Thursday, January 20, 2011

Slaughterhouse-Five...

For my choice novel, I chose to read Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut. This story is Vonnegut's somewhat auto-biographic and mostly fictional account of the 1945 firebombing in Drensen, Germany. Slaughterhouse-Five follows the life of Billy Pilgrim and his journey of becoming unstuck in time. Billy claims to have been abducted by Tralfamadorians and taken back to their planet to be studied. Billy says that while he was there, the Tralfamadorians taught him many things. One of them being the idea that, "All moments, past, present, and future, always have existed, always will exist...It is just an illusion we have here on Earth that one moment follows another one, like beads on a string, and that once a moment is gone it is gone forever. Now, when I myself hear that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is 'So it goes.'"

In contrast to this expose on the horrors of war, is Toni Morrison's Playing in the Dark. Her belief that the idea of Africanism is represented in all American texts and that without it literature would not be what it is. In her second short essay Romancing the Shadows, Morrison focuses on the metaphoric use of darkness to symbolize black and lightness to symbolize white. "These images of impenetrable whiteness need contextualizing to explain their extraordinary power, pattern, and consistency. Because they appear almost always in conjunction with representations of black or Africanist people who are dead, impotent, or under complete control, these images of blinding whiteness seem to function as both antidote for whiteness--a dark and abiding presence that moves the hearts and texts of American literature with fear and longing." When I first read this, I found Morrison's angle of our association to light being good and dark being bad to be unique. Yet after re-reading a passage from Slaughterhouse-Five, I truly realized that the points Toni Morrison was making when she said her theory of Africanism could be related to any text, even the ones not about race.

Protagonist Billy Pilgrim is on his way to Lions Club luncheon meeting. "He was stopped by a signal in the middle of Ilium's black ghetto. The people who lived here hated it so much that they had burned down a lot of it a month before. It was all they had, and they'd wrecked it. The neighborhood reminded Billy of some of the towns he had seen in the war. The curbs and sidewalk were crushed in many places, showing where the National Guard tanks and half-tracks had been." Billy's association of this black ghetto to the destruction he witnessed in Drenson, a huge theme in Slaughterhouse-Five being how destructive war can be, reinforces Morrison's ideas of white/light symbolizing what is good and dark/black symbolizing what is not.

Although, while reading Toni Morrison and Kurt Vonnegut I believed one had absolutely no correlation to the other. Yet when I sat down to analyze Slaughterhouse-Five, I found that because it was so easy to find an example of what Morrison had been proposing in a book that had little to nothing to do with race, it only helped validate her argument.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

CharityWater...

Why Water?

The link above will take you to a website that works toward making sure people in developing nations have clean water. Water scarcity is becoming an international problem, and as residents of the country that, on average, uses the most water per person this should should be a priority for us.

After reading this article, ask yourself how much water you use everyday. How much does your family  use? How much would that decrease if that water was dirty or you had to travel for it? As teenagers we are known for being self-absorbed, but hopefully reading this has some impact. I'd like to think that every time anyone leaves the water on, their mind will drift back to this.

More realistically though, that probably won't happen. So what does it take? These days there are celebrities, and campaigns that bombard people all the time. So, in your opinion, what does it take to bring a nation together to fight for something that doesn't directly effect them?

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Criticism: Sam Anderson...

Sam Anderson's view on criticism, was well not quite what i'd had in mind for criticism. His views on the changing art that is literature was optimistic. Not only did he point out that every generation curses and predicts the demise of something due to new technology, but that each generation can take that as an opportunity for growth. With things like Google, Twitter, Facebook, and other technology, the way we interpret literature has also changed. There are now a million other things we can be doing with just the click of a button. Anderson says that it is the critics job to step it up. In this new age of literature, a critic needs to be the bridge. A critic makes art in the same medium that it critiques. As Anderson  put it, in this new age of technology critics aren't just referees; they're equal players.

I agree with a lot of what Anderson had to say. There isn't a use in debating if literature has changed, because it has. And along with that change is our change of perception. Something will only die when we stop believing it will live. Anderson's optimism for criticism is refreshing and real.

Monday, January 3, 2011

Daisy...

When Fitzgerald first introduced us to Daisy, I found her quite likeable. She had a youthful spirit, and descriptions of her gave me the feeling that although her beauty wasn’t conventional, it was mesmerizing. Her personality was bold, and that was a characteristic I thoroughly enjoyed about her. However, her blind eye towards Tom’s infidelity was a disappointment. Her complete contempt of her life, yet her lack of motivation to change it was unsettling. Needless to say that by the time Daisy was flaunting her affair with Gatsby, just the thought of her character left a bitter taste in my mouth.

            Of course with the new development in the plot, it seems an obvious choice to voice my dislike of Daisy. Yet this feeling seeded long before her reckless driving and jumbled nerves ever came into play. Daisy is a selfish woman, who despite her entrancing personality, seems shallow enough to be ever so willing to constantly “trade-up”. Daisy has, unfortunately, evolved from my favorite character, to that seems to constantly disagree with me.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

How Quickly We Forget...

Most people know where they are from. They can name off a country, a state, and a city. Most people also know where their ancestors came from. People are proud of where their ancestors lived. They may speak the language, follow customs, or visit. But they also know they are American. They know that their ancestors left their home country and immigrated to the United States. People understand their great-great-grandparents were just looking for a better life. These people have heard the trials and tribulations of the generations that came before them. These same people are also proud that their family had a hand in making America what it is. Our country was founded by people that left their home, everything they had ever known, to follow the promise of a better life. After all, America is the melting pot of cultures.

And we pride ourselves on that. Oh yes sir we do. We pride ourselves on the idea that anyone could have come to America in search of a better life. Potato famine got your country down? Come on over! Opressive government not giving you your rights? Hey ours was founded on the priciples of freedom and justice! Just hop on the next ship leaving for America and in a few short months, all the riches and opportunity of our country could be yours.

But is it still that way? Do we still welcome people who only want a better life with open arms? Or do we put up barbed wire fences and stick guards in towers with guns? The way Americans view immigration is interesting. On one hand we pride ourselves on our immigrant beinging. The stories of people coming to this country with only the clothes on their back and not even two pennies to rub together. On the other hand, it's a problem. People are immigrating to the U.S. illegally. But not everyone.

As most stories go, immigrants have always had it tough. They normally didn't speak the language, have very much money, or were very well educated. But in the stories America choses to remember, people always overcome those obstacles.  Now the same principles are true, except we have made immigrants the enemy. They are the people stealing the jobs we are too above to take. They are the people using the healthcare we can't afford to have. And they are the people, who a few generations ago, were just like us.

America is a great country, but we have a short memory. We find it so easy to forget where we were not too long ago. We need to remember one of the things we so pride ourselves on, and not forget that should still be possible for others.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Blog of the Week: The Things They Carried...

The first thing anybody ever told me about the Vietnam War was that it was bad. The second thing anybody every told me was that it was a tie. My grandmother told me the first thing I ever heard about Vietnam, and Red Forman from "That 70's Show" told me the second.

It took me a few years to really question my own perception of Vietnam. Who did we fight in Vietnam? Why did we fight? And if so many people were against the war, why did it take us so long to get out? Although I'm sure that everything my parents ever told me about Vietnam was deeply skewed by their far left politics, I'd like to believe that by age 17 I have come to my own understanding of Vietnam. Of course Vietnam began and ended long before I was ever thought of, which left me with a sense of disconnect to what really happened.

As sure as I am that my parents couldn't give me a completely unbias account of the Vietnam War, I was sure that the media couldn't either. They say that the winners write history, and there was no clear "winner" in Vietnam. Which of course meant that anyone could interpret the war how they pleased. Some truly beautiful works about such a horrific thing emmerged, and some truly bias things about the war have come out too. Some made the "bad guys" look worse, some were just a attempt to justify what those "bad guys" were doing, and some just told what they remembered.

Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried only reaffirmed what I knew about Vietnam. The things that happened, the way people felt about the draft, the tactics that were used, and the long-lasting trauma the soldiers live with. Any other book I've read that touched on Vietnam had one common theme: horror. The horror of what these soldiers saw, or what they were doing. Other texts focused on the soldier. Obviously having served in Vietnam, Tim O'Brien's main focuses were the same. However, O'Brien's take on the war pushed his book beyond the stereotypical war story. He made it connect for me.

I realized that Vietnam wasn't just history, but the things, and some of the problems, that occurred in Vietnam are still relevant in the wars we are fighting today. O'Brien might have been bias, but he was honest about it. He might have fabricated the stories in The Things They Carried, but he was upfront with why. This book was different for me. It was more than a war story. It made me think beyond why war was bad, or even why that war was bad. It made me realize just how many people were hurt in so many ways by such a horrific mistake.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Op-Ed...

Facebook Politicians Are Not Your Friends

This article talks mostly about the effect that Facebook, Youtube, and other Social sites have on politics.
The author starts out by saying that Youtube and Facebook have unmasked many a corrupt politician. Facebook and Twitter have also been very useful tools in recent elections. Rich also compares candidates in the upcoming election, and their use of social networks in reaching their audience. He also makes a striking case, that it makes the reader question how helpful the internet is in political campaigns.