Monday, May 16, 2011
Saturday, April 23, 2011
"Conjoined" like two onions...
When learning about marriage, it is often referred to as “happily ever after,” but as many know, that is not always the case. In her poem, “Conjoined,” Judith Minty helps reveal this idea, noting that it is hard work for two to become one peacefully and effectively. Through the use of metaphors and similes and word choice, she is able to paint the picture of the troubles of a marriage.
The speaker in the poem is unhappy with the way her marriage has resulted and explains the obstacles in a marriage. She creates a metaphor, calling marriage a deformed onion, where two separate onions begin to grow together, “a monster, actually.” Marriage is expected to be a whole, where two halves were put together to make one, not two separate entities growing on one another, ‘deformed,’ as Minty suggests. The connotation of a deformed onion does not give a very inviting nor loving idea of marriage to someone who may be looking into forming a union of matrimony of their own, yet this is what she chooses to describe it. This means that she is not happy in her marriage and knows first-hand that it is not precisely what all it is cracked up to be, nor what she expected. She knows the troubles and trials of marriage. She describes the monster of the onion, “two joined under one skin.” In this, the two onions refer to the man and wife, joined under the skin of marriage. Each onion is “flat and deformed where it pressed and grew against the other.” In relation to marriage, the two people try to grow with one another, and end up changing in order to conform. In the poem, the onions become deformed, alluding to the fact that when people change in their marriage, it is not always what they or their partner may have expected, and may not exactly be a change for the better. This leaves a rather gloomy cloud over the idea of marriage and sharing one’s life with another, which is obviously the poet’s intent.
Judith Minty also uses similes that are not very pleasant to contribute to her portrait of marriage. She describes it, “like the two-headed calf rooted in one body, fighting…” In this, the reader can imagine a two headed cow, which can be referred to as sort of a freak of nature. The two heads are separate cows, just stuck together in one body. As she says, they are forced to live that way, fighting one another constantly, starting with fighting one another for milk from their mother. In a marriage, the two cows in one body could be likened to the two people in one union or house. They are constantly fighting to get along and adapt to one another, which is a challenge, especially to Minty. Additionally, she brings up the idea that marriage is also, “like those other freaks, Chang and Eng, twins, / joined at the chest by skin and muscle, doomed / to live, even make love, together for sixty years. Chang and Eng were Siamese twins, and, like the cows, would be considered freaks of nature, possibly featured in a side show at a carnival of some sort. This depicts marriage as a sort of show at times, which needs to be put on for outsiders. The people involved need to be able to cooperate with one another in public, as Chang and Eng (or any other pair of Siamese twins) would, were they put in a show. Minty is reminding the reader that marriage is a challenge that is natural, but needs to be worked at and overcome. In the last part about the twins, she mentions that they are “doomed to live… together for sixty years.” This helps depict the fact that she and her husband are now conjoined, and cannot escape one another, and adds to the gloomy cloud she depicts with the onion, reminding the reader that marriage that she sees it as more of a burden than a blessing. She is obviously not enjoying her marriage experience, and wants others to know, before they themselves become “doomed.”
Additionally, Minty uses specific word choice to give her poem this gloomy connotation. Words such as ‘monster, ‘deformed,’ ‘accident,’ ‘doomed,’ and ‘kill’ have negative connotations to begin with. She uses them to describe the idea of marriage itself, and the joint of husband and wife. They help to add to the gloomy cloud as well, to remind the reader of the way she sees and has experienced marriage. The last stanza is a reflection of her marriage directly, and the very last line, “we cannot escape each other,” is chosen to elucidate the fact that once one has joined a marriage, it cannot be avoided, even if desired. “To sever the muscle could free one, but might kill the other.” This beginning of the stanza is chosen to describe the fact that if one person changes (or even leaves) to suit themselves, it may have a worse impact on the other person. There is no choice but to join with your partner, in ways you may not know, and it is not always pleasant.
Marriage can be the best thing in someone’s life, but it is not always as easy as it may seem. Judith Minty uses metaphors, similes, and connotative word choice in her poem, “Conjoined,” to help describe the troubles, struggles, and cloudy sides of a union between two lovers.
The speaker in the poem is unhappy with the way her marriage has resulted and explains the obstacles in a marriage. She creates a metaphor, calling marriage a deformed onion, where two separate onions begin to grow together, “a monster, actually.” Marriage is expected to be a whole, where two halves were put together to make one, not two separate entities growing on one another, ‘deformed,’ as Minty suggests. The connotation of a deformed onion does not give a very inviting nor loving idea of marriage to someone who may be looking into forming a union of matrimony of their own, yet this is what she chooses to describe it. This means that she is not happy in her marriage and knows first-hand that it is not precisely what all it is cracked up to be, nor what she expected. She knows the troubles and trials of marriage. She describes the monster of the onion, “two joined under one skin.” In this, the two onions refer to the man and wife, joined under the skin of marriage. Each onion is “flat and deformed where it pressed and grew against the other.” In relation to marriage, the two people try to grow with one another, and end up changing in order to conform. In the poem, the onions become deformed, alluding to the fact that when people change in their marriage, it is not always what they or their partner may have expected, and may not exactly be a change for the better. This leaves a rather gloomy cloud over the idea of marriage and sharing one’s life with another, which is obviously the poet’s intent.
Judith Minty also uses similes that are not very pleasant to contribute to her portrait of marriage. She describes it, “like the two-headed calf rooted in one body, fighting…” In this, the reader can imagine a two headed cow, which can be referred to as sort of a freak of nature. The two heads are separate cows, just stuck together in one body. As she says, they are forced to live that way, fighting one another constantly, starting with fighting one another for milk from their mother. In a marriage, the two cows in one body could be likened to the two people in one union or house. They are constantly fighting to get along and adapt to one another, which is a challenge, especially to Minty. Additionally, she brings up the idea that marriage is also, “like those other freaks, Chang and Eng, twins, / joined at the chest by skin and muscle, doomed / to live, even make love, together for sixty years. Chang and Eng were Siamese twins, and, like the cows, would be considered freaks of nature, possibly featured in a side show at a carnival of some sort. This depicts marriage as a sort of show at times, which needs to be put on for outsiders. The people involved need to be able to cooperate with one another in public, as Chang and Eng (or any other pair of Siamese twins) would, were they put in a show. Minty is reminding the reader that marriage is a challenge that is natural, but needs to be worked at and overcome. In the last part about the twins, she mentions that they are “doomed to live… together for sixty years.” This helps depict the fact that she and her husband are now conjoined, and cannot escape one another, and adds to the gloomy cloud she depicts with the onion, reminding the reader that marriage that she sees it as more of a burden than a blessing. She is obviously not enjoying her marriage experience, and wants others to know, before they themselves become “doomed.”
Additionally, Minty uses specific word choice to give her poem this gloomy connotation. Words such as ‘monster, ‘deformed,’ ‘accident,’ ‘doomed,’ and ‘kill’ have negative connotations to begin with. She uses them to describe the idea of marriage itself, and the joint of husband and wife. They help to add to the gloomy cloud as well, to remind the reader of the way she sees and has experienced marriage. The last stanza is a reflection of her marriage directly, and the very last line, “we cannot escape each other,” is chosen to elucidate the fact that once one has joined a marriage, it cannot be avoided, even if desired. “To sever the muscle could free one, but might kill the other.” This beginning of the stanza is chosen to describe the fact that if one person changes (or even leaves) to suit themselves, it may have a worse impact on the other person. There is no choice but to join with your partner, in ways you may not know, and it is not always pleasant.
Marriage can be the best thing in someone’s life, but it is not always as easy as it may seem. Judith Minty uses metaphors, similes, and connotative word choice in her poem, “Conjoined,” to help describe the troubles, struggles, and cloudy sides of a union between two lovers.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Comic book and crossword puzzles.
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/bassr/218/projects/oliver/MausbyAO.htm
Forgive my blog for being late, please.
I found this article, which is apparently an electronic essay, discussing MAUS by Art Spiegelman.
The essay speaks about three different subjects pertaining to the graphic novel: Techniques of Remembering the Holocaust by Second Generation Jews, The Unusual Structure of MAUS, and The Holocaust as a Demonstration of Man's Brutal Nature.
In the first topic, the author, Antonio S. Oliver discusses the widely known theory that the Holocaust may not ever be properly represented, due to its grave tragic history that killed so many, and because of this, many try to still remember it with respect.
He praises Art Spiegelman’s work in narratives through the graphic novels of MAUS and MAUS II, by saying that Spiegelman complements his father's narrative by presenting a portrayal of the life and struggles of second generation Jewish people whose existences are extremely influenced by the Holocaust despite not being born during its occurrence, due to the tragic loss of family members to the Nazi reign. Oliver says that this trait separates MAUS from other Holocaust narratives, because their limits can only offer one side of the story, one view of the event, one version of the pain.
The second topic of Oliver’s electronic essay discusses the interesting and unusual structure of MAUS itself. For being a graphic novel, which is not seen often, it makes it interesting enough, and even more so for dealing with such a subject as the Holocaust and Jewish entrapment in Nazi concentration camps. Also, because of Spiegelman’s use of animals such as cat and mouse to portray German and Jews, Oliver finds deeper meaning and praises it, since the Nazis often referred to the Jews as the ‘vermin of society.’
The third topic of Oliver’s essay talks about The Holocaust as a Demonstration of Man's Brutal Nature. In this, he relates the millions of deaths linked with the Holocaust to the deaths of the Nagasaki Bombing. He relates them not only by the deaths, but by the recollection of memories from the survivors of either experience, which typically include disgust toward the brutalities that had occurred.
Forgive my blog for being late, please.
I found this article, which is apparently an electronic essay, discussing MAUS by Art Spiegelman.
The essay speaks about three different subjects pertaining to the graphic novel: Techniques of Remembering the Holocaust by Second Generation Jews, The Unusual Structure of MAUS, and The Holocaust as a Demonstration of Man's Brutal Nature.
In the first topic, the author, Antonio S. Oliver discusses the widely known theory that the Holocaust may not ever be properly represented, due to its grave tragic history that killed so many, and because of this, many try to still remember it with respect.
He praises Art Spiegelman’s work in narratives through the graphic novels of MAUS and MAUS II, by saying that Spiegelman complements his father's narrative by presenting a portrayal of the life and struggles of second generation Jewish people whose existences are extremely influenced by the Holocaust despite not being born during its occurrence, due to the tragic loss of family members to the Nazi reign. Oliver says that this trait separates MAUS from other Holocaust narratives, because their limits can only offer one side of the story, one view of the event, one version of the pain.
The second topic of Oliver’s electronic essay discusses the interesting and unusual structure of MAUS itself. For being a graphic novel, which is not seen often, it makes it interesting enough, and even more so for dealing with such a subject as the Holocaust and Jewish entrapment in Nazi concentration camps. Also, because of Spiegelman’s use of animals such as cat and mouse to portray German and Jews, Oliver finds deeper meaning and praises it, since the Nazis often referred to the Jews as the ‘vermin of society.’
The third topic of Oliver’s essay talks about The Holocaust as a Demonstration of Man's Brutal Nature. In this, he relates the millions of deaths linked with the Holocaust to the deaths of the Nagasaki Bombing. He relates them not only by the deaths, but by the recollection of memories from the survivors of either experience, which typically include disgust toward the brutalities that had occurred.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)