Our AP English class just started reading Waiting for Godot, and one of the introductory/thought-provoking questions we had to contemplate beforehand was "Does humankind by nature long to understand the un-understandable?" To be honest, I'm not a hundred percent sure as to what this specific question has to do with the play, but I do know that it struck me as truth, which (I would guess) is a central theme of Godot.
"I am not not going to hurt you." Take a moment to study that sentence. Notice the double "not's." Was that merely a typo, or was done purposefully to convert the statement into a threat? The "not's" cancel each other out, right? So what I'm actually saying is "I am going to hurt you." Well, maybe I'm just weird like this, but those types of sentences annoy the crap out of me. Why? Because my inner desire to understand takes control when I read them. Maybe that was a dumb example, but to me it showcases the humankind's natural tendency to try to make sense of everything that stumbles across our path of life.
Here's another perfect example: children. Ever wonder why kids ask so many "why" questions? ("Why is the sky blue?" "Why do dogs hate cats?" "Why do I have to go to school?") It's because they're curious. Ever get frustrated when you find yourself unable to answer their questions? (I know whenever this happens to me, I cop out and give them the ole "Just because that's the way it is, okay?!" reply, all the while silently fuming.) It all goes back to curiosity; to our need for understanding, even of what we know is impossible.
Our class also studied works of "surrealistic art" as a precursory to our Godot unit, which I found quite fascinating (and creepy at the same time.) Despite the obvious absurdities of the artwork we observed, there was always some facet of truth presented within them. For example, one of the pictures showed what appeared to be a man attempting to escape from the inside of a mini egg-like earth. While the art itself is clearly an example of absurdity, there is no doubt truth in the concept of the need humans have to escape from their physical boundaries, whatever these may be.
Our need to understand reveals an even greater need that all humans have, and that is the desire for truth. Without truth, there is no stability. Without stability, we would all mentally implode and society would erupt into chaos. It's an inherent part of human nature: what we don't know, we find out; what we can't find out, we do research on until we do; when/if our research reveals nothing, we a) hang our heads b) scream and pull our hair out by the roots or c) set off on an epic quest to satisfy our curiosities.
This is where the concept of religion and science come into play. They answer these core questions: where did the universe come from? Why are we here? Were we the result of an imploding speck of dust, or were we hand-crafted by a being so superior to us that we can't even wrap our minds around it? If you believe in god, what kind do you believe in? One invisible dominant figure, or little pieces of a supernatural entity that exists in all of us?
Personally, I don't believe in the concept of agnosticism. Everyone has to believe in something. If you claim not to, then what you're really doing is just blocking out the little voice in your head that's just dying for some foundation to cling to. Face it, you're a part of the paradox: you want to understand the un-understandable just as much as everyone else.
-Kati Davis
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
"Pride comes before a fall."
Yes, it's a cliched expression, but there's an immeasurable amount of truth in it. One of society's biggest problems is that people allow pride to get in the way of reason. I can think of quite a few good examples from literature in which choices that characters make out of pride and selfish desire go horribly wrong. One of the best examples of this type of consequence comes from the story of Beowulf.
Beowulf, lead hero of the epic poem Beowulf (go figure), starts out as an orphan and works his way up in society until eventually he reaches the ultimate position as king of the Geats. Beowulf is known virtually everywhere for his courage, valor, strength... oh, and let's not forget pride. This small character flaw is arguably what leads to Beowulf's downfall in his last battle against a ferocious dragon that has been terrorizing his people. Determined to face the beast alone, Beowulf does just that. He even takes the bare minimum of armor and weapons with him into battle. In the end, our hero pays a mighty price for his decisions: his own life.
From the fifth grader caught cheating on her math test because she forgot to study and was afraid of showing her mom anything less than an A+ to the politician refusing to sway to the arguments of the other side despite the fact that he knows they make much more sense than his do, everyone makes a foolish decision based on pride at some point in their lives. Why do so many promising marriages fail within the first few years? Why do distant and neighboring countries that have virtually nothing in common except that they share the same earth war with each other? Why do the closest of friends allow one tiny disagreement to unravel the threads of a relationship that has lasted for decades? Why do churches, places that are supposedly founded on the concepts of of forgiveness and harmony, split over petty arguments regarding the dress code for Sunday school? Oftentimes the answer to these questions lies in the fact that both parties involved are too stubborn and proud and rooted in their own opinion to try to see through the other's eyes.
In the biblical book of Philippians, chapter 2 verse 3 says to "do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves." The key word in this passage is "humility." The concept of being humble has never been a popular one. Put simply, humility means stepping down from the pedestal of pride and taking others' opinions into consideration, even if you don't necessarily agree with them. Selfishness is an innately human characteristic, and it's one that we all struggle with, even though we often preach the concept of humility to others. "Treat others the way you would like to be treated." I mean, who really follows that rule without bending it or twisting the words to meet their own desires every once in a while? I've yet to meet that person. When I do, I'll let you know.
Before provoking the dragon into battle, Beowulf says so himself that his purpose for fighting solo is "for the glory of winning." Others may argue that the decision was made out of regard to lives of his men, but it sounds to me as though our hero was simply too blinded by the prospect of fame and victory to think reasonably. In my opinion the great king Beowulf, as well as the rest of our real-life society, could use a pretty large helping of the dreaded h word.
-Kati Davis
Beowulf, lead hero of the epic poem Beowulf (go figure), starts out as an orphan and works his way up in society until eventually he reaches the ultimate position as king of the Geats. Beowulf is known virtually everywhere for his courage, valor, strength... oh, and let's not forget pride. This small character flaw is arguably what leads to Beowulf's downfall in his last battle against a ferocious dragon that has been terrorizing his people. Determined to face the beast alone, Beowulf does just that. He even takes the bare minimum of armor and weapons with him into battle. In the end, our hero pays a mighty price for his decisions: his own life.
From the fifth grader caught cheating on her math test because she forgot to study and was afraid of showing her mom anything less than an A+ to the politician refusing to sway to the arguments of the other side despite the fact that he knows they make much more sense than his do, everyone makes a foolish decision based on pride at some point in their lives. Why do so many promising marriages fail within the first few years? Why do distant and neighboring countries that have virtually nothing in common except that they share the same earth war with each other? Why do the closest of friends allow one tiny disagreement to unravel the threads of a relationship that has lasted for decades? Why do churches, places that are supposedly founded on the concepts of of forgiveness and harmony, split over petty arguments regarding the dress code for Sunday school? Oftentimes the answer to these questions lies in the fact that both parties involved are too stubborn and proud and rooted in their own opinion to try to see through the other's eyes.
In the biblical book of Philippians, chapter 2 verse 3 says to "do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves." The key word in this passage is "humility." The concept of being humble has never been a popular one. Put simply, humility means stepping down from the pedestal of pride and taking others' opinions into consideration, even if you don't necessarily agree with them. Selfishness is an innately human characteristic, and it's one that we all struggle with, even though we often preach the concept of humility to others. "Treat others the way you would like to be treated." I mean, who really follows that rule without bending it or twisting the words to meet their own desires every once in a while? I've yet to meet that person. When I do, I'll let you know.
Before provoking the dragon into battle, Beowulf says so himself that his purpose for fighting solo is "for the glory of winning." Others may argue that the decision was made out of regard to lives of his men, but it sounds to me as though our hero was simply too blinded by the prospect of fame and victory to think reasonably. In my opinion the great king Beowulf, as well as the rest of our real-life society, could use a pretty large helping of the dreaded h word.
-Kati Davis
Sunday, October 2, 2011
A Second Look at Mrs. Keating
The Fountainhead. I think it's safe to say that the majority of Mrs. Burnett's first period Advanced Placement English class enjoyed this book, which, along with the rest of the summer's required reading, raised controversial questions about individuality and the fight against the standards of society. It was easy for us as the readers to cheer on the protagonist, Howard Roark, Rand's "epitome of perfection", and it was also easy for us to boo the characters that dared try to stand in his way or force their ideals on him. During the Socratic Seminar, most of us had no trouble expressing our disgusted opinions of Rand's lesser characters such as Gail Wynand, Ellsworth Toohey, and that wretched woman that gave birth to Peter Keating... what was her name again? Ah yes, Mrs. Keating.
But, if you really think about it, weren't we essentially booing ourselves?
It's quite clear that Ms. Rand's opinion of society and humanity as a whole is not very high, and we see this through the way she portrays almost every character in her book whose name does not start with an "H" and end with an "--oward Roark." Apparently her opinion rubs off on her readers, who seem to fall into that same mentality as they read. I'll even admit to being one of them. I couldn't help but wrinkle my nose in disgust whenever I read about Keating's pathetic attempts at gaining society's fickle approval, or shake my head sadly at the way Katie allowed herself to be manipulated by her uncle until she became something quite unrecognizably inhuman and ugly.
But think about it. Think about it really, really hard. How many Howard Roarks do you know? Allow me to restate the question. How many people do you know that have absolutely no emotion whatsoever and never allow themselves to be influenced by the opinions of others? Personally, I can't think of one person who cares nothing whatsoever of the opinion of their family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, teachers, students, pets, etc. etc. etc. Whether we realize it or not, we all have some pretty ugly truths about ourselves that we hide from others for the sake of gaining their approval. But aren't those people the kinds of characters from The Fountainhead that we booed?
Let's take Mrs. Keating as an example. Yes, she was annoying. Yes, she was arrogant. Yes, she forced her opinions down her son's throat and used the guilt factor to twist his way of thinking. No, she probably doesn't deserve the "Mother-of-the-Year" award.
But you wanna know something else about Mrs. Keating? She was human. She had her flaws, no matter how exaggerated Rand might have made them, and she acted out of selfish impulses and desires the same way all of us have done probably more times in our lives than we would like to admit. Like all of us, she had motives behind her actions. I truly believe in my heart that Mrs. Keating loved her son and wanted to see him succeed, however twisted her view of success may have been, but at the same time she was also afraid of losing him and being left alone and friendless, and that's why she was always trying to keep him around.
You may not be able to find it in your heart to feel compassion for this woman, and that's okay, because she probably doesn't deserve your empathy anyway. However, I think we all should be able to find in our hearts the ability to sympathize with her. Remember the scene where Ellsworth yelled at her while talking to Keating and she reacted like a scared puppy? Did you really feel not one ounce of sympathy for her at that moment? If not, then forgive me for asking, but who can you sympathize with? Howard Roark doesn't need our sympathy. He doesn't need anything from us. We could spit in his face and laugh and point at him behind his back, or we could clap him on the shoulder and audibly praise his acheivements, and it wouldn't make a difference either way.
Now, I'm not advocating that it's wrong for Roark not to care about other people's opinions or let himself be influenced by society's ideals. Honestly, I wish I could be more like him sometimes, because trying to please people gets really tiring after a while. All I'm saying is, as much as we and the author may want to believe it, there's no such thing as Howard Roark. He isn't real. He doesn't exist. Mrs. Keating, on the other hand, does. So I think maybe we should do a little less booing and a little less judging; take our noses out of the books every once in a while and take a long, hard look at the reality that surrounds us; and try to fix our own problems instead of condemning someone else's.
-Kati Davis
But, if you really think about it, weren't we essentially booing ourselves?
It's quite clear that Ms. Rand's opinion of society and humanity as a whole is not very high, and we see this through the way she portrays almost every character in her book whose name does not start with an "H" and end with an "--oward Roark." Apparently her opinion rubs off on her readers, who seem to fall into that same mentality as they read. I'll even admit to being one of them. I couldn't help but wrinkle my nose in disgust whenever I read about Keating's pathetic attempts at gaining society's fickle approval, or shake my head sadly at the way Katie allowed herself to be manipulated by her uncle until she became something quite unrecognizably inhuman and ugly.
But think about it. Think about it really, really hard. How many Howard Roarks do you know? Allow me to restate the question. How many people do you know that have absolutely no emotion whatsoever and never allow themselves to be influenced by the opinions of others? Personally, I can't think of one person who cares nothing whatsoever of the opinion of their family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, teachers, students, pets, etc. etc. etc. Whether we realize it or not, we all have some pretty ugly truths about ourselves that we hide from others for the sake of gaining their approval. But aren't those people the kinds of characters from The Fountainhead that we booed?
Let's take Mrs. Keating as an example. Yes, she was annoying. Yes, she was arrogant. Yes, she forced her opinions down her son's throat and used the guilt factor to twist his way of thinking. No, she probably doesn't deserve the "Mother-of-the-Year" award.
But you wanna know something else about Mrs. Keating? She was human. She had her flaws, no matter how exaggerated Rand might have made them, and she acted out of selfish impulses and desires the same way all of us have done probably more times in our lives than we would like to admit. Like all of us, she had motives behind her actions. I truly believe in my heart that Mrs. Keating loved her son and wanted to see him succeed, however twisted her view of success may have been, but at the same time she was also afraid of losing him and being left alone and friendless, and that's why she was always trying to keep him around.
You may not be able to find it in your heart to feel compassion for this woman, and that's okay, because she probably doesn't deserve your empathy anyway. However, I think we all should be able to find in our hearts the ability to sympathize with her. Remember the scene where Ellsworth yelled at her while talking to Keating and she reacted like a scared puppy? Did you really feel not one ounce of sympathy for her at that moment? If not, then forgive me for asking, but who can you sympathize with? Howard Roark doesn't need our sympathy. He doesn't need anything from us. We could spit in his face and laugh and point at him behind his back, or we could clap him on the shoulder and audibly praise his acheivements, and it wouldn't make a difference either way.
Now, I'm not advocating that it's wrong for Roark not to care about other people's opinions or let himself be influenced by society's ideals. Honestly, I wish I could be more like him sometimes, because trying to please people gets really tiring after a while. All I'm saying is, as much as we and the author may want to believe it, there's no such thing as Howard Roark. He isn't real. He doesn't exist. Mrs. Keating, on the other hand, does. So I think maybe we should do a little less booing and a little less judging; take our noses out of the books every once in a while and take a long, hard look at the reality that surrounds us; and try to fix our own problems instead of condemning someone else's.
-Kati Davis
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)