From reading this essay, I can tell that Mary Wollstonecraft was a smart lady. Anyone who stands up for their rights, such as she did with women’s rights in a time when women were considered inferior, is okay by me. But, as is with most writing of the time, the language made it a little difficult to get through. My dictionary was a very good friend while reading this, and with the language she used, she even seemed to be contradicting herself at times.
This essay was written as a wake up call to men and women both. Women are capable of doing anything men do. We aren’t meant to just be there to please and obey the men, responding to their every whim. Luckily in modern times most of us know this, but there is still sexism all around the world. It’s even in some traditional wedding vows. To paraphrase, the wife has to vow to obey and submit to her husband, while he doesn’t have to do the same. This is just one example of sexism in the U.S. Some people still don’t think women should have important jobs or hold positions of power. There are cultures where women are thought of as inferior and are even more limited than in Mary Wollstonecraft’s time.
Mary Wollstonecraft’s message is important, but she is far from concise in her language. My aunt went on a tour of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s house, and she told me that the tour guide said the authors of those times were paid by the word, resulting in confusing language. The more words there are, the more they get paid. I don’t know if this is accurate, but it is believable. At times, with Mary Wollstonecraft’s use of language, I was a little confused as to her point. At first she was saying that women were equal, intelligent beings, and then she was saying that women are not equal, intelligent, and perhaps are just as society views them. I had to reread parts of it a few times to realize that she wasn’t actually contradicting herself; she was reprimanding women for not rising above what society thinks of them and for filling the role society set for them just perfectly. The confusion was all in the language.
Mary Wollstonecraft’s spreading of female empowerment was important in 1792. It is still important today and some would do well to remember it. Aside from her language being difficult to read through, her message is still relevant today. She is a good role model for rising above and eliminating prejudice.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Google isn't Responsible for Our Stupidity
When I first read the title of this essay, I could automatically predict the subject matter. It is clear that Nicholas Carr believes that we as a society rely entirely too much on the internet for our information, and that it is detrimental to our intelligence to do so. His argument is well formed, and it made me think about effects the internet has on people that I never really thought of before.
Search engines like Google have made it easy to find information on any topic we want within a few typed words and a couple of clicks. Carr argues that as we use the search engines and quickly skim the websites and articles for a few valuable or interesting sentences, we are on our way to losing our ability to absorb and think in depth about the things we read, especially longer works. He quotes a blogger named Bruce Friedman: “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print…I can’t read War and Peace anymore.”
Well, I think the average person would have a difficult time absorbing War and Peace, not because they can’t or because Google is making them stupid, but because it isn’t interesting enough. I myself have never tried, but anyone who has seen Happy New Year, Charlie Brown! will remember the difficulties he had with it, not making it past the first five pages after trying for his entire winter break.
There’s another thing about skimming the things you read. It is a research technique that is often used to get through vast amounts of material in a short time. You highlight passages you think might be useful and ignore the rest. If you need to, you go back later and read more in depth to catch the things you miss. I don’t think that this practice makes you lose your thinking ability. I think it may be that some people become too lazy to read anything in depth.
That’s the key right there: laziness. The internet is our source for information, communication, news, and pretty much anything else you can think of in these times. Carr says that the internet is actually making us lose our ability to read and think in depth, as in we can’t even if we tried. I don’t entirely agree with this. I think that everyone still has the ability to do those things but become too lazy to do so. So, in my opinion Google isn’t making us stupid. It’s our lack of motivation.
Search engines like Google have made it easy to find information on any topic we want within a few typed words and a couple of clicks. Carr argues that as we use the search engines and quickly skim the websites and articles for a few valuable or interesting sentences, we are on our way to losing our ability to absorb and think in depth about the things we read, especially longer works. He quotes a blogger named Bruce Friedman: “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print…I can’t read War and Peace anymore.”
Well, I think the average person would have a difficult time absorbing War and Peace, not because they can’t or because Google is making them stupid, but because it isn’t interesting enough. I myself have never tried, but anyone who has seen Happy New Year, Charlie Brown! will remember the difficulties he had with it, not making it past the first five pages after trying for his entire winter break.
There’s another thing about skimming the things you read. It is a research technique that is often used to get through vast amounts of material in a short time. You highlight passages you think might be useful and ignore the rest. If you need to, you go back later and read more in depth to catch the things you miss. I don’t think that this practice makes you lose your thinking ability. I think it may be that some people become too lazy to read anything in depth.
That’s the key right there: laziness. The internet is our source for information, communication, news, and pretty much anything else you can think of in these times. Carr says that the internet is actually making us lose our ability to read and think in depth, as in we can’t even if we tried. I don’t entirely agree with this. I think that everyone still has the ability to do those things but become too lazy to do so. So, in my opinion Google isn’t making us stupid. It’s our lack of motivation.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Thoughts on Skunk Dreams
When I first read the title to this essay, I was intrigued, if not a little confused. Skunk Dreams? What could that mean? At least it seemed to carry the promise of being an entertaining read, which it was.
Dreams have always been a topic of interest for me. Why do we dream the things we do? For instance, the author says that "my best dreams come to me in cheap motels," and "cold often brings on the most spectacular of my dreams, as if my brain has been incited to fevered activity." I myself have dreams that can only be described as bizarre quite frequently. There is no dream dictionary complete enough to explain these dreams to me. However, I do like to think that our dreams are our subconscious telling us something, helping us to see something we didn't, and helping us to gain some perspective. I think that's where the phrase "sleep on it" comes from.
I think the point the author is trying to make is that we should try to see things from different perspectives, such as a skunk's, and doing this can help us to overcome our obstacles. We can live a more satisfying life this way. It's what we have to do to make our dreams reality.
Dreams have always been a topic of interest for me. Why do we dream the things we do? For instance, the author says that "my best dreams come to me in cheap motels," and "cold often brings on the most spectacular of my dreams, as if my brain has been incited to fevered activity." I myself have dreams that can only be described as bizarre quite frequently. There is no dream dictionary complete enough to explain these dreams to me. However, I do like to think that our dreams are our subconscious telling us something, helping us to see something we didn't, and helping us to gain some perspective. I think that's where the phrase "sleep on it" comes from.
I think the point the author is trying to make is that we should try to see things from different perspectives, such as a skunk's, and doing this can help us to overcome our obstacles. We can live a more satisfying life this way. It's what we have to do to make our dreams reality.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
The Talk of the Town
Adam Gopnik, when opening his essay on the Virginia Tech shooting, brings forth an image of the phones of the killed students ringing endlessly as the police clear away the bodies. As I'm sure it was meant to do, it really makes you think about the families and friends of victims of shootings, and of the 9/11 attacks, frantically trying to make contact and failing. Of course all of our hearts go out to those people, and we should do what we can to come together as a country; comfort them and help them to heal, to paraphrase Tim Kaine's comment. I think he may be missing part of the point though.
He doesn't want to focus on the politics of the situation; he says he's just thinking about the families. I can't really speak for them, but if I were those families, I would want someone to start making steps to prevent this from happening again. Now. We should all show support by trying to make some changes. I've always supported stricter gun control. Many shootings happen because mentally unstable people with violent tendencies are allowed to purchase a gun. Furthermore, I don't believe there is any real reason for an ordinary citizen to own a gun. Most would say it's for protection, but if we had more restrictive laws, people would feel less of a need to protect themselves with a gun. If we want to prevent these horrible events from repeating, we need to make some of these changes. As Gopnik says, "The point of lawmaking is not to act as precisely as possible, in order to punish the latest crime; it is to act as comprehensively as possible, in order to prevent the next one."
I felt that Susan Sontag's essay was a bit of a complaint piece with a very vauge solution. I agree with her that America isn't OK; everything is not just fine. Everyone can see that, even now. We have a lot of difficult problems to solve and huge messes to clean up as a country. Yes, we should unite and be strong. But, I think a lot of people didn't--and still don't--really know what's going on. Not all sources are reliable, and many people have been misinformed or are simply not paying attention. In any case, many don't really know the reality. Sontag says, "Let's by all means grieve together. But let's not be stupid together." I completely agree with this statement. The question that she has failed to give a complete answer to is: how? How do we get everybody to see the reality? And, how do we do this while still staying united, as we so desperately need to be? Reality is guaranteed to make some people angry or disbelieving. It's something to think about.
He doesn't want to focus on the politics of the situation; he says he's just thinking about the families. I can't really speak for them, but if I were those families, I would want someone to start making steps to prevent this from happening again. Now. We should all show support by trying to make some changes. I've always supported stricter gun control. Many shootings happen because mentally unstable people with violent tendencies are allowed to purchase a gun. Furthermore, I don't believe there is any real reason for an ordinary citizen to own a gun. Most would say it's for protection, but if we had more restrictive laws, people would feel less of a need to protect themselves with a gun. If we want to prevent these horrible events from repeating, we need to make some of these changes. As Gopnik says, "The point of lawmaking is not to act as precisely as possible, in order to punish the latest crime; it is to act as comprehensively as possible, in order to prevent the next one."
I felt that Susan Sontag's essay was a bit of a complaint piece with a very vauge solution. I agree with her that America isn't OK; everything is not just fine. Everyone can see that, even now. We have a lot of difficult problems to solve and huge messes to clean up as a country. Yes, we should unite and be strong. But, I think a lot of people didn't--and still don't--really know what's going on. Not all sources are reliable, and many people have been misinformed or are simply not paying attention. In any case, many don't really know the reality. Sontag says, "Let's by all means grieve together. But let's not be stupid together." I completely agree with this statement. The question that she has failed to give a complete answer to is: how? How do we get everybody to see the reality? And, how do we do this while still staying united, as we so desperately need to be? Reality is guaranteed to make some people angry or disbelieving. It's something to think about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
