The Grand Finale

Unfortunately, this will probably be my final blog entry unless I decide to post something interesting for Mrs. Burnett to read while I am in college. 

I just wanted you all to know, whether you read this blog or not, that I really enjoyed being in AP English with all of you.  The conversations that we had throughout the year were very inspiring and made me think of various aspects of life in a new way.  I wish you all success in the future and that you truly find what makes you happy. 

Good-bye, good luck, and God bless you all!

Underdog Award

WOW!

Can you believe that this is the last monthly blog?  It feel like just yesterday that I began this humble blog in order to receive a grade for the monthly blog assignment for Mrs. Burnett’s class.

So, in thinking about what work to write about this month, I realized that we have not really studied one work in particular this month.  So, I hope that Mrs. Burnett will not mind me using a work that we have previously used this year.

In this blog entry, I will talk about the work that I have given the Underdog Award, the piece of literature that I feel was very strong and important despite the fact that most of us did not like it.  The recipient of the first and last Underdog Award ever is a work that we read during the first marking period and many people disliked because of its structure.  That’s right, the winner is …………………….....................

A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man

            I know that many of you probably just spit out your drinks and are now wiping off your computer monitors right now, but you heard it correctly, Portrait is the winner of the Underdog Award.  Now, before you close the browser out of sheer confusion and anger and never read this blog again, Portrait wins this award for two reasons:

1.  As a piece of art, Portrait is a brilliant work that I respect, even though I did not enjoy reading it.
2.  I pretty mush enjoyed the rest of the works that we read in class this year.

So, you all must be wondering what I want to write about Portrait.  Well, after June, we will all be responsible adults that must take care of ourselves during our future adventures in life.  In Portrait, Stephen abandons all that he knows and becomes an entirely new person after he leaves home to go to college.  In his own words:

“I will not serve that in which I no longer believe, whether it call itself my home, my fatherland or my church: and I will try to express myself in some mode of life or art as freely as I can and as wholly as I can, using for my defence the only arms I allow myself to use, silence, exile and cunning.”

The point that I am trying to make is the fact that we are all going off to discover ourselves once we step out of the door of our parents’ house and enter the harsh realities of the real world.  Most of us will face trial after trial in our quest for success, and many of us will fail several times before we reach happiness, but the thing that truly makes life living is being an individual and doing what truly makes you happy.  

It's a Bird, It's a Plane, No It's Raskolnikov!

Wow, it just doesn't have the same ring to it!  Anyway, what I want to talk about this month is Crime and Punishment.  Yes, I probably realize that there will be several other blogs about the same exact thing this month, but I want to get my feelings about the excerpt that we read off of my chest.

First and foremost, yes, I thought the excerpt from the book was a very good read, and I may attempt to read the entire book someday.  However, the concept of the superman really has me conflicted.  There are two key concepts of the superman that extremely scare me.

1.     The superman has the right to break laws.

2.     The superman may destroy what exist to make something better.

As previously stated, my initial reaction after reading Raskolnikov say, “an extraordinary man has the right … to overstep …  certain obstacles … for the fulfillment of his idea,” was one of terror.  How could anyone be allowed to break the laws?  Furthermore, how do we decide who is extraordinary?  Everyone is extraordinary in his or her own mind.  There would be total chaos and anarchy because everyone has their own ideas about how the world should be.

As much as I want to say that this idea of the superman is wrong, I had remembered something similar in the Declaration of Independence.  The Declaration of Independence clearly states,

 “That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

In a way, this somewhat confirms idea of the superman.  So, what does this have to do with today?  All over the news everyday we are overloaded with news about the latest conflict between the Republican and Democratic parties.  As we begin to approach an election year, it will only get worse.  One of the biggest arguments in the country right now is the debate over small government and big government.  People on both sides of the argument seem to feel that the U.S. government has become destructive of our unalienable right to some degree.  So, should We The People allow the extraordinary people that we have elected to represent us destroy something to create something better?  No!  We must stand together as a nation and work out our differences together for a brighter future.

Really Abstract Art

Anyone that know me knows that I do not particularly enjoy abstract art.  I find nothing particularly noteworthy or appealing about a solitary black square or a potpourri of colors thrown together onto a canvas for no apparent reason.

During today’s discussion about A Room of One’s Own, there was one question in particular that I was troubled with.  That question is, “What does Woolf mean when she writes “She may be beginning to use writing as an art, not as a method of self-expression’ ?  What is the distinction?”

Up until now, I have always been told that all art, no matter how ridiculous, had meaning to the artist.  So, I accepted that no matter how much I disliked abstract art, I would accept that it had some meaning to the artist.  As such, my initial response concerning the aforementioned question was that art and self-expression are the same exact thing.  I believed that all art is a form of self-expression.  However, after I thought this, I had remembered one of the few parts of The Picture of Dorian Grey that I had actually read.

To open the novel, Wilde writes in the preface, “To reveal art and conceal the artist is the art’s aim.”  Wilde goes on to mention that, “It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.”

Both of these quotes had troubled me because I had always felt the opposite.  I had thought that art was meant to reveal the feelings of the artist, not conceal them.

After reading the assertions made by Woolf and Wilde, I realized something that I had not before, art is truly in the eye of the beholder.  The perfect example of this is the art project that a child makes at school.  To anyone else, the art is of poor quality and usually junk.  However, to that particular child and his or her family, the piece of art is the best piece of art ever created and worthy of displaying.  Furthermore, I realize that Woolf is correct, artists create art for the beholder, whether it be themselves or somebody else.

In terms of today, this issue has much relevance.  In today’s society, for example, people seem to give no respect to art that they do not enjoy, myself included.  After reading Woolf and Wilde, I feel that while one may not find a particularly piece of art pleasing, it is still appropriate for one to tolerate all art because all art is pleasing to a particular individual.

Oh, No, Its the Beetles All Over Again!

Even though we have not had a socratic seminar or any other formal discussion about A Thousand Splendid Suns in class yet, the little discussion we have had did not include one very important subplot of the novel.  The subplot in question, the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union, is very important to the novel as a whole, by aiding in the development of several of the conflicts that occur in the novel.

In World History class with Mr. Farmer, as many of you will probably remember, we learned about the Middle East for half of the year, and we learned about Russia for about a quarter of the year.  So, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan should be nothing new to most of us.  For anyone who forgets, during the cold war, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in an attempt to spread communism to the Middle East.  In response, the United States supplied the Mujahideen with weapons to fight off the Soviet.  The Mujahideen eventually overpowered the Soviets, and took control of Afghanistan.

Until I began to read A Thousand Splendid Suns, I felt that the Soviet Union was justified in invading a country based on “survival of the fittest,” and that the United States was justified in providing the Mujahideen with weapons.  Now, I feel that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was not just, but as a result, the United States were pushed to supply weapons to the Mujahideen.

My change of heart is majorly due to the commentary that both the novel and the characters in the novel give about the wars in Afghanistan.  For example, Babi says that the only thing that the Soviets did right is the education of women.  This commentary reveals his discontent with the Soviet invasion.  Mammy also expresses her distaste for the Soviets when she declares that she will not be happy until the last Soviet troop leaves Afghanistan.

The Soviets were not the only group that invaded Afghanistan in the novel.  In fact, the invasion of the Taliban seems to create more discontent for Mariam, Laila, and Rasheed than the Soviets did.  Once they have control of Afghanistan, the Taliban leaders decimate it with civil war and destruction even worse than the Soviets.

Reading this book, as well as others like The Power of One, has really opened my eyes to the reality of invasion.  It happens today!  Operation Iraqi Freedom, for example, was an attempt by the United States government to invade Iraq and topple the totalitarian government that existed there.  I was always told that that countries that the United States invaded were happy to have us spread our form of freedom.  However, it could be possible, as in this novel, that there are some individuals that think of US outreach equivalent to that of the Soviet Union.  Are we just as bad as the Soviet Union was?

In my opinion, an invasion of one country by another is only justified if it is of importance for national security.  However, a country that invades another should realize that there could be consequences for their actions.  Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the invaded country to defend themselves from invasions.