Oroonoko

Aphra Behn does some really...interesting things with her story. I do like her storytelling, she gives out a lot of really helpful information but I'm rather partial to stories that have more dialogue. Not sure if that's going to pickup in the second half but right now it seems like it's a lot of block text. Which has been working, but it is getting a little boring. 

          I really did enjoy the part about the Native Americans who though the English Governor was dead because he didn't show up when he said he would. There total willingness to call him a liar was also pretty cool. I just really like the idea of a group of people who don't expect everyone to lie all the time. It might be naive but it's also great to see, especially now when our society is built almost entirely on lies. Honestly, what's the point of lies? I'd be really interested in seeing our society try to function without lying. Of course then would come the inevitable collapse of the government and banks and every other piece of infrastructure. 

          I don't really like how she explains how beautiful Oroonoko and Imoinda are and then goes and says it's because they have all these white features. If it weren't for Oroonoko's black skin he would be one of the most beautiful men around. But not only is he black, he's really really black. Like coal. So while she goes on about how attractive he is to all people she keeps throwing in the caveat that 'oh he's not actually that hot because he's black'. It's rude and really racist. Although I feel that's to be expected in this time frame. Imoinda is even so beautiful that 40+ white men have been caught staring at her. As if the fact that white men even find her attractive makes her stand out so much. Half of Aphra Behn's love of Oroonoko comes from the fact that she loves how educated and cultured he is. He speaks English and French and all that jazz but those are all markers of European civilization. Who cares? He's a pretty awesome guy for other reasons. He's a renowned soldier and leader, unbelievably loyal, and a good friend. And any guy who doesn't kill the man who literally steals his wife the day(ish) before the wedding (grandfather or no) gets points in my book. I know he's going to do some stuff that I can't really support in the next half of the story but for now Oroonoko seems like a pretty cool guy. 

Devils, Satan, Adam and Eve, and the Human Condition

In the past few books that we have read they have discussed devils, Satan, and the human condition. In Oroonoko, the author, Aphra Behn discusses the innocence of Adam and Eve tying this novella to some of the other pieces of literature that we have read this year. In Paradise Lost, Satan discusses his point of view. Satan plans to corrupt God's newest creation. In Oroonoko, the narrator discusses Adam and Eve and compares the innocence to that of the narrator prior to when they began to sin. I think that the religious references between the literature that we have read kind of builds off of one another. I know that this is a really short post but my next post will be longer.

Paradise Lost or Found... Also what's up with Satan?

I figured that I would start my post with this lovely picture.

I'm not sure if I sympathize with Satan or not. Yes, I feel bad that he was banned from Heaven but it was his fault. He turned against God and even though banishment is a pretty extreme punishment, I can understand why it was necessary given what had happened. I found it interesting that Milton felt the need to specify that the fall from Heaven into Hell took 9 days and nights.  To me that alone shows how much thought Milton put into this piece of literature.

I do sympathize with the angels that fell with Lucifer. Lucifer lost the battle against God and his followers.So the angels such as Mephistopheles picked the wrong side. I guess in some ways they deserve the same punishment for the same crime only they did not lead. 

As a history major, I really enjoyed talking about Puritanism during class last Thursday. Religion was a big part of life for society at that time.England was going through a time of religious change. A few years ago I memorized the order of the British rulers after the Tudor Dynasty ended, (James I, Charles I, Olive Cromwell (when Milton was writing Paradise Lost), Charles II, James II, and William and Mary) in case anyone was wondering.

 I find it interesting that predestination  misconstrued in public memory. Milton believed that God could predict people's actions from the time they were born. But people have free-will, which I've noticed is a reoccurring theme in this course. I am really curious to see where Milton goes with this theme throughout book II and how big a role free-will plays. 

I think reading Paradise Lost would be easier if any (or preferably all) of the dialogue was in quotes.  Shorter sentences would be nice as well but I suppose that might be asking too much. Basic quotation marks would be really helpful for knowing when characters end their speeches. At some point it tends to say something along the lines of "so spake" or "h' Arch-Fiend replied" and that makes finding the start of speech a bit easier. They just are so wordy (I mean so far that's mostly all Satan) that it can be hard to figure out where they stop speaking. 

That being said  I do really like this translation or update or edition or whatever the proper term is for it. Not only are the notes pretty helpful but the words themselves are easier to process (as many of them as there may be). Just based on that factor this has been the easiest text for me to read up until this point in the semester. So thanks to whoever did the editing. I do think it's interesting how some sentences are ten-plus lines long while others are seven words long. I know a variation in sentence structure makes the reading more interesting but that is one hell of a variation. 

There was a  old man I grew up with, named Guy Waterman, who died when I was six. Guy was a professional jazz pianist , a speech writer for three presidents (including Nixon), and the author of four books. This may seem like a really weird tangent but Guy was a huge Milton fan with obsessive compulsive tendencies. So Guy memorized Paradise Lost. Not just a few lines, not just Book I, but the entirety of Paradise Lost.  In terms of sheer accomplishment I put Guy pretty high up on the list of bad-asses. I imagine the list of people who memorized Paradise Lost consists of Milton, Guy, and a few others who really need to find another source of amusement. 

But whatever, tangent aside. I find myself really liking Satan. Not because he's any pillar of society, I think it's pretty clear that he's not, but because he's pretty optimistic about this hell thing. Like Dr. MB said in class, "Satan's a glass half full kind of guy." And maybe it's because he's got it better than anyone else who fell with him, but I like his optimism. I'm not sure if the other devils/demons/fallen angels are quite such big fans of the "Better to reign in hell than to serve in Heaven" theme but that's probably just because they're stuck serving in Heaven and Hell. I think it will be interesting to see how everything pans out. 

Angelo, the next Faustus

I cannot decide who upsets me more Angelo or Faustus. they have both made really bad decisions, which will eventually end in someone's death (that much is certain). I can already tell that Angelo is going to anger me throughout this entire play. Seriously, if being an scumbag was a crime he would have been sentenced to death before this play even began. He is the perfect example of how not to get a girl, especially, a girl who is training to become a nun. Really Angelo? you're already engaged. I want his fiance to find out what a cheating bastard Angelo is, it's poetic justice, actually, it is justice.  If this is similar to any other Shakespeare play that I have read then Angelo will eventually get what he deserves (which in my opinion is no less than imprisonment for life, which in Shakespeare pretty much translates to, he's gonna die before the play is over).  I think that may be one of my favorite parts of reading Shakespeare, it is like with superheros, the bad guys are always punished. Granted the difference is that in a Shakespearean tragedy the good guys usually die too but hey, what are you going to do.

The Duke is intriguing character to say the least. I am curious to see what he does with his "spare time." Am I the only one who is really curious as to why the Duke chose to go undercover as a friar? I feel like there is a really interesting back story here.

Isabella, so far I like Isabella as a character. She is smart (thus far), she is kind, and she is virtuous. I am curious to see Claudio's reaction to Isabella's decision to let him be killed instead of giving up her Chasity in exchange for his life. Isabella is certain that he brother would not want her to give up her morals so that he can live but is this what Claudio wants. He is in love with Juliet and he is waiting to die so his mindset might be skewed due to circumstance. Claudio is Isabella's brother and as far as we know they have a good sibling relationship. Is Isabella willing to lose her brother in the name of God or will she change her mind? Is she making the right choice? Can her decision be justified?

A variety of interesting characters (none of whom I like).

In a (not so) shocking change of events, I really don't care for most of the characters in this play. (Sorry Dr. MB) That may change but for now I'm a little iffy on most of them.

Angelo, who I know I  detest, seems at first like he's doing his job (which is more than you can say for the Duke) even if he is getting a little power drunk. That changes in Act II. Scumbag over here with a fiancée tries to blackmail Isabella into sleeping with him. It's gross. He's gross. This isn't the kind of man who should be in charge of punishing people for lecherous behavior. Honestly he doesn't seem like the type of man who should be in charge of anything.  If the Duke was wandering around as a Friar for shits and giggles just to see how Angelo deals with the power, that'd be something I could find okay or even funny. The fact that he puts Angelo in charge to make him handle getting the city back under raps is just cowardly. It's like he's trying not to give up his "cool parent" status so he's making Angelo the mean step-parent. It's the Duke's mess, he should learn to clean it up. 

As for Claudio? Look, I get that he was panicking a bit while being sent to his death, but pimping out your sister? That's low. If it wasn't pathetic enough, his sister is a novice, she's about twelve hours away from never leaving the convent. And maybe it's just my modern brain but they seem like a pretty strict convent, what with that whole "never talk to a man unless in the presence of the Prioress and even then with a veil on" thing. Then she goes and says she wishes the rules were more strict. And this is the girl he thinks is going to use her feminine ways to get him off of death row. Okay dude. He can say he wants her to use her quick wit all he wants but when that fails she's still just the sacrificial lamb. 

As for Isabella, she's currently the redeeming factor for me. I appreciate her love for her brother but I also enjoy her respect for herself. I certainly wouldn't ever be able to commit myself to life in a convent the way she has. My siblings mean the world to me and there isn't much I wouldn't do for them. That being said I'm pretty sure I would react much less gracefully to someone trying to blackmail me for my sibling's life. (Honestly I would probably take a brick to their head.) 

I can see why this play would qualify as a "problem play". It's not tragic and it's not really that funny. So where does that leave it?