Poem

"Lost Brother" is the poem I picked to analyze. I liked this poem a lot and I liked the way that it was tought in class. I like the fact that we teach those in class it gives different people's perspective's on the same poem. So to begin I thought the poem was mostly about how the author feels we are losing nature. On the ACT there was a reading about the tallest tree's and how they could survive in those conditions. When I read this poem it reminded me of that story. We could lose the tree's that have been here longer then any of us have, and we wouldn't bat an eyelash. I believe in a way the author is trying to show us that nature shouldn't be treated like simple plants but like family. We need to cherish it and take care of it like we would a brother. Or "Mother" wuld be sad. "Mother" in this poem represents Mother Nature. Because she takes care of all living things like tree's. The tone of the piece is rather admiring towards his "brother" but yet sorrowful that he is lost now. I kinda wondered why people ahd cut it down, this 4,862 year old tree. Was it in the way of some new building? It wasn't important enough? And this poem shows you that this tree has a story adn has seen many more years then we have and suddenly his story is no longer important. "His company" gone, "pink mounain pennyroyal" gone, "White Angelica" gone. The "prepared to live as long as he did" line shows the authors religiius side. He obviously isn't going to live as long as that tree as a human. But he knows he can live an eternal life in God that will be longer than the tree's. The last line is the climax and sarcastic "bag of wind will cut me down." that's the big Climax it shows that yes we're cutting down tree's for no reason. And It's really sad.

Heart of Darkness

I actually kind of liked the book. The story was rather slow but the way the author wrote it was really cool. I would bet you $10 that most of the students say it was hard to read. The thing is, high school students don't like doing extra work so they won't go to the back of the book and read the notes in the back! The problem with that is that as a reader you won't be able to understand a lot of what is going on. Like Marlow's first speech about Caesar was confusing unless you looked in the back and realized who it was actually about. In the actual speech Marlow just says "he" in the back it says it was Caesar. I didn't just love having to flip to the back either but at least I understood! For this book I did the "learn to write" marking the text strategy. The author loves using metaphors and similes. I believe the first big one he says is the Congo river is like a snake. He compares the two because of the twisting and turning way of the river it's like how a snake slithers (not in a straight path). I think the other kind of way he meant it was the river is vicious like a snake can be when it bites. He uses them in describing everything! He uses elaborate detail in describing the forest like every new patch of forest he is in he describes it differently. Like the forest right when he gets to Africa, "like thinking about an enigma." (simile) and "There it is before you- smiling, frowning, inviting, grand, mean, insipid, or savage." (personification). Then 200 miles up the river, to the first base he goes to a place I call "Death Valley" where all the Congo residence go to slowly die. "These moribund shapes were as free as air-and nearly as skinny too." Here he is comparing these dying people to air. They are so little and unhealthy they have almost dwindled away to nothing. Later on in the book he describes his voyage to see Kurtz and he uses simile's and metaphors and comparisons and allusions and personifications left and right. That's what makes this book so difficult to read you have to see the comparisons and see how they connect the two things being compared. The allusions are harder I haven't ever heard of some of them unless I look in the notes and see what the real allusion is. Like "...into the gloomy circle f some Inferno." I never would have known that was an allusion unless the back notes had showed me that he was actually mentioning how "souls suffer punishments appropriate to their sins." The last writing style that I picked up on was when he would make his own prediction, through Marlow's story telling, but then say that it might or only could be true. He kind of rips the rug out from under your feet and is like it might be this but only maybe. "I did not know the motive. Perhaps he was just simply a fine fellow who stuck to his work for his own sake." Here he is talking about how Kurtz got so much Ivory and then went back into the forest and just sent the Ivory down to the river.

The Great Gatsby

I enjoyed reading this book, but only at certain points in the action. When it was slow, it seemed to drag on and on. I used the Create Trails commintating for this book. The first major plot thing was the breakfast at Daisy's. that's where you meet Jordan, Tom, Daisy, and even Gatsby is mentioned. You also find out that Tom has a misstress. The significance of this part is that it opens up the whole story. It shows how the relationship between Tom and Daisy is on the rocks, but they won't get divorced. You also meet Jordan who is the first one to ever mention Gatsby. I thought that it also kind of showed how either oblivious or sheltered Daisy was. Jorda knew all about Gatsby and how he lived next door, but Daisy didn't! The next big thing that happened was Nick met Tom's misstress. They went to New york adn you find out they have an apartment together and even the misstress has a husband. I thought it was rather strange that they both wouldn't leave their spouses! I thought of it as the smallest hint of forshadowing with Daisy adn Gatsby. Then is the party with Gatsby! The author loves describing things in great detail. Like how he characterized the party people was rather clever that way the reader what type of people they were and how they would behave at the party. Nick met Gatsby at the party but didn't even know it was him. That was a huge sign of how people didn't really go there because tey liked Gatsby it was juts for the great parties and the house. I think the author didn't introduce Gatsby sonner was because he wanted to build anticipation for who this character was. to the reader you could have thought of anything, with the big house, the grand parties, and everything in between, but then the author kind of lets you down a little. He's not that great of a guy, he is pretty ordinary: he was a soldier, went to college (but dropped out), and got his money through crime. There were a lot of smaller parts in the book, but the next really big thing was when Daisy came over to Nick's and Gatsby was there. It's their big meet since before the war. Towards the end of their meeting Gatsby shows Daisy the house. For me, that was the biggest clue to his personality flaw. He was so engrossed with his house and thought that it would impress her that he just assumes it will win her back! That sad part is I think it kind of worked. She was so shallow. Even in the flashback he lied about his past and liked her nice things that both times she was with him she fell for the materialistic Gatsby not the actually person. So Daisy and Tom come to one of his grand parties. Gatsby even goes around showing off all the famous people at his parties! Then after the party I start to get the feeling that Daisy doesn't want Gatsby but she doesn't want anyone else to have him. She has been the center of his world and she loves the attention, butwhile I was reading I got the feeling she wasn't going to pick him. The last and most important point in the book is when Gatsby, Nick, Daisy, Tom, and Jordan all go to New York for "ice cream." That's where all hell breaks loose Gatsby demands that Daisy tell Tom she doesn't love him and is leaving him. He was pushing her into a decision she wasn't ready to make! And this fight between tom adn Gatsby evovles and they throw out comments and banter back and forth about whom she loves more. Tom was being a bit hippocritical though with all those "family institutions," for he had also been cheating. So it was ok for him to cheat but not Daisy? Then everyone goes home all flustered. Even I know how people drive with their emotions. When people are mad or upset the have very very poor driving abilities!