Maus is my favorite book that we have read so far this year. I am not really sure what I am going to write my essay on though. Maybe I will write an essay arguing that the Holocaust cannot be commemorated accurately. Justice would never be given to victims of the Holocaust since authors have not been through the tragic experience. That is why Artie only attempts to show his father’s experience in the concentration camps and not portray the general experience of others who went through the Holocaust. His father may have not been under as harsh of circumstances as other Jews, so people may not get the full gist of how horrific the concentration camps were. He wears a mask of a mouse since he feels guilty as if he is trying to façade the emotions of a Holocaust victim in writing his story. He fears stereotyping his father as a miserly Jew but being in a concentration camp can change a person and shape them in a new form for the rest of their lives.
For my essay, I am thing about using Postmodernism as a source. Since the book talks about how there is no universal truth that all believe, so everyone will have a different interpretation of the how awful the Holocaust really was. Artie even finds a fallacy in hearing that their was orchestras playing at the concentration camps when his father never knew of this. Every author will have a bias based on his/her own culture and religion that will affect how he/she depicts the Holocaust.
I would also like to somehow incorporate something about the setting changes from past to present and visa versa but I am sure what to do with that. Let me know if you have any ideas.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Google The Great(or not)
I hope y’all had a good weekend! Well where to begin…
It is evident from Karr’s article that people (myself included) have developed an inability to focus on lengthy texts due to the internet. “A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.” Our brains can no longer retain depth from reading, since we learn the art of skim reading on the internet. While typing an essay, it becomes distracting being on the computer. I take numerous breaks going on Facebook, playing solitaire, and checking emails. The internet is literally turning our brains to mush.
In postmodernism, there is a decentering of values. There are an infinite number of metanarratives making there no central focal point. I think this reflects how people can no longer focus or comprehend a sophisticated understanding of any one thing. Vonnegut most likely made Cat’s Cradle with short chapters that had a different topic for almost every chapter because he knew people would be incapable of focusing on any one topic for an extended period. One such character, Mona, has an inability to focus on one man. For instance, when John knows he is going to marry Mona, he wants her to only love him and she tells him that, “[she] loves everyone” (207). Mona cannot even focus on being committed to one man. If she were dedicated to John, she would learn the depth of his personality, but by being promiscuous, she can ‘skim’ over him and other men.
The internet has even corrupted marriage in today’s society. More than 50 % of marriages end in divorce. People become disinterested in there spouses because of the lack of focus promoted by surfing the net. Apparently, even Barbie and Ken, after years of marriage, are now divorced. As you can see, the internet has turned people into mindless zombies.
It is evident from Karr’s article that people (myself included) have developed an inability to focus on lengthy texts due to the internet. “A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.” Our brains can no longer retain depth from reading, since we learn the art of skim reading on the internet. While typing an essay, it becomes distracting being on the computer. I take numerous breaks going on Facebook, playing solitaire, and checking emails. The internet is literally turning our brains to mush.
In postmodernism, there is a decentering of values. There are an infinite number of metanarratives making there no central focal point. I think this reflects how people can no longer focus or comprehend a sophisticated understanding of any one thing. Vonnegut most likely made Cat’s Cradle with short chapters that had a different topic for almost every chapter because he knew people would be incapable of focusing on any one topic for an extended period. One such character, Mona, has an inability to focus on one man. For instance, when John knows he is going to marry Mona, he wants her to only love him and she tells him that, “[she] loves everyone” (207). Mona cannot even focus on being committed to one man. If she were dedicated to John, she would learn the depth of his personality, but by being promiscuous, she can ‘skim’ over him and other men.
The internet has even corrupted marriage in today’s society. More than 50 % of marriages end in divorce. People become disinterested in there spouses because of the lack of focus promoted by surfing the net. Apparently, even Barbie and Ken, after years of marriage, are now divorced. As you can see, the internet has turned people into mindless zombies.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Hypertechnology
Imagine you are sitting right next to your friend and both of you are texting one another instead of talking. How pathetic is that? Even though you are with company at the same time, you are isolated. Today we are living in a pseudo-modern world, since technology has abolished meaning in life.
In pseudo-modernism, authors have little purpose.
In Dr. Kirby’s article he states that, “In all of this, the ‘viewer’ feels powerful and is indeed necessary; the ‘author’ as traditionally understood is either relegated to the status of the one who sets the parameters within which others operate, or becomes simply irrelevant, unknown, sidelined; and the ‘text’ is characterized both by its hyper-ephemerality and by its instability.” Writers have no purpose in dictating their own work. The writer of a show is invisible to outsiders. Shows such as American Idol are entirely dependant on the voting of viewers. The creator of the show does not get to pick the winner, only the voters who text in their vote. An essay must present an argument to be worth reading and analyzing. Reality shows, on the other hand, bring no thought provoking conversations. Shows and authors become void of meaning. The writer becomes a waiter asking the ‘customer’ if they would like beef or chicken. The waiter cannot control what the customer orders, in the same way, that a writer cannot control the outcome of his/her own work. Ironically, technology was meant to improve our society intellectually, when in actuality, it has diminished our ability to expand our knowledge.
Where does all of this leave us? Is technology more evil than good?
In pseudo-modernism, authors have little purpose.
In Dr. Kirby’s article he states that, “In all of this, the ‘viewer’ feels powerful and is indeed necessary; the ‘author’ as traditionally understood is either relegated to the status of the one who sets the parameters within which others operate, or becomes simply irrelevant, unknown, sidelined; and the ‘text’ is characterized both by its hyper-ephemerality and by its instability.” Writers have no purpose in dictating their own work. The writer of a show is invisible to outsiders. Shows such as American Idol are entirely dependant on the voting of viewers. The creator of the show does not get to pick the winner, only the voters who text in their vote. An essay must present an argument to be worth reading and analyzing. Reality shows, on the other hand, bring no thought provoking conversations. Shows and authors become void of meaning. The writer becomes a waiter asking the ‘customer’ if they would like beef or chicken. The waiter cannot control what the customer orders, in the same way, that a writer cannot control the outcome of his/her own work. Ironically, technology was meant to improve our society intellectually, when in actuality, it has diminished our ability to expand our knowledge.
Where does all of this leave us? Is technology more evil than good?
Monday, November 2, 2009
Cat's Cradle/ Postmodernism
“Postmodernism cultural forms reflect the dislocation and fragmentation of language communities- splintered into small groups- each speaking a “curious private language of its own, each profession developing its private code or dialect and finally each individual coming to be a linguistic island, separated from everyone else” (PCS 14) (Postmodernism For Beginners 37). People are isolated in small distinct discourses and then eventually these discourses branch out even farther, so people have their own individual opinion just to themselves. People become alienated from their own loved ones. In Cat’s Cradle, Newton Hoeniker writes that when his father won the Nobel Prize his, “Mother cooked a big breakfast. And then when she cleared off the table, she found a quarter and a dime and three pennies by Father’s coffee cup. He’d tipped her” (14). Newton’s father, Dr. Hoeniker, views his wife as a mere waitress who is not really a part of his life. He does not think that she made him breakfast because she loves and is proud of him but because she is obligated to as part of her job. His relationship to his wife is one of a business transaction, where she takes care of him and he brings home the bacon. He feels no love for her. Dr. Hoeniker’s only relationship is with science.
Cat’s Cradle exemplifies the postmodern concept of detachment from family. Dr. Hoeniker fills the void in his life with achieving his goals in science, which become his sole purpose in life. He does not cherish his family because that would distract him from attaining his dreams. His wife and kids are just daily encounters he has like tipping a waitress at a local diner. Dr. Hoeniker is the sole member of his own discourse adhering to his own beliefs that are legitimate to him.
Cat’s Cradle exemplifies the postmodern concept of detachment from family. Dr. Hoeniker fills the void in his life with achieving his goals in science, which become his sole purpose in life. He does not cherish his family because that would distract him from attaining his dreams. His wife and kids are just daily encounters he has like tipping a waitress at a local diner. Dr. Hoeniker is the sole member of his own discourse adhering to his own beliefs that are legitimate to him.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Black Hole
So i feel really scatter brained right now. I’ll try to kinda sort through random ideas. Brave New World seems really dark and empty, but that there is an underlying meaning in this.
I feel that I could potentially write an essay on how life becomes meaningless in the society depicted in the novel and ponder whether this is also occurring in today’s society. Death is irrelevant and happiness is falsified, so people don’t have any depth to their personalities. The director believes that “Murder kills only the individual-and, after all, what is an individual?”(148) People are not cherished but used merely as robots for the sake of industry. Without having parents or spouses, the characters in the story develop few emotional attachments that need to be mourned. The citizens in Brave New World are apathetic toward death. Death is the equivalent to, “Oh darn! I have to wait at another red light.” In the same way, death would not upset citizens to the point that soma couldn’t help. Since death becomes indifferent, individualism is abolished.
Happiness loses its meaning since it is forged. As we discussed in class, “How can people experience sadness, if they never know true happiness?”
This brings more essay topics to mind. Is Ford an acceptable God for the Brave New World society? He is not a supernatural being. He was a human who was a sinner, not any better than anyone else. Why does society feel that he can define the rules that they live by? Industry is not relevant enough to be the focal point of a society. People will become bored with it.
In my essay, I plan to reference the Bible and any historical books that discuss problems in the government during Huxley’s lifetime. One thesis idea that I have is: In Brave New World, Huxley provides a fictitious warning that life will become a meaningless void, if happiness is falsified and death goes unmourned.
I feel that I could potentially write an essay on how life becomes meaningless in the society depicted in the novel and ponder whether this is also occurring in today’s society. Death is irrelevant and happiness is falsified, so people don’t have any depth to their personalities. The director believes that “Murder kills only the individual-and, after all, what is an individual?”(148) People are not cherished but used merely as robots for the sake of industry. Without having parents or spouses, the characters in the story develop few emotional attachments that need to be mourned. The citizens in Brave New World are apathetic toward death. Death is the equivalent to, “Oh darn! I have to wait at another red light.” In the same way, death would not upset citizens to the point that soma couldn’t help. Since death becomes indifferent, individualism is abolished.
Happiness loses its meaning since it is forged. As we discussed in class, “How can people experience sadness, if they never know true happiness?”
This brings more essay topics to mind. Is Ford an acceptable God for the Brave New World society? He is not a supernatural being. He was a human who was a sinner, not any better than anyone else. Why does society feel that he can define the rules that they live by? Industry is not relevant enough to be the focal point of a society. People will become bored with it.
In my essay, I plan to reference the Bible and any historical books that discuss problems in the government during Huxley’s lifetime. One thesis idea that I have is: In Brave New World, Huxley provides a fictitious warning that life will become a meaningless void, if happiness is falsified and death goes unmourned.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Postmodernism
Narratives define a culture without having to be justified.Why and how are completely eliminated. For example, if someone were to say that dogs could talk everyone would just believe this outlandish statement. While, a grand narrative is a focal point of a discourse that contains lesser, smaller narratives. In the postmodern land of Brave New World, citizens believe in the narrative of forbidding emotional attachments to follow the Grand Narrative of progression.
In the novel, the citizens put up an impenetrable wall from one another. For instance,the Director recalls how the death of a girl he once hooked up with affected him more than it should have. "Because , after all, it's the sort of accident that could have happened to any one and , of course, the social body persists although the components cells may change"(97). This is really sad and disturbing to me. How can a living, breathing person be insignificant? Another person cannot inhabit the same characteristics as another and replace them. Death is distorted to eliminate anger and sadness ,so people can constantly be efficient to industry. By not having love or compassion for others, death becomes meaningless. Not having to mourn a loss promotes infinite happiness; however, true joy only comes from learning from past sorrows. The director is marganilized into neglecting the pain of death so he can be productive in his work.
In the postmodern world depicted in Brave New World, there is a vast nothingness. People accept fiction as facts with no evidence. Citizens have no goals ,or ambitions, or even thoughts of their own. People only know of the narratives that they are breainwished with in their sleep. Naturally, hhey have the urge to conform to their discourse. Ironically, by conforming, people are isolating themselves from the world with their apathy.
In the novel, the citizens put up an impenetrable wall from one another. For instance,the Director recalls how the death of a girl he once hooked up with affected him more than it should have. "Because , after all, it's the sort of accident that could have happened to any one and , of course, the social body persists although the components cells may change"(97). This is really sad and disturbing to me. How can a living, breathing person be insignificant? Another person cannot inhabit the same characteristics as another and replace them. Death is distorted to eliminate anger and sadness ,so people can constantly be efficient to industry. By not having love or compassion for others, death becomes meaningless. Not having to mourn a loss promotes infinite happiness; however, true joy only comes from learning from past sorrows. The director is marganilized into neglecting the pain of death so he can be productive in his work.
In the postmodern world depicted in Brave New World, there is a vast nothingness. People accept fiction as facts with no evidence. Citizens have no goals ,or ambitions, or even thoughts of their own. People only know of the narratives that they are breainwished with in their sleep. Naturally, hhey have the urge to conform to their discourse. Ironically, by conforming, people are isolating themselves from the world with their apathy.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Power To The People
Whoa! "Brave New World" is freakishly scary. Could our society ever become this demented? I feel that Huxley thought so and wanted to forewarn readers to protect their rights lest history should repeat itself.
Freedom is a right like no other. Often times we take freedom for granted and forgot the hard work our Founding Fathers devoted themselves to. For example, Mustapha Mond says, "Freedom to be a round peg in a square whole" (46). We tend to forget in the pre-revolutionary days that freedom was only an unattainable dream. Today we have an infinite number of freedoms; yet, we always think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. It is hard to imagine a society where freedom is incompatible with day to day life. The characters in the novel are forced into promiscuity and isolated from love; they don't realize it but they are slaves. The citizens in the depicted society are confined to being efficient robots who are deprived of the freedom of being living, breathing humans with emotional ties. Without the freedom of every man/woman being treated as an equal we would not have the president we have today. By using scare tactics, Huxley is frightening readers to abolish a corrupted government if they should ever have the unfortunate occurance of being oppressed by one.
Freedom is a right like no other. Often times we take freedom for granted and forgot the hard work our Founding Fathers devoted themselves to. For example, Mustapha Mond says, "Freedom to be a round peg in a square whole" (46). We tend to forget in the pre-revolutionary days that freedom was only an unattainable dream. Today we have an infinite number of freedoms; yet, we always think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. It is hard to imagine a society where freedom is incompatible with day to day life. The characters in the novel are forced into promiscuity and isolated from love; they don't realize it but they are slaves. The citizens in the depicted society are confined to being efficient robots who are deprived of the freedom of being living, breathing humans with emotional ties. Without the freedom of every man/woman being treated as an equal we would not have the president we have today. By using scare tactics, Huxley is frightening readers to abolish a corrupted government if they should ever have the unfortunate occurance of being oppressed by one.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Acceptance of Imperfection is Perfection
What would happen if we all could accept that we are not perfect and never will be? Would people be happier? The world will always move on and no eraser can erase the ink smudges of past transgressions. Therefore, why should history books and people themselves falsify humanity as perfect.
History books should convey the absolute truth. Future generations need to learn from the imperfections of the past, to make reference of what could be improved or left unchanged in future war and economical situations. History books need to illustrate the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If the Bible, the most holy book of all, can discuss the mistakes of past kings such as David, then so can history books. King David once stole another man's wife ,and then had that man killed by sending him to the front of the battle;yet, he also defeated the Philistines and help strengthened Israel . All human beings are both good and evil. God intended for all human beings to be full of sin and seek forgiveness, to know one day that they can be in a perfect, glorious heaven. The Founding Fathers produced the Constitution knowing that society has fallacies, that freedoms and rights need to be protected. Students need to see the whole spectrum of history and read supplemental books to further educate themselves of the establishment of the lives they are living today.
The acceptance of infallibility can also apply to the life of an individual. If people accept their own mirror image, personality, and talents then they can experience true joy. By not succumbing to the inner devil of condemnation, people can focus on self-improvement in a non-stressful way. While pessimists may argue that lack of self criticism takes away ambition, in reality, by not fretting over past mistakes ,people no longer have an obscured dream covered by their own errors. Instead, they have a clear focal point of the attainment of their goal without the obstructions of guilt from the past. The ability to take ownership of one's imperfection becomes a perfection of it's own.
History books should convey the absolute truth. Future generations need to learn from the imperfections of the past, to make reference of what could be improved or left unchanged in future war and economical situations. History books need to illustrate the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If the Bible, the most holy book of all, can discuss the mistakes of past kings such as David, then so can history books. King David once stole another man's wife ,and then had that man killed by sending him to the front of the battle;yet, he also defeated the Philistines and help strengthened Israel . All human beings are both good and evil. God intended for all human beings to be full of sin and seek forgiveness, to know one day that they can be in a perfect, glorious heaven. The Founding Fathers produced the Constitution knowing that society has fallacies, that freedoms and rights need to be protected. Students need to see the whole spectrum of history and read supplemental books to further educate themselves of the establishment of the lives they are living today.
The acceptance of infallibility can also apply to the life of an individual. If people accept their own mirror image, personality, and talents then they can experience true joy. By not succumbing to the inner devil of condemnation, people can focus on self-improvement in a non-stressful way. While pessimists may argue that lack of self criticism takes away ambition, in reality, by not fretting over past mistakes ,people no longer have an obscured dream covered by their own errors. Instead, they have a clear focal point of the attainment of their goal without the obstructions of guilt from the past. The ability to take ownership of one's imperfection becomes a perfection of it's own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)