The Kite Runner Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

      The final seminar of the year influenced the way I understood the title of the story.  While doing the preparation for the seminar, I realized that the kite in the story symbolized both Amir’s happiness and his guilt because Amir enjoys flying kites as a boy, yet the kite running tournament is also what leads to Hassan’s rape.  One thing that was said which I hadn’t though of in depth was that Amir’s choice to save Sohrab was a way to redeem himself of not saving Hassan when he was a boy.  I though this statement was true because it seems as if Amir is reliving his childhood when he goes back to visit Afghanistan, but that he wishes to do it correctly.

      The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the most is that Baba follows his own code when it comes to morality.  I wholeheartedly agreed with this statement because there is a scene in the book where Baba discredits Muslim beliefs and instead teaches Amir that theft is the only sin.  The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the least is that Baba did not become more tolerant of Amir when they moved to California.  I disagreed with this statement because there are instances in the book where Baba brags about Amir’s writing, showing that he is becoming more lenient towards Amir’s dream.

      Some things that worked well for the seminar were the use of emotional appeals.  Because The Kite Runner is such an emotional book to begin with, the analysis of the text went even further into the relationships and feelings of the characters.  There was use of other rhetorical appeals in the seminar, but emotional appeals were by far the most prominent, and rightfully so.  The strong arguments appealing to emotion displayed the growth of the class discussion as a whole.

      Although the use of emotional appeals was strong, the seminar’s flow was terrible.  There were often long pauses in the conversation in which every person waited for somebody else to speak up.  The half time ended up taking place after about ten minutes because there was such poor cohesion in the conversation.  In my opinion, these long pauses were very odd because it seemed like every person has completed their preparation.  The poor flow of the conversation was an opportunity to learn when and how to speak up, and how to maintain an interesting topic.    

The Kite Runner Socratic Seminar Reflection #1

      The seminar influenced the way I thought about Amir’s relationship with Baba and Hassan.  While completing preparation for the seminar, I realized that Amir’s relationships with Baba and Hassan were almost opposite because while Amir tries hard to please Baba but maintains a distant relationship, he is very close with Hassan but tries not to give him too much credit.  One thing that was said which I hadn’t thought of in depth was how Assef might not actually be a good son of Baba’s despite their friendliness displayed in the book.  This might be true because Assef’s tendency to manipulate others and prove himself superior might clash with Baba’s manliness and duty as leader and protector.

      The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the most is that Amir is not a very likeable character due to his bullying of Hassan.  I found this statement to be true because in the story, Amir is constantly doing little things to prove himself superior to Hassan, like giving him the wrong definitions of words, or making fun of him.  Although there were small points that I may have disagreed with, I generally agreed with every statement made in the seminar, maybe because the story evoked the same emotional responses from my peers.  If I had the opportunity to add anything to the seminar, I would have mentioned that Amir’s belief that he should be superior to Hassan because Hassan is his servant.

      Surprisingly, some things that worked really well for the seminar were the use of emotional appeals.  On the surface, The Kite Runner is a story of social conflict, political turmoil, and new life in the USA.  However, beneath the surface, there is an entire dimension having to do with the relationships between Amir and Hassan, notably, Amir’s torturous guilt of never confessing the rape.  These emotional relationships in the books made up the majority of the conversation during the seminar, and therefore, the use of emotional appeals was a success for the first time.

      Some things that needed improvement in the seminar were the separation of people for the groups and lack of preparation.  The groups were split up by chance, and therefore, the first group ended up having many more people than the second one.  This was a problem because it changed the amount of speaking time people had in each group.  Another improvement that could be made was the lack of preparation.  Many people were very well prepared, but there were others who had clearly not studied the subject material beforehand.  This made it very difficult to include everyone I the seminar. 

1984 Socratic Seminar Preparation Sheet #4

Part I: Summarization

Winston and Julia are captured by the Thought Police and sent to prison.  Winston is brainwashed and tortured until he is forced to believe the ideology of the Party and love Big Brother.  His love for Julia is destroyed, as is her love for him. 

                                                                                                                                     

Part II: Question Development

What values does the Party fear?

When Ampleforth is put in jail with Winston, he says he was put there because he “allowed the word ‘God’ at the end of a line [of a poem].”  This shows that the Party fears religious devotion, as it might spur hope of revolution.  This contrasts with modern popular belief in the freedom of religion and the freedom to worship any god.  Ethical appeal.

What evidence suggests that criminals are still loyal to the Party?

When Winston asks who denounced Parsons, Parsons replies “‘It was my little daughter’…with a sort of doleful pride.”  This shows that even though Parsons is imprisoned, he still remains loyal to the Party by agreeing with his punishment.  Logical appeal.

What evidence suggests that Big Brother is not alive?

When Winston is in prison, he asks O’Brien if Big Brother is alive in the same way that he is, with arms and legs and u unique absolute location in space, to which O’Brien replies “It is of no importance.  He exists.”  This shows a certain level of doubt in O’Brien as he does not fully answer the question and tries to change the subject, suggesting that Big Brother might not be real.  Logical appeal.

What suggests that Oceania has hindered scientific progression?

O’Brien states that “The earth is the center of the universe.  The sun and the stars go round it.”  This ideology was an ancient thought prevalent before Renaissance times, and modern science shows that the sun is the center of the universe, which is the popular belief of all educated people.  Ethical appeal.

To what extent can the Party control humans?

When discussing future Party plans, O’Brien mentions that that “We shall abolish orgasm.”  This idea seems too farfetched for a government to exert on its people.  Therefore the Party is shown to be capable of controlling minds but its power is restricted concerning human instincts.  Logical appeal.

Based on the end of the book, is the authority of the Party really absolute?

The last words of the story are “[Winston] had won the victory over himself.  He loved Big Brother.”  This goes directly against Winston’s rebellious attitude towards the party before he was sent to prison and brainwashed.  This shows that humans are powerless in the face of the Party, and therefore that the party’s rule is unstoppable.  Logical appeal.

How strongly is human emotion influenced by other people?

Without the influence of other human beings, emotions such as love and pain cannot exist because they are impossible to apply to someone else.  Therefore, human contact is necessary for the development of emotion.  Emotional appeal.

Does human powerlessness actually exist?

Human powerlessness does exist because in the face of natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornados, and tsunamis, humans cannot do much to prevent these tragedies.  In a way, despite the pollution and deforestation of the planet, humans will never be able to gain power of nature.  Logical appeal.

Are humans weaker or stronger in the face of death?

In the face of death, humans are stronger because they are forced to accept their imminent death, regardless of if they want it or not.  This takes a certain courage which is only accessible if one is really faced with life and death situations.  Logical appeal.

Part III: Tracking Evidence

“‘It was my little daughter,’ said Parsons with a sort of doleful pride.  ‘She listened at the keyhole.  Heard what I was saying, and nipped off to the patrols the very next day.  Pretty smart for a nipper of seven, eh?’” (Page 233)

“The beatings grew less frequent, and became mainly a threat, a horror to which he could not be sent back at any moment when his answers were unsatisfactory.” (Page 241)

1984 Socratic Seminar #3 Reflection

      The seminar influenced the way I thought about the fictional society of Oceania as a whole.  While talking about the three superstates, Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia, I developed a better since of the fictional world Winston lives in, and how it came to be.  One thing said during the seminar which I hadn’t thought of in depth was a question concerning the possible nonexistence of Eurasia and Eastasia, meaning that Oceania would be the sole world power.  I thought that this could be true since there is evidence to support this.  For example, In Book Two, Julia says that she thinks the bombs dropped on Oceania are really bombs dropped by the Party to scare the citizens.

      The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the most is that the world of the Hunger Games would be a better society to live in than Oceania.  I agree with this statement because there is no constant surveillance of people in Panem, while in Oceania, the citizens are constantly watched.  The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the least is therefore that the world of Oceania would be a better than Panem because in Panem, you have a chance of dying.  I disagree with this statement because although there is a chance of dying in the games, this chance is very slight.  If I had the opportunity to add anything to the seminar, I would have pointed out that it is ironic that we are watched and assessed during the seminars just as the citizens of Oceania are supervised by telescreens.

      Some things that worked really well for the seminar were the use of emotional and logical appeals.  When talking about the love between Winston and Julia, there was a strong emotional feeling in the room, especially during a debate concerning the legitimacy of their love.  As always, logical appeals were also frequently used because they are by far the easiest of the three rhetorical devices.

      Some things that needed improvement were ethical appeals and participation.  Unfortunately, my prediction that ethical appeals would be more frequent did not come true.  Very few ethical appeals were made and in my opinion, these rhetorical appeals are not harder than emotional appeals.  Another issue in the seminar was participation.  Although most people participated, a select few clearly dominated the conversation while other were not left much time to contribute meaningfully.  

1984 Socratic Seminar #2 Reflection

      The seminar influenced the way I thought about the right for people to have privacy.  After having the seminar, I found myself asking many questions relating to this subject.  How much privacy is one allowed?  At one point does supervision become a violation of human rights?  These questions may have many different responses, and are not at all easy to answer.  One thing said in the seminar which I hadn’t thought of in depth before was how Big Brother could possibly not be a real person.  I thought this could be true, since it seems that nothing is directly carried out by him, but rather by his puppet ministry workers.

      The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the most is that the Party limits sex and sexual pleasure to enforce devotion to the government.  I agree with this because if people cannot be attached to each other, and are only brought up to love the government, it will be almost impossible to start a rebellion.  The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the least is that Big Brother is obviously a real person.  I disagree with this statement because there is absolutely no proof to concur that he exists.  If I had the opportunity to say anything else in the seminar, I would have mentioned the fact that Winston must write articles to honor a nonexistent person, which may imply that other people, such a Big Brother, do not exist either.

      Some things that worked really well for the seminar were the increasing use of emotional appeals and good question-asking.  Compared to the last seminar, there were a lot more statements made in which references from the text helped appeal to emotion instead of logic.  I thought this was definitely an improvement, although many logical appeals still dominated the conversation.  The seminar also brought about very thought-provoking questions that were applicable to our society today, such as the issue of privacy, totalitarian governments, and the effect of violence on children.

      Some things that needed improvement in the seminar were the use of ethical appeals and participation.  Because more emotional appeals were used in the second seminar than in the first, I feel confident that more ethical appeals will be used in the third seminar.  However, I cannot say the same for participation because in my opinion, many less people contributed in the second seminar than in the first.  This may have been due to lack of preparation, given that the seminar preparations are extensive.  However, I hope to see more people participate in the third seminar so that more ideas can be shared and analyzed.

1984 Socratic Seminar #1 Reflection

      The first seminar influenced my thinking by applying the themes of George Orwell’s 1984 to our current society.  Many comments were made on how the war, hangings, and appreciation of violence in the book compared to violent video games and the excitement of school fights in our world today.  Also, the subject of privacy was discussed, and the increasing prominence of targeted ads and email verification paralleled to the lack of privacy Winston experienced in the story.  One thing that was said which I hadn’t thought about so much before was how the name “Big Brother” was meant to sound protective and reassuring when in reality, Big Brother was an oppressive dictator.  This also could relate to our world today, as many authoritarian leaders are embraced by the people living under their rule.

      The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the most was that the Party’s regime very closely resembled that of Nazi Germany.  It was mentioned that the Two Minutes Hate rally was meant to turn the people of Oceania against soldiers resembling Jews and Asians.  This favoritism of a “superior” race was one of the main components of Hitler’s administration during World War II.  The statement made by one of my peers that I agree with the least was that the entire population of Oceania was brainwashed into supporting the government.  If I had the opportunity to respond to anything in the seminar, I would have responded to this question, saying that Winston’s revolutionary thoughts are proof of hatred towards the Party.

      Some things that went well in the seminar were extensive preparation, participation, and use of logical appeals.  Everyone in the seminar had obviously prepared, as excellent points and textual evidence were used throughout.  Also, almost everybody in the conversation made helpful contributions that in general, helped maintain the flow of the conversation.  Only one or two people did not fully engage in the seminar, and this may have been due to lack of preparation or shyness.  Finally, the use of logical appeals was very strong because most people referenced the text or their own lives to prove a point.

      Some things that needed improvement in the seminar were use of ethical and emotional appeals.  As the seminar was meant to practice the use of all three rhetorical devices, the lack or ethical and emotional appeals caused a sort of gap in the conversation that was never filled.  Some people, including myself, attempted to bring up an ethical or emotional argument, but the conversation always quickly steered away from the appeal.  Although the seminar was educative and gratifying, the use of these appeals could make the next seminar stronger.       

Othello Dramatic Reading Words and Actions Video

A. Delivery Technique

http://youtu.be/3A_OuQj-OAA

B. Statement of Intent

The passage I chose to read for my dramatic reading was Iago’s plot-twisting soliloquy in Act 2 Scene 3.  I found this specific soliloquy remarkable because it reveals Iago’s duplicity and multi-sided personality – he appears to be supportive of Cassio but reveals himself to the audience as a villain in disguise.  To emphasize this disingenuous personality of Iago’s, I chose to switch the tone of the character midway through the speech, becoming dark and cunning as the character reveals his plan.  I included a slight pause before this tone shift to indicate Iago’s villainous side to the audience.  When speaking in Shakespearian, it is also crucial to put emphasis on important words, so that there is at least some comprehension of the archaic language.  This is why I chose to stress phrases like weak and divinity of hell, to demonstrate Iago’s hatred of Othello.  Lastly, I varied my inflection of each sentence in the soliloquy to keep the speech exciting and realistic.

By “becoming” Iago for a small period of time, I learned much about the character and the play as a whole.  I had realized in the start of the play that Iago was not an ordinary villain, as he masks his jealousy towards Othello and Cassio with kindness and amiability.  However, Iago’s willingness to share his plan brought about an outgoing aspect his personality that I had never before seen.  This openness differed greatly from Iago’s devious attitude up until that point, and it exposed a new dimension which I actually enjoyed.  This soliloquy also taught me the next phase of Iago’s ongoing plan to destroy Othello: while Cassio urges Desdemona to help him, and Desdemona urges Othello to forgive him, Iago will convince Othello that she “repeals him for her body’s lust,” meaning that Desdemona is helping Cassio not out of sympathy, but because she is in love with him. He believes that this will result in the downfall of all the other characters.

The impact of Iago’s Act 2 Scene 3 soliloquy on the play is that it further complicates the relationships between the characters.  Because Iago formulates his fatal plan in this soliloquy, it results in Othello’s suspicion of Cassio even though Cassio has done nothing to Desdemona.  It also paves the way to Othello’s distrust and infuriation towards Desdemona, which eventually leads to both characters’ deaths and Iago’s incarceration.  Furthermore, the soliloquy characterizes Desdemona and Cassio, giving the audience a better understanding of their dispositions.  The speech describes Desdemona as “fruitful as the free elements,” showing that she had a kind nature filled with undying goodness.  It also criticizes Cassio, calling him an “honest fool,” which suggests that he is slow and gullible.  While most of Iago’s monologues in Othello are rather impractical, his soliloquy in Act 2 Scene 3 adds suspense to the plot as well as characterization of himself and others.