I believe that our group for the Jane Eyre script writing assignment (Anna, Meghana, and I) worked very well together in order to complete the assignment. We met on Friday and attempted to complete the whole thing. This of course didn't work. Three friends+ Friday night+ MANY distractions= getting about one and a half pages of the script done with topic changes about every five seconds. We found that starting the project was much harder than it seemed, especially without having a direct end goal; we were just letting the discussion flow and hoped it would end up in the right place. However, though it didn't work out the way we wanted (we hoped to get everything done and out of the way besides edits), it sure did help. We were much more relaxed throughout the process and it gave time to let the ideas sink in.
What I was shocked about was how much I learned from my group. In the script, when I was reading through it, I found myself having many thoughts to add in and piggy-backing off of ideas. This worked out much better than our original intention of us each covering a character. Every time, there was something new and intriguing, and I found that what another person said caused me to have cool ideas as well. This shows the balance in our group, where we tried to cover as much ground as possible by editing several times.
Another thing I liked about the way our group worked was that we let the ideas flow into the basis of the script, then afterwords we tried to find text evidence. This is because we knew it was all there, so we'd much rather get out what we thought and wanted to say, then we'd go back and cite things.
Sure there was some last minute going over, but that's expected. There was some shouting during the editing process, but honestly I preferred that because it meant our group put in the effort to get together and work face-to-face rather than through a computer screen. And I believe this in part is what brought success to our group. In the end, it turned out just the way I'd expected from a group assignment and I was proud of the work we'd done.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Metacognition: Jane Eyre
While reading Jane Eyre, I saw a slight change in my reading habits and began to understand more of how I work as a reader. There were some parts that would just be descriptions for a full page. For these, sometimes I would read enough to capture the essence and then would skim the rest of the paragraph or page until something 'interesting' came up. I've always been the type of person who has read novels where something is always happening. I need something in there to keep me wondering and pulled towards the novel. I wish that with this book, I would've taken more time to read these slower passages and see the beauty that came from the writing. To be quite honest, I feel that at times I would read just so I knew would be prepared for a reading quiz. Yes, at times they could be obnoxious or what I found annoying, but in the future, I'd like to not be so quick to dismiss such passages from the start. Though I tried to become more aware as the novel went on, I hope that in the future, I would be more careful with parts like these and take them slowly rather then just try getting past them.
However, as the novel progressed, I began trying to read these more and paying attention to these details. As hard as it was at times, I attempted taking breathers and reading slower to take it all in. I know in class we talked about Jane's submission to others and looking for something to admire in other people, while putting herself down. Then I realized that this occurs in our society as well. We sometimes look to others whom we perceive to be better off in some way or another. We see people bashing on themselves because they don't think they are good enough. Over the reading of this novel, I began to make deeper connections between our society and Victorian society. I began to see the importance of Jane's story and how it might've impacted female readers of that time period.
This really shocked me about my thinking, because without really noticing it, I was able to make valid connections within and outside of the text and this illustrates an improvement I've made over the reading and year as well. This book may not have been my favorite this year, but I learned that I can bear with it and learn something from it. Yes, it might've been much too slow for my taste, but that shows how our society differs from Jane's and we can then compare fast and slow cultures as well as how the culture impacts the speeds of life. After reading Jane Eyre and thinking about my thinking while I read it, I was able to not only pinpoint what I've liked about my reading and learning habits, but what I would like to improve as well.
However, as the novel progressed, I began trying to read these more and paying attention to these details. As hard as it was at times, I attempted taking breathers and reading slower to take it all in. I know in class we talked about Jane's submission to others and looking for something to admire in other people, while putting herself down. Then I realized that this occurs in our society as well. We sometimes look to others whom we perceive to be better off in some way or another. We see people bashing on themselves because they don't think they are good enough. Over the reading of this novel, I began to make deeper connections between our society and Victorian society. I began to see the importance of Jane's story and how it might've impacted female readers of that time period.
This really shocked me about my thinking, because without really noticing it, I was able to make valid connections within and outside of the text and this illustrates an improvement I've made over the reading and year as well. This book may not have been my favorite this year, but I learned that I can bear with it and learn something from it. Yes, it might've been much too slow for my taste, but that shows how our society differs from Jane's and we can then compare fast and slow cultures as well as how the culture impacts the speeds of life. After reading Jane Eyre and thinking about my thinking while I read it, I was able to not only pinpoint what I've liked about my reading and learning habits, but what I would like to improve as well.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
360 Degrees: Our Future
The end of our sophomore year is nearing. And with each day, we come closer and closer to our future: college and beyond. And this is something my parents are taking advantage of. Recently, they've been trying to have college talks and talks about possible majors. Well this really doesn't work for me. Why? Because I have no idea; I'm still just a sophomore!
Sure it's good to have plans for the future and have goals, but there are definitely positives and negatives to this.
Positives:
1) Having planned out what you want for the future makes you more motivated to try and reach those goals. If you know what type of school you want to go to, then you will work accordingly in high school to have the necessary means to (hopefully) get into that school. Also, when the time comes and you do have to make decisions, you'll have a general idea of what you do want to be doing and will feel accomplished being ahead of the rest of us.
Negatives:
1) It's good to have an open mind. Sometimes with these goals and plans, you forget that you can in fact change them. It's really about what you want to do, not what you wanted to do when you were five (yes, I suppose that's an exaggeration). If you don't keep an open mind then you won't be able to end up doing what you truly love or discover something that in the end will be what you want to do for the rest of your life.
2) Living in the Now. We're told to live in the moment and have fun while it lasts. So why doesn't this apply now? We should be having fun in our youth. I'd like to think life isn't there for you to waste your time while you're young to plan for when you're old, then do things while you're old, and then sit around while you're even older (at least I hope that's not the case). So how can we live in the moment if all we do is plan for the future?
Sure it's good to have plans-as a matter of fact my schedule for the next two years is planned out, and when I tell people, they laugh. But in a way, it feels good to know what I hope to be doing. But remember not to get bogged down in these plans; there's room for adjustments. We should have goals, but they can change to meet our needs. I guess what I'm saying is, planning can be good, as long as you don't get tied down to the point where you can't budge no matter how hard you try.
Personally, I'm going to enjoy the rest of this year while it lasts and try not to worry about colleges at the moment. But let's face it, I do think about them. And while I can't even get myself to think about what I want to do in the long term, I should realize that within the next two years, I should hope to figure it out. Maybe I won't be so quick to shut down these conversations over time, but maybe at the moment it's because I don't want to be stuck to one decision I make without know what else is out there. Because in the end, I don't want to be jumping around everywhere at the age of 24 still figuring out what I should do, yet I don't want to be close-minded about what's out there right now.
Sure it's good to have plans for the future and have goals, but there are definitely positives and negatives to this.
Positives:
1) Having planned out what you want for the future makes you more motivated to try and reach those goals. If you know what type of school you want to go to, then you will work accordingly in high school to have the necessary means to (hopefully) get into that school. Also, when the time comes and you do have to make decisions, you'll have a general idea of what you do want to be doing and will feel accomplished being ahead of the rest of us.
Negatives:
1) It's good to have an open mind. Sometimes with these goals and plans, you forget that you can in fact change them. It's really about what you want to do, not what you wanted to do when you were five (yes, I suppose that's an exaggeration). If you don't keep an open mind then you won't be able to end up doing what you truly love or discover something that in the end will be what you want to do for the rest of your life.
2) Living in the Now. We're told to live in the moment and have fun while it lasts. So why doesn't this apply now? We should be having fun in our youth. I'd like to think life isn't there for you to waste your time while you're young to plan for when you're old, then do things while you're old, and then sit around while you're even older (at least I hope that's not the case). So how can we live in the moment if all we do is plan for the future?
Sure it's good to have plans-as a matter of fact my schedule for the next two years is planned out, and when I tell people, they laugh. But in a way, it feels good to know what I hope to be doing. But remember not to get bogged down in these plans; there's room for adjustments. We should have goals, but they can change to meet our needs. I guess what I'm saying is, planning can be good, as long as you don't get tied down to the point where you can't budge no matter how hard you try.
Personally, I'm going to enjoy the rest of this year while it lasts and try not to worry about colleges at the moment. But let's face it, I do think about them. And while I can't even get myself to think about what I want to do in the long term, I should realize that within the next two years, I should hope to figure it out. Maybe I won't be so quick to shut down these conversations over time, but maybe at the moment it's because I don't want to be stuck to one decision I make without know what else is out there. Because in the end, I don't want to be jumping around everywhere at the age of 24 still figuring out what I should do, yet I don't want to be close-minded about what's out there right now.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
An Inconvenient Truth: Technology is Good
Yes, this blog entry is probably way overdone, but I'm going to go ahead and do it anyway. Everyone goes on about how great technology is-we can connect with others, get things done more efficiently, etc, etc. And yes, I use technology a lot, trust me. Don't get me wrong-I do appreciate it and value its many uses, however, after a recent class discussion, I began to see many more drawbacks beyond the obvious, for those who aren't on equal footing. As much as I love surfing the web and getting carried away when I am bored, sometimes I question how beneficial technology really is for everyone.
Recently in Oracle, we were discussing editorial topics and came across poverty levels and then shifted more towards technology. We started talking about how 90% (or was it 95%?) of students in our school have access to computers at home. This blew my mind-how do students without computers they do their homework?
Every class of mine besides social studies and math are heavily computer based in terms of getting homework done. How do these kids succeed in school if they can't get their work done? I'd like to think that these students have special accommodations so that they can, but let's face it, people won't necessarily be vocal to teachers about not owning a computer, when most people around them have completely different financial situations.
Even if they do own one computer, what about their siblings who need to do just as much work on the same computer? We check the web for homework in many classes or in others find out what's due just the day before, so it's hard to plan ahead and decide who gets computer time. And many of us take for granted internet-just because you have a computer doesn't mean you have internet. And this doesn't solve many problems-you can't do online homework (so rather, after typing up your essay, you sit there and play solitaire).
And even with labs in school you can use, it can be hard to get rides home if your family struggles financially. When we talked about this in class, all the dots just kept connecting. There were so many layers to this problem. It makes me think now, are these students going to fall behind because of what they don't have access to?
What we accomplish with technology is great (and I'm sure it makes teacher's lives easier). We can have ease of access to numerous resources and links. However, if you're easily distracted when it comes to the internet like I am, you'll waste a couple hours without even realizing it and procrastinate and then get all stressed out. If we just did more work without computers (sorry trees, but everyone prints anyway) we might accomplish more. It'll give us ample opportunity to do more with our time and hopefully it can be ensured that everyone has the same resources at the least. So, while you read this from your computer, next time while you try to think of something to do while you're bored, instead of surfing the web pointlessly, read a book. Paint a picture. Chill outside. Ponder away.
Recently in Oracle, we were discussing editorial topics and came across poverty levels and then shifted more towards technology. We started talking about how 90% (or was it 95%?) of students in our school have access to computers at home. This blew my mind-how do students without computers they do their homework?
Every class of mine besides social studies and math are heavily computer based in terms of getting homework done. How do these kids succeed in school if they can't get their work done? I'd like to think that these students have special accommodations so that they can, but let's face it, people won't necessarily be vocal to teachers about not owning a computer, when most people around them have completely different financial situations.
Even if they do own one computer, what about their siblings who need to do just as much work on the same computer? We check the web for homework in many classes or in others find out what's due just the day before, so it's hard to plan ahead and decide who gets computer time. And many of us take for granted internet-just because you have a computer doesn't mean you have internet. And this doesn't solve many problems-you can't do online homework (so rather, after typing up your essay, you sit there and play solitaire).
And even with labs in school you can use, it can be hard to get rides home if your family struggles financially. When we talked about this in class, all the dots just kept connecting. There were so many layers to this problem. It makes me think now, are these students going to fall behind because of what they don't have access to?
What we accomplish with technology is great (and I'm sure it makes teacher's lives easier). We can have ease of access to numerous resources and links. However, if you're easily distracted when it comes to the internet like I am, you'll waste a couple hours without even realizing it and procrastinate and then get all stressed out. If we just did more work without computers (sorry trees, but everyone prints anyway) we might accomplish more. It'll give us ample opportunity to do more with our time and hopefully it can be ensured that everyone has the same resources at the least. So, while you read this from your computer, next time while you try to think of something to do while you're bored, instead of surfing the web pointlessly, read a book. Paint a picture. Chill outside. Ponder away.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Dialectics: Selflessness and Love
While watching the film Once in class, we discussed much about the selflessness and caring that the guy had for the girl. So much so that he took it beyond your typical love story: he let her go. Some people may think that to love someone you must always be attached to them, etc, etc. But one thing we focused a lot on was loving someone was doing the best for their needs. It's realizing that it's not just about you; it's what's best for the other person too. We talked a lot about this while discussing what the film taught us about love. The girl put her family first and did what was best for her daughter, not for her. In turn, the guy did this for the girl by letting her go and do what was right for her. Also, he did so especially through the piano. He met her needs and gave her a piece of him and their memories.
So, while we may watch many sappy love movies where everyone must pursue every means possible to be together in the end and whatnot, those don't get at the other side of love, selflessness. By doing what's best for someone else, you are showing that you understand them and care for their happiness more. And as people realize this, this idea can be reciprocated. So, perhaps if you do something better for someone, another person may come along and do something for you. In the girl's case, because she gave up her wantings for her daughter, the guy, who realized this aspect, had done something for her too, because he loved her. It's important to see the dialectic between love and selflessness so that every relationship isn't forced with someone pushing their way through to get what they want, but to compromise and want to see the other happy.
So, while we may watch many sappy love movies where everyone must pursue every means possible to be together in the end and whatnot, those don't get at the other side of love, selflessness. By doing what's best for someone else, you are showing that you understand them and care for their happiness more. And as people realize this, this idea can be reciprocated. So, perhaps if you do something better for someone, another person may come along and do something for you. In the girl's case, because she gave up her wantings for her daughter, the guy, who realized this aspect, had done something for her too, because he loved her. It's important to see the dialectic between love and selflessness so that every relationship isn't forced with someone pushing their way through to get what they want, but to compromise and want to see the other happy.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Blogging Around: Mary and Darrell
Mary's Best of Week: Side Conversations
Mary's post was about listening to side conversations around her and realizing that many of them aren't just about clothes, TV shows, or other classes, but many were deep, insightful, and relevant to the class discussion.
Mary, this is a well written post, and you made many good insights. I for one, talk so much, even though it's not always intentional, and completely agree that it's easier to listen when I'm not talking. But in a classroom full of 28 genius children, it's hard to always get to say what you want, because even when you think of something great, there are so many others who are the same. So, what do I do? Turn to someone next to me and tell them or just save it for break. Sure, my side conversations aren't always about a book we are reading, but when they are, I think it's quite acceptable to be having them.
Another aspect of your post that I really enjoyed is the hope that other people can do the same. I know I've done a post and even seen a few saying, 'What will come of our society?' but I like the optimism that comes out of your post because there are people who think out there.
Darrell's Captured Thought: A Life Without Opposites
This post was about the importance of opposites and how cannot fully experience things or understand them without hearing out both sides.
Darrell, this is such a cool insight! And I completely agree with it, because I've seen resonating instances too. How do we realize what success is without failure? How can we appreciate joy without having felt sadness? We can't fully experience things we take for granted all the time without understanding the opposite side. It's like an argument too: you shouldn't shut down the other side without hearing them out at least and then making a decision. We'd be ignorant without opposites, which is a great point you bring up. Nothing would be worth enjoying without seeing what else is out there. We'd be missing so much without opposites and you made a deep connection with this. And don't apologize for thinking of something that's so interesting!
Mary's post was about listening to side conversations around her and realizing that many of them aren't just about clothes, TV shows, or other classes, but many were deep, insightful, and relevant to the class discussion.
Mary, this is a well written post, and you made many good insights. I for one, talk so much, even though it's not always intentional, and completely agree that it's easier to listen when I'm not talking. But in a classroom full of 28 genius children, it's hard to always get to say what you want, because even when you think of something great, there are so many others who are the same. So, what do I do? Turn to someone next to me and tell them or just save it for break. Sure, my side conversations aren't always about a book we are reading, but when they are, I think it's quite acceptable to be having them.
Another aspect of your post that I really enjoyed is the hope that other people can do the same. I know I've done a post and even seen a few saying, 'What will come of our society?' but I like the optimism that comes out of your post because there are people who think out there.
Darrell's Captured Thought: A Life Without Opposites
This post was about the importance of opposites and how cannot fully experience things or understand them without hearing out both sides.
Darrell, this is such a cool insight! And I completely agree with it, because I've seen resonating instances too. How do we realize what success is without failure? How can we appreciate joy without having felt sadness? We can't fully experience things we take for granted all the time without understanding the opposite side. It's like an argument too: you shouldn't shut down the other side without hearing them out at least and then making a decision. We'd be ignorant without opposites, which is a great point you bring up. Nothing would be worth enjoying without seeing what else is out there. We'd be missing so much without opposites and you made a deep connection with this. And don't apologize for thinking of something that's so interesting!
Monday, March 1, 2010
Best of Week: Views in Heart of Darkness
One of the best discussions we had this week occurred after we listened to Achebe's opinions and began talking about an African's point of view in Heart of Darkness. We noticed how it isn't brought up, because in 1899, this wouldn't have been 'acceptable,' or rather, it would've been perceived as revolutionary and a huge shift. All because of the portrayal of Africans during this time period. Would we even be studying this book had it an African's view? Like Vicki had mentioned, the entire essence of the book would be changed because it wouldn't have the harsh reality and treatment illustrated in such manners. I completely agree that the entire novel would be different. However, would it be for the worst? Perhaps, but this thought sparked my mind into thinking what effects having an African's view would have on the novel.
After brainstorming possibilities-introduce a close slave, make the narrator black, make the harlequin black- it seemed that the most feasible was to make the narrator black. But wouldn't this change how we as readers perceive Marlow? We'd see him as immoral and cruel, while really, he's the character struggling to find the balance of morality in a world of immorality, whether he succeeds or not. This would change the entire meaning behind the novel in terms of this major theme. I believe that this wouldn't get across the reality from the time period. When we brought up how South African students would feel reading this book now compared to us, this would be flipped 180 degrees had the narrator been black. It would make us hate everything about Marlow while he is just on a journey trying to find his way. So did Conrad make the right decision? I would say yes, because that's what makes me feel these strong emotions while reading Heart of Darkness. It allows readers to envision the horror more so by seeing how the Africans' voices were unimportant at the time; how they were treated in terrible, terrible ways.
This discussion made me realize that there can be two rights. Yes, the essence of the novel would change, but there are possibilities to introduce an African's POV whether it be for better or worse. It made me see how multiple sides played out and in the end how my judgment ruled based on the ideas of both sides.
After brainstorming possibilities-introduce a close slave, make the narrator black, make the harlequin black- it seemed that the most feasible was to make the narrator black. But wouldn't this change how we as readers perceive Marlow? We'd see him as immoral and cruel, while really, he's the character struggling to find the balance of morality in a world of immorality, whether he succeeds or not. This would change the entire meaning behind the novel in terms of this major theme. I believe that this wouldn't get across the reality from the time period. When we brought up how South African students would feel reading this book now compared to us, this would be flipped 180 degrees had the narrator been black. It would make us hate everything about Marlow while he is just on a journey trying to find his way. So did Conrad make the right decision? I would say yes, because that's what makes me feel these strong emotions while reading Heart of Darkness. It allows readers to envision the horror more so by seeing how the Africans' voices were unimportant at the time; how they were treated in terrible, terrible ways.
This discussion made me realize that there can be two rights. Yes, the essence of the novel would change, but there are possibilities to introduce an African's POV whether it be for better or worse. It made me see how multiple sides played out and in the end how my judgment ruled based on the ideas of both sides.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Best of Week: Heart of Darkness
In my opinion, the most valuable discussion we had this week was when we talked about Mr. Kurtz's death and part three of Heart of Darkness. The discussion about morality really struck me, especially when we talked about efficiency versus morality. In addition, it was really interesting when we talked about Marlow's thoughts about Kurtz's death. On page 70, there was so much irony, because of the way Mr. Kurtz did business immorally, and the treatment of the Africans. Yet, Marlow said that Kurtz had a moral victory. There was even more skepticism because people live morally to gain knowledge while Kurtz found knowledge even though he had extremely immoral actions. This also illustrates the modern ideas in the book, because verbal irony is the language of the modern world as we discussed.
This really made me think deeper in terms of what thoughts Marlow has, and how they can be interpreted to find deeper meaning. Why would he say that Kurtz had a moral victory? What does this say about society? I felt that this discussion really hit the nail on the head because I really understood Marlow's feelings about Kurtz. In addition, after this, in social studies we watched a movie clip from about 1939. It showed Henry Stanley and Livingston in Congo, and how though Livingston was kind to the natives, he treated them like children. On the other hand, Stanley hit the natives and was unbelievably rude and towards them. These discussions really made me think about the difference of morality and immorality, how society interprets them, and what can be gained by living a moral life. Heart of Darkness really illustrates the brutality caused by immorality. It reinforces the importance of morality by seeing the terrible things that happen if people aren't moral.
This really made me think deeper in terms of what thoughts Marlow has, and how they can be interpreted to find deeper meaning. Why would he say that Kurtz had a moral victory? What does this say about society? I felt that this discussion really hit the nail on the head because I really understood Marlow's feelings about Kurtz. In addition, after this, in social studies we watched a movie clip from about 1939. It showed Henry Stanley and Livingston in Congo, and how though Livingston was kind to the natives, he treated them like children. On the other hand, Stanley hit the natives and was unbelievably rude and towards them. These discussions really made me think about the difference of morality and immorality, how society interprets them, and what can be gained by living a moral life. Heart of Darkness really illustrates the brutality caused by immorality. It reinforces the importance of morality by seeing the terrible things that happen if people aren't moral.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Connection: Post-Modernism and The Olympic Opening Ceremonies
Though one may not see it right away, there is definitely a connection between post-modernism and the opening ceremony of the Olympics. First of all, there is definitely a coexistence between voices, or what you might call pastiche. Between all of the nations coming out with their athletes and references to past athletes while lighting the cauldron, there is layering in time and space. This relationship matters because the past in the Olympics informs the future. By allowing the layers to overlap and nations to coexist, not only is there great entertainment, but there can be peace and coming together. Also, they time matters in terms of records in the Olympics and legends as well.
Another connection between post-modernism and the Olympic opening ceremonies is the post-modern idea that language is bureaucratic. Several times I'd hear English and French translations. This shows the structure in Canada with languages and how it organizes the people within geographic locations. The fact that they spoke in both languages, shows the efficiency, and they fact that this post-modern view is understood. This is important because they can inform each other. Had this view not existed, then there would be thousands of people speaking different French who wouldn't understand what went on (granted there were people from across the world without translation in their favor). This directly relates to multiple worlds and multiple points of view. People from across the world, from different cultures, different backgrounds all came together for the Olympics. This brings a lot to the table. One can see this as a case of strong nationalism and competition pushing the games forward, or one can see it as the coming together and people with different views putting them aside and coming together. Post modernism informs the ceremony by allowing people to see the coming together of people across the world. It's important for the IOC to recognize this because they can create better relations between people with different views and backgrounds through a common ground, sports.
Finally, the opening ceremony and post-modernism inform each other with a culture of images. With the dancing and fiddle playing, along with the Native American dances and polar bears, we were able to see Canadian culture through images. Spanning throughout different areas of the nation, we saw and learned a little about their culture through the visual representations. With the imagery and projections, there were many stories that were told. The clothes worn by people even told stories about their culture. The fact that the torch was carried and traveled in over 100 ways and by a variety of people, the connection between post-modernism and the ceremonies can be seen through the cultural imagery. There's so much out there that we can only learn about, and by the connection of ideas influenced by post-modernism and the Olympics, we can see how cultures and people in our modern world live and react. It's important to see how these ideas are played out so we can learn a bit about our society and how it's evolved over the Olympics.
Another connection between post-modernism and the Olympic opening ceremonies is the post-modern idea that language is bureaucratic. Several times I'd hear English and French translations. This shows the structure in Canada with languages and how it organizes the people within geographic locations. The fact that they spoke in both languages, shows the efficiency, and they fact that this post-modern view is understood. This is important because they can inform each other. Had this view not existed, then there would be thousands of people speaking different French who wouldn't understand what went on (granted there were people from across the world without translation in their favor). This directly relates to multiple worlds and multiple points of view. People from across the world, from different cultures, different backgrounds all came together for the Olympics. This brings a lot to the table. One can see this as a case of strong nationalism and competition pushing the games forward, or one can see it as the coming together and people with different views putting them aside and coming together. Post modernism informs the ceremony by allowing people to see the coming together of people across the world. It's important for the IOC to recognize this because they can create better relations between people with different views and backgrounds through a common ground, sports.
Finally, the opening ceremony and post-modernism inform each other with a culture of images. With the dancing and fiddle playing, along with the Native American dances and polar bears, we were able to see Canadian culture through images. Spanning throughout different areas of the nation, we saw and learned a little about their culture through the visual representations. With the imagery and projections, there were many stories that were told. The clothes worn by people even told stories about their culture. The fact that the torch was carried and traveled in over 100 ways and by a variety of people, the connection between post-modernism and the ceremonies can be seen through the cultural imagery. There's so much out there that we can only learn about, and by the connection of ideas influenced by post-modernism and the Olympics, we can see how cultures and people in our modern world live and react. It's important to see how these ideas are played out so we can learn a bit about our society and how it's evolved over the Olympics.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Metacognition: Semester 1 Reflection
This semester, I've found that I've analyzed things in different ways than I did before. Previously, I just thought of writing as something you merely do and that's just it. I mean I knew there was something to it, but I didn't think of it as musical. I thought it was part natural and part practice, which as you practice, you could say becomes more natural. I read it and love it, but I never thought of it musically. Learning about the rhythm of writing at first seemed like to much analyzing. But soon after, I realized that it had benefits. It made me look and think twice when reading.
For example, in The Kite Runner, the rhythm made me think of word choice and that made me realize how much thought was put into it. Like we talked about, rewriting all of it with different words just didn't have the same effect. By capturing this concept, I was able to understand it better. Though I haven't particularly concentrated on it in my writing, I have noticed that it's more concise and flows more. By learning about rhythm and noticing it while reading, they are slowly infuse into my work. By reading even more in the future and slowly concentrating more on flow, my writing can improve even more.
In addition, I've found that I look at poetry differently now. Before, I used to really dislike it, mainly the writing part but also reading it. I prefered novels and the like. However, just by flipping through the poetry book we got, I realized how many poems I remembered and realized how interesting they are to read. They have such great flow and use such wonderful vocabulary that anything else would just fall short. Especially after reading "Beauty" by Emily Dickinson, I realized how much meaning there is to so few lines. I've discovered that I do enjoy reading poetry, because it's so different and there's so many ways to interpret it. I'm not saying I like writing it because I haven't really given it a try and don't know how to achieve that quality and effect. Perhaps because I don't know the techniques or maybe because coming up with ideas for poetry makes my brain explode. But what I did discover is that whether it works or not, it's worth a try. Because in the end, I'll either realize I like reading it but writing it isn't my thing, or I'll see that I can do something different and learn more through that.
Through this semester in English, I've pretty much learned that I shouldn't shoot things down before I know more about them. Because if you look and give it a shot, there might be something you really enjoy. I can't say I like everything, so even if I try it out and don't like it, at least I can support my opinion of why not, and appreciate that I did make an effort.
For example, in The Kite Runner, the rhythm made me think of word choice and that made me realize how much thought was put into it. Like we talked about, rewriting all of it with different words just didn't have the same effect. By capturing this concept, I was able to understand it better. Though I haven't particularly concentrated on it in my writing, I have noticed that it's more concise and flows more. By learning about rhythm and noticing it while reading, they are slowly infuse into my work. By reading even more in the future and slowly concentrating more on flow, my writing can improve even more.
In addition, I've found that I look at poetry differently now. Before, I used to really dislike it, mainly the writing part but also reading it. I prefered novels and the like. However, just by flipping through the poetry book we got, I realized how many poems I remembered and realized how interesting they are to read. They have such great flow and use such wonderful vocabulary that anything else would just fall short. Especially after reading "Beauty" by Emily Dickinson, I realized how much meaning there is to so few lines. I've discovered that I do enjoy reading poetry, because it's so different and there's so many ways to interpret it. I'm not saying I like writing it because I haven't really given it a try and don't know how to achieve that quality and effect. Perhaps because I don't know the techniques or maybe because coming up with ideas for poetry makes my brain explode. But what I did discover is that whether it works or not, it's worth a try. Because in the end, I'll either realize I like reading it but writing it isn't my thing, or I'll see that I can do something different and learn more through that.
Through this semester in English, I've pretty much learned that I shouldn't shoot things down before I know more about them. Because if you look and give it a shot, there might be something you really enjoy. I can't say I like everything, so even if I try it out and don't like it, at least I can support my opinion of why not, and appreciate that I did make an effort.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Blogging Around Again
Alex's Dialectics: Ignorance and Bliss
Alex's post was about how ignorance is bliss. However, having knowledge is better. It talks about the importance of having knowledge, as well as your happiness is what you can make with it. It was interesting to read about the knowledge part because I never thought of that angle before. My comment follows:
I'm actually really fond of this post. I definitely agree that ignorance is bliss. Because really, if you aren't facing reality then what worries could you possibly have? If you don't know terrible things are happening, then you won't be affected emotionally and you'll remain in bliss.
But I also agree when you say you'll end up lonely and bored. Who would want to talk to you if you won't bother to listen? Knowledge truly is better because then you can form your own opinion and make what you will with that. Once you learn from other people and become less ignorant by informing yourself, you can be happier because then you'll be more confident in what you know. After the last STAND meeting, we hung around and Mr. Whipple said something along the lines of, 'Stupid people are happy as long as they don't know they are stupid.' (Or something very similar to that at the least.) And it's so true. But, having information available to you and turning that into knowledge gives you a sense of accomplishment.
Having information taken away though, must make people miserable because they won't be ignorant. They'll know there's something else out there that they can't grasp, which will make them explore something they may never get again. You can't take away knowledge, but you can take away information which allows you to gain knowledge, which can take away a feeling of happiness from someone.
Pat's Connection: King Lear and the Berlin Wall
Pat connects King Lear and the effects and fall of the Berlin Wall based on a New York Times article. He makes valid connections and I especially like how he talks about what Shakespeare did well and what he didn't do at all. It gives a fuller view with more perspectives, making it more interesting to read. My comment follows:
You're connections are really interesting and I never would've thought of it this way until reading your post. I definitely agree that you although everyone is affected in both cases, you can't see what exactly happens. The division between Goneril and Regan led to many deaths and a greater tragic affect in Lear. The Berlin Wall affected the lives of those who couldn't see their family on the other side. I like the connections you point out. However, there's one I thought I might add. Your first connection points out Regan and Goneril are horrible and are abusers of power. I think Cordelia can be thrown in there because in King Lear she is the loving one, the good daughter. In the real world, a unified Germany was better, because it united people and brought more peace and conflict resolution.
Alex's post was about how ignorance is bliss. However, having knowledge is better. It talks about the importance of having knowledge, as well as your happiness is what you can make with it. It was interesting to read about the knowledge part because I never thought of that angle before. My comment follows:
I'm actually really fond of this post. I definitely agree that ignorance is bliss. Because really, if you aren't facing reality then what worries could you possibly have? If you don't know terrible things are happening, then you won't be affected emotionally and you'll remain in bliss.
But I also agree when you say you'll end up lonely and bored. Who would want to talk to you if you won't bother to listen? Knowledge truly is better because then you can form your own opinion and make what you will with that. Once you learn from other people and become less ignorant by informing yourself, you can be happier because then you'll be more confident in what you know. After the last STAND meeting, we hung around and Mr. Whipple said something along the lines of, 'Stupid people are happy as long as they don't know they are stupid.' (Or something very similar to that at the least.) And it's so true. But, having information available to you and turning that into knowledge gives you a sense of accomplishment.
Having information taken away though, must make people miserable because they won't be ignorant. They'll know there's something else out there that they can't grasp, which will make them explore something they may never get again. You can't take away knowledge, but you can take away information which allows you to gain knowledge, which can take away a feeling of happiness from someone.
Pat's Connection: King Lear and the Berlin Wall
Pat connects King Lear and the effects and fall of the Berlin Wall based on a New York Times article. He makes valid connections and I especially like how he talks about what Shakespeare did well and what he didn't do at all. It gives a fuller view with more perspectives, making it more interesting to read. My comment follows:
You're connections are really interesting and I never would've thought of it this way until reading your post. I definitely agree that you although everyone is affected in both cases, you can't see what exactly happens. The division between Goneril and Regan led to many deaths and a greater tragic affect in Lear. The Berlin Wall affected the lives of those who couldn't see their family on the other side. I like the connections you point out. However, there's one I thought I might add. Your first connection points out Regan and Goneril are horrible and are abusers of power. I think Cordelia can be thrown in there because in King Lear she is the loving one, the good daughter. In the real world, a unified Germany was better, because it united people and brought more peace and conflict resolution.
Monday, November 16, 2009
iMedia: Jaywalking
"Americans are NOT stupid" (below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE
**Disclaimer: No copyright infringement intended, I don't own any of this material.
As hilarious as this all is, it shows how sad reality is. I'm not going to lie and say it's not funny at all, because I can't deny that I find it quite entertaining. However, this illustrates a serious problem in our society. Do people really not know these basic facts? I'm sure some are just trying to be funny, but really, most of these people don't know this information? How does this reflect on our society? As much as I love this, it's really pathetic to watch. I know these people must have learned this sometime in their youth, because it's mostly required in curriculum. It reflects on the education system because people just learn to pass tests and then they forget the facts. I'm guilty of this too, but seeing this makes me realize more and more that we should care about learning so we don't end up being ridiculously unintelligent when we are older. The even sadder part here is that not only do the people not know about history or current events, they don't even know about pop culture. We're notorious for reading tabloids and watching t.v., but apparently nobody learned even from that. The guy wearing the shirt didn't even know what it said. I know that these people may be the exception to the rule, but do we want to end up like that? I certainly don't. We should take this and learn that education and information is valuable and if we don't want to be ridiculed, we should care about it more.
In the "Americans are NOT stupid" video, it comes to show how we are viewed in the world. And to think these people can vote for role models and leaders? What will happen to us when uneducated people take part in current events and politics? Even a slight amount of uneducated individuals bring down the community. It makes our culture look so bad, and causes people throughout the world to think we aren't capable of anything. But if this is what they see about our culture, can we blame them? That's not for me to judge, but what we can and should do to change this is by educating ourselves. People should rather make a conscious effort to better themselves, because not only will they learn something they will carry forward in their lives, but they will feel better and have better esteem knowing that they are smart and are capable. From this media connection, we should just think twice before disregarding events and history, and other knowledge, because who wants to end up being mocked like this?
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Connection: King Lear and Richard III
Richard III and King Lear both relate because they have a character that goes against the natural boundaries. Richard relates to Edmund because both are trying to disrupt social order to be higher up on the hierarchy and to have more power. They are using Renaissance values to be more important individuals compared to their surrounding medieval characters. I think this is really important to understand because it shows how Shakespeare connects characters from two different plays and ties them together with their same values. Both cause physical harm to others. Richard III kills pretty much everyone in the royal family, while Edmund gets Edward banished and eventually lends a major part in Cornwall taking out Gloucester's eyes.
Both characters have to overcome their hardships to come out on top. Edmund is the illegitimate son of Gloucester, which he has to overcome by plotting and scheming. Once he gets Edward out of the picture and into disguise, he is able to be to 'good son.' This especially works since he convinced Gloucester that Edward wanted to kill him. Richard III only had one 'usable hand' in the play. He had to overcome his physical complications and the way people looked at him in order to gain power. I think the complications really shows how the two characters inform each other and the audience/readers because it can open up a new idea. It can cause one to think whether the complications caused them to perform the actions they did to become powerful, or whether they performed the actions in order to overcome their complications. In both though, power is key. It's important to understand this because power was a major motivation and it shows throughout the play what the hunt for more power does to a character and how their morals disintegrate. Therefore, even though Richard III and Edmund are from different plays, they both reinforce the conflict in their power struggle, while comparing their new ideas and way of thought to those around them.
They both inform beyond the obvious so that readers can question what leads to what and they can better understand Shakespeare's style and question his motives for the plots. I find this to be relevant because it makes his works more enjoyable to read because I can understand his style and what goes on, it allows me to make connections, and it resonates with other literature and plays.
Both characters have to overcome their hardships to come out on top. Edmund is the illegitimate son of Gloucester, which he has to overcome by plotting and scheming. Once he gets Edward out of the picture and into disguise, he is able to be to 'good son.' This especially works since he convinced Gloucester that Edward wanted to kill him. Richard III only had one 'usable hand' in the play. He had to overcome his physical complications and the way people looked at him in order to gain power. I think the complications really shows how the two characters inform each other and the audience/readers because it can open up a new idea. It can cause one to think whether the complications caused them to perform the actions they did to become powerful, or whether they performed the actions in order to overcome their complications. In both though, power is key. It's important to understand this because power was a major motivation and it shows throughout the play what the hunt for more power does to a character and how their morals disintegrate. Therefore, even though Richard III and Edmund are from different plays, they both reinforce the conflict in their power struggle, while comparing their new ideas and way of thought to those around them.
They both inform beyond the obvious so that readers can question what leads to what and they can better understand Shakespeare's style and question his motives for the plots. I find this to be relevant because it makes his works more enjoyable to read because I can understand his style and what goes on, it allows me to make connections, and it resonates with other literature and plays.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
360 Degrees: Leadership
Why does there need to be a leader? I believe that leadership is an important quality because they can guide others and be a role model. What makes leadership such an important quality? What is important in a leader? Can anyone be a leader? What determines who is a leader and what they are made up of? Why do we need leaders? In my opinion, we need leaders for society to function and work the way it does. There are always going to be the people who take action and those who are quiet and reserved. Leaders can help others find the middle ground by helping people take action and become involved. How can everyone be a leader? This is virtually impossible. If everyone is a leader, then who would be a follower? If everyone leads, then there would be too many clashes within and this would create a dysfunctional society. This can really be a dialectic between leaders and followers, but I'll continue asking questions to get the 360 degree view. Leaders need to be responsible, engaging, and should care. This list could really go on forever, but nobody wants to hear that. Why does society see leadership as an important feature? When and why does a leader go too far? I think this is when the power goes to their head and they get caught up in it. They stop caring about others and don't work to make things better. What happens when a leader goes to far? How can this be prevented? Why is it important to be a leader? How can someone find the middle ground between leadership and following? Should they?
Monday, October 12, 2009
Metacognition: The Kite Runner Essay
While working on The Kite Runner essay, a specific type of thinking that helped me create my essay was resonance. I first let my pen flow and brainstormed several thesis ideas and expanded on a few with thoughts that burst into my head. After a day or two, I looked back at my list and tried to see what I could find more levels with, what I could prove well, and what interested me. I finally lowered my list down to my final thesis, which was saying that Amir can only gain closure with Hassan through Sohrab. This required me to make several connections and use resonance to relate the scenes. By doing so, I was able to see how my evidence and connections came to life and really did make sense. I think this was an effective method for me. By writing down all the ideas and possible evidence that jumped right out at me while brainstorming, I was able to see what would work right off the bat. Then, by waiting, I was able to get a fresher perspective, so in reality, whatever theses that may have been awkward, I was able to realize that and eliminate them. This really helped me find the best thesis I came up with and one that I cared to write about.
I was really surprised that I was able to make deep and valid connections, and that I didn't have to rewrite my plan, because for once it all just clicked and made sense. It made me feel more confident since what I connected within the text really worked, and that I knew exactly what I was doing. I realized that I am better at understanding what goes on in books than I thought I was. I liked that my evidence proved my point, in both simple and obvious ways, but then I drew in on them to make it deep and worthwhile. I found that my writing can make an impact and I am able to prove a valid point. One thing I would like to work better on in is writing openers that are catchy and not just boring.
I was really surprised that I was able to make deep and valid connections, and that I didn't have to rewrite my plan, because for once it all just clicked and made sense. It made me feel more confident since what I connected within the text really worked, and that I knew exactly what I was doing. I realized that I am better at understanding what goes on in books than I thought I was. I liked that my evidence proved my point, in both simple and obvious ways, but then I drew in on them to make it deep and worthwhile. I found that my writing can make an impact and I am able to prove a valid point. One thing I would like to work better on in is writing openers that are catchy and not just boring.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Blogging Around
Taylor's Connection: The Kite Runner and Mean Girls
From what I read, I found the point of Taylor's blog entry was to show continuities in human thinking by connecting The Kite Runner with Mean Girls showing that time, location, and culture have no bearing, and that there remains a divide in society because of the brain's tendency to "chunk" information.
This was really a great blog post! Mean Girls being one of my favorite movies, I found it really interesting to see you make valid connections between it and The Kite Runner, and you explained them in depth too. I especially like how you connect it to the real, modern world in the end through your connections. As bad as the truth may be, I agree with you that there will always be people who will make the division continue.
Sam's Best of Week: Nature vs. Nurture
Sam's main focus was that we shouldn't judge someone because their culture and the way they were raised, what they were raised to believe (nurture) shapes them, and they might not know much better (although it certainly doesn't make what they do okay). She then draws on bettering oneself by judging their actions rather than judging others.
This is a great insight that you brought up. I definitely agree with your point that we should judge our own actions rather than judging others. You really took nature vs. nurture to another level; from Assef being a bully, to a circular character, and reflection in your own life. As horrible as his actions were, Nature vs. Nurture definitely shows that you shouldn't judge someone because it might not be their fault. If more people see this and try to better themselves, then that's really the only way to move forward in the world.
From what I read, I found the point of Taylor's blog entry was to show continuities in human thinking by connecting The Kite Runner with Mean Girls showing that time, location, and culture have no bearing, and that there remains a divide in society because of the brain's tendency to "chunk" information.
This was really a great blog post! Mean Girls being one of my favorite movies, I found it really interesting to see you make valid connections between it and The Kite Runner, and you explained them in depth too. I especially like how you connect it to the real, modern world in the end through your connections. As bad as the truth may be, I agree with you that there will always be people who will make the division continue.
Sam's Best of Week: Nature vs. Nurture
Sam's main focus was that we shouldn't judge someone because their culture and the way they were raised, what they were raised to believe (nurture) shapes them, and they might not know much better (although it certainly doesn't make what they do okay). She then draws on bettering oneself by judging their actions rather than judging others.
This is a great insight that you brought up. I definitely agree with your point that we should judge our own actions rather than judging others. You really took nature vs. nurture to another level; from Assef being a bully, to a circular character, and reflection in your own life. As horrible as his actions were, Nature vs. Nurture definitely shows that you shouldn't judge someone because it might not be their fault. If more people see this and try to better themselves, then that's really the only way to move forward in the world.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Connection: The Kite Runner and Harry Potter
When you first hear Harry Potter and The Kite Runner, you must be thinking,"How in the world are these two related?" One's about Harry saving the wizarding world (my five word summary definitely doesn't give enough credit to the well crafting of the book) while the other's about Amir trying to get redemption and closure for his actions, or lack of. However, if you look close enough, there is a definite connection and relation between the two due to their characters.
Voldemort/Assef
The relation between Assef and Voldemort is rather clear-cut. They are both the villains of the novels. But it goes beyond that in their 'structure of evilness.' Voldemort uses both fear as well as gain to attract his followers, or Death Eaters. They fear that if they don't join him, bad things will happen to them or they will be killed. He also promises them that if they join him, when evil triumphs, they will be honored in society. Assef uses similar tactics. Wali and Kamal are afraid that it they don't follow Assef's orders, they will end up in trouble next. This is demonstrated in the rape scene when they think it's wrong to rape Hassan, yet Assef convinces, or forces, them to hold Hassan down. They do so because it's rather Hassan than themselves. Also, Assef uses personal gain to convince Wali and Kamal, just like Voldemort. Since he's a Pashtun and in the higher social class, Wali and Kamal follow so they can also be looked upon, whereas if they were 'defending' or even 'friends' with a Hazara, they would be spat upon in their society. Both characters, Voldemort and Assef, should inform each other by showing that ruthless leaders don't always tell the truth to get to their position. Peter Pettigrew had to sacrifice himself after he transfigured back into a human to make up for lost years with Voldemort. But in the end, the good side triumphed anyway. Kamal experienced a similar case because was raped and killed too, showing that evil isn't the right way. And Sohrab shot Assef with a slingshot in the eye, so it shows that he was toppled, just like Voldemort.
Draco Malfoy/Amir
Malfoy and Amir have a more complicated relation. What is the balance of good and evil in each of the characters? Malfoy was supposed to kill Dumbledore according to Voldemort's plan, but he couldn't because he didn't have the guts to commit such a horrible crime. However, he didn't do anything to stop Snape from killing Dumbledore because he was too afraid of what would happen to him. This was a similar case for Amir. He didn't actually rape Hassan, but he didn't do anything to help or stop it either. In addition, both set up the scenarios for the crime to take place. Malfoy protracted (vocab word!) Dumbledore's stay in the Astronomy Tower, and this bought time for the Death Eaters to arrive. In the same way, Amir set up Hassan because he had to be rescued by Hassan, which built up tension between the two sides. In the end, because Assef couldn't do anything to Amir, he did it to Hassan instead, as a reaction to what he felt about Amir and his hatred. The two characters can learn to balance their actions with their environments, which can lead to a better outcome, with a more positive effect. They should inform that one's actions do play a large role, and that one should think before they act, so a drastic change doesn't negatively affect the lives of those around them.
'Good Wizard'/Hassan
One problem with Hassan's relation to a Harry Potter character is how they are viewed. I began typing Harry, but realized that Harry is looked up to as a hero, while people in Afghan societies would've looked down on Hassan according to the novel. He could be Harry in the sense that he keeps on saving Amir and getting him out of trouble, but I didn't think this covered all sides of the relation. So I tried to connect him to Ron next. Unfortunately, the problem here was that Ron and Harry are best friends, and I didn't see Amir as the benevolent/rescuer from the Dark Wizards sort of character. So I guess if anything Hassan would be like Neville Longbottom (except that minor detail that Hassan isn't clumsy). He always has his friends' backs in the end, just like Neville, who although couldn't execute everything perfectly, he worked hard, and came through for his friends. Then I say an even better relation between the characters. Neville could've been the chosen one. Hassan could've been the 'chosen one' too. Neville could've grown to save the wizarding world and be the hero in the end. Just like Hassan. He was also Baba's son, so he could've been the perfect son in all the ways he is, as well as being 'socially correct' too, for lack of a better term. This insight is quite important because it shows that there are deeper connections beyond the obvious that I learned through digging around a little, as well as you may not look to be the obvious choice or talented one, but inside everyone, there is something that is worth a whole lot more. There's always a star-like quality, even though you may not be the prized possession or main hero.
Voldemort/Assef
The relation between Assef and Voldemort is rather clear-cut. They are both the villains of the novels. But it goes beyond that in their 'structure of evilness.' Voldemort uses both fear as well as gain to attract his followers, or Death Eaters. They fear that if they don't join him, bad things will happen to them or they will be killed. He also promises them that if they join him, when evil triumphs, they will be honored in society. Assef uses similar tactics. Wali and Kamal are afraid that it they don't follow Assef's orders, they will end up in trouble next. This is demonstrated in the rape scene when they think it's wrong to rape Hassan, yet Assef convinces, or forces, them to hold Hassan down. They do so because it's rather Hassan than themselves. Also, Assef uses personal gain to convince Wali and Kamal, just like Voldemort. Since he's a Pashtun and in the higher social class, Wali and Kamal follow so they can also be looked upon, whereas if they were 'defending' or even 'friends' with a Hazara, they would be spat upon in their society. Both characters, Voldemort and Assef, should inform each other by showing that ruthless leaders don't always tell the truth to get to their position. Peter Pettigrew had to sacrifice himself after he transfigured back into a human to make up for lost years with Voldemort. But in the end, the good side triumphed anyway. Kamal experienced a similar case because was raped and killed too, showing that evil isn't the right way. And Sohrab shot Assef with a slingshot in the eye, so it shows that he was toppled, just like Voldemort.
Draco Malfoy/Amir
Malfoy and Amir have a more complicated relation. What is the balance of good and evil in each of the characters? Malfoy was supposed to kill Dumbledore according to Voldemort's plan, but he couldn't because he didn't have the guts to commit such a horrible crime. However, he didn't do anything to stop Snape from killing Dumbledore because he was too afraid of what would happen to him. This was a similar case for Amir. He didn't actually rape Hassan, but he didn't do anything to help or stop it either. In addition, both set up the scenarios for the crime to take place. Malfoy protracted (vocab word!) Dumbledore's stay in the Astronomy Tower, and this bought time for the Death Eaters to arrive. In the same way, Amir set up Hassan because he had to be rescued by Hassan, which built up tension between the two sides. In the end, because Assef couldn't do anything to Amir, he did it to Hassan instead, as a reaction to what he felt about Amir and his hatred. The two characters can learn to balance their actions with their environments, which can lead to a better outcome, with a more positive effect. They should inform that one's actions do play a large role, and that one should think before they act, so a drastic change doesn't negatively affect the lives of those around them.
'Good Wizard'/Hassan
One problem with Hassan's relation to a Harry Potter character is how they are viewed. I began typing Harry, but realized that Harry is looked up to as a hero, while people in Afghan societies would've looked down on Hassan according to the novel. He could be Harry in the sense that he keeps on saving Amir and getting him out of trouble, but I didn't think this covered all sides of the relation. So I tried to connect him to Ron next. Unfortunately, the problem here was that Ron and Harry are best friends, and I didn't see Amir as the benevolent/rescuer from the Dark Wizards sort of character. So I guess if anything Hassan would be like Neville Longbottom (except that minor detail that Hassan isn't clumsy). He always has his friends' backs in the end, just like Neville, who although couldn't execute everything perfectly, he worked hard, and came through for his friends. Then I say an even better relation between the characters. Neville could've been the chosen one. Hassan could've been the 'chosen one' too. Neville could've grown to save the wizarding world and be the hero in the end. Just like Hassan. He was also Baba's son, so he could've been the perfect son in all the ways he is, as well as being 'socially correct' too, for lack of a better term. This insight is quite important because it shows that there are deeper connections beyond the obvious that I learned through digging around a little, as well as you may not look to be the obvious choice or talented one, but inside everyone, there is something that is worth a whole lot more. There's always a star-like quality, even though you may not be the prized possession or main hero.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Best of Week: The Kite Runner 9/14-9/18
Culture in The Kite Runner
In my opinion, one of the most important things we talked about this week is about the culture that is shown in the book. For example on page 38 it says, "Years later, I learned an English word for the creature that Assef was, a word for which a good Farsi equivalent does not exist: 'sociopath.'" I believe this quote tells a lot about the culture, by showing that there isn't an equivalent and that such a thing doesn't exist in their culture. Does this mean that such a drastic condition for a person doesn't exist? Is Amir over-emphasizing the use of the word sociopath? This also shows the power of words, which relates to my last post about Hassan learning new words and working hard to better understand the culture through reading.
Another instance when culture plays a large role is when General Taheri throws out Amir's story. It's important that Amir didn't say anything or pick up the story in his presence because in this culture, more so than others, respecting elders is so important, and Amir realized it was important to respect Soraya's dad. If he didn't then he probably wouldn't have gotten Soraya's hand in marriage when he asked for it from the General. This also demonstrates the connection between micro and macro, because it shows how Hosseini put these micro characters into the macro-ness of the world if you will, and then moved them to a new setting. Yet, the macro-ness of their culture affected their lives so much, that they integrated it into their new surroundings. Although it may have be a micro part compared to the larger surroundings and American culture they were surrounded by, it was a large part of their daily life, which shows how culture was practiced, especially when they live in an Afghan community in America.
Finally, culture is shown as a struggle throughout the novel in Hassan and Amir's friendship. There is such a large gap between Hazaras and Pashtuns that Amir can't make up his mind whether or not they are friends. It shows that there is a large cultural division between the two groups and how that plays into their daily lives. It shows how the two groups cannot quite be seen in public, which Assef makes very clear. Culture therefore, plays an important role throughout The Kite Runner in various ways.
In my opinion, one of the most important things we talked about this week is about the culture that is shown in the book. For example on page 38 it says, "Years later, I learned an English word for the creature that Assef was, a word for which a good Farsi equivalent does not exist: 'sociopath.'" I believe this quote tells a lot about the culture, by showing that there isn't an equivalent and that such a thing doesn't exist in their culture. Does this mean that such a drastic condition for a person doesn't exist? Is Amir over-emphasizing the use of the word sociopath? This also shows the power of words, which relates to my last post about Hassan learning new words and working hard to better understand the culture through reading.
Another instance when culture plays a large role is when General Taheri throws out Amir's story. It's important that Amir didn't say anything or pick up the story in his presence because in this culture, more so than others, respecting elders is so important, and Amir realized it was important to respect Soraya's dad. If he didn't then he probably wouldn't have gotten Soraya's hand in marriage when he asked for it from the General. This also demonstrates the connection between micro and macro, because it shows how Hosseini put these micro characters into the macro-ness of the world if you will, and then moved them to a new setting. Yet, the macro-ness of their culture affected their lives so much, that they integrated it into their new surroundings. Although it may have be a micro part compared to the larger surroundings and American culture they were surrounded by, it was a large part of their daily life, which shows how culture was practiced, especially when they live in an Afghan community in America.
Finally, culture is shown as a struggle throughout the novel in Hassan and Amir's friendship. There is such a large gap between Hazaras and Pashtuns that Amir can't make up his mind whether or not they are friends. It shows that there is a large cultural division between the two groups and how that plays into their daily lives. It shows how the two groups cannot quite be seen in public, which Assef makes very clear. Culture therefore, plays an important role throughout The Kite Runner in various ways.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Carry It Forward: The Kite Runner
"Just because something is hard, doesn't mean you shouldn't try; It just means you should try harder."
-Unknown
While reading The Kite Runner, a I noticed a constant theme about irony and curiosity. Through Hassan's actions, I learned about not giving up and working hard, which is a theme I will carry forward. Hassan is illiterate but he constantly shows a growing interest in Amir's stories. He continuously asks questions and tries to comprehend new words in order to expand his vocabulary. Hassan doesn't give up on the stories just because he might not know a word, in fact, that pushes him and gives him the drive to learn what it means. For example, on page 28, it says, "But despite his illiteracy, or maybe because of it, Hassan was drawn to the mystery of words, seduced by a secret world forbidden to him." This shows that Hassan wanted to better himself by learning more and becoming a more knowledgeable being. Later in the passage, it explains how Hassan was able to solve the riddles more quickly than Amir. This shows that even if you have everything handed to you, you might not be right. Hassan wants to learn because he is so curious to see what he is missing out on. He makes a conscious effort to learn, whereas Amir just tries to trick Hassan. Amir isn't working hard to learn, he just wants to make Hassan feel inferior.
This is also shown through irony. Hassan's curiosity after reading Amir's story. On page 34, it says, "It appeared that on the same night I had learned about one of writing's objectives, irony, I would also be introduced to one of its pitfalls: the Plot Hole. Taught by Hassan, of all people....illiterate Hazara?" His innocence and curiosity allowed him to teach Amir something important every writer should know, even though Amir thought Hassan was being rude since he learned something from an uneducated servant. If Amir doesn't learn these skills and try to improve his writing, he can't get better, and that's because he isn't working towards it. Through curiosity, Hassan wanted to learn more. He worked hard to learn more, which I think is definitely an important topic to carry forward. By working hard, you can improve your skills and get new talents. This can allow you to become better at things you want to improve in. If Hassan gave up on stories because he couldn't read, he would lose his creativity and problem-solving skills. But because his curiosity allowed him to want to know more, he learned more words and life lessons through the tales. This shows the benefits of working hard, because if you give up, you can never become better. If you constantly work hard and put in effort, you will have a better shot at achieving your goals and will learn more through your experiences, even if you aren't successful every time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
