Comments on: Furthering the Discussion of Eyes http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/furthering-the-discussion-of-eyes/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=furthering-the-discussion-of-eyes English 738T, Spring 2015 Sat, 12 Nov 2016 04:10:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Amanda Gogarty http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/furthering-the-discussion-of-eyes/#comment-1369 Amanda Gogarty Thu, 21 May 2015 20:26:04 +0000 http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/?p=1400#comment-1369 Hi Denis, I definitely agree that eyes were one of the most prominent themes in most of the works we have read for this semester. I agree with Sara on the idea that looking into someone's eyes is supposed to reveal the "truth," however I am more interested in how many characters' eyes are hidden (for example, the sunglasses in the Matrix, or Molly's prosthetic lenses in Neuromancer. I think it is also interesting to think of hiding the eyes as a form of protection, especially when a female character decides to hide her eyes (i.e.- Molly again.) I wonder if there is any difference in implication when a female hides her eyes vs. when a male hides his eyes, and if so, what it could signify. Hi Denis,

I definitely agree that eyes were one of the most prominent themes in most of the works we have read for this semester. I agree with Sara on the idea that looking into someone’s eyes is supposed to reveal the “truth,” however I am more interested in how many characters’ eyes are hidden (for example, the sunglasses in the Matrix, or Molly’s prosthetic lenses in Neuromancer. I think it is also interesting to think of hiding the eyes as a form of protection, especially when a female character decides to hide her eyes (i.e.- Molly again.) I wonder if there is any difference in implication when a female hides her eyes vs. when a male hides his eyes, and if so, what it could signify.

]]> By: Kyle Bickoff http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/furthering-the-discussion-of-eyes/#comment-1363 Kyle Bickoff Tue, 19 May 2015 05:34:14 +0000 http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/?p=1400#comment-1363 Hi Denis, I really have enjoyed learning (and noticing) so many eyes in our texts throughout the course of the semester, and the conception of "the eyes are the windows to the soul" is still a very applicable one. I'm glad that you bring Chaucer in here--I hadn't been familiar with the poem previously, but it certainly fits the bill. Eyes retain a position of empathy, or perhaps human connection. I had the chance to, some time back, watch the Ken Burns documentary "The Dust Bowl." When photographers funded by WPA projects went out west to document the terrible, unbearable conditions in the Dust Bowl region of Colorado, Kansas, and the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas, they were told by a supervisor--"I want to see their eyes." So when we see Dorothea Lange's "Migrant Mother," we're seeing her eyes, her emotion, her pain, and even so many decades later we're able to empathize with her through this powerful photo--and through the eyes. Hi Denis,

I really have enjoyed learning (and noticing) so many eyes in our texts throughout the course of the semester, and the conception of “the eyes are the windows to the soul” is still a very applicable one. I’m glad that you bring Chaucer in here–I hadn’t been familiar with the poem previously, but it certainly fits the bill. Eyes retain a position of empathy, or perhaps human connection. I had the chance to, some time back, watch the Ken Burns documentary “The Dust Bowl.” When photographers funded by WPA projects went out west to document the terrible, unbearable conditions in the Dust Bowl region of Colorado, Kansas, and the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas, they were told by a supervisor–”I want to see their eyes.” So when we see Dorothea Lange’s “Migrant Mother,” we’re seeing her eyes, her emotion, her pain, and even so many decades later we’re able to empathize with her through this powerful photo–and through the eyes.

]]> By: Denis Dodson http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/furthering-the-discussion-of-eyes/#comment-1360 Denis Dodson Sun, 17 May 2015 18:02:04 +0000 http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/?p=1400#comment-1360 I am actually writing a bit about "truth" for my final paper, and I would argue that you are correct in stating that humans tend to wrongly depend on what we see. I would further this, however, by stating that it is almost a form of forced subjectivity - humans create flaw in what they see or remember, preferring subjectivity over objectivity. Even relating it back to my previous post about the Baltimore riots, there seems to be an inherent willful ignorance through forcing subjectivity in a lot of human writing or memory. I am actually writing a bit about “truth” for my final paper, and I would argue that you are correct in stating that humans tend to wrongly depend on what we see. I would further this, however, by stating that it is almost a form of forced subjectivity – humans create flaw in what they see or remember, preferring subjectivity over objectivity.

Even relating it back to my previous post about the Baltimore riots, there seems to be an inherent willful ignorance through forcing subjectivity in a lot of human writing or memory.

]]> By: Sara Lyons http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/furthering-the-discussion-of-eyes/#comment-1359 Sara Lyons Sat, 16 May 2015 17:19:04 +0000 http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/?p=1400#comment-1359 I would argue that eyes, based on the texts we encountered this semester, are connected with believability and "truth". In the Matrix, eyes are faulty in the simulated world yet are deemed not faulty in the Matrix - we are supposed to believe that to be truth; however, as we discussed in class, how do we know that what's deemed to be true is actually true? The same can be said for the photography in Memento. The photos don't encompass all of the truth and sometimes are even faulty on their own - he doesn't know the truth about Natalie because he doesn't have time to write it on the picture before he forgets and he doesn't know he already killed the man because he's missing a picture. I would also argue that what defines the reality of something cannot be identified through the eyes because even though, in Blade Runner, the way to determine the "humanity" of someone is through the eyes and the yellow of the Creature's eyes, in Frankenstein, (supposedly) characterizes his monstrosity, these aspects are clearly faulty as they only actually determine the person's physical reality, not actual humanity. I guess I'm concerned with taking the focus on eyes and applying it to how we determine truth as we humans tend to wrongly depend on what we see. I would argue that eyes, based on the texts we encountered this semester, are connected with believability and “truth”. In the Matrix, eyes are faulty in the simulated world yet are deemed not faulty in the Matrix – we are supposed to believe that to be truth; however, as we discussed in class, how do we know that what’s deemed to be true is actually true? The same can be said for the photography in Memento. The photos don’t encompass all of the truth and sometimes are even faulty on their own – he doesn’t know the truth about Natalie because he doesn’t have time to write it on the picture before he forgets and he doesn’t know he already killed the man because he’s missing a picture. I would also argue that what defines the reality of something cannot be identified through the eyes because even though, in Blade Runner, the way to determine the “humanity” of someone is through the eyes and the yellow of the Creature’s eyes, in Frankenstein, (supposedly) characterizes his monstrosity, these aspects are clearly faulty as they only actually determine the person’s physical reality, not actual humanity.

I guess I’m concerned with taking the focus on eyes and applying it to how we determine truth as we humans tend to wrongly depend on what we see.

]]>