Writing my essay about Audrey Lorde’s The Fourth of July, I took a pretty basic approach. I read the essay the first time just to get the basic idea of what it was about. Then, I waited a little while and thought about what she was trying to say. After doing this, I reread the story as analytically as possible. I read and reread sentences, hunted for symbols and hidden meanings, and tried to see what tools Lorde used to get her point across. However, I admit, I did not spend that much time thinking about it. I just wanted to write my paper and get it over with. I was trying to connect with what I read, but it is so much easier to remain disconnected. I didn’t want to overanalyze the essay to the point that I was looking for things that weren’t even there.
I do not think I changed much as a writer, reader, or a person. I want to change; it just didn’t happen this time. The only thing I did as a reader, which I don’t normally do is read the story around four times. When I read, I usually just skim over whatever it is I am reading to get the main idea. This time, though, since the paper I had to write was not about summary but about writing style and deeper meanings, I had no choice but to read it closely. As I writer, I did attempt to portray my thoughts in a well-organized manner, and I did put more effort into my word choice than I normally do. So, there were a couple of changes, but I know I still need improvement.
Next time I hope to do a lot of things differently. I hope to spend more time looking over the reading. I want to put deeper thought into what I will write and how I will write it. I hope to be able to connect more with the reading. Basically, I know I should apply more effort and delve deeper into the analytical part of my brain.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
My Walk and My Thoughts
When I walked out of the classroom, I had somewhat of a plan as to where I wanted to go. The same place I planned, however, is not the same place I ended up. I ended up here, outside, on this wooden bench, listening to the sounds of a passing train and bits and pieces of some strangers' loud conversations. And, even though this is not where I originally say myself, it feels good to be here. It's cool outside. It's quiet for the most part, except for this girl talking so loud on her cell phone. I like it.
My life mirrors my 45-minute "walk" almost perfectly. I set goals for myself all the time. I can plan things down to the final detail, but it never ends up quite as I plan. Yet, I am hardly ever disappointed when that happens. (Not in the end anyway.) I planned to leave for school and go to UT Knoxville. I wanted to get away from Memphis, and live on my own. I even had a full scholarship to pay for tuition and housing. Everything was set and certain. I didn't expect to find out I was pregnant. And, at first, I was hopelessly upset. But ending up at the University of Memphis is looking like a better situation for me so far. I don't stay on campus, so I got money back from my grant and scholarships. I was able to get my car, which may have taken longer if I would have moved to Knoxville. I now have money in savings that is a pretty big start toward living on my own. I am able to be here in Memphis with my boyfriend. And I have my family here to support me. So, even though I didn't end up where I wanted to be, in life or during my my 45-minute retreat, I am content (and blessed).
My life mirrors my 45-minute "walk" almost perfectly. I set goals for myself all the time. I can plan things down to the final detail, but it never ends up quite as I plan. Yet, I am hardly ever disappointed when that happens. (Not in the end anyway.) I planned to leave for school and go to UT Knoxville. I wanted to get away from Memphis, and live on my own. I even had a full scholarship to pay for tuition and housing. Everything was set and certain. I didn't expect to find out I was pregnant. And, at first, I was hopelessly upset. But ending up at the University of Memphis is looking like a better situation for me so far. I don't stay on campus, so I got money back from my grant and scholarships. I was able to get my car, which may have taken longer if I would have moved to Knoxville. I now have money in savings that is a pretty big start toward living on my own. I am able to be here in Memphis with my boyfriend. And I have my family here to support me. So, even though I didn't end up where I wanted to be, in life or during my my 45-minute retreat, I am content (and blessed).
A Not So Independent Independence Day (New & Improved :)
The Fourth of July by Audrey Lorde is a short essay which depicts some clear cut incidences of racial discrimination which occurred in her life. Even though the essay is short and brief, Lorde’s intention is effectively portrayed in her tone, symbolism, and all around word choice. Lorde uses many descriptive details which successfully paint a picture for her audience and symbolize so much more than what is seen on the surface. Her narration intensifies as the story unfolds and we begin to see the irony of Lorde’s Fourth of July vacation.
The Fourth of July is an account of a trip that Audrey Lorde and her family took to Washington, D.C. after Lorde’s graduation from the eighth grade. The trip was important for Lorde’s older sister who was not allowed to attend her senior class trip to Washington since the class was to stay in a hotel that did not permit blacks. I believe Lorde purposely introduces this incident of prejudice early on in her story to show the reason behind their trip and to showcase an example of irony that becomes apparent at the end. (The same discrimination they go on the trip in spite of is what they end up encountering in Washington.)
Lorde describes the care and detail that was taken into planning for the trip. It would be the family’s first time taking a train in the daytime because they usually rode at night on the milk truck, which was cheaper. They took an entire week to pack and ended up with two suitcases and one box of food. This is when Audrey Lorde takes the opportunity to depict vividly the food that her mother put so much care into making. Lorde says her mother packed chicken cut into “dainty bite-sized pieces”, “little violently iced cakes with scalloped edges”, and “peaches with the fuzz still on them individually wrapped to keep from bruising” (Lorde, 567-568). These detailed descriptions are used as tools illustrate how important the trip was and how much detail went into its preparation.
While on the train, Lorde mentions, she wanted to eat in the dining car, but her mother would not let her. Her mother’s reasoning was that is was too expensive. Lorde’s mother did not care to divulge the fact that blacks were not actually allowed to ride in the dining cars. This is only one of a few instances where Lorde’s mother would rather remain silent about the racial injustice they encountered rather than speak upon it. Lorde states, “As usual, whatever my mother did not like and could not change, she ignored. Perhaps it would go away, deprived of her attention” (Lorde, 568). Audrey Lorde maintains that her father is the same way. American racism was her parents’ “private woe” (Lorde, 568). Her parents’ silence was how they dealt with the injustice. Lorde says she and her siblings were told to never trust white people but were on no account told why. Lorde intentionally brings up her parents’ avoidance of the topic of racism to show how she was never really directly exposed to it. She was ultimately sheltered from the truth. This in a way helps us understand the intensity of Lorde’s rage when she finally comes face to face with her first real encounter with discrimination at the end of the story.
Audrey Lorde describes her younger self on the second day of the trip squinting at Lincoln Memorial “where Marian Anderson had sung after the D.A.R. refused to allow her to sing in their auditorium because she was black” (Lorde, 568). This incident involving Marian Anderson, even though it is not an actual event from Lorde’s story, is ironic since the D.A.R. (Daughters of the American Revolution) is a group “dedicated to promoting patriotism, preserving American history, and securing America's future through better education for children” (DAR National Society). But the main point of the scene with Lorde squinting out at the monument is to point out her original reason for disliking the Fourth of July as opposed to why she doesn’t like it as an adult. As a child, she disliked the “agonizing corolla of dazzling whiteness” and brightness that played upon her sensitive eyes (Lorde, 569). The intense heat from the white summer brightness could is a symbol of the whites discrimination. Lorde did not have any sunglasses to shield her eyes from the blinding light, and her parents would not be able to shield her from the truth of racism for much longer. Lorde even describes the light and heat to be stronger in D.C. than back in her hometown of New York. The pavement was also lighter. Everything is different in Washington, and it is here that Lorde will finally witness the intensity of racial discrimination that she was always sheltered from back home.
The point where Audrey Lorde’s The Fourth of July reaches its peak of irony is when her family goes to get ice-cream. While sitting at the white marble counter, her family did not hear their waitress clearly at first and remained still. (Here is the pattern of silence again.) So the waitress moves in closer and repeats herself: “‘I said I kin give you to take out, but you can’t eat here. Sorry’” (Lorde, 569). Lorde portrays her family marching, not walking, out of the ice-cream shop “straight-back and indignant”. They were “quiet and outraged, as if [they] had never been black before” (Lorde, 569). This last statement about never being black before shows that that type of discrimination was the norm and should have been expected. But Lorde was outraged and could not understand why they had to leave even though they hadn’t done anything. Her parents silence made her even angrier. Her sisters were even silent, and Lorde could not understand why. She was the only one in her family who even attempted to break their pattern of silence. Lorde even recounts writing an angry letter to the President.
This, the end of Lorde’s narration, is when all of the vivid imagery and irony can be clearly understood. It is the point at which Lorde finds a new cause to hate the Fourth of July. The Fourth of July is an ironic title since this big injustice occurred on a day when all Americans were supposed to be able to celebrate their independence and freedom to do as they pleased. Also, the fact that it took place in the nation’s capital, where patriotism should reign most high, makes it even more ironic. Lorde also describes many white aspects of Washington to symbolize the hold the whites had: the white summer brightness, the white pavement, the white waitress, the white counter, the white ice-cream they never ate, and the white monuments. Each and every one of these instances of white represents white society and their prejudice.
I found The Fourth of July to be greatly effective in showing how one small incident of injustice can affect your entire way of thinking. Lorde’s word choices play an important part as to how the story affects her reader. The imagery she uses puts us in her position, and the many ironies portrayed help to make her story more engaging and thought-provoking. Lorde’s symbolism takes us beyond her simple tale of Fourth of July trip to Washington, D.C. and into the depths of racism. I really enjoyed reading it, and I feel like Lorde pieced her words together in a way that caught, and kept, my attention through the entire narration.
Works Cited
DAR National Society. 2005. National Society Daughters of the American Revolution. 26 September 2007. <http://www.dar.org/natsociety/whoweare.cfm>
Lorde, Audrey. “The Fourth of July.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. 9th ed. Ed. Virginia Clark and Alfred Rosa. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005. 567-570.
The Fourth of July is an account of a trip that Audrey Lorde and her family took to Washington, D.C. after Lorde’s graduation from the eighth grade. The trip was important for Lorde’s older sister who was not allowed to attend her senior class trip to Washington since the class was to stay in a hotel that did not permit blacks. I believe Lorde purposely introduces this incident of prejudice early on in her story to show the reason behind their trip and to showcase an example of irony that becomes apparent at the end. (The same discrimination they go on the trip in spite of is what they end up encountering in Washington.)
Lorde describes the care and detail that was taken into planning for the trip. It would be the family’s first time taking a train in the daytime because they usually rode at night on the milk truck, which was cheaper. They took an entire week to pack and ended up with two suitcases and one box of food. This is when Audrey Lorde takes the opportunity to depict vividly the food that her mother put so much care into making. Lorde says her mother packed chicken cut into “dainty bite-sized pieces”, “little violently iced cakes with scalloped edges”, and “peaches with the fuzz still on them individually wrapped to keep from bruising” (Lorde, 567-568). These detailed descriptions are used as tools illustrate how important the trip was and how much detail went into its preparation.
While on the train, Lorde mentions, she wanted to eat in the dining car, but her mother would not let her. Her mother’s reasoning was that is was too expensive. Lorde’s mother did not care to divulge the fact that blacks were not actually allowed to ride in the dining cars. This is only one of a few instances where Lorde’s mother would rather remain silent about the racial injustice they encountered rather than speak upon it. Lorde states, “As usual, whatever my mother did not like and could not change, she ignored. Perhaps it would go away, deprived of her attention” (Lorde, 568). Audrey Lorde maintains that her father is the same way. American racism was her parents’ “private woe” (Lorde, 568). Her parents’ silence was how they dealt with the injustice. Lorde says she and her siblings were told to never trust white people but were on no account told why. Lorde intentionally brings up her parents’ avoidance of the topic of racism to show how she was never really directly exposed to it. She was ultimately sheltered from the truth. This in a way helps us understand the intensity of Lorde’s rage when she finally comes face to face with her first real encounter with discrimination at the end of the story.
Audrey Lorde describes her younger self on the second day of the trip squinting at Lincoln Memorial “where Marian Anderson had sung after the D.A.R. refused to allow her to sing in their auditorium because she was black” (Lorde, 568). This incident involving Marian Anderson, even though it is not an actual event from Lorde’s story, is ironic since the D.A.R. (Daughters of the American Revolution) is a group “dedicated to promoting patriotism, preserving American history, and securing America's future through better education for children” (DAR National Society). But the main point of the scene with Lorde squinting out at the monument is to point out her original reason for disliking the Fourth of July as opposed to why she doesn’t like it as an adult. As a child, she disliked the “agonizing corolla of dazzling whiteness” and brightness that played upon her sensitive eyes (Lorde, 569). The intense heat from the white summer brightness could is a symbol of the whites discrimination. Lorde did not have any sunglasses to shield her eyes from the blinding light, and her parents would not be able to shield her from the truth of racism for much longer. Lorde even describes the light and heat to be stronger in D.C. than back in her hometown of New York. The pavement was also lighter. Everything is different in Washington, and it is here that Lorde will finally witness the intensity of racial discrimination that she was always sheltered from back home.
The point where Audrey Lorde’s The Fourth of July reaches its peak of irony is when her family goes to get ice-cream. While sitting at the white marble counter, her family did not hear their waitress clearly at first and remained still. (Here is the pattern of silence again.) So the waitress moves in closer and repeats herself: “‘I said I kin give you to take out, but you can’t eat here. Sorry’” (Lorde, 569). Lorde portrays her family marching, not walking, out of the ice-cream shop “straight-back and indignant”. They were “quiet and outraged, as if [they] had never been black before” (Lorde, 569). This last statement about never being black before shows that that type of discrimination was the norm and should have been expected. But Lorde was outraged and could not understand why they had to leave even though they hadn’t done anything. Her parents silence made her even angrier. Her sisters were even silent, and Lorde could not understand why. She was the only one in her family who even attempted to break their pattern of silence. Lorde even recounts writing an angry letter to the President.
This, the end of Lorde’s narration, is when all of the vivid imagery and irony can be clearly understood. It is the point at which Lorde finds a new cause to hate the Fourth of July. The Fourth of July is an ironic title since this big injustice occurred on a day when all Americans were supposed to be able to celebrate their independence and freedom to do as they pleased. Also, the fact that it took place in the nation’s capital, where patriotism should reign most high, makes it even more ironic. Lorde also describes many white aspects of Washington to symbolize the hold the whites had: the white summer brightness, the white pavement, the white waitress, the white counter, the white ice-cream they never ate, and the white monuments. Each and every one of these instances of white represents white society and their prejudice.
I found The Fourth of July to be greatly effective in showing how one small incident of injustice can affect your entire way of thinking. Lorde’s word choices play an important part as to how the story affects her reader. The imagery she uses puts us in her position, and the many ironies portrayed help to make her story more engaging and thought-provoking. Lorde’s symbolism takes us beyond her simple tale of Fourth of July trip to Washington, D.C. and into the depths of racism. I really enjoyed reading it, and I feel like Lorde pieced her words together in a way that caught, and kept, my attention through the entire narration.
Works Cited
DAR National Society. 2005. National Society Daughters of the American Revolution. 26 September 2007. <http://www.dar.org/natsociety/whoweare.cfm>
Lorde, Audrey. “The Fourth of July.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. 9th ed. Ed. Virginia Clark and Alfred Rosa. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005. 567-570.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
A Not So Independent Independence Day: An Analysis of Audrey Lorde’s The Fourth of July
The Fourth of July by Audrey Lorde is a short essay which depicts some clear cut incidences of racial discrimination which occurred in her life. Even though the essay is short and brief, Lorde’s intention is effectively portrayed in her tone, symbolism, and all around word choice. Lorde uses many descriptive details which successfully paint a picture for her audience and symbolize so much more than what is seen on the surface. Her narration intensifies as the story unfolds and we begin to see the irony of Lorde’s Fourth of July vacation.
The Fourth of July is an account of a trip that Audrey Lorde and her family took to Washington, D.C. after Lorde’s graduation from the eighth grade. The trip was important for Lorde’s older sister who was not allowed to attend her senior class trip to Washington since the class was to stay in a hotel that did not permit blacks. Lorde introduces this incident of prejudice early on in her story to show the reason behind their trip, and it will also end up being a case of irony in the end. (The same discrimination they go on the trip in spite of is what they end up encountering.)
Lorde describes the care and detail that was taken into planning for the trip. It would be the family’s first time taking a train in the daytime because they usually rode at night on the milk truck, which was cheaper. They took an entire week to pack and ended up with two suitcases and one box of food. This is when Audrey Lorde takes the opportunity to depict vividly the food that her mother put so much care into making. Lorde says her mother packed chicken cut into “dainty bite-sized pieces”, “little violently iced cakes with scalloped edges”, and “peaches with the fuzz still on them individually wrapped to keep from bruising” (Lorde, 567-568). These phrases illustrate how important the trip was and how much detail went into its preparation.
While on the train, Lorde mentions, she wanted to eat in the dining car, but her mother would not let her. Her mother’s reasoning was that is was too expensive. Lorde’s mother did not care to divulge the fact that blacks were not actually allowed to ride in the dining cars. This is only one of a few instances where Lorde’s mother would rather remain silent about the racial injustice they encountered rather than speak upon it. Lorde states, “As usual, whatever my mother did not like and could not change, she ignored. Perhaps it would go away, deprived of her attention” (Lorde, 568). Audrey Lorde maintains that her father is the same way. American racism was her parents’ “private woe” (Lorde, 568). Her parents’ silence was how they dealt with the injustice. Lorde says she and her siblings were told to never trust white people but were on no account told why. Lorde intentionally brings up her parents’ avoidance of the topic of racism to show how she was never really directly exposed to it. She was ultimately sheltered from the truth. This in a way helps us understand the intensity of Lorde’s rage when she finally comes face to face with discrimination at the end of the story.
The second day of the trip, Audrey Lorde describes her younger self squinting at Lincoln Memorial “where Marian Anderson had sung after the D.A.R. refused to allow her to sing in their auditorium because she was black” (Lorde, 568). This incident involving Marian Anderson, even though it is not an actual event from Lorde’s story, is ironic since the D.A.R. (Daughters of the American Revolution) is a group dedicated to patriotism, historic preservation, and education. But the main point of the scene with Lorde squinting out at the monument is to point out her original reason for disliking the Fourth of July as opposed to why she doesn’t like it as an adult. She disliked the “agonizing corolla of dazzling whiteness” and brightness that played upon her sensitive eyes (Lorde, 569). The intense heat from the white summer brightness could also be seen as a symbol to depict the intense discrimination from the whites during Lorde’s childhood. She even describes the light and heat to be stronger in D.C. than back in her hometown of New York. The pavement was also lighter. These differences foreshadow the discrimination that Lorde will be subject to while in D.C. that she never directly experienced back home.
The point where Audrey Lorde’s The Fourth of July reaches its peak of irony is when her family goes to get ice-cream. While sitting at the white marble counter, her family did not hear their waitress clearly at first and remained still. (Here is the pattern of silence again.) So the waitress moves in closer and repeats herself: “‘I said I kin give you to take out, but you can’t eat here. Sorry’” (Lorde, 569). Lorde portrays her family marching, not walking, out of the ice-cream shop “straight-back and indignant”. They were “quiet and outraged, as if [they] had never been black before” (Lorde, 569). This last statement about never being black before shows that that type of discrimination was the norm and should have been expected. But Lorde was outraged and could not understand why they had to leave even though they hadn’t done anything. Her parents silence made her even angrier. Her sisters were even silent, and Lorde could not understand why. She was the only one in her family who even attempted to break their pattern of silence. Lorde even recounts writing an angry letter to the President.
This, the end of Lorde’s narration, is when all of the vivid imagery and irony can be clearly understood. It is the point at which Lorde finds a new cause to hate the Fourth of July. The Fourth of July is an ironic title since this big injustice occurred on a day when all Americans were supposed to be able to celebrate their independence and freedom do as they pleased. Also, the fact that is took place in the nation’s capital where patriotism should reign most high, makes it even more ironic. Lorde also describes many white aspects of Washington to symbolize the hold the whites had: the white summer brightness, the white pavement, the white waitress, the white counter, the white ice-cream they never ate, and the white monuments. Each and every one of these instances of white represents white society and their prejudice.
The Fourth of July was greatly effective in showing how one small incident of injustice can affect your entire way of thinking. Lorde’s word choices play an important part as to how the story affects her reader. The imagery she uses puts us in her position, and the many ironies portrayed help to make her story more engaging and thought-provoking. I really enjoyed reading it, and I feel like Lorde pieced her words together in a very efficient way.
Works Cited
Lorde, Audrey. “The Fourth of July.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. 9th ed. Ed. Virginia Clark and Alfred Rosa. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005. 567-570.
The Fourth of July is an account of a trip that Audrey Lorde and her family took to Washington, D.C. after Lorde’s graduation from the eighth grade. The trip was important for Lorde’s older sister who was not allowed to attend her senior class trip to Washington since the class was to stay in a hotel that did not permit blacks. Lorde introduces this incident of prejudice early on in her story to show the reason behind their trip, and it will also end up being a case of irony in the end. (The same discrimination they go on the trip in spite of is what they end up encountering.)
Lorde describes the care and detail that was taken into planning for the trip. It would be the family’s first time taking a train in the daytime because they usually rode at night on the milk truck, which was cheaper. They took an entire week to pack and ended up with two suitcases and one box of food. This is when Audrey Lorde takes the opportunity to depict vividly the food that her mother put so much care into making. Lorde says her mother packed chicken cut into “dainty bite-sized pieces”, “little violently iced cakes with scalloped edges”, and “peaches with the fuzz still on them individually wrapped to keep from bruising” (Lorde, 567-568). These phrases illustrate how important the trip was and how much detail went into its preparation.
While on the train, Lorde mentions, she wanted to eat in the dining car, but her mother would not let her. Her mother’s reasoning was that is was too expensive. Lorde’s mother did not care to divulge the fact that blacks were not actually allowed to ride in the dining cars. This is only one of a few instances where Lorde’s mother would rather remain silent about the racial injustice they encountered rather than speak upon it. Lorde states, “As usual, whatever my mother did not like and could not change, she ignored. Perhaps it would go away, deprived of her attention” (Lorde, 568). Audrey Lorde maintains that her father is the same way. American racism was her parents’ “private woe” (Lorde, 568). Her parents’ silence was how they dealt with the injustice. Lorde says she and her siblings were told to never trust white people but were on no account told why. Lorde intentionally brings up her parents’ avoidance of the topic of racism to show how she was never really directly exposed to it. She was ultimately sheltered from the truth. This in a way helps us understand the intensity of Lorde’s rage when she finally comes face to face with discrimination at the end of the story.
The second day of the trip, Audrey Lorde describes her younger self squinting at Lincoln Memorial “where Marian Anderson had sung after the D.A.R. refused to allow her to sing in their auditorium because she was black” (Lorde, 568). This incident involving Marian Anderson, even though it is not an actual event from Lorde’s story, is ironic since the D.A.R. (Daughters of the American Revolution) is a group dedicated to patriotism, historic preservation, and education. But the main point of the scene with Lorde squinting out at the monument is to point out her original reason for disliking the Fourth of July as opposed to why she doesn’t like it as an adult. She disliked the “agonizing corolla of dazzling whiteness” and brightness that played upon her sensitive eyes (Lorde, 569). The intense heat from the white summer brightness could also be seen as a symbol to depict the intense discrimination from the whites during Lorde’s childhood. She even describes the light and heat to be stronger in D.C. than back in her hometown of New York. The pavement was also lighter. These differences foreshadow the discrimination that Lorde will be subject to while in D.C. that she never directly experienced back home.
The point where Audrey Lorde’s The Fourth of July reaches its peak of irony is when her family goes to get ice-cream. While sitting at the white marble counter, her family did not hear their waitress clearly at first and remained still. (Here is the pattern of silence again.) So the waitress moves in closer and repeats herself: “‘I said I kin give you to take out, but you can’t eat here. Sorry’” (Lorde, 569). Lorde portrays her family marching, not walking, out of the ice-cream shop “straight-back and indignant”. They were “quiet and outraged, as if [they] had never been black before” (Lorde, 569). This last statement about never being black before shows that that type of discrimination was the norm and should have been expected. But Lorde was outraged and could not understand why they had to leave even though they hadn’t done anything. Her parents silence made her even angrier. Her sisters were even silent, and Lorde could not understand why. She was the only one in her family who even attempted to break their pattern of silence. Lorde even recounts writing an angry letter to the President.
This, the end of Lorde’s narration, is when all of the vivid imagery and irony can be clearly understood. It is the point at which Lorde finds a new cause to hate the Fourth of July. The Fourth of July is an ironic title since this big injustice occurred on a day when all Americans were supposed to be able to celebrate their independence and freedom do as they pleased. Also, the fact that is took place in the nation’s capital where patriotism should reign most high, makes it even more ironic. Lorde also describes many white aspects of Washington to symbolize the hold the whites had: the white summer brightness, the white pavement, the white waitress, the white counter, the white ice-cream they never ate, and the white monuments. Each and every one of these instances of white represents white society and their prejudice.
The Fourth of July was greatly effective in showing how one small incident of injustice can affect your entire way of thinking. Lorde’s word choices play an important part as to how the story affects her reader. The imagery she uses puts us in her position, and the many ironies portrayed help to make her story more engaging and thought-provoking. I really enjoyed reading it, and I feel like Lorde pieced her words together in a very efficient way.
Works Cited
Lorde, Audrey. “The Fourth of July.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. 9th ed. Ed. Virginia Clark and Alfred Rosa. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005. 567-570.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The Significance of a Noose in a Tree
Links---> Blog on Slate ... Blog on Bill Maher's site
I read two different blogs about the Jena 6 incident in Lousiana...
The blog posted on Slate by Michael Weiss seemed to take a more factual rather than opinionated approach. Weiss attempted to maintain an objective view on the subject by mostly stating facts about the situation and posting quotes and views of other people. Weiss states in his Friday post: "Thousands of protesters turned out in Jena, La., Thursday to denounce what they call the too-severe prosecution of six black students accused of beating a white student to the point of unconsciousness." Notice he uses "they", trying to be objective in how he feels about the punishment faced by the six black students. Weiss does this through the entire post talking about others' reactions to what went on in Jena, Louisiana.
The post by HymitownPrez on Bill Maher's webpage did not attempt to take an objective view at all. He did not really state any facts about the situation. He just briefly told what he thought about what happened. Whoever this guy is apparently thinks that because the nooses were hung only about 5 feet high, that makes the incident less serious. He also calls the 6 students "6 black hoodlums" and thinks "This shit is so funny. . ." That's the jist of his blog.
I read two different blogs about the Jena 6 incident in Lousiana...
The blog posted on Slate by Michael Weiss seemed to take a more factual rather than opinionated approach. Weiss attempted to maintain an objective view on the subject by mostly stating facts about the situation and posting quotes and views of other people. Weiss states in his Friday post: "Thousands of protesters turned out in Jena, La., Thursday to denounce what they call the too-severe prosecution of six black students accused of beating a white student to the point of unconsciousness." Notice he uses "they", trying to be objective in how he feels about the punishment faced by the six black students. Weiss does this through the entire post talking about others' reactions to what went on in Jena, Louisiana.
The post by HymitownPrez on Bill Maher's webpage did not attempt to take an objective view at all. He did not really state any facts about the situation. He just briefly told what he thought about what happened. Whoever this guy is apparently thinks that because the nooses were hung only about 5 feet high, that makes the incident less serious. He also calls the 6 students "6 black hoodlums" and thinks "This shit is so funny. . ." That's the jist of his blog.
I, myself, am in great support of the Jena 6 and feel like a noose being hung in a tree is far from a prank. This incident puts us so many years behind as far as overcoming racial barriers. I mean, the noose itself represents so much and brings back so many bad images of blacks being hung in trees so long ago. If those white students did not like the fact that those black students were sitting under "their" tree for any reason other than simply the fact they were black, why would they choose the nooses? It was obviously a racial attack. I do not necessarily support the fact that the Jena 6 jumped on that one person, but I do think that the charges placed against them were all too harsh. Attempted murder??? That shouldn't have ever even come up. They beat the guy up and did not use any weapons. And I also think that the action taken against the students who hung the nooses was all too lenient. It was a hate crime as far as I am concerned and deserves a little more than a few days suspension. It seems totally out of balance for me that the kids who hung the nooses were dealt with by school officials and not even charged, but the punishment for the black kids who retaliated went straight to the police. Students get into fights all the time and never get charged with attempted murder---and they don't even have to be provoked much. The entire situation is just ludicrous to me, and I can understand why so many people showed up to protest the charges. And whoever that guy HymitownPrez is on Bill Maher's site obviously does not understand the significance of what happened and how the nooses symbolize something all to serious. And no, this shit is not so funny. . .
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Tasering at University of Florida
Links--------> Jack Dunphy's article ... article from Political Critic ... incident on Utube
The two articles that I read were on the subject of the student (Andrew Meyer) who was tasered by University of Florida police during a speech by John Kerry after asking Kerry if he had been apart of a secret society while in college. Both articles present the story from totally opposing viewpoints...
The first article I read was Jack Dunphy's. Dunphy basically supports the Florida University police and thinks that they did the right thing by tasing Meyer. Dunphy begins his article by saying, "There is an axiom in police work that goes something like this: If you have a lawful reason for wanting someone to behave in a certain way, first you ask them, then you tell them, then you make them." Many people have the viewpoint that the police were wrong in their actions, but Jack Dunphy comes to their defense. He says that the Florida police had good reason for wanting Andrew Meyer to settle down or leave the auditorium and that the police used reasonable force when Meyer did not comply with their demands. Dunphy points out that a man (presumably one of the university officials) can be seen in the Utube video giving a signal at which point Meyer's microphone goes dead, showing that Meyer's question was not one they wanted to be brought up. When two officers approach the student, he is loud an beligerant. He resists the officers and continues to yell throughout the auditorium. Jack Dunphy's point is that if Meyer had simply either calmed down or left without incident, the officers would have never even used the taser gun. So Meyer got what he deserved, right?
The article I read from the Political Critic site goes against Dunphy's argument and condemns the police's use of the taser. This author on Political Critic says that we should consider taking tasers away from campus officers all together. Why did Meyer need to be tasered if he had so many policemen holding him down, and he was already on the ground? The author also states: "The last time I checked, freedom of speech still exists in this country." All of this stemmed just from Andrew Meyer asking a question that someone else felt inappropriate. The author admits that Meyer was loud and obnoxious but also calls the policemen reckless and violent and says "if six police officers cannot handle an unarmed kid without tasing him, they need to find different jobs."
My viewpoint on the matter is this: I do not believe that the officers used reasonable force in this situation. When I watched the video I could not believe how loud and uncontrollable Andrew Meyer was acting. I mean he yelled throughout the entire clip... "What did I do?" "Help! Help!" "Why are you arresting me?" "Get away from me!" It was crazy. However, no matter how loud or crazy he was, he was never violent and never used force. It wasn't like he was trying to attack John Kerry; he never even went near Kerry. Plus, there were six officers detaining him. I just do not feel like the tasing was necessary. But then again, in the defense of the police, they did warn Andrew Meyer that he would be tased if he contin ued to resist arrest, which he did. So I am not sure if Meyer did not believe them or what, but for some reason he would not comply with their demands. So, as you can see, I am sort of torn between the two sides. Luckily, I do not have to be on anyone's side. I just have to talk about the two articles viewpoints on the matter, which I did. :)
The two articles that I read were on the subject of the student (Andrew Meyer) who was tasered by University of Florida police during a speech by John Kerry after asking Kerry if he had been apart of a secret society while in college. Both articles present the story from totally opposing viewpoints...
The first article I read was Jack Dunphy's. Dunphy basically supports the Florida University police and thinks that they did the right thing by tasing Meyer. Dunphy begins his article by saying, "There is an axiom in police work that goes something like this: If you have a lawful reason for wanting someone to behave in a certain way, first you ask them, then you tell them, then you make them." Many people have the viewpoint that the police were wrong in their actions, but Jack Dunphy comes to their defense. He says that the Florida police had good reason for wanting Andrew Meyer to settle down or leave the auditorium and that the police used reasonable force when Meyer did not comply with their demands. Dunphy points out that a man (presumably one of the university officials) can be seen in the Utube video giving a signal at which point Meyer's microphone goes dead, showing that Meyer's question was not one they wanted to be brought up. When two officers approach the student, he is loud an beligerant. He resists the officers and continues to yell throughout the auditorium. Jack Dunphy's point is that if Meyer had simply either calmed down or left without incident, the officers would have never even used the taser gun. So Meyer got what he deserved, right?
The article I read from the Political Critic site goes against Dunphy's argument and condemns the police's use of the taser. This author on Political Critic says that we should consider taking tasers away from campus officers all together. Why did Meyer need to be tasered if he had so many policemen holding him down, and he was already on the ground? The author also states: "The last time I checked, freedom of speech still exists in this country." All of this stemmed just from Andrew Meyer asking a question that someone else felt inappropriate. The author admits that Meyer was loud and obnoxious but also calls the policemen reckless and violent and says "if six police officers cannot handle an unarmed kid without tasing him, they need to find different jobs."
My viewpoint on the matter is this: I do not believe that the officers used reasonable force in this situation. When I watched the video I could not believe how loud and uncontrollable Andrew Meyer was acting. I mean he yelled throughout the entire clip... "What did I do?" "Help! Help!" "Why are you arresting me?" "Get away from me!" It was crazy. However, no matter how loud or crazy he was, he was never violent and never used force. It wasn't like he was trying to attack John Kerry; he never even went near Kerry. Plus, there were six officers detaining him. I just do not feel like the tasing was necessary. But then again, in the defense of the police, they did warn Andrew Meyer that he would be tased if he contin ued to resist arrest, which he did. So I am not sure if Meyer did not believe them or what, but for some reason he would not comply with their demands. So, as you can see, I am sort of torn between the two sides. Luckily, I do not have to be on anyone's side. I just have to talk about the two articles viewpoints on the matter, which I did. :)
P.S. I have seen "tasering" and "tasing". I thought it was "tasing". I've been doing searches, but it is still tough to figure out which is correct.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Prime Directive
In Prime Directive, David Griffith starts by presenting us with a doubtful, indecisive character. A character dressed as Captain Kirk of the Starship Enterprise. It is the Saturday night before Halloween, and "Captain Kirk" is regretting not going to evening Mass. He is also regretting not being with his wife, who is in another state. Instead, he is on the street waiting for his friend to pick him up to go to a Halloween party. The entire time trying to remain inconspicuous to the people who pass by him...
I believe that David Griffith picked Halloween and the darkness of night for his story for a reason. He has taken his character out of his normal everyday element to prove his point--that we all can do things we are not proud of when placed in different situations. If it would have been any other day of the year at any other time of day, Griffith's character would not have been placed in the position where he ends up in the story. He would not have been at a party around people dressed in costumes, spooky decorations, and creepier than normal vibes. He would have never met his old friend dressed in the Charles Graner costume. He would have never posed for the picture he was so ashamed of just moments after it was taken. No, in order for all of this to happen, Griffith's character had to be placed in abnormal circumstances--and what better time than Halloween night? Griffith even states in the story that "Halloween is when unsettled souls roam the earth. Under that circus tent, past midnight, we were all roaming, asking to be seen, looking for a connection. I found it."
The main character in Prime Directive tries to analyze what he has done after taking the picture. He calls his wife and can't even tell her because he is so ashamed. But his shame is our shame. Griffith's purpose in writing the Prime Directive is to open our eyes to what we are all capable of. It is easy to condemn others for sins they have committed when we have never been put in that situation ourselves. We, as humans are all capable of doing shameful and terrible things when placed in abnormal circumstances.
This is Griffith's intent, what he wants to prove. However, after reading over several articles about what went on at Abu Ghraib, I can honestly say that I could have never committed such horrendous acts of torture. It makes my skin crawl just thinking about doing such things to anybody. Those soldiers humiliated, raped, and even mutilated those prisoners. I believe that in order to do something as terrible, you would have to have some kind of deep, dark, hidden desire to do those things in the first place. No matter how much contempt I felt for the prisoners or how much I loved being in command, I could not picture myself taking pictures next to pyramids of naked, abused prisoners!! I can't fathom it. I understand Griffith's point, that we never know what we are capable of until we are actually put in that situation. But some things you just know would be too horrible for you to bring yourself to do.
Now, the fact that Griffith's character poses with his friend in the Charles Graner costume is pretty sick, but it is nowhere close to what actually happened at Abu Ghraib. The guy who dresses in the costume is sick for even thinking to dress in that costume, and who knows what his intent was for doing that, but there is still no comparison. The main character in Griffith's story probably never anticipated that he would participate in something so shameful. This is a good example of doing something you never thought you'd do because you have never been in that situation before. But if Griffith is trying to say that everyone is capable of committing the same acts that the soldiers like Charles Graner did at Abu Ghraib, I would have to disagree. One, because I know I could never bring myself to do anything like that to another human being, or even an animal. Two, there were other soldiers there who did not participate and who testified against Graner and the others.
Reading over Prime Directive the first time, I didn't really get what David Griffith was trying to say. But then again, I did not know what Abu Ghraib was. After I read about the subject and about Charles Graner, I reread Prime Directive again from the beginnning. I slowly began to realize Griffith's point, and to a certain extent I agree with him. Human nature is an unpredictable thing. And as humans, we change in certain situations. However, Graner and the other soldiers who took part in the unthinkable acts that ocurred at Abu Ghraid could not have been your everyday, "sound of mind" individuals. Even though the circumsances they were in were new to them, something had to have been "out of balance" within them for them to act in the way they did.
I believe that David Griffith picked Halloween and the darkness of night for his story for a reason. He has taken his character out of his normal everyday element to prove his point--that we all can do things we are not proud of when placed in different situations. If it would have been any other day of the year at any other time of day, Griffith's character would not have been placed in the position where he ends up in the story. He would not have been at a party around people dressed in costumes, spooky decorations, and creepier than normal vibes. He would have never met his old friend dressed in the Charles Graner costume. He would have never posed for the picture he was so ashamed of just moments after it was taken. No, in order for all of this to happen, Griffith's character had to be placed in abnormal circumstances--and what better time than Halloween night? Griffith even states in the story that "Halloween is when unsettled souls roam the earth. Under that circus tent, past midnight, we were all roaming, asking to be seen, looking for a connection. I found it."
The main character in Prime Directive tries to analyze what he has done after taking the picture. He calls his wife and can't even tell her because he is so ashamed. But his shame is our shame. Griffith's purpose in writing the Prime Directive is to open our eyes to what we are all capable of. It is easy to condemn others for sins they have committed when we have never been put in that situation ourselves. We, as humans are all capable of doing shameful and terrible things when placed in abnormal circumstances.
This is Griffith's intent, what he wants to prove. However, after reading over several articles about what went on at Abu Ghraib, I can honestly say that I could have never committed such horrendous acts of torture. It makes my skin crawl just thinking about doing such things to anybody. Those soldiers humiliated, raped, and even mutilated those prisoners. I believe that in order to do something as terrible, you would have to have some kind of deep, dark, hidden desire to do those things in the first place. No matter how much contempt I felt for the prisoners or how much I loved being in command, I could not picture myself taking pictures next to pyramids of naked, abused prisoners!! I can't fathom it. I understand Griffith's point, that we never know what we are capable of until we are actually put in that situation. But some things you just know would be too horrible for you to bring yourself to do.
Now, the fact that Griffith's character poses with his friend in the Charles Graner costume is pretty sick, but it is nowhere close to what actually happened at Abu Ghraib. The guy who dresses in the costume is sick for even thinking to dress in that costume, and who knows what his intent was for doing that, but there is still no comparison. The main character in Griffith's story probably never anticipated that he would participate in something so shameful. This is a good example of doing something you never thought you'd do because you have never been in that situation before. But if Griffith is trying to say that everyone is capable of committing the same acts that the soldiers like Charles Graner did at Abu Ghraib, I would have to disagree. One, because I know I could never bring myself to do anything like that to another human being, or even an animal. Two, there were other soldiers there who did not participate and who testified against Graner and the others.
Reading over Prime Directive the first time, I didn't really get what David Griffith was trying to say. But then again, I did not know what Abu Ghraib was. After I read about the subject and about Charles Graner, I reread Prime Directive again from the beginnning. I slowly began to realize Griffith's point, and to a certain extent I agree with him. Human nature is an unpredictable thing. And as humans, we change in certain situations. However, Graner and the other soldiers who took part in the unthinkable acts that ocurred at Abu Ghraid could not have been your everyday, "sound of mind" individuals. Even though the circumsances they were in were new to them, something had to have been "out of balance" within them for them to act in the way they did.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
stupid memphis police
i got a stupid ticket today!! for not havin on my stupid seatbelt. and i was only in stupid riverside parking lot. and the stupid police just happened to be posted up lookin all in my car. and i know it must have been like a thousand people that passed with no seatbelt on, but they stopped me. and that stupid man was like "You need to always wear your seatbelt, especially since your pregnant" But i hate havin that stupid belt around my fat ass belly...its uncomfortable. and i started to ask him does he always put on his seatbelt each and every time he gets in the car. but i kept my mouth shut... I NEVER GET TICKETS!!! That is why I have a freakin radar detector in my car. And i saw those stupid police officers sitting there but I did not think they would be lookin all in my car for a stupid seatbelt in the stupid parking lot by the stupid river!!!!! I can drive 80 down the street and not get a ticket, but today I get a stupid seatbelt ticket... I hate the stupid police!! that man did not have to give me a ticket for that! I wasn't even on the real road.
O J Arrested Again
U can find out more on this story by clicking [here].
Ok so O.J. Simpson is in the news...again. He is accused of armed robbery and could face up to 30 years in prison. How stupid can you be? I mean if I was O.J. and I was acquitted of murder charges (when we all know he was guilty), I don't care how many years have passed; I would not be trying to draw attention to myself. I mean didn't he do enough damage when he wrote that stupid book basically admitting his guilt? I know he can not be tried again for the same crime, but I still think he should be trying to stay out of the public eye. (Or at least out of the POLICE'S eye!!!!) I was in the kitchen and I heard part of the story on the news in the living room and decided to look it up since I was online. According to the article I read, which is linked above, Simpson allegedly...
"...burst into a Las Vegas hotel room and snatched memorabilia that documented his own sports career, long ago eclipsed by scandal."
Now was that really worth it???? I mean it wasn't even anything of value. I know I am talking about how stupid it was and he hasn't even had a trial yet... But it is.... soooooo stupid. And Johnny Cochran isn't around, so I am waiting to see who he hires to try to get out of this one!
Friday, September 14, 2007
insomnia?
I CANT GO TO SLEEP!!!!!!!
No one is on face book and the person I was instant messaging disappeared. So now here I am on Blogger. I even added more pics to this page. That is how bored I am. It is like I am tired, but I can not bring myself to get up and go get in the bed. This happens all the time. I never go to sleep until like 2 or 3 in the morning, even when I have to wake up early!! And I don't do it on purpose really. If I go lay in the bed, I'll just be bored and it will still take forever to fall asleep. So I sit in front of my laptop or I text until I get really really really tired...
I know this probably does not interest you the least bit. But I was so freaking bored that I needed something to do... Thanks for reading anyway :)
No one is on face book and the person I was instant messaging disappeared. So now here I am on Blogger. I even added more pics to this page. That is how bored I am. It is like I am tired, but I can not bring myself to get up and go get in the bed. This happens all the time. I never go to sleep until like 2 or 3 in the morning, even when I have to wake up early!! And I don't do it on purpose really. If I go lay in the bed, I'll just be bored and it will still take forever to fall asleep. So I sit in front of my laptop or I text until I get really really really tired...
I know this probably does not interest you the least bit. But I was so freaking bored that I needed something to do... Thanks for reading anyway :)
Thursday, September 13, 2007
EnterTainMent...
Since the dawn of human life, people have sought ways in which to entertain themselves. From gory gladiator fights to violent video games and silent films to raucous music, entertainment has been vital to survival. However, these things can go deeper than just merely being entertaining. As a matter of fact, these things have had a positive influence on our lives, which is why we are writing this paper.
Many people have negative thoughts when it comes to rap music. And this could be understood with all the cursing and violence that comes along with a lot of it. However, there has been one great rap artist that has really influenced my life. Once you get passed the cursing and obscenities, you will see how great Tupac really is.
I think that I have always had a short temper ever since I was a little kid. Everyone needs something that calms them and helps them focus. My thing has always been music, and Tupac’s music has always been my “calm down” music. His songs always have a message, unlike a lot of rap stars’ songs today. Most rappers who are famous today got famous because they had banging beats, or great hooks, or an appealing image. Tupac was different, and, even though he is dead, his music will always live on.
Tupac’s music has influenced my life in many ways. For instance, I can calm down a lot quicker if I spend some time alone with a Tupac CD and just lay down for a while. I also think a lot deeper. I have different views on stuff, and I am a more open-minded person. Many of the scenarios in Tupac’s songs have inspired me to want to better myself and to do things to help other people. I am less selfish and more giving, and more forgiving. Basically, I truly believe I am a better person. To show you what I mean, here is a quote from one of my favorite Tupac songs “Keep Your Head Up”: “I know they like to beat you down a lot/And you come around the block brothers clown a lot/But please don’t cry/Dry your eyes; Never let up/Forgive, but don’t forget, girl keep your head up/And when he tells you you ain’t nothing, don’t believe him/And if he can’t learn to love you, you should leave him/‘Cause sister you don’t need him/And I ain’t trying to gas you up; I just call em I see em.” These lyrics are just one of the many examples of how Tupac’s lyrics have touched my life. Tupac Shakur is a legend, and I am so glad he wrote the way he did. His style of writing has greatly influenced my style of living.
I can never understand why most parents condemn video games. Take my mother for example: she has rallied against video games in our house since I was in kindergarten. Even though they have wormed their way into our home anyway, she still tries to regulate what my younger brothers play (although she fails miserably at that as well.) Many people consider video games of all genres and ratings a complete waste of time. However, think of all the academic computer games you were forced to play in early schooling or at home. I, for one, can attest too many of those. For most, gaming is purely a form of entertainment (although for some, a way of life) that cannot truly be put down as any more worthless than watching hours of TV or sleeping. My two favorite games (well, okay maybe they're also the only two games I've ever extensively played) are Doom and World of Warcraft. My dad ripped a copy of Doom from his brother not long after the game was released and I basically grew up playing it (along with the boring math and spelling games). In general, I do not really believe that I can say any form of sitting on my ass constitutes as "a positive experience for me," but I believe that it has affected me in small ways. For example, I am the only girl I know who has ever played Doom. That's something different about me that most of the people I know cannot match. During the past year, I've grown quite attached to World of Warcraft. Again, it's had its negative effects on me, but through the game I've become closer to friends, made new ones, and even became acquainted with people around the world. It also happens to be an infallibly good method of de-stressing and cooling my temper. Whatever your choice form of entertainment may be, it will always have some sort of positive influence on you. Why else would you spend your time doing it? That is, unless you're just lazy and don't have any qualms about letting your brain rot while "engaging" in mindless activity. It's true that most forms of entertainment are time wasters, but they make us more unique and attuned to the world around us.
Was the year that I spent playing World of Warcraft all worth it? I can’t deny that I had fun at first. At the end however it was more of a hassle than anything. I blew of schoolwork and studying, to play video games. In the end I probably would’ve found another way to blow it off anyways, but WoW made it easier for me to do so. However, the game did have some positive effects on my life. One valuable thing WoW has taught me is a skill that I use all the time. It taught me how to procrastinate and get by with a minimal amount of sleep. This skill is something I find myself using all the time while I’m in school. Another thing that has been a positive for me is the people I’ve met. Not only have I met friends across the world, I have met people in the world outside WoW, who share the same love of video games. Many of these people have become good friends, who I still jeep in touch with today. Although most of them have moved out of Memphis, we still keep in touch through the game. It is those people that made it all worth while.
Sources of entertainment are more than simple things to keep boredom from creeping up on you. Forms of entertainment serve as ways of life, calm stress and nerves, and develop connections between people. Despite the connotations that come with most forms of entertainment, they are conducive and help to establish individuality and personality.
Many people have negative thoughts when it comes to rap music. And this could be understood with all the cursing and violence that comes along with a lot of it. However, there has been one great rap artist that has really influenced my life. Once you get passed the cursing and obscenities, you will see how great Tupac really is.
I think that I have always had a short temper ever since I was a little kid. Everyone needs something that calms them and helps them focus. My thing has always been music, and Tupac’s music has always been my “calm down” music. His songs always have a message, unlike a lot of rap stars’ songs today. Most rappers who are famous today got famous because they had banging beats, or great hooks, or an appealing image. Tupac was different, and, even though he is dead, his music will always live on.
Tupac’s music has influenced my life in many ways. For instance, I can calm down a lot quicker if I spend some time alone with a Tupac CD and just lay down for a while. I also think a lot deeper. I have different views on stuff, and I am a more open-minded person. Many of the scenarios in Tupac’s songs have inspired me to want to better myself and to do things to help other people. I am less selfish and more giving, and more forgiving. Basically, I truly believe I am a better person. To show you what I mean, here is a quote from one of my favorite Tupac songs “Keep Your Head Up”: “I know they like to beat you down a lot/And you come around the block brothers clown a lot/But please don’t cry/Dry your eyes; Never let up/Forgive, but don’t forget, girl keep your head up/And when he tells you you ain’t nothing, don’t believe him/And if he can’t learn to love you, you should leave him/‘Cause sister you don’t need him/And I ain’t trying to gas you up; I just call em I see em.” These lyrics are just one of the many examples of how Tupac’s lyrics have touched my life. Tupac Shakur is a legend, and I am so glad he wrote the way he did. His style of writing has greatly influenced my style of living.
I can never understand why most parents condemn video games. Take my mother for example: she has rallied against video games in our house since I was in kindergarten. Even though they have wormed their way into our home anyway, she still tries to regulate what my younger brothers play (although she fails miserably at that as well.) Many people consider video games of all genres and ratings a complete waste of time. However, think of all the academic computer games you were forced to play in early schooling or at home. I, for one, can attest too many of those. For most, gaming is purely a form of entertainment (although for some, a way of life) that cannot truly be put down as any more worthless than watching hours of TV or sleeping. My two favorite games (well, okay maybe they're also the only two games I've ever extensively played) are Doom and World of Warcraft. My dad ripped a copy of Doom from his brother not long after the game was released and I basically grew up playing it (along with the boring math and spelling games). In general, I do not really believe that I can say any form of sitting on my ass constitutes as "a positive experience for me," but I believe that it has affected me in small ways. For example, I am the only girl I know who has ever played Doom. That's something different about me that most of the people I know cannot match. During the past year, I've grown quite attached to World of Warcraft. Again, it's had its negative effects on me, but through the game I've become closer to friends, made new ones, and even became acquainted with people around the world. It also happens to be an infallibly good method of de-stressing and cooling my temper. Whatever your choice form of entertainment may be, it will always have some sort of positive influence on you. Why else would you spend your time doing it? That is, unless you're just lazy and don't have any qualms about letting your brain rot while "engaging" in mindless activity. It's true that most forms of entertainment are time wasters, but they make us more unique and attuned to the world around us.
Was the year that I spent playing World of Warcraft all worth it? I can’t deny that I had fun at first. At the end however it was more of a hassle than anything. I blew of schoolwork and studying, to play video games. In the end I probably would’ve found another way to blow it off anyways, but WoW made it easier for me to do so. However, the game did have some positive effects on my life. One valuable thing WoW has taught me is a skill that I use all the time. It taught me how to procrastinate and get by with a minimal amount of sleep. This skill is something I find myself using all the time while I’m in school. Another thing that has been a positive for me is the people I’ve met. Not only have I met friends across the world, I have met people in the world outside WoW, who share the same love of video games. Many of these people have become good friends, who I still jeep in touch with today. Although most of them have moved out of Memphis, we still keep in touch through the game. It is those people that made it all worth while.
Sources of entertainment are more than simple things to keep boredom from creeping up on you. Forms of entertainment serve as ways of life, calm stress and nerves, and develop connections between people. Despite the connotations that come with most forms of entertainment, they are conducive and help to establish individuality and personality.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
MonEy, the RoOt of All HaPpinEsS????
Well I really believe I am behind on the blogs. So I guess I will just write about what has been on my mind lately--money!!!!
I know that the Bible says that the love of money is the root of all evil. But what if you don't love money, you just like it a whole lot?
I mean wouldn't you agree that the happiest people are those with money?? I don't believe you actually have to be rich, just comfortable. Poor people may be happy with their family and friends, but most poor people are not completely happy. And those with money, they may have things in their life they are unhappy about. However, I think money is a big part of survival in society today. Maybe I am just thinking that way as of late, since I finally have money. I have been working for a while, but I've never just really had that much money in the bank. I never could really buy exactly what I wanted all the time. I always had to keep money for my phone bill, for food, etc. It seemed like my money would always go so freakin fast!!!! But recently, I have had enough money to do whatever I want. And I still have plenty in the bank---probably the most I have ever had. I won't go into details, but I am truly happier and I feel like I don't have to worry about anything. I even bought my own car, which I waited so freaking long for!!!And since I paid it all, I don't have a car note. Then my insurance is super low and will be even lower after I have my baby. It is like God is really smiling on me lately. I just hope that things are not going well now just to end up taking a horrible turn!!!!! Well at least for now I am content, and I am glad things are going so well. No worries. :)
I know that the Bible says that the love of money is the root of all evil. But what if you don't love money, you just like it a whole lot?
I mean wouldn't you agree that the happiest people are those with money?? I don't believe you actually have to be rich, just comfortable. Poor people may be happy with their family and friends, but most poor people are not completely happy. And those with money, they may have things in their life they are unhappy about. However, I think money is a big part of survival in society today. Maybe I am just thinking that way as of late, since I finally have money. I have been working for a while, but I've never just really had that much money in the bank. I never could really buy exactly what I wanted all the time. I always had to keep money for my phone bill, for food, etc. It seemed like my money would always go so freakin fast!!!! But recently, I have had enough money to do whatever I want. And I still have plenty in the bank---probably the most I have ever had. I won't go into details, but I am truly happier and I feel like I don't have to worry about anything. I even bought my own car, which I waited so freaking long for!!!And since I paid it all, I don't have a car note. Then my insurance is super low and will be even lower after I have my baby. It is like God is really smiling on me lately. I just hope that things are not going well now just to end up taking a horrible turn!!!!! Well at least for now I am content, and I am glad things are going so well. No worries. :)
Monday, September 10, 2007
My Individual Essay: WHAT MAKES TUPAC SO GREAT?
So everyone wants to know what is so special about Tupac Shakur. I had originally decided to write about Michael Jackson, but I got a few blog comments related to my love for Tupac, so I decided to go in that direction.
There is so much to Tupac. I mean a lot of people say that he is one of the best rappers that ever lived. I love him because he is one of the greatest writers that ever lived. Tupac not only wrote song lyrics, he wrote poetry. (This is one thing that he and Michael Jackson have in common.) And even though Tupac is dead, he has left behind somewhat of a legacy.
Unlike many of the rappers today who just write about money, cars, clothes, and hoes, Tupac mostly wrote about things that actually had meaning. I mean, take “Brenda’s got a Baby” for example. Tupac wrote this song after finding out about a similar occurrence in the news. It is based on a true event. It starts off “So Brenda’s got a baby/But Brenda’s barely got a brain/A damn shame--the girl can hardly spell her name/‘That’s not our problem/ It’s up to Brenda’s family’/Well let me show you how it affects our whole community.” I could recite the whole thing backwards and forwards, but I’ll just let you download the song if you want to hear it. Anyway, the song goes on to tell the story of the young teenage Brenda who comes from a poor family who basically doesn’t pay her any attention. The story ends with Brenda dying trying to do anything she could to support herself and her baby since her parents were not really there for her. “Now Brenda’s got to make her own way/Can’t go to her family; they won’t let her stay/No money, no babysitter; she couldn’t keep a job/She tried to sell crack but end up getting robbed/So now what’s left? It ain’t nothing left to sell/So she sees sex as a way of leaving hell/It’s paying her rent, so she really can’t complain/Prostitute found slain, and Brenda’s her name/She’s got a baby” Then the song goes in to the chorus. Yes it is a sad song. And, yes it is vivid. But Tupac was trying to open people’s eyes to a problem that was becoming a pattern in his time. In order to make changes, you have to open people’s eyes up to the problem.
Of course Tupac’s songs had cursing and violence in them just like most rappers, but his songs were not explicit just for the sake of being so. He had to form his music to grab the attention of the audience he was targeting. Another great song by Tupac Shakur is “Changes”. It talks about how police concentrate too much on busting drug dealers and putting people in jail when there are more important issues at hand. “Can’t a brother get a little peace/It’s war in the streets and war in the Middle East/Instead of war on poverty, they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me.” It also brings the issue of how so many African Americans were killing each other. The song is about exactly what it’s titled—changes. Tupac talked about how people had to change the way they thought, acted, and treated each other in order for things to get any better.
Another Tupac classic is “Dear Mama”. This song is like a letter of appreciation from Tupac to his mother. It is about how Tupac grew up with just his mom to take care of him and his sister and how he could never repay her for everything she did for them. It is a very touching song that I believe could bring any mother to tears. I will just quote a few of my favorite lines from this one: “When I was sick as a little kid/to keep me happy, there’s no limit to the things you did/And all my childhood memories are full of all the sweet things you did for me/And even though I act craaazy/I gotta thank the Lord that you made me.”
Finally, the last Tupac song that I will quote any lines out of is “Keep Your Head Up”. This is somewhat of a motivational song directed at anyone and everyone who feels like they have the wait of the world on their shoulders. I know I listen to it a lot when I feel down. The chorus is “Keep your head up/Oooh child, things are gonna get easier/Oooh child, things’ll get brighter”. My favorite part is the beginning of the first verse: “Some say the blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice/I say the darker the flesh, the even deeper the roots/I give a holler to my sisters on welfare/Tupac cares, if don’t nobody else care.” A few more choice lines are: “It seems the rain’ll never let up/I try to keep my head up and still keep from getting wetter/You know it’s funny; when it rains it pours/They got money for wars but can’t feed the poor.”
If you have never listened to Tupac, or if you have but never really payed any attention to the lyrics, I encourage anyone reading this to do so. You may look at him in a totally new light. For me, and I think for many a lot of other people, he is not just a rapper, he is an icon.
So the question was “Why is Tupac such a symbolic figure to African Americans alike?” I can only positively answer that question for myself, but I believe my answer would be the answer of many others as well. Tupac did not just write to make money; he wrote to send a message to all those within earshot. He used his status to influence the young black community of his time. He was a symbol that the young black boys did not have to steal or sell drugs to make money and provide for their families. He showed the entire black community that they still had a chance to make something of themselves and turn their lives around even if they were from the poorest of neighborhoods. And he was such an icon then, that his music still speaks to people today. People are still downloading his songs and obsessing over his lyrics. (I know I am not the only one.) There are still CDs being put out on the market with his music even though he is no longer alive. There are some people still holding on to the concept that Tupac may even still be alive. This puts him up there along with Elvis, and that is a pretty high place to be. To really see the effect that Tupac’s lyrics have you would have to listen to a few of his songs for yourself. Or you could even just look up some of the song lyrics online. Either way, I think that if you really pay attention, you will understand why Tupac was and still is such an iconic symbol for so many people. And I don’t believe it was just blacks either. I mean, it is not just whites that listen to rock, pop, or country. And I know that it is not just blacks that listen to rap. Tupac influenced an entire world of people, not just one race. I am completely obsessed with him from his style, to his tattoos, to his song lyrics, to his thought process. I can recite almost any song of his on the spot all the way to the end. I am a true Tupac Shakur fan, and there are many others out there just like me. And, unlike many rappers who are so big today, Tupac actually put out great things that helped him earn his greatness.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
UGH!!!!
Well I know we are supposed to do like 5 blogs a week. So this next post I will write about why how sick I am of... people, basically...
Ok, so I work at Target, and it started out pretty good. (I've been there for 3 years!) However, people can be sooo crazy. I work at guest service and I have come to realize that people really believe that I am supposed to go through hell and high water to get them whatever they want! It's not Burger King, and no you can't always have it your way! (And it is not Wal Mart either. So I just looove when people say "Well Wal Mart does this..." Okay so! Go to Wal Mart then!)
Like today, this lady calls up to the store and says that she left a bag of cat litter outside in a basket. When someone accidently leaves something at a cash register it's not a problem; they can get the item or their money back. But she had already left out the store. (I feel like you have to be responsible for your own stuff at some point--like when you leave the store.) Anyway, no one had turned it in, and I even had the cart attendant to look outside. This lady was really upset about leaving her stuff, and she really expected me to solve her problem. Our conversation went a little something like this...
me: Well mam, no one turned it in, and the cart attendant says he hasn't seen it and he has been bringing in carts all afternoon.
crazy lady: okay... well...
me: mam?
crazy lady: well what are you gonna do, because I would hate to just be out of my money.
me: Well, are you sure you left it outside?
crazy lady: Yes, I am sure.
me: Okay, well since you left out of the store with it I am not sure there is anything we can do.
crazy lady: Oh there is something you can do. You can either give me my cat food or my money.
At this point I just went to get a manager and let him talk to her, because I could tell she was getting a little crazy. I don't know. Maybe it's just me. Am I the only one who thinks that grown people should be more self relient and not demand that the rest of the world compensate for their mistakes??
This is just a small incident. I only posted it because it just happened today. But I have plenty of stories about crazy people at Target that have come up to guest service and done everyhing: yell, scream, make demands, tell me how to do my job, call me a liar, curse like a sailor, call other employees (like my manager) all kinds of "bitch"s and "ho"s. It's crazy...
Ok, so I work at Target, and it started out pretty good. (I've been there for 3 years!) However, people can be sooo crazy. I work at guest service and I have come to realize that people really believe that I am supposed to go through hell and high water to get them whatever they want! It's not Burger King, and no you can't always have it your way! (And it is not Wal Mart either. So I just looove when people say "Well Wal Mart does this..." Okay so! Go to Wal Mart then!)
Like today, this lady calls up to the store and says that she left a bag of cat litter outside in a basket. When someone accidently leaves something at a cash register it's not a problem; they can get the item or their money back. But she had already left out the store. (I feel like you have to be responsible for your own stuff at some point--like when you leave the store.) Anyway, no one had turned it in, and I even had the cart attendant to look outside. This lady was really upset about leaving her stuff, and she really expected me to solve her problem. Our conversation went a little something like this...
me: Well mam, no one turned it in, and the cart attendant says he hasn't seen it and he has been bringing in carts all afternoon.
crazy lady: okay... well...
me: mam?
crazy lady: well what are you gonna do, because I would hate to just be out of my money.
me: Well, are you sure you left it outside?
crazy lady: Yes, I am sure.
me: Okay, well since you left out of the store with it I am not sure there is anything we can do.
crazy lady: Oh there is something you can do. You can either give me my cat food or my money.
At this point I just went to get a manager and let him talk to her, because I could tell she was getting a little crazy. I don't know. Maybe it's just me. Am I the only one who thinks that grown people should be more self relient and not demand that the rest of the world compensate for their mistakes??
This is just a small incident. I only posted it because it just happened today. But I have plenty of stories about crazy people at Target that have come up to guest service and done everyhing: yell, scream, make demands, tell me how to do my job, call me a liar, curse like a sailor, call other employees (like my manager) all kinds of "bitch"s and "ho"s. It's crazy...
BRAIN STORM!!!!!!
Ok, so my group includes myself, Adam, and Caroline. We were supposed to come up with a common theme, and, once we got past the "umm"s and "i really don't know"s, we settled on "Enterainment". So here is my brainstorm of ideas:
- going to Crunk fest
- changing views of Michael Jackson
- opening up to different kinds of music (like rock and country)
- creating my own mix CDs
- Linkin Park and Jay Z's CD together
- online stuff
- searches for music lyrics
- my obsession with Tupac Shakur
- wanting to go to the Beyonce concert
- missing Music fest
- dancing
Well, those are the thoughts that popped into my head. Not all of them are events, but you never know what you're gonna get with a BRAIN STORM!!!! lol...
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
"UNBOUND" (A New Yorker Article About R. Kelly)
Sasha Frere-Jones wrote an article for the July 2, 2007 edition of the New Yorker describing her conflicting views about R. Kelly's personality and his music. The structure of the article includes an introduction about R. Kelly's child pornography charges (which have yet to come to trial). Following that, the writer talks about R. Kelly's response to his legal troubles. R. Kelly's apparant responses have been invoking God, comparing himself to various black icons like Martin Luther King or Marvin Gaye, and working. R. Kelly's work is the main focus of the article.
The writer describes a few songs from R. Kelly's album, "Double Up". The first song on the album, "The Champ is Here", talks about the pressures he is under with everyone looking at him in such a bad light. He says he is relying on the hood to help him overcome. The author says that the song isn't exactly an admission of guilt but that R. Kelly is on the defensive. This makes me believe that Frere-Jones thinks R. Kelly is in fact guilty of the charges he is facing. The next song to follow on the album is the title track. This song describes R. Kelly in a sexual encounter with two women and Snoop Dogg... Wierd! The rest of the album has a lot more songs of this same sexually explicit nature.
Frere-Jones obviously sees that the type of music that R. Kelly is putting out there seems to be very self-incriminating and odd.
The voice of the article as a whole is rather contradictory. Even though, Frere-Jones does not seem to approve of the persona that R. Kelly portrays, she seems quite taken by his talent. On one hand, he is a man facing child pornography charges and still singing about threesomes and other sexual encounters. On the other hand, he is still the same talenter R&B singer/writer who put out the classic "I Believe I Can Fly" and the compelling twelve-part "Trapped in the Closet". The author even lists a couple of her favorite songs by R. Kelly.
The diction of the article sort of shifts. It starts out more formal, kind of like a news article describing the charges facing a top R&B star. Then, it becomes more informal like the author is talking to a girlfriend about R. Kelly's talent and how much great music he has created. She starts to list her favorite songs, and her own conflicting feelings about R. Kelly begin to surface.
The tone of the article seems a little serious at first, but then it becomes somewhat relaxed. The author finishes up with a description of a couple more of R. Kelly's songs, and depicts what makes them great and what makes them questionable. It is finally about the music and no longer so much just about R. Kelly's response to being charged.
Through the entire article, it was hard for me to figure out if the author was condemning or defending R. Kelly. The beginning makes me believe that she is condemning him for being so careless and uninhibited while he has charges over his head. Then, toward the end I start to feel like she is trying to defend him by pointing out all the good he has done and how talented he is as an artist. I have read the article over and over and over again, and I still can not figure it out. Now I have drawn the conclusion that maybe Frere-Jones still hasn't figured it out herself, and that could be the whole point of the article--to illustrate how many of R. Kelly's fans feel now with everything that is going on.
The writer describes a few songs from R. Kelly's album, "Double Up". The first song on the album, "The Champ is Here", talks about the pressures he is under with everyone looking at him in such a bad light. He says he is relying on the hood to help him overcome. The author says that the song isn't exactly an admission of guilt but that R. Kelly is on the defensive. This makes me believe that Frere-Jones thinks R. Kelly is in fact guilty of the charges he is facing. The next song to follow on the album is the title track. This song describes R. Kelly in a sexual encounter with two women and Snoop Dogg... Wierd! The rest of the album has a lot more songs of this same sexually explicit nature.
Frere-Jones obviously sees that the type of music that R. Kelly is putting out there seems to be very self-incriminating and odd.
The voice of the article as a whole is rather contradictory. Even though, Frere-Jones does not seem to approve of the persona that R. Kelly portrays, she seems quite taken by his talent. On one hand, he is a man facing child pornography charges and still singing about threesomes and other sexual encounters. On the other hand, he is still the same talenter R&B singer/writer who put out the classic "I Believe I Can Fly" and the compelling twelve-part "Trapped in the Closet". The author even lists a couple of her favorite songs by R. Kelly.
The diction of the article sort of shifts. It starts out more formal, kind of like a news article describing the charges facing a top R&B star. Then, it becomes more informal like the author is talking to a girlfriend about R. Kelly's talent and how much great music he has created. She starts to list her favorite songs, and her own conflicting feelings about R. Kelly begin to surface.
The tone of the article seems a little serious at first, but then it becomes somewhat relaxed. The author finishes up with a description of a couple more of R. Kelly's songs, and depicts what makes them great and what makes them questionable. It is finally about the music and no longer so much just about R. Kelly's response to being charged.
Through the entire article, it was hard for me to figure out if the author was condemning or defending R. Kelly. The beginning makes me believe that she is condemning him for being so careless and uninhibited while he has charges over his head. Then, toward the end I start to feel like she is trying to defend him by pointing out all the good he has done and how talented he is as an artist. I have read the article over and over and over again, and I still can not figure it out. Now I have drawn the conclusion that maybe Frere-Jones still hasn't figured it out herself, and that could be the whole point of the article--to illustrate how many of R. Kelly's fans feel now with everything that is going on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
