essay support thread - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Questions and research help requests. Student surveys may be posted here.
By mikema63
#14207746
I was thinking of making this thread for a while, the general purpose is for people to discuss ongoing work they have and seek advice, proofreading, or other general help from the rather valuable minds of PoFo.

Since most of us are in college, involved in education, or some kind of technical career I figured this could be a useful resource.

To start, I have to develop a research question on "the love song of J Alfred Proofrock" by T.S. Eliot, I am thinking of doing something about modern civilizations effect of alienating people from their broader communities and general social interactions. Focusing on J Alfred Proofrock's professed insecurities inhibiting him from initiating social interaction with the woman he desires and the societal reasons that caused these insecurities.
#14207797
From what I remember when I was a Lit student at uni, Eliot was ciriticising those who rejected or coud not coope with thte possibioities society offered, not that it was society that alienated him. He was tring to support those who were proactive and confident and criticised those who could not move forward or out of their own small lives or see alternative lifestyles. Society was the vehicle or the prize, not the inhibitor.

We loved the poem as students in the 60's because we felt we were actually pursuing alternatives and "breaking out of the commonly accepted mold" in our countercultural revolution. I would be interested in researching why young people today are so conformist ..so Prufrockish. Or why people become more Prufrockish as they get older. Obvious reason of course is practical and financial but the image of the aging hippy isn't a good one...why not? Because we EXPECT all young people to eventually conform? To live safely (Prufrockishly?)We see aging hippies as mutton dressed as lamb? Why don't we see them as keeping their vision and faith and courage in choosing a different lifestyle?

Eliot is still one of my favourite poets...I have still to find a more modern poet who is so good.

(do be sure to spell Alfred J's last name properly...)
By mikema63
#14207805
He was tring to support those who were proactive and confident and criticised those who could not move forward or out of their own small lives or see alternative lifestyles.


Two sides of the same argument. modern civilization would include the modern common culture of the age which alienates people from one another. In fact your angle was something I was planning to incorporate or at least mention as well as evidence.

(be sure to spell trying and criticized correctly as well )
#14207839
[quote="mikema63]
Two sides of the same argument. modern civilization would include the modern common culture of the age which alienates people from one another. In fact your angle was something I was planning to incorporate or at least mention as well as evidence.

(be sure to spell trying and criticized correctly as well )[/quote]


Check how "criticised" is spelled in the UK before you criticise me. The other was a typo.

I disagree that modern civilisation (with an "s") alienated one from another both when the poem was written and now. What evidence do you have of such a sweeping stztement? And what part of "common culture" are you talking about? Working class? Middle class? Aristos? In Eliot's day the workign class was tightly bound one to anothr.

Eliot was criticising a type of person, not some cultural group or culture in general. He was too intelligent to even think about trying that.
By mikema63
#14210286
The first draft of my streetcar named desire essay, if anyone wants to give it a read I would appreciate the advice.

Spoiler: show
Human beings do not see the world as it is, we see it through the lenses of our perceptions and beliefs. Is it any wonder then that human society and relationships are not built upon strict truths and reality? Every day we tell little white lies to each other, harmless fibs to prevent hurt feeling. We also often tell lies not out of kindness but to advance our positions and relationships, we say things that stretch the truth about ourselves all the time to prospective partners and friends in order to win them. In “A Streetcar Named Desire” Blanche Dubois exhibits this completely human trait in the extreme. In the play Blanche says “I don’t want realism. I want Magic![Mitch laughs] Yes, yes, magic! I try to give that to people. I misrepresent things to them. I don’t tell truth, I tell what ought to be truth. And if that is sinful, then let me be damned for it!” (Williams 145), what she says here is what we all do implicitly, without admitting it and without realizing it. Her story is our story. We, like Blanche, tell others what ought to be true, we misrepresent things to other people. Like Blanche we do this for our desires. Like Blanche we are all riding the metaphorical streetcar named desire.
Blanche is defined by her losses, like many people the things she loved and lost haunt her, like many people these traumas are a major part of her character. In the play, she is constantly haunted by the song “Varsouviana” which played the night her husband whom she had loved deeply committed suicide due to something she said to him. This reliving of the traumatic event is a classic symptom of PTSD as argued in the paper “On the dialectics of trauma in Tennessee Williams' A Streetcar Named Desire.”, “We argue that Streetcar adumbrates elements of trauma theory, specifically symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder such as involuntary reliving of traumatic events” (Ribkoff 1). Blanche’s fear of loss due to her trauma is a fear we all share in some measure or another, we struggle to find other people to share our lives with. Our desire to escape loss drives us forward and makes us try to fit ourselves into the ideals of others to attract them.
Blanche has another classic human failing. She allows others to define her. In her quest for companionship she creates a façade for others, in the story she says “after all a woman’s charm is fifty percent illusion” (Williams 41). This illusion she creates is one she shapes for others, allowing them to reshape her image as they would, she allows others to define her in this way. She is trapped by her own preconceived notions about how society and relationships work, like us all these ideas are not objectively true outside the human mind, but like us all she is also trapped by the “bad faith” of John Paul Sartre. In the paper “Applying Jean-Paul Sartre's theory of "bad faith" to Tennessee Williams' A Streetcar Named Desire: an existential study” Ghanbari explains bad faith “In Sartre's terms "bad faith" is a kind of selfdeception, when people deluding themselves into thinking that their essence and fate is predetermined and not changeable.” (1). In some form or another we all fall victim to this in the same way Blanche does, we fall into traps of believing our social destinies and roles are laid out in front of us, and we fall into them in the same way Blanche does, fitting ourselves into uncomfortable roles, that don’t fit, with lies and mistruths.
Blanche not only allows others to define her, she only feels her existence through the desires of others. Here she follows a well-worn track, a path all humans take to some amount, she affirms her existence through those around her. Human beings desire not other people in the physical sense but desire to be desired. We wish to be loved, liked, and accepted by those around us. We want friends, colleagues, and lovers to truly want us. It is one of our greatest drivers. Blanche’s desire is not a purely physical thing, it is separate from pure human need. She truly does want love, even though the trauma of her lost husband has stunted her emotionally. “Basically, we want "the desire of the other," which can be understood in the sense that we not only desire the other, but, more importantly, that we desire the other to desire us. The implication is simply that, without being looked at, acknowledged and desired, we do not exist.” (Thomieres 1), human beings are social animals, we exist dependent on society around us to exist and to affirm our existence.
Blanche is a compelling character because she speaks to the human experience. Her first lines in the play “They told me to take a street-car named Desire, and then transfer to one named Cemeteries and ride six blocks and get off at—Elysian Fields!” (Williams 6) are not only the central metaphor of the play but a metaphor for the human journey itself. All human beings desire the love of others, all human beings lie to some degree to try and gain the love of others, and all human beings will experience the loss of those close to them at some point. Blanche’s journey from the streetcar named Desire is the part of human life where our desire to be loved drives us to lie to ourselves and others. The streetcar named Cemeteries is the part of human experience when what we've built inevitably falls apart, where we lose those we love and the payment for our lies comes due. The Elysian Fields is the inevitable end where we lose ourselves, the end of all human journeys where we cease to exist. The entirety of “A Streetcar Named Desire” follows Blanche’s journey through this tale of humanity to its very end. We are Blanche. She represents the core of humanity and the human experience. Tennessee Williams uses Blanche to explore desire, its limits, and its conclusions (Thomieres 1), Williams accurately portrays a core feature of what it is to be human and explores this concept fully through Blanche. He also shows us it in the character Stella, with her desire to keep Stanley leading her into self-deceit. We see it in all of the characters in some degree, the self-delusion and lies led by their desires. Blanche’s journey will be their journey, and our own.
User avatar
By marjy
#14210878
@mikema63

CEMETERIES/ELYSIAN FIELDS

I would suggest that the streetcar named Cemeteries, not the Elysian Fields, is the inevitable end of all human journeys.

In Greek mythology, admission to the Elysian Fields was not a given. Admittance was decided by the gods for the heroic and the virtuous. Once admitted, mortals would remain after death to live a blessed and happy life, and continue in whatever employment they had enjoyed in life.

This may explain Blanche's exclamation at the end of her line “...and ride six blocks and get off at – Elysian Fields!”

Was this simple delight or perhaps surprise that she of all people, given her past, had been judged heroic or virtuous and thus deserving of entry?

CHARACTERS & ACCEPTANCE OF LIES

How successfully Blanche's lies are accepted is entirely dependent on the observer & their own desires. Mitch has a reciprocal desire for love and is therefore last to see through Blanche's facade. He wants it to be true. Stella is fully aware of the facade but shows forbearance because of her own desire not to hurt her sister.

Stanley needs nothing from Blanche, other than her departure, and is the first to see through her. In fact, he has no need to lie to anyone as all his needs and desires are met by Stella in the form of a ready meal, beer in the ice box, a pressed shirt for bowling and animal sex. He personifies the brutality of absolute truth in a social context.
By mikema63
#14210950
I find it boring as well, I just need it to be a strong essay.

@Marjy, I'm not sure that I should interpret it quite that deeply, though given her final delusions about going on a trip with a millionaire she might actually enjoy the asylum.
User avatar
By marjy
#14210997
mikema63 wrote:Marjy, I'm not sure that I should interpret it quite that deeply, though given her final delusions about going on a trip with a millionaire she might actually enjoy the asylum.

We-ll.

It's only a small suggestion, but...

If you're going to posit an interpretation of the Elysian Fields being the "inevitable end where we lose ourselves etc" it just might be an idea to show you fully understand the meaning and symbolism behind the name. After all, in terms of the plot, Blanche might just as well have arrived in the Old French Quarter, mightn't she?

The clues are in the title of the play and in the text.

Cemeteries are where we all end up. Elysian Fields represents the afterlife or paradise. Just saying.

With regard to Blanche's final delusion at the end of the film, that would be sheer conjecture on our part, so don't go there.

The play isn't about delusion though. It's about desire, covering up the truth (ugly truth at that), the lies employed to cover it up and then allowing yourself to be defined by other people if they believe them. Deluded people don't recognise the truth.

Blanche is in effect her own production team. She's author, make-up, costume, lighting and actress all rolled into one. Once the stage is set, she becomes the actress and it's at that point she believes in her role. That's where her delusion lies. She really believes in the role she's concocted for herself.

Your interpretation that Blanche might enjoy the asylum could simply signal your own desire for a "happy ever after" ending.

For what it's worth, and with regard to what happened next, I rather thought she'd end up either having shock therapy or a lobotomy.

It's a recurring theme in Tennessee Williams' work ("Suddenly Last Summer") because his sister suffered mental health issues and underwent a lobotomy.

Homosexuality is also a recurring theme in his work. Blanche's first husband Allan committed suicide because she told him he "disgusted her" after she discovered his liaison with an older man. In "Suddenly" Mrs. Venable wants her dead son Sebastian's cousin Catherine to have a lobotomy in order to eradicate Catherine's memories about her son's homosexuality and subsequent murder because of it, and of course, Tennessee was homosexual himself.

With all due respect, and especially with regard to the plays of Tennessee Williams, there's really no such thing as going "too deep".

Lordy, I hope you don't think you have to include my words verbatim. Just the salient point about Cemeteries & Elysian Fields.

All my guff is just explaining the point.

I think you've got the basis of a good interpretation in your essay. You just need to set your ducks out in a row a bit more clearly.

More new paragraphs would help too. That's probably why you think it's boring because it's one looooooong read.

I rather enjoyed it.

By mikema63
#14211004
Well, I enjoyed the story but after reading it three times, doing academic research, and writing an essay, I've lost the enjoyment.

Unfortunantly I'm already bumping the upper edge of word count for the assignment so If I add something I have to remove other stuff.
User avatar
By marjy
#14211857
You've written 1,088 words.

Surely you'd get an extra mark or two if instead of:

The streetcar named Cemeteries is the part of human experience when what we've built inevitably falls apart, where we lose those we love and the payment for our lies comes due. The Elysian Fields is the inevitable end where we lose ourselves, the end of all human journeys where we cease to exist.

You said something like:

The streetcar named Desire represents our journey though life and the streetcar named Cemeteries delivers us our inevitable end, the end of all journeys where we cease to exist. The Elysian Fields represents Elysium or the afterlife where entry is given only to the heroic or virtuous.

Which is 6 words fewer...

Anyhoo,

Good luck with your assignment.

By mikema63
#14212223
The due date is sadly been and gone.

Now I have to start my J Alfred Prufrock essay to stand in for my final.

The proposal I left to the last minute.

Spoiler: show
J. Alfred Prufrock is a neurotic, self-doubting, self-conscious, and indecisive product of the current culture of western civilization. He has no real self-identity, he is so caught up in worrying what other people think of him that he never really developed a proper sense of self. He worries about fashion and looks more than personality or being, he worries about what people will think of what he says rather than being honest about anything. In the words “Shall I part my hair behind?” (Eliot 1) we see him worrying about whether or not he should follow the latest fashions (parting your hair behind, rather than referring to a comb over, was actually a popular and fashionable hair style of the time). His worrying about how others perceive him has led him into the “bad faith” of Jean Paul Sartre, allowing others to define him instead of defining himself.
Heidegger’s “Being and Time” can help us understand the “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, “Prufrock, the protagonist of the poem, and the world he inhabits illustrate poetically concepts such as authenticity, inauthenticity, the "they", idle talk and angst, which Heidegger develops in "Being and time".” (Griffiths 1). The Protagonist of “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” is an inauthentic human being, a product of society’s obsession with surface and flash, drawing people into endless concern with appearances rather than substance. Prufrock represents the people terrified with the nameless they, “they will think I’m ugly” “they will think I’m an idiot”, these people filled with angst do nothing but idle talk terrified of revealing anything of substance about themselves and never gaining a self-identity, instead all falling into the trap of bad faith. This poem is well suited to an existentialist lens.
My paper will ask the question “What does ‘The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock’ say about social alienation in modern society?” I will argue, through the lens of existentialism that modern society has caused Prufrock to fall into “bad faith”, to lose his sense of self, and to remove all substance from his character until nothing is left but a neurotic so afraid of the nameless “they” that he cannot act meaningfully any longer.
By mikema63
#14213698
And now my Prufrock paper, got to do the presentation still.

Spoiler: show
“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” is a story of an indecisive man’s angst and indecision in dealing with “an overwhelming question…./Oh, do not ask, ‘What is it?’” (Eliot 10-1). This question I argue is part of an existential crisis. He worries “Do I dare/disturb the universe?” (Eliot 45-6) here he shows the conflict between showing his authentic self and simply “going with the flow” and not disturbing the status quo. His inability to connect to other people is driven by this existential crisis. His indecision and inability to bring himself to “disturb the universe” is driven by the “they” of Martin Heidegger as explained in his book “Being and Time” as the collective force of society. “They” are everyone else and the force they exert, their opinions and disapproval. Prufrock worries constantly about what “they” will think of him and I argue that it is “they” who create the indecision, existential conflict, and ultimately the social alienation of J. Alfred Prufrock.
Heidegger calls the essence of a person “Dasein”, the authentic Dasein is the one that is true to itself and defines itself and its own existence. The inauthentic Dasein by contrast does not define itself and does not face reality as it is. Prufrock is a quintessential inauthentic Dasein. His “overwhelming question” represents his struggle between authenticity and continuing in his inauthenticity. Prufrock’s angst is caused by this conflict between authenticity and inauthenticity, and we can see the result throughout the poem. His wish “I should have been a pair of ragged claws/Scuttling across the floors of silent seas.” (Eliot 73-4) is a longing for “thingness”. He here desires an end to his angst and conflict not by its coming to a head but by becoming a thing which has no true being and does not need to define itself. He longs for an end to the conflict within himself.
This existential crisis clearly drives Prufrock’s social alienation, but what drives his existential conflict? I argue that it is “they”, the amorphous blob of humanity whose judgment Prufrock so clearly fears,
And I have known the eyes already, known them all—
The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,
And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall, (Eliot 55-8).
We see here a metaphor for the cumulative force of “they” as a thousand eyes that pin him like a bug for dissection and judgment. The judgment of they is what ultimately prevents him from acting as himself finishing the stanza, “Then how should I begin/To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?/And how should I presume?” (Eliot 59-61). Prufrock’s social alienation is a product of the social atmosphere as we can see. He concerns himself with what is fashionable “Shall I part my hair behind?” (Eliot 122) and he constantly worries about what others will think and say about him “(They will say: ‘But how his arms and legs are thin!’)” (Eliot 44).
Prufrock is not the only victim of social alienation and inauthenticity in the poem. We get a sense of constant muttering and “Idle Talk”, another concept of Heidegger’s. In the poem we see a repetition of a few lines suggesting idle talk, “In the room the women come and go/Talking of Michelangelo.” (Eliot 13-4). These lines give a feeling of a throwaway conversation of no serious import and suggest that these women do not really seek understanding Michelangelo but are simply speaking about what others have said about him. This is one of the main manifestations of “they” in Heidegger’s work, the vacuous gossip of people that lacks any of their own essence. These women too seem incapable of adding anything authentic of themselves in this idle talk at parties where they gather, and like Prufrock, allow the force of “they” to guide them in what they do and say. In the very first lines of the poem it is even suggested that we too are subject to this force. The epitaph used to preface the poem from “Dante’s Inferno” is of a man who tells his story to another only because he believes the other is just as doomed as he is. So too Prufrock begins “Let us go then you and I,” (Eliot 1) speaking to the reader with the same sense as the tortured soul in the inferno. You are just as doomed as he and just as unable to ask the question that would disturb the universe, the same question that Roquentin asks in Jean Paul Sartre’s book “Nausea” “Can you justify your existence then? Just a little?” (177).
Prufrock in the end deceives himself in the face of “they”. He continues to tell himself that he has time to decide in the future. In the end he admits to himself that he is no prince Hamlet and cannot even ask the question, to be or not to be? “’The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock’ is, thus, a poem about a man consciously deceiving himself in order to make his life (more) bearable” (Vujin 6). He lives his life by measuring it in the mundanity of coffee spoons. He does not ever act of his own will but only by the will of others. Sartre describes this as “bad faith”, the allowing of others to define you instead of defining yourself. His character Roquentin in “Nausea” is the same “Thus Nausea and Prufrock both depict the bad faith of role-playing.” (Irwin 7). Clearly we can see how Prufrock is role-playing in the poem. Fretting over fashion and the opinions of others he is driven to follow the will of others and play a set role for them.
The effect of the force of “they” does not affect Prufrock alone in this poem but all the people in it are hinted at as playing their roles. Even the reader is implicated in dancing to the tune of society at large. We often do find ourselves playing a variety of roles to please others and avoid criticism. We can clearly see in the poem how society at large (the “they”) has caused Prufrock’s social alienation. We can also see that it is not Prufrock alone who is affected by it. “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” is clearly a story about a man’s social alienation at the hands of society but also clearly lends itself to an existential analysis of his internal and external conflicts.
#14215692
There has been some debate for a long time as to whether Eliot puts the blame (or explanation) for JAP's alienation to society or not. That he does is not clear in the poem. I tend to think that when the poem was written, there was a lot of social structure, hierarchy, everyone knew what they were supposed to know, do, be . However one of the expecations of certin more economically secure classes was to chatter about art but never experience it..."in the room the women go, talking of Michaelangelo". Interesting that they should speak of such masculine forms which jar so much with the sense of insubstantiality that they present.
This is why I asked about class...Eliot was describing the chattering classes, the ones who thought they were refined and intellectual but who never experienced any of the things they admired. They lived in a prophylactic world and as an artist who was discussed, he was, IMO, poking a finger of criticism at them, but I don't thnik he blamed "society" for their distance. He blamed them who had choices and took the easy one...conformity with the societal expectations of certain class but not of all society.

The rest sounds fine.
By mikema63
#14215732
The rest sounds fine.


The rest isn't my thesis.

Well it's to late now, I have to present it today.

Leslie woman gets to the point. Lol. https:[…]

I'm surprised to see the genocide supporters (lik[…]

@JohnRawls What if your assumption is wrong???[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

This is the issue. It is not changing. https://y[…]