Final blog of the year!

My favorite activity that was done in ELA this year was the response projects. I love the freedom that is allowed on them. I didn't find anything particularly boring because I felt that I was occupied with an enjoyable book or project throughout the year. My favorite book this year was The Great Gatsby. I love it's beautifully descriptive depiction of the Roaring Twenties, it's well developed characters, and engaging plot. I truly hold all of the books that we read this year in high regard, but the one that I found the least interesting was our final book, A Raisin in the Sun. I didn't find it's plot to be very interesting, and I thought it would be a bit more action-packed instead of a cut-and-dry dysfunctional family story. The self-proposed response projects are the best thing about this class. They allow the student to further explore the book's topic, or let their thoughts and imagination flow into something creative. For this reason, I believe we should keep it the same. I really enjoy this class, and for that reason, I do not think anything should change. The only thing I disliked is a part of the grading system for seminars. I think for ELA and all other classes that involve seminars, we should get rid of the grade that is obtained by one student inviting another into the conversation. I think it teaches the student to have to rely on the others for guidance and complete support, and not speak up for themselves. Over-all, this class has been a pleasure to experience and learn from.  

Walter's quote

1. On p. 143, Walter states, "There ain't no causes - there ain't nothing but taking in this world, and he who takes the most is smartest - and it don't make a damn bit of difference how." Do you think that this is true? Why or why not?

        Walter is saying that the ones who take are smarter and stronger according to the world, not just to himself. The people who take and gain more are in control and have a significant amount of power over those who they have taken from. They are viewed as smarter and stronger by society since they succeeded in taking from other societal groups. 

A Raisin in the Sun and Harlem

I feel that Lorraine Hansberry used the line:"a raisin in the sun" for her title, because the story and the poem are both about crushed dreams. In Langston Hughes' poem, he begins with the topic of sweet things. He ends the poem with words that describe destruction and death. This is how life was for minorities during the time that the play was based. One could go about being a kind and generous person, but the results could blow up in their face if they were considered to be undesirable. This could draw a connection to the Jesus Colon story that we discussed in IHSS. He wanted to help a white woman up the subway steps because her hands were full and she had three kids. He avoided the possible fate that could have befallen him when he decided to not help her because he thought she might have been a racist.

Exiting the world of F. Scott Fitzgerald

I drove to Galveston this weekend. During my walk around the area, I couldn't help but relate the streets to the cover of The Great Gatsby. No building rose higher than three stories, everything was ancient, and painted in a solid color. Bright lights made fuzzy glows of light through the hazyness on the roads, for it had been raining earlier. Old billboards towered above everything else and I pictured two big, faded eyes glaring down at me through circular glasses. The green light signaling go over a far away intersection reminded me of the view Gatsby had of Daisy's home in East Egg. This was my farewell to finishing such an exquisite novel, with such beautiful imagery and deep symbolism.

The Great Gatsby, Houston food deserts, and myself

Comment on any connections that you were able to make between The Great Gatsby and the topics that you are exploring in IHSS and Science. How did our outings and/or the seminar contribute to your ability to make these connections.

The primary connections between The Great Gatsby and my science and IHSS class is the constant comparison between rich and poor neighborhoods. One might find that "the valley of ashes" from Gatsby might be a bit of an exaggeration, but compared to the poor neighborhoods in Houston, it wasn't very different. The Houston neighborhoods weren't filled with soot and dirt, but their grocery stores were barren and ancient. Many of the people I saw from my bus window seemed to resemble the "crumbling", tired characters that F. Scott Fitzgerald mentioned as residents of the valley of ashes. 

The West and East Eggs are places fantasizes by many, for they are the representations of the people who achieved the American Dream. The book shows how these privileged, rich people can have a plethora of issues as well as others. In other words: nothing is perfect, the American Dream is a bit of a facade for the harsh reality of the world. After realizing this, a disturbing thought crossed my mind: what if I am in the same situation as one of the debatably fortunate citizens of the eggs?  

Myrtle's death

Describe  what happens when Myrtle is killed in chapter 7. How did it happen? Who was to blame? Use textual evidence.

Myrtle seemed to be in a quarrel with her husband, George. He was sick, and he told the neighbor, Michaelis that he and his wife were moving "the day after tomorrow", and that he had Myrtle locked in the overhead apartment until then. Myrtle must have been enraged when her husband discovered her adulterous ways and finally decided to stand up to her. Their neighbor, Michaelis heard Myrtle cry out "beat me!" and then she proceeded to run out into the road with her arms flailing in the air as if she was trying to get the attention of a speeding car. One spectator of Myrtle's death recalled the car being "light green". In the order of colors on a rainbow, yellow comes just before green, which means it is a lighter color than green. In the darkness of the valley of ashes, one might mistake Gatsby's yellow car for being a pale green in the dimness. So, the culprit is either Gatsby or Daisy (but one will later find out that it was indeed, Mrs. Buchanan herself).   

Gatsby's story about himself vs. Jordan's story about Gatsby

Contrast Jay Gatsby's story about himself on p. 65 and Jordan Baker's story about Daisy and Gatsby on pp. 74-77.  What is different about these stories, and why do you think that they are different?

Gatsby portrays himself to Nick Carraway as a very take-charge, and forever successful businessman. He tells Nick that he was born to some very wealthy individuals, which he then reminds Nick that they are "all dead now". This is the first sign that he is lying about his past. When Jordan expands on her past interactions with Gatsby, he sounds like a common school-boy, who drools after a pretty, young girl like Daisy. Jordan says Daisy received calls on the daily, since she was the prettiest and most popular girl in Louisville. 

The valley of ashes and T.S. Elliot's The Hollow Men

Compare the "valley of ashes," described at the beginning of chapter 2 in The Great Gatsby, with Part 3 of T.S. Eliot's  poem, The Hollow Men. Include evidence from the text

The valley of ashes from The Great Gatsby and T.S. Elliot's The Hollow Men describe many of the same images and give an overwhelming feel of misery, loneliness, and helplessness. "This is the dead land, This is the cactus land" from the poem and Nick Caraway's description of the shambled town compliment one another. In the book, the valley of ashes is described as "a fantastic farm where ashes grow like wheat into ridges and hills and grotesque gardens." By reading this, I got a feeling of loneliness and nothingness, or at least nothing there but ash and soot. The same goes for The Hollow Men. The only thing that is visible in this macabre battlefield is death, and the only form of greenery or other life are cactus plants. "Under the twinkle of a fading star" from the poem, explains the pitiful and helpless state that the soldiers are in. In Gatsby, the line on page 23: "... of men who move dimly and already crumbling in the powdery air.", shows that the people of the valley of ashes are simply rotting away, and the last thing that they will see is the smokey, "powdery air" that drifts about them eternally. 

The terrifying truth about income inequality

What information about income inequality surprised or disturbed you the most? Explore some reasons why you think this information surprised or disturbed you.

While watching the short movie on the unequal distribution of wealth in America, there was one particular fact that disturbed me. When it was made clear that the 1% of Americans make 50% of the entire nations money. To make it even clearer, a complete half of the U.S.'s money is going to the smallest percentage that hail here. The people that make this are movie/music stars, politicians, and other jobs that would earn one a recognizable title and an abundant salary. The only startling part of this is that this much money is given to such a small portion of the citizens. To relate this to the American Dream, I feel it couldn't be any further from the original goal. The goal was to make everyone's wealth equal. This shows how things are easier said than done, and how optimistic and wishful thinking may increase people's hopes for the future, but may not be very realistic. Personally, I think that the American Dream is a wonderful concept, and many would thrive from it, except, it is quite confusing at the same time. After listening to this video, I had two primary questions. If someone with no work ethic is poor because of their laziness (which is not always the case), should they still receive payment for doing nothing?  If someone has worked hard throughout their years and accomplished amazing things, should they receive an incomprehensibly large paycheck? I think that the small percentage that have accomplished more than others  should definitely be payed significantly more than someone who has not accomplished the things they have, but to hand that small group of people an entire half of the nations money is completely ridiculous. 

ELA class review

Ever since I was little I've always enjoyed a good story. I was pleased to find that this year, every book that has been assigned was exciting, thoughtful, or unique from any book I have ever read. I have yet to find one that's interested me so much that I would call any of them my favorite, but, they were very entertaining. The books were indeed, very enjoyable, but I found it quite hard to question the story or annotate things that particularly stood out. I found myself taking quite a long time to come up with a good question to write in the book. Perhaps, we wouldn't have to annotate, but go back to the methods we used last year, which was to simply write a question on the board for seminar. I do agree that it would take a while to get through everyone's question, but we could still save them for another time. The students who didn't read the book would still be noticeable because they wouldn't have very intricate things to say about the chapters. Aside from this, I think that the ELA class should stay the same in every aspect except for the annotations. I have always enjoyed my time in this class, and I am excited for the next reading. 

Odysseus' nostos

Analyze the purpose of all of the violence in books 22-24. Do you think that this is necessary for Odysseus' successful nostos? Why or why not?

I had mixed emotions about Odysseus' nostos. He did go through 10 years of monsters, witches, sirens, storms and other various forms of mayhem, only to come home to several men harassing his wife and plotting to murder his son. He definitely has a right to be angry, and gathering that he is a great and mighty hero who is favored by one of the most powerful goddesses on Mount Olympus, his reputation exemplifies his possible bloodlust during situations like these. Also, this book was based back in Ancient Greece, which means the majority of female characters in Greek mythology were described as either obedient housewives or magical sex-symbols (minus most of the goddesses on Mount Olympus). Odysseus fell victim to the charm of many of these women. Calypso, Circe and the sirens all thwarted Odysseus on his journey back to Ithaca. Keeping in mind that it was a man who wrote this book in Ancient Greece, Homer probably wanted to keep the male characters stronger than the women. This is why I think it may have been necessary for Odysseus to claim his nostos by slaughtering everyone and ending strong, instead of coming home, tired and weak after his ordeals. Although this is only one side of the argument, I also felt that Odysseus could have fulfilled his nostos without the blood and gore.

On the anti-violence side of things, I think it would have made more sense if Odysseus simply murdered the suitors, and spared all of the innocents. The maids received the worst of it all. If Odysseus was supposed to be the protagonist, I would think of him as kind and compassionate. By executing the maids, my image of this character shattered like glass. I understand that Odysseus might feel betrayed by the maids since they chose to serve the men who came into his home and harassed his wife, but in the end, what were the maids to do? They were maids, not queens. The maids may have been the lowest of the low in terms of the palace-dwellers. They aren't really maids at all, they are slaves. They live to serve. They would have (most likely) been killed anyway, if they denied service to the suitors. Things may have been different if the suitors were women. People seemed to be a bit more lenient towards women bickering with other women in literature of this time. Yet, if a woman talked back to a man during this time period, especially a slave like they were, it simply wasn't heard of, and probably wasn't taken lightly either. In other words, I'm not quite sure if Odysseus' actions should be labeled as correct or not. There are so many things that justify both sides of the argument.    

Xenia in the Odyssey

Xenia, or, simple hospitality is shown in every single home that's been described in the Odyssey (except for the cyclops). Telemachus visits both Menelaus, and Nestor's households. On page 45 (book 4), Menelaus has Telemachus and Mentor (Athena in disguise) to join a massive feast complete with maids that lathered them down in various oils, dressed them in furs, and then served them a silver tray, filled with water that had been poured from a golden pitcher so they could wash their hands before eating. On page 42 (book 3), Telemachus was bathed in oils by Nestor's youngest daughter. She then dressed him in lavish robes, and he was then sent forth to take a seat by Nestor himself. 

Telemachus' father, Odysseus received similar treatments. Calypso, the nymph daughter of Poseidon, obsesses over Odysseus and sort of holds him captive on her island paradise. On page 74 (book 5), when Calypso goes to give Odysseus to Hermes, e book mentions that Odysseus had been reluctantly having intercourse with the nymph. Even if it was unwanted, she still treated him with the greater fineries that the world outside of the island had to offer. Before this, Calypso seats Hermes in her cave, which is fragrant with different nature-based perfumes. After escaping Calypso, Odysseus comes across the lotus eaters (book 9, page 127). These people give Odysseus and his men some lotus flowers to eat, which may not seem like much, but, it is really an intoxicating drug that puts the consumer in a state of ecstasy. Circe, the witch/goddess ( book 10, page 154) has her unsuspecting male guests bathed in oils and clothed in fleecy garments. 

Why does The Odyssey start out with Telemachus' journeys instead of his father's?

The first four books of The Odyssey are known as the "Telemachy," as they introduce us to the voyage of Odysseus' adolescent son, Telemachus. Why do you think that The Odyssey begins with this story, and what are the most important things that we learn about Telemachus?

I believe the book starts off this way because Telemachus has to find his father, Odysseus, for whom this book is written for. Odysseus has to come back some how, and since he seems to be caught under some sort of love enchantment/spell with the nymph, Calypso, I don't think he will be completely available to continue the rest of his Kleos and then his Nostos without being given a small bit of assistance. Aside from this, we learn more about Telemachus and his personality. He is a young adult, who has yet to recognize it. He is constantly degrading himself and throwing mini- tantrums when he is in any sort of dilemma or something doesn't go his way. Now, these actions aren't very surprising coming from the spoiled, rich, and slightly bratty child of the Queen and King figure of an entire city in Ancient Greece. Having read this much about Telemachus and his few encounters with people outside of his palace back home  makes me wonder about how long he may last during his  journey to rescue his father.  

Living in a video game.

I don't play video games very often. I have never been very good at finding my way through cyber space land where my main goal is to shoot people, grab coins, or win a car race. Yet, I have always marveled at these different cyber-worlds that you (the gamer) would explore. Since I have never been very good at playing them, I usually watch others do it, giving me plenty of time to think about the setting, characters, and effort that was put into making the entire thing. I do remember one day, my friends were talking about "how cool it would be to live in a video game!" I, however, hold a completely different opinion.

 Life would be completely awful if one lived in a video game. If I was a video game character and my game is opening up for the first time on someone's screen, I would begin by begging the player to actually do a good job. If he or she is a total failure at video games, I would be the one character in the game that glitches all of the time, telling them to just hand the game over to someone that will win. The majority of video games made today involves death in a horribly slow and painful way. It seems like the only way to actually fail a level is to fall of a cliff, get shot, get eaten, set on fire, etc. Take a character like Mario for example. It is a pretty harmless game, but, you have to pass through 12 or so worlds that range from awkwardly happy and dangerous to extremely dark, shady, and dangerous. All to rescue a ditzy princess who will just get kidnapped again in the next game. If you pass through these worlds, great, that means you gotten passed the singing turtles, enraged mushrooms, murderous venus flytraps, and all of the cliffs and pitfalls. You wouldn't even have to be a main character to have a completely horrible life. 

 Even if I was an unimportant character in the game. One that could quietly slip in and out of my cyber-space realm without being noticed, I would still have a horrible time. Simply because I would have to travel into another land, pass through all of those levels without dying, just to get to my location. Every place you go, you are in some form of danger. Buying a house in a video game land would be completely out of the question. Considering that the majority of the time would be spent running away or hiding from dragons, aliens, natural disasters, assassins/ hit men, and various mythical creatures, simply to walk across the street or travel somewhere. So, to sum this post up in a few words is to say that if someone feels like a video game would be in any way a normal living condition, they wouldn't last an hour without gunpowder, magical swords, or a force field. 

Final blog post for Maus

Functionalist:

The functionalists believe that everything that happens in society needs to be in a certain order for society to thrive and function properly. Thinking this way in relation to The Holocaust probably means they would lean more towards the nazi's point of view. Functionalists during this time (that were not Jewish) would believe that Jewish people were lesser and they had to be wiped out for Germany to function properly, and return to its former glory. I feel that the amount of Jewish functionalists would be quite rare considering they were the ones effected by this type of thinking. For example, a functionalist could say men should have a job, and women should cook and clean. The functionalist here would most likely be the man, since the negatively effected group would be the women. 

P.S.

Just to clear up any misconception, I am not saying all functionalists hold bigoted views on society, but, during this time period, and especially in this country, they probably would have if they weren't Jewish. 

Conflict:

Conflict theorists believe that society is constantly changing due to people's constant want to do more than the last thing. In other words, we are in eternal conflict. Similar to the functionalist's possible views during this time, conflict theorists might say that the nazi's tried to assassinate the Jewish population because they were trying to "improve" Germany. Conflict theorists who were Jewish, or Germans that were against the nazis may think in a conflict perspective and say that the holocaust happened to make Jewish people stronger as a people, and to make other Germans realize how truly horrible Hitler was, so that this may never happen again.     

Symbolic Interactionist: 

Believing that people progress through interaction with one another, symbolic interactionist may believe in something that could cross paths with the conflict theorists. When I said that some conflict theorists could argue on the side of the Jewish people and say that the holocaust may have made Jewish people stronger, I think this is what symbolic interactionists could argue as well. The interactions between the Jewish people and the nazis were less than pleasant. This being the case, a few years from then it would become a public matter. When people finally found out what was happening, society has become a bit stricter when intolerance- related problems come up.  

Postmodernist:

Postmodernism is quite difficult to actually define since it usually refers to the arts. In relation to the people of Germany, the Jewish population would probably be the overwhelming majority to agree with is perspective. Postmodernist contradict modern theories and thoughts. Postmodernist would typically be more content with the perspective Maus was written in, since it depicts the tale of a Jewish man and his fight for freedom through the holocaust. Postmodernists believe in the freedom and equality for anyone and everyone. 

Jewish stereotyping and Spiegelman's father

1. On a few occasions in the book, Spiegelman writes about his concern about representing his father as a Jewish stereotype. What characteristics does his father have that seem to match up with these stereotypes, and what events in his life might have caused him to behave in this way?

I remember there being a few examples of Jewish stereotyping in Maus. The one that comes to mind though is the stereotype of Jews being very greedy. Yet, I found that Speigelman did a good job of not applying these stereotypes to his dad or any of the other characters. If he did, I think most people would find it to be a stereotype, but, in reality, everyone, no matter what ethnicity they may be would be greedy if they had to go through something like the holocaust. When people are out to get you, and eventually, everything comes down to the situation where it is either your life, or the other persons. Most people would try to save themselves before they decide to take the bullet for another person. In the holocaust, everyone would fear death, because death wasn't a quick and painless sort of thing, it was slow and painful. They were either tortured in concentration camps, starved, or just shot for no reason. 

The challenges in drawing another person's story.

The challenges one could face while drawing out someone's story are mainly linked to the satisfaction of the person or people who are being drawn. I am an artist, and I can honestly say that there is no worse a feeling than delivering a portrait to someone that has asked for one, and they are embarrassed, disgusted, or ashamed of it. That is, after all, only an example of a portrait, not a full book/story. When you are drawing a graphic novel, you begin with the design of the characters. After the character sketches have been complete, you then need to make sure that the character is recognizable in each comic block or square. Facial expression and clothing is also crucial. If you are drawing someone you know or someone you have been in contact with, you need to express their personality through their appearance. A kind and good  person may wear white and have upward-slanted eyebrows to show their meek personality. A mean or cruel person usually is seen in black or a dark shade of any other color. If they aren't wearing elaborate black robes and capes, their eyebrows will go downward showing their anger and wickedness. In the book Maus, Art Spiegelman's drawings are not very realistic, they are more cartoonish because it is easier to visualize personification through a cartoon than any other medium. People visualize themselves as something they are not, that is why it is difficult to draw self portraits because they usually end up not looking like the artist who drew it. Because of this, I have always thought of art as a form of show business. Art is constantly critiqued and reviewed by the public. Graphic novels have become quite popular now, and if someone has their own visual of a character in a book or a real person, they would expect the images in the graphic to fully visualize that person. If they don't get the same emotion or visual while reading the graphic novel, they won't like it as much.  

Final Alchemist post- The mysteries of the "language of life" and the "language of the desert"

The "language of the desert" and "the language of life". These two topics have been constantly addresses in The Alchemist. Santiago learned about these languages through the Alchemist he met. The only people in the book that (seemingly) understood this mysterious language from the beginning aren't people at all. On page 121, Santiago mentions that his "horse knows the language of life". The boys horse and the Alchemist's hawks have been examples of "the language of the world" for the boy and the Alchemist. These animals seem to have been associated with this language, as if that is how animals are communicating with their squeaks, squawks, and growls. When the Alchemist first appeared in the book, he immediately stuck out (to me) as some sort of mystical being. Not just by his title, but by his entire image. The long white cloak, a hawk on his shoulder, and his interaction with the cobra shows the reader that he has been in close contact with animals before. Since he has spent however many years he has with these creatures, he should be well educated on their ways of life. This also raises another question/theory. Since the alchemist has spent such a long time with the animals, he could have learned something from them. Could the animals be the Alchemist's toutor on the "language of life" and the "language of the desert"?

Do I believe that "When you want something, all the universe conspires to help you achieve it."?

1. On page 24, the king of Salem tells Santiago, "When you want something, all the universe conspires to help you achieve it." Do you believe that this is true? Why or why not?

This statement is very optimistic. It shows the earth's good side and not the rest. To me, this statement translates to: when you want something, it will, most likely, come true. What I mean by this is that this statement is both true and false. First of all, when you want something, you need to work for it. Maybe, this is different in a world where magic and reality are intermingled like the one The Alchemist is set in. In the real world, this is not always the case. When you work for something, and you try your absolute hardest to achieve it, there will always be something fighting against you to prevent you from reaching that goal. It's even been taught in books and stories that are completle fantasy. All characters in magical- fiction based books have to fight some sort of opposing force to get what they have been trying to get, the entire time. It isn't always a bad thing though. By having that small delay in receiving what you desperately want, makes you want it all the more. The waiting enhances our want for that thing, it makes us stronger.  Now, sometimes, things may seem like they are simply being handed to you. This is, however, extremely rare for people who live in a non- fictional universe. If work never existed, I think miracles, and wishes always coming true with 100% costomer satisfaction would be quite common on planet earth. In the real world, you would have to have a bit of both self motivation, and help. If you had self motivation, and no help, bigger wishes like Santiago's wish to travel, would have a larger chance of failing than working out. If he hadn't come across the old man who motivated him to continue traveling, he would have given up and have been stuck tending to a flock of sheep. If you had to simply pick between self motivation and help, then, you would have a harder time achieving your goal. If things just worked out immediately, that's great, but that sort of stuff doesn't exist in the real world. The true part of The King of Salem's saying it that, yes, the universe "conspires to help you", but, nothing would be complete without the wisher doing at least half of the work it takes to achieve their wish.  

The Alchemist: What do Santiago's sheep symbolize?

On page 9, reread the passage that begins, "The only things that concerned the sheep were the food and water," and ends with, "They trust me, and they've forgotten how to rely on their own instincts, because I lead them to nourishment." Do you think that the sheep symbolize something? If so, what? 

Santiago has not spent a significant amount of time with actual people. Since this is the case, he feels like he has no real power or place with civilization. When he said " they've forgotten how to rely on their own instincts..." he was saying they have been living one way for such a long time, that they have forgotten to do things for themselves. This symbolizes Santiago's want to live in a place where there are people like him, to not roam all over and not stay in one place. He has been living by that rule for so long, that his thoughts and actions follow that rule, making him incapable of doing anything he wants to do that is different from sheepherding. Also, he is feeling powerless and contemplates slaughtering the sheep at this time. This would make him feel, and know that he has some sort of control over something.