Representing America - American Literature AP - Blog

Wait, I Thought Lenny Kravitz Was Black

Everyday we either check boxes in which we categorize our self’s to what race we belong or where we live. Does it really matter? It seems that identity no longer weighs into how we view ourselves. We either get stereotyped or discriminated against based on what color we are or where we come from. Culture, Religion, Technology, Gender and Class are categories into which we put ourselves and others into daily. These criterion are synthetic ideas that we come up with to create identity. I think by removing these titles that we link to our persona we can establish a true identity. If we merely speak of what material things make us, we'll become people who are ignorant to what truly makes us unique, our ideas.

I saw an old chappelle episode the other day where there was a skit that involved different races drafting biracial celebrities to 100% fully become a part of their own race. This totally embodied how we judge people especially celebrities based on appearance. I thought that its interesting that Chappelle used the concept that a race would what to own a person completely even though the people genetically belong to another race.

 

Sorry If the text is backwards, I think the user had problems uploading it. (it was the best one i could find)

 

Titanic: a Romance or a romance

 

Holding the spot as the number 2 top grossing film of all time Titanic is known by many people around the globe.  The surprising thing is that the Producers of Titanic used Romantic characteristics when creating the story.

The movie is based around a upper class girl named Rose and a lower class boy named Jack.  Rose is engaged to a rich man named Cal to earn back her families good name and money for both herself and her mother.  However, on their journey to America on the Titanic Rose meets Jack and already feeling trapped in her life starts to rebel against her mothers and societies standards.

The Romanticism characteristic of individualism is expressed through Rose's rebelling against the expectations everyone puts on her.  Rose not physically rebels in Titanic by being with Jack but also rebels through education.  

In one scene during dinner Rose gets so fed up with the repeated topics of discussions that she brings up a new topic which some of the men do not even know of.  This illustration on how well educated Rose is shows how she rebels against society's expectation that women were not as educated or as well-read as men were.  

Rose rebels against the expectation of society by what a lady should act like.  Rose has Jack teach her how to spit off the side of the boat and when her mother and the other women come they look down upon her.  As with many other scenes the spiting scene demonstrates the improper and unlady-like way Rose acts.

Titanic also uses Romanticism with Jack's character.  Jack is extremely poor and only gets on the Titanic because of a lucky poker hand.  The idea of the individual is used because Jack is able to support himself and get onto the Titanic to head back to America.  Also the way Jack is able to get Rose to notice him shows the power the individual has.

The appreciation of everyday life is also used throughout Titanic because of the plots basis around the sinking of Titanic.  Titanic creates the message to appreciate everyday as if it were your last.  

Overall, the Titanic uses Romanticism to enhance Rose's and Jack's character and to create a message that everyday of your life is important.  

The Lovely Bones and Its Power of The Imagination

One of the many characteristics of Romanticism/Transcendentalism is the power of imagination, or "transcending" the physical world/envisioning ideal worlds. This specific trait of this era of literature is modernly adapted in the novel The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold. 

The novel follows the story of Susie Salmon and her untimely death. But what is different about this tragedy than others is that Susie dies in the first chapter of the novel, and then we follow her into her "in-between" imaginary world, some would consider it her own purgatory. In the novel, that was later adapted into a film, Susie uses her imagination to create connections with her family back in the "normal" world in her attempt to bring justice to her murder. Slowly the reader realizes the novel is not about who killed her, but about little Susie Salmon learning to grow up and move on.

Susie's "In-Between" world changes as she changes throughout the novel. It begins where her imagination creates the perfect world for her and when the darkness of her old life begins to reflects in her own world, one can understand she is using her imagination for much deeper reasons.

Throughout the novel the author not only repeadently emphasizes the importance of Susie's imaginiation, enabling her to move on and finally end in peace but also emphasizes how important imagination was for her family, allowing them to hold on to a piece of Susie when she was gone. This is shown through her father. Susie's father feels connected to Susie multiple times in the book, and when he lets the power of imagination completely take over he is able to actually connect with her for the last time. Going through this traumatic experience then allows him to appreciate everyday life, another characteristic of romanticism. 

In the end Susie uses her imagination to end her "In-Between" experience and move on with the rest of her murder's victims. But Susie Salmon, with her power of imagination, leaves a lasting impression on all that she left behind. To me, this story influences one to open their horizons to new experiences and new people, you never know what you will discover with your own imagination.

 

 

Coping With Emotions: Why Oskar Invents So Much

Throughout Extremely Loud and Incredibly Closeyou are entertained with Oskar's many inventions. He makes inventions such as an ambulance that shows how the person inside is fairing, a hiking anklet that leaves yellow dots every time you take a step, and a birdseed shirt that you put on when you need to fly away from somewhere.

As i was reading i noticed that all of he told you about a new invention after he has drama in his life or is upset about something. Oskar doesn't seem to tell people how he is feeling when he is upset so i feel that when he is upset he gets his feelings out by inventing a way for the event that occurred to not happen.

For example, he invented the birdseed shirt after his dad died in the World Trade Centers and the hiking anklets after he runs away from his grandma.  Oskar can't physically tell someone that he is upset about something so he expresses himself in his own inventive way.

True Meaning Behind the Plot Teaser

The ending of the novel took a very interesting turn when it was revealed to the reader that the key Oskar had been searching for, in order to find the supposed mysterious item left by his father was all a lot less then expected. Though, this twist to the story could be extremely frustrating to some, who were expecting Oskar to find a treasure and live happily ever after, some context clues may have lead us to a different view of the book, if we had more closely examined it...

After the first two chapters, when Oskar began to tell the story in his point of view in present tense the reader comes to find out many things about Oskar and his Fathers relationship and their love for one another, but if realistically thinking, would Oskar's father know he was going to die? Would he have known to leave a vase in his closet with an envelope in it containing a key that has the name Black written on it in red pen? And would he have know that, if he died suddenly, that Oskar would go through his closet and stumble across a vase and happen to break it, revealing the the key component to the novel?

It is very reasonable to think that the plot of the story was going to correspond to the key that Oskar found, but I believe that the key that he found is what lead him down a path of maturing and becoming the young man that his father would have loved to see him become. The tragic evens that occurred within the novel were extremely gut wrenching and opened my eyes to the true insanity that attacks of terror can have on a country, a town, a city, and ,painfully, the loved ones of the victims who did not survive. I think that this is what Foer was trying to accomplish with the book after all, to broaden the view of many people that do not know the devastating effects acts of violence can have on a person, as well as tell a story of a boy who is beyond his years who comes to grow as a person in result of the misleading  plot line; not to throw off the reader to make them dislike the book in anyway.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was a great read and had an excellent way of tying in a plot "teaser" with the key to a story that had a lot of true deep meaning behind it.

Breathe In, Dead Soldier. Breathe Out.

First off, I really really like this book. My favorite book of the year hands down.

I mean, yes, my squeamishness comes out in full force during many stories in this book (Ted Lavender, anyone? Curt Lemon? BABY BUFFALO?) but still. I can feel this book.

And I don't mean "feel it" like "Hey man, I totally feel you", but more as if there is a tangible presence to this book, and it's taken up residence in my lungs.

Breathe in, Vietnam. Sunshine demise and baby buffalo and blood in my mouth.

Breathe out, Tim O'Brian. 43 years old, a writer who still breathes in as a soldier and out as a father who tells his nine-year-old daughter that of course he didn't kill anyone.

Breathe out breath out breathe out.

And alright, yes, I admit I might have read ahead. A little. Or a lot, maybe: I finished the book.

And I can only think "Well damn."

Because what about all the soldiers we're still sending out?

Are they pulling their brothers out of trees, peeling them off the dusty, explosion-riddled road, digging them out of a sloppy, mushy shitfield in the pouring rain?

Probably.

Are there men out there like Tim O'Brian, who don't really want to fight but they do it anyway, because they'd feel like they were betraying everyone they know but themselves if they didn't?

Absolutely. 

I've been reading a lot of war stories lately, and I gotta tell you, I cry. At all of them. Sob my eyes out like there is no longer any rainbows or unicorns or happiness in the world. None.

I cry like a five year old who has just been informed that Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny have all been heartlessly massacred.

And I wonder what would happen if the head honchos, the men and women who start the war but send others to end it, would they feel like a different decision is in order if they read one of these books?

Do you think maybe, that if people who felt like war was necessary to solve whatever problem they have, do you think if someone made them read these war novels, this book, The Things They Carried, would we maybe get somewhere towards convincing the world just what a stupid idea it is to go out and shoot at people, and get shot at, and die, and watch your friends die, ( "Four guys go down a trail. A grenade sails out. One guy jumps on it and takes the blast, but it's a killer grenade and everybody dies anyway. Before they die, though, one of the dead guys says, "The fuck you do that for?" and the jumper says, "Story of my life, man," and the other guy starts to smile but he's dead.")...

Will anyone care at all? Will anyone try their damndest to make a dead soldier breathe again?

 

Will anyone listen to the breathing of a dead soldier? 

Losing it All

In class, we were all assigned lenses through which to view Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath. We were then told to defend our lens, to prove that our lens was truly the dominant aspect of the book that Steinbeck intended his readers to see. Although we did as we were told, I'm sure we all realized that The Grapes of Wrath is a mixture of all of these views, not just one. But there is a theme that relates almost all of these lenses: loss.

From the beginning of the book, the Joads have been losing everything they have. First they lose their job, their money, then their property. This sends them on a journey to California, which causes them to lose family as well, as members of the family leave or die one by one.

As Ma notices after the remains of the family arrives at the camp, they have lost their humanity as well. She says, "We was farm people till the debt. And then - them people. they done somepin to us. Ever' time they come seemed like they was a-whippin' me - all of us... An' that manager, he come an' set an' drank coffee, an' he says, 'Mrs. Joad' this, and' "Mrs. Joad' that - an' 'How you gettin' on Mrs. Joad?' Why, I feel like people again" (page 307). The manager makes Ma feel human again for the first time. This shows that the Joads were being treated as objects or animals before they met the manager - that they had lost their humanity.

The Joads continue to lose everything they have as they begin to find work on farms. Their desperation for money will cause them to lose their freedom, along with all the other workers who have done so already, by working for lower and lower wages, "and pretty soon now we'll have serfs again" (283). What else do the Joads have to lose?

I Do What I Want

The most recent episode of ’30 Rock’ was a feminist double whammy. Tina Fey writes the show - which is about a female writer TV writer. Liz Lemon, the main character, cannot seem to find a man, and could easily be called the stereotypical professional woman. The most recent episode was about feminism - it was a feminist show about feminist ideas. In less than 30 minutes, it brought up many issues that are on the minds of cultural critics everywhere. In the show, a supposedly feminist guest writer joins the staff. She turns out to be, frankly, a slut. The episode ends like this:

 

So, while the episode brings up excellent points about how women deal with each other (watch it to see those points), it also defines feminism in a slightly modified way. Women should be able to act and do what they please. Expectations should not interfere with what females do. In 30 Rock, Liz Lemon wants to ‘save’ Abby from acting promiscuous. Liz believes that someone who really respects women should not act in a way that allows men to stereotype women and think lowly of them. However, Abby chooses to act that way. Even though in the episode it is for a legitimate reason, there is no reason to say that Abby shouldn’t act promiscuous in better circumstances.

 

Women should be aware of how they act in some respects - 30 Rock did point out how Abby’s behavior just allowed men to disrespect her. But beyond an awareness of the repercussions and a knowledge of why they are acting in such a mannter, 30 Rock claims that women have the right to act how they want. Stereotypes exist for a reason - there are many women who are mothers, or seductresses, or old maids. It is okay to be these things, but the stigma society sticks to the labels is not. Furthermore, they should not be applied to everyone. 30 Rock forcefully says that women should be able to act as they please - even if it is in a stereotypical or self demeaning way.

Let's Not Blame the Media

Yesterday, I was discussing our feminism unit with my mom. Our conversation went something like this:

I of course believe in equal rights. But I was reading the blog Mr. Heidkamp showed us, and they had an article about how sexist a Swiffer commerical was - in part because it depicted a woman mopping."

My mom replied, "I think that you're fine with feminism and just hate that they blame the media."

It was like the "lightbulb" moment of a psychotherapy session. I like TV, and news, journalism - media as a whole. It annoys me when people blame the media for things. Sure, it over exaggerates news all the time. They lie, and are biased. However, I feel that people should try to be aware of this themselves and look at the information they are being sold. I always ask myseld, "Do I buy this?"

To be fair, the article was also talking about the sexism behind a woman being in love with a mop. And here's me answer to that: Advertisers know their consumers.

In 2006 (old, but the most recent statistic I could find without hacking into Proctor and Gamble's computer system... which I lack the knowledge to do, and not because I'm female) Swiffer's parent company spent $3.5 Billion on adversiting. You could feed 29,166,666 hungry children in Africa for a year with that much money. They don't throw that money away. Big companies hire the best advertisers they can get and a lot os research goes into what they put out there.

The ads reflect what pleases Americans. I'm sure that they had many, many test groups watched and responded to the commerical before it was put out. They liked it.

Media refelects our society's values and preferances. We should think about what we take in, and not blame the media for putting out seeminly (or overtly) sexist things. We should be more worried about society's acceptance and favortisism towards the things that the media refelects.

EDIT: If you care about women, show your support by coming to V-Day on March 18!

A Woman.

The American woman had no name; she was a template for society to use as he pleased, a mold for the man, the glue for the household. Until about the sixties or the genesis of the Civil Rights movement, the mother and the woman were one, they had a very close relationship to each other, like Frank Sinatra’s song “Love and Marriage” says, “you can’t have one without the other.”  Prior to the twentieth century, the woman was silent. Though a man’s eyes may pierce through the very skin he once talked down upon, a woman stood still. Only in the kitchen did the woman run a fortress. Shows like Leave it to Beaver and I Love Lucy, displayed the typical fifty’s mother or the laughable tomfoolery of a charismatic young blonde, not only expounding an American woman, but constructing her too. How this brand of an American woman was born seems to be evident, yet imperceptible, considering the twenties had such a liberal genre of American women. As the century turned, so did womankind, the American woman was no longer silent like an actress in a 1930’s talkie. Through a few short decades, the female race was defined by not what they could provide, but what they could be, and they could be prosperous and beautiful, like Elle Woods of Legally Blonde. The broad shoulder shadow that once overcastted the delicate stance seems to no longer be like an eclipse blocking out the sun—a woman speaks for herself and is herself, she is self-reliant—her graceful silhouette stands boldly against the brick wall. 

 

The "Art" of Rapping

In class, we were assigned a paper about the state of American women in 2011, and to write this paper we had to bring in evidence of our argument from our lives. I can safely assume, I think, that a pretty large portion of the class used today's music as proof that today's women still have reason for "discontent, rebellion, and revolution," as Susan B. Anthony said.

I found it funny, then, that after I mentioned rap music in my paper I came across a satirical article about how to write a rap song. This witty article makes fun of the lack of meaning and intellect in most of today's rap. The article jokes that the Guiness World Record for spending time to write rap lyrics is 45 minutes - an exaggerated statement pointing out the insincere and pointless nature of rap lyrics. The article continues on to say that rap songs tell a story, usually "a precarious urban tale consisting of 'b--ches,' 'hoes,' pimped out rides, guns, the POE-lease, and of course lots and lots of BLING," in which "a contract, money,and bubble-booty women" will follow a string of tragic events in the rapper's life.

While this article is funny and entertaining, the satirical message behind it really hits home, and I think it fits well with our discussion about the state of American women today. Just about any type of music, not just rap, is degrading to women, including songs written by women themselves. And this is what kids start listening to at a relatively young age, putting ideas of male superiority into their heads. Want to know real source of sexism? The media. Anything, from music to political coverage, is to blame.

If you want a bit of funny but insightful reading, check out the article!

Gatsby on the Mind.

    Through the chapters of The Great Gatsby, the audience follows Nick's feelings towards Gatsby. From the beginning, Nick seems to be somewhat fasicinated, but somewhat stricken by the things he's heard from Jordan, which, perhaps polluted Carraway's thoughts towards to the almost-bootlegger, and towards the end of the book, he is constantly seeing the James Gatz that he is familiar with, and the Gatsby that he knows not. Could it be Jordan's fault that Nick looks to Jay as a vessel of intense mystery-- someone almost not to be trusted? Is it because of his love affair with the athlete that Nick seems to look at one of his best friends with uncomfortable feelings? But to what extent do his thoughts really decode the demeanor of the young and rugid Gatsby? 

    Like our opinions on most of the characters, they became to transcend during the heated events of chapter seven, when Mrytle is ranover tragically. True feelings are shown as Gatsby is going back and forth with the dainty love of his life, Daisy. Not only does he show a sensative, starry-eyed side for his pretty flower, but a side of pungent, sharp and somewhat cruel words are displayed as he argues with Tom. Gatsby, someone so sure of his heart, seems to be at a crossroads with himself, not only in chapter seven, but in chapter eight. He has no life of his own, only a life of Daisy. But really, what is Daisy? What is a flower to a man? The "nouveau-riche" thirty year-old throws himself like a fool for the this girl under what I would call false pretenses. Tom loves her for the fact that she is what he adores the most, money and reputation. So does Gatsby. Nick looks at Gatsby like a complex puzzle, but honestly, I think both Tom and Jay are somewhat very similar, they love the ideal of her. Gatsby claims that he was only himself when she was around, claims that she's his true love, claims that he's better than Tom ever was...Yes, the two have had their quiet moments, perhaps the moments that one would say "define their love", but I feel like Jay's love for her is not romantic, but in a form of admiration. Gatsby desired to be like her, though not said, it's quite obvious. His house, it's grandeur. His reputation, his status. As for Tom, he doesn't look to her as someone to define his future and his goals, but someone that shows it off. He's aware of what he has, he wants others to be too-- these are the lengths Tom goes to in order to prove his superiority. 

Semester One in a Nutshell

Coming into Junior year, I was excited for new courses, new teachers, new friends. The book selections we've had this year were interesting just because I think that although they are all American literautre pieces, their situations showcase a different aspect of the American life each time. From our first book, The Catcher in the Rye, to our most recently finished, The Narrative of Frederich Douglass, these selections portray the hard lives of slaves, the real thoughts of the upperclass-private school boy, two things that are completely different. Some selections, I preferred more than others, but if there is one thing I admired about the slections, it's that through reading these, I've been able to compare various subjects to another, regardless of the topic, and still, find common ground. Though The Scarlet Letter and The Crucible are age-old tales (well not really, they're older than half a century), they have modern meanings that are more relatable than one might think. The Scarlet Letter, basically explains how not even those on the highest pedestal are as high as we think of them to be, and The Crucible, I think it focuses on the power of outer sources-- how influential words and obsessions can cause serious issues-- sounds just like the present, doesn't it? 

Besides the reading, we've focused on rhetoric, something that I hated at first, just because it combines so many aspects and details into one main idea, which, of course, is very useful, but a tad bit tedious to identify each subtopic... But anyway, after much practice, I finally got the hang of the rhetoric writing. Not only is it an assignment it's another understanding method for reading, something you can do not only while writing, but when reading as well. After the rhetoric, we were introduced to the synthesis essays, something I caught a grasp to easily. Just like the class itself, it involves looking at one big subject, and connecting the minor and major details under that one large topic together. 

When we studied race, I didn't think that related to the class exactly, but since we're focusing on American literature, it seemed to be important, just because it was such a large factor that has influenced American culture, history, and literature, and it still does. This class doesn't connect the dots for you, I think you have to do it yourself, which is a good skill to acquire! 

Criticism... will it ever end?

All of the books weve read this semester have been criticisms of America at some point in history: The Scarlet Letter brought light upon fallacies in Puritan society, The Crucible showed us the flaws in Puritan society and during the Red Scare,  Frederick Douglass exposed us to the reality of slavery and racism before the Civil War, Huckleberry Finn poked fun at the ignorance of uneducated racists, The Catcher in the Rye emphasized the "cheesy-ness" of the 1900s, and MacNolia slapped us in the face with a real look at racism in America through the eyes of a black girl growing older. That's quite a list there, and I'd say weve been taken through a pretty good chunk of American cultural history just through reading all of these novels.

Reading all of this cultural criticism and satire got me thinking about the flaws of today's society. I know we're not perfect - America is full of capitalists, elitists, and racists, just to name a few. We might not be as religiously oppressive as the Puritans, but there are still religious battles fought today, sometimes violent ones. We abolished slavery and experienced the Civil Rights movement, but that doesn't mean that race isn't an issue, and it certainly doesn't mean that other types of oppression don't exist today. While we've been reading about imperfections in American culture of the past, we should also stop to realize all of the imperfections in today's world.

This is why I truly hope that future writers will write about us, that in a hundred years English classes will be reading about the flaws in our culture, just as we are doing right now. Our world is not perfect, and it most likely never will be. Criticism in the form of literature should last as long as this world does to open humanity's eyes to the mistakes of their ancestors and make future generations analyze the flaws in their own lives.

Holmes and House: Pushing Past Accepted Manners

My favorite satire can be found in both Sherlock Holmes and Dr. House. House, M.D. is based on Sherlock Holmes. In both shows, the main characters, in this case, Holmes and House, use verbal and situational irony constantly. Their manners are indescribley rude, thier minds are brilliant, and their comments immature. I think that their brilliant minds compensate for their unmannered behavoir. House and Holmes spend much of their time solving their cases in situations that seem random and or weird. But nonetheless, these two men create suspense and laughter throughout their shows. Here's a funny mini clip of my favorite type of satire.  

Marking

During class this week, we discussed the differences between being marked and unmarked. Being marked simply means that a person is stereotyped a certain way. We discussed the fact that men seem to be unmarked compared to women, who seem to always have a mark.Women can define their own styles with different hair, makeup, accessories, clothes, etc. Men are usually in the same attire such as pants and a button down shirt.

The markings that we are tagged with are usually from first impression looks. Do you think you are marked, and in what way? Do you think that men can be marked?

Maybe our minds deteriorate as we age.

I was talking to a friend about movies the other day. She told me that she cried during every single Pixar movie she's seen. Most people would think, "Really? Pixar movies? Aren't those for little kids?" And the answer is yes, they are made for kids. But most Disney or Pixar movies today get to the heart of real issues and present much deeper meanings than the movies teens and adults enjoy.

Most of the movies that come out today are romantic comedies like "When in Rome," or action movies like "Transformers." I watched "When in Rome" a few months ago and thought that it was actually one of the wirst movies I've ever seen. Sure, the overall idea was kind of cute: a girl picks up coins from Trevi Fountain in Rome, and all of the guys who threw in those coins immediately fall in love with her. But the "comedy" that the movie used was just corny, and the ending was completely predictable. Of course, it ends with a happily-ever-after wedding, and everyone ends up happy. And "Transformers"... well, while it is entertaining to watch cars that turn into machines smashing a bunch of buildings, Shia LaBeouf driving really fast, and things getting set on fire, what do you take from a movie like this? Absolutely nothing. I'm no movie critic, but I can safely say that a good majority of what teens and adults watch today is completely shallow, unrealistic, and unmoving.

What I've realized over the past few years is that the some of the best movies I've seen have been "kids'" movies. Not only are these movies adorable, entertaining, and funny, they also leave me thinking when I walk out of the theater. "Wall-E", for example, addressed a real problem in the world - people are ruining the environment, and someday it will lead to the downfall of mankind. "Up" deals with the difficult process of coping with the loss of a family member, and conveys the message that you can only mourn for so long before you must accept the loss and move on. And perhaps my favorite, "Toy Story 3," challenges kids' and teens' ideas of growing up. While most media that kids and teens see and hear glamorizes growing up and makes them look forward it, "Toy Story 3" illuminates the downside, the hard part about growing up. While Andy is conflicted about leaving his toys behind when he goes off to college, the toys represent his childhood, his home, and his family. College is always depicted as fun and exciting in movies and television, but this was the first time I had ever seen a movie show a teenager's hesitation to leave his childhood behind. The movie truly made me reshape my ideas of college and adulthood.

So why is it that children's movies are so much more meaningful than "adult" movies? Is it because our society is trying to teach kids morals and life lessons while they are still young? Or is it because our minds deteriorate as we age? Is it possible that we start life ready to take in new ideas and progress into mindless beings that simply consume and wish to be crudely entertained? I think - thanks to today's movies, music, television shows, and magazines - the answer may be yes.

OMG, So That's A Tragedy? Woah.

Before reading Arthur Miller's essay on Tragedy, I had a misunderstanding of the genre known as tragedy. I had thought that tragedy was something like this, "The man loved the woman. The woman loved the man. They got married. The man got ran over on his honeymoon. How tragic". In a nutshell, I thought tragedy, was another word for a really, really, unfortunate event, not really a genre with specific guidelines and certainties. A tragedy, too me, is like an upside-down version of a fairytale, yet a ride to greatness. In the stereotypical fairytale or happily-ever-after story, there seems to always be that princess to pauper story, ordinary to extraordinary scheme. Within tragedy, is a rude awakening, a twist, an uproar in a nobleman's life, something that makes him wake up and taste the coffee-- something that throws the script a bit-- something that makes him realize he's not as perfect as he thinks he is... and for a brief moment, he notices he's like every other man on the planet, of flesh and blood... that he, too, is not perfect. At the end of a tragedy, it is not only the character that learns something (an inner truth or an honest truth about life in genera, a lesson, etc.), but also the audience member. Though the things that make tragedies tragedies are rather narrow in decision-- the protagonist is almost always a nobleman, someone who has it all--it's anything but stiff, creativity can be expressed in numerous ways, numerous character conflicts that the average person might never see in their lifetime. Maybe it's just me, but when watching or reading a tragedy, at least now, is similar to a step on new ground, an introduction to a world most of us have never known, a look at the glitz and glamour...but through that it shows the audience that everything is not what it seems, and that even the highest of high have their lowest of lows. 

Bubble Poetry

When I think of poetry, I tend to think of stories written in bubbles. Sounds odd, no?

The way I see it, a poem is a way of telling a story, but the way it is written is like there are bubbles of words floating around, and depending on the bubbles you choose, when you let them "pop" onto your poem paper, various residues of those words remain, and make a poem. Or a story, as you will.

Basically, it's predominantly subconcious thought, but there is a little bit of active participation in the art of poetry. 

A poem that I feel is a good example of my viewpoint is "The Red Wheelbarrow" by William Carlos Williams.  The way it was written is in short bursts, like residual bubble matter on a paper. However, it still very clearly manages to convey a scene and feeling in eight lines! While he may have started thinking about wheelbarrows, or chickens, I personally think that he had an inkling of a thought and ran with it, letting the dreaming part of his mind rule his hand for a moment.

How do you imagine poetry?

 

The Red Wheelbarrow

By William Carlos Williams

so much depends
upon

a red wheel
barrow

glazed with rain
water

beside the white
chickens. 

 

Non Sequitur circa Mean Girls

When we started discussing logical fallacies this week, we found that the definition of a non sequitur fallacy can be identified as an illogical argument where the conclusion has no relation to the premises that were given. Fallacies such as this often appear in the context of an extreme exaggeration. With his in mind, an excellent example of a non sequitur fallacy can be found in the modern teen classic film; Mean Girls; when the Sex Ed teacher at this average American high school tries to convince the students to practice abstinence using an extremely blunt and simple exaggeration that is the perfect non sequitur.

Although participating in sexual intercourse may lead to the participating female becoming pregnant, it is an incredible fallacy to assume that if you have sex, you will ultimately die because of it, even if you do get pregnant. This ridiculous statement, although found in a fictional and comical context, is a simple example of a non sequitur.

Talk About Fallacy

In regards to our recent topic of logical fallacies, I thought it fitting to address "appealing to popular opinion". I remembered from the beginning of the year the days we spent studying American culture and identifying popular trends and whatnot. I think sometime in the unit Mr. Heidkamp showed us a campaign ad for John McCain. I recalled this ad vividly, where he campaigns for his Arizona senate seat by supporting and promising to help the fight across the border. McCain starts out the ad by referencing "drug and human smuggling, home invasions, and murder", after which the border patrol officer discusses the action being made and proudly says, "Senator, you're one of us." This conversation exhibits multiple fallacies. For one, McCain appeals to authority, looking to validate his argument through use of the credibility of an uniformed border officer. Also, McCain appeals to popular opinion when referencing the crimes committed. He associates all of these injustices with people who cross the border, no doubt affirming the thoughts of many across the nation. Finally, if someone could figure out this last one, it would be great. The border patrol moves from "completing the danged fence" to outright saying, "Senator, you're one of us", as if the entire situation is one of patriotism. This argument also includes the complete disregard for the reasons people cross the border, even if they come to America for opportunity, family, etc.

School Shootings and Abortion? -Faulty Cause/Effect

The logical fallicy called false cause or faulty cause/effect is present everywhere around us. It can occur when people make an assumption that two things are caused by each other when they are not or when a person jumps to a biased conclusion. An example of false cause is in this article.

The article starts talking about how horrible the shooting at Columbine High School was and then jumps to talking about abortion. Even though they do try to find similarties between the shooting and abortion, there is not enough evidence to back up that the two are related or that the shooting was caused by abortion. They go on to argue that abortion is wrong and that it is the reason why there is so much violence in the world.

The reason this is false cuase is because they are trying to link two things that do not have anything to do with each other. It is too much of a stretch to blame a school shooting on abortion. They should not have jumped to a conclusion that the two were related.

If Only We Had Our Own Minds

The slippery slope fallacy is used by many people, including politicians, to get a point across and to make that point seem very grave. The problem with this use of the fallacy is that it has many people believe things that just aren't true.

Some people, including relatives of mine, believe almost everything they hear on the radio or TV without thinking about what the media personality is really saying. Many of these personalities try to instill fear into the minds of their viewers, and it often works because they use the slippery slope fallacy. If this one small thing happens, then it will lead to this large thing.

I think that if people would think more for themselves rather than have the media think for them, people would see that many of the things on the radio or TV are exaggerations or straight up falsities.

"Then you show up, and it breaks!" A Post-Hoc Fallacy

A Post-Hoc Fallacy is also known as a post hoc, ergo propter hoc, which is Latin for "after it, therefore because of it." It is an assumption that, since two events occured, one event was caused by the other event. It ends up as a conclusion that makes sense but doesn't have the evidence necessary to prove it. Sometimes these assumptions make sense: for example, I could say that since my sister was the last person to use the computer, and then the computer broke, my sister broke the computer. It seems logical that the last person to use the computer was the one who broke it, even though there is no clear-cut evidence to back it up.

Lawyers also use post-hoc fallacies to persuade the jury to believe that someone is guilty. They may say that the defendant was in the house at the time of the victim's murder, so therefore the defendant must have killed the victim. Again, this argument is very persuasive but cannot be proven true.

I found a great example of a ridiculous post-hoc fallacy in an episode of "Friends." Joey broke his refrigerator, but he doesn't have enough money to buy a new one, so he tries to blame all of his friends so that they willl pay for a new fridge. But there are definitely some holes in his thinking... check it out:  

Appealing to the People

  

 

 

In this advertisement that John McCain publishes in '08, we see his montage appealing to the people. It has inspiring music, little children, honorable people, courageous soldiers, and diction that makes it sound as if we should vote for McCain. His advertisement was made so that it appealed to as many people as possible. But, that doesn't mean necessarily that everything John McCain would do as president were all the words he has used. This is a fallacy becuase just becuase it may seem like a great thing, doesn't necesarily make it something that will be great for us.

Rushmore Rye?

Did anyone viewing the film Rushmore notice the blatant connection to J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye? While watching the film, I realized how similar the main character Max Fischer was to Holden. For one, Max is a rather insightful, almost inspiring person in how he fails to apply himself in academics, but has another side-his extracurricular activities. Just how Holden fails to apply himself in all of his math, science, and history classes, he also excels in another area, English. They both seem to amaze me in their skills outside of the norm. Also, Max Fischer attempts to hit on a woman. An older one to be more specific. It sounds a lot like Holden looking to dance with the three ladies from the hotel lobby and get a drink with the mother of one of his "phony" classmates. Both Max and Holden seem like anti-heroes; they are not muscular, heroic, or fit any stereotypical protagonist role. I do not know if the movie is meant to cross-reference the book, but it sure is a great example of two related backgrounds and story lines from what I have observed so far. I would be interested to see if anyone had noted any other of these references between these two works.  

Should We Believe Holden?

In class we've been assessing Holden's sanity. We diagnosed Holden with various mental disorders, like bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and depression. But I think Holden's got something different going on - I think that he made most of the story up.

I'm not saying Holden is a liar, because I don't think that he is. But have you ever seen the movie Shutter Island? The main character, scarred by a traumatic past, creates a fictional identity and life story that correspond with the events that occur. His disturbed mind creates these illusions as a defense mechanism. I personally think that Holden has done the same thing - he is obviously traumatized by his brother Allie's death years ago, and he shows us through his daydreams of being in an action movie that his mind is capable of inventing things.

The reason for my theory is that the end of the book subtly mirrors the beginning in several ways. At the beginning of the book when Holden is on the way to Old Spencer's house, he feels like he is going to disappear when he crosses the street, and he has the same eerie feeling at the end, as he's walking down the street in Manhattan. Holden also mentions that the ladies at Phoebe's school shout, "Good luck!" to him as he is leaving - one of the same things that irritates him about Old Spencer at the beginning. Phoebe ostracizes Holden as they walk to the zoo at the end because she is angry at him, just like the fencing team osrtacized Holden for leaving their equipment on the train. And when Holden sees the two boys in the museum, doesn't his explanation of  the mummies seem strangely similar to his essay that Old Spencer read back to him?

To me, these similarities make Holden less credible as a narrator, because it seems like the corresponding events came from the same train of thought rather than an experience, if that makes sense. This might not be Salinger's intent, but I definitely don't think that he did this on accident.

Does anyone else have ideas about this?

Barbers Causing Kids to Fail Out of School

Now don't blame me for this awkward or deranged topic I had to write about. These categories are what one gets when an AP American Literature teacher tells his students to write six different audiences, exigences, and purposes. Read this and take a guess of the audience, exigence, or purpose. (They should be pretty obvious!)

Many people are failing out of school due to not writing their papers. Barbers of the world have the opportunity to change the lives of these young black sheep of our society. One may ask themselves why barbers are targeted for this campaign. Studies have been shown that many kids look up to their barbers. Who wouldn't look up to someone who scares many children; with their sharp scissors in hand, in a dark lit room, with a grin as wide as a football players shoulders. If barbers share their papers written during Beauty School these young black sheep of our society could be inspired to start writing their papers.

Dreaming the Dream

Today, the American Dream's definition not only includes a person's opportunity to prosper, but the opportunity to succeed and prosper without inhibitions from a person's class, religion, gender or race. It is the possibility to succeed to the fullest based on your ability. Not only has success changed in meaning over the years, the American Dream has also changed, becoming more materialistic and complicated.

To be "successful" used to apply to the average success. It used to imply that one held a good job and, if needed, could provide for their family. Now, success is measured mostly by material things and their monetary value, with little reference to familial values. Instead of simply holding a steady job, now a successful person is expected to have a high-paying job and all its perks: a nice house, a nice car, a summer house, children, etc.

Because the rate of success has changed, the American Dream has changed accommodatingly. Today the American Dream is also mostly about owning valuable things. A large aspect of the American Dream is success, and therefore prosperity is an American's main focus.

However, the American Dream has become more complicated as well. Part of the American Dream is to be able to prosper without any restrictions based on a person's race, religion, class or gender. Almost anywhere you go, there is (at times accidental) segregation and discrimination based on these factors. This is especially prominent in the work force. The theory of the American Dream may say that everyone enjoys equal opportunity, but this is not true. The American Dream has changed to accommodate success, and although the dream is to have all people treated equally, our society has not yet changed to accommodate this dream.

Fantasy or Reality

The American Dream is the goal of prosperity for all people.  The American dream is rooted in the Declaration of Independence as, Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.  To many, this is a good job with good wages, home ownership, two and a half children and a dog. Some where along the way I think we started to think that the American Dream was about having more possessions and wealth.  Additionally, greed began to play a role in some people’s perception of the American Dream.

    The new American Dream is nearly impossible to obtain. Most people now want fame and fortune. When people dream of there "perfect" life they imagine a mansion, luxurious cars, and never ending wealth. The truth is there are not many people who can actually afford all of this.   Today, many families are finding it more difficult to reach this dream. Some where along the way, the dream has become harder and harder to reach.  More and more people are loosing jobs. People are having a tougher time making ends meet. People are even loosing their homes. 

    I think obtaining the American Dream is going to get tougher to obtain.  People need to start to changing their perception of the American Dream and refocus on simpler things. Americans do not need all of the luxurious extra to live a full and fulfilled life.  Even though this dream gives people a goal to strive for it is also giving people false hope. Most people will never be able to have these things no matter how hard they try. It is safe to say many americans need to become content with what they have.