Before even reading this article, I knew I would enjoy it. I love psychology a great deal, and even more so, I know a child who actually has gender-identity disorder. This article not only helped me to better understand the young boy that I know, but it also gave me more insight into how exactly it must feel to raise a transgender child.
I really liked the way Rosin began this article. She opens with, "The local newspaper recorded that Brandon Simms was the first millennium baby born in his tiny southern town, at 12:50 a.m. He weighed eight pounds, two ounces..." She sets up the story by having Brandon appear like every other child in this world. She does not begin by saying he was strange or looking particularly feminine. She begins the story, setting Brandon as a human being, just like everyone else. He never deserves to be treated with any less respect.
Rosin went on to say, "The blockers put teens in a state of suspended development. They prevent boys from growing facial and body hair and an Adam’s apple, or developing a deep voice or any of the other physical characteristics that a male-to-female transsexual would later spend tens of thousands of dollars to reverse. They allow girls to grow taller, and prevent them from getting breasts or a period." I found this to be incredible! I didn't really know that children/adolescents could be injected with "blockers" to sway them to develop into the opposite gender. Blockers sounds a bit like steroids to me. I wondered if this was at all unhealthy. However, blockers seem to be a sensible decision because it most likely helps children with gender-identity disorder feel more secure in their own skin. And luckily, for those who are unhappy, "blockers are entirely reversible; should a child change his or her mind about becoming the other gender, a doctor can stop the drugs and normal puberty will begin."
I read on and liked Tina Simms' interaction with Jill, a homosexual mother who also was at the conference for transgender children. Jill said, "I already legally changed [my daughter's] name and called all the parents at the school. Then, when he’s in eighth grade, we’ll take him to the [endocrinologist] and get the blockers, and no one will ever know. He’ll just sail right through.” I found this to be really interesting. First of all, I felt such relief knowing that this young transgender child had such a supportive parent. I know my parents would be able to tolerate it if my sister or I happened to be transgendered, but not all parents are as understanding. Secondly, I loved that I could pick up a sense of hope and acceptance in Jill. She sounded completely confident and self-assured in the fact that her daughter will be able to live somewhat comfortably as a male.
I then tried to picture how difficult it must be to keep a secret from society, and how much more difficult it might be if society slowly began to know about it and critique it. I couldn't even imagine life in Tina's shoes, trying to raise a child confidently, knowing that society did not approve of his lifestyle or behaviors: "In Brandon’s case, for example, doubt would force Tina to consider that if she began letting him dress as a girl, she would be defying the conventions of her small town, and the majority of psychiatric experts, who advise strongly against the practice." But as the story concludes, we see Tina accept her son's gender-identity disorder with incredible strength: "That morning, Tina was meeting with Bridget’s principal, and the principal of a nearby school, to see if she could transfer. “I want her to be known as Bridget, not Bridget-who-used-to-be-Brandon.”
Rosin provided me with some statistics and a bit of history on the subject, which engrossed me tremendously. I had no idea that gender-identity disorder is rapidly becoming more common. I wondered what might have caused the significant statistical increase. But as I read on, I learned that the media actually has a great influence over children and their gender. I also was suprised to learn that as time progresses, gender-identity disorder is becoming more and more prevalent in younger children: "Dr. Peggy Cohen-Kettenis, who runs the main clinic in the Netherlands, has seen the average age of her patients plummet since 2002." I was intrigued by the fact that the endocriologist plays such a large role in this, as opposed to a psychologist. As a Diabetic, I am very familiar with the support of an endocrinoloist.
Rosin goes on to describe the two male twins, "one of whom had suffered a botched circumcision that had burned off most of his penis." I remember learning about that in my psychology course in high school. The "nature vs. nuture" controversy" really plays a role here. Rosin says that, "Money reported on Reimer’s fabulous progress, writing that “she” showed an avid interest in dolls and dollhouses, that she preferred dresses, hair ribbons, and frilly blouses." This supports the "nurture-side" of the theory. However, as David Reimer grew up, it was said that he hadn't ever really "adjusted to being a girl at all. He wanted only to build forts and play with his brother’s dump trucks, and insisted that he should pee standing up. He was a social disaster at school, beating up other kids and misbehaving in class." This supports the "nature-side" of the theory. Reimer was informed of his unknown gender change at age 14. And at age 38, after battling years of confusion and depression, he took his own life. This entire situation was very sad and complex; it clearly shows how significant and life-changing gender-identity truly is.
Rosin continues and references a quote by Dr. Milton Diamond, an expert on human sexuality at the University of Hawaii. He said, "Maybe we really have to think … that we don’t come to this world neutral; that we come to this world with some degree of maleness and femaleness which will transcend whatever the society wants to put into [us]...To him, these cases are a 'confirmation' that 'the biggest sex organ is not between the legs but between the ears.'" I found this statement to be incredibly interesting and I happen to really agree with it. I believe that our sex determines our "maleness" and/or "femaleness" to a certain extent, and that society and care shape the rest. It really is a pure combination of "nature" and "nuture." Gender isn't so much decided by our sex organs, but instead by our mindset. And interestingly enough, studies have shown that “'we can’t [definitely] tell a pre-gay from a pre-transsexual at 8.'" The stories that Rosin includes in this article--about John and about Chris--really illustrated that nothing is definite, certain or permanent in children. Discoveries take time.
The topic of this article reminded me of a young boy that I used to know. I used to be a part of a children's theater called Stage Left Children's Theater--one of the most incredible groups I have ever been a part of. I remember the director's friend came in with her son and her daughter, one evening. Her son was as sweet as could be, but I could tell there was something extra special about him. I found out that he struggled with gender-identity disorder. I considered this to be a pretty sensible diagnosis, seeing as how he would come to the theater decked out in his sister's princess shoes, party dresses and jewelry. We all were so glad to have him there and even more so, we were thrilled that he was comfortable enough to express himself. When I saw the picture of Brandon Simms within this article, I immediately thought of that young boy from Stage Left. I think about him often, and from what I hear, he is doing well.
Overall, I found this to be a captivating article. I thought it was well-written, relatable (because I know a transgender child) and jam-packed with fascinating information.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Becoming Members of Society: Learning the Social Meanings of Gender-- Aaron H. Devor
Out of all of the RPW articles we've read thus far, this was my most favorite article. I find psychology to be fascinating because it logically and sensibly explains the human persona. I thoroughly enjoy learning about why people do the things they do, and how that influences their growth and success in the world.
I thought this article was really well-written and on a very interesting subject: the social meanings of gender. My senior year of high school, I took a class where I learned all about the psychological and biological development of children. So, when I heard this article was going to be about the psychology behind gender, I was eager to apply my knowledge.
I did some research on gender to better understand what I was reading. I wasn't quite sure what "gender" was. According to the "World Health Organization: Online", gender can be defined as, "the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women." An individual's gender is different from individual's sex, which can be defined as, "the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" (WHO). And, according to answers.com, "Gender identity is a person's sense of identification with either the male or female sex, as manifested in appearance, behavior, and other aspects of a person's life" (answers.com). These definitions helped me to better understand Dover's analysis: "Gender identities act as cognitive filtering devices guiding people to attend to and learn gender role behaviors appropriate to their statuses. Learning to behave in accordance with one's gender identity is a lifelong process" (527).
Just like I had learned in class, Devor discusses the idea that "Gender is the most transparent of all social categories: we acquire gender roles early in life and so thoroughly that it's hard to see them as the result of lessons taught and learned. Maleness and femaleness seem 'natural,' not the product of socialization" (527). And it's true. In society today, if we are born female, we are expected to like the color pink and play with dolls and tea sets. The same goes for males, who are expected to love the color blue, sports and race-cars. It seems to us that liking those things are naturally inbred, not what social situations evoke from us as children.
Devor goes on to say that "Very young children learn their culture's social definitions of gender and gender identity at the same time that they learn what gender behaviors are appropriate for them" (529). I thought this was not only well-stated, but also incredibly interesting. If you think about it, young children really get their perceptions, as well as their "shoulds" and "should-nots," from the adults and people that shape their worlds and minds. A child's mind/perception is very flexible, so their view of what a boy should like or how a girl must act really does influence them.
The child psychology class that I took in high school actually had a preschool program within it. On certain days, we would learn about child development (on a biological level, on a cognitive level, on a behavioral level etc.); on other days, the preschool met during class, and we would be able to interact with the preschoolers and observe all of the new things we learned in the children. I remember, one time, I watched one of the young preschool boys play with a pink pony. This was somewhat out of character for him, seeing as how he usually was aggressive and violent. His father was a hunter and so, it would have been more in character of this young boy to pretend to shoot the pony, as he typically did. But this time, he just played nicely with it. Another preschool student confronted him and teased him for playing with a "girl toy." The preschool boy got very upset. He threw the pony violently and hid in embarrassment. This is a prime example of gender-related expectations. It didn't make sense to the young child that a boy be playing with a "girl" toy. As Devor says, "...children's individualistic impulses are shaped into a socially acceptable form both by particular individuals and by a more generalized pressure to conformity exerted by innumerable faceless members of society. Gender identity is one of the most central portions of that developing sense of self..." (530). Interestingly enough, the young boy, within a few days, picked up a Barbie hairdryer and used it as a gun.
I was intrigued by Dover's realization: "Persons who perform the activities considered appropriate for another gender will be expected to perform them poorly; if they succeed adequately, or even well, at their endeavors, they may be rewarded with ridicule or scorn for blurring the gender dividing line" (531). This is quite true. I thought back to high school; one of my closest friends, a track-runner, was titled "gay" for deciding to partake in the school's spring musical. He isn't gay, but the fact that he runs track and sings quite well for a male, crowned him "gay." Dover, later, says, "A heterosexual orientation requires women to dress, move speak and act in way that men find attractive." This immediately reminded me of the five reported suicides--related to intolerance of homosexuality--that have occurred over the past three weeks in the United States. It is ridiculously sad and unfair. Gender-choices should be tolerated. Males that come across more feminine and females that come across more masculine are human, and do not deserve to be discriminated against. They are expressing their gender identities.
I really liked Dover's paragraph on body language. As an actress-in-training, I am learning all about how body language and posture says a great deal about a person and their character. "They demonstrate subordination through a minimizing of spatial use: people appear feminine when they keep their arms closer to their bodies, their legs closer together, and their torsos and heads less vertical then do masculine-looking individuals...Perhaps as an outgrowth of subordinate status and the need to avoid conflict with more socially powerful people, women tend to excel over men at the ability to correctly interpret, and effectively display, nonverbal communication cues" (533). I found this to be quite interesting. A woman's body language says a lot about the character she plays. A character can be defined as incredibly feminine by the way the actor carries herself. For example, Elle Woods from the movie and musical, Legally Blonde (http://images.broadwayworld.com/columnpic/legallyblonde05big.jpg) sits with her legs together, her toes pointed and her eyes up. She clearly fits this gender role.
I think my love for psychology feeds my love for theater. As a theater major, I get the opportunity to emulate and get into the minds of other characters. If I wasn't going to be a musical theater major, I most certainly would have majored in child psychology. I really enjoyed this article.
I thought this article was really well-written and on a very interesting subject: the social meanings of gender. My senior year of high school, I took a class where I learned all about the psychological and biological development of children. So, when I heard this article was going to be about the psychology behind gender, I was eager to apply my knowledge.
I did some research on gender to better understand what I was reading. I wasn't quite sure what "gender" was. According to the "World Health Organization: Online", gender can be defined as, "the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women." An individual's gender is different from individual's sex, which can be defined as, "the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" (WHO). And, according to answers.com, "Gender identity is a person's sense of identification with either the male or female sex, as manifested in appearance, behavior, and other aspects of a person's life" (answers.com). These definitions helped me to better understand Dover's analysis: "Gender identities act as cognitive filtering devices guiding people to attend to and learn gender role behaviors appropriate to their statuses. Learning to behave in accordance with one's gender identity is a lifelong process" (527).
Just like I had learned in class, Devor discusses the idea that "Gender is the most transparent of all social categories: we acquire gender roles early in life and so thoroughly that it's hard to see them as the result of lessons taught and learned. Maleness and femaleness seem 'natural,' not the product of socialization" (527). And it's true. In society today, if we are born female, we are expected to like the color pink and play with dolls and tea sets. The same goes for males, who are expected to love the color blue, sports and race-cars. It seems to us that liking those things are naturally inbred, not what social situations evoke from us as children.
Devor goes on to say that "Very young children learn their culture's social definitions of gender and gender identity at the same time that they learn what gender behaviors are appropriate for them" (529). I thought this was not only well-stated, but also incredibly interesting. If you think about it, young children really get their perceptions, as well as their "shoulds" and "should-nots," from the adults and people that shape their worlds and minds. A child's mind/perception is very flexible, so their view of what a boy should like or how a girl must act really does influence them.
The child psychology class that I took in high school actually had a preschool program within it. On certain days, we would learn about child development (on a biological level, on a cognitive level, on a behavioral level etc.); on other days, the preschool met during class, and we would be able to interact with the preschoolers and observe all of the new things we learned in the children. I remember, one time, I watched one of the young preschool boys play with a pink pony. This was somewhat out of character for him, seeing as how he usually was aggressive and violent. His father was a hunter and so, it would have been more in character of this young boy to pretend to shoot the pony, as he typically did. But this time, he just played nicely with it. Another preschool student confronted him and teased him for playing with a "girl toy." The preschool boy got very upset. He threw the pony violently and hid in embarrassment. This is a prime example of gender-related expectations. It didn't make sense to the young child that a boy be playing with a "girl" toy. As Devor says, "...children's individualistic impulses are shaped into a socially acceptable form both by particular individuals and by a more generalized pressure to conformity exerted by innumerable faceless members of society. Gender identity is one of the most central portions of that developing sense of self..." (530). Interestingly enough, the young boy, within a few days, picked up a Barbie hairdryer and used it as a gun.
I was intrigued by Dover's realization: "Persons who perform the activities considered appropriate for another gender will be expected to perform them poorly; if they succeed adequately, or even well, at their endeavors, they may be rewarded with ridicule or scorn for blurring the gender dividing line" (531). This is quite true. I thought back to high school; one of my closest friends, a track-runner, was titled "gay" for deciding to partake in the school's spring musical. He isn't gay, but the fact that he runs track and sings quite well for a male, crowned him "gay." Dover, later, says, "A heterosexual orientation requires women to dress, move speak and act in way that men find attractive." This immediately reminded me of the five reported suicides--related to intolerance of homosexuality--that have occurred over the past three weeks in the United States. It is ridiculously sad and unfair. Gender-choices should be tolerated. Males that come across more feminine and females that come across more masculine are human, and do not deserve to be discriminated against. They are expressing their gender identities.
I really liked Dover's paragraph on body language. As an actress-in-training, I am learning all about how body language and posture says a great deal about a person and their character. "They demonstrate subordination through a minimizing of spatial use: people appear feminine when they keep their arms closer to their bodies, their legs closer together, and their torsos and heads less vertical then do masculine-looking individuals...Perhaps as an outgrowth of subordinate status and the need to avoid conflict with more socially powerful people, women tend to excel over men at the ability to correctly interpret, and effectively display, nonverbal communication cues" (533). I found this to be quite interesting. A woman's body language says a lot about the character she plays. A character can be defined as incredibly feminine by the way the actor carries herself. For example, Elle Woods from the movie and musical, Legally Blonde (http://images.broadwayworld.com/columnpic/legallyblonde05big.jpg) sits with her legs together, her toes pointed and her eyes up. She clearly fits this gender role.
I think my love for psychology feeds my love for theater. As a theater major, I get the opportunity to emulate and get into the minds of other characters. If I wasn't going to be a musical theater major, I most certainly would have majored in child psychology. I really enjoyed this article.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Serving in Florida -- Barbara Ehrenreich
I found this story to be good, although it wasn't my favorite. While I liked the plot very much--the story of a young woman, searching for a job that suited her socially and economically--I was a bit distracted by the lengthy sentences and the side comments. At times, I felt myself starting, stopping and rereading to make sure that I digested enough information to understand the story. Nonetheless, this story was, overall, entertaining.
When I first noticed the title of this work, I thought it was going to tell the tale of a soldier (because often times, "serving" refers to serving in the military). However, I was taken by surprise when I read that it was actually the story of a lady dedicating herself to some very undesirable occupations. After reading just the first paragraph, I was able to pick up the author's voice. Her tone was comedic and refreshingly genuine. I giggled aloud as I read, "Picture a fat person's hell, and I don't mean a place with no food. Instead there is everything you might eat if eating had no bodily consequences--the cheese fries, the chicken-fried steaks, the fudge-laden desserts--only here every bite must be paid for, one way or another, in human discomfort (291)." A handful of authors would describe it differently, possibly in a more beautiful, poetic way. But the negative connotation of the words "hell," "fat," and "no" really were used honestly to paint the picture of the restaurant. I thought this was an intriguing way to open the story. Her word-choices made me laugh.
Ehrenreich's style of writing really stood out to me. The first thing I noticed was the fact that she tells this entire story in present tense: "I complain to one of my fellow servers that I don't understand how she can go so long without food" (292). I thought that was quite interesting. Most narrative stories are set in the past tense. Also, Ehrenreich's reference to "catsup" made me wonder where exactly she was from and how old she was. I wasn't sure if this story was coming from the perspective of a teenager, looking for work, or from an adult struggling in a crumbling economy. However, while I was reading, I came across the following: "When I request permission to leave at about 3:30, another housekeeper warns me that no one has so far succeeded in combining housekeeping with serving at Jerry's: 'Some kid did it once for five days, and you're no kid'" (300). She obviously was not a kid looking for work. I also wondered when exactly this story takes place. Was this a story written in the early 1950's? 1970's? 2000's? Luckily, Ehrenreich referenced the approximate time period in her footnotes and clarified my query: "In 1996 the number of persons holding two or more jobs averaged 7.8 million, or 6.2 percent of the workforce" (301). I assume this statistic references information relevant to the time period in which the story is set.
This story reminded me of my first job at Dairy Queen. I was asked to work there, my sophomore year of high school by my friend, whose mother just took up the franchise. I delightedly said yes, incredibly eager to earn money and to work beside my close friends. I met new people--like Ehrenreich did--on "slow days," we got along and discussed moments of our personal lives (i.e., school friends, futures, foods, significant others). Some aspects were fun, some were tedious, others overwhelming. I remember it being a lot of work. I had to learn how to make the standard DQ cone, cup, blizzard, frostee and sundae, along with refill low supplies, work the cash register and cook hot meals.
Ehrenreich seemed to understand and put it...tastefully?:
When I first noticed the title of this work, I thought it was going to tell the tale of a soldier (because often times, "serving" refers to serving in the military). However, I was taken by surprise when I read that it was actually the story of a lady dedicating herself to some very undesirable occupations. After reading just the first paragraph, I was able to pick up the author's voice. Her tone was comedic and refreshingly genuine. I giggled aloud as I read, "Picture a fat person's hell, and I don't mean a place with no food. Instead there is everything you might eat if eating had no bodily consequences--the cheese fries, the chicken-fried steaks, the fudge-laden desserts--only here every bite must be paid for, one way or another, in human discomfort (291)." A handful of authors would describe it differently, possibly in a more beautiful, poetic way. But the negative connotation of the words "hell," "fat," and "no" really were used honestly to paint the picture of the restaurant. I thought this was an intriguing way to open the story. Her word-choices made me laugh.
Ehrenreich's style of writing really stood out to me. The first thing I noticed was the fact that she tells this entire story in present tense: "I complain to one of my fellow servers that I don't understand how she can go so long without food" (292). I thought that was quite interesting. Most narrative stories are set in the past tense. Also, Ehrenreich's reference to "catsup" made me wonder where exactly she was from and how old she was. I wasn't sure if this story was coming from the perspective of a teenager, looking for work, or from an adult struggling in a crumbling economy. However, while I was reading, I came across the following: "When I request permission to leave at about 3:30, another housekeeper warns me that no one has so far succeeded in combining housekeeping with serving at Jerry's: 'Some kid did it once for five days, and you're no kid'" (300). She obviously was not a kid looking for work. I also wondered when exactly this story takes place. Was this a story written in the early 1950's? 1970's? 2000's? Luckily, Ehrenreich referenced the approximate time period in her footnotes and clarified my query: "In 1996 the number of persons holding two or more jobs averaged 7.8 million, or 6.2 percent of the workforce" (301). I assume this statistic references information relevant to the time period in which the story is set.
This story reminded me of my first job at Dairy Queen. I was asked to work there, my sophomore year of high school by my friend, whose mother just took up the franchise. I delightedly said yes, incredibly eager to earn money and to work beside my close friends. I met new people--like Ehrenreich did--on "slow days," we got along and discussed moments of our personal lives (i.e., school friends, futures, foods, significant others). Some aspects were fun, some were tedious, others overwhelming. I remember it being a lot of work. I had to learn how to make the standard DQ cone, cup, blizzard, frostee and sundae, along with refill low supplies, work the cash register and cook hot meals.
Ehrenreich seemed to understand and put it...tastefully?:
"...the fudge-laden desserts...The floor is slick with spills, forcing us to walk through the kitchen with tiny steps...Put your hand down on any counter and you risk being stuck to it by the film of ancient syrup spills...The regulation poster in the single unisex restroom admonishes us to wash our hands thoroughly, and even offers instructions for doing so, but there is always some vital substance missing--soap, paper towels, toilet paper--and I've never found all three at once" (291).
As for some of the lengthy sentences: "I'm on a 2:00-10:00pm shift now, and a male server from the morning tells me about the time he "pulled a triple" -- three shifts in a row, all the way around the clock -- and then got off and had a drink and met this girl, and maybe he shouldn't tell me this, but they had sex right then and there and it was like beautiful" (293). Though these sentences were filled with excessive details at times, I felt myself getting lost in their length, especially towards the end of the story.
Overall, though, I did enjoy this story!
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Looking For Work -- Gary Soto
I've read some of Gary Soto's works before so I knew I was in for a treat; however, after glancing at the title, I was reminded of how our nation is in a weak economic state. I wasn't sure if this was going to be somewhat of a dull story, dealing with a man who couldn't find a job. Luckily, I was wrong. This story was one from the point of view of a young boy, growing up and searching for a profound way to make his family "perfect," like the families on television. I really enjoyed this short story and a lot of what was discussed I could relate to.
I was incredibly compelled by just the first paragraph. Soto says, "One July, while killing ants on the kitchen sink with a rolled newspaper, I had a nine-year-old's vision of wealth that would save us from ourselves. For weeks I had drunk Kool-Aid and watched morning reruns of Father Knows Best, whose family was so uncomplicated in its routine that I very much wanted to imitate it. The first step was to get my brother and sister to wear shoes" (27). I think this first paragraph says so much. I really connected to the relaxing image of summer time portrayed: lazy mornings, killing the ants and watching silly television reruns. That was familiar and thus, comforting to read. I also enjoyed the fact that I got a real sense of the narrator's voice, and I loved that. I could instantly pick up the fact that he was young, eager, optimistic and chock full of ideas. I think I really connected with this story because I vividly remember being the exact same way. One summer, my sister got a pamphlet in the mail, saying that she had the potential to go into modeling. Though it was a scam at the time, my summer was free, and my sister and I dedicated part of our summer attempting to set up a car wash services and lemonade stand to raise money. We all need to start somewhere. For Gary, the first step was getting his siblings to dress more formally for dinner. For me and my sister, the first step for me was advertising and getting our parents to let us wash their car. Because we were young--both me, my sister and Gary Soto--we were so enthralled and hopeful. We denied all reality to achieve our goals at the time.
I thought Gary's nine-year-old perspective of TV was really unique and fascinating. He says, "This was the summer when I spent the mornings in front of the television that showed the comfortable lives of white kids. There were no beatings, no rifts in the family. They wore bright clothes; toys tumbled from their closets. They hopped into bed with kisses and woke up to glasses of fresh orange juice" (29). This really got to me. Ever since I was diagnosed with Diabetes, I wanted a similar thing; I wanted perfection and simplicity. It was obviously much easier wished for than granted. Even to this day, I strive for perfection. I am learning though that reality has room for mistakes and that life isn't scripted like a television show is. And as much as we hate to admit it, it's true.
I also was taken back by the fact that television shows portrayed the easy, "perfect" lifestyles of the "whites." Gary Soto goes on to say something ground-breaking: "I tried to convince [my siblings] that if the way we improved the way we looked we might get along better in life. White people would like us more" (30). I was intrigued by the fact that Gary connected an attractive appearance with an attractive lifestyle; he thought the two went hand-in-hand. This obviously was a time period during which skin color yielded discrimination and experiences, so of course, in a way, appearance did influence the type of life led. I wondered what it must have been like to have been a Mexican American during that time period and how that would have compared to have grown up as a Caucasian American at the time.
Towards the end of the story, Gary Soto briefly discusses his sister's "profanity stage." I loved this part and laughed aloud to myself as I read it because I know exactly what he is talking about. I remember my friends and my sister going through the same phase. My heart skipped a beat the first times I heard my close friends and sister curse. Why were they growing up so fast? That was something I feared as a child.
I thought this story was well-written, discussing a very interesting issue. This thematic concept of familial perfection yielding societal acceptance was quite evident. I thought Gary Soto really conveyed a strong and youthful point of view for the reader to pick up on and relate to, and I really enjoyed that. I liked the fact that I could reflect back to my younger years.
I was incredibly compelled by just the first paragraph. Soto says, "One July, while killing ants on the kitchen sink with a rolled newspaper, I had a nine-year-old's vision of wealth that would save us from ourselves. For weeks I had drunk Kool-Aid and watched morning reruns of Father Knows Best, whose family was so uncomplicated in its routine that I very much wanted to imitate it. The first step was to get my brother and sister to wear shoes" (27). I think this first paragraph says so much. I really connected to the relaxing image of summer time portrayed: lazy mornings, killing the ants and watching silly television reruns. That was familiar and thus, comforting to read. I also enjoyed the fact that I got a real sense of the narrator's voice, and I loved that. I could instantly pick up the fact that he was young, eager, optimistic and chock full of ideas. I think I really connected with this story because I vividly remember being the exact same way. One summer, my sister got a pamphlet in the mail, saying that she had the potential to go into modeling. Though it was a scam at the time, my summer was free, and my sister and I dedicated part of our summer attempting to set up a car wash services and lemonade stand to raise money. We all need to start somewhere. For Gary, the first step was getting his siblings to dress more formally for dinner. For me and my sister, the first step for me was advertising and getting our parents to let us wash their car. Because we were young--both me, my sister and Gary Soto--we were so enthralled and hopeful. We denied all reality to achieve our goals at the time.
I thought Gary's nine-year-old perspective of TV was really unique and fascinating. He says, "This was the summer when I spent the mornings in front of the television that showed the comfortable lives of white kids. There were no beatings, no rifts in the family. They wore bright clothes; toys tumbled from their closets. They hopped into bed with kisses and woke up to glasses of fresh orange juice" (29). This really got to me. Ever since I was diagnosed with Diabetes, I wanted a similar thing; I wanted perfection and simplicity. It was obviously much easier wished for than granted. Even to this day, I strive for perfection. I am learning though that reality has room for mistakes and that life isn't scripted like a television show is. And as much as we hate to admit it, it's true.
I also was taken back by the fact that television shows portrayed the easy, "perfect" lifestyles of the "whites." Gary Soto goes on to say something ground-breaking: "I tried to convince [my siblings] that if the way we improved the way we looked we might get along better in life. White people would like us more" (30). I was intrigued by the fact that Gary connected an attractive appearance with an attractive lifestyle; he thought the two went hand-in-hand. This obviously was a time period during which skin color yielded discrimination and experiences, so of course, in a way, appearance did influence the type of life led. I wondered what it must have been like to have been a Mexican American during that time period and how that would have compared to have grown up as a Caucasian American at the time.
Towards the end of the story, Gary Soto briefly discusses his sister's "profanity stage." I loved this part and laughed aloud to myself as I read it because I know exactly what he is talking about. I remember my friends and my sister going through the same phase. My heart skipped a beat the first times I heard my close friends and sister curse. Why were they growing up so fast? That was something I feared as a child.
I thought this story was well-written, discussing a very interesting issue. This thematic concept of familial perfection yielding societal acceptance was quite evident. I thought Gary Soto really conveyed a strong and youthful point of view for the reader to pick up on and relate to, and I really enjoyed that. I liked the fact that I could reflect back to my younger years.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Personal Conflict Narrative: Rough Draft & Final Draft --by Matthew Link
I enjoyed Matthew's personal conflict narrative. It sounds like the experience was tremendously significant in his life. The reader was able to pick up on the influence of the event after the revisions were made on the rough draft. Along the way, I was able to relate to Matthew's passion for music; it reminded me of my love for theater. There truly was an immense difference in the drafts from beginning to end, and I enjoyed the story very much.
The first draft was a bit weak, though it had a lot of potential. A lot of what was stated was phrased awkwardly. The reader was not informed of some major details that could have pulled the story together in a sensible manner. And the story, I feel, lacked a drive. There was no passion, no need to tell this tale. However, the second draft definitely used well constructed paragraphs/sentences to illustrate Matthew's experience interestingly and effectively. The concluding paragraph ended on a bit of a sour note. I respected Matthew's honesty and I understand that his dreams were crushed. However, the ended almost made me believe that he didn't take much from the experience.
Matthew's revised draft captivated me. It was so much more thorough and satisfying to read. I felt like he really expressed himself, and as the reader, that was fulfilling. Towards the beginning of the story Matthew says, "The feeling that I had on stage was like a drug induced high. The rush was so intense that I became a junkie of music" (67). I really can relate to this and I like the way Matthew described it. His passion for music is quite similar to my passion for theater. Being on stage was/is, in a sense, hypnotic. It makes me feel whole, like the cares of the world don't matter, like nothing can come between me and the performance.
Matthew then went on to describe the process of getting a "gig." I liked that because I am not too familiar with it. I have seen shows before but am not very used to seeing live bands perform. I had no idea that bands often need to sell a certain number of tickets to perform. That really surprised me. I have asked friends to come see some shows that I've been in, and the fact that they have to pay makes it a lot less enticing. But to have them pay and then not be able to see you perform must be incredibly frustrating and disappointing. I put myself in Matthew's shoes and imagined how incredibly upsetting it must be to prepare yourself for a show and then not be able to perform, after being called a liar. I definitely felt for him even more than I had originally because I understood more of the situation through the details he provided.
He discussed, in his revised narrative, the moment before he walked into Paul's office to discuss ticket sales. He said, "I walked through the smoky club, passing the dimly lit mixing board and into the lobby. I rounded the corner and opened the weathered door to the coat room" (68). This reminded me of an acting technique called "sense memory," a method used, by an actor/actress, in which the senses are engaged to get a point across the audience. Matthew's description of the "smoky club," "the dimly lit mixing board," and the "weathered door" helps to set the scene for the reader. I could clearly picture where we went and how it looked through his sense-based description. I liked that a lot.
I thought Matthew's analysis of Paul's behavior added such depth to his story. He said, "Part of the reason that Paul wanted to take money from bands is that he was not a rich man. he was also growing older, around thirty-five...He could also just be tired of having to deal with teenage bands" (69). The fact that he saw Paul with a different perspective, altered Paul from being a two-dimensional character--in my mind--to a three-dimensional character. I liked that commentary very much. It showed the reader that the author had matured and with time, saw this man differently.
"Conflicts exist whenever one is confronted by change...Exploring the unknown is not supported by our society today...People are also inclined towards routine. Routine is good because it is not dangerous" (71). I thought this was brilliantly stated. It is so true! And often times, following your dreams yields sacrifices and therefore conflicts. But it builds personal strength and character. As Matthew said, "The bright side of being conflicted is the end result...'There is no teacher like experience'" (71). It is very true.
"[Music] is a form of therapy for me" too (69), just like Matthew. I liked this story because I could relate to it and also because I could see the process and the evolution of his writing. The final draft was very well done, very well-written.
The first draft was a bit weak, though it had a lot of potential. A lot of what was stated was phrased awkwardly. The reader was not informed of some major details that could have pulled the story together in a sensible manner. And the story, I feel, lacked a drive. There was no passion, no need to tell this tale. However, the second draft definitely used well constructed paragraphs/sentences to illustrate Matthew's experience interestingly and effectively. The concluding paragraph ended on a bit of a sour note. I respected Matthew's honesty and I understand that his dreams were crushed. However, the ended almost made me believe that he didn't take much from the experience.
Matthew's revised draft captivated me. It was so much more thorough and satisfying to read. I felt like he really expressed himself, and as the reader, that was fulfilling. Towards the beginning of the story Matthew says, "The feeling that I had on stage was like a drug induced high. The rush was so intense that I became a junkie of music" (67). I really can relate to this and I like the way Matthew described it. His passion for music is quite similar to my passion for theater. Being on stage was/is, in a sense, hypnotic. It makes me feel whole, like the cares of the world don't matter, like nothing can come between me and the performance.
Matthew then went on to describe the process of getting a "gig." I liked that because I am not too familiar with it. I have seen shows before but am not very used to seeing live bands perform. I had no idea that bands often need to sell a certain number of tickets to perform. That really surprised me. I have asked friends to come see some shows that I've been in, and the fact that they have to pay makes it a lot less enticing. But to have them pay and then not be able to see you perform must be incredibly frustrating and disappointing. I put myself in Matthew's shoes and imagined how incredibly upsetting it must be to prepare yourself for a show and then not be able to perform, after being called a liar. I definitely felt for him even more than I had originally because I understood more of the situation through the details he provided.
He discussed, in his revised narrative, the moment before he walked into Paul's office to discuss ticket sales. He said, "I walked through the smoky club, passing the dimly lit mixing board and into the lobby. I rounded the corner and opened the weathered door to the coat room" (68). This reminded me of an acting technique called "sense memory," a method used, by an actor/actress, in which the senses are engaged to get a point across the audience. Matthew's description of the "smoky club," "the dimly lit mixing board," and the "weathered door" helps to set the scene for the reader. I could clearly picture where we went and how it looked through his sense-based description. I liked that a lot.
I thought Matthew's analysis of Paul's behavior added such depth to his story. He said, "Part of the reason that Paul wanted to take money from bands is that he was not a rich man. he was also growing older, around thirty-five...He could also just be tired of having to deal with teenage bands" (69). The fact that he saw Paul with a different perspective, altered Paul from being a two-dimensional character--in my mind--to a three-dimensional character. I liked that commentary very much. It showed the reader that the author had matured and with time, saw this man differently.
"Conflicts exist whenever one is confronted by change...Exploring the unknown is not supported by our society today...People are also inclined towards routine. Routine is good because it is not dangerous" (71). I thought this was brilliantly stated. It is so true! And often times, following your dreams yields sacrifices and therefore conflicts. But it builds personal strength and character. As Matthew said, "The bright side of being conflicted is the end result...'There is no teacher like experience'" (71). It is very true.
"[Music] is a form of therapy for me" too (69), just like Matthew. I liked this story because I could relate to it and also because I could see the process and the evolution of his writing. The final draft was very well done, very well-written.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Malcolm X-- Malcolm Little
I was, for some odd reason, intrigued by this story. I don't know if that's because I have a very personal and connected relationship with my own hair, but I liked it. I followed this story with much ease.
The first thing I noticed was the date and title of the story, first. This gave me a good idea of the setting and time period. From the research I've done, this time period (1960s) was one filled with changes that influenced every single individual in America. There were political changes going on (i.e., Cold War, Bay of Pigs invasion, shooting of president J.F.Kennedy), social changes (i.e., racism/discrimination, Martin Luther King Jr. speeches, rise of feminism) as well as a change in the American facade (the majority of the American population no longer yearned for a sense of domestic perfection, but instead yearned for a sense of justice). From the title, I also was reminded of one of my favorite Broadway shows: Hair. It took place during the same time period and provides similar changes (political, social and "physical") for the audience to see. So even before I read the story, I predicted that this story would be one dealing with the thematic idea of change.
I finally approached the story, eager to read, but came to a halt when I didn't know what the word "conked" meant. After a quick investigation online, I learned that "conking" the hair was a process by which hair (often African American hair) was chemically straightened. Though the look was beautifying, it was described as such a horrifically painful experience. The vivid description really put me in Malcolm's shoes. As his "head caught fire" (22) and his "eyes watered (23) from the "jelly-like, starchy-looking glop" (22), I felt it. It burned tremendously. But he described the look of his new hair-do later and said, "I'd seen some pretty conks, but when it's the first time, on your own head, the transformation, after the lifetime of kinks, is staggering (23)." This story proves the saying, "pain is beauty" to be true. Though I've never had my hair "conked"--and though I don't plan on it--I could feel Malcolm's sense of accomplishment. I also picked up on his sense of disappointment reflecting on the fact, years later: "How ridiculous I was! Stupid enough to stand there simply lost in admiration of my hair now looking white" (23).
I was really taken back when he said, "This was my first really big step toward self-degradation: when I endured all of that pain, literally burning my flesh with lye, in order to cook my natural hair until it was limp, to have it look like a white man's hair. I had joined the multitude of Negro men and women in America who are brainwashed into believing that the black people are 'inferior'--and white people 'superior'--that they will even violate and mutilate their God-created bodies to try to look 'pretty' by white standards" (23). Wow! How empowering and incredibly honest! This really gave me a perspective; at that time, Malcolm X was taught to believe that he was born inferior because of the way he looked. And he wasn't the only one. Like many African Americans, he was persuaded by society to believe that changing his hair would change his social standing. When he decided, with a friend, to "conk" his hair, I think he approved of the idea; it would make him look "cooler," fit in, more "superior." But as time passed, it looks like Malcolm's opinion changed. The fact that he used words with such a negative connotation (i.e., "violate," "mutilate," and "brainwashed") proves that.
This story did in fact illustrate several changes that occurred for Malcom, such as his change in hairstyle and his change of perspective. So in a sense, this story serves as a parallel to the changes that the America was going through, on a much smaller scale. It really gave the reader insight into many aspects of the 1960s, such as degradation, hairstyle and social standings. I thought it was well-written and very interesting!
The first thing I noticed was the date and title of the story, first. This gave me a good idea of the setting and time period. From the research I've done, this time period (1960s) was one filled with changes that influenced every single individual in America. There were political changes going on (i.e., Cold War, Bay of Pigs invasion, shooting of president J.F.Kennedy), social changes (i.e., racism/discrimination, Martin Luther King Jr. speeches, rise of feminism) as well as a change in the American facade (the majority of the American population no longer yearned for a sense of domestic perfection, but instead yearned for a sense of justice). From the title, I also was reminded of one of my favorite Broadway shows: Hair. It took place during the same time period and provides similar changes (political, social and "physical") for the audience to see. So even before I read the story, I predicted that this story would be one dealing with the thematic idea of change.
I finally approached the story, eager to read, but came to a halt when I didn't know what the word "conked" meant. After a quick investigation online, I learned that "conking" the hair was a process by which hair (often African American hair) was chemically straightened. Though the look was beautifying, it was described as such a horrifically painful experience. The vivid description really put me in Malcolm's shoes. As his "head caught fire" (22) and his "eyes watered (23) from the "jelly-like, starchy-looking glop" (22), I felt it. It burned tremendously. But he described the look of his new hair-do later and said, "I'd seen some pretty conks, but when it's the first time, on your own head, the transformation, after the lifetime of kinks, is staggering (23)." This story proves the saying, "pain is beauty" to be true. Though I've never had my hair "conked"--and though I don't plan on it--I could feel Malcolm's sense of accomplishment. I also picked up on his sense of disappointment reflecting on the fact, years later: "How ridiculous I was! Stupid enough to stand there simply lost in admiration of my hair now looking white" (23).
I was really taken back when he said, "This was my first really big step toward self-degradation: when I endured all of that pain, literally burning my flesh with lye, in order to cook my natural hair until it was limp, to have it look like a white man's hair. I had joined the multitude of Negro men and women in America who are brainwashed into believing that the black people are 'inferior'--and white people 'superior'--that they will even violate and mutilate their God-created bodies to try to look 'pretty' by white standards" (23). Wow! How empowering and incredibly honest! This really gave me a perspective; at that time, Malcolm X was taught to believe that he was born inferior because of the way he looked. And he wasn't the only one. Like many African Americans, he was persuaded by society to believe that changing his hair would change his social standing. When he decided, with a friend, to "conk" his hair, I think he approved of the idea; it would make him look "cooler," fit in, more "superior." But as time passed, it looks like Malcolm's opinion changed. The fact that he used words with such a negative connotation (i.e., "violate," "mutilate," and "brainwashed") proves that.
This story did in fact illustrate several changes that occurred for Malcom, such as his change in hairstyle and his change of perspective. So in a sense, this story serves as a parallel to the changes that the America was going through, on a much smaller scale. It really gave the reader insight into many aspects of the 1960s, such as degradation, hairstyle and social standings. I thought it was well-written and very interesting!
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Hating Goldie- Phyllis Rose
I found this to be a very interesting story. I thought it was well-written and truly illustrated the viewpoint/perspective of the author. It also, I think, displays her unique and refreshing senses of style and tone, as well as her very interesting take on her childhood life. Rose spoke with such intensive abhorrence, describing her experiences with Goldie with words and phrases of such a negative connotation--i.e., "insipid," "caterwauling," "I waited for him to die." I was waiting for the story to alter and take a positive twist--i.e, an experience in which she learned a lesson from her antagonizing pet canary--but it remained very forthright and veracious. In a sense, it was very refreshing.
This story yielded my own personal reflection on the events of my childhood. I remember my buying fish and hermit crabs and dogs; not once had my parents ever lied to me about the conditions of my pets. In fact, my parents never lied to me about anything...well, at least, I don't think they lied to me about anything. We had/have a very open relationship. They exposed me to the "good" things the world had to offer, but they never hid the "bad"/truthful things from me. We always talked things through. I think an open and honest sense of communication was missing from Phyllis' relationship with her parents. Her parents, did, in a sense "deprive her of the pain [she] needed to be nourished as an artist." If they had talked more about how they feel in regards to what was going on in life, it could have saved their entire family a great deal of time, money and distress.
The bird, in a very obscure way, symbolizes the challenges that life throws at us. They may not last long, just like the canary in the story, but they are ever-present. We can avoid them or confront them. We can lie about them or truthfully accept them. We have choices and learn lessons with each given experience.
This story yielded my own personal reflection on the events of my childhood. I remember my buying fish and hermit crabs and dogs; not once had my parents ever lied to me about the conditions of my pets. In fact, my parents never lied to me about anything...well, at least, I don't think they lied to me about anything. We had/have a very open relationship. They exposed me to the "good" things the world had to offer, but they never hid the "bad"/truthful things from me. We always talked things through. I think an open and honest sense of communication was missing from Phyllis' relationship with her parents. Her parents, did, in a sense "deprive her of the pain [she] needed to be nourished as an artist." If they had talked more about how they feel in regards to what was going on in life, it could have saved their entire family a great deal of time, money and distress.
The bird, in a very obscure way, symbolizes the challenges that life throws at us. They may not last long, just like the canary in the story, but they are ever-present. We can avoid them or confront them. We can lie about them or truthfully accept them. We have choices and learn lessons with each given experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)