Black Boy

1) "Autobiography"  Black boy is a part life story about a young black boy named Richard who as a child burnt down his own house in by messing with the curtains in Natchez, MS. After being found from hiding his mother Ella beats him unconscious His father Nathan, left him young with his mother Ella. Nathan leaves his family for another, and without the financial support Richard and his family are left in poverty. Mainly because of his hunger Richard grows bitter towards his father. While growing for a few more years Richard finds himself doing all kinds of mischevious things (due to the lack of parenting) because Ella works all the time to try and support her family (Richard and his brother Alan). They endure their struggles and things get easier after they move to aunt maggies house, that is until Hoskin is killed due to jealousy of white men to his success. Aunt Maggie Ellla and the boys relocate again and live fairly easier than before, until Maggie leaves Proffessor Mathews. Then the poverty returns to the family and it gets worse when Ella health conditions lead her to a stroke. After the stroke Ella, Richard, and alan are taken in by Richards grandmother. Richard moves in with Uncle tom but after hearing about the person that died in his bedroom he begs to go back. Granny being very religious sends Richard to religious school with Aunt Addie who beats richard on false accusation at first. Then on her second try to beat him, He defends himself with a knife. Since that day we find Richard being in the same situations getting beaten or fending off his relatives with weapons such as razors and knifes. Though Richard lives a rough life he seemingly excells in school and is interested in learning, reading, and writing. I think it is because his family is hostile to it and his rebellious nature draws him to it. As richard grows he accelarates through school and ends up the valedictorian in his 9th grade year. Time passes and Richard enters reality and after a few tussles within his work, he eventually moves to chicago with his brother, Maggie and Ella. The great depression hits and he is forced out of work, this is when he turns to communism and its belief in protecting the oppressed. Not long after this decision he decides to leave the party after all the strife and ridicule and himself being attacked at a parade. It does not lower his spirits though, Richard keeps his head high and keeps hoping to use his writing to connect to the world.

2) The theme in the novel is obviously personal strife through racism to success. The book is an autobiography called Black Boy. Emphasis on the black because the story is not about a boy growing up in america, its about a black boy growing up in america. throughout his whole life Richard was treated poorly by white people, he was disrespected. Even as a valedictorian, he was ridiculed for his speech in schoool just because he was black. He was constantly beaten throughout the book which is generally what happened to a lot of young black boys at the time, yet Richard strived through it all to success even in the worst state of living. Him and his mom can be seen as some of the strongest individuals ever. His mom dealing with all of her health issues, and still working hard to support her children. Richard not having much, being very mischevious, and having a hard black childhood but in the end just wants to connect to the world with his writing, that should be a legacy.

3) the tone is very literal and legit due to the fact its an autobiography. Wright tells his story with many things that to me i would not want to even include in my book if it was my autobiography. We can see the literacy in the novel throughout the whole story. For example the courage Richard had to include not just one time he was beaten but the multiple times he had to deal with getting his axx kicked, to the point he had to defend himself with a weapon. Then when he gets into a tussle with one of his black co workers due to the fact Olin a white co worker tries to get the two black men to basically kill each other. Then When Richard is awarded valedictorian but is recomended to make a speech based on the white peoples exceptions. The whole story is very legit, I see Richard as courageous for even publishing some parts of the autobiography.

4) "Autobiography" I dont think price meant it to be this way, but the timeframe and setting to his autobiography play a large role in the novel. In arkansas, tennesse, Mississipp and chicago during the slave era were some of the states consisting of many slaves, which brought out the racism factor. Also that Arkansas is very humid and hot making poverty sound even more intense than Richard makes it seem. The conflict of the novel is also very important. You have to understand the main conflict is Richard dealing with all the racism throughout his life, but then understand the little conflicts that makes that true. The struggles as a kid, throughout his hard life in school, and even through joining the communist party we see constant conflict with richard and other white people. The diction used is also key to Prices story. He tells it how it is throughout the whole story. It Makes his readers believe what actually happened in his life. Then I believe the Richard foreshadows the way he handles things with white people by the way he handles things within his family. For example when he stands up for himself from getting beaten, he stands up for himself in a "Black Pride" type of manner. Also, when he deals with adversities with his family, He deals with the adversities of the other white children in school similarly. It is most important in the autobiography to understand character. To understand that Richard starts out young, and grows up as a black boy. That his mother is a women who due to lack of money works hard for her family, that his father was just some jerk who left Richard young, That his grandma is the reason Richard was sent to school in the first place to try and tame that mischevious spirit. To understand why Richard is the way he is that is the most important literary element.

Major Concept

One thing i've learned while being in this class is that the future is in the present. Our new way of learning and coming together not just as teacher and students in an individual class but in all classes throughout the course is really of the top impressive in my eyes. It is all very new to me this learning through web 2.0, but ive definately realized that it is a great benifet to be able to connect with my peers, and learn through their work to make my own even better.

Hamlet, Beowulf

            Shakespeares use of language plays an important role in Hamlet. It connects the readers to not just whats going on, but to the thoughts of the characters in the play itself. As an audience we get to experience first hand the "Self-Overhearing" of shakespeares character Hamlet. The language in Hamlet has to be very carefully analyzed by its audience to be fully understood. For instance, to give a base to the play itself Hamlet makes a promise to himself to revenge his father. Hamlets thoughts are the most important things spoken in the play. We see that his thoughts sometimes cause procrastination, which is brilliance in shakespeares part it adds suspence and confusion. Unlike Beowulf, Hamlet is vastly unpredictable. 
              Hamlet's use of language and self-overhearing makes him very different from epic heros like Beowulf. When reading through Beowulf, most readers can predict the upcoming events. Hamlet is the exact opposite of this situation. Hamlet comes off to an audience as a little crazy, some have classified him as even "emo" because of his thoughts on suicide. They were wrong to even consider those terms. After completely overlooking the simple language in Hamlet, and understanding what he really means Hamlet turns out to be ridiculously intelligent. Hamlet during his primary depression in the beggining of the novel plans on killing his uncle in revenge, but even in the perfect spot Hamlet (after having a little Self-overhearing) decides not to kill his uncle while he was praying. Most people would take that oppurtunity and kill him right there. It is here we realize Hamlets true intelligence, he knew he couldve ended right there, but he didnt want his uncle to have any chance of ascending to heaven so he decided to wait on it.
                The difference between Hamlet and Beowulf is that when reading Hamlet you must sit and figure things out as they are happening. While when reading Beowulf you might as well skip ahead because you know what is going to happen. What makes Hamlet a little confusing is the fact that Hamlet tends to over analyze his thoughts. Making him not be able to turn them into actions at the time space given to him to do so . Then there is the fact that Hamlet at times changes his mind. We can see a perfect example of this in the "To be or not to be"  soliloqy. When i first read the soliloqy i came to the conclusion that Hamlet was so tired of dealing with his adversities he was actually ready to commit suicide, but then after analyzing really what i was reading I began to understand that it wasnt really even a consideration just a thought after reading "To grunt and sweat under a weary life, But that the dread of something after death; And makes us rather bear those ills we have, Than fly to others that we know not of?".
               The language in Hamlet, besides the fact that its from the shakespearean era, is significantly hard to understand at first glance. The language is very advanced and comes with many meaningfull purposes to support the story. It also is very unpredictable, the plot twists shakespeare uses are truly a work of art. It makes the literary elements found in  Beowulf look novice. Though both stories are from a different era of time, the language in Hamlet is significantly different than the language in an epic through its plot twist, self-overhearing, diction and syntax.

Hamlet essay

           Hamlet is one of the most puzzling characters the worlds ever seen. Think about it, you’re a prince, royalty basically, so you got it made! Especially when compared to the lower class. Yet why does he have to deal with self overhearing and performative utterance as much as we see it in Shakespeare’s play? Hamlet says many things, but his actions do not coincide with his thoughts. Sure Hamlet speaks of what is to be done, or what he may want to do, but he will never act on the times of those thoughts. I may talk to myself but usually when I think of something I leave a perlocutionary affect to may thoughts as in the form of what we call “action”. The word action has many definitions and perceptions (varying on the situations of course). Action can mean something done in example fulfilling a duty or deed, or the manner or method of performing. Action, performing, doing, all things that we see take effect throughout Shakespeare’s play. Interestingly enough Hamlet just doesn’t seem to take action, even after all the self overhearing he does. Basically Hamlet only thinks of action, but never performs it.

           It dramatically influences the play. It adds suspense, turmoil, and definitely gives us a more clear insight on Hamlets true character. Hamlet is troubled, (as I learned by memorizing the famous “To be or not to be” speech) he does not seem to know whether to stay alive and deal with his agony and live, or to die and never return. It is a serious matter when suicide comes to play. Do not forget the fact that the whole plotline starts when Hamlet does take action, by vowing or making an oath to his father. It is then when we start to unravel what is really happening, things begin to play out and Hamlet is now purposed. I see myself as a complete opposite of what Hamlets Self overhearing is like, then again the only time I usually do it is for a self motivational speech. Likewise to Hamlets when he is motivating himself to kill Claudius.  I tend to “pump my self up” when I am about to tackle on something of great importance to me. Hamlet seems to do more than that when he is thinking to himself. Though Hamlet never took action at the moment of his thoughts, I believe the reason behind it is because he kept overlooking action with other factors of the situation. Hamlet could have killed Claudius on the spot, but thought it was smart to not do so at the time, the reason why is because he had a reason valid enough (in his eyes) to stop him. This is all boiled down to different parts of his self overhearing process. I tend to realize a lot after something has happened, as do most people we tend to learn from it and later reflect on it.

           Experience is a great thing; it serves as learning or in the video technology world growth to something greater. Hamlet throughout the play experiences many trials. Dealing with a ghost, facing his uncle, dealing with Ophelia, his battle with Laertes, etc. Experience is probably one of the handiest weapons in our whole world. The fact that we know and have seen something before will always help out in our second attempt. If Hamlet wasn’t such a good man with a sword due to his past experiences with one, Laertes simply would have killed him and everybody would move on with a hamlet-less life. Its like if I haven’t experienced the sport of soccer, football, track events, how can I expect to be great at them? I learned to kick a ball roughly the age of five years old. Have I mastered it, no but am I going to be more experienced and have the upper hand against the inexperienced? Yes. In fact, experience itself has all three of Austin’s “forces”. Through attempt you gain experience, in the process you give influence to others who may be doing the same, and as a result you get better, which as a different result you make whatever you’re working at better in example a sports team. Also experience draws expectation, memory and results. If you are experienced you are now at a standard where people will expect you to know what is going on. If you’re an experienced pizza deliverer, than you better know how to drive. If you’ve made 3 goals in one game, you are probably expected to do it again the next time that game happens, or you may expect yourself to do that. As you reflect on anything, you should have a sense of memory from a previous episode of what you’re reflecting on. If not your either forgetful or a rookie. Usually when you have memory of something, you have experienced it, and left a result from when you experienced it. (Not forgetting that whatever you do or are experiencing has other factors of contribution such as Cause and purpose of action, and many others, as does different situations of life) When I reflect on something I take it, analyze it, look at my options, give an attempt of recapturing a moment I was in the same or similar situation, pursue it, and leave with a result that can either be what I wanted or not what I wanted.

           I believe Hamlet does the same exact thing when faced with a time of reflection. (This is most of his parts in the play.) We see this through the perception of hearing, or in our case reading about Hamlets Self overhearing. He always in his thought process takes the situation, analyzes it, realizes his options, and has his result. In “to be or not to be” we see a perfect example of this. Hamlet takes his situation, looks at his options as death which is unknown, or life which for him at the moment is definitely not something he wants. Then he analyzes life for himself, to bear the whips and scorns of time, or to travel to the undiscovered country where no man returns. Then comes off with a decision to live because after analyzing death and how he knows not of what its like, has a valid reason (to himself of course) to put up with his lives struggles. Performative Utterance is Saying or doing something in the world rather than describing something about it. Hamlet and many of us in our everyday lives deal with this concept. Why do we have things said and not done? It’s like breaking a promise. Though it’s true I don’t think that relates to Hamlets situation because hamlet does both. Hamlet tends to do the before mentioned steps in his self overhearing, and his performance Utterance definitely is the cause of Shakespeare play to be so interestingly entertaining and slightly puzzling. 

The Big Question

How can you explain an "imagination"? Taking into consideration a persons personal experiences, personality, surroundings, even genes, How can you explain how an imagination works?, what is it? either looking at it logically or in any mentality?