I would like to have the handouts and the write ups sent to me electronically if at all possible. It would be much easier for me to keep them for my portfolio. When everyone has time can you e-mail me your character tracking handout, write-up, powerpoints or anything else you think would be helpful?
My E-mail Address:
NatashaKSnyder@gmail.com
Thanks,
Ms. Snyder
Emma Doeblin, Maggie Easton, Erin Gresko, Nadia Pierre-Louis, Aireanna Small
ReplyDeleteThe break between reality and fiction seemed to really be something that James wanted to explore. The Monarchs were so obsessed with convincing the artist that they were real, that they lost all sense of reality. They seemed to be from a dream. James described them strictly through their form and how they appeared, because that was what made them "real." This story also seemed to explore the vanity of the world, and how outside deception can fool us all. Although the Italian and Miss Churm weren't actually upper class, they were what people believed about upper class, and what they wanted to see. This, James seemed to argue, is the difference between reality and fiction.
Posting for Zachariah Bellucci, Darnell Johnson, Leah Garlock, and Emma Marshall.
ReplyDeleteJames didn't answer a question with this story, but rather posed one, "What is real?" He did offer his opinion, and expressed it through his characters, the Monarchs, a rich family that are struck with missfortune. They are described as if seen through a lense, which is the way that they would be seen after the picture was taken. They are described in means of form and figure because that is what the artist sees (i.e. instead of an arm a photographer might see just a cylinder, an arm's basic form.) The narrator favors the professional models because they represent the reality that has already been established by the narrator. He decides they look more "real" because they are closer to what he percieves reality to be. Also, since the Monarchs were destitute, perhaps they were trying to glorify thier way of life, thus making an artificial scene, whereas the models could portray it accurately because it wasn't personal. In the end it just seemed that James was asking which is more "real": the way things are, or the way things are thought to be. Reality v.s. Percieved reality.
Postig for Michael Statt, Rosalind Battaglia, Kiera Gates, Alex Brumfield, Aubrey Grube
ReplyDeleteHenry James sought to emphasize the ambiguity of words the "Real Thing" in this story. He used the story of the monarchs and how their authenticity was not what the artist wanted, but rather the poorer couple's image of what aristocracy was. He used this to highlight how real can have any meanings, and that it may not always be represented by the factual thing but more of fake people acting as the "ideal" thing. We found a huge connection to the Great Gatsby in this message of the idealistic dream (i.e. American Dream) being what people really want and not the actuality of their dreams.
Shayla Sanders, Brianna Corbitt, Whitney White, Kennethea Wilson and Tatiana Williams
ReplyDeleteThe Monarch's were a very interesting couple who had something different about them that made them shine through the images they modeled for. It was powerful how the artist's works were viewed so differently after he started using the monarchs as models. The words "form" and "figure" are appropriate to use when referring to the couple because that's how they portray themselves as models throughout life whether for an art piece or everyday encounters. The author used this story to show how something can be viewed from different perspectives as real or fictional.