TB Recio's Blog

Drama Essay Teaser

tbrecio — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:06:25 +0000

According to the schedule, we had a workshop for a rough draft of our drama essay on Wednesday. In case you hadn’t noticed, I was absent. (I’ll elaborate on that in my next blog.) So you guys didn’t have the pleasure at catching a preview of my final product. My essay is coming along. Perhaps I should say essays. I’ll come back to that. I’ve chosen to compare and contrast the theme of gender expectations. I have a close friend who has a Master’s in Woman’s Studies and is tactful on matters such as the glass ceiling. So I guess I have a catbird seat in a way. Unfortunately I’ve hit an obstacle. I don’t know on which two plays I should base my essay. I’m sticking with “A Doll’s House” as one of them. I found Nora Helmer to be the most realistic character in all three plays. I’m unsure why, but I empathize with her more than any of the other protagonists.

As of now I’m leaning more towards “Othello”. I find Shakespeare interesting but frustrating. I’ve read this play twice and I’m still very unclear on many of the passages. I can’t help but feel like I’m missing out on something.

I didn’t care much for “The Glass Menagerie.” I didn’t like the characters. I also found myself bored while reading the pages of this play. However, the symbolism was extraordinary. If I had chosen to review symbolism, this play would be more feasible.

On a side note, I was impressed by the emergence of sexism and racism in this section of the semester. I honestly believe the world, particularly this country, would be a better place if everyone saw themself [I'm not 100% sure if that's correct grammar] as equal to everyone else. And by shedding light on other’s prejudice, It becomes indisputable that such opinions are not only naïve and ignorant, but downright pathetic.

A Doll’s House

tbrecio — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 05:31:34 +0000

I recently read the selection by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. Actually, I pretty much forced myself to read it. You may ask why I chose to use “forced”. Well, I read Ibsen’s mini-biography and it wasn’t all that captivating. Also, I didn’t like the title. I tried to forget it while reading. Don’t get me wrong. I’m for feminism, but the words “A Doll’s House” weren’t appealing. It sounded, how shall I say, narcissistic and cliché. Like a self-indulgent narration falling on my deaf ears. — I know, that’s way too prejudice, but that predisposition set me up for a nice surprise. It was better than I expected. It started out like most fairy tales end. A happily married couple illustrated through flirty dialogue. The setting was the home of Mr. and Mrs. Helmer and their three children. Although their names were mentioned, the children themselves didn’t have any dialogue or make an obvious appearance in the play. I thought that was strange. Upon continued reading, I observed Nora, our protagonist, the systematically employed housewife. She’s a bit of a tortured soul. Past heartfelt attempts to preserve her lifestyle have led to the major conflict of this story. If this play had an antagonist, that character would be Nils Krogstad, I think. I’m unsure if he is supposed to be a tragic villain, but I see him as fickle human being whose actions are entirely dependent on others. Although his resolution has merit, I found it unfitting. While I read Mrs. Linde’s confession to him, I truly thought it was mere deception. The doctor was probably the most interesting character to me. While the best part of the play was Nora’s reaction after being confronted by Torvald, her husband. During his outburst, she had an epiphany I did not see coming. It was like she became aware of the wool pulled over eyes. “You’ve never loved me. You just thought it was pleasant to be in love with me.” (p.1605) captures the brutal truth of her realization of inferiority in the life she’s been trying so restlessly toI recently read the selection by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. Actually, I pretty much forced myself to read it. You may ask why I chose to use “forced”. Well, I read Ibsen’s mini-biography and it wasn’t all that captivating. Also, I didn’t like the title. I tried to forget it while reading. Don’t get me wrong. I’m for feminism, but the words “A Doll’s House” weren’t appealing. It sounded, how shall I say, narcissistic and cliché. Like a self-indulgent narration falling on my deaf ears. — I know, that’s way too prejudice, but that predisposition set me up for a nice surprise. It was better than I expected. It started out like most fairy tales end. A happily married couple illustrated through flirty dialogue. The setting was the home of Mr. and Mrs. Helmer and their three children. Although their names were mentioned, the children themselves didn’t have any dialogue or make an obvious appearance in the play. I thought that was strange. Upon continued reading, I observed Nora, our protagonist, the systematically employed housewife. She’s a bit of a tortured soul. Past heartfelt attempts to preserve her lifestyle have led to the major conflict of this story. If this play had an antagonist, that character would be Nils Krogstad, I think. I’m unsure if he is supposed to be a tragic villain, but I see him as fickle human being whose actions are entirely dependent on others. Although his resolution has merit, I found it unfitting. While I read Mrs. Linde’s confession to him, I truly thought it was mere deception. The doctor was probably the most interesting character to me. While the best part of the play was Nora’s reaction after being confronted by Torvald, her husband. During his outburst, she had an epiphany I did not see coming. It was like she became aware of the wool pulled over eyes. “You’ve never loved me. You just thought it was pleasant to be in love with me.” (p.1605) captures the brutal truth of her realization of inferiority in the life she’s been trying so restlessly to protect.

protect.

It started out like most fairy tales end. A happily married couple illustrated through flirty dialogue. The setting was the home of Mr. and Mrs. Helmer and their three children. Although their names were mentioned, the children themselves didn’t have any dialogue or make an obvious appearance in the play. I thought that was strange. Upon continued reading, I observed Nora, our protagonist, the systematically employed housewife. She’s a bit of a tortured soul. Past heartfelt attempts to preserve her lifestyle have led to the major conflict of this story. If this play had an antagonist, that character would be Nils Krogstad, I think. I’m unsure if he is supposed to be a tragic villain, but I see him as fickle human being whose actions are entirely dependent on others. Although his resolution has merit, I found it unfitting. While I read Mrs. Linde’s confession to him, I truly thought it was mere deception.

The doctor was probably the most interesting character to me. While the best part of the play was Nora’s reaction after being confronted by Torvald, her husband. During his outburst, she had an epiphany I did not see coming. It was like she became aware of the wool pulled over eyes. “You’ve never loved me. You just thought it was pleasant to be in love with me.” (p.1605) captures the brutal truth of her realization of inferiority in the life she’s been trying so restlessly to protect.

Poem Analysis

tbrecio — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:06:27 +0000

I was rummaging through some online poetry. A bit frustrated from reading inert poems which left me with no distinguishable trace of interest, I happened upon this poem, December Night by W.S. Merwin. The setting is what first hooked me. I’ve always been always intrigued by cold seasons. Don’t get me wrong. I love summertime: Relaxing on a beach, isolated from all the worries of the world, basking nonchalantly in the sun– That’s a nice slice of heaven, but there’s something about the ambience of the the cooler half of the year that electrifies my senses. I think the setting gives this poem a preemptive charge. Furthermore, Merwin brilliantly illustrates how the crisp coldness is amplified after the sun vanishes beneath the horizon.

The first two stanzas present the ferocity of the winter wind. How it’s potency not only causes plant life to freeze and die, but to die so fiercely that their death creates a atmosphere of it’s own. It’s almost as if these sudden, unanticipated deaths turn their dwellings into a mausoleum. An Eerie thought if widely applied.

In the third stanza we become aware that not all life has ended. We hear the chirping of birds. I believe this could be a symbol of our bodies shivering or beginning to freeze “kept awake by the moon”. Initially I thought this was meant to present a moment of enlightenment, I now infer from the final line that mankind is oblivious to it. We see it in no relation as a threat to our well-being, merely as an unfortunate event to organisms around us.

I enjoyed this poem from the start, because it baited me with a curious impression of seasons. Once I felt captivated by the setting, I established a humanistic disposition. Only to come to realize the narrator’s point of view was although profound and conscious, not in praise of mankind.

tbrecio — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:01:42 +0000

I haven’t been maintaining my blog, but that’s about to change. It’s probably unorthodox to post a blog beginning with a confession, but I felt I had to. It’s been over a month since my last entry and I shouldn’t have let that happen. So now begins a better sustained broadcast.

I know you are but what am I?

tbrecio — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 14:28:21 +0000

Salutations! My name is Travis and this is my attempt at explaining myself. I’m convinced that my efforts are futile and I will portray myself inaccurately, but I shall do my best. A fruitless endeavor is still an endeavor, and as they say it’s about the journey not the destination. So in that loony way, this undertaking will be as good as that of any experienced auto-biographer. Well I’m a male in my early twenties. I’m not sure of my ethnicity but I doubt that matters. I’d be myself even if I was someone else. (If that makes any sense.) Stereotypes should be ignored. Statistics should be defied. I’d like to think of myself as unique, original, and unconventional. I’m not easily amused. Simplicity rarely satisfies me. I believe if your work can be easily copied, it should be. I have an unflinching obsession to detail. Which is unfortunate because I’m a perfectionist in every thing I do. I like to figure out things and find solutions to problems. Mysteries intrigue me. I’m also very into music. When I hear a song, my ears don’t extrapolate a single tune. I take in all the rhythms, melodies, harmonies, bass-lines, etc. separately. I think the lyrics in songs are highly overrated. Especially in popular music. I have a terrible short term memory, so whenever I learn something new I tend to apply it to my lifestyle. Otherwise, it will probably leave as quickly as it came. I’m sure I left out quite a bit of significant tidbits but I think that’s good enough for now.