Euro Lit: bring student ID on Monday
Honors 9: study guide questions for chapters 1-13 of Grapes of Wrath due
Thursday, April 17, 2014
Thesis opinion: find ways to restate it: you might need to restate it up to 8 times
The reader needs to go into both the dog and the Frenchman to show that friendship takes two people.
P. 173, very top – reliability: you can trust that whatever is said in the story is true.
Gives examples of when the narrator drops into the dog’s point of view to share what the dog is feeling and experiencing in order to lead to the theme. Ex: “the dog relished the caresses.”
Therefore the dog indeed considers the Frenchman a friend.
Plot v. Character –
The quotations and explanations that the writer uses will set the two paragraphs apart and will help to avoid repetition.
Plot: What happens in the story is always an example of the them (either positive or negative) + consequence = topic sentence
-Example: “Vonnegut uses plot to convey theme by having society confuse equal opportunity and equal ability and it results in a dystopia.”
Traven uses plot to convey his theme by having two protagonists, one unable to control his anger and the other unable to forgive, and having their friendship die.
Dénouement always underscores theme.
External question: Can their friendship survive? Internal question (Frenchman) Can he control his anger? Internal question (dog): Can he learn to forgive?
Climax: resolution to internal question (positive or negative)
Character: Characters are always a positive or negative example of the theme. How do the characters change over the course of the story? Why do the characters change? In what way do the characters change?
Bertha a foil to the dog (her ability to forgive) and a similarity to the Frenchman (her tendency towards anger)
T.S. – lit d + explanation on how author uses it to convey theme
One character cannot control anger, one can’t forgive. Both protagonists, same ext. conflict question. Both serve as the other’s antagonistic force, with human nature acting as the overarching antagonistic force. Different int. conflict questions, set in Mexico City to show that both characters are out of their respective places. Climax is when Frenchie doesn’t resolve int. conflict question. Finally, dog also doesn’t resolve int. conflict question; therefore, ext. conflict question is resolved unsuccessfully. Dénouement makes us feel finality. Leave out dénouement for conclusion?
Bertha – Human nature
Frenchie & Doggie – Represent the reader, we are both the dog and the Frenchman
Dog-man’s best friend, dogs are loyal and they always forgive
Maybe doggie’s personification?
Food – Misunderstanding friendship
Dog not crossing the threshold
Slamming of the phone – Human nature,
Dog not coming back
Phone, Bertha, dog: all receive collateral damage from the Frenchman.
Conclusion: Don’t ra ra cheerlead your theme. Do big picture thinking, expanding the theme in real world examples. Choose a subtheme and expand on it. Make an insightful observation about the text (Keep it big picture). For example: why is Bertha in the story? Talk about feeeeeeeels: Mad at Frenchman, sad for poor little doggie, mad at dog too. You can also do plot 3rd paragraph, and leave the dénouement for the conclusion.
Diction – Creates a tone with word choice (e.g. Juicy steak, huge calf bone, brutal, killed a man)
(Can go together with POV, tone)
“The tree thought Mr. Stewart was making fun of me.”“Yeah, man, don’t have anger, man
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
These be thar Honors 9 Notes
Possible theme restatements:
1. To form and maintain long-lasting friendships, one has to control one’s anger and be able to forgive.
2. When life gives you lemons, make a lemon meringue pie.
3. Trusting friendships require one to control one’s anger and forgive friends if they are unable to control their own anger.
4. When life gives you cow-pies, use them as fertilizer to grow grass to feed the cows to make more cow-pies.
3rd person omniscient POV:
1. gives us a reliable source of information
2. helps establish both sides of the story and both halves of the theme
3. is an unbiased narrator
4. can drop into any character’s point of view
Interesting point, both Harrison Bergeron and Friendship use 3rd person omniscient. Could be a good comparison for conclusion. We must know some things in these stories to be fact – unbiased and true.
pg 173 “believing the animal to be only another street dog” The narrator’s key word is believe. In this passage the narrator states that the dog is not an ordinary dog.
Possible body paragraphs:
Plot—Protagonists=man and dog. Can they become and stay friends? Antagonists=each other and human nature (p176 middle). Climax=man chucks roll. Resolution=no no no no no noooo. Denouement=(p182 last paragraph)
Character—Back everything up with quotations and explanations.
How do write a character analysis, Harrison Bergeron example:
Harrison Bergeron was a Homeric hero. Strives to be all that he can be, but has hubris. Exceeds his bounds by kissing the ceiling, and his nemesis is getting shot.
Do A comes back to A analysis (but please don’t call it that…). What changes, what makes it change, in what way does it change, why does the author have it change that way?
Don’t analyze the character paragraph in the same way as a plot paragraph. In a character paragraph, you are specifically only focusing on one character.
P176 middle: Telephone engineers calculated angry people hanging up phones because anger is HUMAN NATURE.
P181 top: man can’t change the dog but he can change himself by having awareness of his own nature (gnothi seaton). Know thyself, change thyself. Man’s existence precedes his essence.
Analyze how the story made you feel (denouement)
Relate it, of course, to another story you read this year.
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Honors 9 Friendship Notes
Why does the dog come back twice? The dog comes for affection, not food, and he needs to teach the Frenchman that it was the love that mattered, not the food.
Dog has self-consciousness and transcends the material world.
Dog is self-aware. The dog realizes that his tail is wagging and he consciously stops himself.
Dog= character, personified (p171 dog is grinning)
Pg 182, dog wags his tail when the Frenchman pets him. Shows that the dog was coming for love and affection rather than the food. Licks the man’s hand for a full minute to show why he kept coming.
Is the dog an ordinary dog? No.
Pg 173 “the dog refrained from coming inside” because the dog knew the restaurant for humans
pg 180 dog doesn’t take the bone that’s offered like other dogs would
Also, the man is disappointed in the dog when the dog comes back because the man thinks that the dog is actually ordinary, and that the dog’s love can be bought.
Why doesn’t the dog cross the threshold?
Because he didn’t trust the Frenchman.
Dog is personified, a symbol of us.
The Frenchman is also us. We have all experienced both roles.
Why didn’t the dog dodge the roll?
(p177) dog could have dodged it easily
(p177 bottom) dog trusted man
(p177 middle) Dog couldn’t believe Frenchman would hurt him, bewilderment
Dog doesn’t come back because he can’t trust the Frenchman.
What changes? The dog stopped coming.
What makes is change? The Frenchman walloped him with a roll.
Why? In what way does it change? Frenchman acted rashly. Sorta like Oedipus. And Romeo. And a lot of people. Most people act before they think when angry. Human nature, yo.
Therefore, the theme is: TO SUSTAIN A FRIENDSHIP, YOU MUST CONTROL YOUR ANGER AND LEARN TO FORGIVE OTHER PEOPLE’S RASH DECISIONS.
We always hurt the ones we love because they will forgive us. They’re close to us—easy targets.
Protagonist: Frenchman and the dog.
External: Can the Frenchman form and keep a friendship with the dog? Can the dog form and keep a friendship with the Frenchman?
Internal: Can the Frenchman control his anger? Can the dog forgive the Frenchman in order to trust him?
Dog cannot forgive the Frenchman after the roll is thrown, Frenchman cannot overcome his anger. Therefore, neither have friendship at the end of the story.
Theme: One must control one’s anger in order to maintain friendship.
Frenchman’s Antagonist (Ext.): Dog
Dog’s Antagonist (Ext.): Frenchman
3rd Person Omniscient narrator