Extra Credit: Dialogue

Mom: Stop bouncing around, there are other people here.

Girl: I can’t, I’m too excited for school!

Mom: (fixes something on a baby’s carriage)

Girl: How come David doesn’t need to go to school?

Mom: David’s too young, he’s only two years old.

Girl: But he needs to learn things too!

Mom: He’ll go to school when he’s older like you.

Girl: Well I hope he hurries up and goes to school because I don’t want a dumb brother.

I heard this dialogue on the D train one morning. It took place between a mother and her daughter, who looked to be in pre-school or kindergarten. I thought this dialogue was really cute, because it showed that this little girl not only cared for her brother’s welfare, she also knew what she wanted and she was on a lookout for the future. I’m pretty sure I wasn’t this perceptive when I was 4. The mother also seemed very amused by her daughter; she probably never imaged her child could be this smart about what she wanted. I think this dialogue is humorous because you normally don’t get to see a young child acting like an adult. It’s very impressive and adorable at the same time, and even though she didn’t say something funny, humor is induced by the things she’s saying as who she is, and the way she says it.

Response to "Shooting an Elephant"

                George Orwell’s essay Shooting an Elephant left me with an impression of pity for Orwell and his easily manipulated role in society. As a police officer, he should have more authority and presence, but as a British police officer amongst the Burmese population, he is more like a puppet or a dummy. He is supposed to be able to use his own judgment and intuition to deal with cases, yet he is just jerked around by the mass, giving them what they want instead of doing what’s actually right. This selfish move allows him to save his own face and hopefully rack up brownie points with the people that don’t like him, the Burmese. He tries appeal to his guilty conscience that he did the right thing by pointing out that the elephant did kill a man, even if it’s a man with absolutely no social status. As a reader, I can see where he is coming from. Peer pressure is a very strong manipulator and can seize total control of the situation no matter how wrong the manipulators are.

                Orwell uses a first person perspective to tell this story. He has a plot and uses transitions very well. I feel like there is a very natural division to this essay. I have divided them up into 3 sections and named them The External Conflict, The Internal Conflict and The Consequences. The first section starts at paragraph 5, where the narrator had been focusing on Burma, its people and how they feel about him.  He narrates the events and panics of Burma. These deal with the outside events that occur in Burma. They are ultimately more narrative and informative than personal. His thoughts concerning the elephant were that of a third person. The second section is when the personal things come in. Orwell begins it by sudden decision to not shoot the elephant. This indicates a transition from the impersonal to the more private, personal view. He uses his emotions and decisions to tell the story. The end of paragraph 11 describes the elephant’s fall. As it transfers from section 2 to 3, paragraph 12 begins by the aftermath of the actual shooting of the elephant. It sums up the events that occurred after the shooting.

Orwell shoots the elephant out of peer pressure. He is the misfit amongst the Burmese, and he wants to win the crowd’s approval. If the crowd wants him to put on a show and shoot the elephant, he will do it, even if it is against his wishes. Orwell also uses the anecdote of his shooting to illustrate his hatred towards imperialism. According to dictionary.com, imperialism is “the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.” Just like the Burmese were forced under imperialistic rule and suppressed by it, Orwell was forced to shoot the elephant under the crowd’s influence. Imperialism gives the parent country power to do whatever it wishes to the country under it, similar to Orwell’s situation with his rifle. It shows the power struggle between the one with the power and the influential mass. The rifle alone has the freedom to just be, living in harmony with everything else and deciding its own fate. However, once the rifle falls into the wrong hands, it can only do what the hands will it to do.

Extra Credit: Response to Syria

If you’re like me and don’t really keep up with current events, the word “Syria” probably doesn’t mean much to you. It’s true that news of it has been everywhere; it’s America’s latest obsession. But that doesn’t mean that the US is the only country dragged into it. Other countries including Russia and Iran are involved as well. The point is, what started out as a little rebellion in Syria has turned into a full-blown civil war between the dictator and the civilians, each side with a number of allies.

The Syrian War is a big deal, and it’s no wonder other countries are getting involved. The Syrian government is going around, torturing, raping and killing thousands of innocent people each day, just because activists peacefully protested and lobbied for change and the government in turns goes ahead and overreacts. They attempted to hush things up but to no avail, and that’s when things took a turn for the violent. They would open fire into crowds and leave the body on the streets as a warning to not mess with the government. Eventually, the civilians got sick and tired of it, and things turned from bad to worse.

Then Assad brings out the big guns: chemical weapons. This grabs the attention of the American government, and automatically, the rest of the world is at risk, especially the US. Chemical weapons are a huge no-no in the world of war, and Obama decides to intervene by setting off missiles to warn Syria to back off. Personally, I believe the US should not get involved. First of all, this is not even our fight. Why should we put our soldiers in danger for the benefit of another country? Second of all, since when was the US the international police force? Who are we to regulate what weapons another country decides to use in a war against itself? With all the violence and confusion and attacks going on in Syria, I feel like it’s already past the point of no return. It’s chaotic enough over there already, even without our help to mess it up even more. The US should just step back and let Syria sort things out by itself. And even if it goes ahead and messes it all up, time will eventually heal all. It won’t be in the next 10 years, or the next 50 years, but someday, things will get better, as long as the United States keeps its nose out of other countries’ business.

Descriptive Writing Piece

            I stand at the foot, holding the ends of the thick blanket and raise my arms in anticipation. Keeping them straight can be a challenge, because only the thickest and heaviest blankets will suffice, but I manage. As quickly as I can, I swing my arms back down, listening to the whip of the blanket against the mattress. It thunders satisfyingly, and the urge to do it again fights inside of me. The sunlight streams into the room, and grazes on top of the blanket, spotlighting millions and millions of dust mites floating out of the blanket and into the air. It almost seems spiritual, as if a tiny being were to emerge out of the blanket, towards the stream of light and into the heavens. The air is now filled with the fragrance of freshly washed linen. Immaculate and clean; it smelled good enough to repel anything that could possibly taint it. And the pillows, giant, fluffy cushions of comfort. 

I have been holding back the urge to flounce in between the sheets, but for now, the urge wins. I slip between the soft sheets and the heavy but welcoming blanket, and warmth instantly floods within me. The mix of textures grazes my skin, and it feels like a baby in its mother’s arms. The weight combined with the silky touch of the blanket provides an impenetrable shield against the dark, my fears, and the lurking monsters in my closet. This comfortably irresistible cloud of security is my bed.

Response to "The Sanctuary of School"

                The term “narrative” is often thrown around, used synonymously with words like “backstory” and “account.” But what exactly entails a good narrative? I believe a good narrative is entertaining, detailed, and informative. It should lead the reader through a series of events that happen in a certain fashion, and it’s up to the writer to tell that story. The six main points to touch are who, what, when, where, why and how. By answering all of these questions, the reader’s curiosity of the specifics of the story is satisfied. They are left with a visual interpretation in their head, as if this were actually a movie that they were watching. Every detail written in the narrative contributes to this movie, making it even more realistic to the point where the reader reacts with the events and the characters. I believe all of these points entail a good narrative.

            In response to Lynda Barry’s The Sanctuary of School, I felt like this narrative was very relatable and interesting. As someone who has also felt a disconnection from what was supposed to be “home”, I felt like her interpretation of what was actually “home” is similar enough to my own to capture my interest. For Barry, school is the place where she was accepted and noticed by her teachers, and it is here that she receives the attention that every seven year old deserves. It is a far contrast from her house, where her place on her parent’s list of priorities is overshadowed by burdens of “frustration, depression and anger”. I really like how Barry begins her story with a very peek at her daily life, before launching into the series of events itself. Only after she sneaks away from her house and into her school does she get into a more detailed explanation of her troubles. Her organization here is metaphorical to how she can only express her feelings once she has gotten away from the main problem.

            Barry uses her narrative to argue that public schools contribute a lot to those who need it; in this specific case, children. Besides the educational portion of the school, it contributes to a child’s mental well-being as well. These days, there really isn’t enough time and energy to look after every single child and make sure they’re happy. That’s where public schools come in; even if parents can’t provide the best for their kids, public schools are still alternative options. Teachers are there to temporarily replace parents, schools are escapes from homes, and schools have more resources, like art equipment, and that’s always a plus.

            Barry also uses the word “light” to indicate all the good things in her life. She first uses it to describe television as “the light of our lives”. In a house where she is surrounded by despair, television is her and her brother’s outlet. Television is usually the one trying to capture your attention, and Barry would gladly turn away from one world into another. She also says that “points of light” in a child’s life can be “as far away as stars”. Again, the “points of light” is used to represent all the good things in a child’s life. But they are so out of reach; no matter how they try and try to be happy, they can’t do it, and the goal is as far away as the stars. “Points of light” is also a metaphor for stars itself, and the children would strive to be the star and shine through the sea of blackness known as the sky.