Satirical Advertisement

Maus II Review Summary

       A truly powerful piece Maus II, evokes many themes; as shown by the novel and the review I found. The review itself is on the two volumes as a whole, however I believe that the main themes and points made are still relevant and useful for our essays. One of the main issues discussed in the review is of the feeling that Maus puts trying to present the holocaust in the background and that maybe even Spiegelman's discovery of this past is as significant. It also discusses that Maus heavily even primarily describes that "Its primary concern is the imprint of that parental experience...on the children of survivors." It develops the theory that Art's suffering throughout the novel as he discovers the painful and cruel pass and the weight he puts on his shoulders. The review also provides an example which is clarifying of the final scene when Vladek calls Art, Richieu and that "This last slip of the tongue - naming Artie his dead little brother who perished in the Holocaust - attests to the ongoing trauma that never ceases." My favorite quote from the review is that Maus "...bears witness to the process of bearing witness..." and after reading the graphic novel, one realizes it is as much about the effect of the holocaust on Art as it is about its effects on Vladek. It goes even farther to say that Maus more focused on the entire Spiegelman family and that there really is no escape from the holocaust because it not only affected those directly affected but also the subsequent generations. It really focuses and hones in on these subjects and also explores some of Art's own intentions on writing Maus.      

"Cat's Cradle" and Postmodernism

       There is plenty of evidence that Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle is a Postmodernist text; it is a novel that does not conform to the form or beliefs of the many novels that preceded it. In the very first pages of the book itself, without even touching on the novel reveals this partly. To begin, the table of contents reveals that a book of about 290 pages has 125 chapters. If that was not strange enough the words printed almost at the very front of the entire piece is "Nothing in this book is true." These are obviously not the basic constructs of a Modernist text; definitely not following the shape or form of what were considered "ideal" frames for books. But first appearances can be deceiving. However the text proves its Postmodernist intentions. One thing that the novel attacks is religion, specifically Christianity. The main character early on describes himself as "I was a Christian then." as he begins his book of remembrance. Yet he presents himself as a a very un-Christian like soul. He describes how he had "...more than fifty-three women..." and shows absolutely no regret for that in any way. He also reveals himself to be someone so easily swayed by the words of Bokonon and believes that "Live by the foma that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy."; foma being "harmless untruths". I believe Vonnegut is using John and Bokononism as a way to express his overall belief that religion is just that; a series of lies that humans use to justify their lives and provide them comfort. He also satirizes how we look upon religion as in one example, he describes how the people of San Lorenzo have a base they called "Jesus Christ." This is definitely not a part of the Modernist theories and the way he could present such a dark and disturbing view is also different in its presentation. The satirical view of the humans and religion is what makes it a Postmodernist work; and overall a potent one at that.               

Forming "Brave New World" Topic

       Alrighty then, that sure was a happy book huh? Well time to move on then. In my Brave New World essay I want to connect the present day world to the novel and try to discuss how Aldous Huxley predicted some aspects of the future; similar to our 1984 essays in which we had to also connect the novel to the present. I want to say that Brave New World is the direction the world may have actually been headed toward. I want to use primarily as my examples in my argument for the present are Neil Postman's From Technocracy to Technopoly, Sir Ken Robinson's youtube video, and both Brave New World Revisited and a letter to the author George Orwell from Aldous Huxley. Neil Postman's writing describes like the title says our turn from a Technocracy to a Technopoly and will definitely help go over the history Huxley might have been working upon and the efficiency is always being headed towards even to the extremes. I would use the Robinson video as a way to discuss the present day parallels to Brave New World especially that of the educational system and that restriction on curiosity and intrigue. And finally I will use Brave New World Revisited by Huxley to describe what he was doing when he wrote it, some points that he tried to make, and gain an insight into the mind of this writer and hopefully help the stance that I am taking. I also wanted to use Huxley's letter to Orwell because within it Huxley describes his own piece of writing while also complimenting and discussing 1984 which I think is both intriguing and helpful in content. Overall I think these sources will help make a really intriguing essay. Hopefully though I may do a little more research and draw on some more sources preferably on the bio-medicine aspect of the novel. However, I think the choices that have been chosen will suffice and still stay on topic.  

Is an Education Worth It If It Makes You Stupider?

       Well I have watched the video and must say Sir Ken Robinson is absolutely right; but also paints a disturbing picture of what our educational system has become and that it sometimes closely resembles the world of Brave New World. Sir Robinson as a part of his discussion describes the so called "ADHD Epidemic." He tells us that ADHD medication is given out to kids who just can't sit still or concentrate; but why can't they do this. Robinson poses that it is not a legitimate medical reason but that the curriculum and entire learning experience is boring. So what do we do, feed them drugs to calm them down; and stifle their active imaginations at the same time. And well in Brave New World  there is "...always soma, delicious soma, half a gramme for a half-holiday, a gramme for a week-end, two grammes for a trip to the gorgeous East, three for a dark eternity on the moon; returning whence they find themselves on the other side of the crevice, safe on the solid ground of daily labour and distraction..." The people of the novel utterly disappear in this substance and become restrained by it; and of course it sponsored and handed out by the government. The only difference here is that the government knowingly restricts the peoples minds. At another point in his discussion, Robinson also discusses how the schools are now organized on factory lines, we educate children batches, and its as if their "date of manufacture" (age) is most important. In Brave New World, these are things necessary to their world motto is "Community, Identity, Stability." It is scary to see these parallels and we need to find a way to escape the hold of these wrong teachings and ideals hopefully escaping these parallels to Brave New World and hopefully find safety and a different way.         

The Loss of Modern Civilization in Huxley's "Brave New World"

       In this quotation from Mustapha Mond:  "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." the reader is given the uncomfortable feeling of something slightly off. There is an unsettling quality in the words of the Resident Controller of Western Europe, yet that does not stop him from being absolutely correct about how the value system of Brave New World. This is a world which runs on "Community, Identity, and Stability"; everyone has their own place in the world, Alpha pluses at the top and Epsilon minuses at the bottom; and all work and are treated according to their position. And in this world of pleasure run a muck, the only ones who can lead it are the ones not prey to the pleasures; with their goal of maintaining a unified and controlled society.
       Humanity is now under the control of the government and manipulated for their own means. The word "family" is nonexistent in the sense that we have today. "Mother" and "father" are considered "smutty" words. To be a "parent" is to be an outcast. Monogamy is even a foreigner experience than parenthood, and is in fact has disappeared. It is considered normal and appropriate to "'Have somebody else from time to time...'" as opposed to staying with the same person the entire course of a relationship. People are encouraged to act impulsively and that "'Impulse arrested spills over, and the flood is feeling, the flood is passion, the flood is even madness: it depends on the force of the current, the height and strength of the barrier. The unchecked stream flows smoothly down its appointed channels into a calm well-being.'" Feeling is almost nonexistent, as the D.H.C. stated, "No pains been spared to make your lives emotionally easy-to preserve you, so far as that is possible, from having emotions at all." It is a place that is driven by desire and pleasure and in this way this world's people are trapped.     
    

Taking a Stand on Literature

       In the analyzation of literature, especially those of controversy ( really all literature is controversial, I know), such as Shakespeare's The Tempest, one issue has been brought up that is quite serious and the decision on this issue can heavily impact the educational community and the analysis of this play; that is, the issue of whether to judge a piece of literature on at its face value (by what is on the page), or by its history and its context (the story behind the story). On one hand, we have George Will, a political commentator for Newsweek. He sets his  position on the former of the two sides. He believes that people should go on what is presented them on the page and that the over analysis of literature makes "...the literary canon...an instrument of domination..." and "...radically devalues authors..." He thinks that the text itself is the "concrete" that should be tread upon in analysis. Thus something as The Tempest is to be judged primarily or solely on the fantastical revenge story presented. On the other hand, we have Stephen Greenblatt who believes that the historical context is extremely necessary, and in the case of The Tempest, all the stories behind the story makes for a better, more detailed, and righteous analysis of the text. However, my own view has yet to be seen, so thus I have to say that there needs to be a balance been the two because the fact is that both are extremely important for a full analysis; and to find that The Tempest has more to say than the text presents and presents a view on colonialism and its treatments of its victims that was appropriate for the times but considered wrong for the present day. In my analysis I plan on using both arguments to support my thoughts as well as Aime Cesaire's A Tempest because it insinuates Shakespeare's intentions. That's all folks, buenos noches.