Upon A Second Glance

Since the first humans came into existence, racism and bigotry has plagued and corrupted our every thought, making us fearful, and as a result, hateful, to anything that differs from our status quo. There has long been a saying that even if we humans were to wake up one morning to discover everyone was of the same, race, creed, religion, and color, we would find a reason to hate each other by noon.



There is, however, a silver lining in the perpetual cloud of intolerance. Humans, though often irrational and fanatical as a whole, are essentially a mixture of both light and dark, and are individually equipped with the infinite potential to do both good and evil. We all have the ability to trade in our biases and hatred for something much more positive, and this fact is demonstrated no better that in Tony Kaye’s award winning masterpiece, American History X. This film smashed the precedent set by most American films of the time that difficult and contentious topics are best left to documentaries, and that any ending that doesn’t end with the tell-tale happily ever after has no place outside of the horror genre. American History X jumps right into the deep end of today’s most controversial, but rarely discussed, issue of race, and navigates through it with intelligence and, for the most part, psychosomatic plausibility



As far as the plot was concerned, none could have illustrated the transformation from destructivity and hate-induced militancy to enlightenment so smoothly than that of this film. In the opening, we are introduced to narrator through the elegant words of his paper, and later find out that it was a an assignment forced upon him by his principle for being apparently sympathetic to the third Reich and praising Hitler’s Mein Komf in a book report. From there we become acquainted with our narrator’s charismatic older brother and idol, an up and coming Skinhead bent on the destruction of everything that was not ‘white, Protestant, and American’. We learn of the brother’s deep seated racist roots that traced all the way back to the subtle prejudices of their father, and eventually reached full boil when he was killed by a black gangster while trying to put out a fire in a crack house. We, as the audience, trail behind Danny Vineyard with a mixture of tear stained cheeks and rage filled shouts, following him along the winding roads of murder, prison, and redemption. We are filled with immeasurable pride when he triumphantly faces the demons of his hatred, and our hearts break along with his when tragedy once again shatters his world.



It is these roller coaster ride of emotions that make this film truly stand out among the rest, and ties the watcher to the true message of the movie This film not only explores the underlying racism among America’s white middle class, and the resulting real life uprising of the neo-Nazi Skin head’s, but causes the reader to look deeper into the similar vices that may very well lead to their own destruction.

Yeah, I don't feel like being creative with the title right now

Article One

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy1.lib.depaul.edu/ehost/detail?vid=7&hid=104&sid=b4cd6cc1-1368-4719-b43b-23e1cdea1379%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=fah&AN=1862850

Films that set out to expose racial hatred for "what it is" sometimes appear to be fanning the very flames that they are trying to quash. Remember Mississippi Burning, a portrait of systematic racial violence in America's Deep South? The pointy hooded klan reportedly advised their members to go and see the film because they felt it served their cause. The same might be said about elements of American History X.

The film sets out to expose the currents of race hatred in a poor Californian neighbourhood, and does so without glossing over any home truths. Racism comes in all hues: slipped in at the family dinner table or vitriolically bellowed out at ear-bleed volume through a concert PA stack.

The story follows Derek Vinyard (Edward Norton), the leader of a Venice Beach gang of skinheads, who is released from prison after doing time for killing two black crooks he caught breaking into his car. His younger brother Daniel (Edward Furlong) is now following in big bro's footsteps and looks up to him for leadership. But he discovers that his brother has changed a great deal during his stint behind bars.

Insights into Derek's development are presented in flash-back: the past, where convictions are more cut and dry, is filmed in black and white. The young Derek, seen through his brother's eyes, has an aura of divinity about him reflected in the music and religious iconography.

The performances are all excellent. Edward Norton shows an extensive broadening of his range, while Edward Furlong shows plenty of promise as an older actor. Avery Brooks gives a strong performance as the African American teacher who cares enough to try and work through the hatred.

American History X goes to the root of racist hatred. It reveals how potent a brew racist rhetoric can be on vulnerable, young minds. It is, ultimately, unambiguous in its depiction of the wastefulness and ugliness of racist rage and violence, but also offers a way of breaking the vicious circle of hatred. Racists may find ways of twisting the film to their cause, but then they always will.

This review was begun in such a way that might have suggested negative connotations were associated with this film and those like it (such as Mississippi Burning, a very famous movie that portrayed the treatment of African Americans in the Deep South that the author mentioned), but later backtracks on such a train of thought, stating that racists always have and always will find ways to twist well-intentioned portrayals to fit their own agendas. The author goes on to praise the film as being completely unambiguous in it’s message that racism and hatred of any kind are at best is totally destructive, and gives the movie’s actors very high marks. He gives the readers a small taste of the plot, highlighting the essentials but taking care to not reveal some key spoilers in between, to better help them understand if they are unfamiliar with the work, and to emphasis his points if they were. In the short amount of words he used, he essentially captured what is supposedly the intended message of the film, all the while offering his positive critique of both the plot and the performance.

Article Two

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=6&hid=17&sid=5b39d86d-aed0-4f73-97e8-8ff4c226260c%40SRCSM1&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=eric&AN=EJ783976

On the day that his older brother is due to be released from prison, student Danny Vinyard (Edward Furlong) turns in a paper praising Hitler's Mein Kampf to his Jewish teacher Murray (Elliot Gould). He is sent to the principal, Bob Sweeney (Avery Brooks) who assigns him another task. He gives him a day to complete an essay on the events that have shaped his life, including the events leading up to the imprisonment of his brother. The assignment will be called American History X.

Writing this essay provides the cinematic device to tell the story of Danny and his older brother Derek (Edward Norton). Derek has been imprisoned for the killing of two men who tried to steal his car one night. Derek didn't kill them because they were thieves but because they were black, and he had been the leader of a neo-Nazi, white-power group. Derek's hatred of blacks was triggered when his father, a fireman, was killed by drug-dealers (presumed black), who shot him as he attempted to put out a fire in a poor neighbourhood. Hooking up with a local white-power activist Cameron (Stacy Keach), he organises a group of white kids into an organised mob who terrorise local non-white owned businesses.

Derek's racism is directed at anyone he meets - he explodes with rage when he finds that Murray is friendly with his mother, because he is Jewish. So when he finds two black kids (one of whom he had encountered before) messing with his car, he has no hesitation in killing them. One of them survives the initial hail of gunfire but Derek finishes him off as he lies wounded on the footpath.

When Derek is released (after serving three years for manslaughter), he returns home to find his mother ( Beverly D'Angelo) and siblings living in a small, shabby apartment, and that Danny has become involved in the neo-Nazi movement. Derek's own reputation has been enhanced by his crime, but he wants nothing more to do with Cameron's activities, and is determined to stop his younger brother following in his footsteps. The film follows his attempt to explain to Danny how his life has changed, and Danny's own exploration of his family's past (through writing his essay).

Tony Kaye's film is a thoughtful and sometimes shocking account of a skinhead's descent into murder and his eventual attempt at rehabilitation. The film is driven by two outstanding performances, from Edward Norton and Edward Furlong. Norton is simply frightening as the hate-filled Derek, all shaven scowl and bedecked with swastika tattoos. His portrayal depicts a keen intellect corrupted by an unfocussed rage. However, Edward Furlong has arguably the harder role, as it is more subtle and less showy. As a gangly teenager, desperate for a sense of belonging, and looking for someone to look up to, Furlong's Danny looks as uncomfortable in his own body as he does in his surroundings. The film is sustained by the sheer power of their performances.

Kaye's direction is visually striking, even if he does tend to overdue his use of slow-motion shots and allegorical imagery. He uses grainy black and white for the flashback sequences, which adds a documentary (and more ominous) feel to them. Kaye presents a couple of truly shocking (though not gratuitous) sequences - the double killing opens the movie and is shown again near the end of the movie. It is a sign of Kaye's confidence and talent that he shows the same scene twice, since when we see the murders at the start of the movie, we merely see a menacing-looking skinhead committing a violent act. When we see the killing later in the movie, we are aware of what drives Derek; we see the killing in a different context, and it is still as shocking and terrifying as the first time.

The other very disturbing sequence in the film is an attack, by Derek and his gang, on an Asain-owned supermarket. Though it is little more than vandalism and petty violence, the sense of reckless energy and viciousness is palpable - Kaye knows how to make an audience uncomfortable and uneasy without needing to gross them out. In some ways, he shares the same skill as Spike Lee in conveying tension and a sense of impending catastrophe.

Kaye's treatment of racism and racists is far more thoughtful than the polemic approach favoured by Lee. However, the film seems to suggest that young intelligent people (such as Derek and Danny) just need some moral guidance to cure them of their racist urges. The rest of Derek's gang are portrayed as fools, and therefore beyond redemption. This theory is somewhat undermined by the presence of Cameron, a confirmed racist who is obviously smart too. As the film concludes, the suggested real source of Derek's racist hatred is far too simplistic and naive, and it ignores the obvious tension arising from the natural conflict between culturally separate groups (white and black working class neighbourhoods). Another flaw in the movie is the depiction of Derek's conversion :- as someone who hates black people enough to kill two men for a triviality, his change of heart in prison is unconvincing. The film may be naive in its beliefs but it is still an infinitely better insight into the minds of racists than crudely drawn rubbish such as Betrayed.

There was some controversy before this movie was released when the director (Kaye) claimed that Edward Norton had used his Hollywood influence to have the final cut of the movie changed so that Norton would get more scenes. If any scenes seem superfluous, they don't include those involving either Norton or Furlong, who have each delivered their best performances to date in their respective careers. Likewise, Kaye's direction announces the arrival of a serious and powerful talent.

This (extraordinarily long) review offers much of the very same things as the first, with a few notable exceptions. Both films praise the outstanding performances of Edward Norton (Derek Vinyard) and his ‘brother’ Edward Furlong (Danny Vinyard), claiming that it was their acting that essentially brought the film to life and made the incredible impact it had on its audience possible. Both reviews also praise the movie’s message as a whole, with the latter of the two articles offering more details and insight into the imagery and symbolism of the film. The second film, however, puts more emphasis on the director Tony Kaye, and his role in achieving this masterpiece. He also does something the previous author does not; he explains the impact that the film had on its creators. He goes into a brief summary of the director’s (Tony Kaye’s) editing of the film, and how they affected the final product.

Best Youtube AMV, period.

I Speak of Poetry

1) When Langston Hughes wrote the masterpiece ‘The Negro Speaks of Rivers, he was sure to pick rivers that would make a desired impact on his readers. His first line states that these rivers are ‘older than the flow of human blood in human veins’, which is true in both respects. These rivers were here long before humans were, and when we finally did arrive, provided the lifelines for civilization as a whole. These specific rivers, however, had a very significant meaning for African Americans in particular, from the Nile River that cradled one of the most famous and advanced African civilizations (the Egyptians), to the muddy Mississippi, which saw their burdens under slavery in the new world.

2) Wow, this is a lot of questions! Alright, when the speaker says that he is the ‘darker brother’, he simply means to point out the fact that he is an African American, but still very much a part of the human family. He eats in the kitchen because he is considered a second class citizen during this time, inferior to his ‘lighter brothers’ and therefore meant to be concealed from the rest. He says ‘he’ll eat at the table tomorrow’ because he believes that in due time (not necessarily tomorrow in the literal sense), his oppressors will realize that he is indeed a person, and deserves to be treated as no less. The title makes the point that ‘negros’ are, too, Americans, and have earned the right of the nation’s respect.

3) The Harlem Renaissance was meant to glorify and celebrate all types of African Americans, giving them all an uplifting voice when there was previously none. This poem, Mulatto, doesn’t seem to do that, as it’s numerous racial slurs and insults to the mixed and black race seem to have the exact opposite effect. Black power advocates like W.E.B. Du Bois was in no means unjustified in objecting to this poem.

5) In his poem, ‘Note on Commercial Theater‘, Hughes objects to black culture being absorbed by whites during the Harlem Renaissance and the seemingly dependant lifestyles of blacks on whites. During the Harlem Renaissance, most African American writers had to get published through white publishing houses, and they gained the largest audiences while performing music in Caucasian clubs. He felt that blacks had to be dependant on themselves to truly succeed. This is still relevant today, especially in terms of music. Hip Hop and R&B have long been the brainchild for blacks, yet it has been absorbed into the mainstream white community, where they are the biggest consumers of it.

6) Because he feels that although we still have African roots and the blood of Africa running actively through our veins, we need to identify as Americans first and foremost. Poems like ‘I, too’ only solidify this belief that we are now a part of this country, and it is permanently imbedded into our collective identities.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1) harlot

For the Sake of Arguement...

"Well, you know whut dey say ‘uh white man and uh nigger woman is defreest thing on earth.’ Dey do as dey please." (Chapter19, pg 181)

According the African American men speaking above, white men and black women are free from the restraints and expectations that other subgroups are forced to abide by. White men, being from both the superior race and sex, enjoy the privileges of doing what they want to who they please without having to worry about trifle consequences, as there is no higher human to whom they would have to answer. Black women, in contrast, are deemed the lowliest of the subdivisions, both pathetically inferior in sex and race. Because of their alleged weakness, they seemed to receive an inordinate amount of mercy from their oppressors, much like parent would dispatch to a young child.

This is the logic of the black men in the novel, but, historically speaking, was it accurate? Did the white man and the black women enjoy more freedom than the rest?

Well, the former statement could obviously be backed up with the barest knowledge about world history and a bit of common sense; the past has shown us, whether it be through the Crusaders, Conquistadors, or the Klansmen, that white men have often taken what they wanted with little regard to the imprint it leaves on others, and came away completely unscathed. They have long been the sole determiners of morality in this world, bending and stretching their ideals to fit those of their actions. Only fools stood in the way of this all-powerful group, especially the negro race, to which it spelled out a death sentence in most cases.

Black woman, however, did not deserve the accusations of the aforementioned black gossipers. By virtue of being both a racial minority and the "weaker" sex, black women had it worst of all and were essentially the bottom of the social totem pole. Just as Nanny once claimed, they have been both the crutch of their men and the mule of the whites, often bearing the burdens and the scorn of both unflinchingly. They were the sturdy glue that held together the seams of the black community, keeping the great quilt of their lives from unraveling layer by layer. They enjoyed no unjust freedoms, as the men above claimed, but were, in most cases, shackled by the chains of condescendence and injustice that were place upon them by nearly every other group. This is the real truth that was often cast aside by people like the men in this novel, and something that would have served them well to recognize.

Money: America's One True Religion

For as long as long as we humans have bartered and bargained with coinage, there have been countless proverbs on the matter, from the familiar “money can’t buy happiness’ adage of our mothers to the still more true “ Money often costs too much’. Although it is true that the following money has invoked in this world can rival that of any leading religion, it would in fact be false to claim that money is the root of all evil, as our forefathers have told us time and time again. Indeed, it is not money, but the lack of money and what people do to achieve it that’s detrimental to our society. Money itself is neutral, a simple tool that does the bidding of its master and nothing more, yet it is our favorite scapegoat when we lead ourselves down a path of destruction in the quest for it. This distinction is crucial in the understanding of Americans and modern society, and we would do well to remember it.

With that said, there is still no denying the fact that Americans today are indeed far too consumed by the notion of the "American dream" We are trained from birth to not become productive citizens for the sake of bettering the world around us, but for the selfish purpose of attaining profitable careers and fattening our own bank accounts. We are engulfed in the world of consumerism from the very jump, forever on a mission to earn more to buy more of the things that advertisers and big-name companies have convinced us we need. We have become the much scorned drug addicts in a sense, desperately reaching and grasping for that monetary high that seems so close to us at the time, but will remain eternally out of our reach.

This thirst for the dollar has another side effect, the neatly classified social classes in which we desperately cling to and identify ourselves by. The upper tier of society consists of the wealthy and powerful few, the ones in which most of the middle tier Americans place upon a pedestal and frantically try to become. There are measured not by their intellect or their moral fiber, but buy their status and possessions, something Lapham does and excellent job in pointing out. “The visible signs of wealth testify to an inward state of grace, and without at least some of these talismans posted in one’s house or on one’s person an American loses all hope of demonstrating to himself the theorem of his happiness”

The sad truth of the matter is, there never has, and never will be, a such thing as ‘just enough’ money; we, not only as Americans, but humans as a species, will always search for more and be forever short, a trait that will keep us firmly planted on the path of devastation and tragedy.

Of Faults and Fallacies

1) Edward Koch’s thesis in support of the death penalty was that the death penalty simply "helps to affirm" the sacredness of life itself, even if this is done by taking a life in the process. He backs this claim up by various facts and statistics about the possibilities of a murderer repeating his crimes, and the probability of a man being wrongfully executed. Koch asks the reader to agree with the idea that capitol punishment is a just and necessary practice to punish perpatrators of the most henous of murder crimes.

2) Koch used the time-old assertion that the death penalty served as a successful deterent towards violent crimes, namely murder. He does not, however, back this claim up with hard evidence, but instead depends on the infamous 'if only' arguement. '...Had the death penalty been a real possibility in the minds of these murderers, they might well have stayed their hand. They might have shown moral awareness before their victims died, and not after. He uses this logic to back up his original thesis of Humarabi-like punishments, putting various logical appeals in the article to lamenate his cry for eye-for-an-eye justice.

1) No. As said as it is to say, Koch seems to genuinely believe that taking the life of someone will somehow justify the crime, or avenge that victim. While it wouldn't be correct to say that he was impassioned exactly, he appears to battle the so called fallacies he brings up in the article whole-heartedly, a fact that I find discouraging to say the least. It would be nice to think that this was just a political ploy, that he was just repeating those time-worn lines to please the bloodthirsty American public, but I do not honestly believe that is the case here. The fact that he makes his history as a public servant known ('During my 22 years of public service....as a district leader, councilman, congressman, and mayor) seems as just an establishment of ethos, not of a shameless plug to get voters on his side come election day; he is genuinely ignorant of the faults in his logic.

2) I feel as though Koch expects his audience to either be hostile or apathetic to the issue of capital punishment, which is illustrated in his unyielding attempts to woo his audience over to the side of the electric chair. He addresses nearly every objection an anti-death citizen could have, leading me to believe that he anticipated some retorts to be brought up among his audience. It is equally clear, however, that he fully expected each and every dissident voice to be silence when confronted with his 'evidence' and logic. He even ends the article with a tactic probably meant to sink even the most liberal of readers; he guilts them into believing his blood for blood ideals by having the sin of the crime thrust upon them, saying that by refusing to adhere to these barbaric and outdated policies, they are encouraging more murder and killing the victims twice. It is shameless, tasteless, and, unfortunatly, it probably persuaded even more people than he intended.

3) He places the responsibilites of the vote into their hands, making sure that they know they have the power to make capital punishment the ultimate justice throughout the country. If there are any readers still left unconvinced, however, he then essentially places the blame of every homicide commited in the country on their heads, a blatant fallacy if I've ever seen one.

1) emotional and rational:" A study at M.I.T. showed that based on 1970 homicide rates, a person who lived in a large American city ran a greater risk of being murdered that an American soldier in World War II ran of being killed in combat" This both plays on the readers' fears and love of facts.

I myself was uninspired by the article and its arguements, but if I were to approach this with the completely unbiased mind of an apathetic American, the emotional appeals would probably play the biggest role in turning me pro-capital punishment. He plays on the readers feelingings like a true pro, inspiring a sense of indignation and terror that can be very hard to counter. And although the rational appeals were faulty and far-reaching at very best, he seemed to depend less on ethical appeals overall, making it the weakest device by far.

2) He purposely paints the two convicted murderers, Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw, as mildly apologetic but irrationally defiant, batting away their pleas for public awareness as if they were merely knats in the breeze. He quoted them as saying that by ending their lives with as much callousness and apathy as could be expected from the very 'cold-blooded' killers they were condemning, they were essentially no better that they were. In other words, they acknowledged their actions as regretable; now, it was time for the government to come to same conclusions. Not so, says Koch, who feels that the government (which is run by people) has the higher authority on the lives it governs, and they have every right to commit the crime in which they were punishing.

3) Personally, I found the counter-arguement to the barbarism claim as unmoving as the rest of the article, especially since it employs such god-awful analogies and slippery-slope fallacies. His claim that 'one does not have to like the death penalty in order to support it any more than one much like radical surgery, radiation, or chemo-therapy to find necessary these attempts at curing cancer' is incredibly faulty, which he even admits to a few sentences afterwards, especially since the death penalty has never been proven as an effective deterent, and certainly not the treatment, of murder. He tries to use the something as universally painful as cancer to stress a point that was backed up by only pretty ideals and quotable nonsense, and much like his logic, this arguement fell well short of being anything near convincing.

4) Luis Vera- "Yeah, I shot her. She knew me, and I knew I wouldn't go to the chair". This example is used to sqash out any sympathy felt for these future cadavers, as well as to prove his point that murderers only kill because believed there own lives will not be ended.

Robert Lee Willie- 'Mr. Willie had previously been convicted of aggravated rape, aggravated kidnapping, and the murders of a Louisiana deputy and a man from Missouri' and Joseph Carl Shaw- 'Mr. Shaw commited another murder a week before the two for which he was executed, and admitted mutilating the body of the 14-year old girl he killed. He used these examples to illustrate his point that the only suitable punishment for murderers is murder, or else they'll live to kill again. Nevermind that these are probably extremely isolated cases, considering the fact that, by the statistic that Mr.Koch himself included in the article, only a tiny minority, seven percent, have had previous murder arrests.

Lemuel Smith- 'Who, while serving four life sentences , lured a woman corrections officer into the chaplain's office and strangled her.' He used this to prove that a mere lifetime rotting in prison is not the proper punishment, that death is needed to solve the murder problem once and for all.

All the Little Things

In most cases, the setting of any fiction work is the breath of life to the entire plot, the one element that effects the plausibility and interpretation of a particular piece in a make or break sense. For plays, the setting of the story becomes doubly important and has to been handled more intricately, as this, coupled with the dialogue, becomes just about the only influential component that will be exposed to the audience.

With that said, it is my humble opinion that Ms. Glaspell successfully achieved the difficult feat of making a story and it’s characters come alive on stage while at the same time expressing distinctive and elaborate themes in the simplest possible way. The basic yet effective elements in the setting create suspense and intrigue on the part of the audience as an attempt is made to solve the mysterious murder of the Wright farm. The main setting of the play, the kitchen, can easily symbolize the confined life of Mrs. Wright, but the play is more so defined by the props that lay inside it. The rocking chair and the Cherry preserves, two of Minnie’s lone enjoyments in her lonely and hollow life, symbolize the last desperate attempts of happiness that she dared reach for. The fact that the bottles had been broken due to the cold weather of winter is also blatantly symbolic, as Mrs. Wright, much like the reserves which she held so dear, was shattered beyond the hopes of repair, much in part to the iciness of her life. Her husband’s frostiness nipped at her fragile core day in and day out, each time leaving barely detectable cracks and breaks along the surface, until one day, she cracked, exploding with the tiny shards of her sanity and broken life.

Both the bird and the bird cage, however, seem to have the most crucial meanings to this play, even with the air of mystery still surrounded the previous prop. In one sense, the dead canary (assuming that it was indeed Mrs. Wright who ended it’s life) could serve as the first hint that she was indeed capable of murder. If it was killed by Mr. Wright, it could indicate his disdain for anything his wife took pleasure in, and his sadistic love for snuffing such things out. As a whole, it could symbolize the end to her happiness, and consequently her sanity, altogether, as birds have long been used as symbols for freedom and contentment. The bird cage epitomizes the confinement and imprisonment, both physically and emotionally, of Mrs. Wright and the countless women she represents.

Through the simplistic setting of Trifles, Susan Glaspell captures the plights of an entire sex and the disenchantment they often face when they choose the perilous path of matrimony. She personifies the voices of millions through this play and, much like the ‘trifles’ in the story, creates something much larger than what first meets the eye.

Transcending the Ages

In the novella Bernice Bobs Her Hair, F. Scott Fitzgerald creates an elegant and often times entertaining portrait of the roaring twenties through the eyes of three fictitious teenagers who lived them, all the while conveying the full complexity of coming of age in one of the periods in which the generation gap was at its widest.

The plot was riddled with symbolism and allegory, with just about every aspect of the story serving a duel purpose in its greater meaning. The bobbed hair, a fashionable but risky statement for women in this time frame, could have indeed represented the conflict between old fashioned probity and youthful levity, as well as the dwindling morality of the previous generation. In a sense, Bernice and Marjorie are of the old and the new, the traditional and the modern, respectively. Bernice, once as pure and wholesome as virgin snow, is seemingly corrupted by the promiscuous Marjorie, which may symbolize the changing of times and the author’s obvious disdain for this new flapper culture. Consequently, this depravity causes Bernice (or the values of old) to convert to near insanity, severing her cousin’s hair and maybe destroying her family relations as a result. In the end, no one can really claim victory as both wear the repercussions of their divergence from status quo, something which seems to me a subtle yet firm warning from a disapproving author.

Although it is true that the underlying messages in this story are very interesting, what struck me most was the fact that I could so easily relate to a story written almost a century before I was even born. Themes of peer pressure, the need for acceptance, the problems of self image versus public persona, self confidence and integrity that the story is very much concerned with seems to be able to transcend the ages, as they are very much alive and well today. I could easily see both Marjorie and Bernice being girls in one of my classes, and can trace some of their traits to myself.

This is a gift not often found in authors, the ability to create a world with eloquence and incredible detail, characters with depth and realism, and themes and messages that are relevant centuries after it is published. It is these traits that make Fitzgerald an excellent writer, and qualities that make this a timeless and enthralling classic.

I Have A Dream

1) alliteration- repetition of initial consonant sound

Allusion- indirect reference to someone or something

Metaphor- all language that involves figures of speech or symbolism and does not literally represent real things

Simile- a figure of speech that draws a comparison between two different things, especially a phrase containing the word "like" or "as,"

2) “Five score years ago” is an allusion to Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, in which he instead said Four score and seven years ago in reference to the Independence of our nation. It was most likely used because it draws parallels from that speech, in which Lincoln invoked the principles of human equality espoused by the Declaration of Independence and redefined the Civil War as a struggle not merely for the Union, but as "a new birth of freedom" that would bring true equality to all of its citizens; this was the ultimate goal of King’s marches and nearly all of his speeches.

3) One example of allusion, though not exactly indirect, was “and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.” An allusion to the Declaration of Independence was made in the familiar phrase “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

4) An example of alliteration can be found in the line “ We can never be [b]satisfied[/b] as long as our children are [b]stripped[/b] of the [b]self-hood[/b] and robbed of their dignity by [b]signs stating[/b].

5) An example of a metaphor is found in the line “quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality.”

6) Simile- “…and we will not be satisfied until “justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream”

7) This is an example of a metaphor. This would be an incredibly effective method because the memories of black bondage were still fresh in the minds of not only the country, but specifically in the hearts of the grandchildren of slaves. This is also a way of reminding them that segregation is only a step up from slavery, if that, and that they were still held back by the ‘chains’ of Jim Crow.

8) The phrases ‘let freedom ring’ and ‘go back (third page, first paragraph after the picture)

9) For one, the repetition of ’I have a dream’ draws attention to the fact that the idea of racial equality in America was still just, in fact, a highly optimistic dream, far from being realized. Secondly, it was sort of like a call to arms, to motivate and inspire others to make this dream become reality.

Short Answer Questions

1) Unfortunately, relations between the Natives of the West Indies and the European settlers were never very positive. West Indians died in droves from Spanish savagery and contact, with the soldiers of Smallpox and Malaria filling graves faster than any European army ever could. Natives came to fear the pale-skinned newcomers as if they were death itself, as Columbus recounted in his letters back home to Spain ‘…there were small hamlets, with the people of which I could not have speech because they all fled immediately‘. The surviving Natives often faced a worse fate than those they’d buried, with over forty percent of them becoming enslaved within the first year of Spanish conquest in some parts. Hundreds of Native Americans were shipped across the ocean to awaiting sugar plantations and European households, further replenishing their dwindling population.

These atrocities, however, were far from being discouraged amongst the European population. Both colonizers and conquerors alike saw the natives as uncivilized and vulnerable savages, and thus needing a firm hand and a forceful shove in the right direction. What ever it took to ‘civilize’ and ‘humble’ these barbarians was justified.

2) Unsurprisingly enough, the European colonizers were no strangers to pleading and haggling with their ’purses’ back east, usually the nobles and rulers of their countries. They used any method they deemed necessary to get the results they wanted, whether it be packing their letters home with exaggerated sufferings to get more money or passing along hyperbolic tales of Native savagery to receive more manpower. In the case of Christopher Columbus, his letters to Ferdinand and Isabella served more as an example of shameless groveling than as a mediator between the two continents, the once great navigator humbling himself for the price of his freedom. Christopher packs on the pathos, using phrases like ’ I never think without weeping’ (letter to Ferdinand and Isabella Regarding the Fourth Voyage, paragraph 1) and ’the unmerited wrong I have suffered’ (paragraph 6) to appeal to the readers’, namely the king and queen’s, sympathy.

3) Explorers and Europeans alike were almost always awed by the breathtaking virgin stretches of land they encountered, many subconsciously expecting to be greeted with the smoking rooftops and crowded alleyways offered in their own native lands. ‘I went on the same course’ writes Columbus in his letter to Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain ‘thinking that I should not fail to find great cities and towns.’ He later goes on to describe the reality of the island, which he later rechristened Isla Juana, as only a clutter of small hamlets, but is very far from being disappointed. ‘This island and all the others are very fertile to a limitless degree, and this island is extremely so. In it there are many harbors on the coast of the sea, beyond comparison with others which I know Christendom, and many rivers, good and large, which is marvelous….Esponola is a marvel.’

There were, however, limits to the ‘marvels’ described by Columbus, as later Europeans were soon to discover. In most cases, there were no golden cities in this new land, no untapped mines gleaming with precious jewels to be shipped back home. This left many a conquistador deeply embittered, and countless natives feeling the brunt of their fury.

1) The plot and the setting, as it turns out, seems to compliment and correspond with one another perfectly. The story’s protagonist, Desiree Aubigny, was raised in the elegant and physically beautiful Valmonde before downgrading to the outwardly unpleasant L’Abri. Her new residence was described in the text as ‘a sad looking place’, having been without female influence for some time. The author goes on to describe the house; ‘The roof came down steep and black like a cowl, reaching out beyond the wide galleries that encircled the yellow stuccoed house. Big, solemn oaks grew close to it, and their thick-leaved, far-reaching branches shadowed it like a pall‘. The plot of the story, it would seem, follows along these lines exactly. Desiree goes from a privileged daughter, beloved wife, and dotting mother to something tainted and undesirable in the course of a few pages, just as sudden as her marriage and move came about. This change in scenery can be seen a symbol of Desiree’s change in social stations, especially since they both were for the worse.

2) I think it’s to add to the suspense of the situation, to keep the reader second guessing their own assumptions until the end.

3) I think the restraint shown by Chopin heightened the sense of surprise and disbelief of the reader, making the impact of the protagonist and her infant’s death that much more powerful. Excessive detail might have ruined the elegant conclusion Chopin set up in the text, making it harder to provide an ending as pleasantly understated as the rest of the story. The subtleness employed in that one sentence can also have the effect of causing desired confusion on the part of the reader, forcing them to re-read and analyze the text, searching for clues pertaining to the fate of Desiree that they may have overlooked. (I sure had to :) )
4)

5) In the Antebellum South, much like the rest of the country, women are still treated as coveted possessions or with degrading patronization, meant to be cared for a looked after by the much more able men in their lives. In the form of Desiree’s baby, Chopin forces us to examine the possibility for a young woman to gain identity and independence through marriage, and ultimately dashes such hopes through her writings. Desiree, so desperate and dependant for the approval of her husband, chooses suicide when she felt she no longer had a place in left in society. Her hasty marriage ended up taking whatever vestiges of freedom society granted her, and when her ‘master’ rejected her and her child, it stole her will to live as well.

1) By failing to explicitly describe the horrors of the House of Usher, Poe creates a sense of foreboding and dread in the reader that he would not have been able to achieve otherwise; now he has his audience cautiously proceeding, for they know that the House is going to serve as a centerpiece of terror for the story, it’s just not there yet. The sentence ‘There was an iciness, a sinking, a sickening of the heart—an unredeemed dreariness of thought which no goading of the imagination could torture into aught of the sublime’ alone provides the reader with a sense of trepidation and the house with an air of mystery that will greatly affect the outlook and effect of the story.

2) Edgar Allen Poe was and is world renowned for his frequent use of thrilling, graphic, and thought-provoking details. Sentences like ‘…an atmosphere which had no affinity with the air of heaven, but which had reeked up from the decayed trees, and the gray wall, and the silent tarn—a pestilent and mystic vapor, dull, sluggish, faintly discernible, and leaden-hued’ invokes equally powerful imagery on the part of the reader, something that is critical in all horror stories. He makes it so that the reader can see, feel, and hear every single detail described in the story, adding to the terror and fear his scenes create.

3) In my own opinion, the Narrator’s main motivations for going to the House of Usher are as ambiguous as Madeline Usher’s strange illness. Maybe he was driven to visiting the Ushers by a withered childhood relationship and the sentiments of guilt that followed. The narrator admits that Roderick Usher, the house’s proprietor, had been one of his ‘boon companions in boyhood’, but ‘many years had elapsed since our last meeting’. The relationship between the narrator and Roderick was never fully explained, but it would not be unreasonable to assume that an ‘acute bodily illness, a mental disorder, and a earnest desire to see me, as his best, and indeed his only personal friend, with a view of attempting, by the cheerfulness of my society, some alleviation of his malady’ would no doubt draw an old friend, no matter how distant, in for a short visit.

Regardless of the reason he came, I think the reason he stayed was quite obvious; he stayed to sate an ever-present curiosity about his elusive and emotionally distant friend. The reader becomes aware of his interest in the House of Usher on the first page of the story, when he describes the family with something akin to awe. ‘I had learned, too, the very remarkable fact that the stem of the Usher race, all time-honored as it was, had put forth, at no period, any enduring branch’. This last visit might give him a first hand look at the strange House of his old friend.

He was also curious about the strange feeling he was getting from the house itself. ‘What was it—I paused to think—what was it that so unnerved me in the contemplation of the House of Usher? It was a mystery all insoluble; nor could I grapple with the shadowy fancies that crowded upon me as I pondered.’ This, however, did not grant him with an answer he felt solved his mystery. ‘I was forced to fall back upon the unsatisfactory conclusion that while, beyond doubt, there are combinations of very simple natural objects which have the power of thus affecting us, still the analysis of this power lies among considerations beyond our depth.’ I think he had to stick it out, had to know just what it was about the house that bothered him, no matter what horrors he had to go through to get it.

4) Yes, I think Roderick was well aware that his sister was still alive when he buried her. The painting ‘a small picture presented the interior of an immensely long and rectangular vault of tunnel, with low walls, smooth, white, and without interruption or device. Certain accessory points of the design served well to convey the idea that this excavation lay at the exceeding depth below the surface of the earth’, was obviously a coffin, perhaps the very one that was to hold his sister, who was already failing in health. Usher’s knowledge of his sister’s survival would also explain the zombie-like behavior Roderick showed after the burial of his sister, as well as Madeline’s angry reaction. ‘She gave a low, moaning cry, fell heavily inward upon the person of her brother, and in her violent and now final death-agonies, bore him to the floor a corpse, and a victim to the terrors he had anticipated.’ If Roderick really did know, she might have been justified in her attack.

Iris

And I’d trade in my world just to hold you
For a kiss a would hand in my life
You’re my goddess, my angel, my reason to be
On your wings I will learn how to fly

And I’m stuck in this blissful delusion
And I’m lost in the world of your eyes
And soon it’s a broken illusion
But it’s all that I have to survive

And these masks of deceit are left frozen
What’s behind them the world doesn’t know
For all hopes and dreams are soon shattered
But for you my torn heart I will show

Your love falls with tears then forgotten
And your heart breaks with lies left untold
When reality’s twisted and broken
Sometimes pain reawakens your soul

And these masks of deceit are left frozen
What’s behind them the world doesn’t know
For all hopes and dreams are soon shattered
But for you my torn heart I will show

And these masks of deceit are left frozen
What’s behind them the world doesn’t know
For all hopes and dreams are soon shattered
But for you my torn heart I will show

And these masks of deceit are left frozen
What’s behind them the world doesn’t know
For all hopes and dreams are soon shattered
But for you my torn heart I will show

But for you my torn heart I will show
But for you my torn heart I will show
But for you my torn heart I will show

And here you have it, my sad attempt at song writting. I think that my version of Iris kinda destroys the simplicity of the lyrics, adding a bunch a mumbo-jumbo that may sound pretty by itself, but really doesn't make sense in the original song. It makes the song more about love than might've been originally intended, instead of the self examination and self discovery it held initially. In comparison, however, I think this one is the best out of all the one's I've done so far.

Glory Box

This game is getting old
Playing the job of Cupid
My heart is yours to take
I hand my wings on over
For Ive been a temptress too long

Just…

why I should give my heart away?
Why should I be human again?
I just wanna be human

From now on, I’m free
Staring at reality through different eyes
Thru this new frame of mind
For you a thousand winds could blow
More over, give us time to grow

why I should give my heart away?
Why should I be human again?
I just wanna be human

Don’t you stop being mortal too
I’d clip these wings and stand by you
Open your heart to me
‘Cause tears are not your weakness

why I should give my heart away?
Why should I be human again?
I just wanna be human

And this is the start to a blooming eternity

It’s time to begin anew

My new lyrics don't really change the feel to the song, but puts more emphasis on her earlier allusions to cupid. I don't know, I guess I felt that would score me some much needed points on the whole 'keeping poetic feel' front, and hopefully it worked. I think it kept with the optimistic and progressive tone of the song, even though I may have butched up some of the modest charm the song originally held.

Ghetto Heaven

Looking for love, in a world of sin
Curves are spread thick, morality thin
I got my third eye, locked on within
Want my peoples straight and rock sweet apparel
My ex-girlfriend and I, apart we have strayed
But I’m here for my baby, until the end of days
Here the wind, speaks to me
Here, I know the Holy Spirit walks through me
The young glance through eyes dulled by the hate
A thug falls to a life of abandonment and fate
The rise and fall, of a nation, even when the buildings tumble
I march on, through the valley, still very much alive
Still I feel, that I need to kill to survive
But that in wasn’t my heavenly plan
To be more than a thug, to be more than some man
Than any person, place, or object, present or past
I found celestial guidance and my Father at last

[d’angelo]
Geto heaven
Dwelling in my geto heaven
Geto heaven
Dwelling in my geto heaven

Love, don’t be dependant on him
Stong woman, your life is much more than him
I know you want a man whose worth it
But when he pays those bills, you’re purchased
Discussing wit ya girl, what love is
But she aint even loved there, cause he don’t love his
Gave her some distance, but layed down the truth
Never go searching for love, until you’ve found you
Time heals all, mistakes you can learn from
But don’t take your angers out on others you turned from
If you want specifics, then you gotta learn too
Then you’ll find somebody who will truly deserve you
Rushing through the pain, many survived through
‘Cause you had to suffer to move on, and you grew
Not even I can ignore being alone it’s hard
Find heaven in yourself and God

[d’angelo]
I know that I adore you
And I know that you feel that way about me
I’m sitting in paradise, but I’m missing you
It’s you

Yeah, Don't Know What to Call This

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/education/03college.html?_r=1&em

1) Total # of words: 874
2) total sentences: 30
3) longest sentence: 35
4) shortest sentence: 4
5) Average sentence length : 22
6) Number of sentences with more than ten words over average: 7
7) Percentage of sentences with more than ten words over the average: 23.3%
8) Number of sentences with more than five words below the average: 10
9) Percentage of sentences with more than five words below the average: 33.3%
10) Paragraph length:
Longest paragraph: 84
Shortest paragraph: 20
Average Paragraph: 48

Of Elephants and the Sheets That Hide Them

In the first chapter of W.E.B. Du Bois’s Souls of Black Folk, Du Bois investigates the ’Negro’s’ journey to identity, the "longing to attain self-conscious manhood”.

Du Bois begins by stating that race, although always present, it is very rarely discussed, with most whites being either unwilling or uncomfortable with addressing the issue head on. The topic of race and the ‘black problem‘, as Du Bois describes it as, becomes a sort of elephant in the room of the nation, both parties willing to skirt around the matter rather than discuss the obvious. He puts his frustrations towards the willingness of his fellow Americans to throw a sheet over this elephant, putting them in his book for the world to see. This not only puts the timid whites on the spot, but it encourages blacks to discuss they’re feelings toward being labeled as ‘problems’.

Du Bois also addresses the restrictions and limitations placed on the behaviors of his fellow blacks, using his example of exchanging holiday cards with a presumably white girl to explain the boundary line ‘negroes’ face when they interact with Caucasians. Dubois feels that he, as well as fellow blacks, live as strangers in their own households, a metaphor for the United States. He spoke of “this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity”, and of a two-ness, of striving to be both American and Negro, and often failing at both in their attempts.

Although the negro was granted liberty, citizenship, and suffrage by the amendments proceeding the Civil War, he claims, they had yet to be seen as an individual by white society, having to constantly bear the burdens of the mistakes of their peers, mistakes that often defined the entire race. The best and brightest of the African Americans may have been able to achieve careers as lawyers and doctors, the prize of unquestionable equality and self-identity was still sadly beyond their grasp, and the bitterness that resulted only increased in time. He expresses his own sentiments towards this double edged sword of dual consciousness quite clearly, using imagery, metaphors, and prior life experiences to drive the message home with his audience.

Du Bois addresses the crimes committed against his people with clarity and composure, never letting any traces of bitterness he may have felt bubble over and onto the pages of his book. He keeps his audience in mind, forever careful not to stray too far from one extreme to the next. He confronts the fallacies that have been uttered against his race logically, disputing each and every one to the very best of his ability. Most importantly, he gives a call for the sheet of bigotry and avoidance to be thrust off that elephant, the plight of the Negro race, and for all to acknowledge the strife of his people for what it truly is.

Annotated Bibliography

Crane, L. Eizenstat, S. Gallucci, R. Laingen, B. Matlock, J. Steele, R.
(2003) “Debating U.S. Diplomacy” Retrieved November 2, 2003 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v8_3/rxns01.html
This article, much like the title suggests, battles the public view of United States Foreign Service Officers as disloyal to their country fiercely and convincingly. Responding to Newt Gingrich claims of State Department employees’ “deliberate and systematic effort to undermine", the former and current Foreign Service Officers recants each and every accusation made by Gingrich by countering them with their own experiences within the Embassy. They all explain away any negative comments made by Gingrich or any other public official, offering valid explanations of the mistakes and mishaps made by the Department. They express their outrage that such an opinion could be had of such courageous and excellent people, provoking an almost-apology response from the perpetrator himself.
At the same time, most of the respondents also make a pleas to have some serious problems within the Embassy resolved, voicing their concern for certain things alongside praise for their coworkers. The State Department is largely understaffed, and the Foreign Service Officers they do have are overworked to the point of exhaustion. Officers are finding themselves trapped in menial jobs and lower positions for longer stretches of time, unable to advance to influential roles until well into their careers. Administration officials too often take an apathetic and hands off approach to the dealings of foreign policy, often times ignoring the events regions that can be vital to the safety of American citizens, both in the homeland and abroad. Gingrich may have been completely off base and totally out of line when he spouted his accusations, but they did give these men and women the opportunity they needed to publicly address the issues and concerns that had been on the mind of Foreign Service officials for far too long.
Although I can’t say that this article offered me any knew information or useful knowledge that I wasn’t already aware of, it did provide me with a bit of entertainment while I read six senior (citizen) officials lash out at one man. Unfortunately, the diction itself was deadly boring and the passages offered no real insight as to the actual responsibilities and lifestyles of a diplomat, something it could have done well to include.

Eun-Kyung, K. (2001) “Reform Efforts Continue: From Many, One”. Retrieved November 3, 2001 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v6_3/edi01.html

This article praises the initiatives carried out by influential Washington politicians such as Colin Powell, as well as the recruitment methods adopted by the State Department and embassy employees alike. It lists, in great detail, the increases and decreases in various ethnicity applicants, citing with great joy the upturn in diversity the career of foreign service has experienced. It urges the embassy to get passed it’s predominately ‘lily-white’ representatives and not only start testing those of diverse racial and social make-ups, but actually start appointing them as junior officers as well. This article informs the reader of the selectiveness of the State Department, stating that only one in every twenty-five applicants actually go on to become junior foreign service officers.

It credits the great increase in interest towards foreign service to a broader outreach of candidates, stating that the recruiters have extended their influence to even those currently employed in the United States military. Many of the statistics given in this article has encouraged me to pursue this occupation, as the growing attempts at diversity may offer me better opportunities to advance in this profession. This article has also helped me better understand the racial and cultural make-up of our foreign service officers, but did little else in the aspect of informing or persuading me to consider this career as an option. It offered no insight as to the responsibilities of a junior or senior foreign service officer, nor did it even touch upon the subject at all. It presented very little information on the processes one must go through to become an FSO, something I feel might have greatly assisted a reader who may have been considering a career in this field. This article also seemed to focus more on the statistical breakthroughs in the embassy than any actual ‘reforms’ that have occurred, making the title seem a bit misleading and disingenuous. It was a very well written article and offered much in terms of facts and numbers, but when one is attempting to better understand a career as a whole, these statistics are rendered irrelevant and nearly useless.

Kralev, N. (2004) “Diplomacy as a Career”. Retrieved November 2, 2004 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v9_2/krn08.html

This article certainly stands out among the other foreign service articles, as it offers information seldom seen in other documents of the same nature. Instead of focusing on the joys and benefits in the career of diplomacy, Kraley instead offers the readers a rare
glimpse into the faults and holes in the system of American foreign service. The evaluation and promotional processes of the State Department is faulty and misleading, the possibilities for advancement are incredibly thin and often times long coming, and the people who are advanced at too frequently inexperienced and undeserving. Requirements for advancement are so ambiguous at times that employees of the embassy don’t know what it is exactly they need to do to qualify for a promotion. New comers to the profession are usually disappointed when they find out that they will be influencing the actual policy of the nation very little for much of their careers, and will most likely end of filing papers and doing menial desk work.
The responsibilities of a officer are nothing easy, but there are some up sides to the job. According the this article, the starting salary for an officer now varies between $37,000 to $67,000, up nearly $10,000 from 2000. More interest is being shown in the occupation, with more people than ever applying to enter the world of diplomacy. Minority officials, luckily for me, are also on an upturn, thanks largely to the aggressive recruiting methods of the State Department and Collin Powell, the nation’s first African American Secretary of State. Occupational and educational diversity has long been the pride of America’s foreign service system, as people from all areas of work and walks of life are welcomed into the Embassy.
If nothing else, this article has given me a fair warning of the potential chaos I can be greeted with should I pursue foreign service as a life long career. It has opened my eyes to the flaws and kinks in the system I’d once perceived as faultless, as well as giving me a new perspective on the benefits of this occupation. It has served as an adequate summary of the disappointments and joys of this career, although I do feel that he could have elaborated more on the opinions of the diplomats, as I am eager to hear more about this job from their unique perspective.

Kralev, N. (2004) “Life as a Diplomat”. Retrieved November 2, 2004 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v9_2/krn09.html

This article at first seems to offers a more optimistic view of life as a foreign service officer than I would ever expect from Nicholas Kralev, portraying the advantages of being a diplomat by recapping the career of a thirty year veteran of the State Department’s most sought after career, Carol Hazzard. He places quotes and first hand accounts of her experiences in the embassy to emphasize his views, stating that “Foreign Service members are often in the company of kings and queens, presidents and prime ministers, and their positions allow them to meet other famed personalities“. He surprises some with his newfound optimism positivity in matters concerning life as an FSO, but eventually trades in this cheerful description of the job for his signature bluntness in exposing the difficulties of the job.

He quickly recants his earlier allusions of the glamour and glitz of Embassy life, going on to describe how most diplomats end up in dangerous hardship posts in at least one point of their career. Often times, diplomats end up working long hours a week in near impossible conditions, sometimes lacking even clean drinking water and electricity. Constant threats from hostile natives make life as a diplomat even harder, especially in third-world countries such as Haiti and Columbia. Many have reported living their lives in a ‘fish-bowl’, usually only associating with the people they work with (who are usually also their neighbors), and only straying from their communities for work and to purchase essentials.

He explains the negative tolls the constant moving can have on marriages, especially if the spouse has an immobile career such as a architect. Same-sex couple are effected significantly, seeing as how they can not enjoy the same benefits afforded to other married couples in the embassy. Children, he states, are usually the most effected by the diplomatic lifestyle, as the almost never have a say so in where and when they will uproot and move on to the next country.
This, in my opinion, is by far the most useful article I’ve read on being a Foreign Service Officer. Although most of this knowledge was already acquired in my independent research of this field, it provided me with outside information and first hand accounts on what life as a diplomat will actually be like. I don’t think this article was missing much, but it could have elaborated more on the specific duties one would face as an FSO.

Kralev, N. (2004) “The Politics of Diplomacy: Diplomats Fight Their Stuffed-White-Shirt Image “. Retrieved November 2, 2004 from
http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v9_2/krn03.html

When a soldier comes back home after serving their country, they are greeted with the gratified cheers and proud smiles of their fellow citizens. They are revered in today’s society, often providing the face for countless parades and patriotic propaganda, commercials and action figures.

In this article, Nicholas Kralev not only illustrates the duties and sacrifices of our diplomatic brethren, but examines the stark differences between the public view of foreign service officers and other servants of our country, such as the aforementioned soldier, as well. He uses first hand accounts from current diplomats, gathering the opinions from more than 260 Foreign Service Officers at nearly 30 separate embassies. Most of their sentiments echoed that of their coworkers, nearly all of them expressing outrage and indignation at the amount of disdain and under appreciation directed towards their professions. He blasts the stereotypes that many Americans, Washington officials especially, have come to associate with foreign service, highlighting the sacrifices and challenges a diplomat faces each and every time he journeys to the embassy for work. He addresses the notion that many foreign officials are ‘out of touch’ with the needs of our country, refuting them with examples of diplomatic importance in the running of this countries affairs as a whole. Kraley illustrated the public ignorance to the real role of a foreign service officer, causing me to have a little more appreciation and respect for the employees of my future profession.

While his article was no doubt interesting and informative, I couldn’t help but feel there was some areas that were certainly lacking depth, that he’d kind of skimmed over certain subjects. I for one would have loved to learn more about what the diplomats themselves were doing to fight their ‘Stuffed-White-Shirt’ images, as the topic was touched on very briefly and vaguely. The specifics of the duties of an FSO were again treated with relative brevity, mostly informing the readers of the symbolic duty of a diplomat, to represent America and her policies as a whole. While these faults were nothing too severe, it did leave me with a bit more questions than I would have preferred.

Lee, K. (2002) “The 'New' Foreign Service Board of Examiners”. Retrieved November 3, 2002 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v7_3/lek01.html

This article may not offer much in terms of explaining the core qualifications needed to become an FSO, but it does offer a unique look into the lives of some of the most hard working and dedicated members of the United States Foreign Service Corp, the Board of Examiners, or BEX. Katherine Lee, the author of this article, provides the reader with a first hand account of the responsibilities and obstacles facing a BEX member daily, all the while intertwining her dry humor and wit into her writing. She uses the benefits and bonuses of the job to attract and persuade her audience to take this particular occupation into consideration, putting up convincing arguments as to why one should pursue this career. She cites the diversity of the workers, the excitement and significance of the work, and the impact one would have on the community as reasons why a FSO should consider switching to a job with the Board of Examiners.

While persuasion and the pursuit of respect are obviously her main reasons for writing this article, she achieves these goals without the all-too-common sugar-laced descriptions of this incredibly stressful job, making sure her readers understand just what exactly she’s advertising. She refers to her job as a BEX member as ’nothing easy’, describing her numerous responsibilities as stringent and unprecedented.

This article has made me reconsider my plans for when I finally leave the embassy for good (I was simply planning on retiring to some tropical island), and has me seriously thinking about taking Ms. Lee’s advice and joining the Board of Examiners. It gave me insight as to what exactly the examiners will be looking for in a potential candidate, information that my prove invaluable when I finally do apply for a junior officer position. I myself was thoroughly impressed with Kathrine’s arguments and her methods of presenting them to her audience, but of course, there is always something lacking in every essay, no matter how well written it may seem. I, along with many other readers, I’m sure, would have appreciated more information on the benefits and the criteria of needed to become a member of the BEX, such as starting salary and recommended years of experience.

Noland, J. (2003) “Defending the Foreign Service”. Retrieved November 2, 2003 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v8_2/naj01.html

The main function of this article, as the title suggests, is to defend the often ridiculed and seldom appreciated career of a foreign service officer. It rebukes the notion that our diplomats are soft in the face of terrorism and threats to our nation, refuting this claim with examples of all these people do for this country. It helped me appreciate the stressful job of an FSO that much more, filling me with pride as I read about the sacrifices my fellow citizens and hopefully future coworkers make for us each and every day.

This article also had some negative effects on me, something I’m sure was the opposite of its intentions and purpose for being there. The letter enclosed in the article, especially, had me second guessing my choice of profession. Diplomat take their families to the most dangerous corners of the earth, in some cases to places without adequate health care and education, it states. While I’m sure the purpose of that quote from Powell was to command respect for the diplomats who serve our country and make such huge sacrifices daily on our behalf, it really made me stop and think about what, exactly, it was that I was getting myself into. The blunt facts and realities enclosed in this letter except shattered my previous, and admittedly naïve, preconceptions about the luxuries and comforts in the life of the typical diplomat. It really made me realize that it wasn’t all about traveling the world and ‘vacationing’ in exotic places, but actual commitments and sacrifices would be demanded from me daily. The fact about more United States ambassadors dying in the last half century that generals and admirals was a bit of a wake up call for me as well. I would not be welcomed in certain areas with open arms, simply because I am an American diplomat; I could actually die doing this. It has made me re-examine my motives and willingness to become a foreign service officer, something I am extremely grateful for.

While this article was very eye-opening for me, I was rather put off by the shortness and brevity of it. The letter was basically the only component of this article, and while it was helpful, it left a lot to be wondered about the matter. How, exactly, do our diplomats aggressively approach things that can prove dangerous to our national security? What are some of the ways they make us safer? These are questions I would have liked to have answered.

Schoonover, B. (2001)“The Lexus and the Olive Tree Considered”. Retrieved November 1, 2001 from http://www.ciaonet.org.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/olj/ad/ad_v6_1/scb01.html

This article, or speech as I should say, was created to address the concerns foreign service candidates and potential candidates may face before entering the profession. She handles each and every issue with tact, using example of past Foreign Service Officers and herself to exemplify the benefits of joining the life of a diplomat. She began with her graduate school dreams of becoming an English teacher in a foreign land, and then her subsequent joining the United States Peace Corp. She cites her experiences there and her life as a spouse of a FSO gave her the incentive and skill needed to take up a career with the State Department.
Mrs. Schoonover also goes into great detail about the duties of a Foreign Service Officer, something that has been notably absent in most articles I have read. She explains that a diplomat ’promote ideals, re-enforce positive images of Americans, and push for the betterment of various nations, most notably their own, by the policies they advocate. They are America’s representation abroad, the ideal officer embodying all that is right and good about the United States. They are all presented with a new world view upon venturing into this occupation, most of them becoming more patriotic as time lapses and the distance grows between them and their country.

She explains the requirements in order to succeed in this field, going through the process of becoming a Foreign Service Officer step by step. Passing the written examine, she states, is the first of many hurdles all candidates for this office must jump, and then the oral exam and interview, rigorous physical examination, thourough background check, and finally your first tour as a junior officer. She offers recommendations as to how you would prepare for a careen in the embassy, stating that being well versed in all things American and international is an excellent way to start, and then internships with the State Department if at all possible.
This is by far the most helpful of the ten articles I’ve researched, offering all the advice I craved as well as some information that I couldn’t have gain otherwise. It is truly difficult to find anything at all missing from this extraordinary article, though I do suppose that further information on the social lives of a diplomat would have been nice.

Reflections of the Soul

It is a common saying among authors that writing does not take any effort whatsoever; one simply sits down with a pen and paper and opens a vein. The blood that stains these pages is filled with all of the writer, their faults and strengths, their aspirations and fears, their truths and prejudices. Nothing is left out of this process, most especially the trials and tribulations that makes up the character of the novelist. In this respect, fiction writing of any kind takes on more truth than the author may have intended.

Such is the case of nineteenth century writer Catherin Chopin. Kate widely used the themes of tragedy and irony in her stories to exemplify her view of the world. Her stories not only accurately described the lives of nineteenth century white women, but also hinted towards her own heart wrenching experiences and grievous past. She wrote of the only world she has ever known, one filled only with regret and heartbreak, hopelessness and despair. The events in her life has probably led her to the assumption that true happiness and contentment were the things of the fairytales she was so fond of, meant to be enjoyed only by the young and naïve until the callousness of reality sets in. This ideal is reflected in her writing, where the fleeting blissful movements in her characters’ tales are inevitably overshadowed by the usually fatal disappointments.

Her pessimistic views on life, however, is what gives her distinction from the other romantic writers of this time. Marriages and life in general for women at the time were oftentimes plagued by hardships and sorrow, more often ending in anguish and grief than in the unbridled bliss that matrimony promised. Her essays and writings touched upon on the changing institution of marriage, shedding light on the fragility of the heart and the disastrous consequences it can have for both parties. She intertwined her own despair in the lives of her character to send messages like these home, so that they might have a positive impact on her readers.

The characterization and backgrounds of her heroines likewise mirror their esteemed author. In both Desiree’s Baby and Story of an Hour, the women are from well-to-do or middle class families, like the author. Both were strong, intelligent women, much like Ms. Chopin. She seemed to model their experiences with calamity and heartbreak after her own, while also installing her own strengths and ideal characteristics in their beings. Her characters were only metaphors for the disappointments and tragedies experienced in her life, as well as so many others around the nation.

Even the fate of Chopin, who’s characters’ deaths were always premature and tragic, seemed mirrored in her writing. She died at the age of fifty-four from a brain hemorrhage, two days after making an appearance at the famous St. Louis World's Fair. The fact that none of her heroines lived to overcome the obstacles of their short lives was far from coincidental. Like her characters, Kate could not escape the shadow of tragedy that seemed to surround her like a cloak. Kate’s stories were elegantly simplistic, hauntingly vivid, and, as it would turn out, tragically prophetic.

Ain't I a Woman Comparison

If one were to read both the original and edited version of Sojourner Truth’s Ain’t I a Woman, they would notice a stark difference in both the language and styles employed for each of them. The edited version is not only more grammatically correct than it’s predecessor, it shows more refinement and restraint as far as diction goes. The language is not as passionate or primitive as before, but this change was made for a reason. One must understand that issues such as feminism and slavery were tough pills to swallow for mainstream America in the mid nineteenth century, even if it were argued by the most educate and sensible white man among them. Changing the diction in Ain’t I A Woman just coated that pill in sugar and spices, making it all the more appealing and easier to swallow for its target audience, Caucasians. It did not take away Miss Truth’s voice and messages like most would argue, but instead let that voice be heard to a wider audience, one that would have a much better influence over the issues she was championing than her fellow Blacks. These changes, it could be argued, were necessary in impacting a group who might not have understood or connecting with the message else wise, much like the language of Shakespeare would be edited and altered to better suit our own generation. In any piece, the diction could be as simplistic and ‘real’ as you wish it to be, but if its messages.

I'm too tired to come up with something witty

In her piece,Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Harriet Jacobs concentrates on the abomination of slavery as a whole, but more specifically on it’s affect on women of all colors. Haled as a superb example of early feminist literature, and rightly so in my opinion, this autobiographical work illustrates the harshness and often cruelties of life as a piece of merchandise, only as good as the amount of crops they can harvest and lustful pleasure they can bring. From what I’ve gathered by reading the passages provided, she seems to have an intense urge to not only expose these basic truths to the whole of the world, she aims to encourage other women, regardless of color, to speak out about their own knowledge and experiences with such atrocities. Harriet uses simple yet eloquent diction in her piece, insuring that the reader is both comprehending her message and being captivated by its fluency, both of which she succeeds tremendously at. She utilizes tact when addressing potentially controversial and offensive subject, treading lightly but confidently on the issues of ‘feminine purity’ (which the biography in the beginning of this packet touches upon briefly) and its applicability to the ‘sub-human’ negro women, the destruction of family ties when confronted with slavery, and the lack of integrity and morality that exists in a relationship between the owner and it’s property.

Frederick Douglass, though no less effective in his messages and writing abilities, chose a much different approach to his piece, Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave. Where Jacobs used the devices of pathos and flowing diction, Douglass instead employed bluntness and imagery as his weapons of choice. Lines such as ’he commenced to lay on the heavy cowskin, and soon the warm, red blood (amid heart-rending shrieks from her, and horrid oaths from him) came dripping to the floor’ invoke vivid and disturbing images from the reader, leaving little room to interpret this narratives purpose. He, too, challenged the horrors of slavery and the devastating effect they have on its participants, though concentrating his focus on another group. Mulattos, he cited, had it worse than perhaps any other type of slave, for they suffer the intense hatred of their mistresses, are often sold by there own fathers, and are permanently separated from their mothers. He also addresses issues of human cruelties, abuses of power by an oppressor, and the utter powerlessness that must have been felt amongst the oppressed. He is not tentative in his approach as one would expect from a fugitive slave in this era, but is direct and explicit in his recollection of prior events. He holds absolutely nothing back, allowing his audience to feel the full brunt of his message and empathize with him on a level that would not have been possible, had he chosen to tell the watered-down version of things.

Both narratives are equally fascinating and effective, both portraying a unique perspective of life as a slave. These memoirs give us a glimpse into the horrors of dehumanization and the effects it has on the mind and soul, as told by the often kicked ’lions’ of history. They offer us a side of a story rarely told, giving a voice to the millions who were never given one, to those who were permanently silenced in life. Together, they encompass issues that have long since ceased in their relevancy, as well as those that are still very much an issue today. Both offer valuable lessons in terms of the capacity for human brutality, lessons which the younger generation of today would still benefit greatly to learn.

Questions

1) Caucasian authors vouch for their African-American counterparts not only to benefit themselves, but to further a message they themselves believe in. The vast majority of these authors were abolitionists and slave sympathizers, who, I’m sure, made it their own personal goal to assist in the discontinuance of slavery in any way they could. Wendell Phillips and Lydia Maria Child were both American abolitionists and Native American rights activists, adamant in the progression of humanity and justice.

2) These Caucasians assist in the establishment of ethos in two ways. The first would be to gather another perspective on such an issue, making sure that the piece does not lopsidedly favor one race over the other. The other, more important purpose for their input is to settle the concerns of the whites, who may not be entirely comfortable reading a piece by their inferior. Another white assuring them that the accounts in the narrative are indeed true and safe for their delicate eyes to read helps to quell these fears.

3) The primary audience at the time of publication would, of course, be Caucasians. Black literacy rates in the times before the civil war were dismal at best, atrocious at worst. As the majority of the population of blacks were slaves, and it was illegal in most southern states to teach a slave how to read, these slave narrative authors obviously couldn’t count on their peers as an audience. Besides, they wielded little, if any, power to change the issues they were addressing. Liberal whites were targeted because they held the key to the slaves’ freedoms in their hands; they were the ones who needed influencing, who could decide the fate of each and every slave narrative author and their relatives.

Blast from the Past

(From Swing Low, Sweet Chariot)

Tell Ole Massa to let me be
Coming for to carry me home
‘Cause in these angels' arms I’m free
Coming for to carry me home

I don't think that this lyric changes either the effect or the meaning of the traditional spiritual, but rather keeps the optimistic view and (so-called) encoded meanings. This verse can mean that upon the death of the body, the soul becomes free in heaven; it can also be a reference to the workers of the underground railroad (the 'angels), and their guidance to freedom up north.

Confounding Contradictions

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those others that have been tried from time to time.- Winston Churchill

Upon starting this paper, I had already decided wholeheartedly which side of this political debate I would align myself to. I had no illusions of a rainbow-tinted world in which everyone ruled themselves ‘justly‘ and independently, no naïve perceptions as to how absolutely wonderful the world would be without government. The concept of anarchy, or any kind of fictional government Henry David Thoreau was suggesting in his highly acclaimed Civil Disobedience, seemed dangerously radical, even to a infamously left-leaning liberal such as myself. The opening paragraph alone seemed

Needless to say, continuing to read only strengthened my predisposed notion of the author’s naivety and my incredulity that such a half-baked scheme could be so respected almost a century and a half after it’s publication.

The first two paragraphs were disappointing, failing to meet even the lowest of standards I’d set for this essay. Thoreau argued predictably and unpersuasively against the ‘evils’ of all governments in general, taking on the republican-friendly motto of ‘The best government is the one which governs the least’ (Page 1, Civil Disobedience). He makes what seems to be a very convincing argument for the incompetence of the American government at one point, but in his efforts to invoke logos (no, surprisingly, it’s not pathos this time), he left out one crucial element. The logos. Sure, the idea of making the government our official scapegoat