Monthly Archives: March 2019

The transition from torment, sin & evilness to spiritual cleansing, unification & praise

In canto 33, the sinner who is chewing on his neighbor raises his head and tells Dante that he is Count Ugolino from Pisa and he eats the head of Archbishop Ruggieri (who imprisoned Ugolino and his sons in a tower, where they starved to death). Ugolino re-tells his story to Dante, by saying that starvation led Ugolino to gnaw at his own hands and his sons mistook this for hunger and offered their bodies as food, willingly sacrificing their own bodies. Ugolino states, “There he died; and as you see me, I saw the three fall one by one between the fifth day and the sixth; and I, already blind, took to groping over each of them, and for two days I called them, after they were dead. Then fasting had more power than grief” (Canto 33, lines 70-75). Dante cries out against Pisa because Ugolino was a traitor, but his sons were starved to death as a punishment for Ugolino’s betrayal in which Dante the author accuses the Pisan government of unjustly punishing Ugolino’s sons. Dante uses this individual’s story (Ugolino) as a way to criticize an Italian town; unlike Dante the pilgrim’s previous journey where he faints from the pity from Francesca and Paolo’s story, Dante is learning to moderate his responses in regard to the suffering souls of the sinners. But for Dante the author, Ugolino’s betrayal of his city does not negate or make invalid the fact that Ugolino loves his sons and the grief Ugolino felt for his sons was genuine. Moving on to the next ring, one suffering soul begs Dante to pull the layer of frozen tears from his face, so that he can cry once more (even though these tears will freeze over his face again and again). Dante agrees as long as the spirit tells him his name, which is Fra Alberigo. Friar Alberigo killed his own brother after inviting him to a dinner. Dante learns Alberigo is not dead, but that this region of Hell called Ptolomaea (which reserves souls for those who betray guests; the demon in this circle holds the souls even before they have died). The bodies of these people are then possessed by demons on earth. He points out another suffering soul to Dante whom is Branca d’Oria, who Dante knows to be alive. Dante’s sense of God’s justice is evident as Fra Alberigo asks Dante to scrape the ice from his eyes but Dante refuses, saying “I did not open them for him; and it was courtesy to treat him boorishly” (Canto 33, lines 149-150). This canto draws a contrast between Dante’s criticism of the Pisan government, which demonstrates the imperfection of human beings and God, whose punishments may seem pitiless but are always just.

 

In canto 34, Virgil and Dante are approaching Hell and the king of Hell –Satan. Satan has three faces: one red, one yellow, and one black. Satan also has three pairs of wings that beat which causes the great wind and freezes the river. In each mouth he chews a sinner—Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus, and Brutus and Cassius, who betrayed Julius Caesar. Virgil and Dante then climb up onto Satan’s monstrous body. Dante holds tight to Virgil as they make the perilous climb up Satan’s body (which isn’t the first time they climb up something steep; which occurs in Canto 24-25 — when they cross the bridge). Dante and Virgil finally reach an area in which they can rest. Dante looks out from it, expecting to see Lucifer’s head, but instead Dante the pilgrim sees his legs stretching up before him, as if everything is upside down. Also, instead of night, its now morning. Virgil says they have passed through Earth into the Southern Hemisphere, and because Satan fell to Earth from Heaven in this hemisphere, there is no land, just ocean. As a transitional segue, Virgil gives more information about the structure of the world as he and Dante move towards Purgatorio. When Satan fell from Heaven, Virgil says, his impact caused a pit to form on Earth which became Hell. Dante looks up and is able to see the bright stars in the sky, which he hasn’t seen since entering hell. The symbolism of the three heads represents Dante’s tendency to mix Christian figures (the holy trinity) with those from Greek and Roman history and mythology. The other demons of Hell express emotion(s), however, Satan, as the manifestation of damnation doesn’t explain his circumstances or express any emotion; instead Satan seems automatic in a mechanical way – hence his tears and his violent, chewing of the sinners. Perhaps Dante the writer does this as way to show that while many of the other sinners are affected by evilness, they still remain fundamentally human; which is something readers are able to see in Virgil and Dante as well. However, pure evil (like Satan) contains no traces of humanity. The imagery in the ending of this canto is visually appealing when Dante writes, “My leader and I entered on that hidden path to return to the bright world; and, without taking care for rest at all, up we climbed, he first and I second, until I saw the beautiful things the heavens carry, through a round opening. And thence we came forth to look again at the stars” (canto 34, lines 133-139).  Dante the pilgrim is no longer in a dark wood: but instead is exiting from the world of torment, suffering and sin and heading towards a world signaling God’s presence: emerging into the light of God’s love. He has to more to learn on his journey and has to move forward, but at the end of Inferno, the cantica suggests that Dante the pilgrim is no longer lost.

 

Canto 1 in Purgatorio an important soul appears which is Cato — Cato who was a Roman politician and known for his defiance of Julius Caesar. Cato questions Dante and Virgil asking Virgil why he is in Purgatory, since Virgil’s soul is designated to Limbo and Dante is not yet dead. Virgil explains to Cato that their journey is permissioned by the heavenly figure Beatrice whom asked Virgil to lead Dante through the afterlife. Cato orders Virgil to prepare Dante by binding his waist with a reed and washing him clean of the filth of Hell. Because Cato is a non-Christian, it seems strange he welcomes souls entering into Purgatory. Therefore, Cato would seem to belong with Virgil in Limbo. In addition, another, more perceptible problem is Cato’s death is suicide, which he chose rather than surrender to his enemy Julius Caesar. Traditionally, Catholic religion held suicide to be among the greatest of mortal sins, and Dante puts those who died by suicide their own special place in Hell (canto 13 with Pier Della Vigna). However, Dante the poet, makes an exception for Cato, whose suicide is excused and even proves the politician’s righteous nature. Canto 2 in Purgatorio, there is a flash of light from across the sea which signals the approach of an angel coming towards Dante and Virgil, a sight that overpowers Dante when he states, “When, for a moment, I’d withdrawn my eyes that I might ask a question of my guide, I saw that light again, larger, more bright. Then, to each side of it, I saw a whiteness, though I did not know what that whiteness was; below, another whiteness slowly showed” (canto 2, lines 19-24). This angel is guiding a boat which contains departed souls heading towards Mount Purgatory. The souls ask Virgil and Dante for directions, but Virgil admits he knows nothing of the geography when he states, “but we are strangers here, just as you are” (canto 2, line 63). Dante recognizes a friend, a musician named Casella (who is also a passenger of the boat). As Dante moves to embrace Casella, he is surprised because he grasps only air. Casella talks with Dante about life back in Italy then sings a song — Dante pleasantly listens to the soul when he says, “he then began to sing—and sang so sweetly that I still hear that sweetness sound in me” (canto 2, 113-114). Other souls join Dante in listening to the song but Casella leaves in a hasty departure. Although Dante is not dead yet, he is welcomed by the penitents with curiosity and politeness. This is one difference noted between Purgatory and Hell is that Purgatory is structured around this idea of fellowship with others, whereas the souls in Hell are cut off from God and from one another (like Farinata and Cavalcanti are in the same tombstone but don’t communicate and acknowledge each other). The damned are physically near one another, their sinful behavior causes them to be in a terrible form of solitary confinement. The singing from Cato and the souls listening also displays a type of form such as reciting psalms and singing hymns. Therefore, Purgatory consists of souls who come together in divine praise.

Blog post due on April 1

There is no particular instruction for this post, but you should aim at writing a “mini paper” (3 paragraphs with a thesis) following the checklist from Sylvan Barnett’s book A Short Guide to Writing about Art. It’s a good checklist even when you are not writing about visual arts.

You should blog about cantos 33-34 of Inferno and 1-2 of Purgatorio, unless you would like to discuss something from canto 26-29 that we haven’t discussed in class.

Reflective Post 1

Going through my blog posts I started to appreciate some of the changes I’ve made when writing a response to the work of Dante. I see a lot less discussion of the text in my earlier posts than I do in more recent published works, and I think that that’s a real and tangible improvement. I stand by the topics I’ve written about, though I think that as my perception of Dante and his Comedy have been refined and developed, so too have my topics of discussion. I think that I’ve made a lot of progress since my first post, and that I’ve better and more effectively engaged and built-off of the text in my posts.

Comparing my oldest and most recent work you can really start to see a lot of improvements. Not just in analysis, but also in how I engage with the text. I used a lot more quotes than I think was necessary in my first few posts. Not exactly a bad thing, but something I think could have been better considering my current works which rely a lot less on excerpts from the text, and more on an analysis of what Dante’s really saying through the Inferno. While the quotes establish a good dialogue and development of the text as I build up to my arguments, reflecting on them now I think these quotes really result in more of a summation than analysis. My second assignment on Canto 7 really shows this, especially through descriptions like “Just as these souls went against the will of Fortune, a device of God, they now take what they have (their weights) and collide and push against each other, a metaphor for their behavior on Earth.” While I stand by the post itself, which focuses on the degrees of sin and the idea of contrapasso, I think that my work has improved a lot from this base. I think that my analysis is a lot more thorough in recent posts than it was in posts like “Dante’s Vision of Contrapasso in the Punishment of Sin,” which isn’t to say that posts like these are bad, only that I’ve developed beyond them.

I noticed a main focus in my works, or a favorite topic at the very least. My favorite works so far are those which include Dante’s perception of God’s “Divine Plan,” and the construction of the Inferno with the intention of contrapasso. Dante’s exploration of contrapasso in the Inferno is something I find very interesting, as readers can probably tell from the numerous times that I’ve brought it up through my blog posts. My favorite post so far has likely been my analysis of the “Progression of the Recognition of Sin,” a post drawing a line between the sinners in the first couple bolgia and the “anti-inferno” from the first few Cantos of the Inferno. I think that the parallels between sin and punishment as well as the parallels between sinners in the Inferno (as I explore in my post) are fascinating, and it’s ideas like this that I feel really embody my development through these posts. In earlier posts, I think I was really just getting my footing in the Inferno. And now with a better understanding of Dante and the construction of his Inferno, I feel that a lot of my ideas are a lot more free-flowing and interesting, especially now that I’ve really solidified an interest in Dante’s work.

Ultimately I think my posts are improving, but they still need work. I think that my topics are improving in terms of thought, but in terms of writing I think I can still do better. A lot of my main shortcomings are a result of relying on the text a lot more than I should, and while I feel that I’ve definitely progressed a lot from that, I can certainly continue to improve.

Reflective Post 1

After reading my posts i realized that my first couple of posts were solely narrative posts as I failed to fully engage with the text. It was only during the next few that i was starting to engage and analyze the cantos. I noticed that my more successful posts were focused on Virgil as i find him to be a more interesting character than Dante.

Writing is definitely not my strong suit as bits of grammatical errors are sprinkled across my posts. Critical analysis and finding hidden meanings are things that I always struggled with, it never seems to click in my head. With a classical work such as The Divine Comedy it increases the difficulty of analyzing for me as now i must struggle to even grasp the most surface level understanding from the text. One thing that i should really improve upon is adding more text from the cantos into my posts to help support my analysis. There is also the lack of outside sources to draw from like Barolini’s comments or the comments from the book, these are insightful comments that have a much deeper understanding of Dante’s Divine Comedy and can provide me a better understanding of the text so i am able to grasp the topics and themes that Dante explores in his text.

Reflective Post

As I revisited my previous posts, I’ve noticed that my analysis requires more content than quality. To my knowledge, I don’t see a real concrete thought process when dealing with these assignments. I deal with this posts without any cognitive process, and if I apply more planning into writing my analysis about these cantos then I can further enlighten myself and the audience. Honestly, on my first post it was difficult for me write about the image to the referred canto. It’s been a long time since I’ve had to write about an artist’s piece, so I don’t know how to go about contemplating on what the piece represents.  This is why i tend to stick with just textual analysis. In my opinion, It is easier to come up with a strategy to translate my ideas into writing.

As I continue on this course, I hoped to utilize many literary theories to help me make sense of Dante’s text. Before, at the start of this course I’ve stated about my fascination on the damned in Dante’s Inferno to which drove me to enroll this class. Now I’ve realized that Dante’s Inferno has more to offer than what I initially thought.  Some of what Dante’s talks about with the damned sometimes reflects what’s going on in today’s world in terms of corruption and morality themes.

Reflection 1

When one embarks on a hermeneutical journey of a great text, especially to that of the Divine Comedy, one is bound to confront the puzzlement of interpreting and analyzing the text. Certainly, one must read, and one must also write, in order to make an attempt to understand the text. For the comedy, it is a literary work of pedagogy that presents a well-rounded, cohesive, sets of classical ideas derived from liberal education that ranges from philosophy, mythology, theology, painting, politics, religion, and poetry. If we are only to read the text in our inner voice or out loud to our self, we are treating the text as a form of dogmatic study. I certainly do find the beauty and the challenge of coming to class to explicate my analysis on a particular theme or idea in the cantos. And indeed, whatever one is spewing out onto the open classroom initiates the reciprocation of interpretation, like when different perspectives of textual analysis are being cross-examined. In the open classroom, new ideas are being born, and instructors and students are all contributing their method of how certain implicit elements come into play and building upon each other’s ideas with their proposed textual evidence and explanation.

Lest we forget that the Divine Comedy should be approached in a holistic manner, by this mean, there is equal merit in analyzing each facet of the liberal education. For example, my treatment of the text tends to gravitate to philosophy and mythology. For once, I was fascinated by the iconography of ascension and the cosmos and its underlying philosophical connection to stoicism. And also, I was eager to find if there is any highlighting connection between the theory of social contract put forth by Thomas Hobbes and why Florence was a discordant city-state at that time. These ideas and other similar ones were composed in a collective class journal that every student can read and comment. For one to derive pleasure in one’s writing, is one just to write for the sake of one. However, we must pretend to acknowledge that our instructor and students are an ignorant layman who has never read the text, and whatever experimental interpretation we have must be subjected to the sterilization of lucidity. It is foolish to start to analyze about metamorphosis in depth when the writer hasn’t even begun to give a proper introduction to the term. I must be frank that I’ve committed such mistake of assuming that the audience knows what I am explicating about.

Since this is an open collective class journal, we certainly do want to be considerate by communicating in a way that is effective and contributing. Although we are not writing an academic paper on this forum, we should treat our written delivery of it as such. If we are explicating our interpretation in the class, it is more acceptable to make a mistake on the fallibility and the delivery of the explication. But if are writing about it on the collective class journal, there is less room for errors, and there is no excuse as to the poor development of one’s idea. Therefore, our instructor points out our mistakes sharply before the students notice it. I reckon that some students express a slight annoyance because the comments that the instructor gave might be too much criticism on their grammar or idea development. But I do want to emphasize one point, which is to find the true lesson of what the text means to you in whatever way, regardless of caring too much about performing poorly on the class journal. One should interpret the comedy by, drawing out on any implicit element that might sound outrageous or out of touch. And that we should risk being wrong, rather than not making any thoughtful interpretation at all. As long as there is an innate attraction for that interpretation, finding evidence of it to support the claim will be a job that certainly requires the pleasure of mental stimulation.

 

Reflection #1: My Past Commentary and Thoughts

When reflecting on my first post on Canto III and the posts that follow after, I cannot find any specific trend in my posts. I do not seem to fall into a niche when posting about a selective reading, rather I first tend to say what particularly interests me and why; often making a contemporary analysis in relation to our current social atmosphere. I also never reread my writing before submitting which makes my arguments unclear. Furthermore, progressing throughout the cantos and our course discussions allowed for me to take on different perspectives on how to read the poetry. I realized that language in poetry is very important and often, when read carefully, provides deeper meaning in relation to the material. In the more recent readings I’ve begun to analyze why Dante (the writer) chooses to construct the inferno the way that he does. I do not believe that anything read thus far has been a gimmick. Then, I noticed that Dante often ironically assigns crime to punishment effectively. This means that each punishment alone may be enough to allow the reader to guess the crime that entails it.

Furthermore, I need to interact with the characters on a deeper level and understand their respective stories. Once I can understand cantos in their entirety, I will be able to reflect better with the story and be more insightful.

Reflective Post One

In blog post one, it was solely a narration of what happened in the first canto. By post 6, I focused much more on a theme in the canto. However, this could still use more work. I tend to only uses a few lines from the canto to illustrate what I am arguing, which is not enough. Additionally, I do not draw enough from other resources available. Having other sources would be a good way of reinforcing my points. I should also look into arguing against what other people have written, if I do not agree with them.

Some of my blog post examine the same ideas as other students, however they usually take a different view on the topics.

Blog post 1 and 5, I used art in my analysis, both from the Yates Thompson 36 Manuscript. I enjoyed doing these two posts the most, as I feel comparing and contrasting how I image the scenes, and how artists have seen them, very interesting. The artworks from this manuscript in particular, I think are very good to examine as they show a progression, from left to right, they illustrate most of the scene.

There is a pattern in most of my posts. I start my stating my argument, then going to further depth about what this argument is, using a few quotes from the canto, analyzing these quotes, then a very brief summary. At first I thought the topics I address have all been very different, but looking back I notice I usually write of how Dante views certain sinners and their actions. I write whether he shows the sinners pity or distain, whether he writes of their punishment as fair or unjust.

I feel I could improve my posts if I just spent more time developing them, through reading other sources, other students’ posts etc, rather than only using the cantos and myself as the only source.

Reflective Post #1

Reflecting on the previous posts I’ve written, I’ve noticed several patterns. One pattern, for example, is a thematic recurrence. I often discuss or reference Dante’s reactions to the souls and the events that take place in Hell or the situations and exchanges he engages in with the souls even when the main focus of the post does not center around this topic. In the post, Farinata’s Attitude in Hell, in which the attitude of a soul who is still preoccupied with the notion of social status is discussed, I noted, “Despite his circumstances, throughout the entire canto, Farinata’s demeanor is calm and collected unlike Dante’s past encounters in which the souls are either sorrowful and pitiful or attempt to put Dante’s life in peril.” Here, it is evident that while the subject of this sentence focuses on Farinata’s bearing, it is used as a comparison to the meetings that Dante has with the other souls. Another example of referencing Dante’s sentiments while the post focuses on another topic is in the previous post entitled “Evil Tail’s Clever Deceit”. In this post, the focus is on the scene where Virgil boldly deals with a group of devils who ultimately end up deceiving him. The clever manner in which they trick Virgil is then connected to the effects it has on Dante. Considering that Dante depends solely on Virgil as his guide, it is understandable that I included this connection in order to make my point. As an example, I notice that, “Although Dante has faith in Virgil’s intelligence and ability to deal with the creatures of Hell, he does not wish to forget this moment for the sake of eluding danger which Virgil fails to do so in canto 21.” Noticably, here, I am taking into consideration Dante’s belief that Virgil is capable of effectively dealing with Hell’s demons while ending the sentence with a change in focus. The change refers back to the central topic of the post which is Virgil’s failure to keep Dante safe in canto 21.

Furthermore, there is another thematic element that is discussed more than once: the constant evolution of Dante’s reactions to the souls. This is clearly illustrated in reflecting on the second post, “Filippo Argenti: The Daring Soul” and the fifth post, “Dante v.s. Pope Nicholas III”. Both posts mention the change in Dante’s response to the discussions he has with the souls. The Filippo Argenti post states, “In past Cantos, Dante would show pity towards souls who would share their stories with him…Here, Dante convey disgust and alarm at Argenti’s daring behavior…” Meanwhile, in the fifth post, I note, “Dante’s reproach is ultimately harsh, blunt and straightforward…In past cantos, the majority of his reactions consist of sorrowful pity or fear.” Evidently, according to these posts, I find it quite interesting that Dante sympathizes strongly with the souls to the point that he even faints. However, in both posts I note this reaction in comparison to the new emotions that he portrays such as disgust or reproach. I believe I focus on this theme consistently because it is important to keep track of the emotional roller coaster that Dante is on. Without following the evolution of Dante’s sentiments as he progresses into the deeper and darker pits of Hell, it would be difficult to understand why he narrates the poem in a certain manner with different linguistic techniques or the different aspects of his relationship with Virgil. Both of these things connect to Dante’s emotions because they are codependent and are crucial to Dante’s physical and mental journey.

I also notice that I have used images in every post excluding the previous one. However, for the most part, I do not discuss the analysis of the text in connection to how the scenes are reflected in those images. I believe, going forward, this would be a useful technique to add to the upcoming posts because it allows for an analysis of how the vivid text is brought to life in a manner that allows me to visualize the harrowing events in Hell.

 

Reflective Post 1

I noticed an evolution in my writing style, I initially relied on background information to draw my analysis but now I rely more on rhetorical devices and especially the syntax of the sentence.

In the beginning, I relied on historical background to analyze the characters and the purpose of the canto. During our first class, the discussion was primarily about all the novels and short stories related to the Inferno. Most of the students are upper class men that have already taken other literary courses and are well-versed with the context of the novel. Originally, I felt left out from the discussion because compared to everyone else, I didn’t have much prior knowledge about the topic. In my early posts, I made a special effort to focus on how Dante’s time period influenced his writings. In my second canto, I analyze Dante’s encounter with Ciacco as a strife between the Guelfs and the Ghibellines. In my second post I write, “Ciacco foreshadows that after 3 years or “three suns,” the Black Guelphs will regain control of Florence while the White Guelphs, including Dante who was an active prior (White Guelph leader) will fall.” I analyze Ciacco’s sentence by breaking the sentence into fragments and connecting it to the historical significance behind those words. For example, I knew that the “3 suns” actually refers to how the Ghibellines come into power again after 3 years. I use the background information to draw the conclusion that Ciacco is foreshadowing Dante’s exile. I strongly believe that the background information provides clarity to Dante’s arrangement of the canto and hints at his personal life. Thus, in my first few cantos, I used extensive background information to get a feel for the structure of the cantos.

In my 3rd post, I’m able to use both background imagery and rhetorical analysis to enhance my argument. I address that Dante defines heresy as the belief that soul is mortal and dies with the body. I use background knowledge to explain why Farinata is a heretic. For example, I write “Farinata’s heresy is defined in terms of his political association with Frederick II.” I further elaborate that Frederick II was excommunicated twice and deemed a heretic, hence Farinata is a heretic by association. I use sentence syntax to show a character development in Farinata from a to a florentine Citizen. My topic sentence is “Farinata’s verbal exchange mirrors his earthly status as a Ghibelline factional leader to his eventual transcendence of all partisans to a Florentine citizen that prioritizes his city’s welfare above all else.” The sentence is actually more closer to my roots, I love setting up parallels between people, sentence structure with character development, settings, etc. I use Farinata’s speech to show his character development. For example, I write “ He uses 3 subjects to compose his identity: “Me,” “My ancestors,” and “My party”.” His initial manner of speaking shows that he’s still fixated on Florence’s politics because he defines his identity exclusively in terms of his ancestral lineage and Florence’s politics. However, I contrast it with the end of his conversation where he says  “If they had learned that art badly’ he said, ‘that torments me more than this bed.” (lines 75-77, Canto 10, pg 31). I elaborate on Farinata’s reflection about the war as a more objective citizen as opposed to a partisan because he is able to admit that his people might be wrong. This post is more advanced than my prior post which solely relies on background knowledge to come up with any analysis. However, this post is more wordy and it attempts to discuss too many topics like heresy, types of heresy, Farinata, Cavalcanti, etc. all in one post. I set up another parallel in my 5th post between the nature of the sinners and the deceptive nature of the Evil Claws. This focuses more on the parallel itself and uses minimal background information to make a point.

My 4th post reflects my creative interpretation of the surroundings while using minimal background information. I enjoyed writing this post more than any other because it was purely my own interpretation and the language syntax was littered with beautiful contrasting pronouns that I could use to establish dualism between different definitions of femininity. While I read other interpretations of canto 19, I didn’t really like them to be honest. I felt that a lot of them dismissed the play on pronouns or simply attributed masculinity to the god itself. For this particular post, I liked my idea and set it up as “Dante defines the dualism between purity and corrupted purity exclusively in the terms of a woman.” I used pronouns to prove this; I write “ For example, Dante addresses the sinners as “that should be brides of goodness” (Canto 19, lines 2). The clergy is married to the church hence, they’re “brides”. However the church isn’t the husband, it’s the “Lovely lady” (Canto 19, line 55).” Based on the absence of the male pronoun, I claim that the text is insinuating that “ The sacredness of the church is a feminine aspect however the loyalty of the clergy is also a feminine aspect.” I particularly like using syntax analysis however, it’s hard in this type of literature because it’s a translated version. Some words are lost or phrased differently which is why I was initially hesitant to form any concrete interpretations from them.

I’m noticing that I’ve become more comfortable with the literature. I use the background information to understand the text but I don’t use it in the posts as much as I use to unless I need it to support my argument. In the beginning, I was uncomfortable with the background and Dante’s style of writing which is why my earlier posts focus so much on it. However, over time, I became comfortable enough to develop my own interpretations (even though they might be different from others) and use rhetorical analysis as my primary source of evidence as opposed to background information. However, I notice that I’m back into my comfort zone and I’m focusing on parallelism, dualism, etc. again. While those are my favorite, I would like to explore other areas of focus like recurring themes, character developments (in main characters), setting analysis, etc.