In today's Socratic Circle, we explored the Jogger's Song by Roger McGough and as I was one of the members of the first circle, we talked about the Jogger's point of view. I found that all my circle members had something to contribute and were very eager to do so too which shows that everyone had prepared well before coming to the circle.
However, most of us were hesitant to start off the conversation and I personally kept in mind not to be overbearing as highlighted by other members of the floor previously. I assume that the others also felt that way as being a dominating speaker often makes other uncomfortable to voice their opinions in fear of being 'lashed' back.
We also started off clumsily and hopped off from point to point, until Ms. Abena told us to follow a stanza arrangement and that greatly gave structure to our discussions. It was interesting as a female to hear the counterpart's view on sexual harassment as this poem was almost disturbing for me. The lack of remorse from the "Jogger" was inhumane in my perspective but as we discussed, we further develop ideas of the "Jogger"'s twisted personality that might be stemmed from being a psychopath.
The second circle was equally impressive in terms of the change of vocal speakers this time, were I noticed Jit really speaking out and making better efforts in engaging with others. I felt as though the ice in our classroom chemistry is slowly melting and everyone is beginning to get familiar with each other which is a good progress.
Overall, today had not been our best socratic circle performance but we could definitely see the impact of preparation before a discussion and others also realize the benefit it puts us at. I hope that everyone would do their part and be better prepared as well to be more confident and proactive when discussing the next time.
How are the character and attitudes of the jogger revealed in the language the poet uses?
In "The Jogger's Song", the egocentric jogger display immense vanity when as he exclaims that he "look after [himself]" and "keep [himself] fit" with terms such as "fit" and "good body" being repetitive as it shows that he strongly reaffirms himself of his own physical assets.
The jogger also crosses between a self-righteous individual and a psychopath as he acts hypocritically towards the woman's behavior while showing no capacity or remorse for her in her intoxicated situation. The jogger behaves as a hypocrite as he condemns the act of the woman for being"pissed", a derogative term for being intoxicated, and claims to know what a "nice girl" would be where the woman display acts that astray herself from that "nice girl" image in the jogger's perspective.
However, as the jogger appear to have expectations towards the moral standards of the woman, the jogger himself breaches ethical values when he rapes the woman and cements his own belief that consent was given as shown by her unconscious body language when intoxicated. The absence of sympathy and complete misinterpretation of the woman's plead ( "Cryin. Cryin.") as a sexual invitation clearly shows the lack of rationale in the jogger's character.
Moreover, the jogger alludes misogyny in the form of sexual discrimination and objectification towards to women by using gender-specific semantic field of slurs such as "slut"and "tart" (both carrying the meaning of being a promiscuous woman) on his victim. These terms degrade the women as lowly and seemingly having less morals than the jogger in his eyes.
Lastly, the most compelling phrase that display the depth of brutality of the jogger's character was when he questions "Why didn't she scream?" if the victim had not enjoyed the assault as it simply highlights the grotesque indignity the jogger is placing upon his victim as he claims that the woman had not stood up for herself hence rhetorically, the assault would then be her fault, and not his.
I found this satirical video relevant to my paragraph:
After we touched a little on Language and Gender this week. I used to only have clear examples of the implication of gender in profanity as demonstrated in our semantic fields activity on Wednesday. Many profanity words were specific to a gender and that was my first idea of the implication of gender in English.
However, I realize that it's not only profanity or certain words but whole sentences itself could be sexist as we did the activity on Thursday by 'neutralizing' gender specific terms and sentences such as postman to postal worker, housewife to homemaker and how making certain words plural such as "doctor" to "doctors" changes it to a noun hence not needing to specify a specific gender to associate it with.
I was surprised when we learnt various terminologies such as diminutive suffixes as I've always seen these words but have only seen them in a new light. For example, the usage of 'ess' and 'ette' at the end of words do add a feminine emphasis but I never knew it also make some lesser, smaller and more inferior in the the example we use which was "kitchenette". Generic terms such as 'man' use in 'mankind' to describe the race of humans including women also struck me as even the term "woman" has "man" in it hence I question the involvement of this gender-specific term ("man") in general terms such as mankind. This certainly made me feel disempowered as a female seeing terms such as described above not prioritizing the role in women and treated with a sense of disregard.
On the hand, I also came to realize lexis asymmetry serves as a concrete evidence that women and men need different ways of address as some words can't be generalized for both. For example, the word buff would be associated with positive values for males but when a female is called buff, it would seem live a derogative term.
Learning about language and gender is certainly interesting as we observe the cultural and societal implications towards genders in language as I feel like I am reading the 'in-between', subtle lines of communication and grow a sense of awareness towards gender biasses in language. I hope that through learning about language and gender, I would be more cautious in the way I think and speak as I believe this would lead to a sense of better respect towards others.
This week in English, I definitely saw an improvement on most of my classmates in our socratic circle discussing the Irish Language. Everyone definitely spoke up and contributed more which shows how we as a class is progressing towards a better conduct of the socratic circle.
The screening of Pygmalion was also extremely useful but I was only interested in Act 1 as I've only read that before the screening. However, now that I've completed Act 2, I regretted not catching the screening of Act 2 as well but I will try to download the play to watch. I would prefer watching the play only after I've read the acts as my mind would then force me to remember details from the text and combine it visually with the imagery from the screenplay. I found it really interesting to see the lines acted out and found some lines that made more sense when played out in the screenplay.
For the Further Oral Assessment, I felt that there wasn't enough preparation time this week. My thesis is still rather vague and my initial plans of wanting to do a duo performance cease to work out. Since our FOA proposals only started to get through the review process this weekend as well, I felt that I would need more time to get my FOA proposal to be better constructed time and more time for rehearsing.
Confounded to the rules of everyday dreariness, we become the de facto dictators in our routines.
The everyday blandness of the conventional hence numbs the astute eye for reflection.
Just a sense of deeper awakening towards the minuscule details; we let it slip through our fingers. But sometimes, the brain can only process so much at once and for people like me, I feel like my clarity is shrouded when time simply presses you to a routine and we become so oblivious to things that aren't in our field of focus.
The details enrich our lives incredibly and when you see it, you will realize the immense amount of life that constantly pass by you and just how much time you've let slip by. The more you observe, the bigger the image grows.
As an example, I often ponder on the characteristics of people. I would ask, why is she/he the way they are? What would have caused this? What does their body language tell me? Without them noticing you gawking like a freak, you'll learn so much more about others and eventually yourself by just observing the world around you as some vague saying goes, you get to see how green your grass is only when you've seen the grass on the other side or something.
I just try to make time whenever I can to observe the smallest details because there really is so much to an every day occurrence then we realize.
Monday: Today, we reflected on our Bal Gangadhar Tilak assignment and analyzed if we've chosen appropriate information from the text source. Most of my points were mentioned and fitted the answer. We also looked at Tilak more as he played an important role in the Indian Independence Movement and served as its first popular leader, according to Wikipedia.
We also looked upon factors that motivated the split and reunification of Bengal and its causes, particularly for divide and conquering purposes, suppressing uprisings and the allowance of concessions. We also touched upon the reactions from the British and Indian perspective regarding the Bengal partition.
Lastly, we also noted on the impact of the 1st World War on the Indians and the British Colony.
Reflection on Gandhi, "Person of the Century" for Time Magazine
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi has been known as a "Mahatma" (Sanskrit for 'greater soul') and also a "Bapuji" (respectful way of addressing elder men in India) in his life. A moral icon to many yet an icon of mere novelty to some.
Gandhi is known for is non-violent movements, his leadership in the Indian National Congress, religious tolerance and Swaraj( self -governing) but I can't help but to notice how these ideas were originally derived from Bal Gangadhar Tilak, whom is also a source of inspiration to Gandhi as he applies acts such as boycotting as practiced by Tilak before. This make Gandhi seem like the 'finisher' of a task instead of a pioneering leader like Tilak, whose ideas where shunned because of its 'extreme' value during his time.
Moreover, Gandhi's forceful "insistent on absolute regularity boldly appears as acts of novelty at times as he indulges in "faddish dietetic experiments" as if trying to show off or make a point, obvious. Through acts of defiance against British manufactured goods and sewing his own robes, bathing in ashes etc., Gandhi's "(Call) for a nation that would turn its back on technology to prosper through village self-sufficiency" simply appears as a "backward, romantic vision of a simple society" that may not be pragmatic.
However, these acts could be a symbolic way of showing a deeper meaning as Gandhi describes, "Action is my domain". Hence in this sense, his public acts aim to perhaps, ignite an epiphany for others and to allow them to ponder on the drastically and exaggerated acts. These simple acts, act as great symbolism and inspiration to others.
Reflection on Socratic Circles:- Vocabulary
half-a-crown (line 161, pg.13): (noun) A coin formerly used in Great Britain, worth two shillings and sixpence.
I've always heard this term when I watch British movies and always wondered if it meant the Queen's royal crown (really expensive). In the context of Pygmalion in the time of the Victorian Era (1837-1901) this would have worth a lot hence used as exaggeration when mentioned by the The Flower Girl as she was filthy poor.
liberties (line 282, pg.16): (noun) the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
Even after knowing what liberties meant, I'm still unsure as to what it means in the context of "You take us for dirt under your feet, don't you? Catch you taking liberties with a gentleman!" (line 281-282, pg.16) :(
kerbstone (line 406, pg.20): [as adj. ] informal unqualified; amateur : curbstone commentators.
After knowing what kerbstone meant, it was easy to understand its usage in the context of the phrase "kerbstone english", portraying really basic English or unsophisticated English.
Strategies/Techniques for Comprehension and Analysis
Clarifying before changing topics- Gives other participants in the discussion a heads-up and to avoid confusion
Analyzing a topic completely before moving on- This is important to allow all participants in the discussion to thoroughly understand the context of the question and to make sure everybody is on the same level of understanding before leaping into another topic.
Being a proactive questioner- Being a proactive questioner helps to push dreary discussions forward and to constantly engage with members of the circle to produce fruitful discussions. Reflection on Performance
Today, I really saw most of my classmates putting in effort to improve the socratic circle than before.
Personally, I believe I was not prepare enough for today's Socratic Circle meet as I did not study the specific excerpt that was assigned to us. I have only read Act 1 hence I knew the gist of the story but I had not studied specific selection of texts to be brought forward in discussions. I unfortunately had not had the chance to speak in the circle today but I believe my commentary on the quality of the circle discussions would be helpful as I complimented my fellow classmates who made significant improvement and stated their strategies such as clarifying before changing topics, staying on topic and being a proactive questioner.
As we discussed about an example of a socratic circle conversation before starting our circle on Pygmalion Act 1, Ashraf noticed the importance of the "questioner" or simply, the initiative to ask questions when the discussion gets dull in efforts of sparking energy back into discussion. Not only did he observe but he impressively applied that method in his turn within the socratic circle and helped his circle to analyze finer details. Danial and Jit also steered discussions back into topic when discussions were going off which is commendable. Moreover, Shahirah also clarified before she moved into a new topic while discussing which I thought would be a great method to practice as this will prevent us from getting confused and engulfed in different topics.
Reflection on Content
Thesis: "Symbolism of gender hierarchy in Act 1."
First paragraph: In Act 1 of Pygmalion, I found it particularly interesting when I saw the contrast in hierarchy between the conversations of The Daughter and Freddy, and The Flower Girl and The Note Taker. In my imaginary essay, I would highlight the grammar of all 4 speakers, and identify which has the highest quality of sophistication as after today's analysis, the quality of their discourse reflects upon their status. Moreover, I would also investigate the weak points of each of their speech and determine what creates the aura of submissiveness as displayed by Freddy and The Flower Girl, who are the subservient characters when conversing with The Daughter and The Flower Girl respectively.
Second paragraph: The study of the symbolism of gender hierarchy in Act 1 could be relevant to the hierarchy of gender today as many assume that Men are usually the dominating figures but in retrospect, there also have been cases where women were also leading figures such as Cleopatra, who was the last pharaoh of Egypt for example. However in symbolism, the modern day has an array of them in the sense of household tasks and the task of "bringing back the bacon" usually associated with a specific gender.
'Ghetto' English
This video entitled "Priorities" is a parodical comparison of the Malaysian English accent with a British accent, demonstrated by Dennis (the specky Asian guy) and Joe (Joe Brooks, Caucasian).
The context of the conversation is preparing for an English exam hence the need to revise for it was belittled by Joe who sarcastically huffs and muttered, "Dude it's an English exam.... English, in "English" as a response to Dennis's grammatically poor probe, "Eh cue me, don't you have English exam tomorrow morning? Video game? Real-ly?"
Dennis' way of speaking also displayed very basic sentences and often lacking in vocabulary hence sounding unfinished or partial as shown when he said, "Don't you have English exam tomorrow morning?" where the usage of 'an' before "English" was absent. Hence the syntax of the typical Malaysian English accent is usually 'broken' as sentences are often incomplete with appropriate grammar.
As the discourse between Dennis as Joe is often initiated by Dennis and is short as well, merely exchanges of 1-2 sentences every time, this also displays the lexis of a Malaysian English accent whereby it's often informal, short and straight to the point.
However, pragmatics is also used often as implied when Dennis asks "Eh cue me, don't you have English exam tomorrow morning?" but is not too complicated to be perceived.
Even as Dennis tries harder than Joe and revises more, we could still see that Joe has a better lexis and syntax as his sentences are not grammatically incorrect while Dennis struggles with "was" and "were". This then places Dennis, who spoke with such 'broken' syntax, at a weaker spot as his speeches isn't as sophisticated as Joe's in terms of grammar, lexis and syntax.
