Neilson and O'brian...

Jim Neilson wrote a convincing article about O'brians novel, "The Things They Carried" that further convinces me of the idea that this novel imphasizes an untruth. This essay, at one point, quotes Timothy Lomperis saying that "The facts, in Vietnam, make us all liars". O'Brian seems to be following the whole Postmodern theme that we have been learing about all year. By that, I mean that "The Things They Carried" is almost like a lie. The stories are supposed to be real life experiences yet they did not really happen. True, Vietnam was probably like this but we cannot know for sure. The audience is told a story and expected to believe it. If we believe everything we read, then anything can be true. Although these events may not have actually taken place, we are inclined to think they actually occured. This can also go back to the way we were all raised. We grow up hearing stories and thinking they are true. It is all we ever learned.

Neilson also talks about the way O'Brian writes like he is attempting to exhibit the horrors of the war. By graphically describing every single story, O'Brian is making the event more real for the audience. Its almost like people have to be able to imagine something before they can believe it. Neilson suggests that O'Brian goes back to certain events just to make us realize how awful it was. This creates a sense of hopelessness that can relate the stories to us in a more believeable way. Everybody has felt despair so by telling stories full of it, O'Brian can make us more sympathetic the the characters even if they never literally existed....they did exist in spirit.

I feel like Neilson is not exactly impressed with O'Brian. Its as though he respects his ability to write, yet he feels that O'Brian is very limited in his perception of the war which, in response, limits his audience. O'Brian talks about American hardships, but none of the other side. He almost belittles the Vietnamese suffering by ignoring it. We believe what we read and, according to Neilson, this book does not provide us with the whole story. We are only concerned with the American side and this makes the whole war seem very one-sided. The facts are clearly not present in this novel but we are only concerned with O'Brians side because his illusions are the only things we have read about.

The things they carried...themes

The Things They Carried is a collection of stories about the Vietnam War. It seems to me that the stories are all unique yet similar. I think a good theme is that life never works out the way you expect and yes I know that is terribly overstated but this is just a rough draft.

First of all, the whole book is arranged somewhat irregularly and I dont mean that in a bad way! I just mean the the boook is put together like a collection or stories as opposed to the traditional style of having chapters. I'm not toosure at the moment what this is sopposed to accomplish. Perhaps it is a way to make each and every story unique or slightly more personal...at least as personal as a war story can be.

Secondly, sice the book is called the things they carried, one would assume that all things being carried would be tangible and real. And the characters do literally carry things like guns and other necessities. However, "For the most part they [carry] themselves with poise, a kind of dignity"(19). Althought the literal translation woult be things or odjects, this storyu also talks about troubles and emotions that the soldiers feel. We cannot take the names literally because each heading carries a deeper meaning.

Furthermore, we find that Lee Strunk and Dave Jenson, at first, do not like eachother. This is established in the story "Enemies". They clearly did not get along because Jenson "wrapped an arn around Strunk's neck and pinned him down and kept hitting him on the nose"(62). The last thing one would expect is for these two, so-called "enemies" to become friends yet by the next story...they gave become friends. And close friends at that! The two were not automatically great friends "but they did learn to trust each other"(65). The fact that the two could go from absomlutely hating each other to watching each others back proves that things change. Thisgs are not always as they seem.

The Things They carried an intersting book mainly due to all the contradictory messages. The book inclodes a story called "Love", yet it is a book of war stories. These two terms completely contradict each other. However, maybe the war and that fighting help the soldiers actually discover what love is.

This semester in Postmodernism...

Okay so for this blog I am going to attempt to explain the whole idea...the main things that we should have learned from the book Postmodernism for Beginners. At least the book is properly named because I am almost sure that none of us had heard of postmodernism before we read this book. Perhaps that is why the conceps are so difficult to understand.

For me, it seems a bit contradictory to try and define the whole idea behind postmodernism. I think postmodernism is an accumulation of a bunch of ideas and a bunch of cultures. This book has taught me that the each individual person lives off of their own ideas or metanarratives...we each have our own center. So many people believe different things which creates a world that is unique to each of us. We tend to follow the beliefs and the examples of those who came before us. We grow up hearing the stories of our culture and we believe them as truth. Just like in Brave New World and 1984. The people who grew up in those books came to believe what they were told without needing proof or evidence. They were extremely willing to believe what people told them. The information, in actuality, may have been false, but the people in these novels accepted them as truths. Its like no matter what actually happened, we only perceive our own knowledge as that truth. And the real truth changes everyday! We constantly have new information thrown at us so our own viewpoints can change everyday. I guess it just depends what outside influences we have shaping our thoughts and our viewpoints.

Well thats my take on Postmodernism. My whole understanding is based on the fact that we create our own understandings. Postmodernism cannot have a clear definition because the definition changes according to each individual group or person.

haha...Google

There seems to be alot of discussion lately about the legitimacy of the internet. In my opinion, the internet is a useful tool when it comes to research and gaining knowledge. Nicholas Carr wrote a whole article about the idea that search engines are dumbing down society by making information too easilty accessible. I see the reasoning behind this. Its like Google has made things so easy, we are not used to doing manual work in order to find information we need. As Carr says, "research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries can now be done in minutes". It is true that at one point in time, people needed to spend alot more time to acieve the same results. Society now seems too wrapped up in speed. We never really take the time to just sit and relax. We live in a state of constant motion. It feels like if we are just sitting still, we are wasting life. This is due to the fact that people value speed and efficiency. For example, families used to spend hours baking bread and making food...now we can jsust go to a fast food place and get whatever we want in a matter of minutes. All people have become accustomed to quick results. And we act the same way with knowledge. It is very true that people find it difficult to concentrate on long books or articles, but i do not think Google and other search engines are to blame. It is simply something that society has pushed us towards. Google is the result of a fast-paced society. It is a tool that fits into the world we have created. I really do not think that the internet has lead to the stupidity of society. People know so much more now than they used to! We have so many answers that had once been questions. Things like Google only help in that way that they help people all over the world share ideas with eachother. People are more able to collaborate or research which leads to answers quicker, which is what our society craves. Even Carr admits that "the Web has been a godsend to [him] as a writer". Even a man that feels Google has been detrimental to oue brainwaves can admit that the internet is extremly useful.

What does it mean??

The world is obviously changing. It changes every second of every day and there is nothing we can do about it. It seems as though the world is becoming increasingly obsessed with technology and other advancements like T.V, internet, and other technical devices like cell phones and computers. Its apparant, by watching that video that our world is changing completely. Just in the past twenty yeras or so, society has completely transformed. Its like we would not be able to function without technology. Postmodern thinker Jean Baudrillard believed that society "becomes electrified only by computer networks and electroncic media" (Powell 65). He is pretty much sayinf that we are all motivated by electronics. All the information we want to share is easy to pass along now. It is easy for anybody to communicate or collaborate with another person even if that person lives on the other side of the world! This makes it a whole lot easier for new ideas to be developed and new discoveries to be found. Combining ones research with that of another person is simple. This is why so technical world seems to be expanding so fast. It is impossible to slow it down because as soon as one new piece of information is found, more questions are addressed. Then these questions will be answered which will create more questions and more speculation. It is an unending cycle. It seems like our world is beginning to emphasize science, much like a postmodern society would. It seems very possible that we will be able to function in society by technology alone. I just think that its interesting that we know more now than we have ever known yet that also means that there are alot more questions that are unanswered and these questions just keep going. I think its a really interesting parallel that has been drawn in this world. It seems like sitting at home on the computer would only make the population less intelligent yet in reality, it actually brings more knowledge into the society.

Cats cradle 1-7

Cat's Cradle, so far seems like a very interesting book. The ideas presented are original and yet we can be sure that all the stuff we read in this book are "shameless lies." The novel is about a man named John who is writing a book called The Day The World Ended, about the reactions of the people who were alive the day the atomic bomb was dropped. Since his book is about the atomic bomb, certain aspects of Cat's Cradle are scientific, which relates to postmodernism because postmodern ideas tell us that scientific research is the foundation of knowledge. A prime example of this is Dr. Felix Hoenikker. He is the scientist who made the atomic bomb. According to his son, "people weren't his specialty." The man did not know how to interact with other human beings but he was a genius when it came to science. He seems to be completely desenchanted with the rest of the world and what is happening. The only thing he focuses on are the things that interest him, which always has to do with science. He is a very original character and very intersting due to his lack of emotion. When somebody suggests that the atomic bomb was a sin, Dr. Hoenikker asks, "'What is sin?'" In his mind, science is not sin. The act of progress is a good thing which mean science is a good thing because it answers the questions people have. In some opinions, the atomic bomb was a sin because it was so destructive, but in Dr. hoenikkers mind, it was a scientific advancement. Postmodern ideas agree with Dr. Hoenikker I think because they ceneter around scincentific advancement; the answering of new questions which just causes new questions to appear. The work must go on and on becauses there is no way that all the questions people have will ever be answered.

Brave New World Thesis Ideas

Brave New World presents many ideas that would lead to a good essay. I think some of the ideas I would like to discuss in my essay have to do with mass production. It seems as though this novel focuses alot of its main ideas on the fact that all people share everything, everyone belongs to everyone, and what not. All the people are similar and share names, looks, and ideas. All the people think the same way due to this mass production, this exremely efficient way of conducting scientific experiments that always seem to go right. I think it is interesting that our way of life, in the novel is so obscure. I don't really know how to put all of this into a thesis. Maybe...In Huxley's Brave New World, science is used to guide society into greatness. I don't really think greatness is the right word but I can't think of another way to put it.

Another theme in the novel is kind of conneceted to originality, and lack thereof. The way people grow up have a tremendous affect on the way they turn out to be. All the people in this book grew up the same way, in government care. They grew up being brainwashed. This sounds horrible, but they seem like they actually enjoy life. Some people now may have a problem with their lifestyle but the people in Brave New World grew up to differently from us. Just because they were brainwashed does not mean that they do not have fun. It seems like, in general, the people in this novel have more fun than we do.

I think a good resource that can be added to this essay can come from 1984. Both novels deal with a government that has far too much power. The people do not have their own rights or their own decisions. The societies are not the same however. The society in 1984 is much scarier and way more threatening. If you mess up in the society they torture you and eventually kill you. Its not that harsh in Brave New World. I think it would be a good idea to bring 1984 into this essay as a way to contrast the happy go-lucky lifestyle in Brave New World to the scary society showcased in 1984. Another resource could come form the outcome of experiments in cloning or brainwashing. I think that could fit in well with my ides.