ENGL 3311 Lecture Notes - Lecture 14: Sestet

14 views2 pages

dhawk270

8 Jan 2023

School

Texas Tech University

Department

English

Course

ENGL 3305

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Metaphysical poetry: the retreat" by vaughn: a yearning for youth. The poem the retreat", by henry vaughn, is the reflection of the past by the speaker to a time when things were simpler and happier. Back to a time when the speaker was innocent to the ways of the world, and the ignorance to what lay ahead. It also could mean that the word stands for an escape from reality or from responsibilities. In those days there was an ignorance to the evils of man and there were no real dangers to face. The speaker is reminiscing of the past and what it was like in those days to be young and carefree. Ultimately, vaughn is contemplating not only a remembrance of the past, but a longing to live his life over in the way that he wanted to live it.

Related Questions

9. Who are "the gods" referring to in this passage from the story?

"The house was an altar with ten thousand attendants, big, small, servicing, attending, in choirs.

But the gods had gone away, and the ritual of the religion continued senselessly, uselessly."

a. the mother, father, and children who lived in the house

b. politicians who began a war and then fled to safety

c. the inventors responsible for creating the house

d. scientists who developed the nuclear bomb astonishment

10. The dog frothed at the mouth, lying at the door, sniffing, its eyes turned to fire is an example of $a(n)$

11. What is the significance of the line, "The dog was gone."

a. This is the beginning of the takeover of the home

b. It represents the end of the last truly living thing in the house

c. The dog has finally left as have all the people

d. It symbolizes the total abandonment of the home

12. Why is it ironic that the house chooses the poem "There Will Come Soft Rains"

a. The poem is Mrs. McClellan's favorite, but she is not there to hear it

b. The house, like nature in the poem, is unaware of the demise of mankind

c. It is raining outside as it is raining in the poem

d. The house is mistaken about the poetry Mrs. McClellan liked

13. Why does the marking of time change at 10:00p.m.?

a. The damage has changed the home's operating system.

b. The home now realizes the family is no longer there.

C. The house is now dead and no longer announcing the time.

d. The home is set to change the marking for time at 10:00p.m.

14. Which line best represents the climax of the story?

a. The nursery walls glowed. (paragraph 24)

b. Today is August 5, 2026, today is August 5,2026, today is ... (last line)

c. A dog whined, shivering on the porch. (paragraph 14)

d. At ten o'clock the house began to die. (paragraph 31)

15. Based upon the story as a whole, the reader can conclude that Bradbury believes

a. more technology should be used in every home

b. technology can be useless, impractical and even dangerous

c. all technology should be monitored closely by the government

d. technology has the ability enhance the lives of individuals

16. What is the effect of the story's point of view?

a. The first person narration reveals the thoughts/actions of the family members.

b. The omniscient narrator reveals details not available since there are not characters.

c. The 3rd person narration provides an objective perspective of the events in the story.

d. The omniscient narrator reveals the carelessness and destructive behavior of the family since they would not.

st8pshsb8f

Write an objective summary of the Lincoln (Abraham Lincoln)-Douglas (Frederick Douglas) Debates. This should at least have 3-6 sentences.

Directions: Read the passage below and answer the question(s) that follow.

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates

In 1858, Abraham Lincoln, a known abolitionist, ran as the Republican party candidate for the United States Senate seat against the incumbent Democratic senator, Judge Stephen Douglas. Lincoln and Douglas held a series of seven debates throughout Illinois, focusing overwhelmingly on what was the most contentious issue of the day: slavery, and whether it should be permitted in the new territories and states that were being rapidly acquired at the time.

The Lincoln-Douglas debates were so heated, in part because of a controversial address Lincoln had previously given at the Illinois State Capitol on June 16, 1858, now known as the "House Divided" speech, in which Lincoln said:

A house divided against itself, cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved - I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become lawful in all the States, old as well as new - North as well as South.

During the third debate in Jonesboro, Illinois on September 15,1858 , Douglas responded to Lincoln's "house divided" contention by iterating the Democratic position on slavery, emphasizing the rights of states (and, by extension, new territories) to legislate their own policies on slavery.

Douglas: I now come back to the question, why cannot this Union exist forever divided into free and slave States, as our fathers made it? It can thus exist if each State will carry out the principles upon which our institutions were founded, to wit: the right of each State to do as it pleases, without meddling with its neighbors. Just act upon that great principle, and this Union will not only live forever, but it will extend and expand until it covers the whole continent, and makes this confederacy one grand, ocean-bound Republic. We must bear in mind that we are yet a young nation, growing with a rapidity unequaled in the history of the world, that our national increase is great, and that the emigration from the old world is increasing, requiring us to expand and acquire new territory from time to time, in order to give our people land to live upon. If we live upon the principle of State rights and State sovereignty, each State regulating its own affairs and minding its own business, we can go on and extend indefinitely, just as fast and as far as we need the territory.

In the 7th debate in Alton, Illinois on October 15,1858 , Lincoln retreated slightly from his "House Divided" stance, agreeing that state sovereignty should generally be constitutionally protected, but slavery is a moral wrong for which expansion must not be allowed, and which should eventually be quashed completely.

Lincoln: The Judge [Douglas] alludes very often in the course of his remarks to the exclusive right which the States have to decide the whole thing for themselves. I agree with him very readily that the different States have that right. He is but fighting a man of straw when he assumes that I am contending against the right of the States to do as they please about it. Our controversy with him is in regard to the new Territories... He says that upon the score of equality, slaves should be allowed to go in a new Territory, like other property. This is strictly logical if there is no difference between it and other property. If it and other property are equal, his argument is entirely logical. But if you insist that one is wrong and the other right, there is no use to institute a comparison between right and wrong. You may turn over every thing in the Democratic policy from beginning to end, whether in the shape it takes on the statute book, in the shape it takes in the Dred Scott decision, in the shape it takes in conversation, or the shape it takes in short maxim-like arguments-it every where carefully excludes the idea that there is any thing wrong in it.

That is the real issue. That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles-right and wrong throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time; and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity and the other the divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same spirit that says, "You work and toil and earn bread, and I'll eat it." No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle.

hersheysmom111

You will require at least 5 varied annotations per age with an exception of 3 annotations for the last page (commentary, summary per page, text connections, unknown words) and should identify a minimum of 5 figurative language / literary devices throughout the story. This means that you should have a minimum of 18 annotations.

You will use the cursor highlight and comment function to complete your textual annotations, being sure to clearly identify (IN ALL CAPS) what type of annotation you are doing (i.e. COMMENTARY, SUMMARY, TEXT CONNECTION, UNKNOWN WORD, LITERARY DEVICE) and then explaining why you identified it, what it means, and/or what the connection is.

About the Author: Kate Chopin (1850-1904) was a renowned feminist author of the late 19 th century. During this period, which was also known as the Victorian Era (1837-1901), women had very little control over their own hives, and many female thinkers like Chopin fought hard for social change

[1] Knowing that Mrs. Mallard was afflicted with a heart trouble, great care was taken to break to her as gently as possible the news of her husband's death.

It was her sister Josephine who told her, in broken sentences; veiled hints that revealed in half concealing, Her husband's friend Richards was there, too, near ber It was he who had been in the newspaper office whep intelligence of the railroad disaster was received, with Brently Mallard's name leading the list of "killed." He had only taken the time to assure himself of its truth by a second telegram, and had hastened to forestall any less careful, less tender friend in bearing the sad message.

She did not hear the story as many women have heard the same, with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance. She wept at once, with sudden, wild abandonment, in her sister's amm. When the storm of grief had spent itself she went away to her room alone. She would have no one follow her.

There stood, facing the open window, a comfortable, roomy armchair. Into this she sank, pressed down by a physical exhaustion that haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul.

[5] She could see in the open square before her house the tops of trees that were all aquiver with the new spring life. The delicious breath of rain was in the air. In the street below a peddler was cry ing his wares. The notes of a distant song which some one was singing reached her faintly, and countless sparrows were twittering in the eaver.

She was young with a fair, calm facs, whose lines bespoke repression and even a certain strength. But now there was a dull stare in her eyes, whose gaze was fixed away off yonder on one of those patches of blue sky. It was not a glance of reflection, but nether indicated a suspension of intelligent thought.

There was something coming to her and she was waiting for it, fearfully. What was it? She did not know; it was too subtle and elusive to name. But she felt it, creeping out of the skyy reaching toward her through the sounds, the scents, the color that filled the air

[10] Now her bosom rose and fell tumultuously She was beginning to recognize this thing that was approaching to possess her, and she was striving to beat it back with her will - as powerless as her twa white slender hands would have been. When she abandoned herself a little whispered ward escaped her slightly parted lips. She said it over and over under her breath: "free, "free, freel". The vacant stare and the look of tenor that had followed it went from her eyes. They stayed keen and bright. Her pulses beat fast, and the coursing blood warmed and relaxed every inch of her body.

She did not stop to ask if it were or were not a monstrous joy that beld her A clear and exalted perception enabled her to dismiss the suggestion as trivial. She lanew that she would weep again when she saw the kind, tender hands folded in death; the face that had never looked save with love upon her, fixed and gray and dead. But she saw beyond that bitter moment a long procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely. And she opened and spread her arms out to them in welcome.

There would be no one to live for during those coming years; she would live for herself. There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature. A kind intention or a cruel intention made the act seem no less a crime as she looked upon it in that brief moment of illumination.

And yet she had loved him _ sometimes. Often she had not. What did it matter! What could love, the unsolved mystery, count for in the lace of this possession of self-assertion which she suddenly recognized as the strong est impulse of her being!