Hannah Hecht's Blog

The Occupy Wall Street Movement works to point out the growing disparity between the rich and the poor. Their slogan, “We are the 99%” points out that only 1% of the people here in the US generate over 40% of the income. The movement hopes to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor in order to shift the balance of power.

While there is definitely an uneven distribution of wealth and power here in the US, I’m not completely sure that the Occupy Wall Street Movement’s goals are defined enough to help solve the problem. Maybe instead of simply exposing the facts that corporations and banks hold too much power, Occupy should look for governmental redistribution reforms, such as higher taxation on the rich. Reforms such as this would help to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor and end poverty in the US.

Nevertheless, Occupy has been dominating the news and raising awareness across the globe. Occupy has shown exactly what people can accomplish when they come together for a common purpose.

This week’s reading was about how the arts are an integral part of a child’s education. Across the board, the schools of America are cutting funding to art programs in order to save money and fund the sciences. While math and science are important, the arts are equally so. The article stated that “Their purpose is not to convey data but to supply insight and wisdom—in a word, meaning. Their power is that they can move us. They serve as connectors that give understanding a human dimension. They tell us about people—how they thought and felt and what they valued. They help us to define ourselves and our times, as well as other people and other times.” The arts provide a vital connection between facts and real life.

Without the arts, school is just an endless repetition of memorization and regurgitation of facts. When student learn subjects that have only “right” and “wrong” answers they lose their ability to think for themselves. Creativity is just as important as, or even more important than, any school subject. In the end, institutions that cut their art programs are setting their students up for failure.

The first reading for this week was about urban legends and scary stories. It was interesting to see how there may be common themes and deeper meaning behind those middle school “scary stories” that kids would swap at sleepovers. Common themes such as isolation, the unknown, and growing up prevail across all of the legends.

I thought that some of the urban legends were kind of stupid and lacked true literary value. For example, one of the stories went like this: “There once was a lady who had lots of poodles. She gave her poodle a bath and wanted to dry it off. She put the poodle in the microwave and it exploded. The end. ” How is that a story!?! “The Hook and Other Teenage Horrors” included many such stories that, in my opinion, are being overanalyzed. This specific story sounds like something that a five-year-old would make up and tell to his classmates, not anything of true merit. While reading about how urban legends are formed is interesting, none of these stories were exactly well-written or spine-chilling.

The second reading (or listening) for the week was much more interesting, in my opinion. “Where Have All the Hitchhikers Gone” pondered the disappearance of a once-popular fad, hitchhiking. It claimed that one story of a women getting kidnapped has scared people across the globe from hitchhiking. This article compared hitchhiking to swimming in the ocean: there is a risk that one will get hurt, but, the article stated, the rewards outweigh the costs.

I disagree with the article. It states that people don’t hitchhike anymore because of the risks, but I think it has more to do with the availability of automobiles to everyone. Back in the day, it was considered good etiquette to pick up hitchhikers; if you were privileged enough to have a car, then you would give back to the community by helping out people who weren’t. Nowadays, just about everyone has a car; therefore the necessity to hitchhike has been dramatically decreased. Because there are less people hitchhiking out of necessity, shouldn’t that mean that there’s a larger chance that the hitchhiker you’re about to pick up has an ulterior motive? Conversely, because regular people are less likely to pick up hitchhikers, doesn’t that increase the likelihood that hitchhikers get picked up by kidnappers? On the other hand, I did think that it was interesting when the article mentioned that most cars were never filled to full capacity. This dramatically contributes to our ecological footprint, but hitchhiking probably isn’t the safest alternative.

Christmas… Everything that I seem to come up with as I try to write this blog sounds incredibly cliché. It’s the most wonderful time of the year? It’s not about getting, but about giving? What is the true meaning of Christmas? Ugh… Anything that I seem to come up with has definitely been said before.

When I think of Christmas, I think of my little sister dancing around to her own versions of carols. She’ll spend all day running around and singing “Hark, Harold the angel sings, glory to the newborn king,” “Jack Frost roasting on an open fire,” and, her personal favorite, “Deck the halls with jawls of jolly.” I’m not too sure what a “jawl of jolly” is, but her song brings a smile to my face every single time.

When I think of Christmas, I think of our weirdest family tradition. On Christmas morning, we all circle around the tree and pull out the board game “Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader” and answer questions in order to open presents. One right answer means that we can open one present.

When I think of Christmas, I think of sitting with my family and watching “A Charlie Brown Christmas,” Elf,” and “A Christmas Story” for the millionth time. All of them are really cheesy, but maybe that’s what makes them fun to watch.

So maybe Christmas is commercialized. Maybe, these days, it has become a little less about the birth of Jesus and more about… Family? Picking out the perfect gift? Snowball fights? Jumping around and singing the wrong words to hymns and carols? Is that really such a bad thing? In the end, it doesn’t really matter whether December 25^th is the exact date of Jesus’s birth; the important thing is that we remember his message of selflessness and love and, most importantly, have fun with family and friends.

Across the past few weeks, we’ve read about a large variety of different topics. The topics themselves (calliagnosia, rhetoric, sports, fractals, and Kurt Vonnegut) were very eye-opening, but the thing that makes honors class interesting is the different viewpoints that people have during our weekly discussion. Our class consists of new freshman from a host of different backgrounds and situations, and that is what helps to make this class so much fun.

When I read the articles, there are certain things that I seemed to pick up on, while others went unnoticed. For example, in the first reading, I tended to focus on how calliagnosia would help to end discrimination based on looks. I thought that it would be a great idea, another way to make sure that all men (and women) would truly be created equal. The class discussion opened my eyes to other opinions. Many other members of the class saw calliagnosia as a threat to beauty everywhere. They helped me to see the true cons of a hypothetical world of calliagnostics.

Sometimes after a discussion I would change or revise my thoughts on a topic, but other times hearing the opposition to my opinion helped me to strengthen my beliefs. For example, when we discussed the issue of women in sports, discussing in class and reading other blogs helped reaffirm my opinion that women have not yet achieved full equality in American society.

In the end, honors class is all about perspective. The wide variety of viewpoints being presented in the Roadman Formal every Tuesday is analogous to the wide variety of people across campus and in life. This class is about much more than reading an article and writing about it; honors class teaches students how to effectively communicate their incredibly varied views in an increasingly diverse society.

When I first began reading this week’s passages, both speeches by Kurt Vonnegut Jr, I thought them to be simple ramblings of a mad man. He darts from topic to topic using the stream-of-consciousness style, without much concern for whether the audience will be able to follow. Sometimes, he spends time talking about serious issues, such as starvation and nuclear weaponry. Just as often, he shoves in random, nonsensical comments, like in the second speech when he called semicolons “transvestite hermaphrodites.”

As I continue to read, I realize that I have read some of Vonnegut’s stories in high school English. The one that sticks out in my mind is a gruesome and morose science-fictional commentary on modern medicine. In this story, a woman has been essentially hooked up to machines in order to stay alive. Each organ is a different mechanical box and all that remains of her original body is a head sitting on a stool. Thinking about it still gives me goosebumps.

Even though I try to bring a much more optimistic approach to life than Vonnegut’s harsh cynicism, there are some bits of information in his speeches that I agree with and find to be really interesting. At one point he talks about how humanity doesn’t necessarily need more science to help the world become a better place. Instead, Vonnegut states, people should just be less selfish and help each other out. There is definitely a lot of truth in Vonnegut’s words. While science is very important to the forward progress of humanity, sometimes we just have to remember to help out our fellow man.

For me, Hunting the Hidden Dimension was nothing short of mind-blowing. Not being a mathematically-minded person, I fully expected to watch three or four minutes of this documentary and then promptly fall asleep or become hopelessly lost in calculations. Instead, I was completely entranced by this stunning display of mathematics in nature and art from beginning to end. It is amazing to think that everything in nature can be condensed down to one infinite fractal.

In the past, I found it incredibly hard to find beauty in math. Instead, I would get trapped in seemingly endless and pointless calculations, only to find out that I had mixed up a negative or positive sign in the first step. As it turns out, math is so much more than the sum of calculations.

Fractals, in my newfound opinion, are one of the most beautiful forms of math in nature. It is amazing that the proportion of long to short branches on a tree is the same as the proportion of tall to short trees in that same forest. Evolution has come up with the same solution to problems over and over and over: fractals and repeating patterns. That is the true beauty of nature: order. As it turns out, one can find order in even the most disorderly things.

Summary

The two different readings for this week focused on the negative aspects of sports. The first, “What’s Manly, What’s Not for Athletes,” describes how society tends to view professional athletes. People sneered at and scorned Mark Sanchez for his modeling photoshoot with GQ, Sergio Romio for taking paternity leave, and Landon Donovan for seeking alimony. The article states that all of these athletes should be able to model, see their children being born, and look for funds to help support their kids without their manhood being challenged. The author also comments on the high levels of sexism in sports.

The second reading shows how watching professional sports can be an incredibly negative influence on young boys. Themes in televised sports, such as pro wrestling, the NFL, the NBA, and Major League Baseball include: racism, sexism, violence, and recklessness. The article invents a formula for “A Real Man,” as portrayed in televised sports. “A Real Man” compromises his own well-being by playing while he’s hurt and taking enormous risks. “A Real Man” is aggressive and tough, on and off the field. “A Real Man” “wins” the attention of women. And above all, one can only be “A Real Man” for a short amount of time; he’s only as good as his last game.

The final piece of the assignment is a Youtube clip of TSN’s Top Ten Most Creative Hockey Goals. This video shows some of the most amazing feats of recklessness, cunning, and athleticism ever performed in a hockey game.

Response

I totally agree with the author of “What’s Manly, What’s Not for Athletes.” Fans shouldn’t belittle Romio for sitting out a game so that he could see his child being born. A true “man” is a good father, not necessarily a good athlete. The same goes for both Sanchez and Donovan. Athleticism does not make the man; there are many more qualities that are much more important. In regards to the sexist comments, the people with those opinions are both maddeningly conservative and incredibly chauvinistic. Women have been looked down upon by men for centuries. It is about time that men and women received equal treatment.

I also agree, for the most part, with the argument that the second author presents. The media, especially sports media, has a way of portraying “real men” as sexist, reckless, and aggressive. These are not values that need to be instilled in young boys. The part that is the most maddening is the sportscasters’ idea that athletes who play injured are the most heroic. These athletes have no regard for the future and will probably end up shortening their athletic careers and having long-term medical problems.

There is one thing that I disagree with about this week’s readings. While the readings portray sports as “the bad guy,” I feel that there truly is value in athletics, especially for kids and young adults. Sports help instill a passion for hard work, camaraderie, and a pursuit of perfection in children. There truly is beauty in working toward a goal, through good times and bad, and eventually attaining it. In the end, sports are not the bad guy. The true problem lies in chauvinistic attitudes.

Summary

Cicero explains his beliefs on eloquence and the art of rhetoric. He begins by explaining that almost every political feat and catastrophe known to man was caused by someone with extreme eloquence and knowledge of the rules of rhetoric, in other words, an amazing public speaker. Eloquence paired with wisdom is a powerful force, which can help one to achieve almost anything. On the other hand, an incredibly eloquent person lacking wisdom is a destructive force, a great danger to society.

Cicero’s supports this statement by explaining what he believes to be the true origin of good and evil. He asserts that men were once beasts, and became “human” because a wise, eloquent person decided that men should not live in anarchy. This astute man educated the rest of the world and decided that men should be governed by the rule of law. On the other hand, evil was born when an extremely articulate man who lacked wisdom persuaded the world that he knew how to run the human race. This eloquent evil man caused the world to fall into disaster and turmoil.

Cicero ends his statement by describing the rules of rhetoric, which can allow one to become a powerful public speaker. By properly using the tools of Invention, Arrangement, Elocution, Memory, and Delivery, one can persuade the world to do or believe practically anything.

Response

Cicero’s ideas about powerful speeches and speakers seem completely believable. Listening to a good speaker can sometimes be as satisfying as eating a home-cooked meal. Just being able to hear someone express their true thoughts and feelings has an effect very similar to that of seeing something beautiful. It doesn’t even matter what the eloquent person is saying, just the way that they say it can make stir up a movement and push people to act in ways that they would never have acted otherwise.

I agree that true eloquence is a gift and a talent that, used without wisdom, can be the most destructive force in the world. History is littered with examples of men and women who stirred up a movement purely with their knowledge of rhetoric; some of these movements were beneficial, and others, those not backed by knowledge,  incredibly detrimental.

John F. Kennedy’s speech “Ich bin ein Berliner” demonstrates the overwhelming hope and pride that a good speaker can instill in an audience. JFK talks to a dejected West Berlin about the dangers of communism and the horrors that their East Berlin brothers were facing. He has a way of expressing the audience’s true feelings that almost brings some of the spectators to tears. His rhythmic pauses and general execution of the speech paint a picture of Berlin that helps modern-day listeners understand the both the suffering and triumphs of the people of the divided German capitol.

Response:

Discrimination: treatment or consideration of a person based on the group, class, or category to which that person belongs rather than on individual merit

It is the year 2011 and many people would say that the current generation of adults has been freed from the binds of sexism, racism, and other types of prejudice. The 21^st Century is an era of acceptance and love for one’s fellow man (or woman). The young adults currently entering the workforce are liberally-minded and know better than to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religious or political views, sexual orientation, age, or disability. With horrors of the 1950’s Civil Rights Movement long past, the new Americans would never allow someone’s appearance to dictate their judgment of him/her.

Or would they? Liking What You See: A Documentary disagrees. This short collection of fictional interviews sheds new light on a type of discrimination rarely considered by the 21^st century American public: lookism. Okay… So, maybe “lookism” isn’t a real word, but there is no word in the English vocabulary to describe discrimination based on bone structure, skin clarity, facial symmetry, muscle tone, eye color, and all the other things that make up one’s general appearance, which sheds light on our ignorance of the subject. Every day, people make decisions, sometimes conscious and sometimes unconscious, about others based solely on appearances. “Beautiful” people are more likely to make friends, get jobs, and find a “significant other” while “ugly” people have much harder time with all of these things. Lookism is just like racism and sexism in the fact that it punishes/rewards people for things that they have no control over.

Liking What You See proposes a solution to this problem and calls it calliagnosia or “calli” for short. When one “has calli” it means that a doctor has stimulated his/her brain with an impulse that, more or less, makes it impossible to tell whether a person is beautiful, ugly, or somewhere in between. Instead, a person with calli can judge people only based on what is inside. Just like how the 19^th amendment allowed women to vote, calliagnosia would level the playing field by eliminating discrimination on the basis of looks.

In the last of the interviews, the main character, Tamera Lyons, comes to the conclusion that her parents should not have raised her “with calli” and that personal beauty is not an issue. She describes a world of calliagnostics as a utopia, and, as we have all learned from various science-fiction books and movies, utopias aren’t quite all they’re cracked up to be. I disagree. I believe that a world where people cannot judge on the basis of looks would be a much better place. It would be a place where Tameras and Garretts could be together and love each other without worrying that one may be “out of the other’s league.” It would be a place without young girls wouldn’t have to continue to try to live up to the media’s standard of “beautiful.” It would be a world where everyone is measured not by the number of pimples on their faces, but by their hard work, love, ability, sense of humor, efficiency, or loyalty, depending on the situation. Calli would not create a utopia; calli would just go one step farther in preventing prejudice and discrimination.

Summary:

Liking What You See: A Documentary by Ted Chiang describes, through various interviews, one school’s attempt to institute mandatory calliagnosia (a process that renders patients incapable of perceiving whether a person is attractive or not) on its students. Through other interviews, it helps the reader develop an opinion through one college student’s personal reflections on her experiences with and without calliagnosia.

At the very beginning of the story, Tamera has just come of age and has decided to “turn her calli off” which will, for the first time in her life, allow her to judge other people based on appearance. Once she has her calli turned off, she begins to see the world, and herself, differently. She persuades her ex-boyfriend to do the same, with an ulterior motive. Her ex, Garrett is significantly less attractive than Tamera and she hopes that he will want to get back together with her after realizing that he is ugly. As a beautiful person, Tamera gains more and more self-confidence, while Garrett begins to lose the confidence he once had. In the end, Garrett decides to turn his calli back on, and Tamera and he do not get back together.

The story of Tamera and Garrett is used to illustrate the high value that modern-day people place on appearances. The other half of the collection of interviews describe Pembleton University’s attempt at and the reasons why it should/shouldn’t institute mandatory calliagnosia. These interviews show the pros and cons of a process that would eliminate an entire society’s ability to gauge attractiveness. After lots of research and a student vote, the calliagnosia initiative is turned down.