Howl

In “Howl” parts one and two, Allen Ginsberg portrays events that I believe happened to him and his friends. This story is hard to follow along with because it is all over the place. In all of the events that Ginsberg writes about, everyone is on drugs doing wild things. This piece seems to me that Ginsberg is just writing down past stories he’s witnessed or been part of. What did you think of his writing style? Anything that stood out?

Loy

Throughout the whole story Loy seems to be confident in her words. She seems to be telling other women how they should carry themselves, and how women and men are different. The Manifesto seems to serve as a guide to keep an inequality between both men an women. What are some differences between men and women Loy writes about in her Manifesto?

The Feminist Manifesto - Mina Loy

  In the Feminist Manifesto, Loy puts forth an argument that men and women are not equal in society. Loy is very forceful in her speech, she uses the second person ( you) to involve the reader personally with her arguments. She also provides personal questions for her reader. This forces the reader to ponder whether or not they agree with what is being said. One question she asks is: " Professional and personal careers are opening up for you- Is that all you want?"  The whole speech had a very aggressive tone to it. She is very vocal in her argument. An example of this is how she bluntly puts "Men and women are enemies". She argues that women must give up their "virtue" in order to improve their equality in society.

How do you think that Loy's writing style affects her message?

PIlls and shit - lenny bruce

In his piece Lenny bruce talks about different types of drugs. He incorporates different other pieces in his own piece. Personally i found this piece very hard to follow. He starts off saying that in England heroine isn't a big deal but they'll throw a person in jail for smoking weed which would make you think that he's pro-marijuanna but he doesn't even smoke. He often refers to weed as "shit". Why do you think that is? Also what is his over-all point? Did you follow along easily and if not why? What stood out about his style of writing and why?

DADA MANIFESTO 1918

The problem with Dada is that dadaists attempted to quantify and destroy art by creating it. But only dadaists know Dada isn't actually art. The thinking, in an extended sense, is that dadaist work could never be in a museum, it could never be admired, it could never been collected. Because since it's not art- society doesn't need to value it. But this anti-art thinking lies only within the dadaist thought. To anyone else (perhaps at the fault of 'true' and 'perceived' cultural value situation in the modern art world), dada is art. But today, we can see dadaism failed- it's just a movement in art- it never transcended anything. Because today, even the slightly cultured expect 'weird' to automatically be art. It can't be anything else. The point is further secured when the author demonstrates disgust when science becomes speculative. It stops being science. Dadaist thought naturally says art without purpose stops being art. Looking at the greater philosophy of dadaism, one could say that dadaism became (or always was) an exclusive club of artists that just hated their art being called art for the sake of being art. But right here, now, I'm proving dadaist's most fundemental point- the absurdity of it all. 

I loved how this was written - long winded explanations cut short with petty and uninformed personal interjections. "...I do not explain because I hate common sense."

What did you think? Could you see where a dadaist is coming from in terms of thinking about the world?  - Ben Schmidt

Pills and Shit: The Drug Scene - Lenny Bruce

In "Pills and Shit: The Drug Scene," Lenny Bruce takes a spin on things and makes fun of the strict system involving drugs. Bruce uses a series of monologues. These monologues are used to portray a humorous point of view about drugs. Do you think that Bruce's use of monologues helps convey his message or do you think that it is hard to follow and understand? Overall, what is the main point Bruce is making? What are the literary techniques Bruce uses?

MLK- Birmingham Letter

In light of his predicament in  being thrown in jail, rather than submit to his situation,  Dr. Martin Luther King decides to write a letter to the clergy of Birmingham. In his letter,  he addresses many issues and his purpose in being in Birmingham.  In the beginning of the letter Dr. King address the clergy by bringing up what was said in opposition of the actions of him and his followers being “ unwise and untimely.”  He later discusses his purpose of being in Birmingham, that in fact,  he was invited, and not “ an outsider coming in”,  the oppressive segregation that is engulfing the community of Birmingham, as well as his non-violent campaign and its processes.  Furthermore, throughout his letter Dr. King uses many examples of historical and religious leaders who have implemented a system of direction action such as Gandhi. What does this do for the reader, does it offer a sense of validity to his argument?  Does it hurt his argument? Tone of the letter?  Any literary techniques that stick out at you?

"The Achievement of Desire" - Rodriguez

"The Achievement of Desire" - Rodriguez 

Rodriguez uses his "scholarship boy" life to bring out his insecurities about being the joke of the family. It seems as though his family members may be jealous because they didn't get to live his life and didn't receive higher learning. Once he became a prized boy he shared all of his success with just his parents. How does his 3rd person view about his life make you feel can you relate to this? If so, explain how. Although he was embarrassed by his parents because they had low education but he took pride in them.

"The Achievement of Desire" - Rodriguez

Rodriguez illustrates his "scholarship boy" life in both direct and lateral ways. He used several 3rd person view points to introduce how that "scholarship boy" grow up in schools and his family. As a scholarship boy, he was laughed at by his brother or other family numbers. "A family joke", he said. That influenced his childhood seriously. Actually, he was a prized boy and felt proud to share his successes with parents. But successes also made him pride so he intended to hurt his low educated parents by teaching them what teacher said in class. There is also some inside conflicts Rodriguez mentioned in this article. I like how he smiled to people who praised him like "Your parents must be very proud of you." He did shyly smile! But his strong inside still felt embarrassed by his parents which is pretty interesting. "A primary reason for my success in the classroom was that I couldn't forget that schooling was changing me and separating me from the life I enjoyed before becoming a student." I love this part which cost his twenty years to realize. In the scholarship boy's story, he could not control the relationship between school and family. By the way, he felt so tired to act two characters in those two places which is a highlight in his future life.

How to Tame a Wild Tongue- Anzaldua

Throughout the reading Anzaldua mixes in the Spanish language. Many others do this to help one understand the speaker's point of view. How does Anzaldua mixing in the Spanish language with English effect you as the reader? Do you think it helps you get a clearer understanding of the speaker, or does it make the reading more confusing and difficult to understand?

How to Tame a Wild Tongue

How to Tame a Wild Tongue by Anzaldua talks mainly about identity of a Mexican American girl growing up in North America. She discusses that the language she and the people in her community speak is heavily judged upon. At school kids were always told to speak English because this is America, and on the other hand  she was being called a "cultural traitor" by people of her culture because she was speaking English instead of Spanish. Anzaldua also stated that her people are being taken away and deprived of their culture because they are forced into being someone they are not. They have to adjust to the language and the people and the author believes she will never truly be herself until she does not have to translate for others. There were so many different types of Spanish she spoke and each identified her as a different person. In this story the author stated she will not be herself until she stops translating for the English speaking people. Do you think she has found her true identify in this story since she did not translate everything? Why should people be accepted as they are and not be forced to learn a different language just to fit in?

"When We Dead Awaken" - Rich

In "When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Revision", Adrienne Rich discusses ways or concepts for women to overcome or "awaken" from the hold that men contain over literature. Rich validates her points by using examples in writing, including Virginia Woolf's "A Room of One's Own" and a few of her own like "Aunt Jennifer's Tigers" and "Orion". Do you think by showing her own positives and negatives within her writings, she gets her point across better? Do you believe that women are forced to write work appealing to men in order to appeal to the masses? If so, how do you think women writer's could "dead awaken"?