ENGL 3231 "The margined Puritans margin"

Year taken: 2013-2014

Professor: Nereida Prado

Class: INGL3231

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodríguez Cruz

843 09 6818

ENGL3251- American Literature I

Prof. N. Prado

       “…The land of the free and the home of the brave.” The Star-Spangled Banner definitely bursts out the label of the United States of America. From the first steps the Puritan settles placed in the new world to the battle for independence against England. However, in the battle for expression of the population, the fight for freedom and equality transformed in favor to the advantages of the white male puritan population with the excuse to expand the “good deed” of the religious culture. The margined group became the authority to margin in fear and panic and the label of “freedom” comes down to be question and to rewrite history.

       The purpose to invade American territory was to create a holy land for the “pure” outcasts of Europe. William Bradford quotes well how the purpose was to “recover their primitive order, liberty, and beauty”. This was decided when the Puritan population noticed how “many of their children by…the great licentiousness…were drawn away by evil examples into extravagant and dangerous courses…” The creation of Heaven on Earth begun by adapting the Pilgrims to the new primitive life. The Natives made a home to those in need and the myth of “Thanksgiving” began the symbol of peace between diversity and a fresh start in God’s glory. This only lasted so long before the white repressed the red skin people with the excuse of “savage devils” influence by a dark force against God’s way.

Chief Logan’s lament is a fine example of the treaty given to the natives compared to the one they gave to the white population: “I appeal to any white man to say, if ever he entered Logan's cabin hungry, and he gave him not meat; if ever he came cold and naked, and he clothed him not… Col. Cresap, the last spring, in cold blood, and unprovoked, murdered all the relations of Logan, not sparing even my women and children.” The horrible idea of bringing the red men to extinction because the land they arrived in was destined to become a pure place for the settlers but not for others. The love for freedom came with an urge to clean the earth from what was believed as unholy and not human. “Manifest Destiny” was the movement driving the Puritans and many of its figures to fulfill the exclusion of the natives to the border and away from their land to give the whites the expansion they so desperately wanted. When the hopes of the red people started to leave and wanted to rise, Speckled Snake convinced his people to move farther in order to save them by promising the ending of their suffer: “I have listened to his[Great Father]  present talk. He says that the land where you now live is not yours. Go beyond the Mississippi; there is game; and you may remain “while the grass grows or the water runs.”… Brothers! Our great father says we must go beyond the Mississippi. We shall be there under his care, and experience his kindness. He is very good! We have felt it all before…” While the natives were margined out, the Puritans were starting to feel more free and less threaten to “evil” But, for how long this paranoid population was to experience the peace without a new rising doubt?

       The fight to maintain the land had begun and with it came drastic and strict culture. The dancing was forbidden, the sermons were law and those who didn’t follow this were a threat. Without any logical and concrete proof, others could be blamed for disturbance and evil just by the simple act of telling out loud. This had never been out of control without the rising of Witch Trials in Salem. Any suspicion and/or confirmation that blamed a man or woman as non-puritan or involved in any other act shunned upon the religious council was sentenced to be dehumanized and punished. The deeds were made with the excuse to "overturn this poor plantation, the Puritan colony"[ Cotton Mather’s Wonders of the Invisible World]Thomas Morton gives a description about how Endecott, a cruel puritan leader, treated those accused: “made Fairecloath’s innocent back like the picture of Rawhead-and-Bloody-Bones, and his shirt like a pudding wife’s apron. In this employment Shackles (the executioner) takes great felicity, and glories in the practice of it.” Hawthorne explains how the puritans were ruthless to the physical harmless people in the story of the “Maypole of Merry Mount” by the acts of destroying the Maypole from the dancing and laughter, shooting down a dancing bear the people were venerating  and the punishing the habitants because of the non-puritan ways of free thinking. In the play “The Crucible” we can see the desperation of John Proctor, a man who was forced to confess while innocent and how he refused to sign his name as the devil and the wrong doing that was being accused in town: “Because it is my name!” he explains “Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them to hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” The marginal image comes to haunt those who out-casted the different with a greater impact. In the end, is freedom real? Was it worth the seclusion in the Puritan idea of being free?

      The embarrassing chapter of the Puritan chaos needed a closure to give space to the new revolutionary ideas for the better of the people. Even with the margin of blacks and gays as an example of recent decades, the United States have tried to leave behind the paranoia and began to depict itself better in the literature and history records. Just like Hawthorne did with Endecott’s figure and remade a strong, manly ruler to be forever engraved as the stereotype of the man of history; America has reassured the world of their liberty by passing it from spoken words to written ones. The new era had begun.

ENGL 3231 American Dream

Year taken: 2013-2014

Professor: Nereida Prado

Class: INGL3231

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodriguez Cruz

INGL 3251-140: American Literature I

Mrs. N. Prado

October 30, 2013

The creation of the American dream and the voices that pursued it

        “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations get corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” says Benjamin Franklin in his so famous autobiography describing his humble beginnings and his ascended life to wealth and power. The United States had just been declared free from England and had begun a lifestyle of their own choice. During this process, we can notice the emergence of illustrious people in the moments the country needed the opinions and guidance to start the independent ways and the powerful political structure needed to prosper. It is no surprise most of these men who succeeded to be heard became some of the most important figures in the American history. These figures needed to explore the optimistic views of hard work and a fresh start which would inspire the humble and the rich to work together for the better of the newborn country and its future generations. It is by their famous and unique contributions that Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and J. Hector St. John De Crevecoeur outstand apart to become fathers of the American dream.

        Benjamin Franklin sponsored the Enlightenment ways of a virtuous life. It came to acknowledge of the people how with hard work he managed to get to where he was and how many others wanted to follow his footsteps. He sponsored the reading, the reasoning and learning since a young age for he believed that superstitions and fear would only drag the people down a rabbit’s hole. He believed in education and how with it, the virtues of a wonderful being were created: “1. TEMPERANCE. Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation. 2. SILENCE. Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation. 3. ORDER. Let all your things have their places; let each part of your business have its time. 4. RESOLUTION. Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve. 5. FRUGALITY. Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself; i.e., waste nothing. 6. INDUSTRY. Lose no time; be always employ'd in something useful; cut off all unnecessary actions. 7. SINCERITY. Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you...” his optimistic views in a hard life expressed in his autobiography won the hearts of the society and established the faith in social reform. The people began to be less scared and more determined putting the “Witch Trials Era” aside to begin a more logic and educational platform without losing their faith.

        Thomas Jefferson made his impact with the “Declaration of Independence” and the concept of equality. He believed there were reasonable causes to separate their relation with the government, example to this was the “Great Chain of Being” which explained how the human beings were socioeconomically categorized as inferior or superior and closer to God and his divine creations. Just like Franklin, Jefferson believed in the Enlightenment and the ways of obtaining freedom and happiness: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.” 

        J. Hector St. John De Crevecoeur brought the concept of being an American and the utopian concept of the American people. In “Letter of an American Farmer” he gives meaning to being an American: “What then is the American, this new man?...He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds. He has become an American by being received in the broad lap of our great Alma Mater. Here individuals of all races are melted into a new race of man, whose labors and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world.” Crevecoeur follows by explaining how Europe misses the comfort of its people and the rude ruling towards them when America is a “mixture of English, Scotch, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans, and Swedes" who live among each other and prosper without problems of co-existing. He proceeds to bash his “homeland” while praising the great change of United States: "Can a wretch who wanders about, who works and starves, whose live is a continual scene of sore affliction or pinching penury, can that man call England or any other kingdom his country?", "a country that had no bread for him...", "who met with nothing but frowns from the rich...", "No! urged by a variety of motives, here they came." Because of these, many more people were convinced on how an amazing change it is to live away from the old world to conquer this beautiful idea of freedom and prosperity in the new lands. These gave away many hopes of a better life.

        Even if these illustrious figures did had their down sides and their secrets, it is no secret for us that this type of speech and writing is what we have always known as the “land of the dreams come true”. The United States are still considered to be the place of freedom, dignity, acceptance and overall, equality. Many of these may not apply to its current situations, but this reputation is what keeps the Americans proud of their roots and flag.

ENGL 4290 Language and Gender: The differences between male and female

Year taken: 2012-2013

Professor:Walter Rybarckewicz

Class: INGL4290

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodríguez Cruz

Professor W. Rybarkiewicz

INGL4290

May 23, 2013

Language and Gender: The differences between male and female

          From the moment we begin to think, we become fully aware of the social differences that consist being a girl or a boy. We get to play with dolls and houses while the boys get the cars and the skates. This however, marks the contrast of both sexes far beyond than just the reproductive organs. It builds society as we know it: who does what and how is it done. Better yet, how is it expect to be done. In our language, we see this trend going on as well; whether you are a man or a woman, you are socially programmed or pre-destined to be a certain someone regardless of the taste or looks you carry. By the end of it all, language has limited our ways of communication to the standards upon us that we don’t even know when it happened. Why is it so wrong for a woman to have a strong and explicit language and a man to have an emotional wreck? Why are we brainwashed by just shunning upon this without questioning when it all started to happen?

          To understand the differences in our daily lives, we have to remember or learn the meaning of “hegemony”. This is defined as “the predominant influence, as of a state, region, or group, over another or others” by online dictionaries. When it comes to society, the masculinity and its dominance has been latent on the fabric of history. M.Donaldson stated: “Its successful application to a wide range of different cultures suggests that there may well be no known human societies in which some form of masculinity has not emerged as dominant, more socially central, more associated with power, in which a pattern of practices embodying the "currently most honoured way" of being male legitimates the superordination of men over women. Hegemonic masculinity is normative in a social formation.”  As we look back at our social system, we see how being a masculine man gives the advantage and the praise of a crowd;  however, if there is a man with femininity traits, the guy is almost certain to be mocked, bullied and ridiculed in a constant matter by all the peers. Differently from the men’s case, women have the option to follow the masculinity traits, but since the social role is a feminine one for any lady, she will not be able to obtain the same respect of a man, even if she does the same thing or surpasses a male counterpart at tasks. So, when we look at this, we start believing that embracing the femininity in social standards for a woman would be the best, but this is erroneous. Female gender roles are tend to value less than male roles, giving the sense of sensuality as priority and turning those who follow into tools. Women have always been the “weakest”, giving the only good trait as the child bearing and the pleasing of the male counterparts. How this decides the way we speak and communicate? This has everything to do with it. In George Keith and John Shuttleworth’s “Living Language” (p. 222), the following traits come down as the difference in communication with people following the social traits:

• women - talk more than men, talk too much, are more polite, are indecisive/hesitant, complain and nag, ask more questions, support each other, are more co-operative, whereas
• men - swear more, don't talk about emotions, talk about sport more, talk about women and machines in the same way, insult each other frequently, are competitive in conversation, dominate conversation, speak with more authority, give more commands, interrupt more.

Supporting this, we find men’s competitive nature coming out in conversations when they are interrupting other males or the few females who dare to talk in public. Dale Splender adds to this problem: "The crux of our difficulties lies in being able to identify and transform the rules which govern our behaviour and which bring patriarchal order into existence. Yet the tools we have for doing this are part of that patriarchal order. While we can modify, we must none the less use the only language, the only classification scheme which is at our disposal. We must use it in a way that is acceptable and meaningful. But that very language and the conditions for its use in turn structure a patriarchal order."

          There have existed different types of talkative understanding: the rapport talk and the report talk. This brings up the custom in language when the male is a dominant speaker in any social activity. “The female style is described as one of rapport, sympathy, intimacy and cooperation while the male style is one of reporting, problemsolving, independence and competition (Talbot 2003: 475).”(Black and Seale 2009: 84) In this, Deborah Tannen has become an expert of spotting the differences. She talks about her contrasts in the book “You Just Don’t Understand” which talks about the eternal conflict of men and women in how they think and they express verbally. In these contrasts we find:

Status vs. support: For men, the world is a competition they have to rise as victors. The communication of males mostly hangs on maintaining the prideful place and not letting anyone stomp upon their domination. Women communicate with others to create emotional bonds and comfort. The sharing of ideas and the vulnerability of the process is deeply respected by the female roles.

Independence vs. intimacy: Men struggle in society to maintain the independence they acquire on the daily conversations, keeping count to express their knowledge and dominance. Women tend to use the talking to make connections and preserve the intimacy between the recipients. This explains the different points of view of a single situation and to create misconceptions between the two in a relationship. This will place the woman as nagging and persistent and the man as cold and incommunicative.

Advice vs. understanding: Tannen expresses how a woman can struggle with communicating men. Another example of this is the lack of understanding from the counterpart. Sometimes a woman tends to approach a man when she is not feeling well hoping to find some comfort; but on the contrary, he might just give an advice to solve it instead of the sympathy she required. This happens when men are used to others approaching to him looking for an answer or a solution to a problem instead of a therapy session about life and concerns.

Information vs. feelings: An example to this is the peers and phone calls. A woman will keep herself on the phone talking about insignificant events of the day, but the importance of the feelings experienced in the situations. When it comes to a phone call of men peers, the conversation is precise and straight to the point; detailing the important events that happened or the details of the next meeting. Andrew Moore states to this: “Historically, men's concerns were seen as more important than those of women, but today this situation may be reversed so that the giving of information and brevity of speech are considered of less value than sharing of emotions and elaboration. From the viewpoint of the language student neither is better (or worse) in any absolute sense.”

Orders vs. proposals: This is a simple trait. Women love to answer indirectly and to talk about the surroundings of a specific topic, but rarely enter any specific thing about what she wants. Women like others to understand her without the clear image of things. Men like to go straight to an answer without any wondering. This also applies to giving orders.

Conflict vs. compromise: Tannen explains: “In trying to prevent fights, some women refuse to oppose the will of others openly. But sometimes it's far more effective for a woman to assert herself, even at the risk of conflict. ” Giving in situations in the work place, a woman may accede to a request but not be completely okay with it, getting to complain later about it; while men resist it if they don’t find the situation suitable to their liking.

          When it comes to insults of demeaning one another, women and men do it differently as well. Moore introduces us to this topic with this: “This is not just a gender issue - these are functions (or abuses) of language which may appear in any social situation. But they take particular forms when the speaker (usually) or writer is male and the addressee is female. In some cases the patronizing, controlling or insulting only works because both parties share awareness of these connotations. It is possible for the addressee not to perceive - or the speaker not to intend - the patronizing, controlling or insulting. Patronizing terms include dear, love, pet or addressing a group of adult women as girls. Note that calling men boys or lads is not seen as demeaning.” But when it comes to demeaning, men tend to be insulted by referring one another with petnames or certain callings addressed to women. An example to this, we share the many times used scene from movies where the Army Sargent insults his cadets by calling them girls or sissies. This shows the lowering of men’s pride to a status of women, which, socially recognized, is lower than men’s. For addressing women as an insult, it is mostly used a connotation related to promiscuity and lack of personality such as “slut”, “tart,” “bitch”, and so on… Taboo language has always been found way more acceptable for men to say it than women since the females are educated as proper and educated with rich words to replace the many insults that men use as everyday language. “Coates (2003: 196) argues that ‘men’s use of taboo language in telling their stories also performs toughness’. Yet in our interview data we found that, rather than performing toughness, the use of swear words expressed feelings of frustration felt by some men with the limited potential of language to express the strength of their emotions. Swearing can be considered as a style for doing illness that implies a stereotypical and possibly (though not necessarily) hegemonic masculine identity. ‘Bloody’ occurred 53 times, and ‘shit’ occurred 27 times in the male interviews. Other swear words were ‘bugger’ (8); ‘blimey’ (3); ‘bollocks’ (3) and ‘bastard’ (2). There were also particular expressions such as ‘bloody hell’ (10) and ‘fucking awful’ (5). In the female interviews ‘bloody’ occurred only 10 times, ‘shit’ three times and ‘bollocks’ once”(Black and Seale: 97)

          Just as there are more names to call-out a woman than men, there also exists terms to define the intelligence. A woman called “Blonde” may either be to state the fact that her hair color is yellow or to doubt her intelligence. Many “blonde jokes” exist that create the stereotype of stupid woman; just like many others jokes that count on making fun of women for it to have a fun structure to it (like the kitchen jokes about women belonging in the cleaning and cooking rather than to be an equal with men in the house. It tends to give the feeling of servitude for the man’s pleasure and to question the place of women in the standards of men.) But there is no such thing as man jokes. There is no fun in ridiculing men by just being them, unless a certain man has the connotation of female gender role.

         Are there any differences in the male and female brain? Can this be proven? “For the first time -- and in unambiguous findings -- researchers from Northwestern University and the University of Haifa show both that areas of the brain associated with language work harder in girls than in boys during language tasks, and that boys and girls rely on different parts of the brain when performing these tasks.” Says the 2008 news of ScienceDaily stating how through the fMRI testing girls showed more development in the use of language in more difficult tasks of recognition; giving a better understanding to the abstract language from the females. “The researchers found that girls still showed significantly greater activation in language areas of the brain than boys. The information in the tasks got through to girls' language areas of the brain -- areas associated with abstract thinking through language. And their performance accuracy correlated with the degree of activation in some of these language areas…To their astonishment, however, this was not at all the case for boys. In boys, accurate performance depended -- when reading words -- on how hard visual areas of the brain worked. In hearing words, boys' performance depended on how hard auditory areas of the brain worked.” But even with this amazing difference, it is still unknown if the changes in the brain are permanent and keep up with the growing up of these children. This may explain situations like giving directions. Women tend to explain this way: “Turn left on Main Street, go one block past the drug store, and then turn right, where there's a flower shop on one corner and a cafe across the street.” While men, being in the same situation, might just be more precise in the directions instead of relating the surroundings.

          The curiosity of this phenomenon in sociolinguistics is more of an interesting topic for women than what it is to men researchers. And why is that? Maybe it is because of the realization of the female understatement and other experiences push these minds into the knowledge to why and how. In the end, we don’t really have proof of a biological difference between the two sexes when adulthood is reached; but we surely have a difference in what society marks in us since very little and continue to remember just like if we were still ignorant children who need to be reminded of their place. However, this unfortunate event has developed the theories and analysis in what gender linguistics are and how to understand one another better than what we have ever done before. Will this one step closer give a better reasoning in society and promote the justice women and men need? All the answers to this and more, lie in the fabric of our future, but not so distant, time. 

Works cited:

Moore, Andrew. "Language and Gender." Language and Gender. Universal Teacher Website, 2002. Web. 2013.

Charteris, Jonathan, and Black and Clive Seale. "Gender and Language." Men and Emotion Talk: Evidence from the Experience of Illness (n.d.): n. pag. Gender and Language. Equinox Publishing, 2009. Web. 2013.

Language Appear Biological." ScienceDaily, 5 Mar. 2008. Web. 2013.

M. Donaldson. "What Is Hegemonic Masculinity?" Faculty of Arts - Papers (1993).

"Hegemonic Meaning." The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web.

ENGL 4290 An Idividual's Grammar from Linguistics Point of View

Year taken: 2012-2013

Professor:Walter Rybarckewicz

Class: INGL4290

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodríguez Cruz

Professor 

Introduction to Linguistics

March 6^th 2013

The understanding of an individual’s grammar from linguistics’ point of view

In the art of the written word, we’ve encountered the many evolutionary changes. However, the difficulty of the learning has always been persistent throughout the ages.  From the creation of new words and meanings to the editing of the existent ones; but how can we help those who need it? How can we tell apart the grammar of someone just by a superficial analysis? From the way he/she talks to the gestures, this may be little to work with but it stands for many.

Most of the time; we think that those in need of a linguistic lesson are the people not as educated in this art. In many of the cases, we blame the population of the average or the lowest economical status. It is only logical to those who want to hurry and get an answer. It is true that in many observations those of us who don’t belong to the wealthy express ourselves in an extravagant manner with many hand gestures, dramatic story-telling and many invented words and sounds to describe the tale.  But this is not the case. In the article “Even the intelligent people don’t speak that good English”, the author states that even if we are entrepreneurs or presidents with a high social and economical status doesn’t save us from the common mistakes of the English language. It is stated that it might be a way to promote a product or to make it easier for others, but the education of the grammar can be the same quality for any of us; even if we cannot afford fancy classes. The examples given in this lecture are the beloved inventor Steve Jobs and the iconic president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. It reveals the lack of commas, prefixes, pronouns and other grammatical keys for a coherent, paucity sentence. But even so, these men are forever engraved in the history of mankind and not shunned upon for their literary mistakes.

Some apply an extra effort for the correct use of words in sentences being written or spoken. This can definitely be a habit that will exploit the desire of perfection in the linguistic field. Teaching our children or everyday fellows to develop the sense of righteousness in the language can be an effective way to spread the knowledge. With the times we live in, the simplicity of everything is taking us back and clogging our knowledge transforming it into the stupidity of procrastination. The texting and chatting have made us overlook the grammar and express, with no rules or whatsoever, our writing in the most unacceptable. The effort of constructing a good and coherent sentence is valuable, even if it doesn’t sky-rocket you into the terms of an educated sir of high society. It is socially thought of doing so, even if the data says otherwise towards this. In my opinion, it is quite a shame it doesn’t.

The pronunciation can become the rival of many good writers. The person may be able to construct a well-formed sentence but he/she can face the difficulty of pronunciation. This is also another case we can find in the linguistics’ locker of basic problems. The education of the written word is never enough if it isn’t combined with the art of the pronunciation. It doesn’t make the person less educated, but it makes the education an incomplete process. Even if the person has the most ideal way of writing, the missing knowledge will make him/her an incomplete package. However, since we are looking for the grammar and its correct ways, this will not be as much importance. But if this is looked over the linguistics’ point of view, it has to be considered.

In conclusion, the understanding of someone’s written ability doesn’t involve economical wealth or high social status; it involves perseverance to acquire the knowledge and respect towards the language. It involves the sense of realization and the search of higher educational standards either by one’s own will or a complete package educator. The linguistics is a combination of written and well-said words. They deserve to be notice after the many changes made to the human comfort.

Source: "Can Use of English Language and Grammar Define Intelligence?" Web log post. HubPages. N.p., 28 Nov. 2011. Web. 06 Mar. 2013.

ENGL 3055 Notes from "The Godfather"

Year taken: 2012-2013

Professor: Ernesto Castillo

Class: INGL3055

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodríguez Cruz

843 09 6818

Prof. Castillo

Film Art

Notes for “The Godfather”

Day 1- A 1972 movie directed by Francis Ford Coppola

Music opens the movie in a mysterious manner. The first scene opens from the darkness to show a man talking about his daughter and how she got beaten and raped by some men and how the law didn’t punish them correctly. The Godfather appears to say they are not murderers but by the end of the scene, he agrees to bring justice to this man’s daughter.

Wedding scene: The godfather’s daughter gets married. We see the contrast of happy and normal looking family in the celebration and the dark/ mysterious side of the business. Two different worlds collide in the Corleone family.

We get introduced to Michael, the youngest son and Corleone’s favorite. The only male in the family not included in the business.

Johnny Fontane is the godson of Don Corleone and he is asking for his help. He needs a movie role to make him famous but the director doesn’t want to give it to him.

“I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse.”

Johnny doesn’t know of his godfather’s work.

Next scene: we are shown the California style and a relaxing music kicks in.

The movie director and Tom Hagen have a conversation about Johnny and his movie role. A walk through the horse barn and the admiration of the director’s most expensive and loved beast is shown for no reason. He refuses to work with Johnny because of his ways with taking women. Tom Hagen politely leaves in a calm and professional way. He threatens the director in a very soothing way.

The next day: The scene starts from the outside of a house

It goes in the house to show the director sleeping with drips of blood. He wakes up and gets scared of this. He follows the trail down to his sheet to find the head of his precious horse in bed with him. Screams in panic. The scene goes back to the far angle of the house to put a more dramatic effect to the situation.

Day 2- The discussion of drug business. We see Sarantino, the oldest son, incapable to keep calm during the movie. He is not suitable to run the business. The business of the drug issue is denied in a polite way. We hear about the Tattaglia family for the first time. Luca Brasi is assigned to infiltrate the Tattaglia family.

Michael is seen to be enjoying his normal life with his girlfriend. The Christmas spirit kicks in with songs from the radio. A transition from Michael to Luca is seen with the same song to provide continuity.

Luca enters the Tattaglia lands. A reflection is seen ( it represents Luca’s duplicity). He gets murdered shortly after.

“Sleep with the fishes”- A box with a fish is sent to the Corleone family. A warning about what happened.

Day 3- The godfather gets shot in the market place and Freddy was unable to shoot back. His bodyguard is killed due to failing ( he was absent the day of the shooting due to sickness). Sonny runs the business right now and he is going out of hands. Michael is asked to come back because of the situation.

In the hospital, the godfather is not being watched and Michael uses his calm mood to make the enemies think he is being guard after all.

The man helping Michael is trembling. We see Michael being suitable for the family job.

Policemen arrive and beat Michael for staying and protecting his father. The corruption is shown and how the Tattaglia have the police officer in their service.

Michael plans the killing of a Tattaglia member and the police officer who did a beating on him. The suspense of the scene is heighten beause of the railroad sound and the silence and emptiness of the restaurant.

He shots both men dead and runs away without saying anything to Kay (his girlfriend). She is not shown as important to him as he is to her.

Day 4- Michael’s life in Europe is a contrast to the one in New York. He falls in love and gets married while his family fights a war with the other clans. The scenes go to each other opposites. Sonny gets killed after he runs to find his sister’s husband because he beaten her up again. He is cornered and shot multiple times. Michael and Appollonia are happy together until she gets killed with a bomb destined for Michael.

He is never the same again. The Mafia found him and he is destined to go back to war.

Day 5- Michael comes back after the killing of Appollonia and looks for Kay. Now he is the head of the family and he quickly convinces Kay to return to him and get married. He never speaks of Appollonia ever again. He is rough, cold and straight to the point.

The heads of the five families agree to a peace treaty and explain how the drug business is ruining everything. There, it is shown that the Tattaglia weren’t really the masterminds of everything. But another head of family was. They suspect of a traitor in the Corleone.

Michael uses his father as the advisor. During the rest of the movie we see Don Corleone being affected by age and keeps forgetting things. Time passes by quickly. Michael has a family and a son. His father dies playing with his grandson in the backyard.

 At the funeral, we see Sally (one of the Corleone men) making an offer to have a meeting with the other families at his place. There it is known he is a traitor.

He refuses to make a good agreeing business with Moe Green because of his part of fault in Sonny’s death.  He agrees to be the godfather of his sister’s son.

In the baptism, Michael agrees to be a faithful and honest Christian while at the same time, his men under his oarders, are killing every single head of the five families of New York. Moe Green is killed as well.

The cross-cutting of the scene is intense and slow. Perfect way to describe the opposite sides of the family and the irony behind it.

Under his regime, he finds out about his sister’s husband selling out Sonny, which caused his death.

He lies to Kay about him being responsible of his son-in-law’s death and she is relieved. She goes out to get him something to drink (coffee) and some men enter the business room where Michael is. He is called the Godfather. The door shuts in front of Kay, leaving her to understand she will never be part of that world.

Movie ends.

Notes for “Goodfellas”

Day 1- A movie from 1990 directed by Martin Scorsese

The first scene is in a dim light with three men in a car. A sound is heard and one of the says it may be a flat tire. The trunk is opened to see a badly injured man in it. He is stabbed and killed. A red light and a pause. A character starts speaking.

It was a shocking first start. It gets the attention of the audience quickly.

The movie is a narrative form of his life. The life of Henry Hill and his desire to live the Mafia life. He is an irish-italian American mix. His family was big and not in a good sources. He started working when he was a teenager for Paulie at his business place. He did simple things and sent messages here and there.

He starts getting attach to them and his father notices he is skipping school to do the business. He gets beat up and complains to Paulie about it. Mailman gets threaten to not send anymore school letters to Henry’s house.

He meets Jimmy the Gent. Someone he gets to admire and hang with throughout the rest of the movie. He is quite out in the business, paying everyone who would do a favor and keeping himself high.

Henry gets caught by the police selling illegal cigarettes. He never tells on his peers. He is congratulated for his first time in court.

Day 2- Henry meets Karen. She becomes a narrative character through the movie as well.

The bittersweet relationship they have is shown since their first date. This was a favor he was doing to his friend Tommy.

In the next date, he leaves her waiting and she rages at him that same day she looked for him.

The next date she is taken to a restaurant. The scene is a one shot from the outside of the place and the journey they have to walk from the entrance, to the backside (the kitchen, the backstage, etc) all the way to the entrance of the main room where people are dining.

He lies to Kate about his job saying he works at construction and how she wants to believe him.

The flash forward motion occurs when the stand-up comedy starts at the restaurant. The scene where Henry and his friends enter to rob an airport follows with the same audio of the jokes made in the restaurant.

Time passes and Henry and Kate marry. She explains how the Mafia treats everyone like family in the same circle. Everybody has the same name and keep themselves in the same circle.

Pictures of events with the family are shown.  And the time skip is noticeable.

Day 3-

Kate is getting to the idea that her husband’s job is quite right and he’s earning his money.

The concept of infidelity is introduced when Henry explains the accommodations made for his lover in an apartment. The marriage starts to crumble because of this.

Henry goes to jail with the other family men.

He starts selling things behind their backs. Henry gets in trouble with Karen once more because of his lover.

Henry switches of lover and this time, the other girl helps him prepare the drug he is selling.

Even with the warning of Paulie about selling drugs. The trio of Jimmy, Henry and Tommy go on a wild drive with it.

Tommy keeps bringing trouble with his hot temper.

Tommy is called to be a “made man” but is tricked just to get killed for the killing of a man who was “made” (the one at the beginning of the movie)

Henry and Jimmy realize how they will never be on the top because of only having half Italian blood.

Jimmy starts to lose his cool temper and becomes paranoid with everything.

Day 4- We learn from Henry that the people that can take you down are the ones who have always been with you and get closer to you.

Henry notices Jimmy is trying to get him killed for him not to tell anything to the cops.

The scenes now represent suspicion and fear for their lives in a subtle way.

Jimmy’s intention in killing Karen is an example of this.

The effects of cocaine are expressed with fastened music, Henry’s paranoia and the fast tempo of the scenes from one to another. Henry gets caught for drug possession and Karen throws away the cocaine kept in the house to prevent it from being found.

 Since the connection with Paulie is broken due to Henry’s drug selling, they have to deal with themselves now. Henry speaks about dedicating his life to them and not even being paid correctly about it.

Day 5- Broke and with no other solution in his life, Henry decides to help the cops arrest the family he has always lived with.

The differences between the common life and the one he was accustomed to be a huge step and negative change for him. But he is okay with living outside the prison walls.

ENGL 3055 Analysis of movie and text "The Great Gatsby"

Year taken: 2012-2013

Professor: Ernesto Castillo

Class: INGL3055

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodríguez Cruz

Professor Castillo

INGL3055

May 22^nd 2013

Analysis of “The Great Gatsby” film by Baz Luhrmann

          We can’t repeat the past… Or can we? “The Great Gatsby” settles the drama and the romance like no one expected. It takes us back in time to the drinks and the glam of the 1920s; when society was on the edge of immorality and values. Baz Luhrmann’s most recent adaptation of Fitzgerald’s famous book by the same name is a trippy, visually-excessive and creative film in where the fidelity and passion of the book are plastered in the most unique way it has ever been done. But, is it a film masterpiece or just a visual eye-candy? Many mixed reviews have been done by the critics, placing the value of the movie in a lower standard than many of the movie-go-ers. However, Luhrmann has, once again, created a statement with his work. Even when Luhrmann’s signature is misunderstood and misconceived, the Aussie director rises in fame by his creative scenery montage and suspension that can leave anyone at the edge of the chair.

          In its essence: “The Great Gatsby” was looking forward to bring the young audience a classic story that most are not used to seeing in the everyday media. As said before, the movie is extremely similar to the original printed work; this is also stated by journalist Charles Moore in his critic about the film: “It uses many of F Scott Fitzgerald’s original descriptions and dialogue. It respects the fact that the novel is told as the narrative of Nick Carraway, cousin of Daisy, the woman whom Gatsby loves. You are reminded of this by the fact that Carraway’s typewriter sometimes prints on to the screen, the words overlaying the action. It attentively reproduces various details, such as the clock Gatsby drops when meeting Daisy again for the first time since she married nasty Tom five years earlier. It follows Fitzgerald’s instructions that Daisy’s husband’s lover’s husband’s garage is beside a “valley of ashes” and a huge optician’s billboard depicting the eyes of Dr T J Eckleburg. It meticulously presents and builds everything that Fitzgerald describes, using computer generation as a substitute for imagination. I do not doubt that it is accurate about the clothing of the period.” The characters brought to us are not as stereotypical as we may expect. Those who haven’t enjoyed the literary work of Fitzgerald will encounter personalities and archetypes twisted to a more realistic way than most of the series or soap operas. The good girl has her dark side, the hero lacks morality, the narrator cannot keep control of temptations and the bad guy has a soft side that blocks any access to hate. With this particular bunch alone, we expect good things from the fresh reboot. But how does the director intend to turn the “good” to a “great”? It will all lie in the hands of good managing of the film’s final style.

          Luhrmann gave birth to CGI-filled stages where the details of the sky were breath-taking and the parties had an on-going animalistic feeling of nonsense. Even if this can be visualized as a bad way to spend money (considering how many remember us that less is more when it comes to topics), I found this amazingly well made. The whole message we need to receive from a movie, as spectators, is to develop empathy to the situations in where the characters need to face decisions and tough thoughts. The mise-en-scène Luhrmann made for the public was an amazing mixture between enchanting the crowd into the Gatsby world in a spellbound and the constant hit of reality with the fantasy-filled scenarios. The constant problem with a public not used to seeing this, sort of, abstract movie-making is the eternal blind stubbornness to what the director makes as the “bigger picture” of things. In the case of the film, we see the excessive lights and make up, the dizzy angles, the modern music and the unrealistic plot here and there; but this is the essence of it all. This is the way of connecting the public into the situations and to the rushes and heartbreaks with the needed stimulation to trigger similarity and, later on, affection to the characters we just met.

          The camera angles decide to play such tricks to the eyes that, I must admit, it was hard to keep up at first. The spinning motions at the parties and the point of view constantly switching from a sky view to a downfall all the way until the appearance Carraway’s face was exhausting for those of us who are not used to this type of style. However, when seen as a critic, we can see how these were necessary to represent a rush, an ever-lasting go-go in the busy life of New York and the fast pace of events. And even if this was the case, the creative ups and downs coming from diagonal sides or from a corner of the scenes really captivated the eyes of the spectators. No one was ever expecting those kinds of transitions coming from a film who keeps a classy touch. This also adds to my praise to Luhrmann’s creative side and performance, giving another way of using the “expect the unexpected” phrase.

          Nothing defines better Baz Luhrmann’s style than a good scene building tension and amazing cross-cuttings. In the film, we see so many tensed moments that it could glue the crowd to scenes forgetting about eating the popcorn. The constant switch from face A to face B and C can be so nerve wracking that, even if it doesn’t count much as a cross-cut-because of the lack of scene transition- it still brings the effect that needed in the moment. The subtle zooming in and out from angle to angle brings desperation out of people, me included. But even if this is such an important factor, nothing brings up emotion more than music these days.

          There is nothing more desperate than the lack of music in a movie. “The Great Gatsby” gives more meaning to the sound of objects or the lack of sound of anything. In the heated scene where a discussion between Gatsby and Buchanan takes an unexpected turn of events-having Gatsby losing his temper an assaulting Tom-; the most amazing thing about it is the sound of the fans twirling and the glasses against each other. The whole scene had such tension that it felt like it could be cut with a knife. I remember sitting down next to someone who confessed he started to sweat by the buildup of the scene being too much to handle. Whenever there was music, we would find a surprise in every now and then. Luhrmann had arranged a soundtrack that brings familiarity even more out there. The party music was a modern electronica or pop song groove being mixed with a 1920s feel to it, giving the tough of a creative moving slideshow of vintage pictures with new music. Whenever this was not the case, the movie would play out a song very familiar to the pop culture. For example: The scene of Carraway’s house being fixed for the meeting of Daisy and Gatsby had been covered by a more settled 1920-kind-of version of Beyoncé’s “Crazy in love”. It brought some laughs here and there with others singing out the lyrics they know by heart, but it was more than obvious how that scene was enjoyed.

          The Symbols are, just like in the book, shown on the right moments. The constant green light resembles the hopes and dreams for a new and bigger future; this makes a counterpart to the Valley of Ashes, where the decaying of men and their dreams settle as a reminder of the cruel life and society to any passerby. The unsettling feeling of Doctor T.J. Eckleburg’s eyes on the billboard is shown whenever there is a foul done to any moral in the movie. Example to this we have the affair of Tom and Myrtle in the beginning and at the end of her death scene, where, as transition, it spreads from Myrtle’s house to the outside of the valley. But none of these were as shocking for me as the weather. The harmony between the rainy times as Gatsby’s awkward situations and the hot days on his loss of temper and frustration won the very best of my viewing and emotional side.

From start to finish, from silence to bangs; “The Great Gatsby” has won its way up to my heart. The incredible selection of committed actors played so well with the extravagance and warmth of Luhrmann’s ingenuity. The movie transports the viewer from the very beginning of the film to a world rich in story-telling, character development, hidden symbols, exquisite details and an unrealistic idea of reality. The contemporary film effects and surprises educate for a better understanding of the film industry and of the art it portrays to the world. The moral of the story being the lack of morals and the amounts of shattered dreams take on the audience just like it took on Nick Carraway; reality is just as sad as any hollow man and woman who used and betrayed one another. This is what leads Carraway to becoming a wreck and the crowd in the cinema to reconsider life, the people in it and the search for empathy and values afterwards. Giving the book the movie it deserves, Baz Luhrmann is a mind-twisting master of masses where he doesn’t simply makes a movie; he creates his own state of nirvana.

Sources:

"The Great Gatsby (2013)." The Great Gatsby. Rotten Tomatoes, 10 May 2013. Web. 21 May 2013.

The Great Gatsby. Dir Baz Luhrmann. Perf. Leonardo DiCaprio, Toby Maguire, Carey Mulligan. Warner Bros., 2013. Film.

Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art: An Introduction. 9th ed. Boston [etc.: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2008. Print.

Moore, Charles. "Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby: A Faithful Film – and a Terribly, Terribly Bad One." The Telegraph. N.p., 19 May 2013. Web. 21 May 2013.

ENGL 3055 Movie Analysis "Goodfellas"

Year taken: 2012-2013

Professor: Ernesto Castillo

Class: INGL3055

University: University of Puerto Rico, Cayey Campus

Grace H. Rodríguez Cruz

Prof. Castillo

INGL 3155

March 8^th 2013

The Analysis of the movie “Goodfellas” as cinema art

     An instant classic! Martin Scorsese’s amazing project sky-rocketed from the very moment it hit the viewing audience.  “Goodfellas” immediately established itself in one of the top ten movies of crime, only to be surpassed by Coppola’s “The Godfather” as the number one. If we submerge into the world of creating a work of art, we see how Scorsese’s dedication and imagination explodes in all the corner of the film-making world. Giving the movie the exact dose of feeling it requires, the creativity needed to make such work a reality is a ground-breaking experience that will change forever the cinema world.  From the content to the interaction with the people, “Goodfellas” becomes the perfect recipe for a show-business success and a every director’s bible.

     From the very beginning we get the glimpses of dim lighting on the first scene; the mystery covers the atmosphere of the very first time we meet our three iconic characters: Henry Hill, the main character, Tommy DeVito, the cold-hearted hot head, and James “Jimmy” Conway, the paranoid gent. The scene takes place in a car where these three find themselves in it. A sound interrupts the silence; the audience, just like Henry, might think of a flat tire of something of this magnitude. We find how wrong we could be when the trunk is opened and a badly injured man is inside it. Tommy and Jimmy then proceed to kill this person and a red light is focused on Henry’s face with a sudden close-up and a stop still of him to start the narration. The impact of this scene perfectly applies the famous sentence “the first impression is the one that counts”. Scorsese’s Mise-en-scéne is established in hot colored lights and the passionate impact they always have in the audience. If a time machine could take us back to the very first time this movie was shown to the public, the reaction to this specific scene would still be the same one we would have today. This is definitely the impact the director was yearning to get from us. This is the motif that will constantly show over and over throughout the movie. The bright red light in darkness: passion, danger and warning. From this point forward, we are expecting things to go down to worst situations.

    Parting from this, the movie goes all the way back to the start of Henry as a teenager and how he entered to the Mafia life. We observe and hear of his insistency in being good at his duties and to never accuse his fellow mafia men. This takes us from the present, to the past, all the way back to the scene of the killing of this “made man” they had in the trunk of Henry’s car. This occurs around half an hour since the first scene was shown in the movie. This is later followed by more new scenes and situations narrated by Henry; which takes us to think that the patterns scene in the form of the movie goes from A (the first scene) to B (the past and development) to A once more (the rest of the first scene and the closure of the murder) to C (new situations). This makes the format completely dependent to time and space.

     The form and content co-exist in all the ways possible in the filming art. The interdependence of the way the movie is structured and the content it portrays must both be important to the finishing product. The impact of the format compliments perfectly the story of how a teenager goes from the most insignificant chores to a gentleman who controls good part of the Mafia army that serves the Lucchese family. The impact of the underworld in which Henry lives makes us see the glamorized life people get when they are in good terms with the “big boys” and the horrible paranoia when everything falls apart.

     When the different meanings get established, we get how the referential meaning is the plot summary: How a young man rises with success in the Mafia and his downfall when he is struck with the problem of drugs and paranoia, leading him to the end of his glamorized life and the beginning of his ordinary one. The explicit meaning is found when we go a little bit deeper into the drama and find the message the film is trying to give us: The dirty business will not take anyone to a good end without some high costs to pay. The implicit side is when we interpret the film and come to a more critical thinking. In this case, we see how the Mafia life can be a dream come true in the beginning of the alliance and how weak we can get by obsessing with more power, money and drugs. The whole side of it can make us lose value of the family, of those who have been loyal to us throughout time and how little can a life be when we have the power to kill and “erase” someone for the tiniest of mistakes. This will be the Symptomatic meaning of “Goodfellas”, the lack of real human bonds.

     The movie needs to be seen in an evaluative way. The whole essence of the film is an exquisite mix of emotions. It shows the development of the feelings well and it portrays the exact purpose of the director. From the effects of cocaine (everything rushes and the music develops faster) to the horror of fearing for your life (the mistrust of a chore or favor asked by someone closed to you. The music stops and the footsteps are more prominent). It is an amazing work of art and the audience got to explore this amazing part of the project. This is one of those few films where the audience and the critics agree unanimously about the beautifully well-made project Scorsese gave the film art.

Sources: Goodfellas. Dir. Martin Scorsese. Perf. Robert DeNiro, Joe Pesci, Ray Liotta. Warner Bros., 1990. Internet.

Beday, Jeremy. "GoodFellas (1990)." GoodFellas. Rotten Tomatoes, May-June 2005. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art: An Introduction. 9th ed. Boston [etc.: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2008. Print.