Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

136212-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This essay examines four novels as responses to the themes and philosophical attitudes set by David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest: Wallace's own unfinished novel, The Pale King; Jonathan Franzen's Freedom; Tao Lin's Taipei; and Junot Díaz's The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao. The authors listed, all writing in the

This essay examines four novels as responses to the themes and philosophical attitudes set by David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest: Wallace's own unfinished novel, The Pale King; Jonathan Franzen's Freedom; Tao Lin's Taipei; and Junot Díaz's The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao. The authors listed, all writing in the 21st century, are part of what can be provisionally described as a "post-postmodern" reaction to the postmodern literature of America in the latter half of the 20th century.
ContributorsKutzler, Brandon Edward (Author) / Michael, Pfister (Thesis director) / Kirsch, Sharon (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication (Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor)
Created2015-05
136058-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Theory has often been historically characterized as lacking pragmatisms and action necessary for social change. Thus, as this challenge between pragmatists and theorists continues to exist, this project attempts to disclose a manner in which we may alter this conflict by reinterpreting theory, poetry, and philosophy as active political moments

Theory has often been historically characterized as lacking pragmatisms and action necessary for social change. Thus, as this challenge between pragmatists and theorists continues to exist, this project attempts to disclose a manner in which we may alter this conflict by reinterpreting theory, poetry, and philosophy as active political moments of resistance that fundamentally change our ethical relationship with language and consequently to others. This thesis recognizes that dire political situations of social injustice require a more materialistic and sociological analysis in order to achieve structural reform for marginalized groups. However, this work attempts to show how an ethical relationship with theory, poetry, and philosophy is requisite to cultural and material change, as these meditative ways of thinking hold a stake in the overall discussion of social progress as well.
ContributorsDel Rincon, Yessica (Contributor) / Ramsey, Ramsey Eric (Thesis director) / Kirsch, Sharon (Committee member) / Luna, Ilana (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2014-12
136069-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This paper focuses on feudalist structure and values within this system in George R. R. Martin's fantasy novel series A Song of Ice and Fire and Shakespeare's play King Richard the Third. The paper is structured into three arguments that focus on different characters from each work. The first argument

This paper focuses on feudalist structure and values within this system in George R. R. Martin's fantasy novel series A Song of Ice and Fire and Shakespeare's play King Richard the Third. The paper is structured into three arguments that focus on different characters from each work. The first argument is focused on Tyrion Lannister and Richard III's deformity, and how they violate feudalist values. This argument ultimately comes to the discussion of whether or not these characters are monstrous and by what values. The second argument is focused on Daenerys Targaryen and Margaret, discussing why both authors give these women a supernatural power. The authors give women these powers because they believe that women should have power. Martin argues that women need to remake the structure, while Shakespeare believes women can change their place in the structure through collective action. The last argument focuses on Petyr Baelish and Richard III, and how they both represent a chaos attacking feudalism. Petyr is a chaos that comes outside the system, exploiting the values of the system, while Richard is a chaos within the system because he violates feudal values, while trying to hold positions where he needs to embody feudalist value. The authors come to different conclusions of what is trying to take down feudalist structure and how this could be fixed. Martin finds feudalism cannot be fixed and that other systems are not much better because they still create violence. Shakespeare comes to the conclusion that feudalism cannot be fixed because people continue to violate its values, so a new system must be put in place.
ContributorsPittaro, James Vincent (Author) / Mann, Annika (Thesis director) / Kirsch, Sharon (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Contributor) / School of Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies (Contributor)
Created2015-05