Senior reflection and what Literature has taught me

"So now do you see why books are hated and feared? They show the pores in the face of life." Fahrenhiet 451 by Ray Bradbury

Good Ol' CSC (this is actually just the East side of campus and part of town)!

Yes, I recently read Fahrenhiet 451. It was the first time in seven or eight years and it spoke to me this time, unlike when I was fourteen or fifteen and the only thing it taught my classmates is that burning books is cool (clearly, they got the point less than I did).

I am done with college. I had my last class yesterday and am now studying for a mere two finals. In the last couple of weeks I've been doing a lot of looking back at my time here at Chadron State College. I was thinking about things I'd tell incoming freshman. Most of this is just because the longer I was here the more I realized how undervalued the Liberal Arts are. I know they say "You can do anything with a degree in English", but that "anything" requires education in another field.

But Literature isn't completely useless. What it has taught me is to never take anything at face value. I can't help, but to look below the surface of everything I read, and watch on T.V now. As a result I don't watch nearly as many shows as I used to (not a bad thing).

One thing my professors have always said is that Literature holds a mirror up to society. What it does is shows us who we really are. It strips away everything that makes us individuals and gets down to the core that we all share and makes us human. We aren't these idealized beings who will always make the right decisions or save the day. It shows that we don't know what we'll do in a certain situation until we're actually in it. What would you do if you discovered how to become invisible? What if you were able to separate your good side from your evil side? We imagine we know, but the fact is that we don't.

What is Literature, anyway? My professors always asked us this and they never received an answer, but neither did we. One time a professor asked if a particular article was Literature. I asked, "What is Literature?" We all laughed and both our questions were never answered. But doesn't that say so much already? There are so many different forms and layers to it that no one can really define it. We are all left to our own personal definitions.

Finally, what would I say to people who ask what I'll do with a degree in Literature? I don't have a clue and I don't have to know. College isn't about "what will I do next" or "what kind of a job will this get me". It's about education. That is what I went for and that is what I got. I'd say it's a success. I don't have to know what I'm going to do. I'm not ready to get serious yet, so I know. My post grad plans right now mean moving to Maine and working in a gift shop till October. So, when the time comes I'll decide the next step in my life, but not before.

On what we value in YA...sort of

I found this article today on Twitter. I'm not going to add to it because the writer of the post summed up exactly how I felt about Hunger Games and Twilight (except Edward being interesting, he just creeped me out). I've seen other posts on this before with the recent movie adaptation of Hunger Games. Maybe it's time to take a step back and ask ourselves why we seem to value the romance aspect of these books so much and do we value the romance more than the actual story?

So much for equal rights

This artical about the new Arizona Law is the most absurd thing I have read in a while. I started a discussion about it in one of my classes this morning and it felt so good to hear other opinions.

I have a few thoughts on what is discussed in the article. The first is about this part of the law: "it will force women considering abortion because of fetal abnormalities to have counselling, and for women having an abortion to have an ultrasound". Excuse me? Those women did not get pregnant on their own. What about the fathers? Do they have to go to counseling? Will they be forced to see the ultrasound of their unborn child?

I am so tired of these politicians telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies. If a woman wants to get an abortion that is between her and the father of her child (if he wants to be involved). It is not the business of a politician who knows absolutely nothing about the couple or their circumstances. It isn't the business of a stranger.

I know I've posted other articles about the government wanting to put an end to birth control, Presidential candidates saying if a child dies before birth a woman still needs to carry it to term, and restrictions on abortion.

The older I get and the more I see of presidential campaigns the more I think the country must not mean a lot to the candidates. Look at them. Listen to them. What do they really care about? It's like they're just blowing hot air to get into office. The great things they can do don't matter. It's all power and prestige. It's called a "race" for a reason. Because all it is is just one big competition. The winner gets all, and it doesn't matter that every single person in this country loses as a result of the rich man's game.

In light of the 2012 elections I ask everyone to think carefully about what rights they value. Which ones are absolutely necessary? Also, please keep in mind that your religion is yours and should not be forced on anyone else through laws and politics.

Ashley Judd says it best!

This article was linked by two different people on my Facebook. Please read the article, Judd brings up some excellent points on how important body image is to society, even though many people actively deny this.

I bring this back to my discussion on Disney and parents. But this time it's about Disney channel and the "sidekicks". Have you ever noticed that the best friends of the main characters are made completely ridiculous by being unrealistically stupid, having outrageous habits, and (I hate to say this) being less good looking than the main characters (thought not always)?

The Disney channel is supposed to be bringing positive messages to kids. It's supposed to make them feel good about themselves and know that they're unique and smart no matter what society tells them. But if you look at the characters, what is the real message? They may promote artistic talent, intelligence, but they also make fun of some very real problems that kids struggle with. What about a kid who struggles in school? How many will laugh at him/her because they remind them of a character on their favorite T.V. show? Phobias, anyone? They're called irrational for a reason, but to the person with the phobia the fear is very real and not something that should be taken lightly.

What gets me more, I think, is that the best friends are poor foils to the main characters. They're even worse that Watson and Holmes. At least Watson had some intelligence and self respect, but what do these characters have? They exist purely for the sake of comedy. They're exaggerated representations of very real people who may not actually want to be made fun of, but when a kid sees themselves represented this way, what will that make them think of themselves? Labeling theory, anyone? This is the theory that says a person becomes what they're labeled as. The class clown stays the clown, the school bully will become a criminal, etc. all because that is what society expects of them. Subconsciously they are meeting those expectations.

So, Disney channel, based on this theory, is teaching kids who do poorly in school (for whatever reason) that they're only a good source of other people's jokes. The sidekicks need to stick by their friends no matter what because who else will make the friend look good?

I'm not saying Disney doesn't have positive messaging, it does. But it'd be nice if the underlying messages were as positive as the ones on the surface.