Write about your thoughts regarding any of the fiction or non-fiction covered in class. The literature being discussed in class, the several iterations of the Cinderella tale, has provided an opportunity to recognize structural familiarity across writing. I for one, as someone who pursues organization in my life, appreciate the order amidst the chaos. In all of the variations of the classic tale, certain elements persist, from paternal relationships to oppression within ones home. Exploring this structuralist approach, I recalled Joseph Campbell's The Hero's Journey, in which even one of the most renowned literature professors approached storytelling at its most fundamental level. Campbell argued that the many tales of man in all of their variations are derived from a mono-myth–a basic framework that dictates the progression of plot and the development of characters. As Mrs. Fusaro said, no story is a new story. From the Greek Rhodopis in the 6th century BCE to Walt Disney's modernization in the 1950s, we always find a lone Cinderella figure endeavoring towards a happily ever after under the boot of her oppressors, whether her father, mother, or sisters. In Charles Perrault's Donkeyskin, a young maiden flees from her father's lust after the death of her mother. Just as in the narration of the Brothers Grimm or in the Greek Rhodopis, Donkeyskin eventually finds security in a royal masculine figure, perhaps a prince or a king. Towards the end, an example of departure between tales can be observed. In the Grimm ending, the step-sisters are pecked blind by doves. Similarly, in Yeh-Sien, the wicked mother and sister are stoned, whereas Perrault's Cinderella features a grand reconciliation between the princess and her father. While the different tales seem to fit into some formula, I believe that it is in these distinctions where the beauty of their literature lies. Reflect on any new information you have learned in English class by considering how that learning influences your critical perception. I've noticed that my perception of literature outside of fairytales and the class setting has begun to be influenced by the observation of patterns and familiarities discussed in class. On days of SATs, finals, or such academic assessments, I often find it helpful to get my brain going by reading a few hours prior to the exam. The morning before my SAT on Saturday, I flipped to a random page in Mythology by Edith Hamilton, and found myself reading about the tale of Cupid and Psyche. As I read I recognized an axes of transformation that involved turbulence in emotion resolving into stability. Cupid and Psyche are enthralled in a forbidden love against the aggression of a jealous Venus. After a period of anonymity, Cupid rescues his lover from the punishment of Venus and pleas for Zeus' protection. Venus is dealt with and Psyche is immortalized, leaving the impassioned couple at peace. Additionally, our work with literary perspectives and critical theory has left me with a similar habit to recognize particular tropes in writing. Through my research, I stumbled across Carl Jung's attribution of 4 predominant archetypes in character psychology. I've begin to recognize that much of literature arises from the resolution of conflicts in the Persona, what we present to the world, and the Shadow, what we obscure from it. In addition, Characters throughout popular literature often find themselves at odds with their feminine and masculine attributes (the Anima/Animus). As authors depict characters approaching a resolution of these conflicts, Jung's concept of self (the happily ever after) can be seen played out In my reading of Cherry by Nico Walker, the polarity of the Persona and the Shadow are found as a veteran and bank robber struggles to maintain his relationships with his girlfriend, Emily, under the perils of addiction and PTSD. His efforts to keep a grip for himself and sanity for his loved ones decomposes as a heroin addiction hijacks his life. Recalling these commonalities in novels I've read months ago as well as in fairytales I'm reading today testifies to the extent of universality in literature–something I've only now begun to recognize and value. How is what you’re learning applied to any other classes/the world around you? I once thought of folklore as the stories of ancient peoples that carried their traditions through pen and tongue. While I wasn't incorrect, I placed an unnatural limitation on what could and could not be defined as folklore. As we discussed the ability of mass media, memes, and the internet as records of society's humors, obsessions, and politics, I began to redefine my understanding of folklore. From then on (just as I assume Mrs. Fusaro intended), I found myself thinking about how every meme I swiped past, every news article I skimmed through, and every reference to pop culture I encountered had the potential to document the customs and beliefs of people from across continents, brought together through a digital bridge. Taking Macroeconomics this year, I might not be studying traditional history, but I do recognize the ability for fairytales and mythology to document the history of a group of people. Let's take Homer's Odyssey for example. Perhaps there were no enchantresses nor cyclopes, but the tales of fantasy conjured in Homer's mind involve a reality that offers us a glimpse into the Mediterranean voyage endured by Odysseus between Troy and Ithaca. As a finance major, perhaps I won't be studying history in my schooling in the future, but any wise man lives every day as a historian, learning from what came before him. For this reason, I believe that my newfound appreciation of folklore as a medium of history will prove truly valuable.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.