Defining Me.

Defining oneself to me is difficult to put into words. For me, when I define myself, I pull from many different sources. For example, I may define myself by how I act, how I treat other people, how I dress and present myself, or even how I speak and communicate with other people. For me in particular when I think about this question, I am drawn to thinking that I define myself with simply “who I am”.
I define myself primarily through what I believe in. I am an avid believer in helping and serving other people for the better of the community and world, and a lot of people see me as that. For example, when I looked at what people wrote about me on my back during that exercise in class, I found that many people see me as the “kind, charitable, do-gooder” kind of girl. I guess I take this as an accomplishment because that is essentially me, but at the same time, I almost wish people could see a deeper layer of me.

I also define myself through how I present myself to my friends, family, and even strangers. I always try to be “true to myself”, which basically means for me to show compassion to those around me. I communicate to people in a way that is friendly and relatable, which ironically are my characteristics.

Defining myself also come through my clothes and appearance. Although this is not by any means what I mainly base myself upon, it is still a valid and important part of me. I often times show my personality and mood through my clothing choices. If I am tired, I will not “try as hard” to look put together as opposed to other days when I make an effort to look nice and “stylish”. I define myself in this way because appearance is what people first judge you on. People who I do not even know are judging me based upon my looks.

In the novel Speak, although the characters are fictional, they still define themselves as humans in real life do. For example, the cheerleaders that Melinda describes are peppy and full of spirit: a stereotypical cheerleader. Melinda also describes how they can sleep with every football player on Saturday night, but by Monday morning, they are seen as virginal goddesses. Sadly in the novel, the cheerleaders define themselves plainly as cheerleaders. That is their social status, which they take pride in, therefore, the cheerleaders will define themselves as just that.

Another group of people within the novel is the clique “the Marthas”. These girls pride themselves in their charitable efforts, school organizations, and matching outfits. This, like the cheerleaders, is what the Marthas define themselves by. This clique, like any other clique within the novel, separated itself from everyone else into a “compatible” group of people whom which they can define themselves by.

Unlike in the novel Speak, I do not define myself by who I choose to hang out with or let those people define me. I am my only ruler and will define myself in the ways I think are effective. And unlike Melinda, I will speak my mind rather than be shut away into nothingness.

Guilty Until Proven Innocent? How about no.

Before I start answering the prompted question, I really want to say how much I enjoyed class yesterday. I like how we don’t always have to follow a certain styling of teaching and can explore the topics we discussed in class. Thanks for letting us be able to do that, Wes.
After our class discussion yesterday, I have come to realize that those kinds of class debates and pieces like “Little Brother” can easily fit into my every day life. Upon going into our discussion, I really only knew minimal and generic information about China and censorship. By hearing other people’s opinions about the reading and current situation in China, it allowed me to form an opinion about censorship and the government.
This type of book, “Little Brother” and the lessons we learn in class do allow me to utilize literature in my life in “real and significant ways”. For example, from our discussion I now am aware about ACTA. I now have a substantial opinion about the “three strikes and your out” concept. Through and class discussions and debates, I know that I don’t think ACTA is right. I do not want someone controlling my Internet usage for the rest of my life if I just so happen to do something illegally. There is no chance in hell that something so simple yet so complex will work.
Also through our class yesterday, I can apply the idea of terrorism and the monitoring of my Internet history. For example, if I just so happen to be searching how to make a bomb and the history of Al Qaeda does not make me a terrorist. Therefore, by no means do I want someone miles away filing me as “suspicious” for my recent activities online. I know that the government is trying to keep me safe, but I really do enjoy my privacy. The whole topic is very much so conflicting me at times.
“Little Brother” is helping me form my personal opinion about the world around me. Just because there is a terrorist attack does not mean that the statement “innocent until proven guilty” should be flipped around into “guilty until proven innocent”.

The Dumbest Generation? Don't be Dumb.

My initial thought upon reading the introductions to the article was apprehension. The writers have many statistics throw out statistics left and right making my generation seem plainly stupid. But where are they getting these statistics? At first, I began to become angry because I felt as though I was not being represented at the fullest potential. Were the kids they questioned really dumb? No, not at all.
After reading further into the article, the writers explain that they believe that it is not the fault of our generation, but out lack of knowledge of historical facts should be blamed on our teachers; the elders. Ironically, our elders are the generation before us, whom which are the ones that had higher correct answer percentages than the current generation. The article states, “First, IQ scores in every country that measures them, including the United States, have been rising since
the 1930s. Since the tests measure not knowledge but pure thinking capacity—what cognitive scientists call fluid intelligence, in that it can be applied to problems in any domain—then Gen Y's ignorance of facts (or of facts that older people think are important) reflects not dumbness but choice.” Gen Y now has the choice as to what information we want to learn and retain.
After reading the article, the content of it somewhat made me think back to “On Studying” by Ortega. In that piece of reading, Ortega stated that although studying must be done by all students, Gen-Y, it is not a necessity to them because one does not need it. In “the Dumbest Generation” article, it declares that my generation chooses what we want to learn and study, which is why we might not know historical facts.
“The Dumbest Generation? Don’t Be Dumb” was a very misleading title for the article. Although it started out blaming my generation for being simply stupid, we truly are not. We are using technological advancements that our grandparents never had. We are progressing forward and certainly are not “dumb”.

Why Americans are Restless

2. When a society devotes their focus to equality opportunity, this weakens the individual’s access to a fair chance at success. Also, when striving for equality, the entire society can never be completely satisfied. There will always be at least one group in the minority that is unhappy and goes not see themselves as having an “equal” opportunity. Tocqueville writes, “When men are more or less equal and are following the same path, it is very difficult for any of them to walk faster and get out beyond the uniform crowd surrounding and hemming them in” (Tocqueville 167). Tocqueville means that when equality is set in place, it is much harder for the individual to have success because they will always be in competition with one another. Tocqueville continues to state, “No matter how people strives for it, all the conditions of life can never be perfectly equal. Even if, by the misfortune, such an absolute dead level were attained, there would still be inequalities of intelligence which, coming directly from God, will never escape the laws of man” (Tocqueville 167). Therefore, the individual within the society can never fully have equal rights and opportunities to everyone else. There will always be a factor, which disallows them to have equality with the rest of their society.

5. Tocqueville believes that Americans are restless because they do not necessarily know what they want or are inconsistent with their desires. Americans cannot stay with something that they are doing, and when a bigger, better deal or opportunity comes along, they take it. For example, Tocqueville writes, “An American will build a house in which to pass his old age and sell it before the roof is on; he will plant a garden and rent it just as the trees are coming into bearing; he will clear a filed and leave others to reap the harvest…” (Tocqueville 165). This argues the fact that Americans cannot steadily keep with what they originally want to achieve. This is a probable case to why other countries see Americans as greedy individuals, when in all actuality we are only striving for what we want to accomplish.

Let Them Eat Cake.

The empowered peasants show intense hatred towards the previous ruling class. They will do anything and everything to take them down, which amounts to the mass executions on the guillotine. In comparison to the peasants, the previous ruling class could care less. They behave in such a way that shows that they still believe that have great power, although they are being executed, like the Marquis.

Personal appeals also have a rather large role between the empowered peasants along with the previous ruling class. For example, when Lucie begs for the safety of her husband, Madame Defarge does not show any sympathy for her. Why would Madame help Lucie when she has helped no one else? Personal appeals also appear throughout the books, like the exchange between the Marquis and the peasants. When the Marquis ran over Gaspard’s son, he did no show any sign of remorse. No sense of sadness swept over him as Gaspard cried out that his son was dead. The Marquis simply exchanged a few gold coins as if Gaspard’s son were worthless, lost cargo.

"A Tale of Two Cities" Book 1 Questions

1. For how long has the man in Jarvis Lorry’s thoughts been buried?
The man in Jarvis Lorry’s thoughts has been buried for eighteen years.

2. What else do we know of this man who has been “buried”?
We know that he is from the Tellson’s Bank and has abandoned all hope of being dug out of his grave a long time ago. He also says that he “can’t say” if he cares to live.

3. What are the two conditions concerning Dr. Manette?
Dr. Manette is the father of Lucie Manette, whom which he does not remember. Dr. Manette also does not remember who he is exactly, and cannot even recall his own name.

4. Who are the proprietors of the wine-shop?
The proprietors of the wine-shop are Monsieur Defarge and his wife, Madame Defarge. The husband is described as “bullnecked” and about thirty years old. His wife is explained as a very observing woman who sits in the shop and takes everything in around her.

5. Why does Defarge show Dr. Manette to the “Jacques”?
Defarge shows Dr. Manette to the “Jacques” because he likes to make a show of him. When asked how he chooses who gets to see Dr. Manette, Defarge says, "I choose them as real me, of my name-- Jacques is my name-- to whom the sight is likely to do good. Enough: you are English; that is another thing".

6. What is Dr. Manette doing when they enter his room?
When everyone enters Dr. Manette’s room, he is making a pair of girl’s shoes. He does not seem interested in who enters the room, and focuses his attention on his work.

7. What does Dr. Manette say his name is? What is the significance of what he says?
Dr. Manette says that his name is One Hundred and Five, North Tower. This is significant because it shows that he has been locked up so long that he cannot even remember his life before his time in the North Tower. He cannot recall something as simple as his own name.

I Am Me, and I Won't Change for Anyone

Why is it difficult not to care about what others think of you? Do we control the way other people see and think about us?

Self-expression is one of the most important aspects of one’s life. Unfortunately, this potentially is the most judged thing about someone. One can express themselves through clothes, hair, and their natural personality, the list goes on, but often times, you cannot be yourself because of what other people think of you.

No matter how much you want to express yourself freely, there will always be that slight fear of other peoples’ opinions. It is difficult to not care about what other people think of you because if you are judged or thought of poorly, it is a low blow to your self-esteem. We as people naturally want to so badly be seen by others in a light that is accepted, that we often times hid who we truly are; unique.

By the absolute need of wanting to feel accepted, we alter ourselves to “fit in” to our society. This is potentially “controlling” how others see and think about us, but does it make us happy? Personally, I would say no, not really. No matter what the circumstance is, the majority of people morph themselves into something that they believe would be allowed and accepted by other people’s own thoughts, not their own.

Bringing this through provoking situation into my own world, I can honestly claim myself as guilty of altering myself in the past. I used to think so highly of how people would think of me, that it eventually got to me. I still expressed myself how I wanted, but people would see and think of me differently than I desired. Now, I believe that I am truly happy with myself and honestly do not think all that much of what other people think of me. To me, as long as I am happy with who I am and how I present myself, I am comfortable within my own skin.