In honor of Father's Day, I thought I would post some ways to not say "Happy Father's Day". Enjoy. Yeah.
"Hey dad, so uh, remember the flamethrower? And uh, remember your collection of Encyclopedia Britannica's? And remember how paper is flammable? Well, anyways, happy fathers' day. Don't look towards your bookcase."
"'Dear parent/guradian of _____
We regret to inform you of the fact that since your child was caught lighting fire to the toilets, he/she will be expelled. Effective immediately.
Many condolences on your behalf.
Also, have a happy fathers' day!
Warm regards,
[principal's name withdrawn]"
"Wait, you mean I shouldn't tell people your social security number over facebook?"
"Hey dad, if you want to see a couch on fire, you're in luck."
HAPPY FATHER'S DAY, DAD. You know, all it takes to be a father is biology that I would rather not delve into, but to be a dad you have to be awesome. AND THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE. So have some dumplings and mooncake, and be...uh...happy.
HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!
Carpe diem!
(Good golly gosh, Latin!)
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
A negative utopia (a dystopia)
Dystopian literature has been around for as long as fictional Utopian literature. As illustrated in "Nineteen-Eighty Four" by George Orwell, a dystopia is a society which would be the opposite of a utopia, or a negative utopia, if you will. Subjects live under the totalitarian rule of an oligarchical collectivist party. They are oppressed and most are held under slavery.
Some speculate that a dystopia is more likely than a utopia. In the struggle for power, government will go to extremes to keep their political standing in check. As shown by Mao Ze Dong, Nazis, or the Soviets, they could start with good intentions and promises of a political revolution which they say will ultimately lead to a Utopian society. That, however, is not how it ends up.
Chariman Mao had at first started a cultural revolution meant to cleanse and purge the minds of the subjects. They started burning books, disallowing children to attend school, and either imprisoned or killed the teachers. All of this because they wanted to change the past in order to create their own present. Now they are paranoid and discourage any outside contact while at the same time falsely encouraging diplomacy (Although, China has bitchen food and the value of the Renminbi is increasing. I liketh China).
Karl Marx predicted that capitalism would inevitably turn against itself and self-destruct, which would make way for socialism.
Now, some people would see that as a change for the better, while others dread it and do whatever they can to prevent such a calamity. I would say I'm neutral. On one hand, the idea of equality for all is appealing, but it's not so much political as it is psychological. I can still think that so-and-so is inferior, even if the law dictates that everyone is the same. Ergo, that kind of state of Union would not last long. On the other hand, socialism is a foundation for Communism, in which everyone gets an equal share of everything and everything belongs to the Party.
In my opinion, an earthly Utopia is unreachable because of all the social, economic, and political upholding that come with it. A negative utopia is more imminent and easier to reach, though is better avoided.
What do you think? Which would be easier/harder to maintain, a utopia, or a dystopia?
As an afterthought: Do you think that our basic liberties are decreasing, even in America? Just compare some recent news with the Constitution and how the actions and decisions vary from the principles of the Founding Fathers. Up yours, government.
Some speculate that a dystopia is more likely than a utopia. In the struggle for power, government will go to extremes to keep their political standing in check. As shown by Mao Ze Dong, Nazis, or the Soviets, they could start with good intentions and promises of a political revolution which they say will ultimately lead to a Utopian society. That, however, is not how it ends up.
Chariman Mao had at first started a cultural revolution meant to cleanse and purge the minds of the subjects. They started burning books, disallowing children to attend school, and either imprisoned or killed the teachers. All of this because they wanted to change the past in order to create their own present. Now they are paranoid and discourage any outside contact while at the same time falsely encouraging diplomacy (Although, China has bitchen food and the value of the Renminbi is increasing. I liketh China).
Karl Marx predicted that capitalism would inevitably turn against itself and self-destruct, which would make way for socialism.
Now, some people would see that as a change for the better, while others dread it and do whatever they can to prevent such a calamity. I would say I'm neutral. On one hand, the idea of equality for all is appealing, but it's not so much political as it is psychological. I can still think that so-and-so is inferior, even if the law dictates that everyone is the same. Ergo, that kind of state of Union would not last long. On the other hand, socialism is a foundation for Communism, in which everyone gets an equal share of everything and everything belongs to the Party.
In my opinion, an earthly Utopia is unreachable because of all the social, economic, and political upholding that come with it. A negative utopia is more imminent and easier to reach, though is better avoided.
What do you think? Which would be easier/harder to maintain, a utopia, or a dystopia?
As an afterthought: Do you think that our basic liberties are decreasing, even in America? Just compare some recent news with the Constitution and how the actions and decisions vary from the principles of the Founding Fathers. Up yours, government.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Literary over-analysis
Almost every Language Arts/English class has had to go through this process:
-The teacher tells the class to read a book.
-You read the blurb on the back, or you flip through it and decide it will be an okay book.
-The teacher assigns you to read 1 chapter every two days or so, for the sake of the students that still read at a third-grade level, albeit the fact that they are in middle school/high school.
-The day after reading the chapter you were assigned, the teacher lectures on the importance of semantics, allusion, metaphors, or underlying themes in the book.
-The teacher pulls out any random sentence and over-analyzes any "underlying themes" hidden in that one sentence. This step is repeated for every portion of the book.
-You start to despise the book, even if it were a good book. Ex: "Of Mice and Men" and "Tom Sawyer"
-You are assigned to write an essay on the book/story. Everyone uses Sparknotes.
-You receive a bad grade because you interpretation was "wrong"
or
-You receive an 'A' because you just copied down whatever crap the teacher says about the book.
Prior to the seventh grade, I was an avid reader, but then our L.A class had a teacher who would find meaning that wasn't intended in the book, and would make the class do the same.
Before long, my interest in reading was dwindling and I was ridden with anxiety anytime I went to the library, because the books caused me anxiety and I could no longer read without getting a headache. A minor headache, but a headache nonetheless.
Now I'm wondering, is it just me, or is literary over-analysis a rising problem?
Also, interpretation is all based on the interpreter, so if someone had a different interpretation, they're not necessarily wrong.
I get A's reluctantly, because I copy down whatever crud the teacher says.
I hate essays.
-The teacher tells the class to read a book.
-You read the blurb on the back, or you flip through it and decide it will be an okay book.
-The teacher assigns you to read 1 chapter every two days or so, for the sake of the students that still read at a third-grade level, albeit the fact that they are in middle school/high school.
-The day after reading the chapter you were assigned, the teacher lectures on the importance of semantics, allusion, metaphors, or underlying themes in the book.
-The teacher pulls out any random sentence and over-analyzes any "underlying themes" hidden in that one sentence. This step is repeated for every portion of the book.
-You start to despise the book, even if it were a good book. Ex: "Of Mice and Men" and "Tom Sawyer"
-You are assigned to write an essay on the book/story. Everyone uses Sparknotes.
-You receive a bad grade because you interpretation was "wrong"
or
-You receive an 'A' because you just copied down whatever crap the teacher says about the book.
Prior to the seventh grade, I was an avid reader, but then our L.A class had a teacher who would find meaning that wasn't intended in the book, and would make the class do the same.
Before long, my interest in reading was dwindling and I was ridden with anxiety anytime I went to the library, because the books caused me anxiety and I could no longer read without getting a headache. A minor headache, but a headache nonetheless.
Now I'm wondering, is it just me, or is literary over-analysis a rising problem?
Also, interpretation is all based on the interpreter, so if someone had a different interpretation, they're not necessarily wrong.
I get A's reluctantly, because I copy down whatever crud the teacher says.
I hate essays.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
