Parents should be mindful of how they communicate with their children to ensure they are on a path that continues to protect, care for, and promote their overall well-being. Therefore, you need to actively listen to your children in order to show them care and understand them better. Lack of good communication can lead to disharmony and misunderstandings within the family. More importantly, parents should be brutally honest with their children. This is because it helps children improve their communication skills and lays a good foundation for them to become decent adults. For example, in the book Gorilla, My Love, Bambara explains why parents feel untrustworthy when they are unfaithful and unfaithful to their children. Therefore, parents should speak only the truth, no matter how brutal, and not protect their children by saying only good things. Parents must teach their children reality and always match their words with their actions. Finally, parents should avoid making fun of their children.
Monthly Archives: December 2022
Chekov
Lomov visits Chubukov at Chubukov’s country house. Chubukov asks why Lomov is dressed up. As an aside to the audience Chubukov wonders if Lomov has come to borrow money.
Lomov finally says he has come to ask for Natalya’s hand in marriage. Chubukov says he is overjoyed. He embraces Lomov and says he will call Natalya. Lomov asks if he can count on her consent. Chubukov says of course, she’s like “a love-sick cat.” He exits.
Lomov talks to the audience. He says he is very nervous. He’s not in love, but he is 35 and it’s time to get married. Natalya is a good housekeeper, not bad looking, well educated. He talks more to let the audience know that he is a neurotic type.
Natalya comes in, offers lunch and smokes, talks about cutting hay. She is surprised that Lomov is dressed up.
Lomov begins to talk about their two families and their lands—specifically, the Oxen Meadows Natalya interrupts and says the Oxen Meadows are theirs, not his.
An argument takes place that is comical. Both Natalya and Lomov insist that the land is theirs. They go back and forth with “Ours,” “Mine,” “Ours,” “Mine.”
Chubukov enters and asks about the shouting. Natalya asks who Oxen Meadows belongs to, and he says, “They’re ours.” There are more arguments, and Chubukov calls Lomov “a grabber.” Chubukov and Natalya say Lomov’s family has lunacy and drunkenness in the background. Lomov says Chubukov’s mother was hump-backed and his grandfather was tried for embezzlement.
Lomov leaves, saying he thinks he’s having a heart attack. Chubukov tells Natalya that Lomov came with the intention of proposing to her. Natalya falls back in hysterics, saying, “Bring him back. Fetch him.”
Lomov returns, complaining about his heart, his foot, etc. Natalya says Oxen Meadows are his. She says to change the subject. So they start talking about hunting dogs.
Once again, they argue. It’s the same as arguing about the land. Lomov says his heart is palpitating, and tells Natalya to shut up. Natalya says she shan’t shut up.
Chubukov enters and asks what’s the matter. Natalya asks whose dog is better—their Squeezer or his Guess. Chubukov gets involved in the argument.
Lomov complains about his heart and says his foot has gone to sleep. Natalya insults Lomov, says he’s not a hunter. Chubukov says Lomov should sit at home with his palpitations.
Lomov and Chubukov go back and forth. Lomov says, “Intriguer!” Chubukov says, “Boy! Pup!” Lomov sats, “Old rat! Jesuit!”
Lomov faints, says his heart has burst. Natalya screams, “He’s dead!”
Lomov comes around. Chubukov says, “Hurry up and get married—she’s willing!” Natalya says, “He’s alive—yes, I’m willing.”
Natalya and Lomov say they’re happy. They kiss.
Then they fight about the dogs some more.
They drink champagne.
Analyze the play using gender theory in literary criticism:
It’s hard to analyze a play from more than a century ago using gender theory. The play “The Proposal” is a satire about the upper -lass Russian custom of marrying couples off to bring together neighboring land holdings.
In this case, Lomov asks Chubukov for Natalya’s hand. Chubukov at least says he will ask Natalya, but tells Lomov that he is happy to be asked. When Lomov asks if Natalya will say yes, Chubukov says of course, that she is like “a love-sick cat.” This is not very feminist, to say the least.
But then, when Natalya enters and she and Lomov start their comedy routine, things become more equal. Natalya shows herself more than the equal of Lomov in their funny bickering.
Chubukov is the first one to say, “Hurry up and get married—she’s willing.” But then Natalya is the first one to say yes.
Apply the Elements of Drama to the play:
Audience: The audience would have a common experience at this play, which is so funny and fast-moving.
Dialogue: The dialogue is witty and humorous. It moves quickly. It deals with the business of the play, which is moving the characters toward (or away from) agreement with each other about whether or not to merge their households.
Plot: The plot in this one-act play is minimal. It takes place on a single day in a single place. Only one thing is supposedly happening, which is Lomov going to Chubukov’s country house to ask for Natalya’s hand in marriage. Of course, there is lots of funny dialogue that happens around this theme. There is plenty of irony, when the plan keeps getting derailed by arguments. And there certainly is open conflict.
Convention: This is a realistic drama, in keeping with the late 19th Century.
Genre: This is a comedy
Characterization: I wouldn’t say that any of these characters are protagonists or antagonists—they’re all just kind of silly.
Analysis of Audio Book Version:
For me, the Audio Book version of the play isn’t as funny as the written version. And I’m sure it isn’t as funny as the version performed on the stage.
That’s because it lacks stagecraft, of course, and an audience. But I also think the dialogue does not come across as being as witty as it seems on the page, and as comical as it would be on the stage. This is a farce, which is defined as using buffoonery and horseplay, and it’s hard to convey that in an audio version. But the lines are also read in a way that is sort of flat, and not a comedic as it could be. The characterization could be better. The characters are not played for their comic potential.
Analysis of the play in light of the Atlantic Montly article on contemporary proposals:
Really, when you think about it, contemporary proposals aren’t all that different from the one in the Chekhov play “The Proposal.” Though the article in the Atlantic didn’t mention it, it’s still quite common for a man to ask a woman’s father for permission before proposing to her. And then, just like in “The Proposal,” it’s the man who usually proposes.
Of course, contemporary proposals tend to be more between the two people involved, whatever their gender. But it’s not unusual to have family members hiding and watching, even if they’re not directly involved. And as the article points out, even if the person being proposed to has doubts, it’s can be hard to resist pressure and say anything but “yes.”
Chekhov
Marriage proposals are big moments in people’s lives but can be loosely used. People are often blinded by the emotions that come with first getting to know somebody that forget that they do not fully know them enough to spend the rest of their lives together. In the case of “The marriage proposal” by Chekov, the Lomov wants to propose to a woman that he clearly does not agree with. Not only do they not agree but the women he wants to propose to clearly has no regard for his heart condition. While he is weeping in pain, she continues to argue with him knowing that the stress of the argument is triggering his pain. It makes you question why he is so excited to propose to her when he knows that she does not care for him. The other character, Natayla also knows that she cannot get along with someone who is allegedly calling her a lair but when she hears word of him wanting to propose she quickly is regretting her statements towards him so he can continue with the proposal. This play shows that proposals can be theatrical with no true meaning or desire behind the intent of marriage. Proposals like this are still present in today’s times. People propose from pressure, fear, and validations of one’s ego.
Parents
When it comes to the weight that an adults words carry with children, every situation is different. Not everybody has to watch themselves, but that comes with a certain amount of self accountability in the relationship. Some parents or elders want to frank and matter of fact about the disappointments of life, but then dislike that when they’re often the prime example of those disappointments that it quickly makes the younger person less likely to respect their seniority. A big problem adults have is that, consciously or not, they tend to have a different set of standards for holding themselves accountable with kids as opposed to adults. They fail to realize that they’re not treating those kids in a way that will help them be functioning adults one day, either because they’ll lack a sense of responsibility, or they won’t trust others will have it either. Sadly, often times it could be both. At the end of the day, kids don’t need their every whim catered to, but some adults take that too far and don’t allow their words or actions to be questioned because they’ve grown comfortable with a certain order of things that they can continue to enforce unless they themselves choose to self reflect.
Writing as Activism
The way people are exposed to information and ideas has changed a lot over the years, especially with the rise of smartphones, social media, and just the Internet as a whole. However, this doesn't eliminate the viability of writing as a means of activism. Writing will always be useful, especially for marginalized groups for the simple fact that it costs virtually nothing. Video content viewers and creators can easily get too distracted by production value, or lack thereof. Sometimes the people who have the most to share can have little resources to put it out there, so writing is sometimes the only critical content that they consistently put out. Furthermore,there will always be like minded or just curious people who are interested enough to read up on a topic with a compelling or bold take. Sometimes these are the people who feel inspired enough to go out and make social media posts, or the ones involved in organizing marches. Writings role in activism may have changed but it still exists, and it's an important one. dunbar nelson
There is a lack of morals in this play. All the characters are hurt people looking for validation from the same system that hurt them. They are worried about being “team players” when the team they are playing for will never honor them if they win. This play does not depict morals criticisms rather, it rattles the emotions of people who feel undervalued and appreciated. It will make ignore those feelings and bend to the command of the oppressor.
“Mine eyes have seen” by Alice Dunbar Nelson shows how easily you can manipulate a person’s way of thinking. How you can convince someone that your way of seeing things is the right way. In the play Dan believes that America does not deserve his service and his brother Chris is trying to convince him that his fight is to make black people in America look good. But what does impressing people matter when you are looked as less than human? It shows how fragile the human brain is and how we can become delusional.
Writing as Activism
Writing, like any other form of activism, is a viable form of BIPOC in the present-day United States and helps broadcast the voices of the oppressed. The book “Gorilla, My Love” by Toni Cade Bambara in 1971 exemplifies how writing can tackle racism, sexism, and social injustice. Through the characters’ stories and struggles, Bambara can bring attention to the plight of Black Americans in a time of racial tension and social unrest. She can provide a voice to the silenced and marginalized persons. In the same way, writing can continue to be a powerful tool for BIPOC to share their stories and experiences to bring awareness about their struggles and advocate for change in the present-day United States. In addition, writing can be a powerful and eternal means of liberation since it helps us connect with our unique perspective and express ourselves in meaningful and empowering ways. Writing allows everyone to find their own stories and express it to the world, which allows people to acquire general skills of becoming responsible to own happiness. Writing serves as a tool for liberation by allowing us to challenge oppressive forces, speak truth to power, and create meaning for ourselves in a world where we often feel powerless.
Poetry Analysis Essay
Levon Turner Jr.
Professor Perry
ENG201
November 7th 2022
Poetry Analysis Essay
The poem ‘Who Said It Was Simple’ by Audre Lorde is an inspiration to me because the poem was able to gain an in-depth understanding, particularly about the tone of the poet. The intended message that she wanted the readers to get was to make them aware of the tribulations black females go through, particularly their affliction and discrimination due to their race and sexuality. What grabbed me in the poem was the tone of the poet and the image that came to my mind was the “whites’ only” feminism whereby blacks were not considered, and I was able to picture how the discrimination occurred. The poem’s memories included the forms of discrimination that marginalized groups and people of color have been experiencing since time immemorial and how equality seems far-fetched.
The poem ‘Who Said It Was Simple’ is able to focus on discriminative feminism that only focuses on people of the white race. The poet has been able to describe the occurrence of racial discrimination by implying “discussing the problematic girls / they hire to make them free,” and “the ladies neither notice nor reject / the slighter pleasures of their slavery” (Lorde).The poet calls out all the people who consider themselves feminists and that the movements they have formed tend to be structurally oppressive and calls on everyone to practice what they preach and stop being hypocrites who say one thing and go ahead to do another.
The poem ‘Who Said It Was Simple’ by Audre Lorde consists of three stanzas that have been separated by sets of lines that are uneven. The first stanza comprises three lines, the second has twelve lines, and the third has three. Therefore the poem can be considered to be a tercet. The poet wrote the poem in free verse, which implies that there is no existing rhyme scheme for the poem. However, readers are able to take notice of rhyming words such as ‘anger’ and ‘shatter’ that are contained in the first stanza of the poem (Poetryfoundation.org).
The poem ‘Who Said It Was Simple’ by Audre Lord comprised elements that impacted the interpretation of the message. Some elements, such as the solemn tone used by the poet, imply to the reader that the speaker in the poem is used to being discriminated and she is dealing with it despite the odds being against her in fighting for equality in aspects that the society has turned a blind eye on including racial, sexual and gender discrimination. The poet has also used imagery to paint a vivid picture to the readers, “the slighter pleasures of their slavery” this makes the audience create the picture of the pleasure people can have yet have been enslaved. Hence
‘A Woman Speaks’ by Audre Lorde inspires me because the poem was intended to be a song for feminist warriors across all communities. The poet has been able to proclaim the experiences women of color go through in the United States and abroad (Lorde).Whatever grabbed me about the poem was the fact that the poet had opened the opportunity to start a conversation, particularly on the ways to the improvement of the feminist movement to have an impact on the lives of marginalized groups and women of color. The memories the poem brought to me were how women of color have been discriminated against in the United States and that nobody tried to speak out against the act (Lorde).
‘A Woman Speaks’ by Audre Lorde is a poem of three stanzas. The poet has used a tone and form that have helped in the creation of a tranquil surface, and when the poem progresses, the readers are directed toward the real conflict. The poem’s theme is similar to ‘Who said it was simple’ since both address the discriminative racism that black women have continued to face. The author has consistently used imagery to paint a vivid image to the readers such that they can see “Moon marked and touched by the sun, my magic is unwritten, but when the sea turns back it will leave my shape behind” (Lorde).
‘Who Said It Was Simple’ by Audre Lorde implies that people should practice whatever they preach and avoid being hypocrites. The poet uses this opportunity to address the various forms of discrimination that women of color go through. The author stated that “and sit here wondering / which me will survive / all these liberations” (Lorde). The author used irony to imply that the liberation movement that has been formed to support feminism is the same movement that oppresses women and is discriminative based on color. The poem’s tone is solemn, which indicates that the poet has been used to being discriminated against, and this results in her scrutinizing those who identify themselves as members of the feminist group but continue to oppress others since they benefit as a result of oppression.
I connected with ‘Who Said It Was Simple’ by Audre Lord because I believe that every member of society ought to be treated fairly and equally without being discriminated against based on their race or gender. Moreover, people should practice whatever they preach and avoid being hypocrites. I also agree with the poet that a conversation on improving the welfare of women of all races needs to take place. Therefore, I believe that people should take bold steps to ensure that they do not oppress others even though there is an opportunity for them to benefit.
Works Cited
“Free Verse.” Poetry Foundation, www.poetryfoundation.org/learn/glossary-terms/free-verse.
Lorde, Audre. “A Woman Speaks by Audre Lorde.” Poetry Foundation, www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42583/a-woman-speaksLorde, Audre. “Who Said It Was Simple by Audre Lorde.” Poetry Foundation, www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42587/who-said-it-was-simple.
ERASURE POEM
poetry analysis
“So Mexicans Are Taking Jobs From Americans” by Jimmy Santiago Baca is a free verse poem. This uses non-rhyming lines that follow the natural rhythms of speech. (Poetry Foundation) Likewise, another poem by Baca, “Main Character,” is also written in free verse, and its themes are similar.
Jimmy Santiago Baca was born in 1952 near Santa Fe, New Mexico. He is of Chicano and Apache descent. He was abandoned by his parents and put in an orphanage. He ran away from the orphanage when he was 13 and began selling drugs. He served five years in prison. He wrote “So Mexicans Are Taking Jobs From Americans” while in prison.
His writing is concerned with social justice and marginalized people. The free verse style reflects his own experience as an outsider to the American Dream.
“Main Character” is also a free verse poem, about the dispossession of Native Americans. During the showing of a Western film, a drunken Indian rose cursing and sobbing and the narrator is left looking for the main character.
In “So Mexicans are Taking jobs From Americans,” the tone goes from playful (“Oh yes? Do they come on horses? with rifles, and say, Ese gringo, gimme your job?”) to brutal (“The rifles I hear sound in the night are white farmers shooting blacks and browns”) to resigned (“What they really say is, let them die, and the children, too”) (owlcation.com)
I responded strongly to this poem. To begin with, as the child of an immigrant and a friend to so many more, I believe that immigrants are a positive force for our country. Also, I have great admiration for Jimmy Santiago Baca and the way he was able to overcome his difficult upbringing and his time in prison, to become completely self-educated, and to reach out to those who are struggling.
