Frustration with immature High Schoolers

So we saw "12th Night" at Marshwood a couple days ago and everyone really seemed to enjoy it. Afterwards the cast opened the floor up to questions. I was the last question to be taken, and being an actor, I was curious to know the difficulties in performing/ understanding Shakespeare. I asked the question in a detailed way to make the question clear and also detail is just the way I speak. After the question was answered one of the actors commented on the amazing auditorium. I politely agreed, the bell rang, everyone went to lunch. Now here is the punchline: Random people came up to me in the last two days commenting on how people (more than one mind you) were saying "shut up" to their friends about my "lengthy" question. COOOOOMMMMEEEE ONNNNN! What are you...Like two years old? People can be so ignorant at this age. We are watching Shakespeare to learn and explore the English language, rather than making comments such as "I love your dress." Further more, if people are SO concerned about the time restraint, why don't they just go back to class and get lectured at? ANNND why do these people not have compassion for anyone?? What if I wasn't even asking an intelligent question, what if I had really low self esteem, what if I talked for hours and stuttered over every word because I was nervous to speak in front of people? Luckily I am none of those things and my confidence is secure, but I can't even imagine what the "shut up yellers" do to people in those circumstances. It sickens me. Please grow up, take advantage of the amazing opportunities the school has given us, get some compassion and learn how to communicate with people. UGH.

Profile confusions

I just figured out how to change my profile...It never worked before. Yeah!!! I have an identity now!

x-ray vision

My uber intellegent friend at an Air force Acadamy in Colorado, recently posted this picture. He figured out by taking a picture of the scenery behind his computer, he could create the illusion that his computer is transparent. I saw this as very artistic, very creative and very time consuming. To get the exact right picture, he said it took him days. I guess that's what college is all about. The creative projects of endless free time! I can't wait...

Sonnet... Bonnet?

In the past few months we have been reading some lovely (Ha!) sonnets in class by my one and only favorite person, Willy Shakespeare. Nigel decided that we should write some of our own brainy sonnets, bring them in, and read them to the class. So last week our sonnets were due, and I had spent all weekend counting syllables and stressed and unstressed feet while my family walked by me wondering what the heck I was counting with my fingers and talking to myself about. I looked like a loony, but I finished it and it had the 10 syllables a line, with the stressed  and unstressed pattern. I was pretty darn proud of myself for even finishing, so I strutted into class on Monday feeling pretty good. That feeling lasted only until MS read her sonnet to the class. I thought that it was pretty good (I couldn't count fast enough to see if there were 10 syllables in each line, but it doesn't matter). Then Nigel asked her what her rhyming scheme was. WHAT? RHYMING SCHEME? I started to freak out. Apparently the sonnets had the RHYME! Well I definitely did NOT rhyme anything in my sonnet. After that I didn't want to read it at all. In the end Nigel just said that the sonnet could be fixed and turned in on Friday. Yay! I'll just go and rhyme the last words of the lines and turn it back in. But it's not that simple.

I spent 2 hours on the computer trying to find good words that rhyme with undisguised and that fit into the message of the sonnet. It was super hard. That got me thinking. Shakespeare wrote all kinds of sonnets, 154 if I am not mistaken, and I have a nagging feeling that he didn't go online and look at the rhyming dictionary to get his sonnet to fit the whole abab rhyming set-up. This is where I have to give Willy-boy some mad props. I mean 154 sonnets! That is crazy! I had a hard time writing one, and I used a thesaurus and a rhyming dictionary to get mine to even fit the sonnet "rules". Who knows if it even made any sense, but let me tell you there were the right number of syllables, stressed and unstressed pairs, and those words rhymed gosh darn it!

This has to be some sort of Kodak moment... one you will most likely never see again, so appreciate it now... but I think that Shakespeare did a... nice job when writing his sonnets. 

So sorry

Okay, so I have been a little lame in the blogging department lately... college stuff is due this week so my mind has been elsewhere. I am going to try and put in some good shorter blogs this week to make up for it, though, so be ready (but don't set your expectations too high or you WILL be disappointed)

"fool"ish relief

I would also like to agree with the fact that Nigel is "da man" for letting us do this blog instead of a ginormous project. I am so foolishly relieved that we didn't have to do the project. I am going to try to be more of an avid blogger like my friend em who blogs every other millisecond... andI know a I will have many opportunities with this upcoming project, sonnets and such other assignments. I am pumped for that because I truly do like blogging. :)

The Loyal Fool

"I had rather be any kind o'thing than a fool,yet I would not be thee, nuncle;I am a fool, thou art nothing." (I. iv.)

The fool in William Shakespeare's play "King Lear" is the most, kind, noble and wisest character of them all. With all the turmoil and insanity around him, the fool must maintain his loyalty through clever humour to King Lear. The fool has sympathy for his old and quickly fading master. The fool follows King Lear out into the horrid storm, only to meet the need for humour. Beyond the fool's comical service to the king the fool is a voice of reason and helps to make Lear aware of his wrong to his daughters. The fool serves multiple purposes to the King, but I believe that although the fool is comic relief, he secretly labours over Lear's breaking of heart.

The way the fool was portrayed in the movie we saw of "King Lear" was appropriate for the fool's comments. The irony that the fool presented through his clever verse is only something that comes with age and humble sweetness in character. The old man playing the movie's fool had visual aspects, such as his silver beard and wrinkled face, that echoed a wise, respected man.
The fool is a simple character with nothing noble about his status, but serves a regal purpose. Even though Lear is the fool's master you sense a closeness about them and that Lear is willing to listen to the fool's opinions.
Through his comical ways the fool is able to be very blunt about true reality of each conflict. Only through humour can you sugar coat the subjects of divorcing your children and war. Through humour, even today, comic strips and Saturday night live skits give the public access to explore their positions further as things are exaggerated to the extreme.
Humour can be a cushion of comfort or a segway to enlightened thinking and the fool in "King Lear" greatly impacted Lear's views. Loyalty and humble opinion made the fool 's memorable character in the book, but also in my mind as a truly noble, daring and fascinating character.

About A Fool

I second Em, thanks so much Nigel.
The Fool in "King Lear" is a fascinating character because his title is fool but he makes the most sense in the whole play. He plays the side note of intelligent thought; in modern plays his role would be like the narrator. The fool helps Lear throughout the play by guiding him with his wisdom, which is a good picture because Lear is basically loosing his mind. At the same time, the fool is seen as an incomplete character because he keeps appearing and disappearing through the duration of the play; the fool shows up in times of stress(on Lear's part) to help the audience know what Lear "should do" in these awful times, but chooses not to(which adds to the tragedy of the story). The overall purpose of the fool is to make sure the audience knows what is going on in the play (he gives direction in all aspects). At times the fool can be seen as a sarcastic character, because he points out the odveous, but he is really a character of compasion and intelligence.

Rivals from Canada

After reading " The Rivals" I was a bit confused about where the book actually took place. I know that it said Bath, but through the whole book i was thinking it took place somewhere in Canada. What was up with the language "Hey, and Aye, and Nay." I really am convinced that someone is a Canadian in the book.

the love of theatre

I have just done the last weekend of High School Musical at Ogunquit playhouse and after doing the show one weekend every month for 6 months, it's been quite a ride. Coming out of this experience has really showed me the mastery of this art form (drama) that I have so come to love. The people I worked with were so focused on their character that it took them to a different realm. As I worked around this sort of talent, I am learning to do this as well. There is just something about losing myself in a complete whimsical fiction that excites me greatly. I love becoming someone I'm not. Not that I don't like who I am, but just the fact that I am able to experience life in another's shoes (even if it is just pretend). After reading the play "The Rivals" and reading of Lydia's fantasies about how she wants to be wooed and loved it reminded me of why I love to act. In real life love is not something that most are able to control, but through theater, you can. Also working with the same people for so long, you really become a family and get to know them well. I will miss all the people I met, but I will be visiting them in their prestigious acting schools and in their awesome plays when I someday see them on Broadway. Even though I probably won't do a lot of theatre after high school, I will always love and cherish the art of acting.

Fool-ish

I am so happy that I have to write this blog about the Fool in "King Lear" and that I don't have to do a whole project on it. Making the project into a blog made my entire week (thanks Nigel)!
The Fool in "King Lear" is an interesting character. During the small amount of scenes that he is in it seems like he is the (very cryptic and riddle-filled) voice of reason and responsibility for Lear as he slips down the icy slopes of old age. An interesting idea that I had not thought of when reading the play initially is that the Fool acts very much like how Cordelia would act in the same situation. The Fool is Lear's version on his youngest daughter and tries to steer him away from silly, and sometimes dangerous places and ideas. It is interesting because the Fool and Cordelia are never actually in the same place at the same time (meaning they are never in scenes with each other). This shows that, in a time and place where loyalty and love were hard to find, Lear was a good enough person to justify two completely separate people, who (as we know) do not know each other or have any connection other than Lear himself, giving their time, advice, care, and loyalty to him in his time of need .
Yet, as opposed to elaborating on the character of the Fool, Shakespeare does not write him into a good majority of the scenes. After the start of Act IV the Fool is not seen or heard from until the end when Lear, in all his grief and sadness, tells of how his Fool was killed. The genuine sadness and elegiac mood (nice word... I know) that surrounds Lear when he talks about the loss of the Fool shows how much of an impact he had on his king's life. When Lear dies it is a combination of many factors that include his old age, and death of his daughter, but also the death of the Fool, because to Lear the Fool represented Cordelia in times when actually having Cordelia there was not an option (because he banished her which is a whole other ball of wax that rolls into all of this). It was the Fool that helped Lear cope with the ramifications of his decision to send Cordelia away. Without the Fool I feel that Lear would not have lasted as long as he did simply because there would be no one there to comfort him, and to keep him from doing very stupid things. After both of his loyal friends and family members had dies there was no way for Lear to keep going without the support and comfort that both Cordelia and the Fool had offered him.
In "King Lear" the Fool is the most interesting and incomplete character simply because of the influence he had on the plot of the play and the main characters, and because of the fact that he had such an impact while only being included in a few of the scenes of the play. Frankly with the Fool it is not quantity it is quality...

Boxes in my head

So I have been trying for the past week to start my essay about... well the essay that I have to write about. It is "Unpacking my Library" by Walter Benjamin, and it is very different from the other essays that oter groups have had to write about. This is both good and bad. "Unpacking my Library" is a very easy read...which is a good thing for me the Queen of "There are too many big words and long sentences". But, it is less of an evaluation of an abstract subject like the other essays... which is not a good thing. This is because there is nothing really to evaluate of to interpret about the essay. It is more of a story being told by the author about his past experiences with collecting books. Pretty straight-forward right? So today a few other people in my group and I asked Nigel, after class, about what we should b writing about. And he went and brought up the idea that the essay is not as literal as it seems. That is is more of a giant metaphore for something way bigger... or maybe deeper than what I had thought it was about. I don't want to give away exactly what he had said about it because I want to sound really smart when I read my essay to the class and it contains ideas that no one else thought about (wow I am a self-centered stinker :) ). Maybe this will help other people who read the essay and find that it is very square and palpable compared to the other essays there is more to it than meets the eye (I am now hoping that I am not the only person who did not see this alternate meaning when first reading the essay I would feel really silly about this whole post).

Mind Boggling

So I am a little over half way done with "The Rivals" by Richard Brinsley Sheridan, and I have to say that I feel like I need to make a chart. There is an intense kind of love circle-squarey-thing going on with the characters. They are all connected to each other in some way or another. But, I feel like the center of all of the confusion and disorganization is Absolute. To Lydia he is Beverly, but to everyone else he is Absolute. When other suitors, that are his friends like Acres, find out that Jydia is in love with some guy named Beverly they get all upset and challenge Beverly (who is really Absolute) to a dual. But then when Absolute's father decides to have his son marry Lydia Absolute has to go to her house and pretend to be Beverly pretending to be Absolute despite the fact that he is Absolute. Whew! This is exactly what I meant about the book and the intricate character relationships. Frankly my mind is spinning...

Can we move no more?

As I was reading through "Between Past and Future" one statement stuck out to me. It was one that I've heard many times before, but for so odd reason I couldn't stop thinking about it: "There is nothing in this situation that is altogether new. We are only too familiar with the recurring outbursts of passionate exasperation with reason, thought, and rational discourse..." This statement to me seems to be a big let down; there is nothing else for me to create because someone probably already thought of it. Then, I thought it would be interesting to know all of the "firsts" in the world, because there had to be one. Now, since every idea or theme has already been thought of, how long has the modern world been stuck in this rut of recurring themes? No one will ever know.

Love is...?

In discussing William Shakespeare's sonnet 116, "Let me not the marriage of true minds," I find that I am asking myself what is love and what are the different forms of love? Is it true? Does it withstand trials? How will I know if I am in love?
Love is the essence and obsession of all of the world. Our movies our culture is based off this feeling. everyone is searching whether they know it or not and if they deny they are searching for love, love is on the search for them. To love a person is something unconditional and pure. You are willing to lose yourself to be part of that person, to grow with that person. Love is so different for everyone but is similar to all that it is a strong feeling that is used to describe subjects with passion and meaning. Love conquers all things, restores all things...it goes above and beyond expectations. But what do I know? I am only a child. It is true I have been loved by my parents and an omnipotent and awesome God that has created me.
So maybe I do know what it is to be loved, but loving others...that is the hard part. "Love is not love which alters when alteration finds," meaning if life gets you down and things get tough, love will remain true, never be shaken and remain strong and firm. Love drives the human soul, controlling our emotions making us confused in our own desires. Love cannot be controlled but harnessed, maybe saved for a later date. There are different kinds of love. Love can be superficial and driven by lust and on the other side be a pure sign of respect, fear and gratitude. Love can hurt and scar you, love can restore and raise you to places you never imagined. But what do I know? I am only a child.

"Listening is understanding
and finding compassion
love is the action of soul satisfaction
a tongue can make wishes and also fine kisses
taste a sweet cake and also cast disses
but nothing compares to the voice from within
without it we might just be mannequins
up to no darn good shenanigans
learn to be skillful movers of the stones
that block the heart and turn humans to clones
learn to forgive, set free the bones
touch with your flesh, take off the rubber gloves
love like your life depends on it
because it does."
-Michael Franti and Spearhead from "Speaking of Tongues"

TASs... It's all backwards

So here I am trying to get things all situated to get up tomorrow at 6:15 in order to go and take the SATs (FOR THE SECOND TIME) in York. I am trying to sharpen my pencils (I keep overheating our pencil sharpener. Who knew that could happen, but it is really annoying) and I got to thinking about just how much pressure there is involved with taking these and other so called "standardized tests". 

We have always known just how important SAT scores are in getting you into college. For many schools the scores that people get on the SATs are a way of narrowing down the "pack". If a school (mostly larger ones) gets a ton of applications they have no way of going through each and every one of them and reading the essays and credentials that EACH individual applicant has. In order to weed out some of the applications schools will often just not look at applications with SAT scores below a certain point. This means that if you do badly on the SATs there is a potential for you to miss out on some schools no matter what your transcript, letters or recommendation, or leadership positions say about you. I feel like this is not the right way to do things. There are countless people who have a very hard time dealing with the pressure of taking a timed test that they know has the potential to impact their futures (who wouldn't have slight anxiety about this?), or just have a hard time on tests. These people end up thrown under the bus if their scores do not turn out well.

I think that the scores on SATs should only be used at the end of the application review process. If there are two people who are equal in all different application sections, then maybe the scores from the SATs should come into play. This would give the people who have a hard time taking tests a fighting chance at at least getting their applications read and looked at.

This is all so stressful! Well.... wish me luck! Tomorrow could change my life...(how dramatic sounding is that? Pretty intense huh?)

Half Full

So, I am going to do something a little out of character for me... so bear with me. 

I started reading "Unpacking My Library" by Benjamin today in study hall just to try and get a head start on it. The last few essays have been really long and dense, so I was thinking that if I read a few pages a night carefully that I would be able to finish it in time to write the essay, and I would (hopefully) understand the content more.

I was dreading even starting it after having read the last few, but I got myself together and started reading (I figured if I had some sort of brain aneurism someone would take me to the hospital [I was in the library not the cafe. No one in the cafe would have helped me.])

To my surprise I actually liked the first two pages that I read! I was literally shocked! I NEVER like those kind of hippie-dippy interpretive stuff. But, I genuinely liked the pages that I read (I bet only the first few pages are good in order to lure you in and then the long words/sentences come out and get you. It's like some sort of literary trap!).

I think that I liked it because, unlike the other essays, it is told in a more fictional way. It is told like more of a story than like an analysis or interpretation. I am actually not dreading reading more and writing a paper on it (this does not mean the paper will be good, I don't want for you all to put that pressure on me).

Anyway, I just thought that I would share my shock and amazement with all of you, since I'm pretty sure that I am the resident Negative Nancy when it comes to reading weird literature in our class. I'm trying to be more optimistic like I said to do in my last post. I guess that this is a pretty good start...

Why so dark?

Today we went over Shakespeare's Sonnet 116 in class. We came up with many different interpretations of how the poems made us feel/think, but they can all pretty much be divided into 2 different views: The optimistic/Romantic view and the pessimistic/I hate love poetry group. Now since this is my post I am only going to share my feelings on the matter and not bother showing the pros and cons of each side (that's bogus writing stuff). I definitely am in the first group of Romantics and optimists (surprising I know, who would think I would be optimistic). The general consensus of the angry unhappy people was that the poem, which focuses on the power of love, is just one giant, overused cliche. I have to agree with that. First of all is cliches are cliches it is because people use them a lot, and they would not use the cliches if they didn't have some sort of importance, influence, or special meaning in their lives. I would have to say that love is a cliche, but not a cliche in bad way.
The poem gave me a very happy feeling. It was a very romantic and optimistic view on the power of love and all that true love can overcome. I feel like today, in a world where we focus mostly on the negative aspects of life (I am guilty here), it is important to almost force yourself into thinking/reading/seeing positive things. Part of the reason why a lot of people felt that this was an overdone cheese fest, I think, was because, as a generation, we have been bred into a lot of negativity and that is what we have come to known in our everyday lives. Many people may feel that this is incorrect, but if you spend the day listening to all the negative things you say, even the small statements, you would find that you complain quite a bit. It is not like I am trying to pull a "holier then thou" attitude because I am as guilty as anyone of being negative (as you can see from my previous blogs)
In the end, I think that reading the sonnet and the reactions that we had to it as a smaller representation of a much larger and more looming problem that we as humans have today.