Ti-Jean vs. Trifles: a face off

            Ti-Jean and his Brothers doesn't immediately grab the reader as being anti-feminist however there are several sexist references I found to be a little insensitive to the feminist cause. The quote by Ti-Jeans' mother, "A woman's life is so. Watching and losing", in the beginning of Scene One was a little irresponsible of the playwright Derek Walcott.  This small quote almost set the theme of the entire play in a different direction. Since 'mother's' part was so small, I think the reader overlooked this. (I did at first!) Only after reviewing the story did I uncover how this play could be compared to "Trifles". In Trifles, the women waited around for the men to do their "official" investigation. In "Ti-Jean and his Brothers", the mother waited around while two-thirds of her children were killed. These women from both plays were sitting around and waiting instead of taking action! In both plays, the outcome would have been drastically different if these powerful women would have spoken out. Actually Ti-Jean asked his mother for advice which was one of the actions that saved his life. Imagine if she gave advice to all her sons...it would have been a very different play. However, I don't fault these women for not speaking up. This male driven culture, especially when these plays were set would not have tolerated an 'opinionated' woman. Just look how long it took for blacks to start speaking out against their oppressors; it can be a very intimidating thing to speak up, or speak out against "The Man"!!!

The Qing Ding Pearl: Just the Facts

The Qing Ding Pearl

The Qing Ding Pearl is a play about injustice and revenge. The Protagonist is Hsiao En, a poor fisherman who must pay unfair taxes to a greedy Chinese official. His adversary is Ting Yuan Wai, the antagonist, who sends his minions (his servant and his boxers) after Hsiao En to enforce and collect the unjust tax. The play is set in a fishing community in rural China sometime in the Northern Sung period from 960-1127 A.D; the capitol is the modern day city of Kaifeng. The theme of this play is quite simple: when people are pushed to their limits, they are capable of anything, even murder. The central conflict consists of fair versus unfair and oppression versus retaliation. The 'little guy' Hsiao En, taking on a corrupt corporation-like entity and overcoming this adversity from the help of his family (daughter Kuei-Ying).

The Good Woman of Setzuan

Mark Jeremiah

May 16, 2011

Eng 15

The Good Woman of Setzuan

                This play is set in the Chinese province of Szechwan and follows a woman, Shen Te, a prostitute who was kind enough to open her house and shelter three gods. (Wong the water seller could find no one else hospitable enough to house them) As a reward Shen Te was granted a small fortune and opened her own tobacco shop, given as a gift but also a test to see if Shen Te was truly good or if her hospitality was a mere fluke. Even though Shen Te was a former prostitute, a "profession" seen as morally reprehensible, she was a compassionate person.  (which in itself is ironic since the only person 'good' enough to shelter the gods, A prostitute, is seen culturally and morally as a 'bad' person) She was so nice and good that people kept taking advantage of her and her kindness by loitering in and around her shop, causing crime and drama so much so that the police start watching her store as a place of interest. That's when Shen Teh introduced her "cousin"- her male alter ego Shui Ta as a means to take back control of her life. I was a little bit offended that Bertolt Brecht, the playwright, decided to use this sexist undertone in this story. By using the strong, strict, alter ego Shui Ta, sends the clear message that Brecht felt that a female character wasn't strong willed enough...unless acting like a man, to control her life.

Death and the Kings Horsemen

Mark Jeremiah

May 16, 2011

Eng 15

Death and the Kings Horseman

            This play was so complex, and had so many issues I barely know where to begin. The play "Death and the Kings Horseman" was written in 1975 by Wole Soyinka as a tragic, true story. The story is about the horseman of a king- Elesin, who must commit ritual suicide because the king has died.  The Yoruba people have this custom so that the soul of the king can be transported (by the soul of the horseman) to the afterlife. If the horseman either refuses or is in any way prevented from killing himself, bad luck and tragedy will befall the Yoruba people; and the horseman and his family will fall into severe disgrace. This is tragic enough by itself, but a bad situation became worse when the British authorities under Simon Pilkings decides that this custom is barbaric and will be deemed as illegal, and banned. That's when Elesin's son Olunde, a promising medical student studying abroad in Europe receives a telegram and decides to commit the ritual suicide in place of his father, to preserve the family's honor. So it seems like the folklore actually came true and was a self-fulfilling prophesy, since the town was in discord (from the horseman not killing himself); Olunde committed suicide and Elesin, devastated, also kills himself but the Yoruba people did not accept his sacrifice. A waste and a tragedy.

Ti-Jean and his Brothers

Mark Jeremiah

May 16, 2011

Eng 15

Ti-Jean and his Brothers Blog

            "Ti-Jean and his Brothers" is a Caribbean folktale by Derek Walcott written in 1958. The protagonist Ti-Jean, short for Tiny Jean, is the youngest of three brothers, each of which challenges Papa Bois/the planter/the devil, the antagonist of this play. The play takes place on the island of Trinidad near a forest. The theme of "Ti-Jean and his Brothers" is an ancient one, good triumphing over evil, but also common sense triumphing over 'brute/dumb' strength and even fancy 'book' intellect (which is seen as a white pastime). Ti-Jean embodies the native inhabitants; the play reinforces those values important to their island community. The central conflict deals with three brothers coming of age and trying to make their way in the world using a gift each one possesses. What makes these brothers unique is that their adversary is the devil himself and failure is NOT an option! Failure is sudden death; no second chances. Gros-Jean-or big Jean, has the gift of physical strength. Mi-Jean- or middle Jean, has the gift of intelligence from 'book smarts'. Ti-Jean- or tiny Jean isn't especially equipped with any specific talent, however he has the good sense (common sense) to ask his mother AND the forest animals for advice; something his older brothers didn't think, or didn't care to do. (His brothers actually blatantly snubbed the forest creatures) Ti-Jean's humbleness and down-to-earth personality won his family riches and saved his own life.

Un Hogar Solido

Mark Jeremiah

May 12, 2011

Eng 15

"Un Hogar Solido" Blog

      Un Hogar Solido by Elena Garro translates literally as "A Solid Home". This short, single act play was, for me, more difficult to relate to than her other works. The play has eight characters and is set inside a tomb with no windows or doors. The characters are deceased and are related to each other and are eagerly awaiting the deaths of the remaining living family members, for some sort of post mortem family reunion.  I understand that this play is supposed to be symbolic of reflecting on life however I found it to be morbid, and even a bit distasteful. From the five year old 'Katie' playing with 'Don Clement's bones, to 'Lydia' explaining how she always wanted a solid home (her tomb), it seems to me that Garro is either making the topic of death insignificant, or she's trying to make her audience feel as though death holds more promise than life. If this is the case then Garro doesn't do a good job of making us want to experience this! Being "the center of the sun" and "the snow on rooftops" or being "the Mezcala" river doesn't sound as exciting or peaceful as spending time with and appreciating my wife or being there for my mother....here and NOW! Not in some far-fetched and unpromised after existence. But perhaps the saddest concept of this play is that, upon death, no one experiences heaven or the Creator. Because "being the fold of an angels tunic" or "wood in flames" cannot possibly compare with spending a blissful eternity with loved ones and our Creator....not with the objects that God created.

Top Girls Blog

Mark Jeremiah

5/8/2011

Eng 15

Top Girls Blog

                I'll be perfectly honest and start by saying "Top Girls" is not a play I particularly enjoyed or would recommend to anyone else. The characters and the plot were all over the place and disorganized, and the climax of the story was altogether lackluster. This play was tedious to read, and I would have been upset if I paid admission and confused with the different character 'jumps'. The play begins with six women meeting for dinner at a restaurant and discussing their life experiences, however the women were historical or literary figures from different time periods and different walks of life (except for the main character Marlene.) The stories told by the woman having dinner were actually interesting, and the best part of the play. However the playwright Churchill  abandons them in scene II, leaving the reader wondering if Act I Scene I was a dream or some strange hallucination and why they were there at all, and what relevance did those women have to the play overall?

The rest of the play dealt with main character Marlene and how she is an independent woman in the 1970's or possibly 1980. (Not knowing the setting of the play until almost the ending was another annoyance) I came to the conclusion about the date because in Act 2 Scene 2, Marlene tells Joyce, "I think the eighties are going to be stupendous."(p. 502)

Marlene is a business woman in a seemingly male dominated industry, or world. The reader realizes this is a female empowering play dealing with female issues because of the various male dominating remarks, such as: "My father taught me Latin although I was a girl." (by Isabella in Act 1 Scene 1 p.478); "..Also women weren't allowed in the library." (by Joan p.479 Act1 Scene 1) ; "I thought God would speak to me directly. But of course He knew I was a woman.";  "..Exactly and I shouldn't have been a woman. Women, children and lunatics can't be Pope." (by Joan p.481 Act 1 Scene 1) And lastly when Griselda's children were being taken away to be killed (or so she thought at the time) and she says, "It was Walter's child to do what he liked with." (p.484) All these statements set the reader up for the female liberation theme of this play. However this female liberation comes with a price; these 'top' girls don't seem to be especially happy with their liberation. All the historical figures from Act 1 Scene 1 enjoyed a high status but all endured crushing tragedies.  Marlene even made the comment while listening to Isabella, Nijo, and Joan's stories (simultaneously, since they all loved to speak over one another), "Oh God, why are we all so miserable?"  (p.482) I believe Marlene and the women that worked for her were miserable because they became like the men they wanted to be liberated from.  In Act 2 Scene 1, Nell is interviewing Shona and tells her what an employer wants from a salesperson; "They think we're [women] are too nice. They think we listen to the buyer's doubts. They think we consider his needs and his feelings." (p.495) Ironically, having feelings and caring about the buyer's needs and wants would actually make a successful salesperson, then as well as now. At the end of the play (Act 2 Scene 2) Joyce tells Marlene exactly what she thinks of her 'top girl' status; "...I'm ashamed of you, think of nothing but yourself.." (p.502)  It seems as if the title "Top Girls" is actually a warning; a person whether male or female can be 'on top', but don't forget about the little people you've left behind.

No Saco Nado de la Escuela

Mark Jeremiah

May

Eng 15

No Saco Nada de la Escuela

What Does the Title Mean?

                "No Saco Nada de la Escuela" literally translates to "I don't take nothing from school", or as the playwright Luis Valdez phrases, "I don't get nothing from school". The play is focused on six students  following their educational experience from elementary school through college. This play is also very racially charged. The protagonist is Francisco, a Mexican American who in the beginning of the play doesn't speak English. He is put in a class where the teacher is insensitive and fails him for not understanding her language. ("Oh! Another one that can't speak English! Why do they send these kids to me?" p. 766) It's ironic that the teacher doesn't realize they send 'those kids' to her to LEARN! Therefore, Francisco doesn't get anything from school because all his teachers and his environment are hostile to his culture.

No Saco Nada de la Escuela should have offended me much more than it actually did. In fact, I was more offended by the play "Master Harold..and the boys" since "No Saco.." seemed like a form of comedic relief or a funny satire, created to destabilize and alleviate the racial tensions in the post civil rights era.

The Qing Ding Pearl

Mark Jeremiah

May 2, 2011

Eng 15

The Qing Ding Pearl

3 ways "The Qing Ding Pearl" is different than the other plays we have read

                I immediately noticed that "The Qing Ding Pearl" is different than the other plays we've read so far because the characters are not only acting, they are telling you (the audience) what they are doing. For example, In the opening scene Li Chun begins by saying, "I've fought fierce tigers on the southern mountains." Ni Jung replies, "And I've kicked the scaly dragon that swims the northern seas." (p.573-74)

They are speaking to each other, but they are acknowledging the existence of the audience. Another example of this is when Li Chun and Ni Jung meet up with Hsiao En and his daughter. Li and Ni are alone together but Li says, "Now that I'm nearer I can discern a figure on board that looks remarkably like my old comrade, Brother Hsiao. I'll call out and make sure." (p.574)  If Li and Ni are together, Li doesn't have to say "Now that I'm nearer..". That statement is meant for the audience. The other plays we've read ignores the audience and the play carries on in real time, the audience being unknown and invisible observers.

             Another difference from the other plays is this play is also a musical. The characters often burst into "hsi-p'i yao-pan"  and "hsi-p'i tao-pan" song.  The songs help to not only describe the mood, but also to describe the setting and stage directions, and even the state of mind of the characters.  For example, while Hsiao En is speaking to Li and Ni, he starts singing to his daughter, "Come out of the hold and meet your two uncles." (p.574) Then he returns to speaking again. Right before scene III Hsiao starts singing to describe the change from day to night. ("Look yonder, the evening shades are falling fast." p.575)

            Another difference The Qing Ding Pearl has from the other plays we've read is this play seems very simple and straightforward. Plays like "Master Harold and the Boys" and "Hamlet" had metaphors and deeper complex meaning (kite flying symbolic of freedom over repression, in M.Harold; and the perception vs. reality theme questioning Hamlets sanity) But the Qing Ding Pearl is very candid. The father did not have the money to pay the unfair taxes, he was punished unjustly, he rebelled by killing his persecutors; end of story.

Master Harold and the Boys

Mark Jeremiah

May  1, 2011

Eng  15

"Master Harold and the Boys" Blog

Describe Master Harold's relationship to the boys.  Is it fair?

                On the surface Master Harold and the men that work for his family, Sam and Willie, seem to get along well and enjoy each other's company. When Hally first enters the scene he walks in on Sam doing the quickstep. Hally doesn't remind Sam and Willie about finishing their work; on the contrary, he applauds Sam's dance and shouts "Bravo" (p622) and they continue talking about the ballroom dancing competition that Sam and Willie have entered.

However as the play progresses, Hally's disrespect and racism become appallingly apparent. The first time Hally lost his temper and started to act disrespectfully to his elders was when Willie threw the rag at Sam and it nearly hit Hally. Hally screamed, (at a grown man nonetheless) "For Christ's sake Willie! What the hell do you think you're doing!" (p.623) Hally also thinks he is above or superior to Sam and Willie. When Sam and Hally were discussing their 'men of magnitude' Hally says, "It is deeply gratifying to know I haven't been wasting my time talking to you." (p.626)

 These statements prove that Harold was disrespectful and willful, and definitely arrogant but that could have been the ramblings of a spoiled child whose parents didn't raise him properly. But Hally's ugly racist mentality was revealed when Sam was making a kite and Hally said, "The sheer audacity of it took my breath away. I mean seriously, what the hell does a black man know about flying a kite?" (p.628)

Is it Fair?

                Almost everyone has to answer to someone. Most people have supervisors or bosses, and even entrepreneurs must answer to the I.R.S and obey the government and laws. So I wasn't shocked to see that Harold was in charge while his mother was away. The unfairness stemmed from what was said to Sam and Willie and how it was conveyed. What's unfair is Hally's parents not being embarrassed by their sons behavior. It's unfair that his parents actually encourage Hally to be disrespectful to his elders and blatantly racist.

                I also think it's unfair that the author, Athol Fugard created Sam and Willie to be these emasculated, super docile, "saintly" black men. The underlying current, to me, felt like Fugard was implying that good, obedient, non-angry and non-threatening black men like Sam and Willie don't deserve to be mistreated because even if you spit in their faces they will still try to serve you.  So by contrast the masculine and non obedient black man can still be treated like a nigger.

Trifles

  "Trifles" is a relatively short, one act play written by Susan Glaspell in 1916. The play consists of five characters however there are two more characters who are not present, which the entire play is based upon.  

The five characters include: George Henderson, the young county attorney;  Henry Peters, the middle aged sheriff and his wife Mrs. Peters;  Lewis Hale, farmer and neighbor to the Wright's and his wife Mrs. Hale. The two characters that do not act in the play are John Wright and his wife. Wright was killed by strangulation and the other characters were at his home speculating about how the murder took place. From the start of the scene it was assumed that Wrights' wife, Minnie, was the murderer. Also, I could ascertain that this play deals with the rights of women, (actually the deficit of rights) in the early twentieth century.

 In fact, if this play was written by a male I would have been extremely offended; I'm surprised at the lack of respect shown to the female characters. For example, in the beginning of the play  Mr. Hale was talking to his friend Harry about installing a "party phone" for himself and John Wright.  Hale said that Wright "put him off" when he mentioned the phone the first time so he thought about speaking to Mrs. Wright about the issue.  Hale then said " ...but I thought maybe if I went to the house and talked about it before his wife, though I said to Harry that I didn't know as what his wife wanted made much difference to John". A marriage is a partnership between two people, so when Hale inferred that Wright's wife's opinion didn't or wouldn't matter, that was absurd to me! If anything, in my experience, a lady can persuade her mate of the need to get/buy something, and can be very convincing! The fact that even Hale, a neighbor, would know that Wright didn't appreciate or wouldn't acknowledge his own wife's opinion tarnishes Wrights' whole character for me and its almost hard to feel empathy over his murder. But it wasn't just Wright's attitude towards women that needed a major adjustment, all the men in this play have serious issues when it comes to the female sex!  Henderson the county attorney is concerned with the state of cleanliness of the house of a suspected murderer, Hale makes sweeping generalizations about women "used to worrying about trifles", and the sheriff won't even investigate a part of the crime scene properly because he says it's just "kitchen things"!

But what's even more mindboggling to me is that even the female characters downplay themselves in this play! Mrs. Peters was asked by Mrs. Wright to bring her apron down to the jail with her change of clothes. Mrs. Peters thought that to be an odd request and came to the conclusion that having the apron would probably make Mrs. Wright feel "more natural".

            Mrs. Hale made an interesting statement while she and Mrs. Peters were trying to justify how Mrs. Wright might have murdered her husband. Mrs. Hale said, "I might have known she needed help! I know how things can be--for women." Assuming men and women have no differences and there are no gender roles, and men and women are just billions of different individuals with individual talents and individual needs, why would Glaspell make such a generalized statement? This seems to be some sort of female double standard to me. Unless Glaspell made a typographical error, and what she really meant to write was 'I know how things can be for --Mrs. Wright'...or 'I know how things can be --for myself".

            I personally believe that tampering with state's evidence is morally wrong and illegal despite the fact that the men in this play were belittling the women, because maybe a conviction would have got Mrs. Wright the proper psychiatric care! If Mrs. Wright was so unhappy maybe she could have considered divorce instead of murder.

Did Gertrude particapate in old Hamlets murder?Why and how do know?

Did Gertrude participate in Old Hamlets murder? Why and how do you know?





Gertrude was never formally accused of participating in Old Hamlets murder however, eyeing her in a suspicious light isn't a farfetched concept due to her "O'er hasty" nuptials to Claudius, Old Hamlets brother, present day King, and prime suspect to his murder according to the ghost.

One of the central themes of Hamlet was based on his getting advice from the apparition of his recently deceased father. The ghost of old Hamlet appeared to his son and told Hamlet of his murder by his brother Claudius, and specifically called Hamlet to avenge him.

However the ghost never implicated Gertrude of committing or even conspiring in his murder. His only malcontent with his former wife was an issue of morality and affinity. (Katherine of Aragon was divorced from the English monarchy for affinity of first husband and Henry VIII)

But even though the ghost referred to Gertrude as a "seeming virtuous queen", it orders Hamlet not to confront her and leave her judgment to heaven.

It would seem that if Gertrude had any part in Old Hamlets murder the ghost would have wanted Hamlet to kill her inherently, since her participation would have been a more cold-blooded betrayal due to their marriage. The ghost expresses that his love for Gertrude was benevolent, as he states that he would have held back the elements if they "visited her face too roughly".

Is hamlet crazy

Is Hamlet Mad?



Asking whether Hamlet is mad is a totally subjective and multidimensional question which can be dissected by using a perception vs. reality outline.

Case for Sanity

Hamlet was an articulate and clever heir to the Danish throne who goes through a mental and also spiritual dilemma based around revenge for a loved one.

The fact that he considers right over wrong and good vs. evil (hesitation to kill Claudius especially while at prayer) shows that Hamlet is fully cognizant and aware, and has a strong and working conscience. That's why all people that commit murder are not immediately carted off to some sanitarium! Killing a person or even contemplating murder is definitely not a normal action; which many believe to be a marker of insanity, however premeditation is what differentiates between a capable individual and someone who's just plain "off their rocker"- crazy.

Case for Insanity

The premise for the entire play was the fact that Hamlet wanted to avenge his father's death because a ghost told him it was a murder. And not only did the ghost reveal the cause of death, he also told Hamlet who perpetrated the crime and wanted him (Claudius) killed for it. Also Hamlet swore to act strange and odd and to "put an antic disposition on" (I. v. 170, 172). He wanted everyone to think he was insane to throw them off track, especially the King Claudius and his entourage.



These are the only cases for Hamlet to be diagnosed as insane. (Although apparitions screaming for bloody murder/revenge would have anyone needing to visit their mental health provider!)

I believe that Hamlet was definitely not crazy. Even if the ghost never appeared, he had reason and motive to want Claudius dead. Hamlet should have been king! In most patrilineal monarchies the heir to the throne is passed down from father to son. That's why King Claudius was referred to as "usurper": a person who has seized and hold (as office, place, or powers) in possession by force or without right < usurp a throne> (merriam-webster online)

And besides...three other people witnessed the ghost, even though it only spoke to Hamlet.

Rituals

Every Sunday I am apart of a consistent ritual that takes place at my uncles hose in the Bronx. First in the morning my uncle Arty calls every one in the morning at around 5am in the morning. We always ask him why he calls us so early in the morning. He replied that was the timeit was when I woke up I called everybody the first time we ever thought of getting to together. Sunday afternoon is here, everyone knows to be at uncle Arty's house at least by 3pm. So we all got there at a reasonable time. We each watch each other as we look at what one another has brought for the event. We each start immediately assorting the table with what you have brought. While we are doing all of this Arty has some food on the stove because he likes to play chef when we all gets together. We love to see him live out his dream so we let him from time to to time. The food is always good anyway so we don't mind as long as he feeds us. Now the food is all most done see we start setting up the xbox and start looking for our game to play and the controllers. We play the xbox 360 to about 1am, this is the exit time for the majority of our get togthers. My family are full of people that plays video games we see video games as a great way to relax and have some personal time. The only time we wouldn't get together would be because one of us is sick or is out of the country. But I would say even with those situations we would find a way to continue the ritual by getting on xbox live or playstation online.

...

From:	Mark Jeremiah <mrk.jeremiah@yahoo.com>    ... Add to Contacts
To:	Da Yung Politician <mrk.jeremiah@yahoo.com>

---

Every Sunday I am apart of a consistent ritual that takes place at my 
uncles hose in the Bronx. First in the morning my uncle Arty calls 
every one in the morning at around 5am in the morning. We always ask 
him why he calls us so early in the morning. He replied that was the 
timeit was when I woke up I called everybody the first time we ever 
thought of getting to together. Sunday afternoon is here, everyone 
knows to be at uncle Arty's house at least by 3pm. So we all got there 
at a reasonable time. We each watch each other as we look at what one 
another has brought for the event. We each start immediately assorting 
the table with what you have brought. While we are doing all of this 
Arty has some food on the stove because he likes to play chef when we 
all gets together. We love to see him live out his dream so we let him 
from time to to time. The food is always good anyway so we don't mind 
as long as he feeds us. Now the food is all most done see we start 
setting up the xbox and start looking for our game to play and the 
controllers. We play the xbox 360 to about 1am, this is the exit time 
for the majority of our get togthers. My family are full of people 
that plays video games we see video games as a great way to relax and 
have some personal time. The only time we wouldn't get together would 
be because one of us is sick or is out of the country. But I would say 
even with those situations we would find a way to continue the ritual 
by getting on xbox live or playstation online