Thursday, February 7, 2019
Week 2 Analysis, "About the House Girl"
I am creating a literary analysis blog post for part B of week 2's reading. I understand that I must choose a literary device from this reading and for this I am choosing Patapir from the story "About the House Girl." In this story, Patapir was very unique to me, but I also learned and understood that he was a very smart boy. Patapir was known as the "flute boy" but I think he often had his own way of doing things and he always had a reason for doing so. I think when he saw the two girls across the river and decided to head over to them, the bigger idea in his mind was to go over there and find an excuse to go up to the old ladies house where Ifapi lived. To me, this was critical thinking that went on in his brain while he was trying to be sly with his actions toward the other girls. When Patapir agreed to meet the two other girls later that night, I think his idea of Ifapi had gone out the window, until he saw her out in public for the first time dancing at the event he was at that night. Once he saw her, I think his mind was really made up that he wanted to be with, and in the bigger picture marry her. The fact that the next day he made it back to her house, and this time went inside to take Ifapi was pretty crazy. The old lady was very protective of her at first, but I think Patapir's determination and respect let the old lady realize everything was going to be fine and allowed Patipir to take Ifapi. Patipir wasted no time and immediately married her, and planned their wedding for that night. This was something that made me think a lot about and wonder how things were so much different in the story than today. I also have to choose a theme that means something to me from this story and I am going to use the river. The river in this story was not only everyone's way of transporting, but also used to get together in the canoes and travel down river. To me, this symbolizes everybody's life, like how are roads are today. We rely on the streets to let us drive our cars on which allow us to get anywhere and everywhere we need to go. Without streets for us in our life, their would be no life. It would be impossible for anyone to commute to work, unless there was a secondary option like airplanes, but I cant see that happening. Same goes for this story, everyone lived around or close to this river they were in, and the only way they ever transported to each other or any events was a canoe, that river is there life like streets are ours. To me, I think it would be cool to live in an area like this, where boats were the only way of transportation. I do not think having a whole world like this would be cool, but having certain areas with river access and places to live would be fun. I think the author used this river well as a metaphor. He basically used the river to symbolize these peoples lives, because without it how would they make it anywhere down or across stream? This story seems to be describing the time of life many many years ago, so I think it is pretty historical. I can tell the historical meaning influences this authors work because he based his whole story off of it. There is no where in the world today, at least I don't think, that lives like the way the people in this story does. I know that some areas may have boat and river access, and may use boats for transportation a lot, but it still doesn't add up with this story 100 percent. The historical element connects to this authors work because the whole story is based around it. Without the author making a historical story about the past, this whole thing would have been different. Overall, I enjoyed this story a lot more than I would have expected, and I hope there are similar to this in the future of these readings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for your post, Logan! I want to review some of the terms for the literary analysis assignment. I'm not assuming anyone knows how to do these, so I'm giving feedback when I see the need, ok?
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to talk about "character" as a literary device, then, according to the document I gave you to look at, you are either going to talk about:
Characterization: The ways individual characters are represented by the narrator or author of a text. This includes descriptions of the characters’ physical appearances, personalities, actions, interactions, and dialogue.
Or you will discuss one or more of these terms in discussing characters: (sorry it's long):
Antagonist: A character or characters in a text with whom the protagonist opposes.
Anti-hero: A protagonist of a story who embodies none of the qualities typically assigned to traditional heroes and heroines. Not to be confused with the antagonist of a story, the anti-hero is a protagonist whose failings are typically used to humanize him or her and convey a message about the reality of human existence.
Archetype: “a resonant figure or mythic importance, whether a personality, place, or situation, found in diverse cultures and different historical periods” (Mickics 24). Archetypes differ from allegories because they tend to reference broader or commonplace (often termed “stock”) character types, plot points, and literary conventions. Paying attention to archetypes can help readers identify what an author may posit as “universal truths” about life, society, human interaction, etc. based on what other authors or participants in a culture may have said about them.
Epithet: According to Taafe, “An adjective, noun, or phase expressing some characteristic quality of a thing or person or a descriptive name applied to a person, as Richard the Lion-Hearted” (Taafe 58). An epithet usually indicates some notable quality about the individual with whom it addresses, but it can also be used ironically to emphasize qualities that individual might actually lack.
Personification: The use of a person to represent a concept, quality, or object. Personification can also refer to “a person who is considered a representative type of a particular quality or concept” (Taafe 120).
Protagonist: The primary character in a text, often positioned as “good” or the character with whom readers are expected to identify. Protagonists usually oppose an antagonist.
It's not just talking about what a character does in the story. It's analyzing the use of a particular character in a piece of fiction, in terms of the purpose they serve, or how they are depicted.
Similarly, in future posts, I'd like you to revisit what you mean by "theme". In your post you say the river is a theme because they use it all the time. That's not a theme. If anything, that kind of discussion of the river would make it a symbol -- which means that you think the author was using this tangible thing (the river) to say something about something less concrete (like love, or justice, for example).
A THEME may be defined as “[an] abstract idea that emerges from a literary work’s treatment of its subject-matter; or a topic recurring in literary works”. Themes in literature tend to differ depending on author, time period, genre, style, purpose, etc.
So for example, in The Hunger Games novel, one theme would be survival, and keeping your humanity and dignity as you try to survive. That theme is a message that is referred to, and played out, throughout the book. It isn't a thing. It's a message the author wishes to convey through the use of a story.
I hope that makes sense. It's a practice. We'll all get more used to them!
Hi Logan, I agree that this story was more interesting than I expected. I agree that the river is an important symbol as well as the flute and how the music traveled. In the story we read how the music traveled from where Ratapi was all the way to the village that Ifapi was from. The river is a way to show not only the reader but the characters that no matter where they were from there was a way to connect to other places and meet different people and to live life.
ReplyDeleteHey, Logan!
ReplyDeleteI also used the same story in my analysis, so it's nice reading someone else's point of view. I like that you mentioned that Patapir went to talk to those girls just to get closer to Ifapi's aunt house. To me, those girls were such a waste in the story since they didn't do anything special, but through your perspective it seems more plausible and interesting.
However, the part that you talk about the river as a theme got me confused. I mean, of course a river can be a theme, but in this story I can't see that. It doesn't seem that the author meant to write it with a different meaning or to represent something. It was just a normal river...