Ana Juan "New Yorker Cover"

         Through her New Yorker cover, Ana Juan asserts her patriotism and reminds us all of our loyalties to our country and the importance of our country's history. She does so by painting the New York skyline reflected on the river, with only the reflection displaying the Twin Towers and the actual skyline without them. Her purpose is to remind us, over 10 years later, never to forget the loss America sustained when the Twin Towers were attacked and to instill within us national pride. By using dark blues and grays, Juan creates a sad, nostalgic tone within her painting that generates those same emotions in viewers.

         Questions:
         1. I think this painting is a beautiful representation of the past and the present. The present is portrayed as the New York skyline, which is at the very top of the painting. The past is portrayed as the Twin Towers in the reflection in the river. The Twin Towers are clearly absent in the skyline, which is fairly small, but they take up most of the actual painting. There is a huge difference in size between the two. Perhaps this is meant to represent how large of a loss it was. We didn't simply lose two buildings, we lost our sense of pride in our country. The Twin Towers fell and left behind a space- the physical space where they stood and a space in our country's heart.
          2. I really love this painting, which is one of the reasons why I chose to write about it. I think it's beautiful and symbolic. I love how the artist is able to get her message across so clearly without words. The painting certainly speaks for itself, and I really like that. 9/11 is one of the most important events in America's history, and I think that sometimes we don't think about it as much as we should have because it happened in our lifetime. In 50 years from now I'm the history books will be filled with information about it and people will recognize its importance, but as of now, we don't really have that. Sure, we have a commemoration every year, but we need to understand how it affected us and how it continues to affect us. I think this is what Juan is trying to get us to do.
          3. I definitely think this painting is an example of "a picture is worth a thousand words." It's the same thing as any other powerful picture from 9/11 but in some ways it's even more impressive because of all the symbolism. I don't really know how to explain how this painting is worth a thousand words, it just is. Whenever you see something so powerful it's hard to explain why it's powerful. Looking at this painting makes me feel patriotic and sad all at the same time. It's a very mournful painting, and sometimes those are the most powerful.

Apple Blog

       I wouldn't want to be in Apple's shoes right now. The company is still fighting to avoid a federal court order that is trying to force them to create new software that will allow the F.B.I. to break into an iPhone used by one of the shooters at San Bernardino. The basis of the argument is privacy vs. security, a question that has been haunting the American people for years now. Where do we draw the line? When do we sacrifice privacy for security or vice versa? I believe that in this specific case, security is edging out privacy. As the threats of terrorist attacks loom larger than ever, now is the time to act in order to prevent the worst from happening.
         Apple believes itself to be a revolutionary company. This is certainly made evident by their controversial 1984 commercial, whose tagline read "Why 1984 Won't Be Like '1984'." The company has fought against "Big Brother" and big government since the very beginning. The commercial itself got mixed reviews- some viewers loved and some, including Apple's Board of Directors, hated it. But once it was aired, its message was clear: Apple won't be pushed around by anyone and they'll always be there to protect its buyers' freedom.
         This sense of company pride and importance has now translated over to the current situation. This time, however, I don't think it's appropriate. In an age where terrorism grows steadily larger and America is constantly being bombarded with threats, it is of the utmost importance that we maintain strong security and a strong defense. The San Bernardino attack could be the first of many. When the lives of the American people are at stake, I believe that privacy becomes a second priority. In this case, I believe that Apple should make the software and allow the F.B.I. to use it because by doing so, they'll be protecting people's lives. In the New York Times article "Breaking Down Apple's iPhone Fight With the U.S. Government," it explains that the F.B.I. wants to break into the phone to see who the shooters were in contact with before the attack. Apple claims that creating software that would allow them to do this could open the door to future breaches of privacy. However, I believe that if Apple has the power to create this software, they have the power to destroy this software. I say they should create it, allow the F.B.I. to use it, and then destroy it. If there comes another time where the F.B.I. would need it, they'll have to go through another long court case. The software should be given out only when it is a last resort, which can only be determined by the courts.
          I don't know what the verdict of this case will be. I do know that I believe the verdict should rule in the F.B.I.'s favor and that Apple will try its hardest to stop that from happening. If there was any other way to get that information, the F.B.I. probably already looked into it. The fact that they're fighting this battle so hard should be a sign that this is crucial and most likely a last resort. The shooters at San Bernardino could have information that threatens the entire country. And that, I believe, is enough of a reason to risk our privacy.

David Sedaris "Go Carolina"

         In his essay, "Go Carolina" (2000), David Sedaris asserts that the way in which society attempts to mold children to fit its standards is shameful. Sedaris makes this assertion through the use of a humorous anecdote from his own childhood, describing the ways in which his speech therapy connected to other aspects of his life, specifically his homosexuality. His purpose is to make his readers aware of, and perhaps even angry at, the pressures of society and the negative and trying effects they can have on children. By writing about a serious topic but maintaining a humorous tone, Sedaris successfully sets up his argument to be both entertaining and educational, allowing his audience to connect both with him and his story.

         Questions:
         1. This story appears to show that schools, or at least this school in particular, find it beneficial to continuously provide students who need it with speech therapy. There are potentially good and bad consequences of such a policy. It could be a very positive experience for those students, providing them with people who can help them overcome their obstacles. However, as shown in this story, it can be a very negative experience, making students feel poorly about themselves for needing it in the first place and making them frustrated when they can't get it right. Another thing this story reveals is the attitudes that the therapists themselves and the teachers can have toward such students. According to Sedaris, his teacher would spare him no embarrassment, either intentionally or unintentionally, by announcing to the class every time he had a session. His descriptions seem to imply that his therapist was uncaring and selfish. These details seem to me to be true, because I believe that schools try to provide students with assistance in every area, even if the student himself doesn't agree. I should hope, however, that most schools wouldn't employ a therapist with so little experience, especially if they get negative feedback from the students, and that they would take more steps to ensure the teachers are more understanding of the situation.

         2. Throughout the story Sedaris uses rueful humor- humor that also employs a touch of reality, describing situations that may have been funny, but perhaps shouldn't have happened. For example, Sedaris writes that his therapist would have wanted to hang a sign on the door that read "'Speech Therapy Lab', though a more appropriate marker would have read 'Future Homosexuals of America.'" Though this is supposed to be funny, it's also supposed to be serious, displaying Sedaris's belief that speech therapy was really just a way to put homosexual boys into a group that would help them become "normal." These types of quips are used throughout the story and help Sedaris to better get his point across.

         3. Again, Sedaris's tone is one of rueful humor, created by many lines in the story. A few examples include:

• "Here was a person for whom the word pen had two syllables. Her people undoubtedly drank from clay jugs and hollered for Paw when the vittles were ready - so who was she to advise me on anything?"
• "On the days I was absent, I imagined she addressed the room, saying, 'David's not here today but if he were, he'd have a speech therapy session at two-thirty.'"
• "Had her name had no s's, she probably would have bypassed a career in therapy and devoted herself to yanking out healthy molars or performing unwanted clitoridectomies on the schools of Africa. Such was her personality."
• "Whereas those around me might grow up to be lawyers or movie stars, my only option was to take a vow of silence and become a monk."

These are all examples of the way in which Sedaris creates a humorous tone, though with a serious message. In each case he describes the situation in a funny way, mostly through exaggeration, but the underlying message is more grave. He shows the way in which his speech therapy sessions negatively affected him and made him feel badly about himself. By using this type of tone, Sedaris creates a connection between himself and his readers, making his audience feel as though they are on the same side, fighting against a common enemy. 

Toni Morrison "The Nobel Lecture in Literature"

         In her acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature entitled "The Nobel Lecture in Literature," Toni Morrison propounds the vast importance and influence of language. She does this by telling the story of an old, wise woman who is confronted by a few young people trying to prove that she is not all-seeing, comparing language to a helpless bird, explaining that it is the responsibility of humankind to nurture language and ensure that it lives on. Her purpose is to teach the people of the world, young and old, that language is powerful and dangerous, and should be given the utmost care and consideration. Her tone and her descriptions of how language can be used and how it can effect us makes it clear that she loves language and wishes to impart that love onto us.

         Questions:
         1. Morrison clearly loves language. Not even necessarily her own language, just the concept of language itself and how it connects humans seems to be of particular interest to her. Most of her speech is made up of an allegory that demonstrates her own approaches to language based on the characters of the children as well as the wise old woman. She clearly feels a connection to the old woman and the bird, as she explained that she often speculated about what it could mean and thus chose to understand it as an explanation of the importance of language. To her, language is something fragile and beautiful, and not something that should be taken lightly. Morrison explains that language is something that can effect every person and that it is within our power to take control of it and use it to the best of our ability.
       
         2. In the beginning of the story, the desires of the children and the old woman are simple- the children want the old woman to be proven wrong and the old woman wants the children to understand that what they are doing is wrong. However, as the story progresses, their desires become much more complicated. Morrison explains that want the children really desire is answers- they want to understand all of life's questions, and they especially want the old woman to teach them how to appreciate language and appreciate life. The old woman in return wants the children to understand the impact that language can have and the importance of using it well. She wants them to realize that language is the most powerful thing in this world.

         3. Honestly, at the beginning I thought the inclusion of the story was quite odd, but at the end I realized it was perfectly appropriate. What better way to address those who have awarded you with a prize in literature than with a story? Morrison understands that she best gets her ideas across through stories, so she created one to demonstrate how she feels about language. I liked the story because I found it easier to understand and relate to rather than just a simple speech. By attributing the ideas to characters, those ideas become all the more real and much more understandable.

The Importance of Getting History Right

         From a young age, our parents teach us that we must always tell the truth. As children, we take this in without question, but as we grow older, we start to wonder why. Why must we always tell the truth? Why is it even more important to tell the truth about history? People have a lot more influence than they realize, and often times they don't understand that retelling history inaccurately actually has the power to change the future. As the saying goes, we must tell the truth about the past so that "history doesn't repeat itself." In order to learn from its mistakes, the world must first understand what its mistakes were.
         Holocaust deniers are some of the most despicable people living in this world. They don't realize what kind of influence they have. Of course at this point in time, we have the capacity to prove that these deniers are undoubtedly wrong, what with the availability of stories from survivors, but what happens after all of the Holocaust survivors pass away? Who will be left with first-hand knowledge to prove deniers wrong? Years and years from now, people living may become more uncertain as to whether or not the Holocaust existed. This is extremely dangerous, because the Holocaust, as well as the entirety of World War II, taught the world a crucial lesson- that man is capable of abominable and abhorrent things. Eventually, will people start to wonder "how could anyone do something so terrible"? If they no longer believe that the Holocaust could have existed, that gives the world a chance to make the same mistakes once again. Telling the truth about the past is crucial to preventing this from happening.
         We see a similar idea in the book 1984, written by George Orwell. In his dystopian future, the society of Oceania lives in a world where history is constantly changing. Lies become truth and everyday the past is altered to serve the government's needs. The consequences of such actions are seen throughout the book; people are uneducated, living in terrible conditions with the government controlling every aspect of their lives. History is taught incorrectly, and the people no longer understand the world they live in. They become mindless drones, accepting everything the government tells them because they don't know any better. The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, finds it difficult to do his job of altering the past because he understands that by doing so, he is giving the government a way to do whatever they want without worrying about the people rioting against them. They don't have the capacity to learn that what the government is doing is wrong because they don't know any other way of life.
         I'm not necessarily worried that in present day, something like this could occur. I think that now, especially in America, we hold truth on a pedestal too high to allow someone to come around and change it. People still try to lie about the past of course, like Holocaust deniers or people who tell lies about Israel, but they are constantly fought against by people determined to tell the truth. Everyday I see friends on Facebook responding to articles that tell lies about Israel or sharing videos that show the truth of the situation in the Middle East. And I don't think the people telling lies will ever win, because even if there's only one person who goes against it, that creates uncertainty, which starts to lead people down the road to truth. However, I don't think the people telling the truth will ever win either, for the same reasons. I think the battle between truth and lies is constant, and that there will always be two opinions about history. It's important for us, however, as educated, young adults, to understand which opinion is the truth and which one is the lie. If we want a better future, one where we don't repeat our mistakes, we first have to look to the past and ensure that we're getting history right.

Maya Lin "Vietnam Veterans Memorial"

         Using her work Vietnam Veterans Memorial, Maya Lin makes a statement about veterans and the armed forces, perhaps suggesting that we as citizens don't think about or thank them enough for their service, and that we often disregard and take for granted their efforts. She gets her message across by creating a memorial out of a clear, black, reflective stone that allows passerby to see their reflections along with the names of the fallen, causing them to think more deeply about themselves and their views of soldiers. Her purpose is to make viewers aware of how many people die trying to fight for our country's safety and freedom and thus to make viewers feel indebted to them as well as grateful. Though her architectural work doesn't necessarily have a distinct tone, the mere magnitude of it as well as how many names are engraved in it inspires an awestruck reaction from her audience.

         Questions:

         1. I think the way she designed this memorial is ingenious. The mere vastness of it as well as the extensive list of names is enough to take people's breath away. By listing every single person, Lin points to the importance of each and every soldier, not just those who are deemed "honorable" or "heroic." By using a dark reflective stone, Lin allows viewers to themselves within the list of names, creating a connection between the living and the dead. I think it's a beautiful piece of art.

         2. Again, I think the fact that she included every single soldier's name is supposed to send the message that every soldier is important no matter what they do. Lin labels all soldiers and veterans as heroes. She attempts to create a connection between viewers and veterans in order to create an understanding and appreciation between them. She wants the viewers to appreciate the sacrifices that veterans make and to have more respect for soldiers and the armed forces in general. Perhaps she also lists every soldier's name to show her disapproval for war- the cost of war is much too great if that many people have to die. 

Annie Dillard "Living Like Weasels"

         In her essay "Living Like Weasels," Annie Dillard suggests that the nature and lifestyle of a weasel represents true freedom, comparing it to the seemingly free lifestyle of humans, stipulating that humans are actually caught up in a world of restrictions and captivity. She begins by describing the entrancing behavior of weasels, then connecting it to her own encounter with a weasel, afterwards explaining how the encounter affected her, and finally giving her opinion upon the entire subject as a whole. Her purpose appears to be to convince readers that the weasel lives the optimal life- never bound by choices or decisions, always acting based on instinct and necessity- and that humans should follow suite instead of getting caught up in their own world. Seemingly addressing the entire human population, Dillard creates an awestruck and detached tone by writing a journal-entry-esque essay, describing her thoughts as if she were the only one hearing them. 

         Questions:

         1. The division of this essay is interesting- I think in some ways the numbered paragraphs follow her thought patterns. They go through first the details of simply what a weasel is, introducing the topic both to us and to her mind. Then she goes on to connect it to a memory, when she encountered a weasel herself. She first describes the setting of where it occurred, going into great detail about the landscape and various species living there. Continuing on, she goes through her thoughts while actually looking at the weasel, recounting exactly what it looked like and how it felt when their eyes locked. The next paragraph describes the aftermath- her thoughts after she sat back and mulled over what had just happened. Then, regret. She describes her metaphorical regret for not latching onto the weasel's throat, symbolizing her regret for not living as mindlessly as the weasel does. The final paragraph describes the general idea that she takes from the whole situation, living her with more food for thought. 

         2. This line is powerful because it's really the heart of her message- she wishes she could live as mindlessly as the weasel does, "noticing everything, remembering nothing." Those two actions symbolize the lifestyle of animals or of nature. Simply taking everything in as it is, not caring about it or placing in it any more significance. I think her thoughts about this come from a place of hurt or fear. Obviously something in the world scares her if she wishes to live like an animal does (or thinking like an animal, to be more accurate). She doesn't want attachments and choices and everything else that makes life hard for humans. She would rather live like an animal because it's more peaceful and creates less of a chance of being hurt or feeling any bad emotions at all. 

         5. I don't think Dillard means "wild" like having no control over oneself. I think she means more like returning to natural instincts, relying on emotions and needs rather than want. When one returns to such instincts, human thoughts and patterns of behavior slowly slip away. She seems to suggest that being "wild" is being free- having the freedom to do whatever you want whenever you want simply because you feel the urge or need to do it. Obviously she isn't suggesting murder or anything of the sort. To her, having a little bit of the wild in life would mean simply doing something because it feels right or it feels good, not being bogged down by the choices of everyday life.