The Codex Chimalpahin, Interpretation And Critisicm

The assigned reading of “Good Readers and Good Writers” by Vladimir Nabokov probes the subject that is the necessary attributes an individual must have in order for them to be successful readers and writers of literature. A list of ten rules is then stated in the essay and sets them as the baseline commandments that an individual must follow in order to be some kind of a devoted “good reader”. While the criteria sets the standard for a “good reader” it aligns with that of a good analyzer and can be applied to that sense. For example one of the first pieces of advice states “If one begins with a readymade generalization, one begins at the wrong end and travels away from the book before one has started to understand it” (Nabokov 1). If a

Questions reader should ask when trying to determine symbolic meaning: “what’s the writer doing with this image, this object, this act; what possibilities are suggested by the movement of the narrative or the lyric; and most important, what does it feel like it’s doing?” (Foster 59).

The context of the plot found in “The School” presents the readers with the timeless question of the meaning of life. However, this question does not seem to present itself immediately to the reader. In order to appreciate Barthelme’s work in this piece, it is crucial that one utilizes the New Criticism’s approach to reading. New Criticism was first developed in the 20th century and it makes reading and interpreting literature a systematic activity. New Criticism as an analytical tool helps the readers to understand and gain insight into all forms of the written works through sheer understanding and by reading closely. This means that our focus

In any great work of literature, each action and thought should contribute to the underlying meaning of the entire work. No action should exist for its own sake; it must instead advance the plot and reinforce the symbolism of both the characters’ actions as well as the truth of what the composer or author is trying to convey. This is especially true of acts of violence; great literature must carefully articulate the violence into a logical meaning. Most importantly, violence and acts of extreme passion work best when communicating a character’s inner-struggles as they relate to the motive and effect of each scene and action.

The capital of the Aztec empire, Tenochtitlan, and what is known today as Mexico City was conquered in 1521 by the Spanish explorer named Hernando Cortez. Cortez was born Medellin, Spain in 1485. He was the only son of a noble family and his father was a captain in the Spanish army. He was fascinated with Christopher Columbus’ journeys in the new world. This was a far cry from his parents wish for him to be lawyer. Before reaching the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico, Cortes along with Diego Velazquez, were powerful figures in the island of Cuba. Their partnership soon ended when Cortes went against Velasquez’s wishes to marry his sister and sailed to the mainland of Mexico against his orders. On 1519 Cortez reached the harbor of central Veracruz (“True Cross”). He arrived with 11 ships, 15 horses and a fleet of 500 men in search for gold. Cortes soon learned that the land was ruled by the great Aztec lord in the city of Tenochtitlán: King Monezuma II.

When reading literature we often attempt to use particular threads of thought or lenses of critique to gain entry into the implied historic or legendary nature of literature. To accurately process a tale in the light in which it is presented, we have to consider the text from multiple viewpoints. We must take into consideration intentional and affective fallacies and the socioeconomic circumstances of the presenter/author/narrator. We also have to consider how our personal experience creates bias by placing the elements of the story into the web of relationships that we use to interpret the external world. There also is the need to factor in other external pressures, from societal norms, cultural ideals, and psychological themes, and how

The purpose of this source is to explore the history of Tenochtitlan and analyze its demise. An exploration of Tenochtitlan’s demise through politics would contribute to the value of this investigation as Tenochtitlan was the center of political activity in the Aztec empire. However, the purpose of this source is limited in that de Rojas, a Spanish male and liberal scholar, may have a hidden agenda intended to advance contemporary ideology or perspectives pertaining to Tenochtitlan.

Cortez and his force arrived in Tenochtitlan on November 8th, 1519. Tenochtitlan was the capital of what we know today as Mexico. Tenochtitlan was one of the largest cities in the world at that time. Tenochtitlan was run by the Aztecs. Cortes then met Montezuma, the Aztecs’s emperor. Montezuma and the Aztecs thought Hernan Cortes was a god. They thought he was Quetzalcoatl. Cortez was there at the right time because the god was supposed to arrive the same year Cortes was there. Since they thought he was a god they would do anything for his command. Later on Montezuma suspected Cortez not to be the god. He gave him gold and jewels to try and get him to leave. It had the opposite affect and increased the Spaniards greed. Cortez then captured Montezuma as hostage to prevent the Aztecs attacking.

Context affects ideas and the way ideas are portrayed in text. The parallels seen between the contexts of the two texts causes both to contain ideas about similar themes, including the progression of society, and man’s place in

The roles of women are useful to historians because they provide an insight into the life experiences, cultures, thoughts, and every day life of a historical period. Similarly this essay will examine the roles of women, which provide insight into the Aztec civilization’s many strengths. The Aztec child bearer/warrior, priestess and sexual being will be analyzed to display that gender relations were complementary that produced equality. The midwife and weaver reveal that the Aztec’s specialization proved successful through fields like medicine and the market. Finally the Aztec daughter and mother will be examined to show that the Aztec’s had a strong socialization system established through education and the family. For these reasons

According to Victor Erlich a formalist interpretive critical lens seeks to, in its simplest form, extract the meaning of the language used and omit any reference to the author or historical setting. Formalist literary criticism was formed to focus on symbolism, tone, structure, . I have chosen to use a formalist approach of interpretive criticism analyzing the following: Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, George Saunders’ “Jon”, and Walt Whitman’s poem “A NOISELESS patient spider” to

the whole novel: “the linguistic pattern of choices realizes a primitive pattern of cognition, which in turn is the key to the tragic vision of the novel.”(Leech & Short, 2001: 32) Halliday being the widely acknowledged precursor of functional stylistics, the eminent German linguist-critic Leo Spitzer (1887-1960), is likewise father of literary stylistics. In his insistence that the smallest detail of language can unlock the “soul” of a literary work, he maintains the task of stylistics is to provide a hard-and-fast technology of analysis: I would maintain that to formulate observation by means of words is not to cause the artistic beauty to evaporate in vain intellectualities; rather, it makes for a widening and deepening of the aesthetic taste. It is only a frivolous love that cannot survive intellectual definition; great love prospers with understanding. (Leech & Short, 2001: 2) A question which is often asked in this connection is “At which end do we start, the aesthetic or the linguistic?” The image used by Spitzer of the “philological circle”, the circle of understanding, however, seems to suggest there is no logical staring point. Spitzer argues that the task of Linguistic-literary explanation proceeded by the movement to and fro from linguistic details to the

“The relationship between the energies of the inquiring mind that an intelligent reader brings to the poem and the poem’s refusal to yield a single comprehensive interpretation enacts vividly the everlasting intercourse between the human mind, with its instinct to organise and harmonise, and the baffling powers of the universe about it.”

The reader must participate in the making of the poem or story by digging the structure out and create coherence out of the seeming incoherence. Therefore, the search for meaning, even if it does not succeed, becomes meaningful itself.

Any literary work is unique. It is created by the author in accordance with his vision and is permeated with his idea of the world. The reader’s interpretation is also highly individual and depends to a great extent on his knowledge and personal experience. That’s why one cannot lay down a fixed “model” for a piece of critical appreciation. Nevertheless, one can give information and suggestions that may prove helpful.