Saturday, October 22, 2011

Journal #7 William Cullen Bryant’s “To a Waterfowl” (p.151) and Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Raven” (p.181)


Read the selections and write a detailed response to the following:

1. Compare/contrast the different views of nature that are being presented in the poems. Refer to the list of classical and romantic characteristics and provide specific examples from the poems to support your analysis.


William Cullen Bryant’s “To a Waterfowl” poem portrays the view of nature in ways that mostly reflect the views and thoughts of the writers of the Neo-Classical era. Edgar Allen Poe’s, “The Raven”, portrays the view of nature while reflecting the thoughts and writings of other Romanticism writers. “To a Waterfowl” portrays more transcendentalism than the Raven. The waterfowl is intuitive and majestic. The raven is irrational, evil, and weird.

The tone of “To a Waterfowl is calm and serene. Characteristics of Neo-Classical writing include harmony, balance, and order. These describe the style of the poem. The poem reflects the typical state of nature. Nature is sometimes unpredictable and unbalanced, but when nature is viewed in the Classical way, it is viewed as the Garden of Eden. Lines 2 and 3 of the poem state “while glow the heavens with the last steps of day, Far, through their rosy depths, dost thou pursue”. The lines demonstrate the neo-classical era writing style. The author portrays the setting as a sunset which is classical, beautiful nature. The world is in perfect balance when the sun sets.

The tone of “The Raven” and its setting is opposite of the tone and setting of “To A Waterfowl”. The Raven is dark, horrid, and gloomy compared to the peacefulness and serenity of the waterfowl. The Romantic style of writing is emotional, imaginative, and irrational. Every aspect of the raven seems to be irrational, such as when the raven flies into the home of the narrator and perches itself on the ledge and the speaker begins to talk to the bird. The repetitiveness of the words “nevermore” shows home gloomy and irrational this poem and story is. The tone of the poem is dull, bleak, and overall scary. The very first line, “once upon a midnight dreary…”, sets the tone perfectly because the rest of the poem connotes death and dreadfulness. The setting of the poem is in the speaker’s house, not outside enjoying nature like “To A Waterfowl”.

Despite the many differences between the two poems such as the gloomy, ghastly view of life and nature in “The Raven” compared to the happy, peaceful view of life and nature in “To A Waterfowl”, there are some similarities. In both poems, the message is the same. The speakers are searching for meaning. They are hoping to be guided. They are searching for guidance that will be them a better idea of what life and nature are truly about. Both birds are symbolic and have specific meanings. The speakers yearn to take the birds’ messages into consideration and apply them to their life. Overall, these poem display different views on nature and a different style of writing, but they ultimately share the same message.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Journal #6: Ben Franklin’s The Autobiography (p. 80–83)

Write a well-developed paragraph in response to the following questions.

1. Explain what was involved in Franklin’s plan for self-perfection? What conclusion did Franklin come to regarding the effectiveness of this plan?

Franklin’s plan for self-perfection included a listing of thirteen virtues essential for moral perfection. Temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, chastity, and humility are all the building blocks to achieving moral perfection according to Ben Franklin. Franklin created a day chart in which he focused on one virtue a week, but still keeping track of the other twelve. He would be able to complete focus on all thirteen virtues four times a year, which would be a grand total of fifty-two weeks. Throughout each day, Ben would make a black mark on the virtue he broke. Franklin devised this perfection-plan on a whim to see if he could acquire moral perfection. As time progressed, Franklin realized he was faultier then he thought. He had the toughest time with the virtue of order. The effectiveness of this plan proved to be not so effective. He concluded that a “perfect character might be attended with the inconvenience of being envied and hated; and that a benevolent man should allow a few faults in himself, to keep his friends in countenance.” In other words, a perfect person is envied for their perfection because it is so rare, so an average man should allow faults in himself in order to be considered human and to keep sane.


2. Do you feel that a plan such as Franklin’s would improve you as a person? Why or why not? What would be your top five virtues?


I feel like Franklin’s plan would improve me as a person because even if you do not achieve perfection, you better yourself as a person by trying. This was Franklin’s intention. It is better to at least try to be perfect and allow faults in yourself, rather than to not try at all. My top five virtues would be order, frugality, sincerity, cleanliness, and humility.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Journal #5 – from Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” (p.95-6)


1. Identify the specific argument that Paine is making in each paragraph. For each of the arguments, identify whether Paine is making an emotional, ethical, or logical appeal and suggest an effective counterargument.

#1
Thomas Paine is arguing that the Americans must stand up against the tyranny of Britain. The longer they wait to gain independence, the more glorious their triumph will be. Their freedom will be highly rated if they take the necessary steps towards independence.
Paine focuses on emotional appeal, to get the readers fired up over the emotions of independence, not the logic of the situation.
An effective counterargument is that since Britain is the mother country of the American colonies, they have the right to tax the colonies.

#2
The argument that Thomas Paine is making is his secret opinion that God the Almighty will not let military powers destroy people who have tried to avoid war by every method that wisdom could have invented. He will protect the peaceful people, and not give them up to the devil.
Paine is making an ethical appeal. He bases his argument mainly on religion and the feelings of God and himself. Paine hints at the Americans as being morally superior over the British.
My suggestion for a counterargument would be, if the King of Britain believed that God gave him his power to rule, why would such a God protect the Americans, who are Britain’s enemy? If God is the leading force behind the British, why would he protect the enemy?

#3
The argument that Paine makes is that war between America and Britain is an inevitable event. Why not get the war out of the way, and not have your children fight? Americas will never be happy until the gain their own independence and freedom from Britain.
Paine is making an ethical appeal. Fight the war now, for the children. Take the burden upon yourself and do not let your children bear the stresses and losses of war.
An effective counterargument would be what would happen if the next generation had no parents because they lost them all in the war? If the war is fought now, what dangers and risks are you taking that could have serious effect your children’s generation.

#4
The argument Paine is making is that we should fight the Britain just as we should fight a thief who breaks into our homes. He is using an analogy to relate the king to a thief.
Paine is making an emotional appeal. He feels as if the king of Britain is a thief and his character is appalling. He believes that the widows, orphans, and the ghosts of the dead America, will come after the king and get revenge on the king because he deserves it.
An effective counterargument would be to argue that the King is not a thief, and he possesses many effective and useful powers.


2. Can you identify any of the logical fallacies that we discussed in Paine’s arguments? If so, which ones? Overall, what do you feel are the strengths and weaknesses of Paine’s arguments?

• Non-Sequiter – Paine jumps from taxing, to slavery. There is no logical sequence.

• Sentimental Appeal – Thomas Paine is trying to get the reader’s minds away from the logic of the situation, and appeal to the emotion of gaining independence.

• Aphorism – Paine uses many clever and wise statements about what life will be like without the British.

• Dogmatic – Paine states that God is on the American’s side, which cannot be proven.

• Ad Hominem – Paine attack’s the King of Britain and relates him to “a common murderer”, “a highwayman”, and a “housebreaker”. He attacks the king of Britain personally. What kind of murderous person would ask God for help?

• Begging the Question – If God will not give the Americans up to the British, why would the British ask God for help? It cannot be proven that God will not give up the Americans to the British.

• Hyperbole – “No a man lives on the continent…” No man lives in America that does not believe that America should be free from Britain. Paine makes a very broad assumption here and cannot prove that all Americans are for the war against Britain.

• False Dichotomy – Paine makes the assumption that either you have peace between two countries or war. There is no happy medium.

• Faulty Analogy – Comparing the King to a thief would be a faulty analogy because it is not a fact that the king is a thief. Paine and a majority of the Americans emotionally feel that the king is a thief.