What it Means to be an American

This week, we discussed pieces by Amy Tan, Maya Angelou, and Sherman Alexie. All of these pieces involved some sort of racial conflict, both external and internal. Amy Tan wishes to appear more American and not seem weird to her crush Robert. Maya Angelou describes the constantly waging war between blacks and whites. Finally, Sherman Alexie describes what being a Native American is like in the new American world. While all of these authors are proud of their identity, I feel as if there is something they all fail to realize. There is no strict definition of what it means to be American. This nation, founded by a mixture of immigrants, isn't all one single race. It's a melting pot of different races and that is why we can call this country great. I am as much American as is Amy Tan, as is Maya Angelou, as is Sherman Alexie, as is the voice actor for Ford truck commercials. Any citizen of the U.S. that is proud of contributing their race to this unique country is an American. Amy Tan doesn't need a new nose to be American, and her mother is partially wrong to think that inside, Amy must be proud that she isn't. However, only by accepting she is different, can Amy truly experience what it is like to be an American. There is a great example of this going on right now in the Olympics. The U.S. team(also including Summer Olympics) involves a variety of foreign teammates including Chinese, Russian, Kenyan, Mexican, and many other races of athletes. A person of any race can become an American. Just as Jill Geer, the U.S. tracks & field communications director points out about foreign athletes, "no one considers them anything but American."

Purpose of "Champion of the World"

Maya Angelou wrote the piece “Champion of the World” in an attempt to reveal the ongoing racial conflict that existed long after the abolition of slavery. She refers to Joe Louis’s title match as just another battle of races. It was just another time in which blacks had to prove that they weren’t inferior to whites. Angelou describes that if Louis loses “It was another lynching, yet another Black man hanging on a tree” (Angelou 16). Using simple sentences in paragraph 16, Angelou emphasizes the constant battles that blacks had to fight to protect themselves. But more importantly, the allusions that she makes to slavery show that blacks know they are still not safe. Even they think that they must prove themselves. However, after they have won a battle, such as in Louis’s victory, African Americans still had to face a violent backlash. Angelou recalls after the victory that “It wouldn’t do for a Black man and his family to be caught on a lonely country road” (Angelou 28). Using simple sentences, repetition of horrors blacks had to face, and allusions to slavery, Angelou displays the insecurity that blacks still felt over a hundred years after abolition.

To this day, a war between races is still being waged. However, it is not nearly to the extent that it was in the time period of Joe Louis. Many African Americans are discriminated against in the labor market and make much less than a white man doing the same job. In this case racism has still not been eliminated, but steps are constantly being made to reduce it. One of the most important milestones in racial progression has happened in this past decade when Barack Obama became president, the highest government position there is. So while there are still many battles taking place in this racial war, they are not nearly as violent or inhumane as they used to be in Joe Louis’s time. Society has progressed in this sense and hopefully will continue to.

Insight into Walter

The Harlem Renaissance was a major black cultural movement in which many African American citizens were able to raise their positions in society. Their fights were no longer for freedom, they were to higher their positions in society. However, this shift in ideals was not a smooth transition. In the poem "The Weary Blues" Langston Hughes describes the feeling of black musician. This musician says that "[He] ain't happy no mo'" and that he wished "that [he] had died", showing that he is no longer satisfied with the life that he lives. His case is similar to that of Walter Lee in the book A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry. Walter is also dissatisfied by his families conditions and his job. As his mom always says, being a servant is never the right job for a man. He should be creating something for the world. Walter wishes to become as close to a Gatsby-like person he can, and just like Gatsby, he has become too absorbed in materialistic possessions. Unlike Gatsby though, Walter has to battle with society to achieve his goal, something we as readers think will most likely not happen. Personally, I see Walter as a combination of Rex Walls, from The Glass Castle, and Gatsby, from The Great Gatsby. He keeps telling his family of the plans he has to get rich quick and is also an alcoholic like Rex, however he is more absorbed in the perks of wealth than Rex, similar to Gatsby.**SPOILER ALERT**(if you still haven't done your homework) After reading Act II, we find that Walter truly is empty with his promises and is just as reckless with money as Rex Walls. How he will react to this defeat though may set him apart. That remains to be read...

What do you truly have when you have everything?

F. Scott Fitzgerald in the book, The Great Gatsby(1923), implies that materialism is a destructive characteristic leading to a life lacking a true meaning. Fitzgerald supports his claim by ridiculing the sense of mystery behind Gatsby's affluence–no one knows who he is, what he does, or what he searches for in the beginning of the book, not even Gatsby himself. The authors purpose is to reveal how materialism can result in a meaningless life with insatiable desires so that society may no longer epitomize happiness inside wealth. The author writes in a cautionary tone to society in order to warn against the consequences in becoming overly absorbed in the dream that is wealth.

The statement "you don't know what you've got till its gone" has some truth to it, dealing with family members and other strictly irreplaceable items. However in Gatsby's case, he didn't realize that he didn't have anything until he actually had everything. While he was working to become rich and leaving his family to fulfill his dream of being rich, he lost sight of what he was truly doing. He was leaving those that cared about him, his family, for riches. Also, he didn't come back to Daisy as soon as he could because he was afraid she would reject him due to his economic state, again not realizing that if she truly loved him, it wouldn't matter. Through this and our socratic seminar in class, it can be concluded that materialism not only corrupts a person's morals, but also it corrupts and consumes their own purpose.

Color Motif in The Great Gatsby

Throughout the entire novel, colors are used as symbols representing certain meanings. These include gold, which represents wealth, white, representing femininity, green, representing hope, and gray, representing a lack of the other colors. However, in the book, there are many colors that also appear to mimic some of these. For example, yellow mimics gold and cream mimics white. Fitzgerald's purpose behind using these mimicking colors is because they represent the idea of mimicking itself. In the beginning of the book, Jordan and Daisy, two highly regarded women wear white, however Mrytle, not as highly respected, wears cream. She is trying to be like Daisy, is even jealous of her, but she is not quite the same as Daisy. This is why she wears a cream dress the first time she appears in the book. Similarly, yellow represents new wealth trying to mimic old wealth. Gatsby's yellow car is an example of this. He buys it to flaunt his wealth and try to appear like those who live on East Egg. Another example of this mimicry is the two twins who approach Jordan at one of Gatsby's parties. Fitzgerald describes them as both wearing yellow. Again, this represents the new wealth trying to mimic the old wealth, however it cannot quite be achieved. In The Great Gatsby colors of similarity are used to represent one group of people trying to be like another.

Modernism in The Great Gatsby

After reading the first three chapters of The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the question arises about why Fitzgerald narrates the story from the point of view of Nick Carraway. Neither is he the one in the conflict of marriages like the Buchanans and Wilsons nor the mysterious, wealthy man Gatsby. So what is the point of Nick being the narrator? As we discussed during class last week, this time period, classified as modernism, involved increasingly conformist and materialistic values. I believe that Fitzgerald is narrating the book from Carraway's view to show how the previous era would view the now modern society. He resides in a simple house described as an eye-sore next to houses of the ultra-wealthy, and is friends with Tom, who is also ultra-wealthy. Nick isn't concerned with material values, rather he serves as a judge of the new era, proved by Tom's want of Carraway to like him and a similarly mentioned feeling that Gatsby feels towards him. Another new characteristic of this new era was the flapper, or strongly independent woman. This role is played by Jordan Baker. Carraway describes her as appealing because she is "self-sufficient", showing society's overall approval of the new-found independence of women. The Great Gatsby serves as a great representation of the new characteristics found in modernism, such as a judge of materialism and of the new identity for women.

#Punctuation

Thesis: In a rapidly changing world, the rules of grammar are constantly being morphed into ever-changing symbols carrying a meaning which is soon forgotten; however, some form of grammar is still needed in order to allow people's thoughts to be read in the form of words.

As source A describes punctuation, "as technology continues to evolve and innovate, the way in which we communicate needs to change as well"(Source A), citing examples of how a exclamation comma or a snark are no longer are recognized in society. Henry Hitchings believes that punctuation no longer holds as prominent of a niche in today's "literary world". However personally, I disagree. In "On Punctuation" by Elizabeth Austen she states how most of punctuation is a "tight-lipped fence" or a "prissy formality"(Source B), however she also mentions many punctuation marks that she would use if  "[She] must"(Source B). Austen brings to light in her poem that even though a lot of punctuation marks may just be fluff, it still is a vital part of writing. Taking it one step further, Lewis Thomas in "Notes on Punctuation" bluntly states "There are no precise rules about punctuation"(Source C), more like there shouldn't be... While I believe that he is incorrect in stating that there are no precise rules of punctuation, I believe this statement should be made true, leaving in the most important rules of punctuation – the period, the comma, the question mark, etc. – and allowing the fluff, described by Austen, to be open for any interpretation of use. While a lot of punctuation continues to evolve in a ever-changing world, these marks are mainly fluff, however the most important rules of it are already engrained into the writings of society.