Quality Project

For our final english project, we are assigned to design any project of quality (vague, no?). For anybody who might actually read these blogs, I wanted to throw out an idea for my project. I don't know exactly what I'll do for all the details, but here's the idea. I'm going to make a few, maybe about three or more, noodle dishes from different cultures from around the world from scratch. Examples include japanese ramen, maybe italian pesto, and middle eastern lentils. The reasoning behind this is to show how different culture's ideas of quality can be seen from the making of their respective noodle dishes. I know, sounds kind of funky, but I think I might be able to do something with it. Any ideas?

Come, Casanova! A True Man Will Have This Title!

Mask (n): A covering for the face, and related senses. Mask (v: To be or go about in disguise; to hide one's true form or character behind an outward show.
If it is a mask you ask for, of the absolute highest quality, and most efficiently performs its primary functions, why sir, you need a Venetian mask. While Venetian masks come in a variety of different styles, colors, shapes, and designs (and all those other words referring to appearances), one is worn by a special breed of people known as Casanovas, after a guy named Casanova. I say "sir", because unfortunately for females, the privilege of wearing such a mask is normally reserved for a man referred to as a Casanova as I said earlier. (You could cross-dress if you're into that kind of stuff I guess.) Simply put, Mr. Casanova was a pretty sexy guy, so the title for Venetian males who were big playas was of course Casanova. No kidding.
Only a magical mask such as a Casanova mask could have been hand crafted in the equally magical city of Venezia. (sounds way sexier in Italian) It's actually one of those things that does its job so well, you're in fact afraid of putting it to use; not that you would ever actually use a Venetian mask anymore of any kind. Real Venetian masks were left unpainted, but rich people probably owned masks with very fancy designs on them for their masque around town. Either one will do, as they both should hide your entire face except your eyes, unlike many masks that hide only a portion of the wearer's face. Everything about this mask is to multiply the attractiveness of the wearer. Therefore, it should normally be worn with a triangular shaped hat, similar to the one Captain Jack Sparrow wears, but much less ghetto to add to the adventurous aura that is Casanova.
Why do you think Casanovas wore this mask in particular? The women can't see through you, your motives, your thoughts, facial expressions, and most of all feelings. The only thing that should escape the mask is the charm of the individual wearer. After all, isn't that what all masks strive to do? A mask is a facade, a false front. While its most obvious function is concealment of the face (so the lovely ladies can stay lovely without knowing who it was that didn't really love them), its primary function is the extraction of a certain feeling from the person you are trying to hide something from. Don't complain about how confusing this post was, just think about it.

Lit Circle post 4 or so

In class, we talked about the chapter titled, "Bel and the Serpent". To summarize this chapter, Leah hates Nathan and Ruth May is bitten by a green mamba snake and dies.

At the beginning of the chapter, for the first time, the political drama unfolding in the Congo has been brought to the foreground, and is described with Orleanna's usual sense of inconcievable guilt. Orleanna's narrative also tells us another reason why she is guilty: because her inabillity, or her utter unwillingness to change or know what has been going on. In this sense, the political struggle the Congo faces parallels her personal one raging within her family and is equally as tragic. The death of Ruth May, the death of Independence.

Ruth May's death was quite expected. Taking into consideration Nathan's utter lack of concern for his family's well-being, and Orleanna's inabillity or unwillingness to act bravely and responsibly brings her worse fears into reality. The fact that the adults could not make a responsible decision about Nelson is what spurred the children to action, resulting in a childish mistake, and Tata Kuvudundu's obvious rage against the Prices.

Her death also turns Nathan's charachter into a far more depressing and tragic one. Leah finds his reaction to her unbaptized state so repulsive, and I do too. But with the utterance of the words "it can't be" sums up one of two things: Nathan's inabillity to show his emotions, or the fact that he disallowed himself to show emotion long ago.

Commonplace 4

It's been a really long time since my last commonplace post. I think I'm not being as enthusiastic as I should be about sharing my deepest, darkest, personal secrets with everybody in the whole wide world. Nah, jus' jokes! It's just that I don't think there's much I can say that would pique other people's interests. Not stuff like a magazine article I read, or a chick book I read, but cool stuff; like I got into a street fight cool, or Holden Caulfield cool, I dunno.

Speaking of street fights, I got this scratch about a half or quarter of an inch below my eye. Sadly, it's not from a street fight. Before I went to sleep on Sunday night, I thought of what I could say about my scratch and how to make myself seem more badass. So here's what I thought of essentially: My favorite shaved ice place is a couple blocks down the hill that I live on and a few more towards the east. Well, the quickest way to get to the shaved ice place is through these two or three blocks that are really ghetto. So, I'm on my way back with my shaved ice, and these mokes are hanging outside of a house. They ask me for some shaved ice and I say "piss off". Well, that pisses them off, and one jumps me from behind and kind of claws at my face. I throw him off my back, ditch my shaved ice on the ground and make a run for it with a rugged battle scar to tell the tale. Lame, huh? Oh, I guess if I've already gone this far, I might as well tell you where I actually got it.

Truth is, I don't know exactly. But last Thursday at the Judo tournament during an exhibition match, I was playing some punk from kam school. Sometime during the match he gave me the scratch, and the thing that pisses me off is that I didn't even win the match. Yeah, that's right. I lost. God, I said. Geez, lay off. Oh, come on, gimme a break! Hey, just shut up already. Oh, you're done? Whoops, my bad.

I'm not sure exactly what I'm trying to say but, what I'm trying to say is, not much really. This has been a lot more like story time. God, knows I hate losing, but therein lies one of my greatest flaw as a person. If I'm bad at something, I want to get better. It's natural right. Oh, I'll try as much as any mediocre person to improve or whatever, but that's exactly the problem. The point isn't to be mediocre, it's to be great. That's why I have to make up queer stories to excuse myself from humiliation. I know the problem, but I'm just too lazy to fix it. Hell, I even know how to fix it, through hard work, but I'm too lazy. Arrgh!! I have everything in front of me in my youth, but I fail to do anything with it. It's like paying for a buffet, but only eating the salad or something I guess. Wow, I've just about killed what little pride I have left in me through that stupid rant. There, is that cool enough for you yet? Entertaining? Whatever...

The Judges critical response to a passage

"I felt the breath of God go cold on my skin. 'We never should have come here' I said. 'We are just fools that have gotten by so far on dumb luck. That's what you think isn't it?'" (309-10).

This passage is the climax of Leah's realization or conversion away from Christianity, or at least Nathan's kind. I have chosen this passage from one of Leah's narrations, and it is while she is escaping with Anatole down the river on a boat away from the ants and Kilanga. They are having a discussion about race and justice when Leah comes to this saddening conclusion. While the entire process of Leah's conversion has been a steady one through her observations of Kilanga, Leopoldville, and her discussion with Anatole, this is the real turning point of her faith.

For her entire life, except for the past few months in the Congo, Leah believed in a idealistic God who rewarded good deeds, and punished bad ones. When she "felt the breath of God go cold on [her] skin" (309), metaphorically speaking, it could possibly refer to her lapse of faith in general. Originally, Leah had viewed their mission as holy, their family as good people, and even most of the other people in the village as good. But when the ants swarm the village, she can no longer believe in a God who would punish good people. As a person convinced she is doomed to die, she relinquishes her ties to her father's simplistic views of God.

SAT Practice Essay 2

People may say that practicallity is taking over people's desires to "learn for learnings sake", but I believe that it is just the opposite and there is too little emphasis on practical learning. It seems the task of living has just become so easy for some people, that practical learning is not required. The material people are being taught nowasays goes beyond practical, adn is more to ensure practical knowledge will never be required in the future.

When my grandpa was growing up as a kid, he was the oldenst son fo eight children in a traditional Japanese family. This meant he had to quickly leanr practical skills, find a job at a young age, and son no in order to help support the large family. Therefore, he did not graduate from high school, although he wanted to, and instead became a learned, experienced car mechanic. And if you ask me, a very practical job selection. My grandpa didn't learn advanced calculus or anything, but he did learn the skills to help him happily through a very demanding life.

Secondly, in the book I am reading for my english class titled, "The Poisonwood Bible," just the opposite happens. The five main charachters fo the story arrive in the Congo with extensive knowledge of scriptures, advanced schooling, and all the things they think they will need to survive. But none of these help them on their mission, and they find everyday life to be a struggle between life or death. The native Congolese end up helping them out much more with their practical skills and knowledge that they implement everyday. The charachters came prepared with everything they didn't need, and therefore should definitely not be considered practical.

Finally, the definition of the word practical gets altered with each passing day. What was practical yesterday is no longer necessary to know for the future. But knowledge that is practical should never be forgotten. History is practical knowledge that people can look to for help, but is forgotten nearly everyday. If you understand history, then you should know what blunders haave been made in the past and how to avoid them in the future. In school, people are taught techniques and solutions for avoiding and vener making mistakes. But a good lesson leanred from history allows you to acknowledge that a mistake has already been made, insuring that you will not make the same one again.

In conclusion, a practical skill can vever be emphasized too much. There's no reason to learn impractical skills with a disregard to ones that actually help you through your life. I cannot comprehend those who deemphasize or ignor what is useful.

Lit Circle 3: Charachter Anayst

On this post, I would first like to talk about Leah. Most people don't like her, or even think she's a bitch for being stuck-up and a daddy's little girl. Me? I find her quite interesting. As a character, she has experienced the most growth out of all the Prices so far. While we know that Leah does the most out of all the Prices to please Nathan, and therefore shares a portion of his zealous religiosity, she also has some views that conflict deeply with Nathan's beliefs.

Of all the Prices, Leah is the one who embraces Africa the most and hopes that someday she will be able to teach the lessons of her childhood in Africa to her future children. In contrast to Leah's acceptance of Africa, Nathan is the self-centered mountain whose views are unmovable, and his personality tyrannical. I found it ironic that Nathan "smacked [Leah] hard for the sin of pride, and made her do The Verse" (156), when it is quite obviously Nathan himself that displays excessive pride the most by being so stubborn. So we see that even though Leah is the one who identifies the most with Nathan and his mission, she is also the one that loves and changes around Africa the most.

Another event in this section is the hope chest saga. While Rachel takes on the project with enthusiasm, Adah and Leah exhibit the same hopeless expectations for their futures when it comes to marriage. It's almost obvious that Rachel's idea of marriage is self-centered around her partner lavishing her and such (and I kind of hope that she takes a great fall from those high expectations). Leah on the other hand seems like a very compassionate girl who would seem successful in a loving marriage, and even though she doesn't want to get married, she does think about having a family of her own.

PB walk activity through Leah's eyes

In class the other day, we were assigned to just walk around campus inhabiting the point of view of one of the main charachters of The Poisonwood Bible. My assigned characther was Leah. In a nutshell, she is a rather passive charachter who strives to please her pious father, but at the same time is nothing like him, having eyes "better suited" for seeing.

Immediately upon arrival, I was compelled to ask Rachel just what day it was. She just rolled her eyes and said, "You don't see the market do you?", and just ambled off flicking her hair in my face. I wanted to remind her that we weren't in the Congo anymore, but I figured that trying to find a cure for stupidity was useless as well, so I dropped it. The reason I wanted to know was queer because everybody acted like the Holy Sabbath had fallen strangely on this sun-bathed Thursday!

Standing on the exquisitely colored tiles arranged in a circle, with carved words stranger than those of Kikongo as the evenescent beams of light radiate from the sky and off the thick overglaze made me feel uneasy observing these people, given that simply living in Kilanga used to be a life or death struggle. My shoulders felt depressed and weighed down liked standing in the nave of a great gothic cathedral, burying me completely in its immenseness, filling my heart with both the holiness of a pure choir and the pity of seeing such slothful people bask in God's light when they seem to do nothing to deserve it.

Maybe they've bended the bible's meaning. "God helps those who help themselves". I suppose they're just helping themselves to other people's work instead of making their own work. Seeing this got me a little riled up, but I calmed down after I remembered how I felt in the Congo and how strange everything they did seemed to me at the time. But I also remembered how different Pascal and I were, now that I think about it. But it's just that they are so materialistic and attached to their worldly possessions that simmers my blood a little. I mean I'm used to Rachel flouting about vainly her accessories and sneaking make-up -- but these people!

I would like to imagine myself giving a talk to a few groups of these people and show them the error of their ways, but I lack the forcefull will of God that my father carries with him in his heart, or his tolerance and compassion for people unaware or ignorant to their potential salvation. Even Ruth May is starting to become more charismatic than I, always playing "mother may I?" with all the village kids.

If I ever have my own kids, I should want to teach them of the lessons I have learned here as well as those I have learned in the Congo. To ignore obvious cultural difference and racial diversity of this place, and to not understand their reasons, or take into consideration their upbringing into their habits of mind would simple be shameful.

Pb Lit Post 2

My role in our literature circle group is the "psycholigical critic". This is where I analyze the psycholigical motives or force that drives the charachter to a certain action. I guess in a sense I'm also a charachter analyst, but this seems to be a much more specific topic. In good literature, all actions have a purpose and a motivation. This is my earnest attempt to try to understand both subjects.

I don't quite understand the daughters' motives in the broad spectrum of the book, yet. There at least seems to be a motive behind all of Leah's actions, which are to move up in her father's good book, and be daddy's little girl. That stuff is basic. Ruth May seems to young to have any motive for her actions, except to do believe what other people tell her. Conversely from Leah, Rachel is the last one to give a damn about anything they're doing in the Congo. Adah is the most complex of them all, and I don't have the slightest idea of what she's up to.

I will start with Orleanna Price, the mother of the Price girls and wife of Nathan Price. Her narration is past-tense for the most part, and is the voice of a guilt ridden soul, seeking retribution; she "want[s] you to find [her] innocent" (8). Innocent of what? Did she commit a terrible crime? No because she'll "insist [she] was only a captive witness. What is the conqueror's wife, if not a conquest herself?" (9). Althought the metaphor of a conqueror's wife seems to hit Orleanna on the personal level, Kingsolver is trying to imply that there are many people who benefit from a crime, but are unwilling to cut their ties with the perpetrator. (I guess kind of like the United States and the Middle East right now if you want to look at it that way. I won't give away the exact historical tidbit that the novel writes about, but I'm sure you can make your own guesses. Without knowledge of the historical background of the situation, you won't really understand some of the foreshadowing Kingsolver is throwing in though).

From the very beginning, Orleanna's own motives tell us what the rest of the book is going to be about. Are her motives the same as the rest of the Price girls? Probably not, then we wouldn't need five different points of view as opposed to a singular one. However, we know something terrible must have happened, and while "some of us know how we came by our fortune, and some of us don't…, [but] there's only one question worth asking now: how do we aim to live with it?" (9). Her story is not only one of redemption, but of living with an "awful story off [her] shoulders" (10), and the pain of guilt.

After Orleanna's chapter of narration comes the rest of the Price girls (not Spice Girls): Leah, Ruth May, Rachel, and Adah. Right now however, I am much more interested in their father's motives, Nathan Price. What is his desire to make this pilgrimage to the Congo? What role does he play in the overall theme of guilt? Unfortunately, we will not be able to understand Nathan's personal motives until we read later on in the book, or research historically the role of missionaries in African in 1960, but we can still keep a couple questions in our minds for future reference.

At this point, we can still analyze Kingsolver's motives for not giving Nathan his own narration chapters to chime in and contribute to the theme of guilt. But unlike Orleanna, he is not the conqueror's wife, and is probably referred to the conqueror himself with his bible beating evangelistic ways (personally I don't like Nathan because he seems even more hillbilly than the other charachters). What is to be conquered is yet to be revealed, but he probably takes a more active role in the crime to be comitted and is likely to be the catalyst of events.

We do however get a hint at the very beginning of the novel with the quote from the book of Genesis. After reading first book, Genesis, this quote takes on a new meaning, apart from the biblical meaning. Nathan's mission is to "subdue [the] [earth]; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (3). I haven't read the rest of the book and am theorizing of course, but this is possibly his general motive and reason for coming to Africa. From now on I'd better pay more attention to the quote at the beginning of each book huh?

PB Lit Post 1

In our first literature circle meeting in groups, we discussed only a few basic things about "The Poisonwood Bible", by Barbara Kingolver. Not everybody read up to the same point, while a couple of people read the entire first book of genesis and knew a lot more than the other members (including me). We started off by just getting all of the charachters straight. We established that Orleana Price is the mother of the family and was introduced in the first chapter as the narrator. Personally I thought that was a pretty cool way to start the book off. To me, her chapter hits the spot. I'm not quite sure. She first comes across as a pretty weird lady, but her voice sounds more mature, and supremely mysterious. Even to the end of genesis, she remains a mysterious, vague charachter; such as in the birthday cake mix scene.

Anyway, other charachters include Ruth May Price, the youngest Price. At the tender age of five years old, she is your typical innocent little girl. For example, she believed her classmate when he told her that the Africans would eat her. She remains afraid of her neighbors through the end of the section at least. She's cute, adorable, lovable, and her all those warm and fuzzy feelings associated with little kids.

Secondly, the twins, Leah and Adah Price are of deeply contrasting personalities. While Leah, in her attempt to be daddy's favorite is the most devout of the girls, Adah makes fun of her father and sister's religiosity. Leah is disliked by many people because of her stuck-up personality. I'll admit to that too. But her chapters are the easiest to read along with the force that drives most of her actions: her desire to be daddy's favorite. She pretty much comes and says it outright in one of the chapters. Adah on the other hand sees the world in a different way because of her hemiplegia. In other words, she walks funny, half of her brain doesn't work (or is it missing?), and can't speak. But she can think and function mentally was well as the next person. In fact, she observes many more things than the rest and loves to come up with palindromes and talk bakwards. She's pretty cool I guess.

Finally, Rachel is your typical rebellious teen, and cares much more for fashion than their family's religious crusade into the Congo. There's not much to say about her, but the way she describes the African's clothes and surroundings makes it easier for me to picture these scenes as well. I kind of like her too I guess.

SAT essay reflection

I started my essay as I thought I was supposed to, a five paragraph essay with an intorduction, three body paragraphs, and a conclusion. I didn't get very far throught that process, and only made it to the first body paragraph. The biggest problem that I had with this essay wasn't that I was a really slow writer, because nobody writes that slow. It's just that the ideas weren't coming to my mind; I couldn't think of examples or supporting evidence to back up my statement: "all forms of media greatly affect people's thoughts and values". I tried to think of historical examples, because I like history, and events in history can't be denied, so it would be pretty solid evidence. But only one example came to mind and my essay was very obviously lacking in substance.

I guess I could have thought of my own observations, but then again personal opinions are highly subjective, and would not make the point that I desired. Although maybe I should have just concentrated on finishing the essay first. Then at least I could make full comments on my finished product, no matter how sucky. Maybe I should start reading more books, magazines, and newspapers because then I could take an outside opinion, and use it to support my own, and say "see, I'm not the only person who thinks this". Then my own point of view would be more supported an solid.

I know that Mr Watson said we should try not to take a yes or no approach to the prompt, because it doesn't have a yes or no answer, but that makes things way simpler and I would imagine it would make the writer sound less wishy washy. Maybe I'll try the indirect approach next time anyway.

Practice Essay (pretty incomplete)

The truth is that people living in urban and suburban communities are greatly affected by all forms of media. It should be known that media are just different forms of mass communication. For thousands of years, the forte humans have always had over other animals has been our abillity to exchange and process thoughts, and develop new ideas based on these thoughts. Although times have changed the way people communicate, the way that people develop and grow are through the same basic means.

History has proven this to be true during the Vietnam war when a new form of media was first being developed on a large scale: the television. For the first time ever, the horrors of war could be seen from a first person point of view, and the masses were shocked. This helped the Vietnam ear to coin the nickname, "the televised war". This was one of the reasons so many people were opposed to the war. This is just an example of how media has influenced the thoughts of many.



Umm, yeah, that's kind of all I wrote. Seriously this is all I wrote. Pretty bad huh? Should I have finished it? I'm a pretty slow writer too, so yeah, I'll blame it on my slow writing.

Ode to Old Houses

This is my piece that's supposed to be as descriptive as hell or something. This is just my portrayal of my uncle's house (which used to be my grandpa's so it's really pretty old. P.S. I just like the word "ode"; only english teachers and writers know what the word actually means, and you can make anything sound cooler (or snoodier) by calling it an "ode to dis" or an "ode to dat" (without the dis n dat of course).

Did you hear that? The crunching of rubber on asphalt screams like the moans of canine guardians over the eves of mountains. Faces. Sledged mercilessly into the cascading falls rushing water pounding into cement crevices. Falling. As you rush to seek shelter from the endless night, its purple eyes follow you across a stretch of rocks ready to knaw at your tender knee caps and palms as your drops under the weight of malice. The creatures that lurk inside snap, as they reach for the chance to savor the morsels of you fingertips. Be careful. Spongy moist ground pulls your toes and sinks and springs the demonic screams that rebound off of the walls and gaping canyons break through the floor trapping you forever entangling the bits of limbs pierced by ancient punji traps.

Isn't that fun? No, actually I love that house, it's just that it's right up against a steep hillside, and when it's raining really hard sometimes, there's a waterfall in the backyard into a mini canal. Oh, and when I was a little kid before it got the cement driveway, I used to run around and always trip and stuff. You know, kid stuff. Oh, and it's painted like barney; green with purple windowsills. And my grandpa used to watch my uncle's dobermans during the day and sometimes into the night, and my dad just kept his malevolant parrot that hates me with a passions there. The floors are pretty creaky and always used to make me feel like a ninja too :)

Globalize Yourself

To be quite honest, I kind of have a small beef with this concept of keeping an online diary of sorts by means of blogging. I know that the whole concept of blogging is to have an online, interactive way to chat and discuss ideas and such, but sometimes I feel that I just can’t be completely honest on my blog because I know that people other than my teacher will be reading my posts. I don’t need other people reading my thoughts and becoming my moral conscience. Well yeah, that defeats the point of keeping a blog, but I can’t help it. I’m just like that. As a result of the lack of honest and heart in my posts, I think that maybe I haven’t been writing as well as I could have. I guess that means I’ve been living an online lie huh? Or something like that.

Actually, I’ve been very honest with my posts. I’ll take back some of the stuff I said before, because the only post I can think of where I kind of made up stuff was my “This I Believe” post. I’m not sure some people understand, but to openly talk about and discuss your belief is so personal, you wouldn’t believe it. Especially for a guy like me. Like hell if I’m going to tell the whole world my moral code of conduct, or the embarrassing metaphor by which I live my life. You might as well conduct a strip search on me, even though I’m sure you’d rather not.

I think it’s because of the initial feelings I have about blogging. Generally, I think of blogging on a similar plane as other online web things such as myspace. The thoughts I reserve for bloggers and myspacers aren’t bad honestly, but say if I was talking story with somebody, and I found out about them that they daily update a blog or myspace, I would probably greet that thought with a kind of funny face and an, “uhh…that’s nice I guess”. I’ll tell you why I think this. If you have the time to spend hours on a computer wasting your time on something as trivial as a myspace account, then you must have many more hours to do more productive things with your life, when you really don’t have all that much time in a day to do what you want. In other words it’s a waste of time.

I’ve been trying to embrace each one of our posts with care, and in doing so I’ve noticed a difference between blogging and myspacing. A myspace is simply an online profile where sexual predators lurk (please don’t tell me we’re going to have to start a myspace now too), while a blog is meant to function exactly like a diary, but the online interaction adds a whole new element to it: primarily the style of writing. I don’t feel the need at all to use poetic elements, descriptive detailing, or any means of making my posts sound pretty (unless the assignment calls for it). There’s just no need for a commonplace post. I’m talking to you, so I’ll be blunt. Maybe here and then I’ll beat around the bush, but I’ll lay it bare for you to see.

Like my This I Believe, when assignments become so personal where I must think so deeply to understand my own belief or how my actions change the way I live in this world, I am pretty loathe to embrace the task. It’s just so difficult; actually it’s more like it’s impossible. Anybody who says it’s easy is either pretty damned wise, or pretty damned stupid.

I suppose I’m a pretty lazy guy, so I’d like to simply say change is a slow process, therefore my essential questions have not changed, but I know they must have changed somehow. I think further exploration is necessary to assist me in my search for more questions and answers.

My first question was, “How does the way we live our lives affect others”. Maybe I should ask easier questions, because there’s no way to answer this. In one of my first posts, I have already said all I have to say concerning this question. I’ll reiterate a few things. The people we affect on a daily basis are obviously our family and friends. But should we by trying to affect people outside our daily contacts? Is it an obligation?

Oh wait, I thought of something else. Among the people we affect, are they all affected personally? I just heard this History International commercial on the TV, and it said that we should know about people across the globe because what happens there affects us here. How? In a historical context, humans have a knack for having bad ideas and making mistakes. And to never make them again, we must know who made them in the first place. The context, the reasoning, and all the other factors that led to this mistake. In the end, we as human beings serve a small part in the world. As far as I'm concerned, we only believe behind one thing when we die: our history, our legacy.

This I Believe (completely re-visioned)

Growing up is depressing. So is the nostalgia of memories of loved ones and cherished moments. It may seem immature, but I don't want to grow up. I want growing up to take as long as possible. I loathe change. I wish the only way to achieve your goals wasn't through hard work, because I'm just going to end up doing it for the rest of my life. No, monotony drains the soul and chains it down onto the earth. Realism is painful. I do not believe in a life that will always be as easy as following a yellow brick road. Idealism is for people who can't face truth. Nor do I believe in days of constant gloom, drear, and foreboding. Pessimistic notions are no better.

Even though I just said I'm not an idealist, life should be experienced like your favorite TV drama. It would be no fun if you knew a show would follow a sequence of events like power rangers, right? Power rangers good—bad guys evil. Good over evil. People live for twists and turns and sudden plot developments. Sometimes spontaneous action is the key to a great show. Maybe like family guy (but not quite that random and stupid). It's quite ironic then, for someone who loathes change to say that change is the key to a great life or drama or whatever you call it. But that's the truth. It wouldn't be the Wizard of Oz without the cowardly lion, heartless tin-man, brainless scarecrow, or wicked witch of the west.

Change truly is life's only constant, and I am thankful for that. However, as an individual, you have to know what would be better to retain. I come from a pretty traditional Japanese family, with rock solid values, beliefs, and practices. Every Saturday after Christmas, our family and friends from all over the island and sometimes even mainland relatives gather at my grandpa's house to carry out the Japanese tradition of Mochi pounding. The bowl that we pound the rice in has been with our family for over a century, along with the steamer and method of cooking the rice. Even though I am a fifth generation Japanese in Hawaii, I'm not into all that samurai death to reclaim honor or whatever. It's just silly. But the point is that the wisdom to know how to change is as important as change itself.

I live everyday of my life as happily as I can. What's the point of being sad? Most importantly, I try to be spontaneous. I don't mean stupid things like jumping off buildings or whatever, but I try not to hang out with the same people everyday at school, and rather maybe talk with this bunch of friends a bit more today and this group tomorrow. If I just stayed in the same place, it would be boring.

Change can be painful and shouldn't be taken lightly either. But it should not be feared as a bringer of death and destruction. Life, when lived to its fullest holds a lot in store for us. But when change is suppressed, all of life's great potential has gone to waste. That's why I loathe change. I want to do as much I can, but I wish change would stop for awhile so I could do more.

I'm still waiting for my endless summer in the sun. But maybe everyday should be like an endless summer. Don't let change get the better of you. Be your own saving grace. Dip your toes in the water and be sure honk as you take your place when the blue of your backdrop changes.

Commonplace post 3

"True charity is when we give up ourselves instead of our material possessions" (Winstons Churchill). During class, the theme of charity has been part about both of the pieces we read, TSSWP and The Gift. This quote though, does not so much apply to TSSWP, but more to The Gift, where the central charachter gives a nondirected kidney donation. This really is taking this quote literally. But anyway, I'm not really sure about all this charity stuff. I mean I should be more charitable and all, but I'm just not a charitable guy. Or maybe I'm just lazy. Either way, this "true charity" must be very hard to give, because the truth is always harder than lies.

"This I believe" essays

I listened to the four essays: "Be Cool", "Just Like Pastrami", "The Tense Middle", and "A Duty to Family, Heritage, and Country". Although I could clearly see just what they believed, some of their points did not make sense. For example, in "The Tense Middle", the author believes that everything is good in moderation (much like the Buddhist belief of the middle path). But in his essay, he also believed that people are given choices, like in an anecdote he told about being sheltered by a Ukranian school teacher during the holocaust. He was given the choice A) to shelter them or B) to turn them in; but wait, that leaves no room for the middle! Unless he meant that we must make our own middle path, but that wasn't exactly the feeling I got from his essay. Overall, it was a slightly confusing essay, but maybe I just chose to listen to it because it kind of reaffirmed my own beliefs.

The first essay that I listened to, "Be Cool", had a very straight-forward and simple belief: that staying calm and collected, or otherwise "cool", is the key to living a happy and fulfilling life. It makes sense, but at the end, he said that being cool meant having a facade when talking to people, and not speaking what you think, rather being polite and respectful. I respect his opinion, but I believe being "cool" is being yourself. I believe being cool means being an unsupressed individual; you don't have to be "cool" with everyone you meet. I think his idea of staying relaxed at all times is being too "cool" (this reflects my belief in "the middle path"), but it is a respectable belief nonetheless.

The second essay, "Just Like Pastrami", was about a teacher's belief in marbling diffferent aspects of your life how you would pastrami meat. While at first I thought that his belief was similar to "The Tense Middle" essay, it did have its own unique points (besides relating life to pastrami). He said that life, like brisket is easy to layer, but it is through marbling we achieve the great flavor of life--just like pastrami. What this means to me is still unclear, but there is a certain aspect of his essay I do understand; you must always work harder to achieve your goals.

The final essay, "A Duty to Family, Heritage, and Country", was a very solemn one. The author was a 14 year old Chinese immigrant, who believed that the only reason she works hard at school is to pay back all the people who have helped her along the way. She believed that even though she wanted to do her own thing, she was being forced, not by her parents, heritage, or country, but by herself as a result of all of their beliefs. Yes, sometimes people, including myself do things out of obligation or duty. But the reason I find this essay solemn is because I almost pity this girl. Sure, she does sound more mature, and probably smarter than I am, but she seems to pity herself too. Self-pity is a very sad thing.

"Their Eyes Were Watching God"

Recently, I read a book titled "Ther Eyes Watching God" by Zora Neale Hurston. It's an absolutely great book, and no matter your sex, race, or religious beliefs, I would say you should really give this book a try. In fact, since it was written during the years of the Harlem Rennaisance, many people view it as a black feminist book, but it speaks more to the whole of humanity. And although the title alludes to God, it is much more spiritualistic in nature than religious.

First and foremost, it is Janie Crawford's search for "life" and love; for independence and self-enlightening. Although this book is truly a tender love story at heart, I feel that the main characther's search for love is simply her personal way of discovering "life", and everybody's search for self-enlightenment takes them down a different dirt-beaten path. The definition of "life" will vary from person to person, and while Janies search spanned nearly forty years of her life, some people's journeys will take longer or shorter amounts of time. It is in this sense that the book finds its spritualistic nature. Here and again God will be alluded to, but the actual name only appears about two ore three times from cover to cover in the 193 page book, and the word or concept of God seems to be meant more as a wordly force or spirit that guides and taunts Janie simultaneously. Sometimes though, I do get a feeling that that is exactly what God does to people.

Referring again to my English class's two essential questions: What is our world like? and how should we live in it?, while reading this book, I have came to the realization that although it uses the pronoun "we", it should be asked in a much more personal form. Because although we all live in the same world, we all choose to live in it differently, and "should" is a highly subjective word.

Brainy!

Yesterday, I read the newest edition of Time Magazine. It was captivating really. According to the magazine's front page article involving the human brain and consciousness; what they know, and what will probably take many many more years to figure out. The line that seperates different parts of the brain has become very blurry, and now researchers are starting to ask the "hard questions", like why do we think green when we see green? Or "explaining how subjective experience arises from neural computation" (Jan 19 2007, Time).

Now, I'm not like a huge science geek philosopher kind of guy, so I don't really know too much about what I'm talking about, but I think it's interesting as hell trying to understand the thing that allows us to understand. A question that arose from this article was "how does my brain make me, 'me'"? According to researchers, that's actually a relatively simple question; it's because my brain is me. And although people tend to believe that their conscience is like one man in a room in front of dozens of monitors that controlls our thoughts and movements, that is also untrue. In our brain, events compete for attention until one outshoots the others and the brain rationalizes the outcome after the fact, giving the impression that a single self was in charge all along.

That's pretty much the only stuff I could vaguely understand from the seven page article, and I just find this stuff highly facinating as hell. It truly takes understanding oneself to the most extreme scientific levels imagineable.

TSSTWP questions and 4 generations video response

After reading and briefly discussing "The Singer Solution to World Poverty" (TSSTWP for short), there were quite a bunch of questions I thought of. However, they could be condensed into these two simplified questions. They are pretty much the same though. It is a variation of the two essential questions we are asking ourselves in our English class (What kind of world is this? And how should we live in it?). If TSSTWP is about our moral obligation as human beings to donate large sums of money to overseas charity organizations, then maybe using Singer's two scenarios as a basis for this question we can start asking ourselves how does living in this world affect others? Should we try to affect others in this world?

Singer threw in those two scenarios about Dora the retired school teacher and Bob the Bugatti man to create parallel situations between our potential relationship with people who need overseas aid. In a nutshell, behind Singer's overly demanding and condescending tone of voice, what he really seems to want is peoples care and support for others who need it direly. I mean just imagine, $200 can almost safely guide a child for the four most vulnerable years of their life. You can be a guardian angel. You can provide care and support. You can affect this child's life in ways that you will not be able to phatom (Am I being overly dramatic? I hope not). However the means that a person might go around influencing other people's lives, whether by running them over by a train (pray you don't), or sending them overseas aid, we have the potential to effect people we don't even know more than we think. I could be really hippy-dippy and say "we're all connected…dude" (Am I being too informal? I hope not x2); but I digress.

Now, getting to the video, it definitely relates to TSSTWP and their shared topics of charity and all. So how does it relate to my personal essential question? Well, it just goes to show how seemingly small contributions can make a world of difference to some. I mean really, my iPod cost about $250. Oh! About the money I need to buy a water buffalo in China! What I'm saying takes on somewhat of a Singer standpoint; that's $250 that isn't being sent overseas, and that's another child dying at the age of two. Maybe by living, other people are dying.

Taking the totally opposite view that my second question posed: should we be trying to affect other people in this world? or shall we "Let it Be" as sang by John Lennon? Well I mean, who are we to be walking around giving free water buffalos away. At the very least we probably shouldn't be going around looking for more Bobs to run over little kids with trains. But anyway, as far as duty goes, we aren't obligated to help anyone according to the U.S. constitution. But Singer is right to a certain extent that we have the means and capable of the moral integrity by which to help others.

But the point is that whether you are more in the unsuspecting Dora's scenario or Bugatti Bob's intentional killing of a child, all of our actions, or lack thereof, have an effect on the world. In this we find truth to the law of action-reaction in life, and what brings light to Singer's main point; that by doing nothing we are really hurting people the most.

Obviously it is the people that we have close relationships with that we affect first and foremost: namely our friends and family. These are people that we live with, laugh with, and love, and the value of the effect our lives have on each other cannot be weighed or measured using money or other physical means. I know that my family, friends, and teachers helped to shape my charachter into the person I am now, the subtleties of which cannot be discussed without a great deal of tedious self-reflection. However, I am even more unsure of the subtle ways I might effect other people. This question is essential to me personally, because I feel that a person should have an idea of what their individual life might mean to the world.

"The Singer Solution to World Poverty" by Peter Singer is a very thought provoking essay analyzing human attitude and behavior towards giving overseas aid to people in need. With a combination of scenarios with morallity issues, hard facts, and playing on peoples' guilt, Singer's essay in a nutshell tells us that we should donate lots and lots of money overseas because a) it is the morally sound thing to do, and b) we can. While I do not completely agree with all of his points, it is agreeable that Singer has created a very effective essay.

The first thing Singer does is provide morally conflicting scenarios that put all Americans in the same boat; the boat of people unable or unwilling to donate at least $200 to overseas aid. By providing these two scenarios of Dora the retired school teacher and Bob and his Bugatti, Singer effectively establishes the fact "that it is also very wrong not to send money to …[an] organizations" (2), and in fact, he says that it is "gravely wrong" (2) for those of us not sending overseas aid. Reading this essay made me feel like a very guilty man.

I am not in agreement with the second half of Singer's essay that says we should not give $200, not $1,000, not 10,000, but tens of thousands of dollars because we can. I'll agree with the fact that if $200 dollars is all a person needs to donate to save a child, that it is a relatively small hole in most peoples' wallets. He says we should all feel as morally responsible as Bob should feel for killing the child on the railroad tracks because we are all "killing" little kids by not donating money. But the honest to goodness truth is that I don't. For the most part I sleep happily at night, keeping these kinds of things out of my dreams. And rather than saving people we hardly know, isn't our obligation as American citizens "the puruit of happiness"? This line of thought may seem cruel and despicable, the reality of it. Many people sleep happily at night, and they would probably feel a little less happy knowing that they are a few ten thousand dollars poorer. In this sense I agree that "that would be taking fairness too far" (3).