Innocence Doesn't Exist

The loss of innocence through age is inescapable. With time, young idealism is violently met with the reality of systemic injustice and to prevent such a reunion is impossible. In A Raisin in the Sun, Mama is described as "being a woman who had adjusted to many things in life," weathered by and tired from laborious years of societal struggles. In contrast, Travis represents the vitality and adventurism of the youth and the preservation of innocence through censorship by older generations.

In an attempt to cover the hardships of daily life, Mama tends to Travis's chores, claiming "he's just a little boy" and that he "ain't supposed to know 'bout housekeeping" (40). And without explanation, Mama commands Travis to "hush up" (59) when he attempts to illustrate his childlike curiosity with the rogue rat. Mama's actions are representative of quiet conformation to societal ideals and institutional abandonment of pragmatic guidance and true education about the reality of struggles. Much like the "plant that ain't never had enough sunshine" (52), Travis doesn't receive the proper educational nutrition that is necessary to sprout understanding members of society. What is left of Travis's tenacious curiosity is a vague understanding that some things are right and some things are wrong.

The solution, I would argue, is like that of any other conflict: effective conversation between dissenting members. On a broader scale, this requires dialogue between people of, but not limited to, different generations, races, religions, and sexes. Bridging systemic chasms requires the full effort of people on both sides of the issue before it becomes too societally ingrained. 

The plant hasn't always been withered, but is it too late now?

Help! Do I have ghetto-itis?

In A Raisin in the Sun, we learn early on that the Youngers operate on a dysfunctional familial level. The "tired" furniture attempts to bring "care and love and even hope" and disguise the "weariness" of the residence, but it does none except exposes the Youngers' desire for a rich-white life. It's apparent that the "acute ghetto-itis" from chronic racism and sexism, created by an unjust system and perpetuated by an unjust society, has long-lasting symptoms on society's most vulnerable members.

Walter, pressured by the role of men to earn money to provide for his family, complains that his wife doesn't "understand about building" him up and making him "feel like [...] somebody." This exposes the fragility of Walter's masculinity and his inability to "be the man" in the family. When confronted by the reality of his aspirations, Walter threatens to "look for peace" outside of his home, escaping his responsibility of curing the dysfunctional home setting.

Ruth, pressured by the role of women to attend to domestic matters, is restricted by her identity of a "colored woman." She claims she "would rather be living in Buckingham Palace," in part mocking the futility of Walter's desires but also revealing her frustration at the entrapment of her current domestic and financial crisis. However, Ruth takes refuge in repetitively making breakfast and ironing clothes, demonstrating her fear of wading beyond the role of a colored woman.

It becomes evident that racism and sexism do not function individually. Rather, they work quite well in tandem to maintain a rigid socioeconomic framework, of which members functioning within the frame find it difficult to escape the societal template.

Corporate Cynicism

"I couldn't forgive him or like him, but I saw that what he had done was, to him, entirely justified. It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy- they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made..."

This passage describes the separation of class, defined by the more obviously divide in monetary worth and less obviously divide in moral intentions. While reading the passage, I was surprised by the immediate relevance this passage held to modern events much discussed in America's political rhetoric.

In the wake of Obama's administration denying further construction of the North Dakota Access Pipeline, an act requested through turmoil and irritated voices, it is worth analyzing the corporate origins, much summarized in the passage, of the initial construction. For the first time in history, many Native American tribes unified against a common antagonist: Energy Transfer Partners, a corporation that represents blind greed and repetitive institutional infringement of Native American rights.

Energy Transfer Partners, and much of its political allies, has consciously ignored the cultural and historic relevance of the land the pipeline would have crudely run through and the environmental implications of the pipeline itself. As in the passage, Energy Transfer Partners and many other modern corporations "[smash] up things and creatures and then [retreat] back into their money or their vast carelessness," for profits outweigh humanity.

Because literature of any time period often reflects the predominant ideology, the passage from The Great Gatsby, exposes a cynical truth that was known back then and is ever more relevant today: a clear barrier exists between the goals of much of those surrounded in wealth and the reality of the repercussions of their destructive greed.

Happy Consumerism!

It always bothered me that stores displayed Thanksgiving and Christmas paraphernalia so early in the year. It bothers me that corporations broadcast their wide array of products, capitalizing on the ingrained consumerism during the holiday season and ignoring the bleak disenfranchisement of Native Americans and religious significance of Christmas. Let's not forget the irony of having store wide sales to perpetuate consumerism the day after people give thanks for what they have. The concept of promoting consumerism through commercialism, however, is not one that is new to society.

The early 20th century was marked by dramatic commercialism and consumerism where "the rich [got] richer and the poor [got]- children" (95). Towering billboards blanketed  America, constantly blaring products and seducing consumers. It was easy to feed into corporate greed. In The Great Gatsby, even the "valley of ashes" (23), a gray and desolate city sandwiched between two prosperous cities, contains an obnoxious billboard. The billboard, displaying the "eyes of Doctor T.J Eckleburg" surrounded by a pair of "enormous yellow spectacles," presents a stark contrast between the wealthy and the poor. It establishes that those belonging to respected professions and the wealthy are quite literally above the poor as the billboard towers "over the solemn dumping ground."

Corporations have made it easy to tap into the taught consumerism and to ignore the wealth disparities among the population. While the early 20th century was a time of economic prosperity for some, many more were not able to enjoy the commercialized luxuries. Now, at a time of exponential wealth inequality, it's especially important to discuss the alluring power and redefine the role of commercialism.

So Hipster

Everyone knows what Tetris is: a retro arcade game with funky background music. You move around shapes called Tetriminos, trying to fit the blocks in the right slot to eliminate lines before they stack up too high. Besides offering me a nerdy- and exhilarating- study break*, Tetris taught me that trying to fit into the conventional only catalyzes the disappearance of personal identity. Perhaps that's why I find Modernism so appealing.

*You should know that I reached the highest rank on Facebook Tetris. That reveals two truths:
                  1) Yes, there is a Tetris hierarchy
                  2) I take a lot of study breaks.

As I was researching Modernist literature, it soon became evident that a common trend in Modernism is the pessimistic denouncement of growing capitalism and traditional viewpoints. Modernism marked the growing lack of faith in Western power and culture; it exposes the chasms among race, gender, and class, and it attempts to bridge the divides. Recognizing societal faults, so that we address the issues before it becomes "much too late" (206), is imperative to progressing society.
Among the gender and racial turmoil, we forget about the increasing class division. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the necessary dialogue needed to correct racism and sexism: The Bluest Eye proves that we have grown so used to those societal toxins. While we still need to address a spectrum of issues regarding racism and sexism, the modern-day wealthy inequality and class as a result of unchecked capitalism needs to be added to the conversation.
I do think that I'll enjoy studying Modernism, mostly because it gives me an excuse to be angry about societal flaws. In a way, it'll provide me a healthy psychiatric outlet to express my thoughts on the top one-tenth of one percent (spoken like a true Berniecrat). What can I say, I like being angry.

Thank You Trump

I'm thankful for Trump.
He has demonstrated that the "roots" of our country- unification, acceptance, equality- have "grown accustomed to the poison" that allows for racial and socioeconomic chasms. He has revealed that as a country, we have work to do to rectify our giant leap backwards. On November 8th, we validated racism, Islamophobia, homophobia, bigotry, and sexism. I cried tears of red, white, and blue, but they weren't for me. They were for minorities, Muslims, the LGBT community, and immigrants- those who are equally protected under our Constitution.
I'm thankful for Trump.
He has shown that people have stopped listening to each other. In a time of anger and confusion in our political atmosphere, it's crucial that we take the time to listen to the opposing side because our country is truly stronger together. No, not all liberals are abortion-loving, tree-hugging, and stoned hippies. No, not all conservatives are uneducated, incestual, white rednecks. Years of political divide and fearful, angry political rhetoric have given rise to extremism on both sides of the political spectrum- Trump being a direct result of that.

While those on the Right have launched attacks on minorities, Muslims, the LGBT community, and immigrants, those on the Left have, admittedly, launched attacks on the white man. I declare, as a concession on behalf of liberals, the white man is not the common enemy. He never was. He is only a physical representation of an imperialistic and broken system that "created the situation" of equal rights to be unequally granted.
Though November 8th will have a disappointing stain on world history, it exposes our country's superficial progress in the acceptance of all people. This is a wake-up call for many, but we're prepared to be the catalyst for uprooting injustices in all aspects of life to preserve the idea that all people are created equal.

The Thing to Fear

Growing up, it was easy to see definitive physical differences between my classmates and me. It was difficult, however, to discriminate and alienate classmates based on these differences, an action which seemingly grew easier for everyone through time. In elementary school, skin color, hair color, and gender didn't decide who I became friends with or who I talked to. As we grew older, we allowed these differences to form societal cliques, and it was easy to label others based on physical attributes: nerds, Asians, jocks, the "popular" ones. The desire to want to seem "cool" or to fit in with "popular" people seemed almost an innocent, childlike act at the time. With the passage of time, however, this desire grows into an unhealthy adult obsession to attain beauty ideals established by a broken and enabling society and reinforced by repetitive images present in "every billboard, every movie, every glance" (39).

In The Bluest Eye,Claudia realizes that her enemies are not "the Maureen Peals of the world" (74); rather, they are the those who decide what constitutes beauty and who insinuate these beauty ideals. The aggressor and "the thing to fear"(74), therefore, would mainly be society. In most cases, it's easy to blame society for the wrongs that need to be written right. In doing so, we remove any intimacy and responsibility from taking part in perpetuating societal standards. Furthermore, simply placing the blame on society does nothing in light of progressing solutions to the longstanding beauty ideals. Therefore, it is incumbent upon all of us, regardless of race or gender, to abandon and stop consuming society's standards.

Plastic (Role) Models?

Barbie's life in plastic does seem rather fantastic; she has access to a limitless wardrobe, a lavish mansion complete with an elevator, and a dashing sports car (obviously in all pink). Not to mention, she has "her giant breasts and high-heeled feet" to look good for all the Kens in her world (354). Who wouldn't want breasts "so out of proportion" you would "fall flat on [your] face" (353)? Sounds to me like a once-upon-a-time fantasy without a happily ever after.

In today's society, these "twisted" ideals of women are subliminally incorporated into our culture: they're present in our music, our advertisements, and the list goes on. Women, therefore, are caught in a paradox. They are reminded of striving towards these unattainable, oversexualized, and rather plastic, features while being told that wearing revealing clothing is skimpy and having such features warrants being labelled a whore, a slut. However, being too covered up warrants being labelled an uptight Jesus-fanatic hag.

At a time like this, it seems almost crucial that everyone examines the true rhetoric of the feminist movement. The movement is about the "social, political, and economic equality for both sexes," as quoted by notable feminist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. These ideals can only be met with cooperation between both sexes in smashing down gender roles, with the enthusiasm of Beyonce smashing down windows.

As a society, we create unrealistic beauty ideals for women. Such that when women do fit the plastic mold, we act as if we're seeing pink elephants. Barbie can no longer be seen as a role model for children to aspire to be. Rather, she is a model for the patriarchy's fantasy, of which shall never have once upon a times or happily ever afters.

Is Race A Social Construct?

Plain and simply, I do not think race is socially constructed. The stigmas and stereotypes that revolve around race, indeed, are social constructs, but race itself is not.
To begin with, dictionary.com defines race, among other definitions, as "a human population partially isolated reproductively from other populations, whose members share a greater degree of physical and genetic similarity with one another than with other humans." Humans are given a set of genes that characterize individuals; they define skin color, hair color, eye color, bone structure, height, blood type etc. When a collection of people within a geographic region share similar physical characteristics, it is defined as a "race."
Some may argue that genetic variance among humans are minuscule; scientists have discovered that humans may only genetically differ by 0.1%. However, the genetic difference between humans and chimps is only 1.2%, and it goes without saying that there is a great disparity in physical appearance between humans and chimps. Point is, what seems to be minute genetic variance actually results in major physical differences, and it allows for the categorization of humans into subgroups based solely on physical characteristics. This plain categorization is purely objective.

When we base race purely on genetic variance and the resulting phenotypes, we remove all social implications and connotations associated with individual races. When we place race in context of society, however, stereotypes and stigmas form- it is these that are social constructs. Throughout history, race has been used to alienate, to segregate, and to discriminate groups of people. As demonstrated in the graphic novel Maus, Adolf Hitler subverts an entire population, claiming that "the Jews are undoubtedly a race, but they are not human." This history has led us to, at the present time, doubt race classifications of people based on physical appearance. While society is moving away from generalizing groups of people, it is worth distinguishing the difference between race and the connotations that come with race. As quoted by Will McAvoy in the TV series The Newsroom,"the first step in solving any problem is recognizing there is one." There exists a problem in the social constructs based on race, not in race itself. Race does not define any individual. People should, therefore, embrace their race, not the socially constructed connotations that are paired with it, as a biological component of their complex individuality.

Maus Analysis

At first glance, the graphic novel Maus has the characteristics of any other comic- speech bubbles, comic sans font, detailed graphics, animal characters, etc. Upon further review, however, Maus is anything but a conventional entertaining comic. Through the combination of pictures and words, Art Spiegelman attempts to represent the events and magnitude of the Holocaust, a feat that would otherwise be unattainable through the explicit use of words.
Art expertly implements many graphical techniques and literary devices to create layers of deeper meaning, specifically on page 59. At the very top of the page, the Jewish mice are lined up in front of the Nazi cats. The particular shading of the mice's uniforms mirror that of a prisoner outfit. This suggests that in the shadow of the Nazis, the Jews are always prisoners, a theme that recurs throughout the novel. However, it is worth noting that the Nazis are also shaded in this particular way. Perhaps the individual soldiers are prisoner to the entire Holocaust movement as they enact orders from officers above them in rank.
Below the top panel, Vladek notes that the Nazis "did everything very [systematically]." The organization of the individual panels illustrating Valdek's interaction with the Nazi mirrors that statement. Unlike other pages, the panels are of the same size. This accentuates the order with which the Nazis carried out their actions.
As the panels switch back from past the present, Art is demonstrated to be smoking, and the rising smoke acts as a physical separation between Art and his father. This represents the separation in experiences of the Holocaust between father and son; no matter what, Art will never fully be able to comprehend the magnitude of his father's experience in the Holocaust. Furthermore, the "panels" illustrating the past have no physical border unlike the panels illustrating the past. The present "panels" are encompassed by the panels describing the past, suggesting that both Vladek and Art are engulfed by the past, and both are unable to escape from it.
(Please enjoy this gif of Beyonce dancing. I only say this because I literally can't relate Maus and Beyonce, but every post needs her blessing.)

Gender Equality

From birth, gender norms are forced upon us. At the hospitals, girls are wrapped in pink blankets and guys are wrapped in blue blankets. As we grow up, we learn that pink is a flowery feminine color and that blue is a firm masculine color. Girls are "compelled to do housework," and society establishes that though it is the norm for girls to do housework, it is seen as "demeaning and degrading" (hooks 105). Guys are expected to be the physically strong money-makers so that they can "be the man" in the family and protect the dainty girl.
In the words of prominent feminist and social activist bell hooks, the "feminist movement will be sustained only if the needs of masses of women are addressed." It is evident, however, that gender stereotypes are equally damaging to both genders, and it is the role of the constantly evolving feminist movement to address the double standards that exist for both genders in multiple aspects of life.

1) Bossy versus Boss
While guys are generally encouraged to be direct and commanding, as society views these traits as integral to effective leadership and CEO material, girls are discouraged from doing the same because they will come off as bossy or bratty, and we all know girls can't be CEOs, right? And if guys aren't able to be direct and commanding, they will come off as being a submissive push-over.

2) Beauty Standards
The current feminist movement does well in addressing the unrealistic body expectations of females. Society imposes "the perfect body" as skinny with certain accentuated sexual features. The current feminist movement, however, does not also address the over sexualized body images of men in many advertisements, presenting them as very apparently chiseled and muscular figures.

The above examples are just a sliver of the countless gender expectations imposed on both males and females. The emergence of the feminist movement in the 60s served to counter gender inequalities. At that time, the disparity between males and females was much greater than it is today, and the purpose of the feminist movement was to address the female perspective of these inequalities. However, with an evolving society that imposes gender norms, the "future feminist movement will be sustained only if the needs" of both men and women are addressed (hooks 107).

Morality in Government

As a child, I went to church every Sunday. I sang hymns and read verses of the Bible. I believed everything that was spoon-fed to me, and, in the words of transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau, "they [forced] me to become like themselves." Perhaps I lost sight of the meaning of Christianity, but what has disturbed me the most about going to church was the fact that, at least in the way I was taught, I was supposed to live my life a certain way because God, a character that seemed so distant from me, willed it and because I was told so by my pastor.

Now, a few Sundays spent sleeping in later, I believe that, with the influence of Thoreau's writing, insinuating one's morals and beliefs on another is unnatural and damaging. No one person has the right to claim his/her standards and morals are more righteous than another. For instance, one society may view homosexuality as a sin while another may view it as a natural sexual preference. However, there is no telling which society is the more 'righteous' one because each respective society views its belief as the 'correct' one.

In modern American democracy, the role of the government is to pass and enact laws that are meant to keep people within a rigid set of morals that the government sees as righteous. Let me remind you that slavery was legal and same-sex marriage was illegal until the summer of 2015. This gives testimony to the fact that standard morals are subjective and continuously changing with evolving societies and that 'unrighteous' laws are intrinsic in our patchy legal code.

Disclaimer: To begin with, I do think disclaimers will be a staple in my posts since they cover generally controversial topics. I do not mean to attack the idea/existence of religion nor its believers. Following a religion, at least in my experience, requires a commendable amount of persistence and faith.

Racial Equality

In the midst of all the chaos and confusion between unarmed African-American men and our highly militarized cops, the all too familiar conversation arises:

"Black lives matter!"
"No, all lives matter!"

Often, the meaning of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement gets distorted by media outlets that set forth a specific political agenda or by people who hold a certain political bias. At the very core, the BLM movement is about addressing the disproportionate killings and incarceration of specifically African-American men.

Racial disparities sentences is what allows an affluent white man to be sentenced to only three months in jail for rape and a low-income black man to be sentenced five years for the same crime. In addressing racial disparities in arrests for possession of marijuana, a case-study conducted by the American Civil Liberties Union states that "in 2010, nationwide the white arrest rate was 192 per 100,000 whites, and the black arrest rate was 716 per 100,000 blacks."
This is why we say Black Lives Matter.*
And when we do say Black Lives Matter, we don't mean black lives are the only lives the matter. Yes, we know that all lives matter, however all lives will matter when black lives do. The movement is not one of exclusion. Rather, it is one of addressing injustices in one particular case, and that's not to say the injustices don't exist elsewhere.
As explained by a Reddit user, "imagine that you're sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say 'I should get my fair share.' And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, 'everyone should get their fair share.' Now, that's a wonderful sentiment -- indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also." Similarly, by saying "All lives matter" in response to "Black Lives Matter", one is ignoring and not accurately addressing the existential injustices against African-American citizens.
This is why we protest.*
The controversial killings of Mike Brown, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, and Tamir Rice, among others, has led to the violent outbreaks in many cities around the United States. As a result, the BLM movement has received mixed feelings of discontent and criticism. Surely, non-violent approaches to protest racial inequalities would be more effective and receive much more positive responses, right? As shown by the reactions to Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the national anthem, it becomes evident that there's no right way to fight for racial equality without treading on people's pride and views of patriotism. Though, as the author of The Partly Cloudy Patriot finely describes, "the true American patriot is by definition skeptical of the government."

*Another disclaimer: I say we to represent the inclusion of all peoples to the BLM movement, but it may seem like I'm taking credit for the actions of the movement. As a result, this blog post will be my tiny contribution to the BLM movement.

Broken Declarations

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
This statement is perhaps the most iconic one in the entirety of the Declaration of Independence, for it well establishes the altruistic intentions of American democracy and the less-discussed hypocrisy of that establishment. While the signers of the Declaration pointed out the unjust actions of an overseas tyrant, they were oblivious to the inequalities present in the newfound nation they declared to be built on equality and democracy. At the time of the Declaration, women were not able to vote or be present at conventions, and African Americans were kept as slaves. I did not know that these "certain unalienable Rights" applied to only the rich white male.

Disclaimer: this post is not to wage war against the original signers of the Declaration nor against rich white men around the world. The original signers were noble, courageous, and sometimes misguided. They were misguided by the patriarchy that existed since ancient times. They were victims of a self-perpetuating societal view that states women and minorities are not equal to the white man. Furthermore, the white man is not necessarily the common enemy. Rather, it is anyone who  insinuates that he/she deserves more rights based on race, gender, religion, sexual preference, and other characteristics that are meant for celebrating individuality, not for causing discrimination.