Modernism is all about the truth and finding one central purpose to live by and believe in.....while Postmodernism suggests that we as a civilization must deviate away from the concept of modernism because there is no one truth and trying to pursue that will only lead to chaos.  Trying to create conformity among the masses will create progress to some extent but it will also lead this "progress" down the wrong path. The book title itself, Cat's Cradle, represents postmodernism in all aspects.  As described in the book we come to realize that the Cats Cradle is the oldest game known to man, presenting no form or end to this mess of string they call a game. This book also brings the theory of having a utopia to light. The struggles of having a utopia are put to focus in the Cats Cradle and the risks of making a perfect society is far more dangerous than the reward. Therefore, establishing a single grand narrative in society is futile.  Vonnegut expresses this point through the use of his characters.  Newt is a midget, while his sister is a giant, and together they have a radical brother-not exactly a stereotypical American family from the mid twentieth century.  In addition, Vonnegut uses Newt to display that society is filled with masked lies that conform to fit the grand narrative. In all aspect the Grand Narrative is Bokonon there religion and foma which is lies made to make the believers of bokononism to believe there doing the right thing.

Brave New World essay topic

For my topic in my Brave New World  paper I want to relate relevant sources to my topic and get plenty of sophisticated scholars and trying to apply there philosophy. Some topics worth considering are the values of efficiency or the role of education between the real world and Brave New World. Also another topic worth stating is pleasure vs. morals. The value of efficiency is portrayed in the Brave New World when you find out the "civilized people are being reproduced in a mass production sort of fashion. The key to this value is the faster you can make a product and the more you can make of it the closer to perfection you get. The value of efficiency ties in with Sir Ken Robinson's philosophy about economics. When Robinson talk about how a culture needs a cultural identity and passing on the cultural genes to reach thee process of Globalization. Furthermore, the role of education is a very important key point which also entails to Sir Ken Robinson. His philosophy regarding education points out that in a culture the previous generation has to pass on the knowledge and the traditions of there culture. In the Brave New World the previous does this in a way so that the children grow up scared of certain items that prohibits them in doing different task. These different topic points are not very different then prior essays such as the "Tempest" and 1984. While i was on the topic of the "Tempest" the point of Pleasure vs. Morals. This relates to Both the "Tempest" and Brave New World. The points of Pleasure in both novels is when the civilized people took Soma for relief and When Caliban attempted to have his way with Melinda. This entails that both novels had Pleasurable focal points but, the morality of the stories two major powers dominate the weaker people which is classified by the dominate power.
       

Oh yeah! new education yeah!

                                In the video I watched on changing educational paradigms created by Sir Ken Robinson and he explains a universal truth about where the educational system is heading. The section in the video that really connected with me thinking about the Brave New World context is when Robinson starts talking about how the educational system of this day and age splits groups of children by age or "date of manufacture" and educate them like that. Furthermore, Robinson makes a lot of good points but the two points that stuck out at me was the two main ones being Economics and Cultural. The economic point of view is based around, how can you teach the younger generation how to take a place in the 21st century economic stand points. Furthermore, the other point is Cultural, which entails each culture trying to give the younger generation a cultural identity. Therefore, they can pass on there cultural genes. The cultural aspect of the video to me draws a major parallel. In the Brave New World the more intelligent and higher ranking individuals pass on the cultural gene. Furthermore, the cultural identity is displayed when as toddlers and babies they were tested by displaying them books and flowers and as they interacted with said items a loud siren went off, lights started, to flash, and they got shocked.
                                   Connecting The Brave New World with the concepts of Sir Ken Robinson is very thought provoking. The way Robinson talks about how kids are just feed ADHD pills to help them pay attention, but instead of being ill these kids are just distracted not hyperactive. Furthermore the consistence on the way the people in Brave New World take soma as if there the distracted kids in our world.  "Although the repeated doses of soma have made them almost completely oblivious to the world around them." This quote tells us that they residents of this society don't just take one dose they take as many as they think they need.  

SHOCKING BABIES!

"Wheels must turn steadily, but can not turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as sturdy as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment." This quote by Mustapha Mond could be difficult to grapple with if you don't have the right text , but in "Brave New World" Huxley applies this dialogue to portray man's importance in a society. The quote puts emphasis on "sane men and obedient men" telling the reader that the sane men are the alphas and betas the smart ones in the book then the obedient ones are the gammas, deltas, epsilons that hardly think only about there insignificant job. Therefore, know matter how smart or how dumb a person is they can still contribute to society by either making big decisions or digging ditches. In Mustpha Mond's speech he quotes Henry Ford saying "History is Bunk" proving that is the reason why the director is not teaching to them  the citizens. The idea of stability in a society is a major aspect in this novel. Mond again says "Strong emotion, inspired by family relationships, sexual repression, and delayed satisfaction of desire, goes directly against stability. Without stability, civilization cannot exist." All the aspects of a normal life are thrown out the window because of the fear of instability. Furthermore, he goes on to say that from this instability comes disease, war, and social unrest resulting in millions of casualties. Can normal family values and emotional attachment or even intellectual knowledge about your surroundings can harm a society that bad? In my interpretation of what Huxley is trying to tell us in these few chapters is that regulation is good in fact a necessity but to much regulation then you get the radical and extreme point of views that will help no one. Hence, that in the novel to much regulation can lead to mass production of people and eventually SHOCKING BABIES!

Disscusions for the Tempest

In the discussions regarding the Tempest, one controversial subject  has been between colonialism and imperialism and whether or not Shakespeare supports either of them. On one side of the argument you have a political commentator George Will that claims literature is important cause of its beauty. Will opposes the practice of reading important literature in a way that is not a very good way to understand it therefore not respecting the literature. On the other hand you have Stephen Greenblatt a Professor at Harvard in the department of Humanities, and he argues that more critical thinking and reading the piece of literature the way that best helps you understand is the side of the argument he supports. Furthermore this makes reading more enjoyable and not just memorizing text but, ultimately understanding what the main purpose of the literature is. Others may even maintain a different view such as taking a little from both sides of the main argument and fusing Greenblatt's ideas and Will's ideas to make and ultimate policy, but i think i would be quite difficult in reaching a compromise between the Greenblatt and Will since they are so attracted to there own ideas they may not want to accept outside ideas. However the view that i am taking is one siding with Stephen Greenblatt, but there are still different parts in Will's philosophy that I can stand firmly on.

Literary Debate

In George Will's article "literary politics", he talks about a woman by the name of Carol Lannone and how she was turned away the NEH(National Endowment for the Humanities) advisory board. George Will often takes the role as the politician in a sense. Will says, "as esthetic judgments are politicized, political judgments are estheticized: the striking of poses and the enjoyment of catharsis are central in the theater of victimization in academic life." George is ultimately trying to attack critical thinking gesturing that there is no need for it when you have political reference to different texts. Also Will debates on trying to preserve Shakespeare's works and not letting different professors  of literature destroying the image Shakespeare was attempting to create by stating "it is a symbolic issue such as imperialism."  Greenblatt says it is " collective amnesia and deculturation." Greenblatt on the other hand says its impossible to understand Shakespeare without mentally grappling with it and try to critical think and understand and formulate ideas. studying both sides of this argument i have sided with George Will in the fact that he is attempting to preserve they teachings of Shakespeare works and upholding the image Shakespeare wanted.

Does the tempest and colonialism have similarties

When a country or a power tries to colonize something they bring there culture and customs to the region that they think is needed to be colonized. In the imperial age the name of the game was colonization and if you had the most territory you had the most power which everyone strives for. In a sense you can say that Caliban is the Native Americans for instance and Prospero is England trying to educate and civilize Caliban cause in his cultural he is a savage. Also there was a moment in time were Caliban and Prospero were able to coexist with one another, but Caliban broke this trustworthy bond between them by attempting to have his way with his daughter Miranda. As soon as Prospero found out the trust was broken and Caliban was sentenced to a cave were he lives now, and is now Prospero slave. The parallel I'm trying to depict is when , the Native Americans had a trust bond with the pilgrims and when the Natives broke that, the pilgrims didn't take it lightly and they were punished, but is it right to colonize a "savage" culture or does that culture think the colonizers are the savage ones ?    

um? Tempest blog

Prospero is a crafty and majestic man. He can manipulate things people imagine of doing. The most noticeable act of manipulation is when he conjures up a storm to bring his enemies to the island, but what some people could have missed is when he explains the past to Miranda. "Twelve years ago, Miranda, twelve years ago your father was the Duke of Milan, a powerful prince and your mother was extremely virtuous, and she said you were my daughter. And your father was Duke of Milan, and you were his heir, a princess"(act1,scene2,page4). This excerpt from the story is revealing the beginning of Miranda and what was to become of here. Also Prospero could just be manipulating her into believing something that possible is not true. Knowing that Prospero could create a storm so that all his enemies could come to the island, i would think that creating a false story to Miranda to get her to believe she could have been more.

Mi Blogio

Last week during Thursdays block period we had an activity called a Socratic circle. in the Socratic circle we discussed a issue concerning a women who thinks there should be a change on the way information is taught to students. Kristen Gardner says," use critical-thinking skills and a variety of primary and secondary source material to explain and apply different methods that historians use to understand and interpret the past, including multiple points of view and historical context." Instead of just shoveling facts into young minds, you can teach them to use critical-thinking, to theorize, and to make-up assumptions. Students can gain more knowledge using critical-thinking. For example, instead of just knowing that the A-bomb was dropped in Japan during world war 2, students will get more understanding out of this situation by thinking on"why did president Truman decide to allow the bombs to be dropped" or "if he decided not to initiate the bombing what else could he do to resolve the war." Allowing students to think for themselves will be more beneficial towards them learning. Everyone in the Socratic circle would agree that they would much rather think and use there brain then memorize facts and regurgitate them when needed to. Who has the rights to allow or prohibit someone trying to gain knowledge on a greater level than memorization. I believe when people start learning they start making emotional bonds to that subject and start formulating opinions and when people try to stop that is just inhumane.     

steve nash

All though he is only 6''3' (that's short in the NBA) Steve Nash is a dominate force in the league even at old age. Through the years of his career, he has accomplished things people dream about. Achieving two MVP awards in two consecutive seasons is a accomplishment for anyone. Also he is a critically claimed to be one of the point guards the NBA has yet to see.

I had some trouble uploading a picture so ill just make a link to one.