For being the first seminar of the year I feel good about it. I wasn’t the most involved but I still need to get acclimated to the idea of seminar. With the next seminar I should be where I was last year with participation. For other people I also don’t think this was thier best seminar. We all just had a difficult time starting in my opinion.
Some opinions that stood out to me were how the truth of war was to Paul. While reading the book I truthfully didn’t think about what he thought too much. Talking about this in the seminar opened up my eyes more about the subject. I also enjoyed conversing about Paul on leave, and why people thought he found it uncomfortable. Although the book mostly told us why I remember hearing a few things that I had not caught from the text.
The one main connection that I had made during the conversation was about Paul on leave. My idea was about how the brain cannot handle the life at home. When the brain gets used to the fast pace and the life/death decisions made everyday, you cannot function at home where life is slow paced and the largest choice of the day is what to eat for breakfast.
The truth of war that All Quiet on the Western Front tries to communicate is that the truth of war is different for everyone. For Paul the truth of war is a horrible thing. Paul sees war as something that happens for no good reason and should never happen. When paul first arrives on the front he is sent with his comrades to set up barbed wire. While setting up the barbed wire the team gets shelled by the French. After the traumatic event that this was, Paul explains how he first feals about being in war: "As if something is inside us, in our blood, has been switched on." Later in the book when Paul goes on leave he finds that his personality has completely changed and that his life away from the front will have to change along with it.Two other characters that you can extract their thoughts of war from are Himmelstoss and Paul’s old school teacher. Himmelstoss was a non-commissioned officer and in charge of Paul and his comrades while in bootcamp. Himmelstoss sees war as something that gives a man power, something that demands the best and will take anyone who isn’t to the grave. Paul’s teacher sees war as something verry honorable. To be a veteran is one of the best things you can be.
"Give 'em all the same grub and all the same pay/And the war would be over and done in a day." (p.41) I think this quote is very important to the idea of the truth of war because it shows the truth that the people higher in power sitting in an office are the ones who risk the lives of the lower civilians. I think that I would really want to represent an idea of the truth of war through a fictional story. I really enjoy writing and showing my feelings about these subjects by putting it through a fictional character’s actions.
Slaughterhouse-Five Seminar Reflection
In seminar a discussion sparked and developed into a flame as people shared their opinions. The subject of the discussion was the quote from Slaghterhouse Five, “So it goes.” Was it good to have this lookout on the negative things in like or did it do more harm? Ideas of how it helped oneself mentally or might kill someone’s reason to live flew about the circle. This was the conversation I took most part in and I enjoyed listening to what others thought about it.
Is this novel an anti-war novel? In my opinion it is. My comprehension of this book is that it is Vonnegut’s way of expressing how war effected himself. He uses the main character Billy Pilgrim to show the insanity one might go through after seeing war. In my understanding, Billy was never really captured by aliens or travelled randomly through time. For the duration of this story i think that Billy was unconscious from something traumatic during the war.
The moment you die, people say your whole life flashes before your eyes. I think that this novel is about Billy’s experience with this. To me this explains the random jumps through time with no linear order. Although I think it is an anti-war novel, Vonnegut seams to leave the biases of the main character completely out of the story so that the reader can build their own biases about war.
Slaughter house five’s main character Billy Pilgrim reminds me of certain veteran of the Vietnam war I know in real life. Talking to this family friend he seams a lot like Billy but not quite as extreme. He is very quiet and seemingly unbiased about everything. He is very humble like Billy is most of the time. Making this connection has really brought Billy into a more possible view, before thinking about this connection, Billy seemed like a very unlikely character.
A connection between Slaughterhouse five and All Quiet on the Western Front is the same question of “Is this an anti-war novel?” I think that both of these novels present the idea of everyone having a different opinion about war. In Slaughterhouse Five Billy himself is very unbiased about the situation but the people he meets along the way all give their opinions on the topic. In chapter one Mrs. O'Hare expresses her negative opinion towards Billy telling him that the present war is like the Children’s Crusade. In All Quiet in the Western Front Paul, the narrator, leans toward the side of hating war. Once again, even though Paul expresses one opinion, the book shares the other outlook on war. Instead of writing books that show how good or bad war is, they share both opinions letting the reader see what they want to see.
Jihad vs McWorld The main idea of this reading was the world having two possible political outcomes: Jihad and McWorld. Jihad is the ideal of individualism where the world contains extreme borders and cultures do not mix. McWorld is the outcome with no borers of culture and everybody shares ideas. McWorld is a world economy where everyone trades with everyone.
Why is the future most likely not to be democratic? I think this is because somebody along the way will take power and control the people. This may start through economic power. According to Marx, the next political system after capitalism is communism. Is the spirit of liberty local? I think it may be because the only ones who feel that they need liberty the most are the people who have experienced it. It is a local feeling felt by individuals who all feel it differently. In the next 100 years, I think that Mcworld will be the outcome. We are already almost there. We share ideas and trade with the rest of the world. Communication is another big factor. With the ability to communicate with the rest of the world Jihad is impossible. For Jihad to overcome McWorld, international communication would have to end which will never happen; it has come too far.
The ones who walk away from Omelas
Part 1
In this story, what is the relationship between guilt and happiness?
The author of this story stated that the people in this story have no guilt for what they have done. After making connections to other parts if the story it makes sense. The people in this society tell themselves that it needs to happen therefore the guilt in the situation is gone. I think that this happens a lot in our individual lives. When we do something wrong we like to convince ourselves that it wasn’t our fault or that there was no way we could have avoided doing such act.
The people who walk away from Omelas are the ones who accept guilt and try not to replace it with another idea or excuse. They trade their happiness for guilt and leave the festival. But whats better, leaving because you feel its right or staying and living your life to the fullest? I think this story really contrasts these questions really well. When I read it, it has me thinking of what I would do. Although my final decision would be to stay, the story gave a strong battle between the options.
Part 2
I’m walking away because of the feelings I don’t have. I have started to see the wrong in this society. I wish that everyone could open their eyes and see why we’re the only group of people who live like this. We are the only ones we know of who purposely threaten and beat a child; deprive it of life. This is why I walk away. Others in the world suffer from poverty and sadness, not as something evil, but as something that has happened naturally. I know what I am looking for and where to go for it, but I do not know the direction. I don’t know which way to go, up or down. Maybe either one will have something promising for me.
When I first saw it, I had no idea why one would do such a thing. I remember the image perfectly. The child. It sat there in the corner, saying nothing. It’s head was tucked into its legs trying to cover his face for no one to see. It was scared; scared of everything. It’s body was pale and lacked any kind of muscle. All I could truly were its arms, legs, and the top of it’s head. The boy’s legs were like no other living thing I have seen before. The skin touched the bone and was as thin as a cat’s leg. It’s arms were the same way. They were wrapped around his knees to hold his legs up near his face. But they were trembling. He was weak and couldn’t hole that curled position for long. The young child’s head is balding from lack of nutrition. After a few minutes he would lose strength in that curled position and immediately flip onto his stomach with his head in the corner, still hiding his face.
I was then asked to leave the child alone, and so I did. After that I had walked around in a sad, sort of ‘dead flower’ like attitude. All the happiness I once knew seemed dull as I walked through the town. After I while I talked myself into thinking that this child suffering needed to happen. There needed to be something there that was wrong. This could never be a perfect society. If one child had to suffer incredibly for the rest of us to live joyfully then it must be ok.
I would hear the new comers or the ‘ignorant’ people talking about this child. Every once in a while I would walk up to that person or group of people and explain to them why it needed to be done. Some people I converted, others were persistent to find better reasons. But soon I started thinking about it again. I started to see how wrong it was, and how wrong I was for bringing people to believe that it was alright. This is why I have started my journey away from Omelas.
I walk across valleys, hills, and cross waters. I have no food with me. I travel light as to set myself free from any burden. I soon grow hungry. I try to find food but there s nothing around. I think about drinking the water from the natural sources around me but they could be filled with viruses. The day is ending and the adrenaline gained from the start of a new journey quickly starts to wear off. I become depressed and dizzy. Not sure why I would leave such a utopia. I find a tree and sit under as to get shelter from the night to come. The sky grows darker and starts to fill with the most beautiful colors. shades of blue, white, and orange. Dancing together around the light of the sun. It brings me back to earlier memories of when I used to watch the sun set while I think about the child. Soon my eyelids start to fall across my vision. I just lie there under the tree. Thinking about said boy. And only then did I remember why I left. Not for revenge. Not to show others how wrong it was. But because I felt this decision was the only one for me. I could not live there any longer. I have joined the many who walk away.
Being Peace
The rules set to attain happiness follow the same stars for guidance, but travel on different roads. Instead of trying to trigger instinctive actions, its a much harder and more complicated process. Using only the mind to create this escapism. The rule I see being the greatest of all is being in the moment. Of course, its everything my version of happiness is. Clearing the mind of past regrets and future plans comes very difficult in our world. For me, it rarely ever happens. Every once in a while when I’m walking to a destination, usually on trails within my neighborhood, I can look up at the sky and listen to the annoying chirp of a bird and think to myself, "Everything is perfect." And at that moment everything IS perfect. Nothing exists but the sky and the earth beneath the soles of my shoes. This is not the same energy you get from sports, but energy from the things around you. Energy coming up from the earth and traveling through you. But the hardest part about this rule, is clearing your mind. This is why monks meditate. It is something so hard to do that it takes a lifetime to learn. Although all my past statements may contradict this rule being good to practice in modern society, it is very good to keep in your head. So that when those time come you don't skip them using your useless thoughts.
Violence vs Non-violence
How to Suppress or Eliminate an Oppressing Force Stephen Miranda
In unfair situations pertaining to a very large group of people, usually through politics, one main argument has stood throughout history: When is violence justifiable? Gandhi’s revolution against the British is a prime example of how violence can cease to exist in a large scale protest. Instead of resorting to violent acts such as assassination which took place frequently in political rebellions, Gandhi scheduled day where everyone fighting for his goal would refuse to work. Later this did lead to many protesters being massacres by the British for they had no work force and all productions were at a stand-still. A very popular quote from Gandhi himself sums up what which path he tried to take to achieve his goal; he said that “We must be the change we wish to see.” This is very much the same reasoning as the eleventh commandant in the Christian faith which states, “Do to your neighbor as you would have done unto yourself.” Whether or not you choose a violent or non-violent approach is all based on morality and further results of a plan. A plan to change an unjust situation should always start with a non-violent approach. The beginning of this plan should be a way of feeling your way through the dark room to get a better idea of how to refine your plan. Violence should only come into play when one’s plan of non-violence is failing with no visual future of success. One good piece of evidence for this is Nelson Vandella. When fighting for equal rights against the British, he openly admitted that he used violent act against the British but he only started it when he realized his plan was not going anywhere. Like in this example, violence can be a very effective final option. (Ghandi)
Although any rebellion against an oppressor should have the same general goal, what makes certain actions justifiable? Hopefully one wouldn’t set fire to a village for better service at a restaurant. The point being is that there are certain variables that one must take into account before taking action. Assessing the situation, one must acknowledge the source and the oppressors intentions. if the enemy has strong intentions toward a his/her goal, non-violent protest may be much less effective. The oppressor might actually not care for the ones being oppressed and would have no problem pushing the knife deeper into the target’s flesh. Though if the intentions of the oppressor are only for mere political power, non-violent protest could take a better tole on the oppressor.
“Time heals all wounds.” To different people, this quote has either helped tremendously in resolving some sort of problem, or spit in their face. Everyone perceives this riddle differently. Of course, if you know what’s good for you, you’ll understand that time only helps the healing process. In fact, it’s a main ingredient; but the chef is given the choice for that one other special something to mix with it. There may even be a list of things. Whatever analogy you want to use, something needs to take place within the time given. The next question to ask when choosing between violence and non-violence is ‘How much time do you want to spend?’ A violent approach may have an arguably faster outcome than a non-violent approach. Although most would settle to get the fastest outcome, others debate the quality of the outcome with how much time is spent trying to achieve it. Within debates with my piers, some of them seam to think that spending more time trying to change a situation, the better the outcome will be. In my eyes, this statement could never be more false. It’s mot the amount of time spent, its the quality of the action done within that time. Having more time available to you, you can definitely spend more of it assessing the situation. Although you are using your time for more good, the enemy can also be using to build up defenses for lack of a better phrase. (Coryell)
Being proactive is the best way to keep a bad situation from becoming worse. Although in some cases it may seem impossible to skip the whole oppression ordeal all together, being proactive and trying to stop it earlier in its emergence will save a lot of pain. In a recent case of religious oppression which arose after the events of september 11, 2001, many suspicious rumors of the Muslim religion were starting to boil among the average American; though that's not to say there were no exceptions. According to Ingrid Mattson, “The first duty of Muslims in America ... is to help shape American policies so they are in harmony with the essential values of this country.” Although racism in America has taken a dramatic turn for the better since the abolishment of slavery, recent events have turned many Americans against the people of the Middle Eastern countries even if they had nothing to do with such acts like the ones that took place on September 11. This tension between these two groups is still young and not at its strongest. With modern communication such as the Internet, this article by Ingrid Mattson has been able to educate myself and many others around the world about what could and should be done. This is what I mean when I say to take a proactive role. To turn as many people against the beast as possible in such little time. This may just be the greatest use of time available to anybody. (Mattson)
In conclusion, the best way to make a plan better would be through starting early and being able to change it if it is needed. One must be able to assess the situation and plan his/her actions accordingly to how much the oppressor wants to reach his goals. Morality is a very large wight that tips the scales, though one should not be caught up in doing what he/she thinks is purely right and should do what would get the job done best. One should not see the amount of time they have as something to use to sit back and better plan one’s ideas. Take on the oppressor early and change plans accordingly after getting a feel how the fight will progress. There are too many things to take into account to explain this in a short essay, though I have laid out the general steps one should follow. What is the best way to suppress or eliminate a oppressing force? To acknowledge the oppressor’s goals and to stop him early no matter how you do it.
Bibliography
Coryell, Deborah M. "Time Does Not Heal All Wounds." - Grief Support at LegacyConnect. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.connect.legacy.com/inspire/page/show?id=1984035:Page:2168>.
Gandhi, Mohandas K. "Gandhi's Views On Nonviolence - Nonviolence." Mani Bhavan. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.gandhi-manibhavan.org/gandhiphilosophy/philosophy_nonviolence_nonviolence.htm>.
Mattson, Ingrid. "Stopping Oppression: An Islamic Obligation." Macdonald Center for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://macdonald.hartsem.edu/mattsonart6.htm>.
"Top 10 Gandhi Quotes." About.com Quotations. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://quotations.about.com/od/gandhiquotes/tp/10_gandhi_quote.htm>.
