February Blog

In the Socratic Seminar Questions for A Thousand Splendid Suns, I felt that question 3 could be expanded on. The question asks, "Who is more trustworthy- Nana or Jalil?" In the novel, Nana is very honest and open with Mariam. She tells Mariam about her illegitimacy and how that causes her to be viewed negatively. Nana is also very open about her feelings concerning Jalil and his family. Although Nana is honest with Mariam, she is also very manipulative and tries to convince her to see Jalil as a bad person and to dislike his family. In the novel, Jalil is most certainly the less trustworthy of the two. Although he visits Mariam every week, it later comes out that he did this to make himself feel better. He tells Mariam stories about the movies and how he wishes she could see them. And he promises her that he will take her to the movies for her birthday. However, his appearance is more important to him than his daughter is. He refuses to see Mariam and lets her stay outside all night. His true character comes out and shows how selfish he is. His loving behavior towards Mariam gives way to show that he is embarrassed to be her father. He has no desire the same type of father-child relationship as he has with his other children. Nana is more trustworthy because she sees through Jalil’s act and tries to protect Mariam’s feelings by telling her the truth even though it’s rough. Nana is always there for Mariam and is always around. In today’s society it can also be found that those with lesser means, like Nana, are more trustworthy than those with power and appearances to uphold, like Jalil. Nana has nothing to lose and so it very open but Jalil could lose his wealth and power. Today, men are potrayed similarly, as of being less trustworthy than women. But just like with Jalil, it is expected of men to lie or cheat or act dishonestly, especially in relationships. Women are often held to higher standards and people make big deals out of women who are not trustworthy. This is not fair to women or men. Men should not be made out to be liars and women should not be expected to be of a higher morality. The question of trustworthiness relates to the way I have viewed adults around me. I have always trusted women more than men. I think this comes from having a parental situation that is in some ways similar to Mariam. I have found that I believe men to be less trustworthy although that is certainly not always the case. The flakiness of Mariam’s father also causes her to be wary of men for the rest of her life.

January Monthly Blog

I think Question thirteen of the Socratic Seminar for The Awakening is important. The question asks, “In what ways do each of the three men in Edna’s life try to possess her? What is each man seeking in her?” Mr. Pontellier tries to possess Edna by attempting to control her activities. He wants her to be the ideal wife and take interest in the housekeeping and decoration. He becomes upset when she neglects what he believes are her duties. Edna goes out on Tuesdays and does not leave excuses for her callers and no longer attends to the meals, children, or housekeeping. His possession of Edna is through the idea of a wife’s role and by trying to force her to follow this idea. Mr. Pontellier mainly seeks an appearance in Edna. He wants their family to appear to be ideal and believes the Edna’s abandonment of her role could cost them in social and business aspects. Alcee Arobin tries to possess Edna in a more physical way. His interest in their affair is very much because of the physical aspect which is why he is not well-liked. Alcee, in a way, draws Edna out of her home and into the pigeon house because of his very inappropriate attention to her. He supports her actions and decisions as long as there is a possible benefit for him too. Arobin is seeking an adulterous relationship from Edna. Robert tries to possess Edna by spending time with her. At the beginning of the novel, they spend the entire day together, every day. Edna often chooses to spend time with Robert rather than Mr. Pontellier which shows how Robert is using her time as a possessive quality. Robert is seeking to be taken seriously by Edna. In all his former, similar relationships, Robert’s affections were never taken seriously. He even goes away because he knows that being taken seriously would be wrong since Edna is married. I think Edna’s relationships with the three men are very similar to many relationships in today’s society. There are many ideas about a perfect relationship and how both parties in the relationship should act. Many people focus so much on having a perfect, romantic relationship that there is never any substance to it which causes trouble just like the Pontelliers have. There are also many purely physical relationships which go along with what Arobin was seeking from Edna. Many people become possessive in relationships today. Especially with texting, people get angry over not being responded to immediately or over the person communicating with other people. Just like with Robert, some people today try to take over every minute of their significant other’s life. I do not agree with the ways any of the three men try to possess Edna. Possessiveness does not really belong in a romantic relationship and the idea of seeking something specific out of a relationship is not right either. Those types of relationships do not allow for individuality or respect.

December Blog

In the article about cultural relativity it claims that there is no moral truth that holds for all people at all times. It later goes on to say that there are only a few rules that all societies have in common including rules against lying and murder. Without those two rules, societies would not be able to function or continue. The rest of the article discusses the idea of cultural relativity. Cultural relativity says that right and wrong differs between societies and that people cannot determine what is actually right or wrong because they will side with the morals of their society. So it is hard to decide if different practices are in fact wrong practices. In Things Fall Apart there are obvious cultural differences between Okonkwo’s tribe and the white men. The white men see it as a crime and wrong to kill infants but Okonkwo’s tribe believes twins are evil and so they have to be killed. This is an example of cultural relativity because the morality of killing babies changes between societies. Another example is how Okonkwo’s tribe believes in many gods but the white men only believe in God. The white men tell Okonkwo’s tribe that they are wrong for having multiple gods but the tribe believes that they are right. This shows how it is not possible to determine wrong or right between societies. The issues between right or wrong between societies is shown today through the argument about abortion. Some groups of people argue that abortion is not morally wrong because the baby is not born yet and is not actually a person and that it’s the mother’s body and therefore her choice. Other groups of people argue that it is wrong because regardless of it still being inside the mother, the baby is still a person and is still alive. This argument between groups of people and different cultures shows the idea of cultural relativity and how when the issue is viewed through the beliefs of both sides, it is difficult to pick which is right without choosing the side of a person’s own society or culture. I side with the pro-life group and believe that the baby is a person and that abortion is murder. There will always be different situations to consider which also affects the ability to determine to morality of abortion. For myself, I believe it is terribly wrong and not something I will ever consider.

November Monthly Blog

I think question seven of the Socratic seminar questions for Oedipus the King is important. The question asks, “Did Oedipus have a chance? Did he get a raw deal? Where did he go wrong?” The question refers to Oedipus’s ability to escape his fate. In Oedipus the King, the idea of fate is carries through the play. In the play, both Oedipus and his parents try to escape their fate. Oedipus’s parents, King Laius and Queen Jocasta, learn of their fate from an oracle, who tells them that their son will kill Laius. They try to avoid this by leaving their baby son to die on a mountain. Oedipus is rescued and grows up with different parents. He learns that his fate is to kill his father and marry his mother so he runs away. After he runs away, he kills his real father and marries his real mother unknowingly. He fulfills his fate and his parents fulfill theirs. I do not believe that Oedipus had a chance. In the play, fate is inescapable. Oedipus cannot do anything to avoid his fate. Even though he tries to run away from, he actually runs to it. I think he did get a raw deal as far as not being able to avoid his fate. However, he was willing to kill someone over passing first so he sort of deserves it. I think Oedipus goes wrong in searching out the oracle. He should not have gone looking the truth because it destroys him. Also he goes wrong when he tries to escape his fate. He knows that fate is inescapable and comes from a greater power yet he still tries to control it. He is very impulsive and that causes him many of his problems. Today, fate or destiny does not have as big of a presence in society. Now, people believe that they control their life and it is their actions and decisions that affect their future. Some people, based on their religion, believe that God already knows their whole life and their future or that God has a plan for them. However, it is not the same as an inescapable fate because their actions still affect their life. I do believe that some people today get raw deals. A small mistake or bad choices can ruin a person’s life and there is not the excuse of a predetermined fate, it is just their fault. I think a lot of people go wrong by embracing the ideas of carpe diem and YOLO. They act impulsively instead of considering how their actions will affect their future. Compared to the characters in Oedipus the King, people today are a lot less concerned with their future. There are definitely many people who still worry about the future and act carefully but impulsive actions are becoming increasingly more common. I definitely fall under the carefully planning and acting category. I try really hard to avoid things that will negatively affect my future and so am hardly impulsive. I believe that my actions and decisions affect my future but also that God has a plan for me and already knows how my life goes and what my future holds.

I do not think that question eleven of "The Importance of Being Earnest" Socratic seminar questions received the attention it deserves. The question says, "Consider the play's vision of marriage-both as a source of laughter and as an issue for serious discussion." In the play, the subject of marriage was a main part of the plot. The two main characters, Jack and Algernon, propose to ladies during the play and their problems are about their engagements. Jack tries to become engaged to Gwendolen while pretending his name is Ernest. Algernon becomes engaged to Cecily, who he had just met, while using the name Ernest. However, the idea of marriage is not as important to the girls as the name of their fiancés is. Throughout the play, marriage is ridiculed through the way the characters behave in order to point out how wrong the way society views marriage is. In the play, the basis for marriage is if the other person has the right name, the right amount of money, or if there is some sort of attraction. The idea that marriage is serious because it should be based on love and trust and honesty is ridiculed through the way that Lady Bracknell views marriage. She places importance on money and social class, and does not approve of the engagements between Jack and Gwendolen or Algernon and Cecily, until she has determined that they are of good standings in both places. There is little importance placed on the fact that Jack and Algernon lied about who they were or that Algernon and Cecily had just met that day. The author does this to comment on the way that way that society takes marriage too lightly.  Today, marriage not taken as seriously as it once was. According the American Psychological Association about 40-50 percent of married couples in America get a divorce. The high divorce rate could be caused by today's basis for marriage which is similar to the play's. Many people get married after only dating the person for a few weeks or months or because of attractiveness or fleeting desire or because of money and stability. Without the serious amount of time spent together or real love, it is hard to make a marriage last. TV shows and celerity relationships are possible causes for the decline in serious and lasting marriages because neither place importance on what the reasons for marriage should be and make divorces seem normal and okay. I personally have a very serious view of relationships and marriage. My parents are divorced and I hate that people and TV and movies make divorce okay. It's not, marriage should be for the rest of your life, that's what you agreed to when you said, "I do" and if even for a second you doubt that you will want it to last forever then don't get married. Marriage is such a big deal, you are joining two families and creating a new one, it should not be trivialized or made commonplace. I believe that getting married should be a slow process based on love and that people should really take time to get to know each other and be sure before they get married. Marriage is not what it should be anymore.