Korrin Jones
Honors Lit.
Mr.Williams
Creative Writing
Relationships and Chess
The poem “Chess” , by Rosario Castellanos, uses chess as a metaphor to relationships ; taking friendships to another level, making boundaries between each other ,and how to score the others heart. This poem use the steps of chess to explain how relationship evolve.
Taking the friendship to another level. The first stanza explains being friends and adding something else to the friendship and becoming something greater. With friends you have things that bound you to each other. For example, having interest in the same things like sports. When it comes to something deeper-playing games of the mind (line4). This would be love this is the one more tie to the friendship. In chess you need a partner to play with . Chess is considered a mind game. In line 4 , it says we decided to play games of the mind. In line 2 the add one more tie is the many things that friends do to bound. In this step there is no control.
We set a board between us ; equally divided pieces into peice, possible values, and moves. Line 5,6 , and 7 is setting boundaries before getting serious. Usually before getting serious with someone, setting the boundaries between each other is common. Respect of the other values and what is acceptable of the other. The board is the control, the boundary . It is what is sworn to be followed. In chess a board is set between the two friends. The pieces are divided equally and then the possible moves are decided. Then the games begin. This is the controlled part where both are putting the ground rules down, that have to be respected.
What takes the longest is trying to score the others heart. this is the part where both partners will do anything to win the others heart. In line 10 sitting here for centuries is the exaggeration for a long time .The centuries that it takes to finally wrap the other around them forever meaning marriage. The annihilation in love is not to the human body but to the freedom of the human. In marriage the freedom is taken away because it is no longer just one person its two. In lines 10-13 the meditation is what will sweep the other off their feet. The annihilation in chess is taking control of the board and in gaining that control you destroy the other player. The mind game of chess is a difficult process of control. Both players are trying to win. The time and the meditation is apart of the control, you have to make moves that will eventually give you the power to annihilate the other player. That last play that determines your conquest.
In the following, the metaphor of chess and relationships is decoded from the poem ”Chess”. taking friendships to another level is the metaphor of bounding with a friend. Setting a board between us is in relationships setting the boundaries between the two and in chess its the game board that the two friends use to play chess and set the board up , the pieces and the possible plays. The time and meditation to finally win in chess but in relationships its the time and meditation that finally sweeps the other away.
The Actual Poem. ^.^
Because we were friends and sometimes loved each other,
perhaps to add one more tie
to the many that already bound us,
we decided to play games of the mind.
We set up a board between us:
equally divided into pieces, values,
and possible moves.
We learned the rules, we swore to respect them,
and the match began.
We’ve been sitting here for centuries, meditating
ferociously
how to deal the one last blow that will finally
annihilate the other one forever.
Rosario Castellanos
(25 May 1925 – 7 August 1974)
Mexican poet and author
perhaps to add one more tie
to the many that already bound us,
we decided to play games of the mind.
We set up a board between us:
equally divided into pieces, values,
and possible moves.
We learned the rules, we swore to respect them,
and the match began.
We’ve been sitting here for centuries, meditating
ferociously
how to deal the one last blow that will finally
annihilate the other one forever.
Rosario Castellanos
(25 May 1925 – 7 August 1974)
Mexican poet and author
Court Case Reflection & Summery
Korrin Jones
Honors Lit.
Mr.Williams
PLESSY V.FERGUSON
The Plessy V.Ferguson case was held on “separate but equal”. Homer Plessy was a passenger on a white car. He choose to stay and not move to a “colored” car. Mr. Plessy was tried before Judge John H. Ferguson, in New Orleans. This Judge took this law seriously but this law was challenged in the supreme court because it conflicted with the thirteenth and fourteenth Amendments.
This court voted 7-1 and said that the state law “ implies merely a legal distinction” between two races and it did not clash with with the thirteenth Amendment. The court did not feel as though the laws were showing in equality. The reason for the fourteenth Amendment was to”enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law”. The court also said that” laws requiring their separation ... do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race.” Arguments referring to segregation laws was not true and also the power to separate is a right given to the state.
Reflection: The separate but equal laws were not fair, Whites were considered to be superior to African-Americans. The choice was given to the state so it was not up to the government. Although these laws did not directly clash with the thirteenth Amendments, the fact that they separated public facilities this took away the value of the “minorities”.
Honors Lit.
Mr.Williams
PLESSY V.FERGUSON
The Plessy V.Ferguson case was held on “separate but equal”. Homer Plessy was a passenger on a white car. He choose to stay and not move to a “colored” car. Mr. Plessy was tried before Judge John H. Ferguson, in New Orleans. This Judge took this law seriously but this law was challenged in the supreme court because it conflicted with the thirteenth and fourteenth Amendments.
This court voted 7-1 and said that the state law “ implies merely a legal distinction” between two races and it did not clash with with the thirteenth Amendment. The court did not feel as though the laws were showing in equality. The reason for the fourteenth Amendment was to”enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law”. The court also said that” laws requiring their separation ... do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race.” Arguments referring to segregation laws was not true and also the power to separate is a right given to the state.
Reflection: The separate but equal laws were not fair, Whites were considered to be superior to African-Americans. The choice was given to the state so it was not up to the government. Although these laws did not directly clash with the thirteenth Amendments, the fact that they separated public facilities this took away the value of the “minorities”.