When I Consider How My Light Is Spent

John Milton’s sonnet, When I Consider How My Light Is Spent, is a poem about loss, obligation, and the relationship between God and man. To get the full meaning of the poem, one must know about the bible story that is alluded to and something about Milton’s life.

When first looking at this poem, it is easy to assume the word “light” to be substituted for “life.” Especially in a poem that makes mention of God, using light to symbolize life and darkness to symbolize death would not be surprising. However, knowing that Milton went blind in his forties, brings a whole new meaning and understanding to the poem. Now we see “light” and “dark” in a much more literal sense. When he “consider[s] how [his] light is spent,” he contemplates the time that he has with sight. In contrast, his “dark world” is one without sight. Milton’s “dark world,” however, can also symbolize his sense of being lost as he inquires God about his situation.

In questioning God, Milton compares his blindness to one of Jesus’s parables in the gospel of Matthew. Milton’s “one talent” refers to a parable where a man entrusts his servants with talents (money/coins). He gives one servant five, another, two, and another, one. The one with five went and traded and made five more. The one with two went and made two more, but the one with only one went and buried it in the ground. Upon returning from his journey, the man came to settle with the servants. The two that had doubled their talents were praised and welcomed with joy, but the servant who had buried his talent was reprimanded for being lazy and not using his gift. His talent was taken away and given to the one with ten. In this poem, Milton compares himself to the servant with only one talent, and fearing that going blind will prevent him from using his gift, he worries that God will reprimand him just as the servant was.

Though worried about his obligation to God and if he shall be punished, he seems to stop and recall his faith. His “Patience” (capitalized because it is personified here) reminds him that God does not need man’s work. Meaning that God gave men talents and they are used to glorify Him, to serve Him, but God is still complete without man’s work, He does not require the use of the gifts He gives. Patience also reminds Milton that those who serve God while “bear[ing] His mild yoke” serve him best. This means that those who do not complain of their burdens serve him best, and so, with this phrase Milton accepts that while bearing the burden of his blindness he can still serve. He then praises God in his “kingly” state. I must admit that the last line seems confusing and out-of-place, and I do not know what to make of it, but it is clear that this poem is filled with faith and reassurance.

This poem can be looked at in two main parts. One where the speaker grieves his loss of sight and worries about his obligation and the nature of God, and another where Patience (or rather the speaker’s mind) reassures himself of his faith and God’s own love. Although one many look at this poem as one about the loss of eyesight, I make the argument that the main element in the sonnet is that of faith, with eyesight being just one factor or piece to a bigger whole. Through this poem, Milton deals with his loss, and his contemplation of God and faith bring him to a better state and understanding.

Word count: 611

Who is the speaker of the poem? Is it safe to say it is Milton?
How did you interpret the word "light"?
Did you know of the parable in Matthew before reading the poem?
What do you take the last line to mean?

Wuthering Heights

I chose to read Wuthering Heights. It was a very interesting book, and while I enjoyed it, I also found it very depressing (with a somewhat uplifting ending). I also had a hard time really connecting with one character the whole time. At some parts (maybe most parts), I disliked every character. I loved Heathcliff as a boy, but when he went away and came back so bitter and hate-filled, I was very dissappointed and disliked him. I somewhat liked Cathy (the first one) as a kid but thought that she was kind of bratty and was very annoyed when she married Linton. What a stupid girl! I liked their daughter, Catherine, though. I think it's odd that she never went outside the grounds of her home until she was sixteen or whatever (never saw or met new people), especially since she's an only child. What a boring life (and I believe it made her pretty spoiled too!)! But one of the most ANNOYING characters is Isabella and Heathcliff's son, Linton! He is such a whimp and a whiner and a brat, and then he turns all mean on Hareton! That's low. Oh, I didn't like Catherine when she was so mean to Hareton either. I, personally, found Hareton to be sweet and endearing. He was really embarassed that he couldn't read, so he tried to learn some letters to impress his cousin and she made fun of him again. He tried to be gentle and polite and welcoming when she came to live with them and everything, and still she was rude to him. He continued to try to teach himself to read, and Catherine made fun of him for that. I was very mad at Catherine at that point and felt very sorry for Hareton. It was nice though when they were together and happy at the end. The end also brought some insight into Heathcliff's character. After reading the actions of a dark and twisted mind, and almost hating him (eventhough you know that he went crazy because of his love for Catherine, and their scene together before she dies is just utterly heart-wrenching) he seems to open up at the end and the reader can see more into his suffering and is therefore more able to feel for him. Oh, and I thought Isabella was stupid. Anyways, I also found it interesting how the visitor that Mrs. Dean is telling the story to, is in the same position as the reader, and I did try to take into account that Mrs. Dean's story may be slightly one-sided or biased. I don't know. She seemed to be very honest though. I had more thoughts on the literary use of the narrator and stuff, but now I forget them. I'm not sure yet what I want to write about in my paper. I've just begun to look at articles.

Death of a Salesman

In our class conversations about Death of a Salesman, one topic of much discussion was that about Biff and Happy and their lifestyles. Both live opposite lifestyles but neither is happy.

Biff is unhappy because he is caught between what he wants and what is father wants. Although he is not living the life that his father wants for him and he enjoys working on the ranch, he is still not happy because he has not come to terms with pleasing his father. Even if Biff is living his life the way he wants to, he will never be happy until he accepts allows himself to be. As long as he feels like a failure to his father, it will not matter what he does, whether he is working on a ranch or a married professional, he will not be happy.

Happy is not happy (haha!) because he is doing what his father wants of him, not what he wants. Happy suffers from trying to live up to his father's expectations for Biff. Biff did not go the route that his father wanted, so Happy takes that route (a professional man who says he's going to get married) in hopes of getting his father's approval.

Although the boys live opposite lifestyles, neither is happy because they both are caught in this cycle of impossible happiness: do what makes you happy but feel bad about it, or do what your father wants and hate it. This family is very dysfunctional to say the least!

Nora: Why is She so Annoying?

Nora is a complex personality. She seems to care about her friend, Kristine, yet she says some very insensitive things. She obtains the money to take her husband to Italy so that he can get better and she seems to care for him greatly, yet it looks like she is not completely happy in her marriage. There are a lot of factors that are involved in the way that Nora acts.

I believe that Nora is a well-intentioned person. She obviously makes some insensitive comments about how happy she is, how good her life is with all her money, how Krisitine should go to a resort (when she obviously does not have the money), and things like that, but I do not believe that those come from a mean-spirited place, but rather from an ignorance. Nora comes off as quite an air-head sometimes. she says stupid things and made the stupid mistake of dating the fake signature on the will five days after her father's death. Nora is in conflict because she wants to be useful, to do something important, to be recognized as smart (to a certain extent), but she also wants to please her husband, who likes to keep her as an ignorant child. Many of these mistakes are a result of her being kept in the dark. As her husband's pet, she is not expected to know much, nor does she need to if she aimlessly follows her husband's decisions; however, when she decides to go off-the-books and get the money for the Italy trip, she makes mistakes because she has never dealt with money or business before. But it seems it would be common sense to date a signature at a time when the person (whose signature it is supposed to be) was alive, right? If Nora were sharp she would realize that even if she had never dealt in business or the sorts before in her life. Nora, however, does not exhibit a sharpness, and while part of this might just be the way Nora is, I believe that a lot of it can be attributed to her husband. Her husband does not allow her to be a smart woman. He does not want a sharp companion, an equal with an opinion. He is all about being "a man," having power, and being in complete control of his house. In consequence, Nora runs around like a silly little air-head to get what she wants. Nora acts in the way that she knows her husband wants her to, but that ignorant way of acting has also led her to say some stupid things to Kristine and deal very badly in business.

Nora talks about how much work she went to and how much she sacraficed to get the money for Italy, so she seems to really care about her husband, but I don't think that she is exactly happy in her marriage. She tells Kristine how she never spent more than half of her allowance and saved the rest towards the trip (and for someone as vain as Nora, that really seems to say something), yet when she is telling all of this to Kristine, she sounds kind of self-praising, as if she is just trying to get pity or glory from her friend for what she did. Nora also seems to rather like Dr. Rank. He and she have a very flirtacious and friendly relationship that she seems to enjoy much more than her current marriage. At home, Nora wants to be someone that she cannot and she enjoys floating around and doing her own thing, rather isolated from her husband. In contrast, with Dr. Rank she feels free to be herself. She can talk to him about things (which she cannot with her husband), she does not conceal her slightly rebellious attitude that comes with her sneaking macaroons, and she is not afraid to just act freely. Nora wants to be more than she is allowed to be at home, and that cannot possibly produce a happy person. Also, while Nora may care for her husband, I do not believe theat the two of them have a loving relationship. Nora is afraid to be herself, afraid of what her husband would do if he found out about what she did, and sure that one day her husband will no longer love her as she thinks he does now. Firstly, these things alone show that she is not in a trusting reslationship. Secondly, if Torvald would reject Nora for being herself, would not forgive her for what she did (since she was just trying to save his life), and will stop loving her once she gets older and is no longer young and beautiful, then she is definitely not in a loving relationship. Nora is not in a trusting or loving relationship with her husband, as a matter of fact, they are quite distant and isolated from eachother. Nora is not in a happy marriage.

All of these factors (Torvald, society, Dr. Rank, Nora's desires, etc.) influence her behavior. In the end, I believe that Nora does not exactly know who she is. She is in constant conflict with herself and that is what creates her complex behavior.

word count: 873

Contradictory Religious Sentiments in Hamlet

Religion plays a major role in Hamlet; however, there are many contradictory religious sentiments in the play, especially when it comes to Hamlet. There is no doubt that Hamlet holds religious beliefs. He believes in Heaven and Hell and Pergatory. He is quite preoccupied with beliefs on where the soul goes once the body perishes and he is very concerned with doing the right and moral thing. All of this being said, Hamlet does not speak as someone who follows the beliefs that he clearly seems to have.

It is well known (or should be) that Christianity is very against taking revenge. It is ALL about forgiveness (and if someone does not know that by now, then I don't know where they've been). So, with that being common knowledge, everyone should be asking him/herself why the entire play is about a man with Christian beliefs trying to avenge his father. The question of contradictory sentiments would be different if Hamlet was attempting to kill Claudius for another purpose besides vengence. If, as king, it was impossible for Claudius to be taken down by a court (because how many kings get a fair trial? They run everything!), so Hamlet decided to take justice in his own hands and rid the world of a criminal, then our question of the contradiction would be very different. Hamlet does not view it like this, however, and he clearly shows this with his words. Hamlet not only seeks revenge, but he plots specifically to get Claudius's soul to Hell. It is another Christian belief that no matter how evil someone may be that they are not wished to go to Hell. Christians, obviously, would like everyone (even if you're Osama Bin Laden) to repent and find eternal life. While Christians believe that there is a Hell and that some people (like most likely Osama Bin Laden) will go there, it is not wished that anyone should go. Hamlet, however, goes to kill Claudius but then stops out of fear that his (Claudius's) soul might go to Heaven. So who is Hamlet? What does he believe? Is he as moral as he and other people think? He is not just trying to kill a man (murder by the way is not on a Christian's to-do list either), he is trying to send him to Hell!

It is possible that part of Hamlet's struggle throughout the play involves his questioning of his very contradictory sentiments, but I'm not so sure.

Well, that's about all.

Creon and Power

In Antigone, we see the dangers set forth by power through Creon. His power makes him prideful and dangerous as he uses it to threaten (not just criminals, or Antigone who he believes to be a criminal, but also Haimon who has done nothing).
Because he is king, he believes that he knows best. He shows his pride when he says things such as, "You consider it right for a man of my years and experience to go to school to a boy?" "And the City proposes to teach me how to rule?" "My voice is the one voice giving orders in this city!" (pg. 1339) As he gets increasingly angry, his words show how he resents the thought of anyone trying to tell him anything about ruling. He is clearly arrogant in his power, and this arrogance gives him a willingness to abuse this power. He wants everyone to know that he has power and control over them. Basically, he is arrogant and a control freak! :P
Creon becomes so angry with Haimon that he rashly threatens to use his power to kill Antigone right then and there in front of him. While Haimon keeps calm and rational, Creon is completely out of control, yelling how he is an adolescent fool and how he is weak to be "sold out to a woman." Creon threatens his son's marriage, saying, "You'll never marry her while she lives." Haimon comments that she must, then, die, but that her death will cause another. I find this an obvious statement that he plans to die with her, so that he can be with her; however, Creon, obsessed with power (and perhaps paranoyed about losing it) takes this as a threat on his own life. Shortly after he calls for Antigone to be brought out and killed before Haimon's eyes. He says this, wanting to punish his son for his words, and Antigone for her actions. He seems to speak this threat in the heat of the moment.
It is clear that Creon's power makes him prideful and dangerous.
I would also like to point out (though I referred to it above) the difference in Haimon's and Creon's attitudes. Their responses foil eachother in this interaction. Creon is out of control, angry, and rash, while Haimon is controlled, calm, and mature. Haimon's attitude highlights Creon's craziness.

I accidently posted a copy of the article below... but now i erased it because its pointless to have two! Sorry!