How do you know I'm mad?

We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.

Madness. Insanity. The crazy people. Hysteria. I touched up a little bit on madness in my response paper for Alice. My research question will be: "How does the Victorian version of madness play a part with the characters Alice meets?" To simplify, the characters that Alice meets are, as the cheshire cat states, "they're all mad. I'm mad too." Since the victorian version of "mad" is vastly different from our version, are some of the characters actually, "mad?"

By this I mean I will be doing some deep character analysis for three of the characters. The Mad Hatter, Cheshire cat, and the Queen. Were they actually mad? If so, how would the characters have actually reacted to Alice? Would they have been as nice as they were to her, or different? Or, Why were they so nice to Alice if they really were mad?

I hope that this would seem manageable, it feels manageable but I may be putting too much on my plate. Please say so if you feel it is.

Maktub.

I see a lot of inner personal development with our shepherd, he is slowly learning that not all of life's lessons can not be learned from herding sheep. He is constantly reflecting on himself on how he has grown. How if he never trusted in the pygmy, this would not have happened, and he would still be a shepherd. He would not have helped that man at the crystal shop. He is already learning many more things he would never have learned by being a shepherd.

(Personally I think there could be a little less talk about constant self development in the book because it seems to take up a lot of space in it, but it is good for reminding you what all he has learned.)

My other item is that, what is the issue with the constant portrayal of the wind? It has made several points in the book through the main character. Could it be referencing to how he is changing over the course of this book? How the wind is always free, yet always changing? It could be trying to tell him that he is starting to become like the wind, in how that although he did not want change at first, he is learning that change gives him freedom. And although the change may be hard and painful at times, it has always led him to a good direction; giving him freedom. Case in point, when he was robbed and didn't know what to do, he ended up working at a crystal shop, making it well known and through change made it very popular, giving him the money he needed to continue on with his journey.

-David Yarbrough

A mad cup of tea.

*cuts cup in half* Just a half cup for me.

I'm just going to say this to get it out now. I was dissapointed that burton didn't follow with the whole "change places" act. Albeit the scene was rather short in the movie, it was to me, one of the more iconic things about that scene in particular, and it wouldn't have been that hard to keep it in there.

Another item that bothered me which I haven't been able to figure out. Was the white mouse that was at the tea party in the movie when they arrived, the dormouse? because in the book, the dormouse was a rather large mouse, near the size of the hare and the hatter.

Okay those are my two main concerns about the movie. All in all, I preferred the book's version more. It was much more magical and random than the movie. Yes the movie's version was much shorter, and to me I felt it was rushed. "oh here's the tea party, stomp stomp stomp on the table, make Alice small and shove her in a tea pot; bad guys come, Cheshire Cat says hi and then says bye, tea sipping, then bad guys go bye, end scene." There was hardly any development for the characters in the movie compared to the book.

Yes, they are mad and that can quickly help with development, and yes, the mad hatter was in the rest of the movie after that, but the whole scene felt out of place and didn't have too much relevance to the rest of the movie because it was so short.

Now, the reason I liked the books version, it was so much more quirky and odd. Always changing places, tunes, attitudes and general feel. I for one found it really neat when they were discussing the topic of time, for me it made me think were they talking about father time as a actual being, or a theory? Or, as you stated in class, "to kill time." Could they have been talking the entire time based on that saying, "it kills time." instead of a actual theory or person? Who knows. I didn't quite understand the point for the part about the butter. But, then again, they're all mad.

So all in all, the book was better than the movie, because in my opinion, the movie trashed that entire scene. It has always been such an iconic scene from Alice in Wonderland, and it was a shame that it wasn't given its due credit. I did like how they made the Cheshire Cat however.

-David Yarbrough

P.S. Neat little info about the Cheshire Cat. I did a bit of research and one of its origins was a cheese mold, and the cat's head had a big smile on it. You would start from the tail, and go up to the head until it was gone. Thus, the disappearing Cheshire cat.

a strange appearance.

Splash! I slipped and was immediately engulfed in water, but it was salty. Most likely by that girl over there, swimming to me. She has no business here, and if she hadn't eaten that cake I left out I wouldn't be in this mess! Hm! She's trying to get my attention. Best act like I didn't see her.

"Oh mouse! Ou est ma chatte?" The girl said.

I jumped out of the water with fright, I couldn't understand her french but I did understand the last word, and now she's trying to apologize! Ooh the nerve of that girl!

"Not like cats!" I cried out. "Would YOU like cats if you were me?" I listened to her response. Oh for pete's sake she's going on about this c-c I can't even say it! My fur was standing on end I was so tussled up about this girl.

"Oh, I beg your pardon! We won't talk about her any more if you'd rather not."

"We indeed!" I hastily responded, trying to maintain some of my manners to the best of my ability. "As if I would talk about such a subject! Our family always HATED c-c-cats: nasty, low, vulgar things! Don't let me hear that name again!"

My heavens now she's going on about her dog, does this girl even have manners? Oh my her dog eats us too? I think I have had enough of this girl. I'm swimming away from her. That conversation was bad from the start, I don't know why I didn't swim away earlier! Oh she's crying out to me now. Well, maybe I was a bit too harsh on her, she does seem to be different from the rest of us. Maybe if she knew why, she might well silence herself about them.

I mustered up my confidence, approaching her again.

"let us go to the shore, and then I'll tell you my history, and you'll understand why it is I hate c-c-cats and dogs."

-David Yarbrough


As for why it is slightly late, I had internet troubles over the weekend and wasn't able to work on it at all, and I only got back my internet today.

I'll be honest I was pretty frustrated with this one, to make it sound like I wasn't just regurgitating a part of the book with a slight change of character.

Lewis Carroll's photography

At the young age of 24, Lewis Carroll took up photography as a aspect of his life, mostly by influence of his uncle, Skeffington Lutwidge. He quickly figured photography out, and he learned so much, so easily and so fast he had thought of making it a living. Theorizing now, if he did make a living out of photography he may have never written Alice in Wonderland and the others. His work mostly consisted of people, and landscape. He did however also take some shots of nude children which I found a bit odd, but it was probably somewhat socially acceptable in that era of history.

Lewis also used his photography to get him into higher social circles, and during the high point in his photographic career he took several portraits and pictures of many famous sitters, who were mostly painters and artists. I wonder if he ever took a picture of the artist drawing a sitter? That would have been a neat shot.

Around 1880, he had completely mastered photography, taking a whopping 3,000 pictures in the period of 24 years. Rather interesting to me that he started photography at the age of 24, and stopped 24 years later. Maybe that was the reason, to keep things even? Who knows. Sadly though, only 1,000 of his photos were salvaged, no thanks to the curse, but sometimes a blessing, known well to us all as time.

His reasons for quitting photography are still unknown.

-David Yarbrough

My favorite book and why.

The Lost World. By Michael Crichton. The sequel to Jurassic Park. Yes, those movies about dinosaurs that was directed by Stephen Spielberg. The first two were actually based on books! the third movie? Well, we don't talk about the third movie.

During my childhood, I was fascinated with dinosaurs as most young boys were. As I grew up, I still favored them more than all the other kids. When I was around 10, my dad rented a movie called Jurassic Park. Boy did I love it. So much so, that I wanted to know more about it. After talking to the library attendant, she told me about Michael Crichton, and told me that the movie I saw was based off his book! I was so excited I rented all the books they had on him. The first and second ones I read was of course, Jurassic Park and The Lost World. I was hooked on Michael Crichton's work from the first sentence.

Why is it my favorite book? Or, why is the second book my favorite? I loved his work from the start, and it was most likely because he had a very interesting way of describing. Yes, he would get lengthy in his descriptions telling you about how something worked, portrayed in the character's mind. But it was that kind of description that made me adore it. The best way I could describe this type of writing, would be "informational description." You learn about various things, but you don't even realize it, and he would do it by keeping you entertained all at once. I learned a lot about dinosaurs from his books through this way. Although of course some of it was pure fiction, but I didn't care.

He played more with the Velociraptors, at least in the novel, which made me more interested. I always wanted to see more of the raptors in the first book, because they were the real killers. Intelligent, agile, pack hunters, perfect killing machines. The T-rex was great and all, but the "huge, strong, and stupid" monster of some kind has been done too many times in books and movies.

He also played a lot with suspense, and fear in the second book, which I loved. So much so, I have read both of those books too many times to count. I shall end this blog with a quote Dr. Ian Malcom, my favorite character from the series:

"If there is one thing the history of evolution has taught us it's that life will not be contained. Life breaks free, expands to new territory, and crashes through barriers, painfully, maybe even dangerously. "

-David Yarbrough