He wants to protect his son because he is his father

Is the man who is dreaming the one who is lecturing?

Relates to the theme of circular.

Why can't the son know that he was dreamt up? What would happen if he did find out?

I connect this to a parent/child relationship. The parent raises the child for years and teaches them, and then the child goes off on their own.

I connect this to art as well. The language makes this sound like the man is an artist creating a sculpture and he is editing and perfecting it.

Again hinting at religion. This phrase reminds me of a Christ character who spreads the message of God.

I kind of notice a religious connotation. It seems like the man is god and he created the first man, Adam.

I know the main character is a man, but this whole process seems similar in a way to pregnancy.

You can tell the man is in the process of dreaming up an eventually fully formed human being

I think dreaming is this man's art, similar to how the hunger artists art was fasting. Everyone has their passion

It's interesting how the author calls what this man does "work", because we are not used to dreaming being considered work

This man's being depends on dreaming, so when he doesn't it is unsettling for him

Students who question information often learn better and retain more information

relating to pedagogy which is the discipline that deals with the theory and practice of education

Is this the beginning of the man he wishes to dream?

Once he stopped planning and putting all this pressure on himself to dream, the man could finally dream again.

I think it's something about this man's dreams that make him magical

I think "circular" is important in this story. It might hint to something that is cyclical or never ending.

By definition, an object is a material thing that can be seen or touched. Therefore, it cannot really die. I think photography gives the narrator a sense of immortality. If you are encapsulated in a picture, you are never really gone.

It's interesting that even though there are all these reasons to hate being photograph that are mentioned before, you can tell the narrator/author still loves it because of the familiarity of it and the feeling it gives them.

Connected to Sontag-- how the photographer has as much control and manipulation over a photograph as a painter does

The author is comparing being the subject of a photograph to a sort of torture

It's interesting that the author is comparing photography to hallucinations. What does that say about how the author sees photography?

definition: a hallucination in which one sees one's own body from a distance

This is true-- at a certain time, if you could afford to get your portrait painted that meant you were rich

I really like what the narrator/author is saying here. The essence of a person cannot possibly come out in a photograph because a photograph is one, fleeting captured moment and a person is 3 dimensional and dynamic and ever changing.

again the fascination with morbidity

People feel this instinct to become a different person in pictures, which kind of connects to Sontag that photography is subjective. Photography can't be an exact snippet of reality when the subject of the picture is putting on an act.

The people moved on to the next big thing.

I feel like this has a larger meaning. The hunger artist could be saying that he doesn't accept the imperfections of the society he lives in, so he fights back, while others simply accept it.

What "swindling" is the passerby referring to?

This totally connects to culture. The culture of wherever the hunger artists lives is changing, and the hunger artist doesn't know what to do about it.

The hunger artist wants the people to want to see him. At least before, the people were actually there to see him. Now, at the zoo, he is merely a quick stop along the way to a more interesting exhibit.

This reminds me of professional athletes. They are in their prime for awhile and then no one wants to sign them because they're getting old.

It's so interesting how the hunger artist sees fasting as a passion. It's a very different perspective than most.

Why is he still trapped in the cage when he's no longer fasting?

The artist fasted just to combat the ignorance of the impresario and the society as a whole, and it wasn't successful.

Why did he submit now? Was it the fact that he was taken out of the enclosure and he has no strength to fight back?

Are there multiple ways to be a suffering martyr? I think that's exactly what he is.

His body is in survival mode, which is why he feels he can keep fasting.

I wish the author would explain this a little bit more. How does the hunger artist find it so easy to fast? Is it simply motivation from their cause?

What is different about these types of watchers that the hunger artist likes them more? They seem equally obnoxious to me.

Is this meant to be some sort of taunt?

These words like "artist" and "profession" are really interesting because this is such a different culture than we are used to, so we have to kind of put ourselves into the shoes of these people and see what they're seeing.

I think you have to think about this sentence from a time frame point of view. For me now, I think that its good that there is less fasting. But I think the author might be saying that this is not so good.

At first the author was saying how photographs are glimpses of reality, and is now saying that they are really capturing an "image world" that is not entirely accurate.

I totally agree with this statement and paragraph. So many people nowadays lose out on truly experiencing moments because they simply focus on taking a picture for others to see. It isn't even just for them to have memories anymore, it is simply for other people to see.

The author was at first discussing how photography captures the present, and is now discussing how it memorializes the past.

It's so interesting how the author mentions that society made photography an art, and backlash against the social uses just reinforced that. The author is implying that negative reactions to a certain thing can simply make it appear as more of an art.

I like how the author is addressing the complexity of photography. On one hand, it is not really biased or an interpretation. On the other, the photographer does control the photo and they have their own interpretations. Nothing is one dimensional, not even photography.

It's clear that the author really values a photograph in its truest form, and believes that's how it should stay.

I feel like it is possible for photographs to be statements about the world. For example photographs in newspapers are statements about the world. But I get what the author is trying to say.

I connected this to the seeing and reality theme we discussed in class. The author is saying that often photos provide a slightly more objective reality than print might.

I like the word thicken here because it really expresses how much of an effect the world of photography has on our modern environment

I agree with the authors observation that photography seems to have lost popularity among a lot of people. Most people now value tv and movies even though it's temporary and a photograph lasts forever

this was originally published in 1977

I think the authors main message with this poem is for people to take risks and discover and be different. Curiosity is not bad, it is essential to human and societal growth. To truly experience life, you must be curious about death.

I think this is a reference to the boxes that society tries to put people in to that they don't fit in. The author is saying let these people be different, because different is good.

I think the author is trying to convey that being curious is not only a gift but essential to life. Lack of curiosity might not always physically kill you (although it might), but without it you would never fully experience life. And without experiencing life, you arguably haven't even lived it.

I think Reid might be using the topic of curiosity to represent the theme of the outcast. Because the curious and the outcast are different, society casts them out.

This phrase goes against what Reid said earlier about how curiosity didn't really kill the cat, however it shows the complexity of any given thing. Curiosity is not just one thing, but is multilayered which Reid is hinting to.

by immediately debunking a famous saying, I can already tell this poem might be about change or being different or something of that sort

There seems to be a contrast of the bright yellow of the banana and the gray of the background. Why is this?

Is this a sort of love story? The author mentions that all their stories would be sad, unless they were with a certain person. This makes me think the whole story is a sort of narration to a lover.

What is the significance of the repetition of "gray"?