This quarter of HumCore was surprisingly the most enjoyable out of all the quarters that I have experienced. As the subject matter was the most modern out of all the quarters, I feel that I was able to enjoy it the most as I was able to relate more easily than the topics that dealt with older time periods. But most importantly, this quarter has made me realize that the humanities are an important field of study... but it's just not for me.
Had I known that this year of taking a class dedicated to the field of Humanities would make me feel so disillusioned to literature and history as it did, I would not have taken the course in the first place. However, it is not as bad as it sounds. I do recognize the humanities as an important aspect of human culture. Otherwise, how else would we be able to fully understand the decision making process behind major events?
As a science and math oriented person, I do believe that making humanities courses mandatory for non-humanities students is bogus. But to say that they are unnecessary takes away from the importance of knowing aspects of humanitarianism. But in the end, only those who are interested in the first place would want to take humanitarian courses, making it an opportunity that is lost to some due solely to the fact that some people are uninterested. So in a way, it becomes a hobby and a luxury to those who can keep up.
Monday, June 6, 2016
Friday, May 27, 2016
A Constant Reminder
The perfect memorial may not exist, but the closest one, in my opinion, is the Armenian Genocide Memorial in Yerevan. If the purpose of the memorial is met, then it has done its job as a memorial. The Armenian Genocide Memorial comes to mind as it serves as a reminder of those who have fallen despite other people and governments denying that they were at fault. The flame in the middle of the is kept lit constantly as a representation of the Armenian peoples' memory. By keeping this constant reminder, it has done it's job of reminding people of what really happened.
As for forgiving and moving on? The politics of the Armenian genocide becomes tricky in that the Turkey denies using the word "genocide" to accurately define the event whereas many other scholars and historians use the term firmly.
To say that memorials "entomb" the becomes contradictory to their original purpose is a bit of a stretch as the majority of the people who go to memorials go in reverence of the historical event. Although there is truth in saying that people tend to pat themselves on the back just for going, I do not believe this is true for the majority.
Saturday, May 7, 2016
The Lost Generation
For the HumCore spring quarter research project, I will be exploring the post-WWI phenomena of what is known as "The Lost Generation". The artifacts that I have chosen include Ernest Hemingway's novel, The Sun Also Rises, as well as F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. Some topics that I will explore include: protagonist characterization and their symbolic representation of the new generation; feminine parallels to the women's suffrage movement of the 1920s; and the impact of WWI on the characters' outlook on life. The main question I will explore is: How do the protagonists of each novel provide an explanation for the enlightenment of the generation as well as their depression?
Thursday, April 28, 2016
Research Project
From the moment this research paper was mentioned, I knew I wanted to do something with World War I. As a fervent bio major with little to no interest in general history, let alone war, World War I has fascinated me since I first cracked open my 9th grade history textbook to the WWI chapter.
Studying WWI for almost a full year in my Academic Decathlon team piqued my interest in the war and it's effects. Nations acted brashly on their underlying rivalries with each other, men volunteered with nationalist pride under their belts, unknowing of the horrors of war, and America prospered while Germany declined. Before learning about WWI, there were only winners and losers; but WWI and its effects had a fuzzier definition of winning and losing, especially in society.
As a result, there were many men and women who felt the aftermath of the war. Initially fueled by nationalism and the idea that wars beforehand were short and winnable, men came home disillusioned with a need to add meaning to their lives. This can be seen in Ernest Hemingway's post WWI novel, The Sun Also Rises. For my research paper, I will look into the disillusionment of men and women post WWI and how their outlook on life changed the literary and political outlook of the future.
Studying WWI for almost a full year in my Academic Decathlon team piqued my interest in the war and it's effects. Nations acted brashly on their underlying rivalries with each other, men volunteered with nationalist pride under their belts, unknowing of the horrors of war, and America prospered while Germany declined. Before learning about WWI, there were only winners and losers; but WWI and its effects had a fuzzier definition of winning and losing, especially in society.
As a result, there were many men and women who felt the aftermath of the war. Initially fueled by nationalism and the idea that wars beforehand were short and winnable, men came home disillusioned with a need to add meaning to their lives. This can be seen in Ernest Hemingway's post WWI novel, The Sun Also Rises. For my research paper, I will look into the disillusionment of men and women post WWI and how their outlook on life changed the literary and political outlook of the future.
Monday, March 28, 2016
Chinese Name, Korean Race, American Person
If you have met someone with the last name Chi, more often than not, he or she is Chinese. My family and I, on the other hand, are Korean; and to this day I have yet to meet another Korean Chi.
So how does having a Chinese last name play out in my life when I'm actually Korean? It's both good and bad. On one hand, it's a great conversation starter and has prompted me to have meaningful discussions about race and culture. On the other hand, it leads to a lot of assumptions like when a Korean teacher assumed I was Chinese from the roster and did not attempt to challenge my Korean speaking skills.
Though I don't know the exact origin of the name, (whether it was a typo from my grandparent's name Choi, or if we somehow descended from a Chinese clan) it has shaped how I felt different from other Korean-Americans as many Korean-Americans are deeply rooted to their Korean half of their identity more than their American side.
This was evident to me when my eighth grade history teacher asked the class "If you consider yourself American, raise your hand" and only the non-Asian kids raised their hands. The Asian-American kids usually thought of themselves as Chinese, Taiwanese, Korean, Vietnamese, etc. without the added -American. I was one of the kids who believed she was one of the sole Koreans until I realized that I was more of an American than I thought. I began to realize that I favored American cultural perspectives regarding race, gender, sexuality, and self expression to a greater extent than Korean cultural perspectives.
For example, the American and Korean perspectives on beauty are vastly different. Now, I'm just generalizing here, but most American media encourages women to be happy with the features she was born with and to enhance the natural beauty that God has so graciously given us (please note the sarcasm). If you look at the statistics on Korean plastic surgery, you can see that Koreans believe that the face that you were born with is just an option. Basically, Koreans believe that if you can fix it, why not?
My mom is traditionally Korean and she believes that plastic surgery is the best way for a woman to enhance her beauty whereas I believe that it is a woman's confidence and self esteem that lets her beauty shine through. She has pushed me to get surgery on my eyes, nose, and jaw so that I can fit the Korean standard of beauty and be wed to a nice Korean man who likes all those features. I have consistently argued against her that I do not want any procedure done to my face (although I have gotten moles removed).
All in all, my Chinese last name and Korean upbringing has showed me that being an American is the part of me that I feel very lucky to have.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Prompt #5 Quarterly Reflection
 |
| http://americainclass.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/sphereofwoman.jpg Ah, the sphere of domesticity. One of my favorite topics from this quarter. |
The first quarter of Humanities Core eluded me completely. Though there was much to learn about what war meant for ancient peoples or how it was studied during the Renaissance, it was never truly interesting to me because all I could think of was: how does it in any way relate to me? I am not a Greco-Roman cultural historian who is trying to find the meaning behind agency in Homer's epics; I am not a playwright studying Brecht to understand how the medium of acting can demonstrate the rawest of emotions; nor am I Renaissance thinker trying to make sense of Machiavelli's texts.
So who am I? And why did I stick with Humanities Core?
It did not truly occur to me until this quarter just how war can truly effect humanity. I already said this in my last blog post reflecting on the Fall Quarter, but learning about the Civil War and Cold War and the memories behind it has helped me to understand just how much war can still linger on in the hearts and minds of people who weren't even directly involved. Perhaps it is due to my appreciation for America that I find a newer, deeper perspective on war.
When it came to the Trojan War mapped out in The Iliad and the historical wars in The Prince, my interests were dilapidated because I could not understand how it affects me. But when it comes to the Civil War or Cold War, it is easy to understand because it is so visible in the country's opinion on many issues such as racism and privacy, to name a few.
As for next quarter's research paper, the most likely topic that I will be focusing on is the Civil War as I am very interested in how the Civil War is remembered in modern day America.
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Prompt #4: Torture Brings Out The Best In Us
Torture is an effective way to get someone's attention in media; it is cruel, emotionally triggering, and inhumane. The media often portrays the hero or an innocent person as the victim of torture so that the torturers can be dismissed as the "bad guys" with little to no contest. However, what if the tables were turned? What if the "good guys" tortured the "bad guys" for the sake of entertainment? What if justice did not just stop at turning over the criminal to the police? When does torture become entertainment? These are the questions that come up when watching Quentin Tarantino's 2007 film, Death Proof.
The final scene shows the main female protagonists, Zoe, Abernathy, and Kim, driving in a Dodge Challenger, rear end Mike, the antagonist, in his car, pull him out, and beat him up until he lays unconscious and is, presumably, dead.
Not knowing anything else about the movie, except for the final scene, may lead you to write off Zoe, Abernathy, and Kim as cruel. However, knowing the context of the movie and that Mike is a sadistic, perverted, and diabolical ex-stuntman who has killed and tried to kill many women including our three main female protagonists makes the final scene feel like a sigh of relief.
So why is it that a protagonist can use something that only the antagonist should be using? To have a protagonist have both good and evil tendencies makes him or her all the more relatable because no one is perfectly good OR bad; instead, we are a mixture of both. Torturing the "bad guy", like Mike in Death Proof, speaks to our inherent nature that justice must be served, the ultimate form of "torture-tainment". So not only does the final scene feel like the denouement of the film, but it also reveals humanity's need for "eye for an eye" justice.
To this day, Death Proof remains one of my favorite movies because despite the problematic morality, I know it is just a movie, set in an entirely different universe other than my own. So if killing a man by beating him up with high heeled boots and drop kicks means that justice was served in the Death Proof universe, then I'm fine with it. In fact, I find it totally awesome.
Thursday, February 4, 2016
Prompt #3: Response to Torture
 |
| http://img1.rnkr-static.com/list_img_v2/17796/57796/C520/the-top-10-types-of-medieval-torture-u1.jpg |
The op-ed piece, by Anne Applebaum, titled "The Torture Myth" summarizes the pros and cons (but mainly the cons) about the use of torture and its effectiveness in recent wars. This article has shown me that although torture has been a widely used method of obtaining information, it has not necessarily been effective and that not using torture has actually been more effective than using it. It has also pointed out to me that torture only leads to reciprocation from the other warring party. The op-ed piece in itself is convincing by showing the ineffectiveness of torture from the direct experiences of veterans from modern wars. But it does not answer the question: Is torture right or wrong? The piece as a whole suggests that torture wrong from an objective point of view, but does not mention the morality of it. The purpose of this piece has been well fulfilled: it successfully debunked the myth that torture is an effective method of obtaining information. However, for the piece to be well rounded and be more useful to a clueless person such as myself, a section about the morality of torture would improve the piece as a whole.
As someone who did not get into much politics until this year, I do not have a personal, concrete opinion on torture. However, reading pieces from people who have such certain opinions regarding politics made me notice things about torture that I have not noticed before. Reading the pieces by Dershowitz and Scarry has made me realize two things: 1. Torture is immoral but neither is war; and 2. Torture can be justified in the eyes of the American judicial system. Though my personal studies on torture are not as diverse and in depth as Dershowitz and Scarry, I would have to agree with Scarry more as I believe that Dershowitz believes that the safety of innocent people is more important than the safety of guilty people, which takes away from the main fact that we are all, in the end, just people.
Friday, January 15, 2016
Prompt #2: Response to "Picturing the Civil War 3: African American Soldiers" by Prof. Fahs
While reading through "Picturing the Civil War 3: African American Soldiers," one could see that Professor Fahs' purpose in writing this blog post was to show how the representations of African Americans changed throughout the course of the Civil War; more specifically, the recruitment of African American soldiers changed how African Americans in general were perceived by the mainstream media. Prof. Fahs illustrates how mainstream media before the civil war portrayed African Americans as either stereotypical jokes of themselves or as helpless slaves.
The post proceeds in chronological order from the beginning of the Civil War to the end, separated by images and Fahs' reflections on them. The recruitment posters and her rhetorical questions are especially intriguing as the rhetorical questions give a new light into how the posters may be perceived. While the ordinary onlooker may see the posters as purely informative, Prof. Fahs' rhetorical questions show how the posters appeal to the emotions and agency of African Americans to recruit into the army. From the posters, Prof. Fahs proceeds to talk about a piece in which an African American soldier is being trained by a white general, the Northern white fascination with the lives of slaves becoming soldiers, daguerrotypes of African American soldiers, and finally, the lingering racism that still existed in America despite the improvement of the general public's perception of black people. Not only does Prof. Fahs use rhetorical questions when referring to the posters, but they are also employed in the very last paragraph so that the reader may come to his or her own conclusions about how the images used in the Civil War were effective in changing perceptions and to what extent.
The questions/comments I have for Prof. Fahs are as follows:
Was having African American soldiers pose in a certain way in the daguerrotypes was intended to create meaning or did it just happen to have an impact on those who viewed it? If the latter, how do you know that the any, if at all, impact was created?
Your thesis is very compelling and putting it in a chronological order is helpful to the reader as one can follow along with your argument easily and effectively.
By pointing out how there was still racism underlying all the progress that had been made in changing the negative perception of African Americans, you successfully create an accurate insight into the societal values of the time.
The post proceeds in chronological order from the beginning of the Civil War to the end, separated by images and Fahs' reflections on them. The recruitment posters and her rhetorical questions are especially intriguing as the rhetorical questions give a new light into how the posters may be perceived. While the ordinary onlooker may see the posters as purely informative, Prof. Fahs' rhetorical questions show how the posters appeal to the emotions and agency of African Americans to recruit into the army. From the posters, Prof. Fahs proceeds to talk about a piece in which an African American soldier is being trained by a white general, the Northern white fascination with the lives of slaves becoming soldiers, daguerrotypes of African American soldiers, and finally, the lingering racism that still existed in America despite the improvement of the general public's perception of black people. Not only does Prof. Fahs use rhetorical questions when referring to the posters, but they are also employed in the very last paragraph so that the reader may come to his or her own conclusions about how the images used in the Civil War were effective in changing perceptions and to what extent.
The questions/comments I have for Prof. Fahs are as follows:
Was having African American soldiers pose in a certain way in the daguerrotypes was intended to create meaning or did it just happen to have an impact on those who viewed it? If the latter, how do you know that the any, if at all, impact was created?
Your thesis is very compelling and putting it in a chronological order is helpful to the reader as one can follow along with your argument easily and effectively.
By pointing out how there was still racism underlying all the progress that had been made in changing the negative perception of African Americans, you successfully create an accurate insight into the societal values of the time.
Friday, January 8, 2016
Prompt #1 Reflections on the Civil War
 |
| My APUSH and IB History teacher, Mr. Ludlam with a smorgasbord of desserts. |
The majority of my Civil War knowledge was imbued upon me by my junior AP US History teacher Mr. Ludlam. Mr. Ludlam was famous on campus and off for being very impassioned, strict, and a shouter (he would shout for almost every lecture, I kid you not). The Civil War was a topic of great interest to Mr. Ludlam for many reasons, most of which I cannot remember. But I do remember the main reason which was that it was an event that centered around one of his idols: Abraham Lincoln. When it came to learning the Civil War in APUSH my junior year, Mr. Ludlam made sure to make us think about and focus on the causes of the war. Everything from literature, politics, sociology, and economics, was discussed in class and expanded upon in essays.
Mr. Ludlam pounded into our heads the fact that Abraham Lincoln was never for the freedom of slaves from the very beginning of his presidency, but rather a proponent of keeping slavery from expanding; by doing so, Mr. Ludlam got the misconception that the Civil War was fought purely for the freedom of slaves out of our heads. Due to Mr. Ludlam's thoroughness in teaching the many reasons for the start of the Civil War, he was able to teach us to form and prove our own opinions regarding the causes of the Civil War.
Professor Fahs' lectures of the Civil War are a lot more quiet and calm than the Civil War lectures I remember, but they are also filled with detail and insight. Though we went over Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison's impact in the 19th century, it was not the main focus of the APUSH curriculum and therefore not focused on in detail. Focusing on Frederick Douglass and the abolitionist movement showed me new ideas and theories around the causes of the Civil War. Therefore I can supplement my own theories regarding the cause of the Civil War by using Frederick Douglass' actions and African American involvement's contingency as proof that the war was not purely about slavery but a big factor and major driving force.
Monday, November 30, 2015
Prompt #6: Reflection on the Quarter
This quarter, we have read and analyzed many books with a focus on the aspect of war. From The Iliad to The Art of War, we have been exposed to war from many perspectives. We have learned the importance of the point of view that a war is seen from, how the subtle nuances in literary devices can change the meaning of war, and how using intertextuality can help broaden one's viewpoint of war. The most important concept that I learned, however, is that war is not just a mechanism for killing people, affecting individual families, but that it can create a huge societal, historical, economic, and political impact on the world.
What I have learned may sound obvious, but it has never occurred to me the extent of the impact that war can have on humanity. I have learned about western wars in high school, such as the wars of the United States in AP US History or 20th Century wars of the western world in IB 20th Century History, but to me, the political, social, economic, military, and historical impact that the wars caused seemed to stay within the parameters of the countries involved. This quarter in Humanities Core, I have learned that one perspective of war, real or fake, can have a global and everlasting impact on how others can form an opinion. For example, The Iliad has shown that even an ancient war that may seem to not have anything in common with modern issues relates to the contemporary world more than what is seen at first sight.
War, to me, used to be just a singular event that only affected families and the overlay of the immediate country. However, being in Humanities Core has taught me that war is not a singular, ineffective event. Rather, war has a large impact in terms of area that has been effected, as well as the length of time that it still holds an impact.
What I have learned may sound obvious, but it has never occurred to me the extent of the impact that war can have on humanity. I have learned about western wars in high school, such as the wars of the United States in AP US History or 20th Century wars of the western world in IB 20th Century History, but to me, the political, social, economic, military, and historical impact that the wars caused seemed to stay within the parameters of the countries involved. This quarter in Humanities Core, I have learned that one perspective of war, real or fake, can have a global and everlasting impact on how others can form an opinion. For example, The Iliad has shown that even an ancient war that may seem to not have anything in common with modern issues relates to the contemporary world more than what is seen at first sight.
War, to me, used to be just a singular event that only affected families and the overlay of the immediate country. However, being in Humanities Core has taught me that war is not a singular, ineffective event. Rather, war has a large impact in terms of area that has been effected, as well as the length of time that it still holds an impact.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
Prompt #5: Machiavelli in the Modern World
In chapter 14 of The Prince, Machiavelli asserts that a Prince should never "lift his thought from the exercise of war (85)." For a prince to be successful, he must be fluent in the art of war, which will lead to acquiring a principality. Not only must the prince study the art of war, but he also must take initiative and be active in the principality by being in it directly and gaining knowledge and familiarity of the area.
This assertion, to me, sounds a lot like the basis for the United States foreign policy as almost every political debate regarding foreign affairs is lead by a discussion on military action. In the interview with Noam Chomsky on truth-out.org, Chomsky points out a cliché analogy of how the US uses its power: "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." However, the actions of the US do no necessarily follow with the Machiavellian assertion as the US tends to use military power for everything as it has been the strongest military power in the world since the First World War. Machiavelli points out that a successful prince must not only have strong military knowledge, but also an understanding of his surroundings, of which the US has little to none.
The idea that a successful prince will arise from a strong grasp of military knowledge and practice has worked before in the past, as seen in Machiavelli's example of Francesco Sforza. However, it does not ring true anymore as the United States' military advances in the past ten years or so have proved to be more disastrous than successful due to an over-dependence on military power and a lack of familiarity with the other countries.
This assertion, to me, sounds a lot like the basis for the United States foreign policy as almost every political debate regarding foreign affairs is lead by a discussion on military action. In the interview with Noam Chomsky on truth-out.org, Chomsky points out a cliché analogy of how the US uses its power: "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." However, the actions of the US do no necessarily follow with the Machiavellian assertion as the US tends to use military power for everything as it has been the strongest military power in the world since the First World War. Machiavelli points out that a successful prince must not only have strong military knowledge, but also an understanding of his surroundings, of which the US has little to none.
The idea that a successful prince will arise from a strong grasp of military knowledge and practice has worked before in the past, as seen in Machiavelli's example of Francesco Sforza. However, it does not ring true anymore as the United States' military advances in the past ten years or so have proved to be more disastrous than successful due to an over-dependence on military power and a lack of familiarity with the other countries.
Monday, November 9, 2015
Prompt #4: Analyzing Genre and Medium
Mother Courage and her Children, by Bertolt Brecht, depicts a Mother trying to pave her way through a war-torn country to try and build her business in order to keep her family. The text itself depicts Mother Courage as an adamant, harsh, yet thoughtful person. On the other hand, we have Theater of War, directed by John Walter, which is a documentary that shows the making of the recreation of the play Mother Courage in New York wherein Mother Courage is played by Meryl Streep. A scene that is written out in the playbook and the acted out in the documentary is when Kattrin finds a baby and Mother Courage scorns her for taking the baby and tells her to put it back because she has to "spend hours pulling it away (Brecht, 60)." The same scene in the documentary and playbook are comprehended differently both because of the medium and the execution of the scene's delivery.
In the playbook the scene is moved along with stage directions in the text so that the reader will know how Kattrin got the baby as she "emerges from the rubble, carrying an infant (Brecht 60)." In Theater of War, the scene starts from Kattrin calming a baby down by making soothing facial expressions. The dramatic nature of the scene in the playbook as opposed to the beginning of the scene in the documentary shows how the stage directions change the mood of the scene as Brecht wanted Kattrin to emerge from a dead space, holding a new life whereas the director begins this scene in a relaxing manner wherein Kattrin is trying to soothe the baby.
The playbook does not do this scene justice as I believe the documentary portrays Mother Courage's dilemma in action much better than in text. When Meryl Streep delivers the line "You give it back to its mother one-two-three before you get attached and I have to spend hours pulling it away, you hear me?", I believe it is executed much better as you hear the distraught and frustration in her voice as she tries to deal with everything else that is also going on. To me, the text only shows the line as a foil to Kattrin's compassionate nature as opposed to the emotional weight that comes with hearing the line with an actor's interpretation of the voice.
In the playbook the scene is moved along with stage directions in the text so that the reader will know how Kattrin got the baby as she "emerges from the rubble, carrying an infant (Brecht 60)." In Theater of War, the scene starts from Kattrin calming a baby down by making soothing facial expressions. The dramatic nature of the scene in the playbook as opposed to the beginning of the scene in the documentary shows how the stage directions change the mood of the scene as Brecht wanted Kattrin to emerge from a dead space, holding a new life whereas the director begins this scene in a relaxing manner wherein Kattrin is trying to soothe the baby.
The playbook does not do this scene justice as I believe the documentary portrays Mother Courage's dilemma in action much better than in text. When Meryl Streep delivers the line "You give it back to its mother one-two-three before you get attached and I have to spend hours pulling it away, you hear me?", I believe it is executed much better as you hear the distraught and frustration in her voice as she tries to deal with everything else that is also going on. To me, the text only shows the line as a foil to Kattrin's compassionate nature as opposed to the emotional weight that comes with hearing the line with an actor's interpretation of the voice.
Friday, October 23, 2015
Prompt #3: A Bronze Cast and a Wooden Stamp
When it comes to mediums, the material used is very important; not only because of how the piece will look in the end, but also because it will affect the meaning of the piece as a whole. I used to think that mediums were exclusive to art and art history, but reading the texts The Iliad and The Adventures of Simplicius Simplicissimus has made me realize that there is more to the medium of the work than just its aesthetic value. The shield of Achilles and Simplicius' tree could not be more different, yet similar in what they symbolize. The meaning of the works not only come from the text itself, but it also comes from the materials in which the pieces are made.
Achilles' shield, in the text, is made by the god, Hephaestus. Already, the shield could not be any more divine having been made by a god himself: "the god creates a world of gorgeous immortal work (The Iliad, 483)". Not only is the shield a functional piece of armor for Achilles, but it is also a symbol of Achilles' power and glory as a strong, charismatic, and forever honored member of society. The fact that the shield in real life is made out of metal reflects Achilles' immortal glory as metal is one of the most permanent mediums that something can be made out of. Metal often has a connotation of being labor-intensive, strong, long-lasting, and expensive; all of which are perfect for a demi god such as Achilles.
Simplicius' tree, in the text, is described to us by Simplicius himself from a dream that he has while thinking about each person's role in society and how they are affected by it. The fact that the vision of the tree was conceived in a dream rather than given to him by some higher being represents how Simplicius' glory as an antihero comes from himself and his own cleverness rather than being bestowed upon him like the shield to Achilles. The woodblock print as a medium has much more humble connotations than that of the metal shield as the work that goes into making a woodblock print is much less labor intensive and the print becomes more accessible to the general public as opposed to the shield which may be the only one in the world. This is important because it shows that the glory of Simplicius as an intelligent person can be obtained by anyone and everyone whereas Achilles' glory as a strong fighter and demigod can only be obtained by himself.
The mediums that each work is made from has importance in the connotations of the material as well as the work that went into it. Whereas Achilles is known for being an elite person of divine glory that no one else can achieve, like the shield, Simplicius had a mere dream and the vision was represented by something that can be achieved by anyone, the print.
Thursday, October 8, 2015
Prompt #2: Engaging with the Iliad
A gun store in Kingston, Tennessee is offering a discount on new guns if you say you are a Christian. The owner, Bryant Williams, has said, "If Christians are going to be targeted we need to protect ourselves...The best way to protect yourself is with the best weapon available, and that happens to be a handgun." To summarize his reasoning in giving Christians a discount on guns in his store, Williams has said that he believes that people are being targeted for their beliefs and that he does not want to hide his faith.
Just as violence in the Iliad was the most effective and profound method of solving problems, some people in today's society tend to believe the same thing. In order to get what you want in the time period of Homer, you would display power and authority to convince others to fight for you as violence was seen as the solution to most problems. This can be seen in Book II, lines 522-524: "Agamemnon the lord of men did not resist. He commanded heralds to cry out loud and clear and summon the long-haired Achaean troops to battle. The cries rang out. The battalions gathered quickly." Agamemnon's overbearing and assertive personality was strong enough to have his army abandon thoughts of retreat and fight instead. Although today's society does not necessarily promote this kind of leadership that praises violence as the only means to the end, there are those who believe that preparing for a violent situation will be the safest method of solving problems, and maybe even preventing the problem from happening in the first place. Bryant Williams is similar to Agamemnon in that they both believe that violence is a very real occurrence and want to prepare for it.
The fact that religious people are being persecuted today is very real, controversial, and violent. However, does this justify the need to arm oneself if he or she is living in a society in which a majority of people share the same beliefs in the first place as Bryant Williams does? Is Bryant Williams justified in his beliefs to arm himself and other Christians for being "targeted" even though he lives in a majority Christian part of the country? If one were to ask Agamemnon in Homer's time, the answer would be yes. However, we do not live in the times of Homer.
Just as violence in the Iliad was the most effective and profound method of solving problems, some people in today's society tend to believe the same thing. In order to get what you want in the time period of Homer, you would display power and authority to convince others to fight for you as violence was seen as the solution to most problems. This can be seen in Book II, lines 522-524: "Agamemnon the lord of men did not resist. He commanded heralds to cry out loud and clear and summon the long-haired Achaean troops to battle. The cries rang out. The battalions gathered quickly." Agamemnon's overbearing and assertive personality was strong enough to have his army abandon thoughts of retreat and fight instead. Although today's society does not necessarily promote this kind of leadership that praises violence as the only means to the end, there are those who believe that preparing for a violent situation will be the safest method of solving problems, and maybe even preventing the problem from happening in the first place. Bryant Williams is similar to Agamemnon in that they both believe that violence is a very real occurrence and want to prepare for it.
The fact that religious people are being persecuted today is very real, controversial, and violent. However, does this justify the need to arm oneself if he or she is living in a society in which a majority of people share the same beliefs in the first place as Bryant Williams does? Is Bryant Williams justified in his beliefs to arm himself and other Christians for being "targeted" even though he lives in a majority Christian part of the country? If one were to ask Agamemnon in Homer's time, the answer would be yes. However, we do not live in the times of Homer.
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
Prompt #1: Viewing War through a Specific Lens
Image Link: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3529496832/tt0031381?ref_=ttmd_md_pv
The 1939 film, "Gone With the Wind", is known for being the highest grossing film in American history, with an array of awards and recognitions. The novel-turned-film tells the story of Scarlett O'Hara and her colleagues before, during, and after the Civil War in the Confederacy as proud, Southern, aristocrats. Although the film has an accurate timeline of the Civil War, it's depiction of the purpose and portrayal of the Civil War is not necessarily the most correct.
The poster (above) shows the Civil War in the South as a destructive, passionate, and romantic war. From the flaming color scheme to the steamy encounter between Rhett and Scarlett, everything about the poster serves to reflect the passionate emotions of Southerners regarding slavery and their right to a country representative of their beliefs. The depiction of the Atlanta Campaign as a fire-y ordeal of destruction (middle right of poster) shows that the Southerners believed the war to be incredibly devastating and victimizing. By making the main characters the central focus of the poster amongst a chaotic background, it humanizes Southerners as people who cared for each other in times of hardship. All in all, the poster wants to show viewers that the side of the Civil War that a majority of Americans do not focus on has its own importance, not just as a representation of Conservative, racist America, but as a humanized perception of the South.
Whereas some perceive the film as a romanticized justification for slavery and racism (akin to the justification for keeping the Confederate Flag), others view the film as a valuable resource for showing the other side of the Civil War that most Americans do not learn about. As the poster is romanticizing the Civil War as the plight of victimized Southerners, it shows the viewer that the Confederate justification for starting the war was a cover-up for the purely racist intention of keeping slavery. At the same time, however, by romanticizing the Civil War, the poster shows that the Civil War was a somber yet crucial part of their history. Therefore the poster has a dual purpose in showing how the Confederate's purpose in the Civil War was both a justification for slavery as well as a mechanism for imbuing sympathy for the Southerner's purposes.
The saturated colors and overly exaggerated acting of the actors in the poster serve to Although the portrayal of the Civil War in the poster is not the most accurate depiction of the historical reality, it is important to have the poster as a resource so that viewers may make their own interpretation of the Civil War, either as a newly discovered sympathy towards the Confederacy or a reflection of the false reality that some Southerners choose to believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)