Thoughts, observations, comments, and concerns regarding our readings and classroom discussions.
posted by annes @ 11:00 AM
Hi. Let's get this party started!
Chang chang!!! lets go!
Daniel, no useless comments.
This discussion is so enlightening!
Man, this is one deep discussion...I think the whole reflection thing ties back to appearance vs. reality!
I agree, tom.
emilyl.i think the apparitions are significant because they show macbeth what is in store for him, but also following the witches pattern of confusion. this is because we find that all of the apparitions come true, only not in the way macbeth expected.
good point Maria
I think she was attached to her father.
yeah---I think that appearance vs. reality was the whole underlying point behind the whole play----it seemed like everything could be tied back to appearance vs. reality
I agree with Maria definitely. Appearance vs. Reality could the mirror in the apparation be a metaphor for something?
Do we know if Lady Macbeth even had any children??
I think it was more of an excuse than anything.nor
It reminds me of the recent school shooting in the Amish community. He did it because of things that happened to him long ago.
ya lindsey, they made Macbeth over confident so that they could be sure he will take action and think that NO ONE can undo him. I think this tells us a lot about ourselves as humans, since overconfidence can be the biggest downfall.
I don't think we can know for sure what happened to Lady Macbeth in her past and for that matter if something happened. Maybe she was always power hungry and the opprotunity given to Macbeth triggered it. Our answers seem to be the same as when we last asked this question.
Not to be rude or anything but how does Lady Macbeth's past relate to the story and the main themes? Does it actually matter?
i think also that maybe something has happenned with her father, which may also be why she is so powere hungry and dependant
I agree with the apperance vs. reality because she says one thing and acts the other.
Lindsey, I think that you are right about Lady Macbeth being all talk and no action. Lady Macbeth is pretty much all about appearance vs. reality.
It does seem like Lady Macbeth is all talk, with no actions---she never follows through...
So basically Lady Macbeth has had a bad past...Did this also contribute to her sleep walking?Maybe the bullies we are taliking ab out are brothers??
Yes, because it could explain her motives and why she turned out the way she did--integral to the story.
erin, remember when she said that she would "bash her baby?" I think that was a clue that she knew from personal experience what a child means to its mother.
Erin- before I remember that we discussed it and their was proof that thay had children.
She acts like a bully now. She acts like a bully towards Macbeth. She taunts him and questions his manliness.
I agree, Ben. That's a very good point. I think that we could do a lot of comparison between that man and Macbeth. Perhaps that's another question for discussion?
Lady Macbeth all talk no game. How could this psychological scar affect the way she acts? Why does she feel so guilty all of a sudden?
I agree with what Tom just said about Lady Macbeth manipulating other people to do what she wants them to do.
Again---appearance vs. reality----Lady Macbeth wants to appear that she is brave and strong and determined, but really she is scared and is just trying to get Macbeth do do things
I also think if she were a man she couldn't do it anyway, but maybe she could of if her mom didn't take her down.
She was sleep walking so much because she could never get the murders out of her mind and she felt guilty for planning it.
Maria, how exactly does that show she knows what a child means to its mother? Seems like the opposite to me.I agree that Lady Macbeth is just covering up for her insecurities with all her bravado.
lane.i think it does because she is obviously very headstrong and she wants to be in control, and this may have been brought on by something in her past. this relates to the main theme because without her wanting to gain power by getting macbeth to be king qould never have happened if she was not so, well for lack of a better word, pushy.
I think so too, Kenna. She wants to appear tough, but she is really soft on the inside. This ties back to appearance vs. reality.
Lane, it could relate to the appearance vs. reality theme. Does she want to appear all macho so she can hide that fact that she is hurt from her past? She could want to cover up the reality of her life story by putting on the appearance of being a driven and strong woman.
I agree with that thing about her father. She had to have been hurt emotionaly hurt in her past. BUT do we ever find out if Lady Macbeth had children?
I think that all of Lady Macbeths guilt may be finally catching up with her, towards the end of the play, and she is realizing all that she has caused---and also she may be figuring out that people are catching on to what they have been doing
good point zach, how could someone so cruel suddenly feel guilty for something she didn't really do?
I am wondering where her mother and father came into the discussion...I think that when she said that she would have killed Duncan if he didn't look she was just making an exuse.
Zach-The mirror could be a metaphor that Banquo is a double of Macbeth and that when he sees Banquo holding a reflective glass, it shows that though Banquo and Macbeth are similar, Banquo has better qualities and therefore became king.Another question, Macbeth and Macduff have similar names, both were generals in the army, but both have wives with similar but different characteristics. Both are called Lady Macsomethin', one relies on her husband and is devestated when he leaves, while the other manipulates her husband. And both die. How many other people are doubles or similar yet different, which I know Shakespeare loves to do. Create doubles and opposites.
Interesting how so much of this story relates to tht theme of appearance vs. reality. Could this reflect something about Shakespeare's life? Maybe he modeled one of the characters after himself.
It is definitely takes being what you hate to defeat it--much easier with firsthand experience.Macbeth is just an outlet for all of Lady Macbeth's pent-up range; his conflicting feelings make him an especially malleable tool.
Well, LM well, urged Macbeth to commit the murder...Back to Maria k's comment...
I agree with ty that maybe she just used her "father" as an excuse because she is too weak to actually commit the action
The look of her father maybe an excuse for not killing Duncan. She does have an opportunity to be powerful finally, good idea Ben. LAdy Macbeth's taunts of Macbeth could relate back to how she was treated as a child. Hates herself because she's powerful.
i think ayla made a good point about lady macbeth hating herself because she is realizing how she is, but she does not seem to like that
Well what if she was a guy? What would have happened?
Lady Macbeth is all about appearance vs. reality because her reality starts to show towards the end of the book just before she dies. Her act starts to crack when she sleepwalks. The mask she showed about being upset about Duncan falls away, and she dies because of this.
Lady Macbeth hid all her guilt--it all comes out at the end, when she is wringing her hands, trying to get rid of her blood. She was just hiding it before to make herself appear less vulnerable.
nice point daniel. Maybe he found himself doing this a LOT and I bet it's hard to stop, maybe the only way to get this out was to write a book to tell us about it...
I don't think that Piggy's Aunt played as big of a role in LOF as Lady Macbeth did in Macbeth.
Good point lindsey and to add onto that I think that she tries to hide that because she doesn't want others to know she is unhappy and she does that by controlling her husband and having him do what she wants him to
I think that if she had the same past, even as a guy, the outcome would be the same. I don't think that gender has much of a role in how you think in relation to things that have happened in your past and whatnot.
Shelby-I think if she was a guy she'd strive to be in Macbeth's position of power so she has authority over all instead of just being a queen.
If something happened to her earlier in her life, I wonder if she has ever sleepwalked about that?
Up until the very end, she hid her emotions, as Tom said earlier. I think holding in this emotion ended up causing her to committ suicide.
You know how when people are unconfident with themselves that they try to pick on others? Is that kind of what is happening in the situation with Lady Macbeth and Macbeth? Good point Ayla
I think with the comment about not killing Duncan because he looked like her father has to do w/ her relationship w/ Macbeth. They don't really seem to love each other. She is willing to let Macbeth get killed, but not her father. Her father always loved her and then she got married to someone who doesn't love her and that brings on some of her bad qualities and cruel personality.
About Annas comment that their wives may be influencing Macbeth and Macduff----I agree, there can be people who are both "innocent" but after they are around people who influence them---they can be changed and influenced, for better or worse---which may have been the case for MacbethI think that if Macbeth would have been a good King if he would have just naturally become king, he would have been a much better one than how he was as a king under his wife's influence and all of this pressure from the witches prophecies
About LOF i think that having Piggy's name as a symbol is a way to show how he represents the "adult" world
Macduff and Macbeth seem like complete opposites. Is it odd that the person who kills Macbeth seems to be his complete opposite?
shelby.i think her being a man would have totally thrown off her being because she seems that she wants all of the power, just like a man would. But she has a problem going for that so if she were a man, i dont think she would have been so self consience or she would have kept her same ideals and just not have gone for it because she would be too scared.
Maria-If she sleepwalked about that maybe it could relate to her restlessness towards the end of the play.
Erin, I agree with you. I also think that Jacka nd Piggy are that way.
Zach- Would she still be all talk and no act do you think?
Going way back to Lady Macbeth manipulating people to do what she wants them to do, mainly Macbeth. You have to take into consideration the role women played in Elizabethan times. They didn't have too much power and couldn't make decisions and actions like killing someone. Macbeth is kind of like Lady Macbeth's puppet who she hides behind to go through with what she wants.
i agree with laura because he seems to be the most logical of the bunch and most adults are more logical than cildren who are more creative
How would LOF be different if there had been girls on the island?
Actually, not really...i met this one person who was my complete opposite...I really wanted to hurt her...(stuck for two weeks...);)
I think girls would have died on the island because they get tramitizeed ealier.
Golding's point was about the nature of HUMANITY, rather than males', then I expect it would have played out similarly.
I think we all just had an epiphany! Piggy the boy and the Lord of the Flies? This vague connection between Piggy, representing sense and civilization, and the pig called the Lord of the Flies, representing anarchy and death, is very interesting.
hannah, was Jack nothing alike the pig he killed? I thought he was more of a pig than piggy. Maybe it ties back to how opposite attract, maybe you really don't like the person who is similar to you.
erin: to build on what you said, is that what happens in LOF, too? Do all the boys pick on Piggy because they feel insecure?People join together in mobs to survive. Mob behavior can carry people away, lose themselves in the crowd. Do mobs always destroy or put down the only voice of reason?
Interesting Sara. I think that girls would be worried about different things and therefore maybe died maybe have been rescued earlier.
Maybe inside Macduff was a lot like Macbeth- appearance vs. reality?
Head on stick...like domination...symbolisim...
Lane, I have a feeling that they wouldn't have turned into savages, but Golding wrote the book to show the flaws of mankind, not the flaws in the different genders.
Hmm... girls eh? I think that the only difference might be that they would have different priorities. Instead of just wanting to have fun, they might place a little more importance on getting rescued or, as all us guys know, keeping themselves looking B-E-A-Utiful. Other than that, I believe that the girls would act in the same general way.
I think the girls would have tried harder to get off the island. I also think that with girls there would have been less blood. However I think there more emotional scarring becuase girls tend to forget things slower.
Well, sticking heads of defeated enemies is originally viewed of as being used by barbarians, but one of it's origins was originally from Ninjitsu where they killed and mauled up the faces and placed them on pikes to intimidate their enemies. Who would want to go to battle thinking that if you lose your face is going to look like the one on the pike. Why do the boys originally adopt this as their way of operating. Also, the boys start to hallucinate and the pigs head becomes the lord of the flies, and starts to talk to Simon. The pigs head is used to sacrifice and appease the beast and bring peace to your tribe. While Macduff killed Macbeth and placed it on his sword and brought peace.
Lane- I wonder how they would have treated the girls. They hated and treated the littluns badly and at that time women weren't equal to men. So, would the boys treat them politely or as inferiors.
WOW if girls were on the island, I think that there would be so much more order on the island. I think (no offence to guys) that girls have a better perspective of what is going on between everyone on the island. I think that everyone would have survived and everyone woud have got along.
Good point, Anna. Does this mean that the Lord of the Flies is Piggy's complete opposite?
i agree with emily because i think that girs would have rationalized more about some of the situation where as the boys became more barbaric
The head on the stick represents power it may make people fear and/or respect Macduff, obviously showing that he dominated a king in battle and now he is supreme.
With the heads on sticks I think it symbolizes victory and that it stood for power and what was to come.
So was the beastie metaphorical? Or was it suppose to be a real creature?
Along with Erin's comment girls tend to be a lot more social and that is how they have conflict where as boys have more of a physical relation/conflict, so the if girls were on the island, they would have different motives then to kill the pig and other people.
I think if there were girls on the island, instead of tribes, there would be cliques, could that be worse?
About girls on the island in LOTF---I think that in some ways the girls would be worse off and I also think that in other ways they would be better ofie. I think that the girls wouldnt have so much of an obsession with hunting---actually I think they might even be afraid to hunt; they would probably just eat the fruit. But anyways, I dont think they would fight so much about whether or not to hunt and keep the fire going------but they would probably have more issues with deciding who was in charge and how to get along with eachother---and they would probably be a lot more emotional about all of the sittuations
I think it could end up the same but with less blood.
So LOF has kill or get killed interpretation to man, survival of the fittest.
EmilyI think it was metaphorical.
Maria---about the cliques---I do agree that may cause an even bigger problem---because there would be so many different cliques they would all be competing with eachother constantly
At first I thought that the beast was real, now I think it was a metaphor. There wasn't anything to kill but themselves, becuase they were the rea beast that was truly taking over.
I think that the beast was just in everyone's imagination. One example is before Simon was killed, he thought that the Lord of the Flies, he couldn't really be talking to a dead pig.
Girl's wouldn't be as barbaric?!? I think not. When it comes down to it, girls and boys are both humans. It might have taken te girls a bit longer to turn savage, but I think that after being on the island for that long, anyone would become selfish and it would change from having fun to the thought that it's all about the survival of YOU. Girls and boys both can't resist the temptation to think that way.
Yes Maria, i think if there were cliques, along with the whole girls on the island thing, that it could be worse. The girls would start to fight eachother instead of trying to work together to get off the island. They would compete against other groups and try to get off the island first.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Madison, about the cliques competing against each other--isn't that essentially what happened with the tribes?
I agree with erin and they might have also used it as an excuse to gain more power and to satisfy their ambition
I think the beast was just everyone's fears being universal so instead of everyone having a different fear they share teh same one.
With girls on the island, I think the same end would have happened: anarchy, chaos, etc. but in a different way. Girls tend to be more vicious, but not nearly as physical. The girls would have formed their cliques earlier, but they would have fought to traumatize each others' feelings.
How does Roger play into this story?
Is wanting to survive really selfish? I think that is a quality that has allowed the human race to survive over the centuries. I think the line that separates the basic want of survival to being selfish is sort of a grey area.
Yeah girls are just the same or worse then boys. Girls are mean. There might be order at first but there would probably be crazyness later.
And also, similar to the boys, there would probably be one or two girls with common sense, but the rest would be totally selfish and try to be the most "popular" or something
When Jack, Ralph, and Roger thought they saw the beast, was that because they expected it to be there? It seems like ever since the beast was first mentioned, their whole life was consumed by the beast.
Kari, in the end, I think it's more about if the ends justify the means. Is it worth it to kill others for your own personal survival?
Was it really a storm that brought the plane down. I just wanted to throw this out there, but the boys say somewhere in the front of the book that they got shot down and that one of the boys said that he overheard the pilot say something like they are all dead. Like there is a war going on and someplace relevant was bombed. I just wanted to throw that out there.
I'll epilepsy up in an actual dictionary...it just wasn't unpacked yet so i used my previous Engish teacher's fav. website...
What type of girl would step up and be a leader on the island?
This is going back pretty far, but if the beastie is metaphorical then what happened the little boy with the birthmark
Also, there is another relation between LOTF and Macbeth. The pig head on a stick in Lord of the Flies was said to "appease" the beast (Keep in mind that the beast represents bloodthirsiness in humankind.) In Macbeth, Macduff puts Macbeth's head on a sword, symbolizing the offering up of the tyrant to "appease" his own bloodthirstiness.
Wanting to survive is not selfish i dont think, however, in LOF I don't think that the boys are necessarily trying to survive at the end well at least not Jack. He is just trying to better himself to gain more power
I think the hallucinations stand for what happens with innosence.
Roger is the torturer for Jack. What does that symbolize in the society?
Once a brutal act is comitted is there any coming back or does the person remain blood thirsty?
i agree with erin beciuse where as boys take out there actions physically, girls tend to go to a much deeper level nd try to bring up every single insecurity, problem, and knot that girl has about herself.
I agree with Laura in that the boys are trying to prove themselves and not really trying to survive.
Roger jumps on the bandwagon of the winning side
I think it symmbolizes that when we need to survive and we are in our last days we have to take over others.
Good question Maddy. I though that the little boy with the birthmark got killed by the fire, but maybe not...
i agree with erin and laura that the boys are trying to gain pride dfor themselves
While we are talking about characters...I compared Jack to dictators...he seemed rather like Hitler...comparison to time and war??
I think that wanting to survive isn't selfish at first, but it can turn selfish. Think about it this way: say that you've been stuck on an island for, say, 60 days. An opportunity comes in the form of a lifeboat that fell off of a ship. It only fits 10 people, and there are 50 of you. I don't think that if you had been on an island for 60 days, you would say, "Oh, I think I'll let you ten be saved and I can just stay here for another couple of months." At that point, it becomes selfish. You would rather have yourself be saved than anyone else. When it comes right down to it, ALL humans are selfish.
I agree with everyone else here how Roger waits for the opportunity to strike--he doesn't do anything shocking in order to gain Jack's favour. This is again about appearance vs. reality; his motives are masked by his acts.
When does a person become satisfied after killing people?
The last chapter of Lord of the Flies, to me, was the most important one. In this chapter, the boys are rescued. They are consistently referred to as "little boys" and "children." This shows distinctly the loss of innocence, or more specifically, the boys' realization of their loss of innocence. Any thoughts or observations?
to answer maddys question, i think it was metaphorical and the littlte boy does not neccesarily prove its not because they were on an island where they did not know anything aout it and the littlw boy may have just gotten lost or something
Why was Jack so desperate to kill the pig?? Was he trying to kill the pig so that he could prove himself?
I think killings upon killings happens by the brains behind the act, and by challenging.
I wondered whether Jack had something to do with the disappearance of the little boy.
Tom, that's exactly what I was getting at. As malicious as people may be, I think that's the necessary quality of humans that has facilitated our survival as a species.
erinhe wanted to prove he was man eneough to and to gain the oters respect
Zach---I think that once a person (Macbeth) has killed a person---he suddenly becomes more comfortable with killing because he has done it before, and therefore---he doesnt have such a problem with it anymore
I agree with Sarah about rationalising.
Joanne, i don't think that Jack had anything to do with it at least on purpose. The boys let the fire get out of hand just through ignorance.
Why out of all the pigs did Jack go for the mother pig who's babies were eating from.
joanne, I don't think Jack really cared what happened to anyone else. I wonder if he even noticed he was gone
Is there symbolisis in what happened to Piggy's glasses when they broke? Like, they lost the eyes of reason when they broke the glasses? Didn't they kill Simon right after that incident?
Piggy had Ralph's back.
What is why guyes and trying to gain everyones respect? Do you think that girls do the same thing?
I think that is an intrinsic quality of people in general.
I think that the theme of manliness shows up in both books. Is Jack or Ralph the better chief? Is Macbeth manly enough?
Here's a weak analogy that relates to getting comfortabe to killing. Remember back to your first dance in middle school. You were nervous to ask someone to dance because you didn't know what they would think. I was DEFINITELY that way. But once your friends convinced you that it was fun and you actually DID it, you became more comfortable and began asking more girls to dance. It's the satisfaction of knowing that if you did it once, you can do it again that drives people to go on "killing sprees".
Now I feel stupid. Tom what exactly does intrinsic mean?
That's what Golding was trying to get across.
Okay everyone, lets try to beat the # of comments that period 2 had!
What I was trying to say, but couldn't quite say it because I forgot... Okay, about the boys offering up the pig's head up to the beastie. When Simon was talking to the LOF (pig's head), which represented the devil and temptation. He told Simon that he should take on the beastie. And then they offer the pig's head on the stick to the beastie. They were afraid of the beastie and they wanted to get the beastie to go away. This kind of was the terrible thing that brought their demise. They have killed the thing that has brought on their fear. But did this make them better? Were they still evil or did their evilness die down? This reminds me of the places where the people want to get back at their government. They will do anything to get what they want and bring down what they don't like. And once they kill that person or bring down the government, are they better off? Have they gained anything? Now they have no government. What will they do? Then they have to make up a government and a set of rules LIKE LOF!! And then they want to bring down that government and then they do that and then start a new government. It is just a big circle where, because of human nature, no one can ever be happy, but once they do what they think they should, are they better off? Is what they want better for them than what they were opposed to in the first place?Sorry this is long, but I can't get in word wise, so I had a lot to say>>> :)
I agree with Lane is another theme of these books pride?
On the killing note, Simon's death wasn't really planned. He was killed out of fear. But the boys planned to kill Piggy and Ralph with the rock if they ever came and tried to take over the tribe or even tried to reason with Jack.
Maddy, I think that's a great idea.
Back to what Ayla said, if Jack was the bad one and he challenged the system and one, and if Macbeth challenged the system(Duncan) and won, does this mean that in order to challenge the system you have to be evil? Do you have to be willing to do anything? I think that Ralph is definitely the good guy in the story, but he is also "The Man." Jack seems like the evil in LOF, but he is also "the rebel."
LIke someone said earlier.. How long can challenging the system go on for? Forever?
Umm... I don't think it's possible at this point to get more than period 2, but we can try. And i just realized that what Ayla just said about cookies is like what I said about middle school dances. Great job Ayla!
Zach that is exactly what I was getting at thanks for putting it in words.
I think killing just becomes a normal routine and so you can keep going on with murders.
Lane, intrinsic is like "natural" or "instinctive." A quality at the core of humanity, in this case.
So, laura, when we challenge the system, are we really challenging the government? Maybe on a smaller scale, like if we challenge a teacher. Does it work to challenge something as big as the government? Were either Macbeth or Jack sucessful?
I think challenging the system is in human nature.
Daniel of course we can beat them if you keep writing.
Piggy = Lady MacduffRalph = Lady MacbethJack = MacbethRoger = Lady MacbethPiggy ends up dying in the book as well as Lady Macduff, and he depends on Ralph to protect him and feels defensless when Ralph leaves him, just like Lady Macduff, Ralph is than outraged at Jack and wants revenge.Jack is power hungry and controls the tribe while Roger is there to take his place, Roger doesn't die like Lady Macbeth but he is conniving and sneaky but very capable of leading.
I agree with Emily, and to add on to it people express and challenge the system in different ways
I agree with Maddy's idea.
Gotcha, Thanks Tom.
Yes, emiily, it definitely is. People want to rebel against the things they don't like and life, so it is definitely going to happen.
I agree with emily.If you don't like something you want to go aginst it. It is like human nature.
Getting use to what we do is a part of being human.
I don't know...what about those pretty little southern bells, always being taken care of...or the classic princess getting rescued by the knight in shining armor
We may not beat period 2 in number, but of course our comments are way more in-depth. :)
Now that you mention it, I think pride is a part of challenging the system. Macbeth is proud, and he can't admit that he killed Duncan. Then he killed more and more people to cover up waht he did and to cover his position as king. He's also proud that he's king, that the witches chose HIM to be king, not Banquo.
riley...does Lady Macduff really influence her husband/leader like Piggy does for Ralph?
thats deep ben
I think that as Americans, we look back on the Revolutionary War and think that the Rebels are always the "Good Guys" and the system is the "Bad Guy," but in both of these stories, the system is the good guy.
Well what would happen if you stop, then what would happen? Would they go crazy amitt their guilt or what?
I agree Ben---it is almost easier to sympathize or empathize with an individual person---but it is hard when there is so many people---and it is also like when we hear more about deaths, we become more "comfortable" with it, sadly, and we dont think as much about it because we hear about it so much
How do we define who is a good guy and who is a bad guy?
that was deep tom
I agree, Joanne. Also, Jack's pride in being the leader of the choir boys became challenged when Ralph came in. Because of his pride, he can't be lesser than Ralph.
The idea of realism vs. over-optimism (Ha! New word!)is very interesting in both of these books. Piggy represents realism, and Ralph represents the over-optimism. When Piggy is gone, Ralph truly realizes the severity of the situation, and he doesn't know quite what to do. In the end of Macbeth, Macbeth has become overly confident in himself, and he has decided that he is invincible. In the end, his confidence is obviously proven to be overdone. What one can tell from these, then, is that without the realist, the pessimist, if I may, bad things are bound to happen. (Now I sound like a pessimist...)
Good question erin...I think it depends on people's background and their morals
Erin, I believe that is one of the fundamental questions humans and society in general are trying to answer.
How are the boys who were murderers going to be punished? Will they at all?
I love how this Macbeth discussion is now pretty much about LOF.
nice point erin, is the good guy just someone that we agree with and the bad guy the "mean" one?
laura: yes, she does. She convices Macbeth to kill Duncan and then to kill other threats to him. Her methods are different( telling Macbeth he's not a man) but their end is the same.
I think we just topped period 2 guys. Nice job!
I totally agree with tom and laura
Ty-I guess it all just depends on perspective because after the Rebels won in the US and Americans were happy about that dont you think loyalists would have though that was challenging the system for worse.
ErinI don't know if you can actually define a good guy and a bad guy because eventually everyone can be bad or good.
I love it too, Kari!
Erin-You judge someone based off of their actions in life towards whats positive and what's negativeand you do have to create a scale
Post a Comment