A unidade 2 do curso sobre fantasia e ficção científica teve Alice in Wonderland como objeto de estudo. Eis o ensaio que enviei.
Está, gramaticalmente, bem pior que o primeiro, pois tive menos tempo para me dedicar a ele.
Relevem, mas não deixem de apontar o que acharem muito absurdo.
Since he can convince readers to keep accompanying him, a writer can do with words what he wants. Lewis Carroll was a mathematician in love with logic - and he soon realized that language had its own logic, quite different from usual.
The consensual and arbitrary nature of language is always at stake in Alice in Wonderland. Cleverly, Carroll chooses a child as the protagonist of his story, because to them this consensus is not natural as it would be for an adult. Maybe so, they seem to live in a wonderful world - and perhaps therefore Wonderland does not wonder Alice too much.
Falling through a rabbit-hole, Alice reacts naturally to the absurdity of the situation: "Down, down, down. There was nothing else to do, so Alice soon began talking again. 'Dinah'll miss me very much to-night, I should think! '(Dinah was the cat.)" (chapter 1). This passive reaction is repeated several times.
Later, we see how the consensual nature of language is explored through sound. In at least two occasions, Alice tries to recite popular stories, but words begin to change and the story gains new meanings - although original musicality be maintained. A similar situation occurs in Chapter 3, in confusion between tail and tale.
This reversal of logic, that words do not always mean what they say, appears in the Mad Hatter episode:
"'Then you should say what you mean,' the March Hare went on.
'I do,' Alice hastily replied; 'at least - at least I mean what I say - that's the same thing, you know.'
'Not the same thing a bit!' Said the Hatter. 'You might just as well say that "I see what I eat" is the same thing as "I eat what I see"!'"
Sounds and symbols, this is what words are. In right hands, they can become anything.
Próxima semana, Bram Stoker's Dracula.