3/24/08

Booker T. Washington’s Up from Slavery presents a unique account from somebody who grew up during and after the Civil War. Washington’s autobiography describes life as a young slave boy on a Southern plantation as well as the beginnings of life as a free man. I thought it was interesting how the slaves that lived and worked on the same plantation as Washington did not feel much bitterness towards their masters who lived in the “big house.” They mourned for the one man who died and felt bad for those who were injured in the war. The slaves felt that being picked to keep watch at night over the men who were recovering was a very honorable position. Even when the slaves were set free by the Emancipation Proclamation, some of the older ones went back to their former masters and asked for work. This was also due to the fact that starting a whole new life at their age would be rather difficult. Booker T. Washington also had a unique desire for an education. I think it is obvious that this willingness to learn, even after only reading the first few chapters, is what propels him to be one of the great African Americans and a great leader for the people of his race. His longing for an education leads to his desire for the rest of African Americans to have an education similar to his. This is one reason why Washington goes on to establish Tuskegee Institute. His commentaries on the effects of ancestry and the Emancipation Proclamation on both races are very intriguing. It makes sense too that after the slaves were set free, the white people in the South were not much better off than the slaves who were going out into the world for the first time on their own. For years, the slaves had always done the labor and chores required to run a household. Now, there was no one to cook, clean, etc. The white girls had to learn how to take care of a house after having it done for them their whole lives. In addition, the ancestry of an individual gave a white man reasons not to fail at a particular job so as to not embarrass his whole family. The black man’s lack of ancestry makes him want to establish a good reputation for his family, but there is no family before him to embarrass if he does not do well.

3/9/08

Kyle Lunsford
3/9/08
Reynolds
Blog #9
The reading for this past week and over the weekend, The Diary of a Shirtwaist Striker, is a novel that depicts the life of girls on strike in 1909. The whole book is a journal of the narrator’s daily thoughts and experiences as she tries to fight for women’s rights, specifically that to have the ability to form or join a laborer’s union. I knew before reading this book that things were bad for female workers in the early twentieth century, but I was still amazed at the awful treatment they received while both working and striking. The conditions are similar to those in Life in the Iron Mills. The idea of women strikers breaks apart the many relationships in Mary’s, the narrator’s, life. The way Malkiel writes the story is very different from most. It is all based on the narrator’s account of events and her opinions. There are no actual conversations in the book, just Mary’s retelling of them. Eventually, she is kicked out of her family’s house by her father and has a falling out with her fiancée. By the end of the reading for Monday, Mary’s dad and Jim have begun to see her reasoning and side of the argument. Mary was very satisfied when she realized that Jim had changed his opinions and was happy just to have turned one person. So in the end, the strike was somewhat of a good thing in that it enlightened some people as to what struggles the factory girls had to go through. The rich and upper class people in this story were so cold and heartless even when the girls came to them and told them their stories. They gave some money, but to them it was pennies and nickels. After visiting with the girls, they would go on with their lives not thinking twice about the hardships the workers faced every day. Overall, I think the book is very feminist, which is its point, and appeals greatly to the females in the audience. It is a very convincing argument in its time as to why women should be allowed to be in unions and it leads into and mentions their right to vote.

3/2/08

In the movie we watched last week, Blade Runner, the futuristic idea of replicants is introduced and brings into question the humanity of the characters. One of the main themes is determining who is human and who is a replicant. The blade runners are basically bounty hunters whose jobs are to kill replicants that have escaped to the earth. They must decide the humanity of a person in order to determine if they need to act. To do this they use the Voight-Kampff test. Harrison Ford’s character, Deckard, uses this test on Rachel, a Nexus 6 model replicant. After 100 questions, he determines she is not human even though she does not know she isn’t. We never find out if Deckard is human or not. If he is, shouldn't he be being hunted? He never takes the test. In the beginning, I automatically assumed that he was human, but in the end his humanity is not distinguishable. He also questions if the replicants are really evil or not. The replicants have a safety net of only living four years so they don't become too human. But why create them if you are going to kill them in four years? The whole idea of giving memories to the nexus 6 models questions what is life. What does it mean to be living? Personally, I found this movie to have no real interesting plot that made a noticeable movement throughout the story. I thought it was very boring. Obviously, there is a lot of significance to the themes in the movie, but the movie did not capture my attention or interest. I heard that this movie is really popular, but failed at the box office when it first came out. I understand that last part but not why it is such a favorite.