Movies

Everyone has a favorite movie or movies or favorite directors or actors. I have always really liek Quentin Tarantino movies. There is just something about them that really appeals to me. My four favorites from him, and no I couldn't narrow it down to one, are Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill 1 and 2, and Grindhouse. Each one is different and I like each for its subtle differences. Pulp Fiction is probably the best though. It has the best acting and by far the best story. You can't beat having Travolta and Samuel L. before they are famous playing ridiculously convincing roles as hitmen. Then having Uma Thurman playing the perfect role as Ving Rhames' coked out wife. She is amazingly convincing. Tarantino's next two movies were the Kill Bill movies as he continued to use Thurman for the leading female, and leading role for that matter. She plays a former assasin who is betrayed and left for dead by her former assasin gang. Thurman discovers she is pregnant on one of her missions and moves to Texas to try to live a 'normal' life. Bill, the boss of the gang and her former lover, tracks her down and shoots her in the head while she attempts to tell him that she has a baby and its his. She awakes from a coma years later and begins to track the assasins who shot her down and eventually Bill. There are many fight scenes, but they are not ordinary fight scenes. Each is choreographerd beautifully and each is set before unique and stunning backdrops. My favorite scene is from Kill Bill Vol. 1 when Uma is fighting Lucy Liu outside in Japan and they are in a snow covered Japanese garden. It is night and there is snow gently falling to the ground and for awhile, all you hear is the rising and falling of this waterwheel type object in the garden. Grindhouse is just 2 and a half hourse of ridiculousness. I feel like Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez just decided to make a pair of the most over the top zombie/horror movies ever made. But its not like they are doing it in an arrogant way or campy serious way, but in a way that old grindhouse movies were supposed to be. A homage pretty much to the old cheap horror movies that promised over the top action and killing but never delivered because grindhouse movies were cheaply made and made for old drive in theatres and/or old seedy theatres on the wrong side of town. So they took that and made it what the original film makers promised it would be. Brilliant!

Super heroes/powers

If I could be a super hero,I would be Superman. I would be him because he has all of the best powers put together into one character. I mean, duh, he is SUPERman. It would be sweet. I would be able to fly and see through buildings. I would also be the strongest man and fastest man in the world. I do not think I could dream up a better super hero to be than super man. If I had to pick just one super power, though, it would be the ability to fly. That would be the coolest thing in the world. I guess I would also still be the fastest man in the world then since no one else could fly and no one could run faster than something flying. It would be really awesome to be able to leave for things whenever I wanted basically and know I was still going to be on time. And best of all, there is no traffic in the sky. I mean sure, you would have to watch out for the occasional plane, but those things are ridiculously loud so I am sure you would be able to hear them from miles away. You would have to obviously worry about birds also, but since you are much larger than any bird, or at least any that I know of, then I am sure that they would be afraid of you and want to get out of your way. Maybe not though. I am sure the birds are a lot more confident when they are flying in large flocks so I bet you would have to get out of their way in that case. If I had to choose another superhero, it would be Aquaman. Haha. Just kidding. He is the lamest super hero ever. I mean, what kind of super power is it that you get to talk to fish. How is that remotely close to being able to fly or have unlimited strength. If I was Aquaman, I wouldn't even call myself a super hero and I would just work a regular 9-5 job. Seriously, if I had to pick another superhero though it would be Batman because he is awesome.

Homework 9/29

The opening statement implies that now every one is the same. No one person has any advantage over the other in any way unless of course you work for the government. The government achieved this by letting all the dumb people stay dumb and by hadicapping all the smart and/or athletic people. The smart people have little radios in their brains that don't let them think and the athletic people are forced to carry around heavy bags so they move slowly. Apparently, capitalism is dead since capitalism is founded on competition between businesses and people and democracy must be dead because there is no way people can be choosing their leaders freely since all the people are all really dumb or handicapped by the government therefore controlled by the government. Eliminating competition and free thought ensures that who ever is in control, the government most likely by some tyrannical leader, will stay in control as long as the people are kept as mindless zombies.
This is impossible under capitalism and democracy for many reasons. Capitalism is founded on businesses competing with each other to provide the best goods possible. Democracy is founded on the principle of natural rights. These rights being that every person should have life, liberty and property. Obviously taking away the ability for one to think for themselves is taking away their life and their liberty since they have no freedom to think and are forced to live a life controlled by government. I highly doubt that this would be the result of a progressive middle class since historically the middle class has been against uprisings of a socialist nature. For example, America as founded by mostly middle class Englishmen. These men made a fair amount of money, but were no where close to the wealthiest. They all felt they had a lot in common since they all made about the same and were generally happy wittheir wealth. Many historians and political scientists point to that fact as to why there was never a huge outcry for socialism or communism to be spread in America. Now if one were to ask if this were more likely to happen because of a progreesive lower class, then I would change my answer. People without anything want to have some land or money and become somewhat equal. So the idea of making every one equal really appeals to them. The French Revolution, for example, was led by the poor, lower class. They were tired of the rich staying in power and of having king's family stay in power for years just because of birth right. I believe grade inflation is silly and not fair. If someone gets a grade, that should be their grade. Giving a higher letter grade to someone just because they tried hard does not make that person smarter, but when that person is applying for college or any institution where greades are carefulyl looked at, then that person with the inflated grade looks smarter even though he is not. Then the less smart person gets more opportunities just because they have inflated grades. That is how this society in "Harrison Bergeron" probably comes to be because less smart people come into power and do not want to be questioned but just rule over people, so they handicap everyone. However, I believe that not keeping score in childrens' sports activities is far less harmless. It is just encouraging kids to keep active in sports and not necessarily worry about the outcome. This does not occur in competitive sports or any sporting activities having to do with schools and it hopefully never will. Then there would be no point in competition.
The U.S. Handicappers go around and make sure that everyone who is better in someone has that advantage handicapped so every one can be equal. The only way this would happen in America is if we gave some one absolute power for some reason, war maybe, and they took extreme advantage of it. This is enforced by the Handicappers and achieved by putting radios in people's ears or making them wear heavy bags.
Vonnegut could be talking about a number of things. He could be talking about civil rights acts or the womens movement during the late 40's and 50's. Most likely he is talking about affirmative action or something of that nature that 'equals' the playing field for those who are less priveleged or whose people have been previously oppressed. Laws like this come about because people feel they are not being looked at in the same light as others and want to have equal opportunities for everyone.
Hearing that a former Senator would say that is appauling to me. He is saying that the best and brightest should not be chosen just because the entire population of those that person is supposed to represent is not the best and brightest. I cannot believe that someone would not want the smartest and most qualified person for any job. This is the exact thing Vonnegut as talking about in his short story.
George and Hazel represent your typical, everyday person. They go to work and come home and sit by the television. Vonnegut, I believe, is saying that if people just sit around and let the televison rule our lives then we will be forced to succomb to the fate Vonegut has described. What happens when everyone watches T.V. is that they learn to just listen to the television and not think of anything for themselves and also they are not excersising their mind in any way. Go read a book.
Harrison is a teenager who is a threat to everyone becuase he has above average intelligence and he is extremely athletic. He has so many things on him to handicap him it looks like he is wearing a halloween costume. When Harrison gets on television and exclaims that he is the emperor, I do not believe he is talking about ruling government. I believe he is trying to ge the message out to the people that they are all emperors of themselves and that they have the power to not only rule themselves but to think for themselves. Therefore, they do not need the government to handicap them and tell them what to do because they are fine just they way they are. I do not believe there is any correlation between Harrison and Sammie. Harrison is actually saving people, albeit briefly, while Sammy could not even save his own job. Sammy was just trying to look cool in front of some girls, while Harrison is trying to save the world by rebelling and getting on television to try and save everyone. The only similarity is that both attempts fall on deaf ears. The singing and beauty of the girl and music are all meant to symbolize individualism. Every piece of music can beautiful to some and not others but it certainly wont sound like the last piece. And every person looks different and some people have better looking facial features than others, such as the ballerina Harrison saves.

Homework 9/24

3. In Joyce Oates' "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been," there are two primary characters. One is the protagonist, Connie, and the other the antagonist named A. Friend. This short story opens with a brief description of Connie's life. It describes how Connie feels she is somewhat living in the shadow of her 'perfect' older sister. Her older sister is always doing exactly what her parents want her to do and Connie is much more selfish. Connie is always looking in the mirror and putting hairspray and doing things to try to enhance her image of herself. She obviously has a confidence problem and ends up trying to use boys to boost her self confidence. She does not think she is beautiful and thinks that by attracting boys and messing around with them that she is getting the love she apparently does not receive from her family. A. Friend sees Connie out with another boy one night and tells her that she is going to be his. He shows up at her house several days later when Connie's family has traveled to a picnic at her aunt's. It is obvious that Friend has been stalking Connie since he not only knows her name but also where her family is and what they are doing. He also knows what she has been up to these last few days with all the boys she has been with. It is obvious that Friend is crazy, constantly saying that Connie is his girl and that they are going to have a great time on their date that they were supposed to be having on this day. Not to mention the fact that he is stalking her. Eventually Connie gets tired of Friend, but he will not leave until he gets his date with Connie. After many threats by Friend and lots of crying by Connie, she finally agrees to get into the car and the story ends, leaving the reader to only assume the worst. Connie drives all the action in the story. Everything happens because of Connie and her actions. A. Friend wants to be with Connie. He pursues Connie from halfway through the story until the end. We know nothing about Friend really except for that he is a crazy stalker who has probably done this to multiple women.
3. Connie begins to question Friend almost immediately when he arrives at her house. Although, I would say that her initial questioning is not because she is alarmed or spooked by some random guy coming to see her, but more as a formality to see what he is doing here and also, as the story mentions, because she has no idea if she likes this guy. Connie does not start becoming alarmed in her questioning until Friend starts telling her he's not going to leave and he knows that her parents are at a barbecue. She does not know what to do. She goes inside and threatens to call the cops but Friend tells her that he wont come inside unless she touches the phone and then he will. He says that she wont like it if he has to come inside. She is very confused. She has no idea what to do and has thoughts racing through her head. Thoughts about doing dishes and cleaning the table. She is also confused about who she is. She knows she should or could be like her sister, highly respected and praised by her parents. Something inside of her wants to rebel and be different but now she is seeing the dark side of doing such things. Of going out when you're too young to be out alone, especially when you're a female. She thinks she is ready to be grown up, to be loved and in love with another, but she is not. She is still just a confused little girl who is trying to act big. So in the end, she does what she thinks a big girl should do and owns up to her mistakes of going out and lying and misbehaving and goes with Friend.
3. In my version of this story it does not end with Connie getting into A. Friend's car. Connie gets in and the story continues. She is taken by A. Friend to a place outside of the town they are in. It is a remote place, a field where no one can see them or hear them. Connie is forced out of the car by Friend so they can continue their 'date' outside of the car. Connie keeps refusing to get out, but Friend says he wont take her back home if she doesn't. Of course, Connie complies. They sit on a blanket in this desolate field and Friend begins telling her how beautiful she is. He keeps bringing up, as he did earlier, how they are lovers and finishes all his sentences by calling her 'Honey'. Friend tells her that it wont last long. Connie begins to think of her family and all the things she could have done to be a better daughter. How she could have been nicer to her mother and helped her out more often. How she could have tried to get along with her sister better and how she should have listened to her father more. She prayed that as soon as this was over, she would do all those things to make things with her family better. For the first time, she could not wait to see her sister's face. She wouldn't see it again though. The last thing she would see was Arnold's face, standing over her's, shoveling dirt.
3. The setting in Oates' "Where Are You Going" is perfect for the story she is trying to tell. In each setting in the story there is not much detail about the area. The reader does not know if Connie is in the city or a small town or suburb or what. Oates describes the burger joint in very vague terms. Oates gives a brief description of Connie's home, but again it is very vague. The reason she does this is so any reader can identify with the story. She is almost begging the reader to insert their own setting here. This helps the reader to further identify with the characters and what is going on because it is then easier for them to visualize the situation. If Oates had gone on to give great detail to the burger joint, it would be harder for the reader to think that Connie could be at the local burger joint in the reader's town. Oates does this and wants the readers to be able to associate themselves more with this story and setting because this story is like a big lesson. It is a lesson about trying to figure out who you want to be and also about how one does not need to try to get self worth by trying to attract the opposite sex. In stories where an author is trying to get the reader to learn a lesson, it is easier for a reader to fall into a story and understand how they might be susceptible to this behavior if they are able to visualize themselves in the story. That is why, I believe, Oates used such vague and nondescript ways of describing her settings.

Football

Everyone know that baseball is called "Our National Pasttime" but should it still be considered this? I believe that football has now taken over baseball's spot as our national pasttime and favorite sport. When looking at MLB stadiums recently, I noticed they a majority of them were maybe half full. I saw in Florida there were maybe 100 fans in the stands the last few games, and their team is not doing poorly. In baseball, not during the playoffs, not selling out stadiums is becoming a more common theme. Of course this does not count for the Yankees, Cubs or Red Sox because those fans will come to games even if they have the worst records in baseball. Mostly, I am talking about the other 30 teams or so that do not fill up their stadiums on a regular game day. Now in the NFL and college football world, you would be hard pressed to find a ticket to any NFL game and any premier college football program, such as USC, Florida, Notre Dame. Many NFL teams have multiple year long waiting lists for season tickets. For example, I signed up to purchase season tickets for the Chicago Bears three years ago and I am still not close to being able to purchase them. My family bought me Bears tickets two years ago for New Years Eve in Chicago. The tickets were $350. Who would shell out that much for a baseball game? I am not hating on baseball. I am a diehard Chicago Cubs fan and would pay to watch them play everyday if I could. I am just saying, I'd rather pay more to watch my first favorite sport, rather than my second.

Favorite books

I feel like I enjoy many different types of book, but I definitely have two genres that are my favorite. First, I like suspense/mystery novels the best. There is nothing that makes me want to keep reading and actually turn the next page more than a good mystery. Mysteries are appealing to me because they hook you in. They present their characters and a situation, but you never know how accurate the initial portrayals are. You never know if how that character is first introduced and how you first see him act, if that is really who he is or is he a killer or something else. You never know about certain settings in a mystery because the author may be trying to hide something from you at first, or the author might be sneaking some little detail about the setting or character and you have to figure it out. I guess that is why I like mysteries the most is because everything usually is not how it seems and/or you have to solve a problem. There is always some uncertainty about whether or not the protagonist is going to come out on top and defeat the killer or solve the mystery.
My second favorite type of literature is political literature. It can non-fiction or comical, either way I enjoy reading it. I am a political science major and enjoy almost anything pertaining to politics. I think reading about famous politicians and how they handled things is very interesting and can be helpful to anyone. I think it is important to understand how our government works and what is going on in government on a day to day basis.

Homework 9/21

Joyce Oates' story, "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" is a tale of a young girl who is threatened by a man who has a particular interest in young women. This man, A. Friend, first sees the young girl, Connie, at a fast food restaurant. Connie is hanging out with another boy at this time, but that does not stop A. Friend from telling her he is going to have her. Within the next couple days after seeing Connie at the fast food joint, A. Friend shows up at Connie's house. No one else is home except for Connie, and Friend knows. He has been planning on it actually. Friend knew exactly where Connie's family was and what they were doing. Friend had been stalking her and a long with knowing about her family he also knew lots of information about her. Friend starts trying to persuade her to get into his car and she keeps refusing. He hints that her family and house may be harmed if she does not get into the car. He also mentions that she reminds him of one of her neighbors, another female who is now dead. This is perhaps foreshadowing Connie's likely demise. Connie, deciding that she did not want any one in her family to get hurt and realizing she was probably out of options, decided to get into the car with Friend and they drive off. This is where Oates' story ends. In the movie based on the story, the story keeps going. Connie arrives back home alive and apologizes to her family for not being the best daughter. Personally, I like the book better because it leaves the reader to decide what happens to Connie. After reading the articles of which "Where are You Going. Where Have You Been?" are based, it would seem to indicate to me that Connie would not be coming back from her little trip with A. Friend. The newspaper articles are about a handsome young man who kills at least three girls and says he also killed a young boy. This young man has no problem with the ladies and seems to just kill for the "thrill of killing." The articles, the story and the movie all have the same central idea and that is that young women should always be weary of their surroundings and what is going on in situations, especially those dealing with the opposite sex. When someone notices something out of the ordinary, and especially if something is indicating that there may be danger, they need to alert someone. It is amazing, though, how many different ways there are to tell the same basic story. There was the true story printed in the newspaper about a murderer of women. An author saw this and turned it into a short story, but changed the characters, setting and plot. Some one then decided to make a movie about the short story. The characters for the most part were the same except some were added. The setting is the same, but the overall story is longer. Each character is explored more especially Connie. Even with all the differences, the central theme throughout stayed the same. Females need to not try to grow up too fast and get themselves caught up with the wrong boys.

Homework 9/17

A piece of literature is not just a mess of ideas and words put on a page, but a carefully thought out idea in the form of fiction, non-fiction or poetry. These ideas that are the final product, or the finished version of the story or poem, are put together from many smaller ideas and then pieced together. Each piece of work or idea can be broken down to show how one would get the final product or finished story. Each piece of literature can be broken down into the ingredients, the process, or how the ingredients are connected, and then the made thing, which shows how what the ingredients conneceted to the process make. This may sound like a way of making food, but it is actually a great way to understand how a piece of literature came to be its final product.
In John Updike's "A & P," there are many ingredients. There is the convienence market that is the A&P. There is also the people working in the store, the people who come into the store to purchase items and also the person who is the manager of the store. Next, we get to the process of putting all these ingredients together. We have all of the people in the store acting like every person in the store before them. We have all the store employees following the orders of the boss, except for Sammy who decides to not obey his boss in the end and quit. So, basically the process is showing how every person, except for Sammy in the end, is a sheep and just follows everyone else. In the made product, there is Sammy standing tall and proud, thinking that he is some hero to these girls, who were shopping and then scolded by the manager for skimpy attire. But some may view Sammy as a hero in a way for going up against the grain and standing up to his boss and not acting like another sheep.
In Sharon Olds' "Rites of Passage," there is a similar made product to that of "A & P" but the way in which the author gets there is completely different. This time for ingredients there are: boys being mentioned as men, as small bankers, as generals, discussing who can beat who up, talking about killing a 2 year old, a cake and a host speaking out. The process takes the boys and uses a parallel structure of them as children to them as different types of men such as generals or bankers. All the boys are being connected to each other through the use of conversation. In the end, or made product, there is the host of the party who decides to act like a man by speaking out and saying that everyone could agree that they could all kill a 2 year old. The boys then have a sense of everyone at least being equal in the fact that they could all kill a 2 year old. This not only shows the boy being somewhat of a hero to his mother for saving his birthday party and saving his mother what would most likely end up as her having to make phone calls to parents because some children beat each other up, but also he acted like a very mature man. This boy also went against the grain by not telling the other children he could probably beat them up. He was not being a sheep, similar to how Sammy was not being a sheep.
In Sharon Olds' "The Only Girl At The Boys Party," Olds describes a girl who, as the title suggests, is the only one at the boys' party, but this girl does not seem to mind. The ingredients in this poem are more intersting than those in the last two works of literature. The poem contains: boys in bathing suits, one girl in a bathing suit, a bathing suit being able to be folded and curves of sexes. The process shows that the description of the girl and watch she is wearing and perhaps how she is thinking is more vivid. The poem almost seems to start with the girl at a very young age, too early to notice that boys and girls have different body parts, and seems to end with her not only starting to notice but almost relishing the fact that she is the only girl here in a pool full of boys. The made product seems to show a parent dropping their child of at the pool, for the reader does not know if this is a father or mother narrating. The poem then shows the narrator going through numbers perhaps signifying that the child is growing up in front of their eyes because at the end of the poem, the narrator notices the boys all staring at the daughter like a piece of meat and her staring and the boys, almost happy in a way because she knows she is the only girl at the pool and she can choose the boy of her liking. The girl is kind of a hero herself, brave enough to be the only one of her sex at the pool. She is definitely going against the grain.
Each piece of Literature has different characters, settings and events that take place in them, but they all three come out with almost the same basic message and that is do not be a sheep. It is amazing how works of literature can be so different, but in the end be so similar. The most interesting work to me, though, was "The Only Girl at the Boys Party." I liked it the most because it did not just discuss a normal, boring topic, but sex. Not literally sex of course, but things having to do with sexual nature. There is a parents' worst fear of having their child finally old enough to realize the sexual differences between men and women. A parent of a daughter is going to be especially concerned because girls, or daughters, are looked at with particular innocence. When this innocence is broken, however, that is when a parents' daughter is transformed into a boy's lover, her innocence gone. She is still the parents' daughter, but no longer the child or baby she once was. To have a poem that really describes what that is like, in only a few lines even, is amazing and interesting to me at the same time.

Homework 9/15

After watching the John Updike interview and then rereading "A & P", I feel like I understood things better or caught some things that I really did not the first read through. The first time I read, I did not notice that Queenie buying the food item she bought really indicated that she was from a higher socioeconomic class than that of Sammy. Sammy, as interpreted through the reading and hinted at by Updike, has a lot less money than Queenie and really needs to work for him and his family. This helps me understand why Sammy would want to impress or try to get with Queenie because she now also represents something better than him or someone almost out of his league. She is most likely someone who he would not normally be able to socialize with. I also noticed this time that the people in the store are all exhibiting sheep like behavior. Every customer just walks through the aisles just like every other customer and looks at things on the shelf. All the employees must heed the word of their boss for fear they might be fired. Updike indicates that because of Sammy having to see this everyday, he grows weary of it and since the girls are almost going against the grain by coming dressed inappropriately that sparks Sammy's idea, or at least plants the seed, for him to stop following the herd and quit his job. I thought it was interesting how at the beginning of the Updike interview, Updike commented on how wildly the girls were dressed and how much of a raucous that would have created in 1961. Today, however, I feel like it would not be anywhere near the same big deal it was then. People dress so much more inappropriately/skimpy today more than ever. I also liked how Updike talked about how he writes and readers read and that there is much room for interpretation of his characters and the situations they are in. He also comments about how teachers come up with things or ideas or themes that they think relate or have to do with his stories. He says that he is aware of some of the ideas the teachers come up with, but that he had no intent or was not thinking of some or most of these ideas the teachers have come up with but that they can fit his stories. My opinion on Sammy has still not changed. To me, he is still not a hero.
After reading the two poems by Sharon Olds, I would have to say that in my opinion her view of heroism and Updike's view seem pretty similar. At least they do when comparing "A & P" and Olds' two poems. In Olds' first poem, "Rites of Passage", she describes a mom speaking about her sons birthday. Her son is obviously very young and has very young guests, about 6-7, and they begin to get restless and fight with each other. The birthday boy, and son of the mother narrating, settles the argument every one is having by saying that everyone here could beat up a 2 year old. All the little kids agree and then go on to enjoy the birthday. I can understand why the mother would view this as heroic. The boy stopped every person at the party from fighting. This saves the mother not only the aggravation from probably having to clean up a huge mess that a fight would make at a birthday party, cake everywhere, but from having to tell other parents that their child was hurt at her son's party under her supervision. The second poem was about a girl being the only girl at a pool party. In my opinion, I do not see how she is heroic in any way. She does not really do anything in the poem except for arrive at a pool party and go swimming with everyone. There is no conflict for her to resolve. I could see one arguing that she is a hero because she was brave enough to be the only girl at a pool party, but it did not seem as if she was hassled by any boys or that she did not enjoy herself. So in my opinion she is no hero at all.

Homework 9/10

What is a hero? This question was recently asked of me and at first I thought I had a concrete answer, but as I began to ponder the answer to the question, I realized there was nothing concrete about the word hero. At first, I began to think of people that are heroes to me. People like Bill Clinton, my parents or even Batman are all heroes to me, albeit one is a fictional 'superhero,' but nonetheless a hero to me. I then began to think that although these people are huge inspirations to me, are they considered to be heroes by all people? And if they are not considered to be heroes by all, does that make them not heroes? Well, Bill Clinton certainly is not a hero to many people on the righter side of the political spectrum. Obviously, my parents are not heroes to the man or woman idling next to me, waiting for the light to change because, well, I doubt they even know my parents exist. Then there is Batman. Fictional character to is a hero to most people in Gotham city, but I bet I could name a few characters who probably do not think he is a hero. I would venture to say that the Joker, Penguin or any other character that the Batman has put in jail would probably not consider him a hero. So, since I could not clearly come up with what a hero was by thinking of personal examples of heroes, I decided to see what the dictionary said was a hero. The dictionary defines a hero as "A man of distinguished ability, admired for his brave deeds and distinguished qualities." So by this definition I guess we can rule out all woman since the dictionary says a hero is a man of distinguished ability. I guess then that Justice Sotomayor can no longer be a hero to Mexican Americans and/or women since she herself is a woman and the dictionary says men only please. The dictionary also defines a hero as "A person who, in the opinion of others, has heroic qualities or has performed a heroic act and is regarded as a model or ideal." I like this definition more. It excludes no gender. This definition makes more sense to me because it is saying that a hero is in the eye of the beholder. That a hero to one is not necessarily a hero to all, but could just be a hero to one. Does being a hero to one instead of hundreds or thousands make any difference at all? Not in the eyes of that one and if that one person was me, I would of course say no because they are my hero and not necessarily your hero. Now, would I consider Sammy, a character from John Updike's A & P, to be a hero? In my opinion, he is not a hero. He quit his job for no noble reason, but only to get the attention of some girls, which he was not even successful in. Not only was he not successful, but his parents were obviously counting on him to bring in money and now he can not even do that. I can, however, see how some people might see him as a hero. I could see a grocery employee seeing him as a hero because he stood up to the boss and quit. I am sure there are lots of grocery store employees or just people in general who would love to stand up to their annoying bosses and tell them that they quit and walk out. Sammy could be a hero, but he is not my hero.

Homework pages 6,8,19 due 9/8

Page 6
1. The wind does not think. The wind just uses brute force to try to get what it wants. The wind seems to be hard headed. The sun is smarter and more cunning. The sun seemed like it had a more calculated plan.
2. The North Wind just tried to use its brute force and strength, not thinking that if the wind just constantly blew hard the man would of course clutch the jacket even harder. If the Wind would have blown harder at different times, pausing for a few minutes between each, then the wind might ave been able to blow the cloak off.
3. The sun was successful because he thought about his plan and did not just use all of its might and force at once, instead gradually making it hotter and hotter so the man would take off the cloak.
4. The human serves as the test subject to see which is smarter and/or stronger, the Sun or the North Wind.
5. The sun was more persuasive becuase it gradually warmed the man to the point of wanting to remove the cloak as opposed to the wind who just blew and used as much force as it could at once.
Page 8
1.The exposition is the first 4 sentences of the story. He uses 2 sentences to set up the dramatic situation.
2. He changes the subject because he is setting up for what he is going to say at the end. He does not answer it directly because he wants to answer it in a way that will have more of an impact in the 2 interviewers. He asks them a question because he wants them to really get the point that he does not want to be bothered.
3. That Chang Tzu is very smart and carefully chooses his words.
Page 19
1. The details of the store and how everything in it is arranged and also how he observes how people walk and act. It gives one a sense of being able to be in this grocery store.
2. He does not really fully describe Sammy. He shows admirable and foolish traits by quitting. He is admirable because he is trying to do something to prove a point, but foolish to me because he is also trying to get the girls' attention and fails. He should not have done something so bold as to quit. His character is shown more than the doctor's.
3. The expostiton starts with the first paragraph and lasts for several after that while the author Sammy goes on to describe the girls and the store as well as other people in the store. It is important because it forshadows how she is going to react in the end and also helps the story seem like its more from actual life.
4. I do detect a little change. He seems pretty smitten with them the moment they walk in because he describes every little detail about them. after he quits however, he only briefly looks for them and when can not find them does not seem that upset.
5. It becomes apparent when the manager is described to be walking up to the girls because the bathing suits they are wearing have been emphasized the whole story. The crisis is when the manager tells the girls not to wear the bathing suits, tells Sammy to ring them up and he quits. The climax is when he quits and confirms that he is quitting.
6. He quits because he is trying to be a sort of hero to the girls and hoping that they will notice him, which they do not.
7. I expected him to be sympathetic to the girls because as soon as they walk in that is all Sammy is thinking about and how he may be able to get their attention in some way.
8. I understand that Sammy was probably working this job to help his family to get by and pay bills and maybe even so he can pay for some of his own things. Sammy means that since he no longer has a job that his family was obvioulsy depending on him to have, is going to make things a lot tougher for him and his family to get by.
9. He makes that supermarket society, like every one, has its own set of characters who all have their little roles in this society such as Sammy, the manager, the old lady who Sammy incorrectly rings up and the girls as well as the other workers and shoppers.