Science Has Taken Over My Life

     After spending a good portion of the day studying for tomorrow's AP Biology test, I guess now is as good of a time as any to write a blog post about science! It's not like I'm tired of it or anything. *Sarcastic laughter*...  So. Anyway. I really enjoyed reading the piece "A Measure of Restraint" by Chet Raymo, because I found the style to be beautiful, and also because it is about science, which is a topic I generally enjoy (just not after cramming it into my brain for hours). But, I did not fully agree with the claim of the piece, which was essentially that "the unexamined quest for knowledge is hemmed with peril", and that we must be hesitant when forging for new scientific discoveries (11). Of course, this makes sense, logically. Putting ourselves at risk in order to make new discoveries may not be the best idea in theory, and human curiosity can be detrimental. However, hesitation in this world of broadening scientific opportunities could prevent groundbreaking discoveries for which the benefits could, in fact, outweigh the possible dangers.
     One part of the piece "A Measure of Restraint" that really stuck with me was the story of Marie Curie, probably because she is a really admirable scientist who committed herself to her work. And, of course, it was that commitment that caused her death. This was one of Raymo's central examples for his argument that restraint should be used in scientific discoveries. However, when I was scrolling down tumblr the other day, I found a quote that suggests that Marie Curie herself may disagree. She states that "nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less". This implies that even though Curie's work lead to her death, she does not regret the discoveries that she made, even though they had great costs to her own health.
     With the fields of science providing more opportunities for research than ever before, it is important to take into consideration the risks of taking advantage of such opportunities. But perhaps more important is to listen to the words of Marie Curie, a woman who threw herself so completely into her research with no hesitation, and who still, even after realizing the consequences of her actions, rallies for scientific discoveries to continue.

Of Maus and Metaphors

     On page 43 of the graphic novel Maus, Art Spiegelman further expands his mouse metaphor. Art now appears as a child, illustrated through how small he appears in his chair, as he states that "sometimes [he doesn't] feel like a functioning adult." This depicts his mental regression caused by his deep immersion in the past and worries about the future. Here, the mouse metaphor serves to represent not only his Jewish heritage, but also his current unstable state of mind. Art continues to mix the past and the future, as he discusses how he is going to be a father in a few months, then recalls how his "father's ghost still hangs over [him]." He then mentions that he is going to his appointment with a therapist, implying how haunted he is by his fathers tales of the Holocaust. The fact that his therapist is "a Czech Jew" and "a survivor of Terezin and Auschwitz" further indicates that Art is seeing him for help with dealing with the Holocaust. This is reinforced with an image of him walking to the therapist's office, surrounded by the bodies of dead Jewish people, similar to the capms at Auschwitch. Thus, by using his mouse metaphor to illustrate himself as child, and surrounding the images of himself with those of the past, Art Speigelman is demonstrating the fluidity of time. Through his combination of words and images, he proves that events from the past have a large capability to affect people in the future.

Reality or Fanta-Sea?

     Contemplating reality is always great way to start the day at 7:20 in the morning, as we did on Thursday upon reading On Photography by Susan Sontag (only after enduring the incessant "awwing" of some classmates over others' baby pictures). In her piece, Sontag claims that photographs promote a skewed, false reality, and that the camera "hides more than it discloses" (13-14). While the latter statement may be true, her assertment that a picture has little semblance of reality is not.
      The Miriam-Webster Dictionary defines reality as "the quality or state of being real; a real event, entity or state of affairs". Looking at a photograph, one cannot deny that what is being depicted in the picture happened, thus making it a reality. However, there are many ways to interpret said reality, as demonstrated in Sontag's Nazi example. One's interpretation of reality does not make it any less real- it is real to them, thus becoming their own reality. So, while a photo may not show all perspectives, it does have a semblance of reality.

Me during Thursday's discussion

The Dumbest Thing of All: Meninism

     After being told the blog assignment for this week was to be sarcastic about something I think is dumb, I was so excited that I proceeded to ignore my second hour teacher in favor of making a list: "Things That Are Dumb (to Satirize)". The list was easy to write, and became quite extensive. The hard part is picking which terrible thing or idea to satirize. Garden gnomes (I mean, just why are they a thing), writing "2k15" instead of "2015" (it's the same amount of characters, what's the point, except to look ridiculous), our obsession with hair (it's basically glorified strands of keratin containing cells), the quote "do one thing every day that scares you" (it is day 1467, and the only thing left that I am scared of is jumping off of a building, I have no other choice, I jump), and the patriarchy (enough said). However, there is one thing that is more ridiculous than all of these put together: meninism.

     For those who are fortunate enough not to have heard of meninism, it is basically a movement opposing feminism by men who for some reason believe that feminism's fight for equality is taking away their already predominant rights. Still doesn't make sense? It probably never will. These men, who already have more rights and power than women, fear that women finally achieveing equality to them will lessen their control over women. And, for some reason, that is a terrible notion that warrents an incredibly dumb movement determened to undermine feminism and it's struggle for equality. They call it "men's quest for rights"- how do they not realize that they already have more rights than women? Clearly, these meninists are a bit dense; their cry-baby attitudes, fragile egos, and ineducation on feminism make them the worst kinds of people. Their super important issue of losing the control over women that they so cherish is taking away from the bigger picture: feminism's struggle for equality. No, not domination. Sorry meninists, wrong yet again. 

Meninism in three accurate and unpleasant words.

The Circumstances of Happiness

     "I don't think two people could've been happier than we've been" (The Hours)
     Richard says this to Clarissa right before comitting suicide. This makes a powerful statement about happiness, seeing as neither Richard nor Clarissa lead the happiest life. Richard lives alone in a dark and dirty room, his mother abandoned him as a child, his father and sister are dead, and he is dying of AIDS. Clarissa loves Richard but is married to Sally, she is secretly unhappy but puts on a facade in order to keep up her public appearance. She throws herself into the trivials of everyday life in order to distract her from what she can never have. However, Richard states that he doesn't believe anyone could have been happier than them.
     This contrasts with Laura's character. Her life is seemingly perfect. She has a loving husband and son and is financially well off. However, she is really unhappy with her life, and even contemplates ending it. Eventually, it is made clear that she is so unhappy with it that she leaves it all together. Thus, it is revealed that contrary to societal beleif, one's life's circumstances don't entirely dictate their propensity to experience happiness. And so, the question is raised. What does it mean to be happy?

Richard, Prior to Suicide

Prisoners of the Soul

     "...she knew nothing about them, only jumped to conclusions, as one does, for what can one know even of the people one lives with every day? she asked. Are we not all prisoners? She had read a wonderful play about a man who scratched on the wall of his cell, and she had felt that was true of life– one scratched on the wall." (Woolf 192)

      Sally's revelation about human nature reigns true to one of the critical themes of the novel: people strive to make meaningful connections, however, our separate and concealed souls make this difficult. As Clarissa compares the human soul and its ability to make connections to two separate rooms, Sally relates it to a prison cell. While in separate houses, Clarissa and her neighbor can glimpse into eachother's rooms through the adjacent windows, but cannot fully experience them. These rooms represent the human souls and our inability, due to their separateness, to make connections with those around us. However, this doesn't stop Clarissa from longing for relations to people; she often finds herself staring into her neighbor's room, representing her desire for human conntections.

     Similarly, Sally compares the soul to a prison cell and our consciousness to a prisoner, forever scratching at the walls. Because the prison of our soul prevents us from reaching our ultimate desires of human connections, we are forever trying to break free of its confinements. Thus, the soul embidies both solace and lonliness, similar to being trapped in one's own or cell.

Humanity's Startlingly Large Ego

     "One cannot bring children into a world like this. One cannot perpetuate suffering, or increase the breed of these lustful animals, who have no lasting emotions, but only whims and vanities, eddying them now this way, now that.

     He watched her snip, shape, as one watches a bird hop, flit in the grass, without daring to move a finger. For the truth is (let her ignore it) that human beings have neither kindness, nor faith, nor charity beyond what serves to increase the pleasure of the moment. They hunt in packs. Their packs scour the desert and vanish screaming into the wilderness. They desert the fallen. They are plastered over with grimaces." (Woolf 89)

     These two paragraphs of Mrs. Dalloway are definitely my favorite of the book so far- although there are many great truths revealed throughout the novel that pertain to time, love, and life, this quote about human nature is one that I find to be most genuine. As humans, we have a tendancy to put ourselves on a pedastal, looking down upon what we consider to be lesser animals, for we believe ourselves to be superior in our intellegence and morals. In this passage, however, Septimus attempts to disprove this human ideal, stating that at our very core, we are equal to, if not worse than, those very animals we spend our lives degrading. 

     Of course, this idea is one that most are hesitant to consider; we humans are very secure in our beleif of superiority, and to some, it may be criminal to think of humans as equivilant, say, to such an animal as a mouse. Septimus acknowledges this, saying "let her ignore it", refering to his wife's refusal to view humanity in this rather degrading light. Although many will desist to recognize it, everything Septimus conveys here is true. Humans are merely "lustful animals", our motivation for the good we pride ourselves so much for doing is most often intrinsic, serving purely "to increase the pleasure of the moment." Septimus further emphasizes our animalistic foundations by using words that conote them; he states that we are a "breed", compares his wife to a bird, and asserts that we "hunt in packs." That we do: we "scour" this world, taking more than we need, purely for pleasure, taking down anything that stands in our way. Our sense of happiness is rooted in our desire for success, and therefore money- we conquer our "whims and vanities" at the espense of the poor. We are selfish, no better than the scavenging wolves that Septimus sees us as. 

     Why we have grown to view ourselves as so great is beyond me. These morals that we praise ourselve so strongly for having, what are they really, but excuses to allow our conquering of the world, to believe that we have a right to what is not really ours. We build upon wild land; we lock up animals that we view as inferior to us for our entertainment. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't see the animals with what we consider to be lesser morals doing this. As humans, we need to take a step off our pedestal for a moment and consider the fact that maybe, just maybe, we aren't as great as we think.