It Was Fun

Mrs. Jetski, I found some time to do this now so I'm doing it just for fun, because I am the sort of person that actually really loves awful nostalgic self-reflection. Also sorry if this is completely incoherent; I am currently typing this in Hosking's classroom with about 5.5 hours of sleep under my belt, so this should be good.

I'd like to start this post by explaining an idea that I like, because I think it will help to make it clearer how I think about the past and therefore why I have written what I have in this post. The way I see it, me in the past isn't really me; they're another version of me, like a different person almost. Over time I have grown as a person, and as time goes on I'll continue to change and (hopefully) improve. It's easier to think about this by dividing myself into eras, spans of time at which I can consider myself one version of me. I think part of the reason that I like this idea is that I can distance myself from these previous versions of me, along with all of their flaws and mistakes. Also I just feel like I'm not the same person that I was in middle school or kindergarten or sophomore year, even if those people had some control over who I am today.

As far as senior year goes, it was fun. I felt like I did really well in all aspects of my life. Or maybe not all of them, but I found a balance that I liked. It's almost like all the way back freshman year, when we took Health and we used those health triangle thingies. I hope you guys know what I'm talking about. It had the whole thing with the three sides where it was like your social, mental/emotional, and physical health. I remember learning about that and thinking, "Who even cares about this triangle? I don't even need the social side of this thing whatsoever!" Boy was I stupid. I think that this year, I had a pretty good triangle. If I had to draw it, it'd be something like this:

|\
|  \
|    \
|      \
|        \
|          \
|            \
|              \
_________

Okay so now I gotta explain which sides which cause otherwise that doesn't make any sense. So the bottom is definitely physical (because it's supporting the other two sides #swole). So then the hypotenuse is mental (Mental Hypotenuse would be a good band name) and the tall one is social. Why am I even talking about triangles? Because I'm really proud of how I've changed this triangle since last year. I'd probably say this is what my triangle was at that point:

|*
|           *
|                         *
|                                          *
___________                                      *

See how awful my triangle was? The sides don't even connect, like that can't be very good. Okay so I think I've made my point as far as triangles go.

W A T C H           O U T :                        G O O D           S E G U E           W A R N I N G

Not featured on his iconic segway, Paul Blart
shares a loving moment with his fellow
mall firefighter Adam Sand.

So triangles have three sides, and IB is basically the Illuminati. I think I've actually learned a ton in IB. If I could go back and do high school again, I definitely would still do IB. The thing is, it's hard for me to admit how much I learned, because most of the changes were slow and hard to define in black and white terms. For example, I really like how my opinions on women's rights have changed during IB. The thing is that they didn't really change, but instead I found a solid logical basis on which to support my ideas. This didn't just make me feel better about my ideas, but it also made me care about them more. Like before sophomore year I would've been like, "Yeah women should have the right to get abortions, and yeah the school dress code is obviously biased by the objectification of women." But now I'm like, "Yeah women should have the right to get abortions, and yeah the school dress code is obviously biased by the objectification of women, AND THAT IS SO MESSED UP LIKE AAAAAAARGH WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW!!!!!" And I think that's a better stance, because it means that I care more.

I got to know myself much better through IB too. Through IB Art junior year, I realized I had a passion for journalism, which caused me to write for the Cat Talk this year and has currently put me on a path to study Journalism at UNC! I enjoyed IB Art senior year even more, because I felt like I really began to find my artistic style and voice. I even got to use programming skills to make a couple of really cool 3D game art thingies which was like the funnest thing ever. I just realized, I hope these aren't being graded for proper grammar and spelling and what not because I just said the word "thingies," which unfortunately is the perfect word to describe that concept.

Speaking of English, this year was my favorite English class ever. I looooooooooooooved Never Let Me Go; I really never wanted to let it go. It was so sad but so good at the same time, and I truly cared about the characters. Also, I just want to point out right now that from the second Tommy appears in the book, I thought of him as Aziz Ansari. There is no other way to accurately imagine Tommy, and it is a shame that Garfield stole his role in the movie. I also really enjoyed Handmaid's Tale; it reminded me of 1984 in some ways, but it didn't have as much of the dry, matter-of-fact tone to it that Orwell's works have to them. The Stranger was great because I struggled with trying to conceptualize my counterargument to absurdist literature and existentialism, which I knew I thought was incorrect but had a hard time explaining why. I did end up reading the first part of Kafka's Metamorphosis though, and I really enjoyed it. Absurdist literature is so great because it's very 1st-person oriented and stream of consciousness. I liked ending the year on Leaves of Grass. Whitman's material lined up a lot with things I believe, and it was interesting to see how he expressed himself through poetry. I have a bit of a soft spot for poetry because my grandpa is a poet. Whenever I visit him I usually get to see some spoken poetry which is always really great. Finally, who could forget Macbeth. I mean, I'm Macbeth. The asides were great too, because "it gives you a look into the character's head, and, it allows you to see what they're, planning."

IB Skipping

I'm sorry, I really didn't want to use my freebie on this one, but I didn't leave myself time to do it today. Maybe I'll have time to do it with the B-Dayers just for fun (emphasis on the maybe). In he mean time, I thought I'd share this video as a way to begin wrapping up the year and saying "Goodbye."

The suuuuuuuuun, has gooooooooooone, to bed and so must iiiiI

"I Need To Learn To Read Better"

Walt Whitman notes that this is not only supposed to be "Dialogue between me and 'President elect,'" but also it is "Lessons for a president elect." This implies that Whitman believes that he has experience and ideas that would allow him to help Lincoln make better decisions. The sketches in the middle seem to depict the conversation. I assume that the first two without hats are Whitman, and the next two with hats are Lincoln. However, this may not be the case, as their faces and facial hair are drawn to look very similar. At the end, there is a short poem that ends "the last war." This seems to imply that Whitman believes that the Civil War will end the country as it currently is.

This is a portrait of Abraham Lincoln

I had caught on slightly to Whitman's Ship of Libertad metaphor slightly before I read the notes, but I wasn't sure i I was reading the whole phrase correctly. I like how the ship in the storm an represent so many things at once, between the Civil War, Lincoln's handling of it, and Whitman's getting through it, the storm is a very illustrative metaphor for all three of these. However, the ship itself it elaborated on as a symbol of refuge in a sea of chaos, with the stability of America therefore representing the stability of democracy around the world. I also am glad to know that all of the sketches are in fact of Whitman, and that the portrayal of him as Lincolnesque is purposeful in the last sketch at least.

"Whitman's works influenced this
documentary" is a true statement that
I am actually stating in this blog post
at this very moment

I think that the fact that I can't read cursive very well didn't help with this. I have learned that I need to learn to read better, or I can just rely on images to get information instead.

Putting the REM in american dREaM

As a flag-flying, bald eagle-owning, passport-wielding Merican, the idea of the American Dream is important to me and my life. When I imagine the American Dream as it is presented in our culture, I think of this scene from Little Shop of Horrors.

It's the perfect image for this idea of the American Dream: the house in the suburbs with the nice neat fence and the nice neat grass, the nice happy marriage, and the nice happy life together. This idyllic scene disgusts me. I mean, I'm fine with people living this life if they want to; I have nothing against that. However, it is not the life for me. I see it as being too stable, too boring. I think that this image is not only against my own desires, but it is against the entire idea of the American Dream. In this country, there is a history of valuing the rights and freedoms of people over the simplification of life. Although traditional gender roles simplify life in a way that is comforting to many, civil rights leaders have worked for over the last century to protect the freedom of those that choose not to follow these guidelines for life. I have personally found that the idea of the American Dream is against stability, as it is all about the ability to rise through social classes and change your life for the better. To me, the American Dream is being able to forge your own path in life and to have society's support for your right to do so.

I think of wealth as a form of power. Those who have much wealth have the power to make more stuff happen than people with less wealth. This stuff can be anything, from sending your face to the moon to putting food on the table. Wealth can even be used, and often is used, to gain more wealth. Everyone needs a certain amount of wealth to survive, but often people desire to have as much of it as they can possibly get because it is so useful.

Both in the context that the Great Gatsby was written in and the context I live in today. wealth defines American society. The rags to rises story is highly valued in our society, whether it be the lucky person that wins the lottery or the frugal factory worker that won the lottery of life. However, this dream is less achievable than our culture likes to admit. With rampant income inequality leading to a distressingly large wealth gap, it is increasingly difficult for many to achieve the American Dream. I think that Americans' attitude towards wealth and poverty has some flaws. There is a vocal minority that pushes the idea that those in poverty simply aren't "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps." Most Americans seem to realize that this isn't the case, and systemic factors lead to many Americans being unable to realize the American Dream. However, it seems to me that the majority of Americans think of wealth as being earned. There is an assumption that people get paid more if they work harder, which is obviously not the case in North Carolina. Americans tend to find wealth to be a goal in life, although occasionally those who have it are vilified (I would argue often justifiably).

Growing up in the United States and in a position where I have not had to experience poverty has influenced my feeling on wealth. In the U.S., people don't like to talk much about money. It's rude to ask someone their salary, while in Chinese culture asking someone's salary is much more socially acceptable. I don't like the idea of talking about money, and I think I'd share Nick Carraway's belief that excessive wealth is something to be ashamed of rather than flaunted. I think that these feelings show a desire to reach a point at which there is equality of opportunity in our society. However, I think that, when applied to society as a whole, these principles can be more destructive than helpful. By not discussing wealth directly, and with wealthier individuals actively trying to hide their wealth, it makes it more difficult to identify that problems with wealth even exist. Although being able to have some wealth is a part of the American Dream, I think that excessive wealth helps to destroy it for others.

Insert Kafka Pun Here

Like Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody and The Stranger by Albert Camus, Metamorphosis explores the absurdity of existence and the conflict posed by tragic circumstances. After turning into a large, insectesque figure, Gregor Samsa is isolated from his family and work. I like to think that Kafka uses this physical change as a metaphor for the difficulty of communication with others that he may have felt after confronting the absurdity of existence. I imagine that Meursault may have felt like a cockroach, being looked down on with fear and disgust by society and being unable to get others to understand his philosophy. However, another layer is added to the difficulty of communicating ideas by the fact that I have to read Kafka' work in English, translated from the original German. Here is what I think of some of the translation of the first lines of Metamorphosis.

Notes

#1: As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.

• Has a matter-of-fact feel to it due to the lack of punctuation despite the fact that a comma could be added after "dreams"
• "Gigantic" feels formal compared to the other word choices
• "As George Samsa awoke" Is a process and a dependent clause; not the most important part of the sentence and occurring as an experience
• "Uneasy dreams" implies oddness and irregularity, something that would make one feel sick

#2: Gregory Samsa woke from uneasy dreams one morning to find himself changed into a giant bug.

• Has a matter-of-fact feel to it due to the lack of punctuation despite the fact that a comma could be added after "dreams"
• "Giant" and "changed" feel too simple, especially with the word "uneasy" being used
• "Gregory Samsa awoke" isn't a process but rather an event, and is also an independent clause, emphasizing the idea of him waking and making the metamorphosis secondary
• Doesn't tell that Samsa is in his bed, making the scene painted less clear

#3: When Gregor Samsa awoke from troubled dreams one morning he found he had been transformed in his bed into an enormous bug.

#tfw you get changed into something enormous

• Lack of punctuation although it could be added after "morning"
• "Enormous" has a child-like feel to it, like something Roald Dahl would write
• "When George Samsa awoke" is an event, an instant in time, but it is not an independent clause, making it less important than him finding himself
• "Troubled dreams" sound lightly burdensome as opposed to sickening, implies negativity rather than irregularity

#4:One morning, upon awakening from agitated dreams, Gregor Samsa found himself, in his bed, transformed into a monstrous vermin.

• Uses much punctuation, creating a broken feeling, as if the narrator is meandering towards the inevitable reveal
• "Monstrous vermin" feels strange of Samsa to think of himself, especially considering his nonchalant attitude through the rest of the novel (or at least Part 1) about his condition
• "Upon awakening" is not even at the beginning of the sentence, making Samsa's experience of consciousness of even less importance
• "Agitated" and "monstrous" imply that the change was negative, although agitated can be seen as describing Samsa experience of discomfort during his sleep rather than a negative aspect to the change itself

Overall Analysis

The wording of each translation has a large effect on how Samsa's experience of life is communicated. Syntax and punctuation both affect how the experience of consciousness is communicated. I think that the second translation does the best job in this regard, due to it emphasizing Samsa's waking as an experience and does not interrupt his thought process. The diction and imagery in the translation colors Samsa's perception of the scenario and slightly changes meaning in the sentence. I believe the first quote does the best job with imagery, not coloring Samsa's predicament as negative or necessarily unfortunate. I also like how most of the translations use "he found himself" rather than "he found he had been." I think that finding himself rather than finding an action to him had occurred creates a better sense of his experience, describing the strange nature of gaining consciousness and shortly after self-awareness when waking from a dream.

Translation seems incredibly difficult to do. With the different grammatical structures, word connotations and denotations, and cultural contexts that are ingrained within every language, the task of trying to preserve an author's ideas seems almost like trying to recreate an art piece in a new medium. No matter how hard you try, there are going to be differences in your final product that will affect how the piece is interpreted. It makes the idea of even trying to take on translating a novel seem futile. However, between these four translation, I think that I have still been able to understand Kafka's ideas that he was trying to get across through this piece of literature. According to Google Translate, Kafka's writing described Samsa's new form as a "monstrous vermin." However, I think that the choice of most translators to use insect or bug instead better preserves the tone of the sentence, making it more matter-of-fact and indifferent to the peculiar circumstance (one of the many reasons to take Google translate with a grain of salt). Overall, I think that none of these translations was perfect, but all of them add value to the work, doing more than merely translating word for word in order to let us understand Kafka's intentions without knowing his language.

I See IOC Practice

I had to record this twice because I accidentally deleted the first recording, so if it sounds unusually coherent (which it won't), that's why.

(By the way , even though this has nothing to do with the IOC, I just wanted to note that most of the photoshop things in this are manifestations of concepts that were created by my smart peers, and the music at the end is Hall of the Mountain King.)

WELL I'm GLAD I Watched That

Malcolm Gladwell: The unheard story of David and Goliath

In this TED Talk, Malcolm Gladwell tells the story of David and Goliath, adding outside knowledge that can be applied to the story to create a better understanding of the event. His main argument in the talk is that powerful people, or "giants," are not as difficult to overcome as they seem. Gladwell touches the idea of perspective, showing how in the case of David and Goliath, a lack of understanding of the perspective of each of the men makes their actions seem to be motivated by completely different factors than once their perspectives are understood.

Gladwell analyzes the literary devices used in David and Goliath, noting how their subtlety makes the message of the story difficult to understand at first glance. Gladwell analyzes how dialogue contributes to the characterization of both David and Goliath. When offered armor to wear, David said, "I cannot wear this for I have not proved it." This hints at David's plans for combat, as he is an artillery soldier and plans to fight from a distance rather than in hand-to-hand combat. Goliath is characterized from the perspective of the Israelites as a powerful, humongous warrior. However, Goliath's dialogue reveals his weakness: Goliath has very poor vision. Goliath is incredibly vulnerable to long-range combat, so it is to be expected that in this battle, David would be victorious.

Gladwell uses a few techniques to get his audience to believe his interpretation of David and Goliath. Gladwell cites many facts to support his argument, such as the geography of the region, the estimated momentum of the rocks, and the medical diagnoses of Goliath based on the story. This is used both as logos, to be used as evidence to support more general claims, and ethos, to add to the credibility of the argument by pulling evidence from a variety of areas of knowledge. Gladwell also uses logos by the order in which he presents new information. He controls the way in which conclusions are reached, coming to multiple conclusions throughout the talk before reaching the ones that he wants the audience to leave with. This shows the audience that Gladwell put thought into this argument, not simply stopping at the first answer he was able to find. The use of pathos in this talk is minimal, as the purpose of the talk lends itself more to logical deduction and more in-depth understanding of the situation. Emotional words are occasionally used, including "terrifying," "weird," and "strange." These words are used to align the audience with the emotion that Gladwell wants them to feel, in order to make the logical progression of the talk make a larger impression on the audience. These words tend to be used before Gladwell add new information to the situation, making the emotion a signal to the audience that they do not fully understand yet what is actually happening.

I'm not completely sure why I picked this talk, but I'm glad I did. I've read a few of Malcolm Gladwell's books, and I enjoyed the way that he takes issues that seem to have one answer and analyzes them to logically find the answer that better fits the evidence. I was sure that anything involving him would be well thought out and would provide insightful revelations on the topic. I am not a religious person, so the biblical topic of the talk made me slightly nervous. I wasn't sure if most of the talk would go over my head or would focus on theology. However, I was surprised to find that the talk focused mostly on the real-life context of the story, including the culture, politics, and geography of the Levant. I like the message of the talk. I think that people tend to make things supernatural, as if they are too powerful to understand or change. It is nice to have Gladwell remind us that this we should be suspicious of this being the case.