In Kafka’s novel, his characters are always in the same scenario, trapped into a bizarre situation, don’t know a reason, can’t escape. In this story, before the law, a country man was trying to get into “the law” through a gate but cannot make it at the end of the story, also the end of his life. It seems a lot of challenge for the country man to get through the gate, but actually, the gate is wide open expect a gatekeeper stood in front of it. Country man believed that he was not supposed to get in unless he got the authorized. The gatekeeper had told him that, “If it tempts you so much, try going inside in spite of my prohibition.” However, what the country man did were cursing, begging, and trying to bribe. The country man spent his entire life to get to the law but not dare to enter the first gate. He was frightened by the power that he had no idea with. Only the thing he can learn was gatekeeper told him that “I cannot endure even one glimpse of the third”.

The law, in the real world, is supposed to be applied by everyone. But in the story, country man has to chase for it. So the law, in this story, does not necessary mean itself. It can stand for everything that supposed to share with everyone. But law always comes with authority, which the country man respected and feared. He could reach it but choose to give up and pretend he was pay effort. He looks pity for being denied by law but actually pathetic for doing nothing. Like people in the real world, struggling for life but afraid to change and take risk.

I have to admit that this is a very strange and odd poem for me to read, but I am somehow obsessed by it. Especially its darkness and deepness. I felt a Funeral, in my Brain is a poem talked about Dickinson’s illusion in her mind and she represented it metaphorically. In the first stanza, Dickinson gave a sight of the funeral. “And Mourners to and fro Kept treading” and the sense was breaking. Then a service was keeping beating that made her mind got numb. With her soul creaked across and a Bell tolled. She plunged down to the world and end with “Finished knowing”. It is more like a nightmare of Dickinson though the whole poem. I think the nightmare is her horror to the meaningless repeating actives.  She the mourners were keeping treading and treading. And “A service” was beating and beating that made her mind went to numb. Those actives made her felt “Wrecked, solitary”. And those actives brought chaos at the same time. Her sense was breaking and collapsing. I believe the Mourners and the service represented the other human in the society. They were making noisy and doing meaningless. Dickinson chose not to the same as others but she was se sensitive that cannot tolerate. She would rather be being isolated and descent her self to the ground. At the end, her knowing was finished. She didn’t choose to be like this but that might be the best result. The funeral was for herself.

I love the part of We-speak I thought it is very inspiring. I have noticed the importance of using we in the article, I never think that before. Actually, author has mentioned it in some other place which I believe he or she considers that as very important. The author pointed that “ we, explicit or implicit, against some other they”. So we can easily feel the distance between “we” and “they”. We could group audience up and deliberately stand with audience literally. As

author mentioned later “The tone set a forward-looking ‘we’ against a predictable camp of the cowardly ‘them’, implicitly inviting the reader/listener to the side if the barve” So that the “we’ gives a typical manifesto image.

Manchester United Revive Manifesto

1878, a red devil befalls Britain the ground of football has shacked

1910, Old Trafford, the dream theater stands erect the Manchester since then the industry city has a base.

1958, Munich air disaster took 8 lives of our talented players.

But Sir. Matt Busby told the world, No we refuse to collapse.

Him and Busby Boys bring us a new trophy of European winner after 10 years.

We shell never fall down.

Then, Sir Alex Ferguson starts his years of glories.

From 1986 to 2013, 27 years,

We win 38 trophies, include the first treble of the Premier League

We knocked Liverpool off their perch.

We become the greatest football club in England.

“Football, bloody hell!”

Now, it is the time for a new chapter.

We have been rested enough since Sir. Alex gone.

José Mourinho, the special one, would take us nothing but trophy and another trophy.

Manchester United always marching

I have been keeping use we-speak to show we are the part of club. Also I use words like Always and never. I start with tell a story.

People always compare realism with romanticism, argue that realism is what really happened and romanticism is about somehow fantasy. However, is it really true? I think this argue only rough limited both realism and romanticism. Things may work in different ways. I believe that realism is what we can tell from what we see.  Realism has been sharped so much by realism novelist. They tied to sharp the story that through it more reality would be reflected.  Then realism was limited by itself.

Elaine Freedgood had mentioned in her article Nineteenth-century British critics of realism realism novel were strong relied on characters. There must be some characters that are stand out so that the story can go on. But in realistic, there were not many resources for those realism novelists to write. At the same time, realism novelists were keeping sharping their story. Being loyal to realistic had been the biggest barrier for the novelist.  George Eliot had complained about the appalling lacking of empirical veracity purveyed.

Then Eliot opened up a paradox about fiction. Fiction may or may not reflect the reality. In another word, in fiction, there isn’t gap between aesthetic and realistic. But Eliot refused to accept the “arbitrary picture” that represent things as they never have been and never will be. George Eliot saw his work as Dutch painting that he delighted very much. Painting should be a mirror-like work present every sight that people can capture. He knew that the truth might be ugly and tough. But people shall do nothing but accept.

On the other hand, Eliot refused to be a “folly woman novelist”. He wanted the unexpected to do something unexceptional.

Back to the days at the 19^th century, a great movement of civil rights was taking place. For the rights that all the creatures are equal, people fought and blood was involved. At this great time, some people decided to stand up to against the slavery for those who are not trodden fairly. Harriet Jacobs, Frederick Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott are typically who would like to go in front of people and represent their will. At the time of the 1800s, to speak for slavery is not as easy as now on. Without a firm belief, no one can make it along with tremendous pressure at that society. Though, as all great activists, they used slightly different ways to inspire people.

Harriet Jacobs used to a slave, or in another word, she was born as slaved. Thus she had been through everything but keeping a mind of liberty. The time she had been suffered urged her to tell the story of her to everyone who didn’t fully understand what is the situation. So she tried to talk to her audiences like they are all together in a table. The narrative she adopted was to get close to her readers. In her book, she had many times to directly address to readers. She wanted to grab audiences’ attention. Also, she was very subjective when she talked about someone. Compare to others, Harriet Jacobs would more occasionally apply her own judgment in her narrative. Hence, rather than writing a novel, she was more like telling a story of her. It makes her personal experience more attractive.

Frederick Douglass also, as an African-American, had suffered a lot. But he used a way more intense tension to address his anger. He complained the society. He was reminding people when you are having your rejoice there were people who are suffering from pain in somewhere else. It can not be ignored. He tried to deliver his voice. In Rochester New York, he awoke the audiences that Negro are supposed to have the same rejoice as well as white. So he shouts out and confronts people where are you when we are suffering. Every word he spelled was strong and powerful.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott, as two female American activists in the movement of abolishing, spoke to female no matter you are black or white. They didn’t have to be emotional but simply listed the facts between men and women. It may not contain a lot of intense but as strong as Douglass. The speech that Stanton and Mott gave was a declaration of women’s right that they naturally supposed to have. It crystal cleared told their appeal.

Actually, no matter in what way they used. They all very well delivered one central idea that all lives matter. People are supposed to have what they deserved.

Lyric has always played a big part of literature all over a world. Basically, lyrics are formed in different ways among different countries and cultures. However, there are always something in common. Lyric would commonly have meter or rhythm to achieve the fluency. Besides, usually, it’s a way to express the mood and emotion either directly or indirectly. Thus, by tracing the writer’s emotion, we can find something beneath the lyric. This time, I will compare to lyrics, find what’s common and what’s common. One lyric, Spring Prospect, is from Chinese poet Tu Fu. The other one is from Japanese poet Kakinomoto no Hitomaro. I am a Chinese who knows a few Japanese. Hence, I will take the advantage of my Asian background to analyze those two great lyrics. One thing I want to claim is the Spring Prospect is not translated very well. Despite it’s very accurate but it lost lots of verse compare to the original one.

The Spring Prospect was written when Tu Fu was suffering from the collapse of his life. His political ambition has nowhere to place and the country he loved was rapidly going downhill. He wrote the lyric to express his sadness. At the first line, he wrote The nation shattered, hills and streams remain addressed the mood of that time. Then he wrote even though is spring time but the surroundings are a mess. It’s parallel to the first line. At the great depression, no one could take care of the beauty that it should be.  Then he used flowers draw tears and birds alarm the hearts to address his depress and anxiety. Same as last two lines, rather than directly address that he is too old and too much stressed, he said his hair was white and too few to hairpin up. (In ancient China, both male and female would have long hair)

The next lyric is in a much easier mood, Japanese poet Kakinomoto no Hitomaro wrote a song of love. Kakinomoto first described the surroundings to create quite, silence mood. The great novelist Natsume Soseki had said, Japanese wouldn’t directly say “I love u”, instead they may say “It’s beautifully the moon tonight”. Kakinomoto wrote

Now as the moon, sailing through the cloud rift

Above the mountain of Yakami,

Disappears, leaving me full of regret,

So vanishes my love out of sight;

This part expresses his love in a very art way which he used in many places.

Comparing these two lyrics, they both have more context than literal wording. When Tu Fu said a letter from home worth ten thousand in gold, it means both the difficulty of delivery due to the mess and his nostalgia. Based on the same culture background, these to lyric technology highly same.

The Astro Boy(鉄腕アトム) is a Japanese manga& anime created by manga artist Osamu Tezuka. The original manga was published from 1952 to 1968. The character was so classic and popular that has a far – reaching influence just like Frankenstein though it’s inspired by it. Basically, anyone in my age with some Asian background would be familiar with Astro Boy. (I don’t know how it is in America). Like all the other classic symbol, Frankenstein for example, my generation has barely read the original book. But it doesn’t mean it’s outdated. It never gets old because it becomes an icon, a pattern of contemporary life.

Cover for Mighty Atom volume 8 from the Osamu Tezuka Manga Complete Works edition. (Wikipedia)

According to the original comic book set, Astro Boy was born on April 7, 2003. The maker, Dr. Tenma, was the professor of japan science and technology department, his son dead in the traffic accident. He can not bear the pain of childbirth so he created the Astro Boy. However, since Astro Boy’s body can not grow up like a human, Dr. Tenma can not be satisfied, and finally, give up the Astro Boy and sell it to the robot circus. After being abandoned by Dr. Tenma, Astro Boy had been through a hard time. But thanks to the efforts of Dr. Ochanomizu, Japan science and technology professor as well, Dr. Astro Boy finally reborn, and recognized the Dr. Ochanomizu as a father. Dr. Tea also created Astro’s sister as Astro boy’s partner. The story is actually about how a boy with superpower grown up in human society though the time fighting with evils.

Both monster of Frankenstein and Astro boy were created and abandoned by a human. But Astro Boy got luckier than the monster, Dr. Ochanomizu had always supported and guided him to a right path. They were creatures of human’s desire. They both were innocent from the first place. But how come they ended up in different ways? Frankenstein set in 1818 and Astro Boy set in 2003, but they both discussed some issue concurrently. What is a qualified human? Unlike the monster, Astro boy was designed as a pretty cute boy. People or the public would have less trouble to accept Astro boy than the monster. The monster was so ugly that Frankenstein run away at the first meet. (Of course,there are some other reasons) The monster lost his first chance from the first place. And what if the XXX family can adopt him, see him as a pretty ugly man, would the story be different. Without Dr. Ochanomizu’s took care, what would Astro boy become? Actually, there weren’t many different these two characters. But we human being gave Astro boy a hand and endorsed him. He became one of us as a strong ally. The monster was a tragedy because no one would give him a hug. Everyone got hurt. Thus, keeping an open mind and accepting people who are different is important. And a good guide would help a lot.

I always enjoy my Friday night when I am chilling in my room with some beers and movies. Especially disaster or thriller movie, I found that I really get relaxed after traveled through those heartquake dramas. I appreciate Hollywood for offering so much thrilling adventure. One reason that I am so attracted by movies is they made those movies so real that I can’t help believe that I was there in person. Not only the technology is an advance but also character’s acting contributed to delivering the emotion of the certain occasion.

Mary Shelley did very well in building characters and portraying the feeling of her characters’. In first few paragraphs chapter V, Shelley successfully created an atmosphere by describing the emotion of the main character, Victor Frankenstein. At the start of this chapter, Frankenstein had his “dream” finally came true after long struggles and conflict on both his body and mind. It is obviously too much for Frankenstein to face the “monster” he created. At the moment, there were multiple feelings combined all together and busted at the same time that he was not able to take them all. And finally realized his dream of creating life was vanished only vain and regret left.

Mary Shelley took the advantage of using the first person in her book which helped a lot to deliver characters’ emotion. At the very first of the book, Shelley made Frankenstein as a storyteller so the plot can be very subjective but make sense. At the second paragraph of chapter V, Shelley wrote “His limbs were in proportion and I selected his features as beautiful.  Beautiful! —Great God!”. Notably, Mary Shelley captained three letters “Beautiful! —Great God!”. I have no idea whether it was Shelley’s initial intention or revised by editor later, but it did present Frankenstein exclamation. He was shocked by the completeness of his work and pretty pride of it. Then Mary Shelley used a long paragraph to describe Frankenstein’s mental active. She not only piling up emotion words but also described character’s physical active like “rushed out of the room” “threw myself on the bed in my clothes” which gave readers image. Especially “bed in my clothes”, it presented how messed Frankenstein condition was. I think it is great to do so. The novel is different from movies and music, readers have to picture the plot themselves which is not very direct and immediate. Physical actives would help readers to trace what character’s doing like the painter of a renaissance would use shadow and light to give portray life. Also, there are lots evidence showed that Shelley was fond of using details. Thanks to those details, readers are able to gather information indirectly. At the same paragraph, Shelley wrote: “a cold dew covered my forehead”. This line tells how nervous Frankenstein was by using an indirect way. And this is why we love to read—- there are rooms for us to picture.

Zen has always been a part of my life since I can spell it in Chinese when I was young. My grandfather was a Buddhist and he had been taught me a lot till he passed away from me. I was influenced and inspired by him at the time we stayed together. He never directly taught me anything or ask me do achieve some but I had absorbed much more than others. I think that is part of his philosophy as Zen. Zen is a highly abstracted subject that people in eastern would hundreds of years to study it and no one can actually say what is this in a sentence. What I learned from grandpa is to appreciate every little thing around you. First, it is every hard to capture little things around. You should train yourself to be a good observer. Sometimes you would have to jump out of those things and to stand out as another neutral party. And to appreciate things you would have to jump out of those things and to stand out as another neutral party. Which is, as you can tell, every hard to achieve.

I really like what Steve Jobs said: “Stay cool, stay foolish.” This phase means to absorb new, you have to be cool with the world and put your self as new to the world. I believe that Jobs had studied Zen. So does Matsuo Basho. He is a master of Zen. The way he observes surrounding was no different from us, but he got the sense to capture and appreciate. His most famous haiku is a good example of Zen.

A new pond

Without the sound of

A frog jumping in

Basically, most of us have the ability to spot a pond and catch the sound of the frog jumping in. But Mr. Matsuo saw something beyond. He found the light of the moon, smelled fresh grass and touched moist air.

When I woke up at morning, all I can see is snow and the whole world turns to white. I went down to a café to buy a coffee. Then I saw different faces. Some faces are annoying and troubling with getting to work. Some faces are celebrating this snow day holiday. I assume none of them, or most of them, cannot truly appreciate the snow today. They are not clammed down enough. Think about snow itself. Think about winter or four seasons are a cycle. You will be more close to Wabi-Sabi.

As snow goes down

The wind is shaking and crossing trees

Birds are coming back.

So every little thing around you in your daily life can be beautiful and delightful. Would you enjoy the time you stuck on the train? Would to say thanks to over-cooked eggs grandma fixed?

Daylight shining

My tea’s cooling by the window

Moon in east.

From now on, I hope you can have the feeling of little things in your life, either bad or good. By this, your little happiness or sadness can b virtue.

Empty house

Dust jump out of table

Sugars are yours

Hey class, my name is Zhongyu(JongYo as it pounced).  Zhang. I’m a junior majoring accounting now. And currently minor in the photograph. I love to travel and capture this city, New York.

What is enlightenment? To answer this question shortly, Kant simply exclaimed a motto:  Sapere Aude. Which means dare to know or dare to be wise. To achieve this, people should learn and get used to having their own understanding without the guidance of another. Kent believes that we all should have the courage to live mentally independent. However, it is not easy to reach. Kent argued that “Laziness” and “Cowardice” are two factors why it’s hard to jump out of the box. First, it easy to set ourselves into others’ guidance. Following a guidance makes life much more convent. Second, it’s been so long people wearing chains and balls that already forget what the freedom is. People lost their courage to think due to the authorities’, like Church and the Monarchy, intimidate. On the other hand, the resource of knowledge to help to people think indecently was taken by authorities. It is risky to not following the guidance. But people should not be frightened.

I think we are still far away from enlightenment even though we are not or less restricted to following the guidance. But we just naturally love to. We are so sightless and lack of understanding. Internet gave us great freedom to speak out, but people just retweet without any thinking. We love Wikipedia because there will be no more research in the library. It has been a long time since 1784 the year Kent wrote the article, people still can not “jump out of box”. And we never thought about this phase. How to? Or, Shall we?