Witty Whitman

http://documents.nytimes.com/walt-whitman-and-abraham-lincoln

This looks like an header to newspaper. I don't know the significance of the title but I have heard that Whitman was a total hipster and eccentric. This could be significant because it could be a self description or a description of Lincoln. The introspective nature of poetry directly correlates with introspective nature of the poet and his definition of self will be the most evident in his art.  This picture in particular lacks color, looks very stark, and jagged. And looks very ordinary.  His aim was to reach the ordinary man and the publication of a newspaper could be expansive and revolutionary.

The New-York Saturday Press was a literary weekly edited by Henry Clap and was described as "pitches into nonsense of all kinds in its sharp, sententious, French way....."  this reinforces my hypothesis that the paper was eccentric.  But it doesn't really talk about the design except that the picture is a sketch.

The American Dream

I don't want to sound uber-critical or negative but one part of me thinks the American Dream is a farce. I think it was created and propagated to make people be compliant. It is expected of us to work until we're old, but what if we can't? Or to simply not to, does that make me less American. But another part of me understands the optimism of new people coming to this country wanting to create a better future, but it has exploitative aspects. Therefore, I don't support the standardized notion of the American Dream. I would describe the American Dream as just that, a fantasy that COULD be attainable if it is followed through this standardized scope.

If I was to define the American Dream, it could be attained by any person of any background, lineage, or nationality. It would be place in which any individual has the freedom to learn, live, and create as they please,, and will comfortably without the fear of having this freedom seized. The American Dream will be collective more than individualistic. I know this sound idealistic but I think it is possible if everyone tries to understand the implications and outcomes of our actions and also try to place the importance of one's selfish ambitions.

My definition of wealth, is the accumulation of valuable possessions. What one finds valuable is different in each person but what I personally find valuable are things, ideas, people, that enrich my experience of life. I feel the general definition of wealth is monetary, and I can understand why, in a lot of respects, money makes life easier and people want reduce as much suffering in their lives as they can. But hardships, do build character. This is no excuse for mass poverty across the country and globe. This can be attested to the ultra-rich draining the resources and exploiting workers. I mean, if you have a 401k plan and earn six figures, I don't think you're directly responsible to global poverty but billionaires and people who have the economic power to fuel wars and propagate corruption have to much control of the quality of people's lives. I think people who are well-off or living comfortably demonize people in poverty because they feel that they  "deserve" to be living in whatever predicament that they're in. I think this is directly correlated to the standardized notion of the
American Dream where if you work hard, you get rewarded. This is simply not the case. For example, my Great-great grandparents were slaves and then they were sharecroppers and had almost no monetary wealth to show for it. But they did live rich lives, and accrued enriching experiences. But they were poor. So it is important to look at how institutions and systems are used to maintain hegemonic power over monetary wealth and the distribution of it.

The Importance of Translations

#1:As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.

• this sentence looks very choppy because it lacks punctuation
• the word "insect" as opposed to bug makes the sentence sound formal, "gigantic" does the same thing
• "insect" has a more scientiffic connotation, and thus makes the situation appear more serious and almost scary.
• putting the "as gregor samsa awoke" in the beginning of the sentence builds suspense.               #2:Gregory Samsa woke from uneasy dreams one morning to find himself changed into a giant bug.
• this sentence looks the most informal which makes it easier for myself as an audience member to feel immersed, by creating a mood of familiarity
• the word "changed" as opposed to transformed makes the sentence less formal as well as the use "bug"
• placing the action at the beginning of the sentence makes it anti-climactic and reads dull

#3:When Gregor Samsa awoke from troubled dreams one morning he found he had been transformed in his bed into an enormous bug.

• the word "troubled" makes the audience feel more concerned because its connotation is more severe than uneasy, which is used in the other translations.
• the word "enormous" has the same effect as using the word as "gigantic" because they are in the same caliber of vocabulary                                                                                             #4:One morning, upon awakening from agitated dreams, Gregor Samsa found himself, in his bed, transformed into a monstrous vermin.
• "agitated" is different from other translations and makes it seem like the dreams were annoying more than scary
• the punctuation is very different as well, the is a heavy use of commas which creates a greater sense of suspense
• "monstrous vermin" is very descriptive and advanced compared to "giant bug" and "gigantic insect" leaving the reader with a sense of severity of the situation

Word choice, syntax, punctuation, and imagery are all transformative with regards to meaning. Each element of is chosen specifically by the authors and translators to get across a certain message and to and to conscientiously portray what they think and feel.  Syntax, punctuation, word choice, and imagery not only portray what the author thinks and feels, but it promotes their audience to empathize with the author.  Punctuation and syntax are a little trickier to identify when first reading a sentence and may not be as easy to empathize with, compared to word choice and imagery because they are so compelling and intense. All of these elements are markers that highlight the author's intention and therefore make the experience of reading enriched.

Translation is difficult when trying to interpret the intent and and purpose of the author's word choice and structure because we as readers impose our personal biases when interpreting and causes a discordance and variation of interpretation. The variance causes confusion about the meaning the text but also leaves it open to discussion and deliberation. It's a good thing that there is no homogeneity when it comes to interpretation because it promotes diversity in evaluation of written works.

A Rhetorical Analysis

"Freebie"

Double Indemnity

Walter Neff is a man who justifies his actions by deriving them from a place of charity or protection even if they're not beneficial. The whole movie is based around him wanting to save a damsel in distress my killing an innocent man. He was persuaded into killing Mr. Dietrich by his false characterization provided by Phyllis who was manipulative. This paints Walter as weak because he is easily influenced and lacks the ability to distinguish between a moral and just decision of ridding a woman of an emotional abusive husband and the heinous crime of taking another man's life. He is weak because he lets emotion cloud his judgment. He cared more about the fantasy of running off with a woman he hardly knows than risking a life of imprisonment. The facade of a strong man crumbled when he was asking constant questions and showing Phyllis that he was unsure and nervous about the act of killing. This gave Phyllis the  "upper-hand' in a sense because it solidified her position of control, which Walter thought he had at the start of the movie. Phyllis later turns this around at the end of the movie when Walter accuses her of planning her husband's death before they had ever met.  He claimed that she was evil and rotten to try to make her feel guilt and manipulate her into going to the cops. Neff is portrayed as weak and manipulative.

 

His relationship with women really defines who he is. The other prevalent woman character is Lola. They had a weird relationship, where he was really protective. Mind you, he only knew her for a short period of time. Both Phyllis and Lola enabled an equal amount of action from him. Lola was like the angel on Walter's shoulder and Phyllis, a devil where he always sided with Phyllis. The key difference was that the enabling of action occurred at different times.  Phyllis at the beginning, ,and Lola at the end.  He wanted to prove to them that he had their best intentions at heart. In Phyllis's case, it was making sure she got the insurance money and for Lola, providing guidance. It appeared that he wanted both women to be successful in their futures because he was so involved in the intimate decisions they chose. I believe that Walter Neff should be viewed as an average man who committed transgressions and  tried to resolve them once he understood the extent of malicious intent of his co-conspirator