Literary Approach for Jane Eyre

Pretty much all of the approaches available can be applied to Jane Eyre. In fact, it was really tricky to choose which one would be the best approach for this particular book. But I am going to be using the Feminist Criticism approach for this book (for now). One of the questions along with this approach that really stood out to me was: If a female character were male, how would the story be different? I think this story would be dramatically different if Jane Eyre was a man rather than a women. Jane Eyre goes through much suffering in the beginging of the book becasue she's a women, and if she wasn't, it wouldn't have happened. Jane would also be even more independent than what she already is. I think many of the trials she had to face would have been eliminated if she were male. If Jane were male, this story would not be the same. This story has so much meaning in it because Jane is a woman. Another question: What behavioral expectations are imposed on the characters ? In this story, women, most importantly Jane ,was expected to grow up like the rest of the women: mindful and lesser-beings than the men. Jane though, did not fall under this catagory. She was independent and did many things on her own, which was almost unheard of at that time. A different question with this approach is this: How do male and female characters relate to one-another? I think that the most importatant relationship in this book is the one between Jane and Rochester. At first, Rochester sees Jane as an ordinary lady. But as the book progresses, he starts to confide in her. Ask her opinioins. Speak with her as a friend and an equal. This relationship is important because it proves that the gender barrier can be broken. If I had to choose a thesis for this book, depending on this topic, it would be about how gender barriers can be broken as long as one can overlook the barrier and see eachother as equals. It could also be about the change in Jane Eyre as she realizes she is and individual and gains her independence.

Calvino Question #8 (And my final blog!!)

The choice between if this essay gave me a logical or emotional reaction is a tough decision. It could easily be both, but because I have to choose, I’d say this gave me an emotional reaction. I chose this for a couple reasons. First because I realized the reason Calvino wrote this essay. He didn’t write it just to inform, he wrote it to use his words to tell others about what the classics really are. He didn’t just say “a classic is a book of the highest quality class and rank”. (Which is the actual dictionary definition) He actually defined them. Told us everything about the essence of a classic work. This is why I had an emotional response. This essay stirred my feelings. It made me think about what he was really saying. Calvino used his words and definitions to get to the audience. He also used examples, like the one at the end of the essay where he’s comparing reading classics to Socrates learning a song on the flute where he says, “At least I will learn this melody before I die”. (Calvino pg 9) These touches are what made me think. I also found myself in awe of how he used his words. To me, his definitions almost were like poetry. I really liked this essay and had an emotional response to it because of the way Calvino used his words and his examples. They were different from the other essay because he put his opinions and his voice into it. You could see more of his writing voice in this essay rather than in Nabokov’s essay. Also, Nabokov wrote his essay to teach us about how we should read classics, while Calvino told us what a classic really is.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question #7

Calvino has an amazing amount of authority when it comes to his essay. By the time he finishes his essay, it’s clear that he put a lot of effort and time into writing it. One example of his authority is the fact that he feels free to give his opinion. He presents facts also, but his opinions are the most important part of the essay because they give it personality and voice. When reading it, you can also see how he feels about reading the classic books. You can clearly see how strongly he believes and wishes that people should read the classics. I think this touch, the fact that you can see how strongly he feels about this subject, is what makes this essay speak to its readers. While reading this essay, I noticed that it had a strong hold on me. The way that he worded this essay was incredible, and it actually gave him MORE authority over the readers. He also presented the authority over the flow of the essay. He used his definitions to dictate how the essay was read, and used them to his advantage. I liked how he would use two similar definitions and then connect them both in a certain way. (Calvino pg 8)

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question #6

Calvino chose a very influential way to start off his essay. Instead of launching into a long introduction, he started his essay off with a definition. This was a great idea, and is not used much, but Calvino made it work. This way, the author can actually grab his readers’ attention. He defines one essence of a classic by saying this, “The classics are those books about which you usually hear people saying: ‘I’m rereading…’ never ‘I’m reading…’”. (Calvino pg 1 par 1) He then discusses topics that relate to the definition. You see, Calvino uses this to start off his essay because it grabs his readers attention and prepares them for what he is about to say.

The ending of this essay was great. In fact, I thought he said some of the best things toward the end. He ended this essay in a way that made me say, ‘that was really fantastic. I’ll remember that’. The ending of an essay is always the most important part because that’s what the readers always remember the most. In this ending, he brought back all his ideas to one sentence. He summed it all up by saying this: “reading the classics is always better than not reading them.” (Calvino pg 9) This sentence pretty much defines everything he wanted to say in this essay. He then ends the essay by using an example of Socrates. This short story links directly to what he said about reading the classics, and it brings his essay to a close.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question #5

Italo Calvino uses a very unique method to organize his essay. Instead of having a normal beginning sentence in his paragraphs he uses a definition. It is actually a genius idea to use this method. What he does is this: Before he starts an essay he presents a definition, and then he discusses that definition in further detail. This allows the audience to focus in on what he is going to be discussing, and it also helps the essay move smoother. By giving a definition he is separating his paragraphs and can freely move from topic to topic without confusing the audience. If he did not use this method in the essay the readers would be completely confused. He even begins the entire essay this way, saying, “Let us begin by putting forward some definitions.” (Calvino pg 1) He goes straight to the point and the readers are saved from having to read a long introduction. I honestly think the way Calvino organizes his essay is very beneficial to him and his readers. It saves time, it gets a point across, and it gives the readers an idea about what Calvino is going to be talking about. This method also allows the readers to gain a further understanding of the essence of a classic. Overall, he organizes it fantastically.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question #4

When reading Calvino’s essay I had two parts that really stood out to me. First there was when he said, “Classics are books which, the more we think we know them through hearsay, the more original, unexpected, and innovative we find them when we actually read them.” (Calvino pg 6 par3) The second thing that really stood out to me was what he said at the end of the essay, not that I didn’t like the rest of it! He said this, “reading the classics is always better than not reading them” (Calvino pg 9 par 3). The reason why the first quote stood out to me was because it was true for me. Jane Eyre and The Picture of Dorian Gray were the first classics I had ever read. I had heard about them on movies and in books and from people, but that’s it. Everything I had ever thought about them changed when I actually read them. I’d expected that they would be somewhat boring and uneventful, but after reading them I realized that was untrue. They are so much better to read than to only hear about. When Calvino talked about this in his essay it just really stood out to me because it applied to me and I agreed with what he said. The other quote stood out to me because it’s just completely true. People always think that reading the classics is boring and they’d rather not read them. But it is so much better to read them than go without reading them because they actually change how you view other books and other writings.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question #3

Calvino used many rhetorical devices in his essay. The great part is though, these touches made the essay more colorful and understandable. You barely have to read but several paragraphs before you start to notice some of these devices. On the very first page a couple paragraphs down you can see the allusions he uses. He refers to Honore de Balzac, a French writer, Herodotus and Thucydides, two ancient Greek historians, Saint-Simon, an early French socialist theorist, and Cardinal Retz, another French writer (Calvino pg 3). He continues to mention other people as the essay goes on. I also found a metaphor that he used in this essay. He says this, “But it is already an achievement for most people to hear the classics as a distant echo, outside the room which is pervaded by the present as if it were a television set on full volume.”(Calvino pg 8 par2) Here he’s talking about how classics take you out of reality because your reading something that was written back in the past. He compares the present to being so loud like a TV turned up all the way, and that one is lucky if you can even hear the echo of the classics.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question #2

Calvino wrote this essay in an astonishing way. He placed his words just right and he went in great depth to describe what a classic work was, and what it means. I found Calvino’s tone to be informative and matter-of-fact. Calvino starts his essay straightforward. He doesn’t tarry, and he goes straight into a series of definitions to describe classics. He even says, “let us begin by putting forward some definitions.” This introduction and straightforward tone I found to be influential as to how I went about reading this essay. I liked how he didn’t beat around the bush and that he launched straight into what he wanted to say. His tone is unique for this kind of essay, and in it you find that he is extremely passionate about what he is discussing. This passion that he had for classic works is what makes this essay even more powerful. As he goes through his many topics and definitions he presents facts and reasoning. These touches give you a friendly feeling while you’re reading, and help you understand what messages he’s trying to get across to his audience. His essay also comes off as professional, but still seems to have a nonchalant touch to it. It’s comfortable and not overwhelming to the point of being impossible to understand. I also noticed how he sometimes directly addressed his audience by using ‘you’ and ‘your’. These things are what contributed to the tone of his essay.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Calvino Question#1

Italo Calvino wrote his essay “Why Read the Classics” in a most unique way, one that I had never seen before. Instead of having paragraph after paragraph, or a standard looking paper, he filled it with definitions and attributes of what a classic was. He personified the thousands of classic novels and stories that we all know and love, and made them almost real to us.

The thesis of this essay is implicit. It was difficult to find because the essay itself was extremely complex and in depth, making it difficult to find words that could describe the whole essay. The thesis, I believe, is this, “A classic is the term given to any book which comes to represent the whole universe, a book on a par with ancient talismans.” (Calvino pg 4 par 4) This one sentence is the sum of all classics. It describes them as they are, and includes every aspect of them. This essay not only tells you many ways to describe classics, but it tells you how to tell the difference between a classic and some other work of literature. This thesis is saying that a classic is not an ordinary work, but a more in depth, more meaningful, and more fantastic literary work. Something unlike anything we could ever read. It’s saying that a classic has more meaning. It isn’t something you cannot forget.

Calvino, Italo. "Why Read the Classics?" Why Read the Classics? New York: Vintage, 2000. 3-9. Print.

Nabokov Question #8

Nabokov’s “Good Readers and Good Writers” was a very well written essay and I enjoyed it. In this essay you can find many important lessons and you learn a surprising amount of information just by reading it once. (Or more than once, in my case) The impression and the reaction I get when reading this essay is a logical one. Nabokov doesn’t dwell on emotions often, and if he did, it was brief. This essay was meant to speak logic to people, and naturally, it does. Nabokov’s sole purpose is to inform and teach others what mindset they should have before they begin to read something, and this essay clearly tells you. While reading this essay, I gained some interesting and completely true information. I found myself completely agreeing with what Nabokov had to say, and many times thought, ‘I should have known that’ or ‘I wish I had known that because it would have been so helpful!’. I especially like when he says that you should not just read a book, but you should re-read it. My favorite quote from the essay and what I believe to be one of the most important things he had to say was this: “a wise reader reads a book of genius not with his heart, not so much with his brain, but with his spine.” This essay came off as completely logical, and I believe it will be that way for everyone.

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question #7

Nabokov has an amazing amount of authority as a writer. He uses his essay to create a whole new experience for his readers. He holds the keys to their minds and what they think and see while reading his work. He can dictate what is said, and control the reader in a way no one else can. Throughout the essay Nabokov uses cleaver rhetorical devices and astounding vocabulary and imagery to grab the audience’s attention and bring them back to his points and the messages that he wants them to hear.

Nabokov uses his writing ‘voice’ to control the reader. He writes the essay smoothly and calmly and makes it inviting for the audience to read. Though it is almost unknown to the reader, they find themselves drawn to his work because of the way he presents his topics and how he words things just right.

Though the reader may find his work extremely comfortable and nonchalant to read, they come out learning something new, and Nabokov had no trouble getting his points across to the reader. All of these things together create the perfect essay: interesting, comfortable, and educational. Nabokov is certainly a master at writing, and his authority as a writer can be seen everywhere in the essay.

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question #6

Nabokov arouses the reader’s interest by introducing the essay with a quote. He discusses a letter sent from a man to his mistress that says, “What a scholar one might be if one knew well only some half a dozen books.” (Nabokov par 2) What this man meant when he wrote his letter was that to be a good reader you have to read more than one book and you must read different genres of literature. This is a smart way to start off the essay because it is not boring and it is an actual thing someone once said. It is also a smart way for Nabokov to start off the essay because he uses this quote to tell the readers what his essay is going to be mainly about, which is that to be a good reader you must open yourself to different books and genres.

In closing the essay, Nabokov wraps up his ideas and starts describing what a writer should be to a reader. He says that a writer should be a storyteller, and enchanter, and a teacher. He then says the facets of a great writer are magic, lesson, and story and talks about how these three elements can come together and form a wonderful story. He says my favorite line, “a wise reader reads a book of genius not with his heart, not so much with his brain, but with his spine.” Then he describes a writer as a person making a castle of cards while the readers watch as his card castle changes and becomes “a castle of beautiful steel and glass”

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question #5

Nabokov organizes his essay like this: he corrects and then he begins to instruct. In the start of the essay he goes through these few ideas: That you should always read a book like it was something brand new (par. 3), that you can’t learn about the past by reading a book (par.4), that the writer of a book is a creator and can make and do what he wants in a book (par. 5). He corrects readers and writers and pretty much says ‘this is how things should be done. This is true and it will always be true’. After he states the truth, he gives the readers a series of questions and asks what things a reader needs to be a good reader (par 6-7). He tests them to see what they know. After that, he gives them the answer and starts instructing and discussing topics like what kind of imagination you should use when reading a book, and what kind of temperament we should have. He then goes into discussing what Literature is, and what it should be to us. He wraps up the story by talking about great writers and what a writer should try to have readers view them as. He talks about what qualities a writer needs and how they should be seen. Nabokov cleverly connects all his ideas and bounces back and forth, discussing how to be a good reader and how to be a good writer. He balances out both of his rhetorical questions and answers them in full by the end of the essay.

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question #4

The ideas expressed in paragraph 12 and 13 are rather interesting to me. The reason for this is because what he says on what kind of imagination you should use while reading is something most people would find to be almost opposite of what they believed.

He says that the imagination and the emotions you feel while reading should not be on a personal level. He says, “So what is the authentic instrument to be used by the reader? It is impersonal imagination and artistic delight.” (Nabokov par 12) He goes into describing that most people treasure a book because it reminds them of a place they once knew or something that happened to them. Or it might evoke a place they remember from their past. He says that the worst thing one person can do is identify himself with a character in the book. This is practically what everyone does when reading a book and Nabokov says this is wrong.

At first this confused me, made me think, “well…that’s not how I would say that..” but then once I thought about it, it made perfect sense. In the next paragraph he says, “What should be established, I think, is an artistic harmonious balance between the reader’s mind and the author’s mind.” (Nabokov par. 13) He means you need to try and focus not only on what you yourself are imagining the story to be, but what the author wanted you to imagine the story to be. He’s saying you need to try and see what the author wanted you to see. To appreciate what the author wanted his readers to think when reading their story. You should treasure the story because it’s a good story, not because you like the characters or the setting or the time period.

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question #3

Nabokov clearly uses rhetorical devices in his essay to wonder the reader and to give the essay a stronger grip on the readers mind. He uses allusion, metaphor, and personification throughout his essay, and these devices give his work life.

The most important metaphor that can be found in Nabokov’s essay is found in paragraph 10. Here he compares a book to a painting. His basic reason for using this metaphor is to say that a book, like a painting, has depth and deeper meaning, you just have to look at a little longer to see it all. He’s saying that you should re-read books so you can see the book as a whole.

Personification can be found in paragraphs 15 and 16. Here is when he describes literature as if it was something living. He describes it as being “born”. He says that it is an invention. He also personifies Nature, saying that it deceives and that a “writer of fiction only follows Nature’s lead.” (Nabokov par. 16)

Nabokov uses many different allusions. These can be found all over the essay. He throws them in to use as examples, and things the reader can use to better understand what point he is trying to get across. In the very beginning of the essay he uses the allusion of Flaubert and the letter to start off and get the audience thinking. (Nabokov par. 2) He then uses the allusion of Madame Bovary in paragraph 3. In paragraph 4 he talks about Jane Austen and Bleak House. In paragraph 15 he talks about the story of the boy who cried wolf. These are used to put depth in his essay.

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question #2

I think that Nabokov’s tone is didactic and matter-of-fact. The author is educating and instructing the reader on how to be good readers and good writers and giving them a series of rules to follow and clever tips on how to prepare to read and write. He educates and is teaching us how to become better readers and what skills we need to harness to be good writers also. Nabokov is also matter-of-fact in his tone, and is not emotional and is to the point.

As Nabokov writes, you find that his sole purpose in giving this lecture is to instruct others on how they can be better and more efficient when reading and writing. He tests the audience, asks them questions. He tries to see what their opinion is and then corrects them in their false beliefs. You can directly see his strong instruction in paragraphs 8 and 9. In paragraph 8 he gives a series of questions, and in 9 he gives the answer. He first asks the audience what qualities and items a reader needs to be effective and then gives them the answer, saying, “the good reader is one who has imagination, memory, a dictionary, and some artistic sense” (Nabokov par. 9)

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.

Nabokov Question#1

The thesis in “Good Readers and Good Writers” was not stated outright and is implicit. It is simply interwoven into the writing, and as you read through the essay, starts to come out and reveal itself as Nabokov connects all his ideas together. The thesis is simply a series of rules on how to go about being a good reader and writer. Once the essay is finished, the thesis is clear. It is this: A good reader should look at a book like a work of art, should be open to it as if it was something brand new to them, should be imaginative and should attempt to connect with the author while reading the book. A good writer should be a storyteller, a teacher, and an enchanter. These two sentences are the outline for the story and are woven and cleverly placed amongst Nabokov’s work.

The thesis is placed in different points in the essay. The first sentence of the thesis can be found in the beginning paragraphs. It says in paragraph two that a reader should look at a book like a work of art and treat it as “something brand new” (Nabokov par. 2) Later on, Nabokov gives a quiz and then answers it by saying that “the good reader is one who has imagination, memory, a dictionary, and some artistic sense” (Nabokov par. 9) He also says that there should be an “artistic harmonious balance between the reader’s mind and the author’s mind” (Nabokov par. 14) This is revealing his opinion that the reader should try and connect with the author in what they are saying.

The second part of the thesis, the one of writers, is seen in paragraph 19. He says, “A major writer combines theses three—storyteller, teacher, and enchanter—but it is the enchanter in him that predominates and makes him a major writer.”

Nabokov, Vladimir. “Good Readers and Good Writers”. Lectures on Literatures. 1948. Lecture. PDF file.