On this entry, I'm concentrating on material from the "Marx" through "The Big Bang" chapters. (You're obviously free to draw on insights or knowledge picked up later in the reading as well...)
I'll expect a comment of one good paragraph or more. (To me, that means 5-6 sentences at a minimum.) You do not need to worry about perfect grammar, spelling and punctuation, but they should be understandable. Remember that this is a public site, and you are responsible for the content of your postings. Assume that each comment is worth 5 points.
YOUR COMMENT SHOULD BE POSTED BEFORE CLASS TIME ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 21st IN ORDER TO RECEIVE FULL CREDIT.
You may write on any ONE question of your choice. (If you want, you can certainly post another comment on a different question as well... First, however, focus on answering one question in sufficient depth, etc.)
NOTE: If I use a page reference, it's from the smaller paperback version that most of you seem to have. I'll also be sure to reference the specific chapter.
1. In "Marx," we see his famous quote that "Philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways; the point is to change it." What does this have to do with Sophie, Hilde and/or the Major at this point in the book?
2. Is it too much to say that the Major is like God? Why or why not?
3. In "Darwin," the chapters closes with excerpts from both Goethe and Thomas Hardy poems. Pick either one and tell us why you think Gaarder includes it at this point in the novel.
4. At the conclusion of "Our Own Time," Alberto shows Sophie a copy of the book, Sophie's World. What should we take away from this? How can one find a book about oneself in a book about oneself? What would happen if Sophie started reading the book?
5. Pick something from "The Garden Party," and tell us why you thought it was particularly interesting and/or important.
6. Where ARE Sophie and Alberto throughout "Counterpoint?" I mean more than just saying, "In Oslo." Have they become real? More real? How do you describe what is going on here?
7. Did you feel like the final lines of the novel "resolve" the whole mystery, or do they just make it deeper? Why?
If Sophie began to read her own life, she would see exactly what has happened in the book. She would read her own thoughts, and relive the experience, just as we did when we read the novel. However, if she opened up to a page beyond where time was, then it gets interesting. She has to follow exactly what is written in the book, but if she is making the book, then she herself has become completely bound to fate. However, this is only because she is a ficticous character. If someone real were to read their own book, they would be completely free to change their lives from the words written in the book, because the choices made in the book do not have to be made by the person. All it does is give them the option and a possible conclusion. We are in no way bound by what someone has written in a book.
Question 5
In “The Garden Party”, I found Alberto’s speech to the partygoers to be both interesting and important. In particular, his explaining how he, Sophie, Sophie’s mom, and the other characters are all living in a fictitious reality was interesting. What I found interesting about this was that none of the characters (except Alberto, but he is unique) were aware of the fact that they are not “real”. I think this idea raises some interesting questions about our reality. Realistically, there is not way to prove or disprove that our world is just an occurrence in someone/something else’s mind, so I suppose anything is possible. However, I think it is a somewhat a waste of time to speculate on the nature of our reality because we cannot do anything about it. Although it would be a dramatic revelation, if we were to find that we live in an “alternate reality”, it really does not change what reality is for us. I think it simply changes the concept of reality in the bigger picture. Finally, I thought is was interesting how the ideas in Alberto’s speech linked to other topics such as The Matrix and Philosophy discussions.
Question #5. Pick something from "The Garden Party," and tell us why you thought it was particularly interesting and/or important.
I found the chapter “The Garden Party” very interesting because of the twist that was thrown in. I thought it was tricky how the author decided to make the entire book kind of philosophical. It was such a surprise to find out that all of the characters are figments of Albert Knag’s imagination. It’s like they were all in the novel to please him and to keep him entertained. It is crazy that all of that was going on in his mind...the entire novel, the entire plot and their lives were all just in his head. I think that is pretty typical of a philosopher to do, when they have a story and then twist it at the end to make the reader or audience think.
I think the Marx quote "Philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways; the point is to change it." is really important. Philosophers and and "wise" people can talk all they want, but this rarely achieves anything without someone putting their thoughts into action. Without someone taking charge and changing things, we would still be sitting in caves and hunting wooly mammoths. The point is, it's the people who take action that cause change, not necessarily the philosophers who just talk about things.
Question 4
I think reading a book about one's own life would be like the the of the third Harry Potter book when they use the time turner (sorry if I just got too nerdy for you). I disagree with Scott, that if you read that parts that already happened, it would not "get interesting" because you look back on that portion of your life and would be able to make connections and understand things that you could only do from the future. I feel like it would be really hard to go back and read what you had done in the past, because you would be reading about it in a supposedly objective manner, but one cannot look at one's own life objectively (at least I think it would be really difficult).I agree that it would get really interesting when you started to read the "future" from the reading you's perspective because it call into question the idea of fate... will what happened to you when you read necessarily happen to you when you get there, even if you try to make sure it doesn't happen? I don't know... at that point it gets too weird for me.
question 4
I think if Sophie read her own story, she would be freaked out. I mean, how weird would it be to read every single thing you've done. I don't think it would do her any harm though if she read her life story up to the point in her life. But if she read beyond where she was in real life it might cause some problems. It's like in the movie Spaceballs when one of the characters has a movie of the story and he ends up fast forwarding their lives by mistake. I don't think it would be fun to see your life before you lived it, and I think that it would have a large impact on how she lived the rest of her life.
Question 4:
If Sophie started reading the book, there would be a paradox; a endless cycle of Sophie's reading a limitless number of 'Sophie's World's. It's like how one sees a picture within an identical picture, and a picture within that picture ect. and you keep on zooming in and seeing the same picture over and over again. What would happen if Sophie started crossing out parts of the book and started adding in new ones? Would this book even be in her hands? Reading the same story within that story says a lot about ourselves. For all we know, we are all characters in some higher being's mind, all being 'written' on paper, published, and distributed to the public.
It's all to do with the 'what if' questions. What if our galaxy is a bit of dust underneath a giant's fingernail? (I'd rather not know)
In sohpie's world, although they did do things the main focus on this book and the main things they did was, well, talk. There wa rmoe philosophy involved than action. What this had to do with the characters was that although they all did a lot of talking and they were involved with a lot of these philosopher's philosophies they never actually did much. Which is where marx's quote about philosophers talking but not walking comes into play.
I believe that for some people, reading a book about oneself would be very detrimental. I think that I would not be that bad if a person were to read a book about their past because most people understand what has happened in their past. However, for some people, who may have not have lived the best life in their past, and may have gone through things that they want to forget, it would not be a good experience. I do not think that people want to relive all the things from their past. Also, I believe that for everything, learning about what will happen in the future, before it actually happens would also be detrimental. I think that people need to live their lives in the present, and if you already know what is going to happen to you in the future, then you will not try because you know that what you do will change nothing. Therefore, because of this I do not think that it would be a good idea for Sophie to read the book. This is because she will relive things that she may want to forget, and she will read about her future (even though the future is not really included in the book, for my argument, I am pretending that it would be a part of this version), which will change the way she presents herself in the world.
I mostly agree with what everyone has said so far about reading a book about one self.
Reading about my own past would initially be weird. Because I would be an objective observer, reading about past events in my life would be different. It is possible that, if the book were written in third person, details that I initially did not see or experience could be present. The new inclusion of these details would then affect my own interpretation of my past, which, would, in theory, affect how I choose to live my future. Confusing! By simply reading about my past, the book about me has changed my future. And we haven't even gotten to talking about reading about my future. It is difficult to decide whether or not a book about me would include the future. How could it be written if it hasn't happened yet?? Or, if it something predestined, can I change it now that I have read it?? As others have commented, this brings into the questions of fate and free will, both of which are questions without answers. If I were given the option to read a book like this, I'm sure I would decline!!!
question 4
This sounds very strange. It is strange because it would mean that the version of Sophy's would go the same way. this gets us into a never ending paradox ware Sophy at the end of the book gets this book, and then that Sophy would read it, then the one after that, then the one after that. it would be interesting though to read through what you have already expirienced.
It seems that Sophie has been merely been reading about the great philosophers. There has yet to be change on a grand scale in her life, granted there have been changes, but not absolutely earth shattering. What Marx was talking about was the transition from intellectual ideas to concrete results and change on a grand scale. Indeed Lenin and Mao would deliver this 100 years latter. I would argue that no other philosopher has vicariously has as great an impact on the course of history as Marx.
I agree with Logan, that it would be really difficult to read a book about your own life. I think it would be interesting, because frequently we're so caught up in experiencing something that we don't have time to step back and look at the larger picture, which reading about would allow us to do. Like Logan said, looking at your own actions, thoughts, and emotions would be very hard, but I also think a valuable experience. While Sophie can find a book that contains her future because she is a fictional, and therefore static character, I think that it would be impossible for me to read a book about my future because, since I don't believe in fate, destiny, whatever you want to call it, it would only show one path that I could take. In fact, reading a book about that future could easily impact my future decision, influencing the choices I make and turning my future portrayed in the book into one that is totally not what happens in my life.
The Garden Party really threw me for a loop. It was interesting to see how the book turned out. I would never in a million years think that the characters had merely been part of Alberto Knag's imagination. It also makes sense to have the book end this way. Not only does it make everyone think, but makes people question ideas as well. Although the ending really surprised me, i enjoyed it very much.
5. Pick something from "The Garden Party," and tell us why you thought it was particularly interesting and/or important.
Like everyone else, I clearly found the part where we find out that all the characters are simply figments of Alberto Knag's imagination to be the most interesting. Like Dan said, this is quite similar to the philosophy of the Matrix. How are we to know that we are not just a figment of someone's imagination. We believe ourselfs to be real, but so did Sophie. But, if that were the case, i would have to say they could be a little more creative!