Weekly Post #9 - The Final Day

This class has proved to be educational and fun, despite what you may think Dr. Wexler. For me, personally, I have been truly grateful that I was able to get into this class to complete my requirements for my degree. Thanks for everything.
This class was probably easier this time around for me because not as many theorists were covered, and were given the assignment of this blog to help us understand the theories better. In the past, I was never given such an assignment that allowed me to see my own understanding of what I was learning, thank you for that.

Analysis #7 - Post-Colonial Theory and Said

Post-colonial theory's main trademark is discovering identity. Post-colonial theory arose from countries that once were colonies and received their freedom or in fact still remain under the rule of another country. It deals with national identity, and attempting to rediscover or uncover that which was lost as the result of being ruled by an outside government.

This theory effects many countries all over the world  that have attempted or are attempting to make themselves unique from the government that one occupied them and ruled over them. One example could be South Africa. For many years the white people of the country ruled over the blacks and kept firm control over almost every aspect of life, what was on television, in the papers, what was taught in schools, what books and films were read and shown. It took but a few to stand up, say 'no' and attempt to change this brutal rule.

Many people outside the country knew little of what it was like to live in this small country. In an attempt to change the view of the country, many risked their lives to change it. Though these changes were not always for the better, the country experiencing what is sometimes referred to as "brain drain", referring to the high crime rate of various kinds, both violent and deadly, including making the country second in line by the United Nations for murder, and first for rapes and assaults per capita from 1998-2000 following a compiled survey.

Even gaining freedom from being colonized and tyrant like rule didn't bring peace to this small nation.

The country though it became a democracy to rejoin the United Nations after getting kicked out, fell into chaos. Even attempting to reestablished cultural and national identity from before British rule, the country still has a lot of work to do.

Edward W. Said saw that imperialism wasn't necessarily a way to bring the world about to the British way of thinking as he states in Culture and Imperialism, dealing with post-colonialism or post-imperialism:
"No, cultural forms like the novel or the opera do not cause people to go out and imperialize--Carlyle did not drive Rhodes directly, and he certainly cannot be "blamed" for the problems in today's southern Africa--but it is genuinely troubling to see how little Britain's great humanistic ideas, institutions, and monuments, which we still celebrate having the power ahistorically to command our approval, how little they stand in the way of the accelerating imperial process. We are entitled to ask how this body of humanistic ideas co-existed so comfortably with imperialism, and why--until the resistance to imperialism in the domain, among Africans, Asians, Latin Americans, developed--there was little significant opposition or deterrence to empire at home" (p 1889, Said).
Britain, at the start, had the idea of simply growing their power, but instead, caused civil unrest, and slowly destroyed cultures and societies in their quest to gain as much land as possible. Even when colonies were decolonized, not all those places  entirely recovered. Many fell to pieces and are trying to pick up the pieces as they try to move towards the future.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Analysis #6 - Feminism and Butler

First off, feminism is a difficult subject to par down to a simple analysis, without getting to far in depth. Butler's most influential book, Gender Trouble, takes the misconceptions of feminism and goes into depth about the distinction between sex and gender. While sex is biological and gender is a social construction, but society places them separately rather than as one.
This opens the argument about what are the biological differences and the social differences between man and woman. Before the 20th century, where women began to exert themselves beyond social norms, more than before, women were considered the "fairer sex", in essence the "weaker sex". Though there is then the argument about the fact that the female body has to deal with a great deal more after puberty than a male body does. Menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, etc. These "trials" are some of the more painful, as well as natural incidences in a woman's life that men never experience. Despite these well known facts, women were held in a position that kept them from having the same power as men outside the home, but at times not even giving much if any power within the home. A woman was supposed to act a certain way, dress a certain way, behave a certain way, but were never allowed to make decisions like the men in their lives did. This even went to the point that women had to publish their writings under pseudonyms so that their work would simply be published.
In today's society, many women now hold positions both in the home and at work that once belonged many times to men, bring much equality to the two sexes and genders.
Towards the end of Gender Trouble, Butler brings up the fact that gender has no real factuality:
 "Gender can be neither true nor false, neither real nor apparent, neither original nor derived. As credible bearers of those attributes, however, genders can also be rendered thoroughly and radically incredible" (p. 2553, Butler).
Such theories on feminism alone can be wide and varied. Even books like American Psycho, later made into a film, are more often than not looked upon as plays upon women, as having no real value to society, since they were either presented as "Barbies" in the form of Patrick's fiancee or as prostitutes. This is but one take on the subject, as are many of the takes on theories by theorists the world over.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Analysis #5 - Poststructuralism and Derrida

Born in El-Biar, Algeria, to a Jewish Algerian family, Derrida moved to France at the age of 22 to begin his studies at the École Normale Supérieur, university for Higher education in Paris, focusing on the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl. His particular interest was in the analysis of écriture, the writing of philosophy itself.What is not commonly known about Derrida is the fact that though he is thought to be French, he is Algerian, since at the time of his birth, Algeria was a French colony.
From 1965 to 1984, Derrida taught at his alma mater, dividing his time between universities in Paris and America, at schools such as Yale and Johns Hopkins. Over the years he wrote several books from Speech and Phenomena , Of Grammatology and Writing and Difference, all in 1967, to The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond (1980), all of which spoke of his “post-structural” ideas as he and other French theorists had their ideas called by the Americans. He was not alone in his theories, one example being Michel Foucault himself.
After his death of pancreatic cancer in 2004, he has without question been labeled one of the most influential philosophers of the 20th century.

Post-structuralism is one of the more difficult theories to translate. In short, though, it can be said that is shows human culture to be molded from language itself.
The title itself was created by American scholars to place a name to the series of works done by French academics. The distinction between the two, post-structuralism and structuralism itself forms a distinction between organization of reality with that of imagination and ideas, a sort of ‘third order”. The precise idea of the differences structuralism differ from author to author, with common themes of rejection and self-sufficiency, as well as a series of binary oppositions throughout.
Structuralism itself was a movement during the 1950s and 60s that used analytical concepts of linguistics, psychology, anthropology and other fields to understand the construct of culture itself.
Like any theory, both structuralism and post-structuralism had their faults. Structuralism felt that systems of meaning were arbitrary and unnecessary, though critics would say that this wasn’t completely true since structuralists still found reason to find a fixed point in meaning to be studied.
Like many theorists, Derrida knew that both poststructuralism and structuralism were faulty, which kept him writing like many others in both areas, attempting to find a point that there were no faults, if that is ever possible:
"The future can only be anticipated in the form of an absolute danger. It is that which breaks absolutely with constituted normality and can only be proclaimed, presented, as a sort of monstrosity. For that future world and for that within it which will have put into question the values of sign, word, and writing, for that which guides our future anterior, there is as yet no exergue" (p.1691, Derrida).
Here Derrida gets across that so far, there is no idea where language will lead the world in its ever changing ways. We will just have to stand aside and watch.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Weekly Post #8 - D&G and Postmodernism

A schizophrenic out for a walk is a better model than a neurotic lying on the analyst's couch. A breath of fresh air, a relationship with the outside world.
Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus.

Deleuze and Guattari, sometimes referred to as D&G, they followed the theory started from Lacan about the human mind not being as clear as the rhyme and reason as why is does what is does, it just does. Freud didn't like to look at this view of things, finding he preferred the more mapped out more predictable map of the human mind he himself discovered.
In class, we viewed part of American Psycho, where a yuppy for no clear reason, starts to kill anyone one he just about comes across, prostitutes, co-workers, by the end of the movie, almost anyone. But then the main character discovers none of what he did happened, and he has a breakdown. This is a prime example of what Freud is against, that he believes that every action a person has is for a clear reason, and Patrick Bateman's actions have no reason, but seem to serve as an outlet from some sort of suppressed emotions, no one really knows.

Weekly Post #7 - Poststructuralism and Foucault

A major part of Foucault's theory included binaries within Poststructuralism in which he is considered one of its founders. Early in his career, he became disillusioned by Marxist, and came to reject the idea of ideology, a big part of marxism. Three parts of this part of his theory include:
1.) ideology is always in opposition with another truth claim. 2.) it refers to something of the order of a subject. 3.) it is based on determinist infrastructure (base) – superstructure model (criticism of economic determinism).
With this, Foucault saw power differently than Marx did, he saw is as something exercised rather than possessed, something that could only be practiced and had to anchors to any one place or institution.

Weekly Post #6 - No Class - A Major Issue with Spring Break

Easter break. Seems that it should come at the same time every year, but unfortunately in today's society, the actual reason for the holiday is dwindling. Its sad that people just look forward to Spring Break, and not the actual reason that this time of year is really so important. From the fact that the Ten Commandments and classroom prayer, even the Pledge of Allegiance are either stricken from public view and away from our children, but that so many people do not realize what is really going on with all these things being wrong. These are things that our country were built on, and instead of respecting them, we are throwing them away or editing them, like a shirt with a fixable tear in it. All you need is a thread and needle. But unfortunately our country has become so blind that that we do not realize that the tear has gotten bigger over the course of the last century. It takes away the fact that one day a year is the day that one man, a simple carpenter died for all of us, so that we could live the lives we have today, and so many of us do not have the gall to celebrate the holiday properly, instead, Spring Breaks are scattered all over the month of April like little kids and their candy wrappers, instead of leaving the week after Easter open for a longer time of realizing what one man gave up for us all.

Analysis #4 - Marxist Theory

 

Marxism is a fouled up attempt to create a society where  everyone is equal in economic status, political status, etc. Unfortunately those that attempted to create societies based on this theory instead made it come out as a totalitarian society. This meaning there was one person above them all calling all the shots making the society therefore unequal, since Marxism was meant to make a non-class system with no government, not one with two classes and a single person overseeing the whole thing. The mistranslation of Marxism also has led to several other versions, such as socialism and communism. As a result, this caused a lot of turmoil and as said before, various forms of Marxism that played on several elements of the original theory, without actually following it. One element that is played a great deal is that there is not such thing as private property amongst this theory's followers; this is something seen as a major proponent of socialism. 
This theory of Marxism, communism and socialism unfortunately still exist in many countries for example, Korea. North Korea to be more precise, since as a result in the severe change in government, caused the country to split in two, the northern part remaining communistic.
Of the many attempts to design a form of society that brought all classes into unity, Marx's dream of it coming true did not work out:
"Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended either in a revolutionary re-constitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes" (p. 657, Marx).
This is in fact what continues today. Marx's original dream of a class-less society, where everyone was equal is something the world isn't ready for yet. It may never be ready for. Marx's ideal society, a utopia if you will, is something that may never exist in any realm of possibility, except in a dead man's dreams.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Weekly Post #5 - Barthes and Reader Response

Reader Response is one of those theories that is easily understandable. It speaks of how the reading of a book, an article, etc. any kind of readable media, and how it effects the reader and how the reader responds to it. Not many writers write for the joy of knowing how the reader will respond to their writing, but sometimes to fulfill some inner desire they themselves have for what they are writing or for money.
With Barthes view of reader response, he is wary authors, seeing their view points are often times to closed off for the reader to get anything out of what they are reading. I agree with this, as once I attempted to read Lord of the Rings, but found it a little difficult to really get into, since Tolkien had put so much detail into his writing, that it was almost impossible to really immerse yourself into the reading without drowning. Their is no leeway for the reader to imagine Middle Earth on their own.

Analysis #3 - Psychoanalysis

Freud first wrote psychoanalysis in an attempt to understand why people act the way they do and tries to connect it with childhood behavior. This is a form of therapy he devised to understand the way people ultimately think. Freud says that the super-ego as he calls it and the unconscious mind are in fact two separate but equal perpetrators of why a person may think and behave as they do and how their emotional state steers the way they think. As for Lacan, he sees no separation in the two and that they are in fact one and the same, no dividing factors involved.
Freud also sees that people in many cases act and do the same or similar things for the same reason, such as if they hate their father, they perhaps see themselves in the position of their father next to their mother, etc. The hate may be lying elsewhere for different reasons, this is perhaps one of the reasons Freud isn't followed as literally today as it was back when he was still alive. People have discovered other reasons for many of the things that they do as adults that connect back to when they were children, and not necessarily for the reasons Freud says they do.
Of Freud's theories on a persons childhood this stood out:
"Being in love with the one parent and hating the other are among the essential constituents of the stock of psychical impulses which is formed at that time and which is of such importance in determining the symptoms of the later neurosis (p.814, Freud)."
This rather bothers me in the fact that this is not the case with all people in their relationship with their parents. Yes, it is true that a child may prefer one parent over the other, and sometimes with good reason, but some children love both parents, just in different ways. This is the same with a person who may love two people, but it is just in different ways, depending on how each person treats them and might speak to them, any number of factors can feed into the reasons that create the different forms of love between them.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Analysis #2 - Structuralism - Lacan and Language - "The Mirror Stage"

Jacques Lacan, one of the precursors to post-structuralism, combined Freud's psychoanalysis theory with Saussure's structuralism, leading to a theory sometimes called "Lacanian psychoanalysis". He believed, unlike Freud, that the ego itself could not take place of the unconscious, if the unconscious mind created the ego, or the 'I' self, making it but an illusion.
Such as that rather than considering the ego as a central part of a person, whereas Lacan places the consciousness as the center, and the ego just a part of it.
This theory appears quite true since not all people look at themselves as the center of every thing and rather look to others to be the center of their worlds. Lacan takes apart Freud's idea of consciousness and ego helping others realize their true selves rather than a self-centered version. This turns Freud's fragmented idea of self into a more unified structure, changing language and ideas into a far more coherent form.
In Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience, Lacan states that:
"This form would have to be called the Ideal-I, if we wish to incorporate it into our usual register, in the sense that it will also be the source of secondary identifications, under which term I would place the functions of libidinal normalization. But the important point is that this form situates the agency of the ego, before its social determination, in a fictional direction, which will always remain irreducible for the individual alone, or rather, which will only rejoin the coming-into-being (le devenir) of the subject asymptotically, whatever the success of the dialectical syntheses by which he must resolve as I his discordance with his own reality" (p.1165, Lacan).
This, albeit, passage, brings forth the center of Lacan's Mirror Stage theory in that it is about discovering ones self outside the usual pretenses society brings forth, and discovering the I instead of the we or us, in a conversation, but the individual.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Weekly Post #4 - Saussure and Semiotics

Saussure is perhaps considered the founder of Semiotics, sometimes called the study of signs, that deals with how language deals with social life and how it directs it. A single word in the English language is capable of changing peoples view on life in a single moment.
Apples are normally several different colors in nature, but when a child thinks of an apple, they see it as red and usually is the same shape as others, but is always red. As a child, you are taught words and how to connect them with images, these images though are just one view point. Then the word dog, there are several types of dogs but we may associate the word dog with a picture in our head that is completely different from what we see.
In other countries the word dog or cat or apple may be completely different, but the picture may be the same. Other words may not exist in that language but mean the same thing when associated with something else. Like the Internet. Other languages have no real way of taking such a word and fitting it into their language structure.

Weekly Post #3 - The Word Picture

In this picture, an almost ghostly specter carries the body of a young woman down a beach on what seems to be a path running along side the ocean. On one side is the ocean, with a barrier of stones and jagged branches, the other the same. It is difficult to determine whether or not the young woman is alive, but the specter carries her with care, down the otherwise treacherous path. Though there are shadows of both, it is hard to tell what is truly making the shadow, since the specter does not appear to be flesh and blood, giving it a mysterious quality.

This picture symbolizes the well known poem, "Footprints in the Sand". This poem is apparently for many years, was said to be by "Author Anonymous". It took years before the author, Mary Stevenson (Zangare), was able too, but do to her discovering a handwritten copy of the poem she had written, she was awarded the copyright, and eventually the handwritten copy was authenticated. Though the poem is not on the picture, the poem speaks of a man who had a dream about walking beside God on a beach, during his walk he saw his life flash before his eyes, and saw a single pair during his times of trial and hardship. He asked God about this, thinking he had been alone during these times, God told him that these were the times that He Himself carried him, not letting him be alone to carry these troubles.
This poem is generally thought of as a poem, though the format is more of a conversation format. In formalism, this poem would be looked at from all angles, including the relationship between the author and God. Though this theory itself could be argued, since formalism goes for a more formal approach rather than a more informal approach, like structuralism does. With structuralism, this poem would be looked at as the close relationship between God  and the author, and the author wondering why they feel that they are alone in the worst parts of their lives, when in fact, God tells them that He is there the entire time and carries them in His arms through that period of struggle.

Analysis #1 - Burke on the Sublime and the Beautiful

"Whatever is fitted in any sort to excite the ideas of pain, and danger, that is to say, whatever is in any sort terrible, or is conversant about terrible objects, or operates in a manner analogous to terror, is a source of sublime; that is, it is productive of the strongest emotion which the mind is capable of feeling" (p. 459, Burke).
This directly says what sublime or sublimity is, it doesn't necessarily need to be a feeling or pain or danger, or something terrible. It can be something wonderful that sends a shiver down you spine and makes you feel the same sensation over and over again ever time you hear it, feel it, taste it, with any of your senses.
"I say the strongest emotion, because I am satisfied the ideas of pain are much more powerful than those which enter on the part of pleasure. Without all doubt, the torments which we may be made to suffer, are much greater in their effect on the body and mind, than any pleasures which the most learned voluptuary could suggest, or than the liveliest imagination, and the most sound and exquisitely sensible body could enjoy" (p. 459, Burke).
This quite states that pain is the strongest emotion, but there can be a thin line between pain and pleasure, as there is between love and hate. All people have their own personal ideas as to what pleasure or pain, love or hate, are. And many of them will say there is a very, very fine line between all of them, but that they are all connected.
Ever since I first saw the film 'Independence Day', Bill Pullman's speech in the final act of the film has always given me goose bumps up my arms and gives me that shivery feeling all over. Though this speech isn't necessarily pleasing to the eye, but is to the ear, which gives more of a sensation than if you simply read the speech. It is in Pullman's voice that gives the sensation that can give you goosebumps, not necessarily the words themselves. This may not be the way it comes across to everyone, but to some, this speech is the one thing I can see that comes into relation with Burke's ideas on the sublime and beautiful. Though it does work with his idea that is does impact the senses through hearing, but not by sight.
This goes back to what I said previously about a picture being worth a thousand words, but doesn't necessarily mean that the words that are used to describe it are set in stone, but can be whatever words the viewer decides to describe it.
During his speech, Pullman talks about how everyone all over the world are no longer separate, but that that day, Independence Day in America, is now a world wide holiday, the day the world says that they will not go down without a fight and that those that endanger them will regret they ever came to Earth.
It's funny, as I write this analysis, I feel the goose bumps surfacing, my mind and body remembering the last time I heard the speech. Maybe when I am done writing this I'll go watch it again.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Weekly Post #2 - Kevin O'Neill Lecture

This lecture was informative, but the set up of the whole thing was confusing. At first I felt that it was just a different version of our class, but found out later that in fact that anyone that wanted to come could. Also I was told that were supposed to, but didn't have to come back to our other classroom afterwards. This troubled me.
Last summer I got to hang out in Poland with another class I had taken about the history of Poland and the Holocaust, along with Dr. O'Neill. This adventure was fun and enlightening about this horrible, tragic event that shaped so many lives into something different than those people ever thought it would become.
The main part of the lecture was difficult to follow in such a large group, since I also got stuck in the back on the far side of the room. Thus, I did not get to enjoy the lecture as much I would have liked.

Weekly Post #1 - Classical Literary Theory - Plato's Allegory of the Cave

Blogs are not exactly my cup of tea to write, but once I get going I don't think I'll stop until the end of the semester.
Plato talks about in his 'Allegory of the Cave', that the world is perhaps not what we see in front of us, but what we see is in fact just shadows and the brief murmurs of what is occuring and not what things really sound like. I always liked this one, but didn't always delve deep into it, feeling a sense of repetition. It comes across sort of like, 'a picture is worth a thousand words', but it depends on what words you use to describe the picture. Are the people in it old or young, men or women? This idea can go into other theories as well. Plato though is talking about imitation of things around us and whether or not we really know if something is real. Imitation is supposed to be the sincerest form of flattery and it isn't always easy to tell what is the original and what is the fake. And when it comes to naming an object say an orange, what if some one else calls it a tomato? Who is wrong and who is right at calling it one of these names? The prisoners in the cave might decide on different names, rather than agreeing on one, like today how blue is blue, green is green, an apple is an apple. But in today's society, many things have a set name and can't be changed except in our own heads.
During the Emperor Qin (221 - 206 B.C.) in China, he took what was in the written language of the country, several "characters" that were for things like horse and cat, and placed single characters for each one, so that each would have one "name" rather than several. This is sort of Plato's idea in his allegory put into action, single objects that have several names, but in Qin's case, he forced upon China the idea to give several things single names rather than several, giving him more control of his people.
Plato states in Book VII of Republic: "...the eyes can become confused in two different ways, as a result of two different sets of circumstances: it can happen in the transition from light to darkness, and also in the transition from darkness to light. If he [the slave] took the same facts into consideration, when he also noticed someone's mind in such a state of confusion that it was incapable of making anything out, his reaction wouldn't be unthinking ridicule. Instead, he'd try to find out whether this person's mind was returning from a mode of existence which involves greater lucidity..." (Plato's Republic, pg. 63-64).
For many years, American military forces have attempted to push democracy on countries that do not have democratic forms of government. Those that attempt to push it on them, do not realize that those that they are pushing it on have to be open to the idea, and can't just cram it down their throats. These people who have lived in socialist, imperialist and other forms of government, are not mentally, morally or even maybe spiritually prepared to take in a new form of government. When the freed slave returns to the cave and shares his adventures with his comrades, they are unwilling to accept the fact that what he saw outside the cave is real, unable to go see it for themselves, or unwilling to accept that such things exist.

Works Cited
Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. Print.

Introduction

Theory is but a way that we as humans attempt to understand what is occurring within us and around us throughout our lives. Plato tells us of how that which exists around us, trees, birds, the sun itself, may not be real but just a perspective of what we believe to be real. In the "Allegory of the Cave", he tells this theory in more detail, having us try to decide whether the shadow or the object that the shadow is of is real. With Freud, he attempts to explain how from infants into adults, our behavior has reasons that are attached to how we see our parents, ourselves and others. Both these ideas are dealt with by many other theorists that are trying to understand the human condition, why we do certain things and why we react the way we do to things that scare us, make us mad, make us laugh, and as to what is real and what isn’t in the world around us.

This semester, I myself will learn more about this subject and post what I have learned personally and in class on this blog.

I see theory as trying to figure out our own idiosyncrasies and more about the world around us. Theorists tend to go over the same subjects with rather little change, attempting to find something new. On some points, they may find new ground to walk on, others they are just trampling down further the ground others have gone over before. Not all their theories cover every person as an individual, but try to cover humans as a whole. Not every description they come up with works for everyone.

For as long as anyone can recall, humans have sought out the answers to their existence and that is where theory mainly comes from: the need to understand why people react and act as they do.