Awhile back (sometime last summer), I took a job at a carwash up on East Pflaum. Basically, the job entails sitting on a stool and watching the security camera mostly, but it also includes hosing down the wash bays, glaring at the clock until it reads four p.m., and wearing a white t-shirt with a overly-optimistic smiling red car and the words "Magic Car Wash Pit Crew." There must be some confusion on the definition of the word "Crew" because me, another part-time employee, and the owner are the only members of the "Pit Crew," and only one of us is there at a time.
Working at Magic Car Wash also involves taking out the trash. In any season other than late summer, this is a brainlessly menial task, but when August and September roll around, this duty requires some creativity. During this time of year, flipping open the lids to the trash bins is like taking a baseball bat to a hornets nest, so you have to become inventive. Sometimes laying out a half-full cola can can provide a distraction for you to pull out the garbage can and take it to the dumpster. Yet sometimes strategies like these backfire. It's happened where I reached in for a soda can for a distraction and found it filled with bees. To anyone washing their car who happened to glance over, I must have looked like some kind of idiot doing a raindance.
These hornets are smarter than they look. If you become careless in picking up their trash can, they'll follow you--quite the traumatic experience. In this instance, you keep looking over your shoulder and seeing that one stubborn hornet is still persuing. You curse him under your breath. Sometimes you have to break out into a jog, making you feel like even more of an idiot. That's the hornet's most frightening quality: they make men feel like little children. They're demoralizing.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Writing Genre: Paddy Style
Perhaps it’s because I’ve been taking a lot of history classes lately, or just that I have a natural interest in culture, but I felt compelled to take on a part of my heritage as a topic for genre comparison. I began to explore Irish culture in writing and uncovered the following three examples, each belonging to a distinct genre:
Celtic Folk Song: The Rocky Road to Dublin
The song details a young Irish lad’s journey from his home in Tuam to Liverpool, England. It is absolutely loaded with Irish culture, which is a benefit of the song genre. It may not provide as much historical fact as a non-fiction book or article, but it gives an insight into the life of a young Irishman’s experience that an article could not. A song has more cultural significance than historical.
Listen
Non-fiction Book: Emigrants and Exiles
This book detailing the Irish migration to North America surely gives a much more thorough and historically-weighted look into Irish Americans. While not as poetic as the Celtic folk song, the book can provide much more information on the subject. The cultural experience received from reading a book is probably denser than the song, which is intended to give an entertaining glimpse into Irish history.
Short Article: History of St. Patrick’s Day
The History Channel’s website gives a convenient, informative history a well-known holiday. It is still historically denser than the song, but much more accessible than the non-fiction book. The article provides just enough information on the history of Irish in America for the reader to learn something new without getting dull.
Celtic Folk Song: The Rocky Road to Dublin
The song details a young Irish lad’s journey from his home in Tuam to Liverpool, England. It is absolutely loaded with Irish culture, which is a benefit of the song genre. It may not provide as much historical fact as a non-fiction book or article, but it gives an insight into the life of a young Irishman’s experience that an article could not. A song has more cultural significance than historical.
Listen
Non-fiction Book: Emigrants and Exiles
This book detailing the Irish migration to North America surely gives a much more thorough and historically-weighted look into Irish Americans. While not as poetic as the Celtic folk song, the book can provide much more information on the subject. The cultural experience received from reading a book is probably denser than the song, which is intended to give an entertaining glimpse into Irish history.
Short Article: History of St. Patrick’s Day
The History Channel’s website gives a convenient, informative history a well-known holiday. It is still historically denser than the song, but much more accessible than the non-fiction book. The article provides just enough information on the history of Irish in America for the reader to learn something new without getting dull.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Writing is a hand-stone: a seemingly simple mass, born from the earth. A stone, when placed in a writer’s palm, is an object of great worth, utility. Such a stone could be thrown, writing as a weapon. Such a stone could be placed in a garden, writing as a natural beauty. Such a stone could be skipped across placid waters to incite energy, writing as an exciter. Such a stone could be employed to create something completely new, writing as a tool. The stone of writing fears no boundaries, insists on being unique, and creates possibilities the bare hand cannot.
Choosing to wield, implement, or plant the stone of writing is undoubtedly a natural decision. Expressing one’s thoughts through a hand-stone is a powerfully primitive symbol of motivation. A writer is unafraid to use his or her stone, and observers automatically understand his or her intention. A spectator to someone picking up a stone or clicking open a pen can feel ensuing action. He or she understands that a statement is to be made—the variety of which is the mystery. I use a stone to translate my cerebral motivation to the outside world.
Choosing to wield, implement, or plant the stone of writing is undoubtedly a natural decision. Expressing one’s thoughts through a hand-stone is a powerfully primitive symbol of motivation. A writer is unafraid to use his or her stone, and observers automatically understand his or her intention. A spectator to someone picking up a stone or clicking open a pen can feel ensuing action. He or she understands that a statement is to be made—the variety of which is the mystery. I use a stone to translate my cerebral motivation to the outside world.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Vietnam Veterans Against the War
The Vietnam Veterans Against the War Statement was a speech written by decorated Vietnam hero, John Kerry, and given to the Senate Committee of Foreign Relations in 1971. It is a piece of literary work that leaves the reader in disbelief. I chose this essay because it depicts events and sentiments in our nation's history that are by no means glorious. This speech's theme is that America was better than what she displayed in Vietnam. It does not demean the United States government or the effort given by the men and women fighting. This speech instead targets those who had a moral responsibility and failed to act upon it. The VVAW Statement is a classic American criticism in some respects, but in others, it's a cry to future generations to never allow anything like this happen again.
John Kerry is poetic. The veteran tells of excruciatingly horrible abuses of which American leadership is responsible. He makes strong, stunning points about how the United States has failed to live up to its morals, and offers a first-hand perspective of the nightmarish events of the conflict. As an orator, John Kerry displayed brilliance. The speech he delivered on the Senate floor in 1971 was one of tragedy, culpability, resolution, and hope. To convey such powerful themes, Kerry doesn't hesitate to employ painfully honest rhetoric. He states a clear opinion.
The closing of this work is perhaps the greatest part of the speech. Kerry calls for Americans not to view the loss of life in Vietnam in vain, but instead to see that those men lost their lives to "turn" America. Those men lost their lives to awaken America and help her to realize how far she has fallen. Kerry wants the audience to understand that such a cause is just as noble as winning. Reading this essay was honestly a great experience for me. It's a moral perspective that is sometimes lost when dealing with the late 1960s/early 1970s, and undoubtedly a speech I will recommend reading to anyone with a remote interest in that era.
John Kerry is poetic. The veteran tells of excruciatingly horrible abuses of which American leadership is responsible. He makes strong, stunning points about how the United States has failed to live up to its morals, and offers a first-hand perspective of the nightmarish events of the conflict. As an orator, John Kerry displayed brilliance. The speech he delivered on the Senate floor in 1971 was one of tragedy, culpability, resolution, and hope. To convey such powerful themes, Kerry doesn't hesitate to employ painfully honest rhetoric. He states a clear opinion.
The closing of this work is perhaps the greatest part of the speech. Kerry calls for Americans not to view the loss of life in Vietnam in vain, but instead to see that those men lost their lives to "turn" America. Those men lost their lives to awaken America and help her to realize how far she has fallen. Kerry wants the audience to understand that such a cause is just as noble as winning. Reading this essay was honestly a great experience for me. It's a moral perspective that is sometimes lost when dealing with the late 1960s/early 1970s, and undoubtedly a speech I will recommend reading to anyone with a remote interest in that era.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Royko on Daley
When faced with the task of finding two essays that are of interest to me, I immediately turned to my favorite columnist of all-time, Mike Royko (may he rest in peace). Royko wrote editorials for the Chicago Tribune, Sun Times, and Daily News for thirty years. He was beloved by many Chicagoans for his wit, casual sarcasm, and powerful knack for delivering an often blunt truth. I'm not entirely sure that an editorial qualifies as an essay, but Royko definitely has an opinion on the life and career of Mayor Daley, so I feel it satisfies the requirements.
In order to appreciate this essay, one must first understand the character that was Mayor Richard J. Daley of Chicago. Living his whole life in the heavily Irish Bridgeport Neighborhood, Daley served as mayor of Chicago from 1955-76. During that career, he initiated countless public works projects within the city, but was also famous for sometimes overstepping his authority or over-enforcing Chicago law. Daley governed one of the most politically corrupt, segregated, and ethnically diverse cities in the nation, and Royko captures the man, politician, and father of Richard J. Daley flawlessly.
Royko's tribute is a little rough around the edges, but then again, so was Daley, and so was Chicago. His unique way of describing some of Daley's characteristics had me laughing to myself as I read the column. When poking fun at Daley's often ungrammatical, inappropriate, or jumbled language, Royko writes, "So when Daley slid sideways into a sentence, or didn't exit from the same paragraph he entered, it amused us. But it didn't sound that different than the way most of us talk." That type of journalism is what made Royko famous.
The essay tells of Mayor Daley at his best and at his worst. One point Royko makes especially made me think. While Daley may not have always done what was in the best interest of morality, progress, or (some would argue) the Constitution, his actions were appropriate in the eyes of the average Chicagoan, if not outsiders. That made a lot of sense to me. Daley may not have always been a master of political correctness, but he was a master of representing his constituents.
The article was extremely amusing, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Sadly, gone are the days of Richard J. Daley, and gone are the days of Mike Royko, but this article was a happy, humorous reminder of both.
In order to appreciate this essay, one must first understand the character that was Mayor Richard J. Daley of Chicago. Living his whole life in the heavily Irish Bridgeport Neighborhood, Daley served as mayor of Chicago from 1955-76. During that career, he initiated countless public works projects within the city, but was also famous for sometimes overstepping his authority or over-enforcing Chicago law. Daley governed one of the most politically corrupt, segregated, and ethnically diverse cities in the nation, and Royko captures the man, politician, and father of Richard J. Daley flawlessly.
Royko's tribute is a little rough around the edges, but then again, so was Daley, and so was Chicago. His unique way of describing some of Daley's characteristics had me laughing to myself as I read the column. When poking fun at Daley's often ungrammatical, inappropriate, or jumbled language, Royko writes, "So when Daley slid sideways into a sentence, or didn't exit from the same paragraph he entered, it amused us. But it didn't sound that different than the way most of us talk." That type of journalism is what made Royko famous.
The essay tells of Mayor Daley at his best and at his worst. One point Royko makes especially made me think. While Daley may not have always done what was in the best interest of morality, progress, or (some would argue) the Constitution, his actions were appropriate in the eyes of the average Chicagoan, if not outsiders. That made a lot of sense to me. Daley may not have always been a master of political correctness, but he was a master of representing his constituents.
The article was extremely amusing, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Sadly, gone are the days of Richard J. Daley, and gone are the days of Mike Royko, but this article was a happy, humorous reminder of both.
Theodore Rex
Edmund Morris captures the essence of Theodore Roosevelt better than I'm any other biographer could attempt to do, I'm sure. Although being extremely in depth (over 550 pages), Theodore Rex never once approaches "boring." Morris writes of one of my favorite presidents like a fiction book, with so much description that one could imagine the scenes quite vivedly. Aside from having started reading a little late and struggling to squeeze the whole book in by the end of the summer, I found reading this biography to satisfy my love for history.
While Morris deserves much credit for his imaculate storytelling, the book reads so easily moreso based on the fact that Roosevelt was one of the most interestingly childish presidents we've ever had. The President, at any time during his seven and a half years in the white house, could be found playing tennis against members of his Administration, trekking about the Rocky Mountains, bear hunting in Arkansas, or sparring with his jujitsu trainer. The impression I recieved of Roosevelt was that he was a giant ball of energy; every thing he did was punctuated with hearty shouts of "Bully, bully!" After a long succession of corrupt, stagnant presidents, Roosevelt was an accidental breath of fresh air that ultimately propelled the country infinantly forward.
The book is split into two sections, his first term and his second. Opening dramatically with President McKinley's assassination, Theodore Rex begins with "Teddy's" inheiritance of the White House and continues to recount the numerous acheivements the young president can be accredited with. These include setting a precedent by inviting Booker T. Washington to a private White House dinner, building up a sleek new navy and parading them about the Pacific, mediating an anthracite mining labor dispute, defending the Monroe Doctrine in the Venezuelan affair, pushing a Cuban reciprocity bill through Congress, securing Panama for canal construction, and appointing several African Americans to federal offices. This was just his first term.
Roosevelt's personality and character at times almost overshaddowed his accolades. He was exceptionally well read and had an obvious thirst for historical perspective in dealing with the activity of his day. Moral, fair, and ever advocating a "square deal" for all Americans, TR was an impassionate speaker, gnashing his teeth and pounding his fist into his palm as he delivered his epic oratories. I was absolutely captivated by the character, for it seemed Edmund Morris honestly couldn't have concieved a more attractive literary personality.
The President's second term was equally historic. He continued to prove to trusts that the federal government held power over monopolies--not the other way around. Roosevelt also started a consumer protection movement, forshaddowing the Progressive movement that would shortly follow. Abroad, he won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in arbitrating and bringing a Japanese-Russo conflict to compromise.
Theodore Roosevelt was a unique American president. Reading Emund Morris's Theodore Rex has only further cemented, in my mind, TR's place among the top five presidents this nation has ever had. He was a political force, an objective mind, and a go-getter all compiled into one statesman, and Theodore Rex was able to invite me into the Rooseveltian White House--a masterful biography.
While Morris deserves much credit for his imaculate storytelling, the book reads so easily moreso based on the fact that Roosevelt was one of the most interestingly childish presidents we've ever had. The President, at any time during his seven and a half years in the white house, could be found playing tennis against members of his Administration, trekking about the Rocky Mountains, bear hunting in Arkansas, or sparring with his jujitsu trainer. The impression I recieved of Roosevelt was that he was a giant ball of energy; every thing he did was punctuated with hearty shouts of "Bully, bully!" After a long succession of corrupt, stagnant presidents, Roosevelt was an accidental breath of fresh air that ultimately propelled the country infinantly forward.
The book is split into two sections, his first term and his second. Opening dramatically with President McKinley's assassination, Theodore Rex begins with "Teddy's" inheiritance of the White House and continues to recount the numerous acheivements the young president can be accredited with. These include setting a precedent by inviting Booker T. Washington to a private White House dinner, building up a sleek new navy and parading them about the Pacific, mediating an anthracite mining labor dispute, defending the Monroe Doctrine in the Venezuelan affair, pushing a Cuban reciprocity bill through Congress, securing Panama for canal construction, and appointing several African Americans to federal offices. This was just his first term.
Roosevelt's personality and character at times almost overshaddowed his accolades. He was exceptionally well read and had an obvious thirst for historical perspective in dealing with the activity of his day. Moral, fair, and ever advocating a "square deal" for all Americans, TR was an impassionate speaker, gnashing his teeth and pounding his fist into his palm as he delivered his epic oratories. I was absolutely captivated by the character, for it seemed Edmund Morris honestly couldn't have concieved a more attractive literary personality.
The President's second term was equally historic. He continued to prove to trusts that the federal government held power over monopolies--not the other way around. Roosevelt also started a consumer protection movement, forshaddowing the Progressive movement that would shortly follow. Abroad, he won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in arbitrating and bringing a Japanese-Russo conflict to compromise.
Theodore Roosevelt was a unique American president. Reading Emund Morris's Theodore Rex has only further cemented, in my mind, TR's place among the top five presidents this nation has ever had. He was a political force, an objective mind, and a go-getter all compiled into one statesman, and Theodore Rex was able to invite me into the Rooseveltian White House--a masterful biography.
Monday, August 30, 2010
A Vindication of the Rights of Women
After reading Wollstonecraft's essay, I was surprised I had never heard of her or her work in history class. She was extremely ahead of her time, and exceptionally thoughtful in analyzing the often sexist writings of French Revolutionary thinkers. What most impressed me about Wollstonecraft's essay was her fearlessness in stating her opinions. She often times used language that must have infuriated most men, and her essays were surely an important part of an early feminist movement.
Early in her essay, Wollstonecraft points out that women are taught from an early age that they are supposed to be gentle, amusing, and obedient of their husbands. The author primarily objects to this limited gender role, but also goes further to say that men employ this female characterization to enslave women, which is the basis of her essay. This was, especially for her time, a valid argument.
Wollstonecraft points out that women are deprived of a full formal education, but interestingly she argues that this, in some ways, better serves women's intelligence. Men are taught other people's ideas that are accepted as true, whereas women are left to observe and draw their own conclusions. In this fashion, men (and some women) believe that they are superior to women simply because they have been told so for generations. They fail to observe the sexes in an objective light; therefore, the accepted theory that women are inferior survives.
I was especially interested to read the author's opinion of what marriage should be. She explains that the ideal marriage is a mutual friendship, not a master-servant relationship. Wollstonecraft goes on to say that a marriage in which the spouses are best friends is a marriage that is much healthier and likely to last longer. When the women is forced to always attempt to please her husband, the relationship deteriorates. This holds true, even in present times.
On a whole, I found this essay the hardest to read, but also the most culturally significant. The dense text made the reading go much slower, but the essay was extremely forward-thinking for its time, so much so that Wollstonecraft also knew she had to convince women that they weren't inferior. We've come a long way...
Early in her essay, Wollstonecraft points out that women are taught from an early age that they are supposed to be gentle, amusing, and obedient of their husbands. The author primarily objects to this limited gender role, but also goes further to say that men employ this female characterization to enslave women, which is the basis of her essay. This was, especially for her time, a valid argument.
Wollstonecraft points out that women are deprived of a full formal education, but interestingly she argues that this, in some ways, better serves women's intelligence. Men are taught other people's ideas that are accepted as true, whereas women are left to observe and draw their own conclusions. In this fashion, men (and some women) believe that they are superior to women simply because they have been told so for generations. They fail to observe the sexes in an objective light; therefore, the accepted theory that women are inferior survives.
I was especially interested to read the author's opinion of what marriage should be. She explains that the ideal marriage is a mutual friendship, not a master-servant relationship. Wollstonecraft goes on to say that a marriage in which the spouses are best friends is a marriage that is much healthier and likely to last longer. When the women is forced to always attempt to please her husband, the relationship deteriorates. This holds true, even in present times.
On a whole, I found this essay the hardest to read, but also the most culturally significant. The dense text made the reading go much slower, but the essay was extremely forward-thinking for its time, so much so that Wollstonecraft also knew she had to convince women that they weren't inferior. We've come a long way...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)