A Puzzling Workout

While others might say that having blue eyes shows beauty, Toni Morrison found it almost repulsive when trying to imagine her friend with such a feature. The Bluest Eye tells the story of Pecola who fell victim of racial profiling as she was mocked for traits such as her dark skin. Being rejected by society can have a wide variety of effects on each and every one of us. With the support of family and friends we can learn to cope with this pain; however, lacking this close company can lead us to shrink and become a so-called Lone Ranger. Pecola responded to the fire against her by dreaming and praying for features (blue eyes and blonde hair) which she believed would make her beautiful, allowing her to fit in.

In the introduction of this novel, Toni Morrison talks about self-loathing and breaking under the pressure of rejection. This self-loathing is often a very powerful force and even quite dangerous much like the addictive nature of gambling in a casino. The other extreme of self-loathing is the point at which one just crumbles under the immense hatred steered toward themselves, turning themselves "invisible". Beauty and conformity seem to a central reason many start to loath and hate themselves as they fail to understand that inside them they hold true beauty. 

Although this novel isn't a memoir, it is based on a conversation that Toni Morrison had with a young girl in elementary school. Morrison still incorporates "invented friends, classmates" to create the presence of truth or verisimilitude. It seems as if this novel will address the question of race and beauty, and I am looking forward to reading it.

Race not Race 🏁

When you Google "is race a socially constructed concept?" the most accepted answer appears saying "Race is not Biological. It is a Social Construct" (NY Times). While I agree that society draws the boundaries of where each race starts and ends, doesn't our genetic material make us look they way we do which allows for racial classification? With a term as abstract and controversial as race, there seems to be no one right answer to what the definition of race is.

Our in-class discussion regarding race helped me understand the very fluid nature of race; race changes as time goes on. Many times in history, race was created as a justification as domination. This very fact perfectly shows the changing nature of race. While the whites used skin color to assert dominance over blacks, Hitler and the Jews were both light skinned. So instead Hitler asserted dominance of the "Aryan" race - classifying people with their blond hair and blue eyes. But then what did mean to be a Jew? Not all Jews follow the religion of Judaism, and not all of them have the stereotyped long nose.

When asked what race one identifies with on standardized exams, what is the point if the person answering the question and the person collecting the data think race as totally different things. In my opinion looking at people's race does not provide people with that valuable of information because the term means something to almost every single person; once again it goes back to our discussion of perspective. 

I can safely say after reading Maus, discussing in-class, and writing my blog I am only more confused about what race is. At least one thing seems to be universal about race, and that is that we are all apart of the Human Race.

A Wrong Turn Reading Comics

When I heard that we were going to be reading a comic in class, I was pretty stoked. I myself have fallen into the general assumption that comics are kiddish and full of humor. Boy was I wrong about this. Maus by Art Spiegelman demonstrates the power of using words and pictures together to deliver the tragic and brutal journey of Vladek Spiegelman. Maus effectively merges the past with the present (as seen by page 45 in Volume 1 where Art's body represents the connection between the past and present) and creates the contrast of past and present through the non-linear form. The story is full of symbols and motifs (such as the smoke, swastika, jail cells) which show readers the depth and magnitude of horrific Holocaust.

While reading Volume 2, page 28 (below) really jumped out at me. Within this page we see a huge change in the tone of the piece. It begins with a very gloomy and depressed tone seen with the dejected nature of Vladek who is "worn and shivering and crying a little". Then in box three we see a sense of sarcasm from Vladek as he shows his anger and disappointment for being in such a horrid place. Finally, the last five boxes show hope. Hope and optimism are two words that probably don't come to mind while placed in a such a situation. However, Vladek's inspiration to grind and stay alive was sparked by something as simple as superstition. Vladek from this moment "started to believe" as the "saint" "put another life" into Vladek. This major shift just within one page shows the ability and effectiveness of comics and how Spiegelman is able to use this to convey his dad's story. Another thing that I noticed was how even after the Nazi's had taken everything from Vladek, even his name, giving him a number instead, he still learned how to find hope and believe. The shading on the page helps to trace the motif of order and jail cells as we see the uniform they are all wearing and also the lines in the background. I also found the very first box symbolic. The reference to the chimney traces the motif of smoke for which the ingrained memory in Vladek is the burning of people, while to Artie it is simply just something coming of his cigarette.

Reading Maus has been really enjoyable. Seeing and living the Holocaust in the perspective of a mouse was really interesting. It has also opened my eyes and has shown me the that not all comics are funny and for children. I'm looking forward to reading more of Spiegelman's work. 

Training our Minds

What is freedom? And what is liberation? This week in class we discussed two pieces which only further increased my curiosity to learn the answers to these abstract questions. However, I did learn that these terms not only are widely subject to different perspectives but also the crucial role they play in defining us as human beings. David Foster Wallace's "This is Water" and Bell Hooks' "Rethinking the Nature of Work" both opened my eyes to the strained relationship between people and the world we live in.

Dictionary.com has a whole list of definitions for freedom including "the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint". Wallace also addresses the fact that there are multiple conceptions of freedom which include "the freedom to be lords of our own tiny Wallace also addresses the fact that there are multiple conceptions of freedom which include "the freedom to be lords of our own tiny skull-sized kingdoms". However, he defines "real freedom" to be the ability to control yourself and pay attention to others. A freedom you have to fight yourself to obtain and exercise. This seems contradictory in the sense that you are limiting your own freedom. Wallace points out that it is human nature for people to be self-centered. I feel while people are all capable of caring for others, they definitely don't show it especially after the long and tiring day Wallace mentions.

The other piece, "Rethinking the Nature of Work", questioned the definition of liberation. Bell Hooks talks about how liberation is different for all women. Some women viewed work as liberation because they finally got a chance to get out of the home, while other women "quit working because the work they do is not liberating". Liberation is therefore all a matter of perspective and ideology. When people in general accept loss and take the easy way, they are inevitably risking the chance to reach liberation. So once again, we are stopping ourselves from reaching this liberation.

While trying to wrap my head around the meanings of these two words, I was able to realize that we hold the power within us to control the way we live and act. However not all of us choose to take advantage of this power, limiting us from our own freedom and pursuit for liberation.

"The Race for the White House"

With the 2016 election approaching soon, the question of voting comes up. Henry David Thoreau states "All voting is a sort of gaming... a playing with right and wrong". This statement couldn't be any more accurate for this election; on one hand we have a business man refusing to release his tax returns and on the other hand we a have a former Secretary of State who put the country in danger using a private email server. Whether the next four years are going to be lead by Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump seems to be all up "to the mercy of chance".


Watching the first Presidential Debate I was quite shocked as the to the current state of our Nation. Are people not concerned with this Nation's future? Voter turnout was 55% in the 2012 election. How do people expect their voice to be heard in the government if they aren't even expressing their right to vote. Thinking about it, about a half of the people in this country are choosing the fate for everybody else.

If people get so angered about injustices in our lives, gun violence, or the US's foreign policy, then why don't they go out and try to make a change by voting. Thoreau states "some are petitioning the State to dissolve the Union ... why do they not dissolve it themselves". President Obama also made a similar point during his speech at the Democratic National Convention: "Don't 'Boo', Vote".

This election is already a historic one as we have a female candidate representing one of the two major parties. The issue of equality for blacks seems to be as important as ever. And the threat of foreign nations seems to be intensifying by the day.  With all these major issues it seems crazy that in the end the man or women leading us through this roller coaster might be decided by "chance".