Ms. Mueller

English 11 AP

May 17, 2009

            At the end of The Crucible, John Proctor finds himself in a major dilemma. After being placed in jail for lechery, unrestrained indulgence in sexual activity, he has an important decision to make: he can either die, or confess to witchcraft and sign a document stating so which will be posted on the church door.

            At first, Proctor decides he will sign the papers to save his life, but at the last minute he changes his mind. He proceeds to take the papers away from Danforth and crumble them up. “His [Proctor] breast heaving, his eyes staring, Proctor tears the paper and crumples it, and he is weeping in fury but erect.” Proctor decided to follow his morals; he must think they are more important than his life.

            If I was in the same situation as Proctor, I would have done the opposite. I would have confessed to witchcraft and signed the papers. I understand I would be compromising my morals and not standing up for what I thought was right, but at least my life would be spared. Nothing is more valuable than human life, regardless if you will become a bad example for your community. Think about it, if you continue living, you will be able to enjoy the rest of your life; including marrying, having children, raising a family, and taking advantage of what life has to offer. On top of that, when it is time to die, God will know you did not commit any sins. With that in mind, who cares what others think? It should not be of that importance because God knows the truth.

            In conclusion, John Proctor is faced with a problem at the end; whether or not to confess to practicing witchcraft. He decides not to because he believes in morals, but I have the opposite opinion. It is not as though I contain no morals, but I feel life is worth living, regardless of what you must compromise.

Ms. Mueller

English 11 AP

May 9, 2009

            Mary Ann Shadd Cary, an African American newspaper publisher, wrote “Why Establish This Paper?” that appeared in the second issue of the Provincial Freeman. After reading an excerpt from it, I was able to identify and analyze a couple techniques Cary used in the process of writing the paper.

            The first technique I noticed was personification; a figure of speech in which inanimate objects or abstractions are endowed with human qualities. Within the first paragraph, it states: “As the great country grows, we grow with it; as it improves and progresses, we are carried forward on the bosom of its onward tide.” You can observe the personification in that statement because it gives a human trait, the bosom, to a non-living object, the country. This technique enhances the paper because by associating non-living objects with human qualities, it allows people to relate to the idea or statement being proposed. This may make it easier to understand what is being said as well.

            Additionally, I saw two other techniques that go hand-in-hand. They are evoking emotion and the use of persuasion. In the second paragraph it reads: “Besides, it is due to our Constitution and Government, that we should train ourselves as to fit us for the discharge of the duties of freeman, in full.” In the process of reading this sentence, it is hard not to get the feeling as though the author is correct. By the seriousness of her tone, and the logic of the sentence, it persuades me to believe in Cary’s opinion.

            Also, this is mentioned: “They either pass us by, in cold contempt, ignore us altogether, keep themselves or their readers, or both ignorant of what Canada is.” In this sentence, she is evoking negativity and gives me a critical point of view while reading. It also makes it easier for me to agree with her, she is giving reasons why I should believe what she believes or feel the way she feels.

            In conclusion, Cary wrote “Why Establish This Paper?” which appeared in the Provincial Freeman. After reading it, I referenced to a few techniques she used to establish her paper; including personification and persuasion/evoking emotion.

Ms. Mueller

English 11 AP

May 9, 2009

       Throughout the play, it is easy to notice four particular things: greed, lust, fear, and power. Through actions and words by the vast amount of characters in the play, one can easily trace them through the story. For this journal, I have decided to focus solely on power; simply because it interested me the most.

       First off, I would like to point out the power surrounding reverend Parris. While reading the story, you soon realize the people of Salem are very religious. In fact, the society is theocratic, meaning it is ruled by religion. (“The people of Salem developed a theocracy, a combine of state and religious power whose function was to keep the community together” Miller, 1218). With this in mind, it is easy to see God and church are a dominant role in everyone’s life during the time. Being that God, the church, and religion are very important factors of Salem society, it would make sense that Parris, a reverend, thinks of himself as having an authority-like role over the average citizen. At one point Parris even mentions that if people “are not obedient to the church, they will burn in hell.” This leaves little by what the people of Salem have to live by besides what the church or Reverend decides. Because of this, I personally look at Parris as a ruler; or at least someone with an authoritative hand.

       Additionally, a sense of power seems to have wrapped itself around some of the women in Salem society. Already to begin with, Salem, along with the average community during the 17^th century was dominated/ruled upon by males. Females did not have much of a say and in a sense, were placed on the back burner; especially Tibuba, a black female slave. There was a part where a few girls were caught dancing in the woods, along with Tibuba and they were scared that they were going to be severely punished by the church, for being witches and associated with the devil. Out of fear, the girls started to give names of people who supposedly were witches, but in reality, they were simply giving names to cover their own faults in hope of forgiveness or mercy by the church. Even if the person named was innocent of any wrong-doings, if the girls mentioned his or her name, the church considered them to be guilty.

       So if you take a step back and look at the entirety of the picture, it is actually quite interesting. Here are these girls, including a black slave, who do not have much of a say in their society or any significant role. However, they found themselves in a position where if they simply mention a name, the town believes them and acts crazy suspecting witches live amongst them. Just think, in the past nobody probably thought highly of these girls or their opinions, but now they consider their word to be important and to rid the town of witches.

Ms. Mueller

English 11 AP

May 9, 2009

            In Anwar Accawi’s essay titled “The Telephone,” he describes his childhood in his Lebanese village; when the concept of clock-time bared no importance. Much different than how we keep track of time in today’s world, in Accawi’s time; his people would find calendars, clocks, etc. to be insignificant. Through two main rhetorical strategies I discovered in the essay, I was easily able to identify the attitude Accawi expressed toward time.

            The first rhetorical strategy noticed was the use of similes. In the passage it reads: “We knew what to do, just as the Iraqi geese knew when to fly north, driven by the hot wind that blew in from the desert, and the ewes knew when to give birth to wet lambs that stood on long, shaky legs in chilly March.” Here Accawi is comparing his peoples’ system of time to the natural behavior of animals, as if by some force of nature, or instinct, the people of his village knew what to do and when to do it, without any obvious instruction. Also, he mentions: “The only timepiece we had need of then was the sun,” which relates to the previous thought of their time keeping based on the surrounding environment and Mother Nature.

            Additionally, there was the use of examples. In the essay, Accawi makes a specific reference to the oldest woman in his village, Teta Im Khalil. He recalls his experience in which he meets the old woman and how her body has worn down over the years. Witnessing this woman, Accawi naturally inquires how old she is, but after asking his grandmother, all she can say is “I’ve been told that Teta was born shortly after the big snow that caused the roof on the mayor’s roof to cave in.” Although people of today’s society would not be content with this response, he is satisfied because he knows the answer can not be anymore specific. According to his peoples’ way of telling time, “so many years before or after an earthquake or a flood,” the answer was perfect.

            In conclusion, I found two rhetorical strategies in Anwar Accawi’s essay titled “The Telephone,” which expressed his attitude towards time. Included in the two were the use of similes and the use of examples.

              After reading acts from The Crucible, I was able to gather enough evidence to suggest that one of the characters in the story, Abigail Williams, is indeed a vampire. However, I must clarify the context of the word vampire; not one in which we immediately think of viewable in Sci-Fi works, but rather a symbolic vampire.
             One reason I believe Abigail symbolizes a vampire is because of her relations with John Proctor. During the story, Abigail is attracted to Proctor, and tries to become sexually connected with him. In the process, she becomes very seductive, trying to lure him towards her. One way she does this is by her beauty, she feels this will make her irresistible to him. Well, a prominent characteristic of a vampire is being seductive, trying to get people so he or she can drink the person’s blood.
                 Additionally, Abigail personally enjoys drinking the blood of chickens. A lot of analyzing is not required here, at least I hope not. When you imagine a vampire in your mind, one of the first things you ponder is the drinking of blood. Simply put, vampires like to drink blood. Abigail likes to drink blood. Therefore Abigail is a vampire. (Yes, I realize that is an example of a syllogism.)
                 One last piece of evidence is the fact that Abigail can be selfish, and at times, manipulative. She tries to use her beauty to attract Proctor towards her, and she uses people for her own personal gains. An example of this is when she steals money from one of the reverends. The aforementioned clearly relates with the qualities of a vampire. Think about it, when vampires drink the blood of others and kill them, do you think he or she cares? The answer is no. This shows selfishness and personal benefits at the expense of others. The vampire is simply using the person so he or she can receive blood; how distasteful.
                In conclusion, Abigail Williams is a symbolic vampire. Not only does she drink chicken blood and use her good looks to try to seduce John Proctor, but she also shows selfishness and carelessness.

In The Crucible, the author uses direct and indirect characterization to describe his characters. By using direct characterization, we are able to depict who the person is through descriptive text; this is more “in-your-face” information in which becoming familiar with someone is relatively easy. With indirect characterization, you learn who a character is based on his or her actions, thoughts, and ideas. For the journal this week, I have decided to use John Proctor. While reading the text, I noticed he was a very popular person, and through both direct and indirect characterization, you are easily able to read his personality.

Proctor was a farmer in his middle thirties. He need not have been a partisan of any faction in the town, but there is evidence to suggest that he had a sharp and biting way with hypocrites. (Miller, 1224)

The above passage is a perfect example of direct characterization. Instead of having to guess who he is through thoughts or actions, the author is very straight forward. I did not have to guess his profession or his age, it was simply stated for me. This makes it easier to find out more about Proctor.

Another ideal example of direct characterization can be found on the same page, 1224. He was the kind of man- powerful of body, even-tempered, and not easily led- who cannot refuse support to partisans without drawing their deepest resentment.

Again, this passage is very straight forward. It comes right out and explains how he is a level headed man, who is not easily influenced. Just from this small excerpt, I am able to learn a decent amount about this person’s personality.

In Proctor’s presence, a fool felt his foolishness instantly- and proctor is always marked for calumny therefore. But as we shall see, the steady manner he displays does not spring from an untroubled soul.

The above passage is an example of indirect characterization. As you can see, the text shows how other characters respond to Proctor and his actions. Additionally, seeing as though he does not spring from an untroubled soul, this insinuates he has a shaky past; he may have skeletons in the closet that would ruin his reputation if discovered. With indirect characterization, you receive hints and clues as to what the person is like and you must put two and two together for yourself. This may make it somewhat harder, but nonetheless, you are able to discover the person’s personality.

          After reading “Why I Wrote The Crucible,” something immediately jumped out at me. During the text it states: “What terrifies one generation is likely to bring only a puzzled smile to the next…” Analyzing this made me think about American history, and it goes hand-in-hand with something we recently learned about in history class this year. During the 1900s, as everyone should know, there were two World Wars; world war one and world war two. Now during the course of world history there have been many wars, so the idea of battles was not a huge deal, but these two wars were different. The destruction was enormous, the death tolls were incredible, and the amount of grief was catastrophic. Simply put, WWI and II were something people were definitely not used to, and the first one proved this. Many people were heart broken and simultaneously stunned. This war terrified the current generation at the time and they never wanted anything comparable to occur again.

          Then came the 1940s, the era of the Second Great War. During this time period, besides the fighting, something else was happening in America, the results of the Great Depression. Many people were jobless, about 25% of the nation at one point, many people were homeless, and the overall confidence in the country was at an all-time low. When World War II was happening, and America was dragged in, the American economy started roaring. The job markets were being flooded, especially those dealing with war supplies, many nations were buying from us, and all of the extra cash lifted the living standards of all Americans. So even though the war in a way was horrible, because massive amounts of people died, it helped our country in a big way, an economic way. When America was doing good financially, which can be credited to the second world war, and people were better off, it had to have made them happier. So essentially, WWI was a nightmare for one generation, and WWII was good (financially) for another generation.

What made me feel even better about this thought is the text that follows “What terrifies one generation is likely to bring only a puzzled smile to the next…” The following text describes the generations after WWII, the time when there was an ultimate showdown between capitalism and communism; the Cold War between the United States and Soviet Union. During the Cold War, the American economy was witnessing robust growth. We were the envy of the world, with the Soviets, and being an American was nothing but beneficial. The benefits of this economic expansion can be traced back to WWII when it lifted our nation out of the Great Depression and on our feet. So as you can see, there is a connection between World War II and the following generations during the Cold War; this helped me feel more confident about my response for this journal.

          Everyone has heard at least part of it before; the “I Have A Dream” speech by Martin Luther King Jr. Not only is it one of the most famous speeches of all time, but from an analytical standpoint, it is absolutely brilliant. Yes the voice is crisp, clear, and powerful, and yes, the words flow together delicately, but one of the best features of all is the magnificent rhetorical strategies used.

            By definition, rhetorical strategies are plans used in arranging writing tasks or compositions. In “Normalcy No More,” I found many different strategies, some of which include: repetition, metaphorical use, the use of similes, allusions, and the way the speaker talks and appeals to his audience.

            The first strategy I would like to point out is the use of allusions. In his speech, if you listen carefully, King makes several references to historical figures; such as Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson. In only the second sentence, this is stated: “Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.” This is obviously pointing to the abolishing of slavery during Lincoln’s administration. By dropping this big name in his speech, not only does King allow people to become more familiar with what he is talking about, but he sets himself up for the next section of his speech. He continues to mention that even though Lincoln freed many blacks, “100 years later,” they are still oppressed and treated unequally. Next he alludes to Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence. With this, he stresses the point that all men are created equal so they should be treated accordingly; regardless of color.

          Another important facet of the speech was repetition. “But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we’ve come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.” Anyone can repeat words, but it takes skill to repeat them effectively. Mr. King uses them with a sense of power, in a way in which the words “One hundred years later” has a lot of emphasis. I find this gets the crowd more involved; by a series of clapping and cheering.

          Next, there are metaphors and similes. I found this during the speech: “No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until “justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.” When you use these types of literary devices, it makes the sentence appear more logical; such as if a teacher give an analogy to explain a lesson. You may comprehend the information when she first explains it, but you really understand it when an analogy is used. Also, the sentences are easy on the ears and this can make you look more sophisticated when speaking; which ultimately means more respect by your audience.

     Finally, there is the most important segment of any speech, the delivery. You can have a well written paper, but it can seem comparable to garbage if read by the wrong person. Knowing this, it is very important that King spoke perfectly. He spoke with a serious yet hopeful tone, which was appropriate for the situation, and he spoke boldly; used emphasis when needed. Basically, he was not boring, so he kept the crowd interested in what he was preaching. Because of this, people took him more seriously, had more respect for him, and cheered at every third sentence. Additionally, he spoke directly to the people. He mentions the “Red hills of George,” the “Stone Mountain of Georgia,” “vicious racists in Alabama,” and the “Heat of injustice in Mississippi.” These territories were known to harbor the majority of slaves and oppressed African-Americans. Due to the overwhelming majority of blacks during his speech, King was able to appeal to them on a personal level.

            We are finally done with The Grapes of Wrath; however I was able to learn a critical life lesson during the story. It was not what farming techniques I should acquire if there is a severe drought or how to keep an automobile running smoothly, it was something much more valuable; irreplaceable. What I was able to understand more clearly is the importance of family.

            We know the basic sequence of the plot by now; the Joads experience a drought, they sell all their belongings for petty cash, travel to California, and reach a great amount of hostility when they eventually arrive there. However, when they had to sell all of their items that they held dearly, including: precious toys, gifts, priceless photographs, and letters, I thought that was devastating. Even though at the time this did seem like a disaster, it could have been a lot worse. The situation would have been more severe if they had to leave each other; their family.         

            When I think about having to travel to another place, what immediately comes to my mind are some items I use frequently which entail of my laptop, iPod, Xbox 360, and cell phone. I think of these things because I subconsciously realize these will keep me content and occupied. After pondering this case with a little more detail though, I figured that although these items appeal to my liking, they are not priceless, they are replaceable, and when going through life, they are not too important. What really matters is the people you spend everyday of your life with, the people you love and care, the people who bring you happiness, and sometimes despair. Without them, you really have nothing to live for, unless you try to create a family of your own, which is still family. Without them, you will find yourself to be lonely, depressed, and feeling like you have no one. Even though you have to one day move out of the house and are not constantly being surrounded by relatives in your household, you still know they are within traveling distance and living on this Earth. You can still take comfort they are still there and that you have people to turn to.

            This ties in with this week’s journal because I think most of the Joad family had the same realization, especially Ma Joad. With their stuff sold and their house gone all they had was each other. On page 217 in chapter 16 it reads: “All we got is the family unbroke.”  Even though they saw their lives were not looking pretty and that their future was dim, they were able to see the people they have known for years; and that is the best belonging anyone can retain. More important than school, more important than your job, more important than money, and even more important than your own personal health, I think family is the best thing in the world. It can not be traded for anything. So next time you think you have nothing or are sad you were not able to receive a certain gift, remember you already have the greatest gift known to man; family.

-Koenig

           After reading The Grapes of Wrath, the class was instructed to read a section of The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. After finishing that, we had to observe the connections between the two pieces of literature, if any existed at all. 

            In my opinion, there were a couple connections to be made. Even though to some The Grapes of Wrath seemed like a simple story, there was more to it which required some analytical skills. One thing that caught my eye the whole time was the underlying tone of communism. Just like The Communist Manifesto deals with communism, it is present in The Grapes of Wrath as well. One example of this would be the theory of the oversoul. With this idea, it is thought that all beings are united in some way. Whether it is for everyone to strive for excellence or be able to participate in some after life, people retain similar goals and in that sense they are one. Well with communism, the whole idea is that people are connected in some way. The most obvious way would be the absence of social classes, meaning everyone belongs in the same group. Another example of the communist undertone would be the Okies and other people who traveled together. In chapter 21, Steinbeck shows the relationships that the migrants take part in. As everyone realizes they are striving for the same goal, they see themselves as one people, even if they are not family.

            Another connection I saw between The Grapes of Wrath and The Communist Manifesto was the people they correspond to. In communism, it does not matter what job you have, everyone has to work, is treated the same, and lives the same lifestyle; they are the working class. In the story of the Joads, do you not realize the type of people traveling west? They are not the rich people with mansions and numerous cars; they are people who have to work hard for their livings. They are used to having little money and food; they are the working class too. Even though the two pieces of literature do not portray the same message, the communist tone in both appeals to the same type of people, I think you know which one.

            One last connection I noticed between The Grapes of Wrath and The Communist Manifesto is that there are struggles present in both. During the journey west for many families, they encountered a lot of problems. Whether it was having a car breakdown, like the Joads experienced, running out of money to continue on, or eventually facing the hostility of California citizens, many migrants struggled. In the other piece of reading, I observed a main struggle that communism had to overcome; which turned out to be criticism. It was pointed out that in this type of government, free love is advocated and workers eventually have no incentive to work; these were negative traits brought about by critics. Of course Marx went on to defend these allegations, but nonetheless, they showed a problem just like there were problems in Grapes.

            Overall, I observed a few connections between The Grapes of Wrath and The Communist Manifesto. Both had to deal with communism, both portrayed the same audience, and both showed struggles that needed to be overcome.