Read and Respond "In Praise of the F Word" by Mary Sherry

I totally agree with Sherry's point, that if students are presented with the option of failure, they will be more motivated to succeed. This sentiment reminds me of the adage "You don't know what you got till it's gone" and many of us have experienced this in life more than once. I feel that when presented with an opportunity to be successful and one fails at that opportunity, having realized what could have been if you were to succeed, provokes a motivation to be better next time, to not fail. An intimate example of this would be my experiences with the my revolving door of loser boyfriends. It takes a painfully long amount of time for me to recover from the failure of a partnership, but every time as a result of the last heartbreak, I am determined to be more successful with the possibility of a new Love. (enter real life awesome long term boyfriend manifestation sequence here)

Academically, when a student is presented with the possibility of failure, I believe it depends on the student as to whether or not they choose to move forward in a positive way. It has been said that successful people view failure as an opportunity rather than a defeat. I failed 10th grade English class and I was devastated. As a high school senior I had to take the class over again as well as attend summer school. It was horrible. The educational system made me feel as if I myself was a failure, and that because I had failed this class I would always be a failure and trapped in my small hometown and I would never have any concept of literature or be successful in anyway. I was ashamed, yet embarrassed enough of my "failure" to make sure that I was worthy of something better.

I passed summer school with a 104 A+. My teachers were pissed, for lack of a better word. I contribute that grade to a smaller class size and the absence of regular school year distractions like football games, the lunch hour and weekend parties as well as the terrible embarrassment I felt at failing the class and having to go to summer school. I also failed American History and had to attend summer school again, to be able to graduate. Not graduating with my peers presented a wholly devastating vision of an idiot loser I could barely cope with. I received a 98 A in American History in summer school and now, at nearly 30 years old, I am a Historic Preservation major with a focus in Construction Technology/Carpentry and my dream is to work for the National Park Service for Historic Preservation. I have been accepted into the University of Oregon Historic Preservation Field School along with a scholarship and will be working in the backcountry of Washington this year restoring a 1940's barn and 1930's Civilian Conservation Corps. shelter.

If a student does not possess a healthy fear of failure, how do they define success? Do they have a desire to succeed in the first place? Without a "healthy fear of failure", as Sherry puts it, in life and in academics, the potential for complacency becomes very real and human beings are meant for more than the stagnant existence of failure.

I've always said, if I had to title the book of my life it would be "Living on the successful side of failure" (with a really awesome boyfriend - tee hee!) - or - "Walking on the happier side of Misery" - which is actually the title of my friend Model T's book - you can find the link here. :)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/47839.Walkin_on_the_Happy_Side_of_Misery

Read and Respond "The Seat Not Taken" by John Edgar Widerman

1. Reading this article really upset me. One reason is that though I do not want to account for the author's color of being the reason why he sits alone on the train all of the time, if he is otherwise nicely dressed and seems as approachable as anyone else on the train, I cannot account for any other reason. This upsets me because, well jeez, I would have sat next to the guy no problem. I find it ironic that though New England was the place that slaves escaped to from the South, there aren't many African Americans in New England, and in my experience subliminal racism is as awful there as it is anywhere. After reading the article I'm no convinced that the reason for the empty seat is because the author is black, but I can't think of any other reason it would be. Though I have observed this similar situation on the bus before, and I have had situations where, for some reason, the seat next to me was left empty though it was clear it was available when people chose to stand instead. Did I smell or something? I don't know, after while I noticed that many people on the bus choose a seat to themselves rather than choosing to sit next to another person. I've done this before too, but it was because I didn't feel like talking, and I chose not to sit down next to someone for feat they would be a chatty Kathy and I would have to participate when I didn't want to. I have noticed that when riding public transportation, most people prefer a seat to themselves. I wonder if, considering the area to and from which the author was commuting, perhaps people were choosing to sit by themselves, so that they too could have extra room for their briefcases and such. Is is disheartening to consider the fact that this man's seat is empty because of his color


2.Whenever I avoid sitting next to someone on the train or bus, it is mostly because I don't feel like engaging them, and though I am only assuming that they would even speak with me, choosing a solitary seat or to stand is usually because when I use public transit I don't often like to speak to people. I have certainly had times of prejudice where an unkempt individual has a free seat and I choose not to sit next to them. I think my objections to sitting next to them can be seen as prejudice, but mostly it's because I don't like to openly socialize in intimate public places, and I admit, I am afraid to take any responsibility if something happens during my interaction with this person. On the other hand, I met one of my best friends on a train and I had no choice but to sit next to her. She had one side of her head shaved and the other long, and I saw her sneaking beers out of her backpack and she had asked one of the attendants where she could go to drink them. I had just gotten done with the Appalachian Trail, a hike that took me 5 1/2 months to complete. I was in absolutely no mood to speak to anyone, much less deal with running water and electricity. The girl's name was Tauna, she offered me a beer and I took her up on it. When she offered me the beer, her demeanor  was so sweet and genuine, I immediately liked her. We went to the lounge car to take in the scenery and have our beer and it turned out we were going to be on the train together for several hours. We spent the next several hours of that trip getting to know one another and laughing, sharing stories and pictures. I am still friends with Tauna to this day, and she remains one of my best friends and I love her dearly. We met so organically and our friendship is so wonderful and almost magical in the way we met and immediately got along and kept in touch over the years. If I hadn't sat next to Tauna, my life wouldn't be any different, but it would certainly lack its luster without her in it.



* PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT*  I would just like to take this opportunity to to say I LOVE THE TRAIN! Train Travel is a serious part of our heritage, culture and legacy and anytime anyone has the opportunity to take a train trip, please, please, please, do yourself and your family a huge favor and take the train! It's cheap, super friendly, amazingly scenic, there is WAY MORE ROOM than a plane, it's way more comfortable, you can get up and move around, and taking the train has a massively lower carbon footprint than flying on a plane. I don't know why we don't have a better train system in this country, I love it and I want it around forever. Perhaps as a Historic Preservation major I will make train preservation my thesis.

Chapter 34 prompt

I think that ideal affordable housing should not only reflect the income of the community or area that it is in - but also the values of the community. Social status and how much money people have (or like to pretend they have) can be observed easily through the architecture of a neighborhood and how well the buildings, homes and streets are taken care of as a result. In neighborhoods that are poor and run down with dilapidated buildings and high crime rates, I feel the it is often an excuse to say that the neighborhood is in such a state because no work is available. I feel it is because the community's values are at risk, lacking integrity and respect for a better environment. This is not to be confused with the highly passionate energy of living in a rough, poor and broken down neighborhood with project housing and the like. There is a culture all it's own reflected in places like Oakland, Baltimore, New Orleans, and Detroit. Values are a reflection of culture, and there is a very fine line between the two. Though a city's culture may be that of grit and harder living, it doesn't mean their housing should be the same. Affordable housing can be available to anyone. In neighborhoods where there is no industry or work, to me this means either no one should live there or the community should be self sustainable somehow, for example they could cooperatively own and operate a farm or garden and sell the produce to make money. If there is no land available for this,a rooftop garden, terrace garden, or container garden could suffice. Places like Los Angeles and New York have several urban gardening movements that fund social programs that have the potential to create affordable housing, higher paying jobs and keep the economy local and accessible. Facilities and services should be the same as any other living situation in which one could thrive. Healthcare, groceries, social programs, good schools, and public transportation should all be equally accessible no matter where you live. Affordable housing can be in the form of several apartments lined up in a row, or little houses each to their own facing into a court yard together, or a city block full of different buildings. It doesn't matter so long as it's affordable to the people that live in the community and it can be equally attainable for everyone. 

A local example of low income cooperative housing is the East Blair Co-op. This co-op is owned by the people that live there. They have a garden, a sauna, a community room with laundry, and each resident has their own private unit. Some families have full time jobs and other families are students. The families that live there are low income families and they are located in one of the most desirable parts of town, the houses they live in are LEED certified (Green Building Council, LEED - Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), the inhabitants have access to everything downtown and it's close to the river and the bike paths. Cooperative living requires it's inhabitants to be an active member of their community. This includes meetings and open discussions with fellow neighbors/members concerning everything that involves the community. Meetings usually involve issues like rent, projects, future or current members and the general well being of the community. Through cooperative living occupants have power over their own living situation and making housing affordable is something they can have control over. I think that affordable housing is best attainable through a cooperative situation.

Chapter 36 Prompt

One of my all time most memorable movies is "Gone with the Wind". This movie is based off of the book written by Margaret Mitchell. The book is considered an epic, literally and figuratively. "Gone with the Wind" is one of few movies that dares to closely follow the book. The movie is a saturated, engulfing - four. hours. long. Oh! just writing about this movie provokes me to be as dramatic as it is. This movie was made in 1939, winning several Academy Awards later in December of 1940. "Gone with the Wind" was one of my mother's favorite movies, and when I watched it for the first time as a young girl, I was overwhelmed with emotion. The movie takes place during the Civil War and features the notorious trials and tribulations Scarlet O'Hara - oh this woman is a terrible, terrible, woman that you love to hate. Scarlet is a gorgeous, judgmental, scheming, spiteful, intelligent, terrible, lovely  horrible, proud young woman. She lives in a huge plantation in the South and is the quintessential 'Southern Bell' with her amazing fancy hoop skirt dresses, perfectly  styled hair and lavish lifestyle. Scarlet's life is turned upside down by the destruction of the war, and her plantation is not only in danger of being taken over by the Union soldiers of the North, but so is her way of life in the South as she knows it. In the beginning, Scarlet tries to manipulate a possible suitor, Ashley Wilkes, into marrying her. Scarlet's attraction to Ashley does not come from a place of genuine mutual affection or attraction. She wants to marry Ashley solely for his money and social status, as well as to 'beat' her cousin Melanie out of a 'bid' to marry a prominent Southern man. Ashley is attracted to Scarlet, but it is a fatal attraction, and he knows it. He marries Melanie, for which Scarlet becomes bitter and she holds a grudge against Ashley and Melanie throughout the movie. She is a jealous, scheming woman, and she strategically plots for her own wealth and happiness at the expense of other's throughout the story. When Scarlet meets Rhett Butler, the romantic aspect of the film, it's all over. Their relationship is a tumultuous love affair. Rhett loves Scarlet but she (at first) is only interested in him because of his money and she holds back on her love for him because she knows what a terrible person she is, and for Rhett to accept her anyway is very difficult for Scarlet. Rhett has just as scandalous of a reputation as Scarlet and so he insists they are meant for one another because of this. They have a child together, whom they name Bonnie. However, the bond of a child brings them no closer as a family. Bonnie dies a tragic death at a very young age which in turn drives Scarlet and Rhett further apart. Their marriage, the war, the death of the South, and the torrid push and pull between Scarlet and Rhett all come to symbolize the break of a nation during war. "Gone With the Wind" ends with one of the most famous lines in cinematic history. After the funeral of their daughter Bonnie, - Rhett and Scarlet find themselves at a crossroads between forgiveness and habit, as they try to repair their marriage , Scarlet continues to push Rhett away and she expects him, as he has always done, to chase after her. Rhett finally stands up for himself, and leaves Scarlet. This infallible character, Ms. Scarlet O'hara, is reduced to begging, a hideous and horrible position for a woman of her calibur to be in. Rhett doesn't give in this time, and leaves her saying "Frankly dear, I don't give a damn." And this is how it ends! A four hour, epic film spanning war, family, death, and love - and it ends with Scarlet broken hearted alone in a massive mansion at the bottom of a giant staircase in tears. She does come out of it, and the film officially ends with Scarlet saying "Afterall, tomorrow is another day!" This is in reference to her once again plotting for a way to get Rhett back and making the decision to return to her plantation home in the South. A sentiment that sends Scarlet back home to 'Tara' (the name of the plantation) and something that always jerked a tear out of my face when watching the film, is a quote from Scarlet's father, a hard working Irish immigrant who says to Scarlett - "...land is the only thing in the world worth workin' for, worth fightin' for, worth dyin' for, because it's the only thing that lasts"  OH! That one gets me. Every time.

Several sequels to "Gone With the Wind" were made in the form of a book, another movie and television series but in my opinion none of them are any good. Margaret Mitchel, the original author of the book, received much pressure from the public and from MGM (the producer of the film) to write a sequel, but refused saying that she had left Rhett and Scarlet "to their ultimate fate"

I love this movie because its soap opera like qualities (which I find humorous) and it has huge ascetic appeal with it's majestic scenery and costume design. It's a classic, timeless film. I suggest it for a rainy Oregon day, or the flu, any time.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mM8iNarcRc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrhNPS4nbmQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4-DIldIX6U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnEZrV_WT44

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ5ICXMC4xY&list=PL44C37059E530C8AA

How Facebook is making friends obsolete by Julia Angwin

I use Facebook pretty regularly. It's no question it has changed our social structure, but in the context of Facebook - only if you let it. The author speaks of privacy issues while using Facebook and how it has served as a substitute for intimacy. I disagree. I consider myself a private person but also a boldly open one, in my opinion there is no other way to live, than fully - and this means being as open about the good things as you are with the bad. After a heart wrenching break-up that left me immobile and in one of the darkest depressions I have experienced so far, I painted Facebook with saddest of bad poetry, uninspiring personal updates, rude comments, you name it. If I was feeling it, I posted it, and I was feeling pretty bad. I have no regrets, because that was my life at that time, and it was very, very, painfully real, and as a result, so were my posts. I believe a lot of times Facebook is a superficial facade that only boasts of it's user's meals, drunken parties, sunny bike rides and big paychecks or a new dress - I am certainly guilty of this as well. I think the argument of no privacy with Facebook is ridiculous. If you don't want people to know about something, then don't post it - and there are always personal messages one can send in the place of a mass post. Not much different than real life, someone will still blab about what you said - this is a reflection of our need for control, not privacy. In the way of intimacy, there are still things I share with friends that could never be on Facebook. A laugh, a hike, meal, dirt, sweat, hugs and inspiration. Oh these things can be quoted, announced or photoed - but Facebook will never replace the human experience of feeling.

I find Facebook hard to avoid most times and refreshing when I can stay away from it long enough to have a life. An example of this would be my hiking trips - as long as I am on the trail, I will not go near Facebook, but I do,shamelessly, relish in posting pictures of stunning nameless mountains and valleys and dirty feet (my trail name!) over a creek, and then blabbing about it all over my album. I use Facebook to keep in touch with international and East coast friends and family, and I'm thankful to be connected to them in this way. Their friendship is not without it's intimacy because of Facebook - there is still the messy ordeal of seeing these "friends" in person, and having that dinner or beer and having to discuss life in person, and this, thank god, still happens. It will happen with or without Facebook, human beings are biologically built to live off of each other - in person. I think Facebook is a valuable tool, but just that - a tool. It's not your actual life that you are physically living, though many people seem to confuse the two, and th theerein, in my opinion  lies the crux of its issue. Facebook is not real, you are. You can control what you use Facebook for, and how you use it, just like your real life - but it is not your real life. Facebook is simply the Matrix of our times, a 2 dimensional Holodeck. A most elaborate, provocative and engaging - TOY.

Law

I think that the labeling of genetically modified foods (GMO's) on all products that have them should be a law. I believe that my money is my vote as a consumer. I believe that when I buy a product, I have a certain standard of quality or level of performance I expect out of that product. Genetically modified foods, in my staunch opinion, are unhealthy and ethically wrong. I believe in organic, local when possible, humanely harvested meats and produce. Genetically modified foods are anything but. GMO's are seeds and foods that are bio-genetically engineered to withstand everything from crop pests to inclimate weather. These foods are designed to be impervious against all odds and for one purpose - to feed the masses. Genetically modified fruits and vegetables are designed to produce more than they would at their natural rate and if the seed is not genetically modified, crops that are under research for this purpose are often sprayed with pesticides. I do not want to eat food that has been treated with chemicals to survive, when it has the ability to do so just fine on it's own. I do not want the chemicals and pesticides sprayed on foods to enter my body, nor do I want the hand of some lab technician playing God with the seeds that birthed my food. The high yield of GMO foods are often due to the laws of supply and demand, provoking companies like Monsanto that back GMO product and research to produce and sell as much food as they can engineer. I believe this is unethical, because the drive for this behavior is rooted in how to make the most money out of the situation instead of providing health and sustenance to a community. Many people are not bothered by this, or are even aware of it. The power to choose what we put into our bodies and the control we have over our health should be a right, not a privilege. This is why I believe that all GMO products should be labeled so that the consumer is aware of what is in their food and weather or not is is a natural byproduct of the planet or engineered by a scientist. Genetically modified foods would still exist, but the consumer would be more aware of the quality of their product. If this were a law, I believe that it would empower the consumer to make healthier choices for themselves and their families. The issue of GMO's is highly controversial, and reminds me of a line in a song by Ani DiFranco - "...any tool is a weapon if you hold it right..." 

Darwin and Lincoln by Steven Conn

Reacting to Ideas # 1:  The author dissects similarities between Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin in this reading. In his second paragraph he states "In different ways, each liberated us from tradition"  and then goes to explain further. This is the first clue as to how Lincoln and Darwin are alike. Lincoln was responsible for spearheading a social revolution, in which slavery  and the socio-economic filters which enabled it were dramatically changed through the Emancipation Proclamation, provoked by the Civil War. Darwin's revolution took on a scientific and evolutionary character in the context of the evolution of species. This came to provide a wider receptivity about the natural world, enabling a broader sense of our environment, and how we engage with it.

In reference to the author's aforementioned statement "In different ways, each liberated us from tradition"  In the context of slavery, Lincoln's revolution, Darwin himself was an advocate of abolitionism. In the last few paragraph's of the essay, Darwin's beliefs are discussed and mentioned that "in a Darwinian world we are all members of one human family". In Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation speech, Lincoln reminds us that slavery cannot exist "in a nation founded on the belief that all men are created equal" In these ways and more explored in this essay, Darwin and Lincoln's revolutions are similar, is not symbiotic.

Reacting to the Pattern # 2: Conn makes the same points for both men in the essay, he continuously provides statements immediately followed by an example, in the context of how both men are similar. The author goes back and forth between his two subjects. He discusses ways in which their ideas were similar, and how their further reaching influences are also similar. I feel the essay ends abruptly, focusing on the social rejection in the South of Lincoln's ideals, and this is the only problem I see.