Monday, October 1, 2007
My Big Question
Do we actually learn from our mistakes or do we gain nothing by accepting them?Throughout the play and from our discussions, Oedipus has been constantly blaming others for his troubles. His arrogance has left him blind of his misfortunes and he resolves to blaming the gods for them (697, 928). As he learns the unfortunate truth of his mother and father, it seems as if he matures and grows stronger in spirit by accepting his mistakes (1290), but is still left in his guilt-ridden state in the end.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
After our discussion today, it seems as if Prince Hal has finally assumed his responsibilities as royalty. He certainly has come a long way since the person he was once before: the thieving hooligan who would rather spend his time in pubs with friends rather than in the court. However, as Jackson pointed out in the discussion, perhaps Hal has not improved in his sense of responsibility. Perhaps he had the potential for leadership all along, but chose to "lower everone's expectation of him" to make his life that much easier. If this were true, then it would be safe to assume that Hal has not learned from his mistakes, but is rather trying to merely hide his past under some facade.
After reading Crime and Punishment, it seems as though, until the last minute of the novel, Raskolnikov learns nothing from his actions. Though he feels that he has been redeemed by confessing to the murder, it does not seem as though he is repentant. Even as he is sent to labor camp in Siberia, he continues to isolate himself from the other prisoners and even Sonya, who shows him the most care and support by following him to Siberia. Even while in prison, he still feels as though his crime was justified, that had he had a proper purpose for the crime, he would have gotten away with it. It is not until he falls in love with Sonia outside the prison that he feels reawakened like Lazarus and properly redeemed. This shows only a minimal character change in Raskolnikov's behavior.
"Rant" takes the form of an oral biography as the novel attempts to put together Buster Casey's life. It is interesting to see the unique structure of Palahniuk's novel, seeing that he incorporates time travel in the plot to return Buster to his original state of being a trouble maker. Through its twists and turns, "Rant" seems to suggest that we learn nothing by accepting our mistakes, for even with his attempts to save himself by traveling back in time, Buster seems to be overcome with fate, that time can never be changed to better the past or, in this case, the future.
Throughout "A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man," Stephen Dedalus seems to be struggling with his identity. Constantly facing disputes within his inner-self, Stephen struggles in deciding whether to follow the life of priesthood or follow his passions and pursue art. He becomes engulfed in the pleasures of women but suddenly becomes repentant as he embraces his spirituality. As he contemplates living the life of a devout Catholic free from his previously committed sins, Stephen realizes that, even as he feels cleansed of them, he has become deprived of the beauty of the world he had always longed for. Even as he feels the need to be cleansed of his mistakes, those of lust and immoral pleasure, Stephen's need to see his world of beauty becomes more important to him as a person, an artist. Though he learns nothing from his mistakes, he emphasizes the point that the pursuit of personal desires is of greatest importance.
Post a Comment