Trojan Gates (1955) by Helen Frankenthaler is an oil and enamel on canvas, which I interpreted to be depicting two separate individuals whose elbows are linked, but forearms and hands are pulled back and away from each other. The elbows and arms are painted in a color which seems to be black, however from reading the description of the painting, I was informed that the artist actually thinned out her pigments using turpentine, which makes the canvas absorb the pigment much faster and creates a richer color, creating that intense “black” looking color without ever using black pigment. In the background of the painting, there seems to be some sort of gaping white hole, with its rims surrounded by color, almost like an explosion in the sky. This white space, while not in the form of a circle but a more abstract shape, is also found at the bottom of the painting but with little specks of blue, yellow and red within it. There also seems to be a ring around the spot where the elbows are linked, almost in the direct center of the artwork, as if that juncture is supposed to be the focal point of the piece.

I feel like the artwork expresses the meeting of two different worlds and the clash experienced when they converge. Each forearms represents a different world, and the explosions represent the destruction and turmoil that arise as a consequence of their union; the symbolism of the linked arms is interesting because it adds a personal touch/aspect. Perhaps it refers to the unconventional/unwelcomed union of two people, and the public outcry in response.

The concept of American democracy is arguably almost completely derived from basic Enlightenment principles. During the Age of Enlightenment, thinkers including Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau among many others, established a foundation for a new kind of society; one where progress in science and technology was celebrated, rulers were chosen by their subjects and through a just process, people were granted basic human rights, knowledge of the self was expanding, land absolute monarchs were figures of the past. These ideas, though they seemed completely foreign at the time, resonated with the masses to incite change and countless revolutionary movements, including but not limited to the American and French Revolutions. The founding fathers of America, when writing the constitution and rebelling against British rule, incorporated the principles and teachings established by Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau into the foundations of American democracy to create the political system that has survived until today (although, it is uncertain just how much longer it will last given the results of the latest election). This complex political system has served as the quintessence of democracy, for other nations around the globe to follow and model their own infrastructures after. The Enlightenment ideas discussed by thinkers such as Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau together, paved a “free” society and configured the concept of the “American dream.” When people think of America, many imagine a promising country in which social, economic and personal mobility is fostered and flourishes, which would not be the case had it not been for the Enlightenment thinkers and their ideas.

Although the Black Panther’ Party Platform and Valerie Solanas’ “SCUM Manifesto” speak of ideas regarding very different topics, they both utilize radical language as a means of drawing readers’ attention and captivating potential followers. Radical language can often times be very enticing to people of vulnerable emotional/political/socioeconomic states, or people who have experienced a disservice at the hands of their society. When searching for an outlet for their frustration, these individuals are easily drawn to the reformative and revolutionary spirit of manifestos– such as many African Americans were to the Black Panther Party Platform during the Civil Rights Movement, and as many women were to Solanas’ “SCUM Manifesto”. People find this kind of rhetoric appealing because it openly declares their concerns/grievances and makes them known to the public, and provides set solutions to their problems which gives them a sense of hopefulness for a better future. Manifestos may also help people feel represented in society as a group, letting individuals know that they are not alone, and instilling the sentiment that change can occur where there is power in numbers. Additionally, manifestos and their radical nature attract readers simply because their ideas seem so different and foreign to their audiences– sparking a natural curiosity. It is for these reasons that change-seekers often implement radical language into their pieces, because it entices, captivates, and motivates people to act in a certain manner or uphold specific ideals.

Ms. Makda threw the hood of her jacket over her head, too lazy to reach into her backpack and pull out her black umbrella. For this morning was already off to a bad start, as she was running ten minutes and had a 10:45 Philosophy exam.
She attempts to remove her iPhone from her pocket and untangle her earphones, as she power-walked uphill on 96th street. As she struggles, she feels a familiar push upon her shoulder– throwing her off balance and sending her back to the summer of 2014 while tumbling to the concrete.  She tastes the saltiness in the Jones Beach air, grips the sand beneath her feet, and has no care in the world other than avoiding skin cancer at all costs. That was the last time she was truly carefree.
She stumbles to find her balance and words to express her nostalgia, as the familiar face of Wendy Wallace lends her a helping hand. She takes the train with Wendy, engaging in small talk that neither of them truly wanted to have, making empty gestures, and acting as if they were really still invested in each others’ lives. Although Amber is flattered by Wendy’s concern for her family’s well-being, she would much rather have sat on the train alone and studied for her exam. She has grown tired of the superficial nature of these types of conversations, and eagerly anticipates her stop’s arrival.  The train finally reaches the 23rd St station, and Amber darts off the train as fast as the elderly woman in front and her own legs allow her. Nothing like meaningless conversations and a rushed morning to start the week off right!

Freud’s theory of Family Romances is certainly an interesting concept; while I cannot say that I fully agree with his claims nor relate to them, I can understand how some people may agree with his ideas. I feel as if Freud is almost sexualizing young children by attributing these kinds of erotic qualities to them, even if he does deem those qualities as “subconscious” or unrecognized within the individual. It can also be interpreted as incestuous, because of the nature of the relationships described between parents and their children. I do, however, agree with Freud’s claim that children strive to be like their parents, especially when they are in their early stages of childhood– and as they get older, start to question their parents’ “legitimacy” in a way by comparing them to figures of higher social class or ranking. While I don’t think I ever resented my parents as a child, it makes sense as to why some children would adopt this complex and want to distance themselves from their biological parents. This can serve as an early form of liberation of children from their parents’ control and influence in a child’s mind. To a certain extent, I can relate to this because I feel like many children look for ways to assert their independence in small ways when their lives are almost completely dictated by their parents or caretakers.

According to Walt Whitman, the untranslatable self refers to the abstract concepts of identity and self-awareness. From what I can understand, it sounds as if Walt Whitman does not know how he fits into the world on a greater spectrum. He is aware of his existence, but contemplates his experience and reason for being. He finds that there is no single way to exist, or experience existing, and that every person is entitled to have multiple views/outlooks on life (whether one view contradicts another or not). Whitman not only questions his own human existence, but also what he knows about the universe and believes to be true. He feels that humans are constantly changing and developing intellectual beings, therefore it is impossible to fully understand oneself or anyone else. For this reason, he distances himself from categorization or belonging to any one specific niche or group. He illustrates a sense of defiance through this, refusing to succumb to the will of society by defining himself as person without outside influence. Whitman believes himself to be apart of nature, connected to the “hawk”, and almost blending their identities into one. Whitman believes that his ideas and thoughts are too much to articulate in words or use his “voice” for. Each line of the poem diverges from a central point or theme, but as a whole, I feel as if the theme that Walt Whitman is trying to convey is one regarding self-awareness and transcendence from one sense of self to another.

Emily Dickinson’s poem, “‘Hope’ Is The Thing With Feathers,” can be applied to the scene in chapter twelve of Jane Eyre, in which Jane is at the top of the Thornfield mansion, contemplating her place in society and life. In the poem, Dickinson metaphorically compares hope to a bird. This bird never stops singing, no matter what obstacle it faces, and its courageous spirit gives inspiration to and resonates with many different people. In relation to this specific scene in the novel, the bird is represented by feminism and Jane’s desire for equality on social and financial grounds. Jane remains optimistic and upbeat about her desire for equality, longing for the day that her progressive concerns will be recognized and upheld. Feminism gives Jane the sense of liberation and freedom she so desires, in a world that only seems to oppress, restrict, and confines her based on gender roles and expectations. The setting of the poem also parallels with Victorian England, the time period in which Jane Eyre takes place. In the poem, the bird is “abashed” by a storm, in a “chill” land and “strange” sea; this can serve as a metaphor to the conditions in which Jane’s feminism existed– the very idea that women were entitled to feel, think, and act in the same way as men do, wasn’t even a concept yet to anyone other than “radical” women in society. While women of her time were limited to the domestic sphere, treated as property, and not expected to think for themselves, Jane defied and challenged these norms with her resilient belief in feminism.

The scene in which Jane speaks out against John Reed in the beginning of the novel perfectly exemplifies the concept of liberation Audre Lorde articulated in her article, “The Transformation of Silence Into Action.” Jane, who has been hesitant to speak out against the bullying and verbal abuse that is afflicted onto her by her own family, finally musters up the courage to push her fears aside and put John Reed in his place after he physically abuses her. Jane eloquently expresses her frustration with her treatment in the Reed household with words, stunning almost every elder in the house with her expansive vocabulary and concoction of historical metaphors, comparing John Reed to a cruel Roman Emperor.  In this moment, Jane basically frees herself from the oppression of the Reed household and proves her intelligence, poise and nature to her oppressors. In a way, the Reeds recognize that Jane is a threat after this encounter,  and for this reason they react in the cruel and rash way they do. Jane’s character develops from a little girl who is constantly being pushed around and passive, to an intelligent young woman who is unafraid to speak her mind, challenge authority, and defy social and gender norms in a very progressive manner for her time period. Jane recognized the fact that in order to live a completely free life, one must not be apologetic for who they are, nor make excuses for your silence when it impedes your ability to seek fairness and equality.

There are many things I encounter in my daily life that give me the experience of the “sublime.” One of these things is New York City itself. Walking past skyscrapers and other structures everyday on my way to class makes me feel incredibly miniscule and unimportant. I think it is human nature to fear that which is bigger than you, and although I cannot say that I have an outright fear of skyscrapers like the Empire State Building, I can say that I do experience awe when I look at it.
Another thing that makes me experience the sublime is my Iphone. When I think about it in depth, it kind of freaks me out just how “intelligent” our phones are– just the other day, my friend recited back to me a list of all the places I’ve visited within the last month from a hidden feature of my location settings. It’s quite unsettling just how much these little things come to know about you.
I have also experienced the sublime in the mountains of Pakistan. When visiting the city of Murree in 2010 with family, we stayed the night in a hotel at the top of a mountain. At an altitude of approximately 20,000 feet, my breath was quite literally taken away. Because of the lack of light pollution, the stars were visible from my balcony and they sparkled like diamonds. Being from New York, this was something I’d never experienced before; it felt completely surreal. The ethereal beauty of the night sky left me and everyone else at a loss for words, feeling pure astonishment.