Comments page!
Write your comments to our weekly question here!
FRENCH LITERATURE AND CIVILIZATION IN TRANSLATION
FREN270W at the University of Connecticut
Pages
- 270 Bloggers!
- AMAZING STUDENTS!
- Comments page!
- Our Syllabus
- Question of the week!
- Random facts!
- Reflections…
- What’s FREN270W?
Recent Comments
 | nathalie on Random facts! |
 | abellon on Random facts! |
| abellon on Random facts! |
| abellon on Random facts! |
| abellon on Reflections… |
Blogroll
- Beyond WebCT: Integrating Social Networking Tools into Language & Culture Courses
- Media That Matters Film Festival
- MY NEW BLOG!
- my new class wiki
- Pixar short films
- Tintin
- WordPress.com
Tags
Visitors!
I must say the Frenchie was my pick. Story wise, Candide was awesome. However Mr. Stranger here is a wise guy when it comes to his reactions. ” no, do I have to?” ” If you insist, Okay then” not the quote from the book but the main character that’s actually not really important. This is like real life experience for me. I had a guy I knew back a few years ago and he would do the same. How you doing so and so … His reply was , good. what do you ?” Kind of arrogant if you’re the extrovert and he is the opposite. But Mr. Stranger was a pimp. The girls loved him because he held his thing down and didn’t change for NO ONE. Even the guys loved him too because they tried to bend him and he wouldn’t. Classic Ghandi like stubbornness.
wudaman2000
September 24, 2007 at 5:33 pm
If I had to choose between the two characters, I would pick Candide. His adventures and innocent outlook on the world was more enjoyable to read. Meursault’s outlook on life was drab and boring to read. In both characters, you could see a transformation with how they were portrayed by the end of the book. But I enjoyed reading about Candide’s character growth more than Meursault.
rease125
September 24, 2007 at 5:47 pm
one of my favorite french short films…”L’homme sans tete” (“The Man without a Head”), thanks to youtube, i’ve found it in 3 parts, please check it out, i’d like for us to talk about it in class:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLcOFTH0Tsg&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAFIJEUvuQk&mode=related&search=
nathalie
September 26, 2007 at 10:40 pm
I believe that short films are not as popular in America because americans are lazy and when they want to watch a film they want to lay on their couch with a gallon of icecream and some popcorn and sit there for longer than a 5 minute film. Americans want entertainment and don’t like to have to think.
I would have to say the movie with the Doc who is told he would die soon. He had crazy patients that had been his patients for many years yet they had not solved the patients issues. Upon finding out he is going to die, the “shrink” opens up and begins to stop his daily routine and solves his patients problems in a short period of time.
the movie was funny and entertaining for a 10 minute film
abellon
September 28, 2007 at 1:00 pm
I see Meursault as something like a cork, bobbing along in the sea, never acting only reacting. A big wave pushes him and he rolls over and bobs up and down and waits for the next wave to push him in another direction.
The existentialists believe that we all create ourselves through our actions. We alone are responsible for who we are. How we turn out is completely up to us. Every day, every hour, every minute we are choosing our actions. Go to class or stay in bed? Another Coors Lite or decaf? And if we say, “I refuse to play this game, I won’t choose anything at all”, we have made a choice! So, we are not only free to choose, to create ourselves, we are condemned to create ourselves! And our choices define us.
How many times in the first few pages of L’Étranger does Meursault say something like, “It’s not my fault.”, meaning, “I didn’t do anything that you can blame me for.” In other words he goes through the motions, doing whatever is expected of him. If things go badly, it’s someone or something else’s fault. He seems indifferent to everything, saying and doing whatever is easy. He reacts but doesn’t initiate. Even Marie just sort of happens.
In Part I when he and his friends are at the beach and have had an unpleasant run in with the Arabs, rather than simply going up the steps into the cabin, he chooses to walk back down the hot beach. In search of what, a confrontation? Why would this person who simply floats through life go looking for trouble? Or was he looking for anything? The heat is extraordinary. The sun alone should have been sufficient to make him react and leave the beach. He pushes on. The last pages of part I almost make the reader sweat.
So who killed the Arab and why? Meursault of course pulled the trigger. Once more he was reacting to a perceived threat. However, he will blame the sun. It wasn’t his fault. It was the sun that made him do it. But what of the 4 extra bullets he fired into the dead body? In choosing to continue to fire he cannot avoid responsibility. At that moment he knows that everything has changed and floating along is no longer an option. He will face life and death square on, and eventually take hold of his life and define himself.
babsinvirginia
September 29, 2007 at 1:33 am
In response to Andrew’s post about the short film “Our Time is Up”… why is it then, that it takes a serious crisis for people to wake up and smell the coffee? What kind of lesson is that all about? so, if the Doc didn’t know that he was going to die, his mundane life including all the nonsense he was telling their patients (probably just to keep them coming back) would still be continuing on and on. isn’t this similar to Meursault who like babsinva calls a bottle cork floating around from wave to wave? Meursault seems to wake up in prison where his freedom has been taken away. Likewise, Doc wakes up after he learns he’s going to die in 6 weeks. My question is, why does it take the extreme to make us realize what we have lost or what we should say? In other words, it seems as if handling the real brutal truth is too difficult and therefore we must shelter ourselves under blankets of fluff so that the truth can rebound off nicely without hurting too much.
nathalie
September 30, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Out of the two characters, I would choose Meursault as a more enjoyable character. The personality of Meursault is one that allows the reader to be more judgemental on his decisions compared to Candide being straight forward with his decisions. Meursault is one who makes bland and nonchalant decisions which has a side of mysteriousness and brings questions into the reader of why he acts the way he does. Through the notions of existentialism, Meursault depicts their beliefs and mindset to the fullest.
matts14
September 30, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Short films are not that popular in America simply for the reason of entertainment. No one wants to spend 10 dollars and just see a 15 minute flick; whereas everyone wants their money’s worth and doesn’t truly want to think during a movie. Although some movies have underlying meanings, they are usually easy to pick up. On the contrary in Europe where short films are common insinuates the idea that Europeans are more liberal/artsy and “creative” in depicting a meaningful story in such a short time period. Personally Americans don’t care to think they just want to relax and just watch a movie for the sake of enjoyment and well just to watch it.
The film that I liked most was the one where the old man buried himself alive with his dead wife. There were many meaningful notions that the short film dwells upon through its underlying message such as being together through life and death. The old man had nothing else to look forward too but the company of his wife and when she died he did what he could to properly bury her(and himself eventually). He didn’t want to go to a retirement home since “pretty pictures” don’t make life better. His life was with his wife and to take it when his wife passed away shows how devoted he was to her.
matts14
September 30, 2007 at 3:10 pm
I enjoyed the short film “Our Time Is Up” (I think that’s what it’s called). It was pretty hilarious but the plot was simple and to the point; emphasizing how when we are faced with our own mortality we realize the things in our life we’re unsatisfied with. I’m also a psychology major and a lot of the methods that the guy in the film used AFTER his diagnosis were methods of treatment for people with mental illnesses (maybe on the extreme side). Flooding is a common method to confront phobias (the turtle guy), where in a session the psychologist is supposed to bring in whatever you’re scared of so you can deal with it. Also the guy used classical conditioning with the guy who loved butts, when he said “no” or hit the guy every time he went to touch it. So the film was pretty on point psychologically but also I just thought it was heeeelarious.
I think it’s ironic that these films aren’t as appreciated in America…we like everything else accelerated (fast food, drive-through windows etc) so why wouldn’t we want our movies to be super speedy too? Americans don’t necessarily enjoy long novels as opposed to short ones…so why movies? I think it had to do with the fact that short movies tend to have less character development, less explanation of the plot, less super action and require more thinking at the end. After a short movie you’re more likely to have to think about what the message was, could you relate to it, did it strike you, etc. In the longer movies, everything is pretty much spelled out for you. Instead of spending 15 minutes engaged and analyzing, you can spend 2 hours pretty unengaged and still “get” the movie.
alm04002
September 30, 2007 at 5:12 pm
ironically enough, one theme in common with our readings and the short films is death. today while in Starbucks, this quote was on my coffee cup: “Our greatest prejudice is against death. It spans age, gender, and race. We spend immeasurable amounts of energy fighting an event that will eventually triumph. Though it is noble not to give in easily, the most alive people I’ve met are those who embrace their death. They love, laugh and live more fully.” (Andy Webster, hospice chaplain in Plymouth Michigan) Wonder what Meursault would say to that?! In regards to the shorts we watched, think about the Doc in “Our Time is Up” and read what Matt says about the old man in “The Last Farm”.
nathalie
September 30, 2007 at 9:07 pm
Since death is a common theme, the way people face and view death usually defines how they are. If one takes their own life it’s very different from being killed by a car. I don’t think people today really view and analyze death enough since one knows it’s eventually going to occur in every living thing. If you had to plan your own death and funeral wouldn’t you care about how you lived your life even more? Death causes actions in people that are usually different from the norm. Knowing you have so many breathes left, I’m sure you make sure every breathe taken is meaningful.
matts14
October 3, 2007 at 3:01 am
The “Horla” is a ghost that is in the author himself, which ultimately manifests itself through his feelings. Clearly there is something wrong with the author and he tries to “catch” the Horla in a logical traps he sets up. Knowingly he beats his own traps in a sense since the “ghost” is basically in himself. The “Horla” is nothing more than schizophrenia manifested through feelings instead of vision. Although he does see some ‘evidence’ with the rose being bent and the experiment he sets, it’s just a self-fullfiling thing since he wants to see/feel it so bad.
matts14
October 7, 2007 at 1:27 am
In terms of why short films are not popular here, one reason that pops into my head is money. The entire economic side of filming would be reduced. back in the days there was short film and then they tried to create it longer and longer. maybe it is our attention span. it does not seem fitting if the movie was short and they advertised it. no body would go for 30 minutes. our cinema culture is totally different. we like these loud films that hit you in ways which differ from other countries filming. I burned the dvd . but of the ones that i did see, I really liked our time is up. very unique. so many characters revolving around one doctor. each characters lines were very short. the scenes and movement of each person tells the story. also it shows how much of a procrastinating state we all are unless you are awaken with a gun to the side of your head like this doctor in the movie , which he was about to die in 6 weeks or month to live.
wudaman2000
October 7, 2007 at 7:06 pm
the horla to the character is this super natural weird thing that is surrounding this patient or the narrator who is writing in the journal. it also could be himself who was having a split personality. better yet. it could be the other part of you that your trying to kill. its always popping up but you try to subdue it and i think this is the case in the story. I guess being on drugs and stuff all the time during those times cause you to think a certain way. maybe its a struggle between the mind and one true self…
wudaman2000
October 7, 2007 at 7:14 pm
I think the horla is that part of humankind that stops them from fully appreciating life around them. i’ll explain later when i think about it more
alm04002
October 8, 2007 at 10:45 pm
I don’t think that a “fear” of dying on a supposedly safe environment is the new fear. If you really think about it, people are worried about things like that for maybe a few days or weeks if that, then things go back to normal. Look at the world trade center incident. Not to be rude an closed-minded but in all reality no one “really” cares about that anymore. Think about it, what did you do on Sept. 11th this year, I’m pretty sure it didn’t involve you watching tv and being all sad and filled with grief/mourning. That’s just how life is in today’s age, we deal with it for a few weeks and then when it’s out of the media/news we don’t really give two cents. Sure we fear our own death, but death has no boundaries. You can be the fittest and healthiest person and a perfect driver, yet you can get killed by a car in any second when you are driving. I don’t think that it’s a “fear” of death in a safe environment, it’s just unlikely and shocking and you get over it quite quickly, but of course if it has some impact on your life then it will last much longer.
matts14
October 11, 2007 at 2:37 pm
in response to matt: i would have to agree with what you said though it’s sad but true. however, (and i’m speaking from a teacher’s point of view) after a good preparation for the teaching world, though preparation isn’t always enough…i would have to say that most teachers are self-censored individuals. what i mean, is that we have to watch what we say, how we look at students, make sure we are inclusive and don’t single anyone out, pick up on warning signs…etc…essentially becoming a parent in a way. And naturally, I speak on behalf of those teachers who actually care about their students. What I wonder is about the “fear” in a classroom. How in this century have we come to a point where video cameras are wanted in a classroom, metals detectors are put into schools, police men roam the hallways and guard entrances, putting stickers on papers may anger a kid who doesn’t get one….and perhaps more recently at a school in VA, kids can’t even give each other, high 5s? Seriously! I’m not even going to get started on the whole airport scene. And what about on TV with the “terror” alert signals…like today it’s red and tomorow it’s green and then orange or something. It seems as if we are constantly scared of something. But like you said Matt, things happen at anytime and if something is going to happen, it will no matter how prepared or unprepared we are.
nathalie
October 11, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I think that there are ways to minimize fear/damages done by it. For example, safety of cars are increased(although they could make every car prettymuch deathproof but it is not economically feasible for everyday people). Air bags, special brakes and all of that help “prepare” in a sense and I think that it minimizes some fear since there is a precaution at hand.
matts14
October 11, 2007 at 6:45 pm
i have no idea what the question is about. Are we scared of dying, is that it? Well maybe i m on point with the question. check it out, I was chatting with a few friends last night and i brought up what we spoke in class with a little twist we talked about death. and the fantasied question i can think of is… drum roll please… If you die in th enext 7 days what would you do? but before answering this, fear is avoiding the inevitable truth of things you need to do but lazy ass hell to accomplish it. its the imagination of a negative foreshadow that you think will come to life. Personally, from my own stand point, I would like to know when I am going to die and not let it be a guessing game like life is(which the purpose of virtue). If we knew our deadline , i sure be happy as hell and plot out a excel chart on what to do …
as for what matt said about the example of 9-11. man i was sleeping when it did happen and i wasnt even thinking it this past october. I m meursult, it doesnt affect me, althought i had to deal with a lot of b.s. when it did happen and b.s. here about kids being affected… please
nathalie as for the teaching part of showing everything . yes … its a social ladder in this position of teacher or whomever. I think we dont want to loose that leverage or even reveal our truest naked form. maybe i made some sense
wudaman2000
October 12, 2007 at 3:10 am
My favorite short story was The Dead in Love since there was a sense of two realities. You don’t know which is real and which is his dream/imagination. From being a priest to being loathed in riches, the polar opposites of his ‘identity’ is quite dramatic. There were also instances where you would have to guess if the vampire was real or not. The ambiguity in the short story provokes a lot more questions than answers. Compared to the other stories, The Dead in Love was flowed/read much easier.
matts14
October 16, 2007 at 1:45 am
While I was watching the L’Homme Sans Tête clips I kept thinking about the film Moulin Rouge, dark, the sets that were half fake-half real. This one seemed like it might have a happy ending but was it all make believe? I mean losing your head is one thing, losing it literally would certainly make life complicated. Funny the girl didn’t even seem to notice. And what a shame he had to give up the one head he really loved because it didn’t match his hands.
babsinvirginia
October 19, 2007 at 2:36 am
I think that “forbidden games” are those that object to the normality that is engraved in people at a certain age of their lives. The “forbidden games” that was instituted within the film was that of Michel and Paulette playing the ‘build a graveyard game’ which is pretty much stealing crosses from any place that they can find them. Today in the 21st century, an example of a “forbidden game” would be exactly the same thing as that of Michel and Pualette if we were looking in retrospect at kids doing that while we are older (adults). A game that would be “forbidden games” in terms for older people/adults would be things that are not formfitting such as street-racing with cars on the highway/road or skipping work frequently to play golf, etc.
matts14
October 22, 2007 at 1:08 am
What are things that you would consider “forbidden games” that we do today in the 21st century?
This is a very difficult question. In the time of the movie (1940s) there wasn’t a variety of ways to raise your children. The cluture was the same, kids would do what their father told them or they got beaten. Now in the 21st century especially in America, you can see a wide variety of people growing up in many different ways. Some are still experiencing parents that are strict and expect their children to obey their rules or get beaten for it. And there are parents to spoil their children rotten and let them do what ever they want to do with out any consequences. Some parents today even support and allow their kids to experiment with drugs and alochol. I would have to say that for an age group from 14-20 (freshmen in highschool to mid-college) one of the forbidden games would be going out and abusing these different drugs or alochol with out geting caught by the police or your parents. It is seen as similar to the case of Paulette and Michel. They collected crosses went to a place away from where anyone else knew they were and used them there. Same with kids playing the “illegal underage game” collecting products, going to a place that they think is safe and using the products there.
abellon
October 22, 2007 at 1:02 pm
just in today…an article about short films! check it out!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21426594/
nathalie
October 23, 2007 at 3:10 pm
for october 13th question . I really like this book called the little prince. before reading it . it was glossy cover. nice neat paper on the insider with another coat of gloss and it had Pictures. on top of that MADE IN CHINA (LEAD FREE I MIGHT ADD). I knew it was going to be great when the dedication was very funny. I must say even though i have finished this book. I didnt want to read it because wow I knew it was going to be that good of a book. anything with colors and pretty paper will always sell me out no time !
wudaman2000
October 25, 2007 at 3:15 am
the forbidden games things i see today. seriously i thought it was child pornography because the short skirt and all the kissing and stuff. but the basic stuff we see are hmmm… well the literal part. parents whipping our butts, some happen to die during war. provish situations, love affairs between neighbors. best friends split apart. And a child being young and youth full while the grown ups are grumpy and old and have to manage the world. But in this movie it seems like all the kids are taking care of the parents not only the main characters. this is common but rare in a modern industrial country like ours.
wudaman2000
October 25, 2007 at 3:19 am
I think forbidden games in our society are things we engage in that are romanticized in our society but still are seen as negative or not allowed. Things such as having an affair, drug use, S&M, pornography, and things like that (I know these are mostly sexual but I think that’s because American society is like a child in regards to sexuality–they see these things as “wrong” but still have this hidden desire to experience these things or see these things as enticing). Forbidden games reflects something that we want to do but it’s not allowed because of social constructs…things we do but aren’t allowed to talk about because it’s not acceptable.
alm04002
October 25, 2007 at 2:18 pm
so does anyone remember what the assignment for the 3rd paper was? i know that it can be a short story but what was the other option? was it: connect the short films that we read in class to the short stories that we read?
edsonrivas
October 25, 2007 at 6:49 pm
I thought the book the Little Prince was different, it really brought out the point that as we get older and more mature, we forget what it is like to be a child. That is the message the Little Prince was saying to the narrator(sp). The little prince was trying to show the reader the life of an adult from the perspective of a child. he did this very well and made adults look like idiots compared to children.
abellon
October 29, 2007 at 12:37 pm
The messages that I got from the Little Prince are the various aspects of adults that may or may not be fully apparent. The characteristics such as working just for the sake of working and being authoritative are easily seen today. Pretty much the Little Prince is trying to say to us to not forget the “child” like behaviors that we once had. With the line at the end of saying if you see the little prince return, it may mean that when you do act like a child and lay back from the harsh realities of being an ‘adult’ , just acknowledge it. I mostly enjoyed the fact that book was simple to read yet has a deep meaning. Not many books are children books that have a provocative underlying notion behind it.
matts14
October 29, 2007 at 11:49 pm
I think the Little Prince really hit on the fact that the adult world is lonely. We spend so much time abiding by the rules of society and getting caught up in them (whether it’s by obsessing about money or how our time is spent or whether we have enough power or recognition) that we really lose the essence of life. It seems like the harder we try to be happy the further away from happiness we find ourselves…we spend so much time reaching and working towards “better” things that we forget to just sit and realize that what we have can be enough if we let it. Even the little prince learned this in the book when he realized that where he really wanted to be was back on his star with the flower who he tried so hard to escape from. I’m curious whether it’s possible to live (and function and be accepted) in the adult world and still hold on to true happiness?
alm04002
October 30, 2007 at 12:26 am
Im writing here just because Wu scared me when he growled on the question of the week page. Ok, about the Little Prince. I thought it was an interesting read, definitely, but in terms of a deeper meaning, kind of brilliant. It really takes a well-thought through novel to accomodate both young readers and old. Children can take it at face value and literature junkies can analyze it for months. I especially enjoyed it because it reminded me of Ender’s Game. I know I’ve said it half a dozen times, but that is the only other “children’s book” I’ve ever read that can be more deeply appreciated, hence why I read it in my AP english class senior year of high school. It too is about a young boy who has an outlook on life that is beyond his years. And that too made me sad for the loss of childhood, the basis behind both books.
leni121
October 30, 2007 at 1:01 am
a really interesting article about Benoit Duteurtre that’s worth reading in which he talks about his book:
http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/06/benoit_astonishes_me
nathalie
October 30, 2007 at 3:15 am
a wacked out combination of Desire Johnson and Latifa’s companion..all in one!
http://www.kpho.com/news/14515066/detail.html
nathalie
November 5, 2007 at 8:22 pm
in the little prince. these are some of the physical things I enjoyed. Its colored. Its nice and shiny. its 10.00 bucks and its made in CHINA , LEAD FREE! Each part had a color display very easy to digest.
I think its very philosophical book. I can really relate. There are times where I slip in to the not real world. i.e. right now but a lot of these things put me back in line with reality. Its a truly great book. first book that I will actually not even bother to sell back on half.com ! And I cant believe I have never heard of this book through out my entire life. then again there are many more things I havent heard of !
wudaman2000
November 6, 2007 at 12:22 am
I think a message that Benoit tries to get across is that rules are simply too strict and taken way out of proportion. There is no rule for common sense in a way, although I’m sure there are “special cases” that are evident in everything. Special Cases and following guidelines somewhat contradict each other in this book. Here we have a man about to be executed in a “special case” but it was that “special case” of a pardon that saved him, pretty ironic. Rules should be rules if people want to use/follow them. Sure you literally can do anything you want in life, yes anything, you just have to pay the price for it, if what you decide to do does have a price, ie stealing – jail time. This is evident in the 21st century when all these “special cases” get people into more trouble or out of trouble. Benoit may insiniuate that the 21st century takes rules to a new level especially if the rules entail some kind of entertainment. Entertainment in the 21st century is what keeps the world going, especially here in the united states and modernized countries. All these “news” report is just to satisfy the insatiable appetite that people have to entertain themselves whenever they can. An example of this would be when your eating breakfast and your watching the news, do you really want to watch a news report of some grandma walking her dog everyday but this one day she slept in? Or do you want to see bombs going off in some remote country and have some drama?
matts14
November 7, 2007 at 2:03 am
you bring up an interesting point Matt…I like how you’ve coined the phrase “there is no rule for common sense”…as strange as it may sound, I think you’re right. And probably as a result, this may be one reason why we are constantly surrounded by the “special case” of the “special case” etc…seriously when are we going to get it together…if that’s even possible, I’m not so sure anymore. and I have to agree…it seems as if the news is turning into yet another “reality TV” show, as if we needed more.
nathalie
November 7, 2007 at 3:53 am
folks…just a thought…if you don’t want to keep your books, give them to me and i’ll sell them for you to my next class (this is assuming i will be teaching the same course).
nathalie
November 7, 2007 at 3:54 am
good idea on that.. but i m keeping the little pimp, i mean the little prince!
That pink book was kinda funny. Little anal satire. Again my comparison to seinfield but this time curb your enthusiasm. Reading a bit of the book you get the idea, its either the little kid or the cigs. I personally hate cigs. weed is another story, but cigs are smelly. And if you are Asian that entire region is sucking on some dirty tobacco from usa! And the kids are okay . but what it really meant for me is how you can maneuver yourself and succeed and someone else in the same situation is getting his or her butt kicked. i guess the dude is pissed off about all these mind blogging rules we created and institutionalized in the pyschie of our mind and he doesnt seem to a lemming . more like going against the gain type of dude with an F-u attitude. I feel him . he aint conformed , just reformed. And he laughs at the war with popcorns in his hands and tears in his laughter.
wudaman2000
November 10, 2007 at 8:46 pm
So I started writing this and then the computer shut down. So here I am writing it over. Yay. When it comes to Benoit’s, The Little Girl and the Cigarette, its one big satire of the world we live in, opinions and political stances in the forefront. Some of Benoit’s criticisms include the power children have over us, whether their innocence be real or not, our obsession with pop culture, aka American Idol, in comparison to what’s really important at the time, such as the war on terror, and flaws in our legal system, like believing as a people in what we want to believe in, rather than what is right. This interested me the most; having two men convicted of crimes that were never fully proven, while one gets off because he played the game right, and the other is sent to his death, a place he never would have gone in the first place, because he tried to play the game. But what is this game? Should we even bother meddling with it? It may benefit us, like it did Desire Johnson, or backfire and leave us beheaded in some foreign country for all the world to see. This is what our legal system has come to, a society pleaser, another way to crank up the ratings and gain the head honcho some more popularity points. And everyone loves it, until they’re the ones forced to defend themselves against a popular opinion, a child’s tears, and the same old game.
leni121
November 14, 2007 at 5:14 pm
did you see our map? people are checking our blog out! whohoo…we’re famous!
nathalie
November 16, 2007 at 3:54 am
in that little pink book. half way reading it, it all comes down to me taking care of my needs or me taking care of someone else. Its 2 level of selfishness. One: to be only into yourself. which is what I am for. Two: take care of the offspring, the future, which in sense sounds caring but it is also a selfish motivation because that is what they care about. A whacky guy who wrote a whacky book. I wonder if he was on drugs when he wrote this. Pink is surely not the color to pick for a book by a male author, no to sound like a masculine pig but that is one thing I learned from this book. PINK covers and little school girls and cigarette are a european fetish of americanism !
wudaman2000
November 19, 2007 at 3:57 am
the author of the little girl and the cigarette (however you spell his name) is saying that society has become so complicated with all its rules, laws, regulations, etc. that anyone can get away with anything. The court system is so flawed that it incarcerates those who are innocent while setting free those who are guilty.
edsonrivas
November 26, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I think the little girl and the cigarette really highlights how absurd the rules of our society are. Oftentimes we don’t see people as individuals who are shaped by a life/environment but instead we see them as representatives of one thing. Desire was celebrated for a single act, the other man (I forget his name…did he have a name?) was hated for a single act as well. In judging people, society denies them of any sense of individualism they have…and I think the book shows what risks we show in doing this. Society condemned the man to death only because of lack of care for children. I’m making no sense…try again later.
alm04002
November 28, 2007 at 4:05 am
this site needs some music . may i suggest a french site ! called RADIOblogclub.com check it outzzzzzzzzzz
wudaman2000
November 30, 2007 at 1:58 am