THE ARTICLES ABOUT LITERATURE

Both these articles make difficult to understand what the author’s points are.  This is what I came up with. 

Will wrote that he believed that every literature is written using the principles of political ideology.  Sometimes writers disguise the interests of the dominant sex, religion, and race. When a person writes they might use the male as the dominant race but, the dominant race would actually be the opposite sex.  Female writers write about their ‘oppression of patriarchal literary standards” (111).  They are upset of why they have to write about a male either human or non human to the superior gender in their literature.   Feminists do not appreciate the position they have in society today being dominated by men.

Greenblatt feels that religion, politics, and colonization will influence the way a writer writes.  These ideas need to be the center of the literature because it can help better the understanding of the world.  In his essay his he makes reference that The Tempest “is full of conspicuous allusions to contemporary debates over the project of colonization” (114).  Greenblatt is probably saying that he got his ideas about colonization from Shakespeare.  Colonization was a very high European thought.

In reading both of these articles I do not know which to pick.   I will say that I am between both arguments.  In Will’s article I thought it was interesting about the feminist opinion about men being superior in everything.  I do not believe that men are superior then woman in everything but, I do believe we are superior in some things, so my ideas will just add insult to injury.  In Greenblatts, his three theme ideas are very good but, I wouldn’t say every book should have them in there.  Depending on each book they might be able to work, but sometimes none of them can.

ACTS 2 AND 3 POST

Through Act 2 and 3 Caliban has been pushed around by everyone on the island.  They look at him as a slave.  When they ended up on that island they tried to make it theirs even though they weren’t the first ones there.  Just like how the settlers came to the New World and toke the lands of the Native Americans and made them servants and slaves.  Shakespeare’s portrayal of Caliban is that of a Native culture that was colonized by another culture because of the lack of superiority of the influence to the people.  As Caliban meets Stephano, he gives Caliban some wine “He’s a good god, who brings liquor from the heavens” (Act 2 scene 2).  This quote reminds me of how Cortez was considered a god when he had met the Aztecs.  He brought them things that they have never seen before so, they assumed they came from the heavens.  So, when Stephano gave him wine, he enjoyed it.  He was under the impression that Stephano was the master that he needed to follow.  When new influences are presented the out dated ones won’t stand a chance.  We can say that Shakespeare makes Caliban just like the people whose lands were taken because of the sense of loyalty that he has for the person that is more superior.  In a colonized country the people must follow who has the most power because they don’t have enough strength to overcome the law.  By the 19^th century the British, “were biologically superior to any other race” (236).  Prospero and Stephano both think that they are superior to Caliban.  They see him as a drunk and worthless person who they can do anything with.  Who can stop them if they are the “superior race”?  Caliban can’t break free from these influences.

THE TEMPEST ACT 1

Since Prospero and his daughter are the only people on the island he can make it seem that he has all the answers if other people were to come onshore. When he is telling his daughter the story of why then are on the island he tells her that she was too young to remember so, he can basically tell her all lies. For example, at the beginning of the story, Prospero claims that his brother” he whom next thyself of all the world I loved” (act 1 scene 2). He of course used this to his advantage making Miranda believe that her uncle was the man that sent them to this abyss to die. He is putting this notion in her mind and there’s a chance that her uncle had nothing to with it. She cannot resist this information because there’s no one else to oppose her father’s truths. Prospero tries to make the island his own world with all the things that it should be. He uses Ariel to lure in people that are shipwrecked so that he can deceive them that people they were with or loved had died or fate had sent them there. Furthermore, tells Ariel not to be unappreciated, for the fact that, “when I arrived and heard thee, that made gape the pine and let thee out” (Act 1 scene 2). Prospero has made Ariel his servant to do his deeds and she has obeyed everything that he has asked. She wants her freedom and he’s quilting with the fact that he freed her so; she must pay up her debt to him. He makes himself seem like he’s this merciful god or savior that rescued Ariel. Lastly, he uses the past of Ariel which is full of slavery and imprisonment to make her feel bad about the she has acted.

During our discussion there were many great points made. Both articles had basically the same information and arguments. Both groups came to an understanding that the Texas school board should not take out important topics and historical figures on their students books. They need to put in information that is full, not put in parts of what happened. The obvious tie to the book “1984” is changing history, but they did not change it as severely as the government of Oceania.


There was a great point made on is they change the curriculum then the AP students would be affected when they take the test. We came up with the solution that AP teachers have their own curriculum to follow and abide by. Yet, we then found that it was weird that students in the same school would learn different variations of history. The AP students would learn history one way and the kids in the regular classes would learn it another way. So, when they ever would come together and they realize part of history has been cut off, the students will be wondering what really is the true history.

The other thing we discussed is the fact that the state of Texas is changing the history book, but there is no real proof that the teachers are actually sticking to the information in it. Some teachers will teach what they want even though they are given a curriculum. There was no mention of any teacher being interviewed about their thoughts about the new textbooks. They weren’t asked if the agreed with the curriculum or if they even use it to teach. So, in the end I believe that the last line of defense is the teachers. They are the ones who decide what actually is taught to their students. A good teacher would give their students the right information and the whole truth of history.