« February 2006 | Main | April 2006 »
March 27, 2006
You better double check that.
Living in Brownlee Hall at Seton Hill University is a very interesting thing. One evening I happened to be walking on the second foor which is the womens floor. Of course, I was being escorted by a female. During this brief stroll I was taking special notice of some of the signs that are hanging in the hallways and in the lounge." Why" you ask? Well, because I had just finished reading a chapter in a book called "Eats, Shoots, & Leaves," by Lynn Truss. The chapter related to how punctuation mistakes commonly occur due to lack of proof reading. Her point is that sometimes people don't realize that they misuse an apostraphe or don't know how to use it in the first place.
With the chapter still fresh in my head, I was walking along only to suddenly stop. My eye caught something that just wasn't right on a sign in the lounge. As my eyes were focused on it, I suddenly noticed that a classmate, Amanda Nichols had noticed the same mistake. There was a breif minute of indecision and then we both darted off faster than cat. You see, Dr. Jerz had told us that if we see any mistakes, take a picture and bring it into class. We both flew into her unlocked room because we both knew that her digital camera was hidden on the shelf behind her fish food. As we both lunged toward the camera I felt a sudden rush of emotion that forced me to reach out further and snatch the camera from the shelf, and jump joyfully in the air, taunting about my victory. However, while my eyes were shut and my feet were off the ground.
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 03:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 22, 2006
No Compromise
Truss, Eats, Shoots & Leaves 3 -- Jerz: Intro to Literary Study (EL150)
“It is sad to think people are no longer learning how to use the colon and semicolon, not least because, in this supreme QWERTY keyboard era, the little finger of the human right hand, deprived of its traditional function, may eventually dwindle and drop off from disuse”(130).
This is true. Truss really makes a good argument that colons and semicolons are not common knowledge to use “middle-class” folk. Honestly, until I got to college I misused them frequently when I used them at all. In this chapter she is once again keeping the heavy punctuation issue light with her one-liners and her wise cracks. I’ll say it again; it’s really enjoyable to read.”
On page 110 she makes a good argument about why semicolons are nearly extinct in modern periodicals. She says, “The semicolon has currently fallen out of fashion with newspapers, the official reason being that readers of newsprint prefer their sentences short, their paragraphs bite-sized and their columns of type uncluttered by wormy squiggles.” I see her point. In today’s fast-pace society, people want shortened information that they can read quickly and understand while riding in a bumpy taxi or in the elevator. It seems like punctuation and language itself is constantly evolving and taking form of whatever society needs communication to be.
As I said before, I like Truss’s comedy however I think that the example with Kerry-Anne was a little overboard. She was 16 years old and there’s no need to write a professional letter to a pen-pal. The way you write it shows part of you. I wouldn’t have written back to that stuck-up Truss either. But I guess that’s why she’s good. No compromise.
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 02:23 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
March 19, 2006
Comma on!
Truss, Eats, Shoots & Leaves 2 -- Jerz: Intro to Literary Study (EL150)
This chapter is very interesting. Truss does an excellent job of relaying the importance of the comma. After reading this selection, I can say that personally, I abuse commas. Yes, it's true. What I found myself thinking was, "Wow, Truss is right. Without the correct use of punctuation, we would really have trouble communicating what we want others to understand." As seen in the last example Truss gave, sometimes if we don't punctuate correctly, people take our dialogue totally different. It's a dangerous area.
I feel that comma's are one of the most important, if not the most important part of speech. All of the information was presented very clearly in my point of view, however rule # 6 threw me for a loop at first.
6. Commas that come in pairs.
"This is where comma usage all starts getting tricky. The first rule of bracketing commas is that you use them to mark both ends of a "weak interruption" to a sentence - or a piece of "additional information." The commas mark the places where the reader can - as it were - place an elegant two-pronged fork and cleanly lift out a section of the sentence, leaving no obvious damage to the whole."
This was all well and good to this point, until I read the example: "The leading stage director, Nicholas Hytner, has been appointed to the Royal National Theatre." In my confusion I had to re-read the text trying to make sense of what Truss said. I knew that if Nicholas Hytner wasremoved, the sentence wouldn't make sense. However, the second point that Truss talked about brought it all together; the sentence could have a totally different meaning if the commas were indeed removed. I'm not sure that I totally understand all of this rule but I know that it's coming. Slowly but surely.
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 10:08 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 13, 2006
Comical Grammar
Truss, Eats, Shoots & Leaves 1 -- Jerz: Intro to Literary Study (EL150)
I really enjoyed Truss'S book, "Eats, Shoots & Leaves." See? Without reading that chapter I would have written TRUSS' book. To me, she does an excellent job of making "boring material" (no offense) something fun and interesting. I found myself laugh outloud in a few instances. I could put myself in her shoes, not as a "stickler" but as someone that a stickler would hate. Yes, it's true I am very ignorant of grammar but have every intention of improving (I better or else why am I an English major?). Her approach would probably seem harsh and would be a turn-off if she wouldn't point out that we're all in this together. In fact she wants to form a "stickler army!" It made me want to enlist.
I found the introduction funny but I couldn't pull out the reason that punctuation mattered untill page 20:
"The reason it's worth standing up for punctuation is not that it's an arbitrary system of notation known only to an over-sensative elite who have attacks of the vapours when they see it misapplied. The reason to stand up for punctuation is that without it there is no reliable way of communicating meaning."
When I thought about this, I couldn't help but acknowledge the truth. What, other than commas, apostrophes, and periods, are we to use to distinguish meaning from written words. The examples that Truss used really worked for me. I liked the example about the Jameson Raid on the Transvaal in 1896. How was he supposed to know what they meant? I think Truss did a great job at getting her points across effectively and she made it easy for me to read (truly a great accomplishment in itself).
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 07:22 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
March 12, 2006
Hall Article
Article: Hall -- Jerz: Intro to Literary Study (EL150)
"'Heart' in the Egyptian sense is much more nebulous. Whereas our understanding of Roman priorities comes from several characters--Anthony Caesar, and Enobarbus all provide insight into the military values of their society--Egypt is represented exclusively by Cleopatra (the queen is "Egypt") and her few attendants."
I find this quote very interesting. The thought ran through my mind as I read this play, that the Roman side of things seemed to be expressed more than the Egyptian side. You could argue for or against this statement but the one thing that is certain is that we come to understand the Roman culture through two or three main characters (Antony, Caesar, and Enobarbus) however we only get a glimpse of the Egytpian culture from Cleopatra and her mistresses.
I really enjoyed how Hall used the looked into both cultures through one medium: "heart." I think the most interesting point was dealing with how Enobarbus's character suggests that this dichotomy [between the two meanings of heart] cannot be rigidly maintained."
"Enobarbus is at first a single-minded advocate of Roman values; he believes that Antony should not make his "will" (sexual passion as well as emotional drive) "Lord of his reason" (3.13.3-4), or be deflected from military campaigning by "affection." When Antony makes an exaggerated resolve to be Roman again and fight-"I will be treble-sinew'd, hearted, breath'd" (177) Enobarbus scoffs at it as foolhardiness."
Seeing the production of Antony and Cleopatra, you could easily see how Enobarbus showed two different sides of "heart." I also found it clever, the way Hall talks about Enobarbus dying of a broken "heart" and how Antony's gesture of sending Enobarbus's chests after him "blows his heart."
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 09:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Bowers Article
Article: Bowers -- Jerz: Intro to Literary Study (EL150)
I really enjoyed the angle that Rick Bowers took in writing this article. He really gives Caesar all of the credit as kind of an unsung hero who was pushing all of the buttons and controlling pretty much every aspect of politics in the famous Shakespeare play. I recently saw SHU’s production of Antony and Cleopatra and was quite impressed. Seeing the play acted out on stage really helped me understand Caesar’s impact on the play better and this also helped me understand Bowers point as well. I thought that Bowers described Caesar pretty well saying that he was “far-sighted, cool, self-controlled, and so single-mindedly intent on the achievement of his ambition, that nothing, neither the happiness of his sister nor a genuine feeling of pity for Antony in his fall, can turn him from it.” This really describes his character in that Caesar is simply only after one thing and that is power, he doesn’t let Cleopatra or even Antony get in his path.
The main point that I think Bowers was trying to make however was that all of the characters listed in this play were wrapped up in a “godgame,” the term coined by John Fowles. I felt that he was right, one character constantly has the upper hand on the other, confusing them and keeping them unbalanced. Obviously it was Caesar.
To me, the passage that gave me the best idea of Bowers opinion of Caesar was on page 525. “And yet the drama takes it audience inside Caesar’s complex youthful paternalism, a paternalism that integrates personality and power within a gamesphere where Caesar makes the rules and the only thing disallowed is losing.”
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 09:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 06, 2006
A & C
Two main things that I picked up in SHU's production of Antony and Cleopatra.
I attended SHU's production of Antony and Cleopatra last on Thrusday evening. As many of you know, the production was modernized. I really enjoyed the play with the modernization, and found it easier to understand. Though I wish that they wouldn't have cut some of the parts that I felt were integral in the play, such as Lepidus, and Pompey, I still feel that it was an effective way to translate Shakespeare's work.
I found a few very interesting things during the play. First of all, I felt that the constant music during all of the scenes was a set back. I felt that it kind of disctracted the audience from what was happening on stage. Also, there wasn't much difference between the Roman music and the Egyptian music. The next thing that I found was that they condensed the play in many ways in order to not have to fulfuill so many characters. For example, near the end, when Antony is dying, he tells Cleopatra to only trust Agrippa.
As I said before going to see the play, modernized or not, really helped me understant the text better. One thing that I noticed was an interesting point concerning the who had the power. I saw two examples in which key decisions in the play weren't decided by the key charaters. For example, who's idea was it for Antony to marry Octavia? You probably think Caesar's right? Well, in the play I finally saw that it was Agrippa who suggested it to Caesar. Big deal right? Well if you think about it, your ruler is only as strong as the people he or she surrounds himself with. Caesar had some smart "cabinet members." The other example that I have involves Cleopatra and Charmian. Now we know that Cleopatra can be nasty one minute and nice the next, and we know that she can be tricky. Well, who was it that suggested to hide away in the monument and tell Antony that she had died? Charmian. Yes, her right hand woman. As I stated before, you are who you associate with, and we can see that Cleopatra either associated herself with people like herself, or was the way she was because of the people she had arround her. These two instances don't seem to be too world changing, but it was something that I noticed, and just thought I'd point out.
Posted by AndrewLoNigro at 08:23 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack