The Cherry Orchard
About an aristocratic russian family struggling to maintain their way of life. Set in early 20th century when Russia is coming out of feudalism. Until 1916 it was ruled by a tsar. One tsar frees the peasants from serfdom. this had mixed results – some moved to town and found better work, while others lost work and security. Anton is aware of the differences in wealth, the unrest in the country, the sense of imminent change, and the desperate need for continuing reform.

-Anton Chekhov
-Culture: Tsarist Russia
– The Cherry Orchard is distinctly influenced by Chekhov’s wide reading in literature, philosophy, and the natural sciences, especially Darwin’s Origin of the Species (first published only some forty years earlier) and Marxist and socialist philosophy (though Chekhov himself was not himself a member of any revolutionary movements)
– intended by Chekhov to be a comedy; Chekhov subtitled his play A Comedy in Four Acts
-Stanislavski, the plays director, viewed it as a drama; the debate as to whether it is a comedy or a drama still continues today
– What type of play is it?
– Naturalistic- actors perform their roles as if the did not know there was a audience; characters speak in everday language; the fourth wall
– Symbolic- narrative poem mourning the loss of beauty in the world; the cherry orchard means something different for each character: Lopákhin- money; Liubov- childhood, native place, way of life, beauty; Trofimov- the past, capitalism. also symbolism in the snapping of the string
– Political- communism(Trofimov) vs. capitalism(Lopakhin)
– Comedy or a Tragedy- farcical exits and entrances that involve slapstick, falls down the stairs comic misunderstanding, bathos (conflict of elevated and common space), eating a cucumber during serious speech;

sadness in loss of the orchard, ends with dim future for ll

final scene is tragic and comic at the same time.

naturalism in theatre
-Ex. The Cherry Orchard, 1904
-Actors perform their roles on stage as if they did not know that they were being observed; audience is encouraged to “forget” they are watching a drama
-Characters speak in everyday language
-Set, costumes, and lightning are designed and organized to create an illusion of reality
-“the fourth wall”: an imaginary wall at the front of the stage
-People and things stand for themselves alone; they don’t have allegorical or symbolic meaning
-naturalism is the most familiar dramatic form in the West
-Konstanin Stanislavski founded a theatre in Moscow and a system of training for actors; he was determined to found a new theater in which naturalism could work
-The 2nd act is less naturalistic and more symbolic than the rest of the play

most famous dramatic form int he West, reflected the belief of darwin’s determinism, projection of human behavior

performed on stage as if the they are not being observed, speak in every day language. use languages, sets, costumes, and lights that cause the belief that its real, lillusion of reality

4th wall

people and things stand for themselves alone, not symbolic meaning

Anton Chekhov
Lived from 1860-1904
-Born in the Crimea region of Russia
-His grandfather had been a serf who bought his own freedom
-His father was a grocer and went bankrupt
-Was a doctor at the age of 24; he wrote in order to live because doctors had a low income
-He wrote short stories and plays
– When he began writing The Cherry Orchard he was aware of the extreme difference between the poor and the wealthy, the need for reforms, and changing times.

Anton is aware of the differences in wealth, the unrest in the country, the sense of imminent change, and the desperate need for continuing reform.

the fourth wall
-The Cherry Orchard, 1904
-An imaginary wall at the front of the stage
-In naturalistic plays to create the idea for the actors that the audience is not present
-separates the audience and actors

Konstanin Stanislavski
– (1863 – 1938)
– was a Russian stage actor and director who developed the naturalistic performance technique known as the “Stanislavsky method,” or method acting.
-first person to analyze acting
-directed the first performance of The Cherry Orchard(1904)
-saw The Cherry Orchard as naturalistic and a tragedy
– was determined to found a new theater in which naturalism could work
– founded a theatre in Moscow
-was wedded to naturalism and created a system for training actors that is still used today

director who wanted naturalism to flourish. analytical acting in depth. experience the inner life of the character, go beneath the text to find the emotional truth of characters and situation

conflict with Anton, who didnt want it all naturalist and who wanted it a comedy.

non naturalistic sets in act one.

act two is a symbolic description of the modern world.

the play strains against naturalism. the cherry orchard is real ut also a symbol and each character looks at it as something different.

Luibov Andreyevna
– One of the main characters in the play The Cherry Orchard(1904)
– Owner of the estate and the cherry orchard, story revolves around her; around 50 years old
– How she views money: Money is not a precious thing to Liubov. She doesn’t work for her money and perhaps has never truly understood that it’s not an inexhaustible resource. Chekhov (who, let’s remember, had two jobs) is critiquing the idleness of Russian aristocrats who, at the time he was writing, were meeting their economic comeuppance.
– How she views love: Liubov lives for love. It influences all her actions, including her way with money, as we discussed above. She freely gives money to everyone from the homeless to her worthless lover in Paris. In Act 3, Liubov confesses to Trofimov that she wants to return to her love. Trofimov is outraged. How can she return to someone who robbed her blind? She doesn’t care about that. Human connections define and motivate Liubov, and she encourages them in others: in Anya and Trofimov, Varya and Lopakhin. Her emotional nature drives her decisions, and is part of what makes it impossible for her to let go of the past.
– How she views her past: Lubov holds the impossible hope that returning home can make her a child again. She’d like to wipe out everything shameful and unpleasant in her adult life. To start over. In some ways, as Liubov gives up the orchard and acknowledges the present, we’re watching her grow up again.
– The meaning of the cherry orchard changes over the course of the play for her:
Act 1(at risk of being sold)- Nostalgia, Act 2(going to be sold)- Denial, Act 3(is being sold)- Agitation, Act 4- Resignation

fell in love with a parasite, her son died. she moved away with her lover, he left her, she tried to commit suicide, then tries to seduce her lover back to her.

for her the orchard is her childhood, her native place and way of life. beauty, nature, innocence. loss of the orchard would be loss of her family / elite culture.

– Character in The Cherry Orchard (1904)
– Marxist student
– He wanted to cut the cherry orchard down; wanted to do away with past because it was evil; to him the cherry orchard is a symbol of Russia’s oppressive past and the dehumanization caused by families such as Lubov’s through the institution of serfdom.
– He is the revolutionary obsessed with the future, while those around him are trapped in the past
– As an outsider, Trofimov brings an objective viewpoint to the situation. He doesn’t side with Lubov or Lopakhin when it comes to the cherry orchard.
– Trofimov is intelligent and impassioned, but he’s also immature
– Trofimov lacks real world experience and lacks Lubov’s emotional intelligence, her power to empathize with others’ pain.
– He serves as a foil for both Lopakhin and Lubov; Trofimov’s ugliness, belief that he is “above love”, and forward-looking nature contrasts with Lubov beauty, her idealistic vision of love, and her obsession with the past

26 year old student, in love with Anya. the orchard reminds him of the past like it does for Luibov but unlike her he wants it to come down. He sses it as Tsarist, feudalisst society and wants to erase the past.

his vision for society is optimistic, sees progress

“The Long Fuse”
– 1839-1914
– The things that overtime slowly ignited World War I (1914)
– Questions of causality and responsibility:
o Industrialism and materialism; imperialism; frustrated nationalism
– Europe was in a decline
– Rival alliances(Central Powers- Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottomans; Allies- France, Britain, Russia)

germany had been consolidating england and also growing. russia and austrian empires also important. rivalries an entangling alliances led to the war.

2 front war: both russia and france. if that happened, they needed to have a strategy. tried to locatre france so they werent a threat.

bismark at the helm – cheif minsitry of germany

global implications of new imperialism – carving up the world, rivalry

naval competition – brit. considered best navy in the world. german kept building more and more.

alliances: triple alliance, triple entente, the balkans.

SHORT FUSE: the balkans, everyone wanted to control is, confrontation zone between ottomans and europe. the short fuse was the assass of Archduke Ferdinand, heir to austrian throne. serbians were behind it, austrians get backing from germ and give an ultimatum

The Austro-Hungarian Note to Serbia
– July 23, 1914
– Note presented to Serbia by the Austro Hungarian government that included 10 points Serbia had to follow in order to not be invaded.
– The note made far-reaching demands and demanded a reply within 48 hours.
– The Austro-Hungarian government did not consult any other government, even the German, before presenting the note.
– Note was caused by Serbia’s movement to separate certain territories from the Austro-Hungary monarchy; involved acts of terrorism and a series of assassinations and murders
– The points basically said to take away any propaganda that was against the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, remove all military service to those officers who are guilty of using this propaganda, and cooperate in the suppression of the movement directed against the territorial integrity of the monarchy
– Serbia did not accept and the Austro-Hungarian government declared war on Serbia on July 28, 1914

ultimatum, ten points, agreed to all but one (the one about the dissenters) and austrian invades anyway. they wanted a war and wanted a reason to take over and gain leverage.

russia get mad cuz serbia is under their protection. they intervene and begin to movilize trooops.

“Total War”
– August 4, 1914 to November 11, 1918
– is a military conflict in which nations mobilize all available resources in order to destroy another nation’s ability to engage in war.
– Nature of war changed because of this
– The ordeal of Total War
o The Schlieffan Plan- Germany’s fighting plan
o The Western Front: stalemate, trench warefare, war of attributin
o Battleships and submarines
o New technologies- the machine gun, wrist watch
o War was fought on home fronts
o The cultural/ psychological impact of the war: shell shocked
o Caused massive numbers of deaths
**poems that show the effects war had on people in notes

b4 this had idealized notions of war – enthuisastic, thought of honor, duty, glory, only last a short time, cofident. then carnage, no death ever like it.

caught between horse and guns.

The Schlieffen Plan and its failure
WWI, named after its creator, Alfred von Schlieffen (1833-1913), former chief of German general staff. Proposed that the first attack from the Germans should be a rapid decisive force through Belgium. The plan’s purpose was to ensure victory on both the French and Russian fronts

fight on 2 fronts. attack france then Luxembourg, then Belgium and hit france from behind. but, not concentrate on russia too. they declare war on france so they can execute their strategy. they go through neutral Belgium which causes Britain to declare war too.

causes Allies (fr., brit., russian, and Serbia) to form against austria-hungary, and germany.

fr. desperate to mobilize – stalemate on western front, trenches, tons of soldiers

“shell shocked”
came from the constant bombardment on troops of artillery, refers to the effect on soldiers after nearby explosions, soldiers became unresponsive and traumatized

trench warfare – machine guns, gas maskes, chemical weapons. tanks to break the trenches, mining tunnels to place explosives, bombing.

“The Peace to End all Peace”
refers to the treaty of Versailles, parody of WWI as the war to end all wars.

ironic cuz of WWII

”A Peace to End All Peace” is about the dissolution of the centuries-old Ottoman Empire at the close of World War I and the consequences of that breakup for the Western powers, the Soviet Union and, to a lesser extent, the peoples of the Middle East themselves. On a still larger scale, the book concerns the political origins of the present-day Middle East. It concludes with the piecemeal territorial settlements of 1922, when political lines were drawn that bear a striking resemblance to the boundaries of today.

Treaty of Versailles
June 28, 1919, ended the state of war between Germany and the allied powers

the losers had to turn over a bunch of stuff. they were left with no navy or territory.

guilt clause – Germany is responsible and must pay reparations.

The details of the Versailles Treaty had been debated and finalized at the Paris Peace Conference, which opened on January 18, 1919 – just over two months after the fighting on the Western Front ended. Although many diplomats from the Allied Powers participated, Germany was not invited to the conference. The “big three” who were the most influential in the debates were Prime Minister David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom, Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau of France, and President Woodrow Wilson of the United States.
On May 7, 1919, the Versailles Treaty was handed over to Germany with the express instructions that they had only three weeks in which to accept the Treaty. Considering that in many ways the Versailles Treaty was meant to punish Germany, Germany of course found much fault with the Versailles Treaty. Although Germany sent back a list of complaints over the Treaty, the Allied Powers ignored most of them.

The Versailles Treaty: A Very Long Document

The Versailles Treaty itself is very long and extensive document, made up of 440 Articles (plus Annexes) which have been divided into 15 parts. The first part of the Versailles Treaty established the League of Nations. Other parts included the terms of military limitations, prisoners of war, finances, access to ports and waterways, and reparations.
Versailles Treaty Terms Spark Controversy

The most controversial aspects of the Versailles Treaty were that Germany was to take full responsibility for the damage caused during World War I (known as the “war guilt” clause, Article 231), the major land concessions forced upon Germany (including the loss of all her colonies), the limitation of the German army to 100,000 men, and the extremely large sum in reparations Germany was to pay to the Allied Powers.
The terms of the Versailles Treaty were so seemingly hostile to Germany that German Chancellor Philipp Scheidemann resigned rather than sign it. However, Germany realized they had to sign it for they no longer had any military power left to resist.

Versailles Treaty Signed

On June 28, 1919, exactly five years after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Germany’s representatives Hermann Müller and Johannes Bell signed the Versailles Treaty in the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles near Paris, France.

Light: Particles vs. Waves
light acts as if it is a wave and a particle in different situations. Albert Einstein dealt with this concept. Light experiences the duality of both waves and particles

light made is seem like particles, suggest that light is waves. everything is particles was mechanist. thought this way was more rational and scientific.

Interface pattern suggests light is a wave.

At first, physicists were reluctant to accept the dual nature of light. After all, many of us humans like to have one right answer. But Einstein paved the way in 1905 by embracing wave-particle duality. We’ve already discussed the photoelectric effect, which led Einstein to describe light as a photon. Later that year, however, he added a twist to the story in a paper introducing special relativity. In this paper, Einstein treated light as a continuous field of waves — an apparent contradiction to his description of light as a stream of particles. Yet that was part of his genius. He willingly accepted the strange nature of light and chose whichever attribute best addressed the problem he was trying to solve.

Light is a form of energy, and exists in two conceptual frameworks: light exhibits properties that have characteristics of discrete particles (eg. energy is carried away in “chunks”) and characteristics of waves (eg. diffraction). This split is known as duality. It is important to understand that this is not an “either/or” situation. Duality means that the characteristics of both waves and particles are present at the same time. The same beam of light will behave as a particle and/or as a wave depending on the experiment. Furthermore, the particle framework (chunks) can have interactions which can be described in terms of wave characteristics and the wave framework can have interactions that can be described in terms of particle characteristics.

Theory of Special Relativity
proposed by Albert Einstein in 1905. Postulates that the laws of physics never change and that the speed of light is the same regardless of the observer

frame of reference are a time in space in which you’re making the measurement. speed, location, situation where observer and observed are makes a difference. includes time dilation, absolute simultaneity and absolute time.

post 1: all observors are moving at a constant speed, will witness identical laws of physics, reaffirms newton, no ether, all works the same

Post 2: the speed of light will be always measured to be the same by all observers regardless of their motion, light as a wave, but doesnt travel through anything, doesnt add relative speeds

Absolute Simultaneity Trouble
proposed by Einstein and states that two distinct events cannot occur at the same time to all observers if they are not in the same space

if one observer sees two events happen at the same time, like the lights turning on, all observers would also see them turn on at the same time.

but motion is relative, there is no absolute frame of reference. events aren’t simultaneous for all observes because it depends on relative motion.

The first postulate of the theory of special relativity is not too hard to swallow: The laws of physics hold true for all frames of reference. The postulate is: The speed of light is measured as constant in all frames of reference.

There is no such thing as simultaneity between two events when viewed in different frames of reference. If you understand what we have talked about so far, this concept will be a breeze. First let’s clarify what this concept is stating. If Meagan sees two events happen at the same time for her frame of reference, Garret, who is moving with respect to Meagan, will not see the events occur at the same time. Let’s use another example. Imagine that Meagan is standing outside and notices that there are two identical cannons 100 yards apart and facing each other. All of the sudden, both cannons fire at the same time and the cannonballs smash into each other at exactly half their distance, 50 yards. This is no surprise since, the cannons are identical and they fire cannonballs at the same speed. Now, suppose that Garret was riding his skateboard super fast towards one of the cannons, and he was directly in the line of fire for both. Also suppose he was exactly half way between the two cannons when they fired. What would happen? The cannonball that Garret was moving towards would hit him first. It had less distance to travel since he was moving towards it.
Now, let’s replace the cannons with light bulbs that turn on at the same time in Meagan’s frame of reference. If Garret rides his skateboard in the same fashion as he did with the cannonballs, when he reaches the halfway mark, he sees the light bulb he is moving towards turn on first and then he sees the light bulb he is moving away from turn on last. See Fig 6 below for clarification.
In Fig 6, the bulb on the right turns on first. I have shown Garret to be moving in the same direction of the distance line between the bulbs, and he is looking towards the moon. As stated earlier, when the bulbs turn on in Meagan’s frame of reference, Garret will see the bulb on the right turn on before the bulb on the left does. Since he is moving toward the bulb on the right, its light has a shorter distance to travel to reach him. Garret would argue with Meagan that the bulbs did not turn on at the same time, but in Meagan’s perspective they did. Hopefully, you can see how different frames of reference will not allow events to be observed as simultaneous.

Absolute Time Trouble
time does not pass at the same rate for everyone depending on his or her location, therefore an absolute time cannot exist that is omnipotent over the whole universe.

Time can be measured with light, light is always observed by all at the same speed, BUT motion causes distance to be observed differently, so speed changes time relatively. light clock on train example.

mentioned that time also changes with different frames of reference (motion). This is known as “time dilation”. Time actually slows with motion but it only becomes apparent at speeds close to the speed of light. Similar to length contraction, if the speed reaches that of light, time slows to a stop. Again, only an observer that is not in motion with the time that is being measured would notice. Like the tape measure in length contraction, a clock in motion would also be affected so it would never be able to detect that time was slowing down (remember the pendulum). Since our everyday motion does not approach anything remotely close to the speed of light, the dilation is completely unnoticed by us, but it is there.

time dilation effect
this is the elapsed time difference that two different observers see when examining the same events. Time does not pass equally for everyone because of the nature of spacetime.

In order to attempt to prove this theory of time dilation, two very accurate atomic clocks were synchronized and one was taken on a high-speed trip on an airplane. When the plane returned, the clock that took the plane ride was slower by exactly the amount Einstein’s equations predicted. Thus, a moving clock runs more slowly when viewed by a frame of reference that is not in motion with it. Keep in mind that when the clock returned, it had recorded less time than the ground clock. Once re-united with the ground clock, the slow clock will again record time at the same rate as the ground clock (obviously, it will remain behind by the amount of time it slowed on the trip unless re-synchronized). It is only when the clock is in motion with respect to the other clock that the time dilation occurs. Take a look at Fig 4 and Fig 5 below.
Let’s assume that the object under the sun in Fig 4 is a light clock on wheels. A light clock measures time by sending a beam of light from the bottom plate to the top plate where it is then reflected back to the bottom plate. A light clock seems to be the best measure of time since its speed remains constant regardless of motion. So in Fig 4, we walk up to the light clock and find that it takes 1 sec for the light to travel from the bottom to the top and back to the bottom again. Now look at Fig 5. In this example, the light clock is rolling to the right, but we are standing still. If we could see the light beam as the clock rolled past us, we would see the beam travel at angles to the plates. If you are confused, look at Fig 4 and you’ll see that both the sent beam and received beam occur under the sun, thus the clock is not moving. Now look at fig 5, the sent beam occurs under the sun, but the reflected beam returns when the clock is under the lightning bolt, thus the clock is rolling to the right. What is this telling us? We know that the clock standing still sends and receives at 1-second intervals. We also know that the speed of light is constant. Regardless of where we are, we would measure the light beam in fig 4 and fig 5 to be the exact same speed. But Fig 5 looks like the light traveled farther because the arrows are longer. And guess what, it did. It took the light longer to make one complete send and receive cycle, but the speed of the light was unchanged. Because the light traveled farther and the speed was unchanged, this could only mean that the time it took was longer. Remember speed is distance / time, so the only way for the speed to be unchanged when the distance increases is for the time to also increase

twin paradox
thought experiment involving a set of identical twins, one twin makes a journey into space in a fast AF rocket and returns to Earth to find that the other twin whom remained on Earth has aged more.

theory of general relativity
Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity is one of the towering achievements of 20th-century physics. Published in 1916, it explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity in fact arises from the curvature of space and time.
Einstein proposed that objects such as the sun and the Earth change this geometry. In the presence of matter and energy it can evolve, stretch and warp, forming ridges, mountains and valleys that cause bodies moving through it to zigzag and curve. So although Earth appears to be pulled towards the sun by gravity, there is no such force. It is simply the geometry of space-time around the sun telling Earth how to move. The general theory of relativity has far-reaching consequences. It not only explains the motion of the planets; it can also describe the history and expansion of the universe, the physics of black holes and the bending of light from distant stars and galaxies. Einstein’s general theory of relativity has revealed that the universe is an extreme place. We now know it was hot and dense and has been expanding for the past 13.7 billion years. It is also populated with incredibly warped regions of space-time called black holes that trap anything falling within their clutches.

Involves: Gravity, The Equivalence Principle (gravity can be neglected in space), Gravity and Time (Gravity can alter time) , Gravity and Light (Gravity bends light as it travels through space), Concept of Field versus Force (Gravity is a field not a force), Weird Conclusions (Black Holes). Also consider the elevator example.

W. B. Yeats
1865-1939. Modernist Poet. Grew up in Dublin, Ireland and London. Began as a playwright and then took a dramatic turn towards poetry. The most important event in Yeats’s life during these London years, however, was his acquaintance with Maud Gonne, a tall, beautiful, prominent young woman passionately devoted to Irish nationalism. Yeats soon fell in love with Gonne, and for nearly three decades he courted her. Yeats deplored the hatred and the bigotry of the Nationalist movement at first, but due to the executions of Easter 1916 and Maud Gonne, he began to write many nationalistic plays and his poetry is full of moving protests against it (look to “Easter 1916”). He was appointed to the Irish Senate in 1922. He won the Nobel Prize for his dramatic works although today he is more significant due to his poetry. Yeats’s had a strong interest in occultism and spiritualism (evident in gyres of “The Second Coming”). Most of Yeats’s poetry, however, used symbols from ordinary life and from familiar traditions, and much of his poetry in the 1890s continued to reflect his interest in Irish subjects.

“Easter, 1916”
On Easter Sunday 1916, Irish nationalists began an unsuccessful rebellion against British rule, which lasted throughout the week and ended in the surrender and execution of its leaders. This poem by William Butler Yeats is based off of this historical event, for Yeats had been in London at and witnessed the rebellion and executions. Before the execution, he hadn’t wanted rebellion, but the executions turned his opinion against the British. The poem is modernist due to its difficulty and obscure allusions. The poem exemplifies Years internal conflict about the rebellion and Irish nationalism. It is modernist due to its imagery (of changing nature and the stone and the stream), obscure allusions (to the Battle of the Boyne), and difficult / dense nature.

“The Second Coming”
Printed in 1920, modernist poem by Yeats. The Great War had just ended, along with other revolutions and wars, and Yeats thinks that the foundation of the world is shaking. The speaker describes a nightmarish scene: the falcon, turning in a widening “gyre” (spiral), cannot hear the falconer. The falcon is a symbol of nature tamed. “Things fall apart; the center cannot hold”; anarchy is loosed upon the world; “The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere / The ceremony of innocence is drowned.” The Second Coming of Christ, believed by Christians to herald the end of the world, is transformed here into the prediction of a birth initiating an era of paganism and termination the two-thousand-year cycle of Christianity. Christianity is ending to make way for the return of Paganism. “Anarchy” is coming as “ceremony of innocence is drowned”. MODERNIST due to its shocking, disturbing content, sharp-edged imagery, and its allusions.

Yeats’s gyres
Yeats used this theory to shows his views in “The Second Coming”. The theory of Yeats gyres is articulated in A Vision, which centers on a diagram made of two conical spirals, one inside the other, so that the widest part of one of the spirals rings around the narrowest part of the other spiral, and vice versa. Yeats believed that this image (he called the spirals “gyres”) captured the contrary motions inherent within the historical process, and he divided each gyre into specific regions that represented particular kinds of historical periods (and could also represent the psychological phases of an individual’s development).”The Second Coming” was intended by Yeats to describe the current historical moment (the poem appeared in 1921) in terms of these gyres. Yeats believed that the world was on the threshold of an apocalyptic revelation, as history reached the end of the outer gyre (to speak roughly) and began moving along the inner gyre. The speaker describes a nightmarish scene: the falcon, turning in a widening “gyre” (spiral), cannot hear the falconer; “Things fall apart; the center cannot hold”; anarchy is loosed upon the world; “The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere / The ceremony of innocence is drowned.” The best people, the speaker says, lack all conviction, but the worst “are full of passionate intensity.”

James Joyce
(1882-1941) Modernism in fiction. 3 works by James Joyce: Dubliners (includes “The Dead”, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (autobiographical novel), and Ulysses (“high” modernism). Born into a struggling family, but in spite of their poverty, the family struggled to maintain a solid middle-class facade. Grew up in Dublin, and Dublin played a prominent role in many of his works. He eventually left oppressive culture of Ireland to write and moved to Zurich, Switzerland. Consummate work of modernism: stream of consciousness, innovate form, disorder and indeterminacy of life in the modern world. His modernist style captures the way our minds move by utilizing techniques for stream of consciousness.

“The Dead”
‘The Dead’ (written 1906-7, published in 1914) is a short story by Irish writer James Joyce (1882 – 1941), who is best known for his pioneering of Modernist literary techniques such as stream-of-consciousness. ‘The Dead’ has some evidence of this Modernist experimentation.’ The Dead,’ from James Joyce’s collection Dubliners, is on its surface a relatively simple story–a man and his wife attend a holiday party–but over the course of that party, and in the hours that follow, we see a character struggling to accept his place as an aging man in a new world. Also, we see in the story Joyce’s development of the important Modernist literary technique, stream-of-consciousness. ‘The Dead’, beyond being a moving story, explores several key themes and illustrates one important aspect of the Modernist literary technique:
Contemporary Irish politics: Ireland, like many countries, has a long history of struggle against foreign imperialism, and in particular against the imperialism of her neighbor to the east, Great Britain. In the tension between Gabriel and Ms. Ivors, we see that struggle reflected. Ms. Ivors interprets any affection for English culture as an act of betrayal, and tells Gabriel as much, whereas Gabriel believes his Irish heritage can blend harmoniously with ‘Continental’ traditions and fashions. The issue remains unresolved, but the important thing to notice is the difficulty these Irish citizens face in trying to establish their own cultural identity.
The pain of aging: While politics are important in this story, the most central human theme is the pain and difficulty of aging. The theme of aging is alluded to several times throughout the story, whenever Gabriel notices his disconnect from the younger generation, but is most evident at the story’s conclusion, when Gabriel not only has his deepest appreciation of the swift passage of time, but also understands himself and his wife to have been passed up by time. Already, he senses, they’ve left the current moment and become part of history.
Stream-of-consciousness: Of all the literary techniques Joyce is known for, the most important is his pioneering of stream-of-consciousness, a method by which the author conveys to his reader not only a character’s thoughts, but the development of those thoughts as they arise from the character’s sensory perceptions, in real time. This story does not offer very prominent examples of stream-of-consciousness (for that, read Joyce’s Ulysses), but at the end of the story, once Gretta is asleep, we see Gabriel’s ruminations about aging and death develop out of the room’s lighting, the snow on the window, etc. It is a subtle, effective use of this groundbreaking technique.

Gabriel Conroy
Main character of “The Dead”, the story by James Joyce. Mr. Conroy is the principal point-of-view character, and the nephew of the party’s hostesses. He is a professor and intellectual, and, in his middle age, is suspicious of the younger generation’s radical politics. 3 women – a servant, a colleague, and his wife – bring him to an epiphany – that its time to journey westward, for life is short. His colleague, Molly Ivers, confronts him about writing book reviews for a newspaper. A fervent supporter of Irish culture, Miss Ivors embarrasses Gabriel by labeling him a “West Briton” for writing literary reviews for a conservative newspaper. Gabriel dismisses the accusation, but Miss Ivors pushes the point by inviting Gabriel to visit the Aran Isles, where Irish is spoken, during the summer. When Gabriel declines, Miss Ivors corners him about his lack of interest in his own country. Gabriel exclaims that he is sick of Ireland. ***Look at Michael Furey for more info about Gabriel and his Gabriel’s ephiphany.

Michael Furey
Alluded to character in “The Dead”, the story by James Joyce. While Mr. Furey doesn’t physically appear in the story, he plays an important role. He is the young man who years ago was in love with Gretta Conroy (Gabriel’s wife), and died of exposure from coming to see her on a rainy night. When Gretta is as the party, a song that is played on the piano transfixes her. Gabriel sees her standing there, and becomes lustful and seems to fall in love all over again. When they get back to the hotel, Gabriel hopes for intimacy but his wife begin to cry and tells Gabriel the song reminded her of her first love, Michael Furey, who died due to his love for her. She falls asleep, and Gabriel experiences an inward change that makes him examine his own life and human life in general. Gabriel sees himself as a shadow of a person, flickering in a world in which the living and the dead meet. Though in his speech at the dinner he insisted on the division between the past of the dead and the present of the living, Gabriel now recognizes, after hearing that Michael Furey’s memory lives on, that such division is false. As he looks out of his hotel window, he sees the falling snow, and he imagines it covering Michael Furey’s grave just as it covers those people still living, as well as the entire country of Ireland. The story leaves open the possibility that Gabriel might change his attitude and embrace life, and that he will eventually join the dead and will not be remembered.

Advertising Becomes and Industry
This is a result of mass production / consumption. Mass production is reaching the point where all sorts of stuff is being produced. Mass production also requires mass consumption and people had to be persuaded to buyt the stuff they didn’t necessarily need. Something had to be done to convince people that traditional values are now outdated and that consumption and excess – such as radios or household appliances – are now valuable. Undermining of traditional values. Advertising consequently expanded during the 1920s and it began to be referred to as the “advertising industry”. Advertising message to go ahead and buy anything you want, for it will make you feel good, and your happiness is what is important. Basically, the advertising message was a way to persuade people to want what they don’t need.

FRD – Socialist or savior of capitalism?
elected president in 1932 during Great Depression and would go on to serve 4 terms; famous for his new deal programs; FDR was accused of being a socialist but quoted that our rich nation could afford to pay for security and prosperity without having to sacrifice our liberties into the bargain; government intervention according to FDR in the economy was not about destroying individual liberty, it was about restoring individual liberty; it was about making capitalism work in such a way as to ensure equal economic opportunity for all Americans, not just the privileged few at the top; a little of socialist, but more savior of capitalism

hoover couldn’t relate to the people. FDR was more confident and eloquent. he was saving the capitalist system and business leaders from themselves. reverted to old views when things got bad, they lost a little bit and blamed him. FDR is denounced by both socialists and communists. Government spreads money around to cause consumption and jumpstart the economy

FDR managed to keep both capitalism and democracy together, showed world that it could exist in harmony.

Legacy: role of gov., power to New deal, citizens didnt come in contact with government, not they connect with gov on multiple levels. legacy of social programs of prevention, regulations of businesses eased, capitalism is worst of all economic except for all the other economic systems. unregulated business.

William Faulkner
1897-1962); author of barn burning; American writer and Nobel peace prize winner from oxford Mississippi; known for his short stories and his novels; dropped out of high school; was not high on formal education and mostly wrote because of his lack of money; became famous for a series of novels that explore the South’s historical legacy

19 novels, 1920s during high modernism. formed innovation and experimentation, stream of consciousness. from 1920-30s there was a shift to social realism, a return from modernist experiments to social experiments. Reigned in style to make generalized to the popular public. in the 1930s they were more socially conscious, and the US moved to the left, as did Faulkner. Over the course of his career he begins to sympathize with the poor characters, not so much with the downwardly mobile aristocrats. in his fiction he was brave although he wasnt in real life.

“Barn Burning”
1939, set in 1895, beginning from POV or small boy. dad has ingenious strategy. sarty feels torn between his father and some other force. plantation home has order, symmetry, and balance but the loyalties are divided. he is torn between allegion to general concept of justice that he sees imbedded in justice and the hopes will help him choose between his fathers class of people and the privileged class. loyalty to “blood” or father?

do you sympathize with ab snopes? abused, burns barn, but the burning of the barn is his integrity because he was owned. he sabotages himeself for his dignity and by fighting the system.

Young Colonel Sartoris Snopes crouches on a keg in the back of the store that doubles for the town court. He cannot see the table where his father and his father’s opponent, Mr. Harris, are seated. The justice of the peace asks Mr. Harris for proof that Mr. Snopes burned his barn. Mr. Harris describes the numerous times Snopes’s hog broke through the fence and got into his cornfields. The final time, when Mr. Harris demanded a dollar for the animal’s return, the black man who was sent to fetch the hog gave Mr. Harris an ominous warning that wood and hay are combustible. Later that night, fire claimed Mr. Harris’s barn. While the judge claims that that by itself isn’t proof, Mr. Harris has Sartoris called to testify before the court. The boy knows his father is expecting him to lie on his behalf. After doing so, the judge asks Mr. Harris whether he wants the child cross-examined, but Mr. Harris snarls to have the boy removed.
The judge dismisses the charges against Snopes but warns him to leave the county for good, and Snopes agrees to comply. Snopes and his two sons then leave the store and head to their wagon. A child in the crowd accuses them of being barn burners and strikes Sartoris, knocking him down. Snopes orders Sartoris into the wagon, which is laden with their possessions and where his two sisters, mother, and aunt are waiting. Snopes prevents his crying wife from cleaning Sartoris’s bloodied face. That night, the family camps around the father’s typically small fire. Snopes wakes Sartoris and takes him onto the dark road, where he accuses him of planning to inform the judge of his guilt in the arson case. Snopes strikes Sartoris on the head and tells him he must always remain loyal to his family.
The next day, the family arrives at its new home and begins unloading the wagon. Snopes takes Sartoris to the house of Major de Spain, the owner on whose land the family will work. Despite the servant’s protests, Snopes tracks horse manure into the opulent house, leaving only when Miss Lula asks him to. He resentfully remarks that the home was built by slave labor. Two hours later, the servant drops off the rug that Snopes had soiled and instructs him to clean and return it. Snopes supervises as the two sisters reluctantly clean the carpet with lye, and he uses a jagged stone to work the surface of the expensive rug. After dinner, the family retires to their sleeping areas. Snopes forces Sartoris to fetch the mule and ride along with him to return the cleaned rug. At the house, Snopes flings the rug onto the floor after loudly kicking at the door several times.
The next morning, as Sartoris and Snopes prepare the mules for plowing, de Spain arrives on horseback to inform them that the rug was ruined from improper cleaning. In lieu of the hundred-dollar replacement fee, the major says Snopes will be charged twenty additional bushels of corn. Sartoris defends Snopes’s actions, telling him that he did the best he could with the soiled carpet and that they will refuse to supply the extra crops. Snopes puts Sartoris back to work, and the following days are consumed with the constant labor of working their acreage. Sartoris hopes that Snopes will turn once and for all from his destructive impulses.
The next weekend, Snopes and his two sons head once again to a court appearance at the country store, where the well-dressed de Spain is in attendance. Sartoris attempts to defend Snopes, saying that he never burned the barn, but Snopes orders him back to the wagon. The judge mistakenly thinks the rug was burned in addition to being soiled and destroyed. He rules that Snopes must pay ten extra bushels of corn when the crop comes due, and court is adjourned. After a trip to the blacksmith’s shop for wagon repairs, a light meal in front of the general store, and a trip to a corral where horses are displayed and sold, Snopes and his sons return home after sundown.
Despite his wife’s protests, Snopes empties the kerosene from the lamp back into its five-gallon container and secures a lit candle stub in the neck of a bottle. Snopes orders Sartoris to fetch the oil. He obeys but fantasizes about running away. He tries to dissuade Snopes, but Snopes grabs Sartoris by the collar and orders his wife to restrain him. Sartoris escapes his mother’s clutches and runs to the de Spain house, bursting in on the startled servant. Breathlessly, he blurts out the word Barn! Sartoris runs desperately down the road, moving aside as the major’s horse comes thundering by him. Three shots ring out and Snope is killed, his plan to burn de Spain’s barn thwarted. At midnight, Sartoris sits on a hill. Stiff and cold, he hears the whippoorwills and heads down the hill to the dark woods, not pausing to look back.

Sarty Snopes
A ten-year-old boy and the story’s protagonist. Small and wiry, with wild, gray eyes and uncombed brown hair, Sartoris wears patched and faded jeans that are too small for him. He has inherited his innocence and morality from his mother, but his father’s influence has made Sartoris old beyond his years. He is forced to confront an ethical quandary that pits his loyalty to his family against the higher concepts of justice and morality.
Barn Burning” explores the coming of age of Sartoris Snopes, as he is forced to grapple with issues of right and wrong that require a maturity and insight beyond his years. “You’re getting to be a man,” Snopes tells his ten-year-old son after delivering a blow to the side of his head. In Sartoris’s world, violence is a fundamental element of manhood, something he knows all too well from living with his father. Sartoris is impressionable, inarticulate, and subject to his father’s potentially corrupting influence, but he is also infused with a sense of justice. Sartoris is in many ways a raw, unformed creature of nature, untouched by education, the refining influences of civilization, or the stability of a permanent home. The sight of the de Spain house gives him an instinctive feeling of peace and joy, but, as Faulkner notes, the child could not have translated such a reaction into words. Later, Sartoris reacts instinctively again when he prevents his father from burning de Spain’s barn. He cannot articulate why he warns de Spain or ultimately runs away, but his actions suggest that Sartoris’s core consists of goodness and morality rather than the corruption that his father attempts to teach him.
Sartoris’s worldview and morality may exist beyond the adult world of precise language and articulation, but he displays an insight that is far more developed than many of the adults who surround him. He sees through his father’s attempts to manipulate him by harping on the importance of family loyalty as a means of guaranteeing Sartoris’s silence. Sartoris’s brother, John, lacks Sartoris’s insight, and he is an example of what young Sartoris could easily become. Snopes has successfully taught John his ideas of family loyalty, and John blindly follows Snopes’s criminal lead. Sartoris, far from silently obeying, instigates the climactic end of Snopes’s reign of terror. At the end of the story, Sartoris betrays the family “honor” and must persevere on his own. As his father warned, if Sartoris failed to support his family, support would not be offered to him. As frightening as the unknown future might be, Sartoris has decided that the kind of “support” his family can offer is something he can do without. His flight marks an end to the legacy of bitterness and shame that he stood to inherit.

Major de Spain
A well-dressed and affluent landowner. De Spain brings the soiled rug to the Snopeses’ cabin and insists that they clean it and return it. Snopes’s unpredictable nature unsettles de Spain, and he uneasily answers Snopes’s charges in court.

assumes he can kill someone who burns his barn, that its his privilege to take

Toni Morrison
Toni Morrison is an American novelist, editor, and professor. Her novels are known for their epic themes, vivid dialogue, and richly detailed characters.

b. 1931, great novelist, won nobel prize.

written by Morrison and is her only published short story; declaiming words musically, in a heightened theatrical manner. the story is set in the 50s. relationship of a black and white girl who meet and an orphanages at age 8. they both still have moms and are the youngest girls.

“My mother danced all night and Roberta’s was sick. That’s why we were taken to St. Bonny’s.” Thus begins Twyla’s narrative of her long-term, intermittent relationship with Roberta, another eight-year-old who shares her failing grades and “not real orphan” status at St. Bonaventure’s, the shelter where they live for a few months.
The two girls become fast friends despite the discomfort occasioned by the situation, their problematic mothers (Roberta’s is hyper-religious and unfriendly; Twyla’s is pretty but childlike, an embarrassment to Twyla because of her casual clothing and behavior), and their racial differences (one is white, one African-American). They also share a defining moment, in which they watch bigger girls assault Maggie, a disabled woman who works in the institution’s kitchen.
The girls meet by accident four more times; as young adults in a Howard Johnson’s, where Twyla works and Roberta stops in with two young men on the way to the coast for “an appointment with Hendrix”; in a grocery store in Newburgh, the blue-collar town on the Hudson river where Twyla lives (Roberta lives in white-collar Annandale); at a picket line against a busing plan (Roberta is protesting the busing; Twyla ends up picketing for it); and finally in a diner on Christmas Eve. Each time they meet, they piece together what has happened in their lives, but also return to the defining moment of Maggie, arguing about what really happened and what role they played in the abuse.

Twyla Benson and Roberta Fisk
two different races, who were roommates at an orphanage.

roberta lives in prosperous area, her hubby does computre stuff. she marches to protest integrating.

mirror images.

race remain ambiguous, experiment of racial codes and taking race away from two character for whom racial identity is crucial.

–somewhere between the racial binary
–binary opposition – night/day, dark/light
–race in US – lines drawn in law between black and white
–post modernism influenced by…

The story is a wonderful classroom tool for discussing stereotypes of embodied differences like race, class, and disability. While the characters and text are attentive to race and other issues of difference, it is impossible to tell which girl is white and which is African-American, much as readers try to decode various “clues” of detail and syntax to establish racial identity. The story dramatizes the social body’s simultaneous construction on more than one axis (race, ability/disability, socioeconomic class) and how in our perceptions and representations, stigma in one category can easily slip into a position of stigma in another one (being disabled and being black, for example).

Twyla’s realization that Maggie is, in some sense, her “dancing mother” exemplifies this awareness. The fact that in the world of St. Bonny’s, in which all the children are disenfranchised, the lowest person in the hierarchy is Maggie, is a rich source for discussion as well. The title “Recitatif” emphasizes the story’s brilliant exploration of the work of memory and the power of successive returns to the same traumatic events in the company of another person less committed to preserving a safe version of what happened.

Maggie the kitchen woman
woman Twyla describes as having legs like parenthesis; was a mute and never said anything; worked hard and never responded or reacted to anything the girls at the orphanage would say

reflective of Roberta’s mom – anyone who is targeted, or considered less

Twyla’s realization that Maggie is, in some sense, her “dancing mother” exemplifies this awareness. The fact that in the world of St. Bonny’s, in which all the children are disenfranchised, the lowest person in the hierarchy is Maggie, is a rich source for discussion as well. The title “Recitatif” emphasizes the story’s brilliant exploration of the work of memory and the power of successive returns to the same traumatic events in the company of another person less committed to preserving a safe version of what happened.

the mute and possibly deaf Maggie. Twyla and Roberta struggle years later to remember a scene in which Maggie, the childlike, elderly kitchen help, is brutalized by the shelter’s older “gar girls,” and the two main characters argue about whether or not they participated in the beating. Moreover, as they acknowledge that they never knew for certain whether Maggie was deaf as well as mute or whether she was black or white, they realize that their own ambivalent memories of her have been repressed and muted. Critics focusing on Twyla and Roberta either cursorily analyze Maggie’s role or interpret it in metaphoric relation to the two main characters. In such readings, Maggie is most commonly associated with representations of silence and absence, or, as Twyla and Roberta observe, with their failed mothers. Interpreted as a negative aesthetic representation rather than a transformable subject, Maggie becomes twice muted—first in the text and then by the critics.

postmodernism in literature
an emphasis on impressionism and subjectivity in writing (and in visual arts as well); an emphasis on HOW seeing (or reading or perception itself) takes place, rather than on WHAT is perceived; a movement away from the apparent objectivity provided by omniscient third-person narrators, fixed narrative points of view, and clear-cut moral positions. Faulkner’s multiply-narrated stories are an example of this aspect of modernism; a blurring of distinctions between genres, so that poetry seems more documentary (as in T.S. Eliot or ee cummings) and prose seems more poetic (as in Woolf or Joyce). an emphasis on fragmented forms, discontinuous narratives, and random-seeming collages of different materials a tendency toward reflexivity, or self-consciousness, about the production of the work of art, so that each piece calls attention to its own status as a production, as something constructed and consumed in particular ways. a rejection of elaborate formal aesthetics in favor of minimalist designs (as in the poetry of William Carlos Williams) and a rejection, in large part, of formal aesthetic theories, in favor of spontaneity and discovery in creation. A rejection of the distinction between “high” and “low” or popular culture, both in choice of materials used to produce art and in methods of displaying, distributing, and consuming art.

the stance of celebration: the Good War
Americans call WWII the good war because they won it and became leaders of the Western World; some Americans celebrate the victory because of all it did for the country, but places like Germany hate to look back at the war and do not think it should be celebrated at all

personal sacrifice, always a cost to war. moral choices, sacrifice for country, complicated with ambiguity.

stance of celebration: dreamer, sacrifice, outstanding morally straightforward war of defense against unprovoked aggression.

conflict with critical scrutiny

the stance of critical scrutiny
– this term refers to looking at the war in a negative way. For example, looking at the bomb being dropped at Hiroshima as a mass murder of innocent people and the same goes for the Holocaust. The alternative view would be looking at it in a positive way as if those things were done to help progression and aid in protection. If you look at the war from this standpoint how do you view the soldiers? (you would view the soldiers as deserving to die and being evil for what they did etc.) If the soldiers looked at the war this way it would cause psychological problems, because they would think they weren’t good people. A modern example would be the Westboro Baptist queers that do the “Thank God for dead soldiers” signs and stuff like that.

dont abandon the system to celebration or anything, just take a neutral stance, looking at the controversial, critique, think of it as a civic duty not a celebration. men had to be worthy of the sacrifice of men and neighbor. Did the war do something good?

moral choices under fire
this can be defined as any immoral choices that could have been made, but a big one Dr. Davis talked about was the medics that would have to decide between friends who to save and even Japanese soldiers that were calling out for help as well. Another aspect would be the soldiers that returned and asked if they were still a good person because of the things they did while fighting

did the war do something good?

moral choice of high school students. sacrifice for country – what compels them to make that choice. they attacked and lost life for military and moral reasons. why? moral dimensions of war – war was complicated with ambiguity.

bomb on hiroshima in 1945. politicians and veterans didnt want it, this event was too much like aggression. thing about the smithsonian not saying the plane dropped the bomb. wider sturggle over the american identity and image.

strategic bombiing of civilais. collateral damage – killing civilians.

moral bombing – justified to bring about german surrender. moral dilemma. over 500,000-900,000 civilians died in civilian bombings, but it helped the Allies win, less loss of life for US by killing civilians in the enemy nations.

“Triumph of the Will”
This is the movie we saw a clip of during Dr. Davis’ lecture where Hitler flies in on the airplane and everyone is cheering. They portrayed Hitler almost godlike. Every shot in this film was directed by Hitler to portray him as a big guy (literally) because the shots were usually shot from below him. At the youth rally, they intentionally don’t show a microphone so it looks like he can project his voice to all of those people

hitler does deliberate manipulation of an image. use it to gain strong leadership during this time.

made race central

used leadership, charisma, and power to push 2 ideas: race and space. Race – arians are better and they need room to grow and expand so they needed a pure state. hitler grew popular due to his promises.

youth rally = power, rhetoric, approach of what he needs or wants here, persuasion

the irony of appeasement
the moral falsity. jap had been aggressive, hitler had high demands, sent that there was never enough. no one stopped him. argument with soviets.

set a war where everyone knows who fault it was. no ambiguity. hitler WAS the aggressor. this was a crucial factor. sustained that fighting was in the spirit of moral certainty and commitment.

paradoxical: made moral clear, Hitler is enemy of US there.

Leading up to World War 2, Germany, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, participated in many aggressive actions which violated the Treaty of Versailles. France and Great Britain, in an attempt to maintain peace in Europe so soon after The Great War, gave in to many of Germany’s demands and actions. The policy of giving in to Germany’s demands in order to maintain peace was known as Appeasement.

this meand “lightning war.” It is a type of warfare where an attacking force of like tanks and all that move in and are immediately followed by air support. It forces a breakthrough into the enemy’s line of defense through a series of short, fast, and powerful attacks. Once in the enemy’s territory, they proceed to dislocate them using speed and surprise and ultimately encircle them. This is done by unbalancing the enemy by making it difficult for them to respond effectively to the continuously changing front

issue of space – hitler trying to estab space for the aryan race, the new order. hitler began to take over by using false pretet to camp. brit declares war when poland is invaded

Blitzkrieg means “lightning war”. Blitzkrieg was first used by the Germans in World War Two and was a tactic based on speed and surprise and needed a military force to be based around light tank units supported by planes and infantry (foot soldiers). The tactic was developed in Germany by an army officer called Hans Guderian. He had written a military pamphlet called “Achtung Panzer” which got into the hands of Hitler. As a tactic it was used to devastating effect in the first years of World War Two and resulted in the British and French armies being pushed back in just a few weeks to the beaches of Dunkirk and the Russian army being devastated in the attack on Russia in June 1941.

Hitler had spent four years in World War One fighting a static war with neither side moving far for months on end. He was enthralled by Guderian’s plan that was based purely on speed and movement. When Guderian told Hitler that he could reach the French coast in weeks if an attack on France was ordered, fellow officers openly laughed at him. The German High Command told Hitler that his “boast” was impossible. General Busch said to Guderian, “Well, I don’t think that you’ll cross the River Meuse in the first place.” The River Meuse was considered France’s first major line of defence and it was thought of as being impossible to cross in a battle situation.

Blitzkrieg was based on speed, co-ordination and movement. It was designed to hit hard and move on instantly. Its aim was to create panic amongst the civilian population. A civil population on the move can be absolute havoc for a defending army trying to get its forces to the war front. Doubt, confusion and rumour were sure to paralyse both the government and the defending military.

In 1940, Britain and France still had a World War One mentality. What tanks they had were poor compared to the German Panzers. British and French tactics were outdated and Britain still had the mentality that as an island we were safe as our navy would protect us. Nazi Germany, if it was to fulfill Hitler’s wishes, had to have a modern military tactic if it was to conquer Europe and give to Germany the ‘living space’ that Hitler deemed was necessary for the Third Reich.

It was used to devastating effect in Poland, western Europe where the Allies were pushed back to the beaches of Dunkirk and in the attack on Russia – Operation Barbarossa.

Battle of Britain
In the summer and fall of 1940, German and British air forces clashed in the skies over the United Kingdom, and locked in the largest sustained bombing campaign to that date. A significant turning point of World War II, the Battle of Britain ended when Germany’s Luftwaffe failed to gain air superiority over the Royal Air Force despite months of targeting Britain’s air bases, military posts and, ultimately, its civilian population. Britain’s victory saved the country from a ground invasion and possible occupation by German forces while proving that air power alone could be used to win a major battle.

crucial in setting up invasion of britian. brithis behind Churchill

The Battle of Britain was a struggle between the German Luftwaffe (commanded by Hermaan Göring) and the British Royal Air force (headed by Sir Hugh Dowding’s Fighter Command) which raged over Britain between July and October 1940. The battle, which was the first major military campaign in history to be fought entirely in the air, was the result of a German plan to win air superiority over Southern Britain and the English Channel by destroying the British air force and aircraft industry. Hitler saw victory in the battle as a prelude to the invasion of Britain (codenamed Operation Sealion).

In May 1940, German forces had overrun Belgium, the Netherlands and northern France using Blitzkrieg (‘Lightening War’) tactics. With the USA and the Soviet Union both still mired in hesitant isolationism, and the French ally toppled, Britain now stood alone against Nazi Germany. Yet as Hitler turned his attention to the British Isles in the summer of 1940, directing a force of over 1,350 bombers and 1,200 fighters first against shipping, airfields, and finally against towns, it became apparent that the Luftwaffe had the odds stacked against it.

The Luftwaffe’s first disadvantage was that it was neither trained nor equipped for the long range operations which became part of the battle. Its tactics were based upon the concept of close air support for ground forces; they were therefore ill-suited to the circumstances of the new campaign. The technical differences between the fighter aircraft employed by two sides were negligible: the RAF’s main fighter planes were the Spitfire and the Hurricane, whilst the Germans relied primarily on Messcherschmitt fighters and Junkers dive bombers. Yet to swing the odds in Britain’s favour, the tactical advantage that German fighters had developed in earlier conflicts was negated once fighter aircraft were ordered to provide close escort to the German bomber formations. These formations had discovered to their own extreme cost that they were unable to defend themselves.

During the battle, the RAF enjoyed the advantage of defending against attacks launched from widely separated airfields, thus profiting from what strategists call ‘interior lines’. This advantage was optimised by Britain’s system of radar tracking and guidance. Furthermore, the added comfort of fighting over friendly territory meant that pilots who crash-landed or parachuted out of their aircrafts could return to battle. British fortunes were also helped by the fact that the Luftwaffe had never subscribed to a concept of strategic bombing. British anti-aircraft and civil-defence preparations were inadequate in the summer of 1940, yet the Luftwaffe was unable to wreak the devastating effects feared by many.

The climax of the battle came on 15 September, a day in which the Luftwaffe lost 56 planes and the RAF 28. During the twelve-week battle, 1,733 German aircraft had been destroyed, compared with 915 British fighters. On 17 September, Hitler recognised the growing futility of the campaign and postponed indefinitely the invasion of Britain. Yet this did not mean an end to the bombing terror. German tactics were changed again and the Luftwaffe resorted to indiscriminate bombing of larger cities, including London, Plymouth and Coventry.

The Final Solution
ultimate answer to the Jewish Question, 1941—1945. The decision is taken to solve the Jewish Question by exterminating all Jews; genocide.

Getting rid of the Jews was integral to Hitler’s plan from the beginning.
Jews, many of whom were fully integrated into German society, were blamed for Germany’s post-WWI problems. As outsiders religiously and ethnically, they were a good target.
What is the best way to get rid of them? Send them into exile? (Madagascar was considered) In Germany there were about 525,000 Jews
But as Hitler conquered territory, he had millions more with whom to deal. Not all could be exiled.

this refers to the extermination of the Jews, because Hitler said this would be the solution to all of the problems (talk about the Holocaust).

Mein Kampf
this means “My Struggle.” It was an autobiography written by Adolf Hitler. He published volume 1 in 1925 and volume 2 in 1926. This book outlines Hitler’s political ideology and his future plans for Germany. The main thesis focused on a Jewish conspiracy to gain world leadership. The book also describes the process by which he came increasingly anti-Semitic and militaristic during his years in Vienna where he met a Jewish person for the first time. Hitler openly states that the future of Germany “has to lie in the acquisistion of land in the East at the expense of Russia. He ultimately blamed all of Germany’s problems on the Jews and social democrats.

3. German social-scientific racism (See Mein Kampf) According to Nazi ideology, there were 3 kinds of peoples:
Creators of Culture (Aryans)
Bearers of culture (those who imitate the creations of superior races) Destroyers of Culture (mainly Jews)
Superior races must not be mixed with inferior or contamination of the national bloodstock will occur.
“Racial hygiene” was the method of keeping the races separate.
“Eugenics”, a movement popular in US and Europe, was the “scientific” support for Nazism. Jews were not just inferior religiously, they were inferior genetically and so conversion to Christianity did not solve the problem of Jewishness (in contrast to Luther; Martin Luther hated Jews, but he hated them for their religion).
According to Hitler, Jews, though small in number, were greedily attempting to control civilization by controlling international finance and sponsoring communism. This was the way they were trying to destroy culture. They were a poisonous blight on world civilization not just by their religion, but by their blood.
In Germany there were strict Racial Hygiene Laws, Blood Purity Laws—no mixed marriages etc.
A great deal of pseudo-science was involved here, but it was not limited to Germany.

this means “the catastrophe.” It is the other term used to describe the Holocaust, because the word Holocaust means “whole burnt offering” which is pretty messed up considering a lot of the Jews were burnt. Shoah occurred from 1933-1945. It was the mass murder of 6 million Jews led by Hitler. I’m assuming you all know a lot about the Holocaust so I’m not going to write everything about it

The Word “Holocaust” is from ancient Greek: olo-kaustoß “whole burnt” which was used in Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible. “Holocaust” first used in French then English translation of Bibles for a sacrifice brought to the ancient Israelite temple and burned up on an alter (e.g. in the scroll of Exodus 10.25)
Since the 1940s it has been used of the deliberate destruction of Jews by Hitler
The common Hebrew name for the Holocaust is Shoah.

2. The Word “Shoah” is from Hebrew: hawv—”catastrophe”
Some find the word “holocaust” problematic, even offensive—b/c it comes from a strictly religious ancient context and was used for offerings to God, offered by Jewish ancestors, out of devotion or love. It was not a negative word and it is grotesquely ironic to use it of Jewish flesh. They prefer the more accurate and negative word “shoah.

The Shoah is arguably the single most important historical event in the history of
Jews/Judaism; it casts its shadow over everything; 1/3 of population of Jews killed 17/18 million reduced to 11/12 million.
I have spoken in many churches and sometimes have had the question asked quite innocently but ignorantly, and in all seriousness, “Why don’t the Jews just get over it? It was so long ago.”
It was not so long ago and the Shoah still echoes through family life, over world politics, and over relations with other religions, especially Christianity.

2. The Shoah is frightful for all humanity not because Hitler was a monster. Hitler was not. To think of him as a monster is to set him apart as intrinsically different from our leaders, from our common humanity, and from ourselves. Hitler was persuasive, somewhat intelligent, and very charismatic. He was a man of a few ideas. He managed to get many highly skilled and intelligent persons, including academics and religious leaders to support his ideas, because they
were persuaded by his rhetoric. The Shoah absolutely required the cooperation and involvement of thousands of people.

Anti-Semitic / Anti-Jewish
discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious, or racial group. It’s usually defined as a type of racism. Hitler and the Nazis were Anti-Semitic so tie this term in with the Holocaust.

When used distinctly, “Anti-Semitism” refers to hatred of or action against Jews as a race, whereas “Anti-Jewish” refers to hatred of or action against the religion of Judaism.
“Semite” is an Anglicized form of a name used in Genesis—Shem, one of the sons of Noah. In inaccurate genealogy of the ancient and medieval Bible-reading world, the descendents of Shem were thought to comprise most middle Asian peoples, including Israelites (later called Jews). Today, “Semite” almost always refers just to Jews, except when talking about the ancient world and ancient language families. (e.g. Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, are all “Semitic” languages)

Since WWII, Anti-Semitism is popularly used for any (religious, social, racial) anti-Jewish acts or attitudes. When speaking of the ancient world, I always use “Anti-Jewish” because the racial issues are mostly modern.

mobile killing units who were responsible for mass killings; S.S. guards (Hitler’s body guards) and local populations, usually 500-1000 men in force. Between 1941-45 this system killed about 1,000,000 Jews. The routine: local Jewish population rounded up and taken by trucks or were marched to a site outside of town; large trenches dug, usually by the victims, who were then lined up on edge of trench and shot, and fell into trench; OR, they were gassed w/carbon monoxide in the back of enclosed trucks and their bodies were hauled out and put in trenches; played major role in the Final Solution.

mobile killing units
S.S. guards and local populations, usually 500-1000 men in force
Between 1941-45 this system killed ca 1,000,000 Jews
The routine: local Jewish population rounded up and taken by trucks or were marched to a site outside of town; large trenches dug, usually by the victims, who were then lined up on edge of trench and shot, and fell into trench.

OR, they were gassed w/ carbon monoxide in the back of enclosed trucks and their bodies were hauled out and put in trenches.

Extermination camps
concentration camps that were set up for purpose of killing prisoners in WWII. Six main, large camps, all in Poland: Auschwitz (w/ Birkenau) Chelmno, Treblinka, Sobibor, Majdanek, Belzec. Trainloads or marches to camps. Herded to gas chambers, (“for a shower” as a pretext). Some used carbon Monoxide from large engines (Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Chelmno), and others used hydrogen cyanide in the form of Zyklon-B (Auschwitz-Birkenau, Majdanek) for the “shower”. Bodies taken to ovens for incineration (thus the term, “holocaust”, which mean “whole burnt”). Conditions in the camp were brutal with starvation and extreme working conditions. Dr. Bowley’s lecture on April 17th

concentration camps that were set up for purpose of killing prisoners.
Six main, large camps, all in Poland:
Auschwitz (w/ Birkenau) Chelmno, Treblinka, Sobibor, Majdanek, Belzec
Trainloads or marches to camps
Herded to gas chambers, (“for a shower” as a pretext)
Carbon Monoxide from large engines (Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Chelmno)
Hydrogen cyanide in the form of Zyklon-B (Auschwitz-Birkenau, Majdanek) Bodies taken to ovens for incineration (thus the term, “holocaust”)

4 Iron Pillars of Nazi Education
race, military training, leadership, and religion, which focused on targeting the youth of German to follow the Nazi party and Hitler’s ways. Dr. Bowley’s lecture on April 17th
1. Race- National Socialist education is an education in the thinking of the German people, in understanding German traditions, in awakening the pure, uncorrupted, and honest people’s consciousness, their sense of belonging to the people. Only a pure member of the German race can have such an understanding of his people, crowning it with the willingness to sacrifice all for the people.
2. Military training- Their bodies must be steeled, made hard and strong, so that the youth may become capable soldiers who are healthy, strong, trained, energetic, and able to bear hardships. Gymnastics, games, sports, hiking, swimming, and military exercises must all be learned by the youth. Parents can help here. They will train our youth in simplicity and cleanliness. They will train them, even when they are older, not to waste their spare time by dubious or even harmful activities such as card playing, drinking alcohol, and bad music, but rather to prepare their bodies for their future tasks.
3. Leadership- They must learn to obey so that they, having themselves learned to obey, can believe in and trust their own leadership and can grow to be leaders themselves. Thus the German youth belong in organizations where they will learn the nature of leadership in its most noble form, where they can learn to obey and — if they are called to it — also learn to lead. We parents want to exhibit such authority to our youth by strengthening family authority and establishing in our homes a healthy and natural obedience on the part of our children.
4. Religion- We want the German youth to again recognize the religious nature of life. They must realize that God wants the individual as well as the whole people, and that they lose contact with life when they lose contact with God! God and nation are the two foundations of the life of the individual and the community. We want no shallow and superficial piety, but rather a deep faith that God guides the world, that he controls it, and a consciousness of the relationship between God and each individual, and between God and the live of the people and the fatherland.

Jean-Paul Sartre
(1905-1980) essayist, novelist, playwright, editor, and existentialist thinker; born in Paris and much of his life was shaped by historical events (Great Depression and WWII); eventually became the study partner of another great existentialist thinker, Simone De Beauvoir, when they both attended École Normale Supérieure in 1929 (the two were essentially “companions” for life); fascinated with “being”; most famous work is Existentialism Is a Humanism; uses the paper-cutter analogy (see definition); believes there is no God, and hence no preexisting human essence, instead, “Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself.” For humans, existence precedes essence; argues surroundings come first and ethical purpose is carved out by you. In short, the essence of something is its meaning, its intended purpose. A paper cutter is made to cut paper; that is its point. Humans, however, do not have an essence. Dr. Golden’s lecture on April 21st

child during WWI, life is formed around the two great wars, great works written after depression, death and trenches, europe in shambles, atomic bomb, technology way more problematic now than in WWII.

when he died 50,000 pep came to his funeral, admired, talented student, failed first comps, next time he got first and Beau got 2nd. they become friend, experimental relationship, open relationship. he was in French army and held captive by germans for three month.

opens with paper cutter idea

a philosophical theory or approach that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will; “existence precedes essence”; four fathers of existentialism are: Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, Nietzsche, and Sartre. Honestly, if given this word on the test, talk about Sartre and Beauvoir and their contributing factors. Dr. Golden’s lecture on April 21st

sarte and beauvior

they are obsessed with how to live one’s life and believe that philosophical and psychological inquiry can help.
they believe there are certain questions that everyone must deal with (if they are to take human life seriously), and that these are special — existential — questions. Questions such as death, the meaning of human existence, the place of God in human existence, the meaning of value, interpersonal relationship, the place of self-reflective conscious knowledge of one’s self in existing.
Note that the existentialists on this characterization don’t pay much attention to “social” questions such as the politics of life and what “social” responsibility the society or state has. They focus almost exclusively on the individual.
By and large Existentialists believe that life is very difficult and that it doesn’t have an “objective” or universally known value, but that the individual must create value by affiriming it and living it, not by talking about it.
Existential choices and values are primarily demonstrated in ACT not in words.
Given that one is focusing on individual existence and the “existential” struggles (that is, in making decisions that are meaningful in everyday life), they often find that literary characterizations rather than more abstract philosophical thinking, are the best ways to elucidate existential struggles.
They tend to take freedom of the will, the human power to do or not do, as absolutely obvious. Now and again there are arguments for free will in Existentialist literature, but even in these arguments, one gets the distinct sense that the arguments are not for themselves, but for “outsiders.” Inside the movement, free will is axiomatic, it is intuitively obvious, it is the backdrop of all else that goes on.
There are certainly exceptions to each of these things, but this is sort of a placing of the existentialist-like positions.

“existence precedes essence”
concept believed by atheistic existentialists (like Sartre); the idea of freedom over determinism is that as humans, we have the ability to transcend individual limitations, meaning we have the ability to choose what our essence is. As humans, we are responsible, and the life you lead is the life you create. Unlike the paper-cutter, you do not have a determined way of life, but rather you make your own choices as to how you are going to exist. Dr. Golden’s lecture on April 21st

existence preceeds essence. metaphor for traditional view point of human meaning. he argues against traditional view pt. of essence preceding essence. he though purpose of being preceds its coming into being. the traditional take on human nature is that there is a God who decided somethings purpose and then gae it existence. essence b4 existence, we are 1st and foremost rational creatures. we actualize our authority and purpose

sartre reverses the traditional essentialism and say existence precedes essence, you choose and define your nature given the circumstances of your existence, you define your own ethics and nature.

aesthecic existentialist – humans decide what their own existence should be, not a cheery realization.

paper-cutter example
metaphor for traditional view that essence determines one’s existence; for the paper-cutter, essence- that is, the ensemble of both the production routines and the properties by which enable it to be both produced and defined- precedes existence. In other words, the paper-cutter was made to cut paper. The essence/ “reason for being” (cutting paper) was thought of before the paper-cutter machined existed. This is the opposite for humans, Sartre argues (argues for existence preceding essence in humans).

Sartre’s primary idea is that people, as humans, are “condemned to be free”.[42] This theory relies upon his position that there is no creator, and is illustrated using the example of the paper cutter. Sartre says that if one considered a paper cutter, one would assume that the creator would have had a plan for it: an essence. Sartre said that human beings have no essence before their existence because there is no Creator. Thus: “existence precedes essence”.[43] This forms the basis for his assertion that since one cannot explain one’s own actions and behaviour by referencing any specific human nature, they are necessarily fully responsible for those actions. “We are left alone, without excuse.”

existence preceeds essence. metaphor for traditional view point of human meaning. he argues against traditional view pt. of essence preceding essence. he though purpose of being preceds its coming into being. the traditional take on human nature is that there is a God who decided somethings purpose and then gae it existence. essence b4 existence, we are 1st and foremost rational creatures. we actualize our authority and purpose

sartre reverses the traditional essentialism and say existence precedes essence, you choose and define your nature given the circumstances of your existence, you define your own ethics and nature.

aesthecic existentialist – humans decide what their own existence should be, not a cheery realization.

Forlornness, anguish, despair
sartre reverses the traditional essentialism and say existence precedes essence, you choose and define your nature given the circumstances of your existence, you define your own ethics and nature.

aesthetic existentialist – humans decide what their own existence should be, not a cheery realization. reckoning with a sense of abandonment, forlorness, anguish, and despair. realizing we are all a blank canvas, our responsibility to respond to the era that we are in. emphasis on the fact of choice. fact that part of being thrown on the scene as humans and you are always given the choices.

2 choices: story of helping mom or going to fight in the war – boy follows his gut, feeling, determine feeling by the actions you actually take – this confirms your beliefs.

all humans wrestle with his responsbility and choice

Forlornness- Forlornness is the idea that “God does not exist and that we have to face all the consequences of this.” There is no morality a priori. There is no absolute right or wrong. There is no ultimate judge. “There is no determinism, man is free, man is freedom. […] We have no values or commands to turn to which legitimize our conduct.” In other words, we have no excuses, and we are entirely responsible for our decisions.What are our values? The only way to determine them is to make a decision. At the end of the day, your ideals aren’t what matter; what matters is what you actually did.
2. Anguish- We experience anguish in the face of our subjectivity, because by choosing what we are to do, we ‘choose for everyone’. When you make a decision you are saying “this is how anyone ought to behave given these circumstances.” Many people don’t feel anguish, but this is because they are “fleeing from it.” If you don’t feel a sense of anxiety when you make decisions, it’s because you are forgetting about your “total and deep responsibility” toward yourself and all of humanity.
3. Despair- Despair arises because we only have power to change things that are within our power to change—and there is a lot we cannot change. Reality is impartial and out of your control, except for small aspects of it here and there. We despair because we can never have full control of the future.

Simone de Beauvior
existentialist thinker who studied with and became life long companion of Sartre; raised a devout Catholic, but gave up her faith as an adolescent; in her later years, de Beauvoir became increasingly involved in political issues, and she worked vigorously for feminist issues such as legalized abortion and care for unmarried mothers (if have Golden or MacMaster would probably give extra points just because talking about feminist supporter…just kidding but really); in her most famous work, The Second Sex, she questions “What is woman?” (can incorporate definition from The Second Sex).

women as annoying?

are there women, really? emphasizing the societal confusion around womanhood. think of cult of true womanhood and virtue under siege.

says that every female being is not necessarily a woman. implies her non-essentialist view of woman and man.

influence of darwinism – no fixed truth, dependent on situation and environment. like darwin, conflicts with traditional notions of man and woman

cultural tradition of men designating man as the human standard and women as the 2nd rate version, as defective, imperfect man, incidental, man defines woman.

women are diff than race because women have ALWAYS been subjugated and subordinate

says it is women’s responsibility for creating opportunities for all individuals.

audience was middle class women.

is happiness a feminist aim? NO, cuz happiness is vague and unclea, aim is equal opportunity for all individuals.

The Second Sex
most famous work written by Simone de Beauvoir in 1949; groundbreaking feminist text; two separate volumes united around question “What is woman?”; first section (” explores biology, psychology, sociology, history, myth, and literature to explain the answers given to this basic question; second section (“Woman’s Life Today”) focuses on women’s various roles and explores ways to move beyond these roles. She further discusses woman as the “second sex” because woman is defined by man. In this work, she also goes on to ask “Why is it that women do not dispute male sovereignty?”, and she came to the conclusion that women have accepted the role as the “second sex” and “other” because women have no past, no history of their own.

the Other
another phrase for this is “second sex”; borrowing terminology from Sartre, she claims, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute- she is the Other.” Man sets himself up as the standard, the “One”- he definition of what it is to be human- so that immediately woman becomes the “Other” (could discuss how we only know certain parts of history because of the people who recorded history (man), and how history is always bias based on who the recorder is); as “the Other” woman is lowered to existence as a being-in-itself (an object), and not able to exist as a being-for-itself; Woman cannot choose her existence because her role is already defined for her as the “Other.” The “Other”, de Beauvoir argues, derives in part from her body- especially her reproductive capacity. Women have accepted the role as the “second sex” and “other” because women have no past, no history of their own, and have always been subordinate to men. Aquinas says woman is “imperfect man” and Aristotle says woman is “defective” (shows women have always been labeled as second rate humans in life).

Non-Essentialism Feminism
an idea inherited from Jean Paul Sarte that was used by Simon de Beauvoir, another Existentialist philosopher. (1908-1986) Sarte’s idea of human beings “Existence preceding Essence” was used by Beauvoir’s in her Non-Essentialism Feminism idea. What Beauvoir pulled from Sarte’s idea is that since human being’s existence preceeds essence, (the idea that human are not made for a specific purpose but are in a sense a blank canvas that can create their own image) Beauvoir believed that this same idea should be related to female’s, and her idea that the terms and categorical criteria attributed to men and to women should be gender-ambiguous.
“Are there really women?” -Beauvoir.

no fixed truth of women, jew, or negro it is dependent in part upon the situation


denying cultural tradition of women as 2nd rate

The Story of My Experiment with Truth
This term is the title of Mohandas Gandhi’s autobiography (1925-29). One of the main themes that Gandhi emphasizes in his work is how he came to find truth in many different forms that he would analyze and experiment within his mind and with what he personally believed in and accepted. From his experiment with the truth Gandhi found that there were certain ideals or truths both good and bad, in various religions and in authors works throughout history.

• Hinduism: “no religion greater than truth”
• Jainism: “Ahimsa”, no harm
• Christianity: “return good for evil”
• Tolstoy: “love as a weapon” apply love to contemporary problems
• Thoreau: Civil disobedience.

From his findings he then adopted and practiced what truths he found to be positively true in his own life (he used these different ideas/tactics to promote nonviolence in India’s struggle for human rights, women’s rights, end of the cast system and the end of control from Great Britain.

lots of indians live in SA and their social system is apartheid with africans high and british low. ghandi starts an experiment that last for the rest of his life. he works for equality, to oppose racism. made training centers, taught to disobey, to work for equality. fought for indian rights, women’s rights, no case system and end of british rule.

Is an Indian word that translates “to not injure” Ahimsa is one of the cardinal virtues and an important tenet of the Indian religion Jainism. Ahimsa is a multidimensional concept inspired by the premise that all living beings have the spark of the divine spiritual energy; to hurt another being is to hurt oneself. (Included animals). Gandhi adopted this idea of Ahimsa and applied it to his social justice work that lead to the independence of India. Gandhi promoted that non-violence or “no harm” should be used by the Indian people in protest of the British control over them.

principle of non-injury to all – turn the other cheek. resist, don’t use violence, requires creativity and experimenting. april 10930 – walks 240 miles to get to east coast and make to make salt as a way of flipping off the british. buring their identity cards. power of fasting, creative hunger striking.

An Indian word that translates to “truth force”. Gandhi coined this term and people used it to describe him later on. Gandhi used term to promote the philosophy of active, non-violent resistance. “I claim to be making a ceaseless effort to find it. But I admit that I have not yet found it. To find Truth completely is to realize oneself and one’s destiny, i.e., to become perfect.”- Ghandi

truth force, philosophy for active nonviolent resistance. making truth show, being real. instead of fighting with violence, he starts to burn cards which is symbolic

(1920’s-.) a filmmaking technique that uses rapid editing, special effects and music to present compressed narrative information. movie aesthetics: editing (assemblage of shots) as creation of meaning. One of the earliest montages was D.W. Griffiths narrative: Birth of a Nation (1915) This film we watched an excerpt from was about how the Union soldiers were attacking a southern town and how the Klu Klux Klan came into town and fought back against Union soldiers to save the towns peoples. The filmmaker of this movie achieved fluid transitions between multi-perspectives of characters, actions, and scenes within the film that gave the plot of the film a broader scope, while keeping the amount of screentime at a logical length.

“Arrival at La Ciotat”
the French brothers, the Lumieres, created this early film. (1896) This 50 second black and white silent film shows a steam engine train riding on a railroad track towards a train station. The angle of the placed camera in this film makes the train appear to be charging directly towards the audience who is watching in the theatre. Supposedly, this optical illusion caused people watching the film to panic and flee the theatre because they thought they were going to be hit by “the oncoming train” (lol). This film consists of a single, unedited view illustrating an aspect of everyday life.

realism. moving pictures, doesnt sit still. photographic. worked by movement. when you see that shot its much like you actually there at the event. people were seeing a real experience. downloading someon elses experience. people were impressed just by seeing what the camera saw.

A Trip to the Moon
Another early film, by George Melies (1902). This film however is different than the previous one in that the “Arrival at Ciotat” was focused on capturing the everday reality that people could relate to. George Milies’ silent film, A Trip to the Moon, is an imaginative film: it follows a group of astronomers who travel to the Moon in a cannon-propelled capsule, explore the Moon’s surface, escape from an underground group of Selenites (lunar inhabitants), and return in a splashdown to Earth with a captive Selenite in tow. Milies’ work was considered the first to prove to have potential as a narrative film. Milies was considered a film magician because of his splicing film technique, and the individually hand colored film gave life and vibrance to his work.

scitists are there. about fear, delightful trickery, artifice. by 1920s, change. feature ilms taken like movies or plays of epic poems. ordinary pople were going to the movies all of the time.

mise en scene
translates to “placing on stage”. When applied to cinema it refers to everything that appears before the camera and its visual arrangement: composition, sets, props, actors, costumes, and lighting. The use of these elements helped to express concepts such as time, space, setting, mood, and characters state of mind. (relates back to French Theatre’s verisimilitude) These concepts can be seen in Keaton’s, The General, (1927) this film is a comedy about a person stealing a train and then getting chased down by others. The views and angles from which the camera is placed on the train and along the railroad tracks create this perception of Mise en Scene.

documentary of nannok of the north. place this in frame, placement. also the general – train stolen, placing in the seen, what is there to be seen?

Battleship Potemkin
is a 1925 silent film developed by Sergei Eisenstein. This film was considered a Russian/Socialist montage. It presents a dramatized version of the mutiny that occurred in 1905 when the crew of the Russian Battleship Potemkin rebelled against their officers of the Tsarist regime. This film had an important impact because it was seen as an one of the earliest works to use cinematography as political propaganda

battleship, shooting, death. protagonist = the people. n main character. chaos. child shot and trampled, baby carriage rolling down the stairs. brutality.

a Hebrew word that refers cultural identity for Jews of European background. The re-migration of these European Jews back into the middle eastern lands after WWII and the genocide that they faced would establish conflicts with the Palestinians who were supposedly living on the Jewish land that “god gave to them”

took away their land, destroyted their land, took away their dignity, now we are in refugee camp

a Jewish ethnic division whose ethnogenesis and emergence as a distinct community of Jews traces back to immigrants originating in the Israelite tribes of the Middle East[12] who coalesced in the Holy Roman Empire around the turn of the first millennium.[13] They established communities throughout Central and Eastern Europe, which had been their primary region of concentration and residence until recent times, evolving their distinctive characteristics and diasporic identity. Their millennia residence in Europe was largely brought to an end following the Holocaust, which resulted in the mass murder or genocide of approximately six million Ashkenazi Jews during World War II in a program of systematic state-sponsored murder by Nazi Germany, led by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party, throughout the German Reich and German-occupied territories

is an Islamic acronym that translates to “Islamic Resistance Movement” that was founded in 1987. It is Sunni Muslim organization with an associated military wing located in the Palestinian territories. HAMAS has governed the Gaza strip, and is considered a terrorist organization to Westerners, while Iran, Russia, Turkey, and China do not consider them so. (Easterners) This group has been in territorial conflict with the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) and promote in “intifada” (shaking off) as a movement of civil disobedience to the Israelite nation that they have been fighting over territory with. Although seen as a primary terrorist group, it is actually only a small amount of radical Muslims who perform these acts of terrorism such as cars bombings on the Jewish people, as a form of violent protest.

the Palestinian Sunni Islamic or Islamist[5] organization, with an associated military wing, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades,[6] located in the Palestinian territories.

Since June 2007 Hamas has governed the Gaza Strip, after it won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Parliament in the January 2006 Palestinian parliamentary elections[7] and then defeated the Fatah political organization in a series of violent clashes. Israel, the United States,[8] Canada,[9] the European Union,[10][11] Jordan,[12] Egypt[13] and Japan classify Hamas as a terrorist organization,[14] while Iran, Russia,[15] Turkey,[16] China[17][18][19][20] and many nations across the Arab world do not.

Based on the principles of Islamic fundamentalism gaining momentum throughout the Arab world in the 1980s, Hamas was founded in 1987 (during the First Intifada) as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.[21][22] Co-founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin stated in 1987, and the Hamas Charter affirmed in 1988, that Hamas was founded to liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation and to establish an Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.[23][24] However, in July 2009, Khaled Meshal, Hamas’s political bureau chief, said the organization was willing to cooperate with “a resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict which included a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders”, provided that Palestinian refugees hold the right to return to Israel and that East Jerusalem be the new nation’s capital.[25][26]

The Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the Hamas affiliated military wing, has launched attacks on Israel, against both civilian and military targets.[27] Attacks on civilian targets have included rocket attacks and, from 1993 to 2006, suicide bombings.[28] Attacks on military targets have included small-arms fire and rocket and mortar attacks.[27][29][30]

are the military forces of the State of Israel. They consist of the ground forces, air force, and navy. It is the sole military wing of the Israeli security forces, and has no civilian jurisdiction within Israel.

Arabic for “shaking off” but is the title of the movement of civil disobedience begun in 1987. The begun after a series of escalating actions and deaths of Palestinian and Israeli citizens, and tensions reached a boiling point when an Israeli Army truck struck a car killing four Palestinians.

an Arabic word which literally means “shaking off”, though it is popularly translated into English as “uprising”, “resistance”, or “rebellion”. Intifāḍat (“uprising of”), not to be confused with the Arabic plural intifāḍāt (انتفاضات). It is often used as a term for popular resistance to oppression.

al Nakba
Arabic for “catastrophe”. Refers to the first Arab Israeli War. Within this war, approximately 711,000 to 726,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes. The term nakba also refers to the period of war itself and events affecting Palestinians from December 1947 to January 1949, and is synonymous in the sense with what is known to Israelis as the War of Independence

The 1948 Palestinian exodus, known in Arabic as the Nakba (Arabic: النكبة‎, an-Nakbah, lit. “disaster”, “catastrophe”, or “cataclysm”),[1] occurred when approximately 711,000 to 726,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.[2] The term nakba also refers to the period of war itself and events affecting Palestinians from December 1947 to January 1949, and is synonymous in that sense with what is known to Israelis as the War of Independence (Hebrew: מלחמת העצמאות or מלחמת הקוממיות, Milkhemet Ha’atzma’ut, a term which covers those two events).[3][4][5][6]

On May 14, 1948, Israel declared itself a new, independent state, and was soon thereafter attacked by assembled forces of the Arab world determined to destroy this proud, determined newcomer to the region — or so the legend has been perpetuated for some 65 years, propelled by the best-selling 1958 Leon Uris novel, Exodus, said to have originated as a PR effort to glamorize Israel and sanitize its dishonorable establishment. This was soon followed in 1960 by the Otto Preminger film that spread the myth to a much larger audience and simplified it further into essentially a cowboys and Indians tale.

Whether deliberate or inadvertent, the widespread appeal of this film may well reflect its close correspondence with America’s own ethnic cleansing of our indigenous population and its whitewashed reversal of heroes and villains, where Zionism and Manifest Destiny are companion ideologies, and Israeli “settlers” match American “pioneers.”

Six Day War
Refers to June 1967 War. The war was fought between June 5 and 10, 1967, by Israel and the neighboring states of Egypt (known at the time as the United Arab Republic), Jordan, and Syria. The war began on June 5 with Israel launching surprise strikes against Egyptian airfields in response to the mobilization of Egyptian forces on the Israeli border.

The Six-Day War took place in June 1967. The Six-Day War was fought between June 5th and June 10th. The Israelis defended the war as a preventative military effort to counter what the Israelis saw as an impending attack by Arab nations that surrounded Israel. The Six-Day War was initiated by General Moshe Dayan, the Israeli’s Defence Minister.

The war was against Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Israel believed that it was only a matter of time before the three Arab states co-ordinated a massive attack on Israel. After the 1956 Suez Crisis, the United Nations had established a presence in the Middle East, especially at sensitive border areas. The United Nations was only there with the agreement of the nations that acted as a host to it. By May 1967, the Egyptians had made it clear that the United Nations was no longer wanted in the Suez region. Gamal Nasser, leader of Egypt, ordered a concentration of Egyptian military forces in the sensitive Suez zone. This was a highly provocative act and the Israelis only viewed it one way – that Egypt was preparing to attack. The Egyptians had also enforced a naval blockade which closed off the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping.

Rather than wait to be attacked, the Israelis launched a hugely successful military campaign against its perceived enemies. The air forces of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq were all but destroyed on June 5th. By June 7th, many Egyptian tanks had been destroyed in the Sinai Desert and Israeli forces reached the Suez Canal. On the same day, the whole of the west bank of the Jordan River had been cleared of Jordanian forces. The Golan Heights were captured from Syria and Israeli forces moved 30 miles into Syria itself.

The war was a disaster for the Arab world and temporarily weakened the man who was seen as the leader of the Arabs – Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt. The war was a military disaster for the Arabs but it was also a massive blow to the Arabs morale. Here were four of the strongest Arab nations systematically defeated by just one nation.

The success of the campaign must have surprised the Israelis. However, it also gave them a major problem that was to prove a major problem for the Israeli government for decades. By capturing the Sinai, the Golan Heights and the West Bank of the Jordan River, the Israelis had captured for themselves areas of great strategic value. However, the West Bank also contained over 600,000 Arabs who now came under Israeli administration. Their plight led many young Arabs into joining the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), a group that the Israelis deemed a terrorist organisation. Israeli domestic policies became a lot more complicated after the military successes of June 1967.

is a 1993 play by Tom Stoppard concerning the relationship between past and present and between order and disorder and the certainty of knowledge. Many critics have cited it as the finest play from one of the most significant contemporary playwrights in the English language.

part detective / love / comedy. math, physics, chaos thoeroys. consists of house play, landowning family.

goes beyond realism to explore scientific discovery.

set in school room and in the present day.

1809 – Thomasina gets lesson from tutor. sees a hole in Newton’s physics that progresses throughout the play.

shift from classicism to romanticism, from regularity to new open forms.

arcadia – an idyllic countryside of rustic paradise. but, for the author, it also makes a reference to “shepherds of arcadia” in a painting. Death hold sway – death is unavoidable.

theatre as staging and not dialogue. theatrical effect.

alternates between 2 sets of characters, modern unexpectedly appear instead of reverse

advancement of knowledge, free will,

crafts the play like an integrated algorithm. conversation repeated from past to modern day. 2nd law of thermodynamics.

simultaneity of final scene – characters overlap present and past.

Thomasina Coverly
The 13 year-old (later 16-year-old) daughter of Lord and Lady Croom, Thomasina is a precocious young genius. She comes to understand chaos theory and theorizes the second law of thermodynamics, before either is officially recognized and established in mathematical and scientific communities. Stoppard apparently based the character on Ada Lovelace (Augusta Ada King, Countess of Lovelace), daughter of Lord Byron. Ada was an English mathematician who conceptualized how Charles Cabbage’s analytical engine could be used.

1809 – Thomasina gets lesson from tutor. sees a hole in Newton’s physics that progresses throughout the play. puzzled by how you cant unstir. this point to the 2nd law of thermodynamics. entropy – measure of the disorder of a system. natural course takes eent to a more disordered state.

Thomasina speaks the very first line of the play, a line that tells us from the start that Arcadia may be set in Regency England, but it’s no Jane Austen novel:

THOMASINA: Septimus, what is carnal embrace? (1.1)

First, while this question begins the play on a humorous and slightly shocking note, it also neatly demonstrates that Thomasina is embarked on the transition from childhood to adulthood, in the limbo of adolescence. She’s obviously picked up the term “carnal embrace,” which shows some exposure to sexual knowledge, from somewhere, but she doesn’t know enough to know what it means, so she has to ask. She can ask this question only because she’s on this border: if she knew more, she wouldn’t need to ask the question, and if she knew less, she wouldn’t know there was a question to ask.

And sex isn’t the only thing Thomasina has questions about. There’s also Newtonian physics:

THOMASINA: When you stir your rice pudding, Septimus, the spoonful of jam spreads itself round making red trails like the picture of a meteor in my astronomical atlas. But if you stir backward, the jam will not come together again. Indeed, the pudding does not notice and continues to turn pink just as before. Do you think this is odd? (1.1)

This passage gives us an idea of how Thomasina thinks: she puts abstract ideas in the context of familiar objects (the laws of physics as rice pudding) and she’s able to make connections between the very small and the very large (pudding and meteors). In the scientific context as well as the sexual one, her almost-but-not-quite knowledge means that she asks questions neither a child nor an adult would think to ask.

The play uses Thomasina’s questions about sex and physics to portray her in that stage between ignorance and knowledge, innocence and experience. How does she go about gaining knowledge? How does her in-the-middle-ness – her remaining childhood imagination and innocence – help her to see more than the adults around her?

Geometry Stinks, But Not For The Reasons You Think It Does

The more knowledge Thomasina gains, the more she hates its limitations. Geometry is a particular target of her wrath:

THOMASINA: Each week I plot your equations dot for dot, xs against ys in all manner of algebraical relation, and every week they draw themselves as commonplace geometry, as if the world of forms were nothing but arcs and angles. God’s truth, Septimus, if there is an equation for a curve like a bell, there must be an equation for one like a bluebell, and if a bluebell, why not a rose? (1.3)

While Septimus is content to have two worlds – geometry and nature – divided up like girls and boys at a middle school dance, Thomasina wants the two mixed. What drives Thomasina’s assertion that an equation “must” exist? Is she pulling a Bernard and saying that she just knows, or is she using the powers of reason? And does that borderline position discussed above affect how she’s thinking about these questions? How?

Waltzing: It’s All Innocent, Right?

While the sixteen-year-old Thomasina who appears later in the play is still interested in “the action of bodies in heat” (2.7; we’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader whether that’s a question of sex or science), it’s waltzing that’s first and foremost in her mind. Her concern with learning the latest dance craze develops her character’s borderline status between innocence and experience in a new direction.

When Thomasina comes downstairs late at night to claim her promised waltz lesson from Septimus, she’s surprised that her tutor doesn’t immediately understand that her kiss means “teach me to waltz now” – as opposed to “I want to have sex with you.” She tells him, “Do not act the innocent! Tomorrow I will be seventeen!” (2.7). Her words are unintentionally funny: she’s thinking about dancing in the vertical, while his thoughts are more of the horizontal variety. Yet he’s the one being accused of “acting the innocent.” It’s a funny turn of phrase – but it also suggests that innocence is more complicated than it seems.

Things only get more complicated when there’s more kissing, instigated by Septimus this time, and Thomasina invites Septimus up to her room. This all happens so quickly, and so close to the end of the play, that it’s uncertain what Thomasina’s motives are. Has she been harboring a secret crush on Septimus? Is she hoping he’ll be an adequate stand-in for her Byron fantasy? Thomasina’s abrupt death, and the end of the play, mean that we’ll never know – and that, as a character, Thomasina is forever poised on that boundary between innocence and experience.

Septimus Hodge
Thomasina’s tutor and the academic colleague and friend of Lord Byron (an unseen but important character in the play). While teaching Thomasina he works on his own research, and has affairs with the older women of the house. When she is older, he begins to fall in love with her, and after her death it is implied that he becomes the “hermit of Sidley Park”, working on the young girl’s theories until his own death.

From the very beginning of the play, we know that Septimus isn’t your ordinary tutor.

THOMASINA: Septimus, what is carnal embrace?
SEPTIMUS: Carnal embrace is the practice of throwing one’s arms around a side of beef. (1.1)

Septimus’s response is absurdly literal: as he goes on to explain, “carnal” really does refer to meat. His answer tells us a lot about him right off the bat. First, he has a sense of humor that tends towards the ridiculous, but is grounded in his academic knowledge. Second, even though he’s supposed to be teaching Thomasina, he’s not above messing with her. And third, as the conversation develops and Septimus gives an answer that’s another kind of literal (we won’t quote the whole passage here – it’s in “Quotes”), we learn that he doesn’t have much in the way of prudish sexual hang-ups. By establishing the character of Septimus so clearly right from the beginning, Stoppard also tells us a lot about the kind of play this is going to be – one with a weird sense of humor, plenty of wordplay, and some sexy talk.

Since we’ve already gotten to know Septimus through how he talks to Thomasina, we’re primed to appreciate his mockery of Mr. Chater, who’s less his match in verbal wit than Thomasina is. Witness how Septimus neatly derails Chater from his adultery-avenging rampage:

CHATER: I have heard of your admiration, sir! You insulted my wife in the gazebo yesterday evening!SEPTIMUS: You are mistaken. I made love to your wife in the gazebo. She asked me to meet her there, I have her note somewhere, I dare say I could find it for you, and if someone is putting it about that I did not turn up, by God, sir, it is a slander. (1.1)

Does Septimus really believe that Chater’s worried that Septimus might have stood Mrs. Chater up for an appointment to have sex with her? Hardly. But by purposely misunderstanding Chater – just as he did with Thomasina’s question that opened the play – Septimus breaks the expected story. When Chater rushes into the schoolroom demanding satisfaction from Septimus, he’s acting out a part in his own imagined narrative, in which the next step would be that Septimus will either deny the whole thing or agree to a duel. When Septimus admits of his tryst with Mrs. Chater, behaving as if he thinks the real sin would have been standing her up, he departs from the available options in Chater’s Choose Your Own Adventure story. By going completely off script in his response to Chater, Septimus gains the upper hand over him, at least temporarily.

Of course, Chater soon gets a sharp kick in the pants from Captain Brice, and the duel does get scheduled. Septimus’s decision to sleep in the boathouse rather than risk a bullet may seem cowardly, but only if you buy the idea that a duel cleanses your honor. From a more pragmatic viewpoint, Septimus’s refusal to pay his debt with a gunfight shows just how smart he is.

Septimus may be less smart when it comes to Thomasina. He totally misses what she’s trying to do with the iterated algorithm thingamagum:

THOMASINA: No marks?! Did you not like my rabbit equation?
SEPTIMUS: I saw no resemblance to a rabbit.
THOMASINA: It eats its own progeny.
SEPTIMUS: (Pause) I did not see that. (2.7)

Here, Septimus’s tendency to take things literally blinds him to Thomasina’s inventive projects: she says “rabbit,” and he thinks, “picture with two long ears, fluffy tail,” not “equation that devours its young.” His disconnect here suggests that Thomasina’s strength is the imagination that Septimus lacks – while he thinks outside the box in managing his love affairs, he’s not so good at applying that originality to mathematics. Septimus’s failure illustrates the play’s larger suggestion that cleverness will only get you so far in both poetry and mathematics: to make really great achievements, you need genius. Septimus’s lack of genius in this regard might give us a clue to figuring out what it is that geniuses do differently.

While Septimus doesn’t seem to change much over the course of the play, the ending does suggest that he’s learned a few things from his time in Arcadia. For one, he gives Thomasina’s essay an A grade “in blind faith” (2.7), showing that he takes her ideas seriously even if he doesn’t understand them – a far cry from his dismissive tone earlier in the play. Smooching Thomasina may be another example of a change, or perhaps just another case of Lady Croom substitution syndrome. His refusal to join Thomasina in her room, however, may show that he thinks more of her than Mrs. Chater – or just that he’s avoiding doing something very, very stupid. Since we know that Thomasina dies soon after the end of the play, their maybe-sort-of romance is left unresolved – and open to interpretation. (Click over to “What’s Up with the Ending?” for more on the play’s conclusion.)

Valentine Coverly
A graduate student of mathematics, Valentine is Chloe’s older brother. After poring over several old documents, he comes to acknowledge Thomasina’s genius.

Valentine is the voice of modern science in the play. As a mathematician, he explains to Hannah (and, by extension, to the audience) exactly what’s going on with fractals and grouse and Thomasina’s rabbit equations. And he not only knows math, he’s more excited about it than a tween girl at a Twilight release party:

VALENTINE: The future is disorder. A door like this has cracked open five or six times since we got up on our hind legs. It’s the best possible time to be alive, when almost everything you thought you knew is wrong. (1.4)

Look, Ma, no first-person singular pronouns! The lack of any kind of “I” in this passage suggests that Valentine more interested in the march of knowledge itself than in being its drum major. He’s happy to be wrong, because that means that progress can be made – in stark contrast to Bernard, who fears being wrong like Superman fears kryptonite. This, not surprisingly, leads to conflict between the two:

VALENTINE: Well, it’s all trivial anyway. […] The questions you’re asking don’t matter, you see. It’s like arguing who got there first with the calculus. The English say Newton, the Germans say Leibnitz. But it doesn’t matter. Personalities. What matters is the calculus. Scientific progress. Knowledge. (2.5)

Valentine’s insistence that personalities don’t matter is the polar opposite of Bernard’s point of view, which is that they’re the only thing that does. This debate could be as simple as the scientific point of view vs. the humanistic one, but there’s also something deeper here: conflicting views of history.

Valentine sees history like a kid making a rock pile. You find a new rock of knowledge, add it to the pile – clunk – and voilà, you have more knowledge. It doesn’t matter that one rock came from a forest and the other from a parking lot, just that they’re both in the pile now. Bernard, on the other hand, sees history like a story: imagine a kid writing a power ballad about the day she found this shiny green rock, and the trouble she went to in order to add it to her pile, and how happy she is that now the rock is hers.

So what does it matter for Valentine that he thinks of history the way he does? Well, for starters, it means he has a lot of trouble believing that Thomasina was doing anything important. If the good stuff is like a pile of rocks, the fact that Thomasina’s discoveries didn’t have any effect – she didn’t add a new rock to the pile – means that, to him, they don’t matter. For all his enthusiasm for Knowledge, Valentine seems to have a fairly narrow definition of what Knowledge might mean.

And as we all know, character development involves someone seeing the error of their ways and gaining an open mind and learning the true meaning of Christmas. So does Valentine cast off his Scrooge-like ways and make a big donation to the Tiny Tim Memorial Orphanage and Math Tutoring Center? Well, at the very least he does soften towards Thomasina. By the end of the play he admits that she was on to something:

VALENTINE: She didn’t have the maths, not remotely. She saw what things meant, way ahead, like seeing a picture. (93)

While Valentine sticks to his assertion that she simply didn’t have the tools to make anything big out of her ideas, he does realize that the inspiration was in itself meaningful. Does that mean that Valentine is going to give up math and take up literary criticism? Probably not, but perhaps he won’t be so hasty to dismiss those who think outside the box – and through him, the play suggests that we don’t need to side with either Valentine or Bernard. There’s some wiggle room between their approaches.

the Coverly set
Putting Thomasina’s equations into a computer made the shape. The results of the equation are called the Coverly set. Valentine tells Hannah that the results are publishable and that Thomasina would be famous. Hannah reminds Valentine that Thomasina couldn’t be famous, since she died in a fire the night before her seventeenth birthday.

Chaos theory of deterministic chaos
is a field of study in mathematics, with applications in several disciplines including meteorology, physics, engineering, economics, biology, and philosophy. Chaos theory studies the behavior of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions. Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.

determinist chaos

Arcadia is influenced most by chaos theory or what is also called nonlinear dynamics. Chaos theory is often heralded as one of the greatest scientific advancements in the physical sciences after relativity and quantum mechanics. Stoppard’s main source of chaos theory information came form James Gleick’s book Chaos: Making a New Science. Chaos theory itself focuses the characteristic or knowable behaviors of nonlinear systems. Nonlinear dynamics are processes that are “chaotic” but not random. As David Peak and Michael Frame have pointed out, “Chaos is irregular output from a deterministic source. The future of chaotic behaviors is completely determined by its past. Chaos is not chance or randomness.” Therefore, chaos systems are random, but have some degree of predictability that may bear some statistical long-term results.

The iteration, like that formulated by Thomasina, is central to chaos theory. Iteration is the repetition of a computation of a mathematical algorithm. Thomasina begins her iteration, but it remains impossible for her to complete. It is not until Valentine and Hannah discover her primer and diagrams that Thomasina’s theory and algorithm can be completed. With Thomasina’s set and completed algorithm, Valentine is able to create a fractal, which is the result of iteration. A fractal is the plotted set that results from calculating an algorithm thousands of time into a computer and then plotting the points it produces. In modern times, fractals are used to describe objects in nature—just as Thomasina uses one or attempts to create a fractal to describe the leaf off of Septimus’s apple. Small sections of fractal images, blown up, represent the whole of the image. Thomasina is determined to find the fractal because she realizes there are pictures and equations to be had in natural forms.

Thomasina doesn’t believe that God’s imagination or the physical world doesn’t extend beyond arcs and angles, simple geometric shapes. Gleick’s describes this same principle in his work: “Clouds are not sphere Mountains are not cones. Lightning does not travel in a straight line.” Iterations are central to nonlinear dynamics because the iteration can be described as a process that continues and changes; like life itself, the iteration changes and transforms randomly. Thomasina’s observations do not end with the plotting of nature by use of algorithm and iteration. Thomasina also links her discoveries with thermodynamics, inspired by Mr. Noakes’s steam engine. Thomasina plots a diagram of heat exchange that reveals the inevitability and non-reversible nature of life itself. Thomasina intuitively understands the inevitable end of life and heat. The consequence of the sensitivity to an algorithm or initial system is irreversibility. Speculation about the future of any chaotic system is limited, besides the knowledge that the system must eventually end. As Valentine suggests, he cannot go back to the original equation once it is set. The randomness of a chaotic system makes this nearly impossible. For instance, the randomness of heat energy and in the human system, as Chloe suggests, sexual energy is impossible to predict. One can never know how the system (or person) will react to its (his or her) environment.

theatricality in Arcadia
he has experimented with dramatic strategies to lure his audience into a series of critical engagements with British politics and culture.

All the visible action of the play takes place in the same room in an English country house, a couple of centuries apart. Keeping the action all in the same place underscores the similarities between the two plots, and the two eras in which they take place. While in the present day, Valentine waxes rhapsodic about what the information revolution has done for science, the rumble of Mr. Noakes’s steam engine signals another revolution that ultimately made iPhones and Guitar Hero possible: the Industrial Revolution. By focusing on two moments of technological change through the lens of a single room that doesn’t change all that much, the play suggests that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Note #1: the play’s stage directions say “the present day” rather than a specific year, but elsewhere (not in the play itself) “the present day” has been defined as 1989, which is four years before the play originally opened.

Note #2: For more on the pastoral setting of Sidley Park, see “The Garden” in “Symbolism, Imagery, Allegory.”