Breana Narine

  • I agree with the expansion on the oppression of Mrs. Mallard’s husband. It’s an interesting concept but may be hard to prove with the times and how marriages were constructed. Women had close to no autonomy and because of this men certainly held most if not all power in a marriage. You mention that she never mentions how her husband oppresses her…[Read more]

  • I haven’t thought of a lot of the points you bring up in your post. The possibility of the telegram just not being a reliable form of information and therefore magnifying Richards’ role in this whole spectacle is a really interesting perspective. At first we see him as a side character who does nothing but carry the information he’s learned to a…[Read more]

  • This is a great take on the story. Whereas in my own response, I didn’t focus on the use of technology I think this response is apt in it’s focus on technology. It is true that without the telegram the horrible news would not have been told to Mrs. Mallard to start with and would’ve delayed her heart episode indefinitely. And the comparison to…[Read more]

  • Kingston writes about an aunt whose existence is a mystery. Her mother brings the idea of her aunt up. But we never really know if the aunt exists. Kingston uses this story from her mother to also show different […]

  • Reading through Fitzgerald’s essay, there is an overtone of hopelessness and disappointment. Even when Fitzgerald describes his youth, these aren’t scenes bathed in sunshine as the term ‘youth’ brings to mind but […]

  • This chapter deals mainly with how to grab a reader’s attention and the importance of action before setting in doing so. When starting to read Rebecca Skloot’s “Fixing Nemo”, we are put into a scene that is told […]

  • Sontag often uses the word artifice to describe one aspect of camp as a whole. Reading through the essay the word usage conveys an image of richness without having to be proper. By Sontag’s definition, camp is […]

    • Very lovely response to Sontag’s essay. However, there is one part of our response, in which I will have to disagree (at least partially): You write, “The idea of a woman through the concept of camp would most likely produce a woman in the most extreme sense of the word, heavy with makeup, hair and adorned in a gown therefore pushing the idea of ‘woman’ as well as femininity to the max.”
      What I disagree with is that females in “campy art” don’t necessarily have to be heavily painted with make-up or wearing any specific outfit like a gown. However, they (females) will if the scene or setting calls for it. Their femininity would in deed come out in their dress as well as their behavior. A female in a camp piece can just as well be wearing a business suit, but usually they would acquire some masculine characteristics as well to match the patriarchal notion that the business world is a place populated by shrewd men.
      What you describe as a feminine character being gussied up in dress and make-up would more closely resemble how camp treats transsexuals. If you’ve ever watched The Rocky Horror Picture Show, you’d have a good idea of what I’m referring to (a la Dr. Frank N. Furter).
      But you’re on point with the artificial theme of camp, how it lessens the suspension of disbelief, as when all know that it’s an engaging show and just a “show,” and some of us enjoy it all the more that way. Camp is a universe onto itself, unlike nature, but still very much inspired by it (only exaggerated and fabulously redone), creating a unique atmosphere all its own. It brings out the extravagant, often celebrating the unusual, and rose-tints our experience. It can make a low-budget film or play into a sprawling masterpiece enjoyed and recreated for generations on end. What power this thing called “camp” has!