Summery and Analysis of The American Dream

When we first started reading this, I actually wasn't in class. I don't know if it would've helped had I been in class but it was a struggle to find any meaning in the play. I just wasn't seeing it. Confusion just held my brain on this until we read in class how this play is identified as being part of Theater of the Absurd. Absurd sure was a word for it. Diving into more detail, the play isn't completely part of Theater of the Absurd, but it possesses qualities that are similar and when applied to this play give more meaning. So now, after hours of annotations and discussions with classmates, here his my summary and analysis of Edward Albee's The American Dream. (Just in case my photographic memory fails me in a couple of weeks/months.)

Hmmm... Where do I begin? ...

The play starts out with two characters, Mommy and Daddy, in the living room in their apartment. They are never given names and when spoken to in the play are referred to as Mommy and Daddy. (This is due to how they represent in the story not just one person or one idea, but rather the society as a whole-- all of the Mommies and Daddies in America.) Mommy and Daddy are speaking to each other about how they cannot obtain satisfaction as they wait for "them". (This is a major theme in the story line as the play as a whole makes references back to this conversation. We also eventually find out that this is the purpose of Mommy and Daddy in the play: to find satisfaction.) As the two are speaking about satisfaction and how they just can't seem to find it these days, Grandma enters. (Again, this is her name and how she's referred to, representing the masses of society and not one individual.) Immediately when Grandma enters there's a focus on what she brings: her boxes.

The boxes that Grandma brings are all wrapped up very nicely; this creates something new and seemingly trivial for Mommy and Daddy to talk about as Grandma leaves to get more boxes. The boxes are the substance of the apartment, literally and unknown to Mommy and Daddy at the time. (The boxes represent the substance of the old American dream and how it's being moved out of where it was. It's still nicely wrapped because it looks nice, but no one wants them anymore, just as Mommy and Daddy don't want the boxes either-- they just want to know what's inside of them.) Grandma's return with more boxes starts the second theme of this play: the struggle for control.

Mommy, Daddy and Grandma are all fighting for control as they talk about "the van people" that are coming to take Grandma away when they are interrupted by the ringing of the doorbell: the "they" that Mommy and Daddy have been waiting for have finally arrived. An important scene takes place here to emphasize a motif in the story, the motif being that there is an opposite role in the sexes between Mommy and Daddy. The doorbell rings and Mommy tells Daddy to get the door. However, Daddy has second thoughts and starts to step back when Mommy steps in and metaphorically holds Daddy's masculinity in front of him, almost taunting him, to open the door. This is the closest scene that we see to being sexual as Mommy is throwing out innuendos left and right for Daddy to take charge and open the door. When Daddy get's too scared and doesn't, Mommy retorts with "Oh, look at you! You're turning into jelly; you're indecisive; you're a woman" (p.75, l.4). This further supports the motif of opposite roles of sexes between Mommy and Daddy and shows just how much control Mommy has over Daddy as he runs to the door to regain his honor.

As the door opens in steps the fourth character we are introduced to, however this one is different than all the others. She actually has a name: Mrs. Barker. Mrs. Barker is here to help Mommy and Daddy, but she doesn't know what she's helping them with. This is the main conflict in the story. The arrival of Mrs. Barker also adds to the power struggle happening constantly as Mommy, who normally wins, is feeling threatened by Mrs. Barker and wants to make sure she's still in control of everything. They all talk together because no one can figure out why Mrs. Barker is there except that Grandma knows, but no one listens to her. Mommy and Grandma get into an argument forcing Daddy to go take apart Grandma's TV*. Mrs. Barker is feeling uncomfortable in the hostile mood and requires water which Mommy tells Grandma to go get for Mrs. Barker but Grandma refuses. This is where Mommy's control over Grandma finally crumbles. It wasn't much there to begin with but finally falls here, causing Mommy to have to leave and go get the water herself.

Since Grandma and Mrs. Barker are the only two left, Grandma "hints" to Mrs. Barker as to why she's here. Mrs. Barker then has to leave to follow Mommy to get her glass of water* as she takes in what she just heard from Grandma. As Mrs. Barker leaves, the final character enters. His name is Young Man, for the reasons that I stated previously. Grandma starts to call him "the American Dream" since he has a lovely physical appearance but lacks substance which is shown when he says "I'll do almost anything for money" (p.109 l.8) This represents how Americans have become so engrossed in material things and money that the new "American Dream" revolves around money whereas the old American Dream, played by Grandma in the story, is represented by substance. That is why Grandma has so many boxes-- she has all the substance. As the Young Man and Grandma begin talking, he tells her of his twin that he had--identical twin--and how he hasn't seen his twin since they were little but now feels empty inside. (Again, supporting the hollowness of new vs. old.) Grandma realizes this and formulates a plan.

Mrs. Barker enters back now and Grandma tells Mrs. Barker of her plan as she has the Young Man take her boxes out of the apartment for her. Grandma tells Mrs. Barker of her plan to have the Young Man be adopted by Mommy and Daddy (this isn't found out until the end) and Mrs. Barker thinks it's a grand idea. Mrs. Barker leaves to go find Mommy and Daddy to tell them of her plan, leaving Grandma all alone. Grandma starts to show some sadness of being replaced (both metaphorically and literally) as the Young Man comes back and tries to console her. Grandma realizes it's time for her to leave and is escorted out by the Young Man. Mrs. Barker enters back with Mommy and Daddy after telling them that she knows what she's here for and that everything is settled and they can get satisfaction. (Important theme) As Mommy realizes that Grandma is gone, she starts to cry from the loss of control she has. Right on cue, Mrs. Barker shows Mommy her "surprise"-- a new American Dream. All the while Grandma is watching this happen and no one can see her but the Young Man, showing a final movement of old to new.

Close Reading #2

The G.O.P.'s Feminine Mystique

By: Samantha Bee

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/opinion/sunday/the-gops-feminine-mystique.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

*I enjoyed the picture included with the article too much that I didn't have the heart to not include it with my analysis of the article.*

This interesting opinion article was about how women in the Democratic Party seemed to look more masculine in facial features than women in the Republican Party. The study was taken by the U.C.L.A.'s Department of Psychology. The article says that "...researchers analyzed the faces of the House of Representatives in the 111th Congress based on objective measures of feminine facial structure. The faces were then rated according to gender-typical femininity, and shown to undergraduate students..." The students then had to guess which political party the faces went with, and apparently most of them were correct in their guessing. 

Figurative Language:

The figurative language that Bee uses gives off what seems to me to be an offended tone. She sounds sarcastic and a bit angry at the fact that being in one party classifies a woman as looking more like man than the women of the other party. I got the impression that she is a Democrat and was not too keen on the idea of being told that she is in a party with women that look like men. When she says "The flip side being that more liberal female politicians tend to have less feminine facial structures. As in: they’re more masculine, I guess. As in: terrific," her tone here seems more sarcastic due to her choice of putting in "terrific" instead of a word actually conveying how she feels about this. I think that this adds strength to her argument of anger at this idea because she doesn't outright say how she feels but lets her audience figure it out, making her feelings sink into the reader more. 

Imagery:

I really enjoyed the imagery she used in one part of the article, even though she used it all throughout. She uses lots of voice in the article to keep her reader's attention and to draw us in. One way with her imagery.  She refers to Michelle Bachmann in a rude manner (yet another indication of her anger at this idea), indicating   Bee's dislike of the woman. She writes that the "Michelle Bachmann Effect", which is what the researchers called this idea of Democrat women looking more masculine than Republican women, is "the tingly feeling that overtakes me when I read or hear something so profoundly ridiculous that I briefly consider living the rest of my life in monkish isolation on a mountaintop with only the cold wind for companionship." A long sentence to get through, but once you do you can see envision that perfectly in your mind's eye and can even feel the shiver down your spine as you imagine cold air rushing at you. Her great usage of voice and imagery helps give her support in her article.

Syntax:

I liked her usage of syntax in this article because it was set up how people speak. Giving off that vibe makes reading the article stick in someone's brain more because they feel like they just had a conversation with someone. Sure she has the long, drawn out sentences like we saw before with her imagery of Michelle Bachmann as well as this one where she writes "It’s the type of research done after three days of being yelled at on the convention floor by people in 10-gallon hats, with only a steady diet of Coke Zero and SunChips to keep you upright." Long and drawn out, but she uses this to set up the scene. She then follows this with a two word sentence to create emphasis on her main idea: "You’re punchy," describing one feels after the image she gave us above. With this structure throughout the article, it makes it easier to read as well as more enjoyable and sticks in your brain longer. 

Open Prompt #2

1983. From a novel or play of literary merit, select an important character who is a villain. Then, in a well-organized essay, analyze the nature of the character's villainy and show how it enhances meaning in the work. Do not merely summarize the plot.

The motivation for a character to do something is not always clear to the reader. This problem is often prominent in the villains of a work of literature. However, when one takes the time to analyze why a villain did one thing instead of another in a story, new ideas become clearer and the work as a whole becomes more meaningful. In his novel Dracula, Bram Stoker uses the important villain character Dracula to enhance the meaning of his work. 

Count Dracula invites Jonathan Harker, a salesman from a small town in England, to his castle in Transylvania, Romania. The Count is very hospitable to Harker at his arrival and never feeds on him. Even at Harker's discovery of what Dracula is, a vampire, Dracula still doesn't change his ways of feeding. Throughout the novel, Stoker makes a point in writing that Dracula doesn't feed on men and only feeds on young, innocent women or children. This is shown when he feeds on Lucy Westenra, a young and naive friend of Harker's fiance. At Dracula's arrival into the small town where Lucy lives, she becomes increasingly less energetic and youthful as she once was as well as loses her innocence and becomes paranoid about her window. The Count takes what he desires from the women and when it has all been, quite literally, sucked out of them, his interest in them is lost and he finds a new source. He could feed off of strong and healthy men, but his interest in only women provides enhanced meaning of why Dracula does what he does. 

Another thing that Dracula does that creates enhanced meaning in the story is his style of feeding. He could quickly kill his prey and suck the life out of them in one sitting in a giant mess of blood, but his method of feeding is slowly and neatly with barely a trace left behind. This brings on a sexual note to the novel that was written when the subject was taboo. The Count likes his victims to be pure like a virgin would be and treats them in a somewhat sexual way. This takes place when Mina, the fiance of Harker and friend of Lucy, finds two little pin pricks on Lucy's neck that become slightly irritated overtime but nothing else seems to be a problem until obvious blood loss is found. Another would be when Mina gets put into a trance by the Count and sucks the Count's blood from his breast, where his heart would be. Dracula's feeding style enhances the books meaning of taboo sexual ideas during the time. 

Dracula uses the actions of the character of Count Dracula to enhance the meaning of the novel. When analyzed more thoroughly, Dracula's actions, such as his choices in feeding, contribute to the novel's meaning. As a result, the villain character's actions in an important literary work such as Dracula have hidden meanings. 

Responses To Course Material #2

Now attempting to think back as to what we have done in class, I find a fog forming in my mind. I don't think it's that we've covered too much material too quickly, but that it's all started to blend together that I can't differentiate what's what. From close analysis to reading plays to studying how literature has changed over time, a lot can happen in a couple of weeks in AP Lit. Let's go over the basics of what's happened.

So we started to read this book called The American Dream by Edward Albee. I was absent when we read most of this in class, so I had to read it on my own. Holy cow. Throughout the entire play, I struggled to find any meaning whatsoever. We later in class went over Theater of the Absurd and how "playwrights loosely grouped under the label of Theater of the Absurd try to convey their sense of bewilderment, anxiety, and wonder in the face of an inexplicable universe" (Martin Esslin, Theater of the Absurd, 1968). So on the first read, unless you know going in that the play is part of Theater of the Absurd as well as being a huge AP Lit geek, it is normal to not understand the point of it. That helped, but what helped the most was when we read Ervin Beck's analysis of Albee's The American Dream. He helped bring to light the complex ideas that are hidden in the play, one large idea being that "...[Grandma] embodies and speaks the truths associated with America's earliest and best impulses" (Beck, p. 2). After reading this and that the Young man represents the new and upcoming America, the entire play made so much more sense to me. I could understand that it represented the shipping out (quite literally in the play) of the old ideals and the bringing in of new ideals in America. (By America, I mean North America, the United States, not Canada or Mexico or Brazil or any other countries who have their own literature and harsh realities to deal with.)

You would think that analyzing why things are funny wouldn't make them funny anymore, but I feel that just the opposite happened. I felt it enlightening to finally understand why I would think it's funny for my brother to slip and fall down the stairs with a grunt of pain and then proceed to limp to the dinner table, but then not find it funny that my great-aunt slipped and fell down the stairs and broke her hip. This is due to the fact that in situations where pain is inflicted, humor is only present when it is "...perceived by the observer as harmless or painless to the participants" (Theories of Humor and Comedy, p. 1). So my brother was fine, just uncomfortable (and apparently able to sing in soprano tones-- puberty might be thanked for that though) which is why his situation was funny whereas my great-aunt breaking her hip actually caused harm and was not funny. This also makes sense when you see someone get sand in their eyes at the beach that you laugh at their misfortune, but when you find out that they have seriously damaged their corneas and have to go in to the hospital and get medication for it, it suddenly loses its humor quickly. Now I know when it's appropriate to laugh in movies and when it's not. (And if I find something funny that no one else does, I'm either smart enough to understand it at the intellectual level, or don't understand and should probably bite my tongue and hope I didn't offend anyone.)

As we continue, as I assume that we will all year, our close readings of works or our studying of vocabulary, I continue to, now almost subconsciously, analyze most everything I read. "What does the author really mean here? Why purple and not blue? Why this word and not that?" The vocab we continue to study helps to put a name on things, as well as makes you look smarter to people not in AP Lit. Knowing that there's a word for "preaching or lecturing" lets me say "I feel that this has a didactic tone, don't you?" This is especially helpful when close reading a work and there's an indirect reference to another work, we can all as a class recognize the "allusion" that we see.

It's been a rough couple of weeks as I'm still trying to find a good balance of study habits for AP Lit along with keeping up in class. Analyzing ideas is not an easy thing to do, and as my good friend William Wordsworth says in his poem "The Tables Turned" in stanza 7: "Sweet is the lore which Nature brings;/Our meddling intellect/Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:—/We murder to dissect" (Wordsworth, ll. 25-28). Bring on the complexities. Bring on the symbols with multiple meanings. The figurative language with its tricks and cons. (My lovely use of anaphora.) Here on Team AP, we are now learning in the ways of analysis, and we murder to dissect. (But not literally-- please note that the last sentence is referencing Wordsworth whom I just quoted from and is figurative. Literal would be: a- illegal, b- disgusting, and c- not something we would learn how to do in AP Lit.)