Quarter 2 Question 2

The movie On The Waterfront displays a wide variety of beliefs concerning what makes a traitor and what makes a whistle blower. On one hand, prominent mob members such as Johnny Friendly strongly believe that anyone who decides to inform the authorities about mob activity is a traitor, through and through. They believe this so strongly that they go to great lengths to prevent traitors from being successful. Anyone who is planning to rat out the mob is swiftly killed. On the other hand, the "good guys" believe the very opposite. Someone the mob would label as a traitor, characters such as the priest and perhaps Edie would label as a whistle blower. They believe it is doing the right thing to stand up against the mob. Also, there is the character Terry. Terry is interesting because his views slowly shift through the course of the film. His beliefs start from Johnny Friendly's end of the spectrum and eventually end up agreeing with the priest.

I personally believe that the difference between a traitor and a whistle blower lies in the motivations behind the person's actions. If someone rats out another to get revenge, or to intentionally create problems for another person, then I'd label them as a traitor. When their motivations are negative, they are a "stool pigeon." But when someone tells on another to help the greater good, or to stop unethical activity, they are a whistle blower. If the person truly means to have a positive effect and their intentions are pure, I'd say they're simply an "informant." I do understand, however, that lots of situations could blur this line. For example, if a worker went to the authorities because what his or her company was doing was wrong, they are an informant. But if that person didn't like their boss or other people in their company and also saw this as a good chance to mess up their life, then the proper label for them is much less clear. In a situation like this, more questions would have to be asked, such as would they have done it even if they liked everyone in the company.

Quarter 2 Post 3

Before I say anything about Martin Luther King Jr.'s ethics, I have to say one thing. GO READ THIS BOOK. Honestly. It is one of the most inspiring books I have ever read. Ever. This man and the effects he had were, and are amazing.
Anyway. Continuing on...
This week's chapters covered the Montgomery Movement; a mass boycott of Montgomery buses to protest the segregated bus seats. Within these chapters, there is a strong representation of King's personal morals. It was very clear to me that two main parts of his code of ethics are non-violence, and the value of family. Non-violent resistance was a key philosophy of King's, and he learned it from Mahatma Gandhi. (Not directly, I think, but I'm not positive). King implanted this philosophy within the movement he led in Montgomery. Through his speeches, he then implanted it in the people of Montgomery. He believed it was the best tool, morally, to attain a 'victory.' Of this method, King said, "It also provided a method for Negroes to struggle to secure moral ends through moral means. Thus, it provided a creative force through which men could channel their discontent" (99).
King's other main personal moral concern was his family. An entire chapter is devoted to his wife, Coretta Scott King. He repeats how important she is to him, how much she supports him, and how understanding and patient she is. King also talks about his love for his first daughter, affectionately nicknamed Yoki. He discusses his parents as well, and the hard times they went through when they knew their son was in danger during the protest. Although he chose to go against his parents' will and go forth with the protest no matter the potential harm to himself, King made it clear that this did not mean he didn't value their opinions. King expresses this internal struggle when he says, "No one can understand my conflict who has not looked into the eyes of those he loves, knowing that he has no alternative but to take a dangerous stand that leaves them tormented" (85).
By the end of these chapters, the boycott is victorious. King is among the first to ride a desegregated bus, and he sits next to a white, southern-born minister. It is an incredible moment.
Now really, go read this book. I wasn't kidding.

King, Martin Luther. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. Ed. Clayborne Carson. New York: Warner, 1998

Quarter 2 Question 1

In the novel All My Sons, by Arthur Miller, characters value family over society or vice versa depending on the role they play in a family. The sons and daughters in the story see society as more important than family, because of their young, and perhaps naive, idealistic ethics. The adults and caregivers, on the other hand, see family as the first priority when making decisions because they must create a safe home and a good future for their children. Chris Keller, a young man, strongly believes that one should value the needs of society. His mother wonders what more she and her husband can do for their children, and Chris tells her she's looking at it the wrong way. He reprimands his mother by saying, "You can be better! Once and for all you can know there's a universe of people outside and you're responsible to it, and unless you know that you threw away your son because that's why he died" (84). Chris is trying to show his mother that there is more than family, in fact, there's the whole world to think about when making decisions. The opposing view is demonstrated through Joe Keller, who justifies the fact that he denied assisting in shipping out faulty airplane parts by saying he was supporting his family. While arguing with his son, Keller pleads, "Chris... Chris, I did it for you, it was a chance and I took it for you. I'm sixty-one years old, when would I have another chance to make something for you?" (70). Keller was trying to build a business for his son. With this goal in mind, he chose his son over the safety of men at war, thereby choosing family over society.
Personally, I have no clear idea how I would pick between family and society. It's obviously going to be on a situation to situation basis, because you can't lay out a specific method for choosing that will work every time. I do have some thoughts on it, though. First, I think that in a situation such as the Kellers, it would have been better to choose society. I say this because the part of the family that Joe was trying to protect was his sons, who both disagreed with Joe's morals, and would have been happier if he hadn't shipped out the parts. When the family understands the predicament and is okay with the consequences it'll have on them, it's better to choose society, although it's not like Joe could have known what his sons would say. My last thoughts on this difficult subject are that one of the best things you can do is to keep your family informed openly and honestly when the decision will affect them, and to consider the pros and cons of each path you could take.

Miller, Arthur. All My Sons. New York: Penguin, 2000.

Quarter 2 Post 2

I didn't read as much as I'd hoped this week, but it's been interesting nevertheless. The chapters I read covered MLK's years at Crozer Seminary, and Boston University.
In these chapters, King delved even more deeply into his religious beliefs, becoming more and more specific. They were combined with his evolving views on moral and political philosophies, and together delivered a complete (yet still developing) set of his opinions. The religious beliefs, however, stood out in particular to me, as I disagree with most of them. As an atheist, it's interesting to read something by a man I respect so much while at the same time I disagree with something he values very much. In the chapter about Crozer Seminary, there was an excerpt from a course paper that he wrote on religion. One passage reads, "It is religion which gives us the assurance that all that is high noble and valuable will be conserved. Such fruits of religion I find to be its greatest virtues, and certainly they cannot be ignored by any sane man. I must now conclude that any atheistic view is both philosophically unsound and practically disadvantageous" (28). This is the first time we see King directly disagree with other beliefs; so far he has only discussed his own. Personally, I don't find it offensive, but I do disagree strongly. I believe that there are many other 'assurances' in the world that are as legitimate as a personal faith, and just as effective. I also disagree that atheistic beliefs are dangerous or impractical. In fact, religion has been more impractical than anything else in the past, as proven by the millions of conflicts over faith in history.
The other thing I noticed in these chapters is King's writing style. I mentioned this in my last post, but I've noticed more since then. The chapters are separated into subsections labeled by headings. Each of these subsections nearly reads like a thesis paper. The main ideas are introduced, then discussed, then recapped with a final thought. While I think this is probably an effect of King's extensive education, I also think it's a natural and easily comprehensible way to write non-fiction. This is not saying that I enjoy writing thesis papers whatsoever.
I can't say that I've found any specific links to what we've been doing in class lately, as we've mostly been working on our stories and finishing up ATPH. I have noticed, though, that MLK's life is beginning to follow the HQP, in a very vague way. This is probably normal, because the HQP must be based off of history and experiences, as it's so common. The teachers and philosophers that he admires act together as a 'supernatural guide,' and we've already been through his 'birth/home' and 'call to adventure.' The 'call to adventure,' I would say, is his quest for a path to social justice.

King, Martin Luther. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. Ed. Clayborne Carson. New York: Warner, 1998.

Quarter 2 Post 1

For this quarter's outside reading, I've chosen The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. It conveniently fits right in with the theme of ethical and moral dilemmas that we'll be discussing in class. This week I read the first two chapters, which covered King's childhood and college years. The point of covering all of this right in two chapters seems to be to set the scene but get to his real legacy quickly.

King grew up in a middle class, loving family. It's clear that both his parents had a huge effect on him, and his ethics. Through his writing, one can see the great need King felt to do good in the world. He became enamored with the writing of Thoreau, and decided that "noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good" (14). He also observed the idea of non-violent protest, and admired it. These ideas at such a young age show what a conscientious person King was.

King's writing style is interesting as well. His voice has no quirks or spice to it, but it is not boring whatsoever. On the contrary, it's clear as a bell and inspiring. The story is easy to follow and it's so amazing to be in the thoughts of such an amazing man. His training as a minister and the fact that he was brought up in a family and community of ministers are very apparent through his words. They suggest he'd be a magnificent orator, which as we all know, he was.

King, Martin Luther. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. Ed. Clayborne Carson. New York: Warner, 1998.

Percy's Perfect Pies

Jack Prelutsky writes great poems for children (...and teenagers... and adults!). They're lyrical, silly, and some of them are terrible tongue-twisters. I read "Percy's Perfect Pies," a poem about a baker named Percival, and his assortment of disgusting creations. Prelutsky uses a number of poetic devices in his poem, like assonance, which is repeating vowel sounds, and alliteration. An example of assonance is the pie titled "Wasp in Walnut Walrus Sauce" (49). The 'a' sound is repeated throughout the name. The Ws make this also a good example of alliteration. This piece of writing doesn't directly link to visual literacy, but it can be related to what we've done in class. Alliteration, assonance, goofy word choice, and rhyming are the elements that give style and meaning to the poem, just like shot angle, distance, and composition provide meaning in a photo or movie.
The poem lists off twenty-four different pies, all of which sound revolting, and are impossible to say without stumbling over yourself, or laughing. I think the poem appeals to younger children because of the silliness, but the multiple poetic devices make it worth looking at when you're older, too. I love this poem in all its ridiculousness. Even the bakers full name, "Percival P. Puffinwuff," makes me laugh (48). Whenever you're feeling gloomy, I recommend you check out a Jack Prelutsky book. It'll take you right back to childhood.

Prelutsky, Jack. It's Raining Pigs and Noodles. New York: Greenwillow, 1993.

Photograph

Photographic Approaches

In this chapter from one of Freeman Patterson's books on photography, two main approaches to nature photography are compared. One is documentary, and the other is interpretive. Patterson explains that there is no solid line separating these two approaches, and a photographer should create their own ideas on them. I'm glad I picked this chapter to read, because it gave me lots of new information. I was especially interested in the documentary approach, because most of what we learned in class was about drawing meaning and emotion from a photo, which falls in the interpretive category. Documentary sounds to me like photographing things in their natural habitat, capturing their characteristics - how an animal lives, or in what environment a certain plant usually grows. It seems like it'd be a nice break from having to deduce a meaning from a picture, as it's more scientific. Personally, I like both types of nature photography (not that I'm experienced or anything, just from what I've seen). Something that surprised me is that Patterson didn't seem to have a preference. No opinions came across in the chapter. He was simply educating the reader, leaving them to form their own opinions and try each approach with an open mind.


Patterson, Freeman. Photography of Natural Things. Toronto: Key Porter, 1982.

I Like The Music

I recently rediscovered one of my favorite old picture books, called I Like The Music. It's a story about a girl in New York City who loves hearing music played in the streets, but not in stuffy concert halls. In the end, her grandma insists on taking her to yet another symphony, but this time it's in Central Park, at night. The girl suddenly changes her opinion - maybe orchestras aren't that bad after all. The story is written in a really fun, rhythmic way, and is almost a song when you read it out loud. Try reading this passage for yourself:
I like the beat
Of my feet
When my shoes hit the street
And I rapa-tapa-tapa
On the hot concrete.
No parade,
Just the maid
With her Dixieland mop,
Soppin' with the boppin'
All around the bus stop.
I remember loving hearing this book read aloud to me as a kid. For all of you who still love reading picture books, I definitely recommend it.
One connection I noticed between this story and Siddhartha is that both main characters try out new things that they previously wouldn't even think of. For the girl in I Like The Music, her new experience is the symphony in the park, which shows her a better side of orchestral music and even gets her to change her mind about it. For Siddhartha, he experiences an entirely new lifestyle, one of wealth and luxury. He previously looked down upon this, but had never known it for himself. When he finally lives it, his opinion is confirmed, and it almost drives him to suicide. Although Siddhartha doesn't change his mind, unlike the girl, they both gather new life experiences that give them firsthand wisdom to use in the future.

Komaiko, Leah. I Like The Music. U.S.A.: Harper Trophy, 1987.

(I couldn't find the city in which it was published, but it did say USA, so I hope that's okay. Also, I tried to do the double indent for the quotation, but the 10 spaces I put it didn't show up in the post.)

Should Homer be considered an early feminist or an old-fashioned sexist?

Homer was possibly one of the first feminists of all time. He was even daring enough to show his respect for women in his famous epic, The Odyssey. When Odysseus finally returns to Ithaca and is in his home disguised as a beggar, he witnesses his wife tricking all her suitors, telling them to bring her gifts so she can decide which man to marry. Penelope is actually strongly loyal to Odysseus, and only wants gifts for the heck of it. Here, Homer suddenly rejects the previous, weaker version of Penelope, who had only sat in her room and wept. He is portraying his belief that women too can have cunning. Homer also shows his point of view through the character Calypso, a nymph who has captured Odysseus. When Hermes tells her she has to finally let Odysseus go, she flies into a rage. Calypso complains how the gods are sexist, allowing male gods to have relationships with female mortals, but forbid goddesses to have relationships with male mortals. The nymph's speech is a means for Homer to send a message to society. He is saying that he doesn't agree with the inequality of relationships, how the men always have the upper hand. He believes relationships should be well balanced, giving the women just as much say as men.
Pallas Athena is another strong female character in The Odyssey. Not only does she guide Odysseus through the entire epic, but she creates peace in the end. A fight breaks out at the house of Odysseus' father, Laertes, as attempted revenge for the slaughtering of the suitors. But Athena steps in with a great command to all, ordering them to stop fighting. She tells Odysseus that war is not always the answer. Through this scene, Homer depicts a woman as very wise. In fact, the woman is wiser than the man. Homer never would have depicted this notion had he been sexist. Homer also shows his respect for women in a morbid way. When Odysseus recounts his journey to the underword, he describes seeing Agamemnon. Agamemnon had been murdered by his own wife on his return from Troy. Clytemnestra, his wife, was without doubt a wicked woman. But Homer depicts battles, deaths between men as honorable and heroic. So to include a woman as a fighter and murderer puts them at the same level as men. From his positive portrayals of women in the Hellenic ages, Homer tells us that he viewed women as equals to men, a revolutionary idea in his patriarchal times.

A Box of Pastels

This week I read the poem "A Box of Pastels" by Ted Kooser (a former Poet Laureate of the United States). This poem describes the poet's experience holding a box of pastels that had previously been owned by Mary Cassatt, an impressionist painter. Kooser notices that warm colors seemed to have been used the most, cool colors the least. He links this to Mary Cassatt's personality, saying "She'd had little patience with darkness, and her heart held only a measure of shadow" (63). I've decided I love this poem, and Ted Kooser's imagery. I especially like the phrase "a simple wooden box in which a rainbow lay dusty and broken" (63). The rainbow, of course, is his metaphor for the pastels. The poem even gets to me emotionally, reminding me of my grandma and her love for creating paintings. Actually, I can look over to the shelf next to me right now, and touch the sleek black box of pastels she gave me. It turns out I didn't inhereit that particular artistic ability, but I'll never be able to throw away that box, especially after reading this poem. I think I'll start reading more poetry by Ted Kooser, since I like his style so much.

Kooser, Ted. Delights & Shadows. Port Townsend: Copper Canyon, 2004.

A Weather Story

Mary Oliver's essay "The Perfect Days" takes a good look at the way weather interests us humans, and how it affects us. In Oliver's poetic way, she describes her own preference in weather, which is "in the smallest quantities. A drop will do" (32). The thing is, Oliver explains, that small bits of weather do not interest people. They want cyclones, thrilling tales of mounatain ascent. In the second part of the essay, Oliver recounts a personal story. She arrived in a large patch of sunlight during a walk, and was overcome by "a seizure of happiness. It was not the drowning sort of happiness, rather the floating sort" (33). She continues to describe the feeling, how at peace she was, how she didn't feel the need to be somewhere, how she experienced intense awareness. This moment has carried over to the rest of her life, and has stayed with her for years, although it was a long time ago. But, Oliver assures us, it wasn't a loud moment. It wasn't a strong epiphany, it was simply there.
At the end of the essay, Oliver ties everything together. One of the most influential moments of her life was all thanks to the weather. Yet it wasn't a life-altering summit, or a hurricane survivor story. She reminds us that although it may not be dramatic, or epic in any way, a small patch of sunlight could make your day. Maybe even make you a better person.
I noted, as I read, that Oliver mentioned a wind god named Aeolus. The name sounded like something right out of a work by Homer, so I looked it up on Wikipedia. It turns out this Aeolus character is, in fact, from Greek mythology. But beyond this surface layer connection, the mentions of powerful storms in the essay reminded me of The Odyssey. Poseidon sends a great storm in Odysseus' path while Odysseus is attempting to sail home from Calypso's island. The storm sends Odysseus far off course and he lands in Scheria. I got to thinking that although had this not have happened, Odysseus would have gotten home and the story would be loads shorter, there was a calmer moment that had an even greater effect on the hero. This is when he finally wakes up on his homeland Ithaca, after being dropped off by the Phaeacians. It is a beautiful day, and Odysseus is so happy to be home he literally kisses the ground. This small, happy moment has affected him more personally than a great big storm ever could've.
Personally, I loved this essay, and definitely recommend it. At least, to anyone who enjoys poetic prose. It reminded me of a backpacking trip I went on, specifically one moment atop a bluff in Isle Royale. We had just hiked up a steep hill under in a dark shade, and I was feeling a little dismal. Then I stepped out on to the small prarie that covered the top of the hill. Sun, prairie grasses, wind. I can't describe it or I'll completely butcher my memory of it. But in that moment, I was so plainly content to be right where I was, doing exactly what I was doing. Mary Oliver was right. It was "a seizure of happiness" (33).

Homer. The Odyssey. Trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Penguin Books, 1996.

Oliver, Mary. "The Perfect Days." Long Life: essays and other writings. Cambridge: Da Capo, 2004. 32-34.

Introduction

Welcome to my (Lida's) English blog. I know it's kind of sparse right now, but I'm sure that by the end of the quarter, it'll be packed with fascinating responses. :] I'm told they're going to be reactions and answers to questions about short pieces of writing, like newspaper articles. My first one should be coming in a little bit, like 5 minutes, unless I decide to write my thesis outline instead. Anyways, welcome to my blog, nice to meet you.