Why does Wright feel gratified after sharing his writing?

he feels gratified because it seems that it is a reoccurence in wrights life that he is inferior, he doesnt understand, or he works to understand the ways of the world and other people by learning. now in this situation, where Wright uses the natural knowledge in him to write a story, he knows more about this than anyone. he has something unique - something he created, some that is all his. where to this girl, she has no idea why he would do such a thing, or what point this story had. but he knows - he is superior. superior in knowledge and superior in understanding. for this, he feels happy. he has accomplished something. 

Wright says it was his ‘cultural heritage’ to dislike Jews. Relate that to his own experiences.

this is a hard one.

wright has grown up receiving different messages his whole life from the environment that he lives in. all affecting the way that he views the world. the short few pages where Wright describes the jews is just an example of one of those views that has been imbedded in him since he was a child. No matter to what extent of how religious the people were - whether it was his Granny or his mom, the majority of people back then were christians. since jews allegedly killed Christ, many people held prejudices against jews. it wasnt that wright had chose to not like jews, that he really hated them for killing christ, but he had been taught even by his mother who throughout the story doesnt seem to be racist, he had been taught by her to not dislike them. to antagonize them and distrust jews was something they were bred from childhood. most parents "generally approved, actively or passively." it was still around this age when Wright had a question, he would askhis mother, or someone close to him to learn the answer. therefore, he being surrounded by this way of distrusting jews, this prejudice, that seemed "the answer." 

Explain Wright's response to his mother's paralysis.

Wright basically goes numb. he shuts down. he doesn't understand to what is going on with her - being what, 10, and seeing his mother nearly dead, not understanding why she cant speak or move. the one constant in his life up until this point in the story is his mother. though he may despise her at times, she has always been there no matter what to care about him and his wellbeing and his morals and to help feed him clothe him shelter him and bath him. he has always had that sense of just a bit of familiarity and family and warmth. but when his mother is nearly dead, when her presence of her challenging him, beating him, teaching him, and taking care of him is not there, part of that warmth is lost. he is more alone than he has ever been. there is a large turning point in the development of Wright - he says in the story "I went through the days with a stunned consciousness, unable to believe what had happened...The utter loneliness was now terrifying.i had been suddenly thrown emotionally upon my own. within an hour the half- friendly world that i had known had turned cold and hostile. i was too frightened to weep...Though i was a child,i could no longer feel as a child, could no longer react as a child. The desire for play was gone and i brooded." something has died in him - and later we see that once he moves in and is surrounded by his family, particularly in Jackson, he is alone. these people dont understand him. and he is able to in some ways fill that gap of his mother with boys his own age - with loyalty and gangs that imbed racial tension. 

Why was Wright so hungry?

Well, this question can be answered in both a very literal sense and a metaphorical sense. in a literal sense, Wright was naturally hungry because of his fathers leaving the household. and since his father was the one to bring home the money therefore the food, he no longer has food. his mother consistently worked long hours just to put food on the table, but being a black cook in a white household during that time period does earn much, let alone to feed three children. wright was hungry - always hungry. hungry after his father left, hungry at the orphanage, hungry on the streets. it seems that since the beginning of the book, wright has always been unsatisfied in some way, like there is a part of him that has always been imprisoned due to the response of his surroundings. hiding under the burning house, he just yearns to run away or never be found again terrified of being beaten. he yearns for freedom. once moving into the city, we see that he just yearns to be on the same level as his father, to "show him." he yearns to have all the knowledge of the city. he yearns to run away from the orphanage - he wants freedom, he wants food, he wants to be fulfilled. all of those yearnings i think can just be a parallel to the emptiness in his stomach. The world around him, his surroundings and his environment - has caused him to feel discontentment in his life that he longs to fill. all the while, he is starving.

What extent do you agree that we don't really need to go to school?

there is an extent that i believe we dont really need to go to school- a lot because i think a lot of the work we do is like gatto said, out of boredom, and a lot of the work that we are given is just busy work or work that requires cramming. and when i cram, i forget. for instance, i have studied so many dates for US history, or so many formulas for pre-calc. i am sure i have forgotten the majority of them, because the reason i memorize them are for the class or that specific test. how many times have we heard the question, when am i EVER going to use this stuff in the real world. though i do believe that at school, by broadening our perspectives, we find out our direction and what we like and what we want to do in school. but i think a lot of the work that is done is out of boredom and what teachers believe they have to do - or what the government thinks kids should know. i learn a lot more in classes like AP english were i get to really talk or listen about things that matter, and hear other peoples perspectives and hear people engaging rather than just bored and doing only to what is expected. in terms of socially, i think school can be both good and bad. i think it is great to meet different kinds of people, and forcing yourself (like in public schools) to be around people that you may not like, have different opinions than you, and who are just completely different people helps understand more of the world, more perspectives, it can also help social awkwardness to have people get used to be around people. but i also think that being forced to be around people can get people in the wrong crowd, or cause people who dont realy know where they fit to sell out or get lost in the social world vs. the academic world. that is exactly how zionsville - my old school seemed to be. that school just seems to be filled with all sorts of social drama and everything is about the social part of school. rarely do i/did i hear about students prime academic focus. homeschooling, i believe can give people maybe a bit more direction and have them focus more on what they want to do and what they like. though it often could cause social awkwardness. just a thought. 

Do you value the nonacademic education you are receiving?

Yes, i believe i do value my nonacademic education - or the nonacademic education i have received since i began school at the Gingerbread pre - school. i value my academic education as well - but that kind of education, for the most part, is just annoying. with that kind of education i certainly have to work and apply myself. i definitely value my academic education, but on a more surface level. on a level where my primary concern is "succeeding" in the real world - getting a good job and making a lot of money. i value my nonacademic education much more. and up until now, i havent even really thought about the "nonacademic" education i have consistently received throughout my school years. such as in the media unit we just studied - we were asked to think and observe the world around us. it wasnt so much academic, but more where we became less ignorant and discovered a lot more insight within ourself about the outside world. like mann said, from an early age i have been conditioned through school systems to have morals similar to ones in religion. dont steal. be nice to one another. do your best in school. etc. all of those are conditioned in me. i think the part i like most about school isnt the academic work - i love art and photography and sometimes math - but not because they are academics, but because it requires me to think and interpret and see different perspectives. it allows me to, as Maggie Dooley said, "find my purpose," or what i like. i have learned i like discussions in class- expressing opinions, developing  opinions. i have learned that i HATE writing papers - therefore, i know i wont become a journalist or anything of the sort. so yes, i do value my nonacademic education much more than the actual academic part of it. 

fashion mall vs. castleton

i thought the point that ethan made about the structure, architecture, and the tone of the fashion mall is very interesting. i had never really looked at it that way before or attempted to see the rhetorical message. like ethan said, the fashion mall is a very soft and white toned mall. half of the ceiling are windows allowing the mall to be lit by mostly sunlight instead of florescent overhead lights. the fashion mall also carries really nice stores - and nicer ones just keep coming in. i remember when the mall used to have Claires - which is just a regular cheap jewelry/hair stuff shop. but for some reason, they took Claires out of the mall and now just recently they are/ already have put in Anthropology, Nordstroms, and an Arts Theaters. all these stores, and even an arts theater can typically appeal to the more wealthy type of people. the type of people who go to arts movies and like a quiet atmosphere. the type of people who would rather eat from le petit bistro, panda express, or have frozen yogurt. while castleton mall has much wider hallways to fit a lot more people - more people equals more noise. castleton mall is much bigger and holds much more traditional department stores such as Sears and JCPenny vs. the fashion mall that just got a Sacs 5th Avenue. though castleton and keystone hold a lot of the same stores, castleton does sells a more random, cheaper priced stores. like forever 21, jewelry stores, build a bear, etc. 

response to kendal's presentation - village of west clay baby

well, i thought it was really interesting that Kendal brought up the village of West Clay in her presentation. i had never really thought about the rhetoric message before of this small community. my dad lives in the village of west clay, so i have hands on experience. i remember when the village of west clay was first built - it was completely flat and barren land and then these huge colonial looking houses. and i remember everyone was like, what the hell is going on with this neighborhood? the neighborhood has greatly expanded since then in all directions "spreading this community like tone." like kendal said, the village of west clay attempts to bring you back to how indiana used to be during the colonial ages - the large plantation looking houses really close together. you can just take a walk down the street to go to your dentist, or even your local modeling agency. however, this village of west clay sends the obvious message that this neighborhood isnt just for anyone. it almost seems like if you are a part of this community then you are and you get to share the "warmth" that is attempted to have been created, but if you are not, and if you not elite or appear prestigious and classy, then the village of west clay is not for you. it is obvious that the houses, especially in the front of the neighborhood, are very expensive. it sends the message that they want a certain look - like the brick on super target in carmel. 

Are we de-evolving as human beings?

i have read both Brave New World and 1984. i have also written papers about how the governments in those two societies use pain and hatred vs. happiness and superficial love to control the minds of their population. Though, i have never written a paper about the parallel to our own society. i believe, as Niel Postman and Aldous Huxley do as well, that our society is very much a parallel to that of Brave New World - controlled by technology and manmade inventions and tools to keep everyone filled. just the other night i was out to dinner with a bunch of girls - and i had this moment when i looked at the table and 9 out of the 10 girls had their phone out at the table and were texting someone else in the world. meanwhile, they are all talking and carrying on with their conversation with eachother, but i doubt what they were talking about held very much depth or meaning. i was just at the mall, and i was looking around to see that about half the people in my sight were on cell phones. i dont think cell phones are bad, but the concept of holding a device to your ear talking to someone far away while you are away, conciously distracting yourself from where you actually are and your life in that very moment is pretty interesting. at a click of a button, you are talking to someone in colorado. a click on the television, and you are given a hundred images and briefly updated about the new genocide in Africa. where is the work? it seems that a sense of depth and meaning and thought is slowly being drifted from our world in my opinion. rarely do people sit down and write with their own personal handwriting, their own personal style, and write words to a friend. rarely to people sit down and read or think about what is going in Darfur - only images. rarely is our society challenged anymore. everything is at a click of a button, and immediately a human being's natural emptiness can temporarily be filled. and i am guilty of this as well considering i am attached to my cell phone and i love texting and constantly being entertained or filled up by my phones activity. i feel naked without my phone around me. shouldnt i be okay without any technology like that? that's how it was in the past - where men and women could just walk around, go in nature, go fishing - without any connection to the world besides locally or through words and letters. i believe there is much more thought and depth in that sort of lifestyle. it requires patience and self-control. it requires the patience to sit and learn as well, to understand. so yes, i do think that we are de-evolving as human beings. 

advertisement commercials!!!

i thought that the commercial for the iBall was highly entertaining and effective. i liked the "infomercialish" aspect of it combined with Brittany's hilarious enthusiasm. This group was very creative in terms of the name of their product - the iBall and even what their product was. This commercial did a great job with demonstrating that no matter how ridiculous the product is that they are selling (because obviously the iBall cannot REALLY make people look awake when they are asleep because it doesnt look like their real eyes obviously), they can still make a great commercial and make the consumers actually want to buy it. A bunch of different scenarios were portrayed to the audience of when this product could be used - whether you're in class bored, with you're friends, needing to act like you're reading a book - anytime, you can use this product. the humor of the commercial made it really entertaining and interesting - kept me engaged. Maggie was really funny wearing the iBall but really acting asleep. i just thought it was really well-thought out and used a lot of "commercial" aspects to sell their product, even if it is completely ridiculous. good job!

Pottery Barn Article Response

After reading this article about Pottery Barn, I am fascinated. I now realize how much thought and how many components are put into the message that Pottery Barn wants to send. What's cool about reading this article is that it makes sense of my world and my view of this store, because I have always loved it and been incredibly envious of all the super cool stuff in the magazines. And this article has truth: Pottery Barn does sell a lifestyle. It appeals greatly to the emotion of the consumer. Yes, there is an incredible amount of logic behind their advertising and the convenient household objects/furniture that they design. But i think the most important thing they do is appeal to the emotion. Pottery Barn rhetorically sells comfort, it sells ease and a simple lifestyle, it sells style but also home. I believe Tejada said they focus on five things - it has to look good, and not be too cutting edge. it has to look directional - like it is new and clean cut. the texture has to be fitting and good. it must be high quality, and it must be durable. pottery barn is expensive, but what the style that they sell can often look much more expensive than it is. They just came out with this new catalog that is sitting on my kitchen counter with the theme of green. and somehow, they still have more and more new and inspirational ideas. and i was getting so jealous - i just wanted to live in a house like that. the organization, the soothing color mixtures, the simplicity and comfort - i wanted it all. everything looks homey yet directional. my point is in this blog is to convey that pottery barn grasps emotion. the company seems to understand their consumers and relate to them. that way they can create something that they know another human being would want. and they totally wrapped me into all of that!

Abercrombie and Fitch

Explain the way in which the environment of a store you frequent tries to influence you.

When i was in middle school and early highschool, i was obsessed with Abercrombie and Fitch. My parents hated that store though because of the way they advertised as well as the really loud music they play in the store. The store itself is set in blue or dark tones, which are colors that set a "chill" or cool tone. On the walls are black and white pictures of half naked teens. Most of these half -naked teens have perfectly sculpted bodies and are highly attractive. The way young men or women are portrayed in Abercrombie advertisements can certainly be a reference for Kilbourne's article. I believe it was winter of a couple years ago (they may actually still do this) when everyday around the Christmas season, a male Abercrombie model would stand just in the door way of Abercrombie and Fitch in just Christmas boxers. And of course, he had a perfectly toned body. It sounds ridiculous typing it out, but it is a clear clear example of what Kilbourne was talking about. How does this influence consumers to buy their product? First of all, it would most likely draw the attention to especially young teen girls, who this form of advertisement is appealing to anyways. The shock value is high. But more than that, Abercrombie and Fitch seems to always, without saying it, sells attraction. If you wear Abercrombie, you are attractive. You are cool. I have also heard rumors that Abercrombie does  not hire employees who are unattractive, or who do not sell "cool." Well who says what is cool? I am not sure exactly how to answer that. It evidently has to do with the way society transitions from decade to decade, and what as a whole is defined as cool. Loud music, as Abercrombie consistently plays, is often seen as being hardcore or cool. When I am in the mall, I can always hear music from Abercrombie like five stores down. Loud music is also often associated with teens. And teens are exactly who Abercrombie and Fitch is trying to attract. The blues, browns, and dark tones sell the cool chill feeling. But i believe that sex is a key way for Abercrombie and Fitch to influence their consumers. Sex, looks, attraction -> the store is filled with that. and it makes the consumer want to look and feel like that. And how can they do that? Well, they buy Abercrombie and Fitch merchandise, of course!

wednesday class discussion

on tuesday night, my english book had not come yet, so i did not read the article by Kilbourne. but that didnt stop me from participating in the discussion! so, basically the discussion was about the effect that ads have on society, particularly ads of objectifying women, whether it is right or not, and if there could be a solution to this problem. a lot of people talked about if they dont believe the ad is right, then they wont buy their product, but another point that was brought up, which i believe in as well, that the problem really cant be solved just by one person unfortunately. the problem is in society today - that it is okay to sell yourself through ads, to in particular make women sex objects in order to sell a product. not saying that sex is bad by any means, but the way that ads portray women affects the way that society views women. meaning that in regular society - women are often viewed as inferior or sex objects to men. the issue came up in the class that this happens to men as well, which is entirely true that men are often objectified the same way women are in ads. but in truth, this happens to women much more, plus the topic of the article was more about women. but i thought the discussion was really interesting and there could be plenty of opinions, but sadly, there really was no solution to this problem, just like there was really no solution in kilbourne's article.