Literary Theory Graphic Organizer Two

U4A1 #2 - Literary Theory Graphic Organizer Two

Theory	Evidence from the text (including parenthetical citation)	Analysis (What does this theory reveal about the text that you might not otherwise notice?)
Feminist	1. By Gis and by Saint Charity, Alack, and fie, for shame! Young men will do't, if they come ‘t By Cock, they are to blame. Quoth she, “Before you tumbled me, You promised me to wed.” He answers, “so would i ha’ done, by yonder sun, An thou hadst not come to my bed.” (4.5, 41-49) 2. “Mad as the sea and wind when both contend which is the mightier. In his lawless fit, Behind the arras hearing something stir, Whips out his rapier, cries, “A rat, a rat!” And in this brainish apprehension kills the unseen good old man.” (4.1, 8-13)	1. What does the makeup of women's relationships with men consist of?   1. After reading Hamlet and analyzing it through the lens of feminism it is clear to see that women are constantly being mistreated. The first quote is from Ophelia. She is talking about how she is being used and treated as an object. She talks about how men make all kinds of promises but then don’t need you anymore after they get what the initially wanted. This proves that in the text, woman are seen as just an object and that they can be easily taken advantage of. Ophelia is just one of a list of women who were used for her body. When she decided to come forward and talk about what happened, everybody assumed she was just crazy. This quote also depicts that women are seen as lesser than men. The men are the ones making all the decisions, proving that men are the dominant party in the relationship. 2. What are the roles of women in Hamlet? 2. Gertrude is a very important character in this text. Her character is the queen and Hamlets mother. Hamlet has some choice words for his mother and is very rude. In this scene, Gertrude betrays hamlet and stays loyal to Claudius. This quote displays how no matter who Hamlet is, even her own son, she’d rather stay loyal to Claudius. She is so influenced by him that she cant make her own decisions. Cleary, even the fact that she is the queen, means nothing to her. She barely has a voice of her own even holding such a high position of authority. She would much rather keep Claudius happy than worry about the people around her. This is so easily compared to the lens of feminism because you can see that in the text, no matter what kind of women you were or what position you held, you were mistreated and used by the men. No matter how much they mistreated her, she always went back to them.

Theory	Evidence from the text (including parenthetical citation)	Analysis (What does this theory reveal about the text that you might not otherwise notice?)
Post colonial	1. “Hamlet, this deed, for thine especial safety---   which we do tender as we dearly grieve for that which thou hast done---must send thee henee With fiery quickness. Therefore prepare thyself. The bark is ready and the wind at help, Th’ associates tend, and everything is bent for England.” (4.3, 40-47) 2. “Why, now you speak like a good child and a true gentleman. That i am guiltless of your father’s death and am most sensible in grief for it, it shall as level to your judgment pierce As day does to your eye.”	1. How do cultural differences intertwine to reinforce or undermine the colonialist ideology? 1. Social ranks play a very important role in Hamlet and can really determine how you will be treated. Hamlet killed Polonius. If Hamlet was any other person he would have faced major consequences but since he is a prince he can get away with it. This quote is about how Hamlet is going crazy so Claudius informs him that he will be sent to England. Like i stated before, if Hamlet was not a prince and not so highly ranked in the social class, he would have been punished much differently. All of this relates to the colonialist ideology because in this particular case, Hamlet is seen to be a colonizer and clearly ranked above most other people. He gets treated with much greater respect even after his horrible actions.   2. Which people or groups does the work identify as “other” or stranger? 2. In this scene specificaly, Claudius is seen to be the colonizer and the Laertes as “others”. This quote depicts how Claudius is convincing the Laertes that he is innocent and had nothing to do with their fathers death. This is so important because it shows Claudius getting what he wants and achieving peace between the two. Claudius is proving that he is the superior of the two groups which proves he is the colonizer. In the end, he proved to the Laertes that he was innocent. The Laertes are the “others” because Cladius has the power over them. After analyzing Hamlet through the lens of post colonialism it allowed me to see who had power and control and who didn’t and how much more impact the colonizer can have on the surroundings around him/her.

Reader’s Response, and archetypal Response to Hamlet Act 3, Scene 4.

Reader’s Response, and archetypal Response to Hamlet Act 3, Scene 4.

After reading Hamlet Act 3, Scene 4, this is my character analysis. Hamlet, the prince, is the main character. Gertrude is the queen and Hamlet’s mother.  Hamlet’s father passed away, and is now “The Ghost”. Polonius is Claudius’ court. Claudius is the king.

As I read more, the plot thickens. As I stated before, Hamlet’ father, Gertrude’s husband, passed away. Gertrude is now seeing Hamlet’ uncle, who is Hamlet’s father’s brother, Claudius. Yes, very confusing! Because of Gertrude’s unethical decisions, Hamlet has been speaking to his father, the ghost, who is plotting revenge on his brother. Through Polonius’ speech, we discover that Hamlet is aware of his mother’s actions and has been trying his best to stop them, “He will come straight. Look you lay home to him. Tell him his pranks have been too broad to bear with, And that your grace hath screened and stood between Much heat and him. I’ll silence me even here. Pray you, be round with him” (3.4.4-5). After reading this, I realized that Polonius has some sort of relation with Claudius as he tells Gertrude to be strict with Hamlet so that the King is not affected by his “pranks”. We also learn the type of man his uncle is, “A horrible act—almost as bad, my good mother, as killing a king and marrying his brother” (3.4.29-30). As I read further, something that really stuck out to me was Hamlet’s loyalty. For example, he killed his own uncle in his father’s honour. As a matter of fact, he is willing to kill anybody who gets in his way, like when he killed Polonius. As the plot thickens I wonder about who else he will kill, or possibly betray in order to protect the loyalty between his father and him. Many of Shakespeare's novels and the characters within them are heavily driven by loyalty and traits alike. I wonder if William himself was a man driven by loyalty and respect? If I had to make an assumption as to what might happen as the story goes on, is that Gertrude will continue her adventures with the King although she says she will stop at the end of the scene; this will eventually anger Hamlet so much so that he will potentially kill his mother.

Secondly, for my Archetypal response to Act 3 Scene 4, i was able to come up with some questions but also draw the following points to a conclusion. After saying all the nice things about his father, Hamlet goes on to say Claudius is terrible. “Here is your husband; like a mildew'd ear, Blasting his wholesome brother. Have you eyes?” (3.4.64-65). Claudius takes the archetypal role of the Villain in the novel, to Hamlet, he is the enemy. In my opinion, I truly believe Hamlet also sees his mother as a “bad guy” in the play. Hamlet says terrible things to his mother, for example, “turns her eyes into her soul”. He said on many occasions, things that a son would never to his mother. “O Hamlet, speak no more: Thou turn'st mine eyes into my very soul; And there I see such black and grained spots As will not leave their tinct” (3.4.85-87). Why does what Hamlet says have such an effect on her? Perhaps she believes it holds some truth? In the quote stated, “black and grained spots” within her soul. To me,  this is a symbol for the darkening of her character because she has now levelled herself with Claudius. Although Gertrude is Hamlet’s mother in the play, she begins to turn into what he believes is an enemy too.

Adnan Syed. is he innocent?

Mixed emotions are just one way to describe the way I felt about the “Serial” podcast. At times I thought that he must be innocent. Then my opinion would completely change and I thought he had to be guilty. It’s so hard to make an educated decision on whether or not a man should be locked away or set free because either way, it has its consequences. After sifting through all the evidence I was provided with throughout the podcast, I have ultimately come to my decision...

Taking a quote from the podcast, it seems to me that indeed Adnan is guilty. Adnan’s friend Jay tells the police and jury that Adnan informed him that he did kill Hae. He also told them that he helped Adnan disregard the body. What should be enough evidence to put Adnan in jail, as the podcast goes on, Jay’s testimony made many changes. In his interview with The Intercept Jay clarifies the reason why his story was constantly changing. “I stonewalled them that way. No — until they told me they weren’t trying to prosecute me for selling weed, or trying to get any of my friends in trouble. People had lives and were trying to get into college and stuff like that. Getting them in trouble for anything that they knew or that I had told them — I couldn’t have that.” I believe that Jay’s testimony was nearly made up in order to protect himself and loved ones from the legal prosecution he was going to face. Jay also changed his story from going to Leakin Park at 7pm, to being there after midnight. Majority of the testimony was based off of cell phone records. Moreover, he mentions that he got a call after midnight, when the cell phone records show otherwise; another instance which kills all credibility he had (Klein).  This piece of evidence pushed me towards Syed’s innocence. Jay was selling drugs and could have gotten into a lot of trouble legally.

A girl by the name of Asia McClain was another important person in the involvement of the Serial’s podcast. She was in touch with Adnan and said she was going to testify on his behalf. Her reasoning was because she claims she was with him in the library during the time of the murder. Obviously, this helped persuade me towards believing in Adnan’s innocence. Oddly enough, she never did testify for Adnan; but now as the case is resurfacing, two people released emails that spoke against Asia’ testimony. The two people in charge of composing the emails stated that they were in class with Asia when she said: “that she believed so much in Adnan’s innocence that she would make up a lie to prove he couldn’t have done it”. Adnan himself was shocked when presented Asia’s letters (Delaney). Now, the strongest piece of evidence in Syed’s favour had been contradicted by the two emails written by the students.  

Both images taken from: “Maps, Documents, Etc.” Serial, serialpodcast.org/season-one/maps.

The third extremely important and intriguing piece of evidence I found was regarding the cell phone records. The court used Jay’s faulty testimonies and Adnan’s cell phone records as their evidence in solving the case. The largest piece of evidence against Adnan was the cell phone records. But, when taking another look at the records, the Judge decided to reopen his trial due to the “failure to cross-examine the state’s cell tower expert about the reliability of cell tower location evidence” (Klein) during his first trial. Other then that, Adnan drove Hae’s car when he was on his way to the crime scene (where he buried her). After inspecting the car, there was not even a single trace of any mud, grass or anything else in the car. The evidence I read in this article is what ultimately shaped me into believing Adnan’s innocence.

Overall, I think that because of Jay’s changing testimonies and inconsistent cell phone records and just an overall lack of real solid evidence; I believe it is wrong to have Adnan is jail for a crime he clearly cannot be rightly prosecuted for. Therefore proving my ideas as to why I believe Adnan to be innocent.

The creation of Star Wars. Original?

The creation of Star Wars. Original? 

There may never be a more iconic trilogy of movies than Star Wars. From, "The Empire Strikes Back" to "The Return of the Jedi", the list goes on! For those of you who don't know, Star Wars is a sequence of movies, centred on a film series created by George Lucas. But were the movies really original ideas from Lucas himself? 

In the three short films by Kirby Ferguson, he outlined the history of the remix and films, as well as the parts of other movies that may have been used as influences for newer ones, like Star Wars. On many accounts, Kirby displayed the similarities and likeliness that certain scenes from Star Wars depicted from movies before it was made. Some examples include: scenes from Flash Gordon seen as updated versions in Star Wars are very similar, scenes from Hidden Fortress, and even Yojimbo when the character has his arm chopped off. Something very similar happens in Star Wars. 

When depicting the majority of Lucas's films, it is safe to say that the ideas are original, but maybe add-ons or come from influencers in previous movies like the ones listed. In one way or another, George Lucas has used some ideas that were deprived of movies made before Star Wars but in my personal opinion little to none credit needed to be given because of the good job Lucas did on making the ideas seem like his own. None were too similar where anybody was able to really point it out besides professionals. The Star Wars movies can be strongly compared to that of an honest and original writer. If Lucas was to copy directly from other movies it can be looked at as an act of plagiarism. Using prior ideas and scenes as an influence for more developed and original ideas is nothing but pure genius and that was what George Lucas was able to do. 

In closing, I truly believe Lucas did a very good job of taking innovative ideas and making them his own without copying or getting into any trouble illegally. Creation requires influence. Star Wars is something that is a part of so many people for so many different reasons. Perhaps it was because of how clever and intelligent Lucas was when it came to shaping his ideas from prior cinema masterpieces. 

Why English should not be a necissary requirment for University applications.

Since I became a student, there has always been some sort of English course that has been mandatory for me to take. from learning to read, write, spell and how to use proper grammar. English has always been a big part of my life and it will continue to be. However, I truly believe that as we get older, the role English plays slowly deteriorates.

At the start, emphasis on learning how to spell and read was always the front-runner. Which then became how to write proper paragraphs and then ultimately public speaking. These are the skills taught in order to become a confident writer and speaker. Then we have high school, students are taught literary devices, how to read and analyze writing and how to write themselves. All of this is rather new as we did little to none of that in elementary school. In my opinion, university English is much more suited and pleasing towards the educator rather than the student. I agree that students are continuing to expand on what we've been learning our whole life but we are constantly doing that in everyday encounters that are far more realistic to the real world and work field.

In conclusion, I believe the things I've learned my whole life have been important but have not varied drastically from the start of high school so what will change drastically in grade twelve English to make it so important enough for all university applications. Writing styles are one of many things that make English students unique. A teacher may either love the way you write or do everything in his/her power to change it. Therefore, marks can vary when you have different teachers grading papers and who's to say that one teacher might give a student a very high mark while another can grade the exact same paper yet give them a poor mark. How is it right for universities to make English a necessary requirement when it is so inconsistent and biased?

I truly believe that the only time English should be required is for a program primarily focused on English and English related subjects.