Post #14, 5-12-09, Leave the Past in the Past

I took my AP Chemistry test today, so bear with me if my newest blog post isn't top notch. But my apology actually serves as a sort of introduction into what I want to write about today. I think I studied more for this particular test than I've studied for the accumulation of all past quizzes and exams. I'm your typical procrastinator- I start out with good intentions, but end with an indifferent attitude. I constantly put things off until "tomorrow". As a result, I developed terrible study habits. I've never spent more than an hour reviewing old notes, and I rarely read textbooks. I was able to get away with that until high school, so freshman year hit me like a ton of bricks. Even still, I didn't put in the needed amount of effort to achieving the highest grades possible. I got by, and that's all I cared about. Until this year. Junior year, I decided I was really going to try. Although I didn't give my full attention every day, I did try during most class periods, and my study habits began to improve. It really paid off in AP Chem, which was where it was needed most. Science has never been my strong suit. The entire class was preparation for the AP test at the end of the year. We went through what felt like a chapter a week, and it took all that I had not to fall behind. Anyway, I flew by the seat of my pants all year, but when May came along, I discovered that I knew more than I thought. I had acquired a genuine understanding of the concepts taught, and I was proud of that. But after today, I'm doubting how much I actually understood. I walked into the library this morning with confidence. I felt ready. I had studied for hours the night before, by myself and with a small group at the library. I got a full eight hours of sleep, and I'd studied even more this morning. I had done everything I could to prepare, and it still wasn't enough. I walked out of the library in extreme disappointment. I was angry at myself for not doing better. I was in a bad mood until school let out. Then I realized, I had absolutely no reason for my attitude. I did my absolute best, which is something I don't honestly say very often. I don't regret anything about this past year, and that's a first. So what did I have to be angry about? I thought about that while reading the last of A Streetcar Named Desire. Then, suddenly, I had an epiphany: Blanche. Need I say more? Her entire life is based on past mistakes and traumatic experiences. She lives every day like it was years ago. Look where it got her- a mental breakdown cost Blanche her family, friends, a paying job, her house. She lost everything by dwelling on the past. Although I definitely do not focus on the past to that extent, I did realize just then that replaying past events over and over in your head gets you nowhere. I believe that the past is there for you to grow stronger from, to learn from and move on. We reside in the present for a reason. If you don't believe me, look at these quotes. People all over the globe, of all different ages and backgrounds, have said the exact same thing throughout the years about the past in regards to the present and the future. It doesn't change.

Post #13, 5-5-09, World Peace?

With the world in its current state- wars erupting left and right, economies steadily declining downhill- the individual's moral decision making is extremely important. The decisions that people of authority make- the president, other members of government- effect all of us. In the latest Newsweek, an article by Sharon Begley was titled "Adventures in Good and Evil". The subheading read, "What makes some of us saints and some of us sinners? The evolutionary roots of morality." Earlier this year, during first semester religion, I took a Christian morality course. During that time, I developed a strong interest in the reasoning behind choices people make and the effects each choice has. This particular article brought up many interesting points through summaries of past and present experimentation on psychology. Some studies show that when placed in control of a situation in which a person is rewarded for inflicting pain on another person, or is made to believe that the situation is beneficial on the larger scale of things, the moral judgement of the person in authority diminishes. In another study, "if people are asked whether they would be willing to throw a switch to redirect deadly fumes from a room with five children to a room with one, most say yes, and neuroimaging shows that their brain's rational, analytical regions had swung into action to make the requisite calculation. But few people say they would kill a healthy man in order to distribute his organs to five patients who will otherwise die, even though the logic- kill one, save five- is identical: a region in our emotional brain rebels at the act of directly and actively taking a man's life, something that feels immesaurably worse than the impersonal act of throwing a switch in an air duct. We have gut feelings of what is right and wrong." I found this incredibly interesting. I would have never realized the connection in the two circumstances if it had not been pointed out to me. It's unbelievable to me how the brain functions- that it can place identical situations in different moral categories, and convince you that one is a more righteous act than the other.
The article goes on to say that important principles instilled during childhood, life-altering experiences, observing qualities like compassion and forgiveness in others, and feeling secure in multiple aspects of life are also characteristics of those with high moral character. A different study shows that, "if only people could feel safer and less threatened, they would have more psychological resources to devote to noticing other people's suffering and doing something to alleviate it." After reading this, I began to wonder what the world would be like if everyone felt safe and secure, assuming that this theory is correct. I think that further testing and developing this idea could be extremely beneficial. It could be a start at world peace, something we all can only dream about. We could potentially eliminate poverty and war. It's almost too much to think about how we can create a more perfect world by simply studying the why's and how's behind our response to critical situations. I don't know, do you think this is attainable?

Post #12, 4-28-09, Remember When?

"Blessed are the forgetful, for they get the better even of their blunders."

-Mary, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

For as long as can be remembered, memory has been a highly intriguing, thought-provoking process. The inner workings of the human brain have not only been the focus of intense scientific study, but also play a large part in the media. Movie after movie, TV show after TV show, book after book have been based on psychological theories. When a certain Newsweek article caught my eye, I began reading and was immediately reminded of scenes from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a 2004 release starring Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet. The title of the film was inspired by "Eloisa to Abelard", a poem written by Alexander Pope in the early 1700's. A small portion of the poem reads as follows:

"How happy is the blameless vestal's lot!
The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
Each pray'r accepted, and each wish resign'd."

The Health for Life section of this week's issue of Newsweek features an article written by Claudia Kalb called "To Pluck a Rooted Sorrow". The article starts by describing an experiment begun by Karim Nader. This experiment involved testing a "fear conditioning technique", in which rats were electrically shocked each time they heard a certain sound. The rats soon started to associate the unpleasant shock with the sound, and formed a memory. Nader then realized that after injecting the rats with a new drug, the rats relaxed when the sound was played. The fear of shock and the sound were no longer connected. This same drug can be used on humans. We may be capable of actually erasing painful memories. This recent discovery is nothing similar to what is seen on TV, however. Dr. Roger Pitman is currently concentrating on victims of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, an illness kick-started by exceptionally distressing memories.

We may be able to help people who suffer from emotional scarring, but at what cost? In Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, the two main characters, Joel Barish and Clementine Kruczynski, erase their memories of each other after their relationship falls apart. Clementine undergoes the memory-erasing procedure first, and after hearing about it, Joel decides to forget about her too. However, half-way through the process, Joel changes his mind because he is still in love with Clementine. While the actual movie is much better than the rough story line I just provided, I got my point across. In the article Dr. Eric Kandel states, "Removing memory gets into dangerous territory. We have to think about it very carefully."

"To Pluck a Rooted Sorrow" brought up many interesting points, and I agree with something psychologist Alain Brunet was quoted on in the article: "People cherish their memories, even their bad memories. They don't want them to be erased, they want to recall them with less pain." I think that's what we all want, ultimately. A perfect life. But that's an unachievable goal. Life, in reality, is messy. When we make mistakes, we have to learn from them. When people hurt us, we have to forgive. I believe that our experiences shape us into who we are. Without knowledge of those past experiences, I'm concerned that the person we pride ourselves in being might be forgotten along with our lost memories. Any other thoughts?

Post #11, 4-21-09, Women

Through recent readings, I've come across several perceptions of women and the place they hold in specific societies. On one side, women are viewed as "truly the fairer sex". The article selected for "The Verdict" section of the April 20th issue of Newsweek describes women in governmental roles. It is said that President Obama will choose a woman to fill the next empty seat in the Supreme Court. Currently, there is only one female member of the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Many people strongly agree that there should be more women present in politics. A theory based on the book by Carol Gilligan, "In a Different Voice", states that "men prefer their law with rigid rules, clear lines and neutral principles; women prefer to look at the totality of the circumstances and favor what Gilligan calls an 'ethic of care' over an 'ethic of rights'." Women provide a different insight, a different perspective on topics of interest. It is necessary to have more than one viewpoint on consequential issues.

However, the other side of the extreme often objectifies women and treats them as inferior. Peter Hessler observes this during his two-year stay in China, and writes about it in his book River Town. In River Town, Hessler describes the two types of Chinese women, or "xiaojie":

"It was impossible to define exactly what xiaojie meant, because it stretched across a broad range of implication. Anne was a xiaojie and so was Li Jiali, the prostitute who had pursued me at the teahouse. Xiaojie was a vague term, which was appropriate because it was difficult to define exactly what was expected of young women in a place like Fuling. They weren't like young upper-class men, whose aspirations could be neatly summarized, and I found that I had no equivalently simple definition for the average young woman in Fuling. She was expected to marry young and promptly have her child, and yet her childbearing was strictly and legally limited. She was expected to have a job and earn money of her own, but job discrimination was even more severe than in America. Traditional morality was breaking down, but this happened unevenly and in unhealthy ways; prostitution was becoming increasingly common and so were love affairs. I was amazed at how many of my young married friends in the city were cheating on their spouses, but divorce still came with a definite stigma for the women involved."

Hessler continues with other complex conditions Chinese women are expected to abide by. He later says that although circumstances were worse in other countries, "the issue of women's independence had reached a transitional stage, and it seemed to be a particularly painful one."

I find it interesting that a woman's purpose and status in society has been and remains so controversial. It is unclear to most what is expected of women, and various cultures come up with their own ideas of what is acceptable.

Forum #5, 4-7-09, A World within the World

"The Restaurant Owner" focuses mainly on Huang Xiaoqiang, a husband, father, and proud owner of a noodle restaurant called the Students' home in the East River district of Fuling. Huang Xiaoqiang lives in his own little world, a world that completely revolves and depends upon the success of his restaurant. Pete Hessler writes in this chapter: "Any changes are made within the world of the restaurant." When Huang Xiaoqiang experienced financial difficulties, he bought a telephone for his customer's use in an attempt to raise money. He also worked to obtain a driver's license, something not many others had in the city. This provided him with multiple opportunities. Hessler informs his readers: "They have no desire to go elsewhere. 'We're here for yibeizi,' Huang Xiaoqiang says, 'A lifetime.'"
This section of the chapter stuck out to me. I began to wonder, do we experience similar situations here in the United States? What are our individual "worlds"?

Post #10, 3-31-09, Weight Watchers

In the newest Newsweek, the health article by Sarah Kliff posed an interesting perspective on how to get children to eat more nutritious foods at early ages. It's really a simple idea. Kliff starts the article: "What's the best way to make sure a kid eats an apple? Ask him if he really wants one... Want her to eat her veggies, too? Rename them." In short, this new concept, called "stealth health", will cause kids to find a balanced diet more appealing because they are being pushed towards the healthier choice. Kliff states that this "push" may be verbal encouragement in the lunch line in the school cafeteria, more expressive food labels in grocery stores, and making healthier foods more readily availiable. As a result, "the most nutritious decision [will be] the most desirable one."

It seems that especially in the United States, people are either at one end of the extreme or the other when it comes to weight. It's easy to find nine year olds who are anorexic, or young adults that weigh three hundred pounds. Fitness is a main focus here. Almost every magazine has at least one article per issue on health, Newsweek no exception. Looking good is a very important part of our society today. I'm not arguing that staying active and eating right are bad things, but the more this concept is stressed, the more I question it's actual benefit. Although these articles target all of the pro's to healthy habits, continually reading them could be a possible con. Your opinion?

Post #9, 3-24-09, Is it the simple things in life?

"You couldn't have said something like that at Oxford. You couldn't simply say: I don't like Hamlet because I think he's a lousy person. Everything had to be more clever than that; you had to recognize Hamlet as a character in a text, and then you had to dismantle it accordingly, layer by layer, not just the play itself but everything that had ever been written about it. You had to consider what all the other critics had said, and the accumulated weight of their knowledge and nonsense sat heavily on the play. You had to think about how the play tied in with current events and trends. This process had some value, of course, but for many readers it seemed to have reached the point where there wasn't even a split-second break before the sophistication started. As a student, that was all I had wanted- a brief moment when a simple and true thought flashed across the mind: I don't like this character. This is a good story. The woman in this poem is beautiful and I bet her fingers are slim like scallions."

-Pete Hessler, River Town

Pete Hessler spent two years in Fuling, China as an English teacher at a small college, and afterwards wrote River Town providing a written account of his life while there. During his stay, Hessler discovered countless times how extremely important language is in China. Pete writes, "So much depended on knowing the language- my friendships, my ability to function in the city, my understanding of the place." Two tutors arranged to meet with Hessler seven hours a week in order to improve his written and spoken Mandarin. Hessler studied rigorously out of stubbornness, because many of his students and colleagues thought his interest in the language a joke. The process of learning Mandarin was a very enlightening experience for Hessler. Everything was "budui"- everything was wrong. It didn't matter if only one character was slightly mispronounced, in the Chinese way it was all or nothing. This caused Hessler to begin to appreciate what he did correctly, even if it was merely reading a short paragraph a young schoolchild could handle.

Although in Hessler's classroom the roles of teacher and student were reversed, the same concepts still applied. Hessler's students declared their thoughts outright and plainly. Because the students were learning the language, there was no need to go into great detail over the meaning behind what was being read. The students were able to come up with their own observations about the characters and plotlines, imagining them as real people in real situations.

Sometimes I think that we need to go back to the basics. Sometimes I think that we let things become too complicated. We focus more on the author's intentions rather than our own interpretations of the story. Often this mindset causes us to develop a hate for literature, rather than an enjoyment. Even with River Town itself, the first time it was introduced to the class there were moans and sighs of disappointment instead of smiles and excited gasps. We dread the point when we are going to have to dissect the book, and look deeper into the story for connections to our everyday lives and hidden intentions behind the author's word choice or sentence structure. On the other hand, I do understand the importance of developing a deep understanding of the book in all its entirety. Sometimes we learn more from our conclusions than from the story itself. I guess, both aspects might be of equal value. It's possible that the two might go hand-in-hand, that fully comprehending the book's plot leads to attempts at comprehending the book's meaning. Let me know what you think.