Cat's Cradle and its Parallel to Postmodernism

         The general meaning of Postmodernism is the search for truth and reason in things.  In Jim Powell’s Postmodernism for Beginner,  it describes how “Modern artists began to look for some internal value that was beyond all the chaos.”  They wanted to see the big picture and then explain things that were first viewed as Chaotic.  In Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut, Postmodernism is prevalent.  At the beginning readers hear some things about Bokonnism.  In the book it explains how, “All of the true things I am about to tell you are harmless lies.” (Vonnegut 10)  This religion serves the people in a couple different ways.  It gives them something to believe and follow but at the same time they don’t have to search for the deeper mean and find truth or reason.  The book claims its made up with lies, this gives the people the justification of believing in a deeper meaning but never having to find the underlining meaning, its all logical.  In the novel, John goes to a laboratory for one of his articles.  He talks to one of the director and finds that the main purpose of the place was to find clarity in things around the world.  He explains how, “Nothing generous about it.  New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth.  The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become.” (Vonnegut 42) Their search is to find the deeper meaning and find knowledge.  This parallels with Postmodernism and the search for truth and reason.  The laboratory doesn’t force its scientist to research what they tell them to, rather the scientist are capable of researching what interests them.  Their main goal is to find knowledge and reason to things that take place around the world.  In their eyes it makes them richer by knowing the truth, similar to Postmodernist believe.

Governments- Passed and Present

In our next essay I think it would be cool to write about a prompt that has to do with analyzing governments and how in Brave New World the government controls the people and how that compares to history as well as other texts.  I would discuss how the government controls everyone by making them happy.  They mind warp them to be satisfied with what their assigned job is.  I would refer to Sir Ken Robinson’s youtube video, describing how the government gives them Soma to concentrate and be happy, he referred to todays world and how we give our children drugs to focus or not be depress, ext. 

            I  would also bring in text about George Orwell’s 1984, and how he envisioned a future controlled by a government.  I would talk about their similarities and how both governments control the way people think as well as having a lower class (prole- 1984, Savages- Brave New World).  I would also talk about their differences, for example how 1984 uses misery and fear, such as the fear of war, to control the people. Brave New World on the other hand uses happiness to control the people. 

            I would also bring in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, written by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, which describes the one day in the life of a Russian prison.  I would tie in how this refers to a real life government.  I would discuss how the government in this novel also tried to control its people, and they did it by taking away people from society and punishing them or killing them.  I would talk about how this could lead up to the future and how it is similar to how in Brave New World they send people they are different from norm to islands where they can live their life out in freedom.  Overall I think it would be a fun essay to write.

A Parallel To Brave New World

Sadly I forgot about the blog so I’m now doing it late.  In Sir Ken Robinson’s Changing Education Paradigms, he touches on a lot of points that Brave New World has.  On one of them he points out how adults and children have come to believe that they are not smart because they don’t match with societies claims as the standards of “smart”.  They thus feel out of place.  This happens in Brave New World.  Barnard is often singled out because he doesn’t look like an Alpha Plus.  Because he is so different, over time he has become more and more separated form society.  He began to think differently because he wasn’t accepted by society.  Barnard makes the comment, “the sight of her transfigured face was at once an accusation and an ironical reminder of his own separateness.” (Huxley 86)  Because he is not excepted by society he is singled out and is made to feel out of place and odd.  Both societies have forced their expectations on the people, when they don’t make the “grade” they are then left out and excluded.   Robinson compares schools to factory lines.  There is sector for each thing and the children get passed down the line from one thing to the next to “learn”.  This is very similar to Brave New World, where children are created in an assembly line and are moved from one area to the next as they get older,  “opening an isolated door he showed them racks upon racks of numbered test-tubes.” (Huxley 5)  In these racks are embryos, right from birth they are grouped in sections and move from one place to the next.  They are only seen as numbers, not real people.  Both societies have kids coming out in batches, there is no individuality.  Robinson say’s that through all this factory system that happens at the school, the children loose their divergent thinking skills.  Divergent thinking, for him, is seeing a lot of possibilities to one question.  Kids are taught to follow a certain way of thinking and problem solving.  By doing this, the school is punishing “wrong” ways of answering or seeing things.  The school verdicts what is right and what is considered wrong.  In Brave New World, they teach the children by repeating things to them in their sleep.  Over time they stop questioning things, they just repeat what they had heard from the recorder, even if they have no idea what it means.  Overall our school system is moving closer and closer to Brave New Worlds society.  The school has assumed the power to verdict how children should think and process things, similar to Brave New Worlds society.

Brave New World- Manipulation

                 In Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, Mustapha Mond in the third chapter says, "Wheels must turn steadily, but can not turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as sturdy as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment."  He is referring to society and how a man need to make sure things stay on track so that it doesn’t go off their “axles”.  In his eyes he believes that manipulating and developing people to fit their designed job is the only way to keep the wheels turning.  The people, right at the moment of conception, are developed and trained to fit a certain style of life.  They are trained to be happy in the life they are suppose to life. 

 The Controllers are the men who tend to the wheels.  Society views them as the people who keep the peace, but they are truly the once that are manipulating the people.  They make the past look terrible.  Mustapha Mond describes the past as a appalling, and inhabitable. “Home, home–a few small rooms, stiflingly over-inhabited by a man, by a periodically teeming woman, by a rabble of boys and girls of all ages. No air, no space; an understerilized prison; darkness, disease, and smells.”  Through this description the children believe that they have evolved and are superior to the past.  Yet they were only designed that way.  Through the manipulation of science they were born to be “superior”.  They are then trained and practically brain washed to except any of the ideas the government wants the children to believe in.  They are expected to exert their emotions and feelings through desire, since “every one belongs to every one else”.  It seems outrages for them to have an exclusive relationship with anyone.  Most don’t understand the concept of family and restricting your self off to one person and then having emotional ties to that family. When Lenina tells Fanny that she has only been with Henry Foster for the last couple of months Fanny is in shock.  She believes that isn’t healthy and encourages Lenina to try having other men as well. In Lenina’s society having that “exclusive” relationship with Henry is unnatural and frowned upon.

Imperialism?

In the discussions of the Tempest, one controversial issue has been that is supports imperialism.  In Aime Cesaire’s rewrite a humorous version of the original The Tempest called A Tempest.  He enhances the idea of Imperialism in the play, making Caliban look even worse than what is portrayed in the real play.  Prospero describes him as “a savage… a dumb animal, a beast I educated, trained, dragged up from the bestiality that still clings to you.”  In the Play, Cesaire illustrates how imperialism is such a big part of the play.  On the other hand, George Will in his article Literary politics, expresses how many people read to far into literature.  He feels that the tempest doesn’t have anything to do with Imperialism.  He thinks that by people comparing The Tempest to imperialism “critics strip literature of its authority.” (112)  Stephen Greenblatt on the other hand agrees with Aime Cesaire’s view of The Tempest and how it relates to Imperialism.  He feels that the only way to truly understand literature is see how it applies to politics, and what is going on during that time period.  This is the same philosophy he applies to The Tempest, “It is similarly difficult to come to terms with what The Tempest has to teach us about forgiveness, wisdom, and social atonement if we do not also come to terms with its relations to colonialism.” (115)  Overall I agree with Greenblatt and Cesaire.  Imperialism did play a part in The Tempest whether we want to acknowledge it or not.  Imperialism was prominent during that time period and it is understandable that even Shakespeare was affected by it. I understand what George Will is saying.  I often feel that some people look to far into literature to get its meaning, but for me The Tempest had a strong pull toward Imperialism. 

Balance

Both George Will and Stephen Greenblatt take radical views on literature and how people should interpret it.  Will opposes the ideology that “all literature is, whether writers are conscious of it or not, political.” (111)  He explains how “this ideology radically devalues authors and elevates the ideologists-the critics- as indispensable decoders of literature”(111).  He feels that by people “deconstructing” authors works they loose sight of what the author was actually trying to explain and then use it as their own political weapon. Overall “critics strip literature of its authority.” (112)

In rebut to Will’s article Literary politics, Stephen Greenblatt explains how analyzing what politically is going on in that time period can aid in the reading and interpretation of the authors work.  Greeblatt sees “art” as “not cement.  It is mobile, complex, elusive, disturbing.” (115)  Greenblatt feels that every angle should be interpreted and that we need to interpret the basics of the literature to be able to understand deeper aspects of the literature.  “It is similarly difficult to come to terms with what The Tempest has to teach us about forgiveness, wisdom, and social atonement if we do not also come to terms with its relations to colonialism.” (115)

I think both sides have good arguments, but I feel that you need to mix both aspects together to create a balanced idea.  I often feel that people dive to deep into the analysis of a certain literature, and then apply ideas that didn’t even exist during the authors time period.  I believe authors express underlying issues in their work that could be politically relevant to their time period.  For example, Native Son, written by Richard Wright, portrays the harsh reality of a teenage African American living in the ghetto during the 1930s.  Wright wrote this during the 1940s when African American’s were being discriminated against, I believe he was trying to make a statement on how African Americans were treated and show how society pushed them to do certain things.  So overall I think it’s important to know when literature was written and the political and social status of the time, that way you came make a balanced analysis.

Caliban

In Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Caliban is mistreated because he is native to the island and different. When Trinculo and Stephano meet Caliban on the island, they act disgusted just at the sight of him.  Because Caliban doesn’t look like them they immediately infer that he is not as civilized as they are.  Stephano mocks Caliban by saying, “Do you put tricks upon ’s with savages and men of Ind, ha?” (Act 2, Scene 2) (Are you playing tricks on me by showing me savages and uncivilized men from the Indies, ha?).    In Charles Bressler's Literarcy Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice), he explains how it is “the assumption that Western Europeans, and, in particular, the British people, were biologically superior to any other race- a term for class of people based on physical, cultural distinctions, or both”.  When the British met races different from their own, they assume that they are not as civilized as they are, and thus feel the obligation of colonizing the area and civilizing the people. In the Tempest, Prospero, Trinculo, and Stephano take advantage of Caliban and view him as a “monster” and “savage”.  They take advantage of his knowledge of the land and then use him as a slave. 

Shakespeare portrays Caliban in a negative light.  Caliban comes across as gullible, uncivilized, and savage.  Caliban is ignorant of humans, and when he meets Stephano and tastes his alcohol he falls to his knees worshipping Stephano.  He sees him as a God and wants to serve him.  Shakespeare in some ways has justified colonization, by showing how easily susceptible Caliban is to Stephano’s alcohol.  This shows Caliban is uncultured, and trusting.  In the video called, How Hollywood Stereotyped the Native Americans, it shows how the Native Americans were portrayed as savages and monsters.  This is very similar to how Caliban was shown.  He looked and behaved differently than the whites.  To Stephano and Trinculo he was a monster.  Hollywood promoted the white image even though the White’s were the ones taking the land of the Native Americans and were killing the people, but Hollywood knew that their audience was primarily white.  In the same way, Shakespeare’s The Tempest was directed toward the British audience. Both were promoting their own culture rather than telling the truth.

The Tempest- Act 1

Prospero manipulates his past history so that the wrongs that were done against him seem outrages. He exaggerates his story to his daughter to get her sympathy from her. He refers to his brother by saying, “that a brother should be so perfidious!” Acting disgusted by his brother’s antics. He then goes on to say that he gave his undying trust to his brother, “As my trust was, which had indeed no limit, a confidence sans bound.” He paints him self in the light that he didn’t possibly do anything wrong and that his good intentions were turned against him by his brother. By getting the sympathy from his daughter he can control her and how she views him. He uses this same type of technique with Ariel and Caliban. When Ariel tries to ask about her freedom, Prospero gets angry and uses the guilt from her past to persuade her that he is doing a honorable thing by “helping” her out. He emphasizes on how bad her treatment was by saying, “To lay upon the damned, which Sycorax could not again undo. It was mine art”. He explains how he was the only one that could free her. By reminding Ariel how terrible her torture was, and by showing how kind it was that he saved her, he is able to get Ariel to be submissive and to obey his orders. Prospero treats Caliban harshly. He constantly reminds Caliban who his mother is “Thou poisonous slave, got by the devil himself upon thy wicked dam, come forth!” By Prospero doing this it’s like he is reminding Caliban constantly how low of a “class” Caliban is in, and how honored he should be to be in front of Prospero. He also guilt’s Prospero in reminding how generous he was to the boy when he first arrived and how Caliban took advantage of that and tried to rape Miranda. Prospero manipulates the people around him by making them feel like they owe Prospero in some way. He often embellishes his stories to enhance his control over the people around him.

How Biased is history?

It was interesting to hear everyone’s comments about the Texas history debate. Somebody brought up the whole idea that there should be a non-biased textbook to help teach the children. In my personal opinions I don’t think it is possible to create non-biased textbook. If their was such a thing the whole book would only be filled with dates. You couldn’t tell how or why certain events took place because you would automatically be putting some biased opinions in there. I think the best way to fix the problem would be to create a textbook that has multiple opinions and views, that way the students could compare all the sides and then develop their own opinions on the subject. Another factor that contributes to this is how the teacher teaches. Just like the textbook issue, teachers are also always going to be biased toward a certain side or point of view. This will influence how the students view things. I think a way to help stop much of this influence on the students is by having the teacher keep an open mind on what there are teaching and state all the views on the subject, that way the students aren’t only exposed to one point of view. For example, I have had a History teacher who was a strong democrat, but he kept an open mind while teaching the students. He didn’t try to persuade his students to think a certain way politically, but rather he taught the information from all aspects and then let the students decide how they felt. I’m not saying that he was never biased, but he did a good job of trying to balance everything out. Overall this is a tough situation to fix but it is also vital that is be correct, because you don’t want the Texas students getting taught a one sided view of American history. The students need to be exposed to all the GOOD and BAD that has happened in American history, this way they can learn from the past and not relive the mistake’s that their forefathers had gone through.

Morro Bay

The coast is my favorite place to go.  My family goes up their all the time because we have a condo up their.  I love taking friends, and getting away frome the heat in the central valley.