best picture ever

yep. can't get any better than this.

Maus II to complete formal weekend :/

The insight on Maus II that I found came from Ian Johnston, from a lecture at Malaspina University-College. In his analysis of the book, one point he brought up that really caught my attention was the fact that Maus II was a comic book. He states, "Naturally, he [Art Spiegelman] could have used plenty of other forms (poetry, novel, music, essays, diary entries, and so on), but as a professional comic book artist he, understandably enough, moved to his artistic strength. That's a unique gamble (something that has contributed to the book's fame and generated some heated debate) because until Maus appeared, the popular conception of subjects fit for comic books did not generally include serious treatments of deeply-rooted historical evil like the Holocaust." I completely agree with that Johnston stated here, because at first I was very skeptical of the novel before we started reading it. I was unsure of how the holocaust would be portrayed in a comic book style because it is a very serious subject, and comic books are often seen as juvenile and fun. As Johnston said, he could have used a different form, such as a novel or diary entry, but how would that have made the story different? Would it completely change the story and how it was understood? I think that even though it is not typical, the comic book/graphic novel was a good form of the story. It made it easy to understand, between the different times it was being told (present and past), and the difference between the Jews, Germans, Amercians, etc. portrayed as animals. The whole nature of representation would have been lost, if there was not the visual of the animals in the graphic novel. If Art Spiegelman would have told his story differently, we might not have understood it they way he wanted us to. Spiegelman's art helps tell his story clearly in his graphic novel, Maus.  

http://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/introser/maus.htm

Is it possible to have a working computer these days?

Cat’s Cradle can be considered a postmodern work of literature most specifically because of the way it is written and how the book starts. The first sentence of the book is “Call me Jonah” which is not a reference from the book Moby Dick about a lost man trying to find his way. The name of the man though is in contrast to  Moby Dick  as it is the biblical name of the man who was swallowed by a whale not a man who hunted a whale. Vonnegut uses both the name and the reference to another book to create a contrast and a postmodern style from the first sentence. The book starts with Kurt Vonnegut’s view of the world after the atomic bomb was used to end WWII. The narrator John or Jonah is writing a book “The Day the World Ended” which is about the day the atomic bomb was used on Hiroshima and included in his book is a section about the bomb’s creator Felix Hoenikker. John’s research includes Hoenikker’s family which includes his midget son, 6 foot tall daughter, and bug obsessed son. Ihab Hassan in his essay “Toward a Concept of Postmodernism” defines Postmodernism as: Paraphysics/Dadaism, Antiform (disjunctive, open), Play, Chance, Anarchy, Exhaustion/silence, Performance/Happening, Participation,  Decreation/Deconstruction, Antithesis, Absence, Dispersal, Text/Intertext, Rhetoric, Syntagm, Parataxis, Metonymy, Combination, Rhizome/Surface, Against Interpretation, Misreading, Signifier,  Idiolect, Desire, Mutant, Polymorphous, Schizophrenia, Difference-Differance/Trace, The Holy Ghost, Indeterminacy, and Immanence. It is clear from the second title of the book “The Day the World Ended” postmodern ideas are being used. The description of the family is also an aspect of postmodernism as they are not the normal nuclear family and they are different and strange and even ironically described as a family of freaks. This is also a comparison to the affects Hoenikker’s bomb had on people as it created mutants in similarity to his family. "The only way I can feel the least bit important is to think of all the mud that didn't even get to sit up and look around" further shows how Vonnegut’s style of writing is dark and contains postmodern stylization such as misreading and antiform.  Cat’s Cradle is filled with postmodern ideals.

This is more fun than SADIE'S!

In the novel Brave New World, author Aldous Huxley expressly contemplates the idea of a futuristic society with no regard for morals, ethics, or even a hint of societal values. Like the fmaous Orwell novel 1984, Brave New World deals with a futuristic society that hasdisregarded all of its moralistc past. Brave New World specifically addresses the issues of technology running rampant and how it could potentially affect the course of humanity. It can be argued that Huxley wanted to show how the rampancy of technology and oppression of society negatively changes the course of humanity.
The Youtube video covering a lecture by Sir Ken Robinson can be effectively used as a juxtaposition to the novel with in accordance with Robinson's views of the education system. Robinson thoroughly describes the modern education system and then proceeds to explain what is wrong with it and what he believes could help fix public education. Sir Robinson explains that the modern education system widely used today was intended for the Enlightenment era and that it is not suitable for today's students. He goes into detail about how today in the age of technology, that information is so readily available to everyone and that technology gives students things, such as video games and unlimited televsion, and that today's children don't do well in school simply because they are bored. Now this video closely relates to how the children in Brave New World are grouped together and the manner in which they are mass-educated, each child the same as the next. Brave New World can be used in my analysis to directly link how technology has changed students and negatively affects education.

In Tempest, William Shakespeare uses his setting and characterization to create a riveting story of a tyrannical dictator. The story of the slave Caliban and his "master" Prospero directly relate to Brave New World and the oppressive and all-powerful technologically enforced government controlling humanity. Tempest can be used to argue my position by using the play to show how an oppressive government in Brave New World adversely controls and changes the entire course of humanity with its technological advances.

I Love Blogging and Watching Youtube For Homework

The lecture given by Sir Ken Robinson helps to  address the striking similarities between the modern education system and the society visualized in Brave New World. Robinson's lecture explains how the modern education system is faulty and that it was created for the Enlightenment era. In today's technological era, Robinson hypothesizes that so many children are being diagnosed with ADHD not because there is an "epidemic" but simply because children are bored. Kids nowadays grow up around technology and the accessibility to information and that the things being taught in school are dull in comparison. The lecture also explains how the modern education follows the "factory model" in that batches" of children are processed through the system. This is similar to the societal trends of Brave New World and how the children are raised in groups to be similar to one another. "… all wear green," said a soft but very distinct voice," (Chapter 2) shows how everything about these "batches" are meant to be the same including what they wear and how they act. Robinson also explains how the education system today is impersonal and how the deciding factor on how "batches" are formed is based solely on age and not intelligence or skill level. This level of impersonality is similar to that of the society in the book. "For you must remember that in those days of gross viviparous reproduction, children were always brought up by their parents and not in State Conditioning Centres," (Chapter 2) shows how the system in the book is impersonal to a flaw. He further lectures on this fact by explaining how today's society has formed a mandate on whether a person is intelligent based on their job. His example of a furniture mover being told by society that he is stupid and him believing it relates to Brave New World and their society's view of different people. This relation to the book is shown by how the Indians are different because they are not genetically engineered as the rest of the population and how they are treated as inferior. Sir Ken Robinson addresses many key problems with the modern education system, many of which are relatable to the society depicted in Brave New World.

blogging is almost as fun as cornmazes....

In Chapter 3, I saw that there is no one ensuring that this technology and lifestyle doesn't go rampant. There is no person safeguarding morals and ethics. In this quote, "You all remember, I suppose, that beautiful and inspired saying of Our Ford's: History is bunk," (Chapter 3, pg. 34) you see how this society is viewed. People like this society and have withdrawn all morals and values from the past, replacing them with their faith in their technology. There is no one who is trying to safeguard and regulate humanity by making sure technology does not take over and manifest itself in all aspects of people's lives.
Chapter 3 shows how different and cold this world is by describing naked children playing like animals and a crying child being sent to a psychologist instead of being comforted, and and being uncomfortable with the word "mother." You can see just how cold and harsh this society is and how everyone is used to this lifestyle and no one is trying to change it. This type of society is enforced by sending a crying child to a psychologist because of the belief that he is abnormal.
Chapter 3 also helps to show the value system that the people believe in. Children must be "fixed" by psychologists when they are acting "differently" and the bonds between child and mother do not exist. Instead, all faith has been put into technology. The conditioning used on these children helps to regulate and control them and form them into socially conformed beings. All ties with other people are not caring bonds, they focus completely on being socially acceptable. The World State is making children without family ties and no feeling or impulses. A perfect society where everyone is the same is the goal. From the time the child is born, the World State brainwashes them and nurtures them into mindless beings.

I really haven't had enough of the Tempest yet.

In discussions of The Tempest, one controversial issue has been theme of colonialism. On the one hand, Will argues we are over-analyzing the text and steering away from its original meaning. On the other hand, Greenblatt contends in-depth analyzing gives readers more of an understanding. However, my own view agrees somewhat with both.

George Will strongly believes that too much analyzing of a text can distract readers from the true meaning. Totally understandable. Sometimes when analyzing texts in classes I highly doubt that a dad wearing a black raincoat means he's going to die tomorrow. Some of the things people come up with just seem ridiculous. Over analyzing and trying to dig deeper and deeper on one subject can really ruin the true meaning. Readers get so caught up in analyzing and analyzing that they forget what it is truly about. Although I do agree with his opinion, I also agree with Stephen Greenblatt.
In opposition, Greenblatt thinks that digging further into texts helps readers understand more what the intent it. Also very true. When I am analyzing something in class, I get many different perspectives and ideas. Maybe it could mean this or maybe the author really was portraying him that way. There are so many options on how to interpret texts.  Despite the fact that analyzing deeper into a text can better help me understand it, I do not want to be told how to interpret my text.
As for the Tempest, I can see both perspectives of Will and Greenblatt. In the instance of Caliban, some think he is a savage, while others see him as a victim. Greenblatt would delve deeper into Shakespeare's' writing, coming up with possible ideas that he may of had. I find these opinions of portrayal interesting, however I cannot be 100% sure of what exactly Shakespeare was trying to get out of the character. We could spend hours and hours debating over Calibans' character, or we could look at it, think about it, and form an opinion. I feel there is no need to dig so deep into something that we lose the original meaning. Shakespeare wrote the Tempest for a reason, and although we may not know the exact reason why, we are free to interpret it in whichever way we want.