Meta Post Semester II

I believe that this semester was my best semester for blogging. Besides the fact that it was better because I actually kept up with it a little better than 2nd quarter, where I struggled on the morning of the due date for all blogs to finish mine, I feel like I also brought better ideas to the table that I will be able to use in thoughtful conversations outside of class as well. I also feel like I created a balanced mix of thoughts that I had on my own, like in Race In Classrooms and thoughts that sprung from class discussions, like The Death of Osama. However, I felt like some of the blogs I wrote from thoughts in class were almost exactly the same as the discussion we had in class. An example of this is More Huck Finn Controversy, where I talk about the banningof the book at New Trier and how I think if it should be banned at all, then it should be banned outside of classrooms so students could properly learn the social messages represented in the book. Although this is thought-provoking, it is still an idea that I took directly from someone else in class, and not my own.
I also had a lack of links in my blogs this semester. I am not sure if this observation is trivial or not, but I know that more links= more viewers. I don't think I did enough outside research for my blog this semester, which could have helped some of my arguments and comments.
I think my best blog for the whole entire semester is Theatrical Tokenism because I went very in-depth into the topic of tokenism in Les Miserables. Although it was quite long, I hoped that some people looking over my blog would be as interested/ appreciative of classic musical theater productions as I was. I brought in other ex   amples of different shows as well, such as Guys and Dolls. I also explained my point well with a little background of the story, rather than an complicated synopsis that would probably just confuse people. This is not something I've always necessarily been good at, so I think that is part of why I am so proud of this blog post. It's also my favorite because it was an original thought that I had outside of the classroom, but it is still mixed with conversations we had during school.

The American Dream

While discussing the American Dream the other day in AS, it was asked whether or not people born into incredibly rich families could achieve the America Dream, even if they already have everything they want. During this discussion, people began adopting Paris Hilton, the famous American heiress, as the ideal figure for this. Ironically, Hilton was on a reality TV show called "The Simple Life," where she and friend, Nicole Richie, took the places of parents in average middle class families in different areas of the U.S. and did all of their chores and errands for one day, while taking care of their kids and pets. Although these seem like completely normal tasks, Paris and Nicole's charmed lives made it entertaining to watch as they failed at folding laundry, making lunch for the kids, and walking the dog. These two girls made it nearly impossible to believe that any born-wealthy American could achieve the American Dream.

However, one exception comes to mind. My dad was born into a very wealthy family, with his grandfather being the CEO of a very successful company, and his father inheriting that company. Dad was a sophomore when his older brother flunked out of college, sending my grandparents into a frenzy over all of their children's educations. My father took it upon himself, in order to make his parents proud, to graduate early from school and work for UPS to pay for college by himself. He worked for one and a half years to pay for his first year of college and part of his second, which he also picked up another job for. He has been creating a living on his own since then, becoming a wealthy man himself and living in Winnetka. I believe that, even though my dad was not born to a poor family, he still worked very hard and earned the American Dream he lives today. Let me know if you know someone like that too!

The Importance of the Ability to Swim

Listening to my grandmother's conversations with her sisters and friends usually sparks an idea or two about racism. The other day, while talking about the importance of being able to swim, one of the ladies involved in the conversation blurted out:

"As important as the skill of swimming is, a lot of black people seem to not be able to. I never see blacks actually in the water, just around it."

This remark sparked a new conversation:

"Well, you know, the reason blacks can't swim is because back during the Civil Rights Movement, they weren't allowed at local pools, so they were never able to teach their kids, and their kids couldn't teach their kids, and so on."

As stereotypical as this is, do you feel there is some truth to it?

Class Markers II

Recently, while watching a film about the evolution of dogs in biology class (called "Dogs and More Dogs"), one of the narrators said something very interesting and relevant to our discussions on class in American Studies. He said that purebred dogs were a sign of an upper class family because it proved that the family could afford them and care for them. It struck me that the narrator specifically said "purebred," as though mutts were not expensive and did not need as much care and attention.
A comparison can be drawn from the low class mutt and high class purebred dog, to the descriptions of white in The Great Gatsby. F. Scott Fitzgerald commonly uses the color white as a marker of upper class in his novel. I don't think it's a coincidence that white people are often associated with upper class, while African Americans are normally associated with lower class. This portrays an extreme amount of racism towards blacks, who, in this case, are more similar to the mutt dogs rather than the purebreds.

Movies

Recently in AS, we have been talking about movies and the way we watch them. I started thinking about movies today and realized that although we consistently have movies coming out, few of them are very good or original. So many movies have 2, 3, or 4 sequels out because our consumerist tendencies have movie making companies milking one good movie for all it's worth.

This also must mean that original scripts are becoming less and less common, as our theaters are filled with movies like Shrek 4 and Spiderman 3. I looked at the movie listings on Fandango and found that the movies coming out consist of a lot of sequels. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, The Hangover Part II, Kung Fu Panda 2, Cars 2, X-Men: First Class, Tyler Perry's Madea's Big Happy Family, and Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil all were listed, just to name a few. Another large portion of the list was repetitive movies, but in 3-D, or "IMAX Experience," or even the IMAX 3-D Experience. I then proceeded to look at the Top Box Office sellers, and found that the number of weeks a film was released averaged from about 1 to 2 weeks. To me, this seemed very different from when I was younger, when films seemed to be out for a month, or a month and a half. These observations seem to indicated that the quality of movies and the movie industry has gone way down. What will movies be like in 20 years? or 50 years? Will they exist at all?

Class Markers

After spending a great Mother's Day helping my Mom open cards and gifts, it occurred to me before long that the method my family chose to prepare our gifts and cards for my Mom was not unique at all to our area where we live. Unfortunately, we pulled the classic "Dad-buys-the-card-and-signs-for-everybody." I remembered talking about this with my friends before, all of them being from upper class families, and they had all said that their family does the same thing on holidays and birthdays. Then, I remembered some of my friends from middle class families saying they made homemade cards, and spent a lot of time arranging them with brothers, sisters, and parents.

While rushing to the store and buying a picture frame after making this realization, I thought about in what way this could be considered a class marker. A distinction between the holidays for upper, middle, and lower class was clear, but I had never thought about the cards presented on the holiday in different families. In upper class families, we need hallmark to phrase things for us, while in middle/lower class, cards are much more sentimental and intimate.

Why are cards usually not as personal in upper class families?

This could be for a few reasons. Maybe a typical upper class family isn't as close to each other because of work schedule for parents (traveling, long hours, etc.) and a common use of a nanny in wealthy families, causing a lack of communication. It could also be the general high tension in the family due to things like pressure from parents which is common in upper class families.

I am not in any way intentionally belittling or judging any type of family, so if you have an exception to this thought, please feel free to comment back and elaborate on it!

The Death of Osama

Today in AS, we discussed thoughts about the recent headlines referring to Osama Bin Laden's death. After we all shared our thoughts and questions on notecards read aloud to the entire class, we realized there were a lot of mixed feelings about this assassination. A common emotion was fear of retaliation from Al Qaida. Others felt patriotic and relieved that the terrorist mastermind had finally been shut down.

Many also felt uncomfortable with celebrating someone's death, as many college students had done in front of the White House Sunday night after the news broke out (White House Celebration). This brought to the table a conflict of emotions between Americans. Should we feel proud to be responsible for the death of this man? Or should we be more respectful since we are dealing with the death of a man, as terrible as he was?