AQOTWF End Reflection

Now that you have finished reading All Quiet on the Western Front, please discuss these three questions with your critical friends. Post a response to one of these questions on your blog. Be sure to integrate the responses of your critical friends in your answer...
1. What is ironic, or dramatically unexpected about the novel's ending?

The ending was very surprising to me because of how the author went along telling the reader that Paul died. I was a very short, non descriptive part of the book. It was on the very last page and a little paragraph at the bottom as almost if it belonged in a totally different book, this is because the rest of the book was so descriptive with its sceneries, the feelings of the people, and the overall setting. So when the ending arrived, and Paul’s death was read, it was so unexpected, especially the way his death was described, so short and non-descriptive. Another thing that was surprising about the ending was because the US media most always ends things on a happy note, the main character normally never dies, and there is always some sort of happy ending. So when the ending came up, subconsciously I was waiting for the ending to be somewhat happy and give Paul his life.

Dialect Journal #2

pg. 295 Paragraph 2 "Here the trees show grey and golden, the berries of the rowan stand red among the leaves, country roads run white out to the sky line, and the canteens hum like beehives with rumors of peace."
In this particular part of the book I think that Paul was trying to say that the eye is made to see peace after a war. When you look at a beautiful scenery, or nature, it reminds you of peace, and although the eye is seeing it, that might not always be the case. So while your looking at the golden leaves, or the country road fade out to the sky, a conflict in some other place will be happening at that exact some moment. And no matter what you do, beautiful sceneries or nature will never fully yield war, conflict or hate. And no matter how much you want that to happen, human nature will always take over, which will cause conflict to occur.

People instinct?

Read through chapter 10 by Friday, and complete the text by Tuesday, Feburary 19. Be prepared for an assessment of the entire text next week.
Write a minimum of two dialectic journal entries and comment on two student posts. Choose one salient quote and:
1. Explain what the quotation means in the context of the text
2. Why it is important/interesting to you.

Pg 273-74 “All other expressions lie in a winter sleep life is simply one continual watch…and store it up as a reserve against the onslaught of nothingness.”
This was the part where Paul was talking about how we gain our animal traits when in war. Once again connecting our survival to animals, and how they save us in the long run. I feel that this quote was a very strong quote that connects to what the book is about and how many of the soldiers were feeling at the time, and in the time of battle. Reading this part of the book, really made me realize how important humane nature, and animal instinct is. This is how the men in war go through battle, they have to watch all of their friends, and comrades die, and are still willing to go on with an attitude of an animal, and move on. This brought up an interesting question while I was reading; what other experiences do we go through, that are aided by the traits and mentality of animals? We think we are so above animals, when it seems we are almost always acting like them when it comes down to the basics of life.

A Poetic Prisoner-Abstract

A Poetic Prisoner takes place in a radio studio, with the talk show host reading a poetic letter dated back from the Battle of Sommes. During this scene portions of the poem alternate between the original poet in 1916, and the spokesman, 2007.
The young man writes his letter behind enemy lines during The Battle of Sommes in 1916 between the Germans and British. Patrick is in a trench scared to death that he will get shot by his own comrades, or be found by the enemy. He stays in the trench for two days, in spare of his own life. With nothing else on his mind besides the love of his life, he decides to write a letter to his fiancé.
The scene concludes with the spokesman expressing to listening that the author of the poem died, along with 700,000 others during The Battle of Sommes.

A Poetic Prisoner - Scene One

Robby: 21 years old, brown hair green eyes and, scrawny build. His hometown is in humble Virginia, where his family and loving fiancé live. Robby got drafted out to the army and is now fighting in WWI on the western front. His fellow comrades see his as a foul, close minded, flake, when he really is shy and self conscious so he maintains this mentality in fear of being considered weak. During a battle he finds himself stuck in a trench behind enemy lines and fears that he will be mistaken for an enemy. So all he can do is sit and wait.

AQonWF Monolouge

Read through chapter 7 for Monday. Now let's be a little creative!!! Write a minimum of a ten line monologue to perform in drama class on Monday. Write and in turn deliver the monologue (speech) as if you were a character in All Quiet on the Western Front. Be passionate, be thoughtful, be CREATIVE.
A monologue is a speech that one actor delivers in a play. Before you get started, consider these questions!!!
WHERE IS THIS PERSON SPEAKING?
WHO IS LISTENING?
WHAT IS THE MAIN THING THEY ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT?
NOW CHOOSE A STARTING LINE that will capture the audience's attention.


Muller: What would you guys do if the war ended now, just suddenly stopped? Peace was made, and no brutal fighting was to be had.
Kropp: No war could be ended in an instant, there are too many lives that have been ended, too many families have been ruined, and worst of all the government has lost too much money.
Muller: No but if it actually did happen, what would you do?
Kropp: Okay, well if the war suddenly stopped, for only god knows why, soon enough war would come upon us once again. Because there is always something to fight about, there is always brutal fighting to be had, and peace that will never be fully made. So if you think about it, we are only really a time in history, we are fighting for something, but soon enough, another conflict between two countries or two people will occur. But we have to do what is right…right? We have to fight for our country, and protect our families. And we are looked up at for killing people? So we have a war going on, and peace that will never be made, our messed up ways of solving conflict, people dying, families being torn apart, and money being lost. That is why I think war will never stop, especially so suddenly. This is not a place for dreaming or fairy tales.

Response to Discussion

I feel that our discussion was very productive. Thinking back, I realized that a lot of my opinions changed or varied throughout the discussion. So much went on during out discussion, it’s hard to remember all we covered. One thing that stood out to me was the whole indifference, and how you will act to your surroundings more than something that is not directly hurting you. When we first started talking about it, I believed that it is the case, people will react to something closer to themselves, rather than something in say, Africa. I think it all comes back to what Mariah said, it all depends on how you ere brought up, and what your morals are. While some would ignore the fact that a girl was screaming down the street, others would go out and see what was going on. So morals and upbringing has to do with a lot of decisions made in history and experiences. But then we always come back to, life and death, would people choose what they thought is morally right, or would they choose human nature?

AQonWF Response One

"At the sound of the first droning of the shells we rush back, in one part of our being, a thousand years. By the animal instinct that is awakened in us we are led and protected. It is not conscious; it is far quicker, much more sure, less fallible, than consciousness. . . . It is this other, this second sight in us, that has thrown us to the ground and saved us, without our knowing how. . . . We march up, moody or good-tempered soldiers—we reach the zone where the front begins and become on the instant human animals."
Why would Paul characterize himself and his comrades as "human animals"?

I feel that Paul was connecting himself and his fellow comrades as human animals because of the way being in a life and death situation can affect you, and give you that adrenalin rush. The teens enrolling and participating in the army made them become one, and totally changed Paul and his friends, because of the strenuous work they had to endure and the mental “workout” each man went through during this time period. They have almost become fearless, and like many animals in the wild, they have gained that sense of instinct, and protection towards themselves. Like a skunk in the wild, its instinct is to protect itself by lifting its tail and spraying its enemy. (I know really odd example.) I think Paul was trying to say that it is animal instinct to protect yourself, and an instinct is something that you don't have to think about, it is just happens. So when in war, it's all about connecting with your instincts and letting go of your thoughts because like Paul said, “ But had he not abandoned himself to the impulse he would now be a heap of mangled flesh”. (Pg 56) So I think that humans have the same instinct as an animal, but it is hidden because of how much we are forced to connect with our mind, instead of our instinct. It takes something that can alter your life, to make those impulses or instincts present.

Legacy of the French Revolution

After Napoleon abdicates in 1814, the revolution is officially over, and Louis XVIII is crowned King of France. Can you believe it? The monarchy returns!!! In light of our investigation of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era, evaluate the legacy of the French Revolution. Do you believe it was a success or a failure? Your response should be atleast 150 words.

I believe that the French Revolution was a success in some areas and a failure in others. Looking on the bright side, the National Assembly gained power and created a source of government for them; they published the rights of man and citizen, stating fair rules and laws that they wanted to be made. They decreased the Kings power and his source of government and protection, in a way he was almost under the National Assembly's feet. They definitely got what they wanted; to be treated equal. One thing I thought wasn't the best success was how crazed and radical the National Assembly got, especially Robespierre. The way him and the assembly handled punishment for the people who weren't one-hundred percent dedicated to the revolution, death was the choice they picked in order to punish those people and it ended up killing 40,ooo people from 1793- 1794. So I think that the majority of the things done for the revolution was successful, but when it comes down to 40,ooo plus people dying, I don't think all those lives were spared for the right sane reason.

Umm hi?

i have no idea what im doing...