Paragraph of Analysis of "To His Coy Mistress"

     The relationship between "To His Coy Mistress" and the  "live fast, die young, make a pretty corpse" is all-too clear in the second stanza, exhibited by gruesome imagery that contrasts with the rest of the poem. Whereas the first stanza laments that the speaker cannot focus on the object of his affection's beauty for all eternity, expressing in an admiring tone, and the last stanza states in a passionate tone his desire to live in the moment, the second stanza has a much less affectionate tone. He discusses the "deserts of vast eternity" (24), i.e. death, similarly referencing a "marble vault" and  "worms" (26-27). This discussion of death is a complete reversal of the rest of the poem, intended to shock the object of his affections from her comfortable refuge of her coyness into his awaiting arms. In other words, he intends to make his mistress uncomfortable so as to reduce her coyness and increase his attractiveness in the grand scheme of things. He is telling her that she will certainly make a pretty corpse, but that the only one to enjoy this pretty corpse will be the worms, causing her "quaint honor [to] turn to dust" (29). He is telling her not to waste his affections by holding him away until he dies, at which point so would his affections as "all [his] lust" turns "into ashes" (30). Rather, the two of them, by the speaker's thinking, should enjoy the time they have, else her beauty will ultimately have had no purpose- the "beauty [that] shall no more be found" will have been wasted (25). So as not to simply jar her from her complacency and cause her to hate him, he provides himself as a solution for her newly discovered problem of her beauty's ephemeral nature.

The Stranger II: Bk. 1 Ch. 6 - Bk. 2 Ch. 1

Mersault's incomprehensibly impersonal tone in the novel is also evident in his interactions with others. Mersault can see that the magistrate "couldn't understand" why he waited, because this part of Mersault's story is inconsistent with the model that the magistrate has built for Mersault's psyche (68). Mersault's mind cannot be comprehended by the people around him because his absurd philosophy is different from the ideologies of every person around him such as Christianity. He denies that he believes in God, indicative of his absurd philosophy. When the magistrate begins to preach about God, Mersault nods his head, but when the magistrate asks Mersault a second time whether he believes in God, Mersault finds his answer of no "obvious" (69). Mersault believes that his absurd philosophy is perfectly logical, even though it makes no sense to those around him - especially those who believe in a higher power that cares about humans, a god of some sort, which is inherently inconsistent with absurd philosophy.

Paragraph of Analysis of "Woman Work"

Thesis: The first fourteen lines compose an urgent, rapid tone representative of the woman's life that slows and relaxes in the latter half of the poem.

In the first half of the poem, the women talks about all of the things she has to do. She says that she has "got the children to tend / the clothes to mend / the floor to mop / the food to shop" (1-4). The implication behind repeated, anaphoric "got" is that it is an obligation; the repeated infinitives mimic the imperative meaning of the phrase "to do." The rhymes of the poem draw attention to the repeated infinitives and to the short, clipped style of the poem, in turn illustrating the rapid events and necessities of the woman's life. These come together to form the stressed tone of a lady with too many things to do to relax, a situation altogether too common in the typically rushed lifestyle of the modern day.

The Stranger I: Bk. 1 Ch. 3-5

Mersault is pessimistic, having lost all aspirations for anything better because he believes that it will not make him happier. His boss claims that he had lost ambition, but he had said that "I learned very quickly that none of it really mattered" (41). By a similar token, he thinks that it "d[oes]n't really matter [whether they] get married" (41). In both his relationship and his job, Mersault believes that advancement will buy him nothing. Either he believes that progress does not make one happier, or that progress can only cease to make one unhappy. This is indicated by that he "wasn't dissatisfied" with his life (41). The double negative, illustrative of litotes, serves to demonstrate his detached tone as well as offer the possibility that progress may only be able to reduce unhappiness, not increase happiness. Mersault may be correct in this respect, as wealth correlates with happiness below a certain quantity of wealth, i.e. the amount of wealth required to reduce one's unhappiness, but being richer than sustainable does not increase happiness, so you cannot become happier due to wealth - merely less unhappy. Therefore, Mersault's lack of aspiration may be a logical response to the world - but, as with suicide in an absurd philosophy, an unsatisfying one.

Paragraph of Analysis of "One dignity delays for all"

Thesis: This poem takes a cynical tone towards the general populace because they value the dead more than the living.

Dickinson focuses her poem on a funeral, ironically the area that she feels people center their attention too much on. She spends two stanzas presenting this image, from the "coach [...] and footmen" (5) to the "dignified Attendants" (9). In doing so, she illustrates for the reader how much people value the dead, and how much time they spend on a mere corpse. By contrast, Dickinson does not mention the living being that the corpse once was, just as those who might see a funeral procession passing by and feel pity for the corpse would not consider the same person worthy of thought if they happened to pass on the street. Dickinson illustrates by her focus how people have internalized these relative importances to be considered normal, despite the ridiculousness of valuing a body over a living person.

Picture of Dorian Gray VIII: Ch. 18-20

Morality is not an accumulated quantity; it is a rate of change of quality of the soul. The quality of a person's life is the aggregate of the morality of their actions, and morality is the change in a person's quality over time. If someone is doing an act that is morally right, than their quality is increasing, and vice versa. This is illustrated when Dorian says "I am going to be good" (160). The specific meaning of "good" in this context refers to morality, not quality. The future tense indicates that his future deeds will be "good," and therefore the quality of his soul will, from that point on, be increasing. He is not stating that the overall quality of his soul over all of his life will ever be "good," nor that he can compensate for killing Basil. Instead, he is claiming that he will improve the quality of his soul, that he will be morally good. That he is "going to be" morally sound indicates that he has changed. The judgement of a person's quality of soul is a meaningless value, because people change; Dorian's past self has been morally wrong and his future self will be morally right, but measuring the overall quality of his soul will simply return the average morality of his life. If his "soul," such as it were, were to be judged, then this quality, average morality will not necessarily refer to how he would, theoretically, act in such a place. For a proper judgement, Dorian's soul would have to be judged at every instant in his life, and in those instants in which he is morally sound, he goes to "heaven" or some equivalent, and vice versa. In summary, a person cannot be judged based on their average morality; instead, they must be judged in any particular moment based on the morality of that moment.

Picture of Dorian Gray VII: Ch. 15-17

Wilde uses biblical imagery to describe the scenery surrounding Dorian when Dorian goes to get opium. Wilde describes the scene as having "here and there a lantern gleam[ing]", where "the light shook and splintered" (137). The heavy light here implies the presence of God. Furthermore, the description "shook" provides an emotion of fear and awe that would be invoked by God. Furthermore, "gleam" is a verb that describes intense, bright light - an appropriate term to describe divine light. By contrast, Satan is present in "a red glare" (137). Red is a color that can imply demonic presence, and thus the "red glare" could be interpreted figuratively as "the angry glare of Satan." The presence of both God and Satan implies a scene of judgement, namely of Dorian's soul, for which the possibility of salvation is uncertain. Thus, the biblical imagery call to mind that Dorian will ultimately have his soul face divine judgement, and foreshadows that Dorian will not escape his crimes forever.

Picture of Dorian Gray VI: Ch. 9-11

Oscar Wilde has stated that he sees himself in his character Basil. This is visible in several of Basil's statements, which mirror the preface; Basil expresses views that are indicated to be Wilde's by means of their statement in the preface. For instance, Wilde states that "to reveal art and conceal the artist is art's aim" (vii). Basil states that "art conceals the artist far more completely than it ever reveals him" (84). The similar diction - namely, in the phrase "conceal[s] the artist" and the repeated word "reveal" - are illustrative of the word echoes that associate Basil with Wilde. Similarly, Basil states that "art is always more abstract than we fancy," but also that "form and colour tell us of form and colour - that is all" (84). By comparison, Wilde states that "all art is at once surface and symbol" (vii). Both Basil and Wilde discuss the dichotomy of art - that art is simultaneously the direct statement and the underlying meaning. Wilde expresses this through a direct statement of the duality, whereas Basil makes two apparently contradictory statements that come together to form a paradox. Both Basil and Wilde express very similar sentiments regarding the purpose of art, and this is illustrative of the similarities between them that Wilde refers to when he states that Basil Hallward is representative of how he sees himself.

Analysis of "I never saw a Moor" and "'Faith' is a fine invention"

Thesis: Whereas "I never saw a Moor" discusses the existence of God directly, "'Faith' is a fine invention" is a commentary on human views of God and science rather than on the subject itself. The two poems connect in that the opinions that Dickenson analyzes in the latter poem are presented in the former.

• "I never saw a Moor" argues directly for the existence of God.
• There is parallel structure between the first and fifth lines, "I never saw a Moor" (1) and "I never spoke with God" (5) as well as with "yet" in lines 3 and 7. 
• This structure serves to illustrate Dickenson's argument that God exists.
• Dickenson claims that she can be as sure that God exists as she can be that any place she has not seen can be, because she is taking both purely on faith, yet it would be ludicrous to deny the existence of the sea.
• "'Faith' is a fine invention", on the other hand, refers to people's viewpoints on God.
• Rather than making direct claims with "I" as she does in the former poem, Dickenson refers to "Gentlemen"; the different pronoun indicates that she is not considering her own feelings, but general human emotion.
• This poem states that people tend to consider God relevant to their day-to-day lives, but irrelevant to science and its "emergencies."
• "When Gentlemen can see" (2) is contrasted with "In an Emergency" (4) by means of the conjunction "But" (3). Thus, the things that people can see, where faith is acceptable, is different than the world people cannot directly observe, in which faith is thrown to the wayside in favor of science.
• This opinion is often how people reconcile science and religion, and Dickenson references this reconciliation in this poem, but does not refer to her own feelings on the matter.
• While Dickenson is critical of the reconciliation of God and science in "'Faith' is a fine invention", she illustrates this opinion herself in "I never saw a Moor".
• Her first poem argues for God on the basis that there are things that science takes for granted (despite a lack of personal experience).
• Thus, she believes in scientific principles, because she will take evidence of photographs as data that illustrates the existence of foreign places.
• However, she also argues for God; therefore, she is arguing both for God and for science, and is therefore expressing an opinion that God can exist in a world with scientific principles - and is therefore displaying a reconciliation of God and science, of faith and empiricism, despite so criticizing this approach in her latter poem.

Picture of Dorian Gray V: Ch. 7-8

When Dorian arrives home after leaving Sibyl, he finds his environment to be simultaneously bland and iridescent. When he looks at his surroundings, he sees "the silent Square with its blank close-shuttered windows and staring blinds" (65). Wilde not only portrays the lack of color in this scene, but also does so using strong word choice. Between the silence, the "blank close-shuttered windows" and the "blinds" (due to the other meaning of "blind"), Wilde vividly illustrates a monochromatic, gray color scheme. This contrasts with the "pure opal" of the sky, the roofs that "glistened like silver," the "violet riband" of smoke and the "nacre-coloured" air (65). These terms all describe a colorful, shiny scene, which contrasts with the utterly bland image presented immediately prior. This contrast is symbolic of the two different performances that Sibyl had presented, and the two different attitudes that Dorian held towards her. Initially, Sibyl performed beautifully, and Dorian saw her as his perfect gemstone, both of which are symbolized by the iridescence; later, Sibyl's performance was entirely bland, and Dorian's emotions towards her die completely. Strangely, the order is inverted in this passage, forming chiasmus between the plot of the story and this passage. Chiasmus can sometimes, as here, refer to something that should be self-evident; in this context, the chiasmus would indicate that it should be obvious that this is the clear and inevitable fate of their relationship.

Picture of Dorian Gray IV: Ch. 5-6

Wilde's arrogant tone is visible to the reader when he states that "women defend themselves by attacking, just as they attack by sudden and strange surrenders" (46). In context, this is either a direct interjection from Wilde himself or the thoughts of the mother of Sibyl - either from the author or from one of the women in his story; in either case, we can take this to be Wilde's direct opinion, because it is either his statement or it is certainly true in his story. Wilde claims, therefore, to understand the female psyche when he directly declares what women are thinking when they attack or retreat. His declaratory statement on a topic that he cannot definitely understand shows how he believes himself to always know the truth - illustrative of his arrogance.

Picture of Dorian Gray III: Ch. 3-4

As is typical for upper-class society during this time, Wilde was familiar with classical literature and culture. He sometimes uses allusions in order to bring to life an image otherwise presented purely through descriptive language. For instance, when discussing how mistakes make one young, Lord Henry summons the image of  "catching the mad music of Pleasure, wearing, one might fancy, her wine-stained robe and wreath of ivy, danced like a Bacchante over the hills of life" (30). The phrases "mad music of Pleasure," "wine-stained robe" and "danced [...] over the hills" combine to form an image that any educated reader of the time would obtain immediately from the word "Bacchante." The Bacchantes were a group of women who were priests of Bacchus, and they would participate in massive orgies (thus, "mad music of Pleasure") atop Mount Cithaeron ("over the hills") devoted to Bacchus (explaining the "wine-stained robe"). The entire image Lord Henry presents is encapsulated by the single word "Bacchante" for any educated reader. The word "Bacchante," in fact, holds even more power, because the Bacchantes' frenzy is beyond what a less educated reader would perceive merely from the adjective "mad." If the Bacchantes came upon a small animal such as a rabbit, they would tear it to pieces by hand, leaving a bloody mess in their wake; if they, by chance, encountered a man in their frenzy, then at best the man would be castrated - at worst, he could end with the same fate as the rabbit. The description provided by "Bacchante" goes beyond what the other words creating this image provide; in this way, Wilde uses allusions to enhance the intensity of his imagery.

Analysis of "Out, Out-"

Thesis: The allusion to Macbeth in the title of Robert Frost's "'Out, out-'" is a fitting comparison for the theme of the poem of the fickleness of life represented in Frost's use of dashes, exclamations and an anticlimactic conclusion.

• The dashes in the poem have multiple means by which they illustrate the fickleness of life.
• The quotation "Little - less - nothing! - and that ended it" (31) shows several of these purposes.
• Firstly, the dashes sound like gasping, and in the poem, the boy is dying - thus, gasping is an appropriate phonetic choice.
• Secondly, the dashes show emotion, the grief and anxiety which would surely be present in such an event as an amputation.
• Thirdly, the visual shape of the dash, a long line, is indicative of a long, slow event that consumes time as the dash consumes space, which could be illustrative of a long, slow last breath - thus, even visually, the dashes illustrate the end of the boy's life.
• Finally, although this was certainly not the original intent of the author given the time in which the author lived, the dashes lead to sounds that are similar to that of a modern-day heart monitor, where words are beeping: the short words would be heartbeat beeps, and the flow of words at the end could be the long beep after the patient's death; although this was not Frost's intention, the poem takes on additional meaning today.
• The exclamation points serve a similar intent, but to a lesser extent.
• After the boy loses his hand, the narrator makes the exclamatory interjection, "But the hand!" (17).
• This shows the emotion in the poem, as it is expressed not only by the characters, but by the narrator through exclamation.
• The exclamation points also add to the phonetic gasping, as, in the way Frost uses them, they cut short a sentence in a crescendo up to that point.
•  Finally, the poem concludes anticlimactically, relating the quickness of death to the fickleness of life indicated in the title.
• The conclusion of the poem is that the death's observers "turned to their affairs" (33); in other words, they moved on.
• This illustrates the fickleness of humans, and therefore how not only is death unexpected, but life changes quickly as well.
• Thus, the image presented in the titular allusion to Macbeth of a candle flickering is an accurate one: a candle dies easily with the smallest of winds, and when it does so, one simply obtains another candle.

Picture of Dorian Gray II: Ch. 1-2

The characters in The Picture of Dorian Gray are representations of the personified concepts they refer to. For instance, Lord Henry relates Dorian Gray to Beauty and Basil to Genius when they are first discussing him. Later, he says "Beauty is a form of Genius - is higher, indeed, than Genius, as it needs no explanation" (16). This is illustrative of the reason why Dorian Gray is worshipped by Basil: Basil is Genius and Gray is Beauty, so Gray is higher than Basil. Furthermore, Basil frequently needs to explain himself (for instance, when he states that he has put too much of himself into his work), whereas Lord Henry recognizes Dorian Gray's beauty as soon as they see each other; thus, Beauty, Dorian Gray, requires no explanation, whereas Genius, Basil, does. Lord Henry then mentions a third capitalized personification, Thought, that can be considered to be representative of Lord Henry himself. It is likely that as the book continues more personified capitalized Concepts will arise as more characters do.

Picture of Dorian Gray I: Preface

          In the preface of A Picture of Dorian Gray, Oscar Wilde illustrates his belief that beauty arises from interpretation. For instance, he states that "those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming [and that] this is a fault" (vii). He claims that those who find ugliness in beauty are the poorer for it, in particular compared with the "cultivated," who "find beautiful meanings in beautiful things," and for whom "there is hope" (vii). He does acknowledge, however, that people may find beauty in different things; in particular,  he believes that the artist should be separated from the piece to avoid objectivity, supporting the notion of "Death of the Author," under which the author's intent is irrelevant and only the interpretation of the reader matters. He believes that different people can view different things as beautiful, but that those who find more beauty are more cultivated. he also states that some things are universally beautiful by the implication of his words "beautiful things"; he had previously stated that beautiful things are created by artists, and therefore could easily perceive everything as beautiful. Therefore, while beauty is subjective, those who find more beauty in everything are in general more "cultivated."
          His tone towards the audience in this passage is playful, but contemplative. He toys with the audience, providing direct contradictions, such as when he first states that "the nineteenth century dislike of Realism is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass," and then that the dislike "is not" said rage (vii). These show how he almost appears to make a point, provide an argument that can be argued with, allowing the audience to finally grasp a concrete statement, then withdraws that statement by claiming exactly the opposite. On the other hand, many of his statements are deeply philosophical, such as that "to reveal art and conceal the artist is art's aim" (vii). He seems to be involved with a battle of wits with the reader, in which he speaks many deep truths while making no argument; therefore, the tone of his writing is similar to that which on would find in such a battle: simultaneously humorous and thought-provoking.

Analysis of "The Unknown Citizen"

Thesis: W. H. Auden used his poem "The Unknown Citizen" to criticize the shift of American ideals away from individualism, towards normality and standardization.

• The title of the poem, "The Unknown Citizen," is indicative of how the person's normality caused him to lose his distinction from everybody else.
• The source of all the information about this man was the "Bureau of Statistics" (1).
• This shows how people cease to be people when they are entirely typical; instead, they are simply another "statistic": if everyone is normal, no one sticks out.
• He is unknown because he is statistically normal, and so his lack of individuality, of self-expression, was ultimately, in the eyes of Auden, his downfall.
•  Auden contrasts that the person is "unknown" with how excellent he was a a citizen in order to criticize not only the viewpoint that conformism is good, but to criticize society for holding this viewpoint.
• About him, there was "no official complaint"; indeed, "he was a saint" (2, 4).
• This shows the ideals of the time: all of his viewpoints are perfect for what everyone believes is right.
• Therefore, when Auden criticizes the viewpoint of conformism, he is attacking the societal ideal of his time.
• Auden concludes his poem with a strongly ironic statement that punctuates his point.
• He ends with that "had anything been wrong, we should certainly have heard" (29).
• The irony is the contrast of this with the title: if the person is "unknown" then the collective speaker would never have heard that anything was wrong because they never would have heard of him.
• Here Auden is stating that it if one is unsatisfied with conforming, one cannot complain and still be considered a conformist, because to complain would be to resist the ideal off conformism and thereby display a nonconformist viewpoint.

1984 #9

War is Peace

• US+Britain(+Austrailasia+S. Africa)=Oceania
• Russia+Europe(+rest of landmass, inc. N. Africa)=Eurasia
• Eastasia arises later, weaker: China, Japan, varying portions of Mongolia, Tibet, Mancuria
• All three countries: warmongering fierce, although pointless: self-contained & no winner
• Fighting over mid-Asia: 1/5 ppl live there, desire cheap labor
• Purpose of war: use up abundance so that concentration of power still exists
• Other ways to spend money, but attitude of war also necessary for patriotism
• Only existence of science for superweapon to defeat other countries
• Atomic bombs: unspoken agreement not to use b/c would ruin power, but stockpile
• No contact with foreigners - cannot see other ppl are like self
• All three countries are same - all pyramid, Ingsoc/Neo-Bolshevism/"Obliteration of the Self"
• No need for efficiency when war cannot end
• Eternal war = eternal peace ==> WAR IS PEACE

Ignorance is Strength

•  Three groups: High, Middle, Low
• High: Stay high
• Middle: Become high
• Low: Equality for all
• History repeats self: middle conquers high by falsely with low, low stay low afterwards
•  This time, permanent retention of high
• Before, classes necessary for order; now, prosperous enough that not so
• Middle now supports high b/c fears & does not desire equality
• 1930s, given up on equality just as equality becomes important
•  Major diff: More conscious of what doing, more focused on crushing opposition than prior more liberal totalitarian states
• Possibility of constant surveillance not available prior
• Ingsoc operated main goal of socialism
• Four ways for gov't to fall
• Conquering by external sources - passed by that point
• Poor enough ruling to stir the masses - theoretical only; never revolt of own accord, w/o comparison don't even know what is missing
• Middle rises up - fixed by constant monitoring
• Top loses self-confidence/willingness to govern - biggest issue, large liberal/skeptic diversion bad for party, so need constant education
• BB only telescreen, never die; Inner Party brain, Outer Party hands, Proles
• Theoretically, not born into  position; Proles don't advance, Inner/Outer only slightly as appropriate (Outer up if ambitious, Inner weaklings go down)
• Not hereditary = beneficial in formative years
• Proles to stupid to rebel; Party too heavily watched
• Crimestop: not thinking too much if going to commit thoughtcrime
• Blackwhite: For enemy, black is white, regardless of facts; for ally, white is black, if told so
• Modification of past: first, no comparison; second, Party always right
• Party's view of past: Not objective, memory and records; ctrls both (mind via doublethink)
• Highest, most privileged = most deluded: intelligent = crazy, b/c both != power stable

1984 #3

Syme is both similar and dissimilar to Winston. They are similar in that both of them recognize the paradox behind doublethink; Syme is different in that he believes that this is fine - or "doubleplusgood." This is illustrated by his brief discussion on duckspeak. He calls it "one of those interesting words that have two contradictory meanings" (54). Syme recognizes the contradiction in the party's statements and words; he is an intelligent, thinking man. He is aware of the paradox in doublethink, yet he believes that this paradox is correct. Winston describes Syme as lacking "a sort of saving stupidity" (55). Because Syme knows how the party functions, he is in danger. He is highly intelligent and understands the party, so despite his support for everything they are doing, he is more forthright with the party's goals than the party itself, and therefore, Winston believes, will be eliminated. Syme is the intelligent supporter of stupidity: his discussions on language illustrate that, despite his recognition of everything the party is trying to hide, he still supports the party; indeed, he supports the party because of the very concepts Winston is attempting to resist, and that is the difference between Syme and Winston.

1984 #1

                George Orwell’s discussion of more modern writing’s tendency to become unnecessarily complex illustrates why there seem to be fewer popular elevated works in more recent history than in the decades and centuries prior. In the 19^th century, for instance, popular books included works such as The Scarlet Letter, whereas today works such as The Hunger Games and Harry Potter are more popular. One reason for this is that such works resist the tendency for long, winding phrases unnecessarily utilizing sesquipedalian loquaciousness. Because they are aimed at children and teens, they need to avoid long and complicated sentence structure. As such, they innately repel many of the problems that Orwell mentions in more elevated writing: the tendency for "verbal false limbs" and "pretentious diction" is reduced.

                Older writing avoided these tendencies by carefully going over every word. Consider the symbolism so intricately wound into works such as The Great Gatzby and Heart of Darkness; at times the author must carefully choose each specific word, considering their work so carefully as to focus on each individual word of their work. Vergil spent years crafting his twelve-book several-thousand-line poem The Aeneid, writing about 15 lines a day; he ordered his servant to burn it at the time of his death because, although he had finished it, he intended to spend the next two years editing it. This is why modern writers do not form enduring works as past authors do: because they focus on appearing to be a good, intelligent author, using longwinded structure to appear well-educated, unlike authors of popular works, who typically write for children, and authors of centuries prior, whose works are so precise that one could write an essay about a single page of their work.

Heart of Darkness IV

Marlow concludes the book by illustrating how being in the darkness has affected who he is today. He has ventured up to the edge of the Abyss; due to looking at Kurtz, he was able to avoid falling in, but he still stands on the edge. Despite how he hates to lie, being in the darkness has caused him to do so. Deception slowly crescendos into a full-blown lie. At first, he is simply avoiding the truth with ambiguous statements such as "he was a remarkable man" and "his end [. . .] was in every way worthy of his life" (161, 163). His statements while the girl interpreted them as praising Kurtz, could equally well, and, given Marlow's perspective and the story that has just been told, should be taken as a criticism of Kurtz. His double-meaning statements show a deception that approaches a lie that one would guess him to abhor based on his earlier claim about his contempt for lies, which in turn shows how being in the Congo has changed him and moved him towards the darkness, how he has not yet fully left the abyss. These deceptions sharpen to a point when he directly lies about Kurtz' last words; here, it becomes dreadfully clear that the journey has changed him to the point where he will lie despite his former honesty, where he remains in the darkness despite having been so far from it prior to his journey. In this way, Conrad makes it painfully clear that although Marlow had Kurtz as a warning so as to know not to fall into the abyss, Marlow has not yet left the abyss, and so remains darkly pragmatic.

Heart of Darkness III

The extent to which Conrad removes agency from the Africans is so complete that it must have been a conscious decision rather than a subconscious act of racism; the details that Chinua Achebe saw that generated her paper were so overwhelmingly obvious in some places that it is hyperbolic, and therefore sarcastic - therefore, Conrad was not a racist, for he consciously chose a point of view that is more extreme than any racism in real life. His use of metonymy and synecdoche to represent the blacks is so complete that it must have been deliberate. At one point, for instance, Marlow narrates that "the bush began to howl" (121); it might have made more sense, logically, to say "the Africans began to howl," but Marlow goes so far out of his way to take agency away from the Africans themselves that it would seem impossible that Conrad did not intentionally exaggerate Marlow's racism and detachment from the Africans. At other points, Marlow refers to components of a body to mean an African, such as "human limbs [. . .] of bronze color" (121). Marlow almost never speaks of the Africans directly, instead referring to them by something related - for instance, a part of their body or environment. This is so consistent and so deliberate that it must have been a conscious choice by Conrad - were it simply underlying racism in his opinion, then he would not go so far from a conventional way of speaking in order to take away the Africans' agency; such an effort could not be subconscious. Therefore, either Conrad deliberately chose to remove the Africans' agency because he genuinely believes the Africans to be less aware of what they are doing than animals, who would have agency, and is therefore a highly extreme racist, even for the late 1800s, calling blacks not merely animals, but less than animals; or he made a conscious decision to do so to exaggerate the general viewpoint of the people of the time in a criticism. Therefore, it is unlikely that the evidence Chinua Achebe presents to indicate his racism (e.g. the use of black parts of the body to represent black people) is anything other than the author using hyperbole upon the viewpoint of the time.

Heart of Darkness II

A brief analysis of Chinua Achebe's "An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's 'Heart of Darkness'" reveals that her paper should be read with some caution. First is that her paper is not fully accurate. For instance, she states the falsehood that the Great Wall of China is the only man-made object visible from the moon; in fact, it is not visible from the moon, due to its width (despite its length), and other man-made objects are visible from a significantly higher height than it. Whether or not this should indicate to a reader that she has not done all of the research is up to the discretion of the reader, but it does cast a shadow of a doubt on the inherent reliability portrayed by her position as a professor, as she has not done the research to recognize that at least one statement she claims in her paper to be true is false. Secondly, and more important than a minor inaccuracy, is her clear bias, as a teacher of African literature; given her position, she is inherently in a place to criticize others for their racism. While she is also in a better position than most to see the issues with society, her perspective undoubtedly also makes her overly perceptive, sometimes seeing racism where there is none. Both of these should be considered when reading her paper, but neither of them detracts from her main point of the general excessive focus of Joseph Conrad on race.

One might argue, as some have, that this focus is that of Marlow, not of Conrad. The issue, however, is more complex: present-day Marlow is likely obfuscating some facts to make his past self look better, and Conrad is likely doing the same. The analogue between Marlow and Conrad is quite multifaceted, and therefore it would seem likely that the author is, to at least some extent, represented in this narrator. However, despite that Marlow, as a narrator, is likely hiding some of the evils belonging to the earlier iteration of Marlow, he does not hide his own racism and thoughts of the continent as primitive and base, still claiming that "going up th[e] river was like travelling [sic] back to the earliest beginnings of the world" (105). Marlow does not consider racism to be immoral, and so does not try to hide it. Considering the equivalency between Marlow and Conrad, it seems likely that Conrad similarly does not believe racism to be immoral. That he does not have Marlow hide it means that Marlow did not learn that racism is wrong during his travels; regardless of whether the character is identical to the author, it is clear that their stories of their travels are parallel, and therefore that the lessons that Conrad learns would be transferred to Marlow. As Marlow did not learn a lesson about racism, as evidenced by the racism Marlow displays as a narrator, it would seem that to be against racism is not a lesson that the Congo had to offer; Conrad would not have learned this lesson either, or else he would have transferred it to Marlow, presuming Marlow would have learned it as well, having gone on a similar journey. Therefore, regardless of her bias and her paper's full accuracy, Chinua Achebe does have a point in referring to Conrad's racism, especially with respect to the lack of prior literature; despite the difficulty of withdrawing conclusions from the intricately layered narrative, it would seem that Marlow's racism is not a result of who Marlow is as a character, but rather of who Conrad is as a person.

Heart Of Darkness I

At the very beginning of Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad establishes a symbolic representation of light and dark that contrasts with most books' use of this motif. Whereas most traditional works of literature will use the color white, light and brightness to symbolize illumination of the truth, similarly using the color black, darkness and shadow to symbolize hiding the truth, Heart of Darkness uses light to symbolize what is unknown and black to symbolize what is discovered. Maslow exemplifies this symbol with his statement that Africa "had ceased to be a blank space of delightful mystery - a white patch for a boy to dream gloriously over. It had become a place of darkness" (71). Maslow is speaking of the white portion of the map as the unexplored portion and of the explored portion as a "place of darkness." In this way, he matches whiteness with a lack of knowledge. This indicates that the white people are similarly unknowing - that whites are unaware of the world. With Heart of Darkness being a story of the discovery of the evil of humanity, the whites' being unaware of this evil contrasts with the perspective of those who live in darkness - the blacks.

Furthermore, the general  scene sets this image. The scene is one of light turning to darkness - of sunset. Similarly, his story is about to transform the sailors from their white, light, unknowing selves to a darker crew more aware of the evils of humanity. The sun is described as in a "curved and imperceptible fall" (66). The sun is slowly going away, turning "from glowing white [in]to a dull red without rays and without heat" (66). In other words, the light is dimming, going from white to black. While the sailors hear his story and are "enlightened" (although an inverse term would seem to better fit with this symbol) to the evils of humanity, the sun drops below the horizon. As the shadows of knowledge overcome the white areas on their moral map, night sweeps over them, ending their light, blissful day with the dark truth.

Analysis of "Cross"

Thesis: The multiple denotations behind the title of the poem "Cross" lead to progressively deeper interpretations of the poem that illustrate a more and more dangerous world for the speaker.

• One meaning behind the title is that the speaker is a cross-breed of different races.
• His father is "a white old man" whereas his "old mother's black" (1-2).
• This would imply at best a difficult life any time prior to or within the lifetime of Langston Hughes.
• This interpretation of "Cross," being the simplest interpretation, tells us the least about the nature of the poem, and similarly only illustrates the danger of being half white, half black to a minimal extent.
• A deeper  meaning would be that the speaker is cross at his parents for creating him as a biracial creature.
• The speaker discusses how "if [he] ever cursed" his mother and father, then he would redact his statements (3, 5).
• This illustrates the emotional strife associated with being biracial: he does not have an inherent internal association with either race, and so he does not know which race he should choose to live as.
• This is a deeper interpretation of "Cross," and gives us a deeper understanding of the speaker; it allows us to understand the internal struggle that the speaker must live with every day.
• Finally, "Cross" is an answer to the final rhetorical question in the poem.
• The final stanza asks, "I wonder where I'm gonna die / being neither white nor black?" (11-12).
• Under this interpretation, Hughes is implying that the speaker is going to end his life by being crucified - an understandable fear for blacks if the speaker lives in the time of the KKK, when the idea of the amalgamation of the races terrified many whites.
• This is both the deepest and darkest interpretation of the title, elaborating on how being a biracial person in a time when racial mixing was feared is physically dangerous and could easily lead to the speaker's painful death.

Analysis of "Break of Day"

Thesis: The sudden use of a break at the end of each stanza illustrates with sound the wrongness of a lover leaving his or her companion immediately at the crest of dawn.

• The change in the meter from the first two rhyming couplets to the last couplet in each stanza causes the reader to stumble somewhat, emphasizing the wrongness and immorality of the conclusion of the stanza and thereby the night.
• In each stanza, the first four lines use iambic tetrameter, as in "Must business thee from hence remove?" whereas the last two lines use iambic pentameter, as in "He which hath business and makes makes love, doth do" (, 17).
• The change in meter towards the end of the stanza sounds improper compared in its abrupt shift, just as the abrupt shift from lover to a person with business is wrong.
• Furthermore, both of them take place towards the end of the event, but not when the event should end: the shift takes place near the end of the stanza, but not quite at the end, and the leaving takes place towards the end of the night, but not quite at the end.
• Similarly, the first stanza shifts from four lines of rhetorical questions to a statement, a shift that similarly emphasizes the contrast between the smooth beginning of the night and its rough ending.
• The rhetorical questions of "'Tis true, 'tis day; what though it be?" last the first four lines, providing a smooth, almost seductive tone to the beginning of the stanza that is interrupted by the implied command behind "Love [...] should [...] keep us together" (1, 5-6). 
• The seductive tone is best illustrated by "why should we rise because 'tis light? / Did we lie down because 'twas night?," because the speaker is arguing persuasively without seeming like arguing, just as seduction is persuasion without seeming to be; this contrasts harshly with the significantly less soft-spoken command-like conclusion
• The difference between the beginning of the night and the end is fully illustrated by the difference between the seductive question and the businesslike command.
• This line of questioning's end follows the same pattern as the metric shift, thus emphasizing the difference between the beginning of the stanza and the end, and thereby beginnings and endings in general.

Analysis of "Ballad of Birmingham"

Thesis: In “Ballad of Birmingham,” the greatest purpose of author Dudley Randall is to make the reader associate himself or herself with the mother in the poem, allowing the reader to gain a sense of empathy for the mother and by extension for the cause of civil rights.

• The use of direct quotations and the repetition within these quotations makes the mother and child relationship known to the reader, invoking feelings that are inherent to such a relationship.
• The child’s use of “mother dear” in the first line instantly allows the reader to understand the child as a child, and to feel the caring emotions that are inherent with children; this is reinforced with the later repetition of “mother” (1, 9).
• The specific repeated use of “baby,” a term of endearment that all mothers use, would allow any parent to understand instantly the worry the mother feels for the child (5, 13).
• The repetition of both of these terms in each quote, including the use of “baby” at the conclusion of the poem, reinforces the feelings that such a relationship creates by consistently referring to the relationships (31).
• The description in the fifth stanza either serves to enhance childlike innocence, causing the loss to seem even greater, or to emphasize the mother’s love for the child, depending on the interpretation of “she,” which refers ambiguously to either the mother or the child.
• If “she” is interpreted as the child, then an image appears of a child dressing up for church, enhancing the feelings of innocence that come inherently with children with the purity that comes with church, amplified by the use of “white” to describe her gloves and shoes (19-20).
• If “she” is interpreted as the mother, then the image becomes one of a mother carefully brushing her daughter’s hair, then dressing her up, kneeling down to the child’s height to do so; this image of a mother kneeling in front of her child to tenderly put on her gloves is a scene that could characterize the love between the mother and the child and thus act as an almost holy image that is shattered by the bomb at the end of the poem.
• The ambiguity causes one who looks sufficiently closely at the poem to see the ambiguity to see both of these images with similar effects, and even in one who simply reads over the poem sees, to a lesser extent, the image that doesn't correlate with his or her interpretation of "she," despite that the reader didn't actually understand the ambiguity as ambiguous.

Analysis of Tempest I.ii.70-200

I.ii.70-200, a flashback to when Prospero was ejected from his kingdom, shows Prospero as he was prior to his end-of-play epiphany when he accepts his responsibility, and as he is for most of the play. He blames his brother for his downfall entirely. He fails to recognize his own fault in not paying attention to his kingdom, saying that Antonio merely thought that he was "of temporal royalties [...] now incapable," rather than seeing that he genuinely was too absorbed in his study of magic to adequately maintain his kingdom (I.ii.131-132). Indeed, there would seem to be an inconsistency in the fact that he claims he knew "who to trash for overtopping" and yet he did not recognize the threat of his brother (I.ii.99-100). He discusses how "he did believe he was indeed the Duke, out o' the substitution," but doesn't realize how he is doing the same thing by deceiving himself into thinking that it is entirely his brother's fault (I.ii.122-123).

He is visibly not crazy, though, in that he doesn't blame everyone involved instinctively. He recognizes Gonzalo as "a noble Neapolitan" rather than simply blaming him as well for merely being one who accepted his exile (I.ii.192). He likes Gonzalo, despite the company he keeps, because Gonzalo aided him "out of his charity" (I.ii.193). Prospero is sane enough to recognize his friends, even if he can't recognize himself as his enemy; no man would recognize himself as his own enemy with so clear a scapegoat, so the audience can justify his actions as "righteous anger" from his point of view, despite the one ultimately at fault being Prospero himself, because Prospero has not crossed the line from "being in self-denial" to "being paranoid and attacking friends and enemies alike."

Comparing Tempest to Typical Shakespearean Comedy

                Pop music follows a pattern: a catchy tune and a theme of love, typically sexually centered. Fantasy stories follow a pattern: an otherwise minor character undergoes an adventure and becomes a big shot hero.  There is a good reason that TvTropes seems as accurate as it does: because every form of entertainment media follows the same patterns in some sense. In this way, The Tempest follows the standard pattern for Shakespearean comedy. For instance, Ferdinand and Miranda fall in love at first sight in Act I, although they exchange vows earlier than in most comedies (Act III, with Prospero’s approval in Act IV, rather than Act V) because, unlike most comedies, the center of focus of the play is not on their love affair but on Prospero, the proper comedic character, and because their love does not require the end of the book’s façade.

                Prospero is the proper comedic character because, unlike Miranda, he is responsible for his own position; in his obsessions with his books, he abandoned his position to his brother and was surprised when his position was usurped. While he may be somewhat nonsensical in his obsession, it is an understandable nonsensicality – he is not randomly crazy, merely obsessed, which is an understandable circumstance that maintains his sanity as a character while allowing him to guide most of the insanity in the play. His return to his senses, when he breaks his staff and abandons his magic, ends the magical, dream-like element to the play and concludes the play with a comic solution that both resolves the situation of the magic and the character Prospero’s obsessions by indicating that he has given up said obsessions with the sacrifice of his magical power.