Columbus Day

The Columbus Day I know is about celebrating Christopher Columbus' finding of the "new world" which is known as the Bahamas or the Americas. Columbus is popular for his contributions of finding the new land and not of the derogating sides to his findings. Although Columbus Day appears to be a celebration, it is rather a day that people should be mourning for the Arawaks, the Native Americans on the new land who had been manipulated and tortured till death under Columbus' authority. 

Personally, I find it very frightful of how Columbus made use of these Arawaks who had no harm, thus, had great hospitality towards Columbus and his crews. Howard Zinn's writing about Columbus made me realize that Columbus is very self-centered and greedy. He was on a conquest for gold and the Arawaks did not hoard them away from Columbus but helped him search for it. The Arawaks shared food, shelter, and everything they had with the shipmen. Nonetheless, Columbus cruelly shipped the Arawaks back to his place and sold them as 'slaves'. They were nothing different from cows and buffalos that humans use. 

It is very appalling to hear that such great hero society admires and praises today is very inhumane. Despite Columbus’ successful findings, his actions led to the mass extermination of the Arawaks. The media should not publicize only the favorable things Columbus contributed but should also publicize the absence of his self-righteousness towards the Arawaks. I strongly feel that it is undeserved for those Native Americans who died without receiving the world's acknowledgements. 

Chapter 5 of 1984

The world Winston lives in consists of a very paranoid government. Systems involved in the governance of Oceania is very paranoia including the new character introduced, Syme, who is accounted for cutting down words to the bone, erasing words that existed, and rewriting the Newspeak dictionary. The government is afraid that the existence of words like "independent" "freedom" and "rebellious" makes people seek to achieve it. Therefore, if they erase those words then people would not be able to feel that way and they will be under the government's control for eternity.

In modern society, I believe that there is no such ideas that appears to be as paranoid as the one presented in the novel. The government in that time is deeply concerned about the power and authorities they hold until the point that they are paranoid. This fear can be considered as a mental disorder and results in a paranoid governance. I personally think this way because the governance in the society I live in promotes democracy and the public has freedom and rights. However, if I live in North Korea, then my viewpoints towards this paranoia would be different, I would probably think that the paranoia presented in the novel is common and usual. Not only that, the way I perceive things might also be influenced by my young age. Since I am still young in experience and work, I still have no idea of how reality is of governing people. For example, some adults own a private business and this involves governing massive number of employees. These adults would have a better idea of how it is and therefore, the hardships they faced is legit to lead them to be paranoid like the governance of Oceania.

On the other hand, I do not think that gender influences how I view the paranoia in this chapter. This might be because I consider that both genders are equal in status and is both capable of making decisions. Therefore, it would be the same as it is now if the government of Oceania is of women.

The Scarlatti Tilt

Response to ORIGINAL 

The original wording, “It's very hard to live in a studio apartment in San Jose with a man who's learning to play the violin. That's what she told the police when she handed them the empty revolver" seems to be vague. The author foreshadowed the reader the events that is going to happen or has happened in the story.

Response to DIFFERENT VARIATIONS 

I feel that the variations of this text conjures different feelings in a certain way. For example:

Variation #1:
The change of noun from "man" to a "white man" makes me think that the woman who handed the police the empty revolver is the bad person. However, my friend has another viewpoint. She thinks that the white man is the bad person because he has been racist towards the woman all along until the point that the woman cannot stand his actions so she killed him.

Variation #2:
The change of noun from "man" to "black man" makes me think that the woman is not the bad guy as she was with the white man's case. In this case, the woman is not wrong because my initial feeling of black people is that they are always wrong and usually the "bad guy". I think that this feeling is very surprising of how I judge people from their race. On the other hand, my friend thinks that the woman is wrong because she is racist towards the black man. Therefore, she is always annoyed of what the black man does and this leads her to murder him.

Variation #3:
The change of noun from "man" to "woman" for the violin player and the change of "woman" to "man" for the killer makes me think that the man who killed the woman is wrong. This is because I feel that contemporary men should have sympathy towards women (weaker sex), and therefore should treat women in a passionate way.

Variation #4:
The change of noun from "man" to "children" for the violin player automatically makes the killer the corrupted and wrong. I believe that children are never wrong because they are still young and naive while adults are old enough to handle their emotions and feelings.

Variation #5:
The change of noun from "man" to "baby" have the same effect as variation #4. It is normal for babies to cry and I would rather view that the killer is very ill-tempered or even mentally ill to the point that he killed the baby.

Variation #6:
The change of the killer from "man" to "woman" have the same effect as variation #5. Anyone who killed a baby because of their cry is mentally ill.

Variation #7:
This variation makes me feel that the woman who killed the man that watches football all the time is biased because she does not like Manchester United while the man might like the team. I feel that this is very common in society but I still think that the woman is the immoral person. She should not let her feelings overcome the idea of self-righteous.