"Bright Future", "Big Expectations"

     You were always told you were destined for something great. Your teachers loved you, believed in you, supported you. You took all the advanced classes. You signed up for all the extracurriculars. You did the community service. You spoke well, dressed well, worked well. You had everything going for you. Where did you go wrong?

-

     6 A.M. and the alarm clock won’t stop ringing. You threw a pillow at it a few minutes ago but for some reason the stupid thing just gets louder. Mornings used to be your favorite time of day. Now, you couldn’t hate them more. You get up, brush your teeth, wash your face, jam your glasses on, and throw on some clothes. You used to put more effort into how you looked. Now, you don’t see the point. Breakfast is a granola bar and bottle of water.

- 

     At work you take the stairs up to the second floor. It’s difficult. On one hand it all seems so damn pointless. On the other, you feel you have an obligation to keep working and striving. Your parents worked so hard to give you this chance. It can’t have all been a waste. You can’t accept that. You won’t accept that.

     So, every morning you drag yourself out of bed and head over to the office. It’s tedious and boring job, but it gives you something to do. It’s better than sitting at home hoping someone, somewhere is willing to take a chance on an unknown, inexperienced journalist. Somedays the situation seems almost comical. You grew up your whole life with this map. You had it all planned: school, internships, study abroad, work experience, career, marriage, kids, death. Somewhere along the way your map got ripped to shreds. You had the kid before marriage, failed marriage before career, and “career” ended up being working at any place willing to hire you.

-

     At lunch you see a man propose to his girlfriend. She says yes and then cries. You used to laugh at people who would call ventures away from the plan, “happy faults.” Anything deviating from the plan was wrong. But after having Michael, you began to understand. He was the bright, shining light in the sea of darkness that became your life. You haven’t seen him in two years, but his father calls to tell you everything that’s happening in his life. You’re not a bad parent, you tell yourself, you’re doing this for him. You’ve been free and clean for almost 6 months now.  You can’t wait to see him again. You don’t want to jinx it, but you know your little boy is destined for something great.

You don’t want to put the same pressure on him that your parents put on you. They were crazy, you know. Anything less than an A and you slept outside. They weren’t proud when you were valedictorian of your class, it was expected. You barely ever saw them. They were either working or needed "quiet time": no time for you. You used to tell yourself they just showed their love differently. Then, you wondered if they even loved you at all. You don't talk to them anymore.

- 

     1 P.M. and back to the office. You dread it, but there’s also some pride hidden there. You’re working for your life, for your son. Maybe some day you’ll piece your map back together. Maybe some day your life will reroute back to the course you had planned for. But until then, this is your life. You play the hand you’re dealt.

We, Still, Like Our Own Best.

In Jane Austen’s Persuasion, the author wastes no time to begin satirizing. We are first introduced to Sir Walter, the wealthy, although frivolous father of Elizabeth, Anne, and Mary. Sir Walter is depicted as being self-absorbed, selfish and, pretentious. He is not evil, he is simply old-fashioned. Austen uses his character to poke fun at the declining aristocracy. Sir Walter is a very impractical man who practices lavish living to maintain his appearance. However, his refusal to let go of this way of life threatens his family’s future. His situation is comical, and Austen uses heavy satire to express the predicament of being unable to “devise any means of lessening their expenses without compromising their dignity, or relinquishing their comforts” (Austen 11). Austen attacks Sir Walter as he upholds the importance of appearance and elitism. Sir Walter greatly contrasts to Wentworth, a self-made, manly man. Wentworth personifies Austen’s idea of a modern gentleman. 

Austen also pokes fun at how rigid her society’s structure is. The only way for social mobility in Austen’s world is through marriage, or by joining the navy. However, Sir Walter looks down even on the navy saying “I should be sorry if any friend of mine were belonging to it” (Austen 16). Austen also challenges the separation of work between a husband and wife. She advocates for a more equal marriage. Admiral and Mrs. Croft exemplify this marriage in the way they drive their carriage. Admiral Croft and his wife drive the carriage sitting next to each other and share the responsibility. 

Despite all this, Austen doesn’t entirely abandon ideas of class, and hierarchy. Her protagonist, Anne, is in no way a perfect egalitarian (not that I expect her to be). Although she strays from acting like typical women at the time, she is not catty, or hysterical. In fact, when Louisa smacks her head, Anne manages to keep a level head and care for her instead.  However, she also greatly dislikes Mrs. Clay simply because she is very against the idea of her father marrying a woman of lower class. Anne remains dutiful to her family. Instead of marrying the love of her life, she broke off the engagement because her father and Lady Russell did not think it was appropriate. When she finally does marry Wentworth, it is now safe. Wentworth has risen in wealth and social standing in the previous years, and thus, the marriage does not challenge the class system. Despite ideas of deviating from the social standards, Anne still returns to her known realm and doesn’t exactly step out of tradition.

Works Cited:

 Austen, Jane. Persuasion. New York: Knopf, 1992. Print. 

Friend Or Fiend?

 The job of a parent is in no way an easy task. The responsibility involved in bringing another human into the world — raising it, teaching it values, caring for it —can often seem an overwhelming mission. So, if you, when the parenting time comes, feel apprehensive about undertaking such a responsibility, or want to feel better about your own parenting skills, look no further than Joyce Carol Oates “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?”. Ironically, the title of the story happens to be the exact questions the parents of Connie, our protagonist, never seem to be concerned with asking. And, this is just the beginning of their parenting fails. 

A child’s actions and beliefs tend to be a reflection of those of their parents. Thus, Connie’s narcism and emphasis on the importance of beauty stems from her mother’s own superficiality. Despite the constant tension between Connie and her mother, Connie is convinced “her mother really prefers her over her…sister…because she [Connie]  is prettier” (Wegs 101). From her mother, Connie learns “real value lies in beauty” (Wegs 101). With this view, Connie is interested in only the glamorous and is consequently obsessed with how she looks. She had a “habit of craning her neck to glance into mirrors…to make sure her own was all right” (Oates 1). Later, when she would meet Arnold Friend, her allure towards the glamorous and flashy: the golden jalopy, reflective sunglasses, dazzling smile, would make her slow to see just how dangerous this stranger was. 

While Connie’s mother was the embodiment of a bad role model, Connie’s father provided no guidance at all. He went to work, came home, ate dinner, went to bed. He “didn’t bother talking to them much”, and definitely took very little interest in Connie’s whereabouts (Oates 1). Further, since “none of them bothered with church”, Connie lacked adequate moral guidance in the absence of parental guidance. Thus, she turned towards pop culture. The values in the music she listened to, and the movies she watched became her own values. Connie, as a naive and abandoned youth, is then taught to believe in romantic love and youthful beauty, which only adds to her superficial views.

Connie’s incorrect views reach a critical point when instead of perceiving Arnold Friend as a threat, she views him as the “embodiment of the teenage ideals celebrated in pop songs” (Oates 102). Connie’s only roadmap of life, the fantasy worlds she sees on the screen, leads her astray because she has only ever seen life through rose-tinted glasses. Further analysis of the story, albeit perhaps far-fetched, suggests the lack of moral guidance in Connie’s life, whether religious or folk-related, causes her to be unfamiliar with demonic or evil manifestations, and thus, fails to recognize the wolf in sheep’s clothing, or rather, the fiend impersonating a friend. 

Works Cited:

Oates, Joyce Carol. “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” New Brunswick: RutgersUniversity Press, 2002. Print.

Wegs, Joyce M. “’Don’t You Know Who I Am?’: The Grotesque in Oate’s ‘Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?’” Journal of Narrative Technique 5, 1995. Print.

Youtube and Chill?

In Rushkoff’s Present Shock, he warns about the collapse of the narrative. He begins with the premise that stories are important because they “create a sense of context” (Rushkoff 13). In fact, historically, all cultures told stories. These stories help with cognitive organization and create a feeling of comfort and relative security. For example, our knowledge of history helps us put the present in perspective and thus, comforting us. However, as technology and new inventions began to infiltrate our world further, our narratives couldn’t keep up. This phenomenon then contributed to the narrative collapse.

Traditional linear stories create a character that the audience identifies with, gives him a problem, and then has him find a solution. Classic examples include Star Wars and Dora the Explorer. With the creation of the remote control, switching channels became easier and more “worth it”, yielding television’s lost ability to tell stories. Shows, like Beavis and Butt-head, “were some of the first to speak directly to the channel surfer” (Rushkoff 23). The remote control allowed “today’s television viewer” to  “move from show to show, capturing important moments on the fly” (Rushkoff 22). As time went on this effect was only amplified.

In 2015, people often fulfill their need for entertainment through Youtube videos. These videos have come to take the place of shows. Instead of watching a “traditional” story, viewers will simply watch someone talk to them with jumpcuts to more “action” scenes. These videos lessen the sense of loneliness. Further, videos are often short, ranging from 5-25 minutes. A viewer can watch a quick video, and then move on with their life. Plus, because these videos don’t follow a tradition story arc, they can be about anything, leaving endless possibilities for content, and creating a show/channel that will continue for a long time. Also due to the lack of a traditional linear arc, a person can take up watching a channel or video at almost anytime and still understand. 

Rushkoff explains, “the new challenge for writers is to generate the sense of captivity, as well as the sensations and insights, of traditional narrative— but to do so without the luxury of a traditional storyline” (Rushkoff 31). With many Youtube videos, the audience is captured and enjoy the speed as the Youtuber jumps from one topic to another. Further, the on-demand aspect, as well as a general lack of commercials contribute to the presentism aspect of this type of narrative. People cram everything into the present into small spaces of time, and that is exactly what Youtube videos do. 

Today, it is commonplace to have stories that do not follow the linear story arcs of traditional narratives. In Latin class, our textbooks are from the Cambridge Latin Course. With these textbooks, we learn the language through a series of stories. But even these stories do not always come with a linear arc. We could be reading about Salvius and his murder plots and all of a sudden jump to the soldiers Modestus and Strythio and learn about their antics, and then go back to killing the king.
 The jumps in the stories we read and write add spontaneity to them and keep the audience interested and engaged. Although Rushkoff claims this creates the collapse of the narrative, I am not entirely sure it is all that dramatic. We continue to tell stories, but we find new ways to do so. 

Works Cited: 

Rushkoff, Douglas. Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now. Print.

"Paris Is Always A Good Idea."

The life of Ernest Hemingway portrayed in A Moveable Feast is something of a snapshot of a happier time in his life. In Paris, he had his beautiful wife, met beautiful people, ate and drank beautifully and wrote beautifully. However, despite the time being “happier”, Hemingway was still a man plagued by his depression. His story is narrated, some times more than others, as if he is simply a bystander in his own life. Events occur around him, and some to him, but he does not seem to react to them. An example of the disconnect between Ernest and the world, thus allowing the reader to feel the disconnect as well, occurs when Hemingway has a jar of opium thrown at him. Ernest recalls, “Monsieur Dunning…took the jar and…threw it at me. It struck me on the chest or shoulder and rolled down the stairs” (Hemingway 111). Following being hit with a jar and profane names, Ernest simply asks “you are sure you don’t need it?” (Hemingway 111). Ernest had been hit by multiple objects but he calmly walks out the door and moves on with his life. It is almost as if he just does not care enough to bother. He seems to act that way in regards to many events occurring in his life. 

A further example of Hemingway’s somberness manifests when Hadley leaves. Ernest spends all of some five lines about how the woman he loved left him. In those five lines, he does not seem angry or even upset at her. He continues to loathe himself, saying Hadley was with a better man than he could ever be. He seems very matter of fact about the whole situation. Hadley is gone. Life goes on. Ernest exudes the presence of a sad, lost, and confused puppy as he attempts to navigate through his life.

An aide to the depiction of Ernest as confused is the more haphazard organization of the book. The plot of the story does not follow any linear progression but jumps around from event to event, almost as if the memories would cross Hemingway’s mind in the future as he wrote and he simply jotted them down as they came along. He jumps around to big events in his life, but he does not go into them in detail. His affair with Pauline, Hadley leaving, or even the outcomes of the Bel Espirit. Future Hemingway does not seem to be all that devoted to his story. He is just telling whatever he feels like at the moment and then moving on. 

  Despite seeming uninterested in his own telling of his own story, Hemingway writes detailed descriptions of the characters he meets. He used intense figurative language to describe average scenes. Ernest describes the Closerie de Lilas as being “warm inside in the winter and in the spring and fall it was very fine outside with the tables under the shade of trees on the statue where Marshal Neys was, and the square, rectangular tables under the big awnings along the boulevard” (Hemingway 73). Perhaps Hemingway’s only reason for being so detailed is his background as a writer, but it seems more likely that he uses details to distract from having to think about the more difficult things such as the issues he hides details from. 

I believe we read this book in order to be exposed to writing in which the style of the novel deeply affects the meaning and audience. Hemingway’s decisions to write in a disorganized, disconnected fashion allows the reader to better understand the way Ernest feels about the world. At face value it seems to be a story of drunk artists, but at a deeper level the reader sees the complexities of life through the stylistic choices Hemingway makes.










Works Cited:

 Hemingway, Ernest. A Moveable Feast. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1964. Print.

Next!

As I write this blogpost, I am exhausted. My primary thought was to just get the post over with: answer the question, get the grade. Then, I can move on to doing other homework. This situation is applicable in schools across the board, regardless of public or private, because it has to do with the mindset schools are creating. We define ourselves as grades and scores, and in the process limit our learning to learning for grades and scores. We stop caring about knowledge and education, and instead focus on what gets us the grade, what gets us the score, and what gets us into college.
 
We have become so reliant on a system of numbers because we know of no, or are unwilling to create an, other system to test what we know. A huge issue with teaching for tests is the fact that they end up measuring not how smart a person is but, “how much smartness someone has” (Postman 183). In order to be “smart”, a student must be able to use concepts in different situations, a skill that is often lost in the need to pass basic tests. In classes like math and chemistry, when pressed for time, I will simply memorize a process for solving something instead of understanding the concept, because I need the good grade. 

Further, in this test-based society, we end up decreasing diversity in schools because we are unwilling to hear stories, and other ways of doing things. In public schools, the use of “Common Core” learning, promotes one way of doing something and one curriculum. This strict curriculum is unable to charter to the needs of different schools in different areas. Teachers will use textbooks and have students copy notes. Students can only ask a few questions because teachers are focused on getting through all the material, as well as catering to the majority of students. Postman finds textbooks to be “enemies of education”, because they promote “trivial learning” (Postman 116). Education comes down to an equation: memorize facts + take exams = good score. 

However, the question then arises, what’s the point? How does knowing these facts in anyway prepare students for the real world? Further, if a student already knows what they want to do for their future, is it necessary for them to take “required” classes they don’t need, if they demonstrate proficiency in them? Another question: how would proficiency be demonstrated? Yet another test? The twenty-first century has created a public based on quick results. People are interested in learning material to get a good score and then moving on. No one has time for the process that learning and education should be. We become so caught up in the trivial stuff, they begin to seem increasingly important. 

Works Cited: 

 Postman, Neil. The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School. New York: Knopf, 1995.  Print.  

A Zebra, Hyena, Orangutan, And Tiger Walk Into A Bar...

I read the book Life of Pi when I was in fifth grade, and quickly fell in love. The twist ending shocked, bewildered and fascinated me all at the same time. The story begins with Pi, a young Indian boy, trying to explain his adherence to several faiths. Our very first introduction to our protagonist shows him as a peaceful, loving, do-gooding kid. This image is very different from the ferocious tiger he becomes.

Sigmund Freud created his Personality Theory based around three central ideas: the id, ego, and superego. His “studies of the unconscious revealed that people's actions were often the result of 'animal' urges or instincts” (Gaarder). When we are active, and secure, in society, our actions and “animal instincts” are better repressed. However, in dire life and death situations, the animal within us makes an appearance. So, how did the sweet boy we are introduced to turn into Richard Parker? Perhaps the answer lies in Freud’s id, ego, and superego.

In Martel’s story, Richard Parker is the literal embodiment of the id. If you have read the book, you know Richard Parker was not an actual tiger, but a symbol of the person Pi was forced to become in order to survive. His id, unconsciously driven by his desire to survive, influenced his conscious actions that allowed him to survive. Freud believed irrational impulses can be an expression of basic drives or needs. When Pi first encounters the cook (the hyena), his superego is still present and controlling, he can only stand by and watch as his mother is murdered. However, in the second encounter, the cook isn't so fortunate. Pi’s id was ready. Richard Parker killed the hyena swiftly and terribly, and from then on our sweet little boy must deal with the belief that he has killed someone.

Pi was forced to come to terms with the loss of his father and his mother, He then witnessed the murder of a man and killed another man. All these deaths, the horrors he underwent and committed, “can be such a tremendous strain”, especially for the superego, and thus, it is repressed (Gaarder). However, “whatever is repressed in this way will try of its own accord to reenter consciousness”, and thus, the creation of Richard Parker (Gaarder).




Works Cited:

"SOPHIE'S WORLD A Novel About the History of Philosophy." Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
<http://192.184.80.244/philosophy-plain/resources/SophiesWorld.pdf>.

 Martel, Yann. Life of Pi: A Novel. New York: Harcourt, 2001. Print.