Final Brave New World Post

Are there really other like-minded individuals to Bernard and Helmholtz in exile, or was Mond just lying to make them more willing to leave?

How long could a society heavily dependent on stimulants even last? Would it gradually slip in effectiveness? (thinking of China's opium period)

How come, in both 1984 and Brave New World, the initial dissenters in the book are fairly important people who are pretty close to the government? Isn't that the opposite of what one would expect?

First Brave New World Post

The One State has not created equality. However, everyone is basically brainwashed into being satisfied with their role in life, which reduces conflict. The government has done away with anything that they claim causes unhappiness and angst, such as relationships and religion. Religion has been replaced with loyalty and happiness-inducing drugs, and relationships have been replaced with casual, non-committed hook-ups. People don't really need rights, because they're forced into happiness, with drugs and hypnopaedia. I believe that this society is a dystopia because, while it seems to work, people have no choice in almost anything in their lives, which are carefully controlled to ensure maximum happiness. A real utopia would give people the right to choose their path in life, and have the freedom of free thought. Instead, hypnopaedia influences people's minds in their sleep, telling them that people in lower classes are stupid and inferior, and people in higher classes have to do far more work. Technicians predetermine one's career field and social status at "birth." Citizens of the One State are repressed their whole lives, but are carefully made to not feel repressed. While cleverly disguised as an ideal society, the One State is clearly a dystopia.

Opener- "Communist Utopia"

What about this painting indicates communism?

There are eyeballs everywhere in the picture, so the people are always being watched. And when people are being watched, they can be more easily controlled, as in communism.

What is the artist's view of communism?

The artist views communism as negative and bad. Everything in the painting is cloudy and grey, and there's a lot of dead trees. These set a sad, oppressed mood that the artist is trying to portray communism as. He's saying that communism is uniform and dull and dark, like the background of this painting.

Explain the title.

The artist isn't saying that it is a utopia because it is a communism; he's saying that it is a utopia to a communist. A communist would view this world as a perfect one, at least in the artist's opinion. This is because, in the thinking of communism, a society where everyone can be controlled is the perfect society.

Opener- culture in clothing

How do you dress?

I dress very casually and consistently. I wear jeans and a t-shirt ninety percent of the time. Sometimes I wear shorts, sometimes cargo pants, but usually jeans. When it's cold out, I sometimes wear a fleece jacket.

How is your dress an important aspect of who you are?

It isn't. It's just what I wear. I'm not trying to make a statement; I wear clothing based on comfort.

What about your culture/ personality is reflected in your clothes?

I'm very laid-back, straightforward, and habitual.

Opener on Perspective

What are the benefits of perspective?

It allows you to remove your bias and see things from a different angle. It's not that any one perspective is better than others; it's best to see things from multiple perspectives.

Why do the rules of ethnography exist and why are they important?

If you don't acknowledge your bias, it can influence your work and mislead people who don't suspect bias. It's important to have an infromant in the culture so that you can be more accurate and have an insider's perspective. Fianlly, if you don't tell your subjects that they're being studied, they will feel manipulated and insulated when they find out.

Opener on "Othering"

Why would the West manufacture an Other?

If we set up others as an "enemy," we can improve ourselves trying to compete with them, like during the Cold War. And we set up this enemy as evil and different as a way to sort of justify our actions against them.

Final 1984 Blog

I believe that Big Brother has won. There is no way for rebellion, because the proles are too segregated and underinformed to do anything, and if the Inner Party plays their cards right, no more than a couple Party members will ever rebel. Most everyone loves Big Brother, and those who are uncertain, like Winston, are kept under control by fear of the Thought Police. They can then be dealt with before they get dangerous. And there is no way Oceania will ever be overthrown by foriegners. All of the countries are just half-heartedly fighting as a way to keep their respective populations in check. No one country will ever waste their resources to actually try to overthrow another. The only way that the party can be brought down would be if some freak occurence or natural disaster threw the government off track, causing them to lose the trust of the proles.

By the end of the novel, Winston has lost all of his hopes and ideals, stripped away by torture. With nothing to fall back on, he turns to the Party's ready-made safety net: love and loyalty to Big Brother. O'Brian has already told him "In the end we shall shoot you," so Winston knows he will die, but he doesn't care, probably because of his fatalist attitude. He even wants to die, calling it the "long-hoped-for-bullet." The party has crushed his mind to the point that he is willing to follow and do anything they say, and if they want to kill him, then that must mean his death is a good thing. Basically, Smith has gone nuts, because he's much easier to control that way.

Opener- "Love Language"

What were your assumptions during the video?

I assumed that she was deaf. I was right.

How is this a cultural conflict?

Deaf people, a subculture, have a hard time being accepted by others. She's trying to be accepted by the guy.

What's an example of external conflict from the video?

The girl can't hear the guy or talk to him normally.

What's an example of internal conflict?

The guy has to decide whether or not to accept her, because she's deaf.

How was the conflict resolved?

He decided that he didn't care that she was deaf.

Opener- Chuck Baird

Make a claim about the author's voice, and support it.

The author has an outspoken voice, because all of his paintings involve subtle, non-verbal items and symbols.

Identify a culture within these paintings.

The culture of these is that of the hearing impaired, because two paintings contain hand signals/ sign language, one has lip-reading, and another shows a "broken" ear, all of which are symbols for deafness.

Write a claim about the author's culture based on these paintings.

Based on the content, voice, and culture of these paintings, I am claiming that Chuck Baird is deaf or hearing-impaired.

Opener- "You Were Right"

Make an inference about the song lyrics and explain.

The artist has a strong appreciation for musical legends who came before him; the song is full of allusions to other songs by popular rock bands, like Pink Floyd, Kansas, and The Rolling Stones.

Write one analytical statement about the music and explain.

The tempo and heaviness of the song don't fit well with the lyrics; just seeing the lyrics, you'd think this would be a slow, sad song, but it's not; instead it's fast and upbeat.

Make a claim about the song's effectiveness and explain.

I think it was effective due to the contrast between the lyrics and the music. The fact that it isn't slow and sad like you'd expect tells you that the lyrics don't mean what you originally think they mean, and hints that you should be taking a different approach to find the subject.

Opener- "Young Life" by Bo Bartlett

Make 3 claims about this painting, and provide evidence for each.

The artist is trying to portray midwest stereotypes; there are stereotypical rural symbols such as hunting clothes and an old pickup truck. The man in this painting is a hunter; he is holding a rifle and there is a dead deer on his truck. The child has problems with his parents; he is frowning and standing apart from them.

Choose one claim and a paragraph in support.

In Bo Bartlett's "Young Life," the boy has a problem with his parents and/or their lifestyle. In the painting, the child is standing apart from his parents, with his back towards them. This clearly shows rejection and disapproval. He is also frowning, showing that he is dissatisfied with something, most likely his parents. Finally, he is wearing a brightly colored shirt, to make him stand out and distance himself from his family.

Opener- "Shame"

What are the subject and tone of the song?

The subject is the singer's shame. The tone is sad and ashamed.

Choose 3 words that push the tone and explain how they do so.

Three words are "blame," "guilt," and "overwhelming." These are all negative words, and "overwhelming" contributes to the sadness while "blame" and "guilt" contribute to the shame.

Opener on Voice

In your opinion, what is voice in literature?

Voice is your personality coming through in your writing.

How does one create voice? Is it intentional or not?

Create voice by introducing personality quirks, slang, moods, and other personal elements. It can be both intentional and unintentional, but it's supposed to be unintentional, so it works better that way.

Why do Eastern Kentuckians talk around a subject? What can we learn about a writer from how they approach a topic?

They talk around a subject because they're very social and neighborly, so they're trying to extend the conversation and be more friendly. We can learn how direct and straightforward an uthor is from their approach, contributing to their personality.

Whether fiction or nonfiction, why is voice important?

Without voice, a piece of writing will sound bland and unoriginal. Voice adds "flavor" to writing.

SOAPSTone- Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out

           The subject of Dave Barry’s “Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out” is that women are very different from men. This subject is illustrated through the author’s examples of the differences between men and women such as most women’s’ ambiguity toward sports and their obsession with cleanliness. This helps illustrate the differences between men and women by comparing their reactions in similar situations, such as cleaning a bathroom, or missing a World Series game.

          
           “Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out” was written during the late 1980s. The essay’s time of creation is displayed in the introduction to the piece, but can also be guessed at more broadly from the casual, modern theme that still lacks the hardened cynicism of the 21^st century. From the carefree and light tone but the modern theme, you can tell that this is most likely from the 1980s or -90s, which is confirmed in the introduction from a secondary source, stating that this was written in 1988. The time and place of the essay’s creation influence the essay by contributing to the casual tone and making the subject more relevant. It makes the subject more relevant because it is so recent, not much has changed between then and now, so the subject still applies to us today. It contributes to the casual tone because the essay is from a decade that encouraged comedy and casualness. If this piece had been written in this decade, it probably would have been slightly more satirical than funny.

            Dave Barry’s specific audience for “Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out” is men who have a hard time understanding women. The author’s target audience is exhibited by his attempts to explain some aspects of a woman’s nature, while at the same time empathizing with the audience because he doesn’t really understand women either. He is clearly trying to explain his interpretation of women’s behavior to help out men who don’t understand them. He is also trying to connect with his audience by identifying himself as one of them. The author’s general audience for the essay is anyone who is willing to read it. The author’s general audience is shown by the fact that the comedy in this essay can be appreciated by a broad spectrum of readers; men who understand women can laugh at Barry’s ignorance, while women can either laugh at themselves or at Barry’s stupidity. The author is reaching out to a more general audience by making the humor more accessible to different types of people.

            Dave Barry’s purpose in “Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out” is to state his opinion about women and try to teach men about their nature. This is illustrated when he opens his piece with “The primary difference between men and women is that women can see extremely small quantities of dirt.” Barry gets right to the point, presenting and sharing his opinion about the difference between men and women. He is stating his opinion, and using his opinion as a basis to try and teach men about women. He also presents another opinion when he says “[Sports] is an area where men tend to feel very sensitive and women tend to be extremely calloused.” Here Barry is not only presenting his opinion about women, he is comparing it to information that his audience is already familiar with, so that they can put his opinion into context better and learn from it.

            Dave Barry, who is a humor columnist from Miami, believes that women are bizarre and complicated. This value is illustrated by the simple fact that he wrote this piece, in order to try and explain women, and the fact that the oddities of women are a common topic in his articles. This is important because if he didn’t think women were weird, he wouldn’t have written an article trying to explain them. Dave Barry also believes that anything can be made funny. This is illustrated by how he takes what would normally sound like the complaining and griping of a confused guy and makes it comedic. He has done similar things with topics such politics, finance, history, sports, and parenthood. This belief contributes to the purpose because since he’s trying to make this article, he’s coming up with ridiculous opinions and trying to teach them as fact.

            Dave Barry exhibits a joking and carefree attitude about the differences between men and women in “Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out.” These attitudes are expressed with phrases such as “doing an important project on my Etch-a-Sketch,” “they could crush my skull like a ripe grape,” and “the women prattled away about human relationships or something.” The first phrase contributes to the joking attitude because the author is creating humor by saying that he was doing something ridiculous and nonsensical. The second quote also contributes to the joking attitude by giving a hyperbole that leaves an interesting mental image and creates humor by comparing the author’s head to fruit. And finally the last phrase adds to the carefree mood because the phrase “prattling away” is used to demonstrate that the women are carefree, and the phrase “or something” demonstrates that the author doesn’t care whether the women are carefree or not. This overall tone supports the purpose because it is more likely to put at ease and open the minds of the audience, so that they will be more perceptive to Barry’s opinion.

Opener- The Beatles vs. Pain

Which version did you like better? Why?

I like the Beatles version better. This is probably because I really liked this song beforehand, and the Beatles version is the one that is the most familiar to me.

Which is more pleasing to listen to? Why?

The Beatles version is also more pleasing to listen to. The vocals and music are more clean and crisp, while the Pain version is just a bunch of heavy metal and screaming.

Opener- Kandinsky vs. Pollack

Which painting do you like better and why?

I like the Kandinsky better, because the Pollack looks like baby vomit.

Which is more pleasing to look at and why?

The Kandinsky is more aesthetically pleasing. It is colorful, has lots of white space, and gives the impression of being both ordered and chaotic at the same time. The Pollack is brown and black and sickly yellow, and is splattered like mud (or baby vomit).

Opener- "Sign Language"

What single effect did you get from this short film?

I think that the creator is trying to leave you with a sweet, happy feeling.

Give 3 specific things that led you to that single effect.

Ben's acting is really upbeat and optimistic; he's wearing bright, cheerful-looking rainbow gloves that happen to match the girl's gloves; the background music is sweet and light-sounding.

If you could change something in the film that would change the single effect, what would it be and how would it change the single effect?

If you were to change or take away the music, it would make the overall tone less happy, and would make the bustling London street seem more crowded and hostile.

Opener- Harry Nilsson's "Good Old Desk"

SOAPSTone this song.

Subject- At first I thought it was just about a desk, but it turns out I was wrong, and that the song was actually written about god and religion and stuff.
Occasion- the 1970s
Audience- the average worker
Purpose- to remind people that they always have support
Speaker- Harry Nilsson, who had a tough life
Tone- comforted, happy

What is he talking about?

I originally guessed that he was talking about how his desk was like a security blanket for him. When I discovered that he was talking about religion instead, I just changed it from "desk" to "religion" and it still worked.

SOAPSTone- Shooting an Elephant (a bit late)

The subject of George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” is that imperialism is oppressive and wrong. His belief that imperialism is bad is illustrated by him openly stating this in the text. As Orwell states at the beginning, “…I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing.” Elsewhere, he mentions that he hates the British Empire for what they are doing in Burma, and secretly supports the oppressed people. This clearly demonstrates the he thinks imperialism is wrong, and how he strongly disapproves of imperialist countries, even his own country. As he says at the end, “When the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys.”

            “Shooting an Elephant” was written during the end of the British imperial era in the 1930s. The essay’s time of creation is conveyed when he mentions that, although he didn’t know it at the time, “the British Empire [was] dying.” This shows that it was indeed written near the end of Britain’s imperial age, in the early- to mid-1900s. The probable place of the essay’s creation is Moulmein, Burma. Although this may not be where Orwell physically wrote the essay, he states in the beginning that it takes place “In Moulmein, in lower Burma.” The time and place of the essay’s creation influence the essay by showing that the author has quite a bit of experience on the subject of imperialism. This is because he lived and worked in an imperialist colony during imperial rule, and saw first-hand the effects of imperialism.

            George Orwell’s specific audience for “Shooting an Elephant” is the average citizen of an imperial European country. The author’s target audience is revealed by his constant appeals to “white man in the East,” and comparing his struggle to the struggles of all the imperial Europeans in Asia. This shows that he is trying to connect with a specific audience, namely colonizing European citizens. The author’s general audience for the essay is anyone curious about the effects of imperialism. The author’s general audience is shown when he explains the basis of imperialism to his audience. His specific audience presumably already knows quite a bit about imperialism, because the live in an imperial country. But when Orwell explains imperialism a little, he is clearly addressing a much broader audience, one that is curious about imperialism but may not know much about it.

            George Orwell’s purpose in “Shooting an Elephant” is to persuade his audience that imperialism is wrong and doesn’t work. This purpose is illustrated when he states that he “grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man’s dominion in the East,” and when he says “imperialism was an evil thing, and the sooner I chucked up my job and got out of it, the better.” Here, he is openly claiming his dislike for imperialism, and his belief that imperialism in Asia is a futile and failed plan. The purpose is further revealed when he says how he views the British Raj, as an “unbreakable tyranny, as something clamped down… upon the will of prostrate peoples.” This once again shows his dislike for imperialism, and explains why he thinks it’s wrong; namely, it leads to abuse and mistreatment of local people and cultures.

            George Orwell, a British writer in the early 1900s, believes heavily in basic human rights. This value is illustrated by his anger toward the British government (mentioned in the last paragraph) for oppressing and mistreating local people. He is angry at the British Raj and all imperial governments in general, because in conquering these native peoples, they often deny the natives of their basic rights as human beings. This belief factors heavily into his purpose, as it is the main reason that he believes makes imperialism bad. George Orwell also believes that Westerners shouldn’t try to interfere with the culture of other’s. This value is illustrated by how he was pressured into shooting the elephant. His Western morals told him not to attack the creature, but he had no choice. In order to save face in front of the natives, he had to conform to their ways and will and shoot the elephant. This factors in to the other part of his purpose: to persuade people that imperialism doesn’t work. He believes that we shouldn’t try to abolish the culture of others, because we can’t; it will just end up hurting us more.

            George Orwell exhibits a pressured and angry attitude towards the effects of imperialism in “Shooting an Elephant.” These attitudes are expressed by his use of words such as “stuffy,” “bitter,” “upsetting,” “intolerable,” and “rage.” The words “stuffy” and “upsetting” express the pressured tone that Orwell uses, while the words “bitter,” “intolerable,” and “rage” all express the feelings of anger that Orwell is trying to convey. These feelings serve the purpose of the essay by providing Orwell’s true feelings about imperialism, which he is trying to convince the audience is a bad thing. And since he is trying to portray imperialism as wrong, it is good to accompany this with negative feelings.

Sorry it's late. I spent an extra-long time on it to make up for that.

Opener on Writing Process (a little late)

Summarize Wilco's approach to creating a song.

They throw together a rough first attempt, then strip it down to the very basics and rework and expand on each part.

What is your process for creative writing?

I don't have a process. I just sit down and write. It works because while I'm typing one part, I'm also thinking about what I'm going to write in the next sentance or paragraph. So since my brain can multi-task, I can afford to just do all the prewriting in my head, on the go.

Opener on Nostalgia (a little late)

What is nostalgia?

I believe that nostalgia is a feeling of fond rememberance and longing for the past.

What images come to mind when you hear this music?

This reminds me of my elementary school chorus room, because we actually had to sing "Rock Around the Clock" in 5th grade.

What sights/ sounds/ feelings come to mind when you think of your childhood?

I remember throwing up a lot, which, frankly, is a sight/ sound/ feeeling that I do not like to remember (I had a weak stomach back then). I also remember that I was really impatient and fidgety all the time, more-so than most little kids, and still am a little today. While I'm not all that nostalgic for those things, I do miss getting up early and watching Saturday morning cartoons.

First Reading Response Blog- Poverty

The two authors, Chitra Divakaruni and Peter Singer, have two very different opinions on world hunger and poverty. However it is hard to compare them, because while Singer is discussing hunger and poverty and morals and philosophy and, well, pretty much everything, Divakaruni is only talking about one specific thing: not embargoing child labor. But the gist is, Singer wants you to place basic morals above all else, while Divakaruni wants you to look beyond the heartwarming hypothetical stuff and think about the logic of a problem.

I think that Divakaruni has a more valid point of view. She grew up in India, surrounded by poverty and child labor. Meanwhile, Singer is just a rich philosopher sitting in his armchair passing judgement on the rest of the world. And also, there is immediately a reader bias towards Divakaruni, just because of her third-world-sounding name. However, she seems like the more biased author, with her family having had a child in employment when she was growing up. But on the other hand, of course Singer can talk all he wants about sacrifice and charity; he's a rich and famous author. But to many Americans, even his suggested $200 is still a lot of money, and losing an antique car is just on entirely new level.

Ultimately, I would agree with Divakaruni's viewpoint. I think that while us Americans can afford to be moral and charitable and "free" (I believe no one is truly free, but now is not the time to get into that), in the rest of the world, one has to do the most logical and practical thing, not necessarily what is "right" by our standards. Although one last thing that I recognize as I'm writing this is that I'm biased against Singer. I never have really tolerated armchair philosophers who feel they have the right to judge others. Also, his description said he helped found the animal rights movement, meaning he is responsible to subjecting our world to PETA (ugh). But even with the hindsight recognition of my bias, it does not change my original standing.

First Listening Blog

I think that the musical facts support my opinion that the song is strange.This is mainly because the instruments are synthesized. I always found that to me, synth sounds very weird and off, so any song with a lot of synth will of course sound weird to me. I mostly picked out the synchopation and synth because the song sounded strange, so I picked the strangest sounding things. I might have a slight bias against this song, however, because I don't normally listen to this kind of music, so of course it will sound alien to my ears.