Just Because It's Happening in Your Head Doesn't Mean That It's Not Real

In "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" by J.K. Rowling, there's a quote that Dumbledore says to Harry that really made an impact on me: "Of course it is happening inside your head Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?". Dumbledore uses this line as an answer to a simple question of Harry's, if what is happening to him right now is real or in his head, but I see this line as more of an ultimatum about life and reality. This line actually drastically changed my overall perspective on certain aspects of life.

Everyone has a different reality. Everyone has life experiences that make them see the world differently. Everyone thinks about things differently. What is reality? Well, the dictionary says this: "The world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them." So reality is "the state of things as they actually exist." What about dreams? What about ideas? Are material things not reality? Are our ideas and thoughts not really as important as maybe we thought they were? Maybe what Dumbledore is saying is that things that happen in our head should be defined as real. 

I think that one's ideas and thoughts are very important. Reality and ideas go hand in hand. Our life experiences shape how we think about the world: Reality shapes our ideas. That being said, our ideas and thoughts also shape what we make out reality, how we live our lives. I think that Dumbledore's trying to say that what is real and what is happening on our heads are very, very closely linked, and sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between the two. There's kind of a grey area. 

In the Harry Potter series, Dumbledore is Harry's mentor. Harry gets wisdom and advice from him constantly. Dumbledore tells him things that will help him grow as a person. This piece of knowledge, one not even explicitly presented as a piece of knowledge, is, I think, one of the most important lines in the entire seires. Dumbledore's telling us that things aren't that hard to reach, our dreams can be achieved, he's kind of making life more accessible to Harry. 

Umbridge's Decision (MAJOR spoiler of the 6th HP book)

At the end of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, by J.K. Rowling, Albus Dumbledore, a great mentor to Harry, dies. He was a very respected and talented wizard and, for the most part, a very well liked person. The only people who didn't like him all too much were the Ministry of Magic, because he seemed to oppose them a lot. However, at Dumbledore's funeral many members of the Ministry show up to give him a last farewell. Among these various wizards and witches is Dolores Umbridge, a Ministry person who made it very clear in the last book that she did not like Dumbledore at all, and thought he was insane.

So why would she come to his funeral? Did the ministry force her to so she could "repent" or something? Maybe it's because she actually cares about Dumbledore now that he's dead. I'd like to think that that's her reason. Now that he's dead, she cares about what he did and she sees that he may have been a good headmaster. Even though she does turn out to be an evil person, she has t have some compassion somewhere deep in her probably very dark soul, and maybe that's why she came to the funeral.

This got me thinking about how people rarely realize how good they have it until they don't have it that well anymore. It gets me thinking about childhood, and how kids always want to grow up, but once they do they wish they were young again. People really take things for granted, with childhood, being able to live pretty much stress free and not realizing how great that is, and with Umbridge, having Dumbledore run things in a very efficient way and be a very talented wizard. Now that he's gone, she might miss him a bit.

In conclusion, I think that even if I don't know Umbridge's exact reasons for going, I'd like to think that maybe she was remorseful of how she had thought of him in life and now does miss him now that he's dead.

What did you take for granted that you wish you hadn't?
Have you ever realized something when it was "too late"?

Taking risks in a small world

    In "Love & Death" by Max Wallace and Ian Halperin, the investigation book into the death of Kurt Cobain, member of the band Nirvana, in the beginning of the book, it talks about how Cobain feels stuck in his small town, and can't wait to get out. For him, music is his way out. In his hometown, he's depressed.
    I can relate with Cobain all too well. Sometimes even though I live in New York City, one of the biggest, busiest cities in the world, I feel like I'm stuck doing nothing that's worth anything. Cobain feels like he's wasting time staying in his hometown, and can't wait to get out. I feel like being in school everyday and living the life that everyone does, and not doing anything especially important will leave me forgotten in the long run. I know that I'm only 13, and only in eighth grade, but I feel like I want to take a risk with my life, and get out of my "hometown", so to speak. Cobain took a risk, and he ended up being famous.
     However, Cobain may have ended up killing himself. (The circumstances of his death are fuzzy and a bit suspicious). If that is the case, then obviously he wasn't happy. Maybe even when we do take risks and get out into the world we're not content. Maybe no one is ever truly content, because there's always something more you could've done to not be forgotten. I guess what I'm trying to say is that even though Cobain did make it out of his hometown, and took risks, and ended up famous, essentially everything he wanted, he still wasn't happy. Maybe no one is ever truly happy.

Grammar + Depression

In "will grayson, will grayson", by David Levithan and John Green, there are two Will Graysons. While they have the same name, they're very different people. Each Will Grayson's alternating chapters are written by alternating authors. The Will Grayson David Levithan writes as, the one I liked to think of as "depressed Will Grayson", writes in all lowercases throughout the entire book, except when he writes in all capitals to show screaming or enthusiasm. it's really annoying actually, he wrote like this the entire book and i was driven a little bit insane sometimes. In the beginning of the book, I really could not stand it. I definitely care about grammar and spelling, and at times I just wanted to scribble all over the book with a pen, turning all the un-righteously lowercase letters capital.

  I honestly have never really been able to connect to Levithan's books, finding them a little unnecessarily complex in terms of the writing style, a little bit too much inside the character's heads, and not all that relateable. I don't think I've ever read and enjoyed a David Levithan book, but I was determined to like this one because I really like John Green, and wanted to enjoy reading "will grayson, will grayson".

In the end, I did enjoy reading it. I think having John Green's chapters written with typical grammar and capitalization rules gave me a bit of contrast to maybe ask myself why Levithan would choose to write in all lowercases. I mean, John Green is able to convey his characters perfectly well without breaking grammar rules. Then I thought, maybe Levithan was trying to say something about how the character's mind worked, and it wasn't just Levithan trying to be above typical capitalization, which is what I thought at first, and honestly thought it to be a little pretentious. 

Having the letters be all lowercase made the character seem like he was trying to be above societal norms, and not trying to fit in, or not believing he could. This Will Grayson was depressed, and believed he was different from everyone else in terms of having felt more pain, and being more, in a sense, broken. To him, the little things in life don't matter. He just wants to be happy, but by focusing on pain, he's holding himself back. I think the reason that he doesn't capitalize his letters, or why Levithan made that decision, is to show that he's past caring, but is also actively making a decision not to care, and in that, he's showing that he does care. By not using capitalization, he's setting himself apart from society, putting himself beyond the reaches of everyday rules and norms. The way Levithan writes his character actually gave me a lot of insight into who the character was, and wasn't just some ploy to make the book more pretentious and "artistic" than it was, as I originally thought his lack of capitalization was. 

In the end, I agree with Levithan's choices, and I think that even though the non-capitalized letters could get  a bit infuriating at times, the choice Levithan made ultimately made the character deeper, and helped me see more who "depressed Will Grayson" really was, past his depression, and also deeper into it.

Can the way we think affect how we write and use literary tools? Can the way we write give others a window into our minds? 

Reading Response to "Am I Blue?" by Bruce Coville

     In the short story, "Am I Blue?" by Bruce Coville, there is a line in the story that I really connected to. The line is said by Melvin, a "fairy godfather" to a 16 year old boy named Vince. The role  of a fairy godfather is to help kids who are being gaybashed, or being made fun of for being gay, even if they aren't. Melvin's role is to give Vince advice, and also to grant him three wishes. Melvin tells Vince the story of how he died, he was murdered by three guys trying to "teach him a lesson" because he was gay. Vince asks Melvin if he wants to "get those guys or something" to which Melvin responds, "I prefer reform to vengeance". This is the line that really stood out to me in the story. I think it has a really good message, and I agree with it.
     The reason I agree with this line is because I believe that vengeance does not really help anyone. The reason it doesn't help is because it only creates more rage, and drastic actions usually occur. Also, it keeps the rage alive, and turns one hateful event into a chain of hateful events. If Melvin had sought vengeance on his attackers, say by beating them up, he would only have kept the chain of events going. Maybe the attacker friends would go after another gay kid, and beat them up because now they believed that all gays were bad, or maybe they would just keep the hate in their minds, and pass it on to their children or other people they had an influence over further on in their lives. Whatever happened, a chain of hate would be continued, and there would just be more rage and hatred.
     What, Melvin says, that he prefers reform to vengeance, makes a lot of sense. Reform can only help people. It can make them better, and make them see the world in a different way. One key to the kind of reform Melvin is talking about it tolerance. He wants to help bullies see that what they're doing is wrong, and that being gay really is okay. He wants to help people see that being gay is not wrong, to change the way they see the world with tolerance, as opposed to carrying on a chain of hatred with vengeance. Now Melvin helps people who are questioning their sexuality come to terms with who they are, helping, instead of hurting like he would be if he had tried to go after his attackers.
     In conclusion, Melvin's statement that he prefers reform to vengeance is something I agree completely with. By helping people change for the better and have more tolerance, Melvin is helping stop a chain of hateful events that could have happened if he had sought to hurt his attackers back. By choosing reform over vengeance, Melvin is stopping hate and promoting tolerance.