Thinking Outside of the Box

"Everything has been figured, except how to live." - Jean-Paul Sartre
"We do not know yet what we want and yet we are responsible for what we are - that is a fact." Jean-Paul Sartre.

 Think about the place you have chosen as your hell. Does it look ordinary and bourgeois, like Sartre’s drawing room, or is it equipped with literal instruments of torture like Dante’s Inferno? Can the mind be in the hell in beautiful place? Is there a way to find peace in a hellish physical environment? Enter Sartre’s space more fully and imagine how it would feel to live there endlessly, night and day.

This is my hell. A place wher I am relegated to continue my existence as one character, one face, while the Others continue to milk me for all I'm worth while I suffer the fallout of said milking. In all seriousness, though, my hell is a place that is indistinguishable from reality. Everything looks the same, everything feels the same, everything smells the same. However, there is a subtle rift about this place. No one cares about you. No one. They will ignore you no matter what you do. Talk to them, and they will simply go about their lives as if you never existed. You can do anything you want, but it has no consequences. No one will react, no one will notice. And the best part: this goes about every day. You don't age. The concept of time has been eradicated. Kinda reminds me of this. Except no happy ending. Meaning, you are stuck forever with your thoughts, but no one to share them with. Have fun staying sane.

Could hell be described as too much of anything without a break? Are variety,moderation and balance instruments we use to keep us from boiling in any inferno of excess,' whether it be cheesecake or ravenous sex?

While hell could be described that way, I lean more towards the notion that hell is a whole lot of nothing. That it presents the illusion of anything while, in reality, it's nothing. Much like BioWare and choices. They present the illusion that choice is present, but in reality that choice is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what you choose, because the story is still going to advance anyways as if that choice were never made. That's hell. You're given the illusion that there's too much of anything and everything when it's nothing. An illusion to act as a catalyst for insanity. An illusion, forcing you to abandon all sense of moderation so that desperation and insanity start hastening into your bloodstream. Moderation, the sign of sanity, gone forever.

How does Sartre create a sense of place through dialogue? Can you imagine what it feels like to stay awake all the time with the lights on with no hope of leaving a specific place?How does GARCIN react to this hell? How could you twist your daily activities around so that everyday habits become hell? Is there a pattern of circumstances that reinforces the experience of hell?

By having Garcin and the Valet engage in dialogue, with Garcin playing a round of 20 Questions. By having Garcin continually ask questions concerning his existence and the perception of hell, we get the idea that this hell is never ending. We also get the idea that Garcin cannot accept the fact that he is in hell. He is still in denial and wants to re-live back in Earth. And who wouldn't blame him? I'd go insane if I was stuck in the same place for the rest of my life. Heck, I might try to deny it even existed, and pulled one of those cliched movie tricks where the character says "It's all a dream. If I go to sleep, I'll wake up in my bed..." but everyone in the world knows that the dream is reality. And that could also affect my activities. Playing the same video game at the same spot the whole time would make anyone want to eliminate their existence. Playing the same song over and over (like this one or this one) would drive anyone to the point of insanity where men like Jeffrey Dahmer, Ottis Toole and Henry Lee Lucas seem reasonable. As evidenced by Groundhog Day, if I had to relive the same day over and over again, I would start losing my wits and my sanity. 

Compare how Plato and Sartre describe the limitations of our thinking and imply solutions to the problem. Be sure to analyze their literary techniques, especially their use of allegory and extended metaphor.

Plato regards thinking as a burden that rests on the individual. Each person is very well capable of thinking for themselves and figuring out that shadows are irrelevant: it's what causes the shadows that is important. All it requires... is a little *push*. Sartre is much more complex. As evidenced by his portrayal of Garcin and Estelle, it's not enough to simply break the chains of ignorance. Rather, you acknowledge your existence and refuse to allow others to create a reflection of you. You are determined by you. Your perception is a direct result of what you've experienced in your life. Everything else is just someone's refection of you. For those who cannot cope with this, life is tough. They cannot create a meaning of their "self" and resort to relying on others to form an opinion of themselves. 

Literature Analysis #4: A Christmas Carol

“Happiness is not something ready made. It comes from your own actions.” - Dalai Lama XIV

1. The story begins on a "cold, bleak, biting" Christmas Eve. It has been seven years since the death of Scrooge's business partner, Jacob Marley, yet Scrooge is still as miserly and despicable as before. He refuses to donate any money to the poor, he refuses to visit his cousin Fred, and the only reason he allows Bob Cratchit the day off with pay is because it's customary. However, that all changes when he is visited by the ghost of Jacob Marley. Jacob tries to warn Scrooge that if he doesn't change his ways, he will be stuck in misery and torment in the afterlife. As such, Scrooge will be visited by three ghosts: the Ghost of Christmas Past, the Ghost of Christmas Present, and the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. The Ghost of Christmas Past shows just how happy Scrooge was in his younger years, and how his increasing love for money caused him to alienate his love, Belle,  and to become more and more coldhearted, to the point where he's a shell of his former self. The Ghost of Christmas Present shows Scrooge many different people celebrating Christmas, such as the marketplace, but most importantly, of Bob Cratchit and his family. Scrooge also takes note of Tiny Tim, and how he's sick, but can't be cured because Bob's pay is so low. Finally, he is visited by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. The Ghost shows Scrooge the death of Tiny Tim, and how, when Scrooge dies, no one attends to his funeral, and how his house woman has stolen some of his belongings so as to sell them. Scrooge is also shown how his grave is the only one left unattended. This prompts Scrooge to vow to change his ways, which he does. He donates a turkey to the Cratchits, he visits his nephew Fred, and he donates money to the poor. The story ends with Scrooge completely changed as a person, one who is now the epitome of the spirit of Christmas.
2. The theme of the novel is simple: redemption and kindness. As is shown with Scrooge, it doesn't matter how much of jerk you are. If you can set your mind straight, and put your heart to it, you can redeem yourself. And that redemption will bring more happiness than money ever will. Which also leads to kindness: Scrooge was at his happiest when he was helping others, and enjoying life. He was at his worst when his focus was on money, and nothing else. Thus, money is the root of all evil.
3. The author's tone changes based on which ghost is present. From the beginning all the way up to the Ghost of Christmas Past, the tone is very somber, very melancholy. The Ghost of Christmas Past is much more sorrowful, much more nostalgic. The Ghost of Christmas Present is jovial, happy. The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come is foreboding, ominous. The ending is very happy, very light.
4. Pathos - Tiny Tim is the embodiment of pathos. We have a small, innocent, happy kid who preaches forgiveness, yet is sick and dying. Simply put, if you aren't moved by Tiny Tim, then you have no soul. And as we saw with Scrooge, he still has a soul. Tiny Tim is what allows him to break away from his shell.
Symbolism - For Jacob Marley, we have a man who is held together with "cash-boxes, keys, padlocks, ledgers, deeds, and heavy purses wrought in steel". In short, we have a man who is chained together. This is supposed to signify what happens to those in the afterlife who do not do good deeds. That those who do bad deeds will be chained by them in the afterlife. Another example is the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. He is foreboding, dark, and we don't see his face. He is like a shadow. This symbolizes how the future is a dark and mysterious place. However, as evidenced by his lack of face, it doesn't have to be that way. We can change the future.
Foreshadow - First, we have the mention of Marley, and how it's been seven years since his death. Coincidentally, Marley shows up to pay Scrooge a visit. Then we have the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, a man who portends to Scrooge what will happen if he doesn't change his ways.
Allegory - This novel, to put it succinctly, is an allegory of the Golden Rule "Treat others the way you want to be treated." and all about giving rather than receiving. It demonstrates the power that love and kindness can have on an individual and the community as a whole.
Irony - The Ghost of Christmas Present, by using Scrooges words against him, demonstrates to him how wrong and ignorant they are. By using "Are there no workhouses?" and "If they would rather die, they better do it..." as verbal irony, he shows Scrooge how wrong he is, and allows for Scrooge to start changing as a person.

Characterization
1. Direct characterization: Scrooge is "a squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner..." (pg. 1) and "Marley's face...had a dismal light about it..."
Indirect characterization "'If they would rather die,' said Scrooge, 'they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.'" and "'The Founder of the Feast indeed!' cried Mrs Cratchit, reddening. 'I wish I had [Scrooge] here. I'd give him a piece of my mind to feast upon, and I hope he'd have a good appetite for it.'"
Part of the reason Dickens switches between direct and indirect is based on the situation at hand. For example, there is a much larger impact when Scrooge says "If they would rather die, they better do it..." as opposed to Dickens simply writing "And Scrooge found the poor undesirable and useless..." Another example is Mrs. Cratchit. What she says has a much larger impact on Scrooge and the audience as opposed to Dickens simply stating "Mrs. Cratchit had a strong dislike of Scrooge." This also allows for a greater showing when it comes to the evolution of Scrooge, as now what he says directly contradicts his earlier statements, which supports the concept that Scrooge has indeed changed as a person.
2. The author's syntax does not change. It's constant. Dickens, at least with A Christmas Carol, writes succinctly. The novel itself is very short, so there isn't much room for Dickens to start changing things up. Also, the focus of the story is its message, how it's an allegory to the "spirit of Christmas". As such, changing syntax or diction based on whether or not he is focusing on Scrooge is irrelevant to Dickens.
3. Scrooge is, for obvious reasons, is a round, dynamic character. At the beginning of his life, he is an innocent, carefree man who tries to enjoy himself. However, as he gets older, his love of money triumphs over his love of life. He becomes more despicable, more miserly. He becomes a "Scrooge". At the twilight of his life, though, things change. Because Jacob Marley and the three Ghosts visit Scrooge, he is able to change his ways. Now he is kind. Now he is giving. Now he is the embodiment of the spirit of Christmas.
4. I would say I came off reading a character. Now, that's not bad or anything, but it is what it is. Scrooge seems like a tool, a means to an end. His change is so quick that it almost seems unreal. In the span of eight hours, he transforms from a "Scrooge" to the embodiment of Christmas. As such, he seems less human, and more of a character in a novel. Someone you might mention, yet never really talk about.

Allegory of the Cave Sonnet

There was this man, who whence came-forth
Who so told us an idea that was most intriguing
That these shadows, and all their worth
Were nothing more than false believing

That our attribution
Of words to their shadows
Was nothing more than dilution
And of it, very shallow

The meaning is lost within
Rather the focus should be
On what causes the shadows wherein
One can spread his knowledge to thee

We laughed, and bid the poor bastard good-bye
For who can trust a man who's mind has gone awry?

Plato's Allegory of the Cave

1. The Allegory of the Cave represents knowledge, and how the majority of people, like the inhabitants of the cave, think they are knowledgeable, but in reality aren't. They are under the illusion that they are knowledgeable. And they will continue to live under that illusion unless they free themselves from their ignorance. As Johnson C. said "All truth goes through three steps: First it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Only until the people realize that their ascribing of words to shadows is wrong will they reach divination.
2. The key elements are the entire cave and its descriptions. For example, painting the prisoners in shackles who are unable to turn their heads reinforces the mindset that Plato is trying to teach Glaucon. That the people themselves aren't stupid. It's just that they wrongly prescribe a word to a shadow when they actually are referring to the "idea" of the shadow. That when someone mentions a "book", they are talking about the physical "shadow" of the book. However, a philosopher, when he mentions a "book", is talking about what causes the book, the idea behind the book, as opposed to the physical object at hand. This is shown through the usage of shadows. The prisoners attribute the shadows to the real thing because they don't know any better. However, those that turn their head eventually figure it out. That the shadow isn't reality as believed before. It's what causes the shadows that matters. Unless you turn your head, you will be in a sea of ignorance.
3. That it's difficult. It's very difficult. Simply put, everything you once knew, gone. Just like that. You have to forget everything you taught yourself. You're going to have to acknowledge you were wrong the whole time. Not many people can. And you, and you alone, are going to have to bring about that change. You are going to have to turn your head (and suffer the pain and consequences) if you wish to unshackle yourself from ignorance. However, the reward is great. Now, you are no longer ignorant. Now, you are strong. Now, you are enlightened.
4. That the cave dwellers are in their small hole of ignorance. That these dwellers, by the means of shackles, cannot see what is the cause of the shadows. As such, they attribute the shadows for reality. They do not focus on the "how" and "why" but only on the physical objects themselves.
5. The focus on wealth and fame as a measure of success. The attempt to accrue and cram as much information as possible without focusing on its importance and relevance. The shortsightedness of most people, such as investors in Wall Street. Politics in the U.S. The concept of school and forcing students into a "standardized environment." The attempt to censor information, whether in the Internet, books, etc.
6. The freed prisoner is enlightened. He is ecstatic. He has information that others do not. He knows things others do not. He can see things others cannot. He can hear things others can't. Above all else, he can comprehend things others cannot. The prisoners, however, can't say the same. They are still ignorant. They cannot comprehend what they cannot see. They are short-sighted.
7. One way is simply through communication. It is hard to explain new information to people without them either getting confused. DICE tried that with Frostbite 2. They explained that most gamers simply wouldn't understand the complexity of said engine, and so wouldn't release any mod and dev kits. There was a huge uproar because, let's be honest, who wants to be called stupid? However, people who used the engine acknowledged that it was indeed difficult. Which leads to my second point. Ignorance. People hate being proven wrong. So what do they do? Simply ignore the information at hand. Pretend it doesn't exist, or believe the other is wrong.
8. There are two ways to free oneself: Either one goes through the pain and suffering to turn their head and removing the shackles, and succeeds, or one listens to the said freed prisoner and is assisted in removing the collar. Either one requires sheer will and determination on the end user though. Simply put, YOU, and only YOU, are the determinate of your own success.
9. I would agree that reality and appearances are different. Look no further than here or here as examples. What we perceive as reality could very well be a figment of our imagination. People see what they want to see, so appearances will be different compared to reality. But above all else, we have no proof that this is reality. This could all be some complex simulation, and we'd have no way of knowing.
10. If Socrates is wrong, then I have two things:
Reality is appearances. There are no differences whatsoever. Those that claim otherwise are liars who want to seem smarter than they are. Or...

IT'S ALL A DREAM! DUN-DUN-DUN.