and is back to the present (as in the first paragraph), addressing to Ted Haggard. Stan says “Ted, if you can make it, I can make it. Together we can move forward, into the clean bright light of the Christian dawn. Together we can make only the most righteous choices. Together we will become decent Christian adults. Call me.” The most important line is probably the last one, which brings again the irony and Stan’s impossibility to change by making him ask Ted to call him.

 

            Through this ironic short story, Paul Rudnick brings up many different messages, mostly in favor of the homosexual community. One of the messages conveyed is that homosexuality is, contrary to what many religious persons believes, not a choice but a biological tendency, which is something that can rarely change. Other messages can vary depending on your interpretation, but whatever message you interpret, Rudnick managed to fulfill the purpose of this short story: entertain and make the reader laugh, or at least smile. After all, it’s in the humor section!

 

 

And here’s the link, as always: http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2009/04/27/090427sh_shouts_rudnick

 

And an interesting extremist argument from Christianity against homosexuality:

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c040.html

 

I say yet again that I take no part whatsoever on any of the communities; neither religious nor homosexual. In addition, none of them is either right or wrong.

He Wishes for the Cloths of Heaven – William Butler Yeats

 

Had I the heavens’ embroidered cloths,

Enwrought with golden and silver light,

The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half-light,

I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.

 

Since we saw this short poem in class, and I found it particularly elegant, I decided to analyze it as a journal.

 

The poem “He Wishes for the Cloths of Heaven” by William Butler Yeats has a simple structure. It is relatively short: a single stanza consisting of eight lines. This contrasts with the complex, deep meaning that the poem actually has. This short poem has an ABAB rhyme, repeating the same words (cloths – light – cloths – light), which makes it very melodious. The voice is directing this apparent love message to another person; both the voice and the person receiving the message are anonymous. In fact, the other person is not even present in the poem.

The poem is about a person, seemingly poor, who would like to offer objects of great value to the person he or she loves. He or she doesn’t want to offer just cloths, but “embroidered cloths”, which are more precious. In addition, he wants these embroidered clothes to be “enwrought with golden and silver”, which are precious materials. This shows an important, although materialistic, love from the voice towards the other person. The voice would also like to offer “nigh and light and the half-light”, which are impossible to offer as they are not even concrete objects, but more like events. One can’t grab the night or light. However, the voice does not want to offer just night and light, but cloths representing them. “The blue and the dim and the dark cloths / of night and light and the half-light”. Through this metaphor, the author is associating the colored cloths to night and light: blue with night, dim with light, and dark with half-light. This first part, the first four lines are like a wish, the dream of the voice, as he/she would like to offer embroidered cloths enwrought with golden and silver to spread it under the feet of the person he or she loves, but is unable to. In the sixth line, the voice expresses “But I, being poor, have only my dreams” which means that what was mentioned before, he/she is unable to give them due to poverty. The last two lines are the most meaningful to me. The voice states “I have spread my dreams under your feet; tread softly because you tread on my dreams”, which can have various interpretations. The first, important thing to note is that the voice, being poor, has offered the most valuable thing he or she could offer to the person he/she loves: his/her dreams. This is, in a way, the ultimate sign of love that the poor voice can give to his/her love. The last line states to “tread softly” on the dreams. The reason why you must tread softly is because these dreams are fragile, they can easily break. The voice is therefore warning, or pleading, or simply asking gently to the person he/she loves to walk softly on his dreams.

Personally, I interpret this as a person that declares his/her love to the other person, and hopes that he/she will “tread softy” so as to not break it, considering its fragility. I am probably wrong thought…

Ode to the sharp pencil resting on my desk

 

A sharp pencil

Is laying on my desk

Its graphite point

Piercing through the air

 

A sharp pencil,

Dear sharp pencil,

With its magic movements

Writing mystic words

Portraying fantastic meanings

That imagination can barely grasp

 

This sharp pencil,

With its eraser used up

Lays on this desk,

As if requesting something

Requesting to be used

Requesting to do magic

 

The sharp pencil

Writes sharp words

With clever meanings

And cleverer words

Words that go on

Into infinity

Without being used up

And resting eternally

In an eternal way

Just like the pencil rests

Calm, serene,

Waiting to be used

One last time.

With the intent of diverting myself, and of course with the purpose of completing the given literary assignment, I rummaged through the New Yorker Online’s humor section. After skimming through the many tittles, and reading one or two short stories, I came across a title that evoked a particular thought. “Confessions of a Pilgrim Shopaholic”, by Paul Rudnick, automatically reminded me of the book “Confessions of a Shopaholic” by Sophie Kinsella, and the movie with the same title. To summarize it briefly, the original “Confessions of a Shopaholic” portrays Rebecca Bloomwood, a young woman with a shopping obsession (which created the word “shopaholic”) who accidentally ends up writing in a financial magazine. Things actually work out nicely for her, and the public enjoy the comparisons and metaphors she uses in the financial magazine. However, her real dream is to write in a fashion magazine.

I have no read the book entirely, although I did read some of it, and in my opinion, I classify it in the “airport novels” genre. Anyhow, my goal is not to criticize this book (although I could do it if I get a copy and finish reading it); my goal is to write about Paul Rudnick’s version of the “shopaholic” story.

 

Although the title is very similar in both the short-story and the novel, the plot differs in many ways. To start with, the setting is not the same; Rudnick’s version illustrates a woman in Plymouth Colony in 1626, while the original version is based on present time. The protagonist in Rudnick’s version is, in fact, also named Rebecca, which shows some more similarities with the original version; although this time she is a pilgrim, a colonizer coming to the New World (nowadays USA).

 

 

Paul Rudnick’s short story is filled with irony and sarcasm, which I do enjoy quite a bit. In contrast to Kinsella’s novel, Rebecca is overwhelmed and feels guilty of buying “a thimbleful of salt” every 5 years. Furthermore, she mentions that she had only “two simple black woolen dresses” that she “alternated wearing in the years”. This kind of irony, almost a mock, shows the author’s disagreement with the “shopaholic fad”. The author further reinforces this feeling when making Rebecca think and long for “patching a frayed collar on one of the dresses” and then making her exclaim “Have I no shame?” showing a great deal of irony. Rudnick then uses a harsh sarcasm, which indirectly also criticizes society, when mentioning a woman who “bartered her second child” for a “wooden button”. Child bartering is illegal in many, if not most countries, and anyways, what kind of mother would do that? Not even animals barter their children. However, the author uses this extreme example to show how much a shopaholic would give up in order to get a simple item. The preacher reacts to this (rather inhuman) act by railing “against the need for additional buttons”, and by calling the woman a “spendthrift and a profligate”, emphasizing on the issue. Rudnick uses other extremes that are much more improbable, by showing the other women’s reaction as surrounding her, “staring at her button in adoration”. The word adoration has a very strong meaning, and the author could have used some other word, but it wouldn’t have had the same effect. Rudnick illustrates through this adoration how people, and often society, follow other people, or fashions. Afterwards, the author says that the women “ripped her limbs from her torso and ate them”, showing a rather impossible situation, taking into account that this happened in front of the preacher.

The author even gets to a point in which hypocrisy when introducing the protagonist’s daughter. The little girl made “a doll from a small rock”, to which the mother answers by striking her and exclaiming “Be ye the Queen of the Nile, with such gilded pleasures?” which would mean that a simple rock is a luxury good.

 

Afterwards, the author illustrates a market, which the protagonist compares to “the French court”, due to the important goods such as the “rusted spoon” and “the box of damp matches” that Rebecca is unable to resist. The story ends up when Rebecca is exorcised, because she is possessed by “a demon from some future century”, ironically leading us back to the original novel. After the exorcism, Rebecca is able to walk again in the streets without even wanting to pick up “a pretty yellow leaf” from the ground, proving that she is free, and yet again mocking the materialism of shopaholics. The last sentence of the short-story is more humoristic, although it involves a subject considered as taboo: sex. The story ends when Rebecca mentions that she had “intimate relations” with her husband in March, and that he might be possessed by a demon as well because he desires the relations again “although it is only November”.

 

Paul Rudnick’s short story illustrates problems in our society by making a contrast with a modern novel. At the same time, he manages to mock ironically Sophie Kinsella’s work, as well as the “shopaholics” in general. To achieve this, Rudnick uses hypocrisy, irony, and far-fetched examples with a touch of sarcastic humor. The finished work, although short, remains precise, concise, and enjoyable (unless you are a shopaholic fan). If one looks for a hidden message, then the author might be reproaching the way we (humans in developed countries) have become more and more materialists throughout the years. This interpretation is not in disapproval with the short-story, as Rudnick’s text presents a setting of people similar to the Amish culture, in which materialism is an unwanted characteristic.

And here is the link: http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2009/03/16/090316sh_shouts_rudnick

I learned to read at a rather early age, compared to the average, and reading has been one of my passions since then. One of the first books that I read, titled “Les Fables de la Fontaine”, is a recompilation of poems and short stories written by one of the most important figures in the French literature.

Jean de la Fontaine (1621-1695) is, according to Flaubert, one of the first writers to “understand and master the texture of the French language”. The works of this author fall in three categories: fables, contes and others/miscellaneous. He is mostly known for his famous fables, which are in fact based on past authors such as Aesop, Horace, Boccaccio, Ariosto, Machiavelli and even ancient Indian literature.

I enjoyed reading the fables for many reasons, although it was difficult for me to read them at my young age as they are written in old French; the equivalent of Shakespeare’s literature. What I enjoyed the most was the presence of morals and hidden meanings behind the wonderful, poetic lines. One of the most famous, and one of my favorite fables is “Le Corbeau et le Renard” (The Crow and the Fox). However, I feel that when translated into other languages, the fable loses some, in fact, a great deal of significance and profoundness, so I will present them to you through this journal.

               Le Corbeau et le Renard

Maître Corbeau, sur un arbre perché,

Tenait en son bec un fromage.

Maître Renard, par l'odeur alléché,

Lui tint à peu près ce langage :

"Hé ! bonjour, Monsieur du Corbeau.

Que vous êtes joli ! que vous me semblez beau !

Sans mentir, si votre ramage

Se rapporte à votre plumage,

Vous êtes le Phénix des hôtes de ces bois. "

A ces mots le Corbeau ne se sent pas de joie ;

Et pour montrer sa belle voix,

Il ouvre un large bec, laisse tomber sa proie.

Le Renard s'en saisit, et dit : "Mon bon Monsieur,

Apprenez que tout flatteur

Vit aux dépens de celui qui l'écoute :

Cette leçon vaut bien un fromage, sans doute. "

Le Corbeau, honteux et confus,

Jura, mais un peu tard, qu'on ne l'y prendrait plus.

Written by Jean de la Fontaine (1621 – 1695)

================================================

The Crow and The Fox

Master Crow sat on a tree,

Holding a cheese in his beak.

Master Fox was attracted by the odour,

And tried to attract him thus.

"Mister Crow, good day to you.

You are a handsome and good looking bird!

In truth, if your song is as beautiful as your plumage,

You are the Phoenix of this forest."

Hearing these words the Crow felt great joy,

And to demonstrate his beautiful voice,

He opened his mouth wide and let drop his prey.

The Fox seized it and said: "My good Sir,

Know that every flatterer,

Lives at the expense of those who take him seriously:

This is a lesson that is worth a cheese no doubt."

The Crow, embarrassed and confused,

Swore, though somewhat later,

that he would never be tricked thus again. 

Translated by Michael Star

 

To begin with, the rhyme suffers a great loss: the French version begins with an ABAB rhyme (é-e-é-e) and then continues with a AABB rhyme. On the other hand, there is no rhyme in the English version, causing the text to lose an element of poetry; and in this case, an important element. When looking further at the structure of the poems, one can notice that the two of them are made of only one stanza, and both have 18 lines. The structure is similar, although the word count does differ between the original version and the translated version. The amount of syllables per line shows a slight pattern in the French version, although apparently not really relevant apart from the aesthetic side. The English version appears to have no pattern in syllables. The wordcount doesn’t reveal any pattern in any of the two versions. When looking at the literary features, one can observe enjambments present in both of the versions, helping the author transmit his message (which is actually the morale that I will discuss later). The enjambments create a better effect in the French version, because, along with the rhyme, the enjambments accentuate the poetry and feeling of the text. Personification is, of course, present, due to the human characteristics attributed to the animals. The personifications appear in both versions of the poem, as they are part of the main idea and participate in creating the morale of the story. The morale, which is the focus of every fable, appears in both versions of the poem. In fact, it is even mentioned in both texts, when the Fox expresses that “every flatterer/lives at the expense of those who take him seriously”. Although this is the main morale, and the one that the author intended to express, other morales can be discovered when interpreting the text with one’s subjectivity.

Another important fact of this fable (among the others of its collection) is that it was given to a prince of France as a gift. Ironically, it was at the same time, a mock. Some people even consider it a satire, as it express a high-placed character (in this case the crow), being fooled by a clever courtier who wants his share of the ”cheese” (representing power). The text also represents the important role, and power, of language in order to reach one’s goals.

In my biased opinion, I would say that the translation of De La Fontaine’s fable is helpful in the sense that it shares the French culture to other communities, transmitting the morale and giving literary appreciation to the world. However, I can not feel some sort of deception due to the losses that the poem suffered during the translation, and I believe that the translation to English over-simplified the text. Anyhow, I admit that the translator did a very good job, as I can not think of any other ways this could have been translated.

The Oulipo, or “Ouvroir de Littérature Potentielle”, is a revolutionary movement that was created in 1960 by two French writers and mathematicians, Raymond Queneau and Francois Le Lionnais. This movement united and, in a way, reconciled both the scientific and literary ideals. The technique involved in the Oulipo, commonly known as “n + 7″, consists of simply modifying a text by changing every noun by the seventh next noun in a given dictionary. As mentioned by the Compte de Lauréamont, “poetry must be made by all and not by one”. This method illustrates nicely Lauréamont’s opinion.

To exemplify this strange and fascinating movement, I will use the “n +7″ in a common mathematical postulate: Euclid’s 5th postulate. Euclid, a famous mathematician, wrote 5 postulates; the first four were accepted as theories, but the fifth one has not yet been proven as a theory.

Euclid’s fifth postulate:
“If two lines are drawn which intersect a third in such a way that the sum of the inner angles on one side is less than two right angles, then the two lines inevitably must intersect each other on that side if extended far enough.”

Now, with Oulipo’s “n + 7″ technique applied:

“If two lingeries are drawn which intersect a third in such a weak that the summons of the inner animation on one side-track is less than two right animations, then the two lingeries inevitably must intersect each other on that side-track if extended far enough.”

As you can notice, the significance and meaning of the whole postulate changes when Oulipo’s techniques are applied. The new text is more poetic, some would even argue that it has become poetry, although i do not agree. I modified the text using Webster’s 1999 American English Dictionary, but trying with different dictionaries will, of course, give different results.Of course, I will try with other texts containing more nouns. Scientific postulates work best, as the new text created becomes hilarious.

The reason behind this movement was to show to the French community, which is where it started, and to the world, two main ideas. The first one, is that language and literature are as important as science and mathematics. Literature and language suffered a great deal during and after the war; many people in the countries affected stopped reading due to the great poverty, lack of freedom of speech, and fear that the war had caused. Furthermore, children would not always go to school, in fact, it was common that the children stayed home, and many did not learn how to read. After the war, a lot of people thought that the most important things to learn were science and mathematics, often forgetting, or studying very little language and literature. This is why the Oulipo’s “goal” was to, although in a funny way, show the French that literature and language were also very important. The second idea behind the Oulipo movement was to show that poetry was not reserved only to the important persons, nor to the smart people, in fact, poetry is at everybody’s grasp. Of course, by this I mean that anyone can make “normal” poetry, as making “good” poetry is not that simple. With the Oulipo, Raymond Queneau and Francois Le Lionnais proved that anyone can make poetry if he or she gives it a try.

 Feel free to try with your own dictionaries and texts, and leave it as a comment!

Some random persons are making comments on our posts, and are even posting links. Do NOT click on the links, and if you get this comments, mark them as spam and delete them! Some random user called “jerometaylor” or something similar posted a link, although i got warned by my anti-virus.

Nymph and Shepherd

by Donald Hall                                                                                         October 20, 2008

 

She died a dozen times before I died,

And kept on dying, nymph of fatality.

I could not die but once although I tried.

 

I envied her. She whooped, she laughed, she cried

As she contrived each fresh mortality,

Numberless lethal times before I died.

 

I plunged, I plugged, I twisted, and I sighed

While she achieved death’s Paradise routinely.

I lagged however zealously I tried.

 

She writhed, she bucked, she rested, and, astride,

She posted, cantering on top of me

At least a hundred miles until I died.

 

I’d never blame you if you thought I lied

About her deadly prodigality.

She died a dozen times before I died

Who could not die so frequently. I tried.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/fiction/poetry/2008/10/20/081020po_poem_hall

 

The poem Nymph and Shepherd, by Donald Hall, has an interesting title that suggests a troubled love. The title reminded me the Song of Wandering Aengus because of the word nymph. The poem consists of five stanzas and is written in iambic pentameter of ten syllables. The first four stanzas have three lines each; however, the last stanza has an extra line, which I believe was added at the end to give a stronger meaning of the poem. The theme is pessimistic, kind of a dark mood, since it is characterized by death. The author seems to give a positive, although sad meaning to death. The voice wanted “zealously” to die, and tried “numberless lethal times”. The voice’s death was caused by the nymph, who is referred to by the voice as the “nymph of fatality”. The rhyme of each verse is repeated through the first four stanzas, and it is an ABA composed of the endings “ied” for A, and “y” for B. The final stanza is different as it is an ABAA rhyme, repeating the last A. This last line has an interesting structure and meaning as it is the only one formed by two sentences. If you look carefully, the sound of the end of the first sentence is “y” which is B. However, the second sentence “I tried” finished with an A. This last line changes the structure, rhyme and organization of the poem, and has a meaning of lamentation. By this I mean that the stanzas used to be of three lines each, with this last line the final stanza is formed by four lines. The rhyme of the poem was ABA and because of this last line it changes to ABAA. The poem was composed of one sentence per line until the last line. All this was made to really emphasize on the meaning of these last sentences which are unusually strong. The voice says with a sarcastic tone “who could not die so frequently”, which is also a mockery and a rant on the nymph’s easiness at dying. The voice regrets that it can not die although it tried. We can identify in the tone that the voice tries and really wants this death; it almost looks as it needs to die. These dark thoughts make me think that the author was troubled while writing this poem, as it almost looks like a suicide letter. Actually, the tone and mood expressed by the voice, the aura released by the poem, gives an uneasy feeling as if you were reading a suicide note. It feels almost as if you are reading the last words of someone who tried to die before the nymph did, and lost this race to death because it died after the nymph. The second, third and fourth stanzas each start with a series of actions such as “plunged, plugged, twisted, sighed, writhed, bucked and rested”. This series serves for the purpose of explaining all the acts that the nymph did easily, and how the voice dealt with these by trying to suicide. This poem is intriguing by the uneasy feeling it gives, but this also make me not enjoy the poem as it has a very dark, unusual aura.

            While remembering what a stream of consciousness was (not that I had forgotten), I decided to try and mix my stream of consciousness with some other writing styles such as the style used in “Blindness” by Saramago, and the style used in “Sobre Heroes y Tumbas” by Sabato. I don’t actually believe I can do great with this, but anyways, Saramago has a very specific kind of punctuation and uses commas most of the time, even when he changes of idea of sentence, sometimes, where supposed to write a dot to finish the sentence, Saramago just goes on and puts commas, and this is what I am going to try as I like experimenting new things, on the other hand, Sabato uses very long sentences (most of the time) and likes to include parenthesis to say little things such as what the charaters of his story think (or at least that is what I think). I just remembered that I have not justified the borders, so I will do so right now, although I am not sure if the authors mentioned above justify the sentences (but if they used Microsoft Word to type it then they should), today I went to the final of the Junior Achievement project, many people were there, and different activities. The room had many chairs installed, and since I was bored by the non-concise and non-preciseness of the presentations and speeches and intrigued by the nervous persons so I decided to count how many chairs there were, after a quick mental process I counted an estimate of 450 chairs (although they were not all occupied), and I thought that about 200 more chairs could be added without overcrowding the place. While waiting for the turn of the project “Ethics” I decided to study the behavior of people, which is a very funny thing to observe, some were very nervous in a negative way, they were sweating and shaking, while others were much exited and dissimulated lamely their attempt to not run when called to the podium. The stressed and nervous people would have little to say, and I noticed that some of them had their legs that shook like when you bend a ruler, while the others would run and read a three or four paragraph message that they had prepared with much (too much in my opinion) care for this special occasion, when my turn came I walked up, thanked the people in charge, and gave a two-sentence message, which was (of course translated from Spanish) “It is important for us, the youth, to stimulate ethics as we are the models of the young and the hope of the future. It is important to use ethics not only in school projects or competition, but we must apply it in everything we do for a better society.” Since I improvised, I do not know if it was good enough, but I think it is better to have a more direct, and clear message, plus since it was short it was not as boring as the long ones (or so I thought), I even applied what I learned in English class, conciseness and preciseness, which, when you come to it, make things better to understand and much more pleasant, however, I know that this work I am writing right now must lack a lot of these two elements, but I guess this has to do with the style and effect I am trying to create. I am freezing here, after living five years in a country at which the average temperature of the day is between 28 degrees Celsius and 40 degrees, and I remember that at night you could not sleep if you didn’t have at least a fan (although it was still really hard to sleep with fan and I needed the air conditioner), and when there would be a power failure, you would not sleep until the power was back on, which is very different from here, since I am wearing jeans and a long sleeves shirt and still feel the cold, well I guess this will be it for now, I will go get some food because I am really starving, although starving is a strong word, but then it is better than saying that I am really really really very very hungry, right?, well I don’t know (do I?), but I prefer to say that I’m starving, (I sigh) the conspiracy of language, well it all makes sense now.