Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Journal #15 Response to Sera De Vilder
In reading your response to what you would carry, I was able to relate to you in saying the same exact thing. Like you said, carrying photos of your family and friends would really help you get through the thought of war and really understand why you are there and who you are fighting for. What I thought was interesting that you brought up was also carrying a diary. I thought that this was interesting that you brought this up because in reading this story, this probably would've been a great thing for the soldiers to carry with them to express their emotions. I think a diary would've been helpful for me if i were to carry something just because it would be away to not only let out my emotions but something that if i were to still be alive, share it with my family so they could realize the sacrifice i made for them and the country as a whole. However, what I could not agree with you more on was carrying your faith along with you. As a catholic as well, I have always believed that having faith and hope will get you through some difficult times. I feel that this is something very important to carry along with you just because if you don't have faith in God and his angels, you wont have faith in yourself. I know from my dad's experience he told me that he had his pennant with him everyday and prayed everyday to help him get though the war. He said that if he probably didn't have faith in god, he probably wouldn't be here today. I feel like everyone in the war had to have some religious faith to get them though what they were going through, especially all the death and hardache they witnessed.
Border Patrol State
Ms. Silko,
Reading your arguments presented were very interesting to read. However though, I had to disagree with you in some aspects. Relating this to a personal story or experience, I have never felt the ways that you have felt when traveling within our borders. I felt it really interesting that you stated "Unfortunately, what happened to me is an everyday occurrence here now. Since the 1980s, on top of greatly expanding border checkpoints, the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol have implemented policies that interfere with the rights of U.S. citizens to travel freely within our borders." I thought this was interesting just because I don't think that checkpoints and all interfere with our rights as citizens. However, I believe that these are done to actually protect us and catch those who aren't citizens and those who have committed crimes while being here in the United States.
I also thought that though your arguments were interesting, I felt that they were a little over dramatic when you stated, " I thought how easy it would be for the Border Patrol to shoot us and leave our bodies and car beside the highway, like so many bodies found in these parts and ascribed to drug runners." As having traveled through the same road as you, I felt that this was a little over exaggerated. In the many times I have traveled the same road, not once have I had the feeling that the border patrol would hurt us in any way. Yes, they do stop you at checkpoints, but they simply just ask you "are you an American citizen?" and let you go. Some might argue like yourself that the border patrol would only do this to non minorities but however, I am a minority as well and I still to this day have not endured the same situation as you have endured. Also, you also mentioned about the way individuals spoke and the accents they had that could be the cause of their detainment. This was one more comment that I had to disagree on due to the fact that my dad has a slight accent and not once have we been racially profiled nor detained at a checkpoint. In your writing, I understood every argument that you made. Like I said before, you made some very key points in your writings but for the most part I would have to agree with you. I realize times have changed, so that may be a factor in our disagreeing as well.
Reading your arguments presented were very interesting to read. However though, I had to disagree with you in some aspects. Relating this to a personal story or experience, I have never felt the ways that you have felt when traveling within our borders. I felt it really interesting that you stated "Unfortunately, what happened to me is an everyday occurrence here now. Since the 1980s, on top of greatly expanding border checkpoints, the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol have implemented policies that interfere with the rights of U.S. citizens to travel freely within our borders." I thought this was interesting just because I don't think that checkpoints and all interfere with our rights as citizens. However, I believe that these are done to actually protect us and catch those who aren't citizens and those who have committed crimes while being here in the United States.
I also thought that though your arguments were interesting, I felt that they were a little over dramatic when you stated, " I thought how easy it would be for the Border Patrol to shoot us and leave our bodies and car beside the highway, like so many bodies found in these parts and ascribed to drug runners." As having traveled through the same road as you, I felt that this was a little over exaggerated. In the many times I have traveled the same road, not once have I had the feeling that the border patrol would hurt us in any way. Yes, they do stop you at checkpoints, but they simply just ask you "are you an American citizen?" and let you go. Some might argue like yourself that the border patrol would only do this to non minorities but however, I am a minority as well and I still to this day have not endured the same situation as you have endured. Also, you also mentioned about the way individuals spoke and the accents they had that could be the cause of their detainment. This was one more comment that I had to disagree on due to the fact that my dad has a slight accent and not once have we been racially profiled nor detained at a checkpoint. In your writing, I understood every argument that you made. Like I said before, you made some very key points in your writings but for the most part I would have to agree with you. I realize times have changed, so that may be a factor in our disagreeing as well.
Friday, November 11, 2011
"The Things they Carried"
In reading the background as to what this writing was/is about, what would've automatically came to my mind was to carry a gun. Thinking back, Vietnam was a dangerous place to be and it is considered one of the deadliest wars we have ever faced as a nation. However, reading this writing by O'Brien, made me actually feel what they went through and changed my first thought about what I would carry with me.
Throughout the beginning of the reading, it describes all the materials the men had carried with them. "Among the necessities or near-necessities were P-38 can openers, pocket knives, heat tabs, wristwatches, dog tags, mosquito repellent.." (pg 1459). Though these could be seen as important items to hold with you, I would probably carry photographs and letters as well, just like Lieutenant Jimmy Cross. In reading, I was able to grasp the feeling he had had with the possession of the photos of Martha. In describing the photos, it showed that there was much meaning towards her and so much love that actually aided him in his efforts to stay alive while fighting in the war. Because understanding the issue that you might/might not come home, I think, that this was a way of coping his feelings and living the happy aspect of his life through mementos such as photographs. Not only do the photographs provide this, but letters as well. I would carry both just because in reading his feelings and reactions, i feel, that having these objects would help me continue fighting. In looking at the meaning, Martha's letters, her presence, every aspect about her, kept Cross going each day. I think that maybe if he didn't have these tokens of her, I don't think that he would've been able to continue in living each day.
Throughout the beginning of the reading, it describes all the materials the men had carried with them. "Among the necessities or near-necessities were P-38 can openers, pocket knives, heat tabs, wristwatches, dog tags, mosquito repellent.." (pg 1459). Though these could be seen as important items to hold with you, I would probably carry photographs and letters as well, just like Lieutenant Jimmy Cross. In reading, I was able to grasp the feeling he had had with the possession of the photos of Martha. In describing the photos, it showed that there was much meaning towards her and so much love that actually aided him in his efforts to stay alive while fighting in the war. Because understanding the issue that you might/might not come home, I think, that this was a way of coping his feelings and living the happy aspect of his life through mementos such as photographs. Not only do the photographs provide this, but letters as well. I would carry both just because in reading his feelings and reactions, i feel, that having these objects would help me continue fighting. In looking at the meaning, Martha's letters, her presence, every aspect about her, kept Cross going each day. I think that maybe if he didn't have these tokens of her, I don't think that he would've been able to continue in living each day.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Zitkala-Sa's American Dream
Zitkala-Sa's writings have so much meaning as the reader is able to live her life through the readings. In beginning to read the reading, I was able to grasp what she under went through much hard ache to obtain the American Dream she yearned for. In the first couple of sections, she describes her difficulties she under went, which therefore leads readers to believe that her American Dream was taken away from her. "I cried aloud, shaking my head all the while until I felt the cold blades of the scissors against my neck, and heard them gnaw off one of my thick braids. Then I lost my spirit." (pg. 431) This sentence really stood out to me in analyzing her text. It shows that under going hardships, losing what she had before, and adapting to a new culture and following higher authorities leads to obtaining an American Dream. Later on, she was able to learn how to speak a more amount of English than she did before, which therefore, was a positive outlook. In writing her piece of literature, she discusses what needed to be done before acquiring that American Dream. Discussing hardships and going into detail on what was felt and endured tells the reader that it required tears and sweat.
This text, in general, shows the life of many in incurring the American dream. In the end, "At the close of this second term of three years I was the proud owner of my first diploma. The following autumn I ventured upon a college career against my mother's will" (pg 437). This text was very important in the fact that this was against her mother's will and what she believed what was right for her. In being away for years and adapting to another culture, thus getting rid of your original, you start to change for the better and realize that where you originally stood, would've never gotten you closer to your American Dream. This nonetheless, shows the differences of American Dreams; In the mother's perspective, her American dream was taken away from her by being taken from her while her American dream was accomplished through obtaining a degree.
This text, in general, shows the life of many in incurring the American dream. In the end, "At the close of this second term of three years I was the proud owner of my first diploma. The following autumn I ventured upon a college career against my mother's will" (pg 437). This text was very important in the fact that this was against her mother's will and what she believed what was right for her. In being away for years and adapting to another culture, thus getting rid of your original, you start to change for the better and realize that where you originally stood, would've never gotten you closer to your American Dream. This nonetheless, shows the differences of American Dreams; In the mother's perspective, her American dream was taken away from her by being taken from her while her American dream was accomplished through obtaining a degree.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
HAWAII'S STORY BY HAWAII'S QUEEN
"But I was destined to grow up away from the house of my parents. Immediately after my birth I was wrapped in the finest soft tapa cloth, and taken to the house of another chief, by whom I was adopted."
This quote from the first chapter stood out in regards to the context used when describing her memories at birth. Using descriptive words such as "finest soft tapa cloth" indicates foreshadowing relating to future wealth and royalty to be obtained and this idea of importance incurred before even declared. However, the overall language starting from "but i was destined to grow up away.." to the end "by whom I was adopted" encodes this message of higher significance and a clear stated sign of dominance, which sends the message across to the reader the idea of the "I wear the pants"concept, that she is a person of self-diligence and leadership abilities, as well as becoming future leader and acquiring nothing but the best either for her or for the best of the future of others.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Blog #12: Imperialism
Write 300-500 words about IMPERIALISM. What has shocked, surprised, or distressed you? What was weird or strange? Reflect on anything about readings on IMPERIALISM (for Nov. 1 & 3), showing how your thoughts changed or expanded.
In discussing imperialism, what automatically came to my mind was colonial times. In our previous readings from the beginning of the semester, we discussed Christopher Columbus and the idea of the Native Americans "needing help or aid". This need turned into other individuals coming in and changing what was already established or reinforcing that "the found this land first." So, when learning about imperialism in class, I immediately thought about what was said prior. The thought of imperialism has to do with the idea of influencing other countries to basically follow what we believe in. With that being said, what happened with the Native Americans and assimilation is exactly what is happening with this idea of imperialism in the late 1800s.
In analyzing the picture in class today, a lot of things came into mind. The photo that was in The Journal, Detroit shows a man (U.S. soldier) carrying what it looks like a native of a country up the hill to a school house. In analyzing this, it basically shows the U.S. forcing the people of whatever country to do what we basically want them to do. The pictures shows force, as the man is carrying him up, and also shows a ship in the background which shows that the U.S. in a way occupied the country which adds to the force. This picture really brought some interesting questions to the table, and really made me think back to our previous discussions. In thinking about this, someone brought up the point in class that this is still occurring now which i definitely agree with. In looking at current events especially in the middle east, one can really see this occurring. Though at times it could be the best for the country, other times it can be seen in a negative aspect. Just looking at the situation, it seems as if the U.S is going back to colonial times when the Europeans did the same. If you look at it, is this really the direction we should be going in? I found these readings very interesting and easy to relate to with current times.
In discussing imperialism, what automatically came to my mind was colonial times. In our previous readings from the beginning of the semester, we discussed Christopher Columbus and the idea of the Native Americans "needing help or aid". This need turned into other individuals coming in and changing what was already established or reinforcing that "the found this land first." So, when learning about imperialism in class, I immediately thought about what was said prior. The thought of imperialism has to do with the idea of influencing other countries to basically follow what we believe in. With that being said, what happened with the Native Americans and assimilation is exactly what is happening with this idea of imperialism in the late 1800s.
In analyzing the picture in class today, a lot of things came into mind. The photo that was in The Journal, Detroit shows a man (U.S. soldier) carrying what it looks like a native of a country up the hill to a school house. In analyzing this, it basically shows the U.S. forcing the people of whatever country to do what we basically want them to do. The pictures shows force, as the man is carrying him up, and also shows a ship in the background which shows that the U.S. in a way occupied the country which adds to the force. This picture really brought some interesting questions to the table, and really made me think back to our previous discussions. In thinking about this, someone brought up the point in class that this is still occurring now which i definitely agree with. In looking at current events especially in the middle east, one can really see this occurring. Though at times it could be the best for the country, other times it can be seen in a negative aspect. Just looking at the situation, it seems as if the U.S is going back to colonial times when the Europeans did the same. If you look at it, is this really the direction we should be going in? I found these readings very interesting and easy to relate to with current times.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Blog #11
In reading Pauline Hopkins' “As the Lord Lives, He Is One of Our Mother’s Children” and Claude McKay's poems, I was able to realize the social changes in the United States after the Civil war. Though there were positive changes in reference to African Americans gaining little rights, lynching became a big problem facing this minority group. When we look at change, we see positive but then as soon as it grows, it gets beaten to the ground in this case. What was so hard for me to understand and maybe this goes along with a perplexing question is that though they were given rights, how was lynching to be able to take place.
In the reading "As the Lord Lives, He is One of Our Mother's Children," lynching was brought to this small town and many whites went after black men in jail first and were to lynch them in front of the crowd. "They only way you can teach these niggers a lesson is to go to the jail and lynch these men as an object lesson. String them up! That is the only thing to do" (pg 245). However, Rev. Stevens discovered a black man who can pass off as a white male hiding from being lynched. In the end, however, the individual is lynched though the true murderer had been caught and he was innocent. While reading this, it brought many questions in regards to freedom and the American dream. The same idea came to mind when reading the poems by Claude McKay. "If we must die, o let us nobly die. So that our precious blood may not be shed." The reason the Civil War was fought was primarily in reference to slavery. After, they were gained extra rights and many would think that this would be it. However, things changed dramatically when the idea of lynching came about. Due to the fact that many whites feared that blacks would now become a threat, they referred to this as a way to deal with the problem. In tying it all together, the question still comes up to how this was even seen as something right politically and morally. If they had gained rights, what's there to be in fear of? How is lynching solving a purpose and how does it correspond with what was written in the Constitution?
In the reading "As the Lord Lives, He is One of Our Mother's Children," lynching was brought to this small town and many whites went after black men in jail first and were to lynch them in front of the crowd. "They only way you can teach these niggers a lesson is to go to the jail and lynch these men as an object lesson. String them up! That is the only thing to do" (pg 245). However, Rev. Stevens discovered a black man who can pass off as a white male hiding from being lynched. In the end, however, the individual is lynched though the true murderer had been caught and he was innocent. While reading this, it brought many questions in regards to freedom and the American dream. The same idea came to mind when reading the poems by Claude McKay. "If we must die, o let us nobly die. So that our precious blood may not be shed." The reason the Civil War was fought was primarily in reference to slavery. After, they were gained extra rights and many would think that this would be it. However, things changed dramatically when the idea of lynching came about. Due to the fact that many whites feared that blacks would now become a threat, they referred to this as a way to deal with the problem. In tying it all together, the question still comes up to how this was even seen as something right politically and morally. If they had gained rights, what's there to be in fear of? How is lynching solving a purpose and how does it correspond with what was written in the Constitution?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)