The Way I See It.

Let's just say that the lens I bring to literature is... colorful. The only way to describe my biases and convictions is to explore my highly intelectual and vastly thought-provoking nail polish collection... :)

1) Matronly Taupe: I begin my quest of lens identification with my bias towards characters. In the most simple way, I enter a text looking for an opinion of a character, and it is not difficult to get me 'riled up'. I look for characters to be responsible, genuine, and of the upmost integrity, and when they lose my trust, sadly my capability to empathize with them throughout the rest of the book is compromised. The 'Matronly Taupe' shade embodies my desire for a character to be good-intentioned-- and if they aren't, my view of them and their actions throughout the entirety of the work is biased and steadfast.

2) Sentimental Crimson: Secondly, although my initial lens would seem otherwise, I find deep emotion to be a driving force in literature. Whenever a scene touches my heart strings or reminds me of emotional encounters that I have had, I immediately tune in to the text. Whether I am looking for catharsis or just a person to sympathize with, emotion is where I begin to draw my opinions of characters and whose actions I support. The "Sentimental Crimson" hue represents the deep feelings of empathy that accompany my voyage through a text.

3) Quirky Emerald: The long descriptions of scenery, the intricate paintings of faces, the scensory details of the weather... but what do I get caught up in? The blue and yellow bug whose quick flight through the scene is rapid and seemingly meaningless. But why? Being such an intricate thinker myself, I find it easy to become distracted by the 'little details' of the text because it is through them, I believe, that meaning is found. 'Quirky Emerald' best illustrates my fascination with oddity and my earnest quest for it.

4) Transparent/Cohesive Clear: I come into a piece of literature looking for sequence. Ultimately, I was things to 'make sense'. When urged in English class to expound upon the abstract, I must first identify the concrete. Throughout a work of literature, I am firstly concerned with the logic of action. If someone dies within the first few pages, I could care less about the bountiful rows of daisies a few streets over, I want resolution and vengeance. 'Cohesive Clear' once again mimicks my lens; one with a passion for coherance.

5) Antithetical Black: What is better in a book than controversy? When I read a piece of literature, I look for opinions and perspectives that oppose my own. It is through this 'simulated controversy' that I develop an argument. It is almost as though I pretend that my opinions are being attacked so that I pay closer attention to their arguments while simultaneously formulating a counter-argument. The best example I have is in Crime and Punishment. Raskolnikov is known for his extremely Nihilistic rationale, and all throughout the book, I kept note of his responses so as to gain a better understanding of his reasoning. Once I finished the book, I found ways to refute his claims and solidify my own. 'Antithetical Black' reveals the controversy I seek in literature.

6) Razzle-Dazzle Rose: One thing that I constantly forget about--yet it yields a great influence on my analysis-- is my generation. Times of black and white motion picture, eight-track tapes, and soliloquies have vanished, and now, I am surrounded with flashing lights, rapid conversations, and an expectance of quick technology. When I begin a slow piece of literature, it becomes easy to lose interest and become disappointed when a 787 jet doesn't enter the scene. Also, application of texts are extremely compromised by my cultural surroundings. Maybe Shakespeare couldn't understand the roles of females who are now CEO's of companies? Maybe Thoreau didn't understand the allure of NYC and that's why he chose nature? I don't know, but I always wonder. Hence, 'Razzle-Dazzle Rose' brilliantly encapsulates my lens once again.

***I must say, I had a splendid time sitting on my floor looking through nail polish colors and attempting to find emotions through their tones... :)

Reader-Response: Willy Loman

   I detest Willy. Willy is arrogant, egotistical, ignorant, and a horrible father figure. He forces one child into 'fame' and utterly neglects the other. He refuses to show weakness, error, or fault, and his frank stubbornness permeates his every move. His ego finally pinnacles in the ultimate selfish act: suidcide. Throughout the text of The Death of a Salesman, the character of Willy Loman ought to evoke frustration and ire in it's reader.
   For instance, Willy's relationship with his sons is temperamental and self-seeking. While having a conversation with his boys, Willy gleefully tells Biff that, "[he] must really be makin' a hit," only seconds later to correct Happy's carwashing ability by saying, "show him how to do it, Biff!" (35). Rarely does Willy show any favor towards Happy, and Biff--the blooming football player-- tends to naturally capture his father's attention. As witnessed in later statements such as, "me comin' into the Boston stores with you boys carryin' my bags. What a sensation!", Willy is driven by success and the keeping of appearances (39). His favoratism of Biff is true of his egotistical nature that desires fame and status, even if it means living vicariously through his son. Any father who seeks self worth through the abilities of their children should not be revered in literature, or life for that matter.
   Secondly, Willy's inability to accept critique demonstrates his flawed character. After his friend Charley suspected Willy of cheating at a card game, Willy's flushed response is to call Charley, "ignoramus!" while slamming the door behind him (51). Willy has little patience, and his self-control level is that of a small child. An adult should be able to peacefully abate the situation, but instead, Willy is the source of the mayhem. Additionally, when Willy goes to visit Charley, he runs into Bernard, and amidst their nervy conversation, Willy declares, "what are you trying to do, blame it on me?...well, don't--don't talk to me that way!" (92). Willy views any sort of questioning as a personal attack, and his child-like defensive nature is eager to 'attack' the sender. When any character investigates Willy's source of unhappiness, family problems, or financial plunders, Willy refuses to cooperate and instead responds with bitterness and annoyance. Willy is dry of humility, and his impulsive behavior leads the reader to deny him of any positive merit. Thus, in reading the play, The Death of a Salesman, the reader can identify negative moral, feminist, and psychological conclusions through the heinous character of Willy.