Unanswered Questions

Invisible cities are all around us. This is the point that Italo Calvino emphasizes through his aptly titled Invisible Cities. He makes it clear that every society created, whether fictional or real, is an attempt at the perfect place, a heaven on earth. Waking Life, an entirely different piece, is an animated movie where the main character talks to several people trying to understand our life, the present society, and the nature of things. Though at first they seem to explore different subjects, we soon come to realize that they, in fact, overlap.

Through the course of Waking Life the main character meets a handful of interesting people, all with personal reflections and theories on different aspects of life. One such philosopher is a man in a bar, shown in this picture. Represented in a medium-wide shot that follows the rule of two thirds, the camera is angled at ¾ front and eye level. The composition of this shot helps us do two things: it both identifies us with the man and it makes us pay attention to what he is saying. The background is not distracting, it doesn´t take our attention away from the speaker, and because it is almost like we can look straight into his eyes it does not feel like he is any better than us. If anything, he is merely opening up to us and expressing his every thought.

This particular person has interesting ideas, talking about the advances over time. There are none, he states. This is a clear contradiction with what the large portion of the human race believes, where the improvements and achievements of humans are boasted. Technology and wisdom has largely improved, they claim, and they have taken us from a Stone Age to the way of live we know today. In complete disagreement, this man says we are “at best, super chimpanzee level”, believing that we are deceived in our perception of what is advantage and development. Waking Life also poses such an idea with Continuous City No. 2. Named Trude, it is a city that essentially looks the same as any other, giving the illusion that you have already been here. The truth is, you have. Because although you don´t feel in a place where you´d be eager to return, there is no escaping it. Trude is everywhere, it is every single city in the world. The only thing that changes is its name, applying the same idea of repetition, of stability, of monotony, as the man in Waking Life. Nothing changes, but we all believe it does. It is only another illusion in our daily lives.

A different moment of Waking Life introduces another man, this one in a very particular situation. As seen on the shot to the left, he is burning himself. The shot, portrayed in an extreme wide shot, frontal and high angle camera direction, is interesting mainly because of two things. The first is obvious. A man is burning. The second lies in the two men seen on the left, simply because they are half-heartedly staring at a man who is probably dead by now, a man who committed suicide right before their eyes. And what was their reaction? None at all. They simply watched, not wanting to help out.

This shot is best understood when what happened before it is seen. The man now burning was talking to our main character, angry at the media and the government. Both are allies of the evil in our world, he says, because the government does not let us be free while the media promotes the evil in the world. He is also believes that we all do our share in making the world a hypocritical place. People often speak against the horrors of wars, disasters, of depressions, but they actually give us a sense of pleasure. Sure, we may feel sorrow, he states, but “man wants chaos…he´s gotta have it”. The shot above is then a perfect representation of his ideas: although the two men do not want to help, they can´t take their eyes off the carcass. Invisible Cities introduces a city of the dead called Eusapia. Its inhabitants, though the most inclined to enjoying life and having free will, is most known because it is often copying what the dead do. Each time the dead innovates, so do the living. They are then twin cities, meaning that the city that so ardently loves life closely resembles death. Sound familiar? These explanations show that the human race has deceived itself in other aspects. This time, it´s our sense of compassion, of cooperation, our will to live peacefully. These values do not exist, they are merely another myth created over time.

What is real? Very few things, if you choose to believe Invisible Cities and Waking Life. Most of our realities, whether they are a society, a custom or a habit, they are all fantasies of ours. If most of what we live is a lie, an illusion, invisible, then what do we live? Is there really a purpose to our being here? And what is the role model we need to follow? These pieces are effective in solving mysteries, but they open many more. If anything, they leave the reader or observer in a pensive mode, unsure of the next move. They don´t even know where they stand. It´s no wonder many choose to live in the dark.

Act III-Pygmalion

This act of Pygmalion is the perfect representation of the common phrase "You can take the boy out of the hood but not the hood out of the boy". Despite her improved pronunciation, Liza cannot help but to tell the inappropriate stories of her past, shocking thus the high-society women and diverting the men. It´s impossible to radically change someone, and the past is just one of such untouchable things. No one can deny their roots, their experience, their origins.
This act is also important in that we begin to see just how much Higgins is protecting Liza and losing himself in what he is creating. Much like the sculptor in Pygmalion (after which the play takes its name), he is falling in love with this vision of his, rather the potential of this woman than what she really is. It is a fictitious love, one that will most likely end in disaster.

Chuck Close

The name say is all...Chuck Close. His exposition in Quinta Galleria was an surprising mix between interesting and revolting. The dozens of close-ups, one after another, all showed the several imperfections in the face of many, which both mesmerized and disgusted you. Despite the ugliness, it was quite hard to look away from each picture. The naked pictures, the back and the front paired together in a frame, the image sort of mirror-like, only add to the strange sense that surrounds the images. The second floor of the gallery is something completely different, surreal images and pictures of moments that were not planned. Also, unlike Close´s photographs, they are not close ups of one person, they have more background and a larger visual frame. But despite the fact that they are somewhat disturbing, Close´s photographs are beautiful. They carry about them a sort of mystic air, a sort of romantic tone, and they just don´t let you look away until you have analyzed every line, every crease in the face of the given person. It is different, it is rare, but it is a wonderful exposition.

Democratic Security?

Vendors and Bystanders

The Accessory Store

Street Artist Portable Furniture Our Future

Moving Shoes

Morning Coffee

Peanuts and Minutes

Flower Men

Flashing Coconuts

Expelled From Her Land

Checking Papers

Aromaticas, Anyone?

Avocados

Street vendors flood Bogota´s streets every day. Enduring the extreme climates of the city, either scorching hot, freezing cold and thundering rain, these men and women are never a strange sight. Their methods vary. Some stand in spotlights the entire day, others travel in bikes, some have carts with their products along the sidewalk, and a few have cars, which they park and display their merchandise in their trunk. And whether they are selling something or simply begging for change, their purpose is always the same: to manage somehow to feed themselves and their families.

Where these people come from is no mystery. Most of them used to be small farm owners, producing enough to sustain themselves and their family in a comfortable way. They came to the capital after having been threatened by one of several terrorist groups, forcing them to give up their lands, work for them, or be killed. Scared to death, they come to Bogotá hoping that they will soon find jobs or at least, find help from their government which so solemnly swore to help out any who found themselves in need. Here, they found overpopulation, crowding, few job opportunities, and living conditions that would repulse anyone. Having to compete with others that migrated in the same circumstances or those born already poor in these streets, many of them soon saw that it was a competition short of impossible to win. Thus the streets of northern, richer neighborhoods seemed the best place to look for profit.

Street vendors and beggars have become part of Bogota´s landscape. Some hate them, wanting to see the poor stick to their own neighborhoods, some ignore them, some help out with tips or food, and others rejoice in the cheap, miscellaneous products they offer. Because the truth is that whatever they sell, ranging from flowers to cell phone cases to chontaduros, these products do not pay taxes. This does not seem to bother the vendors, they often make more than what a cashier or house maid earns. But the Colombian government and its high-society leaders do not see it this way. Condemning them as low lives that only disrupt the Colombian society, they want to see them gone and out of the streets.

In 2008, a law known as Law 087 was passed in Congress. Changing the 2002 792 Law, it suggests that no cars can buy products or give charity closer than 200 meters away from a stoplight, bridge, etc. Its final purpose is to stop illegal product selling and encourage these people to get a job. But what it is really doing is making their lives go from difficult to impossible. With no job opportunities out there and prohibited from showing along streets, what are they to do? With no legal options left, the best way to feed their families is stealing or drug dealing. In no way will this law help the situation of our country. More unemployment and a higher crime rate is definitely not a solution. But what is really wrong about this law proposal is that it hinders honest people, people who chose a hard life of street sales instead of the option that most take-drug dealing. They did not give in to the extortions of the armed groups that threatened them and instead decided to say good-bye to their former lives and head out to the big unknown city. These people are heroes, they deserve the respect of each and every one who has never known what real difficulty is. And the only way in which they are repaid is by declaring them illegal? It seems that in this country no right action can get you anywhere. There are no options for those who cannot find a job, they are constantly oppressed and encounter new difficulties every passing day. Unless the Colombian Government and the high society changes its perceptions and attitudes towards people with less luck the country´s deterioration will only continue until it is too late and they, too, are submerged in poverty. Letting these people work is the lesser of two evils, apparently.

Guilliver´s Travels, Part IV (1)

Three Articles

After reading three articles: JA, The Cost Conundrum, and Heeeere´s....Conan!, it was easy to compare their styles and expression forms of the authors. To begin with, both JA and The Cost Conundrum are based, or rather, tell real life stoires, based on the experiences of the authors either wanting to solve a mystery or simply going along for a ride. Heeere´s...Conan!, instead, is based on the experience of Conan O´Brien, his beginnings and where he is going now that his contract with "Late Night" is over. Unlike the other two articles, which has a first person author, the author is in third person, adding a sense of seriousness to the piece. Even the length of the articles are very different, The Cost Conundrum being very long, expanded and detailed, followed by JA and, finally, Heeere´s Conan! with only a few paragraphs and a much lighter read. They all fall under the informative branch of journalism, the three exposing a person, a situation, or a way of life (sometimes more than one at a time). In all of them, the author uses several methods to expose this certain subject. Interviews, for example, and the use of direct quotations is a method seen in the three, an effective way of really getting to understand how the character lives, what he feels, or why a thing is the way it is. Overall, they all do a good job in getting the message across, but some make it more interesting. I was by far more engaged by the style and topic of the JA article than by The Cost Conundrum, which I did not even finish (eight pages of dullness seems a bit too much), showing that the biggest difference is the developing of the ideas: some are effective, some are not, depending on the person. The Cost Conundrum, in my eyes, failed.

Guilliver´s Travels, Cahpter One Part I

Introduction-Guilliver´s Travels

Waxman-Markeys Bill

It comes as no surprise to any of us to hear that the environment has been crippled lately. A large movement has been created to raise awareness on the subject among the general public in the hopes that the problem is, it not solved, at least improved. The subject became political (proved by Al Gore´s presidential campaign) and today, two men named Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, try to make a difference by attempting to pass their anti-greenhouse gases bill, the Waxman-Markey bill. As described by Paul Krugman in his New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=1&hpw), this bill has encountered opposition from skeptics and, surprisingly, environmentalists. Skeptics claim, as always, that the threat posed by nature is not a real one and that passing such bill, which proposes to reduce greenhouse emission by demanding emission permits from industries, reducing with time such emissions, would only harm the economy. Environmentalists were hurt over the fact that a cause so dear to their hearts was used solely for gaining political support. Those who would like to see it passed argue that despite its many defects, its better than no bill whatsoever.

Personally, a policy that favors big industries over little ones, due to the fact that these companies have a larger purchasing power, should try to be avoided. But I recognize that such is the capitalist system, and, as the author stated, the planet will not wait for us to make a decision that favors everyone. I also believe that trial and error is, although risky when working with politics, a chance that must be taken for any kind of improvement possible. If it turns out a total failure, we´ll know for the future what NOT to do, different from our complete ignorance today.

The image above, a painting by Paul Klee, is both colorful and full of lines. The attention of the viewer is immediately driven to the red balloon in the middle, first and foremost because of the light in the painting. The far ends of the painting are dark shades, blues and blacks and greens, while he shades of color surrounding the balloon are very soft, yellows in a sort of pastel palette, which makes the red stand out and yell for attention. Lines also help center our attention here because the buildings (?) are also facing this object. Mainly because of the light, some could say it was a poetic painting. I differ, however, arguing that it is jargon, not really saying anything or being realistic, but beautiful in a special way.

Marriages

As I continue to read through Cathedral, I notice how three out of three stories I have read include some sort of odd, malfunctioning marriage. Feathers is about a weird family, as I previously discussed in my blog. Chef´s House is about a couple divorced over the man´s drinking problem who move into a cabin for a while when he said he is clean and done with treatment. The third one, Preservation, talks about a man who lost his job and his wife suffers because he does nothing else but sit on his couch and watch T.V. "Why this motif?", I asked to myself. "Why can´t he write about children, or friends, or anything that does not include an unhappy couple?". Knowing that many authors write on what they know, I looked up Carver´s biography just to check that he had not been through a series of failed marriages and was losing faith in love. What I found was that I was right, many of his stories have been based on similar experiences. Just like the wife in Preservation, he had to go through a series of annoying jobs to support his family, finding their condition often miserable and having to struggle. When his career as a writer kicked off, so did his drinking problem and soon had to join Alcoholics Anonymous, but not before losing his wife. Just like the drunk in Chef´s House, he too went to a cabin and hid himself for some while, taking a female friend along. The resemblances are many, and I don´t doubt that the largest part are soon to come. For now, I´ll begin to look for the hidden Carver character in every one of his stories.

Freaks

Raymond Carver´s Cathedral is a recollection of different stories. The first one, Feathers, is a tale of two work friends. One invites the other, wife and all, to dinner in his house. This is the first time that either meets the family of the other, and as soon as Jack and his wife arrive to his friend´s house, things start becoming weird. They have a peacock, an ugly, hidden baby, and bizarre ornamentation. After strange conversations, mishaps with the peacock and with the baby, Jack leaves with his wife and never mention it again. Neither do Jack with his work friend. Despite still being close, they never mention that night again and keep their relationship on a superficial level, notmentioning their families ever again. This only makes us wonder: Why? Of course it was strange, but weird encounters such as these are not uncommon today. Stranger than all of these mishaps, stranger than kept teeth, stranger than the dinner is the fact that all relationships were cutbetween the two families. Is Carver perhaps not mentioning the worst incident of all? Or is it that it is all a mockery of society´s prejudices? Either way, the outcome of the story is by far stranger than the dinner party.

Stereotypes

In Chapter III of A Simple Soul, Felicite both meets and loses her nephew to the navy. Devastated, she knows nothing of him for a very long period of time, until she hears that he has reached Havanna.
"Felicite imagined that Havanna was a place where people did nothing but smoke, and that Victor walked around among negroes in a cloud of tobacco."
This passage, at first, made me laugh, for I know Cuba to be something more than that. "Maids", I thought, "What a shame they don´t know better". I recalled this one time, where I asked my maid to help me pack for Egypt. She was shocked, for she thought I talked about Egipto, the neighborhood where she lives and did not comprehend what packing was needed for. When I explained I meant the African nation, she was amazed and asking all sorts of questions on how we were getting there, what we would do, the places we would visit, and so on. I remeber thinking how cute she looked, knowing almost nothing about such an important country. But I would soon learn that although I do not mistake the country with the neighborhood, I too was very wrong. I believed I would arrive to a country where camels were the main form of transportation, a country where us women would be forced to cover ourselves up, where Coca-Cola was not heard of, and no one knew what a cellphone was. How wrong I was, but the worst thing was that coming from Colombia, where myths about our country are plenty, I should have known better. I was just as wrong as my maid, showing that stereotyping and ignorance does not belong in one group of persons. It is widespread, and it is a general effort what can save us from such dumb mistakes.

Nanny To The Rescue

Upon reading the first few lines of Gustav Flaubert´s A Simple Soul, much is said about the main character, Felicite. You instantly learn about her simplicity, innocence, and effectiveness. As the story progresses we also learn about her position, the maid in widower Madame Aubain´s modest house. This woman was devastated with the loss of her husband and after hiring Felicite became extremely dependent on her, leaving even the simplest of chores to her. Additionally, the care of her two children was left to Felicite, while Madame Aubain rested in her chair or entertained her many visitors, which Felicite was responsible for serving and making them exit when the time was right. In other words, Felicite, despite being an outsider, basically ran the household on her own. It made me think about all the other stories on a maid that fix the household and the following came to mind: Mary Poppins, Nanny McPhee, The Nanny Diaries, and Uptown Girls. It´s a story I have heard a number of times, one that gets old thanks to its never-changing ending (despite the fact that the beloved nanny has left the family, they manage to move on thanks to her great legacy). Is it that Flaubert predicted the 21st century mentality, its likes and dislikes for movies? Or is it this story inspired many others? Or, perhaps, did Flaubert simply follow a current nanny stories that have existed since his time? Hopefully, it´s none of the above. I still hold on dearly to the illusion that an author with such a reputation will surprise me with a completely different, surprising, unexpected ending, one that will leave me satisfied, not bored about seeing the same thing all over again, even if it was the original copy.

In Time

Saul Bellow´s Seize the Day has as a main character a man named Tommy Wilhem, or at least that is what he calls himself. His real name is Wilhem Adler, but his relationship with his father is such that he has changed his family name. Dr.Adler is described by his son as a fearsome man, a retired doctor who was as cold to his son as to the rest of his patients, an aging man. Oddly enough, Dr. Adler immediately remembered me of my own grandfather. He too is a retired doctor, and a great one at that. Although my father has never changed his name, he does admit that their relationship was tough, due to the fact that my father´s grades never met such a prominent man´s expectations. But if I ever met Wilhem I would give him some advice, or at least tell him what lies ahead. As Wilhelm mentioned, his father was pushing eighty. My grandfather will be ninety in one month, but some five years back he suffered a health collapse. He went from having breakfast with his children, traveling and working every single day to staring at a T.V. every day, not being able to walk alone, and forgetting the names of his children and the fact that his wife passed away some twenty years ago. Somehow, when I look at my grandfather it is hard to picture the impressive man that Dr. Raúl Paredes used to be, winning national awards and scaring my uncles and aunts to the death. He does not meet like an agreeable man, just like Dr. Adler. But the fact is that even the scariest, most prominent men will always meet the end and soon, with old age, become old fart bags that will be forgotten soon.

Yet Again, We Got It Wrong

Mothers have a tendency to be altruistic in regards with their offspring, with all of them. This is explained in Chapter 8 of The Selfish Gene, called the Battle of the Generations. But it also explains that, again because of our competitiveness, siblings will always be looking to be the favorite, the one with the most attention and affection. Therefore, it is normal that jealousy should arise. Perhaps the most famous story about brotherly jealousy is the one that precisely condemns it. Cain and Abel appear in the Old Testament as two brothers, one a shepherd and one a farmer. They were giving their offerings to God, Abel with his sheep and Cain with his fruit, and God seemed to prefer Abel´s gift over Cain´s. Jealous over the Father´s preference, he smashed Abel´s head until he was dead, and later denied it to God. He was heavily punished by his father, condemned to eternal wandering. But the importance of this story in Genesis is unbelievable. Almost the complete cause, it lead to the frowning upon anyone who does not have a healthy relationship with their sibling(s). But competition between us is, in fact, natural. Our animal instincts are again frowned upon by our strict society, proving even more that etiquette and social correctness are simple conventions invented to make our lives more complicated. So, once again, we got it wrong.

The Restless Conquest

"Family Planning". This is the title of Dawkins´ seventh chapter, a chapter where he points out the clear increase in the birth rate of humans. Not only are we reproducing much faster than before, but the death rates have decreased exponentially through history. Thanks to medicine and other resources, the death average has gone up and people now live at ages that did not even seem like possible ever before. This idea brought me back to a novel I read about a year and a half ago written by Daniel Quinn and entitled Ishmael. It is truly a philosophical/reflective text, where a man is taught by a gorilla the ways of man and his mistakes. The biggest one, perhaps, was altering nature. Even believing in gene selfishness one has to admit that nature has found a perfect balance to everything-even to the desire of competition. In this novel it is argued that because we decided to domesticate nature instead of letting people die as they should, we have exceeded ourselves and, although we have resources, there is a limit to everything. This goes alongside Dawkins when he says that starvation eventually comes to children who just don´t fit. But what pushes us to want more, more of our species? Our own genes, because the bigger the population the more powerful and capable of overcoming others. This means that eventually our survival thirst will take us to our doom. It is definately a warning, one that many choose to ignore in a very selfish action towards the species.

Do We Have a Chance?

Chapter 6 of The Selfish Gene, Genesmanship, begins with a brief explanation of a selfish gene. It clearly stated that it is all over the world, in all types of shapes, colors and sizes. Each type of gene has their specific survival machines, each designed to outlive others. We need to be strong, to fight, because others will take advantage of us to fulfill their own personal desires. So what does this leaves us with? With the choice of fighting for our lives daily, overcoming those who wish to harm us, or the choice of sitting around and waiting for that same selfishnes in others to end us for good. There is no easy way out, is there?

Excuses, Excuses (Ch. 5).

The more I read of The Selfish Gene the more I realize how there is a scientific explanation for our so-called wrong behaviour. Chapter 5 enters the realm of aggression, where, as survival machines, we see all other survival machines, or our environment, as potential resources to be exploited. This is how food chains arise, species using each other for their survival. But never do these machines use the same species, a discipline called cannibalism in humans and a HUGE taboo. I am a firm believer that the human, in its superiority, believes that it can do as it pleases and that bad consequences will soon present themselves. Apparently, so is Richard Dawkins. The difference between both of us is the fact that he has scientific evidence, while I have my gut. Although we have found ourselves to be excellent survival machines, perhaps the over exploitation of resources will lead us to our own doom. Take plants, harmless, innocent organisms. They barely exploit their environment. They have outlived our species by far, and that have not had to adapt constantly unlike ourselves. And the fact is, that although the natural thing is to take advantage of others, we have challenged nature by refusing to die, by refusing to be of small numbers, by refusing to adapt. Time will take its toll, and it is up to our desire to survive to change our ways at the expense of altruistic casualties for the good of our selfish species.

Justifying

Chapter 3 of The Selfish Gene, Immortal Coils, describes the process of crossing over and how the information that comes from our parents fight each other to become the predominant gene and ultimately define our physical characteristics. It shows how, even before birth, competition is what it is all about. Only the strongest manages to win the race or fight, while the other gene is left as the recessive one. For example, my dad´s hair won the fight when deciding on my hair, which is why it is straight like his and not curly like my mother´s. It is interesting to see how our desire to win begins before our mothers even realize that she is carrying a baby, and it is no surprise that this habit continues in our childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. We have to be the best at something, or else we feel worthless.

When I was smaller I remember wondering why people could kill, hurt, and do illegal things just to win the race of the riches. The answer I always recieved from my parents was the following: "It´s simply our human nature". I shut up right then, but then I felt sad because what I had understood is that we are all meant for murder and concious mistakes. But the fact is that we win at any cost. THAT is our human nature. Although I was against brutal competition, I understand why it happens this way. It is a natural process, one that begins before our life ever does. Too bad.

Survival Machines

The second chapter of Dawkin´s work explains how replicating genes will create "survival machines", or places in which to live. Slowly, just like with evolution, these machines grew stronger and stronger as time and circumstances demanded it. But whichever replicating gene is what lies inside of us got it all wrong. If it wasn´t for opposable thumbs and superior intelligence, we would be the weakest animals of the bunch. Not only do we have inferior force, but we do not excel at swimming, jumping, leaping, flying, or any other useful survival skill. It´s a good thing that with time we developed brain ability, because if we had not found ways to protect ourselves and invent ways to disguise our lack of survival skills, our species would have probably died a long time ago. The truth is, the human race is the most physically inoffensive one of all. But because of our selfishness, we did not let others get advantage. We overcompensated with machines, clothes and the taming of other creatures. So although our genes made a mistake in terms of our physical abilities, they made the correct one in terms of our desire to be the best species of all.

Selfishness Overload

The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins begins by explaining its purpose, which is to expose how selfishness of genes rules in evolution. Although it states that "altruistic" individuals do exist, it also exposes that in the end, their actions are always done for the good of the species and therefore, are selfish. But although it talks about selfishness and the survival of a species, I wonder if there is selfishness among different kinds of groups inside the same species, much like human conflict today. Not only are we selfish in reference to other species, exploiting anything that may serve useful towards us, but we are also selfish between ourselves. Very few people ever become altruistic and "sacrifice themselves for the good of the species". This is the best example that perhaps we are the most selfish species, the most selfish gene of all. Based on Darwin´s ideas, this means that our species will be the last to die, because we are the strongest of all. We will destroy everything in our path to get there, and indeed we are living up to that responsibility. But perhaps, because we do not care generally about others in our species, we will only care about personal survival. If so, perhaps we will only destroy ourselves until the last, strongest individual of all is left standing. Maybe being the strongest is not the best thing of all, because we are so blinded with our greed that we forget that occasional good is not a bad thing. If we don´t slow things down just a little bit, our own selfishness could backfire.

Try and See

One of the most recurrent themes in Slaughterhouse-Five was time. From the Tralfamadorian point of view, destiny ruled and our purpose in life was simply to walk the way that has been already set for us. The very first section of Epictetus´Handbook talks also about the liberties we have. They are essentially different, because Epictetus does believe that decision-making, likes and dislikes, so that we don´t have a set path. But it also states that many things we cannot change, such as our bodies or reputations. In this way, it is closely related to Tralfamadorians view, especially because he insists that worrying ourselves with trying to change such things is completely unnecessary and will bring us in the end nothing but harm. By conforming ourselves we avoid tons of problems, such as aversions or problems with others. The same idea appears in the second section, where it is said that if "you are adverse only to what us against nature among the things that are up to you, then you will never fall into anything that you are adverse to...". In other words, change what you can change and accept what you cannot. What is especially interesting is that these two extremely different texts, one being a science fiction novel and the second a handbook for life, they both advocate a layed-offf, no worries way of life. They both accept the fact that many things we cannot change, which is true, and believe that our attitudes toward things make all the difference. In other words, existentialists have the wrong idea. What if we did let go of the stress? Who would worry about progress, helping others, solving problems? Nobody, but maybe that´s exactly the solution to problems. Who knows?

Watch It

Epictetus´s Handbook is basically a set of rules on how to live a noble life. Although I have only read a few sections, I believe that it is centered on ways to give life a balance and stick to what is necessary. In a way, it reminds me of the Tao Te Ching, because there is no connected story, just life lessons numbered and given striaght up. Sections 13 through 17 share an interesting similarity-they´re all about learning to control yourself. Whether it is by learning to not carry yourself away by someone else´s pain or by taking only what you truly desire when it is reachable, they all come back to the idea of behaving yourself. In a way, it denies us our right to show emotion and pursue our dreams, they want us to be stable and unwavering. In other words, Epictetus´strong point here is to turn us all into conformists, much like Billy Pilgrim had to become once he learned the real meaning of time. While Epictetus advocates letting things be for simple manners, Tralfamadorians laugh at the idea of free will and insist that even if we wanted to, things are going to happen in a certain way no matter what. I disagree with both. Destiny is simply an idea that I cannot concieve, and although I don´t mean to act rudely towards others as is Epictetus´ fear I do want to make my own decisions. But at least he gives us the possibility of breaking his advice, Tralfamadorians have no way out.

All Over Again

In the tenth and last chapter of Slaughterhouse Five, the story returns to a mixture of a narration of Billy´s adventures to the author´s (Kurt Vonnegut himself suspected) own experiences. In a certain moment, the author of Billy´s travels reflects on the lessons learned by his character, coming to a conclusion that goes like this:

"If what Billy Pilgrim learned...was true, that we will all live forever...I am not overjoyed. Still-if I am going to spend eternity visiting this moment and that, I´m grateful that so many of those moments are nice".

It got me thinking-if a man who witnessed arguably the most horrific war and one of its biggest massacres can say this, what can the rest of us say? Whether it is Vonnegut writing himself in his novel or whether it is some made-up character who happened to witness the Dresden raid as well, the point remains the same-he would live it all over again. The rest of his life has to have been incredible, because this is one of the few war veterans I have ever heard say they would go back in time. But I guess that those who have lived incredibly difficult situations will always have a better perspective than those who just sit around and everything falls into place for them, because they can really appreciate the value of good fortune and happiness. It also made me think if I would ever go back in time. It´s not an easy choice, but I would say no, at least in the conditions that Tralfamadorians give. I wouldn´t go back in time to relive mistakes and the same things all over again knowing it is out of my hands to change anything. This is why I believe in coincidences, lucky coincidences, but not in fate. Finding no other way to describe it other than using a cliché, I don´t believe in fate because I like to believe I am in control. Besides, changing mistakes in the past drastically alters your future, and perhaps I won´t like the future that comes out from fixing mistakes. My life has been wonderful and reliving it would not be horrific, but it certainly would not be desirable.

Parallel Universes and Mind Games

Since the beginning of the book, I have wondered if Billy Pilgrim´s experiences were real, a product of his imagination, the effect of drugs, or simple crazy talk. I sort of forgot my doubts when engaged the story, but reading Chapter 9 made me remember of what I had wondered when I began the novel. In this chapter, Billy was in New York after escaping from his daughter´s watchful eye. He was walking the streets when he noticed a little store that had, on its display, several novels by Kilgore Trout, the science-fiction author that Billy enjoyed reading so much. He opened two, and interestingly enough, they had a high resemblance to Billy´s own life. The first was titled The Big Board, and it "was about an Earthling man and woman who were kidnapped by extra-terrestrials. They were put on display in a zoo on a planet called Zircon-212." (pg. 201)

What does this remind me of? Possibly the fact that Billy (an Earthling) was kidnapped by Tralfamadorians (aliens) and placed in a zoo with a woman (just like Billy). As he continued to browse through, he found a second title where the main character has a time machine and manages to go back in time to visit Jesus. Basically, this character could also travel through time.

Reading this made me wonder if Billy´s travels were maybe a product of his imagination that had been inspired from all that time at a hospital and all of those science fiction books. Even so, it must have freaked him out to read that everything that is happening to him, that has happened, was imagined by someone else or perhaps occurs in a parallel universe. It enters the realm of The Neverending Story, by Michael Ende, and its mysticism. The surprising thing is that Billy did not seem surprised, as happened during the course of the novel, but this must have had some sort of effect. But perhaps it was just a game played by his mind, such as Rusell Crowe´s character in A Beautiful Mind, or Edward Norton´s in Fight Club. Would this drastically change the story? Would the significance of Billy´s life dimish because these were not actual experiences? I think not. What is important is that someone printed out his life, the narrator of the book wanted to transmit a message and got it through. The moral is what is important, not how or when it happened.

Pilgrim´s Big Fish

Reading "Slaughterhouse-Five" had always reminded me of something I could not place. Finally, after Chapter 8, I realized of how similar it was to the movie "Big Fish". Directed by Tim Burton and starred by Ewan McGregor, it constantly goes back and forward in time, telling the experiences of Edward Bloom (McGregor´s character) as a young man and his life as an old man, struggling to earn the trust of his son, Will. Much like Barbara (Pilgrim´s daughter), Will has a hard time believing his father´s fantastic tales. Instead of talking about aliens, Edward exaggerates everything. Just like Billy, Edward was a war veteran (Vietnam war, however), but he says he was saved by Siamese Japanese twins, working as entertainment for soldiers. He also told Will that time actually stopped for everyone but him the first time he saw his mother (another resemblance), that his best friend was a giant, and that he knew a town that could not be found unless you were lost. Time is a recurrent theme, for not only did time stop but he knew characters that were not influenced by it. As a kid, he met an old witch. Their lives crossed paths some 15 years later, and this same witch was now 10 years old. When they met for a third time, the witch was now as old as before. She was, you could say, "unstuck in time".

The significance of time does not stop there-when Edward first met the witch he saw his death in her eyes. In other words, much like Billy, Edward knew the exact time and place of his death. This made him fearless and brave, for he knew that whatever difficulty came his way would not be his time of death. Billy lived in the same way, unafraid of death and simply waiting for the day to arrive. Frankly, I was surprised of just how similar they were. I researched to see if the movie was based on Vonnegut´s work, but it is not. I guess that you really can´t write something completely innovative.

When in Need...

Chapter 7 of "Slaughterhouse-Five" focuses more than anything on the lives of the prisoners inside the slaughterhouse before the Dresden air raid. These prisoners are exhausted, weak, and eager to get back home. While working in a factory, they came across a certain syrup that was enriched with vitamins and was meant to be taken by pregnant women. The action of "spooning" soon became quite popular behind the backs of Germans, meaning that prisoners took a spoon and quickly ate a little bit before being found. Billy Pilgrim, at a given moment, finds a window of opportunity and licks a little bit.

"The spoon was a tablespoon. Billy trust it into the vat, turned it around and around, making a gooey lollipop. He thrust it into his mouth. A moment went by, and then every cell in Billy´s body shook him with ravenous gratitude and applause". pg. 160.

Billy wasn´t the only one who felt delighted by this little bit of sugary delight. Edgar Derby actually burst into tears. This remembered me of a stand that my mother usually takes when being the host of a lunch or dinner. She always serves extremely late, making the only food available until that hour light snacks, or, as we Colombians call it, "mecato". Why does she do this? Because she is a firm believer that when in hunger, anything tastes ten times as good when in normal conditions. In normal conditions, the syrup would have probably tasted poorly in to Pilgrim, perhaps he only liked it because he was in need of additional strength. Making alusion once more to a popular cliché, "You do not know the value of something until you´ve lost it". Basically, Pilgrim never felt better because of this syrup. But when the war was over and he had become a rich, married man, he never again felt the same gratitude towards anything else. You would think that a war veteran would be more grateful, but then again, Pilgrim never really showed any kind of emotion.

Schlachtof-fünf

While discussing "Slaughterhouse-Five" in class we have talked about the importance of language several times. For example, we raised the question of the repetition of the phrase "So it goes", but more importantly, we wondered why "slaughterhouse-five" was chosen as a title. Looking over the novel, we observed how the word "slaughter" was used several times, as seen in page 116. Billy Pilgrim is an exhibit at the Tralfamadorian zoo when he tries to explain the ongoing war to his visitors:

"As you know, I am from a planet that has been engaged in senseless slaughter since the beginning of time..."

The Tralfamadorians just find him stupid. But I was reminded of this in Chapter 6 of Vonnegut´s novel, because this is when Billy Pilgrim´s arrival at Dresden was described. As prisoners of war, they were kept in an actual slaughterhouse for pigs that was now abandoned. The number for its slaughterhouse was 5, hence the title of the novel. "Schlachtof-fünf" was the German name for this place. But what striked me as irony was the fact that the place where killings typically took place was where these prisoners actually survived the destruction of Dresden. Even though it was an actual slaughterhouse, it was the only place where deaths did not take place. So perhaps the slaughterhouse was the refuge, and everywhere else in the place, everywhere in a seemingly safe city, was the site for death and destruction. What a cruel trick of fate.

Random Acts of Kindness

Billy travels once again to the future in Chapter 5, this time to 1948, when he is admitted to a hospital due to the fact that doctors believe he is going crazy. His hospital companion was Eliot Rosewater, a man, who, like Billy, loved reading science fiction. Whenever Billy´s mother would come to visit Rosewater would be extremely polite and attentive, for he "thought that might make the world a slightly more pleasant place to live in" (pg. 102). Rosewater´s actions reminded me of the novel by Catherine Ryan Hyde Pay it Forward. This book, later adapted into a movie, tells the story of little Trevor McKinney, a boy who decides that the way to change the world is by small, random acts of kindness. In fact, he proposes that every person has to do exactly three favors, one for three different persons, without an agenda or hidden desires. In turn, those three persons have to do three favors each, making the number of favors exponential. Trevor´s hopes were that every person on the planet recieved and made favors until it was just a plain habit. Truthfully the plan was not all that bad, if only everyone had the same desire of helping others and believed in returning what they recieved. We should all learn from this little kid or this "crazy man", and maybe our world will be a better place to live in.

Free Will

At the very end of Slaughterhouse Five´s fourth chapter, when Billy is traveling aboard the Tralfamadorian flying saucer, he begins an interesting conversation with one of the aliens. When he asks where he is, the Tralfamadorian does not give him a direct answer but rather expresses how amused he is about human curiosity. He argues that where he comes from, people just let it be. They don´t ask questions, just live the moment that life presents itself with. I am a supporter of letting things be once in a while, but what the Tralfamadorian was proposing was, basically, a world with no science or philosophy. These are the two ways with which we try to explain our world, and it has led to interesting theories and possibilities. I can´t imagine a world without explanations or wondering, where our origins and our future don´t matter, where nature has no explanation and the stars are never studied. There has to be a balance between letting it be and knowing exactly how it is, or else we end in ignorance or in an obsessive desire to know everything.

The Master and his Slave

In one of Billy Pilgrim´s trips to the future in chapter 3 of Slaughterhouse Five, he arrives at a place where he is already rich and his daughter is about to get married. But when he spends time at home a crippled man rings his doorbell, as does another in his neighbor´s front porch. Billy never gets to answer this door but from his window watches how a man from his Buick Riviera oversees the cripple´s every move.

"...Billy assumed correctly that he was the man who hired the cripples to do this thing". (page 63)

I related to this experience because living in a country where underprviledged people roam the streets you learn a thing or two, even though you have not had the first-hand experience. It is commonly said that the reason why little kids who beg for money in front of stoplights should not be given money is because when they go home, their parents, different family member or plain stranger will take it away and use it for their own benefit. In other words, these evil people are taken advantage of persons who will probably recieve more compassion than themselves and exploiting them, much like this man with the cripples. And it doesn´t apply only to cripples and homeless children, orphan owners and such have also been the victims of such scandals. This is the worst form of exploitation and greediness. Disabled people, people who just need help or don´t know how to handle the real world will succumb to the first friendly face. They are more likely to fall into the scams and manipulation of others and less likely to stop being abused. These manipulators are the pimps of cripples and children and must be treated as such.

Our Fear

In the second chapter of this novel the main character begins to tell us his novel. Billy, his main character, is a soldier in the Second World War who begins to travel trough time. He can either go back in time or travel to the future. In one of these given trips he fast-forwards 20 years when he is paying a visit to his elderly mother. Pneumonia makes it hard for her to talk, but the words she does manage to get out are the following:

How did I get so old? (pg. 44)

It struck me as a familiar feeling. Growing up with a dad who tries to hide his balding spot and a mother who dyes her hair to hide gray hairs, the fright of aging is not a strange subject. Even I, a 15-year old, am surprised at just how true the cliche "time flies" is. That sentence uttered by an old woman sums up mi biggest fear: letting life pass me by and not making the best of it. But at least it´s good to know I´m not alone in this sentiment.

Heroes?

Slaughterhouse-Five, a novel by Kurt Vonnegut, tells the tale of an American soldier who, like the author, was a witness to the Dresden air raid and its horrors. He is now determined to write a book about it due to the fact that many do not know just how bad it was. I have to admit that I would fit the category nicely. Dresden was a familiar city, and I could link it to a World War II tragedy but the details I did not know. For example, in page 10 of the first chapter the narrator tells us the following:

"It [Dresden] wasn´t a famous air raid back then in America. Not many Americans knew how much worse it had been than Hiroshima, for instance. I didn´t know that, either. There hadn´t been much publicity."

Reading this made me react in two different ways. The first forced me to research further on the subject, and this is what I found: The Dresden attack lasted three days, from February 13 to 15, 1945. At the time this was the seventh largest German city and a very beautiful one at that. These three days saw hundreds of war planes launch thousands of tons in bombs. The thousands of fires around the city turned into one, destroyed practically everything. Although it is a hard number to calculate, it is said that between 25,000 to 35,000 died and many, many more suffered from lesions and burns. The missing reports of persons reached 35,000, of which around 10,000 were found alive later. The Dresden attacked, hurt, killed, and destroyed others. I still do not know for a fact if it was worse than Hiroshima, but it was definitely was a tragedy.

My second reaction is closely linked to the research I did. The Ally army won the war. They ended the reign of terror inflicted by Nazis. They were heroes according to many. What they did was admirable, but to what extent were their options honorable? Because the Nazi concentration were just the tip of the iceberg. Many more horrifying things occurred, but the bad guys do not take the blame for everything. In a war cruel things must be done to achieve bigger things, closely following Niccolo Machiavelli´s line of thought "the ende justifies the mean" or the popular saying "All´s fair in love and war". But is this truly correct? Is war an excuse for cruelty? And what if it doesn´t stop there, but the end begins to justify the mean? Would morality still matter?

Definitions:

REDOLENT: Serving to bring to mind.
DISPARATE: Unequal, dissimilate, separate.
BENIGN: Having kind or gentle disposition.
JANUS-FACED: Having two faces, either polarities or hypocrisy.
SLOUGHED OFF: To discard as undesirable.

Wayuus in Inferno

The Wayuus are a group of indians living in northen Colombia, more specifically in the Guajira department. They have lived here for a far longer amount of time than the spaniards, having inhabited the region for hundreds of years. But Dante makes no exception: these people, belonging to what our country calls a valuable culture that should be defended, belong in hell. Their sins? Well, the main and biggest one is the fact that not one of them have been baptised, or even believe in Christ. During his trip around hell, Dante mentioned that figures such as Homer remained in the limbo, for not even being born before Jesus was an excuse for roaming around without baptism. And if being born before Christ will not save you, neither will belonging to another culture.

Another possible location for Wayuus would be in hell´s Sixth Circle, or the City of Dis. Here heretics, or those who deny the existance of God, such as this indian tribe, lie in open-lid tombs. The reason for the open grave is that since they do not believe in eternal life, they shall suffer an eternal death. Wayuus are guilty of these two charges and will probably rot for eternity in hell. But, if what they believe is true, it will be us who will rot in their hell. And who knows, probably Dante Alighieri will be there to be our eternal companion.

1. What is the difference between a blog and a book?

The biggest difference between a blog and a book is the fact that the book is a physical thing, you can hold it in your hands, while the blog is only virtual and can be looked at, period. Books take a long time to write and a long time to read, blogs can be done quickly and is often light reading. Books are also made of more complex topics, something worth publishing, while blogs can contain any subject at all.

2. How have blogs changed recently?

Blogging has experienced several changes, beginning with its popularity. When it first started only a few existed, but over the years that number began to grow exponentially to the point where hundreds of millions exist today. The content also started out by being a place to write useful information for others, became later a place for publishing opinions and such, and finally turned into a place of personal attacks and negative opinions. Being the most visited blog turned into something of great significance, so many blogs today are writen with the sole intention of catching the attention of the masses. At times, this makes its content superficial and not worthy of reading.

3. Why might you read a blog?

Blogs may be useful when looking for different opinions or insights on any topic. Because it has turned into such a big thing, blogs present us with a great variety of topics, so basically opinions on anything can be found. When trying to defend a point of your own, looking into other people's blogs may be useful-perhaps they managed to put into words the idea you have in mind. Although nobody chekcs if the information on these blogs is correct and anybody is free to upload what they want, often what you are reading is not the truth, but you may also read one to inform yourself on any subject that you are not familiar with.

4. Is there a reason to doubt the objectivity of a blog? Why? Why not?

You might doubt the objectivity of a blog because, as I mentioned before, nobody really checks how correct the information is. Anyone may post what they wish without restrictions or control, and many people make fake information seem like the real deal. For example, I could say that Colombia is a small country located in the south of Asia, a big lie, but who could argue with me? So although it may be a useful site for checking information, it is always best to rely on a safer source.

5. Identify three blogs that mention our summer reading.

"The Blueskies Blog" on "A Brave New World"--http://blueskies2day.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/book-blurbs-brave-new-world-by-aldous-huxley/

"Best Book Info" on Orwell´s "1984"--

http://bestbookinformation.com/121520-1984-by-George-Orwell.html

"Shmoop Blog" on Dante´s Inferno--

http://blog.shmoop.com/2008/12/17/why-should-i-care-about-inferno-by-dante-alighieri/