This is Water - David Foster Wallace

I appreciate the level of honesty behind David Foster Wallace's speech, without the "rhetorical niceties," but I cannot say I look forward to the dreadfully mundane life he described. As a high school senior, beginning my second semester, such a life seems imminent, just around the corner, waiting on the other side. I find this highly inspirational. I, like David Foster Wallace, find freedom in the ability to choose, to decide how I will experience my life. This ability to take a different outlook offers the opportunity to greatly reduce the amount of stress felt every day. I think this opportunity should be taken advantage of. I truly admire the brutal honesty employed while Wallace spread the reality of what was to come, and I think it is because of that honesty his speech has reached its level of renown. This honesty is quite difficult to come by. Generally speaking, people may not appreciate a word of truth, but would rather have it "fluffed" so everything seems grand. Eventually many may stumble upon the boredom mentioned in this speech and wonder what happened and how it happened. This speech seems like a great preparatory speech, acting not so much as a warning of the way things will be, but simply describing what he says is not often mentioned. I think accepting reality is a good way to begin changing how it is experienced. Wallace also describes a way of looking at things differently. I enjoy such creativity, but I also find it difficult to stop and consider how someone else might feel, especially when I am not in the mood for whatever annoyance that person might have to offer. Overall, I would say I enjoyed Wallace's humble, honest speech with its description of the banal facets of life and wonderful stories involving fish to illustrate such facets.

AP English Literature Blog Post #4

I must begin by saying how shocked I was when I read the note from Julia. I read it at least twice to make sure I read it correctly. After I was done reading the simple three word note, I needed to reread the rest of the page because I was still stuck in the “no way” and the “what does this MEAN?” stages, then I again felt the need to reread the note. I might have also been tired, but I closed the book for a snack break and to consolidate what I just read. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, two weeks before the note, Winston was seriously considering bludgeoning her to death with a nice old paperweight he had just purchased, and before that he wanted to beat her and rape her and leave her to die. Winston thought she was spying on him and would undoubtedly turn him in to the Thought Police, which could only end with Winston being vaporized. Instead, she clandestinely hands him a note, ironically after falling, which says “I love you.” After this encounter Winston finally speaks with the girl, whose name he does not even yet know, and they agree to secretly meet somewhere. I have only completed about two thirds of the book and they are already in a romantic and lustful relationship together, they are conspiring against Ingsoc and Big Brother, they have joined an underground group called the Brotherhood together, and they do not wish to be permanently separated. After becoming more familiar with each character, I have found evidence that they are a good match, but it was only much after the initial shock that I found this idea possible, and for this reason the chapter containing the revealing of the note momentarily upset me. While Julia is very youthful compared to Winston, they both seem, in their own ways, quite rebellious. They are, however, rebellious in different ways. Julia superficially plays her part; and Julia rebels, so far, in less than significant ways while ignoring the scope of the power of the party. Winston also plays his part, he rebels much less often, but he does not fail to realize the impact and power of making up reality. Winston sees the other people as the sheep they are made to be in the book, and it terrifies him as it should anyone. Neither of them have significantly rebelled yet because of the risk of the Thought Police.

AP Lit Blog Post #3

I started reading Nineteen Eighty-Four almost immediately after finishing Animal Farm. I intended to read Animal Farm before reading Nineteen Eighty-Four, and I am glad I did. Reading Animal Farm was an incredible background experience to reading the nightmarish prophecy Nineteen Eighty-Four. I think, with Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell continued from where he was in his message after finishing Animal Farm. One difference I made note of was how abruptly Orwell started Nineteen Eighty-Four. This especially caught me by surprise after reading Animal Farm, which had a relatively slow yet steady build up to the end when the pigs completed their transformation. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell wastes no time at all getting to the harsh details of Big Brother, the Thought Police, the constant surveillance, the distortion of information, or the generally uncomfortable living conditions. I also quickly realized Orwell used much more detail and imagery in Nineteen Eighty-Four as compared to Animal Farm. I imagine he did this not only because he intended Animal Farm to be read by a much larger audience of very diverse age groups, but also to make Nineteen Eighty-Four easier to imagine. The imagery in Nineteen Eighty-Four is meant to be captivating, blunt, and above all – frightening. Nineteen Eighty-Four was Orwell’s way of saying “or else.” In the first third of the book, this story has already consisted of constant surveillance, in the form of both video and audio; the sudden and utter disappearances of individuals by the hand of the Thought Police during the night, casually referred to as being “vaporized;” a language praised for its constantly shrinking vocabulary and elimination of ‘unnecessary words,’ which was called Newspeak; and the acceptance of information as truth, despite being constantly changed and having no legitimate basis in reality. Like Animal Farm, Nineteen Eighty-Four is meant to convey how thoroughly populations can be manipulated, suppressed, and exploited, regardless of intelligence. With regard to these stories, I believe Orwell agrees with Edmund Burke's quote "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing." 

AP English Literature Blog Entry #2

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL

BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS

Nothing about Animal Farm would ever be complete without dissecting this quote and all the quote entails. I believe this quote is the absolute best lingual representation of the completion of the transformation of the pigs. Near the beginning of the story, Seven Commandments were outlined for all animals to follow. The last commandment on the list, when it was originally painted on the side of the barn, read “All animals are equal.” I believe this was listed last, perhaps because the commandments were simply listed in the given order to offer a rough foresight of the order in which the commandments were each changed or broken, but more likely it was to symbolize its lacking importance. I was also surprised, after all I read about Animal Farm, how late in the story the actual addition of “but some animals are more equal than others,” had occurred. I believe this delay was an intentional stylistic choice to make the transformation of the pigs blatant and evident, to dispel any doubt of it. It was through the action of the reading of the quote that even Benjamin the donkey, who would not previously participate in the political happenings around the farm or do so much as reveal his true opinion of the happenings at all beyond an obscure and enigmatic statement, finally made his political debut. I think Orwell did this also to symbolize one of his messages: no one will be able to avoid the consequences of allowing communism to gain power. I believe it is in this scene Orwell is especially attempting to convey his warning and the call to action against communism and Stalin. Orwell also does not finish with this addition. No chance of ambiguity is left when the pigs invite a deputation of neighboring farmers to the farmhouse, announce the changing of the name of the farm from “Animal Farm” to “The Manor Farm,” and end the story with a quarrel after Napoleon and Mr. Pilkington both play an ace of spades simultaneously. The transformation is complete.

Blog Entry #1 (AP Lit/Ever)

I was looking forwarding to reading Animal Farm for quite some time and I was recently able to acquire a copy of it. Animal Farm is Orwell's fairy-tale satire of Communist Russia. It was meant to reveal many of the atrocities underlying communism, such as the corruption of the leading class, in a way that anyone and everyone could and would read. The people of the time of the release of the book, however, did not seem to want to immediately recognize what was really happening in Russia and wanted nothing to do with the book. The story begins on a farm going by the name “Manor Farm.” The leader of the farm, Mr. Jones, is a drunk human. Major, the farm’s prized white boar, is to die soon. Major has a dream which he shares with the animals of the farm in the form of a speech before passing away. This speech also outlines many ideas representing those of Karl Marx himself. Major tells the other animals, the overworked and under-compensated working class, they must eventually overthrow their ruler to gain full freedom and to truly live happily. Soon after Major’s death, the animals of the farm rise up and take control of the farm, then rename it “Animal Farm.” The pigs quickly rise to roles of leadership on the farm. At first, the animals seem to be working toward a better community, running the farm well and keeping a certain harmony; however, this does not last. As the story progresses, the pigs, in many ways, behave increasingly more human-like, and exploit the other animals to increasingly severe amounts. This is represented in such increments as drinking the milk, eating all of the apples, sleeping in the farmhouse, and eventually walking on two legs. By the end of the story, the pigs complete the transformation and the other animals are no longer able to distinguish between the pigs and the humans. Many articles I read about the story, almost all prior to actually reading it, describe who the characters represent, such as Napoleon and Major represent Stalin and Karl Marx, respectively. The human beings in the story also clearly represent capitalists.