American Born Chinese was an interesting read. I finished it within an hour and was amazed at how fast it went by. The story was more complex than I initially thought. Within the overall story there are three parts that come to play intermittently. Jin-Wang was the first character introduced, then the Monkey King, and finally Danny. Each of these characters had a similar conflict-- They needed to accept themselves. Jin-Wang's revolution did not happen until the very end, but the Monkey King's helped the entire storyline move forward.
The Monkey King was so consumed by the thought of becoming like the other deities that he lost sight of who he really was. When the monk showed the Monkey King that things could be better, the Monkey King did not believe him at first. When the two were discussing the Monkey King's ability to escape this rut he had put himself into you can see in the panels just how pointless it was to resist. In two of the panels, the Monkey King was made speechless by the monk's reasoning.
Danny was battling a couple of things. The main thing was himself. He was so afraid of embracing his heritage that he lashed out at anything that would cause suspicion that he was not just a cookie-cutter boy. Chin-Kee was his other enemy. It was not by design, it was just that Danny felt that his newly found school life was being threatened.
When we find out that Jin Wang is actually Danny and Chin-Kee is The Monkey King, everything seems to make sense. Of course I was a little confused. I thought that the Monkey King segments were added to give some background to the Asian culture, but it turns out that those panels played a significant role.
The panels that interested me the most were those of when the Monkey King was under the rocks, and the only way to escape was to "release" himself and become himself and not what other people expected him to be. I thought that was an amazing lesson.

I think that if you have an imagination it's almost impossible not to read the world into a story. Isn't that what authors count on? Our ability to relate and transfer fictional ideas to reality?
Race, gender, and class can be focused on in literature because it's focused on in the everyday world.
I usually read fictional stories (I find nonfiction rather depressing) and I have found these three factors all over! In Harry Potter for example, race could be seen as being a muggle-born or pure-blood. In many of Jane Austen's novels, she displays the issues of social standing (class) and that of woman (gender). Those ideas have to stem from somewhere, right? It makes everything come full circle, whether the author intended it or not. Just like our own interpretations... we all make different assumptions based on ourselves and how we perceive the world around us.

I don't chew with my mouth open, but if I did... would I be looked down upon? Does my race or social class protect me from that? When I see someon'es food being brutally chewed, I can't help but wonder ho their mother could have neglected teaching htem manners... I think it's more of manners rather than race. And our actions do change around people of different social standing.

Multimodial is like our senses.  We use many means to interpret the world around us (smell, sight, touch, taste, and sound).  

Multisemiotics are the meanings that the individual takes away from each mode or sense.  We may all experience the same thing, but how it relates to us through our history, culture, society, and our own individuality is different.  So in a way, multisemiotics feed off of multimodial.  And it's good to keep in mind that (from the article):

The idea that there is one standard set of meanings for all is no longer considered true. Rather, the available meanings taken from any instance of communication are potentially multiple, or multisemiotic.

Multimodial literacy relies heavily on the senses (film, books, audio).  You have to look at every piece of literature as you would a culture-- holistically.    In Mcloud, all of our senses are involved, even when you don't realize it.  The images stimulate our visual sense, while the words work their way into our minds.  Words are pretty powerful if you think about it.  The imagery along with the detail in description and dialogue can persuade our minds into thinking that we can smell, taste, and even hear!  I remember reading last year an article by Stephen King about writing.  He describes writing as telepathy.  As we read, the author invades our mind and makes us think what he wants us to (in most cases).  I think that's incredibly interesting because it's true (for me a least).  

Molly Bang Concepts

In this painting (Iowa American Gothic) the possible relationship between the two subjects seems strained. If it is natural tendency to feel threatened by sharp objects like Molly Bang says, then the pitchfork plays an important role. Take note that the pitchfork is also placed near the center and the center is what draws our attention the most. I have heard that the actual description of this piece is that it's a father driving away unwanted suitors from his daughter.I don't know if I agree with that unless he has been doing that for a long time because the daughter doesn't seem to be in her prime anymore. Even the roof of the house in the background comes to a point. The only roundness or security that can be found is in the shape of the subjects' head the man's glasses and the woman's brooch. Frankly, this kinda creeps me out. Their expressions are unnerving and the old man is staring at me. The woman isn't as bad because she is staring off elsewhere but her expression is sad or frustrated. The upper part of the painting does look to be freer...just look at the colors...the sky is a friendly blue and the trees are a fresh shade of green but once you shift your gaze to the bottom of the painting the colors darken and you find yourself looking at a not-s0-friendly pitchfork.

What is real literature? Whoa, I don't know where to start. I used to think that literature was always in the form of an extremely thick book (Moby Dick, Jane Eyre, etc). I guess I'm wrong. Literature generally encompasses any media that displays or passes on some form of information? I'm not sure of the textbook definition, but that's how I'm trying to view it.
I admit that I have a trunk full of comic books at home (filled with classics such as Batman, Justice League, and even some Teen Titans). Yeah... I'm basically a dork, but hey I like it that way. I know that there are the stereotypes that go along with comic book reading... like a forty-something-year-old that lives in his mother's basement and attends conventions dressed as his favorite hero or villian... (I'm not that into comic books)... or maybe those are just Star Trek junkies... anywho...
McCloud's book introduced me to some interesting concepts, such as the "gutter" of a comic book page. I didn't realize that while I was reading comic books, I was bringing them to life, and my imagination was basically the main machine... even when there are no images!
I would sometimes think that if I wasn't participating in something, it wasn't happening (of course that's a rather self-centered way of thinking so I gave that up a few years back). When I read that McCloud had those thoughts himself, I thought that as kind of funny, and I have to say, I'm glad I wasn't alone in thinking that...

Lalala, I like books.

What is an American?

     Technically? It's someone with citizenship in the Americas, but there is a whole other meaning assigned to the word. My take on it is that an American is someone who strives for better not only for their benefit, but for the benefit of many. Now, I can't say that is the only thing an American does, because I consider myself to be an American... but what am I doing to help the people in my community?
I think that passion plays a big role in someone's identity as an American. Sheesh, this is slightly frustrating because I was to give "American" a textbook definition, but I know that is nearly impossible.  Being American is being anything.

      Both my parents are teachers and though they sometimes lose patience with their work, they continue because they like it--they like to know that they are making a difference. My sister's boyfriend is in the army--stationed in Germany-- and even though he isn't all too thrilled about the war in general, he has risked his life to not only protect his homeland, but also other people threatened during this time.
So what have I done? Sheesh, nothing but go to college, but I guess that's a good enough start for now.

The Feminist theory is appealing to me because…well basically because I’m female! I think it is a great thing that women in the past and still today push to make their presence appreciated. This theory makes you wonder what kind of roles women play. Whether a woman is present or not is a big indicator of the author’s view of women. Say there were no females in the book, could this mean that the author thinks that woman aren’t important enough to be displayed? If women are present, then what are their characters like—are they stereotypical in their roles or personalities? I think this ties into the New Historicism theory because in order to understand why the author or creator portrays women in such ways, you need to look at all that could influence the product.

The New Historicism theory catches my interest with its proposition that literary works should be viewed in their own context. That context could be referring to time and geographical settings as well as culture. I think this could apply to people as well as literature. You can’t understand a person fully if you simply judge them based on your own standards or background. You have to see how other factors have played a role in the molding of both people and literary works. Now that’s quite the life lesson. 

I think that all the theories are linked with a bit of gray haze… each can overlap with another, yet one could stand-alone. I find that look at different pieces through the lenses of separate theories changes my mindset, and I end up taking different information from the same thing.