Slaughterhouse Five EXPLAINED

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

It's very clear that the Narrator wanted to write a book about Dresden; however, he couldn't remember enough to make it a full novel. Even with the aid of O'Hare and a visit to Dresden, the Narrator just couldn't think of enough ideas to write a full length novel. However, his memory of the general war did seem to hold true. He remembered a man named Billy Pilgrim, and decided to make a book about him. Being around a character like Billy Pilgrim must have been quite strange for a soldier, since Billy was frail, awkward, reserved, and timid. These characterizations coupled with Billy's odd choice of clothing throughout the war made it easy for soldiers, primarily our Narrator, to assume Billy was a loony tune. Billy became the Narrator's key to writing about Dresden, yet having a plot line interesting enough to attract readers. Factually, Billy "and the rest were being marched into the ruins by the guards. [The Narrator] was there. O'Hare was there" (Vonnegut 212). Billy not only was part of the Dresden events, but he was weird enough to become an attractive main character for any author. Billy may or may not have actually time-traveled, but it nevertheless kept the reader interested long enough to learn about Dresden. In conlcusion, I'm out this game.

Slaughterhouse Five: Symbolism

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

At the beginning of the book, the Narrator claims that he wanted to write a book about the disaster at Dresden that told the truth. The Narrator's frustration is symbolized by the character of Rumfoord. He is portrayed as a stereotypical aristocrat, a wealthy aged man who spends his money to make himself appear more intelligent. He has seen only a few things on Dresden, but has firm opinions about the subject despite not knowing what really happened there. Billy's predicament in the hospital bed personifies the Narrator's attitude of helplessness. The narrator wanted to write a fantastic novel that would answer any questions about Dresden, but his memory just couldn't make his dream a reality. Even when Billy wants to correct Rumfoord, all he can manage to say was that he was at Dresden. Rumfoord is so shocked that he believe Billy's " 'simply echoing things we say...he's got echolalia now' " (Vonnegut 192). I think the Narrator had tried to make a shorter book about Dresden, and tried to sell the book to publishers. However, the pompous, disbelieving publishers assumed that the narrator wasn't credible, and ignored his account about Dresden. Because of this, the narrator had to change the plot of his book into a sex-filled, alien-involved, time-travel adventure to get it on the shelves.

Slaughterhouse Five: Where in the world is Billy San Diego?

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

Billy is constantly time-traveling, but he has to be time traveling from some location. Upon first thought, i would say Billy is located in the war. He is usually referring back to the war after and before other time-traveling experiences. However, the war was early in his life, so how would he even have the concept of time travel if he hadn't come across the Tralfamadorians?!This is why Billy has to be on Tralfamadore during all his time-travels. This is proven when "He traveled in time back to Tralfamadore. 'Time-traveling again?' said Montana" (Vonnegut 207). If Billy had time traveled enough for (I suppose his temporary wife) Montana to notice, then that would suggest he had been traveling frequently through time while on the planet. If Billy is actually on Tralfamadore, this can explain why he acts so Tralfamadorian. Being in contact with his captors while reliving his whole life through time-travel would have an effect on a person. Billy acts much less sad, and treats everything as if there is a higher purpose. For the recent time being, Tralfamadorian ideals are all Billy knows, so he believes his views are always right and is reserved and content when silly people think he is crazy.

Slaughterhouse Five: Who is Mr Narrator?

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

In chapter one, the Narrator speaks directly to the reader in first person, but maintains (mostly) third person narration while telling the tale of Billy Pilgrim. In the last chapter of the book, the Narrator returns to first person, telling the reader about his adventures he went on with his buddy O'Hare. Why tell a story through Billy Pilgrim, if the Narrator's intention was to speak truthfully about Dresden? In fact, the narrator doesn't reveal any facts he himself learned from Dresden, he only explains the scene through Billy's eyes. Even when the Narrator flies to Dresden, he almost immediately says "Billy Pilgrim was meanwhile traveling back to Dresden, too, but...in 1945" (Vonnegut 212). My theory on the structure of this book lies within the memory of the Narrator. he himself says he has a very hazy memory, so he couldn't remember most of Dresden. His war buddy O'Hare also had a shaky grasp on the past. Because of a lack of solid proof, the Narrator created a fictional Billy Pilgrim to relive the events for the Narrator. Dresden was such a gruesome experience, that the Narrator wanted to convey an accurate message without having a sound memory to back him up. The time traveling allows Billy to relive the war over, and over again. The war has desensitized him, and he hates it. Being able to see his whole life, while having the war as a strong memory, makes Billy's life empty, and he feels nothing when his loved ones die around him.

Slaughterhouse Five: Who is Rosewater?

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

Within one of Billy's "instances," he is located in a veteran's hospital, and the reader meets Eliot Rosewater. Both men suffer some mental ailments, but they are normal enough to carry on thoughtful conversation. The interesting thing about Rosewater is that he is interested in Science Fiction, more specifically things dealing with aliens and the unexplainable. The meeting of Rosewater happens to Billy chronologically before meeting the Tralfamadorians, but since Billy has already lived many moments of his life, Billy knows all about the aliens. What is a coincidence is that Rosewater explains that life is mostly in the fourth dimension, much like how the Tralfamadorians lived their lives. Rosewater said "that there really were werewolves and goblins and angels and so on, but that they were in the fourth dimension" (Vonnegut 104). Now maybe it is the author who has met the Tralfamadorians and is relaying his knowledge through these books, but, despite Rosewater's attempts, the author doesn't seem to exist. Rosewater believes he is the only person to hear about his favorite author, yet has no idea how to reach him in order to thank him. Either the author has a similar life to Billy, or Billy never really met the Tralfamadorians  Instead, Billy got all of his notions of 4th dimensional life from the books and Rosewater, and explains it all by saying aliens abducted him.

Slaughterhouse Five: Hypothesis two, hazy memory

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

Now I know my analysis tends to be wrong on many of these literary works, so I developed a plan B! Basically, this scenario is the most likely reasoning behind Billy's time travel if the Tralfamadorians don't exist. Throughout the novel, the narrator refers to many different objects by describing them with metaphors and similes used to describe the differing objects independently from one another. When Billy's father threw him in the deep end at the pool, he eventually saved Billy and had a watch on his wrist. Billy noticed this because "the watch had a radium dial" (Vonnegut 90). After that flash back, Billy is returned to WWII and he notices the other prisoners of War. He saw that "there were more starving Russians with faces like radium dials" (Vonnegut 91). This sort of coincidence occurs with several other metaphors throughout the book, and they happen so closely together that they must be linked. If he is describing completely separate memories by using the same characteristics, then Billy must have a skewed memory. This line of thinking would suggest that Billy has really lived his entire life, and the telling of this story is simply him trying to recount the events as interestingly as he could. In his old age, he is most likely forgetful, and therefore reuses similar metaphors and similes to describe totally different events, perhaps for emphasis to his story. The idea of aliens abducting him just helps the reader grasp the idea of time travel, when, in actuality, Billy simply reveals different parts of his memory at different times in order to create a suspenseful story!

Slaughterhouse Five: My Hypothesis

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

Billy repeatedly has flashbacks and flashforwards throughout the novel, and claims they have occurred ever since he encountered the Tralfamadorians. The instances (I'm going to call the time-traveling "instances" so i can type less) also happen in the middle of a different time period, and often return to the original time period once the instance has run it's course. My only questions was how would an alien abduction cause such instances to happen with a human? The answer lies within the Tralfamadorians, for they "spend eternity looking at pleasant moments...[and] ignore the awful times, and concentrate on the good ones" (Vonnegut 117). This lifestyle is one that Billy has tried to make his own; however, he can not get a firm grasp on it, for he is imperfect like a human. The Tralfamadorians were praised by Billy (and myself for that matter) as highly intelligent and nearly flawless, and Billy wanted to replicate them in order to make his life more fulfilling. With this thinking, Billy's instances become defined as him attempting to look at his life in moments, specifically the happy moments. Since he is imperfect and flawed, he lives in his bad moments (like the war and his time in the mental hospital) temporarily  before he escapes into times that bring him joy and comfort. He can only stay looking at these happy moments for a limited time, before reality pulls him back into the bleakness that his life is in that particular instance. The idea that Billy is mimicking the Tralfamadorians is again supported by his depression the reader sees him in during many of his instances. During his depressing instances, Billy realizes that he isn't perfect enough to only focus on the good moments in life, so he becomes indifferent to his surroundings and does not care how the dismal instance plays out. These are my observations, let's see how close I get to the truth...

Slaughterhouse Five: Germans VS Aliens

Slaughterhouse Five
Kurt Vonnegut

Billy arrives at the German POW camp after being crammed into a train car for hours, and going in and out of consciousness during the ride. He also experiences multiple flashbacks/flashforwards during his transfer, which also contributed to his delirium. By the time Billy finally got into the POW camp, he didn't know where or when he was. he originally believes he was on Tralfamadore, for he was being inspected much like he was on the alien planet. He didn't question the Germans' commands, for he thought he had already lived this moment on Tralfamadore. Once billy takes off his clothes, the reader realizes that the Germans are similar to the aliens, since "That was the first thing they told him to do on Tralfamadore, too" (Vonnegut 83). Such a similarity may suggest that the Tralfamadorians that Billy has mentioned are completely fictional. Something in his life has definitely caused him these vivid time-traveling experiences, but to immediately accept alien activity seems too naive. Billy is most likely, when thinking of the aliens that took him, imagining his German captors and changing their features to disillusion his past. This way, Billy could try and wipe the war out of his memory, and replace it with something that actually interested him, which is Science Fiction!

The Dark Night

Acquainted with the Night
Robert Frost

The speaker, at first glance, is strolling through the night with no purpose. He seems lost, looking for something to guide him or give him a purpose in his dreary life. but the poem isn't so simple. Rather, the night is a metaphor for sadness or confusion. The speaker has "looked down the saddest city lane....and dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain" (Frost 976). The speaker experienced great turmoil, and doesn't know what his next steps should be in order to escape his current life. Darkness surrounds him, which makes it difficult to find a clear path to take. As long as the darkness persists, nothing can show him the way to happiness. His only source for answers are himself and vague symbols in the night, like the moon. With such little help, the speaker is bound to be trapped in this depression, waiting for the day to come. The light may never shine on him, if someone doesn't come to his aid.

Just because she's a woman and doing laundry doesn't mean anything...

Sorting Laundry

Elisavietta Ritchie

Laundry is a routine task, and frankly mundane at that. However, the speaker takes joy in doing the laundry because she gets to spend time with her husband's clothes (just bear with me). Folding his clothes she gets to soak in all the memories she has seeing him in those clothes. It's as if their clothes are them, living their lives together. It's a surprisingly sweet thought, but such a sweet thought eventually causes the speaker to wonder what would happen if her joy ever ended. When the speaker says "If you were to leave me, if I were to fold only my own clothes" (Ritchie 842), it shows a moment of terror within her. She's so scared because, as things are now, their love could never be broken, but she's sane enough to know that sometimes things don't work out. Society's thinking that people make the wrong decision 50% of the time when dealing with marriage has gotten into her head, and frightened. The fright somewhat displays how strong their love truly is. Such fright would only come from a separation after so many years of such true love.

These kids doing the strangest things to catch a buzz

I taste a liquor never brewed
Emily Dickinson

The speaker sure does love nature, and cleverly uses the metaphor of alcohol to associate her desire with. The speaker takes in all she sees in nature much like she would taste a fine wine. Some parts she relishes and savors, enjoying the moment and her surroundings. But some parts of nature are so miraculous to her that she over-indulges, much like one may consume a tad too much alcohol. When the speaker makes the allusion that "Butterflies-renounce their 'drams'" (Dickinson 797), it means that some parts of nature, particularly the autumn aspect, are coming to an end. Normally that would cause sadness in those who fear winter, but she is excited for all of nature and keeps taking it all in. But why is the speaker so enthralled by nature? She seems to be a very sheltered person, perhaps secluded away from the bulk of society. this would explain a distaste for traditional liquor and preference towards the hidden pleasures of life. An obsession with nature could make sense if someone was out in the country for the majority of their life.

The Titantic was overrated anyway

The Convergence of the Twain
Thomas Hardy

The structure of the poem creates an air of irony around the Titanic. Though it was created with beauty, extravagance, and invincibility in mind, every stanza ends with the imagery of the current resting place of the ship. The ship sailed as a fantastic vessel, but couldn't avoid a doomed fate and now resides at the bottom of the sea. Not only did the ship meet a grim fate, but now it is no longer idolized, for it is inhabited by sea creatures and decay that show no appreciation for what the Titanic once was. A glimpse of symbolism comes from the terms twin and two. "On being anon twin halves of one august event" and "jars two hemispheres" (Hardy 779) allude to the rise and fall of the Titanic, as well as the connection between the two sides of the world. The ship was meant to be a link between lavish Europe and unexplored America, but its wreckage became a model of arrogance. It showed the two hemispheres that problems can occur, and it is important to slow themselves down as to not cause another disaster. The twin halves of the ship would forever serve as an example  to the world of what can come from those who become over confident with their work.

Two People does not make a jury...

A Jury of Her Peers
Susan Glaspell

The characterization of Mrs Wright is complex for she is viewed as two people: Mrs Wright and Minnie Foster. According to the investigators, the woman is Mrs Wright. However, when the "professionals" are no longer present, Mrs Hale and Mrs Peters refer to the woman as Minnie Foster, the woman they knew as her friend. As the story progresses, the women became increasingly regretful that they didn't visit more, because they found clues that revealed the truth about Minnie's life. The attorney assumed the gals wouldn't find anything, saying "but would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?" (Glaspell 412). However, they continually discovered that Mrs Wright lived a lonely life, and was talked down to by her husband. They then began to notice things being half-done, implying that Minnie had to leave her work in a hurry. They then discovered a strangle bird, and slowly pieced together the reason for Mr Wright's death. He crushed the bird during an argument with Minnie, and she strangled him in retaliation. The women only learned this from being in the kitchen and, supposedly, out of the way of the crime scene. While the men were stubbornly looking at the little evidence, the women discovered the motive, and hid it from the police to protect their now friend.

Friendship always wins

Hunters in the Snow
Tobias Wolff

The story begins following alongside three dysfunctional friends. It's clear they all have personal and psychological issues they deal with, but they mask over their issues with jabs at each other. Typical men, not sharing their feelings but instead making fun of their buds. Their jokes slowly morph into hostility throughout the story, and the boiling point comes when Kenny gets shot. Though tensions are still high, the trio begins working together to help Kenny. They begin to grow closer as friends, and start sharing the issues they deal with in their life. Tub and Frank grow the closest while trying to get Kenny to the hospital. A bit of irony is in the fact that, though Frank and Tub have became as strong as ever, Kenny is suffering in the back of his pick up truck while bleeding out. Frank said that Kenny's blankets are "'not doing him any good...We might as well get some use out of them'" (Wolff 201). It's almost as though Frank and Tub liked each other, but disliked Kenny more. The peak of irony is revealed at the end, when the reader learns that Frank was going the wrong way to the hospital. Though Frank and Tub are best friends, there is a strong possibility that they had killed their other friend, and they're totally oblivious.

On a lighter note...

It doesn't sound nice, but it is

My Mistress' Eyes
William Shakespeare

Men are genuinely nice people, we just don't sound nice. The poem is satirical in a sense that it ridicules most love sonnets. A typical love poem would talk up the woman like she is some sort of goddess, incapable of error. That view of women is thrown out the window by the speaker! He describes his love as pretty plain, and somewhat off-putting. He describes her features as they are, and to be honest, the woman doesn't sound too attractive. However, the speaker makes the sonnet into something sweet by the end. He stats that "I think my love as rare as any belied with false compare" (Shakespeare 885). Despite all of her flaws and dullness (no offense to this woman), the speaker still loves her. Not just that, but he proclaims that he loves her so much that he can speak about her truthfully and still love her. He doesn't need to talk her up in a way that most sonnets do, he is attracted to her with all of her imperfections. Though he sounds mean throughout the poem, the speaker is chivalrous and is truly in love.

Who hasn't disassembled a Barbie?

Barbie Doll
Marge Piercy

The poem stereotypes this particular girl into the category of the future housewife. She "was born as usual and presented dolls that did pee-pee and miniature GE stoves and irons" (Piercy 835). Her toys growing up was a child and an oven, so her future occupation was fairly well laid out to her. This stereotype only intensifies the struggle she went through during her teen years. Kids became judgmental  only focusing on two minor physical features that weren't like everyone else's. Despite her prominent intelligence and kindness, people on saw her physical imperfections. She began to think it was so crucial to look normal that she tried to fix herself. When normal measures didn't work, she figured she could remedy her situation like she fixed her dolls' imperfections, by swapping parts. So she cut off her legs and nose, you know, like a sane person. What was ironic was that people saw her as calm and beautiful in her coffin. I suppose it is what she wanted, and she was happy to be pretty, but it is sad that joy comes from such grim measures.

You can't spell "Irony, AG" without Iago...

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

I knew the story was a Shakespearean tragedy, but I assumed that meant someone would succeed. Both Iago and Othello were the losers in the end. Iago lost because, though he caused Othello much despair, he wasn't there to make the final blow to Othello. Since Othello killed himself, Iago won't have any other opportunities to see Othello as a shattered man. Besides the fact that Othello committed suicide, he also suffered great defeat. He lived long enough to realize he murdered a near-perfect woman and realized his adviser had been lying to him for days, possibly weeks. Furthermore, he was made a fool when his fellow delegates learned of his misfortune. And oh how the irony strolls in when his plans were revealed. Othello was dethroned and "Cassio rules in Cyprus" (Shakespeare 1460), making Cassio the commanding General. Iago, from the beginning, was mad at Cassio for stealing his job and assumed he would be gotten rid of with ease. Not only did he survive a stabbing from Iago, but he got promoted! There is no doubt that Iago will be rotting away in a cell for a long time, but boy was he a good villain.

Women, always ruining things

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

Emilia, Iago's own wife, is the one who foiled his dastardly plot. It was clear that she idolized Desdemona, and when she heard she had died and killed herself, she knew that something didn't add up. She quickly deduced that Othello was the one that killed her, but again was confused as to why such a noble man could do such an act. When she learned it was Iago who had been whispering evil into Othello's ear, she had had enough. She cursed his name, and yelled for all to hear. Othello still had faith in Iago, probably because he wanted his murder to be justified. However, Emilia, Iago's own wife wanted him to "rot half a grain a day! He lies to the heart" (Shakespeare 1454). She cared about Desdemona so much that she tossed aside her marriage, and stepped out of her comfort zone to make it clear that her mistress died unjustly. She was the key to unraveling the truth. In the first half of the play, she came off as a simple maid, who acted as a reluctant henchman to Iago's revenge spree. The murder of her best friend changed her, changed her in a way that honored the one she wanted to stand up for. She died clearing the name of her friend, and cursing the name of men everywhere.
...yay for men.

Does anyone else think Iago is lying? Just me then...?

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

Roderigo has been Iago's assumed ally from the beginning of the story, and he has taken the role of dutiful henchman to Iago's deeds. However, it is in Act IV that he is fed up with Iago, and begins to crack through the mountain of mischief Iago has constructed. The money that Iago had Roderigo save up was used to buy jewels as a gift for Desdemona. Iago told him she accepted the gift as a token of love, but Roderigo saw no signs of such affection. It may be due to his frustration, but Roderigo attacks Iago for his wrongdoings done to Roderigo and no longer believes Iago is the honest man everyone thinks. It is here that Iago shows his greatest act of villainy. Iago even applauds Roderigo for noticing his lies by saying "your suspicion is not without wit...thou hast...purpose, courage, and valor" (Shakespeare 1441). He turns Roderigo back into his favor by baiting him with Desdemona, the very thing he has proven to not have gotten for Roderigo in the past! One would think Roderigo would be wary to follow a man like Iago, but he is blinded by lust, and even agrees to kill a military commander to get to her. Roderigo doesn't even consider the consequences of murder and then the stealing of a general's wife. It is because of this blind loyalty that I believe Iago has dealt with Roderigo for this long. Roderigo will kill Cassio, and Iago will have an easy time of pinning the murder on Roderigo, telling authorities that Roderigo was an insane lunatic, and honest old Iago had nothing to do with it...

I'm starting to think Iago won't be killing anyone.

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

Not only is Iago a master of manipulation, but he has also artfully put his plans into motion without blood getting on his hands. In order to get revenge on Othello, he could have killed Othello, his wife Desdemona, his friend Cassio, or destroyed his reputation, or any combination. However, Iago went with destroying Othello's mind. On its own, this sounds like a mild revenge, but Othello's insanity will lead to more emotional and physical torment. Iago wants Othello to kill Desdemona because he wants Othello to never be able to love again. Furthermore, Iago prompts Othello to "strangle her in her bed, even the bed she hath contaminated" (Shakespeare 1432). Iago is so trusted by Othello, that Othello is willing to, in blunt force, murder his wife and most likely have to take the blame for the murder. Iago also tells Othello that he shall deal with Cassio while Othello kills Desdemona. But Iago rinses his hands yet again by convincing Roderigo to kill Cassio. He assures Roderigo that he will be there to back him up, but it is Roderigo's job to crush the only thing that stands between him and Desdemona. At least, that's the information that Iago has been feeding him.

Act III: This is going to be a long line of dominoes.

Othello, the Moor of Venice

William Shakespeare

Act III marks the betrayal of Othello's trust by Desdemona. Though the evidence he gathered is circumstantial, Othello is beginning to see what Iago is illustrating for him. What's impressive is that Iago is still maintaining his status of wise friend while feeding Othello all these potentially horrible truths about Desdemona. He does this by reminding Othello that none of these rumors are one hundred percent accurate. He includes, in nearly every conversation, that "I speak not yet of proof. Look to your wife. Observe her well with Cassio" (Shakespeare 1410). This way, Othello is in control of whatever his mind imagines his wife doing, it is not because Iago manipulated him in any way, noooooo (he said sarcastically). I find Othello's relationship with Desdemona to have gone through a dramatic shift, and it is somewhat ironic. In Act I, the couple was in love and Othello defended the honor of himself and his new wife. Now the love is deteriorating away, and he suspects that she has forsaken all respect for him, this being weeks after their marriage. If Othello has gotten this paranoid, this quickly, it foreshadows how villainous this supposed protagonist will become.

Act II: Let's try to evaluate Iago

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

Iago is after Othello because he heard a rumor that Othello slept with Emilia, Iago's wife. Now, though it is a rumor, I understand where he is coming from. Honor is a big part of the society they are living in, but why doesn't Iago burn Othello's house down or stab him in the leg? It's because Iago wants a punishment worthy of the crime. We knew that Iago acts his evil out through manipulation and deceit, but that is because he suspects Othello used such tactics to sleep with his wife. Furthermore, Iago doesn't trust women. He is aware of the tricks they can play in the game of love, he just applies those tricks in the game of revenge. He states that "if she be fair and wise, fairness and wit, the one's for use, the other useth it" (1386 Shakespeare). Women attract men with how they look, but use manipulation and other tactics to keep a man around forever. Iago recognized these practices, mastered them, and made his target to be revenge rather than marriage. The same tricks Othello (allegedly) used to get with Iago's wife, Iago will use on others to have Othello's sanity and well-being stricken from him.

Act II, Iago is up to no good, startin' makin trouble in the neighborhood

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

Iago sets his plans into motion in Act II. His end game is to get close to Othello so that he can destroy him, both physically and mentally. Iago is cunning enough to realize that there needs to be a lot of leg work before he can squash Othello, so the reader sees Iago go from person to person establishing some kind of relationship with them. He makes sure to give his "friends" a sense of security, as well as portray himself as an honest guardian of sorts. When facing the ordeal of Cassio's fight and Othello's interrogation, Iago carefully pleases all parties involved, allowing him to be viewed by his peers as a truly respectable friend. He stats that he would "rather have his tongue cut from my mouth than it should do offense to Michael Cassio. Yet I persuade myself to speak the truth" (1398 Shakespeare). He builds tension between Cassio and Othello (which is part of his master plan), yet he appears as though he is helping out his friends to the attendees. After Othello fires Cassio, Iago is the one who attempts to comfort his "friend" Cassio, and suggests he should ask Desdemona to convince Othello that he should forgive Cassio. Little does Cassio know that Iago plans to insinuate to Othello that his wife is unfaithful, and Cassio is her lover.

Act I, I think Othello is a Moor

Othello, the Moor of Venice
William Shakespeare

As a commanding general of the Italian army, one would think Othello would deserve some massive respect. However, Othello is almost never referred to by name when he is not present, he is instead called the Moor (as well as a handful of other demeaning names). Despite the air of racism amongst his peers, Othello has earned success in most things he does, and has never boasted about his achievements. Rather, he works towards winning the next battle or establishing his next friendship. The Duke, though higher in status than Othello, sees great potential in Othello and voices it by saying to Brabantio "Your son-in-law is far more fair than black" (1379 Shakespeare). This left-handed compliment makes it clear that Othello is burdened by his skin color, but his virtuous gallantry shines brighter than his physical qualities. This characterization of Othello earned him his wife Desdemona. His hardships he faced attracted Desdemona to him, and he had to conquer even more obstacles by marrying her away from the custody of her father. He even had the loyalty and brilliance to offer his life to Brabantio if it turned out Desdemona truly didn't love Othello. His actions echo the qualities that Othello exudes...for now.

February

February

Margaret Atwood

This poem is basically one long inner monologue. The speaker often skips around from topic to topic, connected each thought with the previous. She begins by observing winter as a lazy time of year, that no one is too fond of. She then focuses on the cat, and how he behaves during winter. The cat jumps on her bed as a "way of telling whether or not I'm dead" (Atwood 876). This changes the tone to focus on death. The speaker believes that winter is death, and we just have to deal with. She then makes a jump to say that love is death. Loving someone or something can makes us forget what really makes us sane, and insanity leads to our downfall. The viewpoint of the poem then cycles through all the previous thoughts, until the speaker finally is fed up with February, and demands that spring comes. But dealing with all the despairs of february and winter makes the spring that much enjoyable. The best things in life are only attained after going through hardships.

WHY IS THIS CALLED Popular Mechanics?!

Popular Mechanics
Carver

These short stories never have happy endings. The tone of this story is very bleak, forcing even more sadness to rain over the reader. The couple is splitting up and they each demand to take their child with them. Emotions are raging, so they couldn't be thinking logically and settle this matter in the court system. Their argument symbolizes their relationship, and how it had slowly fallen apart. "In the scuffle they knocked down a flowerpot that hung behind the stove" (Carver 335). Though it seems insignificant, the flowerpot along with assorted items in the house represent the couple's relationship. It breaking symbolizes their love falling apart, and in the end their love only centered around the child. They hated each other but loved the baby, and that only caused the argument to become more heated. They both wanted to cling onto the last thing that represented their love, which was the baby. And, in the end, the baby suffered the greatest. The ending is vague, yet it leads the reader to believe it was torn apart. The story itself serves as a metaphor to failing love, and warns of the deadly consequences.

Tonight, on 60 minutes

The Story of an Hour
Kate Chopin

Well wasn't that ironic, but everyone is going to blog about irony, so I shall blog about imagery!!! When Louise comes to terms that her husband is dead, she gains a new outlook on life. Not only that, but it's almost as though she gains super powers, and can finally see and hear all that is going on around her. From just opening a window she can taste "the delicious breath of rain" and could hear "the notes of a distant song which someone was singing" (Chopin 326). She knew she would be on her own, and was somewhat afraid, but she was excited to tackle the world in this new way she experienced it. Though death had stolen possibly her closest friend, she remained headstrong in her sense of freedom. The imagery and diction empowered Lousie, depicting her as a heroine ready to travel the world. She triumphantly walked down the stairs once she had understood her new life, only to find her old life rushing back to her. Her husband hadn't died, and her mind and heart couldn't comprehend it. Louise died at the sight of him, perhaps from joy, but more likely from despair. She would have been trapped in her dull, secluded, homemaker role with her husband around, and I don't think she wanted that to be her reality.

Yo mamma so ugly

You're Ugly, Too
Lorrie Moore

There's a reason Zoe is still single, it's because she's terrifying. She had been in some good relationships, but the moment the man acted out of line she cut ties with him. She wasn't very good at flirting, but she made a good effort throughout the story while talking to Earl. Irony is highly present through this story, for even though she wants love, she spends most of her time talking about how love has failed her so many times. Not only that, but such conversations isn't going to catch many fish any time soon, Zoe. She makes up a fake relationship (assumedly to make it seem that shes not crazy) with her long-time taxi driver. It almost makes me feel bad for her, especially when she asks Earl, "Are you involved in a relationship? With a woman?" (Moore 366). She knew he was going through divorce, yet she starts up this conversation for small talk! Either she hates the guy, or she is doomed to never find love, despite he craving to be loved. It becomes clearer at the end of the story that she really dislikes Earl when she nearly pushes him off the balcony. I believe this sums up her destiny of love: she can deal with a man for only so long, until she needs to get away.

eHarmony, match.com, or maybe craigslist

Lonely Hearts
Wendy Cope

If you didn't realize, back in the mid 1900s, the internet wasn't invented. For this reason, poets had to take all their single friends' likes and dislikes and put them in poems, hoping the readers would ask out the poet's friends. If this is the correct interpretation of the poem, then HOLY GORSH MICKEY!!!

More than likely, the poem is to sympathize with the average person who is down on their luck in the love department. There are plenty of simple, ordinary people who just want someone special in their lives, and these simple messages symbolize all these different romantics. Every message is just 3 lines long, yet every message corresponds to a significantly different person. There is a "Gay vegetarian whose friends are few...[and a] Successful, straight, solvent...Jewish lady" (Cope 973). If these two people were in a story, they couldn't be more different, yet they represent the same type of person in this poem. Everyone is looking for love, and they have put their faith into writing messages and hoping someone special will find it. There are always lonely hearts, but as long as the hearts stay open someone will take away the lonely and make it lovely.
EDIT: I think I should forever be less manly for making this blog. I need to remedy this...I'm now a man.

Bright Star

Bright Star
John Keats

Upon reading this my first time, I assumed the other loved women and astronomy. That may be true, but I think he meant for the stars to be a metaphor for the woman he loved. He relates how eternal the stars are, which corresponds to his eternal love for his girly friend (My personal stance is that girls have cooties). Not only does he love her, but herself and her beauty will last forever in his eyes. He briefly comments on the moon and "the moving waters at their priestlike task" (Keats 792). Now he is saying that the "stars" (but really the moon) has a nearly full control over Earth's tides. This relates to his love's control over him, and that he is blown away by how amzing she is. He believes that this girl is so amazing that all of space is barely a good enough analogy to describe her wonder. The metaphor that love is eternal beats within the author's heart as he speaks to this woman. If she were to leave, than the entire universe would crumble around him.

Why did she stay?!

Eveline
James Joyce

She had one decision to make, and she made it a huge fiasco!!! My biggest problem with the story is with how she decided. It would've been fine if she refused to go with Frank because she wanted to help her family. However, the narrator describes Eveline as being afraid, as if she was unsure of her own decision. She had wanted to start a new life with Frank for a long time, despite the few reasons she needed to stay home. Even though her mother wanted her to protect the family, Eveline thought "She must escape! Frank would save her" (Joyce 221). When she ended up not going with Frank, the story seemed unfinished. Her decision was more on the basis of her getting cold feet. In a rush of emotion, she got confused and thought home was safer than being with frank. Now, after the story ended, Frank could've easily got off the ship, had a talk with Eveline, and truly figured out what she wanted...BUT THE STORY ENDED TOO QUICKLY!!! So if anyone decides to write a sequel to this story, I advise you to please tell me about it.

How I Met the side characters

How I Met My Husband
Alice Munro

The main characters in the novel are Edie, Chris, and some may argue that Alice is as well. However, Loretta Bird and Mrs Peebles are definite side characters. Even though they aren't in the story that often, these two side characters have a large effect on Edie. Loretta for one loves to gossip, and her thirst for drama brought Alice into the story. Furthermore, all of her questioning and prodding brought up the relationship Edie had with Chris, and caused the Uproar that changed Edie's life. Mrs Peebles had a more life-changing effect on Edie. She lived her life wanting the Peebles to like her, and needing to not make any mistakes to change that. She was almost paranoid, thinking that "Mrs Peebles might not fire me, when she found out, but it would give her a different feeling about me altogether" (Munro 135). I had originally thought of Mrs Peebles as a static character, but her impact on Edie partly changed her. A dynamic change takes place during the ordeal with Edie and Alice, in which Mrs Peebles defends Edie as if they had become friends. Edie was so convinced that Mrs Peebles would disown her, but she was the only friend that helped her.