My experience working in groups and using GoogleDocs

My experience working in groups was absolutely fantastic. I teamed up with my friends so it really was very thankful, because if you have a problem with someone (not the case, but thinking it could have happened) you just have to said to him/her. We're friends so there's no problem, everyone feels "forced" to do his/her best because you don't want to fail your friends.

Also, working in groups makes your vision about a topic increase, and as we were 5 people, the vision was 5 times wider.

The topic we chose "Comparison of classical works with the English novels" was very hard to do though. There were no secondary sources, and we looked in a lot of books and in electronic resources, like electronic magazines like "Amaltea" but we found nothing.

About working with GoogleDocs I think it was a good a idea, but it didn't worked to much. Why? Because a lot of people in order to have "some links done" just hyperlinked words to Wikipedia. And I find this very stupid. Why linking a wiki to another wiki? It's pointless. I think there's one reason to link to Wikipedia, and it's when you link to a picture hosted on Wikipedia, unless it's ridiculous.

The books I've read during this year

My experience in this year has been very  illustrative. I mean, this subject has showed me (or at list in my point of view) how works English Philology. Procedures when doing a paper, research, etc.

But focusing, I'll talk about the books I decides to read and why:

First of all, Robinson Crusoe was the book I chose of The Enlightment. Why? I really don't know. But, surely it was because is the most famous book of that period. I also knew Gulliver's Travels, thought, but the plot of Gulliver's travels didn't look so attractive. Days after, you told that Robinson Crusoe was the first English novel and that is the last what made choose Robinson Crusoe. 

About the experience reading it, I think I shoult tell the truth. It was not very funny, thought I forced myself to read it fast. The language was very old (well, of course, it was written on the 18th Century) and the action was too slow for me. I preffer books where the characters speak more. But with persistence I could read it. It was a good heating, by the way. I could find some themes, and also develope a theory of mine "CrisisTunity" so, I think it was a success.

The second book I read was Pride and Prejudice, and it was because a friend (and a classmate) told me she was already reading it, and that it was very interesting.  The title looked a bit boring, but when I started reading I couldn't stop reading it. It was pleasant, just after Robinson Crusoe, which was way difficult to read. I found Pride and Prejudice like an old gossip magazine. I really liked Elizabeth. I think she was a very inspiring woman. She was self-assured, good minded, and had a clear vision of her life. She didn't know what she wanted, but she knew what she didn't want. It was a very good novel.

The next book I read was Vanity Fair, and I chose it because I thought it was going to be like a Pride & Prejudice II. I mistaked, but it was the best error I could have done! I really enjoyed Vanity Fair. Becky Sharp (and all her sharpness) was the anti-heroine I needed. I found the story very easy to follow, and when Osborne dies I was delighted, because, Becky could be just a climber, but she had honor, and Osborne was a very dishonest, liar, and a bad friend. The end of the novel didn't fit me too much, but I was a good one actually.

Frankenstein was my next book. At that moment I hadn't chosen a book from the Romantic period, and of course Frankenstein because it's a very famous book. This one was a bit shocking because I had another idea on mind about how the book was. This is because they're a lot of film adaptations and they're very different from the book! So, I had the wrong idea, but it din'dt bother me too much. Another thing that surrised me was when I discovered that the creature is not called "Frankenstein"! I always thought the name of the monster was "Frankenstein" and that Victor Frankenstein was "Dr. Frankenstein". The story was OK, but I dind't like tha fact that the monster is so evil, and kills so much, just for a payback. I really hated the monster when he kills Elizabeth.

My next choice was Oliver Twist. Although it wasn't in the list you gave us, one day said that it really dind't matter too much at least as the author was the same so I picked it because I read it when I was younger, years ago. They weren't new susprises, but reading the whole book (when I read it years ago, it was an adapted edition) made me fell better and remember the whole plot (which I dind't remember completely) so it was OK.

And the last one was Jude the Obscure. The plot was exhausting, I felt bad reading it. Specially when Jude (Son) kills his siblings and himself and the note with the: "Done because we are to menny". The characters suffer too much, I don't like the stories where the protagonists go throught that kind of experiences. The death of Jude is also very ridiculous. I didn't like it at all.

Robinson Crusoe: Analysis

Robinson Crusoe is a novel written by Daniel Defoe. The first Edition dates to 1719 and is considered as the first English novel. Due to this, it is one of the most important and relevant novels in English language.

Shortly, the book narrates the story of an English castaway who is shipwrecked, and has to live in a desert island for 28 years and the events that happen to him. Despite the narrative style (which is complicate to follow) and the absence of a love motive (in that time it was a must-have), it had a good reception in the literary world. As a result of this, it is a very good work to be analyzed.

I will point out some aspects of the work that, in my opinion, are very important and they must be given a special meaning. They are:

• The Colonial vision of Robinson Crusoe.
  
• The Religious references in the novel.
  
• Morality troubles found.
  
• The Economic view and the importance given.
  

And in addition, mixing all of these themes, I have developed a theory of mine, which I have called “Crisistunity” (made with the words "Crisis" and "Oportunity"), but I will expand on that later.

As we easily can see Robinson Crusoe is a representation of the colonial life. James Joyce said of Robinson Crusoe: "He is the true prototype of the British colonist. … The whole Anglo-Saxon spirit is in Crusoe: the manly independence, the unconscious cruelty, the persistence, the slow yet efficient intelligence, the sexual apathy, the calculating taciturnity." [“Daniel Defoe,” translated from Italian manuscript and edited by Joseph Prescott, Buffalo Studies 1 (1964)]

In some way Crusoe tries to replicate his own society on the island, developing an island-wise application of European technology, farming, and also a political hierarchy. In the novel Crusoe is addressed as the “king” of the island (by himself), or the “governor” of the mutineers (by the Captain). Moreover, the island is referred to as a “colony” at the very end of the novel. Also a representation of the idea “Master-Slave” is present in the novel, represented by Robinson and Friday: While Friday is the “Savage” who is living a wild life and can only be saved adopting a more European lifestyle, Crusoe is shown as the Enlightened man.

Religion was very important when Robinson Crusoe was written. Religion was present in every single aspect of life, during the Enlightenment, and the period of colonies. Robinson Crusoe has several religious references. This was because the very Daniel Defoe was a Puritan, and wrote books on how to be a good one, such as The New Family Instructor (1728) and Religious Courtship (1732). The themes and the theological and moral points of view, in the religious works of Defoe, are shared in Robinson Crusoe. It is also said that the name of “Crusoe” could have been taken from one of the Defoe’s classmates, Timothy Cruso, also a guidebooks writer [p.e God the guide of youth (1685)] who died eight years before “Robinson Crusoe” was written.

In the very first chapter of the novel Crusoe is compared to Jonah. Both neglected their duty and find punishment in the sea.

“That is another case,” said he; “it is my calling, and therefore my duty; but as you made this voyage on trial, you see what a taste Heaven has given you of what you are to expect if you persist. Perhaps this has all befallen us on your account, like Jonah in the ship of Tarshish”

[“Robinson Crusoe” Extract from Penguin Edition (1985)]

Religion and Morality are well-known as to be related each other. In "Robinson Crusoe", we have a good example. When Robinson finds out the rites the cannibals perform, first of all, he is shocked. Then, he thinks about killing all of them, but later, he realizes that is their religion, they were educated that way, and they do not know that what they are doing is not correct. So, he finally turns back and leaves them alone. The problem with Cultural Relativism is very clear in this point.

Another a moral problem is the moment when Robinson reaches the island and he makes a list with the Pros & Cons of his situation (Chapter "I Build My Fortress") because he feels sorry for the death crew but not too much because he is alive.

Later he makes some trips to the ship, supply himself of tools, goods and other stuff. This is an example os the Economical view of the character of Robinson Crusoe. He is a hard-working person, and his work is worthed more than all the valuable things that were in the ship. He leaves the valuables, and chooses to rescue the useful tools, because he knows that what is actually valuable in the island are the tools. Karl Marx made a critic about this on his work "Capital".

The shipwreck is one of the "Crisistunity moments" (when everything is apparentely against the character, but finaly he turns them into a possitive experience): He nearly dies but, he does not, and he can supply of tools. Another one is when he is lost in the sea, after scaping of the pirates, boarding the coast of Africa. They are looking for exchange in order to get some good (food and water), but by chance, they save the tribe, and they get them for free and more over some fur of exotic animals (which later he sells for a good sum to the Captain). And the last one is when a ship arives to the island, but the crew are muteened. So Robinson manages to talk with them, convinces them, and they finaly leave the island.

Finally, I want to point that Robinson Crusoe was way dificult to read for me because the language used is nearly Old English, and the vocab was sort of old-fashioned.

Frankenstein: Analysis

“Frankenstein or The modern Prometheus” is a novel written by Mary Shelley, and it’s one of the most famous novels of the universal literature. It’s also considered as the first science-fiction novel.

“Frankenstein” “Frankenstein” was written under the influence of the traditional oral tales (with a terror theme), myths, and legends of the culture of that period. It is also known that the original idea of “Frankenstein” was though by Mary Shelley on a visit she made to Lord Byron when he was living in Switzerland. One night they were reading an anthology of German ghosts tales, and later Lord Byron challenges them to write a terror story based on dreams they had that night.

Condensing the stories of inmortal creatures, and the gothic novels that were very popular at the moment when "Frankenstein" was written, Mary Shelley gives special attention to the myth of Prometheus.

Prometheus was a greek Titan who gave the fire to the humankind, when Zeus hid it, while Victor Frankenstein, is a scientist who discovers how to give live to inert matter. But, they are some differences between both characters: Prometheus is punished by Zeus, and Frankenstein is punished by his own creation. Also the character of Prometheus is linked to another myth but this myth is Latin. Prometheus was known as a craftsman, and he made the man from clay and water, again a very relevant theme to Frankenstein as Victor rebels against the laws of nature (how life is naturally made) and creates artificial life.

The name of Frankenstein couls have been derivate of some sources. In German, it means "The stone of franks", and also is the name of a castle that Mary Shelley saw on the trip to go to Byron's home. Also it was the name of a region of Germany (in the actuality, is owned by Poland). But they are no strong evidences of this. The college of Ingolstadt is possibly chosen because it had a very good reputation on medicine, and it could be a good scenario for the experiments of Frankenstein.

Regarding to the creation the creature in the laboratory, it is one of the most important events in the novel. Victor is works so hard to create live, but just before giving the creature birth he doubts about it, because the creature is very ugly and looks terrible. Tht is why when the creature is alife, Victor scapes from it. The monster feels pity, he has been rejected by his creator, like when God expulsed Adam and Eve from the paradise. And because of that the creature becomes angry and evil, and starts to kill the beloved people of Frankenstein, to make him to feel as unhappy as the creature is. Because Frankenstein never gave it love.

So, the final theme is exposed. The fact of if technology and progress is good and inspiring or it should be controlled. In the novel, the consecuences of the creation of the monster are just presented as a total fail, because it was not well prepared. The creature was not taken care of. But looking a it as a mere experiment, it was really a success. Inret matter was given life. We also have to think that the period when "Frankenstein" was written, electricity was recently discovered, and it was a good gate to imagination, reseach and developent.