Oedipus Journal #2

A letter from Creon to Oedipus:

Dear Oedipus,

I'm writing to you as an attempt to persuade you to think about the current situation in a more sensible way. You have strongly accused me of being involved in an intricate plot to overthrow you from your position as king. Since Tiresias hinted that you are the one responsible for Laius' murder, and I was the one who sent for Tiresias, you seem to believe that I have created a conspiracy against you by framing you as his murderer. In your assumptions, you have concluded that I have created this scheme so that I may gain more power of my own. However, I ask that you stop pointing your finger at me and listen to the truth. Why would I desire more power than what I currently possess? You and I rule the land of Thebes with equal power, so why would I need to overthrow you at all? We rule with the same amount of authority, and I do not desire the full kingship simply because of the many extra duties there are to perform. Besides, the people of Thebes adore you as their ruler, and I do not have the ability to step into such a role. Oedipus, I am your friend, and I cannot fathom why you have so suddenly turned against me. If your problem is with Tiresias' vision, then take up your argument with him. Perhaps you heard him incorrectly and jumped to unfair accusations as a means of defending your honor. This scheme of mine exists solely in your mind, and it is an insane accusation for one to make against his own friend. I ask you to reconsider what has happened; maybe after some time to think you will have come to your senses and snapped out of this moment of insanity. But for me, all I ask from you is that you let me reign peacefully alongside you, and spare me the banishment or execution reserved for a man who is truly guilty.

Sincerely, Your friend and kinsman,
Creon

Oedipus Journal #1

"Defiance becomes our duty in the face of injustice." Referring to at least two works you have studied, explore the ways in which writers have attempted to persuade us to accept or challenge this view.

In Oedipus The King, when Oedipus is accused of being the murderer of Laius by the blind prophet Tiresias, his first instinct is to defend himself, by denying that it is true. He turns against the blind prophet who he had trusted to give him accurate information, insulting him and accusing him of having lost his prophecy powers. His defiance increases as he says to Tiresias: "Come here, you pious fraud. Tell me,/ when did you ever prove yourself a prophet?" (443-444). Oedipus' cruel attitude is a major change from the well mannered, easygoing attitude we saw him possess when he was first introduced to us at the beginning of the tragedy. Because Tiresias is accusing Oedipus of something that seems completely ridiculous and completely impossible to him, Oedipus feels the need to defend himself and his honor against the unjust accusations. The author, Sophocles, uses the contrast between the two attitudes to show that defiance becomes one's duty in the face of injustice, or rather, it is instinctive for one to act out defiantly when they face unfair accusations.

Likewise, in the book 1984, author George Orwell persuades the audience to accept this view of defiance in the face of injustice. When Winston is caught and imprisoned by the Thought Police for committing thought crime and acts against the party, he clings to his own beliefs as long as he can. Even though O'Brien spends months trying to persuade him to accept the idealogy of the Party, for the longest time Winston will not forget his own values. When forced to speak in favor of the Party or be hurt by a shock machine, Winston publicly defends his own ideals even though he is hurt because of it. Winston's acts of defiance against the Party continue until he is completely brainwashed into loving the Big Brother. Orwell uses Winston's reaction to his situation (the injustice of being imprisoned for trying to live as an individual) to show the reader that when one is faced with an unfair or unjust situation, it is an instinctive reaction to show defiance.

Poetry Journal: XX Comparison

The work I will be comparing to Neruda's poem XX is the chorus from the song "Tattoo", written by Amanda Ghost and Ian Dench (performed by Jordin Sparks).

Don’t look back got a new direction
I loved you once, needed protection
You’re still a part of everything I do
You’re on my heart just like a tattoo
Just like a tattoo
I’ll always have you
I'll always have you

Neruda's poem (XX) is about a man coming to terms with the end of a relationship.  In the poem, the
speaker tries to convince himself that he has moved on from the woman he once loved, but we
can see that she is still important to him, and he actually still loves her.  One of the ways Neruda
highlights this idea is through the repetition of the line: "I no longer love her, that's certain".
Because the speaker uses this line more than once in this poem, it seems as if he does not believe
what he is saying, so he must say it multiple times to try to make himself believe it.  Although he
wants to move on and move forward with his life, the speaker cannot convince himself that he is
really over his previous girlfriend.  Another technique used by the poet to convey this idea is the use
of the terms "her" and "she" when referring to the woman.  Because the speaker dose not use the
woman's actual name when talking about her, we can see that he is doing his best to forget about her
by de-personalizing their relationship.  However, his love for her gets the best of him as we see through
the numberous amounts of times he brings her up (using "her" and "she" - 30 times).  Although the
speaker has attempted to move on from the relationship, he cannot because he still loves the woman.

Like the poem (XX), "Tattoo" is about the end of a relationship, and somebody being forced to move on.  Unlike the
speaker in the poem, the speaker in the song seems very willing to move forward.  We can see that she wants to
move on with her life through the line "Don’t look back got a new direction".  The speaker in Neruda's poem is
much more hesitant - he knows he will have to move on, but is not completely willing to let go of the
relationship yet.  Since the speaker in the song is much more accepting of the fact that she will have to move on,
she is also more willing to embrace the fact that since she used to love him, he will never be completely erased
from her life.  This point is emphasized through the use of the simile "you're on my heart just like a tattoo".  In
using this simile, the writer of the song emphasizes the permanent effects the relationship has had
(and will continue to have) on the speaker.  This idea is proved even more through the repetition of the line
"I'll always have you".  The reader leaves this song chorus knowing that the speaker is ready to move on from
a past relationship while acknowledging the fact that the person she used to love will be on her heart "just like
a tattoo" for the rest of her life.  The person leaving this relationship is much stronger and self-assured than the
speaker leaving the relationship in Neruda's poem.

Poetry Journal: XIII

This poem is about a relationship between a man and a woman. Although the man and women have had a physical relationship, they do not have a strong emotional relationship because the man has trouble fully expressing his feelings toward the woman. In addition, there is some kind of distance separating them that weakens their relationship. The man speaks of the woman possessively, as if he owns her. However, it is seen in more of a protective way than a controlling way, as he wants her to be happy and tries to cheer her up when she is sad. At the end of the poem, the man faces the consequences of his inability to share his feelings and ends up closing himself off from love.

The speaker of the poem is a man speaking to a woman from his past who he loved but lost. To me, it seems like he is speaking to her out of regret. The distant tone of the poem suggests that while the man knows it is too late to get the woman back, he still wants to attempt to tell her his feelings that he could never express before.

This poem was written to show how important communication is in a relationship. The speaker finds out that because he is unable to let the woman know how he feels about her early on, he is forced to deal with the consequences this brings - likely heartbreak. The last stanza of the poem hints that the speaker is now alone and closed off from love. Although in this poem the speaker tries to share his feelings, it is too late for him to win his love back. The poet is trying to emphasize that one must share their thoughts and feelings with the other person in a relationship soon, because if they do not, they will create distance between them and one person will eventually move on.

The poet uses the repetition of the word "something" in the fourth stanza to emphasize the speaker's inability to express himself. By using of this general word instead of naming the specific object at hand, the speaker is able to get by without fully communicating his thoughts. We see the speaker's possession of the woman through the terms he uses when addressing her: "sad and gentle doll", "my toy doll", "my sad tenderness". By calling her a doll and using the possessive pronoun "my", the speaker objectifies the woman and seems to take ownership of her. The simple yet intense verbs used at the end of the poem when the speaker has lost the woman convey a different mood than previous stanzas. In previous passages when the woman is still in his life, the speaker uses terms like "loved" and "dream" when speaking, but now that she is gone he resorts to terms like "burn" and "flee". We can see that the consequences he now faces that involve the loss of his loved one have changed him and his mindset.