Author: oshehan

No heart? No brain? No courage?

Posted on by oshehan

The Scarecrow, the Tin Woodman and the Cowardly Lion each have a “missing” characteristic that motivates them to travel with Dorothy to the Wizard of Oz- the Scarecrow wants a brain, the Tin Woodman wishes for a heart, and the Cowardly Lion yearns for courage. Dorothy’s initial interactions with these characters confirm that they are missing these things but later on in Chapters six and seven, I am not convinced that the characters are completely lacking these qualities.

As I pointed out in class, the Tin Woodman is the first character to make the reader question if he is truly missing something. He does this by weeping over the fact that he stepped on a beetle and killed it. While the Tin Woodman is literally heartless he does not act that way because typically someone who would be described as heartless would not cry over killing a bug. In the next chapter, where the group of four work together to defeat the Kalidahs, the Cowardly Lion and the Scarecrow also take action that makes me doubt that they are thoughtless or cowardly. The Scarecrow shows that he has a brain by having the idea for the Tin Woodsman to chop down a tree to make a bridge, the Lion calling it “a first rate idea” making one suspect “[he] had brains in [his] head, instead of straw.” (Page 81). The Scarecrow is also the one to think to cut down the bridge when the Kalidahs are on it, Frank Baum even writing that the Scarecrow had “been thinking what was best to be done,” (Page 82). I think that the Scarecrow is not as brainless as he thinks himself to be. The Cowardly Lion also declares that he will fight off the Kalidahs as long as he is alive. While he doesn’t have the opportunity to take action because of the Scarecrow’s quick thinking, he was offering to fight the Kalidahs, not just roar at them. I think this chapter sticks out because it shows the group bonding together for their harrowing journey, but I think these displays of action from Dorothy’s three companions are very revealing. As the book continues I wonder if we will continue to see more hints from L. Frank Baum that this characters aren’t as weak as they think they are.

Power of Names

Posted on by oshehan

I’ve always been fascinated by how things are named. It seems so strange that someone named a thing, and everyone agreed with that particular name, and from that point on everyone would call the object that given name. The act itself seems so simple when it’s broken down like that, especially when you consider how much power a name holds. Without a name, there is confusion and frustration because the ability to communicate becomes so much harder. Alice’s adventure through the nameless wood exemplifies the control that a name has over a person. First she experiences the frustration of not being able to name the place where she is, and then the loss of self by not being able to remember her own name. I think everyone has faced a similar moment when they can’t think of word but to imagine a place where you could not recall the name for anything would be maddening.

While words are so important for society to function, there is also a balance that can only be attained when the divisions that are created by a name are dissolved. Alice’s interactions with the Fawn show how without a name they were both in a sense on equal ground. The Fawn did not fear Alice because she could not remember that she is a human child. The Fawn’s fear rested in the name, not Alice herself. As soon as they made it through the wood, the Fawn realizes that she is fawn and Alice is a human child and because of these names and the relationship society has dictated they should have, they must fear each other. Just these two pages have made me question how many relationships we have are determined by the names, and by extension, titles we are given in life.

 

Can Death Be a Virtual Reality?

Posted on by oshehan

This past weekend I was watching the TV show “The Good Place” which is about four people who die and are told they have been sent to the Good Place (a non-denominational version of heaven). In reality, they have actually been sent to a version of the Bad Place that has been disguised to look like the Good Place with certain features designed to subtlety torture them. The first season follows them as they slowly figure out that each of them do not deserve to be there, and that it is in fact the Bad Place. Now that I am watching the show and taking this class at the same time it has made me wonder if death is a virtual reality. When you die, you cease to live and are no longer conscious, suggesting that whatever comes next is a virtual reality, because it is no longer “real life.”

“The Good Place” really plays with this idea of death being an illusion when the demon in charge of creating this false Good Place completely fabricates everything the four characters believe to be true. This reminds me a lot of Plate’s Allegory of The Cave, and the puppeteer’s power over the cave dwellers to create what they believe to be true (until they escape from the cave). It gets even more interesting in the second season after they figure out the truth because the demon, Michael, just resets everything to the beginning, and continues to do this every time the four humans figure out the puzzle- a total of 800+ times. Each version was different and showed all the different combinations that could happen in this fake heaven. With all of these “fake” versions of the Good Place, are there any of them real? Or are all of them real Bad Places because the demons know it is real even though humans don’t though at times they believe it is real. Then to really throw a wrench into things, is it not all fake because either way the humans are dead? I’m not sure what the answer is but I will say in addition to this weeks readings I’m not sure where death falls in the discussion of virtual reality.

Clarity of Clarion

Posted on by oshehan

In class, we have discussed the role of Clarion, the clown who appears to speak the truth in Life is A Dream where what is and is not real is constantly questioned. There are several indications throughout the play that Clarion may be a character that the audience can listen to and trust. First is Barca’s very deliberate choice of name for the character. A clarion is a shrill medieval war trumpet, or when used as an adjective, means to be “loud and clear” (Oxford Dictionary). Barca wanted the audience to know that Clarion’s role in the play is to alert people to what he has to say. The other indication of Clarion’s role as a truth-teller in the play is that fact that he is a clown. In the Renaissance, clowns and jesters were tools to tell the truth for what was happening in court. This revelation in class discussion struck me as odd because our modern day perception of clowns is the opposite. When people talk about clowns today, half the time I feel that people are saying how they have a fear of them. IT , one of the most popular films of 2017 (and book from the 20th century) centers around a killer clown. Even the less scary versions of clowns that you see perform at children’s parties aren’t exactly what I would call symbols of truth since they put on a mask of make up to perform. These modern interpretations of clowns led me to believe that Clarion was an unusual travel companion for Rosaura, but with a better understanding of the importance of his name and occupation, I see that he is a powerful tool for Barca to implement.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/clarion