A Year in Review

As I finish up my senior year of high school, I have had some time to reflect on the year itself and how things have transpired. While it has been an up and down year in some regards, and a very stagnant year in others, this year has been much like the books that we have read this semester! All have common messages and ideas, yet they are so different in lots of ways. So let's go through the books and see where we have been taken on these journeys. Each book will get a first, and last, annual award known as the Fat Mowlers (a play of words on famous blogger Matt Fowler).

1984: By all accounts, probably the most famous dystopian novel of all time under Suzanne Collins read a few dystopian novels and said "hey I can change this slightly and make a lot of money", prompting the Hunger Games. But in all seriousness, this was a classic to start with and showed us the power of Big Brother. Technology and the government is a huge part of this class, and this book hits it right on the nose. Although written in 1949, this books seems to accurately guess where society is heading and it's not good. The important thing with this book is to stay patient because the story heats up fast. The Fatt Mowler for this award for this book is "most likely to be that book you sort of kind of remember in maybe a few years".

Feed: While we may not see cooperations as a huge enemy, in this next novel they play a huge role in literally dominating society. While the book was written in 2002, the author has an incredible conception of where technology is going. In this world, everyone has a little chip in their head and they are being shown only either what the government wants them to know, or their preference. The discussions will be focused around the power of technology and how, should we continue down the road we are on, things will get worse before they get better. One of my personal favorite events in the book is when the feed goes offline and no one is quite sure what to do with themselves. So in honor of that, The Fatt Mowler for Feed is "most likely to happen if you don't pay your electric bill ONCE, though vow never to forget again".

Life As We Knew It: If the first thing you did when you saw the cover is ask "why the heck is the moon so big", congrats! You're probably going to like this book and as the right questions while reading it. I would argue that this is the most suspenseful book of the semester, yet what makes this ironic is the characters actually don't do much. Like seriously. Read it. I know that's "not how it actually goes Matt", but this one defiantly has a different tone to it. If you like reading in the books about how the s*** goes wrong, as oppose to when it already has gone bad (like in 1984), this one will keep you on the edge of your seat. This book briefly talks about the environment (don't worry, it's not a huge theme, it only pops up when something goes wrong), so if you're into that there's something for everyone. The Fatt Mowler for this book is "most likely to be your motivation as to why it's a bad idea to live with your parents for too long". 

The Handmaid's Tale: I hate to set gender relations back a few hundred years, but there's a good chance that if you read this book and you are a women, there will be a small part of you that just hate the male gender. But that's a good thing, because the events in this book are VERY shaking. But now that I've set back gender relations a few years, you get the idea of the book. This book always feels like you've hit the climax, but it keeps going. Make sure you keep up with the reading because the plot changes faster than a speed limit from getting off the highway. If you ignore it, there will be consequences . Margaret Atwood does an incredible job addressing the question of if we really should keep feminism around (yes), and the idea of HOW to change the idea of feminism comes up a lot. The Fatt Mowler for this book is "most likely to actually happen because the book doesn't involve robotic-cyborg-dragon-eating-fire-breathing-moon-monsters and actually makes some great points".

Blindness: Ho. Ly. Crap. You've got to read this book. It's chilling, it's suspenseful, it makes you sit on the edge of your seat, it's just got everything. We travel to a world where people start going blind and must come together to survive. And yet, there is one that can see among them. I really don't want to ruin this book because the ideas explored and the themes discovered are absolutely incredible. The Fatt Mowler for this book is "most likely to pick up and never put down because yes it just is that unbelievably awesome and suspenseful".

Satire YOU should listen to!

Somewhere along the way, we got lost. All of a sudden, people don't seem very interested in the world around them. Maybe you do, as the reader, but not everyone does. So why? Why is this? I have an idea that due to the rise of social media (and everyone having something to say), we wave off what people are trying to say and warn us off. We have so many "scientific studies" that show different things, it's hard to know who to listen to and who to trust. You need to have that balance of a light and dark side (something Anakin Skywalker failed to understand around 2005) in order for people to listen to your point.

Entire satire.

The movie we watched, Idiocracy, offers a unique warning about the world and what happens if we stop caring. But we don't see the movie in a super dark and menacing story line. I would say it would be the "anti-1984", also because how the society is set up in the movie. And yet, here we are. In a world that people are tired of hearing from people about how bad the world is... which is maybe WHY the people are voting for someone like Donald Trump. They want change and this is how the American people are speaking. But back to dystopia.

Satire in these books can help us feel that we belong in the society. I use my reference from before about the movie being on the opposite "side" of 1984. Both forms of media show us some warnings about how society is going, based on the same message, but yet we seemed to listen to the film much more than the book. 

To me, this is why the book that we read, Life As We Knew It, is that sort of happy medium. While the events in the book are a little out of "societies" control, our main characters still offered some humor while describing these events. I believe that they ground the story and make it more believable. We had a hard time jumping into the plot-line and idea of Feed because the idea was so similar to how we are now, yet very different due to rules and ideas in the book. We even found ourselves asking the questions in Life As We Knew It, because the story was being "made up" as we went along!

Look, I'm not saying that every message needs to have a positive message or at least some humor. But I believe that satire can have a strong effect on dystopian novels because it allows us, the readers, to access the book a little bit better.

Ted Cruz and Offred; a match made in heaven

I know what you're thinking.

Please, PLEASE don't do a blog with politics. They never end well.

Please.

Too bad!!!

So if you're still reading at this point, congrats! That means that not only are you curious what my reference is going to be with politics but that we made it to the end of The Handmaid's Tale! Certainly an interesting book, but I want to focus on that ending. As Offred ends her story in the book, her journey is just beginning. We get some strange advice from Nick about who to trust and an uncertain future.

And how fitting is it that as I was finishing up this book, Ted Cruz popped up on the old Tele! Only it wasn't really good news. He was announcing that he was done with the presidential race after an embarrassing loss in Indiana. Which means that Donald Trump has basically the easiest path to the nomination. Think about it. He's basically the last one standing. Him.

As I was sitting there worrying about it though (I am NOT a fan of Donald Trump even if this next part may seem like I am), I thought it was similar to the book in that we TECHNICALLY have an ending to this part of the story, but there is still so much that is unknown and we don't know who to trust. I get that this is going to make me seem like I like Donald Trump (not true), but we don't know what about happen. Let's face it, we haven't been pleased at some of our presidents when they took office, and yet some of them (SOME) were able to turn around their public image.

I don't think people growing up now know it, but in the 1930s a lot of Americans blamed the Depression on Franklin Roosevelt. He was far from the hero then that he seems to be now. And it's true. So maybe, MAYBE (in an attempt to also connect the political sphere to our class) Donald is the one that we need. Society clearly is not where we all want it to be, and people know see and hope for different times. I see Offred and Donald Trump in the same boat, as they both will continue from a journey FAR from normal, and into a unique and unforeseeable future. 

Homonyms and Homographs

A family is being held hostage. For reasons that the captivator cannot explain, they have been chosen to make a statement. A man dressed in camouflage arrives top investigate. After tense exchanges from both sides, the man dressed in camouflage pulls a piece of equipment from his back, killing the captivator. That item that he used is the sole reason why he (the man dressed in camouflage) and the family are still alive. He is considered a hero.

School has begun and it like any ordinary day. When He comes to the front desk, he has not one intention of stopping. By using the same item as the man dressed in camouflage was able to obtain, 12 people lay dead due to his actions. He is considered (and rightfully so) a villain.

Both situations used guns to complete an objective. Yet, the context of them were totally different. One being a Marine that saves a family, and the other; a school shooter. Isn't it funny that a simple word can mean so much? That one word (GUN) can completely change a situation, yet the pure definition of a gun never changes. A gun is defined as a weapon incorporating a metal tube from which bullets, shells, or other missiles are propelled by explosive force, typically making a characteristic loud, sharp noise. How we interpret its meaning is up to us. 

Feminism. 

It's like a gun, but you never know what direction its going to fire in and if its a good thing. Except that is... not? Is.

In "The Handmaid's Tale", we see lots of examples of how women are defined and none of them seem to be positive. While sure the book is open and honest (portraying women as essentially breeders), it doesn't help the image of women. Just like the guns in the hands of a school shooter, as oppose to a trained Marine in the field. 

I read this article and immediately saw a problem. There is no progress. And we still can't seem to find one definition of this word. And it's a problem because this is how issues like this began, and soon we end up in a world like the one in our present book. A world where we have determined that something isn't worth getting an absolute definition of (even it that means 45% of all people on earth).

We MUST stop allowing articles like this to come out, or at LEAST find an appropriate definition of what feminism is because otherwise, we are headed for a world like the one we are currently reading about.

Life As We Now Knew It Tomorrow From Yesterday

Okay dokey! Let's get right into it. No ice breakers on this one, sorry about it! I happened to find this quote from the book before I knew what this prompt was and I enjoyed it! I liked it because of the references to McDonald's (yes that is a reason) and the connection from the world in the book to the world that we live in today.

“I guess I always felt even if the world came to an end, McDonald's would still be open.” 

The link to the article that I went to go find can be read here! I won't rewrite the article here or give some massive summary about it. There are just a few things I want to touch on. No, obviously, the article does not DIRECTLY mention McDonald's, but I feel that fast food is mentioned a lot with that company for obvious reasons. The article asks the basic question of if we are ever going to "eat" (fast food) ourselves to death! Strong point of view obviously, but it seems to make sense. Our portions are only getting bigger and no one seems to have a problem with it!

To me, this quote talks to the idea of McDonald's being a company that "kills you among death" but as I was sitting here I also thought to the point that these cooperations DO NOT DIE. They basically run the world and its amazing that people don't seem to mind that. So I suppose the two points that I bring up from this dialogue is that this food is still VERY much dominating our lives.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this? I'm sure that in such a book like this we can see trends such as the main characters becoming more "cheeky" as the worst possible scenario unfolds. But as much as this could be a cute little line, I see it as something bigger and not just because we've been told to write about it! It's always fun finding these lines in books because they can be very small moments that can be brought out to mean something more to the audience.  

My Feed has been Fed and now is Full

I know, clever me though right? So I have what my ideal "FEED" world would look like on a separate sheet of paper (I know everyone's is going to be different!). And as I was creating this world, I thought more and more how TERRIBLE it would be to live in it! And that's my basic one page visual of Feed, let alone an entire novel! It's not that I didn't like that world, it's that when I truly saw that my world would only contain the things I wrote about, I didn't like it. There was no variety AND nobody was truly themselves. Actions were dictated ahead of time.

Resist.
The.
Feed.

Look, I'm not against cooperate America. I'm really not, I promise. They have their own sides to stories and usually I can respect that. But I saw a surprising picture actually just today that made me stop and think for a second (WTF actually stands for Wasn't That Funny of course, nothing else).

ISN'T THAT CRAZY!!!!

I know that nobody is to blame for something like this happening, but it speaks volumes in terms of where we are going and can relate very much so to the book! The Feed is already happening!!!!


-
At the beginning of the novel, I didn't see what they big deal was about getting this information and having the information organized in ways that we like it. But once we started talking about it and doing the activity with Donald Trump and Google, this is a huge problem! We need to take a stance on this now before (has it already) gotten out of control!

6.

That's all we have now controlling the media! So what's going to stop that number from shrinking even more and having someone decide what people hear and do not hear through the media? We are. We have to be.









Honestly, I really liked this book. I was surprised! I did not know what to think of it going in, and I'm not just saying that based on the small pages. That's a benefit.

The Life of Truman Burbank, 1984-1998

If you're good at math, you may notice that mine doesn't seem to make a lot of sense! Because from my math, that would make Truman 14 years old when he "died" from television which can't be right at all!

That's actually not totally my point... I see the movie of "The Truman Show" being a very chilling compassion to the novel of 1984 (hence when he was "born", dying after the movie itself was out in theaters. I was one year old at the time, can you imagine! My how time flies.)! I want to break my argument into several different categories, just in case if you're not convinced that these two have anything in common (I didn't either at first).....

<SURVEILLANCE>
I think that it's important to understand that the examples used with Truman are going to seem far more humane, wether it's because Jim Carrey did a wonderful job with his role, or that the rules are not that strict for Truman. Yes, both members follow the rules of their society, it's just that if Truman happens to break some laws, it probably won't be the worst thing in the world. But yes. Both are being watching at a fairly close level and more people tune in as the story continues!! We see examples of the many different types of cameras that Truman has around him and we know how personal the government (Party) can get in 1984. Check out my previous blog post to get a little more insight on this article!

<NO ESCAPE>
This one feels like there's no need to explain....

<(a streetcar named)DESIRE TO LEAVE>
Both characters seem like they are unhappy with the ives that they have and want to leave! We see throughout the course of each story them try to do that. Sure, the Party breaks Winston (open to interoperation) and it's only Truman who truly leaves, but both express this passion to want to go somewhere else; and a common theme could connect back to the fact of a journey and that they both WANT to leave, but don't know how and when to do so. They always feel like their (false) life gets in the way sometimes

<LOVE>
Doesn't everyone love a great love story? And I must say that the only thing more unique than watching it come together is actually sometimes how it falls apart (I know, I know, I'm a monster. But those things don't happen over night and in order to create that sense of hate, it must take time and an adequate story line and persuading roles by good actors). But both Truman and Winston find women that they should not be with (wither by control or rule) but yet find a way to sneak around with. It's obvious that Winston did more with his feelings that Truman did but I appreciate the irony of it because it would feel like Truman would have more liberty to do things like that, yet we see Winston break the rules to a further extent. I think it also has something to do with the fact that he KNOWS the rules that he's breaking are wrong. Poor Truman has no idea.

Talking to her about computer hardware, I made my mother board

If you're still reading this article after the ridiculous title (that I spent way too much time laughing at), congrats! Welcome to what is technically called Blog Post 4, though let's not look at it like that! There is a reason I want to mention the blog itself and that's because we're going to talk about technology! Well, more or less. Let's see if you get it! Let me explain.

In 1984, there are very common themes and motifs of the government watching its civilians weither they approve or not, as well as the different types of technology that people have the government uses as portals to access information about people's lives. It's funny because in a book, this idea may seem crazy with the reader going back to the whole "yeah, but that's never going to happen in today's society because we would know better" routine. Well wake up! It's happened.

(Just in case if you missed it, click the link provided on the last sentence of the previous paragraph. It kind of sets up what I'm about to talk about)....

The government is lying to us. And there's a chance you don't even know it!

Look I know that we can read a book like 1984 and agree such a society would never be tolerated in a place like the United States, but these things don't happen overnight and ignorance cannot be to blame anymore. We all know that the government takes information from our computers, like what they did to 1984, and are collecting it for "research and protection". How would it be possible to know that something is not right? However, as citizens we must make sure that this does not go too far. The fact is that now that we know the things that Edward has shown us (and others, he just happens to be the most famous at the moment) and we simply cannot ignore them anymore.

I don't think George Orwell saw the future QUITE like how it is today, though I must say, he did a pretty good job for taking a shot in the dark. This issue has followed us since the time he wrote the book and will continue to haunt us! Now try and imagine what things might look like if you couldn't see the black boxes at all! And it feels like there is nothing that we can do. Sure, things like the Patriot Act have fallen through, but the key thing we need is proof. A lot of this can be solved by TRYING to do something. I have had the discussion in this class as well as others, and a lot of people don't seem to mind if the government takes their information because they are doing nothing wrong, but you give these people and inch and they will take a mile! We cannot become like the people in 1984 and not able to question our government! But if we continue on this path, we may not have a choice.


This is the first blog post in which I did not change the font or anything about the style of writing and I have a reason for it! And no. It's not laziness. Mostly. More as a unique point of contention, who is to say that the government isn't altering files? Just because they can view them and SAY they do not have direct access to them, how are we suppose to believe that????

Who's the greater good?

With the exciting events of the presidential race now underway (that may have sounded sarcastic, but I do mean it! This is an interesting time for all parties involved), there are so many stories going around about each of the candidates and this seems to be the freshest time to present an argument or a change to something. 

Yet again, we find ourselves talking about civil rights today! This isn't a bad thing at all, I just don't want to find myself falling into certain traps that I see people take with civil rights. We've been asked if we should ever give up our civil rights for the greater good. I enjoy the openness of this question, because we first must ask ourselves WHAT rights that would be and for WHAT is the greater good.

So let's talk terms (turkey?) before we go to out article. I looked under the book that we used for our A.P. Government and Law class and it says that civil rights are "the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality." which means a few things right off the bat. If we are to give away these things, that means there must be something SERIOUSLY wrong. If you think about it, it makes sense. Should someone ever sacrifice their rights to freedom for the greater good? What would that greater good look like? Think about it. We're talking about your freedom, what our armed solders around the world fight for. And in order to give that up, there must be something important going on. 

Here's the article I mentioned would be here before!: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/02/bernie-sanders-core-university-chicago

What I find interesting is that we seem to compare the ideas of someone's beliefs on the issue of civil rights to what they were doing during the civil rights movement or what they believe from it. While i think that era is VERY important to the rights that many minorities have today, it's not everything. Because if you do think about it, that era of the 1960s was a long time ago (sorry Dad). 

So why do I bring up the past to talk about the future? Good question! If you're still reading... Well I looked back at the question that we are suppose to answer and I see that it asks if it is ever NECESSARY to give up your civil rights, not SHOULD you ever give them up. That to me makes all the difference because while I myself would be alright with handing over my rights to help say my country or the people I care about it, I can't actually think of one time it would be NECESSARY to do such a thing. You could take the patriot act as an example, though people argue the merits of that program and if it was truly necessary.

The only time that we ever change things seems to be too late. Airports are the saddest example of this after 9/11, but there are so many more examples that we could list. And I don't think it's ever necessary to cash in your rights, but I don't think people should be on the forefront of trying to save them because if times change (and they do ever so quickly), you may need to hand them over. It's that kind of sacrifice that may be hard to come by, but will help the greater good in itself.

The Colo(u)r of the Sky

It's funny how time can seemingly change things. We look at the past and wonder "how could we have ever believed that" and don't seem to have answer. The. Let's take the nuclear bomb as an example. Yeah. I'm going big early. In the 1960s, there were commercials all the time about
WHEN THE BOMB DROPS 
what you should do to be prepared. But let's face it, does that really do anything? We laugh at those types of things now, but don't we do the same thing when we have a tornado warning? government. Except now the way that we receive the information is different. No longer are there TV spots rather people just tell us the information!

So who cares? That might be a question you ask a lot if you read my blog, but at least I have you asking questions!

Before answering the broader question of if there are benefits to propaganda, I feel like it's important to really see how many kinds of propaganda. My purpose of this post isn't to make you critical of everything in your life, but most things can be taken as propaganda! Why else do we have commercials? Aren't they trying to sell us on a certain point?

I didn't know much about the local DuPage County election, but from the ads that some people ran if I didn't know any better (you can decide if I should know better or not; I'll leave that one on you) that Bruce Rauner was a child-eating slave-driving criminal mastermind!!!! Like this. But I for one DO see the benefits of propaganda! is. And here's why.

The only way you're reading this blog is if you are on the internet or using some sort of data streaming service. Because we live in a country that has basically no restrictions on the internet (sorry Trump, it's just against the law to do that here. Best of luck with your wall though!), you can go look up WHATEVER information you want! always. So as much as people may try to throw their options at you, I think that's their right to do that, but if you truly want to know more about something, you must look it up! Don't believe what people tell you! Unless it's your mother. Always listen to your mother.

If people are using propaganda to say that
BIG BROTHER
is watching you, then won't that force you to think about what you're doing? You may no be inclined to break the law if you THINK someone is watching you.

Even if propaganda that you're using is incorrect, it can still motivate people. watching. If you have a poster showing someone going to jail after they litter, people might not want to litter! And see my point above if you have a problem with this. Look it up!

If something shows a belief that someone has, it can have positive effects on the things and people around it. They can choose to do something about it or they can choose to not look into something that may impact their lives. I hope I showed enough examples of that.

Perfect World or Perceived World?

It may come as a surprise, but I don't LOVE dystopian novels. Let me explain. I really do like them, but my favorite part comes from the discussion after the fact. The fact that in lots of different attempts to make society perfect, we notice that there is something that doesn't go right or something that we don't agree on. I don't believe there is one Utopia. I enjoy these books because of the talks that they bring for the life around us. Watching perfection unravel can be difficult to absorb sometimes.

Take this for example. Look at the difference between these two photos....
1
2

You even know that the two things are going to be incredibly different just by your understanding of the the words. But my point is that they can both bring happiness if you look at them one way, but they can also show sadness. In a Utopian society, I think that they only way things work is if you give the people just ONE way of looking at something. Because you wouldn't want them to see this...
1
2
....If you still wanted people to be happy, based off of the first set of photos. This might not help MY idea of a Utopia, but I feel like it gives some clarity to what I'm trying to say. That in order for this concept to work you have to control certain elements of society.
-
So what is my favorite idea of a world? It's interesting as I thought about this, that there would still be conflict on my Utopia. Sounds strange, I know, but I feel that conflict is a powerful way to get things done. First and foremost, everyone would be happy and doing what they love. Money would mean nothing in this world, but that does not mean that everyone has everything that they want. Oh and no guns. There's no need for them. I see a world without war and hunger, but I want to go deeper than that. I feel like those are points that everyone is going to have. There will still be judgment in my world! I know that we typically frown on that in our society but I sometimes think it's good to use judgement WHEN NECESSARY to solve problems and figure things out.

I want this world to be in the clouds. I would make it temperature controlled so it would not be super cold, but the clouds could be peaceful to look about and see. Can people fly in this world? You sure bet they can. There are lots of calm lakes and peaceful beaches. You have a choice as to where you want to live. If the city life isn't for you, there are rural areas that you may live as well. Homes can be connected by tubes under the foundation so you can visit people quicker. 

I also believe it's important to set ground rules as well in Utopia that I see and am running. You can't cheat death. There isn't a pill that you take that makes you immortal because no one would appreciate the life they have if it never ended. Crime is a difficult thing to talk about. Because while there still are crimes, there are no INCENTIVES behind why someone would commit a crime in an ideal society. But should someone commit a crime, they must help the people they have wronged for a certain amount of time, before returning to their lives. This doesn't include killing people! If you kill someone ON PURPOSE, you must leave the island of clouds. 

I want to leave my Utopia slightly more vague on purpose. It would be within the control of the people in the society to alter the life they have around them. There are few limits and lots of outlets for imagination! That being said, focusing on the first part of the question, I don't actually believe that there is such a thing as a perfect world. There is always something that can be changed or something that could be improved in different ways according to different people. There are very few things that we can all agree on. And that's ok! My point is that I just don't see it happening. Take my examples of beaches and music notes. It's all about how we look at something, not necessarily what it is.