A Jar of Marbles

2011-12-22T23:24:00.000-06:00

Batman: the Dark Knight, is a movie that explores the aspectsand roles of both the “official Hero, and the “outlaw hero.” It is the story oftwo “knights,” or heroes of sorts. It is about Batman, the outlaw hero,fighting off a crazy murdering psychopath and how he loses everything in theprocess because he pushes the criminals into retaliating back by paying the Joker to kill and terrorize.The other character is Harvey Dent, who is the “official” hero, and hesimilarly loses everything to the Joker, but instead of pushing forward likeBatman, he goes insane and starts killing people.

Harvey Dent from Batman the Dark Knight is, at thebeginning of the movie, an official hero. Harvey Dent is in fact, a nearlyperfect image of an official hero. He isthe district attorney for Gotham City, and is known by the city as “Gotham’sWhite Knight.” His job is to do the same thing that The Batman does, which isto catch criminals. Harvey Dent’sphysical appearance even gives off the sense of a bright shining hero with hisyoung healthy person, his blond hair, and even his honest blue eyes. However,he also has some “outlaw hero” in him. He breaks the rules when he lies to thecity and he says he is Batman so that the Batman has a chance to catch theJoker, or when he takes one of the Joker’s men and threatens him in an alley,which he does when he finds that the Joker has threatened the love of his life.He says near the beginning of the movie when defending Batman that, ">When their enemies were at the gates, the Romans wouldsuspend democracy and appoint one man to protect the city. It wasn't consideredan honor, it was considered a public service.” When Rachel says, “Harvey, thelast man who they appointed the Republic was named Caesar and he never gave uphis power.” He replies, Okay, fine. you either die a hero or you live longenough to see yourself become the villain,” Which is a foreshadowing of what isgoing to happen. Later in the movie, when Harvey Dent loses Rachel, hisgirlfriend, he lets the Joker convince him that he should have revenge, and soGotham’s “white Knight,” is turned into a villain. At the end of the movie hedies and they cover up his murders so that Gotham doesn’t lose hope in HarveyDent’s initial fight against the crime in the city. He does both the thingsthat he says a hero does. In reality he becomes the villain and kills people,but in the eyes of Gotham, when batman covers up for him, he dies a hero and isremembered for his noble cause.

Bruce Wayne, oras he is known by the criminals of Gotham city, Batman, is an “Outlaw” hero.Bruce Wayne is witty, intelligent, and dangerous. He is childish in the factthat he seems to enjoy his little game he plays by pretending to be a snobby,selfish, unintelligent playboy by day and The Batman by night. Robert B. Ray saysthat an outlaw hero has a distrust of society, which is shown by the fact thatBruce Wayne doesn’t think that Gotham’s police force is adequate enough to takecare of Gotham without The Batman. So, just like an outlaw hero does, BruceWayne decides to take the law into his own hands to try and stop crime inGotham city. One thing that suggests that maybe Batman might wish that he wasable to fight crime lawfully is when the Joker says, “Don't talk like one ofthem, you're not. Even if you'd like to be. To them, you're just a freak, likeme. They need you right now. But when they don't, they'll cast you out, like aleper. See, their morals, their code... it's a bad joke. Dropped at the firstsign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll showyou, when the chips are down, these... these civilized people will eat eachother. See, I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve.” So it brings upthe question of whether or not Batman really wants to fight crime masked andsecret, but by the end of the movie he makes the decision of being Batman andtaking not glory, but hate, because Bruce Wayne, or Batman, is there for thepeople, not for himself.

What is thedifference between Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent? In the movie, they are almostpartners of sorts. Harvey Dent is the “White Knight,” and Bruce Wayne is the“Dark Knight. They help each other when Harvey protects Batman from Gotham bytelling Gotham that he is Batman, and then Batman saves him from the Jokerafter that. Even their appearance is symbolic, in that Harvey has blond hair,blue eyes, and Bruce Wayne has dark hair and green eyes. Also the same thing isdearest to both of them, and that is that is that they are both in love withRachael Dawes. When she dies however the two men have very different reactions.At the end of the movie, Harvey Dent’s statement, “You either die a hero orlive long enough to see yourself become the villain,” comes true when ithappens to both him and Batman at the end of the movie. Harvey sees himselfbecome the villain at the end of the story by threating and killing people, butin the same breath, when he dies by falling off a building, The policecommissioner Gordon, and Batman decide to cover up Harvey’s crimes so that allthe good work he did doesn’t get erased, therefore, Harvey dies a hero in thepeoples’ eyes. Batman makes a choice and decides to take the blame because ashe puts it, “I can do those things because I'm not a hero, not like Dent. Ikilled those people. That's what I can be. I’m whatever Gotham needs me tobe.You'll hunt me. You'll condemn me. Setthe dogs on me. Because that's what needs to happen. Becausesometimes the truth isn't good enough. Sometimes people deserve to havetheir faith rewarded.” Batman decides to take the heroic blow because he is thenot the “official white,” knight, but the “outlawed dark knight.” Oneinteresting thing is that Batman also has the both of Harvey’s said possibleending for a hero, he dies a hero, “he stops being Gotham’s secret hero Batmanby taking the blame for Harvey’s actions, and he lives long enough to seehimself become the villain in the eyes of the people. This gives an interestingspin on the “official” and the “outlaw” hero.

Paradox of The Dark Knight

2011-12-22T21:51:00.002-06:00

I’ve never been able to keep up withHollywood’s constant stream of movies releases, preferring instead to waitthree months until the movie is released on video. I distinctly remember myfriends going to the midnight opening of TheDark Knight when it was released in 2008 and the continuous raving for thenext couple of weeks. Even so, it was three years until I finally got around towatching this movie, which I’d heard so much about. Cynical because it was anaction flick, and a super-hero film to boot (I’d seen the Spider Man movie andwas less than impressed), I sat down hopeful to be surprised, yet prepared tobe disappointed. As I watched The DarkKnight, I was entranced, my stomach in knots and my blanket up to my eyes.I kept thinking to myself, “I know this story. I know this story!”

Thereare particular stories out there that, for some reason, pull at human heartstrings in very singular ways. Specifically, these stories play, whetherconsciously or unconsciously, on the fact that every human being lives the samestory, that we the human race are fundamentally made up of the same stuff, thatthere are some things that hold true for us all. These stories are myths.

Recentlyreading Robert Ray’s essay “The Thematic Paradigm,” in which he explores theidea that American films do not merely entertain, but reflect “fundamentalpatterns and contradictions in our society’s myths and values,” I wondered whata movie like The Dark Knight saysabout our society. Ray says that there are two kinds of heroes in our movies.Firstly, there is the official hero, who is an outstanding citizen, upright,wise, and just. He is accepted in his community and usually has a stableprofessional and personal life. The second is the outlaw hero, who does notabide by the law, but instead makes his own rules for the good of others orhimself. He is often daring, unreliable, and almost childlike. However, Raypoints out, we usually cannot seem to choose between these two heroes, andinstead merge them together into one character. He suggests that this isbecause America has always been ambivalent of the value of civilization. Thisambivalence is revealed by the heroes of our movies, as, at the cinema, we playThe King’s Speech in theatre 7 and Pirates of the Caribbean next door intheatre 8. We simply cannot choose whether to root for the “official hero”,such as King George VI or to root for the “outlaw hero,” such as Captain JackSparrow. The outlaw hero: brave, independent, and totally free, and theofficial hero: decent, just, and full of wisdom are in a continual tug-of-warwith each other. On the one hand, the glamour and freedom of the outlaw heroare alluring to us. There’s a reason they’ve made four Pirates of the Caribbean movies; there is something so wonderfullytempting about Captain Jack Sparrow—he is friend to no one, feels indebted tono one, and considers only himself in every choice he makes. At the otherextreme, however, what could be more heroic than George Bailey’s choice in It’s a Wonderful Life to stay home andrun the Building and Loan to keep the town from going to ruins in the hands ofMr. Potter. And so the tugging rages on. In TheDark Knight this paradox of the official hero and the outlaw hero isevident in the characters of Batman and Harvey Dent, and the movie reveals a muchabout the ambivalence and yet absolute faith that our society has incivilization.

The Dark Knight joins thistug-of-war too, but what stopped me in my tracks, was that this duality isfound not only within the film, but within the main characters. Bruce Wayne, asBatman, takes on this duality, which is the basis for entire movie. He is, inessence, both the official hero and the outlaw hero. By day, he is Bruce Wayne,Gotham City’s richest, most influential businessman, who owns close to half thecity’s businesses. Like every businessman, Bruce Wayne wears a suit and tie,goes to meetings, and has his own secretary. He is highly regarded in the eyesof the city officials and is known for his philanthropy. After a fundraiserwith Bruce Wayne, any politician won’t need another cent for his campaign.Fitting the bill of the official hero, Bruce Wayne is in a place of power inthe city and is extremely smart with his resources and position. By night,though, this man dons the mask and armor of Batman, a secreted vigilante, whosingle-handedly put Gotham’s criminals behind bars, without aid or connectionto Gotham’s police force. Truly, Batman himself is a lawbreaker, operatingoutside the rules of the common people. Even so, Gotham’s police force does nottry to stop Batman, because, with crime flourishing in the city, they needBatman desperately. The incredible strength in Batman is not that he islawless—he is not—but that he replaced Gotham’s laws with a law of his own.Because Gotham’s laws hold Batman back from bringing justice to the city, hemust ignore them. Batman only has one rule: he will not kill. He must upholdthis rule because he knows that when he breaks it, Batman loses his power. Ashis butler, Alfred, says, “He can make the choice that no one else can make—theright choice.” By holding to this law Batman makes himself more than a man. Inthe words of Henri Ducard, “But if you make yourself more than just a man, ifyou devote yourself to an ideal, and if they can't stop you, then you becomesomething else entirely—a legend.” Batman inspires people; he brings them hopeof justice. Gotham depends on Batman. It does not love him and it is not loyalto him, but it does depend on him. The genius of The Dark Knight is that the duality of the official hero and theoutlaw hero in one is so blatant. Bruce Wayne struggles throughout the entiremovie. On one side of the coin, Bruce Wayne wants nothing more than to be donewith Batman and he does everything in his power, including helping to lock upthe entire mob, to prepare Gotham to no longer need Batman. On the flip side,however, Bruce Wayne cannot give up Batman because Batman is his true identity,and it is Bruce Wayne that is the mask. Rachel sees this struggle in him whenshe writes in her letter, “When I told you that if Gotham no longer neededBatman we could be together, I meant it. But I'm not sure the day will comewhen you will no longer need Batman.”Batman holds a mythical position of this strange dichotomy of the melding ofthe official and outlaw hero.

Instrong parallel to Batman, Harvey Dent is the secondary hero of The Dark Knight. Much more so thanBatman, Harvey Dent is an official hero. He is the district attorney of Gothamcity, has neatly combed blonde hair, and is going steady with the beautifulRachel Dawes. He is known by the people as Gotham’s White Knight. Harvey Dentis a very likeable man who is smart, clever, good, and decent. Unlike Batman,he works with the police openly to fight crime, but is also very adept at it.Harvey Dent is, in many ways, similar to Batman, sharing a passion to fightcrime, a symbolic image of justice in Gotham, and even feelings for the samewoman. He is a brave man, explaining to Rachel, in one scene, that he’s farless scared of the mob than of the members of the Fire Brigade at his campaignfundraiser. In his first scene, during a court session, the criminal on trialpulls out a gun and points it at Harvey’s face. Without hesitation, Harveyknocks the gun out of the criminal’s hand and punches him in the nose. Totallyunfazed, Harvey retorts that, “If you want to kill a public servant, I recommendyou buy American.” From the start, we learn that there is a rebellious side toHarvey Dent. In this scene, he did not do the “responsible” thing and let thecriminal escape, but instead, risks his own life and takes matters into his ownhands. It isn’t until later in the movie that we discover Harvey’s reputationfor having two different sides to his personality. Here comes that inescapabledichotomy. In addition to his nickname Gotham’s White Knight, Harvey hasanother nickname, which is far less pristine—Two Face. Suddenly, the officialoutlaw hero dichotomy is revealed. Although we never knew the exact reasonHarvey earned himself this nickname, we know that he, just like Batman, has twovery different sides. He is both the official hero and the outlaw hero.

Tofurther entangle this hero paradox, it is interesting to examine the characterof Batman and Harvey Dent a bit further. Ray says in “The Thematic Paradigm”that although America cannot choose between the official hero and the outlawhero, we have a tendency to lean towards the outlaw hero. There is somethingcompletely enticing about the freedom and courage the outlaw hero brings, whichare values that America itself is built on. Batman’s existence, this ideal ofBruce Wayne’s creation, fundamentally depends on Batman’s lawlessness, or inother words, on his outlaw-ish heroism. Just as Alfred reminds Bruce Wayne, assoon as Batman cows to the demands and laws of the society, Batman ceases toexist. Diametrically, Harvey Dent is theexact opposite; he cannot exist without the law. The moment he sets footoutside the law, he is corrupted. As Harvey Dent says at the start of themovie, “You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become thevillain.” Fulfilling his own words when he tries to take justice into his ownhands, he turns to murder and betrayal. Harvey kidnaps Gordon’s, his formerpartner, family and threatens to kill his them in the name of justice. BlamingGordon for Rachel’s death, he claims that is only fair that Gordon share hispain. Without the law, Harvey Dent becomes another villain. That is why, at theend of the story, Batman is the true hero—the outlaw hero.

Thezenith of the paradox is that after all is said and done, Harvey dead and thecity on the brink of disaster, Batman too must fulfill Harvey Dent’s words.Batman shoulders the blame of Harvey Dent’s villainy and give up his title asGotham’s hero. He becomes Gotham’s scapegoat and by “dying a hero”, saves thecity. He receives no glory, no love, no admiration, yet that is not his place.Gotham depends on him. It is this story’s mythically paradoxical nature thatmakes me, every time since my first viewing, think to myself every time I watchThe Dark Knight, “I know this story!I know this story!” I know it because I’ve heard the story many times beforeand because I know these heroes well. TheDark Knight is a blatant and brilliant picture of the tug-of-war betweenthe official hero and the outlaw hero, between glory and humility, and betweenthe dying and rising of a hero.

You Talk Good, Mr. President

2011-12-22T21:36:00.000-06:00

If you want people to trust you, talk to them, and talk to them good. Ronald Reagan, as a former movie actor, knew full well that the key is communication, earning himself the nickname “The Great Communicator.” Interestingly, Reagan, hailed as one of America’s best-loved presidents, took on the White House equipped not with outstanding political experience, but with storytelling experience. Some people suggest that Ronald Reagan was not one of our smartest presidents, and, in fact, he did not have one of the top IQ scores, especially compared to presidents such as Eisenhower, Clinton, or Wilson. Perhaps Reagan wasn’t as book smart as some of his predecessors, yet he was certainly one of our wisest and cleverest presidents, because he knew how to play his strengths and how to be honest with the country he was running.

Known as a highly committed conservative, Reagan’s politics broke the stride of the moderates that had served for the last several years. His plans, which came to be known as Supply Side economics, were to raise taxes in order to promote economic growth. Surprising many left-wingers, Reagan seized on issues that Democrats had long regarded as their own, including the issues of economic growth and personal consumption, but taking a different strategy to achieving it. He proposed to lower taxes immensely. Some people scoffed at this idea, predicting that it bring an economic heart attack rather than expansion. For the first couple of years after these policies were adhered to, there was a sharp economic downturn. Thankfully, things were merely getting worse before they got better. In 1983, the U.S. economy experienced a dramatic rebound, producing 17 million new jobs and causing inflation to drop about ten percent, landing at about two percent. Although these policies later proved controversial because the large expenses that were built up by the government, including huge expenses for the military, it is certain that Reagan got the U.S. out of a deep economic slump and that the military expenses surely had a lasting effect for America in regards to the Soviet Union.

One thing that Reagan had in common with his all of the presidents from the thirty years prior to his presidency was that he was strongly anti-communist, stating that, “The Soviet Union is an Evil Empire, and Soviet communism is the focus of evil in the modern world.” Unlike Johnson, Nixon, Kennedy, and Eisenhower, though, he sought different methods to defeat communism. When talking about America and specifically the Republican Party Reagan said, “All of a sudden, Republicans were not defenders of the status quo, but creators of the future. They were looking at tomorrow with all the single-mindedness of an inventor.” The words from Reagan’s own mouth also apply well to himself. Reagan’s approach against communism was far more aggressive than his predecessors in this sense: Reagan was not always on the defensive, attempting to “roll back” communism—containment. Instead he focused mainly on challenging the Soviet Union with the U.S.’s military buildup, whose budget increased nearly thirty percent in four years. Yet, for all these expenses, it was not Johnson, Nixon, Kennedy, or Eisenhower who saw the end of the Cold War in their White House years, but Ronald Reagan, who achieved it at the tail end of his second term.

One advantage Reagan had was that, as America’s oldest president he had acquired a different kind of wisdom. Just as he knew his strengths, Reagan knew what he could not do. He understood that he could not, and should not, run the country single handedly, kinging every area independently. He learned to delegate, a skill completely underrated and regarded as an incompetent man’s safety blanket. Some people thought because of this that Reagan was only posing and wasn’t really in charge. They thought he really had no clue what was going on. However, I feel that his ability to delegate was Reagan’s greatest asset, which dovetailed perfectly with one of his major priorities which was to reduce the governmental regulation structure. Reagan himself said frankly, “Government is the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”

In everything he did, Reagan brought hope to America, spreading his message, “It’s morning in America.” In this, he was very similar to FDR, who was one of his heroes as a child, yet Reagan was far more honest than FDR. People trusted Reagan, and they still do. Even in his professional life he hid little and openly laughed at himself and the government. He didn’t take himself too seriously, commenting once, when talking about his C-average grades, “But there are advantages to being elected President. The day after I was elected, I had my high school grades classified Top Secret.” People also trusted Reagan because he wasn’t afraid of America or what they could do to him, and most importantly he had faith in the American people. He believed that the American people were good, full of brilliant ideas that could change the way America was run.

The Great Society

2011-11-22T23:27:00.000-06:00

Playing shadow to Mr. Celebrity president for two and a halfyears, Lyndon Johnson knew he would have to establish an iconic administrationall his own after Kennedy’s unforgettable assassination. Following up such aman as Kennedy would not be easy, as he was adored by the public. Johnson gotthe presidency by default, as opposed to by the people’s vote. Johnson hadnever possessed the charisma or media-friendly personality that Kennedy hadbeen known for. Yet, Johnson was determined to wield his power over America,which had so long been stifled by his background position during Kennedy’sfruitful years in office. Although he lacked Kennedy’s silver-screen looks andpersonality, Johnson was a master at wheedle his position, whether by flattery,persuasion, or threats.

Johnson both urged for passage of legislation that had beenproposed by Kennedy’s administration and for much grander proposals of his own,concentrating namely on three domestic issues: tax cutting, civil rights, andeconomic inequality. It turned out that Kennedy’s death was very beneficial toJohnson in some regards. Johnson pressed congress to respect Kennedy’s lastwishes by passing the legislation he had fought for in the last months of hislife. By 1964, Johnson obtained the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in July 1964.Although, the act surely would have been passed eventually, the emotionalpressure placed on the congress by Johnson quickly made up their minds on thecase. Not only this, but between 1964 and 1965, nearly 200 new laws werepassed. Although he used Kennedy’s assassination as sure-footed leverage,Johnson also made clear that it was time to close the New Frontier. He forged anew policy and called it the Great Society. He said that it was time forAmerica, “to build a great society, a place where the meaning of man's lifematches the marvels of man's labor." Johnson wanted a society where thingswere “fair” and where no person was very poor, and so he pushed for welfare.Johnson also cared a lot about the image of the nation. Poor people weredistasteful; they made a nation look bad. Similarly, the conflict of the CivilRights Movement made America look divided and unorganized, and so he pushed forCivil Rights. On the other hand, Johnson believed that tax cuts would promotehuge growth in the economy, and so he pushed for tax cuts. Many of Johnson’spolicies, such as Medicaid, Medicare, and social security reflected his need tocontrol America’s image as an unrelentingly anti-communist, economicallyunprecedented world power. However, the measures Johnson took to do this wentawfully far.

When Johnson took office immediately after Kennedy’sassassination, he was hesitant to get highly involved in the war in SoutheastAsia, but he feared that his associates might find him a pushover towardscommunism. This was one thing he couldn’t have, so when Johnson gained thepresidency, he sought to deepen the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. This was astep into quicksand, and getting out would take America twenty-five years. Thewar stretched on, yet even after Johnson felt sure that the U.S. would not beable to preserve an anti-communist in South Vietnam, he was torn over theconsequences that would occur from a U.S. pullout and hestitated. This epochwould brought the death of over 58,000 Americans and two million Vietnamese.All this for one man’s reputation.

The Vietnam War was both our longest and our mostcontroversial war. If you ask most people today why we fought the war, theywill shake their heads in confusion. We lost millions of lives for absolutelyno reason. Lyndon Johnson once said, “Any jackass can kick down a barn but ittakes a good carpenter to build one.” What he didn’t realize is that this isexactly what he did in Vietnam—he kicked down a barn. Because of the Vietnam War,Johnson lost lives, resources, and the trust of his people. He couldn’t evenface another presidency and determined not to run again in 1968. It seems thatJohnson’s idea of a “Great Society” turned against him, for America was farfrom this ideal at the end of the Vietnam War. Truly, it was not a GreatSociety.

Mr. Celebrity President

2011-11-20T23:31:00.000-06:00

John F. Kennedy served one of the shortest terms of any ofthe presidents of the United States, yet he holds as one of the Americanpeople’s favorite presidents. Why did this man who served only two short yearsloom so large in the hearts of the country? John F. Kennedy—Jack—as he wasusually called, grew up the son a multi-millionaire business man in Brookline,Massachusetts. With ambitious dreams for each of their nine children, Jack’sparents urged him to make something of himself, especially in the academicrealm. JFK was an extremely driven person.

Paradoxically, JFKwas one of the most unique presidents and yet one of the most traditionally“American” presidents. He was a picture of “newness”, as both the youngest manand the first Catholic president to be elected. He captured the attention ofthe public with his tanned good looks, including a head full of hair, hissnappy dressing, and his beautiful wife. The baby boom was slowing down, yetthe idolized images of a healthy-wealthy family of the 1950s were stillflourishing, and JFK, his wife Jackie, and their two children were the epitomeof this image. Jackie Kennedy embodied the decade’s values for women; she wasput together, dressed in French-designed dresses, and supported her husbandtirelessly in his career. Achieving celebrity status that greatly contrastedhis predecessors in the presidential office, JFK also possessed a mysteriousand enchanting side. He was known to have strong connections to the media andto the glamorous celebrities in Hollywood. Still today, rumors of an affairwith Marilyn Monroe are commonly believed to be true. The president was knownfor mixing with many lovely ladies other than his wife. As well as his appealof newness, JFK also appealed to people because of his traditional Americanvalues. As the son of an influential businessman, and the grandson of twoextremely influential Boston businessmen, JFK’s heritage was groundedsteadfastly in the American culture. He attended Harvard University, the U.S.’sfirst college, which was built in 1636. In addition, JKF staunchly opposedCommunism, which was the gripping fear of the 1950s, and which the nation hadlittle forgotten. People felt that they could trust this through-and-throughAmerican. Balanced with charm, intellect, and American values, JFK won thetrust and admiration of America.

Tremendously skilled, JFK possessed the power to talk topeople. America listened. JFK was extremely eloquent and was the third presidentto use television to speak to the public. His short yet memorable sayings arewhat he is remembered by today, namely, “Ask not what your country can do foryou, but what you can do for your country.” JFK was the first president toeffectively use the medium of television to speak directly to the Americanpeople. This phenomenon made the people listen, and JFK made them listen. When he appeared on television, hestrategically wore a dark blue suit, so that he would show up clearly on theblack and white screen, which was in direct contrast to Nixon’s dull gray suit.Former Senator, Bob Dole recalled in a PBS interview, “I was listening to it onthe radio coming into Lincoln, Kansas, and I thought Nixon was doing a greatjob. Then I saw the TV clips the nextmorning, and he ... didn't look well. Kennedy was young and articulate, and ...wiped him out.” Next to Nixon, JFK was a picture youthful health. Mostimportantly, it wasn’t only what JFK communicated to the people, but how hecommunicated.

Even JFK’s politicalstances spoke of this exciting newness, with his most famous politicalcatch-line, “The New Frontier.” He also wanted to confront the demons of thepast like poverty, war, and ignorance in order to provide for a brighterfuture. This included his strong pushfor the civil rights movement.

Shockingly, only two years into office, JFK wasassassinated. No single other event could have made him more famous then he wasin his lifetime. His death transported him from celebrity status to martyrstatus. Just as in his lifetime, television played a great role in this. Hisassassination was shown in homes all over the country. Even the image of Jackie’s bloodstained pinkdress has become iconic to America. Because many people watched the assignationand saw pictures of the murder scene, the president’s death became very real tothem. It’s very difficult to hate a man who’s been unjustly murdered. Withflamboyant youthfulness, swirling myths, and a dramatic assassination, JFKholds the interest of America still today. JFK had the whole package; he wasour celebrity president.

Abortion is Harmful

2011-11-15T23:19:00.000-06:00

Abortion is harmful in every instance. Whether it is legal or in an early stage ofthe pregnancy, it harms the women in physical, mental, and spiritual ways, andit does not help restore rape victims back to their former way of life, and italso kills helpless unborn babies. In many instances, people state that thereare logical reasons to have an abortion, but all the reasons that are given,including that they are too poor to have another child can easily be counteredwith options that do not produce death. For example a poor woman that ispregnant can easily give her child up for adoption, which would mean givingdifferent couple the chance to enjoy and love the life that she has created. Awoman without the means to support a family should also have thought twice thenbefore taking part in the activity that is specifically designed to producechildren. An abortion disregards a gift that was given to a man and a woman.

The first reason abortion should be illegal is that it harmswomen. Leslie Carbone says in her essay “Abortion Harms Women,” that studieshave shown that women who have an abortion are three times more likely tocommit suicide than the general population of America and six times more likelyto commit suicide than women who have given birth to babies (165). In mostcases, women admit that they think about their unborn child daily and grieve onevery birthday that might have been if they had not killed their child, andwhen they see other women with children they are reminded of their childrenwould have been if they had not taken the life of their baby. (Carbone165) Abortion also harms womenphysically. Many mothers have become infertile, very sick, or even died fromthe abortion surgery. There is also anew found link between abortion and breast cancer. When carrying a baby amother has hormones that are released in her body so that she can produce milkand a short time before she gives birth these hormones fully develop and matureso that her body can take care of the child. However when a woman then has anabortion, these hormones do not reach their last “maturing” stage and thereforecan be very dangerous to the woman and increase her chance of breast cancer oreven initiate breast cancer (Carbone 166). Some say since abortion clinics arenow legal, abortions are safer. However, all it has done is allow doctors whoperformed illegal unsafe abortions in the past, the ability to perform legalunsafe abortions.

One prevalent argument for abortion is that if a female israped she should be allowed to have an abortion. One of the most horriblethings that the pro-abortion advocates have achieved is in convincing peoplethat the babies of rape victims are unwanted and somehow disgusting because ofthe origin of their conception. People are often deceived into thinking that anabortion will erase the memory of being raped or that a baby will be a dailyreminder of a horrible event in the victims’ lives. William Norman Grigg reports in his essay“Rape Does Not Justify Abortion,” that studies have shown, however, that thewomen who have had an abortion after being raped have even more psychologicalproblems, some of which they never recover from because of the traumaticexperiences of both rape and abortion (136). Is it better to choose an abortionover adoption? No. Even though a girl may still have to carry a baby for ninemonths a human life is still the one natural and good thing that comes fromrape. Aborting a baby that was conceived by rape simply perverts the unnaturalsituation even further. Rape is a terrible thing, but a baby is still a gift nomatter what the circumstances.

The last and most important problem with abortion is that itkills people. When a sperm meets an egg the immediate result is fertilization.Neither a sperm nor an egg is considered a living organism, because they cannotsustain life and they do not grow. However the moment the sperm comes incontact egg to fertilize it, the embryo is a living organism, because afertilized egg is a living growing organism (Gargaro 37). Abortion is genocide. Every time a woman hasan abortion she is murdering her baby, her own flesh and blood. People say thata baby in the womb is just a part of the mother and not a separate being,however even inside the womb a baby has its own blood type. If the mother’sblood mixes with the baby’s blood, the baby dies. How then can we say that ababy is not a human being? It is often said that abortion is not genocidebecause genocide is a “hate crime,” and abortion clinics do not dislikebabies--they just have the mother’s best interests in mind. However accordingto Gregg Cunningham in his essay “Abortion is Genocid,e” the fact that abortionclinics do not dislike babies does not seem to be the case with clinics ofSouth Dakota and Minnesota which have published the newspaper ad: “BABIES ARELOUD, SMELLY, AND EXPENSIVE, UNLESS YOU WANT ONE. 1-800-230-PLAN”(57). This is obviously a degrading statement aboutbabies. In some states contradictorily, if a pregnant mother is killed in a carcrash, the person who initiated the crash is charged with two deaths, but thesestates also declare that babies are not people. If a woman doesn’t want herbaby then a woman that is pregnant can easily give her child up for adoption,which would mean giving different couple the chance to enjoy and love theperson that she has created.

Abortion is unnatural and harmful to both women and babies.The American culture has come to undervalue life. If abortion is allowed to goon like this, it will make a gateway that might make other disgusting crimesseem less sinister, acceptable, or even encouraged. As explained above, babiesare humans from the moment of conception, and to take the life of a human iswrong and repulsive. The line is too fine to say when a collection of cells isactually a baby or not; therefore, a baby is a human from the moment ofconception. The abortion clinics also do not inform women about theconsequences or effects of having an abortion which often causes great regretin a woman’s life. The abortion clinics also wrongly convince rape victims thattheir children will be a horrible reminder rather than a beautiful little babythat was created under unfortunate circumstances. In all, women need to bewarned before they are undervalued or harmed by the severe effects of abortion.

Works Cited

Carbone, Leslie. “Abortion Harms Women.” Abortion: OpposingViewpoints. Ed. Mary E. Williams.

San Diego: Greenhaven press, Inc., 2002. 164-168. Print

Cuningham, Gregg. “Abortion is a Form of Genocide.”Abortion: Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Mary E.

Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven press, Inc., 2002. 54-57.Print

Gargaro C. Carolyn. “Abortion Violates Human Rights.” Abortion: Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Mary E.

Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven press, Inc., 2002. 36-44.Print

Grigg, William Norman. “Rape Does Not Justify Abortion.”Abortion: Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Mary E.

Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven press, Inc., 2002. 135-141.Print

Grades Prevent Education

2011-11-14T23:10:00.000-06:00

From the moment a child enters kindergarten, he is told thatif he performs well, he will receive a gold star. The school system keeps ongiving “gold stars” all through grade school, high school, college, but thegold stars become grades. Ironically, grades destroy children’s innate love oflearning, which is the very opposite of what they’re supposed to do. By givinggrades, adults communicate to children that since they must get a bribe forlearning, it must be something that they don’t want to do. Although this loveof learning is natural to all children, it takes only a year or two for thegrading system to be drilled into a child’s mind. It is embedded in students’minds, from the time they are children that the goal of learning is to gain agood grade, not to learn. Education should be a way of exploring what a personfeels about the things he sees and experiences, so that he can form ideas aboutwhat he believes. The purpose of education is to teach students to think forthemselves, not so they can earn a good grade, but so that they can understand,discuss with, and love others better. Giving grades in school completelyprevents true education. With a systemof education that is so strongly set in our society, many people assume thatgrading is the best or only option available today. The two most commonquestions people have about reforming this system are, firstly, why are gradesunnecessary and detrimental to students’ motivation and, secondly, what would areformed system look like, and more specifically, how would teachers trackstudents’ progress and how would colleges conduct admissions.

Are gold stars necessary? Can students be motivated to learnwithout the promise of a reward? In Tom Sawyer, Tom tricks the other childreninto doing his chores for him by making them believe that the chore is an honorand demanding payment for doing it. The children assume that if they must payto do it, it must be what they want to do. This concept goes the otherdirection, too. If a person is being paid for doing something, then he doesn’twant to do it. If we must give a student a reward—a grade—they must be doingsomething they wouldn’t without the reward. This discussion is one of intrinsicversus extrinsic motivation. Simon A. Lei describes these two temperaments asfollows, “Intrinsically motivated individuals have been able to develop highregards for learning various types of course information without the inclusionof external rewards of reinforcements. In contrast, extrinsically motivatedindividuals rely solely on rewards and desirable results to act as a catalystfor their motivation” (153). In his essay, Lei maintains that intrinsicallymotivated students work on academic tasks because they enjoy them, and notexplicitly because of a promised reward, but that extrinsically motivatedstudents will often not complete an academic task, regardless of theircompetency, if there are no incentives present (154). Many experiments havebeen performed to explore the differences between these two motivations. One ofthese experiments, done by Susan Harter, tested the hypothesis that childrenreceive the most pleasure from optimally challenging tasks by giving a group ofsixth graders were given four difficulty problems of differing complexity. Halfof the group was instructed that the task was a school assignment which wouldreceive a letter grade and half or the group was instructed that the task was agame. The children who viewed the task as a game chose and showed a preferencefor optimally challenging problem. On the other hand, the group who viewed thetask as an academic assignment chose significantly easier problems. Thesechildren respond below their optimal level, and also exhibited less pleasureand verbalized more anxiety. Harter states that the findings within the studycan be interpreted within the cognitive-evaluation theory, which argues thatextrinsic rewards can negatively affect intrinsic motivation by decreasing astudent’s sense of self-determination and competence (788). Clearly, grades arenot only unnecessary for motivating students, but detrimental to students’educations.

If grades were not given out in school, how would teacherstrack the progress of their students? In schools today, grades are the scalewhich students are measured by. Without grades, determining if a student shouldcontinue on to the next course would become a more difficult matter and wouldput much more pressure on teachers to know their students, their students’work, and their students’ progress in the class. Many concerns would arise suchas would a student pass a class only if they had a theoretically ‘A’involvement in the class and wouldn’t every teacher regard a persons’ workdifferently? With much concern, people argue that students who were completelyunqualified to pass courses could be passing left and right. Let us considertwo things, however. First, with ourpresent grading system, there are multitudes of unqualified students passingcourses, which either have not effectively tested their mastery of a subject orhave allowed them to cheat the system in many ways. Illustrating this point toperfection, hundreds of high school students enter college composition classesevery year without the basic knowledge of how to use commas correctly,regardless of the fact that they have taken twelve years of English and grammarcourses. The second essential consideration is to ask why a student should beallowed to pass a course with anything less than an ‘A’ grade or completemastery of the skill. If the student has not accomplished the course work tothe teacher’s satisfaction—if a student can further improve, why should theycontinue? The point of education is not ability compared to others, but masteryof a skill.

There are ways for teachers to keep track of their studentsother than grades. These ways are much more time-consuming and morecomplicated, yet altogether more effective. Demanding much greater commitmentfrom teachers, marking progress without grades would consist of teachersknowing their students personally, letting go of control over grading students’performance, and spending time giving constructive criticism in the form ofnotes or a conference on how a student is doing. Necessarily, is would demandthat students care about the subjects they are learning—not care about thegrade they would be receiving, but the knowledge they take in. This reformedsystem would mean a reconstruction of the school system from kindergartenforward. The truth is that true education is not easy because it necessitatesthe care and commitment of all involved.

If grades were not distributed, there would be a completelydifferent system for college admissions. The system could conceivably consistof three different things. First off, it would consist of an extremely detailedportfolio of essays written by various teachers commenting on the particularstudent’s abilities, strengths, and weaknesses, which would resemble a letterof recommendation, except far more honest and revealing. The student would alsowrite an essay about himself and his educational experience explaining suchthings as what subjects were most important to him and why he wants to attendcollege. The third section of the college admission would be an interviewbetween a college representative and the student that would give time for anyremaining questions the college might have for the student and allow thecollege to get a feel for the kind of person they’re admitting. Alfie Kohnelaborates on grades by explaining that “Contrary to popular belief, however,admissions officers at the best universities are not eighty-year-oldfuddy-duddies, peering over their spectacles and muttering about “highlyirregular” applications.” He elaborates that often these people are just a fewyears out of college themselves, and, after hundreds of identical applicationsfrom average good students, they’re refreshed to look at something unconventional(110). Today, the most renowned schools, including Harvard and Yale,applications demand not only a high ACT or SAT score, but also a testimony fromtwo teachers and an essay written by the student. These colleges know that agrade point average is not enough. Harvard’s admissions page states:

Applicants can distinguish themselves for admission in anumber of ways. Some show unusual academic promise through experience orachievements in study or research. Many are “well rounded” and have contributedin various ways to the lives of their schools or communities. Others are “welllopsided”

with demonstrated excellence in a particularendeavor—academic extracurricular or otherwise. Still others bring perspectivesformed by unusual personal circumstances or experiences. Academicaccomplishment in high school is important, but we also seek people withenthusiasm, creativity and strength of character. Most admitted students rankin the top 10–15 percent of theirgraduating classes, having taken the most rigorous secondary school curriculumavailable to them (“Applying to Harvard”).

Certain students today do have “highly irregular”applications, most specifically homeschooled students. Commenting on thisphenomenon, Kohn says, “Given that the most selective colleges have been knownto accept home-schooled children who have applicants would be rejected if,instead of the usual transcript, their schools sent along several thoughtfulqualitative assessments from some of the students’ teachers, together with aform letter explaining cultivate intrinsic motivation rather than a performanceorientation. Indeed, admission officers for two of the country’s mostprestigious universities confirm that they do receive, and seriously consider, applicationsthat contain no grades” (110). This individual reformed and grade-detox systemfor college admissions would succeed in determining the brilliant studentssuited to each school.

In schools across the nation today, grades are thwartingtrue education, which has been diminished to a counterfeit puppet show of trueeducation. Contrary to widespread belief, education does not depend on grades.Students can be motivated without grades, teachers can track progress withoutgrades, and colleges can accept applicants without grades. So why do gradesstill exist? Because, ridding the education system of grades would not be asystematic piece-meal restructuring, but a radical reformation in whicheverything that people take for granted in schools—grades, extra credit, popquizzes—all of these which contradict education, would be banished in one fellswoop. It would utterly change the mindset of students and professors, bycreating an environment that encourages a love of learning and exploring,rather than a system that promotes performing and accomplishing the minimum.This reformation would change this country’s culture more than almost any otherdecision possible, and that is a terrifying though. Change is alwaysterrifying, especially when the change calls for exchange of easily followedrules for more ephemeral and subjective methods, as is the case with theexchange of grades for specific feedback and intrinsic motivation. Yet thischange would benefit the school system incomparably. Most importantly, withoutgrades students would learn to think for themselves, would learn to learn forthe sake of learning, and would learn to become self-motivated people, who aredetermined to discover the world around them for themselves. Grades keepstudents in chains, but with reform they can be free.

Works Cited

“Applying to Harvard.” Harvard.edu. Harvard College. Web. 7Nov. 2011.

Boggiano, Ann K., and Diane N. Ruble. “Competence and theOver Justification Effect: A DevelopmentalStudy.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37.9 (1979): 1462-1468.PsycARTICLES. EBSCO. Web 16 Oct. 2011.

Harter, Susan. “Pleasure Derived from Challenge and theEffects of Receiving Grades on Children’sDifficulty Level Choices.” Child Development 49 (1978): 788-799. EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 16 Oct. 2011.

Kohn, Alfie. Punished by Rewards. New York: HoughtonMifflin, 1993. Print.

Lei, Simon A. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: EvaluationBenefits and Drawbacks from College Instructors’ Perspectives.” Journal ofInstructional Psychology 37.2 (2010): 153-160. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO.Web. 16 Oct. 2011.

Artists vs. McCarthyism

2011-10-27T12:28:00.002-05:00

The Red Scare was on the rise! AfterWorld War II, the anti-communist sentiments were raging as a political stanceknown as McCarthyism, after Joseph McCarthy, led the charge. McCarthyism was firstdescribed as the widespread sentiment of anti-communism in the United Statesduring the late 1940s through the 1950s, but today it has come to meangenerally the practice of publicizing accusations of political disloyalty orsubversion without sufficient evidence. During a span of about fifteen years,hundreds of innocent people were blacklisted. Some were imprisoned, whileothers were suspended from their work. One of the only valuable results thatcame from the McCarthyism was the influence it had on some of the great artistsof the day, who, inspired by the accusations made against them and their fellowartists, created significant works that are still held in high regard today.

One government organization spurred ongreatly by McCarthyism was the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC),which was established in 1937 for the purpose of investigating subversive andun-American activities. During the 1950s, HUAC began an investigation into theHollywood motion pictures industry, and created a blacklist of 320 people,including geniuses such as Charlie Chaplin, Orson Welles, and Arthur Miller,who were suspended from their jobs, some for ten years. In the case of thesethree artists, some good did come of this terribly frustrating and unjustifiedact against them. Inspired by the events caused by McCarthyism, their artreflects vividly the experiences they had.

In September 1947, Charlie Chaplin wassummoned to appear before the HUAC. Little did he know that the FBI had a 1,900page file on his political activities. When getting ready to return from a stayin London in 1952, he found that his entry permit had been revoked, and that hehad been denied the right to live in the United States. Chaplin wrote in hisautobiography, “My prodigious sin was, and still is, being a non-conformist.Although I am not a communist I refused to fall in line by hating them."He responded to the blacklist by making the film A King in New York, a satire starring Chaplin as a deposed king of “Estrovia”who flees to America where he is persecuted by McCarthy style investigations.Unsurprisingly, the film was not released in the U.S. It wasn’t until 1959,when the accusations were lifted, that the film was released to the Americanpublic.

On June 22, 1950, a pamphlet called Red Channels was published with thenames of 151 writers, director, and performers whom they claimed had taken partin subversive activities before the Second World War. Criticized for his work inthe 1930s with Marc Bliztstein, a Marxist composer, on The Cradle Will Rock, Orson Welles’s name was on in the list. Hedidn’t make another movie until 1958.

Although Arthur Miller, like CharlieChaplin and Orson Welles, was blacklisted by the HUAC, this did not stop hisplays from being performed, since Broadway, in contrast to Hollywood, did notimpose the blacklist. Miller was distressed to see his friends’ careers beingrent apart by the accusations of communist involvement, especially when friendsbetrayed information about other friends. He determined to write a play based on theseevents. At the time, Miller was reading TheDevil in Massachusetts, a book about the Salem Witch Hunts of 1692, whichbrought to his attention the many similarities between the Salem Witch Huntsand the Red Scare—or the Communist Witch Hunts. Out of this idea was born The Crucible. Because of its background,the play was not well received. Miller reminisced years later, “"I havenever been surprised by the New York reception of a play. . .What I had notquite bargained for, however, was the hostility in the New York audience as thetheme of the play was revealed; an invisible sheet of ice formed over theirheads, thick enough to skate on. In the lobby at the end, people with whom Ihad some fairly close professional acquaintanceships passed me by as though Iwere invisible." Ironically, TheCrucible still won the Tony Award at the end of the year and is stillperformed all of over the world today.

Overall McCarthyism brought the RedScare only more fear, injustice, and chaos, but there were a few glimmers oflight that came from it. The work of Chaplin was surely affected by theMcCarthyism, when his career in America was put on a temporary halt, after hewas accused of subversive activities. Similarly the work of Arthur Miller,namely The Crucible, might never havebeen accomplished if it had not been for the McCarthyism blacklisting. Ifnothing else came from the ridiculous, inadequate, and unjust measures takenduring the Red Scare, at least we gained a few great works of art from theseartists and others like them.

Hattie Bush: Joining the Ranks of Rosie the Riveter

2011-10-17T23:58:00.001-05:00

Just asthe roaring twenties rolled around the corner, my great-grandmother, HattieSimmons Bush arrived in the world on May 10, 1922. Growing up the middle childof nine children, Hattie was an easy going girl, who worked hard and playedharder. She grew up on a farm in Pisgah, Iowa, where her family raised sheep,pigs, and cows. When Hattie was small, she and her older sister, Delores, lovedto ride their pony, Dixie, who had a crippled foot, but still gave the girlsplenty of excitement. Before Christmas, they would go out to the pasture andpick out a tree, which they would decorate with candles.

Hattiegraduated with a class of eighteen students from Pisgah High School in 1940—oneyear before the United States joined the war—with aspirations of becoming ahair stylist. The next year, while she was attending beauty school in Sioux City, Iowa, she metFrank Bush at a social dance in town. Before the year was out, they were planningto get married. However, when tragedy struck at Pearl Harbor and the UnitedStates jumped headlong into World War II, Frank was drafted into the Army AirForce Ground Troops and sent to California to the Air Base in the mountainsnear Victorville.

Loatheto be separated from her newly found beau, Hattie packed her bags and made thelong trek to California to live with her aunt. In Victorville, Hattie metJoellen and decided to move out of her aunt’s house and rent an apartment withher new friend. Not long after, Joelleninformed Hattie of a job opening at an airplane factory. When I asked mygrandmother why she chose this job, she answered with a laugh, “Well, I had to supportmyself!” Hattie and Joellen worked there for good wages, in a group of womenassigned to put parts on the lower section of the airplanes. Because many menwere drafted into the army, there were many opportunities for women to acquirejobs that were usually reserved for men. Who would imagine that twenty-year oldgirl from a small farm in Iowa, who had graduated from high school only twoyears before, would be in California helping to build airplanes?

Toosoon, news came that Frank was to be deployed to England were he would bestationed at an Army Air Force base. Before he flew out, Frank and Hattie weremarried in January of 1944. They made their vows before a priest in the chapelon Sheppard Army Air Force Base in Wichita Falls, Texas, a decidedly non-frillyaffair, with only one other friend of Frank’s present and without any weddingdress or veil. My great-grandmother reminisced that she wasn’t disappointed by the ceremony,but was simply ecstatic to be married before Frank left. It would be two yearsbefore she saw him again.

Thenewly-named Mrs. Hattie Bush moved back to Iowa, and because of her experienceat the factory in California, was lucky to get a job working at anotherairplane factory in Sergent Bluff. She passed the time while Frank was inEngland by keeping busy. She still went to dances with her girlfriends, wherethere were plenty of soldiers to dance with. Hattie also went to the movies,although she was always disgruntled that the films were so often about the warthat she was trying so hard to forget. She worked hard to support herself whileFrank was away and waited impatiently for his return. Like many women, shewaited for news of the war’s end, listening closely to her radio and watchingevery headline. When the news arrived in September, 1945, Hattie was overjoyed.It wouldn’t be long before her husband, Frank, would be home, and they couldbegin their marriage together, unfettered by war any longer.

Thecourse of my great-grandmother’s life was significantly altered by World WarII. If America had never joined the war, Hattie almost surely would never havemoved to California, worked in an airplane factory, or been married on an Army AirForce Base, but like so many women of the 1940s, she established herindependence during the war by joining the forces of “Rosie the Riveter.”

Portrait of a Male Nurse

2011-10-14T13:38:00.000-05:00

Jerkedfrom my own thoughts, I suddenly looked up and asked, “Hey, Dad, what’s thebest choice you made when you were young?” Without a pause, he answered me, “Ijoined the Air Force” and laughed at himself a bit. Coming from my father, theanswer I expected was a long-drawn out-pondering-each-side-and-not-making-judgments-quicklysort of an answer. I was surprised at his rare succinctness. When reflecting on it later, I realized howconnected my dad is to the Uniformed Services of America, and how hispartnership with them has been a foothold in our family all of my life and hasguided my dad in many of the important choices that he’s made in his life.

KevinElker was an eighteen year old boy from Moorhead, Minnesota with a high schooldiploma in one hand and few options ahead of him. He determined that he wantedto go to college, but his family was not well-off, and he knew that he wouldhave to earn his own way. Like many teenagers, the obvious choice was to jointhe army, which offered to repay on his school loans. Kevin had always been aquirky person, and when he joined the army he told them that he had reallyenjoyed cooking in home economics class, so they appointed him as a cook. Hewas also a cook at a pancake house in town and worked his first nursing homejob. After a year of hard work, Kevin packed up and made the short journey toBemidji, MN, to study at Oak Hills Bible College, a tiny private school, whereKevin received an associate’s degree in Biblical studies. He told me that atthe time he wanted to learn about what he believed, and he did—some, but insome ways, more importantly, he confided in me that he learned how to discussthings with people, understanding their thoughts about the world and how toexplain your own thoughts to others. Funny enough, when he was studyingmeticulously for his nursing degree at Winona State University, one of hisprofessors asked him in amazement after a long class, “Kevin, where did youlearn to think like this?” My father answered candidly, “At Bible College, Professor."

Afterthree years of hard studying in Winona, Kevin and his wife, Kristi, hopped intothe car on graduation day and drove north, back to Bemidji. Kevin strove determinedly in the winterwasteland of Bemidji, but when talking to me, he reminisced about hisdiscouragement and discontent with his job as a nurse at the local hospital.However, several glorious things did happen during this time—the birth of histwo children, Mackenzie in 1995 and Isaak in 1996.

Two anda half years later, the armed forces reentered his life, offering a new chanceas a nurse in Dayton, Ohio. He took a leap, packed up his small family, and turnedtowards a new chapter of life. Kevin and his family lived on Air Force basehousing, a grouping of small disheveled townhouses which formed close-knit, ifvery temporal, communities of people from many different races, jobs, and walksof life. Kevin explained a bit about the wonderful atmosphere that the AirForce can foster, saying, “In the Air Force, there are people of all differentraces and religions, yet people first and foremost consider themselves to be ‘armypeople.’ Because of this people view each other differently and put many oftheir personal prejudices aside.” During this time, Kevin met and worked withmany different kinds of people, expanding his experience with people greatly.Although He lived in Ohio for only five years, he received two promotions,advancing from second lieutenant to first lieutenant and then again from firstlieutenant to captain. Although Kevin’s time in Ohio was very valuable, it wasnot a permanent way to live. Kevin and his family made many close friends, butpeople never stayed put for long in the Air Force, and after five years hedecided to move back to Minnesota where his family lived. The Air Force hadhelped him to make great strides in his career and would continue to do so backin Minnesota, if in an absolutely unexpected way.

WhenKevin returned to Minnesota, settling in Rochester, a city known nationwide forit medical community, he did not apply for a job at the renowned Mayo Hospital.Nor did he take a job at St. Mary’s Clinic or Olmsted Medical Center. My fathertook a job at the prison.

Kevin’scurrent job, which is still a branch of the armed forces, The Uniformed PublicHealth Services, as a Wound Care Specialist at the Federal Medical Center,though a far departure from his other jobs at nursing homes and in care units,was perfectly suited to him. He has always had a great sense of humor, which heuses daily when dealing with difficult patients. My father said his favoritepart of being a nurse is that, “It’s a wonderful blend of science andcompassion.” At the prison, this takes on a whole new meaning. Many times,humor is his compassion. One of his most common responses to unresponsivepatients is, “I’m not your mama.” Hardly a week goes by where a conflict is notresolved by singing some crazy song, such as “You just call, and I’ll bethere...” Kevin’s methods are far from traditional, and yet strangelyeffective. The convicts always know what is expected. Although his job has its quirks, it is alsovery rewarding to see a patient, who has had a very destructive diabetic footulcer or a pressure ulcer, heal after a long, grueling treatment.

Kevin has worked extremely hard to get to hiscurrent position, studying for three years in graduate school before receivinghis Master’s Degree of Science in nursing as a Clinical Nurse Specialist. Becauseof his work in this area, he gained the expertise to do research in the field,which he has been able to apply to his practice. Kevin is definitely a maninterested in learning more about his field, whether or not he’s studying forgraduate school or doing personal research. His focus as a nurse is to help hispatients to heal and help his staff to learn to do their job better. Mostimportantly, he knows that he doesn’t have all of the answers and keeps pushingfor improvement at the Federal Medical Center, by communication clearly withthose around him, sometimes firmly, sometimes humorously, but always withcompassion, and this is what makes him, in his own humorous words, a priceless“male nurse.”

Teacher of Imagination

2011-10-14T13:31:00.000-05:00

As my mother turned from her digital scrapbooking toanswer my question, she looked around the room, which had poetry on the walls,important sayings on the bulletin board, pictures, a feather theatre mask, and wittypostcards, and thought over my question, “What’s something interesting aboutyou mom?” before she answered with, “I guess I like to be creative!”

I decided to interview my mother because she is one ofthe most interesting people I know. One thing about my mother is that she lovesto write. Actually she loves anything and everything that takes imagination toenjoy. When I wake up in the morning, she is oftentimes working on some projecton her computer, and when I go to bed at about midnight, she is usuallydownstairs working on some other creative hobby. She has two main creativeperiods in her life: her creative hobbies as a youth and her presentimaginative projects as a stay at home mom of two children.

When she was a small child, my mother’s favorite activitywas arts and crafts. While she explained to me about what she did onValentine’s Day, one of her favorite days of third grade, her eyes lit up asshe told me what she did that day. She woke up to walk two blocks to the HarneyElementary, where she made a Valentine’s box by covering a shoe box withconstruction paper and making little tissue paper flowers and little pink andred hearts to cover the box with, and when she was done with her Valentinemasterpiece, she chose her favoriteglitter glue and wrote her name in huge sprawling letters. So even as a youngkid, my mother has always had a passion for expressing herself with the thingsshe can make. As a freshman in highschool, my mother decided to attempttheater as one more way to enjoy her love for being creative. She explainedthat the first play she auditioned for was the musical The Wizard of Oz, and she grinned to herself as she told me thatloved dressing up in her green munchkin outfit and singing in a high pitched, squeakyvoice as the munchkins welcomed Dorothy to their world. Auditioning for Harvey in her senior year, my mother thenexperienced her favorite part in a play when she received the part of MyrtleMae, who is the spoiled niece of Elwood P. Dowd the main character in the play.She finally found a thing that she most passionately enjoyed doing while shewas attending Winona State University to become an English major. This thingwas poetry. From then on she was writing poetry in her free time and even beganto present it at poetry readings on and off campus, and she got some of herpoems published in a small poetry magazine. She then told me then began to tellme about one of her most exciting nights as a student at Winona State was beingasked by the English department faculty to introduce Maya Angelou, author of the book I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings andfuture poet laureate of President Bill Clinton. Before my mother introduced Ms. Angelou, she met her backstage andvisited with her briefly. Then when sheleft Winona and became a mother, her creative hobbies became more private.

One of her new hobbies became scrapbooking. She loved andstill loves to preserve and show other people her family and their favoritememories. When she moved to Dayton, Ohio in 1997, she was the happy wife of anAir Force nurse and the mother of a two year old, my sister, and a one yearold, me. From then on, all of hercreative juices were put towards teaching her kids to be imaginative. Whetherit meant making Halloween costumes for her kids, building with Legos, ordecorating eggs on Easter, she loved to do fun, artistic things with her twochildren, and she still does. Four years ago she also found a newhobby—blogging. In the last few years her thoughts, her feelings, her desires,and her experiences have made it on to her blog. Her face then lit up as shetold me she found a way to print her blog off the internet so she can have hervery own book of her very own writing. Diligently keeping a prayer journal inthe last few years, she also explained that she loves to write her thoughts toGod down on paper so that she can look back on what she has written and see howher beliefs have changed about life. Currently, she has one big creativeproject going on—the play A ChristmasCarol. She is currently is workingon making display different Christmas “eras” to set up in the theatre, whichmeans lots of shopping for things from lots of different eras, everything froma Victorian era to an 1970s era. She will also be playing the part of Agnes, thecharwoman, in the production of TheChristmas Carol this winter season, which she is quite excited about.

This is my mother in a nutshell. She is a passionateteacher, and she has a passion for learning from poetry and other arts. Whenshe was young she loved to make crafts and her favorite birthday present as achild was a journal that she could write her thoughts down in. In high schoolshe loved theatre and in college she loved poetry and creative writing. As amother she has loved blogging, prayer journaling, stamping, scrapbooking, andteaching her kids about the importance of being curious. As she sat there andgot more caught up in the story she also stated one of the most importantthings to her is “not just liking a story, but discussing what makes it a goodstory, and looking at a writer’s style of expressing himself.” With that, shesat back and said, “Isaak, I really need to get back to my project!” This is mymother who has been the most passionate, creative, brilliant teacher I haveever had.

What We Love, What We Hate, and What We Buy

2011-10-09T09:56:00.001-05:00

When Susanna Berger stepped off the plane and into America, with one green suitcase, fourteen body-piercings, and a scared countenance, I had no idea how to pinpoint her. Susanna stayed with my family for one year as a foreign exchange student from a small German village of 600 people. For the first few weeks after her arrival, because of the language barrier between us, the only clues I had to understand who Susanna was were her possessions. She wore punk clothing, had a nose ring and a tattoo, and listened to Pink, the rock star with explicit lyrics, so at first I judged that she would be a rebellious, tough sort of girl. I quickly realized that this was not true and that Susanna was not rebellious, but very shy. There were many things about her that surprised me. Although she loved the horror movie, Saw 4, she also loved Disney’s The Lion King. Although she always went to wild parties in Germany, she also enjoyed sitting and playing strategy games for hours on end with my mother. I just couldn’t figure this girl out! It turned out to be much more difficult than I had predicted to understand our new family member. Susanna turned out to be much more than her possessions, of which she had few when she came to America. Her belongings were simple, owning one pair of shoes, a couple of books, and a couple of pairs of clothing. I had only the possessions in her one green suitcase to judge her by, which furthermore were possessions from a completely different culture than America and were not familiar to me. Because Susanna owned fewer possessions when she arrived in America, her image was freed from being chained to them, and it was easier for me to realize that there was more to her than what she had bought.

In a period where a consumer culture flourishes like never before, marketers tell us continually, “You are what you buy.” Is this true? Do our possessions define us? To answer this question, we must first ask three other questions that will give us insight into the topic. First off, what do our possessions say about us? Can you tell a person by what he buys? Or, perhaps possessions are just a piece of the puzzle. This leads to the next question; what is it that we desire? In any realm of life, if you want to understand a person or a culture, always ask what they desire, because our desires are a significant part of who we are. And finally, if we are not solely what we buy, what else forms our identity? With these questions, we begin to answer the looming question, are you what you buy?

So much information is revealed by the things we buy. In a moment we project a menagerie of different signals and symbols to the people around us. In many cases, however, it isn’t who we are that we present, but who we want to be viewed as. For example, a normal middle-class woman will often be seen wearing a pair of scuffed oxfords and an old comfy sweater, yet carrying a Coach purse. Just because this woman owns a Coach purse does not automatically make her a fashionable, wealthy, chic woman. Perhaps she would like to be viewed as this kind of woman, and the image she projects will be just that—a woman who wants to be associated with wealth and fashion. Another possibility is that the woman is simply fond of Coach purses; however, I would suggest that there is hardly ever a situation where we are solely fond of an object for its utility. I observed this when Susanna lived with us. She brought with her a diary covered in promiscuous photos and a Playboy wallet. These two items gave an air of rebellious sexuality like her tattoo and piercings. However Susanna’s personality was never remotely rebellious while she lived with us. She wore little makeup and wasn’t overly concerned with her appearance. When she described her life in Germany, she told us that she was very shy and didn’t talk very much. Not only were the diary and wallet symbols of sexuality and rebelliousness, but more specifically, Playboy is based in American Culture, and America is very popular in German fashion, so the wallet was a way to identify with American sexuality and also with money, since carrying money is the purpose of a wallet. The possessions were a way for her to express an image of herself which she wished was true. We use possessions as a language to express who we are, or more appropriately, to express who we want to be.

To further understand our culture and ourselves, it is vital to understand what we desire. Understanding what our possessions say about us exposes a lot of important information, but to discover what we want from our possessions goes to the heart of the subject. In Signs of Life, Laurence Shames maintains that possessions are about control. Humans, especially in this day and age, love to believe that they are in control of their lives. We delude ourselves into thinking this with our climate-controlled cars, our climate-controlled houses, our retirement plans, and our schedules penciled in by the hour. We also desire to create an image for ourselves—a very controlled image—of course. By creating an image for ourselves with our possessions, we attain another important desire: a feeling of security. My mother is a relatively frugal woman; nevertheless she owns her own computer, regardless of the fact that we have another laptop and a desk top in our house. Although she could share the other two computers with our family, she chooses to have her own laptop that only she uses, so that she can use it at a moment’s notice, without anyone else in the family competing with her over it. By eliminating competition, she gains control over the time she can use her computer. We in American hate to share. In contrast however, my brother and I share a cell phone. It’s a rare occurrence to see a teenage girl and boy sharing a cell phone. It’s very practical for us to share a phone because it is cost efficient and it makes it easy for my parents to get a hold of us; however most people would think it odd because a cell phone is a status symbol for teenagers and many teenagers wouldn’t dream of having to share one. For me, my cell phone is primarily an object for utility.

In his essay, "The More Factor," Shames also suggests that people today want to be viewed as safe, yet new. Just like the woman with the Coach purse, people often try to project an image that is not quite true to them. We attempt to be rebels, without doing anything rebellious. Clearly, our possessions attest to our insatiable desires for control, safety, and yet wealth and the new.
If it is true that our society is significantly defined by and engrossed in its possessions, then are we what we buy? Can our identity be fundamentally broken down to our possessions? For example, a young man in his prime owns a red sports car, an i-Phone, and a comfortable apartment. He is a wealthy, fashionable, young man with a taste for excitement and flashiness. Is this all he is? That’s it? This seems like a pathetic identity. What about this man’s beliefs, values, and dreams? These must come into play; they are a crucial part of a person’s being. Our belongings may reveal something about us to others, but they are not the thing that makes up our identity. Primarily, the thing that makes up a person or culture’s identity is its beliefs about God, other humans, and what is important in life.

After one year with Susanna, my view of her had absolutely changed. Taken out of her normal surroundings, Susanna presented an image of herself primarily by her preferences and dislikes and her reactions to new things and new situations. I learned that she was a social person, loving to sit up with my family, talking for hours on end. I learned that she was a sensitive person, crying the first time she attended an American church. I learned that she was a hard working person, helping out with house hold chores every day. The year she lived with us, Susanna changed a lot, and her purchases reflected these changes. When she arrived she was very particular about the clothing she bought, preferring the colors black, purple, and blue. By the end of the year she was open to shopping at new stores and liked wearing brighter colors like green, yellow, and brown. Because she knew that her trip to America was temporary, Susanna purchased a few special, expensive items, including an i-Pod and an elegant prom dress to wear to her graduation. When Susanna first arrived, she most certainly would have bought a black prom dress, but later in the year she chose to buy a bright blue dress which was feminine and matched her eyes. This shows that she learned to embrace a different side of herself, which was positive, girly, and proud of what she looked like. Susanna’s favorite thing to spend money on was Caribou coffee. Unlike America, Germany does not have a Starbucks, Caribou, or Dunn Bros. on every corner, so the idea of specialized dessert coffee, which has become a symbol of intellect and fashion in the USA, was a new and exciting one to Susanna. I learned much about Susanna by what she bought, but more importantly, I learned that she was so much more than what she bought.

Most importantly, after asking the questions, “What do our possessions say about us?”, “What do we desire? and “What else defines us?”, the resounding answer is that we are much more than what we buy. For example, the U.S. A. defined itself long ago, not by what it possessed—the new frontier—but by saying that it was “One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Surely, who we are is made up by many different things, including, but not at all limited to, what we love, what we hate, what we feel about God, what we feel about our fellow human-beings, what our parents taught us, what our name is, what kind of ice cream we like, and yes, what we buy.

What a Banjo Can Tell

2011-10-08T08:18:00.000-05:00

As I stood on the sidewalk in downtown Rochester during Thursdays On First, a weekly summer event in Rochester that allows a great opportunity for making money street-performing, my guitar case open, the sun beating down on me and my fellow musicians, and my voice cracking from hours of trying to sing over the hubbub of the busy street, only one thought motivated me to keep playing. If I kept my music going for a few more hours, I might finally have enough money to buy a banjo. As I plucked my guitar strings while my best friend, Ciaran, strummed away on his mandolin, and Sophia played her violin, people stood around and listened to us play “The Ballad of Love and Hate,” a folk song by the Avett Brothers. When nine-thirty finally came and there were no more people passing by, I sat down to count out how much I had made in my ten hours of performing that day and found that I had, indeed, made enough money. I spent the next few days pouring over banjos on the internet, trying to pick one that was the quality I wanted. I was very particular because I did not want to be known for having a low quality banjo. So, I am a street performer who likes banjos and folk music. Do you have me figured out? Am I what I buy?

When I look around at peoples’ possessions, I am always left wondering who they really are because peoples’ possessions often mislead us. When we see people and the things that they own, we need to ask ourselves three important things. First, how do people represent themselves through what they buy? Second, what do people want or desire for themselves? And third, are people who they appear to be as shown by their possessions? When we take some time and explore the answers to these three questions, it will be clearer whether people are what they buy or not.

When looking at the American culture to see how people represent themselves, a good place to start is with some of the most obvious possessions such as cars and clothes. Americans seem to use their cars to show at a glance how their owners want to be characterized. “The jock” is more likely to be driving a red Mercedes than a Smart car. The “tough guy” is less likely to be seen driving a mini-van, but might invest in a Harley. And a “soccer mom” is more likely to drive a mini-van than a Harley, which is an indicator that she’s a mom because it’s a practical choice for her family. Similarly, clothes also show others who they are. For example, people love to be characterized as the “jock” or the “musician” because of the outfits they wear. If guy is wearing an Adrian Peterson jersey, then chances are he is a football fan, and more specifically, a Vikings fan. That does not mean that at his core being, he is just a football fan and nothing more. Not only do people buy tangible things that others can see, but they also buy experiences. In the same way, my banjo does represent the tiny part of me that loves folk music, but it doesn’t show that my favorite genre of music is hardcore, a style that has much darker connotations to it.

Running up to my room to count my money the Thursday night I had enough cash to buy a banjo, I threw down my acoustic guitar and collected money from all around my messy room. I rummaged through drawers full of Harry Potter books and notebooks, and I searched under various instruments until I finally gathered up all the money I had. The reason I wanted a banjo so badly is because I love how the banjo is a unique instrument with a very distinct sound, and also I believe it is a very undervalued and forgotten instrument in the current generation of youth, so I want to have something special that other kids my age don’t have. Although some people may argue that my purchase of skinny jeans and band t-shirts are just a couple more things that describe who I am, there are also many other genres of music that I also love that I haven’t purchased.

When people buy things, they often desire the approval of other people. Catching the eye of others, they feel a sense of comfort that comes with being supported or admired. The soccer mom in her minivan may have made her vehicle choice based on her need or desire to drive kids around. And the man wearing the sports jersey may have selected it because he desired to support his team or because he wanted to fit in with the rest of his friends who also love sports. People will do anything to belong, from dressing a certain way, to talking and acting a certain way, or even by pretending to know about things that they do not. The last reason we often buy things is to feel important or superior. Driving around in their nice sports cars, people might easily think, “I bet those people there in their rusted used car think I am pretty important” or “I look like I have a grand life compared to those people.” My banjo definitely shows what I desire. I want to be able to play music and I want to be accepted by the people who also love that genre of music.

The last and trickiest question is whether or not peoples’ possessions are a façade of who they really are. This leads me to think that we are not what we buy because what we buy is sometimes just what we want to seem rather than what we are. For example, a person might have a beautiful house, but they might just have a great eye for decorating cheaply by refinishing their tables or by sewing their own curtains or just by having a real knack for bargain shopping and a gift for hunting for great deals. Buying nice clothing may have left another person with no money for anything else so even though a person might give off the sense of being in style, they might actually be a very poor person in every other sense. So, if I bought a banjo to carry around rather than to learn to play it, or If I bought a banjo rather than saving up for an I-pod, I would be putting on a mask to seem a certain way that I’m not or I would just not be showing all the things I want in life.

From the possessions people buy to represent themselves, to the things people desire, and even to the façades people use to be accepted, what we buy plays an important role in who we are. Are we solely what we buy? When it comes to what we buy to show who we are, possessions cannot show who we are as a whole; they only show little bits and pieces of us. Even though someone may be dressed exactly the same as me, in skinny jeans and band t-shirts, and we might both be in different hardcore bands, often that kid uses lots of profanities when he speaks, whereas I don’t because I don’t find it a polite or intelligent way of presenting myself. We might also have opposite views on life, he might be an atheist, and I believe in a relationship with a God who loves. As for desires, sometimes we desire things that are contradictory to our other possessions such as a person wanting to belong to a group because they are cool, but their beliefs are contradictory to the groups’ beliefs. Lastly, if a person buys something to be accepted rather than because the item itself actually matters to them, they are not accurately depicting how a person is. If a person buys a football jersey, not because they like football, but because their friends like football, they are falsely representing themselves to fit in. Even though people buy things to represent themselves, their possessions cannot solely depict who they are. People are much too complex to be represented purely by what they buy. Therefore, we are not what we buy. The banjo can only reveal a little of who I am.

A Merry-Go-Round of Hypocrisy

2011-09-29T21:09:00.001-05:00

In schools today, it is commonly accepted that the theory of evolution is true, and teachers everywhere tell their students that this theory is the explanation for our existence. In the defense of the separation of church and state, teachers are forbidden to teach other theories, such as creationism.

Ironically, a debate of a similar nature went on eighty-five years ago in Dayton, Tennessee at a time when, conversely, it was illegal to teach the theory of evolution. A young biology teacher named John T. Scopes, looking for a chance to defend his point, openly admitted to teaching the theory of evolution to his students, and was quickly arrested. He, together with his defense attorney, Clarence Darrow, and The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hoped that this would be their chance to challenge the constitutionality of the Tennessee Law. Their chance proved unsuccessful, and Scopes was convicted. And so the first amendment was disregarded, for the Tennessee law was a law directly abridging freedom of speech. John T. Scopes should have had a right to make his students aware of the theory of evolution as another view—not forcing his students to believe it, degrading them if they did not believe it, but simply presenting it.

Many people today, and for that matter, many people in this class, will argue that Scopes was a martyr for evolution, a man unconstitutionally treated and wholly misused. These same people will argue that creationism should not be allowed to be taught in schools today. What is the difference then? They are not, then, defending freedom of speech, but only their own beliefs. A common argument is that teaching creationism breaks the wall of separation between church and state. This argument is commonly parroted by uninformed students, who, if they would research the topic for themselves, would quickly discover that the separation of church and state means something very different. The separation of church and state doesn’t mean that religious beliefs can’t be presented in a school, which they are today, since evolution is just as much a religious belief as Christianity, Buddhism, or Judaism. When Jefferson, who was not a Christian himself, wrote the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom in 1786, regarding it as his second greatest achievement, he stated this:

An excerpt from the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom:
I. Well aware:

•That all attempts to influence it by temporal [civil] punishments or burdens or by civil incapacitations [lack of fitness for office], tend only to…[produce] habits of hypocrisy and meanness and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who, being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate [spread] it by coercions [force] on either, as was in his Almighty power to do;

•That the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical [religious], who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion [rule] over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible [ones], and, such, endeavoring to impose them on others, have established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time;

•That our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than [on] our opinions in physics or geometry;

•That truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, [for] errors [cease] to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.

Clearly, when Jefferson wrote of The Separation of Church and State, he didn’t mean that it was wrong to teach about religious beliefs in public, but wrong to force people to believe these teachings or adhere to a particular religion chosen by the government. Today we ride a merry-go-round of hypocrisy—we defend Scopes and we rage on creationism, then we belittle Scopes and praise creationism. Round and round we go, holding tight to our own stubborn beliefs, and forgetting completely about Freedom of Speech and the true meaning of Separation of Church and State.

Liberty and Justice for All

2011-09-29T21:09:00.000-05:00

Although both Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. De Bois had widely differing views on blacks’ best strategy for gaining equality in society, they were both great American leaders and made significant progress to their causes. This is essential to remember lest we undermine the change to which they devoted their lives.

When analyzing the philosophies of both Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. De Bois, it is important to consider that these men came from vastly different circumstances. Booker T. Washington was born into slavery in 1956 to a slave mother and a white father, who was a nearby planter. W.E.B. De Bois, on the other hand, was born in 1968, a free man to an African American mother and French Huguenot and African American father. Experiencing the difficult and oppressive life of a slave, Booker T. Washington did not gain the status of a free man until he was nine years old; therefore he understood the meaning of slavery in a very different way than De Bois ever could. In addition, Washington lived through the Civil War, while De Bois was born three years after it ended. These differences alone must change these men’s views of their culture and their place in society. Obviously, neither men lived easy lives in an easy time, but they experienced different hardships and different cultures.

Booker T. Washington’s beliefs that blacks must educate themselves, take up the trades, and seek the respect of the white man to earn equal rights is not far off from the beliefs of Fredrick Douglass, the renowned abolitionist. He, like Washington, urged that blacks should join society by trying to add something of value to their community. W. E. B. De Bois also believed that blacks should educate themselves and be active in society, however he did not share Washington’s “don’t rock the boat” theory. He pledged that the only way that blacks could ever gain equal rights with whites was to demand and fight for them. Although the text presents these two men’s views as opposite, it seems that they both may have truth in them. I suggest that though the men’s views are different, they are not complete opposites. Some of these differences were created by the enormous changes that occurred in the culture during the time of their birth. Because he was born a slave, Washington assumedly experienced great fear and bondage as a child. Whether or not he was treated fairly by his owners, the status of a slave still constitutes that the person does not belong to him or herself. When he was a slave, it is probable that he operated under the rules of playing fair with white people; if you rock the boat, you get hurt. This may be the origin of his later political views.

However, without the work of men like W. E. B. De Bois—men of action and leadership—the road to equal rights for blacks would have been an exceedingly sluggish one. It wasn’t until 1910, when De Bois was already 40 years old, that he founded the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. He had spent his entire life under racial prejudice and persecution, so it is unsurprising that he felt it was time for action. Action begets change. It is significant to remember that our country was founded by men, like De Bois, of action, who took enormous risks for the sake of America, who had faith that change was possible, and who weren’t afraid to step on toes to win their objective.

Therefore, I would argue that De Bois led the more effective reform for racial equality. We owe a great deal to men like Washington for his work towards racial equality, but without men such as W. E. B. De Bois, America would never have become the country that it is today—truly a country with liberty and justice for all.

Splendid to the End?

2011-09-24T21:09:00.000-05:00

"Where I’m from, we believe all sorts of things that aren’t true. We call it history." —Wicked

This quote absolutely describes the Spanish-American war. When we study the Spanish-American war, we swim in murky waters and truth is a very rare, very valuable hidden treasure. At this time in history, there were many different groups who wanted to go to war for vastly different reasons. The imperialists wanted America to become a world power and believed that going to war with Spain would lead to further expansion for the country. Various groups of industrialists, traders, and investors hoped that gaining an alliance with Cuba would open doors for international trading and easy access to foreign goods such as sugar. On the other hand, there were many people who believed that the Spanish were acting downright inhumanely and unjustly and who felt that we should go to war because it was the moral thing to do. Obviously, these reasons were in direct conflict with each other. To add to this menagerie of desires, goals, and contradictions, William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, two of the country’s most wealthy, powerful, and manipulative men, controlled, almost exclusively, the newspapers of the day. Like the Muckrakers of the magazines, they succeeded in boosting circulation by printing shocking and sensational stories that played with America’s hearts to win their agreement. Between them, they had more power of the people than all of congress put together.

When you take this basket of contradictions, it’s difficult to decide if we were justified in going to war with Spain. Surely, at the start of the ordeal, there was a large amount of people who truly wanted to help the Cubans. America understood their plight as one similar to their own only a little more than a hundred years earlier. And it wasn’t only those in power who saw this as an important moral cause. When America called for soldiers at the beginning of the war, over one million men volunteered to fight—men of the masses. When one million men volunteer their lives for their country, there is certainly more at stake than a bit of sugar. They have to be energized and excited into action by a cause, even if the cause they think they’re fighting for is half-way made up by a rich newspaper man. But how do we know? There was nobility in our decision to go to war with Spain. Like grains of sand, this nobility was mixed with selfishness, ignorance, and pride, but there was still nobility in it. After the war was over, McKinley announced his intent to make Cuba, as well as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, a part of the U.S. This was a significant departure from the original plan. America proceeded to occupy these territories for the next few years, controlling their governments, and even using tactics terribly similar to those of Spain when putting down rebellions. America crossed the line from liberators to oppressive rulers. Something that had started off as, at least in part, a noble and just cause, had turned into a very different sort of mission—one which was directly in conflict with America’s identity as a democratic nation of the people. We were justified in going to war with Spain, but what happened after Spain is a whole new ocean of murky waters.

A Replica of Peace

2011-09-07T21:09:00.000-05:00

We waited. We watched. We pledged peace until the last possible moment. When America entered the Great War in 1917, we were the only world power that still had energy to give. The other nations involved in the war, including France, Germany, Japan, and Russia, were exhausted by 1917—their resources disappearing fast and their peoples’ hopes fading into oblivion. Because of this, the U.S.A. had a decided advantage when it jumped into the tussle. America joined the war for various reasons, contrary to Wilson’s declaration that we were going to war in opposition to oppressive governments—joining, along with France and England, Russia, a country ruled by a cruel and iron-fisted dictatorship, which is certainly a funny paradox. During the first few years of the war, we had ties to England that strongly compromised our proclamation of neutrality. First of all, America was selling goods the British. Because England had blockaded Germany’s ports, America was unable to trade with Germany. However, America did not put up a great fight to this fact, as they were enjoying the economic benefits of selling to England. This rubbed Germany the wrong way. America also had developed a strong enmity towards the Germans since the German submarine, or “U-boat” blew up the Lusitania, a British passenger liner which, unbeknownst to its passengers, was carrying a large store of munitions. However, the American passengers on board had been warned by Germany not to travel on British vessels during wartime. Regardless, America was furious at Germany and wanted to avenge the over-hundred American casualties. As England was America’s mother-country, there were already established roots to their culture, with a shared language, inherited religious traditions, and similar customs of all kinds. For all of these reasons, England had slowly crept from its seat of neutrality towards the defense of the British and the Triple Alliance.

When America declared an Alliance with England, France, and Russia, it must have come as a glorious aid—a miracle to know that help was on its way. President Wilson must have felt that America was a sort of savior to the Triple Alliance, and he must have expected that if they were victorious, as they surely would be, England, France, and Russia would be greatly indebted to America and would want to repay it as soon as possible.

When the war ended, America, who had experienced the least damage to its economy and people, had established itself as a significant world power. Wilson brought his 14 points to the table, probably expecting that England and France would be ready to accommodate his demands for a League of Nations immediately. He was dead wrong. The Prime Minister, David Lloyd George of Great Britain and Premier Georges Clemenceau of France were reluctant to give in to Wilson’s 14 points, including his desire to assemble a League of Nations. Clemenceau’s view was, “God gave us the Ten Commandments, and we broke them. Wilson gives us Fourteen Points, We shall see.” Although Britain and France did have a sense of debt to America, they had an even greater sense of wanting glory and justice for what they had gone through during the war. Wilson called for “Peace without Victory”, but after a long and bloody war, Britain and France weren’t ready to settle down, forgive Germany, and forget the past. They wanted justice, and so they felt heavy resignation toward Wilson for demanding his 14 points and asking them all to kiss and makeup.

If the other countries in the Triple Alliance had been more compliant to Wilson’s 14 points, the events of the next 15 years might have been significantly altered. However, what Wilson partly failed to realize is that laws can never accomplish peace. People accomplish peace. The League of Nations, which was a great establishment to the world, is only a regulated imitation of a community devoted to peace. Most importantly, without every man deciding personally to act justly, respect his neighbor man and his neighbor country, and strive for the good of others, there will never be peace.

To Read, To Write

2011-08-29T10:17:00.003-05:00

“Oh, Magic Hour when a child first knows it can read printed words!—A Tree Grows In Brooklyn

I’ve been reading voraciously from the age of six years old—anything and everything. Before that, my parents read to me each and every day, for hours at a time. I remember vividly the first “chapter books” my dad read to me at six. He started with Junie B. Jones is not a Crook and continued on to the other seventeen stories. Strangely enough, my father moved right from these kindergarten readers of June B. Jones to Harry Potter. My reading habits have never changed, and I skip seamlessly between Jane Eyre, Winnie the Pooh, and Augustine all of the time. Because I have been homeschooled my entire life, reading as a family has been an integral part of who I am. Every evening we sit down together and my mother reads a book aloud to us—sometimes for twenty minutes, sometimes three hours. I have never viewed reading as something you primarily do because you are “required to” for “school”, but was taught to read because it’s what you want to do—to learn and imagine and enjoy yourself. I’ve read so much that it’s hard to know where to begin, but in general, I really love good stories and read mostly fiction. Some of my favorite stories include, To Kill a Mockingbird, Peter Pan, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, Winnie the Pooh, The Thirteenth Tale, and Till We Have Faces. I suppose some of the similarities that you would see in my choice of reading would be older literature, children’s stories or stories about children, and literature told in the first person, but it is certainly not limited to this. I, like so many others, am also a loyal and sometimes eccentric fan of the Harry Potter books, and have been since first hearing them at age six. Although I primarily read fiction, I also enjoy reading history, philosophy, and poetry. I’ve surely been affected by the books I’ve read, probably more than I know.

Writing and I have a love-hate relationship. Part of this is because, at least in contrast to reading, it’s quite new to me. I’ve only been writing actively for the last four years. For me, writing is difficult because there is so much I want to say, and getting started can be an overwhelming task—the blank page is a frightening sight to me. Once I get started I tend to overwrite, forget organization, and go into long tangents. I also have unrealistic expectations for myself to always produce a great paper on my first draft. Because of these struggles, writing has often been very frustrating to me. However, over the last couple of years, I have begun to learn the meaning of process, of rewriting, and of patience. The last two years I’ve been taking an intensive writing course, which has been extremely instructive in my writing, as well as a great trial sometimes. In this writing program, I’ve learned to write many different kinds of papers, including a summary, a research paper, a literature analysis essay, and a persuasive essay. Most importantly, this program has taught me to know the difference between content and form, emphasizing a rock-solid knowledge of form, so that it can be effectively used as a vehicle for content, thereby creating good communication. I believe that this is the purpose of form; it’s a tool to present the things you want to say in your writing. Apart from these academic papers, I’ve also done some journaling, fiction, and playwriting. Last fall I wrote a one-act play that was performed at a student-written one-act play festival, which was a very helpful experience. Although writing is sometimes challenging for me, I believe it’s very important for me to learn how to express myself in this way, and I’ve learned a lot about myself through my writing.

Walt Disney: Defense and Discovery of the New

2011-06-01T08:23:00.000-05:00

When we see “Walt Disney Presents” appear magically on the hyper-blue movie screen, as we so often do, it’s easy to forget that Walt Disney is the name of a man. Walt Disney once said, “Let us never forget that it all started with a mouse.” However, it did not start with a mouse, but long before a mouse with a man, a man who was once a boy, for while Disney Studios was not signed and running, Walt’s mind was always wildly running. Throughout Walt’s life, how did he become the artist that he did? What made Disney Studios great while Walt was alive? Even after Walt died, Disney Studios went on. Continuing fifty years, Disney changed significantly from the time Walt died. Has Disney fared well since his death? Will animation ever be as brilliant as when he was alive? Surely there will be others ready to step up and make genius film, by both exploring technology for animation and telling stories in a way that they move and excited audiences everywhere.

Walt Disney’s Life

The day Walt Disney was born, animated feature films didn’t exist. By the day Walt Disney died, animated film would never be the same. As a child, Walt was a budding artist, who knew what he wanted to be—and was determined to be it. Embarking on a precarious investment, Walt and his brother began Walt Disney Studios, and created the world-famous Mickey Mouse. Arguably his most genius achievement, Show White revolutionized animated films for years to come. Before Disney, animation was primitive. Attempts at animation date back to 1892 in France when a young experiment used five-hundred pictures in a machine much like the modern projector. By the time Disney was entering the animation business, it had evolved by leaps and bounds, but Walt was yet to make his mark on it. He was a born artist-- an intuitive story teller and an inventive animator.

When Walter Elias Disney arrived in the world on December 5 of 1901, who could say that he would one day be one of the most influential artists of the twentieth century? After living in Chicago until Walt was four, his father, Elias Disney, decided to move his family—his wife Flora, his three sons, and his young daughter—to a farm in Marceline, Missouri. As a young boy, Walt was responsible for taking care of many of the animals on the farm. Walt adored animals. Taking some teasing for his affections, Walt named all of the animals and treated them as friends, even coaxing the biggest hen, Martha, to come when he called and lay an egg right in his hand. Although the family was poor, Walt always found creative and cheap, if sometimes unsatisfactory ways of express his art. Excitedly discovering a barrel of fresh tar by the house, Walt invited his little sister, Ruth, to do some painting with him—their own version of graffiti. Soon one of the house’s outside walls was covered in zigzags and doodles. It surprised Walt immensely to fine that the tar would not come off. After this ordeal, Walt was more careful with his drawing medium, and he stuck to toilet paper and bits of wrapping paper. Together with his love of animals and drawing, Walt determined the thing he wanted to be—a cartoonist. And what a cartoonist he would be! His drawings were always admired—gaining him free haircuts from the barber and sweets money from friends and neighbors. One year, for Ruth’s birthday, he made her a little book of drawings that looked like a moving picture when you turned the pages quickly. Years later, at eighteen, while driving a Red Cross ambulance in Europe in World War II, he still kept drawing, covering his truck with cartoon drawings. One of the only places Walt’s imaginative artistry was not appreciated was at school. When the teacher instructed them to draw a pot of flowers, Walt liberally added faces and bodies to each bud, causing his teacher much dismay. However, Walt stuck close to his drawing—his way. Perhaps not even Walt knew the things he would achieve, but he didn’t have to know—he was drawn to art like a bird to the sky, and he was about to take flight.

Animation caught Walt’s attention and he never caught it back. He watched the cartoons of the day, readily believing he could do better. Reading books on animation, studying different animators, and saving money for his own film equipment, Walt worked tirelessly to start his career. After many failed attempts to make it in Kansas animation studios, he moved west to Hollywood with unfailing hope, even after his failure. Looking back, Walt later said, “I’d failed, but I’d learned a lot out of that. I think it’s important to have a good, hard, failure when you’re young.” Through a series of fortunate events, Walt started his own animation studio with his older brother Roy, who was always his closest friend and companion. Next came the mouse. Only five years later, Walt created Mickey Mouse. Originally, Walt wished to name him Mortimer, but his wife, Lily, objected, suggesting that it sounded too serious. So they named him Mickey. While Mickey’s first two cartoons didn’t cause much stir, this third cartoon, Steam Boat Willie, was an instant hit. This was strongly due to the newly discovered phenomenon of synchronized sound . Silent films were no longer the only option. Scoffing at the new technique, many movie makers believed that this was only an overrated fad, but Walt knew otherwise—he jumped at the new opportunity, recognizing the options it offered for his animation studio. First testing synchronized sound out on the Mickey Mouse cartoon Steam Boat Willie, Walt worked hard to create a fresh exciting new cartoon, even using his own voice for Mickey Mouse. In this achievement, Walt proved his genius by two things, firstly, that he was a great storyteller. He later explained, "I honestly feel that the heart of our organization is the story department. We must have good stories—we must have them well worked out—we must have people in there who can not only think up ideas, but who can carry them through…to completion."

And second, he was always fighting to develop technology—trying new things, taking risks, he raised the bar for animation by challenging his artists to do better. This was the basis for Disney Studios—and it gave Walt a new idea a crazy risky idea for a full length, full sound, Technicolor, Cartoon—Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. By 1934, the Disney staff had grown, in six years, from 6 to 187, and Walt Disney was about to make animation history.

Growing tired of only making short cartoons, Walt devised and presented to his team the radical idea of creating a full length animated feature. He knew what story he wanted to make. When Walt was fourteen, he had seen the silent movie of Snow White, starring Marguerite Clark. It was Walt’s first vivid memory of the movies, and he never forgot it. Inviting his animators into the sound studio one night, Walt told the story. Under a bare light bulb with his animators in a semicircle around him, he acted out each part in its turn, Snow White, The evil Queen, and each of the seven comical dwarves. At the end of the storytelling, the animators had tears in their eyes. Walt had instilled in them his excitement for the project and they began without delay. One of the biggest challenges Walt wanted to overcome was to figure out a method of making the cartoons more life-like and fluid.—they had no depth. Gradually, Walt began to develop a new camera called the “multi-plane camera.” A second problem surfaced when Walt realized that an animated feature running an hour-and-a-half would require 300 drawings total—an enormous amount! Walt informed the head of the Disney art school, and soon the studio was bursting with new talent. So much artistic and financial effort went into the film, and everyone wondered what the response would be at its release. Financially, the movie was an enormous endeavor. When Walt had announced his idea to Roy, who was the head of business, Roy was extremely apprehensive that they would have enough money to finish the film. Walt initial budget for the movie was $500,000, an amount that set Roy’s knees to buckling. It turned out that this estimate was absurdly low, and it turned out that the film would cost 3 times the original estimate. Before its release, people called it “Disney’s Folly” and predicted that it would send the studio into bankruptcy. However, Walt and his artists kept their faith in the picture. When it premiered on December 21, 1937, all the Hollywood big-wigs showed up to see the film. At the “Happily Ever After”, the audience stood and cheered. Years later, Walt reminisced,

All the Hollywood brass turned out for my cartoon! That was the thing. And it went way back to when I first came out here and I went to my first premiere. I’d never seen one in my life. I saw all these Hollywood celebrities comin’ in and I just had a funny feeling. I just hoped that someday they’d be going in to a premiere of a cartoon. Because people would depreciate the cartoon. You know, they’d kind of look down.

All their hard work and faith paid off. Audiences everywhere were enthralled. Animated film would never be the same.

Certainly Disney was an extraordinary man. In some ways, though, he started off seemingly ordinary, as a poor hard working creative boy, who drew on toilet paper. Childhood was an important time in Walt’s life as an artist. Another significant point in Walt’s artistic life was the distinct start of his career with Disney studios, bringing the world’s attention to Walt Disney like lightning. Snow White and the Seven Dwarves caused audiences and critics to expect great things from Walt time after time. And for many years, Disney delivered. Most importantly, Walt was willing to risk failure. When he first started off as an animator, he experienced failure repeatedly, but he didn’t let it stop him.He was not a cautious man, and his prerogative to step out into the unexplored was where his genius lay. What would happen to Disney Studios after Walt, the maker himself, died? When Walt Disney died one little boy remembers thinking in horror, “There will be no more Pinocchio!” Surely, he was not alone in this fear. The time between Snow White’s success and Walt’s death was filled with much success, change, and of course, Walt’s brilliant, if crazy, ideas. Expanding their medium, Disney Studios also began making live action films which were much cheaper than animated films. In this way, Disney kept their piggy bank full, at least full enough to supply funding for each next endeavor. One of these endeavors was the design, building, and opening of a completely Disney themed amusement park, Disney Land, which turned out to be a completely unprecedented and unexpected success. As always, Walt knew they could improve on Disney Land, and he began plans for Disney World. Sadly, Walt never saw the park open, before he passed away. It was his last great project. What happened after that? The time after Walt’s death is marked by three distinct periods. The first, lasting a strangling twenty years, was Disney’s decline, when they seem at a loss without they’re determined leader. Thankfully, they found their footing again and made a run of movies marking the Disney Renaissance. Thirdly, though not strictly a period of time, was the birth of Pixar Studios in 1995, the heart of animation moviemaking today.

Disney Studios after Walt Disney’s Death

Continually changing, moving, and growing, Disney studios, powered by Walt’s passion and his team’s enthusiasm and skill, had never slowed down, but had kept making better and better films with each year of artistic discoveries. But then, as in any of the Disney movies, the villain arrived in the form of lung cancer. Struggling with his health for years, Walt finally had to deal with his troubles. The doctors determined to remove the lung immediately when they found a walnut-sized tumor in one of Walt’s lungs. After two weeks recovering from the surgery, Walt was released from the hospital, but with a greatly pessimistic prognosis predicting Walt would live only two years more, perhaps less. Although Walt returned to the Studio the next day, by the end of the month he was back in the hospital. He died on December 16, 1966. But Disney Studios had to continue. In a statement to the public Roy Disney promised: "As President and Chairman of the Board of Walt Disney Productions,I want to assure the public, our stockholders, and each of our more than four thousand employees that we will continue to operate Walt Disney’s company in the way that he has established and guided it."

However, although Roy desired to hold to his brother’s standards and creative genius for animation, without Walt’s drive for the new and greater, Disney declined into a lower vein of movie making. Unfortunately, some of this was due to the new staff at Disney Studios, including Walt’s son in-law, Ron Miller, the new executive producer. Ron Miller was a cautious man, not a suitable trait for a man in the movies, and he began to turn out the same movies year after year. Many of the films were made for the masses, with safe stories and cookie-cutter characters. Trying to fine their footing with their genius leader gone, Disney lost some of Walt’s vigor and philosophy, but they would rise again, if after twenty years.

It wasn’t until 1989 that Disney surfaced, with the exciting, fun, and exotic feature, The Little Mermaid. Interestingly, it was the first Disney fairy tale feature created since Walt’s death. In one way, Disney had returned to home plate with this retelling, and yet they found a way to make this new feature totally unique from the others. Disney knew its audience again. They had changed, but Disney Studios was back on track. Following The Little Mermaid, were a few mediocre films, but it had breathed life back into Disney Studios. It was the beginning of the Disney Renaissance. Following The Little Mermaid were the now-classic Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas, The Lion King, Mulan, and Tarzan. Truly one of the best Disney films ever created, Beauty and the Beast was even nominated for Best Picture of the Year at the Academy Awards, the first ever to receive such and honor. Beauty and the Beast also won Academy Awards for “Best Score” and “Original Song”. For years following, Disney became known for their capturing music, which brought these films to life. Monopolizing the Academy Awards for both “Best Score” and “Best Original Song”, Disney won for not only Beauty and the Beast, but also The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, and Pocahontas. After the days of the Disney Renaissance were over, Disney hit another ten year dry spot, returning the predictable formula following films of before. In 2010, Tangled, the tale of Rapunzel was released, recapturing audiences with some the most lovable comical character from Disney in a very long time, and it is certainly in the ranks of the great Disney films. Could this be the return of Disney? Since Walt’s death Disney Studios has had its ups and downs, producing films Walt would have been proud of—Beauty and the Beast, Tangled—and some that would have made him blush—The Black Cauldron, Oliver and Company.

Although Disney did make a comeback with some great films, the studio today who is truly upholding Walt’s philosophy of movie making, is Pixar Studios. Leaving animation job at Disney in 1984, John Lasseter joined George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, in his special effects computer group, which would later become Pixar. Over the next ten years, Pixar made commercials and short films much like the way Walt Disney had started. Their first feature film, Toy Story, released in 1995, was altogether groundbreaking—the first fully computer animated feature film. Pixar Studios pushed the envelope of art in technology and storytelling, which were the two things Walt Disney himself strived towards. Unforgettably, the characters of Toy Story were ones that children of the generation would come to call an important part of their childhood. It was pure genius, creating a film about characters that each child and adult knew well, Mrs. Potato Head, a Piggy Bank, a plastic Dinosaur, a space ranger, a cowboy doll, and one-hundred plastic, green, army men. With each successive film, Pixar has driven to get better and better—and they’ve done it. Pixar is also known for their clever short films. Before each of their feature films, a new animated short is played. In 2006, when Pixar had already released six fantastic films, the Walt Disney Company bought the studio. Telling the story of a grumpy old man flying his house to Paradise Falls by balloons, Up took its place as Pixar’s tenth animated feature, and was nominated for Best Picture of the year at the Academy Awards, only the second after Beauty and the Beast ever to be chosen. Significantly making its mark on movie making over the last sixteen years, Pixar would certainly have made Walt proud by their incentive to push their films to their best. They are the best story tellers in the movie making business, the most determined technologists in animation, and if Walt Disney were alive today he would be working right alongside them.

Although its founder, Walt Disney died, Disney Studios “kept moving forward” as they say in Disney’s Meet the Robinsons. After twenty years of uninspired movies after Walt’s Death, they found their footing again. The Disney Renaissance truly contained a few unforgettable movies, which spurred animation on in their technology and their stories. Undoubtedly , however, Pixar studios, the animation rookie, has not only held their own with Disney’s best movies, but have surpassed Disney Studios, in only ten years, by changing the way animation is produced and telling stories, as well as any Studio in history. Making their mark, as two distinctly important times, Disney Studios experienced failure and fortune after Walt’s death. Although the failure seemed to teach them and help them recreate a fresh feeling to their movies again, Disney Studios sadly slid back into a predictable method again, leaning on the cautious and sellable. Most significantly, since Walt Disney’s death, is the work of Pixar, who, like Walt Disney, have forced art farther, pushing, driving, and refining their work until it is gleaming gold. The thread of genius that Walt Disney Studios started may have dulled, but in art there’s always someone, like Pixar, to step up and creating things like never before—trying new techniques, taking new risks, and telling important truthful stories.

Surely, Walt Disney established a new medium during his life time, determining to make movies that young and old could both enjoy. The work he did during his life was novel and brilliant, partly because he was the first to take animation to the level that he did. Since then, Disney has always been the animation to which all other animation is measured. During his lifetime, Disney was primarily the mastermind behind the work, but after Disney died the Studio and the animators still went on. When Walt Disney died, it seemed that the first epoch of animation had ended. Thinking that they had the animation equation down, Disney studios attempted to copy what Walt had always done, but they failed because Walt had always been trying new things, experimenting, and testing the waters. He had never tried to do the same thing twice, unless to improve upon it. However, great movies did come from Disney Studios after Walt’s death--many mediocre movies, but a couple of gems. Presently, animation is at its zenith with Disney’s Pixar Studios, who hasn’t had a flop yet. One crucial thing that Walt Disney understood about animation was that it was an important medium that could do things that other art forms couldn’t—it wasn’t a lower form of moviemaking—or simple and cheap for children, as some might think. An animated film requires an enormous amount of people and a significant amount of money, as Walt discovered on his first feature, Snow White. Proof to this was the very first premiere of an animated movie, when an audience of adults cried at Snow White’s death and stood cheering at her victory. And recently, in the Pixar films Up and Toy Story 3, audiences everywhere laughed and cried time after time. Adults who watched Up cried when Mr. Fredrickson arrives in Paradise Falls in his house of flying balloons, and when Woody and Buzz wave goodbye to Andy at the end of Toy Story 3—there was a similar jolt in every stomach. Because it’s certainly not just a kid’s story—not just an animated cartoon. These scenes in these two movies could never have been done so effectively in any other style of moviemaking. Walt understood this, and from the beginning animated movies were a risky business, but he saw something invaluable in them. More than once he risked bankruptcy in the defense and discovery of the new, and mostly importantly, Walt believed that the Story Department was the Heart of his studio, and by combining great stories and technically exceptional animation, Disney is one of the most brilliant movie studios of all time.

Bibliography

Ford, Barbara. Walt Disney. New York: Walker and Company, 1989.

Simon, Charnan. Walt Disney: Creator of Magical Worlds. New York: Children’s Press, 1999.Thomas, Bob. Walt Disney: An American Original. New York: The Walt Disney Company, 1994.

“Synchronized Sound.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Jan.2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sync_sound

A Master Storyteller

2011-06-01T00:14:00.000-05:00

“The sun did not shine.
It was too wet to play.
So we in the house
All that cold, cold, wet day.
I sat there with Sally.
We sat there, we two.
And I said, ‘How I wishWe had something to do!’
Too wet to go out
And too cold to play ball.
So we sat in the house.
We did nothing at all.
So all we could do was to
Sit! Sit! Sit! Sit!
And we did not like it.
Not one little bit.
And then
Something went BUMP!
How that bump made us jump!
We looked!
Then we saw him step in on the mat!
We looked!
And we saw him!
The Cat in the Hat!”

Since 1957, these words that Dr. Seuss wrote have been read by millions of people around the world. Putting these words to paper and publishing them, Dr. Seuss had no idea that it would be one of the best loved and cherished children’s stories the world has ever seen. Dr. Seuss, whose first page of his book The Cat in the Hat was just read, is one of the most renowned children’s authors of all time. There are so many questions about him. Challenged to find out about Dr. Seuss, biographers all over America try desperately to find where he got inspiration or what he believed about life. In his books, does Dr. Seuss insert his own experiences or are they just nonsense stories? Some say he does and others say he doesn’t—sometimes people see things that aren’t there. So why did he write the stories he did?

Who is Dr. Seuss? The legendary children’s writer seems to some as though he popped out of the ground—and maybe he did—for all they know. He probably encouraged this idea. Raised creatively by his parents, Seuss, whose first name was Theodore, was telling stories as soon as he could talk. When he left for college he planned to be an English teacher, but soon found much more enjoyment in telling tales and making people laugh with his comics. Suddenly meeting and marrying the women of his dreams after only a short relationship, Dr. Seuss found what would be his one counselor whom he trusted completely. Though not very much information is known about this famous story teller, he had a very interesting life.

On March second, 1904, Theodore Seuss Geisel was born to Theodore and Henrietta Seuss in Springfield, Massachusetts. He was always called Ted. While growing up, he was always encouraged by his mother to draw continuously. She even allowed him to draw on the walls of his room and the walls of the attic. Critically watching his son draw, Ted’s father believed that his drawings were too cartoony and that they didn’t truly represent what real animals and people look like. Reading constantly, Ted’s favorite book was called The Hole Book, in which there is a story—all in rhythm—about a boy who shoots a gun and it ricochets off everything in his house until it is stopped by a very hard cake. He also may have been inspired by his books from his childhood called More Beasts for Worse Children[i] where he seems to steal some creatures from.

When Ted graduated from high school, he immediately headed to Dartmouth College to work on a liberal arts degree. Quickly submitting comics to the humor magazine “Jack-O-Lantern,” which he soon became editor of, he quickly found success. He much preferred it to studying. In his senior year, he was caught partying the night before Easter with some friends and was fired from his chief editor position in the magazine, the only part of Dartmouth he actually enjoyed. However he still submitted comics as he finished off the year under a new alias, Dr. Seuss. Graduating from Dartmouth, Ted decided to attend Oxford to expand his studies, but when he arrived he couldn’t stand the English snobbery or the bland food in England. One day while Ted was sitting in class doodling during a lecture, a girl named Helen Palmer looked over his shoulder and said, “If I could do that, I wouldn’t be sitting in this class.” A few months later they were married and he had taken her advice and moved back to America to try and make a career of writing and drawing instead of continuing with college.

Moving back to America, Ted immediately set out to start a career. He began by advertising. Promptly finding an advertising job with the bug killing company FLIT, he successfully rose to the challenge. As soon as he started, Flit became famous for the slogan “Quick Henry the Flit” that Ted gave it, accompanied by his wild drawings of people battling and killing humanized insects with Flit. In 1937 Ted published his first children’s book And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street, which was an immediate success. The more children’s stories he wrote, the more popular he became. Jokingly challenging Ted to a bet, William Spaulding, the director of Houghton Mifflin’s educational division of Children’s books, said that he didn’t believe Seuss could write a book for new readers that contained exactly 225 words out of a possible 348 beginner’s word list and create a book that children would like. Ted rose to the challenge. On March 18, 1957, Dr. Seuss, who not only met all the requirements of the bet, published The Cat in the Hat, and its popularity spread by word of mouth immediately. Kids all over America were begging their parents to buy Ted’s book, which was the most fun book they had ever read.

Telling stories from a young age, Dr. Seuss always needed one thing—an audience—a listener to share and critique his ideas and drawings with. When he was a young boy, this role was usually filled by his mother; she listened, criticized, laughed at, and most importantly, encouraged the stories he told. This is where his genius lies. Suddenly finding himself void of listeners when he went off to college, Ted—who did not give up easily—found a new audience in the readers of the comic paper Jack-O-Lantern which he became the editor of until he left for [ii]Oxford where his new listener was his soon to be wife, Helen Palmer. She would become his only trusted adviser for the next forty years. In his years of writing he was always asked, “You write children’s books, but why don’t you have any kids of your own?” and his answer was “You make ‘em, I’ll entertain ‘em.” Dr. Seuss did not just love telling stories, he loved telling stories to people.

Curiously searching for where Dr. Seuss inspiration came from, people were always asking him where he pulled his ideas from. Whenever he was asked, his stock answer for over a decade was usually:

“I get my ideas my ideas in Switzerland near the Forka pass[iii]. There is a little town called Gletch, and two thousand feet up above Gletch there is a smaller hamlet called Uber Gletch. I go there on the fourth of August every summer to get my cuckoo clock repaired. While the cuckoo is in the hospital, I wander around and talk to the people in the streets. They are very strange people, and I get my ideas from them.”

Elaborating his story of Horton in the tree, his final version of the tale was that late one night two pieces of paper blew through the window and landed on the table on top of each other—an elephant on a tree. As long as it was a good story—and it always was--he didn’t care if it was historically correct. He also often added in political and moral ideas and his own experiences into his stories which have sometimes subtle, sometimes blatant, morals.

When Seuss was at a party once, another writer told him that it was a pity that Seuss never wrote anything political. Unexpectedly receiving a package from Seuss a month later, the same writer curiously opened it to find a copy of Marvin K. Moody Wiill You Please Go Now, which had the name Marvin crossed out and replaced with Richard N. Nixon. During World War II, he also did many comics for the war. In his book Yertle the Turtle, Seuss based Yertle, the ruthless power hungry king of the turtles, off of Hitler. His most obviously political book, however, is The Butter Battle Book. Living on either side of a wall, the zooks on one side only eat their bread butter side up, while the zooks on the other side eat their bread butter side down. In the end of the book, both sides are poised to bomb the other side into oblivion over a small political matter of breakfast food.

When Dr. Seuss wrote, he always pulled things from his past or present life. In his first book, he used Mulberry[iv] Street, which was a street he lived a few blocks away from and walked on quite often as a child. Groggily looking in the mirror one winter morning, Seuss said that he had gradually become a very “grinchy”[v] person, and so he wrote—with great deliberation--what is now one of the most famous Christmas stories in the world, How the Grinch Stole Christmas. His most famous character shows him best. Dr. Seuss always said he had a soft spot for cats, and then came The Cat in the Hat. Some say that Seuss wasn’t creating a character; he was just tweaking and exaggerating himself with his tall lanky figure, charming smile, and ability to make people laugh.

Although Dr. Seuss loved to slip and sneak morals into his stories, some people have gone too far in analyzing his work. In The Cat in the Hat, the bathtub rings, which are spread around the house, were wrongly accused of being a protest to against the spread of the red menace. When asked about these analyses, Dr. Seuss said, “I think they’re a waste of time…. For example, they’ll take a book of mine that has one color in it and talk about my great sensitivity in handling that color and why I chose that color, when the fact is that Bennett Cerf called me up one morning and said, ‘We’re having a bit of a financial problem, so cut down your colors.’” Reading How the Grinch stole Christmas, many people came to totally misunderstand Seuss and think that he did not believe in turning his famous and lovable characters into consumer goods. This is not true. Completely open to the idea of making money, as Charles D. Cohen says in his book The Seuss, the Whole Seuss, and Nothing but the Seuss, “Dr. Seuss had no problems milking his characters for everything they were worth.” Some people just don’t understand the way he puts in his morals.

Quietly slipping in morals throughout his books, Dr. Seuss has created many of the well-known sayings today, such as “A person’s a person, no matter how small.” In the Sneetches, he spoke about equality, in The Lorax he talked about the environment, and in Horton and the Egg he undertones about keeping promises. Writing his stories first and letting the morals come naturally, Dr. Seuss, who hated when a story was written around a moral, knew from his own experience as a kid that kids can easily spot a moral a mile off, and that it immediately strips the story of all its fun. When he wrote, his beliefs and experiences just seeped through his brain and landed on the paper amidst the tale he was spinning, whether it was political or just a regular memories. He had very strong beliefs on certain subjects.

Subtly slipping in his ideas, Dr. Seuss had a very sly way of stating what he thought about things. Attending the colleges and having the opportunities he did definitely affected his book writing later on in life. Throughout his marriage, his wife, who was always there to hear what he had to say on everything, was always ready to give her opinion. Whenever he told stories he always had an audience, whether it was millions of people across America, his mother, his wife, or a stranger passing on the street. He loved telling people stories. His most important feature was how he brought his life, his ideas, his views, and his words together to create excitingly wonderful stories that people love and will love for ever. Dr. Seuss was a master story teller.

[i]More Beasts for worse children was a book of stories written by Hilaire Belloc,to scare naughty children into listening to their parents

[ii]Oxford: a famous college in England

[iii]Forka pass: is a high mountain pass in the Swiss Alps connecting Gletsch

[iv]Mulberry Street: a thoroughfare in Manhattan New York.

[v]Grinchy: based off the character of the Grinch, who did not like Christmas

Bibliography:

Cohen, D. Cohen. The Seuss The Whole Seuss And Nothing ButThe Seuss. New York: Random House, 2004

Pease, Donald E. Theodore Seuss Geisel. Oxford: UniversityPress,2010.

Weidt, Maryann N. Oh, The Places He Went. Minneapolis, Carolrhoda books, Inc..

Connecting with Social Networks

2011-05-04T15:30:00.000-05:00

Arriving home from work or school, millions of people around the world head straight to their computers to check their MySpace. In the modern world, social networks such as MySpace and Facebook are becoming the most seen icons everywhere, from computers to billboards. Quickly stopping by their computer to check messages, post statuses , or even to browse the internet, this generation uses social networks constantly. Social networks are on the rise. As they grow steadily however, some people, who look down on them, say that they are a waste of time and should be shut down and forgotten because sometimes it is used as a stand-in for real life. Its main uses seem to be connecting with people, expressing one’s self, and communicating with others. Are these pros or cons?

How do social networks help connect people with others? On these social networks, some people are often more outgoing then they are face to face, which can be a good and bad thing. Finding old friends and acquaintances, people often use MySpace and Facebook to reconnect with people they once knew or still know. Since people are so busy things like Facebook are good ways to jot down a quick note like, I miss you, if you don’t have the time to talk on the phone or hang out. Unfortunately some people constantly pester and stalk those who would rather not talk to them. One thing to be wary of is, when on Facebook or MySpace, never accept friend requests from people you don’t know, because there are so many real social network stalkers out there. As Barbara J. Feldman puts it, “MySpace has a wide variety of users; this increases the chance of meeting distasteful people.” Always be on your guard. Choose who you would like to connect with on these sites.

Used often as an outlet to express one’s self, social networks abound with art, emotions, poetry, music, and literature. This digital expression of a person can often be highly annoying when people, who want the whole world to know how they feel, have emotional breakdowns. One thing that relates to self-expression is impression management, which is where people try to impress other people by their friendship choices, only displaying things that they think others will see as cool, or even posting crude or inappropriate things to seem tough (Boyd). Although these things are true, as Connie Neal says in in her book MySpace for Moms and Dads something that applies to both teens and adults:

"MySpace gives teens a place to showcase their talents and share their “artistry” with the world. Musicians can share their music in amazing ways! Even if Mom and Dad don’t appreciate their particular taste in music, there’s sure to be a group at MySpace music that understands and appreciates their genre of music. A budding musician gets quite a thrill to find out that people are hearing their music" (Neal, p. 99).

On Facebook and MySpace, people can usually find and relate to common interests with other people easily, while they can also read peoples’ writings and ideas that they would never have known existed if it hadn’t been for their page.

Commonly used to communicate, Facebook sends millions of information relaying messages every day. Complaining that needed information does not always get replied to fast enough, some people are against this form of communication because of either its reliability or because written messages can be misread and misunderstood. As Facebook and MySpace grow though, more and more people, who use it for jobs, clubs, youth groups, and social gatherings, are using it as their primary form of communication. It is simple and reliable and free. On these messages you can quickly double check information, whereas you might forget the details of a phone conversation. Also if you want to write a simple note to someone for fun, or encouragement, it is easy to write on their social network in a matter of seconds.

Despite its uses in connecting, expressing, and communicating, people are still protesting against social networks. It’s not the network that’s bad; it’s how you use it. When it comes to the issue of people stalking or chatting with you when you don’t want, you can choose to delete or ban them from your friendship, and therefore block them from seeing your page. Excepting the emotional breakdowns and tantrums on Facebook, you can discover an abundance of poetry and art in what people have to say. Also, the easy communication system on social networks is a fantastic reason to use them. In the modern world, things like Facebook, which is relevant and convenient to our day and age, can be put on cell phones so you can receive and send information any time. Just as there are negative aspects to any form of communication—even the telephone—the positive aspects of social networks help us connect and get to know each other better in our busy culture.

Bibliography

Boyd, Dana M. and Nicole B. Ellison, “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” 2007. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11.29 Apr. 2011. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html

Feldman, Barbara J. “Pros and Cons of MySpace and Facebook.” Surfing The Net With Kids. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.surfnetkids.com/go/safety/167/pros-and-cons-of-myspace-and-facebook/

Neal, Connie, MySpace for Moms and Dads, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2007.

Standing the Test

2011-04-27T18:38:00.022-05:00

There’s word on the street of a novel gizmo that is making bookworms everywhere draw their noses from the pages—the electronic book better known as the e-book or e-reader. Casually, some say that this is simply a passing trend, a five-minute-fad, while others believe that it could indelibly change the world of reading. What is this new curiosity? The e-reader is a portable electronic device used for reading digital books, which comes by a few different names, most popularly the Kindle and the Nook. Although some devoted bookies feel as though they are rejecting their dear old paper-bound friends when they choose to buy an e-reader, there are certain advantages to the new items. Noting the distinctive characteristics of both a book and the e-reader, such as ease, environment, and cost, only time will tell which of the two will win out in the end.

The e-reader surely is a convenient device. Instead of needing an entire bookshelf to store your books, the e-reader provides unlimited storage for stories. Hundreds of books contained in a tiny screen. Only eight and a half ounces and six inches long, the e-reader is extremely conducive for portability, easy to be thrown in a purse or backpack. In today’s fast-paced lifestyle, the ease of being able to buy and receive a digital book with only a few clicks of a button and in only twenty seconds is certainly desirable. Using the special tools and settings such as the dictionary, passage finder, and highlighting functions, the e-reader is remarkably simple to navigate. Although the e-reader is wonderful for storage, portability, and ease, there is the drawback of not being able to lend your favorite books to your friends and family, which is possible with a paper book. Also, only one person at a time can use an e-reader, even though it can hold hundreds of books at a time. Undoubtedly, the e-reader is fascinating device with very neat advantages.

How green is your reading? Economically, the contrast between paper books and e-readers is decided; however, they both have their advantages and disadvantages. With the e-reader, the environmental advantages are obvious—the saving of many trees that would otherwise be made into paper, but the disadvantages of the techy book are more complicated. In the technical world, there’s something called a carbon footprint. A carbon footprint is perplexing, but basically, “Every time you use energy that comes from fossil fuels, you create CO2 and make your carbon footprint bigger. Think of CO2 as energy waste. It’s what’s left over after you use fossil fuels. You create carbon dioxide every day”(Deiterich). The carbon footprint can be thought of as the measurement of how “green” an item is. Because paper books can be lent and borrowed through libraries and friends, the carbon footprint can be reduced considerably. Surely, the best choice is expressed in the amount of books a reader consumes. The Sierra Club Green concluded – as did a recent New York Times piece on the same subject:

Unless you’re a fast and furious reader, the energy required to manufacture and then dispose of an e-reader is probably greater than what’s needed to make a traditional book. If you’re reading forty or more books per year on your e-reader, that would be the right choice. But if you use it only occasionally, probably better to stick to a “regular” book.

The proof is in the reading.

Definitely the deciding factor for most readers is the cost of this techy little book. Is the cost worth the flashy doodads and neat quirks? For the average e-reader itself, the cost is $160—which is a considerable chunk of change. With this money, it would be possible to buy thirteen books. After buying the e-reader itself, you must purchase the books that you wish to read, which are no cheaper than the price of the same paper book. While you can lend and borrow books for free from friends or public libraries—which have an enormous selection of books—an e-reader can only be used by the person who owns it. Paying the same amount for your digital book, you lose a great advantage of lending and borrowing. To have all of your books stored in one very small thin fragile casing is not only costly, but risky. It would be easy to accidentally drop or spill a cup of grape juice on it. When a book is ruined, it is usually simple to go and buy another copy for a mere $15, but if an e-reader is wrecked, not many people would be willing to skip out and buy another for $160. As the Sierra Club Green views the matter, “Here’s the best answer: go to the public library next time you are downtown. Borrow three or four books, finish them all, then return ‘em next time you’re near the library. This is truly the most sustainable way to read: the good old fashioned public library”(Sierra Green Club). The cost of an e-reader is extremely high and is simply not worth the advantages.

Although a handy contraption, the e-reader is over-rated, for it is extremely costly and economically mediocre. For thousands of years, books have served people around the globe satisfactorily, and people have never claimed books to be inconvenient before. Obviously, books are very convenient: the average book is easy to carry, and most people only carry one or two books with them at a time—not a difficult maneuver. It is apparent that our society imagines problems with the old when the new arrives—problems that never existed before. Settings like the dictionary, passage finder, and highlighter are quick and useful, but these are not things that are difficult to do without an e-reader. Bill Gates himself confesses:

Reading off the screen is still vastly inferior to reading off of paper. Even I, who have these expensive screens and fancy myself as a pioneer of this Web Lifestyle, when it comes to something over about four or five pages, I print it out and I like to have it to carry around with me and annotate. And it’s quite a hurdle for technology to achieve or match the level of usability(Darnton 69).

In addition to the practical, environmental, or economic considerations, what about the beauty of the book? Many owners of e-readers admit that they miss their books, miss turning the pages, and miss the familiar smell. All “Marian the Librarians” know that exhilarating fresh smell of a new book—and the feel of a stiff binding, and the sound of words screaming to be read. It is a fascinating idea to think that the words you’re reading in some old second-hand book have been read by an number of people—the same ink markings have been enjoyed, studied, or despised by others before you. Books are a strange connection between people. They have power. The writer, Sydney Smith, said that “No furniture is so charming as books”(Useful Information Website). Somehow, a little white piece of metal isn’t the same.

Consider the book. It has extraordinary staying power. Ever since the invention of the codex sometime close to the birth of Christ, it has proven to be a marvelous machine—great for packaging and information, convenient to thumb through, comfortable to curl up with, superb for storage, and remarkably resistant to damage. It does not need to be upgraded or downloaded, accessed or booted, plugged into circuits or extracted from webs. Its design makes it a delight to the eye. Its shape makes it a pleasure to hold in the hand. And its handiness has made it the basic tool of learning for thousands of years (Darnton 68).

Before it was said that only time will tell if either the e-reader or the book is the best choice, but, in fact, the book has already stood that test—it’s stood the test for five thousand years, and the e-reader will not last that.

Works Cited:

Darnton, Robert. The Case for Books: Past, Present, and Future. New York: PublicAffairs, 2009

Deiterich, Ann. “Carbon Footprint Definition for Kids.” Live Strong. 31 Mar. 2011.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/159514-carbon-footprint-definition-for-kids/

“E-readers vs. Old Fashioned Books—Which is Greener?” Sierra Club Green. 9 Dec. 2010.
http://www.sierraclubgreenhome.com/videos/e-readers-vs-old-fashioned-books%e2%80%94which-is-greener/

“Famous Library and Librarian Quotations.” Useful Information. 22 Apr. 2011.
http://www.useful-information.info/quotations/library_quotes.html

A Minor Decision to Save the Earth

2011-04-05T20:21:00.004-05:00

In the modern world some say that our resources are running low. Have we been careless and imprudent with our resources? Recycling is too time-consuming for some people who are busy and running from place to place. Surprisingly, prices are higher on eco-friendly things, which makes people take the easy way out. Yet, is the world slowly running out of the means we need to live?

Shopping after a long hard day of work, people often don’t want to have to search for items of an economy- helping nature because they are often in hard to find spots in the stores. When these items are found they usually are well above the price of the standard item they could buy instead. Understandably, people often take the easy way out, which means buying what is cheapest rather than what is good for the environment. Also things such as charged batteries can be much more of a hassle than throwing out the old ones and buying new ones.

Separating out recyclables also can easily be time consuming. Exhaustingly long hours at work can make a simple task like separating the trash from the reusable items seems like a great chore. However, it only takes about three minutes out of your day, and it can help the world become a cleaner and safer place. Sometimes it takes no time at all. Just lickity split. After that, your whole day is free, but you helped make the world a better place.

When it all comes down to it, is three minutes of your day that long? Why cut down trees which provide cover, oxygen, and food for animals if we can reuse paper? As you recycle paper, you are simply adding to the beauty of this world and saving nature. Using eco-friendly gas, such as ethanol limits the pollution, which gives our lungs a healthy fresh breath of air. The Environment Defense association did a study that showed that “the risk of cancer from breathing diesel exhaust is about ten times more than ingesting all other toxic air pollutants combined, with diesel emissions contributing to over 70% of the cancer risk from air pollution in the USA.” Consciously deciding to reuse water bottles also cuts down on the heavily growing pollution in our air.

Some people say that recycling is an unnecessary waste of time. However, with minimal effort the people of this nation can make and maintain a better living place for our children and their children. Simply recycling will better our community. Walking to nearby places, which will save on pollution in the air released by cars, is an easy way to save resources. It doesn’t take much-a small thought here, a minor decision there-and you are gradually helping save the earth.

Home Schooling or Public Schooling: Socialization?

2011-04-02T19:20:00.000-05:00

The differences between educating children at home and at school are incredibly different so it no surprise that the social aspects of these two education styles are also incredibly different. But which is the most beneficial path to take—homeschooling or public schooling? While public school students are surrounded by hundreds of people their own age, home school students study with and teach their own siblings—or perhaps, with a small study group. In Public Education, students are taught by teachers employed by the school, whereas homeschoolers are taught primarily by their own parents. Also, education style greatly affects the family as well, and the differences between the family life of public school students and homeschool students are incredible. So which road is the most beneficial for the social lives of students, their families, friends, and teachers?

Surrounded by hundreds of students every day, public schooled children have a vastly different experience than home schooled students. Culturally enriching, public school awakes students to the differences of others—their beliefs, their lifestyles, their learning styles. Students may become friends with those unlike them, helping them to see the world in different, fresh ways. Because students spend most of the day, five days a week with each other, they have the opportunity to form strong friendships with each other. Through Public Education programs, extracurricular activities are usually easily accessible to students, providing other outlets for their strong interests. This is a convenient option. The social settings of homeschool students are very different. Although they do study daily together, their schedules are more flexible, allowing them to meet with their friends at different times. Also, they’re friendships are likely to be with children of all ages, as they are not confined to studying within age groups.

Relationships with adults is an important social aspect of education. Passing down their knowledge, teachers have a great responsibility to students, instructing, encouraging, and meeting their needs. In public school, students enjoy the benefits of having some teachers who possess a bounty of information on particular subjects. They experience many different teaching styles and are familiar with many different adults, which can be healthy. For home schooled students, studying is primarily with their parents. Providing unlimited one-on-one time for students, parents can give the attention truly needed for their children, helping them to become strong in their subjects. Naturally, parents understand the needs of their children well and are equipped to help them in their individual learning styles. As teachers have an enormous effect on students’ lives and education, the strengths of public school teachers and home school teachers are very important.

Obviously, a student’s education affects his family life enormously. Because homeschooled students study at home, they are with their family a great deal of the time. Spending time learning, playing, and talking together, they become extremely close, understanding and truly knowing each other. When a student’s teachers are their parents, they develop respectful caring relationships by learning to understand each other. Although homeschoolers have less chances to meet people, their siblings become their best friends because they are used to being together. Siblings are likely to be life-long friends. It is true that many families feel that homeschooling cannot suit their family life because both parents need to work, and some families feel, probably accurately, that they prefer the ease of the public school system. However, in the view of family closeness and friendship, homeschooling is surely a wise path.

Although home schooled students may not have as many chances to meet people in their studying environments, their friendships are not plagued by peer pressure, cliques, bullying, and the popularity complex of public school, causing their friendships to be strong, long-lasting, and honest. Also, they have chances to make friends in areas of their lives other than school. Learning from their very own parents, homeschool students have the advantage of studying with teachers who understand and care about them and can provide one-on-one help as opposed to public school teaching with only one teacher to twenty some students in a class. Unlike public school students, homeschool students are not gone all day long at school, and consequently, are able to spend much time with their families, creating familiar, trusting relationships. How can families who only see each other for three or four hours a day know each other well? Homeschooling brings families closer together, making friends of siblings. Surely, homeschooling has great advantages socially between a student and their teachers, friends, and family.

The Ugly Crow (Mark Twain Style)

2011-02-18T19:34:00.006-06:00

It was a fine day. Not too hot as to make the pond dry up, which it often did some sunny afternoons, for it was not a strong willed pond—it came with rains, left again in the wink of an eye, and when it laid, it laid dismally. It was a fine day. Not too hot yet not too cold either, in my account. There was no breeze, no cloud, no whisper of winter. There lived a black crow in a tree beside the pond. I say she was black, for there is no other sympathetic thing to be said for her. Proud as a peacock, as they say, she ruled her branch with utmost severity, propriety, and absurdity. Proud as a peacock, yet with nothing to show for it. On that fine nearly ordinary day, the crow stood eating a small delicacy—a piece of yellow cheese. This was the only event holding as out of the ordinary, as the crow, for all her pride, was not a fine creature. She stood at the end of the branch, as to be in the clearest sight of her neighbors, to savoring, treasuring, idolizing, the small cheese.

“Hello there!” cried a cheerful voice from the ground. A young charming fox walked up, his gait quick and spry, making the blades of grass around him stand a little straighter. “A fine day, Madame, a fine day—and a fine day for you especially, I see,” he said, nodding towards the cheese.

The crow attempted a flirtatious smile at the fox in which attempt she failed dismally.

“A day what could hardly be made better.” Nobody had ever done what the fox did next. He tilted up his chin at an angle of perfection and called, “Lady, you must have a sweet voice to join that sweet voice of yours. Sing me a song, won’t you?”

He had won without hardly a fight, like a young vagabond, who dons knight’s clothing, marches up to seize a city, and arrives on time for his banquet of honor, prepared by his surest enemies. The crow could not refuse him. Many say that truly it was the perfect tilt of pointed chin. The crow’s beak opened, letting out a shriek to make the pond dry up in a moment. The cheese had landed perfectly in the fox’s mouth. No time was taken by him for savoring, treasure, or idolizing. All he said was, “Good day, Mam. And thank-you kindly.”

What became of the crow? She stayed very much the same, although she never ate her dinner on the edge of the branch anymore. The next day the pool was gone. A fortnight come it was back again. What is the foreseen, dreaded, sagely moral of this story? Some have said that it is—Pride comes before the fall. This is a true statement, but I do not believe that it could help the crow very much. The advice I would offer—If you are ugly, the world only wants your cheese.

The Sly Fox and the Prideful Crow (Charles Dickens Style)

2011-02-15T20:12:00.001-06:00

One dismal morning a proud little bird sat eating a piece of cheese. This must be distinctly understood or nothing good can come of the story I am about to relate. Did the fox know he was proud? Of course he did. He and the proud crow were neighbors for years.

And on this morning when the crow was sitting on his usual branch, the fox edged his way until he was standing directly below the crow. Smoothing his coat, licking his lips and clearing his throat, he called up to the proud crow in a voice as sweet as butter, “My, how well you look this cloudy morning!” But the crow could not reply because of the piece cheese.

“Your eyes could make angels sing,” continued the black hearted fox, “and your feathers--how black and glossy they are!”

The crow was ever so pleased. And her chest which was swollen to an enormous size with pride. “And I’ve been told that your voice has put all the other birds to shame. And if I could hear you sing I would be satisfied with my life. Please, please sing. Will you?” the Fox inquired.

This was too much for the crow, and she opened up her mouth and let out a screech that made the bugs shrivel in their socks. But as she did so, the cheese fell, tumbling, rolling, spinning, and falling through the air and right into the fox’s gaping mouth. “Thank you ever so much,” called the fox, “Your song was so awful it could have woken a door nail from the dead--but your cheese was delightful!” And with that he trotted into the woods.

Fox and the Grapes (Politically-Correct Style)

2011-02-04T15:22:00.001-06:00

One day a non-human fox saw a clump of grapes hanging from a height-endowed vine. The grapes looked pleasing to the eyes, and he very much wanted to place them in his vegetarian stomach. He jumped, thinking how enjoyably tasteful those grapes would be. But he was too vertically-challenged to reach them, and he knew that such a size-diminished vine would not support his firmly blessed body. He wondered if those grapes were really as pleasing as they looked. The more the fox jumped, the more physically inept he became. Soon he simply was too physically diminished to jump any more, and he gave up trying. Finally, he said in a voice-challenged way, “I shouldn’t have bothered to jump so high. I’m sure those grapes are sweet-challenged anyway.”

Mob for a Massacre

2010-11-09T15:15:00.002-06:00

In 1758 when the British had just finished the French and Indian War, they controlled a vast majority of the Americas, which were called The British Colonies. Eventually these colonies would rebel against the crown. Why did they do this? The unfair taxation without representation started it all, as it led to the Boston massacre, which ultimately led to the well-known trial of the soldiers.

In 1654 there were thirteen colonies in North America, which were all governed by Britain. The colonies were free thinking. When King George started taxing the colonists to help lift the debt of the French and Indian War, the colonists boycotted items such as tea and clothes that were imported from Britain, as they declared that Britain had no right to tax them. Sending four thousand soldiers over to the colonies, King George, who planned to settle the little American rebellion with force, figured it would be easy to settle the boycott. Immediately the colonists protested because there was a job shortage because soldiers worked extra job when off-duty for less pay than the colonists. The colonists often jeered at the officers, called them names, and violently threw things like stones at them.

As the king taxed them more, the people rebelled against him, which led to the king sending more soldiers to the colonies. On March snow had fallen and it was a chilly night. Seeing an officer being jeered at by a wig-maker’s apprentice, Private White came to his aid and smacked the boy in the head. Loudly crying and running away, the boy brought back ten angry men. Rounding up the soldiers, Captain Preston came to White’s aid. The soldiers were not allowed to fire without the permission of a civil magistrate so they stood together, surrounded by what was now a violently-angry mob, while they were called names and things were thrown at them. During the confusion, one of the solders heard someone shout, “FIRE!” and automatically assuming it was Captain Preston, he fired. Quickly picking up his lead, the other soldiers also started shooting, which led to six people getting killed and the rest of the crowd dispersing.

Immediately the next morning, Captain Preston and his men were thrown in a rat-infested jail. Demanding justice, Boston and the other colonies were in uproar. The date of the trial was set, but they could not find a lawyer for Preston. As the trial grew closer, a lawyer could not be found until John Adams, a patriot, decided that the soldiers still deserved a fair trial. He received much ridicule for this. At the end of the trial, Captain Preston and six of his eight men were found “not guilty,” while the other two guilty soldiers were branded and then also set free.

Eventually the events of the taxation, the Boston Massacre, as it came to be called, and the trial of the soldiers all led up to the American Revolution. Although it is called the Boston Massacre, it was not actually a massacre. Under a barrage from the mob, the soldiers could fire because they were allowed to protect themselves if threatened. It has been said that the angry mob, which was out of control, was asking for a massacre from the soldiers.

A Yearning for Freedom

2010-11-09T14:55:00.000-06:00

The Boston Tea Party was the first flame of the revolution, spurring and igniting the blazing roaring fire of the Revolutionary War. When the Puritans sailed to America in 1606, they sought to find a place where they could have religious freedom. Before they came to American they were harshly persecuted and were forbidden in their religious practices. In the years leading up to the American Revolution, the colonists worked to form a government based on a collaboration of the writings of Martin Luther, John Locke, John Calvin, and many others. For some time, the colonists lived in peace without interference from Britain, striving together to form a just and peaceful community, but eventually the British Crown again started to wrongly interfere with the colonists’ way of life, and trouble ensued. Undoubtedly, the Boston Tea Party was not an isolated event. It could even be said that the Boston Tea Party could be traced all the way back to Martin Luther and the Reformation, but there are some events which assuredly led to its happening. Issuing the tax on tea, Britain demanded payment from the colonists for their military exploits, while refusing them the privilege of representation in Parliament. This blow towards America caused much consternation and discontent. With growing frustration towards Britain, Samuel Adams began the group of patriots known as the Sons of Liberty, who later helped plan the Boston Tea Party. The Boston Tea Party was proof to Parliament and King George that America was ready to rise up and fight for their rights.

The tax on tea was one of the many, but most significant events that led to the resistance of the Boston Tea Party. In the 1750s the French and Indian War, also called the Seven Years War, broke out between the English and the French because the English and Americans desired to expand their territory westward, but the French were unfortunately in their way. After the English conquered the French, the pressing concern of how to pay for the war arose, for the English were then in a dire state of debt. Reasoning that since Americans were to benefit from the war, Americans should pay for the war, Parliament passed the Revenue Act, and in 1765 the Stamp Act for “defraying the expenses of defending, protecting, and securing British colonies and plantation in America.” This caused uproar in America. People were furious that they were expected to pay for Britain’s war when they were not given the privilege of having representatives in Parliament. If America was represented in Congress, the Stamp Act would have undoubtedly been a different matter. James Otis, a fervent patriot, who believed that the Stamp Act violated the God-given rights of the people, explained the American sentiment as follows, “When the Parliament shall think fit to all the colonists a representation in the House of commons, the equity of their taxing the colonies will bas clear as their power is at present of doing it without . . . It seems plain, that the reason why Ireland ant he American planation’s are not bound . . . is because they are not represented in the British Parliament.” “Taxation without Representation” became a common slogan. Urgently, Benjamin Franklin, an influential painter, inventor, and statesman, encouraged the colonies to become a strong united force—a voluntary union. Controversially, Franklin drew a cartoon of a dead snake chopped into many pieces with the name of a colony next to teach to illustrate their need to unite. These events sparked the fire for the resistance later displayed at the Boston Tea Party only ten years later.

In opposition to the Stamp Act, Samuel Adams, with the help of James Otis and Paul Revere, started the Sons of Liberty, a group of patriotic agitators who challenged the British Crown’s right to take away their freedom and later were the same men to organize the Boston Tea Party. Fervently, Samuel Adams believed that this act was “the loss of those religious rights, the enjoyment of which our good forefathers had more especially in their intention, when they explored and settled the new world.” They intended to do something about it. They fanned the revolutionary fire. These men defended their claims by drawing on the men who had written on religious freedom before the colonists had come to America, the same men on whom the colonies’ government was based—Locke, Calvin, Cromwell, Milton, and many others. Writing aggressive articles that were circulated around the colonies, the Sons of Liberty spoke out about the injustice of the Stamp Act and inspired people throughout the country into opposition. As the months went on, the Sons of Liberty grew and grew. In almost every colony there was a group identifying itself as The Sons of Liberty. Together, they numbered about three hundred and were made up of all sorts of men—merchants, doctors, blacksmiths, printers, silversmiths, and others. To further unite these groups, Samuel Adams initiated “Committees of Correspondence,” in 1772, as a network of communication between and within the colonies, so that each colony would be aware of what was happening in regard to the British Crown and America. If every colony understood what was happening, it would be possible to reach an agreement for a plan of action. Before the “Committees of Correspondence,” the resistance movement had taken place chiefly in the sea-coast towns and major cities where people were affected most significantly, but afterwards every colony banded together in opposition. The Sons of Liberty fanned the fire of the revolution by making people aware of the injustice of the Stamp Acting, banding people together into a united force and setting the stage for resistance displayed at the Boston Tea Party.

The first action of resistance against the British government was the incredibly risky act of destroying three shiploads of British tea, an even known as The Boston Tea Party. When Parliament passed the tax on tea, the colonists declared that this was the last straw. Although the tea tax was small, it nevertheless created uproar because it only a small example of the payment Britain expected from the colonies, while refusing them a representation in Parliament. Not only this, but the Tea Act forbade colonists from buying tea from any ships other than Britain’s’. The Sons of Liberty devised a plan. Rebelliously, Samuel Adams called a meeting at the Old South Church in Boston on the evening of December 6, 1773, and was joined by hundreds of people ready to take action. That same night, men gathered at taverns and homes around town, waiting for the appointed time. Dressing in shabby old blankets, donning woolen caps, and blackening their faces with soot, they went out secretly and silently toward Griffin’s Wharf, where three ships, the Dartmouth, Eleanor, and Beaver, carrying tea, were awaiting at the dock. They called themselves the Mohawks. Separated into three parties, each having an appointed leader, they quickly boarded the ships. Calmly and powerfully, the leaders ordered the officials off the ships. They proceeded to lug the chest of the on deck and shovel in into the water. By the time they finished, the crowd from the Old South Meeting House had come to join them. They left the wharf, marching to “Yankee Doodle.” No authorities attempted to stop them for fear that innocent bystanders would be injured. When King George heard news of the tea ordeal a month later, he was furious. Losing a fortune in tea, the East India Trading Company was shocked. King George vowed that the participants would be found and arrested. The names of the Mohawks, however, were kept so extremely confidential that it was impossible to discover the perpetrators. The Boston Tea Party was the first deliberate, organized act of resistance toward the British Crown and it united and prepared the colonies for the Revolutionary War.

The Boston Tea Party was preceded by many events, people, and ideas which propelled it to happen. Creating discontent in the colonies, the Stamp Act was one of the first events which ignited the colonists’ yearning for complete freedom from Britain. Afterwards, the society called the Sons of Liberty was initiated by Samuel Adams, uniting the colonies into a force that was ready to fight for liberty, even until death. When the Tea Act was proclaimed, the colonies were ready for rebellion and destroyed three shiploads of British tea in Boston—an event known as the Boston Tea Party. Fighting and sacrificing for America, our forefathers built a country centered on truth and justice. Most importantly, they were not high and mighty stuffed shirts, dainty and self-important, cut they were men of action who were unafraid to get their hands dirty and to stir the people into action as well. On the night of the Boston Tea Party and rally at the meeting house, which Adams himself had organized, he was right in the thick of it, rallying the people there—he was their equal. Not only this, but they were men ready to fight for freedom, including the freedom to worship God in the way of their consciences. Boldly, they stood up to the authority of Britain, a great and powerful force who militarily could have wiped them out effortlessly. Or so it seemed. Much can come of bravery and boldness even when all the odds seem opposing. That is what built our country into what it are now—bravery, boldness, and a yearning for freedom. The Boston Tea Party was America’s first declaration of that yearning for freedom.

The Man Who Never Grew Up

2010-10-10T17:03:00.010-05:00

In America, everyone has heard of the story of Peter Pan. Silently flying off to Neverland one night with a strange boy named Peter Pan, Wendy and her brothers arrive and have many adventures, bravely battling pirates and Indians. Returning home, Wendy and her brothers grow up, while Peter Pan, who stays in Neverland remains a boy forever. This incredible story was written by a man named James Mathew Barrie. As he drew inspiration from many of the people he interacted with, J.M. Barrie formed the great story of the boy who wouldn’t grow up. Some of his most interesting times were his childhood, his time with the Davies, and the making of Peter Pan. This is his story.

In year 1860, James Mathew Barrie was born in a small weaving town called Kirriemuir. Although his family didn’t have much, they were not exactly poor. His father was a successful weaver, while his mother stayed at home with the eight kids. Leaving home at age eight, J.M. Barrie went to Glasgow academy and was looked after by his older brother and sister, who worked at the school. Easily passing exams with flying colors, he then attended Humphreys academy at age thirteen. When he was sixteen he wrote his first play, and started a drama club, which caused much trouble, because not all of the plays had up standing morals, and was looked down upon by the clergyman on the school governing board. After graduating he immediately started writing plays and became a well-known and well respected author in a city which was, much larger than where he grew up.

When he was thirty-one J.M. Barrie fell in love with the pretty young actress, Mary Ansell, who starred in one of his plays, and they got married. In 1897 an extraordinary thing happened--he met the Davies family. Meeting Mrs. Silvia Davies at a dinner party, Barrie was instantly charmed by her beauty and how she would hide sweets in her silk reticule and say, “They are for Peter.” It was not until almost a year later that he met the Davies again. Daily walking in the park, J.M. Barrie often noticed the two little boys wearing red berets, as they walked with the nurse, who was pushing a baby. On one sunny morning, he started talking to the boys because they wanted to play with his dog, Porthos, and he learned that they were part of the Davies family. They were George and Jack Davies. Immediately, J.M. Barrie and the Davies boys became completely inseparable as they met at the park day after day, and J.M. Barrie would often go home with them and play make believe and tell stories until their bedtime, not coming home to his wife until late evening.

Where did Peter Pan Start? He started with the Davies. Telling stories to the Davies boys one day, Barrie told the tale of the boy who wouldn’t grow up, and he named him Peter after Peter Davies, who was listening intently to every word he said. As he wrote the play The Little White Bird, Barrie added in the character of Peter as a small part, but he was so intrigued by the character he decided to write a new play about him. In 1904 Barrie sat in his little cottage home as he wrote continually. Finally finishing his play Peter and Wendy, he took it to be published. At first he had no luck getting it published until his friend, Charles Frohman, who was delighted by the story, agreed to put it into production. It was an instant hit because the charming quality of the play, and people were clambering from everywhere to see the play, which was now named Peter Pan.

After leading a successful life, J. M. Barrie died at age seventy seven of pneumonia. From the time of his childhood, through his relationship with the Davies through the writing of Peter Pan, and even until his death, he was said to be quite childish and even playfully devilish at times, just like the boy he wrote about. One of the most significant things about J.M. Barrie, who loved to write stories until his death, is that he hardly ever noticed his fame and popularity. At a very old age he still loved telling stories and playing make believe, quite like a man who never grew up.

Who Are You?

2010-10-09T13:17:00.008-05:00

Who are you? This familiar question asked by the caterpillar of Wonderland is one that is appropriate to the adventures of the man who wrote the famous classic Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, a man who is far less known than the tale he created, though just as intriguing. Although he is most widely known as the writer, Lewis Carroll, this man, born Charles Dodgson, was also a mathematician, inventor, and teacher. Avidly creating and inventing since he was young, Charles’ early works show his prowess in clever rhymes, interesting riddles, and crazy new words such as “chortle”—a blend of “chuckle” and “snort.” Enjoying the company of children, Charles befriended three young sisters, which would lead to the writing of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

On January 27, 1832, in a small parsonage of Daresbury in Cheshire, Charles Dodgson, the man today known as Lewis Carroll, breathed his first breath. The third of eleven children, Charles was taught at home until he was eleven and enjoyed a happy, peaceful childhood with his family, although he was always very shy because of a stammer with which he was born. Charles loved to create from the very beginning. When he was thirteen, he wrote a poem called “The Fairy.”

The Fairy

I have a fairy by my side

Which says I must not sleep.

When once in pain I loudly cried
It said “You must not weep.”

If, full of mirth, I smile and grin

It says “You must not laugh;”

When once I wished to drink some gin

It said “You must not quaff.”

When once a meal I wished to taste

It said “You must not bite”;

When to the wars I went with haste

It said “You must not fight.”

“What may I do?” at length I cried,

Tired of the painful task.

The fairy quietly replied,

And said “You must not ask.

Naturally quick-witted and clever, Charles’ talent for humor paired seamlessly with logic is evident even in his first works.

It was while Charles was teaching at Christ College that he met the little girl who would spark the ideas for the story that he would one day become famous for--Alice in Wonderland. Because of his stammer, Charles was often shy among adults and preferred the company of children. Some of his closest friends were three young girls— Edith, Alice, and Ina Liddell, who were the daughters of the dean of Christ College, where Charles lectured math for many years. Whether they rowing on the pond, or Charles was telling the children a fantastical tale, or photographing the children, they always had a wonderful time. The children adored him. Peacefully rowing one golden afternoon with his good friend Robinson Duckworth and the Liddell sisters, Charles told them an enchanting story in which the main character’s name was Alice. Delighted by the story, Alice Liddell begged him to write it down. When she was older, Alice recalled that it must have been even better than usual, for Charles had made up many stories for them before, but it had never been enthralling so much as to spur a proposal for him to write it down. Alice pleaded. She begged. Charles finally agreed. Charles would write the tale for his little friend, Alice Liddell, Alice’s Adventures Underground.

Even after he began writing the Alice story down, never did Charles suspect that Alice’s Adventures Underground would be published. Hardly a year and a half later, he presented the hand-written green leather-bound book to Alice as a Christmas present, with a note inside reading, “A Christmas gift to a dear child in memory of a summer day.” After showing the book to the fairytale writer, George McDonald and his family, who were good friends of Charles’ they encouraged him strongly to publish “Alice’s Adventures Underground.” They soon persuaded Charles. Searching fervently for an illustrator, Charles decided that John Tenniel, the well-known cartoon artist, was the best fit. It was exactly three years to the day of the golden afternoon when Charles had told the tale to Alice and her sisters, that the book was published, although Charles had nearly doubled its length, added all of John’s Tenniel’s drawings, and changed the title to Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

From this short tale, told on a child’s whim, was born a story known around the world, published in in over fifty languages, illustrated by over two-hundred artists, and adapted into two major motion pictures. Clearly seen in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland are many aspects of Charles Dodgson, his childhood, his love and exceptional talent for inventing and storytelling, his teaching in math, and-- most importantly, his special fondness for children. It is always an adventure when people can read a work and see much of the writer inside the pages. So Charles Dodgson, who are you?

Snoopy's Defeat

2010-09-21T15:37:00.006-05:00

On a winter day in December, when it was very cold, the Peanuts gang was enjoying the afternoon skating. Clutching his blue blanket tightly to his cheek, Linus stood in the middle of the pond, wondering why he had come along. He’d much rather be inside with a toasty mug of hot cocoa, cuddling his blanket and sucking his thumb in his favorite chair instead of in the freezing wind, which was making his poor blanket whip back and forth. Clumsily hobbling towards the bank, Linus decided that ice skating was not for him.

Snoopy, who enjoyed skating immensely, was turning pirouettes and spinning circles around everyone as usual. When Linus turned around, he discovered that Snoopy was charging his way. In an attempt to escape, Linus shuffled hurriedly towards the safe edge of the rink. Zooming towards Linus, Snoopy caught him just as he reached the bank.

Snatching the fuzzy blue blanket in his mouth, Snoopy spun Linus around. With determination, Linus clung on to his blanket, his most precious possession, while Snoopy dragged him around the pond. Linus wouldn’t let go. Crazily, Linus was pulled ‘round and ‘round, until his head was spinning wildly. Linus jerked his blanket suddenly, sending Snoopy towards a large snow bank, where he landed dejectedly in defeat.

A Day for Ice Skating

2010-09-21T15:32:00.001-05:00

Waiting for Charlie Brown and the others to arrive, Linus, who was early, was skating around the pond slowly. He hadn’t wanted to arrive early, but his mom said, “Better early than late.” In the air he could see his breath fogging up. While he circled the frozen pond, he rubbed his hands together for warmth. Suddenly a freezing gust of wind almost blew him over as he wrapped his blanket tightly around him. He couldn’t wait for Charlie Brown to arrive.

In the distance, Charlie Brown and Snoopy trudged slowly through the deep snow. Looking towards the pond, Charlie Brown could see a speck, and he thought, “That must be Linus!” As he pushed through the snow, Charlie Brown wondered where everyone else was. Suddenly, bounding in front of Charlie Brown, Snoopy, his dog, sped off towards the lake, while Charlie Brown didn’t pick up the pace at all. Charlie Brown watched him run off, shrugged his shoulders, and kept moving forward at his own pace.

As he grew closer to the pond, Snoopy picked up the speed considerably so he could arrive as soon as possible. Violently shivering in the cold, Linus could only make out a white and black blur speeding towards him. Reaching the ice, Snoopy tried to slow down, but went flying across the pond, grabbing for the only thing in his reach. The only thing in his reach just so happened to be Linus’s blanket, while Linus, who refused to let go, got dragged along with Snoopy until they both crashed into the snow bank at the edge of the pond. In the icy snow, Linus and Snoopy untangled themselves to find Charlie Brown, who had finally arrived, skating across the pond to where they were. “I don’t want to skate anymore Charlie Brown,” said Linus.” Freezing cold, they went home.

Defying Gravity

2010-09-17T12:33:00.002-05:00

Since its opening in 2003, the Broadway show Wicked has been the show to beat. Based loosely on the novel Wicked: The life and Times of the Witches of Oz, which is a novel paralleling Frank Baum’s classic film The Wizard of Oz, the musical Wicked is an uproariously funny, yet deeply thoughtful story. Initially premiering in San Francisco, Wicked created little buzz with its audiences. Critics wondered if the show would make it. The show then traveled to New York for the premiere there. It immediately became a box office smash! Like Elphaba, the show has been defying gravity ever since!

Driving While Texting

2010-09-17T12:17:00.005-05:00

Everyone has heard of a DWI, but how about a DWT? The reaction time and concentration of a person texting while driving is equal to that of someone who has consumed three or four drinks of alcohol. It’s taken far less seriously. Unfortunately, one out of five drivers admits to texting while driving, while over half of people between eighteen and twenty-four have texted or emailed while driving. Since most people don’t admit to texting after a car accident, these statistics are likely to be significantly higher. Considered far less serious than drinking while intoxicated, texting while driving poses a dangerous problem and will continue to, unless people begin to change their risky and untimely habits.

Six Kids and Their Music

2010-09-17T12:06:00.002-05:00

Forming a band for fun in 2005, six kids began what is known today as The Devil Wears Prada. As they tour more and more, The Devil Wears Prada has quickly become immensely popular with song names like “Reptar, King Of The Ozone.” From Dayton, Ohio, The Devil Wears Prada is a hardcore band that has released three full length CDs and one EP album, although they have been a band for only five years. Deriving their name from the book with the same name, the meaning for the band name is completely different. It’s a message about anti-materialism, or as their screamer Mike Hranica put it, “When standing before God, He won't care about your sweet Prada scarf or Gucci shoes or whatever.” On August 22, 2006, they came out with their first full length album, which was named Dear Love A Beautiful Discord. Recently making a new record, The Devil Wears Prada’s newest EP, which is named Zombie is exclusively about zombies and even comes with a zombie comic book. They’ve come a long way from six kids playing music for fun in 2005.

No More Cover Songs

2010-09-17T11:58:00.005-05:00

Our Last Night is a five piece band made of guys who were “sick of jamming out to cover songs.” Starting while they were still in high school, they played wild shows and quickly grew popular in the New Hampshire area, and they also gained much attention for their vocalist , because he was only eleven years old when he joined the band. Throughout their career they have put out three full length albums and one EP. In August of 2007, they signed to Epitaph Records and put out their album The Ghosts Among Us. Strenuously working with Andrew Wade, who also works with the bands A Day To Remember and Versa Emerge, Our Last Night released their CD We Will All Evolve on April 30, 2010. Our Last Night has become a great band since their decision to stop jamming to cover songs.

Cracked

2010-09-17T11:47:00.005-05:00

Comfortably sitting in the study, waiting for Mr. Perry, Betty was thinking the day over. Picking up a book, she wondered why the name Betty had been chosen for her because she hated the name Betty. It wasn’t her real name. Her real name was actually Meg, and she was an information gatherer. Under cover as a health consultant for Mr. Perry, who was the owner of all the electrical companies going under in the United States, her mission was simple: see how Perry was taking bankruptcy. While she relaxed in the chair, she also wondered when Mr. Perry would arrive.

As she sat, a loud noise broke into her train of thought. Wildly swinging from the gold chandelier above her was--none other than--Mr. Perry himself. Hooting like an owl and flapping his wings crazily like a bird as he swung back and forth, he kept clawing at nothing with his feet. His clothes were torn, he had half a beard, and he kept screaming, “They will never find me in this jungle.” Above Meg’s head, Mr. Perry, who finally spotted her, let out a howl of rage, and started grabbing books off the shelves, as he chucked them at her head.

Calmly observing the man, Meg watched as he rocked back and forth. “After all your scheming and bribing your way to the top, you have finally cracked, you old tyrant,” she thought. “Although I think I like you better this way anyhow.” Standing up slowly, Meg curtsied and called up, “I shall take my leave now, Mr. Perry,” and with that she turned, smiled to herself, and exited the room. As she walked down the hall to the front door, she planned her report in her head. She didn’t have much to tell the boss, because Mr. Perry could be summed up in four short words. Cracked, but quite delightful.

Fifty Bucks Well-Earned, Almost

2010-09-17T11:39:00.003-05:00

As Marge walked down the long aisle she looked up to see the groom, who was standing, smiling at the end of the aisle. Immediately saying yes when he had proposed, she could not wait to be married, especially to the man of her dreams. Waiting at the end of the aisle, Frank stood nervously. He had been waiting for this moment all his life, and he could not believe it was already upon him. He felt like jelly. In the first row, the mothers were clutching their tissues and bawling boomingly into them as Marge passed.

Meanwhile, Francis was standing in the lobby, ready to enter behind Marge. On a pillow next to him, lay the wedding rings, small and gold. He did not want his sister to be married because he didn’t much care for Frank, but he couldn’t do anything about it. Picking up the rings and starting slowly into the aisle, he realized that if he didn’t want his sister to be married he would have to act immediately or forever hold his peace. Quickly, he shoved them up his nose. “This will stop the wedding for sure,” thought Francis as he followed Marge.

When he reached the end of the row, the preacher looked down at the pillow and then at Francis. “Where are they?” he asked. “I don’t know,” replied Francis innocently as he sucked them farther up his nose. “Do you have a cold my dear bo--HOLY CRAP! WHAT’S WRONG WITH YOUR FACE!” screeched the preacher, finally noticing Francis’ bulging nostrils. Digging up his nose with his finger, Francis pulled out the rings, which were covered in snot, spit on them to rinse off the mucus, and handed them to the shocked preacher. On this note, the preacher quickly married the couple. Gloomily searching for his parents, Francis finally found his father, who took the pillow from him as he said, “If your plan had worked, I would have paid you a well-earned fifty bucks.”

Gold Digging

2010-09-17T11:25:00.007-05:00

Watching his beautiful older sister glide down the aisle, escorted by their father, Jimmy’s heart sank. Exasperatedly, Jimmy rolled his eyes at the idea of people falling “in love”, which he found to be very obnoxious. Marriage was a fun-sucker. Jimmy, on pain of death by his parents, was the ring bearer; although he’d done everything he could to avoid this terrible prospect. With all his heart, Jimmy loathed that man, from the moment he’d met him. Although he’d hated all of Lia’s boyfriend’s, Cuthbert was the worst. What made him the worst? Cuthbert had actually succeeded in taking away his dearly beloved sister.

Dejectedly he thought to himself that the worst part about it all was that there was nothing he could do to stop it. He had planned. He had schemed. But he had lost. All of his plans, all of his daydreams, which included things such as blowing the groom up, pushing him off a cliff, or chasing him away with a giant rabid ape, had failed. Panicking, Jimmy looked around, and as he did, a brilliant plan popped into his brain. This was his last chance! In desperation, he snatched the two rings from the frilly white cushion, and without hesitation, stuffed one into each nostril. As he marched innocently behind his sister up the aisle, he felt a glow of pride at his own brilliance. No one would ever suspect to look there. He would stop the wedding if it was the last thing he ever did.

Jimmy chuckled to himself, remembering what his mother always said when he picked his nose, “Are you digging for gold?” Now he literally was. When Jimmy arrived at the altar, he held out the empty white pillow to the priest. Glaring at Jimmy, the priest,aghast, demanded where the rings were. Jimmy shrugged his shoulders casually. To Jimmy’s delight the wedding was postponed in order to search for the rings. As the day continued however, the rings began to slide down his nose, so Jimmy continually pushed them farther up. Unfortunately, Jimmy had a very small nose, so this was an extremely painful predicament. Finally, three hours later, he screamed that he couldn’t take it anymore and stuffed his pinkies up to pull the rings out, but Jimmy had pushed them so high up that this was problematic. The rings were stuck! Jimmy’s parents were furious when he confessed, but they, too, couldn’t extract those precious rings rom Jimmy’s tiny freckled nose. In the end, the rings had to be surgically removed, which was an excruciating experience for Jimmy. His parents decided that this was punishment enough. As Cuthbert and Lia took their vows, Jimmy made his own vow that he would never dig for gold again.

The Journey Through Hell

2010-05-17T10:20:00.001-05:00

Often recognized as one of the greatest poets ever, Dante Alighieri was born in Florence In 1265. In his younger years Dante studied at home and at age 12 was betrothed to Gemma di Manetto Donati. Much of Dante’s early adult years were spent in politics, and he was also part of Guelph-Ghibelline conflict, and fought in the battle of Campaldino. This ultimately ended in his exile, at which time he wrote The Divine Comedy, which is a three part poem: Inferno, Purgatory, and Paradise. After writing The Divine Comedy, he died on September 14, 1321. Part one of the Divine Comedy, The Inferno, which is the most popular of the three, describes a pilgrim’s journey through hell, guided by the poet Virgil. In The Inferno, Dante uses a certain formula for the journey through the circles of hell. First each circle’s punishment parallels the sin committed. Second, as he journeys further into hell, the sins are represented as becoming more repulsive. And third, the further he journeys into hell, the less activity he finds.

In The Inferno, each sinner has a punishment that reflects his sin on earth. Expressing this point in Canto seven, Dante places the slothful under the mucky swamp where they are stuck for eternity, inhaling the mud and water, never being able to move because of their laziness on earth. Another example of this is the circle of the soothsayers, where Dante says, “And when my gaze moved down below their faces, I saw all were incredibly distorted, the chin was not above the chest, the neck was twisted--their faces looked down their backs; they had to move ahead by moving backward, for they never saw what was ahead of them” (Canto 20, Lines 10-15). Their faces were twisted around because they always tried to see and predict the future, and now they don’t even get to see what’s in front of them presently. One last example is Canto twenty-three, which contains the hypocrites, who are laden with such heavy garments they can barely walk. They wear these because they were so burdened with their lies on earth. By giving them exactly what they want, Dante has punished them by giving them such an excess of the sin that it shows how perverted it really is.

As the journey goes deeper into hell, Dante’s opinion about what sins are deserving of more punishment is shown. For example, the first group of sinners who are neither accepted by God or by hell are forced to run forever outside the gates of hell. Whereas, about halfway down are the suicides who are encased in trees and can only talk if a limb is broken and their blood spills out. Because they did not cherish their life on earth, they have no life in hell. The last circle of hell holds the traitors, which is interesting because of Dante’s political views and his war against the traitors to his country, which was the reason for his exile. Horribly tortured in ice are the traitors to their country, and finally Lucifer, the ultimate traitor and the king of hell, is found chewing on the worst sinners: Judas, Brutus, and Cassius. Obviously Dante had a certain contempt for traitors, which was probably due to his exile; his hell seems to be influenced by his personal experiences.

One interesting literary contrast is the difference between the first and last circles of hell. In the first circle of hell, Dante observes the indecisive sinners, who chose neither God nor Lucifer, running away from responsibility of choice. In hell they spend their time endlessly being chased by bees, literally having to run. Whereas, those who chose to directly oppose God, like Lucifer and Judas, are stuck, immobilized, and in Judas’s case being eaten eternally. Dante seems to find it worse to be trapped in one place, because as he travels deeper into hell the tortures become more immobile; for example traitors who are in the bottom of hell are frozen in ice.

Reading The Inferno reveals much of Dante’s thoughts on which sins should have a worse punishment, like the deepest circle of the traitors. He also hints that immobility is a more terrible thing than being tormented yet still having strength. In the end of The Inferno, Dante and his guide, Virgil, have gone through all hell literally and finally have to crawl down the leg of Satan to arrive in purgatory and continue their journey to heaven.

A Journey Through Hell

2010-05-17T10:09:00.001-05:00

The Divine Comedy was written between 1308 and 1321, by Dante Alighieri. Originally in Italian, The Divine Comedy continues to be translated regularly. In Dante’s culture, when the vast majority of literature consisted of stuffy lovey-dovey poetry, Dante’s poems were a huge step forward. It was written in every day plain Italian for the everyday normal Joe, but it was about Hell. This was not what Florence was used to. Lasting 700 years, Dante’s story is gritty, graphic, violent, engaging, exciting, and deeply moving. It deals with matters of the human condition and is still completely relevant today.

Dante’s Divine Comedy has lasted for centuries because he knew how to tell a good story, and a good story is the best vehicle for ideas to travel from the page to the mind to the soul. What rings true in one heart and mind will ring true in hearts and minds around the world. Dante rings true. How do we explain the ways in which men sin and are reconciled again to God? We do this by telling stories. Another familiar word is parable. In Dante’s parable he tells of a man—himself— going through Hell so he can eventually reach heaven. He presents his story as a journey. Perhaps he wrote it this way because there is a universal theme that every person experiences in life, which is that good can come from bad situations. Through trials we grow stronger. Life comes from Death. In the play The Fantasticks, the narrator, El Gallo, says, “There is a curious paradox that no one can explain. Who understands the secret of the reaping of the grain? Who understands why spring is born out of winter’s laboring pain? Or why we must all die a bit before we can live again? I do not know the answer. I merely know it’s true.” Since The Divine Comedy is a journey, it must begin with the storms and hardships of Hell, so that the pilgrim can reach the harvest of heaven’s glory.

One unique device that the poet Dante uses in The Divine Comedy is to place himself in the story, making us feel as if it might have really happened. He makes himself the pilgrim on the journey—the one who experiences Hell. And we, in a sense, experience it with him. While traveling through the circles of Hell, observing the various realms of sinners, including the liars, the thieves, the lustful, the wrathful, and the hypocrites, it can be tempting to comfort ourselves with how evil those people are and feel proud that we don’t struggle with those sins, but it’s difficult not to see glimpses (sometimes more than glimpses) of ourselves in all of the sinners. But in contrast Dante also doesn’t let us forget that they are evil nasty sinners, and he is rebuked several times for pitying them. But sin is not to be pitied because as soon as we start making excuses for the sins of those condemned by God, we start making excuses for our own sin. Pitying those that God has chosen to condemn, we question God’s justice. This is what Dante does not let us do. We must hate sin. Because we are on the journey with Dante, seeing Hell through his eyes, we are also rebuked with him for pitying sin. Just like Dante, we must turn our own condemning finger on ourselves. Oh, me, condemned sinner. In his art, Dante helps us to see ourselves for who we are—sinners. Thankfully, he didn’t stop with the Inferno. This is a journey, and our destination is paradise.

As we travel through Hell it is curious and often surprising to discover who Dante the poet placed in Hell. A large percentage of the sinners in Hell are Catholic popes, who are mostly in the lowest realms of Hell. It’s ironic and a bit unsettling that those who are regarded as holy and good and who are supposedly God’s chosen leaders on earth are those we discover to be deep in Hell. As might be less surprising, we also meet many of Dante’s enemies in hell. There are those who hold the opinion that this is Dante’s spiteful revenge towards them, but another fact suggests otherwise. Dante also puts his friends in hell. A prime concept in The Inferno is that “good decent” people are in Hell right along with “nasty evil” people. In Dante’s story there are hundreds of popes in Hell, yet we know there are thieves in heaven. What’s the difference? Redeemed thieves. We don’t get to heaven by being nice respected people, but by being saved by grace. If the pilgrim Dante hadn’t “woke to find himself in a dark wood,” he also would be keeping company with these condemned in Hell eternally. The reason the pilgrim Dante is making the journey through Hell is so that he may be redeemed.

Great stories always last, because they are about who we are as human beings. Putting a mirror up to nature, they ask us to take a look at the world and at ourselves. They teach us what to love and what to hate. Not to love good people and hate bad people, because there is no such thing. There are only redeemed people and those who are not. When you find yourself in a dark wood, know that you have a journey through Hell ahead of you, so that you can reach paradise.

The Twisted Hero

2010-04-09T12:13:00.003-05:00

Macbeth is the classic story that illustrates the fragility of human nature. Written 1606-1607, Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s most famous tragedies. To understand the character of Macbeth, it’s important to consider the role of fate and choice. As in many famous plays and stories, the question arises of whether or not Macbeth is a helpless victim of fate or a man overrun by selfish desires. Equally important are the concepts of how actions shape a person’s character and how they can rob someone of personal insight.

Although, in the end Macbeth is a ruthless, murderous tyrant, he didn’t start out that way. Ironically, the first description of Macbeth is the hero in battle who charged in without fear and defeated the enemy, namely their leader, Macdonwald, whose head he put on a stake. It’s interesting how our first perception of him is the conqueror of a traitorous villain, one whom he will resemble by the end of the play.

But then Macbeth meets the Weird Sisters. Up until this point we have no reason to believe that Macbeth has traitorous tendencies. But he always had the potential to become a murderous traitor, and this is the reason we cannot blame his repulsive moral condition on the Weird Sisters or Lady Macbeth or Fate. The Weird Sisters relay three prophesies to Macbeth: “All hall, Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Glamis! All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Cawdor! All hail, Macbeth, that shalt be king hereafter!” (1.3 lines 48-50). Even the choice of words at the beginning of the play hint that Macbeth isn’t’ a victim of Fate. “But all’s too weak: For brave Macbeth—Disdaining Fortune, with his brandished steel.” This suggests that Macbeth is above fortune or Fate; it doesn’t control him. Macbeth is ruined by his choice to take matters into his own hands. Fate had given him the perfect hand and Macbeth knew that if he played his hand right, the game would be in the bag. But does Macbeth “disdain Fortune” for the sake of loyalty to his country or just sheer decency? Macbeth knew what he was doing. He was painfully aware of it. “I am afraid to think what I have done: Look on ‘t again I dare not.” (2.2 lines 55-56). It’s tempting to blame Macbeth’s sins on Fate, especially when we consider ourselves in his place, but this is not the case.

Throughout the play we see devolution of Macbeth’s character. When Macbeth hears the prophesies of the Weird Sisters he’s not sure what he’s going to do yet, although he immediately entertains thoughts of murder: “Why do I yield to that suggestion whose horrid image doth unfix my hair and make my seated heart knock at my ribs, against the use of nature? Present fears are less than horrible imaginings shakes so my single state of man that function is smothered in surmise and nothing is but what is not.” And with this beginning or conflict, we see that as Macbeth ascends in power, his moral character rapidly declines. Before Macbeth murders Duncan he is swayed back and forth—should he do it? Should he not? Although some of his doubts come from selfish fears of being caught, it does seem that Macbeth is wholly corrupt. He’s still able to distinguish between right and wrong. After the deed is done Macbeth feels extreme regret, but it’s not long before the regret wears off. As the action continues, Macbeth feels less emotion regarding his depravity, and it becomes easier with each murder. By the end, he tells us that he fears no longer: “I have almost forgotten the taste of fears. Direness, familiar to my slaughterous thoughts, cannot once start me.” (5.5 lines 8 and 13-14). In this sense, never fearing is an unnatural and sickly state of being. When we consider each of Macbeth’s murders, it’s important to see how truly perverted they are, firstly the murder of his king, to whom he’d sworn eternal allegiance. Next, with much less reluctance, the murder of his close friend, Banquo, is a comment on how desperate Macbeth is becoming to tie up all the end of his treachery. And third, Macbeth has come to a state of such unnaturalness that he feels threated by women and children. His senseless butchery is repulsive. Each of these murders twists Macbeth, forming different characteristics in him. With the murder of Duncan, Macbeth becomes the tyrant. With the murder of his good friend Banquo, he cuts himself off from human companionship. And the complete unnatural murder of women and children is nothing but the work of a coward. Utterly low, Macbeth has become a wretched creature, willing to do anything to keep his power.

Macbeth does not die a heroic death, but a pitiful death. Near the end of the play, before he battles Malcolm and Macduff, Macbeth clings to the prophesies of the three witches. Cleverly, Malcolm’s army has carried three branches from the forest Birnham to conceal the number of troops coming, therefore fulfilling the prophesy of the witches. Macbeth meets Macduff, and they begin to duel. Macbeth claims that Macduff cannot defeat him, boasting, “I bear a charmed life, which must not yield to one of woman born.” But Macduff was ripped from his mother’s womb early, thus; he is not born of woman. Now Macbeth is without loyal solider to follow him, without his wife, who was his driving force, and now it seems that all Fortune is really against him and not for him. The prophesies have fallen flat and Macbeth has nothing left to cling to. Still, he refuses to surrender, and he vows never to give in. “Though Birnam Wood be come to Dunsinane and thou opposed, being of no woman born, yet I will try the last. Before my body I throw my warlike shield. Lay on, Macduff. And damned be him that first cries ‘Hold, enough.’” Macbeth has become so wretched that he will not surrender and admit that he’s defeated. He’s so far into his evil ways that he can no longer realize that his cause is lost. Early in the play, Lady Macbeth reassures her husband that “A little water clears us of this deed” (2.2 line 6.9), but it is not so. Macbeth dies fighting to keep the power that never belonged to him. Maybe if Macbeth had realized this, had begged for death on his knees before Macduff, this wouldn’t be a tragedy, but Macbeth is unable to do so in his corruptness.

In one regard, Macbeth hardly feels like a tragedy. No one sitting in the audience is on Macbeth’s side, cheering for him to kill Macduff. As the curtain closes, the villain is dead, and good has triumphed, even if it is at great cost. At one point, the crowd might have felt a liking for Macbeth and hoped that he wouldn’t commit his atrocities. “Don’t do it, Macbeth! Don’t do it!” But towards the end, the mutual feeling is, “Just kill him, Macduff.” The most important thing about the character of Macbeth is the concept of a good man turning into a vile tyrant. Since the beginning of history, our stories demonstrate that each and every one of us is susceptible to corruption.

Always Waiting

2010-02-20T10:55:00.001-06:00

Even after thousands of years, we still often hear references to the works of Augustine, the bishop of Hippo in Roman Africa. Although his works are regarded to be duller than a butter knife by most people, and expected to be a bunch of incomprehensible mush about the Bible and morality, a true reading of The Confessions reveals a simple, surprisingly down-to-earth story of a man’s everyday life, not a perfect righteous snob, but a lousy sinner redeemed by God. Honestly, leaving no dirty story untold, he writes of how he strayed form the straight path and lived in darkness for many years. His story leads to the pivotal moment when he lays his burdens at Christ’s feet, crying for help and rest. The story of his life reveals the beautiful reality that each of our lives leading to the moment that we admit to Christ that we need him. In one regard Augustine was no extraordinary man, but in the other regard, what is more extraordinary than submission to Christ?

As an only child, much was expected of Augustine, even as a small child. Educated at very good schools in Latin, Greek, and rhetoric, Augustine’s parents wanted him to be successful and elevated in social status. Naturally, Augustine hated school and only wished to play ball with his friends as any ten year old boy would want to do. Raised in the Christian faith by his Catholic mother, Augustine grew to be a smart and pure hearted child. Of course, he wasn’t perfect, and he often cheated at games, and raged against those who did the same to him. One of his first experiences with God was praying that his teachers wouldn’t beat him when he was disobedient. In the eyes of a ten year old, God did not come through, and Augustine was angry that God had not answered his request. As he got older Augustine hung out with some of the wrong kinds of people, and the burden of peer pressure weighed heavily on him. From the days of his childhood, his mother prayed that Augustine would seek God and follow him, but this would not come to be for a long time. Augustine spent much of his adulthood in a life of sin, but little did he know that God watched over him and had a plan to restore him. Just as his parents had wished, Augustine excelled in school and showed a successful career ahead of him, as a teacher of the liberal arts, law, and rhetoric. Unfortunately, Augustine’s desire for success, the approval of others, and the good life, led him into some rather undesirable circles. One of these groups was the Manichees, a religious cult which believed that all matter is fundamentally bad and who strived to reach the higher spiritual life. For ten long years Augustine followed the Manichees, although he always felt like there theology was lacking and unsatisfactory. After attending schools in Carthage and Rome, Augustine moved to Milan with his mother, where they met the bishop Ambrose. Impressed that Ambrose was an educated well speaking gentlemen, Augustine talked with him often and started to learn more about the Catholic faith. Although he didn’t disagree with any of the beliefs of the Catholic Church or find fault with them, he wasn’t ready to believe it yet. He still desired the successful life. Over the next ten years God worked to soften Augustine’s heart for the moment when he was ready to accept the truth of Jesus.

Even after several years of being on the fence between choosing to follow Christ and his impure lust for a life of success, it wasn’t until Augustine was twenty-nine years old that he became a Christian. One day an unexpected visitor named Ponticianus came to visit him and his friend. While they were chatting, Ponticianus, spotted the books of the apostle Paul sitting on the table and proceeded to tell them of two men’s conversions to Christianity, and how their devotion to Christ led them to abandon their former lives, including they’re jobs and fiancés. When Ponticianus left, Augustine, moved by the story, knew he had to choose- now or never. Going out to the garden he was almost in hysterics. A full fledged battle raged in his mind. Finally, bursting into tears, he confessed to God all of his sins, especially his sin of sexual lust, and pledged to give himself to a life of piety. Suddenly he heard a child chanting to herself, “Pick up and read. Pick up and read”. Racing to the house, he snatched up his Bible, opening it randomly. The verse he read was Romans 13:13-14—“Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissention and jealousy. Rather clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and not think about how to gratify your sinful natures.” Augustine, overcome by joy, felt absolute peace when he read this, and he praised God. After twenty-nine years, God had plucked him out of the muck of sin and set him on the path of light.

Raised by a Christian mother and educated at good schools, Augustine led a normal happy childhood, until he joined the wrong crowd of people as a teenager. Especially in his younger adult life, when his devotion to the Manichees was steadfast, Augustine lived a life of sin, struggling futilely with lust. Thankfully, God gave Augustine a yearning for the truth, and Augustine was always eager to evaluate his own beliefs and others too. After many long years Augustine decided that it was time to either choose God or reject him. He’d be on the fence for too long. Sitting in his garden he contemplated what following Christ would mean for him and her wondered if he could ever give up his flourishing sin of lust. Satan was pulling at him, but he was no match for Christ. Augustine broke into sobs, realizing that he could never be truly free without Christ. Why is it that we still read a book by a dead guy who lived thousands of years ago? Because people really aren’t that different, even now. They still mess up, sin, and reject God. But God doesn’t change. He does not forsake us. He is always waiting for us to come running back into his arms.

A Mess Turned to Beauty

2010-02-18T10:39:00.002-06:00

The book Saint Augustine’s Confessions is his confession to God, which includes the story of his life. Telling of his childhood, Saint Augustine explains how he comes to Jesus and is saved after much sin. Here is a summary of his life up until conversion.

Born to a Roman official and his wife, Augustine grew up in a middle class home. Deeply concerned with his education his father spent a great deal of money getting him into the best schools, but his dad was never concerned with Augustine’s spiritual life, because he wasn’t a Christian, whereas his mother was deeply committed to the Catholic faith. As Augustine grew, his mother was very concerned with his sexual habits, and prayed for his conversion, while his father encouraged this immoral behavior.

Enrolling at Carthage when he came of age, Augustine’s sexual addiction became worse and worse. He also decided to join a cult called the Manchees, which had false beliefs about life. They told him that they had a great leader who would come and speak. Augustine waited a couple of years for the speaker to arrive, but when the speaker came, he didn’t know anything more than Augustine did and just used flowery language.
Wanting to turn from his sin Augustine wrestled with himself for a whole day. He knew that to serve God he would have to give up his sexual sins. Opening his Bible he opened it up to (Romans 13: 13-14) "Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying; but put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, in concupiscence.” After that he submitted himself to God completely.

The amazing thing about the story of Augustine is how a sinful person can turn totally to God. His mother also became a saint because of her diligent prayer for her son to come to God. Saint Augustine is a great example of a mess being transformed into something beautiful.

A Victorian Christmas

2010-01-21T16:28:00.004-06:00

In the Victorian age, a small table-top Christmas tree was usually set up in the living room area. Instead of electric Christmas lights, people decked their trees with real candles. Although the tree looked wonderful when every candle was lit, families couldn’t leave the candles burning for long because the open fires were dangerous. A bucket of water was often kept beside the tree for emergencies.

Also hung on the tree were strings of popcorn and cranberries, which were simple and inexpensive, but colorful and festive. Some families set up a Nativity or outdoor scene under the tree, using moss for grass and mirrors for ponds. Because ornaments weren’t popularly sold at stores, most ornaments were home-made. Young women spent hours crafting detailed, exquisite paper ornaments from scraps, adorned with lace, ribbon, and beads. Decorations included fruit, cotton-batting Father Christmas, pine cones, children’s mittens, paper fans and paper cornucopias filled with nuts, candies, and berries. Among the branches were hidden goodies and trinkets of all kinds, like jewelry, tin soldiers, whistles, dolls, and cookies, and of course, an angel at the top. Victorian families adored finding new exciting ways to give their gifts. One way they did this was by hanging tags on the tree, each with a family member’s name on it. Connected to each tag was a long ribbon, which they wound through the branches and around the furniture. Tied to the end was the matching name’s gift!

The War Years and Christmas

2010-01-21T16:25:00.000-06:00

In the 1940s, the ideal Christmas tree was large and exquisite. The bigger the better. Large colored lights lit the tree with artificial beauty. Because of the industrial revolution, mass production was able to turn out inexpensive plastic and blown glass ornaments, like the brand Shiny Brite. Absolutely the most important feature of the tree was the amount of silver tinsel dripping from its boughs. During most of the 40s, World War II was being fought, so patriotic details were popular on the Christmas trees, like small American flags. (Those original flags would have included only 48 stars). Other nifty trends were making Chinese lanterns and paper chains out of construction paper for tree decorations. A favorite activity for families in 1930s and 1940s was sitting around the radio listening to the Orson Welles dramatization of “A Christmas Carol.” From 1934-1938, the voice of Scrooge was brilliantly played by Lionel Barrymore, while in 1939 it was played by Orson Welles, himself. Fun fads for children in the 1930s and 1940s were games like Dominoes, Monopoly, Sorry, Candy Land, Shoots and Ladders, Clue, and Scrabble. Children also enjoyed paper dolls, marbles, Raggedy Ann and Andy, comic books, and metal die-cast trucks.

The Space Age and Christmas

2010-01-21T16:24:00.001-06:00

In the late 50s and early 60s an extremely different sort of tree was being set up in living rooms around America: the aluminum tree. Many pamphlets were available during the 60s declaring the most fashionable ways to decorate your aluminum Christmas tree. Putting lights on the tree was an electrical hazard; therefore, a color wheel¸ which is a rotating wheel made up of four different colors that reflect off the tree, was a must-have. Matching color schemes were all the rage, especially in colors like blue and pink.

Instead of a radio, the center of the living room was now the TV, with Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer debuting on television in 1964.
Although many things changed in the 50s and 60s “A Christmas Carol” did not fail to be included in this decade. In 1951 the movie “A Christmas Carol” was released with Alastair Sim as hum-bugging Ebenezer Scrooge.

Because of the baby boom in the 40s and 50s, over half of the population was made up of children, so children’s toys were being made at a gigantic rate. As most adults had grown up during World War II, parents were eager to give their children all the things they hadn’t been able to have when they were young. The shelves of stores boasted numerous kinds of toys, including Slinkies, Silly Putty, metal doll houses, dozens of different board games, matchbox cars, and the Barbie Doll, invented in 1959. Gone were the days of only one kind of dolly! Mr. Potato Head, the Hula Hoop, Ant Farms, and Frisbees were also big hits.

Animal Stories Used for Teaching

2009-10-07T13:20:00.003-05:00

Surprisingly one of India’s most influential contributions to world literature, is the Panchatantra which is contains five animal fables that were written between the third and fifth centuries. Although the original compiler or author is unknown, an Arabic translation from about 750 AD gives the credit to a Hindu man named Bidpai. The three stories that will be looked at are “The Foolish Friend”, “the Gold-Giving Snake,” and “The Brahman’s Wife and the Mongoose.”

The first story, “The Foolish Friend” is about a king and a monkey. Finding a monkey, the king keeps him for a pet, feeds him, and always keeps him by his side. Pleasantly strolling through his garden, the king tells the monkey to let nothing disturb him, and then the king takes a nap. While he is sleeping, a bee tries to sting him and the monkey strikes it with a sword, but accidently kills the king! The moral of the story is to not choose a fool for a friend, for it is better to have a clever enemy than a foolish friend.

“The Gold-Giving Snake” is about a farmer who feeds a snake every day and every day the snake gives him a gold coin. Telling his son to feed the snake while he travels into town, the farmer leaves, and his son tries to kill the snake, so he can steal the gold, but the snake bites him and he dies. Quickly burying his son, the farmer exclaims that justice has been done and goes out to feed the snake, but the snake says that she will no longer give him gold because he is greedy. In this fable the main moral is greed leads to loss because the farmer was so greedy he didn’t even grieve for his son, and his son was greedy because he struck the snake and lost his life, trying to find more gold.

The last story is “The Brahman’s Wife and the Mongoose.” Giving birth to a son, the wife also gave birth to a mongoose. One morning the wife told her husband that she was going fetch water, and that she needed him to watch their sons because she did not trust the mongoose. After she left, the husband ignored her and left to collect alms leaving the house empty. Inside the house a snake crawled out of a hole and was sneaking up on the baby when the mongoose killed it. Quickly running to find his mother and tell her how he saved his brother, the mongoose went outside. The mother, seeing the blood splattered mongoose, feared he had killed her child, and she hit him with her bucket, killing him. Rushing into the house the wife realized their baby was safe and the mongoose had saved him. While the wife was crying over the mongoose, the husband returned and the wife said, “See here you greedy one, because you let greed rule you instead of doing what I told you to, you now must taste the fruit of your own son’s death.” The themes in this fable include greed and trust.

Interestingly these fables were used to educate sons of royalty. Some of the main points stressed in these stories are do not be greedy, along with do not be foolish, which are very good instructions for princes learning to be wise rulers. In all the fables animals are characters, which is an entertaining way to present morals and stories used for teaching.

Linked to Its Religion

2009-10-07T13:07:00.002-05:00

When reading Indian literature, it’s found that Indian religious beliefs and morals are constantly knitted into the stories. Written between the third and fifth centuries A.D., the Panchatra is a book containing five fables. The Panchatantra is like an ancient Indian version of Aesop’s fables. Mostly, the fables are beast tales ending with a moral. These three in particular follow that idea: “The Foolish Friend”, “The Gold-Giving Snake”, and “The Brahman’s Wife and the Mongoose.”

In “The Foolish Friend” there was a king, whose constant and favorite companion was his pet monkey, which he fed the finest food, honored above all, and even unwisely gave a sword to carry around. Snoozing peacefully in his garden one day, the king trusted that his monkey would not let harm come to him, while he was asleep. Seeing a bee, the faithful, but foolish monkey vowed that no creature should bother his master. Drawing his sword, the monkey struck the bee, but not without also splitting the king’s head with the same blow. And so it is said, “Do not choose a fool for a friend, for the king was killed by a monkey.”

Another tale called “The Gold-Giving Snake” explains how a Brahman, struggling to make ends meet, discovered a great snake in his field, living in a huge ant hill. Knowing she was the goddess of the field, he quickly brought her an offering of milk, and in return, he was surprised to find the gift of one gold dinar. Every day the Brahman offered the milk and received a precious coin. One day he asked his son to go for him, but his son plotted to destroy the snake, and pillage the small anthill, where the snake lived, as he supposed there must be a fortune hidden inside the anthill. He tried to crush the snake’s head with his club, but the snake was too crafty, and it bit him. The bite was fatal. When the Brahman discovered what had happened, the snake presented him with one pearl and commanded him never to return. This is a story to teach that greed brings destruction.

“The Brahman’s Wife and the Mongoose” is about a Brahman and his wife who had two children, a young human child, adored by his parents, and a mongoose, whom the mother secretly distrusted. Telling her husband to watch over the boy and protect him from the mongoose, the mother went to fetch some water from the pond. Ignoring his wife’s command, the Brahman went off to collect alms. While the parents were busy, a horrible malicious snake crept into the boy and the mongoose’s bedroom, but the mongoose woke up and quickly tore the snake to shreds before the fiend could hurt his brother. When the mother returned, she saw the mongoose covered in blood. She assumed the worst. She struck the hero. She killed him. When she saw her son sleeping peacefully in his own bed, with the snake’s mangled remains on the floor, the mother realized the truth. The Brahman was blamed for the misfortune and the moral of the tale is do not let greed rule you, but do what you are told, although it might also be—Do not act rashly before the facts are known.

In each of these three stories: “The Foolish Friend,” “The Gold-Giving Snake,” and “The Brahman’s Wife and the Mongoose,” the end holds a moral for the reader. Reappearing themes of the stories are don’t be greedy and don’t be foolish. In eastern countries like India, culture, namely literature, is distinctly linked to religious and moral beliefs.

A Reappearing Flood Tale

2009-09-17T11:11:00.003-05:00

History offers us two catastrophic flood narratives, which are exceptionally similar: the Biblical story of Noah’s flood and the Sumerian poem, The Gilgamesh Epic. In Genesis 6-8, the Bible tells of Noah, whom God, the God of Israel, commanded to build an ark. God directed Noah to load the ark with every kind of living animal so that when he sent a flood to destroy all of the evil people in the world, Noah and his family would be saved. Recorded in around 1200 B.C., The Gilgamesh Epic is a tale surrounding Utnapishtim, who, following the orders of the Sumerian Gods, built a massive boat, which rescued him and his family from a greatly destructive flood.
In comparison, these two stories have much in common, although they both originate form extremely different civilizations. Both basic stories are mostly the same; A man builds an ark on the belief that God is going to send a catastrophic flood to eradicate the world of evil. Another parallel is that when the storm finally ended, both Noah and Utnapishtim release a dove and a raven to find land. In likeness, both tales say that the men offer a sacrifice to their God, or gods, and that the aroma was deliciously pleasing. The biblical story of the flood and The Gilgamesh Epic are essentially the same tale, with many different twists and turns.

While the two narratives have many similarities, they also have some significant differences. Definitely, the most important difference is the representation of the gods. In the Bible there is, of course, only One God, who is all-powerful and omniscient, but who loves his creation, but the Sumerians, who wrote The Gilgamesh Epic, believed in many pernicious pagan Gods, who where not omnipotent or usually loving. When the storm raged in The Gilgamesh Epic, the gods even cowered in fear at what one of the gods had caused. All-powerful? Omnipotent? Surely not. Although there are many other details which vary, the most enormous difference between Genesis 6-8 and The Gilgamesh Epic is the temperament of the One God and gods.
Interestingly, the two narratives, written at different times and by people from different civilizations, seem to be telling the same story. These two stories are truly similar, but the greatest difference is in the God and Gods personalities, and obviously numbers. The most important thing about comparing and contrasting these two stories is to see that this story of the flood has popped up several different times in history, giving much authenticity to the tale.

A Fairy-Tale For All

2009-05-11T16:13:00.006-05:00

“King Grisly” is a fairy tale written by the Grimm brothers, European patriots who desired to and succeeded in keep the Germanian folk tales alive, for as of today their stories are read in over one-hundred and sixty languages. Written in the early 1800’s, the Grimm brothers' stories became so popular that Children’s and Household Tales were published in 1812. Tirelessly searching, studying, and scribbling them down for readers, the Grimm brothers spent a considerably tedious amount of time on their project. Especially popular stories by the Grimm Brothers include “Cinderella,” “Hansel and Gretel," and “Rumpelstiltskin.” Although it is obscure, “King Grisly” is an exceptional story, which should be read alongside “Rumpelstiltskin” or any of their other stories.

The main characters of the tale are a beautiful, but haughty and priggish princess, her father the king, an honorable long-bearded king wishing to marry the princess, and a poor fiddler. Desiring to find a husband for his daughter, the king invites many suitors to visit and dine at the palace, but the princess rudely treats them with disdain. She snickers. She snoots. She snides. Mockingly, she remarks that one king’s long gray beard is like a mop, and dubs him King Grisly-Beard. Upon hearing this, the King, her father, vows that the next man to walk through the castle door is the man she will marry, if she wishes it or not. When a poor dirty fiddler walks through the door a few days later, the princess is distraught, but the king holds to his promise, and they are married.

On the way to the fiddler’s small dwelling, they pass huge forests, they pass vast green fields, and they pass magnificent cities. Inquiring to whom these all belong, the princess truly regrets her conceitedness when she discovers that the forests, the fields, and the cities all belong to King-Grisly Beard. When they arrive at the fiddler’s hut, a humble dirty shack, she fails at every kind of work she tries: weaving baskets, spinning wool, and even selling clay pots. She is as helpful as a nest of hornets. The fiddler, frustrated with the girl, still patiently finds her another job as a kitchen maid in a nearby castle, where she will have to work hard, but can bring home some left-over meat to eat each day.

As the princess is working one day, she sees that the King’s eldest son is going to be married and that a feast was being prepared, while all the courts arrived. Suddenly, the King’s son—who she is horrified to see—King Grisly-Beard, takes her by the hand and asks her to dance. Turning red with embarrassment, thinking he is only trying to torment her, and pulling her hand out of his, the princess runs quickly towards the door. But King Grisly-Beard cries out, “Fear me not! I am the fiddler, who has lived with you in the hut. I brought you here because I truly love you. I have done all this only to cure you of your silly pride. You have learned wisdom, and we shall hold our marriage feast.” The princess is then garbed in rich beautiful robes, and the whole court dances and sings.

As fairy tales usually go, “King Grisly-Beard” is a story with a predictable, happy ending, but a great and meaningful story, none-the-less. Is anyone ever too old to read fairy tales? Usually thought of as silly children’s tales by adults, fairy tales are often disregarded as great literature which needs to be read by all ages. “King Grisly-Beard” is about pride, the great sin which all ages struggle with. Loving the princess, King Grisly-Beard humbly dressed as a peasant so that he could cure the princess of her obnoxious pride. Before a joyful wedding celebration could occur, King Grisly-Beard had to take the role of a servant so that the princess could be redeemed. There is nothing simple about pride or love, and servant-hood, and that is why this fairy-tale is for all ages.

The Hope, Rescue, and Forgiveness of Cinderella

2009-05-11T16:01:00.002-05:00

“Cinderella,” which was published in Grimm’s Fairy Tales in 1812, is a wonderful short story. Although it was published long ago, this fairy tale is known by almost every child in the United States today. Preserving Germanic folk tales, Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm quickly realized that the stories they collected and edited intrigued young readers. In their collection they also include some of the world’s most famous stories such as “Hansel and Gretel”, as well as “Rapunzel” and “Rumpelstiltskin.”

In the story “Cinderella,” the characters are the kind and beautiful Cinderella, the evil stepmother and vile stepsisters, and the charming prince. Living with her stepmother, Cinderella is cruelly forced to do all the house work, while at night she sleeps among the cinders, which is where her name comes from. While it ends “happily ever after,” the beginning of the story is sad.

When the prince sends an invitation to all the ladies in the kingdom inviting them to a huge, exciting ball, Cinderella wants to go. Giving her so much work that she can’t go, her stepsisters also show their horribleness by laughing at Cinderella when Cinderella says she wants to go. Finally breaking down and weeping after her stepsisters leave for the ball, Cinderella, who is left behind, cries on the hearth.

Weeping uncontrollably, Cinderella looks up to find her fairy godmother, who turns her rags into a stunningly beautiful gown; this is the most exciting part of the story. Arriving at the ball Cinderella is the most stunning girl there, and every one, including the prince, admires her. Sitting with the prince and dancing every dance with him Cinderella realizes that she is supposed to leave before midnight, and runs off just as the clock strikes twelve. Quickly yelling and rushing after her, the prince can only find a glass slipper which he says he will try on every girl in the kingdom, marrying the one it fits.

At the end of the book, the slipper fits Cinderella perfectly, and she marries and lives with the prince. Ending in a happily ever after, “Cinderella,” which is a fantastically great book, should be read aloud to all children. Although the characters lack excess personality, the story makes up for it with its symbolism of rescue because everyone understands the concept of rescue. Throughout the story it is natural to hope that it will turn out good for Cinderella and that someone will help her. Even though Cinderella’s thoughts are not revealed, it is obvious that Cinderella is kind and caring because in the end of the story she forgives her stepsisters and stepmom for treating her so poorly. The hope of Cinderella during the most discouraging times, the rescue of Cinderella by the prince, and the forgiveness of Cinderella towards her enemies makes the story beautiful.

Union Giveth Strength (King James Style)

2009-05-09T10:16:00.003-05:00

Now there was a man far advanced in years, who, at the point of death called his sons to his bedside to giveth them wisdom. He ordered a servant to bringeth a faggot of sticks to his room, wherefore he might use it to teacheth his sons, and he said to his eldest, “Thine strength is great: breakest the faggot of sticks,” and his eldest son straineth at it, but he could not breakest the faggot of sticks, and to the others he said Thine strength is great: breakest the faggot of sticks.

And although the others strained, they were unable to breaketh the faggot of sticks. The father told them, “Untieth the faggot of sticks and taketh one each for yourselves and breakest it,” and they obeyed their father and tooketh out one each and broke it. “See my sons: union gives strength.”

A Little Tragedy

2009-04-28T13:25:00.006-05:00

The tale of "The Little Mermaid" is a tragedy unraveling into a descriptive fairy tale written by Hans Christian Andersen. The central character is the quiet and thoughtful little mermaid who lives with her father, the sea king, and her wise old grandmother and many sisters. Living at the bottom of the ocean, the mermaids are allowed to rise to the surface of the water at age fifteen.

Patiently waiting for years to rise to the surface, the little mermaid finally swims up to the surface and sees a boat full of people and a prince, whom she falls in live with. While she watches, a storm comes and destroys the ship, and she saves the prince from drowning. Wanting more than anything to be with him, she tries to find a way to become human. Although she searches for a way to become human, she finally resorts to the sea witch, who gives her legs, but takes her voice and says she must marry the prince or she will die.

Swimming to the surface of the ocean, the little mermaid receives her legs. On land, whenever she walks it feels like hot coals under her feet. The prince decides to marry a princess. On their wedding night the only way the little mermaid can live is if she stabs the prince with a knife, but as she stands over him as he sleeps, she throws the knife into the sea and jumps in after it. Dissolving into sea foam she is met by angelic creatures who say she can work three hundred years for a soul because she sacrificed herself, and every time she sees a child being good a year will be taken away, but every time she sees a child being bad, a day will be added. The theme of this story is sacrifice.

This tragedy is made for children and is trying to motivate them to be obedient. Describing places with much detail, Hans Christian Andersen’s book is beautifully written for children. Apart from the descriptive style, Andersen’s story is designed with the themes of love and sacrifice. One of the poorly written apects is that the characters, who have no names, never give the readers much understanding of their personalities.

Not So Happily Ever After

2009-04-24T02:12:00.006-05:00

“The Little Mermaid” is a descriptive tragedy fairy tale, although it is more commonly known by the Disney movie, which varies dramatically from the original version. Written by Hans Christian Andersen, “The Little Mermaid” was published in the mid-19th century, although the exact dates are unknown. Suddenly “knocking on his head” as Hans Christian Andersen said, “The Little Mermaid” was one of his one-hundred and sixty-eight numerous imaginative stories for children.

The central characters of the story are the quiet, thoughtful little mermaid, who desires more than anything to live above the water, and the handsome young prince, whom she falls in love with. Underneath the water also dwells her father, the sea king, her proud grandmother, and her five lovely sisters. When she turns fifteen, she is allowed to swim to the surface of the water. She stares in wonder at the prince dancing and laughing on the ship. Crashing waves and pelting rain soon end the ship’s party and send the prince flailing into the sea, where the little mermaid rescues him and brings him ashore.

Returning to her underwater home, the little mermaid hopelessly dreams of the prince, wishing there was a way for them to be together. Eventually resorting to the horrendously wicked sea witch, she travels to the whirlpool, which is filled with human skeletons and slimy creatures, and through a series of terrible enchantments she sells her tongue to the witch in exchange for a pair of human legs. The malicious sea witch tells the little mermaid that if she cannot woo the prince to love her with all his soul and to marry her, she will turn into sea foam. While she is on land she meets her prince, who takes a fancy to her, for she is exquisitely and enchantingly beautiful, and he brings her into his palace to live, where she enjoys many hours spent dancing, horseback riding, and sailing with him.

Disastrously, the prince favors another girl and marries her, although he cares deeply about the little mermaid. When the prince and his new wife are sleeping, the little mermaid’s sisters bring her a knife, telling her that if she kills the prince with it she will be saved from death. She takes the knife. She enters his bedroom. She raises it to strike. The little mermaid cannot force herself to kill him, for she loves him more than her own life. Into the water she perishes, rather than betray her beloved. Expecting to find herself turned into sea foam, she awakes under the water filled with transparent floating bodies, and is told that because of her good deed she will be shown mercy as she enters into a purgatorial-like land. This tragic ending shows the importance of not trying to be what you’re not and the power of self-sacrificing love.

This is a not so happily ever after fairy tale tragedy about the strength of self-sacrificial love. Sacrificing yourself and your hopes for another is one of the most important themes because it leads back to the ultimate story, the story of creation and redemption through Jesus, who sacrificed everything for humanity. Disappointingly, the story concentrates essentially on earning eternity by performing good deeds. Filled with vivid images and brilliant descriptions, the story is told captivatingly, although the many twists and turns of the story tend to be tiring. Overall this story is unique, just as are all of Hans Christian Andersen’s stories, is enjoyable to read, and challenges readers to think about the meaning of love and eternity.

The Founding of America

2009-04-22T20:00:00.001-05:00

The history of America’s founding dates back hundreds of years to England, where revolutions occurred over freedom of religion. Because of lack of freedom the Puritans sailed to America, where they set up colonies.

One of the great contributors to the Reformation’s role in advancing political and religious liberties was Martin Luther who said that the church and the people should have more freedom in religious matters and that the government should no longer legislate about God. Saying that the government could not force people to believe in a certain religion, Luther believed that the role of the state was limited to secular things, and people’s minds and opinions could not be controlled, which was also believed by John Calvin, who came after Luther, and said that people’s minds and opinions are exempt from government control. During his life, Calvin also said that if a king went against God or ordered a individuals to go against God, then they should and must disobey the king. Although it was a long time after either of these men lived, America was built on their basis of freedom of beliefs and religion.

The Puritan Revolution broke out in England, when Charles 1st tried to force his Scottish subjects to worship in ways they found offensive. During this time, Samuel Rutherford wrote a book called Lex Rex that said the king should not have authority in religious matters, and if the government broke its own law the people could break laws. In 1688 the glorious revolution broke out when King James 2nd tried to enforce The Divine Right theory, but parliament forced him off the throne.

On August 5, 1620 the Puritans, who are called pilgrims, sailed for the New World to have religious freedom. When they arrived in America they drew up a document called the Mayflower Compact, which pledged their mutual submission to each other and promoted fair laws. Believing that God was the perfect king and the Bible a perfect expression of His will, the Puritans advocated a government in which written words, not people, were sovereign.

As people, dating hundreds of years back, fought for there freedom of conscience, they set up the basis of America. In his lifetime, Martin Luther said that freedom of religion was right. Fighting against Divine Right of Kings, the Puritans turned against the king in the revolutions. Finally, sailing to America, the Puritans escaped from the king to found America.

America's Roots

2009-04-22T06:37:00.004-05:00

America, as people know it today, could not be as it is except for numerous courageous people who took risks and for events which took place. Without the ideas that support Christianity and many events which took place prior to it, the American Revolution most likely would not have occurred. Advancing political and religious freedom happened during the Reformation, which was one of the most essential steps to freedom in America. Although the colonies were not even founded yet, two revolutions in England were already setting the stage for America’s birth. Bravely sailing to America, the first colonists began to shape the way that America would be governed.

The Reformation’s role in advancing political and religious liberty was enormous because it was the first time when certain daring people took the chance of speaking out and proclaiming their thoughts and ideas which may have opposed the governments. Probably the most outspoken of all people during the reformation was Martin Luther who posted his ninety-five theses on the door of the church in Wittenberg, boldly naming all of his objections to the way the Catholic Church operated. As no one had ever even hinted that there might be something wrong with the Catholic Church, Martin Luther’s objections were a big step towards religious freedom and separation of church and state.

Writing “Institutes to the Christian Religion,” John Calvin had an exceptionally significant part to play in the Reformation through his writing, which later influenced the founders of the U.S. and shaped their political ideas. These men’s writings were similar. Before religious freedom could be grasped, the first risky, but vital steps had to be taken during the Reformation by Martin Luther, John Calvin, and others like them.

Setting the stage for America’s birth were two revolutions: the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution. In 1641 a long and terrible civil war broke out, which lasted years. Sometimes called the Protestant Revolution, this war was between those loyal to the king, Cavaliers, and English Puritans, who wanted to purify the Church of England, hence the name Puritans. When King James II was on the throne, he refused to recognize the colonies of New England and believed in the Divine Right of Kings theory, which says that a king has been divinely appointed by God, and therefore has the right to do whatever he wishes. This led to the Glorious Revolution when Parliament peacefully took James II off the throne without using violence.

Essentially, these two Revolutions, the Puritan Revolution and the Glorious Revolution, prepared the way for America’s beginning, because it showed the government that the Puritans were serious about their beliefs, were even willing to stand up and fight for them, and were tired of the government’s unrelenting control over their beliefs.

Pursuing their dreams of religious liberty, many Puritans decided to make the journey across the ocean to America and settle there. The colonies were founded. When the colonists came together to draw up their laws, they realized that without a king they were powerless to restrain lawlessness, but they knew that they couldn’t possibly survive unless they founded their laws on biblical moral standards, while still having a separation of Church and State. Wisely, they drew up a document called the Mayflower Compact, which pledged their mutual submission to each other. Concerning the separation of Church and State in years to come, some were not as effective at keeping them separate, which led to unjust events and eventually the Salem witch trials. The Salem witch trials were a time when many women were unfairly and brutally executed for being accused witches.

Thankfully, after this terrible epoch followed a revival and the Great Awakening, and American colonists began to sort out how their government should function correctly. The Puritans flight to America was vital to the way America is set up presently because they learned by trial and error the most effective way to run a government.

Significantly, because of the events which led to the American Revolution, America was founded with biblical morals. When the Restoration took place it advanced political and religious freedom. Because of two Revolutions which took place in England, the beginning of America was indirectly prepared. Fleeing and settling in America, the Puritan colonists set into place laws that we still follow today.

Union Gives Strength (Hans Christian Andersen Style)

2009-04-21T13:36:00.004-05:00

Once upon a time, in a distant and beautiful county where rolling green hills and an ocean of golden poppies stretched as far as the eye could see was a small humble cottage were an elderly man and his two sons dwelled. The wise old man loved his sons and had taught them everything he knew so that they were strong, smart young men. Every day the father, whose hair was silver as the full moon, sat on his three-legged stool and played splendidly on his mandolin while his two sons worked in the fields. His mandolin was his favorite possession and pastime, and when he played, it instilled joy in all who heard it, and birds of all shapes and sizes would divert their flights to perch and listen to the great artisan.

But one day in late autumn, when the last of the golden leaves were beginning to drift toward the ground, and a dusty darkness lay over everything, the mandolin ceased to sing, but was replace by the sound of hollow wind. The father lay languishing in his large oak bed; his health was failing. Each day one of his sons sat by his side while the other labored in the fields alone. But he wanted to teach his sons an important lesson while he still had time.

Calling his sons to his bedside, he asked them to bring a large, tightly-bound bundle of sticks into the room. When they brought it in, carrying it together for it was very heavy; their father commanded them to break the bundle of sticks apart. The eldest son, who was intelligent and knew how to use leverage cleverly, set the sticks on his knees, and pushed. But his trick, which had always worked before, resulted in only an aching leg. Like his older brother, the younger son was a practical son, due to his father’s impeccable teaching, so he grabbed his best saw and tried to saw the bundle of sticks apart. Although it was sharper then an alligator’s teeth and sturdier than a brick wall, the saw broke in half.

They both turned to their father in consternation and he told them, “You see my meaning; union gives strength.”

Small Friends are Good Friends (Hans Christian Andersen Style)

2009-04-21T12:52:00.005-05:00

Once upon a time not so long ago in a land far away where the water was as blue as the sky, an ant as small as a speck of dust, woke up as happy as a child on Christmas because the sun was shining as brightly as a diamond, and she went running as fast as a cheetah down to the beautiful stream, which had as many currents as gorillas have fleas and long rocks protruding from the water like knives, while the water leaped and bubbled around it like it was laughing. As she was drinking like a camel which had not had water for many weeks, a wave jumped up like a huge roaring monster and dragged her under.

A dove, who was as white as newly fallen snow in December when children go sledding for the first time and as soft as a fresh pillow, was gliding over the trees that stood as tall as towers with there many branches reaching out like many arms and fingers, when she spotted the ant, who was yelling for help as loud as a trumpet, and dropped the bough she was carrying to build her nest with into the rushing river. The ant climbed aboard the bough and laid there like a shipwrecked sailor who had been brutally thrown around like a potato in the ocean. When the bough floated to shore the ant flopped onto the ground, water-logged as a sponge, and then got up and thanked the white dove.

A couple of weeks later when the leaves, which were turning brown and yellow and falling to the ground, a hunter, who was as mean as a grizzly bear with a toothache, took such a perfect aim at the same beautiful dove that saved the ant, that Robin Hood’s jaw would have dropped like a rock off a cliff, but the ant, who was as angry as a wild boar, stung him so hard that he ran like he was being chased by the Roman army, and he never—as long as he lived—never took a step out of his house. However, the brave little ant and the kind dove learned that the smallest of friends are the best of friends.

The Dove and the Ant King James Style

2009-03-27T18:00:00.000-05:00

In 2000 AD an ant woketh up and went down to the stream to sippeth, and she fell in and was carried down the stream. A dove that passed by dropped the bough she was carrying and the ant climbed upon the bough and floated to shore. I am forever in thy debt because thy saved mine life and if thine ever has an enemies I shall smite him and send him where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth: said the ant.

In 2001 AD the dove was flying when a foul man beast approached and tooketh aim with his gun, but the ant was passing by and smote him on the foot and the hunter fell and died and his body was eaten by worms. The dove and the ant learned the lesson: The littlest of warriors is the best of friends.

Original Aesop Fable: An ant, going to the river to drink, fell in, and was carried along in the stream. A Dove pitied her condition, and threw into the river a small bough, by the means of which the Ant gained the shore. The Ant afterward, seeing a man with a fowling piece aiming at the Dove, stung him in the foot sharply, and made him miss his aim, and so saved the Dove's life.

"LITTLE FRIENDS MAY PROVE GREAT FRIENDS."

Phil Doesn't Need a Degree

2009-03-26T12:39:00.001-05:00

Phil Lindskog was born in Rochester, Minnesota on March 31, 1989 and grew up in a Christian household with his parents. He is now nineteen years old and in college so he can go into youth ministry because he has a great talent for working with teenagers. Phil loves Mountain Dew and will drink it whenever he has the option. His favorite things to do are listen to music, which he does constantly, and watch anything with Will Ferrell in it. Phil loves to laugh, and people get a welcomed feeling when they meet him. Phil loves talking to God and spending time with Him more than anything else in the world.

Attending Christ Community Church since he was nine years old, Phil goes every week and volunteers joyfully with the youth. Occasionally, he works as a janitor at church and sometimes works with the preschool, Kingdom Kids, in the summer. While Phil is busy with school, he takes a lot of time to help out with the seventh grade boys at youth group. Phil also has a great love for music and is in charge of a youth worship band at church, which, as an act of service Sunday mornings, helps elementary children worship God through singing.

Going to a Christian college, Crossroads, in Rochester, Minnesota, Phil is continually busy with homework. While someday he hopes to go into ministry because of his love for Jesus and his gifts with middle schoolers, Phil is currently in his fifth semester at school and is working hard on a degree of ministry with youth and family. Obviously it does not require a college degree to love people and volunteer time, which Phil has been doing for years!

The Dove and the Ant Uncle Remus Style

2009-03-25T09:24:00.003-05:00

One day en ant woke herself up en thawt ter herself, “Wat a butifo mawnin.” En she went a skippin en a hoppin en a hoppin en a skipin happy down ter da rushin riva where all her antish frens be.

“Fine mawnin weed havin. Wud yoodegree?”

To which her frens sez, “Not nothin fine bout it.”

En dey went ter argin bout da wedder til quite sudden, the ant wen slippety on da rocks, en wen a splashin inter da riva. Meanwi, a dove was passin by en spot the ant in da riva, so she went en dropped da bough she was caryn in the stream. Da ant wen en stick herself to dat der bough mighty quik en floated to shure wer she exlaim ter da bird, “I bet my life on it, if it wasn’t for dat der bough that you gone throne inter da stream, I’d ben a goner.”

Days laita der was a killa loosed in the same forst wid ‘is gun, en he took a mighty fine aim at da same dove dat had gone en save da ant, but da ant was passin by en give dat killa a bite on da foot dat it nevuh foget. Dat killa run off like a hut chile, en fo da resuff der lives da dove en ant dey live demselzes a peaceful life en were never bothered agen.

Littlest frens often be the mightiest frens.

Original Aesop Fable:

An ant, going to the river to drink, fell in, and was carried along in the stream. A Dove pitied her condition, and threw into the river a small bough, by the means of which the Ant gained the shore. The Ant afterward, seeing a man with a fowling piece aiming at the Dove, stung him in the foot sharply, and made him miss his aim, and so saved the Dove's life.

"LITTLE FRIENDS MAY PROVE GREAT FRIENDS."

Letter to Grandma and Grandpa

2009-03-24T11:30:00.000-05:00

Tuesday, March 25, 2009

Dear Grandma and Grandpa,

Since my birthday I have been deciding how to spend the money you gave me. I decided to spend a little and save a little. Buying a black acoustic guitar is one of the things your money helped me do. Not too long ago, some of my friends and I also started a rock band and have been occasionally meeting and practicing when we get the chance, which has been a lot of fun.

Immediately putting some of the money towards my beautiful acoustic guitar, which I am very excited about, I have been practicing every day. It is called an EJ-Acoustic Electric guitar. Having a black body, it is accented by gold tuners and a dandelion print on the front. When I look at it, one unique thing I always notice is that at the bottom of the guitar it has a design which is called a mustache! I love playing it. During the last month and a half, I have slowly been teaching myself how to play by learning and practicing new chords every day, while I hope to take lessons soon.

Joining choir, I have been working hard to learn my songs, which is quite challenging. Finally, I have joined the tenors instead of the altos or sopranos! During the last couple of months I have continued playing piano and singing in a youth worship band, “The Uprising,” at church. Since last fall our church has had a middle school band play for the elementary kids, practicing and then playing on Sunday mornings; I am one of the singers!

Starting a band called “So Much for Sleep” with my friends, we played at our church’s American Idol talent show, which we had a great time doing. Determinedly practicing, we have guitars and drums, and I am the lead singer! In April, we hope to play at a Rochester middle school talent show. We auditioned last week, and hopefully we’ll be selected to perform. If you go to my blog on the computer you will see the video of us.

Most importantly, I will keep practicing and pursuing music. Obviously I have gotten my great musical love from both sides of the family. When you come next time, I will show you what I’ve learned on the guitar. Thank you so much for the money, the I-tunes gift card, which I’ve used to download six songs already, and the gift card to Barnes and Noble. I’m going to use it to get the graphic novels of Black, Red, and White by Ted Dekker.

Yours truly,
Isaak

Bundle of Sticks Uncle Remus Style

2009-03-24T10:41:00.001-05:00

Once der were a old man wit mar dan a lil wrinkle on his der face dat he look like a prune of sawts. Now he was so old dat he wadint gonna last so mawch time longer, so he calls his grandsons to hiz bed an he sayz shakonly, “Maw gud boys,” he says, “Go you ut to the field and bringer en a gud size bundel o’ sticks."

When dey cawm back, an dey do quick cuz dey big strong muzzles dey got, dey say, “Granpappy we did done like ya says.”
And granpappy says shakonly to da biggst of da two, he say, “Break it apar.”

The firs grandson go tarin and rippin and ripping and tarin but he ain’t no getting dat bundel apar. An with a stridle of sweat runnin’ dun iz face he say, “Granpappy, I ain’t able to.”

So iz brother come fluxxin iz muzzles proud, and he pulled and tugged and tugged and pulled, bud he ain’t able neither. En fac, he does fall un da flawr fum zaustion.

Den grandpappy say shakonly, “Boys, ya untaw dat bundel o’ sticks and tek ut one each.” So dey did es dey were teld. “Now brik et apar’,” says grandpappy shakonly.

And like it were a stick o’ straw dey brek it apar’, an ol granpappy say wise, “Seez—togeder yooz is strong!”

Original Aesop Fable:

An old man on the point of death summoned his sons around him to give them some parting advice. He ordered his servants to bring in a faggot of sticks, and said to his eldest son: “Break it.” The son strained and strained, but with all his efforts was unable to break the Bundle. The other sons also tried, but none of them was successful. “Untie the faggots,” said the father, “and each of you take a stick.” When they had done so, he called out to them: “Now, break,” and each stick was easily broken. “You see my meaning,” said their father.

“UNION GIVES STRENGTH.”

Letter to Grandma and Grandpa

2009-03-23T10:50:00.000-05:00

Friday, March 6, 2009

Dear Granma and Good G,

Although I am writing this letter because I have to for school, I love you both dearly and hope you don’t take it personally. During this last week, I’ve been busy with my numerous but enjoyable activities and still have more coming up in the next week. Looking at my program, singing the songs, and telling my friends about it, the excitement from going to “Fiddler on the Roof” still hasn’t worn off! It was absolutely amazing! Thank you for taking me to the show G and Granma. I’m looking forward to seeing you next weekend when we go to Nikki and Randy’s house!

Incredibly well done, “Fiddler on the Roof” at the Orpheum is the best show I’ve ever seen, although I immensely enjoyed the Christmas Carol at the Guthrie as well. What’s your favorite play that you have ever seen? Watching Chaim Topol, an ancient but amazing actor, is an experience I’ll never forget! During the musical I was having the time of my life! Although I loved the whole show, one of my favorite things was the brilliant dancing, especially during the wedding and during “To Life.” Fruma Sarah, who I thought was frightening, surprised but impressed me in the dream scene when she was dancing, twirling, and singing, while on someone’s shoulders (at least that’s how I think they did it). It was a hilarious scene! “Fiddler on the Roof” is my favorite musical I’ve ever seen, especially because you were with me!

I can’t imagine anyone I‘d rather have gone to “Fiddler on the Roof” with than you, G! Thanks for going with me! Going to the show with you is a fun memory to have because you were the person I saw the movie with first! Within the next year, our copy of the movie, which you gave us, is going to be scratched and broken from being watched so much! Probably, “Fiddler on the Roof” is one of my two ultimate favorite musicals, along with Hello Dolly. Although I didn’t expect you to agree or even to consider attending the play, I’m incredibly happy you did!

Since you and Granma left I’ve been staying busy as usual. On Thursday I went to choir, which is so much fun, and we started learning two new songs: a hymn and a gospel song which sounds like it should be sung in a black southern church! It’s awesome! I was also planning to audition yesterday for the one act plays Words players is going to perform, but unfortunately I got distracted and it completely slipped my mind. At times I feel like Dory from “Finding Nemo”—“There’s nothin’ in my noggin.’” Hopefully I can still try out in the next week. Previously playing Imogene Herdman in BCPE, a girl named Brianna Hicken is going to be starring Annie Oakley in “Annie Get Your Gun” tonight, and I’m going to go see it! Performing the same piece (the one with the three bowel movements) I played at my recital when you guys were here, I am going to play in the Evening of Music and Recitation on Tuesday night. It’s a home school event. I’m looking forward to seeing you two after my jam packed week is over!

Looking forward to the play tonight, performing my piano piece next week, and hopefully trying out for the one act plays, I will be busy, but will tell you guys about it when I see you next weekend! As you have probably discerned by now, I completely adored “Fiddler on the Roof,” which, in my opinion, is one of the better musicals ever made! Most important, of course, I would like to thank you, Grandpa, for going with me to “Fiddler” and you, Granma, for driving us up to the cities. “To Life!”

Love,
Z

Nate Stenholtz: Everyday Hero

2009-02-16T12:45:00.000-06:00

Avid reader, consumer of French-pressed coffee, and follower of Jesus, Nate Stenholtz is a great friend whose normal life displays the supernatural work of Someone bigger. Nate was born in 1976 in North Dakota, although his family lived across the border in Wyoming. For most of his life, Nate has lived in Minnesota. Nate’s family is immensely important to him. Inside the church or outside, he lives as a missional Christian in obedience to God. Sharing his life and talents with teenagers and learning from them, Nate is a middle school youth pastor.

Nate is a family man. Marrying Kristin Cave in 1998, Nate firmly says that this event was one of the most important in his entire life. Excitingly, Elise Anastasia Stenholtz entered the world in 2003 with Aubrey Joy Stenholtz following in 2005. Nate adores his two daughters and loves to spend time with them every night by reading stories to them. While Nate’s family spends time together, they especially enjoy experiencing new things together and traveling to new places. In about five years, when the girls are older, Nate and Kristin plan to go on a family mission trip together because they love to travel and also want to further God‘s kingdom. Nate Stenholtz, who is a wonderful father and husband, loves his family and spending time with them.

Nate Stenholtz is no stranger to missions. In Nate’s early teenage years he treated baseball like his god and played constantly. When Nate met Jesus Christ, who changed his life, he was asked to do some difficult things. Asking Nate to quit baseball and go to Russia for a month, Jesus clearly had a different plan for Nate’s life than Nate did. Nate obeyed God. Significantly effecting Nate’s life, the trip to Russia was very important to Nate, and his experiences helped the way he now views the world. Since the mission trip to Russia, Nate has also been to parts of the U.S. and throughout parts of Europe, such as Finland. Nate hopes to return to Russia someday. Although Nate has traveled to many far places, his mission field is not limited to across the ocean. Loving and serving many in his community, Nate has a heart for helping others and learning from others, especially teenagers.

Because Nate, who is exceedingly friendly and extremely inviting, enjoys interacting with people, he does a fabulous job as middle school youth pastor. Nate’s first youth pastor job was when he was twenty-two and newly married at a small church in Marshall, Minnesota. Throughout the years, Nate has worked at different churches, but now he is the youth pastor at Christ Community Church in Rochester Minnesota. Journeying with students in their relationships with God is Nate’s favorite part of being a youth pastor.
Nate loves his beautiful wife, Kristin, and his two girls, Elise and Aubrey. Since his child hood years, missions have been significant in Nate’s life. Although Nate may seem like a normal man with a regular job as a middle school youth pastor, he is a hero because he unselfishly loves others.

Hydeful Nature

2009-02-04T15:38:00.000-06:00

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a novel written by Robert Louis Stevenson, which was published in 1886. After becoming a famous book, over 123 film versions were made about it, not to mention other adaptations, including stage performances and radio dramas. Certainly, the main theme in this book is about the fight between good and evil in all of us. This reflects the Bible verse Romans 7:19-20, which says, “For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is the sin living in me that does it.”

Living an ordinary life as a doctor and a good man, supposedly, Dr. Jekyll wants to give into sinful temptations. “He began to go wrong, wrong in the mind,” says Mr. Lanyon one of Dr. Jekyll’s old friends. Secretly creating a potion that will transform him into Mr. Hyde, who is actually the completely evil side of himself, Dr. Jekyll can do whatever he likes without people knowing it’s him. By drinking the potion, Dr. Jekyll can turn back into his regular and better self and continue with life like normal. While concealing his evil life, Dr. Jekyll is strong and healthy, but when he is his Mr. Hyde, he is small and weak.

Viciously evil, Mr. Hyde displays Dr Jekyll’s worst nature. “Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish; he gave the impression of deformity without any nameable malformation.” Changing from Dr. Jekyll to Mr. Hyde, this man is a murderer and has no mercy; he is cruel, and some people say he’s barely human, and they get chills when they’re around him. By killing a defenseless man and also trampling a small child, Mr. Hyde shows how evil he is.

Robert Louis Stevenson, who is the author of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, seems to have a view close to the Christian world view. Choosing to become Hyde, Jekyll decides to become evil and do what he wants. While he becomes more controlled by Hyde, Jekyll finally gets trapped forever by his pride in the body of Mr. Hyde. In this way Stevenson shows how Dr. Jekyll becomes a slave to his sin. Man has choice. The Bible says that we need to take responsibility for our actions, which is similar to Dr. Jekyll choosing to become Mr. Hyde. In the Bible it also says that man has a sinful nature, and man is totally depraved, and Dr. Jekyll gives into sin because he chooses to.

Closely following the Bible’s view of man, Stevenson shows how man has choice and a sinful nature, while also showing that man is totally depraved and needs a savior. Creating the illustration of man as a sinful creature, Stevenson’s book is consistent with the Christian world view of man as seen in Romans 7:19-20, which says that people want to do good, but they often don’t.

The Doubleness of Man

2009-01-26T08:59:00.000-06:00

Dr. Jekyll is a large, middle-aged, well-to-do man who possesses enumerable titles to his name and is high up in society. Although Dr Jekyll is a gentleman, who is kind and polite, some of his old friends disapprove of what they call his “scientific heresies.” “Too fanciful; he began to go wrong, wrong in the mind,” reflects an old comrade, Mr. Lanyon. Ambitiously Dr. Jekyll works on his scientific concoction until he finally finishes it and decides to try it. He drinks it. Transformed into another being, whom he calls Mr. Hyde, Dr. Jekyll can do whatever he likes when he’s in the other form, which he can change into at any time he likes. During his excursions as Mr. Hyde, Dr. Jekyll gives into all his sinful desires and enjoys doing evil without having to worry about his reputation. After awhile of this routine, though, Dr Jekyll begins to become a slave to his sin and can no longer control when he changes into Mr. Hyde. Dr. Jekyll, who was of the best stature in society, eventually can no longer overcome his sin and is a slave to worse self, Mr. Hyde.

Mr. Hyde is Dr. Jekyll’s double worse self. He is pure evil. Detestably pale and dwarfish, deformed somewhere, hardly human, and an extraordinary man is how he’s described him and fear him. “Particularly small, and particularly wicked looking,” says one onlooker. Murdering a well-known man and treacherously trampling a girl who was walking on the street, Mr. Hyde displays ruthless violent behavior. Inside and outside Mr. Hyde is a disagreeable and horrible person. Mr. Hyde is very powerful, and he overpowers and destroys Dr. Jekyll’s good nature.

Robert Louis Stevenson, the author of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde who actually rejected the God of the Bible, had a similar view to the biblical world view. Although it is not clearly stated that man is made in the image to God, the book does say that Dr. Jekyll lost hold of his better original self. Concerning the view that man is fallen it is clear that he believed man has a sinful nature and must battle against it or he will become a slave to sin. Interestingly, the view that we cannot be our own representative is portrayed, although Robert Louis Stevenson didn’t believe in God. Comparing himself pridefully to all of his neighbors and justifying himself on a standard lower than God is when Dr. Jekyll’s final mistake happens, and he turns into Mr. Hyde permanently. Robert Louis Stevenson did not believe in God or the Bible, but the world view displayed in his writing is very close to the biblical world view.

Creating us in his image, God purposefully made us significant and this is the biblical world view. Within each person there is a spirit which is which allows us to live after death according to the Bible. God made man he gave man free will to choose make choices. Man has a sinful nature. “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:3). Because of our choice to sin, men are now slaves to their sinful natures without God. Thankfully, we have Christ as our perfect representative so that we can be saved and fight against our sinful natures. Although Robert Louis Stevenson is not a Christian, he displays a world view undeniably close to the biblical world view. This book is a fantastic intriguing story about the true doubleness of human nature.

The Message of Frankenstein

2009-01-20T08:00:00.000-06:00

A monster, formed from bodies of the deceased, with black thick hair, pure white teeth, and yellow waxy skin, is alive, alone, and friendless in the world. Written by Mary Shelly, who was only seventeen at the time, Frankenstein is set in the seventeen hundreds, which was a period of intense discovery, and the main characters are an ambitious young scientist, the monster he creates, and his family living in a country called Geneva. Secretly devising his plans and obsessively working to create the monster, Dr. Frankenstein represents Mary Shelly’s view of God. In the story, the monster represents man. If we look carefully we will be able to determine Mary Shelly’s view of nature.

The biblical world view of God is that he is loving and immanent. In Frankenstein, the character that represents God is Dr. Frankenstein who created the monster. Although Dr. Frankenstein is the creator of the monster, just as God is the creator of humans, there are significant differences. Immediately after Dr. Frankenstein creates the monster he is so distraught at the hideous appearance of the monster that he runs away from it. In the Bible God says, “Never will I leave you never will I forsake you.” Hebrews 13:5. Dr. Frankenstein is far from immanent. Loathing his creation, Dr. Frankenstein passionately desires to destroy it. Whereas our God calls us his beloved children, Dr. Frankenstein calls his creation “miserable wretch” and “demonical corpse.” Completely void of any love for his creation, Dr. Frankenstein doesn’t even compare to our God, who loves us more that we can imagine. This unloving, insensitive, man who runs away from his creation does not follow the biblical view of God.

The biblical world view is that man is made in the image of God and man has free choice. The monster represents man. Hideous and unnatural looking, the monster isn’t human. “A mummy again endued with animation could not be so hideous as the wretch,” says Dr. Frankenstein. When Dr. Frankenstein made the monster, he didn’t make it in his image. In the story, the monster has free will, but sin is not pictured to be the result of his choice. Eventually the monster, who is pictured to be relatively innocent and good- natured in the beginning, felt so rejected and alone that he turned into a violent and horrible being. Therefore, it was others that made him into the villain that he became and it wasn’t his choice. If we examine the view of man pictured in Frankenstein, we will see that is doesn’t follow that biblical word view.

Subtly scattered throughout the book, Mary Shelley’s view of nature (the physical world) is a different one than the biblical world view. In the Bible it clearly says that we humans are God’s most prized creation, his very best. Elevated to a place which is higher than humans, nature is like its own being, affecting the characters and causing them to feel certain emotions. Phrases such as “Nature gives sublimity of thought and peace” are used. Nature takes on a dominant role of comforting the characters and being the thing that gives peace and tranquility.

In Frankenstein, Dr. Victor Frankenstein incorrectly represents God. The monster dysfunctionally represents man. Nature takes on an important role in the book since nature is elevated to at throne higher than humans and sometimes as high as God. When reading Frankenstein the most important thing to remember is that although Frankenstein has been passed down as a “great American story” and has been made into horror movies that are fun to watch, the original book Frankenstein has messages that are being displayed by the author that do not follow the biblical world view such as God portrayed as unloving and insensitive and that man is only a product of his environment.

The Nature of Frankenstein

2009-01-19T12:27:00.000-06:00

Mary Shelly, the author of Frankenstein, reveals a lot about her world view in this book. Her world view is very different than the biblical world view. Examining this closely, readers find differences between the God of the Bible and the God of this book, the nature of man, and the view of the natural world.

Representing God in the book Frankenstein, Dr. Frankenstein has a secret: the secret of creating life. As he uses that secret to make a monster, he does not seem to care about what will happen when it comes to life, which is foolish. Completely obsessed, Dr. Frankenstein gives life to the monster and is so terrified he runs away from his own creation. Differing from the God of the Christian world view, Frankenstein, the God of the monster, runs away from his creation and hates it, seeking to destroy it; whereas the Bible says God is loving and kind to his creation and wants to have a relationship with them. In the book Frankenstein, Mary Shelly, the author, portrays God to be weak and hopeless, which does not match the world view of the Bible.

When he was first created, the monster, who represents man, was innocent and wanted to learn and to be loved. The monster realizes later that he will never be loved, and he becomes malicious and starts killing Frankenstein’s friends and family, while proclaiming that it wasn’t his fault, but that it was his surroundings that made him who he is. Showing in this book what she thinks of the nature of man, Mary Shelly indicates that she believes it’s not people’s fault that they are evil, but rather, their environment is the cause of their evil actions. But the Bible says that man is responsible for his actions.

Calling nature the “all powerful,” Frankenstein reveals his view that nature is like a god. In grief, Frankenstein goes to nature for comfort, whereas the Bible says that humans should take care of nature, but it is God who made nature. Apparently, Mary Shelly believes that nature is nature with a capital N, like a god.

Weak and wretched is how God is pictured by Mary Shelly, and it does not follow the Christian world view at all. Also not following the Bible is that man does not have choice. The view of nature in this book says that there is nothing more powerful, which is not true to the Bible.

Extraordinarily Ordinary

2009-01-16T09:54:00.000-06:00

Although the beloved Christmas movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” was filmed years ago, it is still a favorite of young and old. This movie was released in 1946 and is set in the time of the Depression when most families were poor. Generously, George Bailey, who is the hero, finds ways to help others. Listening to and answering prayers, the God of Bedford Falls is loving and infinite and fits with the biblical world view. Throughout the movie, man is show as made in the image of God and having free choice. In the movie, good and evil both have consequences.

As “It’s a Wonderful Life” starts, God is shown in heaven receiving prayers for a man named George Bailey, who is loved and cherished, but who has something terribly wrong with him. How does this God respond? What kind of a God is he? God calls an angel named Joseph to help him and tells him about George’s situation and that He is planning to send the angel Clarence to help. Immediately, the audience perceives that He is a compassionate God, one who hears and answers prayers. He knows everything about George. Choosing the quirky angel, Clarence, although he is a second-class angel and innocently naïve, God shapes his plans through others even if they are imperfect. Upon hearing the prayers, God does not fix the problem in a bolt of lightning, but he teaches George that He knows best. God, in “It’s a Wonderful Life,” is loving and infinite and correctly portrays the real God of the universe.

Compared to the biblical world view, which is that man is made in the image of God, man is fallen, and man has free choice, “It’s a Wonderful Life” shows an accurate view of man. George Bailey, hero of the story, is fallen—a good man—yet fallen. Mr. Potter, enemy of George Bailey, is an evil man and is also fallen. Although the characters of the story are imperfect, they are significant, which is one of the main themes of the movie, and this portrays the biblical world view that they are made in the image of God. “Strange, isn’t it? Each man’s life touches so many others. When he’s not around, it leaves an awful hole, doesn’t it?” Clarence asks George. Living in a small town, working at the Building and Loan, and leading a simple life, George Bailey is an ordinary man, but his choices affect so many others in a positive way. Constantly throughout the movie, the characters’ actions and choices, namely George’s, affect the story, their lives, and others lives in both small and huge ways. Without George’s choice to rescue Harry from drowning when they were kids, Harry would have died and would never have gone to war and saved every man on his transport. They all would have died. If George hadn’t chosen to marry Mary instead of traveling the world, which was his dream, she would have become an old maid, living a dismal life. Repeatedly, George’s choices affect his and others lives more than he could ever imagine.

In “It’s a Wonderful Life,” there is good and there is evil and good and evil both have consequences. Good and evil in the story are paralleled by George Bailey and what kind of place Bedford Falls is and Mr. Potter and what sort of place it would have been if George had had not been born. Generously giving to others, sometimes from his own pocket, George Bailey is a good man and is dearly loved by many. While George is good, Mr. Potter is an evil, rich, cowardly man who cheats people, cruelly steals from George, and only cares about doing “good” business. He is sorely hated. Named after George Bailey, Bailey Park is a nice neighborhood with pretty homes owned by poor, hard-working people who are decent, friendly, and have a sense of community. If George had not been born, Bailey Park would have existed in Pottersville as a neighborhood that looked like a dumpster with houses plopped in the middle of it. Paralleled by George Bailey and Mr. Potter and each of their own towns, there is a distinct difference between good and evil. For each action that is taken in Bedford Falls, there is a consequence. Completely lacking morality, Mr. Potter’s choices led to many peoples’ sadness as they lived in his slums, while George’s choices of kindness and love led to the story’s happy ending. There is good and evil in Bedford Falls, and there are consequences for actions, which follows the biblical world view.

Absolutely loving and entirely infinite, the God in “It’s a Wonderful Life” follows the biblical world view. Possessing free will, the people in “It’s a Wonderful Life” make choices that are significant and affect the circumstances, which follow the biblical world view. In the film, man is fallen. In the movie, good and evil exist and are paralleled by George Bailey, who is the hero, and by Mr. Potter, who is the villain. A person may not be winning glory in a war, sitting in an important meeting in a skyscraper, or exploring the world, but each human life is significant. “It’s a Wonderful Life” has a wonderful message that just as George’s extraordinarily ordinary life touched many others, every person can affect others with either love or hatred.

A Truly Wonderful Life

2009-01-16T09:39:00.001-06:00

The movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” is best known as a Christmas movie starring James Stewart. How can a movie that is about a man who doesn’t get to follow his dreams, who is stolen from, who is ordinary, and who considers killing himself a happy movie? Surprisingly, George’s story is one of love and the importance of any person and their effect on the world.

The God of the movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” is all-knowing, personal, and loving, which seems similar to the God of the Bible. “Dear Father, I’m not a praying man, but if you’re up there and you can hear me, show me the way. I’m at the end of my rope. Show me the way, oh God.” Praying to God, whom he calls “Father,” George Bailey receives an answer, which makes God personal. The answer to his prayer comes in the form of an angel named Clarence who shows George what the world would be like without him. In “It’s a Wonderful Life,” God knows George’s full-life story and everything that ever happened to him and how much George’s choices have affected people in a good way.

In “It’s a Wonderful Life” man has free choice. George Bailey, who has many bad things happen to him still makes good choices. Even though George dreams of going to college and traveling the world, he unselfishly makes the choice to stay in Bedford Falls and help people after his father dies. When Clarence comes he shows George what would have happened if George had never been born and made the choices he did. Harry would have died, his old boss would have gone to prison, Mary would have become an old maid, and Potter would have taken over the town.

Evil, in Bedford Falls, is portrayed by Mr. Potter’s choices, especially, just as evil is a choice for every man, which follows the biblical world view. Absolutely evil, Mr. Potter seeks to take control of Bedford Falls. Stealing eight thousand dollars from the Building and Loan, he hopes to put them out of business and see George go to jail. Mr. Potter is a great example of what sin does to people—it corrupts. Mr. Potter was a lonely, bitter old man.

Fully loving and all knowing, the God of “It’s a Wonderful Life” fits into the Christian world view. In this movie, man has free will to choose right or wrong, which is how human nature works. The most significant message of this movie is how people’s choices affect others, either for good or for bad, which shows George has a truly wonderful life.

The Not So Wonderful Wizard of Oz

2008-12-16T10:00:00.000-06:00

The “Wizard of Oz” is a movie based on the book by Frank Baum. The Land of Oz is not governed by the same rules and principles at those express in a Biblical world view. In Oz, the Wizard rules, but he is not like the God of our world. Unlike the Biblical view about the nature of man, which says that man is sinful and has choice, the Wizard of Oz shows man without any choice. Similarly, evil in the story does not reflect a biblical world view.

Contrary to the God of the Bible, the Wizard of Oz is neither infinite nor personal. Although in the beginning of the story the Wizard is inaccurately portrayed as great and wonderful, we find out later that he is not great or powerful, and he is just a man who acts great and helps no one. Hiding from the people of Oz, the Wizard does nothing without payment, and he does not keep his promises. The Wizard also cannot give Dorothy, the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, or the Lion what they need and tells them that they already have what they need.

In the Land of Oz, the nature of man is very different than what is the Biblical world view. For example, the Bible says that man is created in the image of God, and is special because of it. While in the Land of Oz, we find out the Scarecrow’s take on life by some of his song lyrics. “I would not be just a nothin,’ my head all full of stuffin’.” As you can see, the scarecrow measures his worth by his knowledge. Also, the biblical view says that man has choice about his actions. The Lion says that it’s his fate to be a sissy, which means he doesn’t get to decide whether he’s brave or not.

Suffering and evil are caused by the witch who lives in Oz. This is different from the biblical world view because she’s the only source of evil. But in the Bible it says that man’s choices also lead to suffering and evil. Therefore, in the movie, once the witch is dead, that means that all is good. There’s no requirement for a savior. In fact, the Wizard God is not the savior. Man is. In the end of the story, the witch is killed by Dorothy, who does it on her own strength.

In conclusion, the Wizard of Oz is the not the hero. The heroes are Dorothy and her friends. Overall, the movie portrays a world view that is not biblical. It has a very different view of God, of man, and of evil.

The Seemingly Wonderful Wizard of Oz

2008-12-15T09:17:00.001-06:00

Somewhere over the rainbow lies a land with a wonderful wizard, where there are no troubles, and where all your dreams come true. Or so you thought. The movie “The Wizard of Oz,” based on the books, which were written by Frank Baum, was released in the late 1930s. If we carefully examine “The Wizard of Oz,” we will see that the wizard represents the god of Oz, although there are some differences between the wizard and our God. Presumably, Dorothy, the scarecrow, the tin man, and the lion represent man. Throughout the movie, the despicable witch represents evil.

The god of Oz is the wizard, who is seemingly great and wonderful. Although the wizard is known as great, and Dorothy and her friends sing of “all the wonderful things he does” the wizard is later revealed to be a disappointing man--only a man. Absolutely different from our God, the wizard is not loving or infinite. Yelling at Dorothy and her friends in a deep commanding voice, the wizard has no compassion for the distance they’ve traveled, calls them degrading names, and forcefully tells them to “go away and come back tomorrow.” Because of his deep commanding voice, the wizard might be pictured to be an infinite, omniscient God, but his words betray him. Asking them what they want, he demonstrates that he isn’t all-knowing. He doesn’t know them either. When we look closely we can easily see that the wizard isn’t as great and wonderful as everyone thought.

In the land of Oz, man is represented by Dorothy, the scarecrow, the tin man, and the lion. The Bible tells us that man is made in the image of God, which gives us worth and significance to him, but that isn’t clearly found in “The Wizard of Oz.” “I would not be just a nothin’ my head all full of stuffin’ my heart all full of pain.” Singing these words, the scarecrow tells us that he believes he is worth nothing because he believes he has no brains. Intelligence gives him value. When the tin man sings that he’s an empty kettle he shows that he believes he’s a piece of junk because he thinks he has no heart. Remarkably difficult to uncover, the view of choice in Oz is not always free will as in the Biblical world view. Fate affects the circumstance more than the individual actions of the character and when action is taken it is usually an accident. Blaming his cowardice on fate, the lion sings, “When you're born to be a sissy” and “a fate I don’t deserve.” When Dorothy kills the witches both times she whimpers, “Oh, I didn’t mean to.” Repeatedly she insists that Toto didn’t know what he was doing when he bit Ms. Gulch. Unlike the Biblical world view, “the Wizard of Oz” doesn’t consistently show a view of free will.

Representing evil in Oz, the witch correctly portrays evil, but the view of evil is tainted because of the imperfect misgivings of the wizard. Evil comes from another source, which is the witch, as well as the wizard. Because the wizard isn’t holy, this view doesn’t follow the Biblical world view which is that evil comes from another source outside of God. In the Bible, sin leads to pain suffering, and death, but only occasionally in Oz. Predictably, the witch dies in the end and “evil” is overthrown, but the wizard, when accused of being “ a very bad man” never repents as he isn’t “that bad.” He was “acceptable.” The view of evil is skewed because of the imperfection of the wizard.

Representing God in Oz, the wizard portrays a different kind of god than our God. Within the story, Dorothy, the scarecrow, the tin man, and the lion represent man. The witch represents evil. The most significant thing about “The Wizard of Oz,” which is still an entertaining movie, is that it doesn’t follow the Biblical world view. Although, if you don’t study it closely you might not discover this.