I'm Looking for the Critical Views of Gwendolyn Brooks?
446149
Here's one source, link below:\n\nWhile some critics found an angrier tone in her work, elements of protest had always been present in her writing and her awareness of social issues did not result in diatribes at the expense of her clear commitment to aesthetic principles. Consequently, becoming the leader of one phase of the Black Arts movement in Chicago did not drastically alter her poetry, but there were some subtle changes that become more noticeable when one examines her total canon to date.\n\nThe ambiguity of her role as a black poet can be illustrated by her participation in two events in Chicago. In 1967 Brooks, who wrote the commemorative ode for the "Chicago Picasso," attended the unveiling ceremony along with social and business dignitaries. The poem was well received even though such lines as "Art hurts. Art urges voyages . . ." made some uncomfortable. Less than two weeks later there was the dedication of the mural known as "The Wall of Respect" at 43rd and Langley streets, in the heart of the black neighborhood. The social and business elites of Chicago were not present, but for this event Gwendolyn Brooks wrote "The Wall." In a measure these two poems illustrate the dichotomy of a divided city, but they also exemplify Brooks's ability both to bridge those divisions and to utilize nonstrident protest.
70157
At Oprah.com you'll have access to her message board and on-line journal.  You can also try writing her...just click below for more dets:\n\nEverything is "on-line" at oprah.com  but she does read the message boards and the journals!!!!
3356
Yes, she's a Holocaust Survivor and the University of Michigan has a great oral history with complete transcripts and audio:\n\nhttp://holocaust.umd.umich.edu/webber/
866945
No, I dont believe she has a website... if you run a Google search, you'll come up with different facts/information about her.\n\nGood Luck!
329674
Yes i posted twice yesterday alone that she was racist. Always slamming Americans, and more loyal to Mexico, breaking the laws, throwing race cards when her argument fails, and basicaly irrational....\n\nMost of her questions are meant to antagonise and stir up anti-White anti-American sentiments. And they go on one after another all afternoon and night.....\n\nIt certainly isn't out of sincere interest in learning that she asks. The education of Americans alone was answered in and out last night. And objected to as it is one more lie to gain bleeding heart sentiment. They have learned one thing being here in America, that our fellow countrymen are far more critical and hateful to our own in these areas. They look down their noses if you take the cook job. If you dont your a lazy bastard. Now they have the nerve to say it's only jobs Americans wont work that the Illegals take.....\n\nShe has ILLEGAL relatives and so do a couple others who have frequented the answers to spouse racist comments. Rather than getting off her azz, shutting off the comp, and helping them apply to become legal citizens. She spends her time here defending them and slandering everything about this country. And to me that is the problem with amnesty. No loyalty or commitment to this country or our laws. She proves the point. If you speak with Legal immigrants their attitudes are alot different not only about Americans and their laws, but about the issues we ar debating about. They have a true commitement to the country, respect for what it took to get here, and pride that they perservered to get here.\nILLEGALS and children born of ILLEGALS (who never get legal) seem to have a very negative and destructive attitude. They basicaly have old world mind sets of pure survial, only about themselves and screw everyone else. I am sure that is not all, but I am seeing a knowtiseable trend the more time I spend talking to people about the issues.\n\nIF YOU KNOW OF ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS HERE IS THE WEBSITE TO REPORT THEM ALL.\nhttp://www.wehirealiens.com/
1021698
Certainly. She is not afraid to speak her mind and doesn't roll over with popular opinion.  \n\nPersonally, her opinion of these four 9/11 widows who run the tv circuit to criticize our government, is pretty accurate.  Why did they get so much attention and money?  There were plenty of others murdered in the 9/11 terrorist attack.  Why did these widows receive over a million dollars on the death of their husbands while family of a soldier who dies barely get enough for his funeral?  \n\nThink about what she says..........
117297
Other than someone who is incredibly biased, factually incorrect, and needlessly divisive, she wouldn't be too bad. Well, there's also the deliberately provocative use of emotionally charged words, as well. \nBut she seems to fulfill the need of some to demean anyone who she decides to label as liberal, right or wrong.
676866
keller.clarke.edu/~english/honors/liz.\n\n PLEASE CHECK OUT THIS SITE THE LINKS THAT ARE IN THE  BODY OF THE PAPER ARE INCREDIBLE. GOOD LUCK!!!
774585
I responded to your first question. I couldn't find the question in the family section. It is perfectly fine to disagree with this Carol chick, but you can present your opinon in a more civil &less personal way Your comments were not only rude to her they were disrespectful to white women in general. You can disagree with Carol without attacking the entire caucasian race. We are all trying to put Racism in the past but it is opinions like those that help keep it alive in the first place. You would be just as offended if someone had made those comment about a black person. Respect works both ways, and if you want to be respected you have to show respect. Respect is something you earn not something you are owed. You owe all of us an apology.
1166011
Those who say she is right on the mark are just as cruel and heartless, perhaps even godless, as she is.\nA sample of her heartfelt, truthful book: (so very sarcastically said)\nIn "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," the uncompromisingly right-wing Coulter writes the Jersey Girls have no right to criticize President Bush or any of the failures that led to the terror attacks.\n"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis," Coulter writes. \n"And by the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy. . .\n"These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them."\n\nThis is an outright attack. Pose for Playboy? C'mon! Even Bill O'Reily was surprised.
634676
Will this help?\nhttp://www2.arts.gla.ac.uk/SESLL/STELLA/STARN/prose/GALT/GOG/gog.htm\nhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06628a.htm
1120861
I tried to research this issue.\n\n     The computer blocks wouldn't let me go to her website. I'll have to ask my mom for help.\n\n     Why do you ladies say mean things about her?
28613
Just big boned to the best of my knowledge. You can probably ask her on the Morningwood Forum page or on myspace. She may be a jetsetting rockstar on the rise but Chantal Claret gets bored easily and goes on the web. (And she's an absolute sweetheart.)
973890
look up some of her quotes from the past...do a web search and find out just what she thinks...its scary
556269
Her opening sentence/paragraph should be about what her paper is about. Email me and I can help--I'm an English teacher.
1009655
This sums it up:\n\nhttp://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-dsouza070203.asp
159182
you're asking alot of questions about Phyliss Hyman...maybe you should Google her...then you can have real references for your paper (or whatever you are using this information for) instead of relying on strangers you'll never meet to be truthful! Good luck!