Final blog: Diverse, not Dumb.

I think what I have learned the most is that there is a lot of difference in opinions among all of us in this class and even the world. I am a really stubborn person, and when I take a stand on something, I automatically assume it is the correct one. That brings along a lot of frustration and anger. Sometimes due to the stupidity of those who can't defend there angle on the conflict, or because they have a valid point to counter my position. I'm sorry, but the students in this class fall under the first one I stated there because I don't feel a lot of them looked deeply into some of the issues we discussed about. I know we are supposed to be "scholarly" and "well-informed", but when they are not, I cannot sit there and take what they seriously. We aren't well-informed at all because we live in a society that treats conflict with a sense of indifference and then take the usual route to remedy it all, which is WAR.
Now with all that said, I feel this class moved us all one step closer to ridding ourselves from having that exact mentality. I enjoyed "thought-picking" at certain pieces this semester to get more out of it than what is on the surface. Even though we beat a lot of the same stuff to death, then revived it, and then went over it again. Of the themes we did cover, I particularly enjoyed analyzing the fact that we are consumed by entertainment and cannot get enough of it.
Entertainment to us has become almost as if it is "owed" to us. We nearly demand that shows continue that we enjoy so much, and get pissed when a Lockout of the NFL may occur. Without all these things to consume our time and attention, we wouldn't know what to do with ourselves! What would we do? Read a book? Go on a hike and enjoy wilderness? Cure AIDS? (well maybe not that...but you get the point)...We could do great things. Which brings me to Emerson and Thoreau. Thoreau went a very long time with only basic necessities and very little technology and resources we take for granted. And he was able to do so easily and established a new look at life. He grasped a sense of life that nobody else could because of his experience. I can't help but think he had a better satisfaction with life than I will ever achieve...
Overall, what I am getting at is, from this class I have gained a new appreciation towards literature in a whole and how it may or may not benefit me. I see that a lot of what is out there, whether it be stories, experiences, themes, personalities, can be related to every one of us. The problem is that not many of us take a lot of effort to go see what those things are and what they could have in store for us. From being called "The Dumbest Generation", I have really wanted to prove that notion WRONG since the beginning of this semester. I want us to not be under that umbrella, I want us to sort of have our own umbrella and be diverse in our thoughts and opinions. If we can prove that we don't all think alike and can contribute a plethora of different achievements of the sort, then we will be taken seriously and not deemed....Dumb.

Blog #9: No books?

I want to start out by saying that I rarely take the time to sit down and read a book, unless I am forced to by a class I am taking of course...Anyway, I have never been one to find much enjoyment through reading a novel and analyzing it when I am finished to somehow gain a sense of satisfaction that can't be achieved elsewhere. In reality, I would much rather "read my screen", meaning be on my laptop reading posts on Facebook, articles about sports news from my favorite teams on ESPN.com, or even breaking news stories of car accidents or crime being committed in our region from Pennlive.com. So to answer the question asked of us for this blog, being forbidden or "missing" the access to a plethora of books would probably not affect me as much as it would others in the class or even the world.

I know there is probably some loophole argument that can be made to counter my OPINION that I just answered with, but truly it would never change my viewpoint about this. I have seen that much of the people in this day and age just "wait for the movie to come out", than actually go read the book. We do it because it is easier and most likely more entertaining. For some of us it is hard to envision exactly what is going on in a book, so seeing it on the big screen prevents us from having to use a thing called "imagination". I found this particularly true with Hunger Games. I couldn't help but sit there and wonder what Peeta, Katniss, and Gale might look like, but now that a movie is being made, I won't have to imagine it for myself. So it could be said that no books equals easier understanding in some cases.

A book can be informational, creative, thought-provoking, and even inspiring. But how a book becomes dangerous is when it is controversial. Controversial meaning it opposes something already deemed factual by society. Examples of this would be "The Origin of Species" by Charles Darwin and "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown. Sparks of outrage came about in rebellion to these novels because they questioned and even altered facts that had already been established. People have a right to freedom of speech, but when that speech opposes society as a whole and what they may believe, it can become a dangerous weapon that causes events we've never witnessed before.

A world without books may be a good thing or a bad thing however you look at it. We pay an astronomical amount of money for books we barely use in our college courses. Getting rid of books could mean getting rid of that expense. But getting rid of those books means losing out on the information they hold.