Entry 31: Comparing Poems

Compare and contrast the attitudes toward death in "The Tide Rises, the Tide Falls" and "The Cross of Snow." How important is it that one poem is about an unnamed traveler—probably standing for everyone—while the other is about a specific person? What is your opinion of the two attitudes toward death? Do you feel they are incompatible, or can they both be held simultaneously? In your own life, how do you feel about death? Write about what death as an abstract concept means to you, and compare/contrast that to what death means when it is up close and personal.

• I believe that the two poem's attitudes towards death contradict each other. Therefore, the two of them are incompatible. "The Tide Rises, the Tide Falls" implies that one should keep on living even if someone dies, because they are strangers, and the world will continue to go on - it won't stop for you. The other poem, "The Cross of Snow", however, is a sonnet in memory of Longfellow's wife. Despite the former saying to continue on, the latter cannot go on and griefs for Longfellow's wife for eighteen years and even more. 
• Concerning death, I believe that everyone will eventually meet this situation - it's part of a cycle. Even though I don't want to die, there is nothing I can do about it, so why not just accept it and live on? I also believe that we have to appreciate our life and the fact that we are still alive, and live our lives to the fullest (meaning no suicides and self blaming, etc.). 
• Close deaths influence us more than the death of a stranger because when someone close dies, the limbic system (part of brain that is associated with emotions) is activated. This makes it harder for someone to cope with death of a close one compared to the death of a stranger.

Entry 30: Image of Grief

Romantic poets often use aspects of nature to express emotions that might be too painful or personal to state directly. In "The Cross of Snow," Longfellow takes a dramatic scene in nature and transforms it into a powerful image conveying intense grief. Why do you think he chose that particular scene? How does it represent his emotions? Think of an image from nature that you could use to describe or represent a feeling of great sorrow. Set up your comparison like a metaphor: "Grief is . . ." Then, explore how grief is like the image you have chosen.

• Longfellow chose the particular scene of the crossed shaped snow in the mountain to convey his intense grief because he wants to convey that his grief is extremely deep, and too cold to be melted by the heat and warmth of the sun. The deepness is represented by the "deep ravines" that are very deep down into the mountain and cannot be shone on by the sunlight. The coldness is of course represented by the snow itself. The cross shaped of the snow gives up a insight of Longfellow's opinions of his wife - he believes that she is someone that is very special and has even become a holy figure. This is a very smart way of representing his emotions, the grief cause by his wife's death. Great sorrow and grief can be conveyed by many different examples. Here are two. The first one is "Grief is raining like there's no tomorrow". This symbolizes (for religious people) that God is crying with them because of the tragedy. The second one is "Grief is like that falling of leaves and autumn enters winters". This represents that happiness is "falling away" and leaving people, and all that's left is to suffer.

Entry 29: Human Life: A Cycle?

Think of how nature repeats its cycles over and over again: Summer turns to winter and returns again; day follows night and returns again; the tide rises and falls and rises again. Then, think of individual human lives. Are our lives like these endlessly repeated cycles of the natural world, or is a human life different? How do you think of your own life, or the lives of people close to you? Is it any easier to think of death for you or your friends and family when you put it in the perspective of a natural cycle? Why or why not? If not, what makes it different?

• There are different levels of looking at cycles when talking about human life. On the small scale, human life is a continuous (and sometimes really boring) cycle. Here's an example: we wake up, we do our daily routine, we go to sleep, then we wake up again, we do our daily routine again, and we go to sleep again, and so on. On a scale that is a bit larger than the previous one, we can say that human life is linear instead of cyclical. When people die, they will just... die. It's their end. If we are being really scientific, we can say that there are no souls and that the physical body will just decompose back into the Earth. So it's linear. On an even larger scale compared to the previous one, human life is actually a repeating, continuous, and endless cycle (unless homo sapiens went extinct). People are born, then they live, and they give birth (some), and then they die. The cycle repeats itself again when the children who are given birth to live, and then give birth to their own children, and then they die. I believe that it may not be any easier, know that death is part of a natural cycle. But it's actually not any harder as well. I think that it's better to think that if we only have one life, we should live it to its fullest.

Entry 28: Thanksgiving

What are you thankful for?

• If I am to say that I am thankful for anything, then it would be the fact or the action that I was born into this world, especially the fact that I was born in a family that is quite well off, with enough money to have 3C technology as well as enough money to send two children to go to a very expensive American school. Now I think about it, I have a lot of privileges. I get to live in an extremely comfortable environment, I get enough food, I get enough water, I get medical aid, and I get people to care for and about me. Also, I even get to enjoy entertainment, something that would technically be impossible if I was given birth to in a third world or in a less developed country. Many people right now are dying from starvation, illness, genocide, and homicide, yet I am living here so comfortable, without knowing the hardships of living alone or the hardships of war. From this I learned that I should not take things for granted - anything should be treated as a privilege. I also learned that I should show gratitude to the things I have and to the people who provide me these things (namely my mom and dad and my other family members).

Entry 27: More Thanatopsis

In "Thanatopsis," Bryant expresses his views on both the process of life and the nature of individual lives. In the space below, write a paragraph describing Bryant's views on individual lives. Support your ideas with details from the poem. What connections can you find between Anne Bradstreet or Sor Juana's poems and "Thanatopsis" in regards to what is permanent, what is transient, and how human life fits into the overall scheme of the universe? What are your own view points on nature, mortality, and the universe?

• In his poem "Thanatopsis," Bryant describe the process of life saying that all people should not be said even if they know that they will die eventually, and that they will rejoined with the Earth and with the elements.  Bryant then goes on to further emphasize that no one is alone concerning the topic of death. There have been other people, the people in the past, as well as present, who have died and rejoined with the Earth and with the elements. I believe that one of the connections with Anne Bradstreet's poem is that both of them have the theme that material wealth is not that important, and they people will eventually lose it. In Bryant's poem, he implies that since human beings die and rejoin with the Earth, so does the material wealth that people own. In Bradstreet's poem, she states that material wealth is not important, that the only important thing is going to heave, the eternal house. Sor Juana's poem is similar with Bryant's poem in that both poems also talk about knowledge. The former says that knowledge is more important than material wealth, while the latter says that knowing this knowledge will make people feel better.

Entry 26: Thanatopsis

How does William Cullen Bryant's poem, "Thanatopsis," reveal the Romantic conviction that the universe, far from operating like a machine, is really a living organism that undergoes constant cyclical changes? How does the human speaker (the narrator) feel about this view of the universe? How do you feel about it? Describe your own view of the universe as it compares to the Romantics in general, and to Bryant's narrator in particular.

• The poem Thanatopsis shows Romantic conviction that the universe is really a living organism that undergoes constant cyclical changes by using nature as the theme, since nature is one of the most important characteristics of Romanticism. An example of this is that the poem refers to the rejoining of things, substances, and matter with the elements and the Earth (which is, in a sense, the universe). I believe that the narrator agrees with the view that people should not fear death, and that people should live happily and to their fullest and be ready to embrace death. He agrees that death is something that is good, or more specifically not necessarily bad, since it happens to everyone (no one is alone). I feel that his views in a way make sense, and may be true, but sometimes it depends on the situation to determine. My own view of the universe, as said above, is somewhat similar in that the universe is continuous. However, I cannot be that sure about the cyclical part because there are some contradicting things. For example, seasons and life cycles are cycles. However, what will happen when people actually die? Is there a thing such as reincarnation?

Entry 25: Natural Cycle

Romantic poets looked to nature for lessons - lessons that we too can learn by looking around us. One of the ever-present lessons of nature is the organic cycle of birth, growth, death, and rebirth. Think of some ways that nature reminds us of this recurring cycle. Do you find this aspect of nature disturbing or comforting? Explain.

• Nature has a lot of cycles that remind us of the organic cycles of birth, growth, death, and rebirth. For example, the changing of the seasons - spring, summer, autumn, and winter, as well as organisms' living continuous cycle of birth, growth, death, and rebirth. I believe that I find this aspect both comforting and also interesting. It is comforting because we know that life will continue to go on, instead of just stopping and ending. This is a very interesting phenomenon as well. Why has Earth come to its mechanisms in the present day? This is a very mystery that present day human beings will never find out. Another mystery is why is it cycles? Why is it not a linear line that ends after a while? Does the continuing of the cycles benefit organisms in any way? What are the advantages? I am actually very interested in this topic. However, I would not want to be in a job to search for the answers, because it would be an useless (at least in my opinion) attempt. Why, you ask? Because we have not concrete evidence since it has been so long. If I were given the chance to go back to the past and see exactly what happened, I would definitely take the chance.

Entry 24: Freedom and Equality

These are two words that are bandied about very liberally when talking about America's founding principles. Do you think these are truly American values? Why or why not? What do they mean to you? Are they something you take for granted, or do you hold them precious? Can you think about an example of something that you can do because you live in a free society? Describe it and explain why you need to be free to do it. What about things you can't do? In what ways is your freedom restricted? Do you think you live in a free society? Explain.

•  These values are the values that American claim that they have. However, if we look closely into things, we will find that this is not the case. Though there is more freedom in the country compared to the freedom in other countries, freedom is still limited by laws, as every country or ever society is. The value of quality is even more not the case. Women, African Americans (or other XXX Americans), foreigners, all of these groups of people have been discriminated against one way or another. According to the Gender Empowerment Index, there is no country where women is one hundred percent equal to men. African Americans is a very obvious example - they have been treated as inferiors for a very long period of time, as slaves, and as indentured servants. To mean, freedom and equality means the freedom to pursuit happiness, because many of the things you do in your life are actually your decisions and the equality of being treated like a person (many are not treated like human beings). Both freedom and equality are things we take for granted - many people are deprived of these two rights. I am free to walk around safely, without worrying being assaulted by other people. What I can't do, is to commit crimes. This is a given, because all societies have laws to maintain order, and in a way, it restricts freedom. Though freedom is in one way restricted, it is actually a privilege in our society because we can express and do most of our free will.

Entry 23: Tom Walker and John Edwards

Consider the sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" and relate it to "The Devil and Tom Walker." The story takes place roughly at the same time and in the same place that the sermon was delivered. What do the story and sermon have in common and how do they differ in terms of the idea of the relationship between human beings and supernatural justice? The sermon was intended to strike fear into people's hearts. What about the story? Edwards said there was only one way to salvation, and that it could not be achieved through prayer, church-going, or good deeds alone. How does the story relate to that idea?

• The sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" and the story "The Devil and Tom Walker" is common because both of these preach about faith, and also about people's religions and beliefs. However, they differ in the subject, the topic, of what they are preaching about, and the difference of their beliefs. The sermon given by John Edwards preaches about the belief in supernatural justice, namely Jesus, and their main goal is to pray for salvation, to pray for being able to go to heaven instead of being damned in hell. On the other hand, the story of Tom Walker warns people to stay away from supernatural justice because many of it is evil. This is related to the pessimistic view of the Dark Romanticists, that even though the events of nature gives clues and hints to the truth and about the spiritual world, not all may be good - some may be bad. And that is what the story is trying to say: stay away from supernatural justices because they may be bad. Not only is it trying to say stay away from supernatural justices, but the story "The Devil and Tom Walker" is also trying to strike fear inside people's hearts and minds to keep people from being greedy for money and wealth. I believe that these two are related in the way that they are opposites of each other. One says to act good and pious, and to believe in Jesus (supernatural justices), while to other says not to believe in supernatural justices.

Entry 22: The Devil and Tom Walker

What characteristics of this story make it an example of American Romanticism? What sort of genre would you classify it in? How do you think a contemporary author might handle the same plot? How would the story (or its details) be the same? How would they be different? How would a modern treatment affect the tone? Do you think the ending would be different? Explain.

•  The characteristics that make the story "The Devil and Tom Walker" an example of Dark Romanticism literature include the dark atmosphere induced by the setting, the sinister acts an interactions of Tm, Tom's wife, and the devil, and the descriptive details of sinister and mean acts. I believe that a contemporary author would write it in a way that would be more optimistic. For example, the ending might be that Tom and his wife successfully tricked the devil and got the money, and finally, that they lived happily ever after. It would still be the same in the sense that there is the deal between Tom and the Devil, and all the conflicts between Tom ad his wife. The ending and the resolution would be different from the original story in the sense that it is more optimistic. The wife would not have died, and the both the wife and Tom would be happy, in a sense, money and wealth provide them the sense of happiness. If a modern tone is applied to the story, it would be said in a different point of view. For example, it may be more narrative, and I believe that there would be more direct influences instead of inferences.

Entry 21: Darkness

Some of the writers of the Romantic period were considered "anti-transcendentalists" or "Dark Romantics". Read the section of your text on pp. 172-173 about the Dark Romantics, and then compare and contrast them to the other, transcendentalist writers of the period. Which of the two types of writers do you think you would most like to read? Why?

• The Dark Romantics and the transcendentalists, though they seem very different, actually have a lot in common. Both of these point of views believe in God, and also the point of view that feelings, emotions, and intuitions are more valuable than logic and reason. Also, both of these point of views believe in signs and events as things that will lead them to and connect them to the spiritual world. The main difference between them is how they view God's signs and events. Are the signs and events leading to something good, or are the signs and events leading to something bad? The transcendentalists have a very optimistic view about these signs and events connecting to the spiritual world. They basically believe that all human beings are good in nature. The Dark Romantics, however, believed that not all of the signs and events lead to good things and good truths - some may be good while others may be bad. The Dark Romantics have a more pessimistic view of the world. So basically, these two point of views are like opposing groups in a large, general group with the same ideas. I would not want to read any of the two types, since I am more of a rationalist, but if I have to choose one, then I would choose to read works by transcendentalists, mainly because the world is sad enough as it is, and I would rather read something more happy.

Entry 20: Compare Heroes

Review the characteristics of the Romantic heron on p. 168 of your text. How does this type of hero compare with the characters who play major roles in literature and movies today? Do you find evidence of the Romantic hero in the ways that today's prominent public figures (politicians or athletes, for example) are packaged for popular culture? What are the characteristics of people that are considered heroes of our times? Write about the similarities and differences of today's heroes with those of the Romantic period. Which type of hero do you identify with most?

• As said in the previous journal, "the American Romantic Hero must consist of certain characteristics to be considered an American Romantic Hero. He or she must understand their "self" perfectly - they have to understand who they really are and the way their brain and mind functions. Also, he or she must have all of the characteristics that a Romantic must have - he or she should value feelings, emotions, and intuitions more than logic and reason." The characters that play major roles in literature and movies today may be both similar or different to the American Romantic Hero, depending on the setting of the plot and how the movie is going to proceed. I believe that for politicians and athletes, the first characteristic mentioned about the "self" is mainly true. One must know himself or herself in order to lead others and persuade others to follow him or him, and one must know himself or herself the best in order to do best in competitions, etc. However, the "feelings, emotions, and intuitions" part may not be that true. For example, if a politician relies too much on them, other people who have different point of views might go against that certain politician. Today's heroes include characteristics such as knowing the self, having leadership skills, and being rational for a certain degree. I identify the most with today's heroes, and not the American Romantic Hero, because I believe more in rationalism.

Entry 19: Strengths and Weaknesses

How do people discover what their strengths and weaknesses are? How would you respond to the idea that each person is an "unknown quantity" until he or she is tested by a challenging situation? What kind of challenges might reveal a person's qualities? What do you think your strengths are? Your weaknesses are? How do you know? Have you ever had your ideas about your strengths or weaknesses challenged by a difficult situation?

• I believe that challenges are good ways to discover one's strengths and weaknesses. I kind of agree with the idea that each person is an "unknown quantity" until he or she is tested by a challenging situation, because without challenges, we wouldn't know what we are capable of. Some examples include knowledge tests (IQ tests and EQ tests), challenges that test your responses (how you response, your reflex, and if you are calm or not), challenges that test your creativity, challenges that test the cooperation between people, and challenges that test your responsibility. I believe that my strengths are that I can put in efforts when they are needed (under the most necessary circumstances). My weaknesses, however, are that I am lazy. I sometimes also don't know when to stop talking (meaning I am sometimes not sensible and am oblivious to certain tense situations). As for the last question, yes, I am challenged many times by hard situations that need a lot of effort. My weakness is challenged here because I am lazy, but I make up for it (most of the time :]) by putting extra effort into the challenge when I really get started. I believe that everyone has been challenged at least once in their life.

Entry 18: Rational or Transcendental?

Review the "Rationalist World View" on p. 15 of your text. Then read "A Transcendental View of the World" on p. 171. Describe the similarities and differences between the two philosophical schools. How would you sum up each in a nutshell? Which viewpoint is closer to your own? What elements of either do you particularly agree or disagree with? Explain.

• The main difference between the pint of views of the rationalists and the transcendentalists is that the rationalist believe the reason and logic is more important while the transcendentalists believe that feeling, emotion, and intuition is way more important. The point of view that I believe I am closer to is the rationalist point of view. I do not have any particularly strong religious behaviors, and I usually do not trust my intuition because it's wrong most of the time and I don't trust my emotions because I sometimes have mood swings that make them not reliable to trust. I sometimes even detest my feelings because they might be horrible (and why I won't explain).
• The basic ideas of rationalism is that God made things and does not interfere with its workings, letting it run on its own. The rationalists believed that the gift God gave them was the ability to reason, and by using this reason they will be able to find truths, therefore valuing reason and logic more than anything else. The beliefs of rationalists usually take them towards civilization. On the other hand, the transcendentalists use intuition to find the way to enter the spiritual/ideal world, and therefore value feelings, emotion, and intuition over reason and logic. The transcendentalists basically move away from civilization and tend to move towards nature to find their truths. Both of these point of views are the same because both include inquiry (though towards different subjects), both believed that human beings are basically good, and most important of all, they both believed in God.