Dickinson, Emily. “Heaven’ –is What I Cannot Reach.”

“Heaven’ –is What I Cannot Reach”

How does the speaker define heaven? How does the definition compare with conventional view?

The speaker defines heaven as something that we can’t reach according to the title. The speaker compares heaven to many things we can’t touch. There is a lot of things in life we want but can’t have. This definiation is the same as the conventional view. We think of heaven as a pleasant place everyone wants to go to. In reality, we can’t touch or even see heaven. We still know that it is somewhere we would like to go to.

Look up the myth of Tantalus and explain the allusion in line 3.

Tantalus had to stand in water with a fruit tree hanging out of his reach. The allusion in line 3 is a good comparison of heaven. We can’t touch heaven. Tantalus didn’t taste the fruit on the tree but knew would enjoy it. People haven’t been to heave before but know they would enjoy it as well.

Given the speaker’s definition of heaven, how do you think he or she would describe hell?

Hell like heaven is somewhere we can’t reach. The places as far as touching and seeing them are the same. I don’t think the speaker would  have talked positive about hell.

Works Cited

Dickinson, Emily. “Heaven’ –is What I Cannot Reach.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 9^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2012. 834. Print.

Carver, Raymond.“Popular Mechanics.”

“Popular Mechanics”

1 Discus the story’s final lines. What is the “issue” that is “decided”?

The “issue” that is “decided” in the final lines is which parent is going to keep the child. Both parents repeatedly say they want the baby.

3 How do small action take on larger significance in the story’s? Consider the woman picking up the baby’s picture and the knocked-down flowerpot.

Carver says, “She noticed he baby’s picture on the bed and picked it up. He looked at her and she wiped her eyes and stared at him before turning and going back to the living room. Bring that back he said” (276). Carver shows us by her looking at the baby’s photo and the guy wanting it back that they love their child. I think the parents fighting over the baby shows that they have something in common. These parents might decide to stay together for their child.

4 why is this couple splitting up? Do we know? Does it matter? Explain your response.

No, we didn’t know why the couple is splitting. It seems that the girlfriend doesn’t want her boyfriend to leave. The girlfriend is says, “I’m glad you’re leaving” and “you can’t look at me in the face” (276). What she says show she doesn’t want the guy to leave. If the problem is small between them they may solve their differences and stay together for their child.

6 what is the conflict? How is it resolved?

The conflict of the story is which parent is going to keep the child. The parents were pulling the baby back and forth between them. Carver says, “He felt the baby slipping out of his hands and he pulled back very hard” (277). One can infer that this is a physical contest of who is stronger. Whoever can keep ahold of the baby is the one that will keep it.

8 Explain how Carver uses irony to convey theme.

The theme could be that there is good and bad in relationships. The good in their relationship is their child. The irony is that the girlfriend is says, “I’m glad you’re leaving” and “you can’t look at me in the face” (276). These are two conducting statements.

Works Cited

Carver, Raymond.“Popular Mechanics.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 9^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2012. 276-277. Print.

O’Brien,Tim.“How to Tell a True War Story.”

“How to Tell a True War Story”

1) What implicit problem is created about the story by its first line, “This is true”? How is the notion of “truth” problematized throughout the story and subject to irony?

When someone says “this is true” it makes me think that something they said was not true. It is hard to tell what the “truth” throughout the story is. O’Brien states, “You can tell a true war story by the questions you ask” (295). He is answering the question that everyone is thinking.

3) How are you affected by the description of Curt Lemon being blown up in paragraph 17, 98 and 105?

I though Rat was telling the truth in paragraph 17 about Lemon. O’Brien states how they “shinny up and peel him off” (295).  It would be hard for someone to peel their best friend from a tree. O’Brien says in paragraph 105 “if I could ever get the story right” (295). Rat himself says how he is not telling the truth I start to think what really happened to Lemon

5) What emotions did you feel as you read about the shooting of the water buffalo? How does paragraph 75 achieve these effects?

It was hard for me to believe the shooting of the water buffalo. I was shock at first. I then realized what a great story teller Rat was and thought that might have not occurred. So, it was hard for me to feel any type of emotions.

7) Trace the narrator’s comments about what constitutes a true war story. What do you think these competing and contradictory ideas finally add up to?

O’brien first statement about a true war story it is “never moral” (288). Rat thinks that one should not be “uplifted” after hearing a true war story (288). The second statement about a true war story is that “it’s difficult to separate what happened to have seemed to happen” (289). This justifies Rat reasoning for not being able to remember what really happened to Lemon. Also the third statement about a true war story is that it “cannot be believed” (289). Many people who come home from the war like to make up stories about things that didn’t happen. The fourth statement about a true war story is that “it never seems to end” (291). Rat told more than one story of how Lemon died. He had stories for days. Rat then explains that “if there’s a moral at all, it’s like the thread that makes the cloth” (292). Rat is saying that it is very hard to find a moral in a true war story if there is even one. O’Brien states, “You can tell a true war story by the questions you ask” (295). Throughout the story O’Brien says “This is true.” Answering ones question even step he made.

8) Characterize the narrator. Why must be repeatedly “keep on telling” his war story?

The narrator is using the example of Lemon to show how to tell a true war story. He tells how Lemon dies in more than one way. He keeps repeating “keep on telling” because there is always more to the story. Also, thoughtout the story O’Brien says “this is true.” This means that everything he states is true. The fourth statement about a true war story is that “it never seems to end” (291). So, if something never ends then one must “ keep on telling” his story.

9) Consider O’Brien’s use of profanity and violence in this story. Do you think they are essential or merely sensational?

I think the use of profanity is “merely sensational. Sometimes when people use profanity they think this is a way of expressing their true feelings. There is not much profanity used. So I wouldn’t say that it something Rat uses a lot. When he does use profanity it is to make one understand his point he is trying to make. O’Brien says “Jesus Christ, man, I write this fucking letter, I slave over it, and what happened?” (288). Rat uses profanity sensational about the situation he is in. He is upset because Lemon’s sister never writes him back.

Works Cited

O’Brien,Tim.“How to Tell a True War Story.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 9^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2012. 287-296. Print.

“The Lady with the Pet Dog”

“The Lady with the Pet Dog” pg 192

1) Consider the following assessment of the story: “No excuses can be made for the lovers’ adulterous affair. They behave selfishly and irresponsibly. They are immoral –and so it’s the story.” Explain what you think Chekhov’s response to this view would be, given his treatment of the lovers. How does this compare with your own views?

I agree with the assessment of the story. I think they did “behave selfishly and irresponsibly.” They didn’t think about their husband or wives. Chekhov response would be that Gurov lured Anna. Anna felt bad for what she had done. This was Gurov first affair. I think Chekhov would say that Anna was just a victim of Gurov.

3) What does Gurov’s view of woman reveal about him? Why does he regard them as an “inferior race”?

Gurov feels that he is superior to woman. This can be related to any person who feels like they are superior to someone else. Gurov has the upper hand over women. In reality, the upper class needs the lower or middle classes. Chekhov states how “he couldn’t live without the ‘inferior race’ for two days together” (192). Gurov can be describes as a player. A player is a type of person who uses the opposite sex for their enjoyment. Chekhov states that Gurov “disposed women in his favor” (192).

5) When and why do Gurov’s feeling about Anna begin to change? Is he really in love with her?

Gurov feelings start to change about Anna in a little more than a month after she had left. Chekhov talked about how Anna “followed him about everywhere and watch him” (197). He thought about her “when in the evening stillness the voices of his children preparing their lessons reached his study, or when the storm howled in the chimney, suddenly everything would rise up in his memory” (197). Yes, Gurov does love Anna. Chekhov states at the end of the story that Gurov “had fallen in love really, truly –for the first time in his life” (202).

6) Who or what is the antagonist in this story? What is the nature of the conflict?

Gurov’s and Anna affair is the antagonist in the story. They both love each other. The conflict is that they have to be in secrecies with their love for each other. Chekhov states that Gurov and Anna felt like “they were a pair of migratory birds, male and female, caught and forced to live in different cages” (202). The antagonist and the conflict go together.  

7) What is the effect of having Gurov as the central consciousness? How would the story be different if were told in Anna’s perspective?

Gurov loved Anna. Chekhov states at the end of the story that Gurov “had fallen in love really, truly –for the first time in his life” (202). Gurov goes to find Anna. I believe that Anna just would have gone on with her life. Chekhov states that Anna says, “We are parting forever –it has to be, for ought never to have met” (196). Anna would not have come looking for Gurov like he did for her. Anna even says that she “pressed him to confess that he did not respect her” (196). She didn’t think Gurov loved her.

Works Cited

Chekhov, Anton.“The Lady with the Pet Dog.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 9^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2012. 192-203. Print.

“The Lady with the Pet Dog” pg 206

1) Which version do you like better –Chekhov’s story of Oates’s? What’s the point of retelling the story?

I like Oate’s version better. It is more of Anna version of the story I enjoy. As a woman I can better relate to woman. So, this is why I enjoyed this version more.

10) At the end of paragraph 19, Oates has Anna ask herself the question “What did it mean to enter into a bond with another person?”

To me entering into a bond with another person means starting a relationship with that person. A “bond” can be made with different things. When a child is first born parents have to “bond” with this child. After we grow up, we can bond with friends or our significant other. Having a “bond” with someone means that one know more about that person than the outside world does.

Works Cited

Oates, Joyce.“The Lady with the Pet Dog.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 9^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2012. 206-218. Print.

Hemingway, Ernest.“Soldier’s Home.”

“Solder’s Home”

1) The title, “Soldier’s Home,” focuses on the setting. Do you have a clear picture of Krebs’s home? Describe it, filling in missing detail from your associations of home, Krebs’s routine or anything else you can use.

Krebs’s parents doesn’t treat their son like a man. After coming home from the war his parents have just decided to let him start driving the car. Krebs’s mother says speaking for his father “He thinks you should be able allowed to drive the car” (169). Krebs wants to be respected by his parents to live the life that makes him happy. Krebs’s mother wants him to settle down. Krebs’s mother even says, “Charley Simmons, who is just your age, has a good job and is going to be married. The boys are all settling down; they’re all determined to get somewhere; you can see that boys like Charley Simmons are on their way to being really a credit to the community” (169). Krebs’s father wants him to get a job. Krebs’s mother says for his father, “All work is honorable as he says” (169). Krebs’s sister wants Krebs to be a part of her life. Krebs’s talks about all of the “complications” of returning back home. He did however, stop and see his sister play baseball before he leaves town.

3) Belleau Wood, Soissons, the Champagne, St. Mihiel, and the Argonne were the sites of fierce and the bloody fighting. What effect have these battles had on Krebs? Why do you think he won’t talk about them to the people at home?

Krebs wanted to talk about the war. Hemingway states, “Later he felt the need to talk but no one wanted to hear about it” (165). Krebs thought that no one wanted to listen to him.Hemingway states, “His town had heard too many atrocity stories to be thrilled by actualities” (165.) The army had a major effect on Krebs.  Krebs learned a lot from the army. Hemingway states, “Besides he did not really need a girl. The army had taught him that” (166).

4) Why does Krebs avoid complications and consequences? How has the war changed his attitudes toward work and women? How is his hometown different from Germany and France? What is the conflict in the story?

Hemingway states, “Krebs wanted his life to go smoothly” (170). That is why Krebs wanted to avoid complications and consequences. Krebs learned a lot from the army. Hemingway states, “Besides he did not really need a girl. The army had taught him that” (166). Krebs explains the different types of guys in the army. Krebs final explanation of women is, “You don’t need a girl unless you thought about them” (167). Krebs than explains the only difference in French and German is the women. The conflict in the story is all of the complications of returning back home.

6) How does Krebs’s mother embody the community’s values? What does Krebs think of those values?

Krebs’s mother wants her son to get a job and settle down. Krebs’s mother talks about the other returned soldiers in town. Kreb’s mother even says, “Charley Simmons, who is just your age, has a good job and is going to be married. The boys are all settling down; they’re all determined to get somewhere; you can see that boys like Charley Simmons are on their way to being really a credit to the community” (169). When Krebs’s mother talks to Krebs about the returned soldiers she uses the word “all” a lot to describe them as a whole. After Krebs’s mother tell him all of these things Krebs says, “nothing” in return.

7) Why can’t Krebs’s pray with his mother?

Krebs doesn’t want to lie when he pray with his mother. Krebs dream he has for himself and his mother dream for him are two totally different things. Krebs talks about “consequences” a lot throughout the story. Krebs didn’t want to deal with consequence of praying with his mother.

10) Explain how Krebs’s war experiences are present throughout the story even though we get no details about them.

Krebs’s talks about the things he had learned in the army. Krebs learned a lot from the army. Hemingway states, “Besides he did not really need a girl. The army had taught him that” (166).

Works Cited

Hemingway, Ernest.“Soldier’s Home.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 9^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2012. 165-170. Print.