Syllabic Sabotage

Upon Reflection
Haikus are easy,
But sometimes they don't make sense.
Refrigerator.

Long Life; Short Poem
At last, as dying,
The squirrel, he sighs - the acorns
They are all perfect

Ad infinitum
Tradition began
But by whose authority?
Infinite turtles.

Sic Semper Tyrannus
like you, i did not
choose these shackles. art? i am
brave enough to break free.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down

Apocalypse Now

I think of the difficulties facing the screenwriter (Nicholas Cage) in the film Adaptation whenever I see a movie that is an adaptation of some well-established story. Within that context, I consider this movie to be a tremendous success. First of all it does a great job of captivating the essential storyline elements and style of Conrad's original "Heart of Darkness." From the very start of the movie, in the images of the fan superimposed upon the images of the helicopters you are starkly and vividly thrown straight into the mind of the main character in a modernist fashion--you are living his experiences. Also the narrative style of the story reflects Conrad's original design nicely. There is even great since of imperialism in the actions of the one army colonel, by deciding to go to the one peak simply for reasons of "surfing." Not only that but as any good adaptation does it brings in it's own new elements and styles to enhance the original story without stealing from its original intrigue. I think by setting the story in Vietnam it makes the story a little more meaningful to modern audiences, and is able to bring in a whole new element of psychological intrigue--the difficulties of battle, and the ridiculousness of the Vietnam war are thrown in your face with intensity unlike I have seen in a movie for a long time. Of course this is made to parallel also the insanity of the jungle in Heart of Darkness, however, in the context of this war it takes on a very different meaning. Perhaps the best example of these new elements are seen around the bridge, the last outpost on the Nong river. You see clearly the complete and utter destruction of human sensibilities in the midst of a situation which is fundamentally inhuman. You vividly see a message that is also very apparent in Kuberik's "Full Metal Jacket" that many of the soldiers in Vietnam were simply boys, scared, and unable to make rational decisions when faced with the task of killing. A clear statement that no human being is designed to deal with such situations in a sane manner. Specifically I am referring to the scene on the river in which they freak out and kill everyone on the boat. This scene strikes me as one of the most powerful moments in the movie. Also the character and development of Mr. Kurtz seems to be very well done, and in the spirit of Conrad as well. The movie ends in darkness and gave me a very similar impression over all that I had when reading heart of darkness, however, maybe even a with a little more profundity because of the newly introduced psychological elements of war. Overall, I loved the movie, and I think it did a great job of paying homage to classic British literature while at the same time creating an extremely powerful commentary on the futility of the Vietnam war.

After-class Note about the Sacrifice Paintings

I wanted to mention this in class, but we ran out of time. The contrasting views of sacrifice that we saw in those last two paintings (I can't remember the exact titles) is especially interesting from a contemporary standpoint.

Left painting (modern sacrifice): What stands out to me is the silhouette/statue of a soldier in the background, suggesting that it is a military sacrifice. The fanfare surrounding the soldier depicts a sense of honor, pride, and celebration (i.e., the trumpets, drums, wreaths, the colorful flags, and what looks like a version of the Eternal Flame). Thus, while the soldier does not want to die, which we can see from his "death grip" (trying to hold on to life), as someone pointed out, he HAS to die for the cause because that is what the situation has lead up to. At this point, there is no way out of death and, though frightened, the soldier seems to be proud as well. He/she knows that there will be a parade, a celebration of his/her life and military actions.

Right painting (ancient sacrifice): What is interesting to me in THIS painting are the masks that the people seem to be wearing; either they are masks or the artist is purposely distorting their faces. However, this is different from the other painting, as there IS indeed some depiction of a face. Thus, we get to look into the "face" of the ancient hero, the brave soul who is giving up his/her life for the cause of the ancient people. The painting makes me question what that cause is, however, as I do not know much about that time period as opposed to my own. For what reasons would someone be sacrificed in this time? Is there really a sense of pride coming from the sacrificed person (re: is it a somewhat willing sacrifice, or forced?) I am also interested in the fact that there are four sacrificers in this painting, yet the other painting does not show anyone else, does not show exactly how the man/woman was sacrificed. Finally, the difference in clothing styles is intriguing. Are these ancients military personnel? Religious subjects? High-class/low-class individuals?

I'm sure there are more questions, but I will stop here. What does everyone else think? Does anyone have a good grasp of ancient rituals of sacrifice, and would you care to share that knowledge?

Empire of good intentions

As the documentary was named ''Empire of Good Intentions'' I am certain many people may have been left with a feeling of doubt. This feeling of doubt due to the fact the British really did not do much ''Good'' while in India, or Ireland for that matter. Although this maybe true this documentary brought a light on the issue of British Imperialism and outlined its harsh reality. 

Specific issues that were particularly interesting to me were the Irish potato famine and the amount of Indian peasants that died during this British reign, 5 million I think, once again really outlining the reality of this issue. Ultimately India was left in ruins and the IRA was formed in Ireland, so although the British may have had ''good intentions'' clearly none of these intentions had much of a positive affect on Britain's image during this particular time period. 

The Wind that Shakes the Barley

I thought that the movie was controversial and questionable. The movie tells the story of two brothers joining the Irish Republican Army to gain freedom from the British. The British were depicted as the devil, while the Irish were depicted as courageous resistance fighter for the greater good of the Irish people. Toward the end however, it was interesting to see the Irish fighting their own people, and a brother ordering the death sentence of his younger brother. I question the portrayal of the British as the devil and the Irish as the saviors. What is the point of fighting without complete freedom? Why would you stop if you are so close to your goal? The last thing I thought of was the death sentence ordered by the brother. Are the ideals and order more important than you own brother?

Sorry Conrad, But You're a Racist

I agree with Achebe and believe that Conrad was racially prejudiced. Throughout the story, Conrad fails to distinguish his opinions from the opinions of his characters, so why would I be compelled to believe that the opinions of his characters aren't his own? Little comments such as "The African is indeed my brother but my junior brother" suggest that Conrad had a prejudice against the African people. Also, in Firchow's analysis of the Heart of Darkness, he tries to justify racism by saying the word wasn't in existence during that period of time. To me, that is the same as saying murder was okay to perform before there was a law that condemned such an action. In short, I feel like Firchow is full of bologna and I agree with Achebe that Conrad is indeed a racist.

Achebe Vs. Firchow

In a comaparison of these two authors, it is easy for one to see that racism and contraversy similiar are up to personal interpretation. When looking at a short story written by John Conrad entitled, "Heart of Darkness" one can see both points made by each author. First, Achebe that their truly is a distained look at Africa and its people, as they are not truly represented and many other problems that many British sailors witnessed during their struggles in the African Congo. Yet, one must also see Firchow's point that this was how a British writter is going to write since this is his social background and what he knows. As well as this was the context of so much of the time. Therefor, when the question is asked if "Heart of Darness" is racist, One must look from all perspectives and the context of the time and ask him/herslef if he/she feels in their heart the extent of the racism.