Oni

"'Dance with this,' and I dance and as the wind stirs in the trees..." (235). The final line of the novel Power ends with reference to Oni, or wind. Oni is not simply wind for the Taiga people, but rather a source of life that sustains. As Omishto fans herself and dances, she creates her own wind. A wind that empowers her to be the woman she desires to be. The woman that she knows she can be. Does our breath create a wind for others, a wind which helps them fly? I really liked the idea of Oni that was mentioned throughout the text because for them this wind is what keeps them going from day to day. What keeps you going from day to day? Others' expectations? External pressure? God? Faith? For me, it is a combination of many things, but it is definitely an intangible presence.

Knowledge vs. Belief

Omishto says that "believing and knowing are two lands distant from each other" (40). In my opinion, knowing and believing have more in common than some understand but it is crucial to be able to distinguish between the two. To know something is based off of provable facts based on first hand knowledge of something that you have experienced. Essentially, believing is putting faith in some other input and accepting it as truth. The things we believe require no proof or evidence. We believe them because they are part of and support a larger system of beliefs that we have been forming throughout our lives. They are most often things that have no empirical evidence nor do we feel that they require any. Knowledge only takes a person so far, and at a certain point a person simply needs to believe. This is why I see knowing and believing to be similar because they are continual, when knowledge ends belief picks up. Knowledge and belief compliment each other and together they establish ourselves. It seems that Omishto is confused on these two, and thus is insecure about herself and is greatly influenced by her surroundings. Do you think Omishto is struggling to find herself in these two worlds: the old and the new? What does she know and what does she believe?

What's in a name?

In both novels, Lucy and Power names play a significant part of the main character's identity. Lucy Josephine Potter is a character who has an identity issue. When she learns the origin of her name she finds relief and a sense of self: Lucy- derived from Lucifer is a reference to the devil, Josephine- named after a wealthy uncle with hopes he may share some of his wealth, and Potter- after a wealthy English man who was a slave owner. To me these names do not reflect who Lucy is, but understanding the significance of these names allows Lucy to take ownership of each name regardless of their accuracy. Omishto, also wears a name with significance, meaning "the one who watches." Like these girls, I, too, hold a great sense of identity with my name. From the start, I have had to deal with mispronunciations and misspellings of my name- Máire pronounced Mora. They even spelled my name wrong on my birth certificate! Máire is the gaelic name for Mary meaning "bitterness," "wished for child," and "beloved." Since I have had to deal with a lot of mispronunciation, I have learned to love and take a great sense of ownership and pride in my name. As unique as it is, it fits my personality to a "t"! I know we talked about this a little in class, but do you take ownership of your name like Lucy, Omishto, and I do? Or would you prefer to have been named something else?

The Impact of a Books Cover

I found an anonymous quote that says, "A closed book is a closed mind." I would like to disagree with this statement because so much about a book can often be interpreted from its cover, while the book is closed. Your mind takes the image and runs with it. Despite the common phrase "don't judge a book by its cover" everyone does it, most likely unconsciously. In the novel Lucy, the cover tells the reader a lot about the content of the book, but without knowing what to look for the plain cover could be overlooked amidst a shelf full of books. Looking at this cover for the first time, the flat colors mesh together to create an image of a solemn woman. The contrast between her skin tones and the harsh orange background create a sharp distinction between the two. The circle with the image in the center focuses our eyes on this image of a woman while the light green is overlooked. Within the book, this light green (her past) serve as a significant part of who Lucy is in America and why she acts that way. The image of the daffodil faintly shown in the light green reminds us that the past contributes to who a person has become. This cover influences my understanding of this novel because the focus is on Lucy as an au pair but as we read on we learn about the light green (her past) inhibits Lucy to truly love.
I found an interesting blog created by a person who works in a public library and judges books by their cover everyday... Check it out....

Personal Aesthetic

David Sokol gave a lecture about "The Noble Room: Unity Temple" located in Oak Park, Illinois. This Unitarian/ Univeralist church was designed by the the famous architect Frank Lloyd Wright. Aside from giving some history of the place he talked about why it took about three years to rebuild after it was destroyed by a fire on June 4, 1905. The famous American architect had his vision of what would be best for the place, the congregation had their opinion on what would be best and most practical, and the contractor from his experience had his personal aesthetic about such a building. These three people came together often and butted heads on quite a few matters. Because each party had their own opinion, the reconstruction of the famous temple was slow.
When it comes down to it, everyone must compromise: Sanjeev needs to either accept Twinkles new found fascination with Christian paraphernalia or suggest a compromising situation in order for their marriage to work out. The narrator in The Yellow Wallpaper and her husband needed to find a room that suited both peoples aesthetic. In order to create a "room of one's own" each person strives to reach his or her own personal aesthetic, but realistically this is not practical. The Unity Temple stands as an example of many compromises. Think about how many compromises you made today? Let's see, for me I have about 5 (finish my math homework/ watch a show, eat a cookie/ go for a longer run, go to half the basketball game/ be on time for work.... the list goes on). If I could have everything my way I would have stayed for the whole basketball game. But if I wasn't at work, people would not have someone to ask questions to. Frank Lloyd Wright would have had less seating and more geometric shapes with planters on top of them, but then the congregation would not have enough seating. Twinkle would continue to collect the knickknacks, but their marriage would most likely fail. We all need to know how to sacrifice our personal aesthetic to mesh together with others, just as Wright had to do with the reconstruction of Unity Temple.

Communication Under the Same Roof

Within "This Blessed House," the characters of Sanjeev and Twinkle quickly get married and begin living together under the same roof. Their love for one another comes across as questionable and their opposite mannorisms and attitudes become clear. Sanjeev has more of a serious attitude and heavily relies on other peoples' opinions. But Twinkle, on the other hand, is livelier and she seems to always look on the bright side of things. While cleaning the new home, Twinkle finds a vinegar bottle with Christ's figure and proudly places it on the undusted mantel. As the process continues, other tacky Christian figures emerge and are placed on the mantel as well. Sanjeev becomes quite irritated by these icons while Twinkle is continually intrigued by them and consciously looks to find more. As I was reading, I was thinking of insignificant mannerisms that people I have lived with do that have irritated me over the years and how I have handled the situation... Does your roommate always keep the shades closed or place her stick bottle on your dresser? Did your brother always slam his door at night? Did your mom chew gum loudly in the car? And did you ever mention that it annoyed you? For me, I related to Sanjeev because he rarely voices these irritations. As insignificant as the act may be, it often begins to build up to something that does not need to be. The key to sharing space with someone is open communication, something that Twinkle and Sanjeev are clearly lacking.

yoo-nuh-vur-suhl?

The question arose in class whether or not we believe Shakespeare's work is universal?? While taking notes during the film "O," I felt like I was writing a brief summary of the plot of Othello... When I was first asked this question I was unsure of how to answer it, so I turned to my trusty friend Mr. Dictionary- he told me that UNIVERSAL mean:
* "applicable everywhere" (yes)
# "affecting, concerning, or involving all" (yes)
+ "used or understood by all" (not necessarily his language used in his text but the drama- yes)
= "present everywhere" (yes)
So after responding yes to each of these definitions, I realized how universal Shakespeare's work really is. By work, I am not just referring to his actual text but rather on a broader level: his drama and plot. Everyone can watch a movie such as "O" and relate to it in some way. We understand feelings of anger, jealousy, love, trust, and hurt because they are uncontrollable human reactions to ordinary situations. What Shakespeare does is pick and pull at universal human emotions, capturing his timeless audience into the plot. This plot can be represented in millions of different ways, but it is and always will be understood.


/ˌyunəˈvɜrsəl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation