Second Brave New World Post

1) Why does John quote Shakespeare so often?
Unlike the people of the World State John has not existed in a society where strong emotions and conlifts have been negated and as a result he uses lines from Shakespeare's plays to express how he feels and process these emotions. When first given the book, John has a revalation about his additudes towards Pope. "But [the word's] magic was strong and went rumbling in his head, and somehow it was as though he had never really hated Pope before; never really hated him because he had never been able to say how much he hated him" (140). John is now able to understand what the feelings he has for Pope are and what they mean. This leads John to use quotes from Shakespeare as a mechanism to understand and decode his emotions.

2)Could the purpose of the World State and its citizens be to parallel the dependence of their citizens on civilization and our dependence on civilizations?
When Linda begins living with the Savages she is completely inept at caring for John and unable to adapt in the ways that her surroundings need her to. This is meant to be a parallel of us as American's and our dependence on what we know to be civlization and life. "When he tore his clothes, Linda did not know how to mend them. In the Other Place, she told him, people threw away clothes with holes in them and got new ones" (138). At the time when Huxley wrote Brave New World, it was becoming much more common for people to not mend clothes but rather to purchase new clothing, as is still the case. Linda is representative of us and our lack of self capability. This suggests that is we were to be removed from our form of "civilivation" and stability that we would just as inept as Linda in taking care of ourselves and others.

3) Why is the book titled "Brave New World"?
Aldous Huxley chose to title his book in reference to John's quoting of Shakespeare in an effort to emphasize the role of the people of the World State and satirically link Shakespeare and the society that has sought to abolish free thought.  "By some malice of his memory the Savage found himself repeating Miranda's words. 'Oh brave new world that has such people in it'" (166). For the second time in the story John has said this quote but under very different circumstances. In this case John is saying the people and their actions he is witnessing are disturbing so he is ironically using the quote. The irony of using a Shakespeare quote to title a book about a world that has made free thought nearly impossible is important as well. Just as John is using the contrast difference so is Huxley with the title.

Brave New World #1

-The Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre is very instrumental in creating social stability and conformity. They create different classes of embryos that eventually are grown into human beings that are designed to perform designated functions in society. The classes are referred to as Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Epsilon. The Gamma, Delta, and Epsilon embryos are subjected to a procedure known as the Bokanovsky's Process, which allows for 96 identical twins to be produced from a single embryo. "Bokanovsky's Process is one of the major instruments of social stability!" (Huxley 21). By creating social stability the World State has there upon created social uniformity. Equality in the simplest form of the word has not achieved because each of the different classes is regarded to be of varying importance. However, within each class everybody is the same, as exemplified with the identical twins.

- The World State has essentially made strong emotions impossible to be felt by the population. Previously the people had been “mad and wicked and miserable" but now the emotions that caused such conditions are no more and therefore social stability is further reinforced (Huxley 54). Individual’s no longer posses genuine rights but rather predestinated privileges. "'We also predestine and condition. We decant our babies as socialized human beings, as Alphas or Epsilons, as future sewage workers'" (27). We can see that each baby is given a specific life path, leaving room for very little personal rights that would include freedom of choice.

- The World State has created conformity in one way by creating vast amounts of identical twins that are designated to do identical jobs. The creation of social classes plays a larger role in the conformity of the people as well. Everybody of the same social class conforms to the social class's predestinations. The illusion of happiness has also been creating by taking away the ability to think freely through physiological conditioning and soma, a drug. People do not have to address and resolve inner conflicts that they face concerning the World State because they have been conditioned to be loyal subjects.

-The society of the World State is to be considered a dystopia. The people are not given freedom but rather have had any freedom stripped from them. The government has created an idea of happiness in addition to systematically planning every aspect of life down to profession. This society is meant to serve as an example of a dystopia that has taken the human aspect out of being human and experiencing life.

SOAPSTone 2

SOAPSTone Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out

Subject

                The subject of Dave Barry’s Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out is the difference in men and women concerning their sensitivity to certain subjects. The disconnect between the two sexes is illustrated through Barry’s amusing anecdotes about his cleaning his son’s bathroom and his wife not recognizing the importance of a World Series game. With the bathroom anecdote the audience is able to compare Barry’s idea of dirt and how that applies to cleaning with his wife’s idea. The second anecdote is used to express the contrasting way men and women view the importance of sports. Barry examines a subject that men are much more aware of and women typically treat more flippantly.

Occasion

Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out was written during 1988. The essay’s time of creation is displayed by the introductory blurb at the beginning of the article that explicitly states the year it was published. Without this information the exact year or even decade the essay was written in would be difficult to difficult to distinguish. The audience would have been able to assume that the piece was written with the last 20 or 30 years based upon the language, technology mentioned, and the interactions between men and women.

                The time and place of the essay’s creation influence the essay in regard to how Barry writes about men and women. In the essay Barry tell the story of how his wife asked him to clean the bathroom and how their views of clean differed. From this bit of information we are able to see that men doing “women’s” was no longer an extremely taboo subject to discuss. Because of this shift in public values per say, Barry is liberated to talk freely about the fundamental differences that exist among men and women.

Audience

                Dave Barry’s specific audience for Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out was middle aged men. The author’s target audience is exhibited by taking a sympathetic tone towards the men in the story. Barry does not attack women, but he focuses more on men and portrays the difference of the sexes as having a negative impact on men in particular.

                Dave Barry’s general audience for the essay was individuals who can relate to having different outlook than those of the opposite sex. The author’s general audience is communicated with the fairness that each sex is treated with. Barry does not chastise either sex; instead, he merely points out distinctions between their behaviors. In doing so he creates a piece that is able to be read by both men and women and no one sex feels as if they have been pushed up against a wall.

Purpose

                Dave Barry’s purpose in Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out is to illustrate that men and women approach situations in life differently but harmony is attainable. The possibility for peaceful cohabitation is manifested by: “Soon all four of us [four male friends] were in there, watching the Annual Fall Classic, while the women prattled away about human relationships or something.” This quote from the text illustrates the harmony that is possible despite the stark contrasts between men and women. The harmony that developed was separate but that was a result of the realization that satisfaction came in different forms for both parties.

Speaker

                Dave Barry, possibly the funniest man in America, believes that a difference exists between men and women which influences the way they view life. The value is illustrated by the way Barry describes the reactions of men and women to different situations and stimuli. According the Barry, men are less perceptive to dirt while women are less interested in the world of sports. Both qualities are exemplified through the personal anecdotes.

                Dave Barry’s use of irony is evident in: “[The men of Pompeii] never even noticed the ash until it had for the most part covered the children.” Barry’s writing is somewhat representative of the peace that can be obtained between men and women. Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out deals with the touchy topic of gender differences but it does so in a manner that is both humorous and light hearted. Barry used his humor to show that harmony can exist between conflicting ideas in addition to making the attack of a serious subject seem less serious.

Tone

                David Barry shows a light-hearted and interested attitude about men and women’s different sensitivity levels toward certain subjects in Batting Clean-Up and Striking Out. These attitudes are expressed through the use of phrases that are unnecessary but add humor, such as: “Hey! the men [of Pompeii] said (in Latin).” These phrases are used to add a light hearted air to the essay. The language of the men is unimportant but the addition of it is comical. Barry’s tone is useful to the topic of the essay because it allows Barry to discuss gender difference without offending anyone.

Final 1984 Blog

As Winston sits at the cafe and contemplates his current position we are shown that Big Brother has indeed succeeded; Winston loves Big Brother. The rebellion that existed inside of Winston is gone and now he is free to buy into the propaganda of Big Brother. I feel this is the victory of Big Brother because Winston is now under their control which is what the purpose of the institution is.

The One State rules with such an iron fist that a form of revolt that would result in the downfall of Big Brother is highly unlikely. The fail safes that are in place to ensure such activities do not occur (the telescreens, the thought police, even children) are shown as being very effective in controlling the actions of people via fear. As a result the possibility of rising up in a unified number that would be strong enough to make a difference is highly doubtful. However, suspending logic for a moment, Big Brother could possibly be overthrown by the proles if they chose to unify. Winston even points this out while he is walking amongst their society. Big Brother does not dissect and manipulate every facet of prole life which leaves the door open for rebellious union amongst proles who so wished. They then could potentially riot and spread the idea of doubt among Party members which could snowball into widespread suspicion leading to a possible upheaval of Big Brother. Now, unsuspending logical thought processes, the likely hood of Big Brother being overthrown is slim to none.

Judging from the end of the novel Winston Smith sits at the cafe for a few more hours mulling over his love for Big Brother. When it is time for him to return home and obey curfew he will do so and the next morning return to work as normal. I interpret this from the quote, "I love Big Brother." Winston has finally succumbed to the authority of Big Brother and love the One Party like the countless other Party members. As a result of this he will engage in the behaviors that are seen as appropriate by Big Brother: obeying rules, working diligently, ect.

October 19, 2011

1.       The conflict is external and involves a differing of opinions concerning modesty and women.

2.       Different points of view among different types of individuals naturally result in opposing opinions. Often times these opposing views become the central point of conflicts. She is implying that Western ideals are dominant in the world and as a result ideals that are not parallel are often disregarded as being subordinate.

3.       As a result of globalization many people have visible role modles that at one time were not as prevalent. Women in many regions of the world are exposed to strong, independent such as Sandra Day o’ Connor.

4.       The constitution is the source of truth in Western society/ America. For Muslim society the Qur’an is the dominant source of truth.

2+2=5

1.       The world cannot be boiled town into a list of rights and privileges. Life is too complex, if someone tries to make all of life equal bad things happen. I draw this interpretation from the line “Are you such a dreamer/ to put the world into rights?”

2.       The tempo of the music up until the bridge was slow, nearly dreamlike, programmatic which coincided with the message of the lyrics. I also noted that there seemed to be a shift at the end of the song right before “maybe not”.

3.       The song seems to describe a world where personal liberty is not important and common sense things about life are not so common sense anymore. To me this is extremely similar to the society that Orwell has created in 1984. 

Aristotle October 25, 2011

1.       I feel that Aristotle meant it takes a smart, intelligent mind to argue for an idea without believing it themselves. I agree with this because from personal experience I have found that it is easy to argue for something if I agree with but not so easy when the conviction is removed. Being able to evaluate an idea from multiple stand points also helps to strengthen one’s opinion or argument.

Me vs. We October 24, 2011

1.       Individualistic cultures would consider independence and personal power to be paramount while collectivist cultures value loyalty and selflessness.

2.        I would guess that individualistic cultures would value status more than collectivist cultures. Age would be highly valued in a collectivist culture because it stands to represent experience which in turn reflects knowledge. In an individualistic culture having a Ph. D would serve to elevate your status because it represents knowledge in most individualistic cultures. Both cultures value status, however status is interpreted differently in each culture.

3.       If she were to move from a collectivist culture to an individualistic culture she may encounter issues where her bosses may expect her to speak her mind or give her opinion but she may keep her head down because it is what she is used to. As a result her bosses may assume she is incompetent and not well suited for the job.

4.       An acquaintance is someone you know but not on an intimate level. For me, the word personally has a negative connotation. I typically use the word to describe someone I know but don’t really care for.