Category Archives: Uncategorized

Tagore’s “Punishment” talks about the role of men and women in India at the time. In the story, a man, Dukhiram Rui kills his wife after his wife snaps back at him when he asks where his food is. Chidam, Dukhiram’s brother, plans to let his wife take the blame for the murder because to him, a wife can be easily replaced, whereas a brother cannot.

When Ramlochan went over to the Rui household and noticed something wrong at their house, the first thought that came to Chidam’s head was to lie to Ramlochan and blame his wife on the murder. When Chidam asked his wife Chandara to take the blame, I think Chandara realizes that she does not mean anything to Chidam and agrees to take the blame for Dukhiram.  I think this part showed the power that men had over women and how women were treated like a piece of property in India at the time. However, after Chidam told his wife, Chandara, what to say to the police, Chandara confessed to the murder but didn’t say the rest of the story. She instead said that there was no ill-will between them and was willing to accept all the blame. Chandara sticked to her own story and said nothing else. I think this showed how death to her would have been better than staying married to Chidam for the rest of her life.

After doing a bit of research on Tagore and what it was like in India at the time, I found that Tagore’s father was in a social reform group called the Brahmo Samaj who wanted to blend Western ideas with the Indian culture. I think this had a huge effect on Tagore’s writings and can be seen in this story. Right before Chandara was going to be hung, a doctor told her that her husband wants to see her and she says “To hell with him”. I think this showed the idea of women being freed from men.

Questions:

1. The title of the story is “Punishment” Who do you think is being punished in this story?

2. Do you think Chandara had power over Chidam when he broked down and swore that his wife was innocent and then blamed the murder on himself?

“Carriage, autumn sun, noon wind, village path and weary beggar-woman”. At the  beginning of the poem, beautiful scenery was displayed through these specific terms, but suggested a solemn and sad atmosphere. Everything was still, the wife packed for the husband and held back her tears; the husband pretended to be calm and softly said goodbye to his dear wife. It was a so common scene about leaving; the sun blazed, the trees were silent and the people were sorrowful.But suddenly, a soft but firmly voice broke the peace and shocked everyone. “I won’t let you go.” The little girl of the man simply replied this claim solemnly, neither cries nor be noisy.

It’s really incredible for a 4-year-old girl to express her desire with such a strong tone. Commonly, adults are shy and timid, when we have to face those whom we love dearly gonna leave, we may just say such as “I do not wish to let you go” or “I don’t feel like letting you go”  But the child’s love claim for her father is so intense and direct. I’m really interested in this little girl because her reaction for her father’s leave is so mature and calm, which just not like a 4-year-old girl behavior! Pay attention to the words described from line 55 to 60, she “quietly sits with no attempts to close the door or either hold her father’s arm”.  Not like other kids cry to beg  father to stay, she just sadly says some simple words, which is more powerful than physical behaviors.I don’t know whether she knows how to use  the power of words to express her emotion. Maybe she is just unintentional say such words; or maybe she has experienced some things which deeply affect her, so that she can clearly  express her thoughts by saying “I won’t let you go” with no hesitates. What has happened on this girl and on this family? How her weird personality is formed? Why her father firstly is shocked by her claim and then recalls this claim over and over again when he thinks about sky and earth? There are too many questions to be thought and explored, and the sources of a series of questions are the little girl and her unique claim. “I won’t let you go” is more than a claim for love.

Questions:

1. The statement of “I won’t let you go” is the core sentence in this poem and is repeated through the whole poem, so why it be used as the title for this poem?

2. Tagore spend a fair amount of ink to describe different scenery in this poem  , how does this setting works? And also, are the season and weather helpful for convey the feelings of characters?

In this essay, Richard Pevear argues that translation “takes place between two languages” and “allows for an enrichment of the translator’s own language, rather than the imposition of his language on the foreign original.” More specifically, he suggests  that for a translator to enrich the piece with his own language, he is making it more easily understandable. He also agrees with philosopher Paul Ricouer’s stance on what translation is, which Richard translates into English for us from a French newspaper. He claims that translation is the mediation between the plurality of cultures and the unity of humanity. He adds that translation is astonishing because it transfers the meaning of one language to another language, thus making them an equivalent. I believe that he is more closely suggesting that translations are able to act as equivalents in meaning because most cultures can relate to one another.

I agree with his argument that translating involves reaching across historical moments and cultures in order to accurately translate the meaning of what was meant to be evoked by the author. But, I would add that too much is lost in translations because in some cases it is very difficult to perfectly translate the meaning of a piece in the exact words that would evoke the same meaning in the new translation. Unless the reader themselves can read the language of the original production, then they are ultimately relying on the translator’s goodwill. That is that they are accurately illustrating the meaning of what is being said. I am not saying that I do not believe in a translator’s ability to translate thoroughly, but rather I am stating that one person’s translation is not enough to give the reader a chance to relate to what is being said. By reading multiple translation’s of the same piece it would be much easier for the reader to piece together circumstantial meaning of what it written during the historical time that it was written in and relate it their present culture.

With this said, I would like to pose two questions:

1) Do you believe that every, or close to every, piece of literature is able to  be accurately translated?

2) Do translations unify humanity or can it divide humanity as well?

Alexander Pushkin’s “The Tale of the Preacher and His Man Bumpkin” teaches the reader some important life lessons. In the poem, the preacher is self-righteous man who is looking for cheap labor. He wants to find someone to do all the housework, but wants to pay him little money.

After the preacher strikes a deal to have bumpkin work for him, he realizes how capable and hard working bumpkin is. The preacher is afraid bumpkin will flick him, so he develops a plan to make bumpkin lose the deal. The preacher’s wife tells him “Give Bumpkin an impossible task, and make him do just what you ask. He fails, you send him packing, and spare your head a smacking.” By this point in the poem, it is apparent that the preacher is only worried about himself and he is willing to stoop to any level to save his honor.

The bumpkin represents a witty and strong figure that shows the preacher just how conniving the preacher is. He uses his intelligence to undermine the preacher’s excessive pride. When trying to earn rent from the devils, the bumpkin has a hare race with the devil’s grandson and uses a horse to defeat him in a weight-carrying contest. Bumpkin proves to the preacher that he can complete even the most challenging tasks. By doing all the things the preacher asks, the bumpkin teaches the preacher not to underestimate his abilities and the abilities of all others who are of lower status. Additionally, those who do work for the preacher should be paid fairly for the hard work that they do. The preacher should not try to save his pocket when employing others. The preacher’s actions also teaches us that self-arrogance gets one no where; he believed he could easily win the deal and he ended up losing his dignity.

The most significant scene in the poem is at the end when the bumpkin finally flicks the preacher’s brow, crushing the preacher’s pride. The animation at the end of the poem is especially humorous as it shows just how angry and defeated the old preacher is. Pushkin writes this poem using rhyming couplets. He creates a comical poem using this rhyme scheme and the animations, but still manages to portray a principal idea within the poem.

Two questions for the class:

1. Do you think bumpkin used incorrect methods to win the money from the devil?
2. Do you feel sympathy for the preacher by the end of the poem?

In volume III we were taken through this dark emotional journey with Victor Frankenstein. He goes on this journey traveling to different parts of the world with his friend whom he tells his father is to relieve his mind and find tranquility so that when he gets back he can fulfill his father’s wish and get married to Elizabeth. Under any other circumstance he would have enjoyed this trip but the actual purpose for this trip was not for self-fulfillment but to get the creature away from his loved ones while he completes his promise to the creature by creating his female partner. While he was doing his research and putting the finishing touches to his creation, Frankenstein started thinking about what the consequences would be if he completed this task. The possibility of more murder and mayhem upon the earth because of Frankenstein’s creation did not sit well with him. After realizing all of this he destroyed his creation all the while not noticing that the monster was watching him.

After the monster confronts him of what he has done Victor Frankenstein finally stands up to his enemy and tells him he is not going to make him a female partner. The creature does not understand why Victor would want to see him suffer his whole life without having a love partner. The monster leaves Victor with the promise of coming back on his wedding day. When the creature made this promise Victor interpreted it as the monster was going to kill him that day but little did he know he was planning to kill his soon to be wife.

As promised the monster did show up at his wedding and killed Elizabeth. Shortly after finding out the news about Elizabeth Victor’s father passes away. The guilt Victor feels is overcome by hatred and the want for revenge. Victor’s creation destroyed his life by killing all of the people he cared about.

In Volume III we get to see another side of Victor that is selfless. In Volume I he was more worried about himself and feeling very isolated. In Volume III he was worried about the safety of his loved ones. He was on the verge of creating another monster due to his fear of the monster which can be seen as a very selfish act because he will be putting plenty of people in danger. Afterwards, he acknowledges this and corrects it by destroying his work and standing up to the creature. I believe that he felt he would be the one that dies at the end so that brought him a sense of tranquility because he felt the creature was not going to harm his loved ones.

Questions:

1. If you were in Victor’s position would you destroy the creature?
2. Do you feel that Victor went through so much that he was actually looking forward to the monster killing him on his wedding day?

In Volume III, Victor promised the ” Monster” that he would create a mate for him, so he would not feel lonely anymore. But victor fears that maybe his new creature would reject  and repulsed by his appearance. it was really interesting how the monster showed his desire of having somebody else like him in order to not feel reject anymore. He confronted victor and asked him if he dared to break and destroy his hopes and that if he dare to do that he would ruin and attack him on the date of his wedding. Victor was really worry about it, because he did not want to traumatize Elizabeth and also he did not want Elizabeth to see the monster and see how the monster kill him.

It touched my heart how the volume ends, the monster confessed Walton how he is feeling about killing his creator and also how he is felling about bring pain and sorrow to those who love victor. He also told Walton that he just wanted to be happy and feel loved. he asked the question ” Am I to be the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me?” .The monster is really upset and he wants to end with his life .

1. Why victor thinks that she (new creature) would reject the monster?

2. why the monster wants to end his life at the end of the volume ?

In the volume I of the Frankenstein by Mary Shelley the story let us know the motivations of the experiment of Victor Frankenstein and the horrible creature created as a result. First, we see Victor Frankenstein gathering the information for his scientific cause the “creation of life”, looking for information from teachers at the University of Ingolstadt and developing his skills for to accomplish his experiments. After two years of study and labor Victor Frankenstein success in the creation of the creature. We can perceive Victor Frankenstein as an insecure person incapable of assume the consequences of his
experimentation’s because he hides from his creation letting the living being abandoned. In a moment of remorse for his actions Victor Frankenstein try to get back to Geneva to his family and friends finding that his brother William has been killed.  For this Justine Moritz a servant for the Frankenstein house was accused, condemned and executed by mistake.

On the second Volume of Frankenstein, we can perceive the sense of guilt of Victor Frankenstein for not to reveal the truth about the dead of his brother and the execution of an innocent person. On Mouth Blanc, Victor Frankenstein met the monster and we start reading the story from the point of view of the creature. He describes the process and the difficulties that he experience from the moment of his birth. He describes his first moments on this world, his senses and his fears.  During this Volume the Monster tells Victor about how he has to develop an ability for to survive, how he discovers fire and how he uses for to cook his meals, one of the parts that really cached my attention was when after the creature learned to read and started questioning about his existence and his origin, he realized that he was like Adam (p.105) created by a god with no link with other living creature.  This is the point where the creature discovers the papers from the Frankenstein’s laboratory in his pocket and interprets the symbols and the notes given.  At this moment the creature decides to approach the family looking for protection but only he finds rejection. As a consequence the monster decides to run after his creator and starts his journey to Genève where he tastes the pain of being shot as a reward for saved a girl.

The Volume II coming to an end when the creature relates to Frankenstein the reason why he killed William Frankenstein in the woods. During this transition to the Volume III the mood of the creature changes, it’s no more the innocent creature from the beginning of the Volume II, he is full developed in his senses and his objectives are clear: he doesn’t want to be alone in this world anymore and he wants revenge from his creator.

Victor Frankenstein in the Volume III stars a journey across Europe. The motivation for this journey according to Frankenstein is to prepare and gather the information for the preparations destined to the creation of the female companion to the creature. For this porpoise Frankenstein takes his time, travels across Europe and stars feeling hesitant about the accomplishment of his promise to the creature. He expects that the time past and something random could happen to the living being. He starts guessing about the creation of a new female creature and the possible bad outcome to this process. Frankenstein feared about a new race of uncontrollable “devils” (p.138). The creature that have followed Victor Frankenstein during his journeys saw the destruction of his female being and promised revenge on the night of Victor’s wedding: “I shall be with you on your weeding night” (p.140). After abandon his project Frankenstein decides to leave to Switzerland and start his fleeing in a small boat in the middle of the night. The boat is carried away to a near island where he is imprisoned, accused for the dead of Henry Clerval. After a couple of moths Frankenstein is cleared of the homicide of his friend and benefactor and goes back to Genève in company of his father. In Paris he receives a letter from Elizabeth and he decides (no matter the promise of the creature) to marry her. On his wedding night Frankenstein hears the scream of his wife and he found her dead, killed by the creature. The notice of the dead of Elizabeth leads to the dead of his father. As a consequence Victor Frankenstein began the chase of the creature for all across Europe and ended in the Arctic Ocean near Russia where he dies from sickness. The creature appears in front of his dead body and had a conversation with Mr. Walton where he reflex about his motivation for his crimes and end with his vengeance and then vanishes in the ice.

The character of the creature really gained my sympathy from the beginning of the story. From the point of his creation the creature really suffered but he was adaptable to difficult situations. The creature has unique characteristics that made him a super human or more human than his creator: He possessed physical abilities like he’s supernatural strength; he’s rapidly learning skills and he’s ability for to resist extreme weather conditions. But the creature share with the humans their emotions and his emotions where augmented as his physical strength that may be made the creature not to reason clearly and commit the homicides. For me the creature was born well but the society and the human world molded him and turned him evil.

1. Every time when Victor Frankenstein are supposed to take responsibility for his actions during the story he got sick. Do you think the lack of responsibility of Victor Frankenstein was a decisive factor in the story?
2. According to the text the human beings are created according with the characteristics of his creators. There are similarities between Victor Frankenstein and the Monster?

The speaker of this poem begins by talking to a start like he normally talk to a person, and he actually calls this star by a name. But what exactly was he trying to say to this “bright star”? at the beginning of the poem, the lines would describe the meaning of the words where he was trying to say how he would like to be like this certain star. He says “Would I were stedfast as thou art”, which it actually means “I wish I were as steadfast as you are”. This could might make you think that the speaker is a person who travels a lot and he’s desire is to be at one place only.

However, as you keep on reading he tries to change up his words around by saying how he would not like to be like the star, huh?

Furthermore, he uses the word “Emirate”, which it was use as a fancy way to the word “hermit”in the seventeen century, and it means loneliness. There, he is revealing why would he not like to be like the star. Why would he start by saying that he would like to be like a star and then changes his mind?. As you can see, later on the poem he starts to reveal what exactly the star is gazing on from up there. Then, he sees that although this star is steadfast is still too far away from others, and this is why he lays on his girlfriend breast feeling a relief of having her near him. Therefore, he says “still steadfast, still unchangeable”, where I believe that what he is trying to say that he might want to be as steadfast as the star, but not change anything that already is surrounding him.

1. What difference do you think the order of the words make? Which order do you prefer? why?

2.Why do you think he changes his thought of wanting to be as steadfast as the star?

To stay silent is a situation that leads someone sometimes to consider guilty, sometimes creates confusion and others leads to controversy for his sayings or his actions. However, in the other hand, to remain silent probably is the only way to express the pure reality and hides the only truth that someone has inside him. In the story of Anne Carson ‘’ Variations on the right to remain silent ‘’ the classic author represents exactly this of two substances morph of the silence. Here we have three stories that are mostly represented, and each of them is a different case, but all of them have the same denominator witch is the silence of their words or the silence that covers painting, or the silence that it is hide behind the translation of words.

In the first case something that caught my attention was a word (mwly) the Greek from mythology word that is it is very difficult to translate in English, but even more is difficult to translate and to give the real meaning or the real story that is behind this word. Even if we try to do that this word that for the ancient Greek mythology was something important, will lose this religious power that it has. Furthermore, Francis Bacon has also a silence painting. He wanted to convey the sense through of his painting without to give more explanation, because then, if do so its painting will lose its magic and real meaning of what he wants to convey with his painting. As this article was ending Anne Carson try to translate some fragment poems and she did that in a funny way, because she was trying to translate them with wrong words or with meaning totally different from its original. Emphasizes in this way how much difficult is to translate, and she underlines that some words has to remain silent in order to stay with their truth and real meaning.

The subject that makes me to struggle more and creates me a lot of senses of sadness and of injustice was the story of Joan of Arc. This particular came to the point to prove that we are unable to translate everything and to give to them en exact meaning. She refers to her ‘’voices’’ in her trial, that guided her personality as a God in her life.’’ Voices’’ which she does not want to give physical substation, she does not want to explain how these voices were for her in what shape or what form. She wanted to let them as an abstract which if someone explains it loses its meaning and loses their power. This decision that she took to do not explain clearly the meaning of the voices and to translate them in the real world, by letting them in silence was finally her condemnation in the court, it something that makes me thinking that a silence make really troubles, and brings injustices. That point leads me to think even more about the title of this article ‘’ variations on the right to remain silent’’. Her right to remain silent and to do not explain the meaning of these voices gave to other people the right to make her guilty.

Questions 1 ) : The title of the article is ‘’ Variations on the right to remain silent’’, how this right to remain silent it is expressed and responds in the stories of the article.

Question 2) : Do you have ever think in the way that Anne Carson thinks about the silence of the words that are untranslated? Do you have ever think how much power has an untranslated word or action?