Blogging Around Yet Again..

A rap on Jason's Music Post-

Jason's post was on music, specifically the piece Canon by Pachelbel and a version that happens to have 70 million views on YouTube, one that I have seen many times also. He mentioned that all types of music are worthy forms of expression, and I agreed in my comment. Also, he stated that every piece of music is a synthesis of the old and new, just like really any art form. I think to take this further, we can figure that in order to be great, music has to both realize history and try to push beyond it. If you want to be a great musician, it's just important to know what came before you as it is to form your own creativity. Think of the history as a basis for greatness, and internal creativity a means to achieve it.

A walkthrough of Nirali's "Jaywalking" post-

I've seen this segment of Leno's show a bunch of times, and find it pretty funny, but I completely forgot about the fact that the people shown don't know basic facts that we should really all know. I stated this within my comment, as well as the fact that it's hard to do too much about it. While everybody should have this knowledge, we can't force people to go back and learn it. The point is that our entertainment can show problems in our society. Another good example is all of the violent video games and movies out now. We have a craving for violence, and that's demonstrated in what we pay to see or play. So, we can analyze our culture through the means of entertainment that we have. Clearly there are shortcomings in the way people are taught facts, and they should be taken seriously.

iMedia: John Coltrane's A Love Supreme

First, a clip from John Coltrane's "Pt. 1- Acknowledgment" off of A Love Supreme:

I picked this clip for a lot of reasons. I'll begin with the composer, John Coltrane. Alive in the early-mid 20th century, Coltrane remains by far one of the most influential musicians of all time. In the genre of Jazz specifically, I'd argue the only one on an equal plane with him is Miles Davis. Coltrane took Jazz music, which was at the time all about dancing, and made it into something that you just couldn't dance to. Almost everything before him and Miles was bop- quicker, lighter Jazz meant for people to have fun with.

And then, while every other musician just played along, Coltrane took the norm and smashed it in half. New York Times writer Ben Ratliff says in his biography Coltrane, "[John] got beyond the language of the utterances... he kept playing more forcefully and originally."

There have been hundreds of historians that have said it: John Coltrane changed music forever. One man, lived only 40 years. Music had been around for thousands of years. If you do that math, it's pretty astounding to see how quickly one man influenced it all.

The piece I picked is the first number off his A Love Supreme, about a 35-minute album with four longer pieces. Their titles are the first thing that stand out: Acknowledgment, Resolution, Pursuance, Psalm. The album title suggests that these songs could be about pursuing a perfect loving relationship. I see them as the steps to solving a problem: recognizing that it's there, resolving it, pursuing any underlying causes, and then turning to beliefs and hoping it won't happen again.

The song is a little harsh on the ears, and it's meant to be. This is what Coltrane did: he took the often-soft and emotionless Jazz music that was circulating and threw it away, creating an avant garde style that many at first found appalling. It's taken me many lessons to accept the music, but comparing it to a lot of the other Jazz I have reveals how much better it is.

Good music is indeed a part of our culture. There are many forms of art, but I'd argue music is the most universal. If you took a group of 500 high school students, maybe 50 would say they paint or draw regularly. I hate to admit it, but only 150 would admit to reading regularly. But 498 would say they listen to music every single day. It's been around for thousands of years, as I said. Instruments have been part of cultures dating back to ancient African cultures and further back. Music is embedded in our culture, we're keyed in to it.

So, if it's just entertainment that a lot of people like, why is it important? That's the key, it's not just entertainment. Music can teach us lessons just as well as books or movies; you just have to look harder sometimes. What does this Coltrane piece teach me? It tells me to go beyond what our society tells us. Nothing is set in stone, don't let anyone tell you what art to make or what sounds to play.

The point is that Coltrane's music is controlled chaos. If there were no rhythm, nobody would like it. There has to be beat, it has to stay in some sort of form. This is why they had some of the most solid drummers, like Elvin Jones on A Love Supreme. If all the structure was lost, there would be no point. People would say that Coltrane is more of the useless musical garbage that is so often found these days.

So, there's a huge lesson to be learned here. As long as you don't ever lose your grounding, you're free to be as creative as you can be. Keep the foundation, keep structure, and you don't need to hold yourself in with any limits. This is Coltrane's message, now quiet down for the sax solo.

Connection: King Lear and the Berlin Wall

As I first turned on my computer today, a New York Times email popped up with the day's news and reminders. The very first thing I saw was a note on the Berlin wall being torn down. I soon learned that tomorrow (Monday) will be the 20th anniversary of the opening of Western Berlin to everybody.

Upon seeing this, I started thinking about the reasons that the wall was taken down: the ending of Communism and the Soviet Union, a huge uprising in East Germany, and a huge amount of people on either side of Germany clamoring to see those on the other side.

The New York Times article did an excellent job describing the phenomenon associated with the destruction of the Berlin wall. We all can see the wall as a great metaphor for what was going on: a huge concrete construction tearing an entire country apart. As this wall was broken, freedom poured through and people were ecstatic.

Obviously I wasn't around for the tearing down of the Berlin wall, but I can still get a feeling for what that day must have been like. After a huge buildup of political and social tension, the opening of borders must have been a gratifying result for everybody (except some of those crazy politicians).

It took a little longer to develop parallels with King Lear than it did to capture the feeling of the wall's destruction, but I really wanted to write about it after reading the NYT article. So, I went ahead and tried to make a few analogies.

The first is pretty obvious, being the division of Lear's state. He is in essence creating a Goneril England and a Regan England (doesn't sound as nice as West/ East Germany), and is paving the way for a whole lot of conflict. The basic conclusion from our reading so far is that this was a bad decision. Regan and Goneril are regular abusers of power, and overall quite horrible people.

I'm not trying to insinuate that every politician in Germany was a horrible person, and it wasn't even a Communist decision to divide Germany (the Allies took the West after WWII, a division was necessary). In this way, Goneril and Regan didn't necessarily want the division. Lear passed it on to them and they "dealt" with it accordingly.

So, the cause of our issues are pretty analogous. In both, a division of state was made and two different leaders took over. Now, the effects are a little more murky. One thing that Shakespeare did not do well is capturing the story of normal people. He seems to have tried to portray their ideas through major characters, but it's hard to get the whole story from his diluted tales of royalty.

What we do know about Germany is that everyone was affected. The New York Times article tells us that there were some people who were unable to see family or friends because of the way Berlin was divided. We have no such details (as of yet) in King Lear, so it's hard to tell. We can make the assumption, though, that the corrupted rules of Goneril and Regan are in some way affecting their subjects.

What's more important than their similarities, though, is what we can learn from them. We learned a lot from the Berlin situation: divisions in countries lead to violence, cultural and political issues, and myriad other problems. In King Lear, the division will be a cause for tragic effects (it is a tragedy). I'm gonna pretend I haven't finished the book and just take a guess: these divided countries don't work out so well, right?

360 Degrees: The Works of Shakespeare

It's been said over and over: Shakespeare was one of the greatest writers in history. All of his writings are ingenious, he was brilliant in his invention of new words, and most of all, he was the master of expressing romance and emotions.

So, we've all heard the raves about Shakespeare's greatness; the positive aspects of his writing have been recorded in thousands of books and lectures. Now, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that William wasn't quite as amazing as everyone thinks.

Shakespeare made up a whole lot of goofy words, and he's known for it. One source said he made up over 3,000 different words. I believe, however, that it's important to remember what time he lived in. There were probably thousands less words back in his time, than there are now. So, while it's certainly cool that he invented words, anybody could have done it. In fact, it's still being done now. Every year, dozens of words are added to the dictionary. Beyond that, many of Shakespeare's words were just silly, like slugabed or flibbertigibbet.

Another popular claim is that every one of Shakespeare's works is a masterpiece. I'd argue that certain works, like his Titus Andronicus were just extravagantly violent plays meant to appeal to audiences that clamored for such entertainment. One researcher, S. Clarke Hues, said Titus has, "14 killings, 9 of them on stage, 6 severed members, 1 rape (or 2 or 3, depending on how you count), 1 live burial, 1 case of insanity and 1 of cannibalism--an average of 5.2 atrocities per act, or one for every 97 lines." It might just be me, but I'd say that's completely excessive. This play is also (with a little research) considered by many to be his worst. If some of his works are so jam-packed with violence, where's the room for the beauty that's supposed to be Shakespeare?

The last statement I made in the opening was that he was the master of romance and emotion. I'm not at all suggesting that he didn't make a huge number of relationships, I'm just suggesting that it's been done in better ways by other people. The often ridiculous Shakespearean language seems to dodge around what he's really trying to get at: the core of human emotion. Romeo and Juliet's encounters are always uncomfortable to the reader, and death (of all things) stops them from truly being able to love each other at the end. Shakespeare made so many hints at love and emotion in his plays, but I've yet to see a place where he actually followed through.

With an opposite view taken, I think it's important to see some sort of balance between the two (here's the dialectic part). On one hand, he's amazing. On the other, he's nothing special. If we weigh the two against each other, we can reach a pretty solid conclusion: Shakespeare was good at many things, but never the best at anything. There were better overall writers, better romantic writers, other people who can create more words. But nobody else put it all together. William Shakespeare was indeed special.

Metacognition: The Kite Runner Essay

To be honest, I had a lot of trouble thinking about this essay. Obviously, the rest of my paragraphs had to fit in with the thesis. I knew this, but at the same I felt that I wanted to go in different directions with the whole thing.

I guess what I learned about my thinking is that it lacks a lot of focus. I found myself wandering a lot throughout the essay, wanting to go towards completely different points or pieces of evidence. It took me a lot longer to write the essay than I wanted it to.

Other than the focus problem, I realized I don't like exact quotes. I'd rather refer to a whole passage than try to narrow it down to one single quote. I have trouble putting a whole point into one short line, and that's something to work on. I think I did alright picking quotes, but I'd like to get better at it.

As far as the focus goes, it's probably an ongoing battle that a lot of people face. Maybe thesis-evidence essays bore me, and I have trouble with the attention span required to write them. This could mean that I'm better at writing things I'm really interested in. Unfortunately, for the rest of my years in school, I'm going to have to write about a lot of stuff that I don't care for. This means it's something to look at and try to find patterns about.

In conclusion, there are two things I really need to work on- focusing on single ideas and formulating points into compact statements. Both of these involve a little more determination in writing, and I'll certainly think about it.

Blogging Around: Bill and Darrell

Note: Please take points off because I did this assignment late.

Bill's post- "Carry it Forward- The Code of Living"

Bill wrote an interesting post on the law code that campers agree to abide by each summer. These laws are ones involving being adventurous, passionate, and daring.

My comment-

"I agree that those involved in creating their own laws have a much bigger chance to actually follow them. This relates somewhat to The Blue Sweater, where Jacqueline involved the people in creating their own lives.

As far as the actual law code goes, it's pretty interesting how the "laws" are more about taking initiative and being happy than just following rules. Maybe if everybody is passionate and appreciative of the things around them, they wouldn't need regular rules. In other words, if everybody is following these five simple laws, why do we need any others?"

Darrell's Post- "It Matters: Facebook and our Identity Crisis"

Darrell had a really interesting post about facebook and this age of technology- one in which we are often completely obsessed with it. He analyzed research and came up with some possible consequences.

My comment-

"Darrell, this was a pretty sweet post. It's a pretty scary view that we're headed into a world where we really don't know how to communicate with technology. Sometimes it seems like we can't even live without our computer or phone for a week, and that's pretty bad.

I'd say that Facebook gives us a pretty unrealistic view of the world. It's like your entire life can be shown on one page, but that's not true. It means so much more to talk to someone and really learn about them, than it does to just look at their Facebook.

There are really only a few solutions to that problem, and the idea of just completely eliminating technology is pretty ridiculous and not exactly the smartest one. I guess we just have to be careful to balance out our lives and make sure we don't use Facebook too much. We can use technology to our advantage as long as we don't let it control us."

Connection: Amir and Berlioz

We know that many of the older conductors had some interesting songs, influenced by very wide-ranging histories. Classical music is probably one of the more engaging genres to study because of this fact, and yet it can be one of the more disturbing as well.

In band this year, we received a movement from Hector Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique, one of the 1800s conductor's more famous pieces. This one, titled March to the Scaffold is very dark.

The background goes like this: the protagonist is dreaming that he has just killed his wife and is sentenced to death. His drug- induced dream culminates with watching himself getting decapitated. All the while, he dreams of how much he loves his wife.

It's this constant, knowing march to his death that I think is related to Amir's story. On a more subtle note, Amir is marching to his scaffold (guillotine). We think of execution as a form of justice for a pretty bad crime, in this case murder.

Throughout all of the Kite Runner, we get the sense that Amir is seeking atonement for his sins. The book builds up to Hassan's assault, in the way a symphony builds. From there, like a decrescendo, it's all downhill. The idea is that Amir has killed his honor, his love, and he needs to find a way to get it back.

So, while Amir isn't literally walking towards his beheading, he is building up to some sort of redemption. We mentioned that memoirs are all about reconciliation and atonement. In a way, Berlioz's symphony speaks of the simplest form of redemption, execution.

We can only hope that Amir won't face the same fate as Berlioz's character, but there are parallels in their seeking for justice.

Best of week: Words That Just Don't Translate

In the midst of one of our many Kite Runner discussions this week, an interesting issue came up. On page 38, towards the middle of Chapter 5, we are given details on the walking terror of Amir's childhood, Assef. Amir recalls he later "learned an English word for the creature that Assef was, a word for which a good Farsi equivalent does not exist: sociopath."

To analyze the quote on its basic level is pretty simple: Amir is assuming that Assef is a sociopath because of his terrible deeds and apparent lack of any feelings or empathy. Of course, later in the book, Assef's actions get even worse and culminate (maybe) in the horrible alley scene with Hassan.

To use micro vs. macro here, we can assume that Hosseini is writing this on the micro level. Amir is just making a possible statement about Assef's mental condition. But, as we look on the macro level, Hosseini is doing something pretty interesting: he's showing that words don't necessarily translate well.

Let's take a step back from the details of the story for a second and see what might be going on. We know that this is in 1970s- 1980s Afghanistan, so obviously education wasn't at its prime. It's probably one of the harshest regions in the world, and it's not likely that they had the time or necessarily the wanting to develop words for social disorders.

So, what I'm really saying is that words in a given language can tell you so much about the place that they come from. A little research on Farsi shows that it originated in Iran and spread all around the area, into places like Afghanistan and Bahrain. Now, given the fact that there's no Farsi word for "sociopath," we can make a pretty important assumption: they didn't ever take the time to research or develop facts on disorders.

This could all be a stretch, and I might be completely wrong, but if you think about the way languages work, there's some big evidence. We only develop words that we're really going to use, ones that we need. It usually takes time for a word to catch on and circulate. When words are missing, there usually either isn't a huge need for them, or nobody knows that there's a need for them.

The core of the statement I'm making is that Khaled does a great job of showing us something about the way Afghanistan works. It only took him one passage to make the point that Afghanistan was lacking something, empathy for those with disorders or the complete lack of knowledge on mental conditions. This is so powerful because we know a lot more now about the world our characters live in.

Of course, there'd be no point in making this macro statement if it didn't apply elsewhere. The reason there are so many languages in the world is that every distinct region has its own, every area or country shapes its own words. Take for example the word google. Recently, it was accepted as a real word, one that means "to search the internet using the Google search engine." Now, if you went to a third-world country and find me a lingual equivalent for this word of ours, I would be completely surprised. They won't have a word for it because they don't know about it, they don't need a word.

Lastly, we have one more interesting observation to think about. Given that our languages are all different, we can be certain that not all translating will be smooth; some words won't translate at all. So, we need to think more outside of our language and the barriers that we set on it, and look at other languages. Words can tell you history, they can teach you everything about people and places. Therefore, locking ourselves up in the English language is like ignoring history everywhere else. This is why we study foreign languages, and why Hosseini's point is so brilliant.

Change Of Mind: The Blue Sweater

Every day, we hear about a bunch of charity organizations and people working to collect money and help around the world. There's no doubt that all of this is done with good intentions, and it can help. What I learned with The Blue Sweater, though, is that good intentions just aren't enough.

Take, for example, an organization like UNICEF. They get millions of dollars every year from donors across the globe, but as Jacqueline Novogratz addresses, some big foundations like this don't really get the job done. Sometimes, money can end up in the wrong hands, or people simply don't know what to do with it.

Novogratz created the Acumen Fund, a group which fixes these problems. What she's really stressing is that you need to educate people on money: they need to know what business means. So, by getting social entrepreneurs rather than just blind donors, we can fix a lot of these problems. She focuses on young people out of some sort of business school, with a lot of determination to change the world. The ideal candidate would know about the world's problems, have an idea about how businesses work and how to sustain them, and be able to listen to others.

So, my big change in thought was that we need to change our charities- or get rid of them altogether. There isn't any sustainability in just giving money away; we need to educate and train people to use it, so they can make it on their own. While the intentions of most people are already pretty good, we need to change their actions.

This is a pretty important change in thinking because of the position we're in at our age. We have to decide relatively soon what to do with the rest of our lives, and knowing that helping people can go along with a good education and smart thinking is pretty important. As we go into college, it's certainly something to think about. With social entrepreneurship, I'd say saving the world is a little bit bigger of a possibility.