Are You Braver Than a 3rd Grader?

             This week, 12S has been discussing The Metamorphosis. As a modernist text, it lacks a typical "happy ending,"instead offering a rather depressing end coupled with a strong message.  One of the most depressing aspects of the story is that despite their disgusting treatment of Gregor, the protagonist, he continues to crave the love and attention of his family. In fact, he is desperate for it. Now, to be fair, if you woke up one day to see that your brother was a giant beetle who could not speak you would be pretty grossed out, wouldn't you? However, their treatment of Gregor after his transformation and their sudden ability to work and earn money for themselves shows that they had in fact just been lazy and taking advantage of Gregor the entire time. 

              Now, a quick question... Did anyone else think of James and the Giant Peach? As soon as I heard "giant bug" the image of the story popped into my head, not surprising as I read the book about 100 times. But I digress... For those who don't know the story, it's about a little boy named James, who is mistreated by horrible aunts, until one day, a magic spell creates a gigantic peach in his yard. James soon discovers a group of giant, magically enlarged bugs (a spider, silkworm, centipede, grasshopper, a ladybug and earthworm, to be exact), and with them he goes on a wonderful adventure, ending up in New York. Like poor Gregor, little James had been made to work like a servant for his family members, who took advantage of him. And the whole giant bug similarity is hard to ignore. However, as a children's story, it lacks the bleak outlook and sad ending. In the story, James ends up living happily ever after in New York City with his bugs, while Gregor knowingly, though not all together willingly succumbs to injuries inflicted by his father, as a last ditch effort in getting some sort of recognition from his family. So why did James get a happy ending, while Gregor died alone, locked on a dark room? James recognized his aunts for the jerks that they were, and at his first opportunity left the house, to experience something outside of the bleak world he shared with them. Perhaps, as a little boy, he still had that childlike sense of wonder, and hope, which have him the courage to go out on his own. It is this first step that leads to many other wondrous things for him, and he learns that he is better than his aunts treated him. Gregor, a grown man who works a job he dislikes to take care of his parents and sister, is most likely too wrapped up in the reality of the world to daydream about its many possibilities.... 

               But I'm just saying, if you can one day wake up as a giant bug, isn't anything possible? Imagine if Gregor had just left, in the middle of the night, and went to live in the sewers or some other bug friendly zone. Due to his size, intelligence, and ability to "speak" like a bug, he probably could have ended up being some sort of bug king, revered by all his little big subjects! Now, that would have been making the best of unfortunate circumstances! But, alas, it is Gregor's very human need to be accepted by those that shun him that keeps him in that house, and ultimately causes his destruction. The Metamorphosis offers up a lesson about what the need for the acceptance and approval of others can do to someone. It is never beneficial to bend over backwards in attempts to make people love, or accept you. In Gregor's case, it was not even necessary, because his family ends up being better off without him, acting as if a huge burden had been lifted off their backs! If ever confronted with a situation in which you are not appreciated or accepted by others, and are not treated with the respect and dignity you deserve, be like James! Leave, go out and find a new environment, with people who care for you. To spend your time trying to fit into the mold of what others expect from you is an exercise in futility. Why try to change the minds of people who are not open to having their minds changed? Why not find something new? Why not move on to greener pastures, as they say...or in Gregor's case, stinkier sewers. There's a niche for everyone in the world, and if you know that where you are, isn't it, then go out and find it!... Or, you can allow yourself to be beaten down on a daily basis by your environment. It's your choice, though I hope, it is an obvious one.

Unleash Your Inner Creature

"When Gregor Samsa woke up one morning from unsettling dreams, he found himself changed into a monstrous vermin."

       As I read the first lines of The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka, I tried to imagine what kind of "monstrous vermin" Gregor had become. It was hard for me to actually visualize the overnight transition, I tried to come up with some conclusions as to why and how this could happened to a seemingly normal person. My thoughts began to drift on to broader aspects of what this "metamorphosis" could be as I continued to read. I concluded that Gregor's metamorphosis was state of mind that enveloped his entire being, changing his physical humanness into a "monstrous vermin."  His change reminds me of  Rihanna's "We Found Love" music video that showed her  metamorphic state of mind that literally consumed her because she was so in love with that "Chris Brown wannabe".

      Out of all the animals and creatures in the world, why did Gregor manifest into a insect? To think that a man could be cast into the shadows of a permanent physical solitude. Imagine the type of creatures we would turn into on a daily basis if we had this type of "metamorphosis" power. Right now, I would probably turned into a honey bee since I'm always busy and I can never find time for things. What kind of creature can you see yourself changing to?

End of the Road

Althought we should be happy that there are very few classes left in our senior year, our English class has been slightly depressing. The modernist text, "The Metamorphosis" forces us to realize the injustices and harsh realities of our society through a man who transforms into a "monstrous vermin." While reading, we've frequently discussed the mistreatment Gregor faces along with our sympathy for him. The sadness we feel at his situation makes me think of how we as a people usually feel sadness when it is already too late. Gregor has already transformed into a bug which makes it easier for us to see how much he has been walked all over and isolated from his own family. Even though his family did some particularly heinous actions toward him, we are sometimes guilty of doing similar things on a smaller scale.

One thing Gregor's family does is exclude him. He is only a part of the family as long as he can contribute. As members of today's society, we tend to be focused on our own agenda. This can sometimes cause us to be so wrapped up in our own lives, that we do not stop to assist and include others. This is not necessarily wrong but excluding people, intentionally or unintentionally, is a pretty mean thing. No one has it easy, and by isolating others it just makes it harder for them to feel accepted by their peers and society.

Another way Gregor is rejected by his family is when he can no longer work. This can be compared to having a friend for convenience. Sometimes people only come to certain people when they need a favor or something they have. Under the right circumstances, this can be acceptable, however, using someone for your own benefit without considering their feelings, is selfish and disrespectful.

Many of us are guilty of doing things to avoid the things we find socially unacceptable. Although we may not be as severe as Gregor's parents, we do have moments where we choose not to deal with the people who are to different or difficult to understand. Since almost all of us are going to college in the fall, I hope that we can shed these habits and be even more accepting people. We all felt saddened by Gregor's transformation and how it affected him, but we are forgetting that the individual injustices are what caused him to change into a bug. The sympathy we feel for Gregor should be the same sympathy we feel for all those we face injustice due to our own prejudices.

***the video is from "What Would You Do?" on ABC. This is one of the less serious topics, but it shows who sometimes a simple prejudice can cause issues and hurt others. Because white barbers are not accepted, he is subjected to discrimination.

This Could Be Our Revolution

"We alone can devalue gold 
 by not caring 
 if it falls or rises 
 in the market place. 
 Wherever there is gold 
 there is a chain, you know, 
 and if your chain 
 is gold 
 so much the worse 
 for you. 
 Feather,shells,
 and sea-shaped stones 
 are all as rare. 
This could be our revolution: 
 To love what is plentiful 
 as much as 
 what is scarce."

-Alice Walker


 While reading "The Bet" and "How Much Land Does a Man Need?", I was struck with a feeling of nostalgia. Memories of my eighth grade English class came rushing in and immediately I thought of this poem. Both "The Bet" and "How Much Land Does a Man Need?" teach us the dangers of seeking material wealth. No matter how much we have or how much week seek the end result is never satisfaction or happiness. The lawyer in the end of "The Bet," learns to "devalue gold." He realizes that the pursuit of earthly possessions is a pointless one. In his letter he says, "Everything is worthless, transient, illusory and as deceptive as a mirage." Those words could not be any truer. We go to school, to get a diploma, to get a degree, to get a job, while holding on to the false idea that we can satiate our wants with the wealth we might gain. But it's never enough. And it will never be enough. Our true desires cannot be bought. Like Pahom, we leave it all behind.

This is our chance to start a revolution. Let us devalue gold. Let us release the chains of greed that drag us to our grave. Whether rich or poor we face the same end. There's a choice to be made. This could be our revolution. To love what is plentiful as much as what is scarce.

Is Any Life Better Than No Life at All?

In "The Bet" by Anton Chekhov, there is a young lawyer who has imprisoned himself because he makes a statement saying, "The death penalty and life imprisonment are equally immoral. But if I had to chose between execution or being locked away for life, I'd opt for the second, without any doubt. Any sort of life's better than none at all"(960). The young lawyer made a bet know as "The Bet" with the banker, and this bet requires that the young lawyer will stay in the banker's lodge for fifteen years without any communication with the outside world. I do not know about you, but I would have kept my mouth shut and never taken it. While the lawyer is in confinement for fifteen years, he tries to search for an answer to this BIG question. Is any life better than no life at all? I believe everyone has their own opinion to this question. Ms. Whitley asked this question as an exit ticket. This question is constantly replaying in my mind because I think a lot of us would jump to yes because anything is better than being in a grave. But is it really? After fifteen years, before his time was almost up, the lawyer writes a letter to the banker, and it basically says he has attained so much wisdom and knowledge but he could not answer his dying question. He says, "You may be proud, wise and handsome, but death will wipe you from the face of the earth, together with the mice under the floorboards" (964). We can infer from this statement that the lawyer believes anyone can have all the wisdom, be prideful, and beautiful but it all means nothing because death with kill you and the earth will go on. Reading this I agreed for a bit, but then I realized the world will go on but it is what you do to leave a mark on this earth that will never be wiped away from this earth. According to the lawyer, no life is better than life at all. What do you believe? I think its what you do with the life you have will determine wither or not your life was worth living. The lawyer was dissatisfied because he was looking in the wrong place to find a answer only he himself and his actions to impact this world could answer. I want to know what everyone thinks, tell me.

  

God vs. Mephistopheles

This week we began to read Faust.  In the prologue, we were able to see the relationship between God and Mephistopheles.  Honestly, in my opinion, Mephistopheles reminds me of Satan. Does anyone else feel that way?  He has an interesting relationship with God. It's strange but the rivalry over humans between God and Mephistopheles seems like a game. "What do you wager? You will lose him yet,/Provided you give me permission/To steer him gently the course I set." Mephistopheles mentions a wager, which makes this seem like a game between rivals. It is almost as if there is some sort bet over who is to be tempted by evil and who is to remain good. The relation between them is really complex. They are both discussing Faust's fate. Mephistopheles decides to try to tempt Faust and God allows him to do so. As it was said in class, it shows that even in the end God has the ultimate control and makes the final decisions.  The only question I have is why? Why would God allow one of his people to be tempted and corrupted? It is interesting to be able to see an interpretation of  how God thinks. The way the prologue ended made me want to know what is going to happen in the story.  I really want to find out the reason God has allowed Mephistopheles to tempt Faust.

The Link Between Rationalism and Romanticism

https://m.flickr.com/photos/kawkawpa/3477365086/in/search?q=brain%20vs%20the%20heart&mt=all&w=all

     During the Age of Rationalism, there was a constant search for enlightenment. It was a time to question any and everything. Questions led to answers which ultimately led to a better understanding of things. Many famous philosophers were able to write and share their ideas with the public during this time. It was a time to inspire and be inspired. The thirst for knowledge was at an all time high. People grew so passionate about learning. So why does Romanticism reject the ideas of Rationalism, if the Age of Rationalism bore some of the best erudite of our time? During the Age of Romanticism, what the heart felt meant more than analyzing every single situation. I think it is safe to say that if you like overthinking and overanalyzing situations, the concept of Romanticism would probably not appeal to you. I think we can all agree that overthinking a situation before or after it has happened can suck all the fun right out of it! Instead of thinking things through, Romantics lived spontaneously. You know that sappy saying, "Follow your heart," yeah well that is probably something that the Romantics would have encouraged. In addition, Romantics were very fond of nature. They took out of their day to smell the flowers and embrace the beauty of nature. Let's not forget the admiration Shug Avery also felt for nature back when we read The Color Purple! "I think it pisses God off when you walk by the color purple in a field and don't notice it." Shug would have fit in so well with the Romantics! Haha

     The connection I am trying to make, however, is between the two poems we read that were written in two completely different time periods. Paradise Lost which was written by John Milton during the Age of Rationalism and "Ode: Intimations of Immortality" which was written by William Wordsworth during the Age of Romanticism. Although I discussed how these time periods contrasted each other, the poems written during these two times share many of the same ideas. The Age of Rationalism and the Age of Romanticism are linked through these poems/stories.

     In Paradise Lost, Adam and Eve must face the fact that they have lost something that they will never be able to get back: their innocence. Similarly, in Ode (too long to keep retyping lol) Wordsworth's grief is over the fact that he will never be able to experience the glory, innocence and purity that he once possessed as a child. Both poems deal with the lost of things that were of great value. Things we will never be able to repossess. Second, in Paradise Lost we see how blissfully ignorant Adam and Eve were. They had no responsibilities, burdens, or anything to worry about. We are able to see the same type of ignorant bliss in the children Wordsworth describe in his Ode poem. I think it is fair to even compare children and infants to Adam and Eve before they experienced their downfall. Before growing up and losing our glory(or forgetting it perhaps), we were celestial beings like Adam and Eve once were. When they ate the forbidden fruit, it forced them to open their eyes to how chaotic the world really is. Similarly, when children grow up, it is the same as them eating the forbidden fruit, except they are not given a choice. Whether they like it or not, they are forced to see, understand, and even experience all the things wrong in the world. The new knowledge that the forbidden fruit (also my metaphor for growing up) provided in both of these poems seems to hurt us more than it actually benefits us ("knowledge is pain"). Lastly, I noticed how both poems deal with the loss of innocence, but they also deal with what we gain after our loss. In Paradise Lost, we gain Free Will. The freedom to be able to think for ourselves and make our own decisions. In Ode, we gain a "philosophic mind." The ability to understand complexed matters, think deep thoughts, and provide solutions to problems is not something that most children are able to do. It is something that we learn to do as we go through the many obstacles we must face in life(which involves us losing our innocence). It is ultimately up to you whether to decide if what we gained is better than what we loss or vice versa. It is all a matter of opinion so there really is no right answer. These poems make it evident that after every tragic loss, there is a chance to rise. It is up to you how you choose to see this acquired knowledge. Is it burden or a gift? Or is just another gray area?