Final Essay

Accepting The Unavoidable

What do you expect to leave behind after you die? As you live, you leave behind a legacy, and what this legacy is about, reflects what you are. As a person, you survive moments that will change and strengthen your heart. You experience emotions that will change and develop perspectives. You will learn information that will change and nourish your ideas. You will simply live life through a constant change. A person is affected by all these changes and consequently, a city is too. A city reflects its inhabitants or the inhabitants reflect the city, still, in both cases, they are directly connected to one another. They each live a life, some are long and others short, and then die. However this death might not really be death but just a dream, or it could actually really never lived.
In the movie Waking Life, there is a scene where a couple talks about some of the things that bother them, including the way in which we might really not be living but we are already dying. We could be experiencing a moment where our body is dead but our brain is still alive. There is no way of proving if what you’re living is actually the last few minutes of work your brain is doing as you die. In the same way in which you can live a lot in a short dream, you could be living a whole life in those six to twelve minutes of death. So you really don’t know if you are dead or you are alive. It’s a conception that includes dreams and reality that one can’t really decipher and has no way to prove if it is one or the other. In Italo Calvino’s book, Invisible Cities, there is one city, Eusapia, which also experiences this limbo. This city really consists of two sections, one that the living domain and one that contains the dead, but at the end “…there is no longer any way of knowing who is alive and who is dead.” (Invisible Cities p. 110) So, just as this city has one part that reflects the other and you can’t decipher which is really which, humans don’t really know if what they are living is a dream or it is actually some kind of reality. What they do know is that the dream can be based upon reality or reality can be based upon the dream, and that one city is really a reflection of the other, “They say that every time they go below, they find something changed in lower Eusapia…So the Eusapia of the living has taken to copying its underground copy.” (Invisible Cities p. 110)
Just as one city affects the other, they change with time. Change is unavoidable, but uniqueness is what identifies each person, or a city, and there is a basic part that will always stay the same. “We´re always becoming different people yet we always remain essentially ourselves.” (Waking Life 36: 56)During the movie, this is stated when two women discuss the way in which a person grows and “regenerates” through life, because it is true, we are always changing but we are born with a section that preserves uniqueness and will make each person stand out as exclusive and exceptional. At the beginning of the movie there is also a college professor that says, “It is always our decision who we are.” (Waking Life 11:10) And this is also true, because we live in a place where we are taught morals and lessons that will help us in life. These will lead us to a life of integrity and honesty, but the truth is, each person chooses which social codes to apply, just as anybody can choose which advice to follow and which to ignore, and in this same way, each individual is a part of a whole, a part of a city, that is being formed by what its people are choosing to do, so a city doesn’t really get to choose what it is, but the people that live in it do. When people try to avoid change, they choose their end, and if the people of a city don’t let it change, what might have originally been unforgettable, as it tried to remain more memorable, like Zora, in Invisible Cities, will “languish,” “disintegrate,” and “disappear.”
Language and communication work in the same way, they must be constantly readapting to survive. New points and ideas want to get across and people are constantly looking for others that will understand, or teach. Expressing ourselves can become very difficult. People have ideas and experience emotions that are simply too unique and personal to have others understand. “We use that same system of symbols to communicate all the abstract and intangible things that we are experiencing.” (Waking Life 12:07)This proves to be correct when Marco and the Emperor try to communicate at first through gestures and symbols because that is the only language they share. However, with time, Marco Polo learns the new dialect and is able to be much more concise with his descriptions “And yet each piece of information about a place recalled to the emperor´s mind that first gesture or object with which Marco had designated the place.” (Invisible cities p.22)This proves we will never get to be fully understood. That the things that we feel and think might get explained to one point or another but the truth is that we “are looking for a perfect communication” (Waking Life 38:14) that will never arrive and sometimes what sticks and stays the most is the simplest, most primitive ways such as “gestures, leaps, cries of wonder and of horror, animal barkings or hootings, or with objects.” (Invisible Cities p. 22) This is a universal language that will give space to individual interpretation but will always mean just one thing or another. So in many ways we should just accept some things of nature, like the fact that we will never be fully understood, or the fact that change is unavoidable or that a city is composed by its people, and that each person reflect its city.

Sports All Around

Many sports include balls, however, the way in which the ball is used differs from sport to sport. In volleyball, basket and soccer, there is direct contact between the body and the ball. In racket ball and soft ball, you can instead find equipment separating the impact between the the ball and the person. The way in which the person interacts in the game and puts in effort varies and each sport can therefore apply to individual tastes. The body moves and reacts in different ways and develops abilities that give a person talent and coordination. Each sport requires unique techniques but as a whole, they all need good physical abilities and determination and competitiveness. They can also help you mentally and psychologically develop abilities and techniques and ways to think. Sports are something many people dedicate time to, they are supposed to be good for you and they are also enjoyable. Its an acquired taste that will give you something to look forward in life and a hobby to keep you occupied.

soft BALL

racket BALL

foot BALL (soccer)

volley BALL

basket BALL

Pynchons Preface to 1984

I agree with Pynchon's idea that Orwell is trying to criticize socialism and that he is annoyed and rejecting it. I believe this is quite obvious throughout the novel since each character and situation is really part of a well hidden symbolism. The fact that people are conditioned into believing one thing or another and that the government is able to control and manipulate its people so well will make the reader think. It will lead the reader to question his life and to compare it to the society he is reading about in 1984. One thing that has a very obvious connection is the way in which the ministries are actually the opposite of their names. "Doublethink also lies behind the names of the superministries which run things in Oceania—the Ministry of Peace wages war, the Ministry of Truth tells lies, the Ministry of Love tortures and eventually kills anybody whom it deems a threat." This shows how the world can be very ironic sometimes and that even now we find ourselves thinking that the government is honest with us when this is a very naive thought. It makes us realize that even our current government is tricking us and lying to us, that what they tell us is not based for our good but on the success of their power, that yes they have to keep people happy, but only because this is a side effect of what they need to accomplishing their position and power. Just like in the book, there are revolutionaries today, and just like in the book, the government does all it can to get rid of them. There are cases when they reach the same drastic consequences and there are other cases in which they are less or even more drastic.

However, referring back to the maxim, I find it interesting Pynchon commented on this topic because it is something that many authors write about: the hypocrisy of our country and our society. One topic I was surprised he didn't comment on was the relationship between parents and their kids, the fact that they would turn them in for the crime of thinking. I guess that this is a topic that refers to the lost bond between many generations nowadays in their families. Kids and parents don't share as much bonds and the communication they have is more and more restricted. It also shows how the government is very successful with their brain washing and how important it is to start conditioning kids as they are young. This way their passion is much more honest and the effects will be much better for the government.

Pynchon also discussed the fact that Orwell left his "The Principles of Newspeak" part and I think that is great, it was his work and if he wants it that way then there is no reason why he should change it to make some producers happy. I also think he might have gone deeper on some topics. However, I must contradict myself because I think his essay was of a well managed length and that he covered the most important parts with success and giving his opinion and critique.

Freedom: Subjective

When Gulliver signed his contract to become free he didn't realize that his freedom had now become dependant. He wasn't really free, he was a servant now, still he says that he was at "full liberty". After being chained such a long time, the new liberties he has seem as all he could need, but the truth is he is still dependant on the Lilliputants. To be able to acquire these freedoms he had to accept some conditions. The Lilliputants obviously took advantage of the situation and forced him to do things that would benefit them. For example, they got him to find their perimiter and to make reports on things that would have taken them much more time to accomplish. They also took advantage of their "man-mountain" by using him as a weapon. "6th, He shall be our ally against our enemies in the island of Blefuscu, and do his outmost to destroy their fleet, which is now preparing to invade us." (p.29) This, in my opinion is a very good strategy because they are making Gulliver as if he were free but they are actually manipulating him. He now owes them his alliance and help and he will have to keep his side of the treaty.

If you think about it, it is ridiculous that Gulliver is accepting that treaty since he experienced much more liberty before . He used to live in England, where he could do whatever he wanted. Yes, he had to respond to the government and follow the law, but he could practically do whatever he wants. Actually as I think about it, he actually was kind of restricted in the same way. We all are, we have to get passports to leave the country, Gulliver needed permission to be granted. We also have to protect others and support our country during war, we have to be careful with the things that belong to others and must, in every way we can help our country. Still, I believe that we are brainwashed into believing that this is what a good citizen is and this is what we have to do to help our country, so we do it out of our own merit. Gulliver, instead has to do it to be able to avoid getting chained.

A World Of Fantasy

After reading the first two chapters of Gulliver's Travel I realized how much I enjoy fantasy. I really liked reading this story and having the images come alive in my mind. I didn't look for pictures but until after I was reading because I enjoyed having everything come real in my imagination without having to see somebody else's creation. Since I was little I have enjoyed reading these fantasies and I really get involved with the character and I like imagining things that don't exist. I really liked the description the author uses as he describes what he felt, thought and saw. I actually admired his actions and I began to even like the Lilliput people.
I tried to get inside of Gulliver's mind and imagine what he must be feeling. What it would be like to just arrive at a place, after experiencing his ship wreck and probably feeling as a failure for having spent his money in a project that didn't survive, and find all these miniature humans. It must be weird to be the monster, as we have always imagined that someday someone (aliens, machines, animals, monsters) will come and try to fight us. He must have felt very lonely and constantly thought of his family but really had nothing to do. I don't really understand why he just stayed there and let all these mini people boss and order him around. If it would have been me, I think I would have probable reacted violently to such creatures and even more due to the fact that they tied him and kept him as a captive. However, considering all that Gulliver had just gone through, I guess I wouldn't have had the spirit or strength to fight them and then go back to see, because where else could he go. Now Gulliver is having a passive relationship with these new creatures and he is going to be able to learn about them and get to know them.
This is like a dream to me, I don't believe this possible but I still enjoy reading it and at moments I do kind of wish that this would've happened to me. Its an experience that I would enjoy, like the Harry Potter world, or Narnia, or even Twilight. Its things I know are childish but I still appreciate. I like watching these movies, I devour these books when I get to them and even though I am completely aware that those are fake worlds, I like imagining myself sometimes inside of them and I like establishing feelings towards the characters and they really get me happy and make me enjoy my time.

California- USA- The world: We Are All Living The Crisis

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/opinion/25krugman.html?ref=todayspaper

A common problem that is currently worrying the whole world it the economic crisis we are finding ourselves in. Many countries and companies have been greatly affected by it and even people lifestyles have been changing. It has been proved, through surveys, that people are no longer, traveling, shopping and spending as much as they used to. This is the "selfish gene" kicking in and having each person do the best they can to survive. So each person is now taking the measures they consider necessary to survive but they also depend on others, this is not a circumstance that is controlled by one but by all and what one does affects all. Because of this, people rest their trust in their leaders, in their presidents and governors and those who are supposed to help make things better. However, these leaders are, like us, humans and sometimes manage things wrongly. Paul Krugman, wrote an OP-ED in the New York Times where he criticizes Californians, and their way of reacting towards the whole situation.
He blames both the people and the governor for their current state and he expresses his concern on this significance. He is worried that the United States, as a nation will follow California's mistakes and just like them, find that they are incapable of escaping this problem. Due to old laws, California is unable to raise taxes and get the money they need in order to keep going in good conditions. He believes that by raising all taxes a bit, California, and even the United States would be able to avoid much of the crisis and get back on track.
Krugman is trying to warn the United States of a big mistake and he is complaining about the nations leaders and he is even insinuating they are cowards since he says they "fled" when the problem arouse and they haven't been able to fix what they have in their hands. So even though he based his article on just one state, he ends it by getting us to realize that California is undergoing what all of the United States are under going and that we shouldn't follow them, but instead learn from their mistakes and correct them.

A MACHO SOCIETY?

To look at the article I am responding to, please click on the link below:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/opinion/21thu3.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Equal Pay for Women Denied, Again


Throughout many years women have been discriminated. However we haven't given up and we never will. Woman have been able to get everyone to look at them with the same eyes men deserve. It has taken lots of effort in behalf of some individuals, but they have fought and represented us and thanks to these people is that I am now able to have the life I live. However, it is sad to admit that our fight is not over yet. Our society has improved but it still has much to change. Women are sometimes rejected in regards to jobs and many opportunities are rejected due to their gender. It even happens that women receive a lower payment for doing the exact same job men do.
This is completely unfair. The job is still being done and with the same quality so why doesn't it deserve the same payment? The Supreme Court argued that one of the reaons for a lower payment in woman is that they have pregnancy leave but the truth is that this is only a few months of a womans work life and it doesnt compare to the large amount of money women are being denied by reducing the pay check.
I am glad to know that women are still fighting for what we deserve and it is time for society to change at a faster rate and recognize us as great as men. We can do everything they can do and it is very important that we fight for what we deserve, that we show people what we are capable of and that we get the recognition we deserve. This article is defending womens right to get the same paycheck as men do and woman will probably end up having the same paycheck because it is what we deserve and therefore we will win the trial and get what is fair.

Paul Klee- Red Ballloon

The main focus of this painting is definitely the red balloon that is rising between the two walls of blocks. The balloon is almost centered but not completely to maintain certain attraction and not bore the person that is watching. By keeping it a bit to the left he is following the "thirds" rule of design and he is keeping it also on the top third of the painting. The picture is full of geometric figures and they have several colors which make the painting have life. Also, the colors near the balloon contrast because it goes from dark shades to a light background and then the bright red pops out in front of the picture. The fact that at the bottom there are more blocks than on the top makes the eyes focus on the empty space. One of the most important compositions of this piece is the usage of lines. It uses blocks and lines and geometric figures to keep the composition and balance of the picture.
When I saw this picture I was reminded of those movies when you see like a fair or carnival in Paris or New York a long time ago and you see everybody dressed up all pretty and elegant but also hvaing fun end enjoying everything around. It made me feel kind of calm and it gave me tranquility because the balloon lookes as if it was floating happily in the air and as if it were having a calm ride.

Miró

May 12
This painting by Miro uses mostly colors and shapes to give life. When looking at it, I feel happy and actually like curious towards life. It takes some time realizing what the overall picture is but as you identify each individual figure, you get to admire the way in which shape are put together. The emphasis is mostly in the persons head and then goes towards the guitar. As you look closely you identify that the persons face is actually formed by a worm-eating bird. Other animals are also found. The deformed dog, horse and cat are present along with the ducks and other birds outside of the window that aren’t so important. I guess that the size of the animals affects on how important Miro considers them. According to this, the horses would be really important, and then would come the dogs and lastly the cats. The birds however I wonder how important they are for him. Some are outside the window which makes it seem they aren’t very important while he uses one to create the human face so it gains importance. There is also a squirrel and other shapes that help give the picture life and happiness. The guitar probably shows his spirit towards art and it shows that he likes art and agrees with its form of expression and life.
Another reason why the horse, person and dog are highlights is due to their color. Since these are the biggest spaces, other than the floor and wall, and these are the lightest areas because they are white. Also the lines of the walls, floor, and window lead the attention towards the face of the person. I really enjoy looking at this picture because it kind of has humor and makes you kind of smile when you look at it.

Is It Worth Gambling?

May 7
When Tommy gave all his money to Dr. Tamkin he knew there was a possibility that things wouldn’t work out and that his money would be lost. Yes, he probably hoped it was successful but at the end it wasn’t. He gambled his last economical chance. He was already short on money and then he went and spent his last bit in a high risk business. In my opinion he should have looked for a safe spot. He should have tried to invest in something that will certainly give him money, maybe in a slow and steady way, but at least that way he would always have an income. However, he chose to risk it all when he couldn’t really afford it and lost it all. Maybe he would have been very lucky and the business he invested in, turned very successful. But he didn’t know that would happen. In this case I think that when people have lots of money and have a back up, then they can try new things that may fail or succeed, however when you have so little opportunities you should try keeping your position safe.
This is one thing that definitely gets me thinking about the future and makes me wonder what will become of my life. I really hope mine doesn’t turn out as Tommy’s did. I am very scared to know that I’ll have so many responsibilities and so many options on my hands. I hope I will be able to make the right choices at the right moments and that whenever I chose to gamble I gamble on something that has high possibilities of success and actually works out. I hope I have a successful life and that I am happy and glad and satisfied with it and my choices. I would like to live in peace of never regretting and enjoying all I could.

Family Support

MAY 6, 2009
While reading Saul Bellow´s Seize the Day I was sad to read about Tommy’s relationship with his dad. It was really depressing knowing that the disappointment his dad felt is actually what many people feel everyday for their family members. His disappointment was so strong that he didn’t even help him get out of his troubles, he didn’t believe in him. Tommy had to turn to Dr. Tamkin for support even though he didn’t really know what his intentions were and if his interest really was to help him out. Tommy had to look for support because he was living through a really screwed up moment in life, actually he had always been kind of screwed up. He had been a living a life that hadn’t really turned out as he wanted and he had nobody to support him during his failure. He even had married and had two kids but the way in which he helped out wasn’t really making him even a good example for his kids. So his relationship with his father, the one he hates so much, is going to repeat itself. He can’t give financial support and he is not even being a good example for them.
I believe he could have avoided such a situation if he had tried to fix his problems and deal with them as he was younger. Also, if he had received some kind of support he might have had more chances of success, however, he didn’t. I consider this very sad because your family is one of the things you are usually going to have by your side. You are connected to them by blood and this is a stronger force than the one people usually realize. Friends can come and go but your family is always going to be there and keeping a good bond and a good relationship is very important. Usually family relationships are honest and they look for each other’s best interest. That way if Tommy would have kept a good relationship with his dad, he would have known that all the advice and suggestions he proposed would have been with his best intentions. Tommy does find Dr. Tamkin and he hopes he is being there for him with his best intentions but the truth is he can’t avoid wonder if he’s just blabbing and telling anything without really caring what the consequences will be. It is sad to look at this father-son relationship and I hope that the bond with my family are always as strong as they currently are and that I am always able to count on them and have their support even when I don’t really need it.

Looking At Life From Different Eyes

May 5, 2009
By just reading the title Seize the Day, one can already see that this story will have some life lessons and it will probably inspire the reader to live life at its maximum and enjoy it as much as possible. Only with the title one knows that the writing style will be very different from the one in Cathedral. It will lead people to look at the positive aspect in life while Cathedral leads you to think that everything will go wrong and that there is nothing you can do to avoid it. In this story, instead, Wilhelm feels out of place like many of Carvers characters did, but what I guess will happen is that in Wilhelm’s case, things will get better and he will teach the reader, through his thoughts and actions how to become a better person and enjoy everything life has given us. He will show that we are all capable of getting through hard moments in life and he will probably do this by showing us how similar we really are. Because one thing is for sure, we are all humans and we well all live through emotions such as happiness, joy, sadness, pain, grief, hope, disappointment. So we should all really understand one another and help one another when we have problems. As humans we sometimes forget that we have to help each other out and that is what we should do, we should get in one another’s shoes and do everything that is possible to get through hard moments, or celebrate together happy moments. It’s really all up to us and the way we want to interpret life, so we better do it in a way that is beneficial to us, in a way that will help us rise instead of fall. I would probably say that Saul Bellow is much happier with his life than what Carver is and they are each sharing their opinion in life and it is up to us to choose how to deal with. Except, who knows, maybe Carter is happy and is concentrated on dullness to try to experience this feeling and Bellow writes about taking advantage of every possibility to see if he is able to take his own advice and apply this attitude in life.

4 Blogs due on Monday, May 4

Addictions
Having addictions must be horrible. Depending on something so much, either physical or emotional, that you can’t live without it is very limiting. It’s like being a slave to something you chose yourself. Becoming an addict means you lose liberty. There are some things on which we depend on: food, water, sleep. But there are others that we don’t really need to survive but some people make them necessary, indispensable. Drugs, sex, alcohol are things to which one can easily get addicted to. In several of Carters short stories, the main characters are either alcoholic or heavy drinkers or he at least mentions alcoholic beverage at one point or another. This probably shows that the author might have a problem with alcohol and even if he doesn’t have one, he still thinks about it a lot. In his story Where I’m Calling From, he even sets the main characters in a drying-out facility and shows how they are trying to fight this addiction. He also shows how the body will want alcohol and how addicts adore and feel the need to have their alcohol. I think he shows this to get across the message that one does become dependent of things one doesn’t realize and that we are probably all addicts to something around us and we will never realize it. And if we do, many don’t accept it, and many others are just not strong enough to fight it.

Careful
This story once more irritated me because I never got to know what it was the wife wanted. So I went back to my signifying nothing frustration. However I believe that one of the things that Carter is trying to do with this story is tell everybody that the senses we have are precious and we don’t always appreciate them. In the story Cathedral he also mentions a blind man and the relationship he develops with his host. In Careful he doesn’t really talk about a deaf man but the main character clogged his ear and is annoyed by the feeling. He feels so frustrated with his new incapacity that he actually says he would prefer to die. “…if I had to go on like this, I think I’d rather be dead.” (p. 120) In my opinion this is very exaggerated and what Carver is trying to do is to get us to understand that we complain too much. He shows that when we have our senses perfect we don’t really appreciate them or realize their importance, then something goes wrong and one of our senses start malfunctioning and that’s when we understand that we don’t appreciate what we have until we lose it. He probably is also critizing our reaction because we dare to complain about a strange feeling, the man didn’t actually lost his hearing, he is still able to listen perfectly through one ear and the other just gives sound a strange feeling but he can still hear and he complains and threats with his life. Instead there are people that aren’t even able to hear, people that can’t hear plus have other incapacities all at once and they go on with life. They live a happy life and take advantage of what they do have instead of complaining about what they don’t have. Carver also shows us how Lloyd is affected after this experience. After he gets close to losing his hearing ability, he freaks out and gets paranoid that he might lose it once more. He finally begins to appreciate his sense but he doesn’t do it in a positive way but instead freaks out. Instead of realizing the importance of hearing and afterwards talking advantage of his ability he just focuses on the possibility of losing it once more and suffers because of this. So it is rather Ironic because you don’t know any more if Lloyd was suffering more while he had his problem or if he is suffering more now that he doesn’t know what will come and if he’ll lose his hearing ability.

Is Sickness Sometimes the Reflection of Sadness?
As I read the short story I first thought about the importance of kids in a parent’s life and how these should be really well taken care of and appreciated. When I first read the disaster the baby sitter had been I felt sorry for Carlyle and kind of felt mad like he did as he kicked the kids out, that had been after another sitter had failed so I knew he wanted the best for his kids and felt sorry he hadn’t been able to give it to them. Then ironically his wife, the woman that had just left him, gave him a recommendation on a sitter that turned out being great. This woman was great with the kids, the house, and with him. She was even the one with whom he eventually let everything out and helped him finally get on with his life. He was able to let everything out when this sitter said she had to leave and Carlyle had just been sick.
Many people believe that your emotions and ideas affect your health. Carver probably agrees with this because he named the story after the sickness he had just before he got over his situation, Fever. Carlyle probably got sick because he couldn’t stand things anymore. He had been suffering too much because of the fact his wife left him. He missed her and what was worse of all was that he kept on hoping she would come back even after he knew she wouldn’t. I guess that he reached a point of exhaustion and when everything was finally going well, his job, his kids had a good sitter, he had begun getting over his wife, life overwhelmed him and he got sick. Through his fever he got all of his stress out and he “purified” himself and rested while trying to recover. And I guess in a way that fever was really good because it gave him the possibility to rest for a while and think things through and get all the load he had off his shoulders. Now he was able to think clear and his body got a point to when he was able to let everything out to be able to start again and that was what he did. Mrs. Webster was his support as he cried and no she was leaving but after she did, he will have a new beginning and he will be ready for it.

When things go wrong
All of Carters stories have like a dull mood. In every situation something bad happens to his characters. In some stories, the situation worsens, in others it stays as bad and in others nothing really occurs with it. There are a few in which nothing bad happens and this is as close as one can get to a happy ending in one of Carvers stories. I wonder if this is his opinion of life, that no matter what, it will never be happy. It will be dull and dark and the best you’ll get is just a like plain, unexciting life. All his characters, either good or bad get a sad ending, so what the point with being good if no matter what kind of a person you are, things will go wrong. This is kind of a predestined idea in the way that Carver believes that people can think that they will be happy but no matter what, at the end, or at some point, something really bad and horrible will happen. There is no way you’ll live a completely happy life, no matter what, you are predestined to have things go wrong. You have faith in the fact that things will get better but the truth is fate has a different plan for you. People might get a climax moment when everything seems to be going well but there is no way of staying there, at one moment or another everything will fall apart and it will either stay good or get better in a small degree until things go wrong again. Happiness will never be something stable while sadness and grief and problems can be.

A Small Good Thing

April 29 2009
This story kind of depressed me. It is sad that things like this happen and its even sadder that it happened on his birth day. Scotty didn’t actually died a few years after on the exact same day that he was born, but he did suffer an accident on this day that would lead him to his death three days later. It’s actually all very ironic really, his birth day is the same as his death day. Too bad it had to be this day but if you think about it one will day any day, it might be expected and it might not. All you have to do is wait until the day comes. One thing that called my attention was the fact that Howard realized he had been “lucky” in life and that his luck could change any moment and it’s sad to see it did. They were good people and they didn’t deserve what they got, but then again not everyone deserves what they get, some deserve better and some deserve worse, but whatever one gets is what one got and sometimes there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. For example the man that hit the kid. He just drove away, he didn’t offer help or anything, he just escape. That’s sad also. It’s sad and maddening to realize that there are people like this in this world. People that don’t have hearts and people that don’t take responsibility for their actions.
Going back to a topic I had mentioned before on my blogs I actually really liked where this story’s title came from. “Eating is a small, good thing in a time like this” (Carter, Cathedral p.87)I guess I like it because I agree with it. Compared to all the problems you’re facing, eating is just a really tiny thing to consider, but its effects can be great. Since eating is one of the pleasures in life, it has the ability to stimulate happiness, and well, during such depressing moments, a small amount of joy can be highly appreciated. Looking back at when my dad died I remember that everybody sent food. At moments it got frustrating but as I think about it, it was something that helped getting through. Eating made moments less worse even if it was just because it made you focus on something else. So I liked the title because after all that went wrong, a small detail as food can actually be a great difference in a huge circumstance.

A Simple Soul, A Broken Heart

April 28, 2009

Felicite is a girl that has many self-esteem problem s and it is obvious throughout the story. One thing that you can also feel throughout the story is like her feeling of despair and sadness. Nothing ever goes on right to her, (this also happens a lot with Carters stories, they don’t have what we could call happy endings, many don’t even have endings but the point is they don’t really have a happy mood to them) too many things in her life turn out wrong. One example of this is when she is finally very in love with a man and then she discovers he left her. “He informed her that she would never see her sweetheart again; for, in order to escape the conscription, he had married a rich old woman, Madame Lehoussais, of Toucques.” (A Simple soul)The man leaves for his own benefit and this reminds me of the Selfish Gene because it is just showing the animal behavior we have within. Love is supposed to be a really strong force within, and you are supposed to be easily controlled by those who love you but then again, one can see how survival reigns over love. Genes control your body much more than what feelings do, maybe the man really did love Felicite, but as long as he could escape and get a good, wealthy life, he abandoned her. As any other animal, he is looking for his best possibility so he can reproduce and keep his genes alive.

Writing Styles

April 27, 2009
While reading A Simple Soul By Gustave Flaubert after reading so many short stories by Raymond Carver, it was really easy for me to tell some of the differences in writing style. It was obvious, as a starter that Flaubert described much more every situation and gave detail on all that was happening at all moments while Carver was pretty concise. In general, I didn’t tend to concentrate so much on style, I liked to focus much more on the content. I think that was obvious as we first started working on the “signifying nothing” theme. It forced me to start identifying styles and actually appreciating them. Now that I think about it, I understand why it came that I liked some stories while I didn’t really enjoyed reading the book, or why I liked some books so much while I didn’t really like the story. It was due to style and content. I now read this short stories focusing much more on the styles and I have therefore identified some of the characteristics of the authors, while before, I tended to just read the story and not really think about the style while I was reading. Maybe at the end I just commented on the general form of writing of the author and reach a conclusion on the idea that I either liked the way in which the author wrote or not.
That is one thing I really like about this class: it has forced me to focus on things I didn’t used to. If I compare myself with many of my classmates I can tell some of them already had the tendency to analyze and like close read and focus much more on the writing that I did. I really just used to read very superficially many books and now I feel like I’m actually getting more of what the author is trying to transmit to the reader. I also feel as if I have improved my writing abilities and this gets me really happy because I have also developed a better “taste” for writing. I usually prefer to read than to write but I have been enjoying writing much more lately. Plus, other than for just enjoyment I’m really glad I have improved because when I took the PSAT exam, it suggested that the areas that I had to work most on where on reading comprehension and writing so I hope to see a big improvement on my next year’s results.

The Watch And The Son

April 23, 2009
While reading the story I arrived to the conclusion that Carver was comparing Myers son with the wrist watch he had bought him. If you think about it, Myer had begun a relationship with a woman and had his son with good intentions, or at least I’m supposing so. Later on his relationship with his son died after a fight and they had eventually parted from one another after such a terrible experience. After some years Myer felt as if he wanted to meet his son once more, he had taken the first step at trying to reach him and now he would go ahead and reach back. However as he made his trip to get to his son, he realized that that wasn’t what he wanted, that his son was actually someone he didn’t want to meet once more since he considered him his “enemy” and still felt some grudge on him. So, at the end, he didn’t meet him. He arrived to the meeting point and never got off the train. Something similar happened with the watch.
Myers chose to buy his son a wrist watch in Rome while he was there. He bought it as a present, as a little something to give him when they met. However, on the way lost it. Actually it got stolen from him. Obviously annoyed for getting robbed, Myers tried to find the thief and get his watch back. After looking for it in some compartments, and trying to get information out of the man who was sleeping and sharing his compartment, and after having no success, he gave up. He just went back to compartment and annoyed started thinking about his situation. In my opinion these two subjects relate because Myer got a son and a watch, then he lost both, after that he tried to make it up (went to meet him and looked for the watch in all of the compartments) and lastly he gave up, he realized he didn’t really wanted to see his son and he accepted that he would never find his watch. I guess that what the author was doing was that he was trying to get his feelings about his son across to the reader through the whole watch situation. The reader gets to feel Myers anger and frustration when he is trying to find the watch and one can relate them to the uncomfortable feeling his having due to the encounter with his son. Myers always will wonder what happened to that watch and he will want to know who stole it, at the end he believes it was the man with whom he had shared the compartment but suspicions aren’t enough to give the fact. He will also wonder if his son went to meet him, he won’t know for sure if he did go because he never got off the train and he didn’t see him in the station but he once more believes he will be waiting, however, once more his hypothesis is not enough to prove the fact and we will never know what happened with the son. Or with the watch.

Social laziness

- April 22, 2009

A common idea has been established in all our minds. It has been expressed in books, movies, plays and even in life. Lazy men sit and watch TV on the living room couch. Of course this isn’t what all lazy men do, exceptions exist and each person reacts in different ways but this is definitely a common characteristic. This attitude can be seen in men on Sundays and resting days, but it can also happen when they’ve got nothing else to do, for example when they have no work. That is what happened in Carvers short story, “That evening he got back on the sofa. He began spending all his time there, as if, she thought, it was the thing he was supposed to do now that he no longer had any work.”… “It’s like he lives there, Sandy thought.” (Carver, Cathedral p.36) The main character lost his job and even though he did go to try to get a new one, he became completely useless. Instead of finding something to do with his spare time, like helping out with something around the house(fixing pipes, resetting the roof, even helping with weeding the garden) he just laid down to rot. He didn’t even tried going to the gym or kept on reading his book, he even stopped sleeping with his wife on their bed. He began to “live” on the sofa.
His wife was understandably irritated with his behavior. She had to work for both so they would get some money and he wouldn’t help her with anything. Then there was this situation in which the refrigerator died, and he didn’t even notice. He was there all day and he wasn’t even useful enough to notice the mess. And so, with their freezer dead, the only possibility they had to make things better was to get a new one, and that was when he started complaining because he didn’t have a job , but really, he never even went really looking for one. And then, his wife suggests an auction and she’s doing everything she can to make things better and she’s trying to get the positive side out of the situation and he doesn’t even eat the pork chops she made him (they didn’t really sound good, but still). I guess this story is therefore showing and making fun of a typical situation plus it is showing sexist behavior. It shows how the man has become lazy while the woman does all the work and how it is actually accepted and considered normal. It also shows that there is lots of unemployment but that people don’t really try to get a job and it also shows how many people live this situation since the man says he saw lots of people when he went to the state office. So it could even be relating to the current world crisis. The economy is going through a hard moment and situations like this will become more and more common.

Our Reaction to the Unknown

While reading the story Cathedral I was constantly thinking about the I way I would personally react to a blind person. It impressed me how the man was at first reacting to the fact that he would have a blind guest. He want happy at all. He was making imprudent comments and he was not being nice or supportive to his wife. However I did like the end of this story. I was glad that the narrator is able to connect with Robert and that he actually tried to explain to him what a cathedral was and how it would look like, "I tried to explain to the blind man what was happening."(p.223) This shows that he is a good person in the inside and at the end he actually kind of experiences the blindness on his own. He takes the time and trouble to give his best explanation of what a cathedral would look like and then they end up drawing it together to give Robert the best idea possible.
I cant imagine what being blind would be like. I guess it would be like this feeling of nothing, you don't see and you don't know what seeing is so you don't crave it. I don't know which is worse, being born blind or becoming blind. I guess that the good thing of never being able to see is that you don't know what you are missing so you don't miss it. On the other side, if you were able to see during some point in your life, well you at least enjoyed it for a while. Plus a person that used to be able to see would probably be able to imagine descriptions much easier since he knows what colors are and how textures look like. He would have bases and guidelines from where to create an image. Still I wonder, how do the people who was originally blind remember moments, or how does a deaf think. I mean one remembers with images and one usually thinks with a voice, but how do these people, who have never experienced either one, do? How do you describe something they have never seen before and is composed of other things he isn't able to see. I guess the only way is to have him experience through their other senses, like touch for example, just like they do in the book.
I wonder how I would react the day that I meet a blind person and I hope to do so in a way that i don't offend the other one because they might not have all their senses working well but that doesn't take away the fact that they are human beings just as any other and one just has to learn to accept them as they are. So I hope that I will always be able to react appropriately when I meet a person with a disability, since I have met some in the past and consider Ive done well. I will hope to enjoy all the good qualities and abilities they have instead of focusing on what they lack.

The importance of titles

Vitamins. I guess the title is rather obvious in this case. The story mentions people that work selling vitamins and how this has affected their lives, they have even begun to dream with them at night and feel they cant escape them. However, this doesn't really matter at the moment. What I really wanted to talk about was the importance of titles. Titles are like a first impression. When you meet a new person you usually decide if you want to keep getting to know him or her depending on the first impression that was presented, well with a book its the same thing. One many times decides what to read based upon the title of a book. Its like the famous saying that goes: "don't judge a book by its cover", however one usually does. You make decisions on what you interpret and if you think it will be good and worthwhile. That's why people that write newspaper articles have to be very good at coming up with catchy titles. They need to call their publics' attention to make sure people will want to read their work.
Some titles are very obvious but others require some more analyzing ability. Some are tricky and one really has to think to understand where the title came from. Titles are important for everything. They affect books, articles, poems, movies, songs, ideas, paintings, sculptures, plays, almost anything that you want to get other people to know because the title is a name, it is what everybody will remember that work for. So it is necessary to give the necessary attention to a title and highlight its importance.

Who We Are

We have been commenting a lot this semester the free will vs destiny topic. If you pay close attention to each book or story, one can often find how the authors include this question in their writing. Some suggest that there is only free will, that each person has the power to choose what will come based on their actions, others say that we are predestined, that no matter what we do it was always going to be that way because one has a fate to follow, and others just question the topic or give ideas for both so that the reader is left thinking about it. In the short story Chef�s, House by Raymond Carver, one of the main characters says: "We were born who we are" p33. In my opinion he is suggesting that our life is somehow predestined. That we become who we are due to our past, because every experience, feeling and situation we live affects who we become and who we are. There is also another interpretation, one can also infer that he is saying that even when you were born you already had a future in front of you and everything you did was going to lead you to who you become. So you were born with a life ahead and you cant go supposing what would have happened if you were somebody else or if you would have made another choice because that isn't the case, you were born, and you made the decision. So you were really born not knowing what you were about to do, but the truth is you were always going to make that decision, you were always going to look that way, you were always going to think in that way, you were always going to suffer and enjoy in that amount. So really since you were born, you were somehow destined to act in a way and become that specif person you are.

"I take what happened back there as a sign." p. 108

And The Point Of The Trian is...

The whole story of The Train by Raymond Carver occurs in the train station. At first a woman talks about a murder she almost commits but decides not to and then an old couple arrive and argue until the train arrives. When the train arrives the story ends. I would have probably liked this story better if more background information was included. If we knew the reason why the lady had pointed a gun at a man, if we knew some more information about the couple, then maybe the story would have gotten better. In my opinion the story lacked a point. There was nothing to that story other than a narration of a events that don't really even connect. You can really make a story out of anything, out of any moment, and a good author is that one who can. However, I don't really appreciate this skill yet. When reading a short story such as The Train one cant expect something interesting to happen. There is really no point to that story other than being able to appreciate the authors skills at creating a good mood and writing style. I have been used, throughout my life, to novels, poems, informative papers, essays, any writing in general that has a point. One reads it and feels the author is trying to get a point across to you. They might even just tell you a story but it is one that is meant to entertain you or just make you spend your time on a topic you enjoy. However this story doesn't really make you enjoy what is being told because of the content, but you must instead focus on the style to enjoy it.

Even if it was the best story(in content) ever, without any style, the work sucks. One has to tell the occurrences in a way that the author gets through to the reader. It might not be wanting you to learn or discuss a topic but it does get you to feel a certain mood and each one develops his own voice. It might be a sarcastic one, or it might be a sad one, or as in this case it might be an expectant one (except the story ends abruptly without anything really happening and a wasted suspense), in any case, the reader must connect to the author and appreciate his writing skill and how he might create a story out of the simplest thing.

The point of Feathers

After reading this short story all I could think about were questions, what was the trauma that dinner had left Fan and Jack? Why had they decided to ave a kid if they hadn't wanted one and if the baby was ugly? Why had Fran seemed so unwilling to go to dinner? Plus, even though its like a short story about two friends that have dinner together with their wives, I don't see what was the main purpose of the story. It didn't lead anywhere it just narrated an event but there really wasn't like a main point or purpose for it. I don't know, maybe its like Crying of Lot 49 where the author is actually trying to get at us and have us suffer from the same paranoia his main character is experimenting. Still I don't think Carver is like Pynchon, who is trying to trick us. I think Carver just wanted to write a piece and it just came out with no meaning at all. Pynchon on the contrary is laughing at us, he is making us fall in our own dilemma in which we begin to doubt our selves. So what is the point in books like these? What are they trying to tell? what is the reader getting out of them? I really like having like a specific goal and guideline to understand and at the moment I cant figure out what it is im supposed to get out of these writings.

Reflecting Myself in My Work

In the book review, Glistening as it vanishes, Ben Wilkinson comments on the third full collection of Maura Dooley's poems, Life Underwater. He comments that the author has improved her works, comparing them to her previous volumes but he concludes that she still has lots of space for improvement.

He also criticizes the title of the book since he doesn't agree with its appropriateness since only few poems mention wetness while most are based on other drier topics. He declares, "Life under water is a somewhat misleading title..."However, he also gives positive feedback on the work, he congratulates and acknowledges the author on the improvement of her factual reference. She is now including historical events on her works but she is blending them in a way in which one feels them flow and bend with the rest of the writing. She has also included the historical facts in ways that one can infer that she knows about the topic while in her previous works many times her references didn't really make sense or connected with the point that was being tried to get across. Still Dooley keeps her personal style and expresses her talent in a way that only she knows how to do.

One of the most important traits about an author, in my opinion, is his/her style. This is very important because it takes a reader to have its own personality plus it becomes recognizable and unique. Due to the fluidity and richness that voice can give a piece of work is that we, as students, are taught since young to give a unique personal touch to each work. Placing your signature on your work in an indirect form is not always easy to do. This is an ability that you might have been very lucky to have come naturally since you were born, but on the most part you don't have it, you develop it. Teachers give us the basics on what it is and after that only practice can develop it to have what you want. You readers will easily recognize your works and you will be able to leave a little bit of yourself in each and every one of your works. It will eventually come off naturaly and you will see that all your works have that little something that you made them bring to life.

Manipulating Convenience

Everybody wants the best for them selves, they may be altruistic in certain situations, but in general, every individual looks for its own benefit. Sometimes one gets the benefit because he is lucky, but when capable of manipulating results, every human will turn the scale in their favor. They do it since they are young. "The sight of her child smiling, or the sound of her kitten purring, is rewarding to a mother, in the same sense as food in the stomach is rewarding to a rat in a maze. But once it becomes true that a sweet smile or a loud purr are rewarding, the child is in a position to use the smile or the purr in order to manipulate the parent, and gain more than its fair share of parental investment."
With time, humans learn how to arrange things to benefit them and the manipulation gets smoother and smother until it is no longer noticeable. A person learns to live and survive in their life and gets the environment around him/her to support survival and comfort. If a person is capable of utilizing their bosses, they will. They will get employees do do what they are told and even friends and family to please them as much as possible. But wanting these things is not enough. One must learn how to apply the manipulating strategies and one must know when to use the appropriate ones. Its a trial and error technique. one can use guilt or positive conditioning to see which affects in a more efficient way the victim and then the manipulation begins. One way or another, we all learn what will get us going in life and naturally begin to apply it in order to survive. We all have our own way and we all use it. We all want to keep going. We all want to survive.

HUMANS: UNNATURAL?

Humans have changed many of the ways that things happen in nature. One of this is altering the birth- death ratio. As it is said in the book, nature usually has its way of controlling the population of a species. It keeps it in balance with diseases and predators. However, humans have made machines and weapons that keep away predators and have used science and medicine to eliminate and defend themselves from diseases.
Going back in history one could see how this would affect society. Men and women would marry young and have babies soon and take in life quickly. They would do this because they didn't know when they would die, a lucky person would live to his fifties, in the middle ages a lucky old guy would be one in his forties, but now, we see men and woman in their eighty's and ninety's and it its actually not that weird. Humans have been able to get their life expectancy much longer and the death rate has decreased. The birth rate, on the contrary is increasing and we are therefore having an overpopulation problem. Women have and have children and our culture is actually suppressing anti-conceptives and drugs that will prevent more children. Why? because it is supposedly unmoral. But isn't overpopulating the world to a point when we are just going to end up killing ourselves unmoral? all we are doing is using up all the resources to a point when the nonrenewable ones will run out and the renewable will no longer be renewable. So we will consume everything and leave all other creatures out of our world. Except, this wont happen because nature will make sure it doesn't. We, as a species will probably starve. the selfish gene inside of us will kick in and make each person fight for its own survival. Nobody will be willing to sacrifice and die for the good of others so you don't get a few healthy humans but you get many mediocre ones. They aren't strong enough to survive and the little strength they have they use it up with survival. So no one is strong enough to survive. We will all die. From starvation.
So what we have thought is smart and were all proud of the fact that we are outsmarting nature is actually our death bed. Unless we do something to stop our over population, we will end all dead, all starved. Well that is if global warming doesn't kill us first.

IS LOVE A GENE SURVIVAL STRATEGY?

One can see how a parent and a child have a strong bond. How love will take moms and dads to die for their child and don't really mind the sacrifice they are going through, as long as their child lives. This has always been a matter of love and loyalty but, now, looking at the human nature, this "unselfish" act can be totally opposite, a selfish act. How can it be selfish? Well, humans want to get passed on, and relatives are the best example of similarity in genes because the go from one generation to the other. So a mom wants a child so this one, at its time can reproduce and pass on the genes from the mom to another baby and then this one will grow and reproduce and pass on the genes and so forth and therefore the gene is preserved from one generation to another, the gene never dies. So the mom sacrifices herself so that the genes she passed on are not wasted and because they might not have a life - including reproduction- ahead of them and the baby does. This is why when a relative is dying of old age, it is more acceptable in a way and an altruistic behavior is less expected. However, when the case includes a child that has a long life ahead, parents are commonly altruists. So kin selection works even naturally because the truth is that all examples of child protection and parental care are helping it. All the body organs get involved, milk secreting glands, kangaroo pouches, and so on, are examples of the working in nature of the kin-selection principle. So parental care is in effect altruistic but it is as well selfish. We, as humans, just cant avoid out selfish gene.

How Experiences Affect You

My mom is reading a book that she is glad to constantly share. In "the Outliers", by Malcolm Gladwell, some of the psychological characteristics of human beings are looked at. It talks about the way in which past experiences reflect on the person we become because we tend to repeat pleasant memories and avoid harmful and sad memories. "All that happens is that individuals who are accustomed to winning become even more likely to win, while individuals who are accustomed to losing become steadily more likely to lose." pg 82 This happens because the individuals who won will enter the next fight with more confidence and will therefore have a higher chance of winning, because they believe in themselves, the ones that have lost in the past enter the fight doubting their abilities and pushing themselves lower and lower and will probably loose and then the stimulation will be even stronger for the next fight and the cycle will begin. These individuals will probably end up avoiding fights and have a very low self esteem regarding this section. "The Outliers" talk about the way in which a human is formed since he is little. He says that, in general, obviously there are always exceptions but we´re not considering them, the oldest ones in a group tend to be more successful. In a grade level, for example, the older ones are usually more confident because they have had more development. Comparing a kid that was born in January and a kid that was born in December will probably show what the author is trying to say. When they are young, each year is a big significance in development, therefore when they are in school, the January kid has had 11 more months to develop both mentally and physically, therefore when PE class begins, or when the kids are asked to learn some facts, the December kid is more likely to have a harder time accomplishing the goals. The December kid will look at the January kid and see how he accomplishes things much easier and immediately decides that it is based on ability and not development. All his life, he will grow seeing how the the January kid finds everything easier and he will consider himself lower and he wont realize that maybe, if the January kid had been born on December as well, that he might have kicked his ass at everything because it turns out he is smarter and more coordinated, hes just one year behind in practice. As the two kids grow, their age stops affecting as much, however, the two kids have already established the idea that the January kid is better than the December kid in their minds and the January kid will have probably been inhibited as a kid and wont try many more things when he is older from the fear of failing.
So the kid that always wins, will believe in himself and probably win once more, while the kid that always looses kind of accepts that as a fact and enters the fight already believing that he will loose and will therefore not give everything hes got. So your past experiences do affect it and if humans have seen that their selfishness has helped them survive as an individual, they will keep on being selfish to be able to survive.

Lying Animals

"But do animals ever communicate false information; do they ever tell lies?"
According to Dawkins, they do. He talks about camouflage and some instincts being lies. Maybe the difference between animals and humans is that animals are not conscious of what they are doing. A bird might make a false alarm warning others of hawks and gets to be able to get more food for himself and he does it as a survival technique. Some plain old fly has the bees stripes in able to appear like a bee and avoid as many predators. Angel fish wait quietly at the bottom of the ocean camouflaging with the sand until a possible prey is close enough to get eaten. All of these animals are lying to survive. If the angle fish didn't hide, he'd never get other fish close enough to get them and eat them, he would starve. All of the animals lie, but not with evil intentions, just with selfish intentions. It is very different since one case infers the prosper of one with the destruction of the other while the other just wants the destruction of one and sees as a side effect the survival and prosperity of the other. We as humans instead are aware of our lies. We are aware of our intentions and we are aware of our motives. As humans, we choose when to lie and when to tell the truth, when to hide and when to come forth. We do things for our benefit or we do them for the disgrace it will bring the other. We are conscious of our acts and of their consequences. so why are humans so mean? how can be so selfish but then go and value altruism? why are we such hypocrites, even with ourselves? will we survive individually or will we survive due to group work? will we survive at all? Will we end up destroying one anther? how does our difference from all the other creatures affect our future? What is our purpose in life? Into what will we evolve? How much longer will we keep this form? Some questions just don't have answers and there is no way of getting them until they have actually occurred, there are some that will simply never have answers, or will develop more questions from each answer, we just don't know.

SURVIVING WITHIN

Reading what is currently being taught to me in biology is rather interesting. It is saying exactly the same that I am being taught except that it shows some analogies and different methods of showing and explaining the process and the way in which things work. For example, Richards Dawkins explains chromosomes as volumes, and DNA as instructions and so forth to make it easier for the reader to understand. This is good because not all the readers know much about biology so even though the author many times assumes we already know some things, by doing this you get to understand some basic science even if you don't identify each term. It also explains the basics of the ways in which things work so one gets to understand each idea. One very interesting method of survival that nature has developed is the way in which traits are stored. Even though one of the characteristics might not be present in one generation, it can still be kept from one generation to the next. It is astonishing how the molecules and cells get a survival machine and adapts it to its benefit. Even though nature is not conscious of the act, things have evolved in a way that cells and traits are preservable. In this way, the DNA instructions specify a specific characteristic in each person and store others for future generation. When one receives the mothers and fathers chromosomes and unites them to create your own DNA, many possible combinations of results exist. The DNA eventually gets created by the mixing and arranging of inherited characteristics and in situations such as eye color, if you inherit brown and blue eye possibility, you will end up having brown eyes because brown is a dominant trait. If you wanted to have blue eyes, you needed both parents to give you blue eye "instructions". This shows how brown, the dominant trait is or has been more "selfish" than the blue trait, and therefore appears in the physical appearance. The Blue trait, however, is also somewhat selfish and fighting for survival and will not permit his presence to be forgotten. These recessive traits have therefore developed a way in which to survive. They may not show in a person but are stored internally so when that person reproduces, its offspring also has the possibility of showing the trait. With time, some humans are "better" survival machines than others because they confront the world better and survive longer and in general fit better the description of "survival of the fittest" and therefore, the genes in these humans tend to get spread more and each time humans evolve and continue to evolve. Currently however we do not feel the change because evolution is a very slow process but one thing is definite: molecules that are millions and millions of years old have survived within their survival machines and we are just one more try of a machine that might get renovated, kept or thrown away according to its capability.

HUMAN SURVIVAL MACHINE

So, we have evolved because mistakes happen. So maybe mistakes aren't so bad after all. Many people say to learn from your mistakes and apparently even non thinking molecules apply this advice. With time each tiny cell, each small molecule learned from the mistake of the first replicator and applied the replication it itself. This way, new kinds of molecules were being produced and each time they got more and more complex. During the replication, mistakes could occur and each mistake lead that molecule to either a better life or a worse one. If it lead it to a better one, then when it replicated itself, this new characteristic would also be transmitted and therefore passed on. If the mistake didn't help, well the molecule most probably didn't survive, or was to weak to replicate itself and therefore wasn't able to pass its traits on. And so we evolved thanks to this replication and to the increasing of complexity through out time.
Three aspects that were a great influence on each individuals survival were longevity, fecundity, and copying fidelity. These are really important because it helps establish which group survives and goes on living in next generations. Since competition is currently occurring, to have long lives, helps increase of survival, so does reproducing constantly and having good newborns because if they all change then there is no basic thing to transmit plus to many negative mistakes might occur. For competition, having a good "survival machine" also helps a lot because it increases your chances of survival. Today, we, humans, are the survival machines of thousands of cells, some very old ones, some relatively new but we are still their survival machine and it is us what keeps them alive and existing.

Selfish or Altruistic?

When reading Richard Dawkins, "The Selfish Gene", I have discovered that I read in a different tone than when I read a novel. It is different to read science because one tends to have to pay much more attention to everything you go through, you cant afford to doze of because you than all that you have read because one must understand things in a chain to be able to get them straight. In novels and other books, you can sometimes doze off a few paragraphs and then get once more involved and you still understand everything that is going on. In "Slaughter House Five", for example it isn't as bad to doze off. plus the experiences told in the novel usually make it easier for you to doze of because it leads you to think about your own experiences or you get a point of view or perspective in a certain topic so you doze off. In this book it is even less worse since it doesn't have a straight time line so you can go back and forth with the thoughts and you wont really get lost. "The Selfish Gene" has also gotten me involved in a topic that i actually enjoy and would like to learn about.
In this book the author says he will discuss why humans are selfish and how this characteristic has gone from generation to generation. He says its not just a human trait but many animals have it and it is actually indispensable for evolution and survival. However he also talks about altruism and how it may help for survival but that there will never be a completely altruistic group since selfishness always develops and takes over. It also talks about individual selection and how one may survive and then transmit to others that characteristic. He talks about selfishness being necessary for survival and a natural thing in creatures.
One thing that actually impressed me was the fact that he wasn't going to talk about nature vs nurture since he didn't really consider it that important. I , on the contrary, believe that that is very important because society really can transform you in some ways but that there are other things that you inevitably inherited and there is nothing you can do about it. Last year, in PDR, we actually did a debate on this subject and we concluded that both are very important on the development of a person. So it actually surprised me when the author specified that this would be one of the topics which he would not discuss.

Looking At Things from One Point Or The Other

In Slaughter House Five, Billy pilgrim meets the Tralfamadorians and learns from them a new way to interpret and view life. He gets to understand that there are things in life that he cant change and that he doesnt have any any power over. He even gets to believe he doesnt have power over anything, not even his own decisions. That everything is happening, has already happened and will happen at the same time. He even learns a prayer in which he asks god to "grant him the power to accept the things he cannot change." So its just as Epictetus sugests it, one has to choose the way in which one sees and interprets life. "Do not seek to have events happen as you want them to, but instead want them to happen as they do happen, and your life will go well. "So, he just suggests to "accept what you cannot change" and to actually enjoy it and see it in a positive way, and the way to do it is by actually convincing oneself that is what you want.
Both works talk about life perspective. The way we look at things, people and life. They try to tell us how to interpret each one and how to handle them in a way that will make us happy or atleast that we dont suffer about them. Vonnegut found a way to get council from all the pain he had from war, he accepted a belief of no free will and of destiny. He got himself atached to people that died and suffered for it but then found a way to ease the pain. Epictetus, instead, suggests a way in which one can avoid the suffering from the begining but one would probably avoid the bond and friendship as well, so you never gain it but then you cant loose it. Its just self persevernce and keeping a sane mind.

Anchors Away!!

In Epictetus they suggest a very detached life. I talks about detachment from many things, personally I don't consider myself capable of doing so. "That is how it is in life too: if you are given a wife and a child instead of a vegetable and a small shellfish, that will not hinder you; but if the captain calls, let all those things go and run to the boat without turning back." This really makes me think how one can simply let go of these things. I guess that it matters how your priorities are set up in life, and in my case, it would be very hard because family is really high up on my list. I also wonder, in the analogy, what would the captain be in real life? It compares kids and wife with the vegetable and selfish but then what is that big power that calls and you have to answer? It really confuses me because it is kind of contradicting. It says not to depend on anything but then it says that one must answer the "captains call". I would really like to know who the captain is. It talks about the boat "being anchored" and about you running to avoid being "left behind." What do all these mean? The boat is what: Life? And then what, kids and family are just a detour? It talks about getting "fresh water", so what is that, like a rest? a rest from what? something new to try? Wouldn't it be unfair with your wife and kids? One day you just decide you want your old life back and leave them? except that I guess that if everyone followed Epictetus´s Handbook, then the kids and wife would also consider him just a "stop" and wouldn't really mind him leaving. I guess it would be a matter of perspective and the way in which people live so if we all follow Epictetus's way, then we all think of others as things that we are fond to but that nature can take away at any point. So I guess, we could all live his way, its a matter of getting used to it.

How Much Dethatchment is Good Dethatchment?

The first five of the aphorisms of Epictetus Handbook lead you to question the way in which you interpret life. It talks about a person suffering or feeling disappointed or averted because they do not live in the "correct" way. It tells people that to accept life as it is, and to avoid all the suffering and confusions in between if you don’t, one must separate things in life in what is up to us and what isn’t. This way we can’t suffer upon the things that weren’t under our control but we instead accept them as natural because it was supposed to happen. Through this, we avoid disappointments and instead we change our way of thinking. We get detached from things we can’t actually own, such as our family and therefore don’t feel sad when they die or live because they were just a few more human beings that can be replaced. So it’s all about our perspective and how we view things and how we think. "What upsets people are not things themselves but their judgment about the things." So it all depends on the way we react to each occasion and how we deal with ideas and opinions. The text also got my attention when it says that an uneducated person blames others, a partly educated person blames himself and that a well educated person doesn’t accuse anybody, it just understand that there are things that happen in a certain way and one can’t control and that there are other decisions that one takes fully conscious of what one can obtain and what one cannot.

I do believe that there are things that one can’t change in life and should accept but I also think that detaching oneself from all these will not get you a satisfactory life. I do think that one should be careful in the choices one makes avoid getting hurt but I think that one has to accept the things that will hurt you as they are and accept that they hurt you. I believe that to experience happiness and joy one must also suffer because you won’t otherwise enjoy it because you’ve got nothing to compare your happiness to. So when it says you won’t get harmed than it might be right, but you won’t get good feelings at a high rate either. So yes, one should accept some things as they are, yes one should have a good perspective in life and avoid getting confused because you are experiencing a bad outlook, but NO, one should not avoid getting completely dethatched from all that you can’t own because even though one cant own them physically, you do own them sentimentally and they are an important part of your life and a support that always keeps you going, even at the worse moments.

Poo-tee-weet?

This final chapter is kind of like the first. Vonnegut begins and ends his book by communication with the reader directly. Once more he is telling what he feels and what he thinks instead of narrating sections of Billy's life. I really liked this closure since it once more lets us knows Vonnegut's direct thoughts. He is sharing with us what he wants us to know and he is closing the book he spent so much time and effort on. He now gives his perspective about death and even continues his "So it goes." to show that he still tries to give death as little importance as possible and that it means much to him but that it is also just something natural that had to happen.
He continues to talk about Dresden and about the human condition it developed in him. "I suppose they will all want dignity" (212) He keeps on emphasizing such points that he tried to get across throughout the whole book.
We also get to see that Billy and Vonnegut are not the same person since he says "Now Billy and the rest were being marched into the ruins by the guards. I was there. O´Hare was there." Or we can interpret them as being the same person. One can be "Dante" and the other can be the "pilgrim Dante. " Another thing that caught my attention was how Edgar Derby dies and how stupid and ridiculous the whole situation is. Even though they had already announced his death several times throughout the book, I was kind of expecting some more details but there were none. So really why is his death so important? because or if irony or is there a deeper message that I haven't yet deciphered.
"Poo-tee-weet?"-That's the last word of this book. So, what does it mean? I think this last word can have many interpretations. As I had discussed with several of my classmates, this phrase can be a sign of hope because even after all the horrible things that have happened there is still a bird that sings, It can also be seen as a mockery to our behavior, it being so horrible and terrifying that even the birds question what it is we are doing. It can also be seen as an end to all the bad things Billy has lived, as if the bird was saying, "Its OK, you're back now, you can get back to your normal life and go on with it. " Or it can be an Irony as well: as if it was saying that even though all these terrible things happened to them at Dresden, the rest of the life was just going on with their lives and even birds were just living their own circumstance and had forgotten about them and now they are welcoming them back to the real world.
By the end of this book I had answered many questions but I also have many new ones. This "unstuck in time" thing is something that really got my attention and I was glad to have read this book not only because it gave me some knowledge on common history but also because I got to experiment with a new kind of structure. I was used to a linear story with maybe a few flashbacks and foreshadows here and there but i had never read such a mixed up book. I guess the closest Ive got to it is "Crónica de una muerte anuncida" by Gabriel García Márques which also jumps around in time and space. Still this was a novel that also made me question my current life and my actions and human nature in general. I liked about this book that every interpretable part had several interpretations and each reader gets to find their own and look at the circumstances in their own way. So, what was this book to each and every one of you?

Are we Predestined?

Are humans good or evil? Do we have free will or are we predestined? Is there an excuse or justification for our actions? What and why do we act upon?
These questions are very common. I guess we could even call the cliches, still the way in which we react to them is unique and personal for each individual. Even Vonnegut has these doubts and relates his book to these questions. He is constantly highlighting human cruelty and how we are always making so many wrongdoings. he even highlights our perversion at one point. ´"That's not what you want, for Christs sake." He told Billy."What you wants in the back."´ Here the bookstore salesman is referring to the back part of the store where all the porn is. He is amazed and actually laughs at Billy when he realizes hes not interested in porn but all he wants to do is buy a Kilgore Trout book, their display "garbage".
Vonnegut also indirectly relates his book to human dignity. He kind of tells people that the only way to justify such horrible human behaviors is to think that things happen the way they do because it is meant to be that way. By looking at things this way, the Tralfamadorian way, he gets to calm some of his uncertainties and some of the things that probably haunted him after war. He stops taking all those actions personally and stops questioning them and just accepts them.
Vonnegut reaches an interior peace, or at least gets close to it because he takes away human guilt and human will. It is no longer our decision what we do but we just end up doing what we are meant to do. This theory takes away our blame because it means that it wasn't us who CHOSE to do all those bad things, we just had to do it so that things would work out. We did not have the bad intentions and we did not wish anybody evil. This is also taking away the reason for why we decided to act in one way or another because we just did it so that the future could complete itself. However, the fact that Billy/ Vonnegut found a way to clam himself down doesn't mean I found a possible satisfactory answer, I still wonder about these questions as they pop into my mind every once in a while.

SO IT GOES...

Throughout the book there is a phrase that constantly comes up: "So it goes." At first I didn't really understood why Vonnegut wrote it. Maybe he just doesn't care about others and every death is just one more death. After having Mr. Gunther go and talk to us during class, I understood the real reason for this phrase. Its actually almost completely backwards to what i had thought. It all connects to the fourth dimension and to the tralfamadorians.
Through the class discussion I got to understand a new concept: the fourth dimension. I may not be like a genius at it or anything but now I have a basic guideline on how it works. Vonnegut included the tralfamadorians in his story to show the reader that there is another way of seeing life. That one is able to perceive it from another point of view, from one in which you don't only see the stars as "lines" instead of "dots" but you also see the complete course of a lifetime. The concept of time doesn't exist in its normal way but is no longer a constraint in life. To the tralfamadorians, life doesn't consist of a future, a present and a past, it consists of something called a time worm, where you see everything at the same time. This way, you get to choose what part of life to see and what moment to "live."
The way in which you live your life must be a very important topic to Vonnegut. Taking into consideration that he was one of the few that survived Dresden, he must have been left with a huge sociological disorder. Understanding this fourth dimension must have kept him a bit calmer because he can, at the same time, acknowledge any moment in any persons life. Therefore, he just chooses to see a certain situation and goes from one to the other, he is unstuck in time. This way of seeing life must be comforting to Billy and therefore to Vonnegut, (I believe Billy is an indirect representation of Vonnegut and what he felt and lived and experienced) because it permits him to see the great moments of all of his friends´ lives. That way when he says "so it goes" it might refer to the end of a persons life line but it doesn't really matter because he can choose to see any point on that line and remember all the loved ones he lost. This way he doesn't have to suffer his past or anything like that, he just time travels in a way that he just looks at life in a way that lets him fight all the pain he´s got inside. So its not that he doesn't care about somebodies death, its just that its really not such a big deal because the death is just one of the many points that make a line and he can travel to any of the other points and choose to enjoy it instead of torturing himself with the loss of his friends.