Eden’s Comments (group member since Aug 31, 2011)

Eden’s comments from the 2012 - Ms. Richardson L.A. group.

In the first phase of the hero’s journey, the hero finds himself living in a space called the mundane world. In the mundane world, the hero is either not satisfied with the ease and comfort that the space brings him or he feels out of place and longs for something more. Book five of Homer’s Odyssey renders a perfect example of living in the mundane world through Odysseus’ relationship with Calypso on the striking island of Ogygia. The beautiful goddess Calypso hands Odysseus every luxury an ordinary fellow could ever crave including a lush island surrounded by glorious landscapes and the ultimate proposal of her undying love; his very own paradise. Odysseus is not enchanted by the wonders that Calypso has provided and he yearns for his wife, his family, and challenging obstacles that make a person’s heart skip a beat. He longs for adventure. Odysseus, like any other great hero, is no longer enthused by the predictability of the common place that he has outgrown. When taking a close look at book five, the reader begins to fathom that comfort, warmth, and ease is an enemy to the hero. One who wishes to follow the hero’s path can see that Calypso symbolizes the consequences of living in utmost comfort or being trapped by contentment. By willingly giving up comfort, Odysseus shows the reader that if a true hero is to be triumphant and achieve greatness, letting go of comfort and overcoming challenges are the only ways. If one decides to remain in the comfort of Calypso’s island, then they would have made the choice of ending their hero’s journey and leaving any conceivable triumph hidden in the depths of paradise.

The second phase of the hero’s journey is when the hero is called to adventure. This call either comes to the hero, or the hero goes to the call. No matter which way one meets with the call, they have the choice of taking the call or not. An excellent example of the call to adventure can be found in book five of the Odyssey. Hermes, the messenger of the gods, comes to Calypso’s island completely awestruck by the absolute beauty. He brings with him the message that Zeus has made the decision that Calypso must let Odysseus go so that he can return home. Odysseus is called to adventure when Calypso informs him of Zeus' decision. Reluctantly, Calypso agrees to let Odysseus go. This was Odysseus’ own, personal call to adventure and it was his choice to leave. Odysseus shows the reader that one must go to the call to adventure or take the call to adventure if it comes ones way if they want to become a hero. If a person takes the call to adventure, then they are preparing themselves for a potentially dangerous situation that they are going to eventually face. Taking the call to adventure is a risk yet it’s a risk that must be taken.

Crossing the threshold is the third phase in the hero’s journey. A hero crosses the threshold when they go into adventure without turning back. A prime example of Odysseus crossing the threshold in the Odyssey is in book five when he leaves Calypso and her beautiful island behind. Calypso helps Odysseus build a raft and then watches as her true love drifts away into the sea. Odysseus officially crosses the threshold in this book because he doesn’t want to turn back, nor can he. Odysseus prepares himself for the unknown adventure that lay ahead with the hope of returning to his wife and home. By closely examining book five, one can see that Odysseus leaving the comfort and warmth of Calypso and her island is starting an adventure because he has no way of knowing what kinds of challenges and obstacles are in store for him. If one doesn’t cross the threshold, then they will never get to experience adventure and become a hero. If the reader is seeking a model for the hero’s path, then they must understand that not crossing the threshold will leave them in an ordinary space where any possible greatness is yet to be discovered.

The fourth step in the hero’s journey is the path of trials. The path of trials consists of meeting new mentors, new friends, and new enemies. While on the path of trials, one also faces new challenges and acquires new skills and knowledge. Odysseus travels the path of trials in book nine. Although Odysseus does not meet any new mentors in this book, he does meet the king and his court at the start of the book and they end up becoming Odysseus’ friends. In book nine, Odysseus travels the path of trials where he faces many new challenges including the Cyclops. Odysseus leads his men onto the Island of the Cyclopes when it was quite unnecessary, showing great hubris. His arrogance and excessive pride came with consequences because several of his men ended up being eaten by the Cyclops; hubris is deadly. The Cyclops Polyphemus, described as "a brute so huge", symbolizes a challenge that is bigger than life. If one doesn't defeat the 'cyclops', then one will be defeated themselves, whether it be physically, emotionally, or spiritually. After Odysseus conquers the Cyclops using cunning and wit, he boasts to him that "I am not nobody; I am Odysseus, Son of Laertes, King of Ithaca." This large act of hubris upsets Polyphemus' father, Poseidon, the god of the sea, who is one of Odysseus' enemies. Poseidon is ultimately the one who inhibits Odysseus' homeward journey. Odysseus was also a challenge to himself because his hubris kept getting in the way of swiftly traveling the path of trials. Odysseus traveling onto the Island of the Cyclopes shows the reader that hubris can get a person into dangerous situations and that avoiding hubris all together will make things a lot easier. Odysseus meets several enemies in book nine, two of whom are the Cyclops and Poseidon. Making enemies is something that all heroes do but learning how to deal with enemies is something that will make someone an ultimate hero. Odysseus acquires new skills in this book by learning how to outsmart a Cyclops by lying about his name and by figuring out the Cyclops’ weaknesses. By defeating the Cyclops, Odysseus now has new skills on how to conquer a larger than life challenge. The path of trials makes the hero who they are at the end of their journey. What matters the most is what the hero has gained from the path of trials and avoiding challenge means that no new skill or new knowledge will be gained.

The fifth and final phase of the hero’s journey is when the hero becomes the master of two worlds. The hero becomes the master of two worlds when he has succeeded in the new world and returns back to the old world as a changed person. Now that the hero has officially mastered both worlds, he has the choice of which world he would like to remain in. In books sixteen through twenty-three, Odysseus returns to his homeland of Ithaca disguised as a beggar by Athena. His son, Telemachus, is let in on the secret of his return and they go to Odysseus’ wife and eventually kill off all of the suitors. In the end, Odysseus is united with his wife and peace is made among everyone by Athena. Odysseus returns as a changed person because he has done things that have ultimately altered him as an individual such as spending a large amount of time being held captive by Calypso, escaping the Lotus Eaters, fighting and blinding a Cyclops, escaping the rock-throwing cannibals, getting away from Circe, going into the Underworld and returning, and going past Scylla and Charybdis. Odysseus, in books sixteen through twenty-three, shows the reader that becoming the master of two worlds provides the hero with the ultimate choice of living in either world. Defeating all of these obstacles has made Odysseus a different person. It is only through overcoming these challenges and all of the discomfort that they bring that a person genuinely evolves.

Joseph Campbell’s quote is basically saying that one need not fear the trials and hardships that lay ahead because one is not alone. All risks have been taken, all adventures have been experienced, and all labyrinths have been journeyed. Campbell shows that very few will be the first to face a problem because many others have gone through it before and that an individual’s thoughts don’t always predict the outcome. His wise words bring comfort, ease, and reassurance to the reader.

This quote most certainly applies to the study of mythology. Since mythology deals with the themes of goodness and evil and the danger of hubris, this quote relates to mythology quite nicely. The heroic figure is prominent in most of mythology and the idea of bravery and overcoming trials and facing fears is common in much of mythological stories. As a reader, I agree with this concept and believe that myths are very important in teaching lessons and illustrating man's journey through the challenges that life brings.

The first sentence in this quote, “We have not to even risk the adventure alone, for the heroes of all time have gone before us” explains that one doesn’t have to take a risk alone, for others in the past have gone before. All troubles that may come one’s way have been faced before. This links together very well with the next sentence stating that “the labyrinth is thoroughly known.” This means that the twists and turns of life are known by many. One is not the only one who has had to confront the many ordeals that life brings. “We have only to follow the thread of the hero path.” This means that many have gone before and one has only to pursue what heroes of the past have. Although there have been many successes and many failures, one is not alone.

Toward the middle of the quote, Campbell says “And where we had thought to find an abomination, we shall find a god.” This line is saying that many people go into troubling situations expecting the worst but finding that it was actually a blessing in disguise. This sentence could also express where one sees sadness and suffering, there could potentially be a phenomenal triumph. For instance, as one individual sees someone who is blind and deaf as a hopeless failure, another might see the potential and beauty that this person possesses. This sentence tells readers that their expectations can oftentimes be different than the reality.

The quote goes on to express that when one is judging another, they actually just fear what they might become. Or, when one is pointing out flaws in another, they are just realizing what they don’t like in themselves. Joseph Campbell poetically explains this by saying, “And where we had thought to slay another, we shall slay ourselves.” The actuality is that many people call attention to others’ imperfections and weaknesses to keep their own faults and weak points from being noticed.

“Where we had thought to travel outwards, we shall come to center of our own existence.” This line explains that when one is looking for answers about who they are and what their purpose is, they start to understand that they need only to search within. Campbell ends the quote by saying, “And where we had thought to be alone, we shall be with all the world.” This line is saying that the human race is linked together through common experiences that everyone shares. One is not alone because the heroes of the past have shown the way.

The historically tragic story of A Tale of Two Cities is relevant to a modern audience due to the ideas and themes that are portrayed. One of the most valuable themes, artfully embedded into the description-rich novel, would be that found in the well-known anaphora on the first page. “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness…” This timeless idea is one of the most prominent sources of relevance to a modern audience. For many it is the best of times whereas for others, it truly is the worst of times; there are many fools yet many people are full of wisdom. There are similar things going on in the book to what is going on in present-days which allows the reader to directly connect and relate to the story.

In Charles Dickens’ novel, the rich had everything they could possibly need, plus more, and believed that it would stay that way forever. “In both [France and England] it was clearer than crystal to the lords of the State preserves of loaves and fishes, that things in general were settled forever” (pg 1). While the royalty bathed in wealth, the rest of the population had no rights and were dependent upon the rich. While the poor were ravenous with hunger, the government would often entertain itself with such pastimes as cutting off a young man’s hands, tearing his tongue out with pincers, and burning him alive because he had not kneeled down in the rain to give recognition to a dirty procession of monks more than fifty yards away (pg 2). “…to-day, taking the life of an atrocious murderer, and to-morrow of a wretched pilferer who had robbed a farmer’s boy of sixpence” (pg 3). This aspect of differentiating classes happens to be what sparked the French Revolution in 1789.

This is exactly how our world is today; some have everything before them while others have none. There are many people in present times that are living in complete poverty and don’t have any money, food, shelter, or anything for that matter. These people struggle every single moment of their lives with whether they’re going to be able to support themselves and those close to them. There are others in the world that have nothing to worry about and are perfectly well-off in terms of money, food, and health. This text also has modern relevance since many face starvation and revolutions are breaking out in countries across the world. Although Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities was written more than a century ago, it still remains the best of times and the worst of times.

In the acclaimed novel by Susan Collins, "The Hunger Games", Cato embodies the villain archetype. Cato embraces this archetypal villain by consistently being single-minded. With single-mindedness comes focus.
An archetype is a constantly recurring theme or motif that is universally used and understood in literature and other art forms. There are many different types of archetypes including character archetypes. The villain character archetype happens to be one of the primary character archetypes.
The villain's focus is usually their only goal, making all else fundamentally secondary. In "The Hunger Games", all Cato cared about was killing Katniss, forcing all else to be insignificant. While other character's lives were coming to a brutal end, Cato couldn't possibly care less. From the very beginning, Cato had a strong sense of hostility towards Katniss, the tribute from District 12. When Katniss received an exceptionally high score at training, which happened to be higher than Cato's, his hate amplified. What made Cato even more mad was all of the attention Katniss and Peeta were receiving. “Star-crossed lovers desperate to get home together. Two hearts beating as one. Romance.” Page 261. Throughout the entire novel, Cato expressed hate and even jealousy towards Katniss.
An example of Cato’s single-mindedness is on page 162 when he sees absolutely no harm in letting Peeta join the Careers. He exclaims, "Let [Peeta] tag along. What's the harm? And he's handy with that knife. Besides he's our best chance of finding her."... He is referring to Katniss. One of Cato’s methods was to manipulate and sabotage Peeta in hope of dismantling Katniss of her courage, stamina, and strength.
Cato is a superb example of the archetypal villain. He embraces this archetype by having a selfish, narcissistic mind that only yearns for and desires the satisfaction of causing the death and destruction of others.

The novel by Suzanne Collins, "The Hunger Games", is the perfect example of characters embracing and rejecting their common and cultural archetype. An archetype is a pattern or theme that recurs in different texts over an extended period of time. There are many different kinds of archetypes including character archetypes. One attribute of the general archetypal villain is single-mindedness. Cato, from District 2 in "The Hunger Games", assumes the quality of single-mindedness by being determined to kill Katniss Everdeen and win the Hunger Games. With single-mindedness comes focus. The author plays with the villain archetype and gives Cato various characteristics and motives, particularly narcissism and single-mindedness that portray the archetypal villain.

Cato is most certainly the villain in "The Hunger Games". The villain's focus is quite often their only goal... all else is fundamentally secondary. In the novel, while characters were being killed and severely injured, Cato could care less. All he cared about was killing Katniss, making all else insignificant. This also shows his narcissistic side by being too self-absorbed to care about the pain and suffering of others. Although right away you could tell that Cato was a villain, as the novel progressed, his villainous gestures and actions became considerably apparent. From the very start, Cato has had hostility towards Katniss, the tribute from District 12. When she received an exceptionally high score during training up until when Peeta Mellark proclaimed his undying love towards her, Cato's hate grew. Cato is obviously very single-minded, especially when it comes to his crucial goal, to win the Hunger Games, and of course... kill Katniss Everdeen.

Cato, the Career from District 2, embodies the common and cultural villainous archetype by illustrating many of the same motives. Still, the most prominent aspect of the villain archetype would be Cato's single-mindedness towards killing Katniss. For example, on page 162, when he sees no harm in letting Peeta join the Careers, he exclaims... "Let [Peeta] tag along. What's the harm? And he's handy with that knife. Besides he's our best chance of finding her."... He is referring to Katniss. Cato assumes that if Peeta is with him and the rest of the Careers, then Katniss will become weaker. He only lets Peeta live because it is beneficial to him, showing his narcissistic tendencies yet again. Towards the end of the novel when he is about to get eaten alive by the 'Capitol's mutts' he can't bear the thought of Katniss surviving, let alone winning the Hunger Games.

The character Cato exhibits the archetypal villain in numerous ways particularly his single-minded goals and selfish mind that yearns for the satisfaction of the death of others.

The popular novel by Suzanne Collins, "The Hunger Games", is the perfect example of characters embracing and rejecting their common and cultural archetypes. Over time, different character archetypes have evolved including general gender archetypes (male and female), the hero archetype, and of course, the villain archetype. In the now very popular novel targeted at young adults, Cato, the Career from District 2, repeatedly embraces the villain archetype. Cato's constant yearning for power and control, his tendency to attract conflict, and most importantly his heartless, cruel mind makes for the archetypical villain.

Suzanne Collins does a wonderful job of mixing up the common archetypes. We had Kastniss embracing and defying the gender archetype of female at times while we also had Cato embracing the villain archetype. This definitely made for an interesting read. When asked if Collins is more likely to embrace or defy the archetype of the villain, I would say that she probably would embrace it based on the overall storyline of the book and especially Cato's actions. In "The Hunger Games", two tributes from each district of Panem are put in an arena to fight each other to death. Just thinking about it sounds like a villainous phenomenon. Cato is a large, mean, and skilled fighter who has been training for the Hunger Games his whole life. From the get go, he has always had a strong dislike of Katniss especially when Peeta declared his undying love for her. Many times throughout the text Cato displays a prominent villain archetype. For example on page 162 when Cato sees no harm in letting Peeta join the Careers, he exclaims, "besides [Peeta's] our best chance of finding her." he is referring to Katniss Everdeen. Cato is extremely single-minded... his focus is to kill Katniss, all else is basically secondary. Cato's motivation is almost unbelievable and he can't stand being conquered. When Katniss saw Cato's reaction to all of the Careers supplies and food being completely ruined by the mines her reaction was, "-so people really do tear out their hair and beat the ground with their fists-". Plus when Clove's life brutally came to its end, all Cato could think about was revenge. Almost every single time the name Cato is brought up in the book, it has something to do with the villain archetype. Although Cato's charisma and persuasion had won the hearts of the Careers, Cato still only had one goal which was to win the Hunger Games... and to kill Katniss Everdeen.

I would most certainly say that Suzanne Collins defies the general archetypes by challenging the readers to really think about the characters. With Katniss almost always embracing the male archetype, Peeta quite often embracing both gender archetypes, and Cato continually embracing the villain archetype, Collins did a wonderful job of defying the common and cultural archetypes which in my opinion, made the book even better.

In the short story "The Most Dangerous Game", Rainsford is the protagonist. At the beginning of the story, two fellows, named Whitney and Rainsford, head out to a strikingly exotic island in hope of hunting some large game. Although they both seemed quite delighted about their hunting trip, Rainsford begins to show little empathy for the animals that they may hunt in the future. "You're a big game hunter! Who cares how a jaguar feels?" This statement made by Rainsford, addressed to Whitney, automatically makes most readers dislike Rainsford's merciless tendencies. We later discovered that Rainsford is the main character or, protagonist because the plot follows him throughout the story leading him to an island where the game in which he intended to hunt is not exactly what the average individual would expect. Upon encountering the island, Rainsford also stumbles upon a gentleman by the name of Captain Zaroff. When Rainsford first meets Captain Zaroff, I got the impression that he was very charismatic and likeable because he gives Rainsford food, shelter, clothes, and also agrees to teach him some of what he knows about hunting. Later into the story, we discover that Captain Zaroff is actually the antagonist. Like the experienced hunter that he is, Captain Zaroff began hunting human-beings instead of animals because he claimed that animals are not witty enough to out-win his hunting skills. This statement gave me the impression that Captain Zaroff thinks he's superior compared to others. When Rainsford is actually the one being hunted by Captain Zaroff they literally participate in the most dangerous game. Rainsford boldly states that killing humans is murder which definitely shifted his perspective on hunting in my opinion. In the end, Rainsford defeats Captain Zaroff in this cruel phenomenon he referred to as a 'game'. I think this whole experience actually changed the protagonist for the better. I believe that Rainsford will continue hunting like he always has been but after being hunted he will probably have a more empathetic outlook on the overall objective of hunting.

The Scarlet Ibis symbolizes Doodle in many ways. I think that the most salient sense of symbolism in the story would probably be the idea of Doodle shortly florishing in an environment that was misfit for his strength and needs. From the moment when Doodle came into being, he was obviously 'different' from the average child. As explicitly shown in the text, Doodle was not supposed to live very long at all, nor achieve much greatness. Although Doodle did face many hardships, his prevailing love of life made all the difference. Likewise, the Scarlet Ibis was not suited to thrive in the environment where it seeked shelter. In fact, the Ibis was originally from Florida, as shown in the text, and traveled a far distance. Doodle's strange nature and doggedness much related to the Ibis's by the fact that they both came a long way, overcoming many trials, yet in the end, they both could not endure the battle of existence.