While the chemistry Nels proposed was way to complicated for me to understand, I could distinctly see its beauty. I thought that the analysis of beauty and science and how the two are intermingled, separate and in some ways halfway in between. I wonder how his scholarship application will go.
Ashley's presentation brought out all the best of Hazel and all the intricate webs Nabokov wove around her. Most, but not all the mysteries surrounding Hazel and her role in Pale Fire came through, with just enough left over that Hazel retained her perfect imperfection.
The Bizz/Jenny painting was fantastic! As was their face paints. Bizz brought out such an interesting discussion on the intricacies of the human mind in its function and dysfunction. Who would have thought that the mind can work better when it isn't working than when it is. As for Jenny, I had no idea there were so many different kinds of chess! And to think that they all can relate back to a novel is really astounding.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Response to presentations on 11/29
Madeleine's presentation was spectacular. The special effects brought out the energy of her discussion. I found the idea of drawing parallels between Kinbote and Prospero to be rather interesting. She shows an interesting perspective on the ways in which the two exiles impose their wills on their surroundings in an attempt to give their existences meaning.
http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/05/08/eye-candy-chilean-volcanic-thunderstorm/
Michael
Insiders and outsiders. Two people playing chess from opposite sides of the window. This was absolutely awesome! The analysis of pale fire as through the eyes of the reader looking in at Nabokov and Nabokov looking out was very intriguing.
http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/05/08/eye-candy-chilean-volcanic-thunderstorm/
Michael
Insiders and outsiders. Two people playing chess from opposite sides of the window. This was absolutely awesome! The analysis of pale fire as through the eyes of the reader looking in at Nabokov and Nabokov looking out was very intriguing.
http://itschess.blogspot.com/2010_12_01_archive.html
Breanna
I enjoyed the imagery this presentation brought in. Of Icarus flying with wax wings and falling to the sea. Of the artist building the labyrinth which became the novel Pale Fire. It shows the convolutions of Nabokov's mind and Kinbotes attempts to fly too high and his fall.
http://www.blirk.net/labyrinth-wallpaper/1/
http://fineartamerica.com/featured/icarus-david-lane.html
http://www.mizozo.com/entertainment/12/2010/06/creative-mixed-media-digital-art-and-designs.html
Sarah
I wish the computer system had worked! I will have to read the analysis of how Bach and Pale Fire mix and intermingle. Although from what I heard, the idea is cool. The Fugue, as the piano player said (I apologize, I do not remember his name) was made up of a simple melody that was repeated and expanded upon throughout the piece. I want to see how this relates back to pale fire.
http://flickrhivemind.net/Tags/sibelius/Interesting
http://www.paintingsilove.com/image/show/69094/after-hearing-a-bach-fugue
Thursday, November 10, 2011
The Memory Palace
The Memory Palace, also termed the Method of loci, according to wikipedia, is a method whereby a person builds up spaces within his/her mind in order to remember a list or events or anything really. The person, to recall these memories, simply 'walks' through these spaces in their mind in order to recall them. The method was used and perhaps first discovered by ancient Romans and is used by people today to win memory contests or in application of everyday life. One does not have to be particularly intelligent in order to use this technique, just disciplined. Apparently one person used this technique to memorize over 65,000 digits of pi. And Dr. Hannibal Lecter used the technique in the fictional film.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci
http://mnemotechnics.org/files/2011/03/Emma-Willard-1846-temple.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci
http://mnemotechnics.org/files/2011/03/Emma-Willard-1846-temple.jpg
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
GMOs and Pale Fire
Well, now that I'm a partial expert in the policies that have allowed France to take practically all Genetically Modified Food off their supermarket shelves, I thought I would share some of my new found expertise.
First, Genetically Modified Organisms are each created with a distinct purpose. A particular section of a plants DNA is chosen for its properties, isolated from the rest of the DNA and then removed.
Second, a piece of DNA from another organism, often a bacterium, is selected for its specific properties, isolated and then removed.
Next is a lenghty process in which the DNA pieces are modified and placed in sort of parcels that are given to a bacterium that then transports the DNA and inserts it into the rest of the plant's DNA.
Finally, individual cells are sprayed with antibiotics, those cells that survive are kept while those that don't are discarded.
The plant's immune system has been changed through human intervention. The new plants are often either Herbicide tolerant, meaning they can withstand herbicides meant to destroy other plants, or insect tolerant, meaning they are immune to the insects that once destroyed them. They sometimes contain bacteria in their pollen that kills a targeted insect species. Some plants can also kill weeds or they were meant to. Before the local population came and destroyed the field, a group of scientists were working on a type of sunflowers that would kill off the local ambrosia, a plant that can cause severe allergic reactions (ironic isn't it).
Now, GMOs are controversial in many ways. For one thing, humans are interfering in the natural evolution of plant life (one can argue that breeding has been doing the same thing for eons, but this process is a bit more invasive). The use of antibiotics in the plants makes them resistant to those antibiotics which could lead to the humans ingesting those plants to be antibiotic resistant. This, as well as the plants new found resistance to insects and herbicides, could lead to the creation of superbugs that could lead to the end of humanity as we know it (sorry this is a bit too dramatic, but superbugs are no laughing matter). There is also the possibility of GM crops infecting heirloom crops, which could lead to the loss of those rare species. And of course, there are incidences where mysterious illnesses have caused lots of deaths and injuries and they can be related back to genetically modified dietary supplements.
In short, genetic modification is the process whereby an organisms is infused with the essence of another organism so that the original organism can better survive in the world we humans have created for it and there is the possibility that these modified organisms will kill everyone eventually.
So, how does this relate to Pale Fire? Well Kinbote obviously. Nabokov has engineered this crazy character by adding on bits and pieces of mythology, literature, history and his own life experiences and then in this world that Nabokov has created, Kinbote eventually kills off his best friend and all he's worried about is the survival of Shade's poem.
So, I would like to explore all the bits and pieces that Nabokov added to Kinbote, how this modification had an effect on the other weeds and insects (characters in the novel) and how all this led to John Shade's death, if he truly existed or if any of the characters truly existed.
First, Genetically Modified Organisms are each created with a distinct purpose. A particular section of a plants DNA is chosen for its properties, isolated from the rest of the DNA and then removed.
Second, a piece of DNA from another organism, often a bacterium, is selected for its specific properties, isolated and then removed.
Next is a lenghty process in which the DNA pieces are modified and placed in sort of parcels that are given to a bacterium that then transports the DNA and inserts it into the rest of the plant's DNA.
Finally, individual cells are sprayed with antibiotics, those cells that survive are kept while those that don't are discarded.
The plant's immune system has been changed through human intervention. The new plants are often either Herbicide tolerant, meaning they can withstand herbicides meant to destroy other plants, or insect tolerant, meaning they are immune to the insects that once destroyed them. They sometimes contain bacteria in their pollen that kills a targeted insect species. Some plants can also kill weeds or they were meant to. Before the local population came and destroyed the field, a group of scientists were working on a type of sunflowers that would kill off the local ambrosia, a plant that can cause severe allergic reactions (ironic isn't it).
Now, GMOs are controversial in many ways. For one thing, humans are interfering in the natural evolution of plant life (one can argue that breeding has been doing the same thing for eons, but this process is a bit more invasive). The use of antibiotics in the plants makes them resistant to those antibiotics which could lead to the humans ingesting those plants to be antibiotic resistant. This, as well as the plants new found resistance to insects and herbicides, could lead to the creation of superbugs that could lead to the end of humanity as we know it (sorry this is a bit too dramatic, but superbugs are no laughing matter). There is also the possibility of GM crops infecting heirloom crops, which could lead to the loss of those rare species. And of course, there are incidences where mysterious illnesses have caused lots of deaths and injuries and they can be related back to genetically modified dietary supplements.
In short, genetic modification is the process whereby an organisms is infused with the essence of another organism so that the original organism can better survive in the world we humans have created for it and there is the possibility that these modified organisms will kill everyone eventually.
So, how does this relate to Pale Fire? Well Kinbote obviously. Nabokov has engineered this crazy character by adding on bits and pieces of mythology, literature, history and his own life experiences and then in this world that Nabokov has created, Kinbote eventually kills off his best friend and all he's worried about is the survival of Shade's poem.
So, I would like to explore all the bits and pieces that Nabokov added to Kinbote, how this modification had an effect on the other weeds and insects (characters in the novel) and how all this led to John Shade's death, if he truly existed or if any of the characters truly existed.
5 Discoveries
5 discoveries about the novel Pale Fire: Which turn out to be more questions on what was really going on in Nabokov's twisted neurons
1. Reality is not what it seems -
which leads to the next discovery
3. There are references all over this book to mythology, literature, history and they are in plain sight and deeply buried
This next is a question and a discovery
4. After listening to the presentation on Nabokov's Blues and learning about Nabokov's life and work with Lepidoptery, Nabokov has included personal references among the mythological and literary within this work. Things like the butterfly in John Shade's death scene. Being as how the poem is about the death of a child and her parents' reaction to that death, why did Nabokov pick such a poignant subject on which to write a poem? Why is a mad man then interpreting it with the idea that the work revolves around him?
5. Sybil Shade is an incredibly patient woman
1. Reality is not what it seems -
- Is Charles really the King of this distant land, Zembla or is he just making it up?
- Is Gradus really an assassin from Zembla out to shoot Charles or is a crazy man that just escaped form an asylum?
- If Charles isn't the King of Zembla are all the friends and acquaintances he talks about real or are they too just a figment of Charles' imagination?
- If Charles works at a University and he's crazy, how did he get there? And then again, does Charles really work at the University?
- Are the crown jewels real? Do they represent something if they are not real?
- and the list could continue indefinitely...
which leads to the next discovery
3. There are references all over this book to mythology, literature, history and they are in plain sight and deeply buried
This next is a question and a discovery
4. After listening to the presentation on Nabokov's Blues and learning about Nabokov's life and work with Lepidoptery, Nabokov has included personal references among the mythological and literary within this work. Things like the butterfly in John Shade's death scene. Being as how the poem is about the death of a child and her parents' reaction to that death, why did Nabokov pick such a poignant subject on which to write a poem? Why is a mad man then interpreting it with the idea that the work revolves around him?
5. Sybil Shade is an incredibly patient woman
5 obvious facts about pale fire
I have learned, mostly through design in Architecture courses my Freshman year of College, that in order to design you have to start at the beginning and progress to the end. Without the progression you lose something along the way and your design holds up like wet tissue paper.
So, Five obvious facts about pale fire:
1. The book contains a poem called Pale Fire written by a man called John Shade
2. The poem is interpreted by a man called Charles Kinbote or Charles Xavier
3. John Shade is shot
4. John Shade and Charles Kinbote appear to work at a University
5. Charles Kinbote says he is the King of a distant northern land called Zembla
So, Five obvious facts about pale fire:
1. The book contains a poem called Pale Fire written by a man called John Shade
2. The poem is interpreted by a man called Charles Kinbote or Charles Xavier
3. John Shade is shot
4. John Shade and Charles Kinbote appear to work at a University
5. Charles Kinbote says he is the King of a distant northern land called Zembla
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Oct. 17. 16th Century Language and Similitudes
This last spring semester, while studying in France, I got to take a course on 16th century French literature. While I cannot say that I understood more than 75% of the class, what I did gain was an interesting perspective on the French Renaissance and the evolution of pedagogy from the Middle Ages through the first thinkers of the new french era.
The Renaissance, as the professor kept explaining, was not a true 'rebirth' as the philosophers of the time period would have us, the future generations, believe. It was a time of change, but the ideas during the time period were a simple evolution; a slow progression that was a continuation of many of the ideas of the previous era. While the invention of the printing press was monuments and did indeed allow the thinkers of the time period to access the great texts of ancient Greece and Rome from within the comforts of their own nation, it took a long time for that invention to catch on and for the copies of such books to circulate up into France (as my professor in the history of media explained). Therefore, the invention of the printing press allowed the individual philosopher the chance to read more of the ancient texts without the need to travel to Egypt, or Italy, or Constantinople.
This time period was also fraught with the invention of encyclopedias and new dictionaries. Vernacular languages were gaining popularity and new dictionaries that taught how to translate from the ancient texts to the vernacular languages. Encyclopedias, written in vernacular tongues were written in order to teach about the past and present.
With this new information becoming more readily available by the decade, pedagogy became an increasingly important topic. How were the young to be educated in this new material? The previous method, deemed copia by some philosopher I cannot recall, was the most popular method. Students were expected to learn through memorization and imitation. The idea was that students would copy out the styles of the ancients and eventually learn, not a new style, but a combination of the old styles and ideas. However, during the latter part of the 16th century, thinkers such as Montaigne were encouraging original thought and analysis rather than memorization and the melange of random styles.
All of this information came to mind in Foucault's chapter on 'The Prose of the World'. He talks about 4 different kinds of similitudes, all of which humans use to make things alike so that they can be understandable. Language, the basis for understanding and knowledge, which at one time had much more significance than it does now, has been diluted, according to Foucault. The original words used to describe things were much closer to the objects they described. So I find it interesting that Foucault mentions the work of the late 16th and early 17th century thinkers in his analysis of language and its place in the way humans understand their world.
I don't pretend to understand anything of what Foucault was saying, half the time his words went in one eye and straight out the back of my head. But I find that his connection between mimesis, language and the 16th century to be very interesting. The time period was characterized by its attempts to understand the world through different epistemes. By studying and copying the texts of the ancients, these people tried to understand their world through the eyes of those who had never seen it. In order to understand these texts, publishers would write dictionaries that would take a more 'real' language and translate it into a vernacular tongue that was farther from what Foucault would describe as true language. But all this was done by making things that were non comprehensible like things that were comprehensible so that the former could be understood. This type of learning doesn't seem to have much room for originality or creativity, but perhaps that is what Foucault was getting at, there is nothing new left in this universe.
The Renaissance, as the professor kept explaining, was not a true 'rebirth' as the philosophers of the time period would have us, the future generations, believe. It was a time of change, but the ideas during the time period were a simple evolution; a slow progression that was a continuation of many of the ideas of the previous era. While the invention of the printing press was monuments and did indeed allow the thinkers of the time period to access the great texts of ancient Greece and Rome from within the comforts of their own nation, it took a long time for that invention to catch on and for the copies of such books to circulate up into France (as my professor in the history of media explained). Therefore, the invention of the printing press allowed the individual philosopher the chance to read more of the ancient texts without the need to travel to Egypt, or Italy, or Constantinople.
This time period was also fraught with the invention of encyclopedias and new dictionaries. Vernacular languages were gaining popularity and new dictionaries that taught how to translate from the ancient texts to the vernacular languages. Encyclopedias, written in vernacular tongues were written in order to teach about the past and present.
With this new information becoming more readily available by the decade, pedagogy became an increasingly important topic. How were the young to be educated in this new material? The previous method, deemed copia by some philosopher I cannot recall, was the most popular method. Students were expected to learn through memorization and imitation. The idea was that students would copy out the styles of the ancients and eventually learn, not a new style, but a combination of the old styles and ideas. However, during the latter part of the 16th century, thinkers such as Montaigne were encouraging original thought and analysis rather than memorization and the melange of random styles.
All of this information came to mind in Foucault's chapter on 'The Prose of the World'. He talks about 4 different kinds of similitudes, all of which humans use to make things alike so that they can be understandable. Language, the basis for understanding and knowledge, which at one time had much more significance than it does now, has been diluted, according to Foucault. The original words used to describe things were much closer to the objects they described. So I find it interesting that Foucault mentions the work of the late 16th and early 17th century thinkers in his analysis of language and its place in the way humans understand their world.
I don't pretend to understand anything of what Foucault was saying, half the time his words went in one eye and straight out the back of my head. But I find that his connection between mimesis, language and the 16th century to be very interesting. The time period was characterized by its attempts to understand the world through different epistemes. By studying and copying the texts of the ancients, these people tried to understand their world through the eyes of those who had never seen it. In order to understand these texts, publishers would write dictionaries that would take a more 'real' language and translate it into a vernacular tongue that was farther from what Foucault would describe as true language. But all this was done by making things that were non comprehensible like things that were comprehensible so that the former could be understood. This type of learning doesn't seem to have much room for originality or creativity, but perhaps that is what Foucault was getting at, there is nothing new left in this universe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)