Reflection:
Throughout the year I have learned how to improve my work despite the many struggles I faced. I put a lot of effort into the things I already knew how to do well – like visuals and making creative presentations – and had to work extra hard on the things I struggled with – like effectively writing essays and doing a presentation in front of a group of people. I employed many strategies to improve my struggles.
One reason for my improvements throughout the year in humanities has been my developing familiarity with the style of questions and assignments I was presented with. I was able to distinguish what my teacher was looking for so that I could do better in the class.
For example, throughout the year I wrote three major personal responses to text. My marks on these three assignments reflect the fact that I improved on each one. On the first response I got 63%, mainly due to my lack of understanding of the question and not knowing what my teacher was looking for when marking it. I learned many things from that perceived failure. On my next personal response I scored 83%. I understood the question, but lacked on tying all of my key points back to the controlling idea. On the last personal response to text that I completed I did very well, earning a mark of 90%. When writing it, I considered all of the advice I had received during the year, making it one of my best pieces of writing thus far.
For my critical/analytical responses I did much the same thing, constantly considering the suggestions I had received from my teacher and peers, as well as realized myself.
I had a wake-up call after receiving the feedback from the first visual I created this year (for “On the Rainy River”). I realized I would have to put more thought and effort into my visuals in the future. After this personal insight, I created more visuals that were superior.
Although I plan on going into the sciences in university, I believe that the skills I have learned in Humanities 30 will be extremely useful to me throughout the rest of my life. I will always take with me the ability to learn from my mistakes to improve in everything I do, to take advice with an open mind, and the ability to work successfully with others in a group. Humanities has prepared me for a bright and promising future for which I believe I am ready.
Critical/Analytical Responses to Text:
Critical Response to The Grapes of Wrath
John Steinbeck’s thesis presented in The Grapes of Wrath is that in order for society to run best, people must not act out of self interest, but rather in the interest of the collective. Throughout the book this idea is established as characters are developed and the situation of the time period is demonstrated. According to the author, the thought of self-preservation plays an important role in an individual’s response to conflict. Every person has an ultimate objective that they constantly strive to achieve, but every person also faces many obstacles that get in the way of achieving that ultimate goal. In other words, one’s self-preservation is only attainable if one can overcome the competing internal and external demands that obstruct it.
There are many characters and situations described throughout The Grapes of Wrath that support Steinbeck’s theory about the best way to overcome obstacles in order to pursue self-preservation. One example of this is the development of Tom Joad throughout the book. Joad started out with an individualist perspective, but as the book progressed, the author developed him into more of a collectivist. In the beginning, Joad thought mainly of himself and his family, but after gaining many new experiences and seeing new perspectives, he began to think more of others and the group than just himself. This is demonstrated when he was talking to Ma in the cave about possibly revolting against the rich owners; he said, “I been thinkin’ a hell of a lot, thinkin’ about our people livin’ like pigs, an’ the good rich lan’ layin’ fallow, or maybe one fella with a million acres, while a hundred thousan’ good farmers is starvin’. An’ I been wonderin’ if all our folks got together an’ yelled…” (ch.28 pg.571). This quote shows Tom Joad’s desire for equality between social classes and his determination to achieve economic equality and collective interest, while also presenting his seriousness about the possibility of a revolution to attain these ideologies.
Another character who was developed into a collectivist to support Steinbeck’s thesis was Jim Casy. During the course of the novel, Casy went through multiple phases. He started out as a preacher, leading the people and advocating the word and spirit of God; he was then incredibly confused, constantly thinking about life, faith, and the spirit in everyone; finally, Casy sacrificed himself for the good of the group, believing that doing so was in the best interest of the collective. When Jim Casy was getting attacked for leading a strike, the narrator said, “Casy dodged down into the swing” (ch.26 pg.527), which represents Casy’s willingness to die for the potential that others would be able to have better lives. In Steinbeck’s opinion, this sacrifice was the ultimate solution to pursuing self-preservation – by acting to help the collective group. Casy showed his devotion to achieving self-preservation by benefitting the group many times throughout the book, offering to take the blame and go to jail when Tom Joad beat up a cop, preaching about the need for a revolution to obtain equality in the collective interest, and passing on his thoughts to Tom Joad in order for his visions to be seen through. One particular idea that Casy came up with while he spent his time constantly thinking, and then shared with Joad, was that every person’s soul is just a small piece of one big soul. Both characters firmly believed that it was imperative that everyone unite their souls and work together in order to achieve self-preservation; one individual thinking only of his own success would eventually lead to their inevitable failure.
Steinbeck not only represents his ideas in the way of character development, but also uses the setting and events of the time period to help portray his main idea. In many of the intercalary chapters throughout the book, the author looked beyond the challenges that the Joad family and other main characters came up against, and described the general hardships faced by all the struggling people. For instance, in chapter five the narrator informs the reader about tractor drivers. He tells us that they were just ordinary people who used to struggle to find food just like the rest of the poor residents, but then, by striving for their own and their family’s self-preservation, the drivers destroyed the livelihood of everyone else around them. An angry tenant complained about a tractor driver’s greediness when he said, “…for your three dollars a day fifteen or twenty families can’t eat at all. Nearly a hundred people have to go out and wander on the roads for your three dollars a day.” (ch.5 pg.50). Steinbeck included this whole situation in the book to illustrate the negative effects that may occur if people do not think of the common good. The tractor driver was only thinking of himself and his family, never giving thought to the hundred people who would be displaced and starved as a result of his doings. Although he may or may not have realized it, this tractor driver harmed others immediately, only to harm himself in the long run.
Throughout The Grapes of Wrath, many obstacles were presented which the characters had to overcome in order to achieve their ultimate objective; they had to conquer the competing internal and external demands in order to accomplish self-preservation. Using multiple techniques, Steinbeck presented his thesis that collectivism is ultimately better than individualism. He supported his idea by developing characters like Tom Joad and Jim Casy, who in the end thought that everyone’s souls are part of one giant soul and that no one can get by on their own; each person’s soul must be connected to the collective soul in order to prosper, or even just survive. Steinbeck also used the method of intercalary chapters to develop his theory further. He wrote about a tractor driver whose greediness and individualistic perspective caused harm to everyone around him and would eventually cause harm to him as well. As a whole, The Grapes of Wrath combines many situations that support Steinbeck’s thesis that in order for society to run best, people must not act out of self interest, but rather in the interest of the collective.
Critical – Analytical Response to the Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
Peter Jackson created a film that portrays the ways in which individuals take responsibility for themselves and others. Many of the characters developed in this film took responsibility reluctantly but willingly, making a personal sacrifice in order to help society.
This film depicts the idea that accepting responsibility for something usually means that a personal sacrifice must be made in return for the benefit of society as a whole. Many of the characters in this film realized that they needed to take responsibility in order for their society to persist. They recognized the need to help a larger power rather that only looking out for themselves; they would be helping all of Middle Earth by accepting responsibility for their society in a time of need. In the cases of many of the characters developed by Peter Jackson in “Lord of the Rings: Return of the King,” the consideration of such a personal sacrifice caused them hesitate before accepting responsibility.
Frodo reluctantly took responsibility for all of Middle Earth by accepting the burden of the ring and the task of destroying it to prevent the rise of evil forces in Middle Earth. He made many personal sacrifices in the anticipation of fulfilling this obligation. It is apparent throughout the film that the ring’s power took a toll of Frodo, weakening him almost to a point of death, but he heroically persevered to fulfill his responsibility of destroying it in order to help society. When faced with the decision to accept this important responsibility, Frodo recognized the personal sacrifice he would have to make – the many hardships he would face which could ultimately lead to his demise – in order to help his society. After hesitating slightly, Frodo ultimately made the decision to put the needs of society above his own, accepting this responsibility which was vital to Middle Earth’s persistence.
Another key character developed by Peter Jackson who portrayed the willing acceptance of responsibility despite his hesitation of making a personal sacrifice for the benefit of society, was Aragorn. Although Aragorn was heir to the throne of Gondor, he initially rejected the responsibility of becoming king. It can be argued that his reason for this reluctance was the fear that he would not live up to society’s standards and expectations. Throughout the film, he became more confident in his beliefs and his own identity, causing him to show his heroic nature in a time of need to lead his people into the future. The turning point at which Aragorn made the decision to accept responsibility was just before the final battle for Middle Earth when he realized society’s need for his heroic leadership. He stepped up to front his army’s attack on the forces of evil from Mordor. Aragorn ultimately sacrificed his fear and doubt, realizing that the benefits that would come from his help and leadership of society would greatly outweigh the consequences of his possible future mistakes.
Peter Jackson created a film that clearly represents the ways in which individuals take responsibility for themselves and others. It was shown through the analysis of two of the main characters, Frodo and Aragorn, that responsibility is often taken reluctantly but willingly, and with the thought that the benefit of society outweighs the consequences presented by the personal sacrifice that must be made.
Personal Responses to Text:
Pinocchio’s Free Will
Personal well-being can be pursued differently when one is faced with different conflicts. If you are being manipulated and are under the control of someone else without knowing it, you are faced with a unique type of conflict. This type of situation can be looked at and compared to Keith Carter’s image titled Pinocchio as well as personal knowledge of certain circumstances.
Manipulation can come in many different forms. One example of someone taking advantage of someone else who does not realize it is a sales-person trying to sell a particular product to a customer. Sales-people generally make an effort to sell the product that will produce the highest profit for themselves, and do this in any way that they can. Sales-people will sometimes only give you parts of the information to help them sell the particular product. For instance, a television salesman will tell you all the amazing features of one model, leaving out the potential cons of the choice, while only giving the possible downfalls of another model and leaving out the good features. By using this method, the customer only has biased information about the products, leading them to make the decision that the sales-person led them to. Despite the fact that the sales-person tells you to make the decision on your own, he has already practically made the decision for you. You think that you are making the choice between the two products, but actually the sales-person has manipulated your thoughts into leaning towards the product that they will make the most money off of. This is only one of many examples of manipulation which can be used to benefit, or more often, harm the receiver.
In Keith Carter’s image titled Pinocchio, a certain type of manipulation is demonstrated. The puppet has the illusion that he can move however he wants, while actually the puppeteer has complete control of his every move. In the image, the puppeteer, or manipulator, is blurred to give the impression that the puppet is not aware of his presence or dominant control over him. Pinocchio is not conscious of the fact that there is a presence standing above him, pulling strings to control his decisions. Despite what he may think, Pinocchio does not have free-will. This image demonstrates the same concept discussed above; a manipulative presence has control over the receiver without the receiver being aware of it. The puppeteer pulls the stings to force decisions to be made which produce predetermined outcomes; the sales-person pulls strings to lift the customers’ hand to the television that will produce the highest profit. Although these examples have focused mainly on the negative aspects of manipulation, it is also possible for the overseeing blurred presence to force good decisions from the puppets as well.
Both of these examples relate to concepts of human nature in more general terms. Humans are commonly faced with situations of competing internal and external demands. We are often forced to respond to these conflicts in the best interest of our own personal well-being. Humans generally want to make their own decisions without someone or something dictating what they can and cannot do. The examples above make certain suggestions about personal well-being when responding to conflict. In these types of situations the puppet is not aware that he is being manipulated, which means that he is not conscious of any type of conflict. Although the person who is being manipulated is not aware of the manipulation, there is still a man versus man conflict taking place. Despite the potential for positive manipulation, there is a far greater likelihood that the manipulation will be destructive. This negative influence may cause the reduction of personal well-being such as fulfillment, self-satisfaction, or even survival. Making a major decision may give the illusion of fulfillment and self-satisfaction, but like the example above, a conscious decision was not actually made by the puppet. An extreme situation involving a similar type of manipulation could even put a life in danger, threatening the vital survival of the pawn. There can be numerous effects caused by the blurred presence of a manipulator which, to a certain extent, may ruin the puppet’s ability to pursue personal well-being.
The examples above suggest that human nature causes individuals to respond to the conflicts presented by manipulation in a certain way. We are under the impression that we can do and think anything we want, when we are actually unknowingly under the complete control of the manipulator. The understanding of certain situations as well as Keith Carter’s image titled Pinocchio has provided some insight into individuals’ natural response to these types of manipulative situations.
Balancing in the Wind of School
The struggle to restore honour and certainty may come in different forms, from different situations, and may have different solutions. There are times when you are faced with a problem that seems out of your reach, moving too fast for you to distinguish the details, having the potential to knock you off of your precarious balancing position. What are you going to do about it? Will you simply try to stay balanced until it has passed, letting your honour and certainty slip away, or will you take action to try to slow it down, separate the details from the blur, and restore your honour and certainty?
In the image titled 120 km/h, 1975 by Jan Saudek, a young person is balanced in a precarious position. Directly in front of them, a fast moving train flies by. The individual can barely make out what is happening in the blur, while simultaneously trying to gain some sort of balance on the level-crossing gate as the wind created by the train threatens to knock them down. Similar to the individual in the image, I struggle to find a balancing position where I will not be obliterated by the intense workload of school. There is no possible way that I can slow down the rapidly approaching unit tests, project due dates, and diploma exams in front of me. All I can do is attempt to stay balanced – to keep my head above the water – and distinguish and absorb as much of the information from the blur as I can.
As the weight of homework gets heavier, the pressure to study gets stronger, and time goes faster, I find myself falling. But then I catch myself. My honour and certainty come back into sight as I temporarily regain my balance, until another chemistry assignment gets handed out and I don’t understand it. After catching my breath I am able to slightly make out the details of the speeding train before I remember the math unit exam that is tomorrow for which I still have to study. After barely making it through that, I must focus on the multiple projects with fast-approaching due dates in humanities. I cannot let the wind from the train knock me over as my balance is becoming more unsteady and I am beginning to doubt my honour. But then I receive a mark back in math; I restored my certainty – I aced the test. I catch a glimpse of the date and a panic attack hits me like a train going 120 km/h. There are less than two weeks until I write my diploma exams; I begin to fall again.
I am doing everything I can to succeed in this time of overbearing pressure. Honour is achieving high marks, doing as well as I know I am capable of, and learning new things every day. Certainty is the feedback I get that lets me know I am doing well, and the fact that I will be able to get into university and achieve the goals I am striving towards in my life. In order to achieve this honour and certainty I must keep my balance and effectively make out the details of the train flying past me. I use what little time I have effectively, and I keep my focus on the task at hand. I am taking one step at a time to run the marathon.
As life flies by like a speeding train, we balance on the sidelines trying to make out the details before it is too late. Everyone struggles to restore honour and certainty – whatever their definition of the terms may be. As the train passes we are constantly trying to slow it down in order to discover the solutions to our problems. We may never find the cure to everything, but in the process of looking we may just find a way to stay balanced until we begin to fall again. The conflicts we deal with are always against us – the wind is always threatening to blow us down – and all we can do is struggle against it to stay up.
Accepting Responsibility
When faced with a controversial situation in which one is forced to make a decision, it is truly tested whether or not that individual is actually responsible. If one chooses to accept responsibility for themselves and others around them, they are proven guilty of being an admirable, responsible person.
After witnessing a classmate cheat on a test, I am forced to make a decision. Will I tell the teacher about the mishap, or will I let the person get away with cheating and forget about the offense? If I choose to notify the teacher, I will be accepting responsibility for myself and everyone else in the classroom, ensuring that justice is maintained. So why would I choose to do the “wrong thing” by objecting to notify the teacher, pretending to be oblivious to the offence? There are many factors that may contribute to the reasons why a person makes a certain decision – why they choose to accept or deny responsibility.
My situation requiring a choice to be made is similar to the situation of Hatsue in the excerpt from “Snow Falling on Cedars.” We were both forced to make a decision about whether or not to accept responsibility. In the excerpt, Hatsue makes the decision to take the situation into her own hands by making the decision to take responsibility for her actions. Similarly, I must make the decision to either inform the head of the classroom about the wrongdoing that I have witnessed, or let the student get away with cheating by ignoring my moral obligation.
Many individuals in society are faced with comparable circumstances. When faced with this type of situation, one must make a decision to accept or deny responsibility for their own actions or the actions of those around them. It seems as though most citizens in society tend to let these types of transgressions go. Most people make multiple excuses to themselves in order to justify why they stood by as someone else committed a seemingly harmless felony. Humans have a moral obligation to report misdeeds – no matter how victimless they may be – to a person in charge.
The real question is, why do some individuals choose to accept this responsibility, and why do others choose to remain ignorant to these situations? Although many inferences may be made, there is a possibility that no one will ever know the true answer to this question. To inform someone about a mishap that you have witnessed it would take a lot of effort and you would risk your own reputation in return for practically no reward, whereas if you simply choose to remain unaware of the situation, there may be no noticeable consequence. In my circumstance, peer pressure existed that stopped me from doing the “right thing” by telling the teacher about my classmate who was cheating. Like countless people in society, I witnessed a victimless crime and decided to let the cheater get away with their offence.
Although it may be incredibly difficult to accept one’s moral obligation to society, it is our responsibility to report immoral situations to those in charge.
Creative Responses (visuals):
My visual response to "On the Rainy River"
My visual response to the poem “Dolce et Decorum Est”
(click image to enlarge)
My visual response to the poem “The Swimmer’s Moment” (click image to enlarge)
Creative writing:
(click image to enlarge)
The above image is my response to Shakespeare's play "Hamlet"
Independent Reading Assignment:
After I got into the book "Truth and Bright Water", I actually enjoyed reading it. The fact that it was narrated from the perspective of a young Aboriginal boy made it a bit more interesting and relatable.
