Semiotic: Thematic: Decadent enough for a coachman, but still dark and odorous as to not be fancy.

Semiotic: Structural: The cottage

Scope: Spacial: Narrow. One small room is mentioned.

ID: Action: Carefree

ID: Action: Troublemaker

ID: Action: Appreciates old and used things.

The motifs of wet and dry are seen again through the use of sea and burned. This also connects to the previous lines due to their use of drown and smoke.

The use of drowned and smoke create a juxtaposition due to the opposition in the wetness and dryness that are associated with drowning and smoke.

With the use of natures fruited vines the author can showcase her success, which is paralleled by the throne she sits in.

Why do you feel the need for a clarvoyant?

Who are you if the arch duke is your cousin?

Why do memory and desire need to be mixed? Why aren't they already combined?

Spatial, Structural

ID: Action: day dreamer/dreams of something more

ID: Action: cares to present himself at his best

ID: Environment: has a big personality like the city he lives in

ID: Action: Is a good person

ID: Action: caring/supportive

ID: Environment: Not very particular or finicky.

ID: Action: Adventurous/Leader

DD: Speech: Educated

DD: External Appearance: Tall

ID: External Appearance: Possibly dirty and rough looking

ID: Action: Willing

ID: Action: Imaginative

Eggs nirmally are associated with fertility and kids, so this implies that this mother's kids constantly take from her. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.essence.com%2Fnews%2Fthe-write-or-die-chick-bitter-mothers-are-just-as-bad-as-deadbeat-dads%2F&psig=AOvVaw32EYWJ2VRNOHMmBAvBP6ko&ust=1697047508621000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBAQjRxqFwoTCPDnkeGI7IEDFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE

With all of the chicken imagery and themes in the poem, wives resting tranquil remind me of a hen sitting in its eggs in a nest. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.istockphoto.com%2Fphotos%2Fhen-sitting-on-eggs&psig=AOvVaw3HoQTbdOK52rybBdSLkj5g&ust=1697047425853000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBAQjRxqFwoTCJip4rmI7IEDFQAAAAAdAAAAABAJ

The push and pull, and the impossibility of what shes asking, feel like hes being split in different directions. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.istockphoto.com%2Fvector%2Fseparation-gm912367074-251174572&psig=AOvVaw2I7MBzkL5Y7Mv2vcfna-oR&ust=1697047164268000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBAQjRxqFwoTCNil-LyH7IEDFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE

If the wall separating them continually has gaps and holes in it, one would think it’s a bad fence. Does this mean the neighbor is directly telling him that he’s a bad neighbor? Or is he possibly trying to note the improvement of their neighbor relationship after fixing this wall?

The man is paranoid about being judged despite the fact that he’s alone. While the man is in the village and has no way of seeing him, he still allows him to occupy his mind and focus on him.

As he said multiple times in the poem, with no difference in the roads, there was no difference made. This line is him convincing himself and embellishing the truth to make him believe that his decisions matter.

Seeing himself as he is and how he used to be is a sort of double consciousness. He sees himself in both past and present tense.

Masters writes as if he is people. Telling their stories in first person like he is them. It connects him more to the poem rather than separate him like Adams did with his writing.

Masters uses first person even when speaking of someone else. This is almost the exact opposite of Adams using third person for himself.

He mentions only mentions all things that keep her trapped and statonary.

It seems like that patterns that she is seeing is actually just her shadow and the shadow of the bars on the window. She mentions that the pattern changes in the moonlight as if the shaodw is shifting.

Is she actually speaking of the wallpaper? Or is the wallpaper just something that she focused on while feeling trapped by her husband?

This training and emphasis on knowledge and education is a large theme in both Du Bois' and Adams' work. However, Adamm does not believe in the simple learning of facts, which shows his privilege as a white man, while Du Bois simply wishes for any and all education for black Americans.

Adams saw the dynamo as some kind of god and almost worshipped it in a way, and with the motor and new technology came freedom. While it is a less literal freedom as Black Americans experienced, it is similar.

Both authors seem to seek knowledge and ask questions where they can.

The same opposition seen in fists and flowers from a couple lines before can also be seen in the direct opposites of down and up.

It's interesting how the author contrasts negative and positive connotations in the violence of fists and the beauty and peace of flowers.

How is a new technology killing science? If anything, wouldn't it be expanding science and innovation?

I understand that he sees new technology as something incredibly impressive, but why would that lead to him praying to it? People usually pray to something in the hopes that it is some being that can help them, so I don't understand why he would be praying to an inanimate object.

How does he know so little if he seems to be obssessed withn them? He got rid of all the exhibits that have nothing to do with force, and yet he doesn't know much about force?