I think this image represents a very important concept that we can see in the play "Waiting for Godot" by Samuel Beckett: TIME.
There is the tree that is described as one of the few elements that constitute the scenery, and some clocks that hang from it and represent the idea of time. In the poem, between the first and the second act, 24 hours have passed. However, the characters feel that ages have passed and that they are not the same person that existed one day ago.
Estragon is too stupid and superficial to understand anything. Vladimir, on the other hand, is an intellectual that tends to rationalize everything, so especially for him, time is related to crisis since his experiences are in a different tune in comparison to time. Vladimir notices all the changes that have affected the characters in just one day and he cannot endure not understanding what happened. If time is out of his reach, then what does he know about life? How can he be sure about his own life if he has no idea of how time has passed? Our society is a Vladimir-like society: we have to rationalize everything in order to understand everything, because if we don't, then nothing makes sense. Becket proposes the opposite idea: there is no point in trying to make sense and understand the universe because the universe is senseless. Even the simplest clock is senseless, because the seconds, minutes and hours that it indicates do not reflect the tiime that has actually passed.
At the end, for Becket, Vladimir is stupider than Estragon because he makes an effort in trying to understand the world when in fact the world is understandable and absurd. Estragon does not attempt at giving sense to the universe because he doesn't care about that: That's Beckett's idea of the universe.
Besides the idea of time, in the image we can also relate the tree with life. For Beckett, life is a cycle. If we think about the tree, the tree is constantly losing and growing leaves, and this marks the season in which the tree is. In our life we also have moments that define the "season" in which we are, the stages through which we advance in life, but at the end it's just a cycle and we go back to the beginning without even noticing. If life is a cycle, is there any use in trying to find its beginning and its end?
I believe that by looking at this image we can see the most important concepts implied in the play, LIFE as a cycle and TIME as unmeasurable, represented by the tree and the clocks.

"(De-)Analyzing" BoRhap taking "Waiting for Godot" into account

Here I am writing this entry, after HOURS of fighting against Blogger and my internet server (thank you both!) Last class, when Mr. Villa was talking about Beckett's Waiting for Godot, I couldn't help remembering Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody." As many of you may know, I am a H U G E Queen fan, and I know that this song in particular has called the attention of a lot of people (if not of everyone that has ever listened to it because, let's be honest, the song is too cool to be true.) This is primarily because the song begins with a well-remembered set of words--the "is this just real life? is this just fantasy?" (Mercury, 1975) has rised up a lot of cuestions. Afterwards, insanity dominates this "killer's mind" and he starts to sing opera with his insanity and the judges. Finally, there comes a rock part and the smooth "anyway the wind blows" followed by a gong. Yeah, it totally makes sense (and, dude, if you come to think about it, the video gives the song even more sense. YEAH, RIGHT!)

Of course, when in presence of SUCH a puzzling song, many fans, music critics, and journalist have wondered the following: WHAT IN THE HEAVENS IS THIS SONG ABOUT? It has been claimed that the song may be about Freddie's sexual orientation (yeah, he was gay. HUGE BUMMER!) or that it may be about Freddie leaving his home and boarding school to go to the UK. Well, when people tried to ask Freddie Mercury, the author of this masterpiece, this question, he just answered that Bohemian Rhapsody was "random rhyming nonsense." Just as when Beckett was asked about Waiting for Godot's meaning: "it is what it is."

The previously mentioned idea makes me remember the ideas that we dealt with during last session, yet one idea is way more salient than others: the human necessity of finding meaning in things that are meaningless to avoid collapsing. Personally, I wondered millions of times about the meaning of "Bohemian Rhapsody" because it is not a mystery that the lyrics can be understood in an allegoric way! The words Mercury uses, the lack of connection present in the song, make me lose my mind, and it seems that I, and all the ones that have heard the song and have looked for its meaning, needed a basis to try to understand what the author meant, what the author intention's was, and what the song represents.

But, then again, BoRhap is like the Universe: it is something that cannot be explicable. Yes, it is a very beautiful song, the lyrics choice is nice, and the melodies and different musical textures that Freddie added to the words is simply fantastic, but the named choices are as random as Family Guy's clips that appear after a character gives a special emphasis to some arbitrarily chosen statement, word, or anecdote. Approximately two years ago, I stopped wondering about the song's meaning and I set myself the goal of enjoiying it! I have no longer asked myself--or Yahoo! Answers--about what the song is about.

Believe it or not, leaving the "understanding the mystery" of the song aside, I started to admire it for WHAT IT IS, not for WHAT IT IS OR MEANS TO ME. Do you know why? Because the latter changes from one person to another--being influenced by cultural, psychological, experiencial biases--and reshape the intention or meaning (or lack of it) of the author of something (of the song, in this case.) Plus, due to the fact that it is quite insane trying to find the essence and meaning of a particular thing all the time. So, when you have come to the point when you run out of ideas and cannot decipher a puzzling song, poem, story, book, or whatever you want to find meaning to, stop trying to reveal its core and enjoy its mystery.


Best,


Marta Francisca Miranda Soto =)

PS: Please, if any of you has an interesting idea to be shared regarding this topic, please, do not hesitate commenting on this post! =D

As Long As You Don't Choose, Everything Remains Possible

      Here I am writing this entry and there you are reading it. What would have happened if I hadn’t dropped the other college program I was in? I wouldn’t be writing this, for sure; we wouldn’t have met each other! By the same token, many situations wouldn’t and would have happened, none of us know what, when and why.  The question: what would have happened if….? What if…? Is, to me, one of the “never- will-be-answered questions”  in our lives as human beings, we will never know because there are too many options from just one different choice we make. Sometimes it is very hard to choose between one option or the other since we start thinking about the consequences, or what will happen after making THAT decision. That’s the sort of discussions or conversation that (as we saw in class) R. Frost used to have in his walking with his friend….., and those were the inspiration for Frost’s poem: The Road Not Taken which we saw a couple of weeks ago.

    While reading that poem I couldn’t help remember Jaco Van Dormael’s movie “Mr Nobody”. The movie is placed in different life stages of the main character Nemo Nobody (Nemo means “Nobody” in Latin) . During those stages – as a kind, as a teenager, as a 35 years-old man- Nemo made different choices in his life which lead him to different lives, we don’t really know which of those lives is the real one. To understand, Nemo is telling his story to a journalist in a future 2092, he is 118 years old and the last mortal human.  The first “great” choice Nobody has to make is to decide (after his parent’s divorce) whether staying with his father or going with his mother, in a train station at the very exact moment in which he cannot change that decision. Michael Sullivan, for The Washington Post online movie reviews states that in sum “What is “Mr. Nobody” about? For one thing, it’s about that universal sense that life has passed you by, and the longing for the nonexistent reset button that will allow you a second chance. It’s also about the nature of time and causality, and the notion that many — perhaps infinite — different paths might coexist at the same time”. http://www.washingtonpost.com/goingoutguide/movies/mr-nobody-movie review/2013/10/30/bb919da0-402c-11e3-9c8b-e8deeb3c755b_story.html).

    I really enjoyed the movie. At the beginning it was kind of difficult to grasp, but then you reconstruct the possibilities, at the same time I asked and imagine my different possibilities if I had made different choices in my life. Maybe that’s not the kind of thought good to overthink, though. Anyway, I strongly recommend you to watch this movie, the soundtracks, the imagery and the science behind the story are truly catchy and make you think.  

     Here is the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpi0qsp3v_w. Hope you enjoy the film as I did.

     Finally, what would have happened if you had decided not to take this study program? I mean, not being a teacher in the near future?   I think that maybe I would have continued the other study program to become a chef!

   Have a nice week.

Being the center of everything becomes less important with age

From an article in the N.Y.Times Magazine about novelist Margaret Drabble (by Daphne Merkin, 9/13/09):

"As I get older," Drabble confided, "I do fear my physical world is getting thinner. When I was younger, I led multiple lives. When I'm here in Porlock, everything flows in again. It doesn't matter if I'm thinning out. . . . The trees are full, the sea is full and I am getting more ghostly. The physical world is taking over and absorbing me and eventually my ashes will be scattered in the churchyard." And then, taking her aptitude for seeing beyond the glare of self-interest - beyond the moment's buzz - to its natural extension, she muses unblinkingly on the inevitable void that awaits even those who fill the world with words: "My being the center has ceased to be of importance."

Taken from: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/creating-in-flow/200911/does-it-kill-you-contemplate-death

I think that what I quoted above represents in some way Frost’s poem, “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening.” In this poem, I imagine a person contemplating death, considering the possibility to leave this world because he or she thinks that death is not something bad, but something inevitable that all people will face in some moment. And, I think that the person in the poem could have thought something similar to the words I quoted while he was watching the woods filled up with snow. In that moment, he might have felt attracted to nature and thought that some day his ashes will be scattered in the churchyard, being part of that nature. However, he decided to keep his promises. This means that he has social responsibilities and decides to continue his journey because he has miles to go before he sleeps (meaning that he has things to do before dying).

The Hours - 2002 (MOVIE)

It is a drama film based on Michael Cunningham’s book which has the same name. “The hours” is a movie in which three women of different times live similar situations. Their lives are connected by what they live, all of them are connected by Virginia Woolf´s book, Mrs Dalloway. Indeed, one of the characters is Virginia; the other two characters of the movie are in a way other two “Virginias” and share some characteristics of her life and of her book’s character, Clarisse. The main idea of the movie is to show Virginia’s life, and how it would be develop in different generations. This film shows us two main issues in her life; lesbianism and suicide.

The movie in a way mix Virginia’s life with Clarisse’s life, and there are some important moments in the movie such as the one in which Laura tries to commit suicide and then some water appears, when she changes her opinion. For me, it is a relation to Virginia’s death, because she committed suicide in a river.

The lesbianism is showed in the movie too, and is taken from Virginia’s book, Mrs Dalloway. Many important facts of Virginia’s life are taken into consideration in the movie such as her mental illness that then allow her to commit suicide, or the bipolarity she had. From my perspective, I strongly believe that Virginia’s stories are a reflection of what we wanted to be or to do, depending on the book, in a way she tries to escape by writing and putting into paper her thoughts. The “suicide” as an important topic in her writing was maybe a clue of what was going to be her final death. Even though she has mental disorder, she was completely conscious about her writing, being one of the pioneers of that time with James Joyce. Indeed, both of them were part of a well-knonw group called “Bloomsburry” in which many intellectuals shared their knowledge. I know that we have not read the book “the hours” yet, but we will. I really think it would help us to understand better Virginia Woolf’s writing.

The Road not Taken

While I was writing my previous entry—yes, just a few minutes ago—I remembered “The Road not taken,” written by Robert Frost, because the facts of questioning your current life and thinking constantly about your decisions made are really connected to this poem.

First of all, I am leaving you this picture with the poem just to make easier for you the understanding of my entry (and because the landscape shows clearly the title of it).

This poem, as you should already know, is about the decisions made during our lives, but not about the decisions we made thinking a lot beforehand. Instead of that, this poem is about the ones we made without knowing what could happen later. The person in the poem says clearly that both roads were alike; then, he looked at one for a long time trying to discover the future he would have if he took that one; but AS JUST AS FAIR, he chose the other road without really knowing.

The idea of the poem is showing that human beings do not make their decisions in a deliberate, planned, or intentional way. No, they make them almost by accident—maybe not all the time. Nevertheless, the importance here is to be victorious in spite of this casuality. People do not choose difficult roads because they are “heroes,” but they can easily become one of those if they are able to show heroic courage when they are already walking in the road chosen. And this is what makes the difference: becoming the heroe of their own decisions. Are you a heroe, then?

Thanks for reading! You have one day left to make comments, so it would be interesting to share some ideas since we talked about this poem two days ago and in a very quickly way. Maybe you understood something really different from what I told you here.

Best,

Javiera Francisca Ramírez Cornejo :)  

Mrs. Dalloway is back!

Hi everybody! Let’s talk a little bit about Mrs. Dalloway—yes, again. In order to do this I want to share these lines taken from the novel. After reading them, you will notice that they were taken from the beginning of the story.

“She had the oddest sense of being herself invisible; unseen; unknown; there being no more marrying, no more having of children now, but only this astonishing and rather solemn progress with the rest of them, up Bond Street, this being Mrs. Dalloway; not even Clarissa anymore; this being Mrs. Richard Dalloway.”

Why are these lines important? Clarissa during the whole novel—the day of the party—is questioning her current life and what she has achieved. She realizes that she is just a wife trying to be “perfect” for people that she really does not care about. Thus, Mrs. Dalloway starts to feel invisible because she has “wasted” her entirely life in the shadow of her husband: Richard Dalloway. Here, it is important to mention the fact that her real name—Clarissa—is not even used; the book is called “Mrs. Dalloway,” just few people call her by her real name, etc. So we can see the big importance that her husband’s last name has.

Mrs. Dalloway feels that her present life is not what it used to be; she used to be a free woman, she wanted to achieve many goals, and she wanted to marry a man that really loves her (the money was not important). But, when she made the decision of marrying Richard, everything changed since he was rich and important. In this way, the only worry that Clarissa had when she “became ‘Mrs. Dalloway’” was being a wife and a mother instead of having a life apart, a career, or a job. Mrs. Dalloway was known for giving the best parties, but during this day she realizes that her life was so empty—giving parties is not a big deal.

Even though I am not the kind of person that fights for women’s rights (I am not feminist at all), I can understand how boring Clarissa’s life was. And this is because she changed her essence; in this way, she lost her reason for living. She felt so empty because she was not doing what she wanted when she was young. I am not saying that her current life was bad since being a wife or a mother 24/7 could be beautiful—I say “could” because I am neither a wife nor a mother, so I cannot give a certain opinion—but to enjoy it, it is necessary to want to be a mother or a wife. And in this case, Clarissa did not imagine her life this way when she was a teenager.

Now, we can connect these ideas to our own stories. If we want to be presidents, wives, doctors, shoemakers, teachers, husbands, etc., we are completely free to do it, but the idea is to do what we really want to do. Do not be another Mrs. Dalloway feeling that your “moments of being” already happened and that your dreams did not come true. “Think twice, act wise,” and do not wait until the moment you are about to kill yourself to realize how beautiful your life can be.

I look forward to reading your comments :) 

Javiera Francisca Ramírez Cornejo

Money does not bring happiness!

What would you do if you win the lottery? Probably, most of us will spend the money within the blink of an eye, some others will save it thinking of the future, but it doesn´t matter how you spend it because you will never be rich in terms of money.  The point here is that even though you will have money, you will never belong to an upper class, to the wealthy class because you were born in other reality and the way you think rich people are is not completely true; it is just a fantasy that regular people has about having a lot of money. This is the case of Jay Gatsby, who was able to make a fortune –who knows how, the only thing we know about that is that it may not be on legal terms, - have a great mansion, a lot of clothing, and all the things we as regular people can imagine, all of that was done in order to be at the social level of the girl he was in love with. Tom, who truly belongs to the aristocracy, always thought of Gatsby as someone he had never heard of, and so that he concluded he was a bootlegger: “…I picked him for a bootlegger the first time I saw him and I wasn’t far wrong.” (The Great Gatsby, page 143)

The novel of Jay Gatsby, as many people who read it may think, is about the American Dream that is concerned with being happy, succeed and rich in the US while you work hard to accomplish it; but in my humble opinion, I think it uncovers the disintegration of this dream in the “golden age” of America -where anything could be possible, it was a prolific country and its inhabitants were enjoying of the richness of the country,- because it is a reminder that you cannot have it all, that is why money does not brings happiness. We have to understand that in spite of all that Gatsby did, all the amazing parties he had thrown, the illegal business he was into, and I also think that it was not a coincidence that Nick rented the next-door house and his housemate had left the house to Nick alone, I think it was Jay who needed all the resources available to accomplish his ultimate goal, meeting the one who once was an innocent lovely wealthy girl, Daisy Fay, in order to let the love, once strongly felt, between them exist.

As discussed in class, the novel may be written with some truth in it, why? Because Fitzgerald, as Jay Gatsby did, went to New York to make a fortune in order to get the girl he loved. But at the end, poor Jay Gatsby got nothing in return. No matter what Jay did, or may have done, Daisy wouldn’t have gone with him because she was not part of his world, he was never closer to Daisy as he thought, there are moments in life in which regardless everything you do, are gone for good, those moments will never return, those moments vanished, those moments were magical, in both senses, they were a dream came true and then they were not there anymore. This is what Jay didn’t understand, he will never make the past again, what had happened between him and Daisy was gone, it was a true feeling though many things have happened in between they met again. 

To conclude this reflection, I would like to add that we need to be able to look the people that surround us, the people who loves us know, today; the things that we have, not the things we would want to have; do activities that fulfill our souls and bring us happiness because now is the time to enjoy our lives, not tomorrow as nobody know about tomorrow; don’t think that you don’t have enough money, you just have enough to put yourself outside your body and watch yourself being happy, doing the things you want, being with people you love, enjoying life; MONEY DOESN’T BRINGS YOU HAPPINESS, HAPPINESS ARRIVES WHEN YOU LET IT IN, IT COULD BE FROM NOW ON AND IT IS UP TO YOU MAKING IT STAY IN YOUR LIFE. That is one of the reasons Gatsby ended up all alone, in spite of all the people who attended to his parties, all those people who fancied with him, nobody was with him at his very last moment, nobody attended to his funeral, except those who loves him, his father and his only friend, Nick Carraway.

I would like to add a quote of the current Pope, Francisco to make you have a second thought on money: "No sirve de mucho la riqueza en los bolsillos cuando hay pobreza en el corazón."

THE OTHERS: Connections between Literature and the Film

The Others is a 2001 psychological/supernatural horror film written, directed and scored by Alejandro Amenábar. I was 11 years old, but I clearly remember the day when I decided to rent this movie because I had been told by my friends that it was a must-see movie— and yes! they were absolutely right.

For those who may not know The Others, the storyline of the movie portrays the life of Grace Stewart—role performed by Nicole Kidman, who also plays the character of Virginia Woolf in The Hours— a devout Roman Catholic mother who lives with her two small children, Anne and Nicholas, in a remote country house in the British Crown Dependency of Jersey, in the immediate aftermath of World War II.  The children have an uncommon disease, characterized by photosensitivity, so their lives are structured around a series of complex rules designed to protect them from inadvertent exposure to sunlight. The new arrival of three servants at the house — an aging nanny and servant named Mrs. Bertha Mills, an elderly gardener named Mr. Edmund Tuttle, and a young mute girl named Lydia — coincides with a number of odd events that will be happening through the storyline.

Ironically enough is the fact that in the story, Anne and Nicholas, are not completely conscious about what is happening in the outside word, given that they have been alienated from society by their own mother, Grace—decision that is justified in the film because of their disease. In fact, they are all, as a family, alienated because it’s their own choice, I believe; they live far away from the city, which was considered to be the place of technology, full of chaos, “where you lose yourself.” Moreover, main events in history such as the I World War (1914-1918) and the Market Crush (1929) had already taken place; they were still living under the influence of modernism though. But, it seems that under Grace’ instruction, these kids are not fully aware of all these changes led by modernism that we’ve been talking about in classes.

For instance, philosophers like Darwin, Marx, Freud, and Saussure must have been completely banned in their lessons. Grace, as the devout Roman Catholic she was, would have never allowed her children to question or criticize God—there is a scene in which Anne is asked to pray for hours as way of punishment because of her disrespectful behavior. The role of Literature, which was being considered as a new way of expression by creating a new vision of the world, was restricted and just for instruction in this particular case. 

In connection with the concept of fragmentation—which basically points to the idea that we all perceive fragments of reality; therefore, everything we experience is adjusted with our own beliefs—we may say that during the storyline Grace and the children have a different perception of what is happening inside their house (there are many signs in the story which lead us to think, as an audience, that there must be more characters that we don’t see—Ghosts). Because of the way Grace was raised and the kind of instruction she was given, she refused the idea of thinking that ghosts may be ‘playing around.’ Her perception of reality because of her beliefs is that there must be something else. On the contrary, the children have another perspective, which completely differs from their mother’s point of view—there is another idea that I would like to portray as well concerning the same topic, but I have to mention another fact first.

Moreover, Kidman’s character is going to experience what an epiphany is—concept that have been portrayed in Woolf’s and Joyce’ works. As we all may know, epiphany is considered to be a moment where a character experiences self-understanding or illumination. By the end of the movie, Grace experiences this revelation when she realizes that after all these several odd events that were occurring inside her house, the ghosts were actually herself and her children—I’m sorry to tell you the end of the story if you hadn’t watched the movie, but I have to mention it!

Regarding this revelation in the movie is that I think I am able to establish an interesting connection—at least for me—between the film and the topics of being and fragmentation. As an audience, we have this perspective that the characters are facing a terrifying situation—not to mention how scary it could be to see a ghost—and just in a matter of seconds, after this revelation in which we realize that the protagonists were actually dead, the storyline changes 180° degrees; therefore, the perspective we have as an audience changes as well—who were really the intruders in the house? Who were really the ghosts in the end?  From this point, it's that we may say that reality can’t be objective and it really varies depending on the point of view.

In addition, as explained by the end of the movie, at some point Kidman’s character chose to believe that she was alive after murdering her two children and committing suicide because she was convinced that God, in his infinite mercy, would give her another chance to start again—she chose to be believe, between this ‘to be or not to be’ thinking, she wasn’t dead. 

Thank you for reading this post and I hope you can share your opinion with me in order to exchange more ideas. Please find enclosed a link of this scene in which I can approach you to this amazing moment in the movie.

What really matters...

Hi to all of you that are reading. 

I want to ask you. What really matters for you? What is that thing that you could never refuse, even for a huge amount of money?
 
This time, I would like to start by highlighting the moment in The Great Gatsby when Gatsby thinks about having a life again with Daisy,  so he wants her back in his life, but it seems that he hasn't realized that some things have changed, and that she is no longer the girl that he thinks she is.

Everything he has done in his life has had a purpose, and money was not an issue; he has earned a lot--not in a very honest way--with one purpose; to be shared with Daisy. At the same time, it corrupted Gatsby's soul and left him alone; without his beloved one and without his life. He could never fill the empty space he had inside with his belongings--money can't buy happines after all. It can solve economical problems, give you a status in society and give you anything you can buy, but not what really matters. Tom Buchanan, a high-born man, got married with Gatsby's love because of his wealth related with his power, status, and fortune; nevertheless, they never enjoyed life together.

In the novel, there is a moment in which Gatsby is full of hope of his future with Daisy, where he truly believes that they will get married and also go back in time when everything was perfect and anything had happened. In that moment, they say the following:

 “You can’t repeat the past.” [Nick to Gatsby]
“Can’t repeat the past?” he cried incredulously. “Why of course you can!”

Nick and Gatsby talked about the possibility of repeating the past, Nick states that it is not possible, but Gatsby argued that it is. However, he doesn't realize that in the end was wrong. We don't have that power.
Daisy's character makes me wonder about the real power of money and how it can shape people's personalities and make them blind about the truly important issues in life and in how much are we capables to bear in order to have our dream life.

I would like to stop here and make a little comparison between Gatsby's love story and another one that I hope you have heard of; a novel written by Nicholas Sparks named The Notebook. In this novel, the main character, Allie Hamilton, is a girl that even though she had the opportunity to have a wealthy life, she takes the chance and stays, against all odds, with the person she is really in love with. She almost doesn't care about money, all she wants is happines and the company of the love of her life, and Noah's efforts to call her attention again have the desired effect. Here, we could see the opposite case in which money is not more important than what really fullfills your soul for both of them. It could neither contaminate their feelings nor their realities.

I learned that what really matters is what fullfills your soul; it is not status, it is not complex and/or expensive things, It is, simply, what makes you feel unique and worth it.

 

A Modern Hero

Hi, Everyone!

You might possibly have heard of the story of this guy that did not had a shower for a year, haven't you?

Well, If not, it is a trending piece of news that I found surfing the net and I believe that he is a very good example of a Hemingway’s apprentice hero; he was true to himself and followed and respected his own established principles and rules within a period of time. In addition, he told the truth about everything he did, felt and saw... It was certainly a real inner growing process.

 He stated:

“I set a bunch of rules for myself to follow to lead by example. The rule for water was that I could only harvest it from natural sources such as lakes, rivers, and rain or from wasted sources such as leaky faucets.  And I kept track of exactly how much I used too, with an aim of showing just how little we need to get by. (…)  I set a goal for 6 months and when that day passed I figured I might as well go a full year without a shower.”

Furthermore, I could say that he lived with an astonishing connection with nature and, just as the famous transcendentalism, Thoreau, lived literally “In the woods” and learned the importance of appreciating every single resource neededfor him, something that we, unfortunately, easily forget.

Maybe if we could just set our own rules or maybe follow his--maybe not in the exact way as he did but some adapted to fit to us--we could also make a little change in the world. 

As we could notice, he set 6 months and then he continued, maybe it could be the key for success. In the end, no one is born an expert, and we should know that--almost--every important achievement in life is made little by little.

As a final comparison to what Hemingway states, I would like to say that I believe that this man is an aficionado in his own game, because he is still learning, but know the rules inside out, and is a person that Hemingway would perfectly think worth being a hero.

If you want to read the hole story, click here.

I also encourage you to read some poems that he wrote on his journey and after it in his webpage, specially the poem about life that I found specially inspiring.

Hope you enjoy it as much as I did! 

"It was a good book, because it was an honest book" - Ernest Hemingway

I guess that most of you have seen the movie "Midnight in Paris", or at least have heard about it in classes because Mr. Villa mentioned it. Well, I have found a very short scene of this movie in youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzoOA473wq0

The main character, Gil, is transported back to the Belle Époque at midnight. There, he is introduced to important writers from the 1920s.
In the scene you can see that Fitzgerald (yes, the author of "The Great Gatsby") takes Gil to meet Hemingway, and just in a matter of seconds Hemingway expresses two main concepts that we talked about in class: morality in writing (which has to do with being truthful) and the ordering code (which has to do with the hero who fights with honor so dies gracefully).

I want to focus on the former: the idea of morality in writing. Hemingway says firmly "it was a good book, because it was an honest book" which reflects how concerned he was with truth in his writing. As said in classes, Hemingway stated that being truthful is to be right. For being truthful he put down what he saw in the simpliest way, avoiding saturation and extremely editing.
About this, I think that it was an exaggerated point of view, because a good book doesn't necessarily need to be honest. What about books that are full figures of speech? We enjoy them; they appeal to our emotions, plus we can clearly understand and feel what we are reading. If "the sun is smiling" we know that it is shining, we imagine its bright and can almost feel its warm. If the sun can't literally smile it doesn't mean that what was written is a lie, because we are able to interpret the writers intention; we get what he meant anyway and it's true.

Maybe Hemingway was too focused on describing real facts the closest to truth, so he didn't appraise a book for its complexity.
 

world water crisis

Hello classmates, I would like you to watch the following video:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRGZOCaD9sQ

This video is about world water crisis. The reason why I want you to watch it because it aroused in me this idea that in the future we may not have enough water to survive, which as shown in this video, is already happening in some parts of the world. With an scenario like that possibly awaiting us in the future, and considering the fact that in some parts of our country lack of water has been reported, I've ended up agreeing with Hemingway's idea that having children in this world means condemning them to suffering, which is reflected not only in Hills Like White Elephants' implied, imminent event--the abortion, but also in one of the facts mentioned in this video--that "every 20 seconds a child dies from a water-related-illness diarhea."

So I leave you classmates with the following questions: Do you think in twently-years time we are going to be able to live without caring much about or without doing something about water crisis as at least some of us do now? Supposing that in twently-years time in Chile we won't have enough water (which is perfectly possible considering the current state of affairs), would you agree that under such circumstances, having children would mean condemning them to suffering? Do you think everyone would be able to raise children under such conditions?
I look forward to your answers.

 

Grace under pressure

Hi everyone! I would like to share this quote made by Ernest Hemingway with you: “Courage is grace under pressure.” I hope you remember it because we were—I mean the teacher was—talking about that in one of our classes.

First of all, let’s explain the meaning of the phrase—or at least what I understand from it. What is courage? What do you think this word means? Well, the Oxford dictionary says that courage is “the ability to do something dangerous, or to face pain or opposition, without showing fear.” That is a very good definition—I think—but we cannot base our lives on a meaning given by a dictionary, it is necessary to go beyond that and create a good definition founded on our own experience… Possibly that was what Hemingway did.

Probably, we may have suffered, cried, had bad moments, or lost a loved person… “Life is not easy,” right? However, those terrible moments are the ones that help us to learn how to deal with life and are what we will call “the pressure.”

The idea of Hemingway is that we, as human beings, can face the bad times and fight against them, which is hard, I know, but we were made to be happy, and giving up is not the solution to get happiness. On the other hand, it is TOO easy to give up the fight and continue being miserable the rest of our lives. The important thing is not being the winner or the loser of the battle, but the idea is to fight with honor and demonstrate that we are brave and able to show “grace under pressure.”

In order to make it “funnier” I’m sharing this picture that I found, where the little boy instead of letting the fire burn him, what is he doing? Yes! He is fighting against it :D . We can see that it is being really difficult for him to extinguish the fire, but he is trying very hard to do it… I hope you all do the same ;)

Javiera Francisca Ramírez Cornejo