Thursday, August 14, 2014
Monday, March 3, 2014
"A Modest Proposal" Relevancy Post
"A Modest Proposal" is a satirical pamphlet written by satirist Jonathan Swift. Its aim was to criticize English tyranny, the wealthy, and landlords, and to expose their sins to the poor to show them the preposterous actions taken against them. While ultimately it did not galvanize the impoverished to take action, "A Modest Proposal" is still considered a relevant piece today, that can be connected to multiple countries around the world, not just Ireland in the 18th century.
One quotation that really stands out in Swift's pamphlet is "I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children." (pg. 397 The Malcontents). This quote stands out because it applies as a metaphor for so much of the misfortunes that modern day poor have to face. Back in Swift's time, landlords would charge excessive rates for renting tenement flats, and so the poor were almost always slightly in debt. Swift uses irony in his pamphlet to say that because the landlords have already "devoured", as in finished eating the money, life, and energy of the parents, they have the right to "eat" the children as well. This leads to a vicious cycle as the children are forced to be kept in debt, and their descendants, creating a vicious cycle with no escape. In modern times, the same greed can be seen in the practices of bankers. In an op-ed written for the New York Times by Paul Krugman called "Eating the Irish", Krugman links the landlords in Swift's time to modern day bankers. There was an economic miracle in Ireland that led to a speculative frenzy, financed mainly by money borrowed by the Irish banks from foreign ones. Eventually, the economy crashed and the banks faced huge losses. Because the corrupt, puppet Irish government was controlled by British interests, and much of the money lent to the Irish banks came from English coffers, the Irish government stepped in and shouldered the debt, making it a public obligation. The sharp increase in taxes hurt the poor, as well as the government-instituted spending cuts. Thus, today's Ireland, is a very similar situation to the Ireland of the 16th century, with the poor only getting poorer, not because they caused the spending cuts or debt, but because of wealthy private interests that ruined the economy. Now the less fortunate citizens of Ireland have to clean up the mess the wealthy made.
Point about outsourcing raw materials from Ireland, manufacturing in England, then selling globally to other countries without giving any commission/payment to Irish who provide the materials, which most of the time are the poor farmers and laborers. Link to the comeback of textile plants, where automation is increasing productivity and boosting domestic manufacturing instead of overseas manufacturing. Automation and modern technology decreases cost of manufacturing at home (in the US) rather than manufacturing overseas, even though labor costs are cheaper overseas.
On another note, this quote can also be interpreted a different way. Swift criticizes the Irish government for being corrupt and basically puppets of the English counterpart in London, so "landlords" could also refer to the government. This is because the English were outsourcing Irish raw materials, producing them in England, and selling them internationally as "British" goods. The Irish didn't even see a pence for providing the materials, which coincidentally were mostly provided by the poor farmers and laborers. While the Irish government has the power to stop this, it is simply a puppet government under the British. As long as the Irish politicians are bribed or threatened, they won't oppose the largest imperial power at that time. Thus, the poor had no way of earning money by harvesting these raw materials. Thus, generation after generation of Irish farmers and laborers are unable to escape their situation. Hence the irony in "landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children." Today, India faces similar problems. Coincidentally, India contains around 40% of the world's malnourished population today, similar to the hungry Irish poor in the 1700s. The government has provided numerous services and programs to solve this issue, but there is still a high number of malnourished people in India. The question is, why? In fact, it is because some of the programs are corrupt and inefficient. The Public Distribution System (PDS) in India is a plan that distributes foodstuffs like grain and wheat to rural areas where poverty is more prevalent. However, much of the grain is siphoned off to black markets or sold in the market at a profit. The total value of corruption in the PDS is around 358 crore a year, which is approximately 57 million US dollars! The corruption is widespread in the PDS and the government has done nothing to really stop it from happening. This is similar to the portrayal of the English government in Swift's pamphlet, as he says that the Irish government is corrupt, due to the bribery and graft that the English government is paying the Irish government to maintain a pro-British regime in Ireland.
In conclusion, "A Modest Proposal" is definitely still relevant in today's society, particularly in modern day Ireland and India. Swift's criticisms of landlords are metaphors of private banking practices in modern day Ireland, as well as metaphors for the corruption going on at a political level, as the government shoulders the private debt to make it a public one. The corruption metaphor of the landlords is even furthered in modern day India, as the programs the Indian government are implementing to solve malnutrition not only worsens the problem, but also helps the wrong people by putting corrupt dollars in the hands of corrupt officials, instead of food in the bowls of the poor.
One quotation that really stands out in Swift's pamphlet is "I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children." (pg. 397 The Malcontents). This quote stands out because it applies as a metaphor for so much of the misfortunes that modern day poor have to face. Back in Swift's time, landlords would charge excessive rates for renting tenement flats, and so the poor were almost always slightly in debt. Swift uses irony in his pamphlet to say that because the landlords have already "devoured", as in finished eating the money, life, and energy of the parents, they have the right to "eat" the children as well. This leads to a vicious cycle as the children are forced to be kept in debt, and their descendants, creating a vicious cycle with no escape. In modern times, the same greed can be seen in the practices of bankers. In an op-ed written for the New York Times by Paul Krugman called "Eating the Irish", Krugman links the landlords in Swift's time to modern day bankers. There was an economic miracle in Ireland that led to a speculative frenzy, financed mainly by money borrowed by the Irish banks from foreign ones. Eventually, the economy crashed and the banks faced huge losses. Because the corrupt, puppet Irish government was controlled by British interests, and much of the money lent to the Irish banks came from English coffers, the Irish government stepped in and shouldered the debt, making it a public obligation. The sharp increase in taxes hurt the poor, as well as the government-instituted spending cuts. Thus, today's Ireland, is a very similar situation to the Ireland of the 16th century, with the poor only getting poorer, not because they caused the spending cuts or debt, but because of wealthy private interests that ruined the economy. Now the less fortunate citizens of Ireland have to clean up the mess the wealthy made.
Point about outsourcing raw materials from Ireland, manufacturing in England, then selling globally to other countries without giving any commission/payment to Irish who provide the materials, which most of the time are the poor farmers and laborers. Link to the comeback of textile plants, where automation is increasing productivity and boosting domestic manufacturing instead of overseas manufacturing. Automation and modern technology decreases cost of manufacturing at home (in the US) rather than manufacturing overseas, even though labor costs are cheaper overseas.
On another note, this quote can also be interpreted a different way. Swift criticizes the Irish government for being corrupt and basically puppets of the English counterpart in London, so "landlords" could also refer to the government. This is because the English were outsourcing Irish raw materials, producing them in England, and selling them internationally as "British" goods. The Irish didn't even see a pence for providing the materials, which coincidentally were mostly provided by the poor farmers and laborers. While the Irish government has the power to stop this, it is simply a puppet government under the British. As long as the Irish politicians are bribed or threatened, they won't oppose the largest imperial power at that time. Thus, the poor had no way of earning money by harvesting these raw materials. Thus, generation after generation of Irish farmers and laborers are unable to escape their situation. Hence the irony in "landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children." Today, India faces similar problems. Coincidentally, India contains around 40% of the world's malnourished population today, similar to the hungry Irish poor in the 1700s. The government has provided numerous services and programs to solve this issue, but there is still a high number of malnourished people in India. The question is, why? In fact, it is because some of the programs are corrupt and inefficient. The Public Distribution System (PDS) in India is a plan that distributes foodstuffs like grain and wheat to rural areas where poverty is more prevalent. However, much of the grain is siphoned off to black markets or sold in the market at a profit. The total value of corruption in the PDS is around 358 crore a year, which is approximately 57 million US dollars! The corruption is widespread in the PDS and the government has done nothing to really stop it from happening. This is similar to the portrayal of the English government in Swift's pamphlet, as he says that the Irish government is corrupt, due to the bribery and graft that the English government is paying the Irish government to maintain a pro-British regime in Ireland.
In conclusion, "A Modest Proposal" is definitely still relevant in today's society, particularly in modern day Ireland and India. Swift's criticisms of landlords are metaphors of private banking practices in modern day Ireland, as well as metaphors for the corruption going on at a political level, as the government shoulders the private debt to make it a public one. The corruption metaphor of the landlords is even furthered in modern day India, as the programs the Indian government are implementing to solve malnutrition not only worsens the problem, but also helps the wrong people by putting corrupt dollars in the hands of corrupt officials, instead of food in the bowls of the poor.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Learning Reflection
It's been a long time since the beginning of this course and I have enjoyed the entire journey. From the first essay about Joseph Campbell and The Dark Knight, I learned to make sure I integrate quotations, make a strong claim and organize my paragraphs in a coherent order. The next unit was about Grendel from the original Beowulf as well as the novel written by John Gardner. With that argument essay, I met the expectations for quote integration, showing I had improved since The Dark Knight essay. Finally, in our last unit, we became experts on our respective monsters and wrote a narrative from the perspective of that monster. That was my most favorite assignment because it let my imagination go wild and I could, in effect, write about the aftermath of Fenrir's imprisonment and the events leading up towards Ragnarok. Even though the word limit was a bit to little, I think I still managed to convey the irony and effect of a short story to my readers.
I think the narrative really made me realize why monsters are so fascinating: it is because they are different. We always think about the heroes and how they accomplish their feats, but nobody really thinks about the monster, or tells the story of the monster from its point of view. The audience could be, in effect, missing important points because all of us only focus on the point of view of the hero, and ignore the monster. This difference really adds to the fascination of the monster because we are unfamiliar with its point of view and its perspective. It really fascinated me to read about Grendel and Beowulf's battle in Grendel by John Gardner because it provided a new perspective of a story that is ages old. After reading all the short stories, watching The Dark Knight and reading all those analytical texts on the nature of a monster, I think a monster is someone or something that is bent on some kind of destruction. Fenrir, the Norse wolf, was a archetypal destruction monster, as well as the Joker, who was bent on destroying society to prove that everyone is as crazy as he is. The only thing that differs between monsters is the medium they act through. For example, Fenrir acts through the physical medium, by physically destroying the things around him. At the same time, his destruction affects other mediums, like society. The Joker destroys through the social medium, and that affects the physical medium, for example, when he kills so many people to prove his point.
I think the narrative really made me realize why monsters are so fascinating: it is because they are different. We always think about the heroes and how they accomplish their feats, but nobody really thinks about the monster, or tells the story of the monster from its point of view. The audience could be, in effect, missing important points because all of us only focus on the point of view of the hero, and ignore the monster. This difference really adds to the fascination of the monster because we are unfamiliar with its point of view and its perspective. It really fascinated me to read about Grendel and Beowulf's battle in Grendel by John Gardner because it provided a new perspective of a story that is ages old. After reading all the short stories, watching The Dark Knight and reading all those analytical texts on the nature of a monster, I think a monster is someone or something that is bent on some kind of destruction. Fenrir, the Norse wolf, was a archetypal destruction monster, as well as the Joker, who was bent on destroying society to prove that everyone is as crazy as he is. The only thing that differs between monsters is the medium they act through. For example, Fenrir acts through the physical medium, by physically destroying the things around him. At the same time, his destruction affects other mediums, like society. The Joker destroys through the social medium, and that affects the physical medium, for example, when he kills so many people to prove his point.
Thursday, November 28, 2013
Beginning the Short Story
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Short Story Analysis
I thoroughly enjoyed reading all the short stories because it not only gave me some new inspiration on how to write my short story, but each one of them had their own unique characters and plot that were really interesting to read about. I realized that irony is a big part of the writing of a short story, particularly one in the view of the monster, which is quite unusual in itself. The authors of the stories use a lot of irony in describing the original "heroes" of the stories themselves in the view of the monster. The irony used seems to have been done to satirize the heroes and that they are no better than the actual monster. For example, in "The Hollow Man", Partridge uses irony because the monster categorizes its victims depending on how much it likes them, since it says that it "instantly liked him best." It's ironic because monsters don't usually "like" their victims. In the "Creature from the Black Lagoon", the narrator uses its awareness of its lack of evolution as irony, since it didn't evolve at all since the beginning of time, even though it was born to swim, the narrator was "out of his element." In the "Rakshasi", the narrator says resentfully that her contract could have been "over anytime [Jonathan] chooses." It shows that while she kept her contract alive by doing her master's bidding, the master himself did not keep his own promise to her. There are many other instances of irony throughout all three short stories.
Another thing that I learned from reading the short stories is that they use dialogue to explain or show a specific experience or event. For example, in "The Hollow Man", “"Tomorrow mornin’,” blurted Redbeard, “we’re gettin’ away from here. I’m not dealin’ with no crazy hermit."” It shows the unwillingness of Redbeard to confront the "hermit", or the monster, which gives the monster a motive to mind control Grizzly to kill Redbeard. In the "Creature from the Black Lagoon", there is dialogue between the human characters, but the most important is the internal dialogue that the monster has with himself, in his reflection of his behavior towards Kay: “What was less saddening, finally, than a narcissist’s solitude? I'd been drawn to Kay the way insects singled out the younger shoots or leaves not yet toughened or toxic.” This is also a form of irony, since it's unexpected that the creature would have such thinking skills, able to reflect on his actions. In the "Rakshasi", the author includes dialogue to foreshadow some future events. For example, as Amrita is talking to Catherine, her isha's wife, she tries hinting at obtaining her freedom, but Catherine replies with “‘I know. But his obligation...’”. This foreshadows a later realization as the narrator admits to planting the seed of doubt into Catherine's mind in order to put her plan for obtaining her freedom into action. In fact, at the end of the story, Amrita does get her freedom with the help of Catherine.
In conclusion, irony and dialogue are two among many particular devices that the authors use in their short stories, which were important in driving the story forward.
Another thing that I learned from reading the short stories is that they use dialogue to explain or show a specific experience or event. For example, in "The Hollow Man", “"Tomorrow mornin’,” blurted Redbeard, “we’re gettin’ away from here. I’m not dealin’ with no crazy hermit."” It shows the unwillingness of Redbeard to confront the "hermit", or the monster, which gives the monster a motive to mind control Grizzly to kill Redbeard. In the "Creature from the Black Lagoon", there is dialogue between the human characters, but the most important is the internal dialogue that the monster has with himself, in his reflection of his behavior towards Kay: “What was less saddening, finally, than a narcissist’s solitude? I'd been drawn to Kay the way insects singled out the younger shoots or leaves not yet toughened or toxic.” This is also a form of irony, since it's unexpected that the creature would have such thinking skills, able to reflect on his actions. In the "Rakshasi", the author includes dialogue to foreshadow some future events. For example, as Amrita is talking to Catherine, her isha's wife, she tries hinting at obtaining her freedom, but Catherine replies with “‘I know. But his obligation...’”. This foreshadows a later realization as the narrator admits to planting the seed of doubt into Catherine's mind in order to put her plan for obtaining her freedom into action. In fact, at the end of the story, Amrita does get her freedom with the help of Catherine.
In conclusion, irony and dialogue are two among many particular devices that the authors use in their short stories, which were important in driving the story forward.
Saturday, November 16, 2013
The Hollow Man: Irony
Norman Partridge uses some irony within his short story "The Hollow Man", which describes a kind of parasitic monster that needs a human host. However, at the same time, it can fly around at will. Partridge uses irony by having his monster laugh at the sight of companions turning against companions and death. He uses irony with the monster's categorization of the four adventurers, saying that the monster "liked [Grizzly] best". It becomes irony because it is the opposite one would expect. Would anyone laugh at death and homicide? No sane human would ever laugh at something as grim as death or homicide. Another thing that was unexpected was for the monster to categorize it's victims on how much it liked them. Did Grendel ever say he liked Beowulf? Did Batman ever say he liked the Joker, the Penguin or Bane? Thus, this is quite an unexpected turn of events. However, later on in the story, we realize that the monster had good reason to like Grizzly, since he was, perhaps, the most fit for survival and the best host out of the four for the monster.
I think this story was very well written because it includes a lot of descriptive detail, which enhances the "showing not telling" theme that is prevalent in most short stories. Partridge also brought out the sinister nature of the monster with the monster's actions, like how the monster laughed at the traveller's predicament. Another thing that made the story grim was the description of the hollow man that the monster inhabited first. It seems like the hollow man had rings in his neck and it was basically a kind of pet of the monster, as well as an extension of the monster. Mixed with the irony Partridge uses, his story is memorable as a frightening account of a parasitic monster.
I think this story was very well written because it includes a lot of descriptive detail, which enhances the "showing not telling" theme that is prevalent in most short stories. Partridge also brought out the sinister nature of the monster with the monster's actions, like how the monster laughed at the traveller's predicament. Another thing that made the story grim was the description of the hollow man that the monster inhabited first. It seems like the hollow man had rings in his neck and it was basically a kind of pet of the monster, as well as an extension of the monster. Mixed with the irony Partridge uses, his story is memorable as a frightening account of a parasitic monster.
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Monster Presentations Day 2
After day 2 of expert Monster Presentations, I think the one of the most outstanding presentations was the Kamaitichi by Billy. One reason why his was a good presentation is because he was very enthusiastic about his monster, which was rather infectious and it made me pay more attention. In addition, the visuals were very nice paintings where it visually enhanced his presentation. Another thing that was very good about his presentation is that his monster interested me. The Kamaitachi is a very interesting monster in the sense that it is one being made up of three other minor beings that contribute to the name of Kamaitachi. Another presentation that I thought was outstanding was the one about the Chupacabra done by Jay. He had a very thorough analysis and explanation of the blood-sucking monster, including a classification. Jay's volume was also sufficient so that it was very easy and clear with what he was saying. I think the things that make a good presentation is good volume, visuals and enthusiasm that enhances your presentation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)