Reflection on my group presentation

     For my group presentation, we had a larger group than the others. In this way, it was harder to meet all at once, so we focused on emailing each other. We had a great powerpoint presentation with our individual notes submitted to one of the classmates. I enjoyed our presentation especially because I observed how six different theorists came together, or apart, all at once. It was good to be refreshed with information in a summarized way, and have the experience of teaching a whole class. It was interesting to speak out and hear so many different opinions and conclusions from both these theorists and the class all at once.
    Jean-Paul Sartre, the focus of my part in the presentation, was an interesting man to go in depth with. I realized, as did the people that study him, that he does not exactly answer his own question, "why write"? But instead he beats around the bush, lending to his purpose of having meaning end in the reader, not the author. In fact, this might be his subconscious effort to help us understand that we have to make the meaning "exist" by reading even his own open ended theory.
     One of the most interesting things I found is a point that Sartre makes about art and how he relates it to writing. He says that "we never receive from it that gaity of love. We put them into it," a subjective discovery. Since the art piece comes from the depths of our heart, we will never find anything but ourselves in it. He then relates it to reading in which "the author does not see the words as the reader does since he knows them before writing them down." He only "projects." This is an interesting statement to ponder.

Weekly Blog #1 Classical Literary Criticism

     It is interesting to see how Georgias of Leontini not only had a unique name, but had some unique views on speech. He differs from Plato's didactic view, which I found very interesting.  While most would look down upon wording ad phrasing that aims to persuade with no substane of truth, Gorgias praises it. He embraces rhetoric while Plato thinks it is utterly wrong. As he rose to be one of the most influential Sophists, we can see that there was definitely something approved and admired within his social construct and practice.
     How often do we hear that someone reads a poem and stands in awe; in agreement, but doesn't have a clue as to what it means? There is the same sort of appeal in the kind of speech pattern that Gorgias puts on a pedestal. Whether we admit it or not, there is a great commendation toward rhetoric; an approval and encouragement of it, because it has some sort of settling effect on us; a cathartic experience, and usually something to hold on to and root for at the end of a speech, for example.
      The diligent teacher is different then the great speaker. While both can collide, the teacher would have no place in rhetorical devices as a means to success, but truth revealed as a means to success. In the conviction, for example, of a stance in politics, he might spend more time researching and methodically revealing the information, while a rhetorical great speaker might spend more time on the wording and phrasing of the information, even if he had to say a speech on the spot, with little research done. He would use appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos for a strong argument, supporting what little solid facts he might have. In this scenario, the latter might easily be won by an audience of artists, but might lose in a group of politicians.
     In the case of Helen, not only do we have a speaker who is skilled with rhetoric, but a situation in which it is extremely unpolular and challanging to defend. The power of speech is highlighted here, however, to defend Helen quite eloquently.

Analysis #2 Structuralism

Structuralism is conveyed in this photo, taken by Dave Blumenkrantz, due to the juxtaposition of this soon to be mother and a machine for destruction. It creates a place to speak, to theorize, to investigate, instead of just gazing at the aesthetics. It decenters the individual portraying the self as a construct and a consequence of impersonal systems." They are not in control of their social existence, but "created by social and cultural systems, within which they are subjects" (Norton, 20) We focus on the internal approach here. What is this woman's life like? Why is a precious life about to be born next to a killing machine? What is she thinking? This evokes a string of conversation about the actual happenings within the picture, not just the composition of the picture. Rather, the composition evokes the structuralism therein. This picture poses a spectrum of possibilities as we realize the setting of her home.