Humanities Seminars

Dulce Et Decorum Est Seminar Reflection

Bryan B.

            One thing that Ian said was very cool and opened up a huge window in my view of photography and poetry.  Ian said that poetry is better at conveying a message than a photo can.  He was saying that in poetry the vocabulary you can use is so much more powerful and that you can become desensitized to pictures.  I can absolutely vouch for this theory because I have become desensitized to pictures about warfare and violence.  I laugh at cheesy gore and am really unaffected by images.  I may go ugh at first but after just a few seconds it’s not disturbing.  Another thing that got me thinking after what Ian said was that most pictures get old after time.  Wallpaper on your computer or phone gets old and you may change it.  With poetry it never gets old, I read Dulce 5 times and once or twice to my parents and I still like it.  Also poetry gives you a story unlike a picture.  I read Dulce and totally felt as though I was there in that trench.

            I have learned a ton over the past few weeks, one being that poetry is not always about flowers and unicorns but sometimes about watching your friend and comrade die by poison gas.  In all the poetry I’ve read before this has been Shel Silverstien, fluffy kids stuff, or about a creepy raven.  Nothing wrong with those things but it seems that most poetry is not about fluffy bunnies but about the more serious elements of life, one being death.  Another thing I learned is the elements involved in poetry; an example of this is the kinetic text poetry.  The use of spaces and varying sizes of font and bold letters adds an element of voice even if you can’t here the person who wrote it.

            I believe that only under certain circumstances is it right to die for your country.  I also think it is never sweet to die for your country, I think that’s just dumb.  I mean nobody in the army goes “yeah! I’m dyin’ for my country! Sweet!”

Nobody is excited to go die.  I do think it can be right though, under certain reasons though.  I think that you must really have something to fight for.  One example that I thought of during the seminar but didn’t get a chance to say it, was that the American Revolution was a perfect example of when it is right to die for your country.  (In this case half of your country.)  In the American Revolution men were fighting over there homes, family and freedom.  This is the only thing that you should be right to fight for, if your personal life is affected if you don’t fight.  That is the only way it is right to die for your country.

Being Peace Seminar Reflection

            Upon reflecting about what people have said I remembered that Leah said we as Americans would rather be in touch with someone else rather than themselves.  I thought this was really interesting because in today’s society all the news and media discuss how celebrities got busted for stealing or got in a fight with police.  When looking at the magazines in the grocery store, all it is is drama based on celebrities not being perfect.  On page 92 of Thich Nhat Hanh’s Being Peace, Hanh states, “Aware of the suffering created by attachment to views and wrong perceptions…”  Hanh is saying that if we attach ourselves to wrong views and perceptions that it will only bring suffering.    I believe that this is totally true, if we look at other peoples lives and believe them, we will in turn be led into suffering. 

“We will try not to lose ourselves in dispersion or be carried away by regrets about that past…,” (Page 96, Being Peace).  Someone in the discussion, based on this quote, said that why should we have history class if we needn’t look to the past?  I thought this was rather interesting and it questioned my perception of history class.  History is to educate youth about the past; wars, assassinations, presidents, ect.  Most would argue that history is an important bit of knowledge, but is it really?  Hanh is trying to say that looking toward your past can only lead to suffering.  You may realize that you should not have dropped out of college so that you could buy that fancy car you want.  That want for the car you can’t have drive you insane and you, according to Hanh, lose spiritual energy worrying about that fancy car.  But what does this have to do with history class?  Well I think that the government has to worry about what we learn about in History.  Take President Nixon for example, President Obama may be worried that what happened to Nixon may happen to him, giving him anxiety, draining his spiritual energy.

How do the practices described here fit into American culture?  Or don’t fit I should say.  I think that most if not all of these mindfulness trainings will not work at all in American society, and some should be sent to the nether realm. 

The one mindfulness training that the American public would send to the nether realm is mindfulness training 5:  “Aware that true happiness is rooted in peace solidarity, freedom and compassion, and not in wealth or fame, we are determined not to take as the aim of our life fame, profit wealth, or sensual pleasure, nor accumulate wealth while millions are hungry and dying,” (Page 94, Being Peace).  In the US people are so focused on their jobs, technology, clothes, and having better things than anyone else.  Take technology for example.  Technology, like the iPod, is advancing so fast that when you buy an iPod 1^st generation the 2^nd generation iPod comes out a week later.  This race to have the best tech has overwhelmed the general public.  The iPad came out and everyone was in a buying frenzy.  The same with the Kindle and the iPhone 4.  another example is clothing.  So many people will pay extra for a name brand.  Having Oakley glasses is a status symbol among wealthier people and anyone that can’t afford it aren’t as cool or in the group of Oakley wearers.

Another mindfulness training that no one in the US government would despise is  the third.  “Aware of the suffering brought about when we impose our views on others…,” (Page 93, Being Peace).  As soon as I read this I thought of the us military in operation Iraqi freedom.  The government went into Iraq and said “hey this type of government is the best, use it.  This totally crushes the third mindfulness training and pushes it under the rug.  This mindfulness training is telling us to respect others opinions and not be entirely closed minded.  We ought to suggest our opinion and let them decide what they want to do. 

One of the connections I made during the seminar was when I mentioned that the war in Iraq was a disregard of the third mindfulness training.  The group was discussing this mindfulness training and I thought that the war in Iraq was a perfect example.  Another connection I made was to my own life.  The question what is the hardest mindfulness training for you personally?  That really got me thinking that it would be very hard for me to convert to Buddhism, especially in the fifth mindfulness training.  I love tech like videogames and I don’t think that as a Buddhist I would be able to play call of duty.

One question I still have is that if this type of Buddhism would work in the US and I actually answered my question in the text.  The actual mindfulness training quotes (the first sentences) were the answers.  Take the fifth for example, “Aware that true happiness is rooted in peace solidarity, freedom and compassion, and not in wealth or fame,” I think that the US is not capable of this, and that was my answer in the text.

The second question I had was why would anyone feel the need to bring Buddhism into the US?  My answer could be that Buddhists want to spread their religion throughout the world.  I could get a solid answer by asking a Buddhist monk.

   

Jihad vs. McWorld Seminar

            Unfortunately I talked a lot more than anyone else in the Seminar so I don’t remember any of what anyone else said but I will discuss something that I said.  I mentioned that if a society were to base the way they do things on an entirely solid form of community and culture, peace and stability would follow.  I do believe this still but my idea was challenged during the seminar.  My group members said that if you were to encounter someone with different beliefs how would you react and how would you cope with them.  I took a smart ass approach and said I just wouldn’t interact. But then I started to sort of think about that and I realized that my society would crumble and fall apart.  One reason this would fall apart is that the other society that I was dealing with may start preaching their beliefs to my society, this could make some people in my society to think that this other society was better and join them.  Also there may be violence if we have to much conflicting cultures.  So I now believe that in order to have both stability and peace; and community and identity; we must take away the sense that we are better than everyone else.  We need to throw away our differences and communicate as one whole nation of humans.  That is the only way to achieve both.    

Dali Painting Seminar Reflection

An egg, blue as the sea, sits upon a barren wasteland of crumbled pebbles and dust.  The earth, cracked from the year’s drought.  The air was dry and stale.  Breathing offered only lungs of hot, dust filled air that burned in the back of your throat.  Directly underneath the egg, lay the tattered shambles of a cloth, white as pale flesh, peppered with dirt thrown by the wind.  Atop the egg a mistreated and rugged cloth floated, as if suspended by the egg itself, a few feet above the egg.  Ripped and torn, it flopped in the wind, sounding like a flag in the wind.  An air horn in comparison with the ambient noise of the barren, windswept wasteland.  Behind the egg the sun set in a glorious display of oranges, pinks and reds, turning the mountains cobalt blue shining against the brown hills that lie in front.  Far to the east a stunning tower stood fast as the sun set.  A square tower one hundred feet high with an angled roof that sloped back toward the setting sun.  Two windows black as night crowned the face of the tower in vertical fashion towards the top.   Two figures then approached the egg and began to wait.  The first figure had skin like the dead, an old rotten corpse yet still alive and was clearly emaciated.  Her skin clung to her bones and each individual rib stuck out like ripples in water.  A rotted fig leaf covered her genitals and was the only scrap of cloth she wore.  The second figure was of a young naked child, also with flesh like the dead, although more muscular than the woman.  The two began to watch the egg intently, with such intent it could be compared to a cat stalking its prey.  They seemed to know something was about to happen.  They waited for no more than a moment when a map of the world began to appear on the surface.  First came South America, then North, Europe, Asia, Africa.  No sooner than Africa fully appeared a foot began to protrude from the side of the egg.  The egg had the texture of a latex glove; it stretched as the shape of a person began to appear on the eggs surface.  First the foot stuck out of the left side then head then knee.  Then like tearing through rubber the egg began to rupture and tear.  A seam opened up directly on North America.  The man’s hand burst forth from the seam.  As this happened Africa began to swell like a sponge full of water.  So saturated it look bulbous and appeared ready to burst.  It began to drip liquid and formed a puddle on the tattered cloth beneath.  South America began melting as though heated from within the egg.   The man’s hand landed on Europe, and like a flower pedal in bright sunlight shriveled into a crumpled heap.  The seam opened wider, exposing the man’s torso, a thin bead of crimson blood trickled down and onto the ground, immediately being absorbed by the parched ground.  At the sight of this horrid act, the child hid in terror behind the woman, clinging to her legs, hoping the beast in the egg would get no closer.  But the woman had other plans, she gently pointed toward the egg looked down at the shivering child and said… “Watch.” 

Omelas Seminar Reflection

           

            Let me just say that Kinjah was totally on top of it during the seminar, and he said some pretty mind blowing things, and I’m sure everyone in our group is going to talk about him.  One thing that Kinjah said that really got me thinking was that the story of Omelas was a metaphor for our world in the United States.  Basically what Kinjah said was that we in the US are the people of Omelas, happy and peaceful, but are profiting from the suffering of people in third world countries.  These third world countries symbolize the child in the closet in Omelas.  I thought that this was a sweet analogy, and I totally agree with Kinjah.  Here in the US we tend to buy things that are made in places that they treat their workers in a less than human way.  Take diamonds for example, Cora mentioned that diamonds were mined in Africa and those workers are basically slaves.  When Cora said this I was reminded of the movie Blood Diamond.  In blood diamond most of the workers in Sierra Leone were in fear of their lives and forced to work.

Kinjah also said that in order to help the child in the closet you would have to take his place in the closet.  That was really a deep thing to even think of.  I don’t think that I could have ever come up with anything like that.  Cora challenged this saying that she would never take the child’s place and that that wasn’t totally the best idea for helping the child.  This brought up how we could help the people in the “closet”, so to speak.  This brought up the diamonds again.  Cora said that she like diamonds and thinks they’re pretty, but realizes the fact that most are mined in countries like Sierra Leone, I thought that we could just not buy diamonds.

            Some of the connections that I made were when Cora mentioned that diamonds were mined by “the child in the closet.”  This instantly made me think from Blood Diamond. 

Another connection I made was when Cora said that when new technology came out and you bought that version a new version came out within the month.  I connected this to the Best Buy commercial, where the guy buys a 3D TV and then sees the 4D TV on the moving truck.  I think that was funny because it’s true.  I was at Radio Shack the other day trying to buy a case for my iPod touch 2^nd generation and, thanks to apple, any case for the 4^th generation wouldn’t fit onto my 2^nd generation.  What Cora said really reminded me of these things.

The final connection I made was when Cora said that violence in kids’ minds today comes from videogames.  Cora was saying that most videogames were all about guns and killing.  I made the connection because I am a huge fan of first person shooters and the most popular games out today, and the most played are games with some sort of killing involved like the Call of Duty and Halo series.  This got me thinking about things like Columbine, that people that play violent videogames tended to do things like this.

            What role does the child play in the closet in their society?

            I believe that the child allows the society to be happy and a peaceful, worry free city.  “It is the existence of the child, and their knowledge of its existence that make possible the nobility of their architecture, the poignancy of their music, the profundity of their science.  It is because of the child that they are so gentle with children.  They know that if the wretched one were not their sniveling in the dark, the other one, the flute player, could make no joyful music…,” (Page 5, The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas).    This is evidence that show that the flute player wouldn’t be able to play his beautiful music unless there was a child in the closet.  If the flute player couldn’t play then the people that went to watch the little flute player would only see an empty street corner. 

            Another role the child in the closet plays is to weed out the guilty people in the city of Omelas.  “At times one of the adolescent girls or boys go to see the child does not go home to weep or to rage, does not, in fact, go home at all…  …Each alone, they go west or north, toward the mountains.  They go on.  They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back,” (Page 5, The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas).  I don’t think that Omelas wants people who are filled with guilt and pity.  I think that this guilt, in their minds, is blinding them from true happiness in their society.  Anyone who leaves is filled with guiltiness so they leave, ridding the city of more people that are pitiful.  This leaves the city in a much more “happy” place.  This leaving also makes the people who are guilty, a lot less guilty since they got to leave the horrible place of Omelas. 

            The main question I have is: Is this society of Omelas a metaphor for our world in the United States?

Actually no; upon researching the subject I found out that the main message is that one has to take the suffering of others and is it right for one to take all others’ pain.  I believe that this message is actually stronger than the one I thought it was.  I like this better.  I realize that the idea that this is a metaphor for the US is a great message in and of itself, but the real meaning seems better.  Obviously.  I think that we just scratched the surface with this story.  

Roots Of War Seminar Reflection

            I don’t really have a reaction to what one person said because we were cut short and there wasn’t much said; but I think that it was really incredible that the entire group agreed that war could not be abolished.  I thought that this was strange that everyone agreed, that never happens, and on such an arguable subject.  I just think that someone out of the group would argue that the world could become peaceful.  During MUN practice run no one could agree on anything weather it was making marijuana legal or if Iran should have nuclear power.  There were so many different things that people said during MUN that I couldn’t believe that during the seminar no one disagreed.

            This seminar changed nothing of my opinions but developed my ideas of the fact that war cannot be abolished.  Actually I think that Hannah said something that changed my opinion.  She said that animals don’t have wars, and I at first thought that animals did battle, like when predators attacked their prey, but Hannah said that war was more of when two cultures, the same or different, came together head on and attacked each other.  She then stated that animals don’t really fight face to face.  Zebras don’t band together to secure the water hole, and lions don’t try to wipe cheetahs off the map.  So I now agree that animals don’t engage in warfare.

            The only thing that I connected to was Saving Private Ryan because we were talking about war, but other that there was nothing else that I connected to.

            I think that it was a real bummer that we got cut short because there was a lot more I could have said and I think that it affected my grade.  I think that the thing I did the best on was communication but I didn’t really think it was quite up to par because I didn’t really do what it said on the rubric.  I give myself a B- or a C+. 

Slaughter House 5 Seminar Reflection

            One thing that Ian and Nathan said was really interesting.  They said that free will didn’t  exist, that you had one chosen path and no matter what you did to change it, it was still your path.  In other words if you were a doctor and you changed your job to a teacher, you had the option to change what your job was but it was still part of your master path.  Your changing of job was all part of that plan.  It was already set in stone that you would change your job.  This was really interesting to me because I always thought that you could change your path and that nothing was set in stone. 

            The thing that changed my mind the most was what Ian and Nathan said: that your path is decided for you.  This was really interesting to me because the idea of a predestined path was weird.   The reason I thought it was weird was the fact that I believe free will is important and that I can change my future by my actions.  As I always thought your path was undecided and you could change this with your free will.  I still believe that you can change your future but its a little tweaked I thought what Ian said was weird at first but after I thought about it I realized that it was a great point and now I think I may believe it. 

            This seminar reminded me of the sociology project last year, in the free will aspect.  It reminded me of this because we sort of talked about how or actions would determine our future.  It also reminded me of this because of the deepness.  In our sociology project we discussed the deepest stuff I’ve ever talked about.  The thought of free will was so deep during the discussion we couldn’t quite put a label on what free will was.  That’s pretty cool.

             I think I did the best on communication.  I always try to get my message off as clearly as I can no matter the subject.  I’m sort of a short and sweet person so that’s why I attempted to convey what I what I was trying to say, like my view on free will, without anyone having to ask what I meant. 

DEOGRATIAS SEMINAR REFLECTION

What makes Deogratias so crazy?  Think about what he does, and what is done to him.

There are several reasons why Deogratias is so crazy.  The first reason and probably the most apparent would be his drinking problem.  Deogratias tends to drink a lot and I think his drunkenness causes him to hallucinate and think he’s a dog.  This believe that he is a dog also creates a crazy person image.  In Rwanda dogs are considered to be pest since they would eat on the corpses during the genocide.  The other reason I think Deogratias is so insane is that he has PTSD.  Something like genocide would make even the most hardened people a little loopy.

Who is the person in this book with the most guilt?  In other words, who is the most responsible for what happened to Venetia, Benina, Apollinaria, and Deogratias?

I would have to say that Deogratias is responsible for what happened to Venetia, Benina, Apollinaria, and himself.  I think this because in the book Deogratias tries to hide Apollinaria in his home, which in turn made her leave which in turn led to her death.  As for Venetia, she went to go find her daughters, Apollinaria and Benina, which in turn got her killed.  Since Deogratias didn’t let Apollinaria go anywhere Venetia went looking for Apollinaria.  Benina was attacked at the church and hid in the latrines for quite some time.  This was not directly related to Deogratias but when Apollinaria found Benina in the latrine they went and surrendered to the Hutu’s.  Deogratias was apart of the party that Apollinaria and Benina surrendered to, and he did nothing to stop them from being killed.