Process of Change in America

Change.
It's a word that can have both positive and negative connotations.   Some people don't like change - it is scary, not consistent, and not predictable.  Some people like change - it brings excitement and something new to the table.
What would America be like without change?  Or with more change?  Is America an ever-changing society?

From "What's 'American' About America", by John A. Kouwenhoven:
"Change, or the process of consecutive occurrences, is, we tend to feel, a bewildering and confusing and lonely thing.  All of us, in some moods, feel the 'preference' for the stable over the precarious and uncompleted' which, as John Dewey recognized, tempts philosophers to posit their absolutes.  We talk fondly of the need for roots - as if man were a vegetable, not an animal with legs whose distinction it is that he can move and 'get on with it.'  We would do well to make ourselves more familiar with the idea that the process of development is universal, that it is 'the form and order of nature.'"

Change in America is necessary.  It keeps the economy moving forward and progressing.  It allows our families, friends, lives, neighborhoods to be in a constant cycle.  It is part of our culture.  Change is part of what it is to live in America.

"Our history is the process of motion into and out of cities; of westering and the counter-process of return; of motion up and down the social ladder - a long, complex, and sometimes terrifyingly rapid sequence of consecutive change.  And it is this sequence, and the attitudes and habits and forms which it has bred, to which the term "America" really refers."

Writing and Running: A Comparison

I receive the "Runner's Quote of the Day" from the Runner's World website in my inbox every morning.  I got this one a few days ago, and immediately thought of it in the context of our final papers:

"Like writing, running is so much about mind over matter. There are times when you have to override the discomfort and keep pushing.  That capacity to endure and then prevail is just amazing."

Much like running, writing demands endurance.  But, the difference is between physical endurance and mental endurance.  Furthermore, writing endurance also demands that you have the ability to stop eventually.  To get up and walk away from your work, take a break, and come back later. 

That's the stage I am in write now with my final essay.  I have it completed (9 pages with works cited)...but I have LOTS of editing to do.  I find myself getting frustrated because it's really hard to keep looking at the same pages over and over again, and I feel like my brain just gets so full of the information.  Yet, I know that with my mental endurance, much like the physical endurance of running, this paper will eventually be finished and I will be proud of my work. 

Liberal Arts Education

Before this week, I had never really considered the greatness and rewards of a Liberal Arts Education. I had always thought of it as ho-hum...and maybe even been a little jealous of my friends who didn't have GE's because they were in Engineering School, or Business School.  But, after reading the following as well as the St. Olaf booklet, I think differently.

From L.W. Boe's letter to President Acheson and friends of Macalester College:

"The Liberal Arts college is American to the core, but at the same time has been, more so than any other type of institution, world-wide in its interests and outlook.
In the making of America, in that wonderful chapter which covers the moving of the frontier across the continent, the Christian Liberal Arts college has had its big part.  It was not far behind the hunter and the trapper, a missionary, not only for religion, but for culture in its deepest sense.  It was the bearer of civilization.  Into its halls came the uncouth sons and daughters of the pioneer.  Out of it went a generation of consecrated, Christian leaders that helped shape the character of the nation.  To the pioneer it brought a religious and cultural content and reality and helped shape the instrumentalities and forms that should be the bearers of the civilization he wanted to plant here.  The history of this great Middle West barely covers a hundred years, but brings before our eyes a moving picture of life and action the likes of which no other nation or time can produce.  The pioneer was not only the bearer of civilization.  He had to make and create the machinery for it as well."

So, through a liberal arts education, we become the machinery of America.  We become the machines that keep America functioning as a whole.  I guess the well-roundedness of my education will be a great asset, and will keep my "machine wheels" turning and working throughout my life -- because not only have I learned information, but I have learned HOW to learn -- and I will keep learning my whole life.

On Rolvaag's "Concerning Our Heritage"

As I read through Rolvaag's "Concerning Our Heritage", the repeated message that I continued to hear was about how the Norwegian American's heritage is unique and necessary in American culture, especially their value of higher education.

Rolvaag writes, "This view, that learning improves life and makes it fuller and richer was widespread among our people in heathen times.  They also understood that a life lived in ignorance is impoverished."  This, I think is an American view as well -- for the most part.  Especially at St. Olaf; we wouldn't all be here unless we knew that it will serve us well (and some of us might possibly enjoy it).  One of my firm opinions is that education is a main determinant of one's wealth -- and that the gap in quality of education in America is a core cause of the inequality of wealth in America.

There is also emphasis on being more than just Lutheran -- Rolvaag takes a daring move and states that perhaps it is the Norwegian Lutherans who "led the way" in the value of education in America.  He writes, "Just suppose we did! The Lutheran Church has been in America a long time now; still it has not managed to create a seat of learning that is first-rate either in size or influence.  Historically the Lutheran Church ought to be the church of enlightenment par excellence.  Suppose we Norwegian Lutherans really exerted ourselves and led the way, perhaps taking a slightly different path than the one others have trodden before us?  We have the power to do it both financially and intellectually."  I think that St. Olaf wouldn't be St. Olaf if it wasn't founded in Norwegian heritage.  Yes, we'd have the church; yes, we'd be Lutheran.  But we wouldn't have the sweaters, the lutefisk, the immense number of blonde-haired-blue-eyed people.  We wouldn't have the culture that we have.  Both the Norwegian aspect and the Lutheran aspect of St. Olaf's heritage are key in understanding the campus culture.

Finally, I find the St. Olaf's mission statement being conveyed through Rolvaag's words when he writes,
"This desire for knowledge is the aspect of our heritage that we as a people have taken best care of since we became Americans."  Desire for knowledge, taking care of that knowledge, cultivating that knowledge, importance of knowledge.  The combination of American values, Norwegian values, and Lutheran values are what define St. Olaf today.

Paying Attention to Language

I've always thought of writing as a way of expressing myself.  I've always thought of writers and fairly deep people, who engage in writing as a way to reach out to themselves and to others.  For me, I find that often my pen and paper produce words or thoughts that I didn't even know I had; it's almost like magic to me. I write, I feel better, and often I figure out something about myself I never knew before writing.  Writing helps me focus on me; it helps me sit quietly and appreciate the moment of thought and scribbling on paper.

But writing (like music from our discussion yesterday), is more than just about the writer herself.  It's about language.  It's about word choice.  It's about preserving the beauty of words as they are put into sentences to form language.  Language is a way of communicating -- and really, what would writing be without language? Nonexistent?

Robert Bly, a farmer and Norwegian American immigrant wrote in his essay "Norwegian Roots on an American Tree":

"Some people believe that to be a writer is to engage in a moral project.  I think writing has to do primarily with language - with using language precisely and accurately.  And we're all involved with that project.  One of the worst results of the Vietnam war was that it damaged the American language.  The administration began it by insisting that their motives were noble.  Johnson would always quote Lincoln when he was doing something especially despicable.  This double life became national policy.  But if the government insists that it has no shadow at all, then the opposition will accuse them of being nothing but shadow.  I belonged to the left and still do, but our group wasn't any better in its use of language.  Our language for public discussion still has not recovered.  Poetry has to do with paying attention to language."

Poetry has to do with paying attention to language.  Great writing has to do with paying attention to language.  I think of My Antonia, and how beautifully written it is. I think that this is because Cather paid attention to language; she recognized the impact of beautiful language and took advantage of it in her writing.  

Language can be beautiful. Writing can be beautiful.  But only both can be beautiful as long as we pay attention to them. To disregard writing means to disregard language; they work together.  Maybe Bly is getting at a deeper American issue when he says talks about paying attention to language -- maybe we need to pay attention to the language of everyone around us, instead of only the language we know.  Different languages mean different cultures; so if we respect and pay attention to all languages, I believe that we in turn, can respect and pay attention to all cultures. 

Topic Statement for Final Essay

The following is my newly-developed topic statement for my final research essay:

I am going to write my final essay as a journal of 20-year-old Jolene Stien during her sophomore year at St. Olaf, on December 1, 1918.  Jolene is a english major, hoping to become a teacher or even a principal at a grammar school.  She is a white Norwegian and a Lutheran from a fairly wealthy farming family just outside of Minneapolis.  She participates in the St. Olaf Choir and finds ways to play sports with boys even though she is not technically supposed to; she has a lot of spunk and will not let gender constructs get in her way.  Jolene writes her journal as letters to her deceased older brother, Jeremias Stien, who was killed in combat in World War I at age 22 on August 1, 1918 (4 months prior to the current day).  Jeremias was both her brother and her best friend; he had always encouraged her to pursue higher education. However, their mother and father feel differently.  Their parents want Jolene to stay home from college and work on the farm; they had already lost one child and did not want to lose their other.  The journal entry will encompass all of these aspects, as well as touch on the impact of the war on the college, the Christmas Festival concert that Jolene will participate in, the beginning of the winter season on campus, and the development of her gender role on campus. 

Christmas Festival and Social Capital...

I had a flash from the past last night during Christmas Festival rehearsal.  I started thinking about how all of these people from out of state, young and old, travel here to be a part of Christmas Festival.  I thought about how, at the beginning of the year, the majority of the people in choir were strangers to me.  And now, we all hangout outside of choir, we joke together, and we eat meals together.  Then I thought to myself, I'm thinking of social capital from AmCon last semester!  It's funny how the things we learn never truly leave us...

 The link for Christmas festival is below:
http://www.stolaf.edu/christmasfest/

Encourage family and friends to watch it either in the movie theaters or on television! It will be great!

Black Bears!

I love bears.
I love everything about them. When I go camping with my family, I am on bear-watch the entire time.  I think they are beautiful animals and super fascinating. So, when I found this article in which experts say that the black bear population is on the rise, I got very excited:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203710704577050464182836548.html?mod=e2tw

"Forty years after being hunted to near-extinction in many parts of the U.S., black bears have become so plentiful that they are causing trouble for their human neighbors—ripping open camping tents in Colorado, attacking dogs in New Jersey, even breaking into a home in Florida to nab a birthday cake from the kitchen counter."


I just wanted to share this. It appears that this rise in population might be doing a little harm, but as of now, I am just glad that they aren't near extinction anymore.

Past Relationships vs. Present

My Antonia has a large emphasis on the past.  Both Jim and Antonia seem to value their past very highly and almost "live" in their past rather than the present.  Antonia seems to more accept and recognize that that is what has happened and that is how she feels, whereas Jim seems to be pretending and not totally recognize that he has idolized the past. 


When Jim finds out that Antonia has a child but is not married, the author writes (in Jim's voice), 
"I tried to shut Antonia out of my mind.  I was bitterly disappointed in her.  I could not forgive her for becoming an object of pity."  He is disappointed that Antonia did not turn out to be the girl he had pictured. Because he had spent so many years idolizing her, when she did something out of the ordinary, he was angered. 


Towards the end of the text when Antonia and Jim reunite, they both seem to dissolve the barriers of pretending that they are still in the past, and just enjoy remembering and reminiscing with one another.  I think that even though Jim sees that he won't always get to be with Antonia, he gets to have the memories of his past with her, and to him, that is enough.

Race in My Antonia

"When Samson was well again, his young mistress led him back to the piano.  Several teachers experimented with him.  THey found he had absolute pitch, and a remarkable memory.  As a very young child he could repeat, after a fashion, any composition that was played for him.  No matter how many wrong notes he struck, he never lost the intention of a passage, he brought the substance of it across by irregular and astonishing means.  He wore his teachers out.  He could never learn like other people, never acquired any finish.  He was always a negro prodigy who played barbarously and wonderfully.  As piano playing, it was perhaps abominable, but as music it was something real, vitalized by a sense of rhythm that was stronger than his other physical senses, - that not only filled his dark mind, but worried his body incessantly.  To hear him, to watch him, was to see a negro enjoying himself as only a negro can.  It was as if all the agreeable sensations possible to creatures of flesh and blood were heaped up on those black and white keys, and he were gloating over them and trickling them through his yellow fingers." (92).

We talked in class about the implicit messages of the book, and specifically how race is present in the book.  This passage stood out to me, especially because Marissa and I just finished our paper on how race is relevant in the musical world.
This passage seems to be surprised at how well a black musician can play.  To see him enjoy himself and cross the "black and white" barriers (black and white keys).   A black boy being a great musician was rare in this time, especially in this environment.  When he performs, race becomes neutralized, and he becomes harmless.  He is just a musician, regardless of race who his audience can observe without feeling threatened.

Nature in My Antonia

From My Antonia when Jim is sitting in the middle of his grandma's garden:

"I kept as still as I could.  Nothing happened.  I did not expect anything to happen.  I was something that lay under the sun and felt it, like the pumpkins, and I did not want to be anything more. I was entirely happy.  Perhaps we feel like that when we die and become a part of something entire, whether it is sun and air, or goodness and knowledge.  At any rate, that is happiness; to be dissolved into something complex and great.  When it comes to one, it comes as naturally as sleep" (12). 

Nature is often what brings me peace. If I am having a hard day, am upset, or just need to be alone, I almost always seek out nature. I like feeling like I am small -- the universe is so much bigger than I.  It is in nature that the world feels okay - I know am okay...I experience "enough", aka happiness.

I feel like the novel has a kind of curiosity intensity; the character is exploring both mentally and physically his new surroundings.  Jim at one point compares trees/treats trees as humans. His openness and compassion for nature is a ongoing theme in the text.

One night as he is looking up at the stars, Jim says, "though we had come from such different parts of the world, in both of us there was some dusky superstition that those shining groups have their influence on what is and what is not to be.”  (in reference to Antonia).  He appears to be a deeper character who is exploring his beliefs on fate, nature, and himself. 

Some more Gwendolyn Brooks

I found myself a little enchanted with Gwendolyn Brooks after reading her work in class the other day.  So I looked at a few more of her poems and found this one to be one of my favorites:


My Dreams, My Works, Must Wait Till After Hell by Gwendolyn Brooks
I hold my honey and I store my bread 
In little jars and cabinets of my will. 
I label clearly, and each latch and lid 
I bid, Be firm till I return from hell. 
I am very hungry. I am incomplete. 
And none can give me any word but Wait, 
The puny light. I keep my eyes pointed in; 
Hoping that, when the devil days of my hurt 
Drag out to their last dregs and I resume 
On such legs as are left me, in such heart 
As I can manage, remember to go home, 
My taste will not have turned insensitive 
To honey and bread old purity could love.


This poem speaks to me because it is about hope, waiting for the "dawn to come" and that if you just wait and hope (or "sit and hold") that your life will work itself out.  
I think this can be very applicable to the victims of racial discrimination in the early 20th century because they had hope that times would change; there was some glimmer of light in the future that "hell" would end.
I came across this quote in a book about appreciating your life for what it is:
"Hell is wanting to be something and somewhere different from where you are.  If that is true, and I believe it is, most of us spend most of our lives in hell".
Regardless of our beliefs about hell, I believe that hope can be a good thing for any person.  I know that there is this belief that some people have that after they go through a really hard time, that then they will be able to achieve their dreams and works; they will eventually reach some type of satisfaction.  But what I know (and have been trying to work on with myself) is to accept my life for what it is, keep hoping, and believe that my dreams and works are happening now and are possible in the future.

A Further Note on Religion as an Identity Factor

I came across this article on the Washington Post website:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/patheos-on-faith/post/10-questions-worth-asking-about-a-candidates-faith/2011/09/26/gIQAOqlX0K_blog.html

"So, in the spirit of journalistic “fairness,” here is a suggested (albeit incomplete) list of 10 questions worth asking about a candidate’s faith:

1. How does your faith inform your public service?

2. In what ways has your faith experience helped you become a better citizen? A better leader?

3. Can America truly be “great” apart from God and a belief in God?

4. What role might your faith play in the event of a national emergency (i.e., terrorist attack, nuclear war, etc.)?

5. Should Mayor Bloomberg have been allowed prayer at the 9/11 Memorial event this month in NYC? How would you have handled this?

6. Has your faith changed you as a person? In what ways?

7. Does your faith experience cause you to be more accepting of other people’s belief systems or less?

8. After 9/11, the song “God Bless America” was often sung at public events (i.e., sporting events, etc.). In what ways do you believe God has “blessed” America? In what ways do you pray God will continue to “bless” America?

9. Do you view your entrance into public office as a means for advancing your particular faith group or denomination?

10. In what ways do your commitments to faith and family help qualify you for public office?"

I am reminded again of how much religion is an identity factor.  People are drawn to it, repelled by it.  People judge it, shun it.
In politics, it is a very large decision for some people when they vote.  People judge candidates based on their religion.  In politics, it is an inescapable part of one's identity.  They have to pick a "religious" view to hold by so that they have something to tell the voters.  It's something a lot of people are about.

Religious Identity = A Choice?

Yesterday in class we talked about something that I just can't stop thinking about:

Religion is a legitimate form of identity that everyone gets to choose.  It is a choice.  It is not common for a lot of identity forms to be able to be chosen.  But, religion defines a person, and it is one of those parts of identity that isn't always rooted in your childhood.

I tried to think about what other identity factors are "choosable".
Family is not -- you don't get to choose your family members, but you do get to choose how you identify with them and also how much you include them in your life (at least when you're older.  Children don't really get a choice).
Race is not a choice. It is a physicality that cannot be changed really; it is an almost-forced identity.
Your environment, such as small town or big city; lots of siblings or only child, school environment, etc, are not really chosen by you.  Yes you can change how much you want your "history of environment" to be a part of you, but part of it will always be with you.
You get to choose your friends, yes.  They somewhat identify you.

I guess that for me, religion is something I grew up with.  I grew up going to Lutheran church.  But once I was really old enough to choose what faith meant to me and develop my views, I decided to keep religion as a part of me.  And it really is a big part of who I am.  I guess I have chosen to let it be part of my identity because that's what is important to me.

A few thoughts on "Chicago's Influence on Religion"

As I read through the article, I found myself having a few different thoughts on "Chicago's Influence on Religion", by Martin Marty. 


"Moody came as a young businessman who was soon found to be a success at “soul-winning.
The first was about Moody -- he arrived in Chicago as a "soul-winning" man.  He promised hope, renewal, etc, to the American people.  For so many people, the idea of "soul-winning" is important -- I believe that an American ideal is that people always want to be better, and people idolize those who they think are the best.  Because someone can offer people a way to be better, to be "soul-winning' and pure -- a way to reach their own goal -- it makes sense that Moody would go to Chicago.  It was a huge city (it still is).  It didn't really have the risk of failure because there were so many people and so many possibilities to succeed.
"Moody came as a young businessman who was soon found to be a success at “soul-winning.


The second, is that even in religious growth can race not be escaped.  But this time, no one could argue that race wasn't a plus -- most African Americans were Christian of some sort, and because this was the dominant religion, people couldn't scorn them from their religion.  African Americans could escape their race barriers just a tiny bit when it came to religion - they were allowed to believe the same as white people; it was something both races could identify with.
"After the Catholic immigrations, the greatest change came during and after the two world wars and in the prosperous postwar period, when African Americans by the many thousands migrated, especially from the rural South. They brought with them Methodist, Baptist, and later Pentecostal faiths associated with the South. They made their homes in the South and West Sides of the city, areas which most whites left. Catholicism and white Protestantism became increasingly suburban phenomena, although Catholic parishes persisted and Catholicism remained the majority faith in the city."


The third is about African-American gospel music.  When I saw this paragraph, I immediately thought of my experience in choir.  In every single choir I've been in I have sung gospel music, even including Cantorei this year (we've already sung two gospel pieces).  It is fun, it is upbeat, it is different, and it is a reminder that much of our musical heritage comes from our religion -- whether it be gospel music or old hymns. 
"The Chicago influence has spread to other arts as well. One can make the case that “gospel” and “soul,” major African American contributions to religious music, originated in Chicago. Thomas Dorsey was the pioneer of gospel music, and singers like Mahalia Jackson helped carry it to the rest of the nation and much of the world. Long before that, Billy Sunday's musical partner, Homer Rodeheaver, influenced the kind of evangelistic gospel song popular in revivalistic Protestantism.Northwestern University's school of music fostered world-acclaimed classical church music, for example through the compositions of Leo Sowerby. GIA Publications, under Catholic auspices, and Hope Publishing in Wheaton, an evangelical house, have encouraged and published music that shapes styles across the nation and wherever American religious influence spreads."

Fostering Community -- St. Olaf Style

Today in class we discussed Pullman's little village, and whether or not his rules as well as the villages set up fostered community.  My conclusion was that they both help and hurt the community, but as Marissa said, it's a give-and-take process. Some people like some of the rules that others hate.  It goes back and forth, but all in all everyone works together to make the community last.

I thought of how this relates to St. Olaf.  There's the honor code, which everyone works to uphold.  There's the alcohol policy; some hate it, some love it. But the community works within it. There's the final exam policy (which, rumor has it, is getting changed) that every class has to have a final exam period.  This can be a burden or a gift.

Either way, each of the rules within the St. Olaf community are liked or disliked by many different people. But these are things (opportunity costs) that students and faculty give up to be at a place like this.  We make compromises to help foster community within the college, and in doing so, we create a welcoming and accepting atmosphere.

Business and Its Culture

"For him [Pullman] there was never any distinction between culture and business; indeed, his business was founded upon the manufacture of a new life-style of travel...Pullman's meticulous attention to monopolizing the means of supervision also had another purpose.  He wished to change the behavior of his customers and his workers through manipulation of the cultural environment - to transform them into better customers and workers" (Gilbert 146-147).

Pullman wanted to combine culture and business into one.  For him, it was one combined idea.  For other's, it was separate.  He wanted the highest standard of commitment and work from his employees, and he wanted his customers to spend as much money and love the company as much as possible.  He loved his work culture and wanted to make it an enjoyable place to be -- his work was his life, so he wanted to make it a good enough place to spend a lot of time.

Thinking about this concept of combining business and culture into one kinda fits my recent experience of interviewing with Northwestern Mutual (this morning, actually) for a summer internship in 2012.  It went really well, and I left smiling and excited about the position.  The recruiter was very excited and happy to be where he is -- I was reminded of how important a friendly, happy, supportive work environment really is.  My recruiter combines his business and culture into one -- to have the best, most profitable clients as possible, as well as leading the best, most talented set of interns as he possibly can.

Winter?

The following is an article about the snow storm out East this past weekend:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/historic-october-northeast-storm-epic-incredible-downright-ridiculous/2011/10/31/gIQApy7LZM_blog.html

One of my older brothers is living in Washington D.C. and told me about all of the snow!  My other older brother, who lives in Boston with his wife and 3 little girls, told me he wasn't prepared at all.  It's funny for me to think about a state OTHER than Minnesota getting snow before us!  I also feel like we have been incredibly lucky with the warmth that we've had so far.  Most of the time we get snow before Halloween But not this year. Rumor has it though, that we will have snow within the next 2 weeks.  Don't know if I am excited or not!  Actually, once 102.9FM starts playing Christmas music on November 1, I would be happy to have snow.  I love the spirit of the holidays! We have started Christmas Fest music in choir too.

This past weekend I was worried about having snow because I played in an ultimate frisbee tournament down at Winona State University, called "Hallowinona".  We were lucky and did not get snow! I was yet again reminded of why I love it so much -- because of the team dynamics, being outside, and the honesty with which people play!

7 billion Population!

According to the United Nations, today the world has hit a population of 7 billion people.  Geez!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/world-population-not-only-grows-but-grows-old/2011/10/25/gIQAdt17VM_story.html

Apparently we are "going gray"; or in other terms, there are way more old people than there used to be, and way less young people than there used to be.

"The aging of the human race has been faster than anyone could have imagined a few decades ago. Fertility rates have plunged globally; simultaneously, life spans have increased. The result is a re-contoured age graph: The pyramid, once with a tiny number of old folks at the peak and a broad foundation of children, is inverting. In wealthy countries, the graph already has a pronounced middle-age spread."


We do not have enough young children to replace the older people in the work force because of the fertility rates being so low.  Experts always thought it would just be something that took care of itself; but it didn't.  Cultures may change because of this:


"The aging of the world will change cultures in myriad ways. People may have to extend their working lives far beyond the traditional retirement age. Countries may start competing for immigrants. Across the planet, vast numbers of people already are migrating from high-fertility countries to those that need workers"


It will be interesting to grow older in a world where the elderly are more common than the youth and to see what happens in the next 20 years as the world tries to increase fertility rates.

Vaudeville and Performing

With Vaudeville on my mind, yesterday in my Christmas fest mass choir rehearsal I couldn't help but think about performing.  Vaudeville performers were so passionate about what they did and everyone was so into it.  Anton and Aspaas always talk about how we as singers need to put passion into our singing.  It has to be more than a note and a word.  We have to translate it into our own lives a so that we can convey a passion to our audience.
Vaudeville performers would also 'get the hook' if they were not pleasing to the audience or if they were not family-friendly (and appropriate) in the later years of Vaudeville.  This is somewhat synonymous with choir here at St. Olaf.  Not that we 'get the hook' persay, but we are expected to have the highest standard of musical quality and integrity and work ethic as possible.  And if we don't, we get yelled at, or, we simply just feel very bad/guilty for not putting in the same amount of work as other musicians.  We of course keep our music appropriate as well.
Lastly, Vaudeville performers made up their own acts, whereas as a singer in Christmas fest we have our 'act" (aka music) handed to us.  This means that as a performer, we have to listen to our director and conform ourselves to sing the pieces the way he or she wants it.  This is different for orchestrating it on our own because this means that we have to listen to our director, our peers, and ourselves.  There is a little less freedom, but there is also a lighter burden because it means we do not have to discipline the group without the help of a leader.

Child Labor

"...Although in our work girls under sixteen, as well as boys, are counted children.  It will be remembered that the census returns place girls over fifteen among adults, but reckon boys as children until sixteen years" (Hull-House Maps and Papers 52).

Girls were considered adults before boys were.  What?  Humans are humans, children are children, age is age.  This is saying that 15 years old meant that girls were adults, but boys had another year of childhood.  So girls' childhoods were taken from them even earlier than they were supposed to be.  First off, I am going to hit this from a feminist standpoint.  Girls were supposed to grow up faster and become adults before boys; so in some ways girls had more responsibility, they lost their childhood before boys.
We talked yesterday in class about how Hiis's pictures sent the message that children lost their childhoods; they were forced to act older, to grow up faster, to have more responsibility.  What goes along with this message is the assumption that childhood is a right.  Everyone has a right to a childhood; I personally believe that one of the greatest (yet very common) tragedies is when children lose their childhood.  I believe that when children are forced to grow up fast, to have to seek out love on their own, to have to fend for themselves, they are robbed and something within them "breaks".  What "breaks" is the child's sense of safeness, the sense that they are okay and that they will be okay.  When faced with hardship during the early years of childhood, children are robbed of growing up and believing that they can have a good life.  They are robbed of the vision of the American Dream.

America and Individualism

A question from "Jacob Riis: Shedding Light On NYC's 'Other Half'" article: 
"If different "races" and nationalities possess inherent moral and cultural characteristics, how can that be reconciled with the American creed of individualism?"


I LOVE this question, because I struggle with the idea of American "individualism".  It seems to me as though society wants us to conform to the 'norm'.  Yet there is this strive, this American Dream to be individualistic, to stick out.   How can these two ideals coexist?  I have a hard time with this.  


I think of Perfect Cities, and how different jobs, the upward mobility of Chicago as a whole, and the emergence of women's and men's rights caused this city to be individualistic. But then I find myself kind of clumping together all the people of Chicago into little groups and just assuming they were all the same; it is just that simple.   But then this defeats the "individualistic" vision I have of Chicago.  Can a city have individualism itself, even if the people are not all individualistic?   Can individualism naturally exist in a person, or does the idea of individualism have to be planted in his head?  Is it even individualism if someone before him thought of it?


Inherent moral and cultural characteristics will always be a part of America.  We are a big hodge-podge pish-posh of different cultures and morals.  This makes these different morals and cultures individualistic.  They are defined, they stick out.  But do the people?  Or are they just swallowed up into the group?  Does individualism of a group or a city cancel the possibility that a member of that group or city can achieve individualism?

Cantorei Choir Tour 2011

I spent this fall break with Cantorei Choir, touring the midwest (Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska).  As there was a lot of bus time, I took the time to read Perfect Cities, and I came across this quote:

"The tourist of this era, then, was a person who intentionally placed himself or herself in a strange situation, for pleasure and for instruction"(James Gilbert 22)

I am a tourist!  Of the midwest, on a choir tour.  So...here's my experience on this trip in terms of this quote.

1. "...placed herself in a strange situation":  I placed myself in a strange situation, that's for sure!  I got on a bus with 85 other people of whom I probably knew 15 at MOST; went to 3 states (drove through 4 if we we count Iowa!) that really don't have too much to offer except for the churches we are singing at and lots lots LOTS of cows; and I stayed with host families each night.  So I basically got on a bus to spend 4.5 days with people I didn't really know.  Strange?  I thought it would be.
But, as per St. Olaf habit, it was SO MUCH FUN.

2. "for pleasure":  I wasn't really going on tour for 'pleasure' persay.  I was going because I was required to as a member of the choir.  But, it turned out to be for 'pleasure' by the end -- I enjoyed the people and the music so so much.

3.  "and for instruction":  It is true that I learned a lot on this trip.  I learned more about singing and music.  I learned more about people.  I learned information about the different states we went to.  I learned what it feels like to be in a car that runs over an animal (and how emotionally traumatic it is).  I learned how to stay with people I knew nothing about.

Oh, job applications

I just finished taking 2-hours-worth of assessments as part of my interview for Target's "business analyst intern" position that I am trying to get for next summer.   These assessments reminded me a little of psychology class -- I took a personality test; they were also a reminder of the ACT (high school!) because I took a 'numerical analysis' test and a reading test.   It's funny how we never get too old for tests.

I am reminded again of how competitive the business industry is, let alone any industry.  The fight for and the drive for success starts right here, right now.  It's so different to how it used to be; my dad talks about applying for college 3 months before it started, how he didn't pick his major until senior year, and how graduate school wasn't really expected.  Now these things have completely changed!

I feel as if I am in the midst of 'writing' the most important part of my life story during these next few years. What I do now will significantly impact what happens in my career, family, life in general.  As we read through different texts (Quicksand, Ragtime, etc) and we go through an entire story of a character, beginning to end, I find myself wondering what my story will turn out to be. What do I want my story to be?  What do I want my ending to be?

As for the present moment, I am off for a fall break of touring the midwest with Cantorei Choir!  WOOHOO

Dreams of Change -- Quicksand

"She began to make plans and to dream delightful dreams of change, of life somewhere else.  Some place where at last she would be permanently satisfied. Her anticipatory thoughts waltzed and eddied abou to the sweet silent music of change.  With rapture almost, she let herself drop into the blissful sensation of visualizing herself in different, strange places, among approving and admiring people, where she would be appreciated, and understood" (Larsen 53).

This is perhaps my favorite passage that I have read thus far in Quicksand.  And what I see when I read these words are sadness.  Sadness about life; dissatisfaction as well.
I am once again reminded that every individual struggles with something.  It can be easy to get caught up with what we would like to change about ourselves, our friends, our community, America in general. People always have complaints, they always have things they would like to improve.  And while improvement is not a bad thing, it is also good to recognize what we have, just as we are. Marissa recently wrote a blog about recognizing how great our bodies are just as they are--everything they allow us to do.
However, I realize Quicksand is a little bit of a different situation.  It is set in a time where everything was judged, changing, and hard to find one's place in.   Of course she wanted to find a place where she was appreciated and understood.  To find a world in which she could be herself and not have to worry about being "out" of the crowd.
It's interesting to think about this and how things don't really change that much.  The need to be understood and appreciated travels through generations.  I find myself wondering if these needs are learned, or if they are innate in us as Americans.

Team = Social Capital?

I played in an ultimate frisbee tournament this weekend; as usual, it was super fun and made me super tired!  But, at the end of the day, this thought popped into my mind:  Ultimate frisbee tournaments are an out-picturing of social capital (last semester, anyone?)
Within each team there is so much love and acceptance.  Teammates have to trust each other to catch, throw, follow through the continuations. We spend so much time together that we all know each other impeccably well. But there is more than just that.
Ultimate frisbee is a culture.  The jerseys, the shorts, the hats.  The attitudes.  The games that you play with the team you are playing against -- not just the game of ultimate frisbee, but during timeouts and afterwards, games are played between the teams.  Silly games, like "WA" or "kungfu" or "mini tanks".  Games that allow for laughter.   I can't think of many sports where rival teams get a long like this.
Part of the reason I love ultimate is the 'spirit of the game'.  There are no referees.  Fouls are called on a trust basis; you call a foul if you get fouled. The person that fouled you can 'contest' or 'no contest'. Honesty is a big component.
Both between teammates and between teams, there is a lot of trust and kind attitudes that are shared.  Sounds like a great kind of social capital to me!

Coherence

My paragraph that I chose for coherence, from Takaki:

"The demand for Mexican exclusion resonated among Anglo workers.  Viewing Mexicans as a competitive labor force, they clamored for the closing of the border.  In 1910, the American Federation of Labor's Advocate asked: 'Is it a pretty sign to see men, brawny American men with callouses on their hands and empty stomachs - sitting idly on benches in the plaza, while slim-legged peons with tortillas in their stomachs, work in the tall buildings across the way?  DO you prefer the name Fernadez, alien, to the name, James, citizen, on your payroll?' Five years later, the Advocate again denounced the employment of Mexicans as cheap laborers:  "True AMericans do not want or advocate the importation of any people who cannot be absorbed into full citizenship, who cannot eventually be raised to our highest social standard.  Clearly, race was being used as a weapon by the American Federation of Labor:  Mexicans not only constituted 'cheap labor' but were regarded as incapable of becoming fully American."

Who Gets to Decide?

As I read Gay New York, I can't help but think "Who gets to decide?"  Who gets to decide what is acceptable?  Why does society shun that which is different or new?  When did this phenomenon start? What is its root? 

Doctorow writes, in a section about the revulsion against gay life (this also connects to my last blog post about masculinity):

"The revulsion against gay life in the early 1930s was part of a larger reaction to the perceived 'excesses' of the Prohibition years and the blurring of the boundaries between acceptable and unacceptable public sociability.  But it also reflected the crisis in gender arrangements precipitated by the Depression.  As many men lost their jobs, their status as breadwinners, and their sense of mastery over their own futures, the central tenets undergirding their gender status were threatened.  A plethora of sociological studies of 'The Unemployed Man and His Family' reflected a widespread concern that massive male unemployment and job insecurity had upset gender relations and diminished the status of men in the family.  The reaction against the challenges posed to manhood by Depression dconditions was widely evident in the culture, from the celbration of pwoerful male physicques in the public art of the New Deal to the attacks on married women for 'stealing' men's jobs and the laws passed by several states requiring women to be dismissed from teaching jobs when they married.  Lesbians and gay men began to seem more dangerous in this context - as figures whose defiant perversity threatened to undermine the reproduction of normative gender and sexual arrangements already threatened by the upheavals of the thirties.  The new laws forbidding gay people to gather openly with heterosexuals in licensed restaurants and bars and banning even the representation of homosexuality bespoke a fear that gender arrangements were so fragile, even a glimpse of an alternative might endanger them.  The risk seemed so palpable that special attention was not even given to the threats such contact or images posed to impressionable young people - the usual vehicle for the expression fo fears about social reproduction.  Even the adults who patronized TImes Square nightclubs needed to be protected from them" (353-354).

Why did society have to try so hard in order to stop a movement that wouldn't be stopped?  Why is change such a bad thing?  I have question after question...

I think of gender roles as socially acceptable.  Society accepted them, created them even, and so therefore they were good. When they were threatened, society was threatened.  Sex roles, however, were never really defined by society.  It was just assumed that everyone was straight.  Because these were undefined, when homosexuality came along, it threw society into an uproar.  Add on top of that the women who wanted to change their gender roles, and it's no wonder why society felt threatened.

But why is society threatened by change?

Where did this threat originiate?

And does it still exist?

Masculinity in Gay New York

I left class today with SO MANY thoughts racing through my head.  But the one that I kept wanting to say was about this second passage that I had also picked out for class:

There was this whole worry that the masculinity of men was being damaged in the early 1900s; that because of this gay movement, the image of the typical American masculine man would be destroyed.  But this didn't really happen, did it.  Men are still the "head of the household" and are still very respected.  They even still are regarded as (maybe) superior to women in the workforce.

Chaucey writes: "But the fairy also provoked a high degree of anxiety and scorn among middle-class men because he embodied the very things middle-class men most feared about their gender status.  His effeminacy represented in extreme form the loss of manhood middle-class men most feared in themselves, and his style seemed to undermine their efforts to shore up their manly status" (115).

This is so crucial because part of America has always been about men;  European men were the "first ones here" with Christopher Columbus.  We've always had male presidents. Male soldiers dominate. Men. Men. Men.  The masculinity of our culture is so evident, it kind of seems silly to me that these middle-class men were so afraid of losing it because of the fairies.  If you look at our culture now, men are still the center of it. I don't like admitting it, but they are.  Perhaps this gay movement that emerged in the early 1900s proves that the masculinity of men will never disappear -- it's always been here, and it will never be undermined.

A Forgotten Fruit?

My older brother, who is currently living in Washington, D.C. trying to make his way in the world of politics with a political science degree, sent me this article.  He knows I love fruit, so that's partly why he sent it, but also because it is a little piece of history that is actually really cool!


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/09/29/140894570/the-pawpaw-foraging-for-americas-forgotten-fruit?sc=fb&cc=fp




The PawPaw is a little fruit that "grows along the banks of the Potomac — a speckled and homely skin that hides a tasty treat."  It's a tropical fruit in the United States! What? Here's the history: "Thomas Jefferson had pawpaws at Monticello. And when he was minister to France in 1786, he had pawpaw seeds shipped over to friends there. He probably wanted to impress his friends with something exotic from America."  Furthermore, "Lewis and Clark wrote in their journals that they were quite fond of the pawpaw. At one point during their expedition in 1806, they relied on pawpaws when other provisions ran low. And from Michigan to West Virginia, people have even named towns and lakes after the pawpaw."


Who would have thought a little piece of fruit would have so much history attached?? I thought this was more than fitting to blog about -- so much American history!  And a side note -- pawpaws are apparently full of antioxidants, so eat up!

You Can't Escape Discrimination

"But the fairy also provoked a high degree of anxiety an scorn among middle-class men because he embodied the very things middle-class men most feared about their gender status. His effeminacy represented in extreme form the loss of manhood middle-class men most feared in themselves, and his style seemed to undermine their efforts to shore up their manly status.  His womanlike manner challenged the supposed immutability of gender differences by demonstrating that anatomical males did not inevitably become men and were not inevitably different from women.  The fairy's feminization of his body seemed to ridicule and highlight the artificiality of the efforts of other men to masculinize theirs.  Being called a fairy became  a serious threat to middle-class men precisely because the boundaries between the she-man and the middle-class man seemed so permeable, despite men's beset efforts to develop manly bodies and cultural styles" (115).

Discrimination seems to be the never-ending theme that I see so far this semester! It's everywhere! Also, the recurring theme that society doesn't like things that are new.  In this case it is the gay culture and the fairy.  I find myself having a hard time with this issue because I think of America as so free.  We are free to be who we want to be, say what we want to say, do what we want to do (within reason).  And yet this comes with an almost guaranteed attachment of society's disapproval.  A part of society will always disapprove of something someone does.  So we do not really have true freedom without disapproval from someone.  Does all freedom come along with an attached judgement by society?  Is it even possible to do something completely "right" according to society?  Is society made up of one view?  I would think not; rather, I think society is an overlapping and chunking of many different views on different issues.  Society's judgement and constructs seem inescapable, and it kind of freaks me out.  Our history texts and other texts that we have read thus far in AmCon seem to say that society's judgements are inescapable to.
Scary, I think.

Poetry and America

Dream Variations by Langston Hughes

To fling my arms wide
In some place of the sun,
To whirl and to dance
Till the white day is done.
Then rest at cool evening
Beneath a tall tree
While night comes on gently,
Dark like me-
That is my dream!

To fling my arms wide
In the face of the sun,
Dance! Whirl! Whirl!
Till the quick day is done.
Rest at pale evening...
A tall, slim tree...
Night coming tenderly
Black like me.

This was by far my favorite one that I read by Langston Hughes.  I realize that a couple of his mentions of "black like me" and his last sentence makes it seem particular to only blacks, but I felt like I identified with the bulk of it. To me, this poem seems to be about freedom. And maybe the freedom he is talking about is different than the freedom that each person who reads this thinks about.  But when I read this poem, I hear him asking for the freedom to live, the freedom to relax, the freedom to be carefree or worry free;  I hear a desperation yet also a recognition like he believes he will never be able to be that free to "dance". 

The author's subtle mention of nature --  "sun" "tree"...recognizes how much peace can be found in nature. Can freedom be found in nature?  I would like to think so.  But even if this is true, then can this freedom be kept?  Or is it only short lived?  I know that it is in nature that I feel most free, but when I leave nature, I am no longer free.  This, of course, translates into the question:  Is all freedom short lived?  

Intro to Harlem Renaissance

From the article, Great Migration: The African-American Exodus North:


"[The Great Migration] had such an effect on almost every aspect of our lives — from the music that we listen to to the politics of our country to the ways the cities even look and feel, even today," says Isabel Wilkerson. "The suburbanization and the ghettos that were created as a result of the limits of where [African-Americans] could live in the North [still exist today.] And ... the South was forced to change, in part because they were losing such a large part of their workforce through the Great Migration."


The Harlem Renaissance is honestly something I am not too familiar with;  I never studied it that deeply or have read about it that closely.   Yet, the film we watched in class today and then these articles we have read have really caught my interest!
I LOVE the fact that The Great Migration had an effect on the "music we listen to and the the politics of our country..."  If you look at American culture today, we see that the music is different for different classes, races, gender, etc.   Music is something I can really identify with because I grew up singing, playing piano, and playing violin.  
I like to think that when music changes, it is always meaningful;  when music changes, it means something BIG is happening.  Think of a movie, for example -- when the musical score gets louder, perhaps a fight is happening.   Now translate this into the Harlem Renaissance -- the music was changing.  The traditions were changing.  Culture as a whole was changing.  America was changing.  If you pay attention to music in history, you can learn a lot about the events happening  at that time.
Some of the greatest hits of all time come out of the Harlem Renaissance -- Louis Armstrong, for example, was a big hit-music maker at that time.
I guess what I am trying to say is that music says a lot about a culture, a people, a race, a gender.  Music can tell a story; music tells the story of history.  And if we open our ears enough to listen, we will hear a story of change being sung or played.  The story of change in the Harlem Renaissance was that of African-Americans and other races finding their own identity in music and in America itself. 

Dissatisfaction Quote Analysis

"It was evident to him that the world was composed and recomposed in an endless process of dissatisfaction."

True or false?  Here is what I wrote in class today when DeAne told us to just "write!":

"True...? If human wants are unlimited, according to economic principles, then it has to be true.  Wanting focuses on what you don't have.  Satisfaction notices what you do have and allows that to be enough.  In America, it seems as though people don't stop to realize what they do have.   They look at what someone else has, realize they don't have it, and go after it.  There is always something that someone is going to want; there's always going to be dissatisfaction."
To continue on this subject...
Katie mentioned (over skype) that there is this idea of individual satisfaction versus satisfaction with the world.  And that we are not stuck in dissatisfaction.  Is life, then, what we make of it?  Can we decide that this composing and recomposing of dissatisfaction is just present, and continue on our lives? Or are we supposed to make it end?
I agree with Katie that the individual can be satisfied even though the world is not satisfied.  Ever since we got out of class today, I find myself looking around at others...and wondering if they are satisfied.  With themselves, with the world...even just here at Olaf.  Is it possible that our campus composes and recomposes itself in an endless process of dissatisfaction?  Is it inescapable?  (Wow these seem like depressing thoughts...).  So many questions...and I believe there's not really "one" right answer.

Ragtime Film vs. Book

Tonight we watched a good chunk of the film of Ragtime.   I actually really enjoyed it because it helped give me a visualization of the words I read!  However, I did have some things that really stuck out negatively to me about the film:
It seemed that Mother was depicted as downtrodden, inferior, almost stupid.  I didn't like that.
Father was depicted as more ignorant that I think he is...he was being rude and mean to Coalhouse Walker more-so than he was in the book.
I was really pleased with how they portrayed Coalhouse Walker, Tateh, Tateh's little girl, and Mother's Younger Brother.  I think Mother's Younger Brother did very well and he was actually exactly how I had pictured him.
One topic that the film helped clear up for me was the how political the upper-class world of Evelyn and Thaw and Standford White was.   The culture really left Evelyn with not very many choices, and I can imagine how trapped she felt.  It was also interesting how they cut out the part about Evelyn spending days and days and days with Tateh and his daughter.  I thought this was a crucial part in the book about how Evelyn wanted to make herself a part of the lower-class group.
In conclusion, I enjoyed the movie and found it very helpful to watch.  I would eventually like to see the end of it...but for now I am moving forward with my Ragtime paper!

Race and Ethnicity

From DeAne or Mary off of moodle: "So there were Negros and there were immigrants. What do the lenses of race and ethnicity help us to see in the book? What does the book help us to see about race and ethnicity, then and now?"

The most strong idea about race and ethnicity that I get from Ragtime, is that the two are still blended together and discriminated against.  And part of the reason they are discriminated against is because of American history; there is a history of discrimination.  There is a movement these days about embracing diversity, having humans live together in peace.  Just because our history is founded in shunning diversity does not mean that it should continue (though it does, and will always continue probably...). "But the general perception of human diversity - often with value judgement attached regarding mental, physical, and moral attributes - is as old as settled human existence."  (Constructing Social Identity: Race).   Yes, America's perception of diversity has always been around.  Yes, as humans we are naturally drawn to those who are similar to us because it's 'safe'.  But that doesn't constitute a need to shun those who are different, to discriminate against them, and to not embrace diversity.

"In order to understand ethnicity, we must divest it of all conscious or unconscious racial connotations.  Ethnicity may be defined as a collective, inherited, cultural identity, buttressed by social structures and social networks, and often formulated in opposition to competing social groups."  Ethnicity is not about race.  Ethnicity is about where an individual is from; their environment.  "Ethnicity is a collective phenomenon, a 'we feeling' that unites a number of people"(Constructing Social Identity: Ethnicity).   That being said, couldn't our AmCon class be an ethnicity?   We are a "we feeling"...we are united by the 2 years we spend together, the things we discuss, the material we read.  Ethnicity is about cultural and social identity.  It is important to redefine ethnicity vs. race, and to make sure that American (specifically student) understand the difference between the two.  It would be another step towards living peaceably among one another. 

Obama's 9/11 Speech

I just wanted to share this for those who might have not listened to or read Obama's speech from 9/11.  In my opinion, this is very moving....

“Today, it is worth remembering what has not changed,” Obama said. “Our character as a nation has not changed. Our faith -– in God and in each other –- that has not changed. Our belief in America, born of a timeless ideal that men and women should govern themselves; that all people are created equal, and deserve the same freedom to determine their own destiny –- that belief, through tests and trials, has only been strengthened.”

Dissatisfied America?

Here is a quote that hit me 'square in the face' that I had forgotten about for a couple of days from Ragtime, by E.L. Doctorow:

"It was evident to him that the world composed and recomposed itself constantly in an endless process of dissatisfaction" (118).

Dissatisfaction.  A little scary, isn't it, to think about our world never being satisfied?   And we are our world, meaning that this translates into us never being satisfied.  Is this possible?  Is there nothing that can satisfy our wants? Our needs?

I know that one of the basic principles in economics (class thoughts overlapping here) is that human wants are unlimited.  But can we get something and be satisfied, not want any more of that one thing, but still want something else?  Does the wanting ever stop?

There are so many trails that I could go on with this quote, that I will have to contain myself a bit here.  In relation to the book...the ragtime feeling of the text was that of dissatisfaction.  Nothing was ever quite right.   Someone was always unhappy.  America was in a bit of an uproar.  But isn't it still?  All over the news, even today, are articles about how people are unhappy, articles about all the wrong that is happening in the world.  Corrupt politics.  Corrupt businesses.  Corrupt people.  

I try to imagine what would really happen if there was never satisfaction.  Would this mean destruction?  That if we humans were so unhappy with the way things were (or are) that we would try to destroy ourselves?  Is that what (maybe) some of our authors and historians and even current reporters could be getting at?   A dissatisfied America is one that falls apart.  And to some, it could seem like America is falling apart these days.  

Perhaps something that, as a society, we need to work on, is being more satisfied with what we already have.  Noticing what we as Americans do have, and allowing that to be enough.  We have all grown up (I'm pretty sure, regardless of generation) thinking that we should always want and expect more.  I am reminded of an Anne Frank quote that I love... 

      "Think of all the beauty still left around you, and be happy."

I suppose I am making this statement, in conclusion:   Americans need to realize how good we have it. Be thankful for it, and allow ourselves to be satisfied.  Because it is with satisfaction that we learn to work together in a democracy.  And if we are satisfied with ourselves as individuals, we can be satisfied with one another as a whole country. Not to say that everyone will be happy and in agreement with what is going on, but maybe, at least we would have peace within the country and be able to bridge the gap between different political parties, social classes, etc. 

Ragtime and Social Class

Is social identity based on social class?  

I'd have to say yes.  But maybe social identity is not always what people want it to be. Take Evelyn Nesbit, for example.  She seems quite fed up with being in the upper-class and having people identify who she is based on that...so much so that she falls in love with the poor.  She loves helping them.  She loves being with them.  She loves escaping her life to be with them.  Is Doctorow suggesting that one's social class can be a burden, regardless if one is in the upper class or the lower class?  Is either place a place to be unhappy?  Can happiness within a certain social class be achieved?  The following is a passage from Ragtime that helps put this into perspective.

“This was the day Evelyn Nesbit considered kidnapping the little girl and leaving Tateh to his fate.  THe old artist had never inquired of her name and knew nothing about her.  It could be done.  Instead she threw herself into the family’s life with redoubled effort, coming with food, linens and whatever else she could move past the old man’s tormented pride.  She was insane with the desire to become one of them and drew Tateh out in conversation and learned from the girl ow to sew knee pants.  For hours each day, each evening, she lived as a woman in the Jewish slums, and was driven home by the Thaw chauffeur from a prearranged place many blocks away, always in despair.  She was so desperately in love that she could no longer see properly, something had happened to her eyes, and she blinked constantly as if to clear them of the blur.  She saw everything through a film of salt tears, and her voice became husky because her throat was bathed in the irrepressible and continuous crying which her happiness caused her” (Doctorow 49-50).

Evelyn seems to enjoy 'escaping' to be with the poor.  She enjoys not having to bear her own social class 'burden'.  I think Doctorow is depicting Evelyn as a "generic" young woman wanting to break free from the constraints of her social identity and social class; she does this by helping out Tateh and his daughter. 

On "Ground Zero is Sacred Space, But Not Just Because of 9/11"

Today, today, today.  10 years. It doesn't seem like 10 years ago.  I feel as though because it is always in the back of our minds, it is always being remembered by our nation.  It's something I never forget.  It's always there.  It still makes me upset. As I'm sure it does for most people.  Here is an excerpt from an article DeAne emailed out to us:


"The most ringing defense of the proposed Islamic center came from Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York and a Jew. “We would betray our values—and play into our enemies’ hands—if we were to treat Muslims differently than [sic] anyone else,” the mayor declared. “In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists—and we should not stand for that.”"


People are biased against Muslims.  They have a fear of them.  They stereotype them. And it's neither right nor fair.  I often wonder, where have our American values gone?  Why would we let our enemies win?  Why would we allow them to make us treat each other wrongly based on our feelings towards them?
I think that the anniversary of 9/11 should be about remembering those who gave their lives and the tragedies of that day.  But also remember the values of honesty and trusting and hope of America; and to remember to place these values in our daily life towards our own self and towards one another.  Lastly, it should be about remembering and recognizing everything we do have and being thankful for that; we should want to help others not just in times of crisis, but always, each and every day, regardless of the degree of the situation. 

Why is this place so wonderful?

            I’m currently sitting outside with some of my best friends here at Olaf.  We’re doing homework, reading, etc.  I’m laying in the grass, looking it up at the sky.  The leaves on the trees block the sun enough, but yet it’s rays still try to come through.  I see green, blue, yellow, orange.  I hear laughter.  I feel like I am in bliss.  

           It makes me wonder if everyone here, or even at other colleges, feel this way about their college.  I love being here.  Even more than I loved it last year. When I stop and look around, when I become aware of the moment I am in, I am in awe of how good I have it. I am in awe of how wonderful the world is and how much potential all of us have here.

           I have a little quote that I try to live by -- it’s by Abe Lincoln, but I’ll put it in simpler terms here:  “You’re only as happy as you make up your mind to be.”   And I know that’s a hard thing to do.  Not to say that it's a bad thing to have emotions and be sad.  But there's a difference between being sad every once in awhile, and being just a glum, unhappy person 24/7.  There are so many people in this world who have chosen to not be happy.  But what I know is that it’s so much more preferable to choose to be happy.  I know I can spread my happiness with others, that I can make others’ lives better because of my attitude about life, and I know, without a doubt, that we are beyond lucky to have a place like St. Olaf to be at.  As I've said....I'm in bliss!

Statue Of Liberty Poem

The following is my poem from in class today:

The stone and structure unrelenting

A body standing strong

Harkening to the people from the pedestal

That there will be victory for those beaten on

And with a torch lifted high

As a symbol of hope for the lost

The statue stands tall

Symbolizing freedom for all

Poetry is something I am never quite sure about.  When I was younger, I wrote a lot of poems as a way to express myself.  But eventually I stopped.  I was actually quite good.  When Mary first asked us to write a poem out of the words we chose, I froze up and got scared.  I doubted myself that I could come up with something, or that anyone in the room could come up with anything really good.  But I was wrong!   I found meaning in my own poem and in all the poems everyone created.

My poem was more of a hopeful one.  It expresses what the majority of people believe it symbolizes: hope, freedom, victory.  Having something concrete to believe in is very important...I think that how the Statue of Liberty seems to possess this kind of hopefulness for the lost.  It will take in the poor and the weary.  Does that still hold true for America today?  Do we help out the poor and the weary?  I think it could be argued both ways, but I also know that I believe it is our civic duty to help the needy.  To give to others who have nothing.  To put the symbol of hope into action and give others a hope for a better life here in America.    

Democracy Quotes for Monday

 I couldn't just pick three quotes for Monday's class. Looking back on our semester, we have read and researched so much about democracy that I had forgot some of the authors and texts that we studied! Here are my favorite 7 that I have found thus far;  I will elaborate with my own thoughts on three of them. 
1."Of course, a multitude of persons are to be found who entertain the same number of ideas on religion, history, science, political economy, legislation, and government.  The gifts of intellect proceed directly from God, and man cannot prevent their unequal distribution.  But it is at least a consequence of what we have just said, that although the capacities of men are different, as the Creator intended they should be, Americans find the means of putting them to use are equal" (55).  Alexis De Tocqueville's Democracy in America
        These different gifts we are given allow us to each learn how to live among those we do not always agree with. Americans find the means of putting their different gifts together to live peaceably in a society.  Furthermore, I think that having different gifts and views is key in a democracy, because without opposing or different views, there would be no basis on which to build a lot of our social capital.  If everyone had the same gifts, the world would be a very different place. 
 2.  "And like other American Dreams, the power of this one lay in a sense of collective ownership: anyone can get ahead.  An assertion of universal enfranchisement is routinely reaffirmed by this dream's boosters...Occasionally, it has been roundly condemned as an opiate of the people..."  -- Cullen
              Democracy provides the opportunity or people to get ahead of others. Without democracy, people wouldn't strive for the best, strive for what they want, or strive to get their opinion heard.  The collective ownership that we have to succeed in America has made our democracy flourish; people know that they can get ahead, especially if they join with others (voluntary associations) to make it happen. 

3. "...In democracies there is always a multitude of persons whose wants are above their means, and who are very willing to take up imperfect satisfaction, rather than abandon the object of their desires altogether"

--Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America

             Democracy demands that compromises are made.  Maybe not compromises between different people's opposing opinions, but compromises between people to live peaceably together.  This means that people are willing to not always get what they want, because they understand that democracy is a give and take kind of process. 

 4. "The first is to get people within a given institution talking with each other about their concerns.  In the case of a church this would mean hundreds of individual conversations and small gatherings -- called 'one-on-ones' and 'house meetings,' respectively -- among church members.  The second objective is to identify and cultivate leaders from within.  These leaders represent their institutions in the citizens' organization and in the broader forum of public discussion" (2).  -- Stout

 5."One way of defining democracy would be to call it a political system in which people actively attend to what is significant" (273).  -- Robert Bellah

6. "There is no such thing as the 'perfect form of government' on earth, but any other form of government produces even less desirable results than democracy.  Until today, no other form of government has been invented that could regulate public affairs better than democracy" -- Sir Winston Churchill.
7.  Lincoln on the last page of Cullen's chapter 3:  "Let us hope, rather, that by the best cultivation of the physical world, beneath and around us; and the intellectual and moral world within us, we shall secure an individual, social, and political prosperity and happiness, whose course shall be onward and upward, and which, while the earth endures, shall not pass away" (102).