False Reality

After reading Susan Sontag's short argument about photographs for the first time, I nearly laughed. How can something as innocent as a photograph be "the most irresistible form of mental pollution?” After scratching my head for a while, I found the answer by applying the ideas in Sontag's 1977 essay to the mass media today in 2019.

Photographs and videos coupled with the internet have clouded reality in many ways, and most people are completely unaware of it. Anyone with skills in video editing can manipulate videos to create nearly flawless results. People can be edited out of videos or put in videos with ease. False videos can spread through social media to millions within minutes. So how do we know what’s real and what’s not?

Movies are another example of how technology can distort reality. Various Marvel and Star Wars movies have used digital de-aging techniques to make actors look 30 or 40 years younger (examples include Michael Douglas in Ant-Man, Samuel L. Jackson in Captain Marvel, and Carrie Fisher in Rogue One: A Star Wars Story). Think about that again. Visual effects artists have figured out a way to create a digital version of an actor that looks and acts just like a human. It sounds as fictitious as the movies themselves, but it's real! And the most mind-blowing part is that it works in reverse as well. In Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, the production team "revived" the actor Peter Cushing, who died in 1994, to play the role of Grand Moff Tarkin through various 3D models and an actor for the movements. The audience was in awe by how convincing this digital version was in resembling the real Peter Cushing.

(digital versions on the right)

From the internet on our phones to movies in theaters, our reality has been morphed into the unknown. Of course, everyone knows that movies are not real, but how long will it be until such technology is applied to everyday life? How do we know that the news reporters on TV are real people? Will we even need human actors in the future? Is this a stretch? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!

The Literary Tape

Just a normal roll of Scotch tape right? Wrong. This is double sided tape – the special stuff that works like magic when used correctly. On flat surfaces, it glues items together so well that it basically morphs them into one coherent object. Yet, if even one surface is slightly uneven, it becomes completely useless. 

What does this have to do with a blog post for AP English? Well, words function in an almost identical way. Double sided tape looks just like normal tape; similarly, sentences can be masked with layers of sarcasm or euphemisms or innuendos that create meanings other than what is literally said. For example, the phrase "Thanks a lot" could be a genuine comment or a sarcastic insult. In other words, sentences that look the same on paper could serve vastly different purposes, like double sided tape, which is two times as versatile as single sided tape yet looks identical to its inferior counterpart.

Lastly, we reach the tape's primary purpose: to stick items together. Words have the power to unite people. Powerful speeches, presentations, and essays can influence the minds of millions, and through words, knowledge can be passed for generations to come. Now that sounds heartwarming and all, but words can also be harmful – they are double-sided. They "let us say the things we want to say and also things we would be better off not having said." They can cause destruction through calculated ambiguity. Ambiguity in applying tape can result in a broken picture frame or a burst pipe. Double-sided tape used incorrectly on a rough surface can cause a divide between objects rather than a union. Words used incorrectly can be offensive and split relationships. 

And then, we reach the Flex TapeⓇ of all words. The strongest words that can unite people (maybe two people) forever. But those words are for you to decide. Let me know in the comments below!

Focus on the Relevant

"...never mind the fact that this American classic (written in 1884) depicts the spiritual kinship achieved between a white boy and a runaway slave, never mind the fact that the "n*****" Jim emerges as the novel's most honorable, decent character. "

By focusing on the center, one does not get
lost in the vast landscape

Many of us, including me, forget to focus on the main purpose of a work. Instead, we worry about the irrelevant details that carry little significance to the piece. As Kakutani mentions above, the relationship between Huck and Jim is one of the most important lessons from The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, yet many critics focus solely on the words used to create this message. To some extent, I do this as well. Sometimes, I fail to recognize the main idea of a passage or article, which makes the knowledge that I gain from reading it useless. While focusing on the main idea of a literary work is important, many people fail to realize is that this concept can be applied to all aspects of our lives.

Meeting someone for the first time can be an enjoyable experience only if one ignores the other person's flaws. In terms of appearance, nobody looks perfect, and by ignoring looks we can focus on the more important features that make someone significant, such as personality. Often, we meet someone with a "potty mouth" – someone who can't even say a sentence without swearing at least once. And often, these people use racial slurs unacceptable today. Now, while such words should never be used, the person saying them may not actually have cruel intentions.

Which brings me back to Kakutani's argument in "The Word Police". Censoring hundreds of possibly irritating words (not racial slurs) is not going to solve the real issues of prejudice in this world. So, in other words, let us make an effort to identify the underlying issues in society instead of labeling the irrelevant as significant.

The Plant, The Moth, and The Human

Beside a tall glass window in my house lies a series of ceramic pots with various plants. Some are grown for cooking, and others, like the flowers, are for decoration. Despite the occasional aphid or spider mite, I enjoy watching the plants grow at their gradual pace. I noticed, however, that no matter how any plant was placed, it would always try to grow towards the sun. Almost every leaf would tilt to maximize the surface area of solar exposure. Many of the long-stemmed plants would grow towards the window, sometimes growing around obstacles. The plants had an almost human-like willingness for their source of life – the sun.

Similarly, the moth described by Virginia Woolf also shows a willingness to survive. It is trapped behind the window pane, unable to travel outside – in a state of ennui – like a plant. Other than look out the window, it simply flies from "one corner of [its] compartment... to the other." Woolf also describes how the moth dies: it is slow and hopeless death where the moth gradually loses its bodily function – similar to a plant devoid of sunlight. Yet, the moth constantly shows a willingness to survive by "dancing and zigzagging" while attempting to escape its confinement. The plant, a brainless stem with leaves, grows towards the sunlight for the same purpose as the winged moth.

As humans, we sometimes forget to consider that all living beings have a willingness to survive. Although a plant or a moth may not have emotions, it will try anything in its power to prevent its death. So besides our appearances, what really is the difference between a plant, a moth, and a human?

The INTENSOMETER

I find the classification of literary works according to their intensities highly captivating– especially when they are soaked with double-edged irony. While the IRONOMETER measures the strength of different types of ironies, my INTENSOMETER measures the intensity by which an ironic work conveys its message.

INTENSOMETER ranking for this week's works:

1. Jourdan Anderson's letter
2. "A Modest Proposal"
3. "Marrying Absurd"

WHAT? Who in their right mind would rank "A Modest Proposal", the sardonic essay about cannibalizing children, under Jourdan Anderson's letter in terms of intensity? The answer lies in Jourdan's effective use of subtle irony to create a stronger, long-lasting effect.

Everyone knows, after reading "A Modest Proposal", that the absurd proposal described is a mere exaggeration. Swift was an established and sane writer of the 16 - 1700s; he definitely did not actually want boiled children "seasoned with a little pepper or salt." While the grotesque hyperbole does deliver Swift's point about the poverty policies of the time, it appears as a fantasy to the reader, lessening its impact.

On the other hand, Jourdan's use of subtle blame and passive-aggressive tone keeps the real consequences of slave abuse while also attacking Col Patrick Anderson. Almost every sentence has a deeper meaning. Jourdan states that he has "often felt uneasy about" Col Patrick Anderson. This understatement is extremely effective, as Jourdan does not simply feel uneasy about his former slave owner – he despises him. 

Lastly, I placed "Marrying Absurd" at the bottom because of its slightly lighthearted tone. The essay is simply mocking the fast-paced wedding; it is in no way sardonic or extremely sarcastic. 

Of course, there are many ways to organize this INTENSOMETER. Let me know if you agree or disagree with my view in the comments section!

Consider the Kitchen

DISCLAIMER: The restaurant that I mention in this post is one of my favorite places to eat. This is just my imagination of how the restaurant functions; it may or may not be true.

Twice a year, my family and I drive to a certain outlet mall to shop for the discounted prices. I, however, have a different reason to visit the mall. Between the vast swamp of stores lies a small Chinese/Thai restaurant. It's a calm place with smooth lighting and fancy red decorations. The square tables have a small red chair on each side and are covered with a white tablecloth. As soon as I walk in, I can smell the mouth-watering aroma of Chinese and Thai food. This, however, is what it looks like from the outside.

Past the door with a sign that reads "Employees Only" there exists a culinary hell. It's unbearably hot, people are shouting orders, the clanging metal pans are deafening the employees, and the coordination between employees is abysmal. Ting, the new chef, is always sneaking a noodle or a bamboo shoot into his mouth — sometimes even an entire piece of chicken. The other employees are no better: each one is clumsy and drops a dish at least once a week. The kitchen is also rarely cleaned since Ting has a habit of sneaking more food if it's easier to find.

Thankfully, the customers have no clue about the mess because the “Employees Only” door masks most of the kitchen’s cacophony. In the end, it is the craziness of the kitchen that results in the scrumptious, unique food at the tables. Although I hear loud voices near the door sometimes, I have never seen what actually happens back there because, in the words of David Wallace, it is "just selfishly convenient" not to.

Why Do We Waste?

Yikes

We live in a world so crowded with waste that there is a patch of garbage twice the size of Texas in the Pacific Ocean. Most people are aware that wasting resources is harmful for the environment, but why does waste still exist? I believe the answer lies in the production of items rather than the consumption of them.

Lauren Singer's waste jar.

From 2012 to 2016, a woman named Lauren Singer minimized her waste to the point that it could all be kept in a jar. At first, I was amazed by what she had accomplished, but soon I realized the impracticality of her strategy. Singer had lived a nearly waste-free life by making her own products and avoiding packaged ones; not everyone, however, has the resources or time to do this. So, instead of focusing on decreasing our consumption, we should minimize the production of unnecessary products.

Or, we could consume each other's waste. For example, my sister hates mushrooms on her pizza;  whenever she gets a slice with mushrooms on it, she removes the mushrooms and throws them away. I, on the other hand, love them on my pizza. Logically, I asked her for her mushrooms and both of us were more satisfied than we were before. In the words of Lars Eighner, "almost everything I have now has already been cast out at least once, proving that what I own is valueless to someone". If everyone valued their waste as highly as what they consume, like Eighner, then every single person in this world would benefit. In other words, if the producers of the world created exactly what each individual wanted, we would have no waste. So, the next time you go to discard something, think about its other uses before you waste it.

The Talking That Really Matters

Are women really more talkative than men? Does it matter?

Not really. According to the researchers behind this study, "sex differences in conversational behavior have long been a topic of public and scientific interest." This stereotype, however, has aged over the years, and it’s not as relevant today. To me — and most other people — it makes no difference whether men or women speak more. The question that we should be asking is — who has the ability to speak with higher quality?

This is just one example of a
 school in Detroit that suffers
 from dilapitated conditions

A higher quality of speaking, formed from proper diction and grammar, can help a person convey their thoughts clearly. Many factors determine a person’s ability to do this; personality, upbringing, and societal norms are some important ones. An extrovert will tend to communicate more fluently than an introvert. While this true, many people do not have access to the most important factor: education. The main purpose of education is to provide a student the tools to effectively communicate with others. Education in any language or culture can improve a person's communication, and it provides the student with a more accessible path to success. Of course, many people have been successful without a proper education, but it is easier to stand-out from the crowd if you have a proper education. The issue is that not everybody has access to education, and even if they do have access, many learn in environments that hinder proper learning. Performing an in-depth research study on this topic would have helped society much more than the one I mentioned earlier about men and women.

I believe this is a lesson for all of us. Let's phrase our questions so that they improve society. Let me know if you agree or disagree in the comments section below!

Uniformly Marked

Deborah Tannen begins "There Is No Unmarked Woman" with a short anecdote of when she was observing the physical appearances of some men and women at a conference. She focuses on three aspects of their appearance: hair, makeup, and clothing. While these qualities do contribute towards whether or not a person is "marked" or "unmarked", they are not the only ways to mark a person.

Many years ago, I had lived in India for a few years, and the school that I went to required all students to wear a uniform. They also required students to cut their nails and keep a certain hair length. And no makeup was allowed. I used to think these rules were ridiculous when I first heard of them, but slowly I began to realize their purpose. By enforcing a strict uniform policy, the school was eliminating all methods of marking a person by their appearance. People were, of course, still marked by other ways. One girl used to raise her hand for every single question, and she constantly talked with the people next to her. Despite the uniform that made her look like her peers, her outgoing personality marked her as an easy-going and conversational person (although incessantly annoying at times). The uniform policy, unfortunately, wasn't perfect at keeping people unmarked: there was one boy who used to get bullied constantly for being plump.

Of course, being marked is not necessarily negative. Tannen says it best: "I [Tannen] felt sad to think that we women didn't have the freedom to be unmarked that the men sitting next to us had" (556). People are always going to be marked by some way or another, but we must move towards a society where an individual can choose whether or not to be marked.



What are your thoughts about uniform policies? Do you think they're effective in unmarking people?
Leave your thoughts in the Comments Section below!