I recently read the book Where Things Come Back by John Corey Whaley. I went into this book expecting to get a good story about a boy looking for his brother, but instead I got a lot of lessons about life. I enjoyed this. This book, to me, was more about the big picture than any of the individual characters. The individual characters were interesting and, for the most part, well-developed, but I felt like they were all used to convey a deeper message.
One of my favorite characters was Lucas, the main character,(Cullen)'s best friend. What initially intrigued me about him was how he was friends with the Cullen, even though Cullen described himself as a loser and Lucas as a popular guy, but with a maturity unusual in his age group. Lucas is close to Cullen's family, but also close to his other friends who are more vapid and occupied with appearances than Cullen and his brother Gabriel are.
I think Lucas keeps his superficial friends because of his past. Lucas's dad was abusive to him and his mother, and he had a brother who died. Lucas had an unusually hard childhood. Cullen however, had a childhood that was pretty much normal, two parents, no huge tragedy or struggle to overcome. However, neither of them is totally content with who they are. Lucas wants to fit in. Cullen doesn't. If Lucas grew up believing that he was different, even if it was an underlying belief that he never really confronted, and he's not happy with who he currently is, he might look to his past as a way to blame something or someone for his discontent. By trying to fit in, he's trying to make himself happy.
People always seem to go to things that they aren't. Probably because with the standards that are set socially today, not many people are confident or comfortable with who they are. So in an attempt to make them happier, they go for a change, something that they aren't to make them better. I think that this is what Lucas is trying to do.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Young Love
In the book Looking for Alaska, by John Green, the main character, Pudge, falls in love with Alaska Young in a matter of months. Having recently finished Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, and reading about Juliet and Romeo's mutual love that occurs in a matter of days, it makes me wonder about why people fall in love, and why teens fall in love so fast.
The first time Pudge sees Alaska, he says that she's "the hottest girl in all of human history". It's obvious that from day one he's attracted to her, but the first time he says he loves her is a while later. He develops an obsession with her that starts from day one, and grows into love. Why does Pudge fall in love with Alaska? I think it's because he sees qualities in her that he doesn't see in himself, sees her very frequently, and there's also a significant degree of sexual attraction. Pudge is a bit of an awkward boy, who doesn't connect with people very deeply, and doesn't really see anything that special or interesting about himself. Alaska is a girl who is confident, emotional, and highly intriguing. She has stories to tell and a lot of secrets. She's also periodically vulnerable, and that makes him want to take care of her. Pudge also sees Alaska very often. They take classes together, and Pudge's roommate the Colonel is one of Alaska's best friends. Pudge and Alaska spend thanksgiving break almost totally by themselves, and spend large amounts of time together. Pudge's love for Alaska is interesting. If they had met at a later time, would he still love her, or would he see her in a different way depending on his experiences?
Love is a highly circumstantial thing sometimes. In some cases, people might fall in love because someone is what they need at a particular time. In other cases, people might have fallen in love no matter the time or place. I'm 14 and have never fallen in love, or anything remotely close to it, so this is all conjecture and opinion.
The reason I think teens fall in love so fast, is because they're growing and unstable, and usually have low self-esteem, and fall in love with traits they admire in others, and also other people who see good in them and care for them. In a time where everything is variable, they're looking for someone who will love them constantly and unwaveringly.
Reading about young love recently has given me time to reflect on what it is, and why it happens.
The first time Pudge sees Alaska, he says that she's "the hottest girl in all of human history". It's obvious that from day one he's attracted to her, but the first time he says he loves her is a while later. He develops an obsession with her that starts from day one, and grows into love. Why does Pudge fall in love with Alaska? I think it's because he sees qualities in her that he doesn't see in himself, sees her very frequently, and there's also a significant degree of sexual attraction. Pudge is a bit of an awkward boy, who doesn't connect with people very deeply, and doesn't really see anything that special or interesting about himself. Alaska is a girl who is confident, emotional, and highly intriguing. She has stories to tell and a lot of secrets. She's also periodically vulnerable, and that makes him want to take care of her. Pudge also sees Alaska very often. They take classes together, and Pudge's roommate the Colonel is one of Alaska's best friends. Pudge and Alaska spend thanksgiving break almost totally by themselves, and spend large amounts of time together. Pudge's love for Alaska is interesting. If they had met at a later time, would he still love her, or would he see her in a different way depending on his experiences?
Love is a highly circumstantial thing sometimes. In some cases, people might fall in love because someone is what they need at a particular time. In other cases, people might have fallen in love no matter the time or place. I'm 14 and have never fallen in love, or anything remotely close to it, so this is all conjecture and opinion.
The reason I think teens fall in love so fast, is because they're growing and unstable, and usually have low self-esteem, and fall in love with traits they admire in others, and also other people who see good in them and care for them. In a time where everything is variable, they're looking for someone who will love them constantly and unwaveringly.
Reading about young love recently has given me time to reflect on what it is, and why it happens.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Mercutio's Mind
In Romeo and Juliet, Mercutio is a very complex character. He has a way about him that's hectic and almost panicked. He provokes people in clever ways, by using insults that aren't obvious to everyone. Mercutio gives off an air of nonchalance and detachment, but under the surface, he seems to be living in a bit of turmoil.
In the Queen Mab speech, Mercutio goes a little bit insane. Romeo sets him off with a harmless comment about dreams, and he goes off on what is at first a light-hearted, fanciful monologue but turns into something rather dark and disturbing. I believe that in the Queen Mab speech, we see a little bit of what Mercutio is like under his jokey exterior. Why does he go on about dreams into such length? He says that dreams are "the children of an idle brain" and he talks of people who dream as if he's not included in them, and as if they're being taken advantage of or being controlled by the dreams they're having. Does Mercutio believe himself to be above others? This is plausible, as he makes fun of those around him on a regular basis.
Something I've noticed about Mercutio is that a small amount of his lines are in verse. Many of his lines seem more disorganized than those of other characters. Shakespeare is showing, in this, the hectic and disorganized nature of Mercutio himself. He's a very intense person, and seems very caught up in his own mind most of the time. He has intense highs and lows, sometimes helping Romeo out and encouraging him to do things, and sometimes just disregarding him. The only time Mercutio gives a clear piece of advice/ a premonition is on his deathbed, with the line "A plague o' both your houses"
Mercutio is a whirlwind of activity who seems to suck Romeo and Benvolio into things, regardless of what they want. He's complex, and seems to have an underlying personal conflict under all of his jokes.
In the Queen Mab speech, Mercutio goes a little bit insane. Romeo sets him off with a harmless comment about dreams, and he goes off on what is at first a light-hearted, fanciful monologue but turns into something rather dark and disturbing. I believe that in the Queen Mab speech, we see a little bit of what Mercutio is like under his jokey exterior. Why does he go on about dreams into such length? He says that dreams are "the children of an idle brain" and he talks of people who dream as if he's not included in them, and as if they're being taken advantage of or being controlled by the dreams they're having. Does Mercutio believe himself to be above others? This is plausible, as he makes fun of those around him on a regular basis.
Something I've noticed about Mercutio is that a small amount of his lines are in verse. Many of his lines seem more disorganized than those of other characters. Shakespeare is showing, in this, the hectic and disorganized nature of Mercutio himself. He's a very intense person, and seems very caught up in his own mind most of the time. He has intense highs and lows, sometimes helping Romeo out and encouraging him to do things, and sometimes just disregarding him. The only time Mercutio gives a clear piece of advice/ a premonition is on his deathbed, with the line "A plague o' both your houses"
Mercutio is a whirlwind of activity who seems to suck Romeo and Benvolio into things, regardless of what they want. He's complex, and seems to have an underlying personal conflict under all of his jokes.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
The Concept of Juliet
In Romeo and Juliet, Romeo is a character with very intense emotions. The emotions he feels seem to be related almost entirely to love. He's a total hopeless romantic. In act 2, scene 2, when he meets Juliet for only the second time he speaks about how much in love with her she is. He even goes so far as to say "O, that I were a glove upon that hand,/That I might touch that cheek!" He met this girl earlier that day, and yet by the end of it, he's talking about how much he loves her, and asking her to marry him, asking for "The exchange of thy love's faithful vow for mine." Romeo has fallen madly in love.
Juliet is not the first woman Romeo has loved. In the beginning of the book, in fact, just hours before he meets Juliet, Romeo talks about "fair Rosaline" a woman who unfortunately for him, vowed never to marry. He speaks of her beauty, saying that "One fairer than my love! the all-seeing sun/
Ne'er saw her match since first the world begun." Later that day, he has forgotten all about her, and is now in love with Juliet.
Juliet is not the first woman Romeo has loved. In the beginning of the book, in fact, just hours before he meets Juliet, Romeo talks about "fair Rosaline" a woman who unfortunately for him, vowed never to marry. He speaks of her beauty, saying that "One fairer than my love! the all-seeing sun/
Ne'er saw her match since first the world begun." Later that day, he has forgotten all about her, and is now in love with Juliet.
So does Romeo actually love these women, (maybe children would be a more fitting word, and Juliet isn't even 14 years old.) or does he just think he does. He doesn't even know Juliet, and yet he's asking for her hand in marriage the day he meets her. What's wrong with him?
I think that Romeo is in love with the concept of love itself. He can't truly care about Juliet within hours of meeting her, but he can be head-over heels about the idea of having a wife who's beautiful, and who loves him back.
This reminds me all too much of many middle school relationships. The scenario I see happen over and over goes like this: Person a finds out person b likes them. Person b begins to like person a back BECAUSE their feelings are reciprocated. This lasts for anywhere from 3 days to about a month, and then both the people get tired of the relationship, and back out. Now, I'm not saying that this is always the case, but I've seen it happen quite often.
If Romeo and Juliet hadn't died, would their marriage have lasted? What if Romeo annoyed Juliet? What if Juliet turned out to be really mean? Without getting to know each other, how do they know they're in love. I don't believe they were, or at least not in my definition of love.
In conclusion, Romeo's views on love are really intense, and he's a total romantic. He's also naive and stupid to marry Juliet so soon, in my opinion. If they had only waited to get to know each other, they may have realized that they weren't what each other wanted, and ended up alive.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Looking Forward
This week, I read an article from Upfront Magazine called "Trying Times". It's about the struggling job market in the U. S. right now, and how it's affecting recent and near-future college graduates. Kacey Herring, a girl who is soon to graduate from NYU, talks about her trouble finding a job in today's industry. The end goal, she says, "is to work in entertainment marketing", but in this economy she says right now "I just need a job." The reason jobs are so hard to find for young people right now is that our economy is still suffering from the Great Recession. While unemployment rates are not as high as they were, there are still many young people out of work.
These young people aren't out of work because of incompetence, or because they're unqualified, in fact, many of them have college degrees. They're out of work because there's simply a lack of jobs. However, a college degree can greatly increase your chance of getting a job. This being said, student can put kids and their families deep into debt. It's a situation where you have to choose your path wisely, and it's not as easy as it should be.
This makes me think/worry about my own future. It saddens me that I might not be able to do what I want to do with a career, and rather have to do something practical and required in this economy. I don't think it's fair how many people are in debt because of student loans. This makes me scared for my own future. I'd like to become a number of things, but are any of them extremely practical or in fields that are easy to find work in? I don't want to give up happiness for practicality.
People should be able to get a job without being in debt to loan companies. According to the Constitution, America is about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Will people be happy when they're living trying to pay of student loans that they took out to get degrees that won't even get them a job? Is it fair that college puts people in this situation? No, I don't think it is, and I'd like to help change that somehow, not just because it's an issue that pertains to me, but because every young person should be able to end school with a life to look forward to.
This makes me think/worry about my own future. It saddens me that I might not be able to do what I want to do with a career, and rather have to do something practical and required in this economy. I don't think it's fair how many people are in debt because of student loans. This makes me scared for my own future. I'd like to become a number of things, but are any of them extremely practical or in fields that are easy to find work in? I don't want to give up happiness for practicality.
People should be able to get a job without being in debt to loan companies. According to the Constitution, America is about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Will people be happy when they're living trying to pay of student loans that they took out to get degrees that won't even get them a job? Is it fair that college puts people in this situation? No, I don't think it is, and I'd like to help change that somehow, not just because it's an issue that pertains to me, but because every young person should be able to end school with a life to look forward to.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Forgiveness
In the book Christine Falls by John Banville under the pseudonym Benjamin Black, there are many complicated and confusing relationships at work. Quirke and Malachy Griffin are brothers, and although Quirke was adopted, he's the favored son. However, Malachy or Mal as he's referred to, married the girl that Quirke has been in love with. They're not close, even though they were raised together.
This is sibling rivalry to an extreme. What is the line that has to be crossed that totally obliterates possible forgiveness of a family member? I've heard stories from children of drug addicts forgiving their parents for total negligence. I've never refused to forgive anybody in my life. Why is there such a rift between Mal and Quirke?
The difference between forgiving a negligent parent and forgiving someone who's stolen a girl or a parent's favor, is that they're two different conflicts. One is forgivable because it's the person who gave life to you making a mistake- a huge one, possibly the worst you could make, and if there is forgiveness present, a new relationship can be built out of the ashes of it. Mal has never forgiven Quirke because Quirke stole the admiration of his biological father. Quirke doesn't need Mal's forgiveness because Mal stole the love of his life, and neither of them wants to forgive the other, or wants forgiveness.
Who started this feud? It wasn't Quirke's fault that he was the favored child. However, it made it easier for Mal to marry Sarah when he felt like he was getting back at Quirke by doing it. It's not possible to pinpoint who's fault it was, or to put blame on any one person, but it's like that in every situation.
Have you ever been so mad at someone you had no way to forgive them?
This is sibling rivalry to an extreme. What is the line that has to be crossed that totally obliterates possible forgiveness of a family member? I've heard stories from children of drug addicts forgiving their parents for total negligence. I've never refused to forgive anybody in my life. Why is there such a rift between Mal and Quirke?
The difference between forgiving a negligent parent and forgiving someone who's stolen a girl or a parent's favor, is that they're two different conflicts. One is forgivable because it's the person who gave life to you making a mistake- a huge one, possibly the worst you could make, and if there is forgiveness present, a new relationship can be built out of the ashes of it. Mal has never forgiven Quirke because Quirke stole the admiration of his biological father. Quirke doesn't need Mal's forgiveness because Mal stole the love of his life, and neither of them wants to forgive the other, or wants forgiveness.
Who started this feud? It wasn't Quirke's fault that he was the favored child. However, it made it easier for Mal to marry Sarah when he felt like he was getting back at Quirke by doing it. It's not possible to pinpoint who's fault it was, or to put blame on any one person, but it's like that in every situation.
Have you ever been so mad at someone you had no way to forgive them?
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Sometimes You Have to Get it Out
One of my favorite songs is Holy Cross by River City Extension.
Here's a link to the song- Holy Cross audio youtube video
And here's a link to the lyrics- Holy Cross- River City Extension lyrics
Sometimes the things we feel are too much. We have to vent, to let it out, subject one of our friends or peers to a sea of emotions. We expect to be understood when we rant, and to be met with compassion and sympathy. All too often, that's not the case, and the final result ends up being frustration. To me, that's what Holy Cross is about, the frustration that comes from believing in people and the lack of understanding that is apparent.
One of my favorite lines in this song is "I hid your name upon the quilt I knit, still, I don't think that you'd understand." In this line, the writer is trying to show a gesture of appreciation and love to someone, but he's afraid that his intentions will be misconceived. The "still", to me, is a representation of the fact that even though he's trying, and even though it's a large gesture, the person he's trying to make see the light doesn't have the capacity to understand why he's doing it. Another line that stands out to me is "Well I don't think the lord understands / And why the hell'd it take so long to grow?/ Perhaps we worship all the things we know" The part of this I love is "Well I don't think the lord understands". I love this line because of the way the songwriter is singing about God, a supposedly almighty and all-seeing power, in a way that puts God on a human level, and the way he even dares to be a little bit (honestly) condescending towards the epitome of religious respect. The writer is rejecting the company of the figure that many turn to in times of great need, and simply dismissing the fact that God would be able to comprehend his emotions.
At the end of this song, after the last line plays and the last note is fading out, there's a little snippet of speech: "Sometimes, you're in a bad place and you have to- you know you have to get it out and uh- I don't know. Everybody wants to do everything. I want to do everything. You- Ya Know?" I love the way the song goes from a critical tone to a voice that plays directly to the listener, and stops being combative. The last two words of the song: "Ya know?" are perfectly ironic to me. The entire song is about how nobody ever fully understands anyone else, and then the song ends with the writer asking for the listener to understand what he's been saying. Even though no one understands him, he's asking for understanding. My theory on this is that without saying these things, he'd only be lonelier than if he didn't say them, even if they won't be fully comprehended.
Every time this song ends, I'm left with the words "ya know" echoing in my head, asking me to understand the song. It's funny, because I'm being asked to understand something I've just been told I won't be able to. It's a cycle we go through, asking to be understood, hoping that maybe this one time someone will be able to know exactly what you mean, and ending up frustrated again. Ultimately, we're in the same lonely place that we were in when we stared. But as said, sometimes you just have to get it out.
Here's a link to the song- Holy Cross audio youtube video
And here's a link to the lyrics- Holy Cross- River City Extension lyrics
Sometimes the things we feel are too much. We have to vent, to let it out, subject one of our friends or peers to a sea of emotions. We expect to be understood when we rant, and to be met with compassion and sympathy. All too often, that's not the case, and the final result ends up being frustration. To me, that's what Holy Cross is about, the frustration that comes from believing in people and the lack of understanding that is apparent.
One of my favorite lines in this song is "I hid your name upon the quilt I knit, still, I don't think that you'd understand." In this line, the writer is trying to show a gesture of appreciation and love to someone, but he's afraid that his intentions will be misconceived. The "still", to me, is a representation of the fact that even though he's trying, and even though it's a large gesture, the person he's trying to make see the light doesn't have the capacity to understand why he's doing it. Another line that stands out to me is "Well I don't think the lord understands / And why the hell'd it take so long to grow?/ Perhaps we worship all the things we know" The part of this I love is "Well I don't think the lord understands". I love this line because of the way the songwriter is singing about God, a supposedly almighty and all-seeing power, in a way that puts God on a human level, and the way he even dares to be a little bit (honestly) condescending towards the epitome of religious respect. The writer is rejecting the company of the figure that many turn to in times of great need, and simply dismissing the fact that God would be able to comprehend his emotions.
At the end of this song, after the last line plays and the last note is fading out, there's a little snippet of speech: "Sometimes, you're in a bad place and you have to- you know you have to get it out and uh- I don't know. Everybody wants to do everything. I want to do everything. You- Ya Know?" I love the way the song goes from a critical tone to a voice that plays directly to the listener, and stops being combative. The last two words of the song: "Ya know?" are perfectly ironic to me. The entire song is about how nobody ever fully understands anyone else, and then the song ends with the writer asking for the listener to understand what he's been saying. Even though no one understands him, he's asking for understanding. My theory on this is that without saying these things, he'd only be lonelier than if he didn't say them, even if they won't be fully comprehended.
Every time this song ends, I'm left with the words "ya know" echoing in my head, asking me to understand the song. It's funny, because I'm being asked to understand something I've just been told I won't be able to. It's a cycle we go through, asking to be understood, hoping that maybe this one time someone will be able to know exactly what you mean, and ending up frustrated again. Ultimately, we're in the same lonely place that we were in when we stared. But as said, sometimes you just have to get it out.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
In the Name of Love
The Pact by Jodi Picoult is about a suicide pact, or what seems to be one at first. Emily and Chris have been friends since birth, and neither of them have childhood memories that don't involve the other. Emily suffers sexual abuse as a child, and it haunts her so that even when her and Chris's relationship turns into one of lovers, she can't feel comfortably intimate with him. Emily has a lot of pressure to go far in life, and when she gets pregnant, she decides she can't handle it, and decides to kill herself. She tells Chris of this plan, and he decides to try to stop her. As the plan develops, Chris keeps waiting to stop her, and finally, they end up with the gun to Emily's head and Chris not being able to stop it anymore. Chris shoots Emily, the person he loves most in the world, and suddenly she's gone, and it's his fault.
So why didn't Chris stop Emily? Instead of trying to get help, as you're supposed to do for a friend who informs you of a suicide plan, Chris aides in the ending of Emily's life. The reason that Chris did this is very complex. For part of the time while Emily was planning her own death, Chris could have been in denial.
Even though he knew that his girlfriend was suicidal, he could have not realized the full extent of the problem, or not wanted to accept it.
My theory, and the one that seems most plausible due to the characters' relationship is that by helping Emily kill herself, Chris actually thought he was helping her. He was setting her free from a life she hated living, and he didn't want to betray her trust by telling someone of her wishes. Chris did what he thought was best for Emily, just as he had done his whole life.
People often make mistakes, think that they can solve problems that are in reality too big for them to handle. Most of the time, this ends up in a bad situation, but in Chris's case, it ended up in the death of the person he loved most.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
"majority-minority" country
Link: The New Face of America
The article from upfront scholastic magazine, "The New Face of America", is about how more minorities are being born in America than whites.The article starts off with Jessica Ramirez explaining how since she grew up in a predominantly Latino school she never felt like a minority, even though in the overall US, she is. The article goes on to explain how a recent census of the US presented that minority births now outnumber non-Latino white births. This is happening because high immigration rates from countries such as Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines, and also because of the increasing number of mixed-race marriages. This fast rate of change is unlike any other country's in the world. Never before has there been such a racially different generational gap. It will be interesting to see where it leads in the next decades.
I think that the author wants the reader to be aware of the rapidly changing racial state of our country. In a place where people are sometimes made fun of or stereotyped for their racial differences, race is beginning to not be such an isolating factor. The nation is changing rapidly and leaving no room for racism and bigotry. I think that the author wants the reader to feel a sense of acceptance. The power to accept people and in return, to be accepted by their peers, for their race, no matter what their background.
This article makes me think about the foundation of this country, and how it was founded on ideas on equality and justice for everyone. Right now, I can think of many social divisions that don't have the equality or rights they deserve. For example, women in high power jobs, gays and marriage laws, immigrants and immigration and labor laws, and the list goes on. The only people who seem to have a fair amount of rights are straight white men, and as we can see from predicted polls, they aren't going to be the majority of people in this country anymore. This country was founded as a place for people escaping persecution to come, and the first settlers (besides Native Americans) made a life in a new place as somewhere to get away from being judged on who they were. The fact that America will soon become a "majority-minority" country is a huge step in the same direction our ancestors took when they created a place where people could live in acceptance alongside each other.
The article from upfront scholastic magazine, "The New Face of America", is about how more minorities are being born in America than whites.The article starts off with Jessica Ramirez explaining how since she grew up in a predominantly Latino school she never felt like a minority, even though in the overall US, she is. The article goes on to explain how a recent census of the US presented that minority births now outnumber non-Latino white births. This is happening because high immigration rates from countries such as Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines, and also because of the increasing number of mixed-race marriages. This fast rate of change is unlike any other country's in the world. Never before has there been such a racially different generational gap. It will be interesting to see where it leads in the next decades.
I think that the author wants the reader to be aware of the rapidly changing racial state of our country. In a place where people are sometimes made fun of or stereotyped for their racial differences, race is beginning to not be such an isolating factor. The nation is changing rapidly and leaving no room for racism and bigotry. I think that the author wants the reader to feel a sense of acceptance. The power to accept people and in return, to be accepted by their peers, for their race, no matter what their background.
This article makes me think about the foundation of this country, and how it was founded on ideas on equality and justice for everyone. Right now, I can think of many social divisions that don't have the equality or rights they deserve. For example, women in high power jobs, gays and marriage laws, immigrants and immigration and labor laws, and the list goes on. The only people who seem to have a fair amount of rights are straight white men, and as we can see from predicted polls, they aren't going to be the majority of people in this country anymore. This country was founded as a place for people escaping persecution to come, and the first settlers (besides Native Americans) made a life in a new place as somewhere to get away from being judged on who they were. The fact that America will soon become a "majority-minority" country is a huge step in the same direction our ancestors took when they created a place where people could live in acceptance alongside each other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)