how do you define culture? what makes up a person's culture? is it intrinsic or extrinsic? explain.
culture is a person's viewpoint and interpretation of not just their personal life, but the world around them. this includes family relationships, arts, media and entertainment (or what they do in their free time), communication styles, morals and how people behave in the presence of others. a person might be born with the capacity or tendency towards one aspect of culture, just as people have their own style and personality, but culture is mostly learned from others.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Sunday, August 19, 2012
opener // 8.17.12
three facts and three claims about the painting "Runaways" by Norman Rockwell:
- the paining is painted by Norman Rockwell.
- in the painting, there is a police officer, a young boy, and a man behind the counter.
- thee is a chalkboard displaying the specials behind the counter.
***
- the painting depicts a different time period, mostly indicated by the clothes that the subjects are wearing and the decorations of the shop that they are in. today, the painting could be viewed as how times have changed. in our time, a kid that age would never be out, running away on their own, at least without getting very far.
- the man behind the counter works there. this one is simple. yes, he might be smoking a cigarette, but the way he is dressed closely resembles a kitchen worker.
- some would say that the police officer is scolding the child for running away, but it could also be viewed that the police officer and the kid both ended up at the lunch counter because they are both taking a moment to run away from their own responsibilities. it all depends on your point of view and how you choose to interpret the title and the work together.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Pygmalion // part two
From act II to act III, most of Eliza's training is going on behind the scenes and skipped over in order to get to her presentation as a member of high society. I guess it would have mad a hundred-page play much longer and somewhat boring to include this part. the reader understands much of the process, and the jump from one time to the next is probably meant to illustrate a large and sudden shift.
The party that all of this is leading up to is certainly a very odd scene. while Higgins' first student, identified as Whiskers, seems interesting, how he misinterprets Eliza to be of French or Austrian descent is just another example of a motif that I keep seeing: people make assumptions about small details of someone's personality, and these people are usually wrong. Things and people are not always what they seem. Everything seems to be going well at the party, but when Eliza, Higgins and Pickering get home, Eliza flips out, because she has been reduced to being less than human and more of a mission accomplished. And I think her anger is justified.
Another main point of the story seems to have something to do with expectations; part of Eliza's success and quick learning had to do with the expectations others had for her and the focus that she had. These expectations can take a person very far, but not everything about style, grace and personality can be taught. To force these things on a person and expect them to learn to be a more desirable person somewhat reduces them to less than they were in the beginning. Like I said in the beginning, a person cannot be reduced to to the way they speak or where they came from. The more you get to know them, the more one will realize that everyone has their own vision, expectations and dreams.
[act III - end of act V]
The party that all of this is leading up to is certainly a very odd scene. while Higgins' first student, identified as Whiskers, seems interesting, how he misinterprets Eliza to be of French or Austrian descent is just another example of a motif that I keep seeing: people make assumptions about small details of someone's personality, and these people are usually wrong. Things and people are not always what they seem. Everything seems to be going well at the party, but when Eliza, Higgins and Pickering get home, Eliza flips out, because she has been reduced to being less than human and more of a mission accomplished. And I think her anger is justified.
Another main point of the story seems to have something to do with expectations; part of Eliza's success and quick learning had to do with the expectations others had for her and the focus that she had. These expectations can take a person very far, but not everything about style, grace and personality can be taught. To force these things on a person and expect them to learn to be a more desirable person somewhat reduces them to less than they were in the beginning. Like I said in the beginning, a person cannot be reduced to to the way they speak or where they came from. The more you get to know them, the more one will realize that everyone has their own vision, expectations and dreams.
[act III - end of act V]
Monday, August 6, 2012
Pygmalion // part one
The story begins in the rain, which you could have guessed, given the setting. The reader, having read the back of the book, is probably eager to meet this new protagonist, but it is not apparent at first that she is present in the opening scene. It is not until later than her name, or the fact that she has a name and is not some faceless stand-in, is revealed. The same goes for the two Higgins and Pickering, and the fact that they just happened to run into each other when one was looking to find the other. It seems very coincidental. My observation is that people and characters often drastically change and become more complex the more time you spend around them. As the play goes on, names and backgrounds are slowly revealed.
Second (I'm jumping around here), Mr. Doolittle's erratic behavior seems off to me. Eliza, seeming to be about 17-20(ish), never mentioned that she had much of a family, and she is living on her own, which I guess is uncommon for the time. When Mr. Doolittle shows up, first demanding to take her back and then later allowing her to stay, it indicates to me that there is more something more to him.
The story, at first, reminds me of Jasper Fforde's Shades of Grey (published long before there were fifty, thankyouverymuch), where everyone is colorblind to a certain extent, and social standing are determined by how much and what color a person can see. In Pygmalion, more realistically, how a person speaks determines how others see them and indicates where they came from. While eloquence may make communication clearer and more polite, people often make too big a deal of it. I think that exaggeration of one thing like color or speech as part of a literary work serves to illustrate how society puts too much emphasis on small differences that can't completely define a person.
[my copy only has 102 full pages, so this is to the end of act II]
Second (I'm jumping around here), Mr. Doolittle's erratic behavior seems off to me. Eliza, seeming to be about 17-20(ish), never mentioned that she had much of a family, and she is living on her own, which I guess is uncommon for the time. When Mr. Doolittle shows up, first demanding to take her back and then later allowing her to stay, it indicates to me that there is more something more to him.
The story, at first, reminds me of Jasper Fforde's Shades of Grey (published long before there were fifty, thankyouverymuch), where everyone is colorblind to a certain extent, and social standing are determined by how much and what color a person can see. In Pygmalion, more realistically, how a person speaks determines how others see them and indicates where they came from. While eloquence may make communication clearer and more polite, people often make too big a deal of it. I think that exaggeration of one thing like color or speech as part of a literary work serves to illustrate how society puts too much emphasis on small differences that can't completely define a person.
[my copy only has 102 full pages, so this is to the end of act II]
The Pearl // part two
I can see how the pearl could have been seen as unique, if not odd, but 'a monstrosity' is not something that I saw coming. I guess the rejection by the pearl buyers foreshadows the coming events leading up to the end of the story. For now, Kino and Juana are on their way to the capital to find a better offer for the pearl.
One thing that sticks in my mind is how the attackers the Kino fights off multiple times during the nights are never described or revealed at all. A struggle, cuts and scrapes, but never a face or a name for the reader. In the beginning of the story, few could have seen the real cost of the pearl, and how little wealth it would really bring. Funny how when everything is good, it's difficult to seriously consider all of the thing that could go wrong. These things are cloaked in the shadows of foresight, much like the attackers in the night that can never be truly known.
It's still tough to explain, but I would connect the ending to John Green's Looking For Alaska, where it is often asked [spoiler alert] for the sake of the story, did Alaska really have to die? While this story is much simper, the question is still the same: did Coyotito really have to die in the end, even if by totally unforeseen circumstances? is it fate, sealed when Kino discovered the pearl?
Simply put, I see two main points to the story: First, riches and fortune will always come at a high (and often unforeseen) cost. Second, in hindsight, the loss of a family is far greater and more deeply mourned than that of a fortune.
Well, there goes my night.
[pages 47-101]
The Pearl // part one
Chapter one begins, as with most stories, with establishing the setting, explaining the situation and letting the reader know what is going on. A quick portrait of an average day...I'm taking notes as I read, but something about the scorpion biting Coyotito seems more like foreshadowing of something to me.
When Kino finds the pearl, word spreads quickly, as it would in almost any small setting like this one, but the comparison to the nervous system of the human body is very accurate. Often, messages and events are transmitted faster than we can consciously know. Also, almost constantly throughout the story, the mood is conveyed through an ever-changing 'song' that has become a collective form of communication. I believe it to be a connection to the tradition of oral history which was probably very common in a rural village in Mexico, for not everyone knew how to read and write. Though not used as much today, I would compare it to how some people (myself included) often associate a song or sound with a memory or feeling.
Finally, the doctor seems to be a personification of how wealth changes not only the person who posses it, but the people around him or her. While the priest is extremely condescending to the people of the village, the doctor actually despises them, as if their lack of money makes them less than human. ("what am I, a veterinarian?") That is, until he hears that the man that was too poor to be seen is now wealthy beyond belief. (also, wealth has changed the pearl buyers, who have become clever, trying to get away with paying less to the divers.) It's obvious that the capsule that the doctor gave to Coyotito was not a cure, but a way for the doctor to get some of the money that Kino was soon to have. Perhaps the person that you would trust with your life has become less ethical than a poor fisherman. But perhaps the reason that I feel the most contempt for the doctor is his supper of chocolate and sweet cakes. With which he is discontent.
[pages 1-46]
When Kino finds the pearl, word spreads quickly, as it would in almost any small setting like this one, but the comparison to the nervous system of the human body is very accurate. Often, messages and events are transmitted faster than we can consciously know. Also, almost constantly throughout the story, the mood is conveyed through an ever-changing 'song' that has become a collective form of communication. I believe it to be a connection to the tradition of oral history which was probably very common in a rural village in Mexico, for not everyone knew how to read and write. Though not used as much today, I would compare it to how some people (myself included) often associate a song or sound with a memory or feeling.
Finally, the doctor seems to be a personification of how wealth changes not only the person who posses it, but the people around him or her. While the priest is extremely condescending to the people of the village, the doctor actually despises them, as if their lack of money makes them less than human. ("what am I, a veterinarian?") That is, until he hears that the man that was too poor to be seen is now wealthy beyond belief. (also, wealth has changed the pearl buyers, who have become clever, trying to get away with paying less to the divers.) It's obvious that the capsule that the doctor gave to Coyotito was not a cure, but a way for the doctor to get some of the money that Kino was soon to have. Perhaps the person that you would trust with your life has become less ethical than a poor fisherman. But perhaps the reason that I feel the most contempt for the doctor is his supper of chocolate and sweet cakes. With which he is discontent.
[pages 1-46]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)