Luis’s Comments (group member since Jan 20, 2015)

Luis’s comments from the Morales 2341 Spring 2015 Class MW group.

Suzette wrote: "She had no loyalty towards her husband. i would say that yes, it was immoral, It was not right for Calixta to do what she did by any means, She was married, she had a sexual encounter during a stor..."

I agree (along with the rest of society) that cheating on your spouse is wrong. At the same time she is sexually repressed and the first opportunity she had she slept with the first man she came across. Does this justify adultery? No, there is nothing to justify that. Is she solely at fault? No she is not, Alcee also cheated on his spouse. It also seem that Alcee will continue to pursue Calixta again in the near future.

The line “So the storm passed and everyone was happy” does show that there is no moral closure. An immoral act has occurred and it is never dealt with. Calixta and Alcee committed adultery and go on their merry way with no remorse. After the adulterous act, Alcee writes to his wife Clarisse and tells her to stay in Biloxi for another month. Rather than wishing she was at home, Clarisse is happy to be away and “their intimate conjugal life was something which she was more than willing to forego for a while”. When Calixta’s husband Bobinot, arrives at his home he is worried about what his wife will say when she sees her son’s pants are muddy. It seems that no one is happy being married. Adultery is an act can destroy a marriage if their spouses ever found out. The phrase “ignorance is bliss” seems to apply in this story. Does immorality in marriage still apply today as it did in the late 1800s? Yes it does. In other societies, marriage is seen as being more for convenience rather than love, in the US marriage is still seen as sacred. In society today, a person is still frowned upon whenever they stray from the moral path.

Nancy wrote: "The short story "The Flea" talks about how the author describes a flea sucking up blood from a man and a woman and comparing it to having sex. It describes how this little flea is sucking up the bl..."

Although I wouldn't do it, I can see how the speaker sees a flea as a vessel for having two lives joined as one. Blood is what gives everyone the ability to live. If two individual's blood are mixed then (according to the speaker) makes them bonded for eternity. When the woman killed the flea, she killed their togetherness. She killed it and sinned. According to the speaker's reasoning, if she can sin by murdering, then she can sin by having premarital sex.

Rogerio wrote: "“Wild Nights-Wild Nights!”
Is a poem about women’s desire to reunite with an old lover? The first couple of lines introduces the speaker, remembering her lover. She does not need any instrument of..."

Very interesting interpretation. It is very different from other Dickinson poems. She definitely broke away from how society thought women should behave morally. According to biography, Dickinson had distanced herself from religion and lived as a hermit, but was still expected to live within the social norms.

In the poem "The Flea" by John Donne, the speaker is utilizing a flea to symbolize the joining of his blood and that of a woman that he is trying to convince to have sex with him. “And in this flea our two bloods mingle be”, the speaker tries to reason with the woman stating that their blood is joined inside the flea. The speaker states that the flea represents the woman and himself and that the flea is their “marriage temple”. Since her “parents grudge” or do not condone their courtship, he knows that she will not go to bed with him without convincing. The woman intends to kill the flea and he pleads with her stating that it will be a sin to murder three lives, his, hers, and the flea’s. The woman goes ahead and kills the flea. “Cruel and sudden, hast thou since purpled thy nail in blood of innocence”, states the woman has murdered the flea. He argues that the only thing that the flea has done is suck a drop of blood from both of them. In the line, “Just so much honor, when thou yield’st to me, will waste, as this flea’s death took life from thee”, the speaker states that killing the flea is as much of a sin as going to bed with the speaker.

Suzette wrote: "Sammy quitting from A&P is out of rebelious behavior. I think Sammy was clearly trying to impress the girls after they were embarrassed clearly because of their lack of clothing.The manager does ex..."

I believe that Sammy made the right choice. He felt that life would now be different because he is finally making adult decisions and standing up for himself. As an adult, he will no longer be under the umbrella of his parents.

Shanda wrote: "I feel as though Sammy quitting is both a statement and a form of rebellion. When the manager Lengel tells the girls "he wants them decently dressed when they come in the store." The Queenie speaks..."

I agree that Sammy is standing up for himself, but the enemy is not the manager. It is what the manager represents. He represents the older generation and the conservative and oppressive views.

Sammy quitting his job is a modest form of rebellion. The story A&P was published in 1961, a time when social views clashed over the appropriateness of ideas, dress, appearance, race, and social standing. Sammy is rebelling against the conservative generation, in this story represented by Mr. Lengel. Queenie and the other two teenage girls were dressed, in Mr. Lengel’s opinion, too risqué to be walking in public. Mr. Lengel tells the girls “We want you dressed decently when you come in here” to which the girls responded “We are decent”. In my opinion, this short story is a form of rebellion by the youth of the time. As with any generation, youths asks, “Who do these adults think they are?” Sammy’s actions are a rebellion against the authoritarian views of his parent’s generation. He refers to the others in the store as “sheep” and “house slaves” because they all follow the standards set by society. Stuck in a dead end job, Sammy does not like the idea being held to a standard that he doesn't agree with. When Sammy says he quits, Mr. Lengel responds with “It is they who are embarrassing us”. Sammy folds his apron and “their” bow tie and leaves the store with his new found freedom from the “oppressive” older generation. From the outside of the store, he see the life he has just left. He sees Mr. Lengel standing at his register and felt “how hard the world was going to be to me hereafter”. Sammy is now a rebel because he does not blindly follow society’s expectant behaviors.

Hilda wrote: "“The House on Mango Street” by Sandra Cisneros starts off with the narrator talking about where she has lived. Esperanza and her family have moved many times. She describes how they no longer live ..."

Hispanics like other minorities strive to achieve a better life, but at the same time are very judgmental of other Hispanics. The house, in my opinion, is a status symbol of who she is and where she comes from.

Shanda wrote: "Esperanza is a young latina girl from a large family which is fairly common in this culture. She even states "By the time we got to Mango Street we were six-Mama,Papa, Carlos, Kiki, my sister, Nenn..."

I also believe the house will act as a form of motivation for Esperanza. With the proper motivation, she can achieve a great deal more than what her parents achieved. After all, isn't a better life what parents want for their children.

All Hispanic families has a story similar to the short story “The House on Mango Street”. It is a story of the American dream. The narrator of this short story is a young girl who dreams of, one day, living a house her family can call their own. A house that she will not be ashamed of when others ask where she lives. Although it is not stated in the text, one can assume the narrator is either a first or second generation immigrant from a Latin American country and from a working class or lower middle class family. Her parents, like many immigrant parents, have dreams of living the American Dream. The American dream is proudly owning a nice house, nice car, financial stability, and having their children live a life much better than their parents. The narrator states one day a nun asked where she lived, “There. I had to look to where she pointed—the third floor, the paint peeling, wooden bars Papa had nailed on the windows so we wouldn't fall out. You live there? The way she said it she made me feel like nothing”. The narrator is not happy with the appearance of her house. Her family had moved several times, to make room for a new sibling. Her parents, after much struggle, where finally able to buy a house. She describes the house as “not the way they told it at all”. A house is a building that can be seen by everyone and people usually judge the family that live in it by its appearance. The house represents her tight knit family, traditions, language, and heritage. “I knew I had to have a house. A real house. One I could point to. But this isn't it. The house on Mango Street isn't it.” She like many Hispanic children had decided to abandon her roots in pursuit of the American dream, so in her mind, she will never be ashamed of where she calls home.

Angel wrote: "Even though everybody thought that the writer in "Porphyria's Lover" didn’t know that he was going to kill her, and did it out of impulse, I think otherwise. I think that it was premeditated, and h..."

I agree that Fortunato's murder was premeditated, but I believe Porphyria's murder was "a crime of passion". It seems that her murder was triggered by her declaration of love.

Shanda wrote: "While both have the persona of a killer they both killed for totally different reasons. In Porphyria's Lover I believe he did not want his young lover to fall in love with someone else so easily an..."

I agree that both are murderers and it is quite obvious they both have psychological issues. I believe it would be more appropriate to say that Montressor murdered Fortunato because of pride rather than revenge. Montressor killed him because of an insult.

Besides Montressor and Porphyria’s lover being guilty of murder, they have very few things in common. Both murderers have obvious psychological issues and are male. They come of different standings in society. Montressor is wealthy but what today would be called upper class. Though the information provided by the poem is limited, it does not seem to that Porphyria’s lover is a wealthy person either. Montressor lives in a “palazzo” or a very large house with servants, while Porphyria’s lover lives in a cottage. Porphyria’s lover is very possessive and fears losing her. Mix possessiveness and psychological instability and you get a woman who is murdered by her own hair. Montressor is every bit as crazy as Porphyria’s lover but his motive for murder is pride. He murdered because he felt he was insulted. Of the two, I feel that Montressor most unstable of the characters. It takes a great deal of planning to lure a person into the vaults chain him up to a wall and then build a wall to hide his corpse. Obviously he has done this before since there were other human remains in the vault.

Monique wrote: "I believe that he is escorting the speaker to paradise because the poem didn’t give off the vibe of deceit. Usually the character of death is seen as a dark entity for obvious reasons. Being as dea..."

Yes, the poem was not dark. It was very calm just like the carriage right the author uses as she is transportated into the afterlife.

Shanda wrote: "I believe the poem shows death kindly escorting her to paradise. The very first line of the poem is "because I could not stop for death" if you think about this we live our lives everyday we never ..."

I too saw the children, fields, and sunset as different phases of her life. I guess that in death you are no longer made "busy" by the little things in life and you should enjoy life no matter how long it lasts. In the end, life will always seem too short.

While I could see how others might interpret death as someone who deceives her and robs her life from her, I disagree. I believe that the author has accepted death as an inevitable trip that we all must take. The line “Because I could not stop for Death--He kindly stopped for me” seems to say that a person has little time for much in their lives, and death always finds a way for a person to make time for it. The poem uses a carriage as her conveyance to eternity, making depicting different moments in one’s life. Children in the playground signify childhood, while fertile fields and the setting sun signify adulthood and old age. “The Dews drew quivering and chill” states she feels that lack of warmth, or death. “We paused before a House that seemed A Swelling of the Ground—The Roof was scarcely visible—The Cornice-in the Ground”, describes her new temporary home, a grave. A cornice is the horizontal plane of house, so when she states it’s in the ground, it signifies the house is in the ground, hence her grave. The line, “Feels shorter than the Day I first surmised the Horses’ heads were towards Eternity” in my opinion states life is short and death is forever. In the poem, the carriage heads off to eternity, which mean life is short death is eternal, one must enjoy life.

Angel wrote: "What I think Cynthia Ozick is trying to say is that we all go through life lying to our self. We are too distracted, as we should be, on aspects of our lives that we forget the truth, and most cert..."

Begining the novella with the funeral was much better than if it were written in chronological order. You comments are spot on, we all lie to ourselfs to make us feel better about ourselves. Most of use will not realize this until we are on our deathbed.

Shanda wrote: "I am in total agreement with Cynthia Ozick Ivan Ilych led his whole life as a lie. He got his education following in his father's footsteps so he would could get the same job. His father got him a ..."

Very interesting in associating his illness with depression. There is no doubt that he was depressed and lonely towards the end of his life. Perhaps if was closer with his family rather than drowning himself with work he would have been much happier.

I agree with Cynthia Ozick, the novella “The death of Ivan Ilych” was about the discovery of what is the meaning of life and how his life was a lie. The meaning of life, varies from person to person, what is meaningful for me might not be to you. Ivan Ilych, upon his death bed, came to the realization that he never lived a full life. He had a family, a nice job, good standing in the community, but has not felt true happiness since he was a young boy. It was on his deathbed that he felt “a loneliness that could not be more complete anywhere—not at the bottom of the sea, not deep down in the earth—of late in this fearful loneliness Ivan Ilych had lived only in imagination in the past”. The rest of the world, including his family, has continued living their life. His family has forgotten about Ivan with the exception of a few courtesy visits and gestures. The doorman, wife, children, and doctor continued their daily routines as if Ivan was more of a nuisance than as a loved family member. Ivan never lived his life that way he wanted, instead he lived life the way others wanted him to. He lied to himself by thinking he was happy and played a large role in other's lives. Sadly, it is too late for Ivan to change his ways.