Symbolism is universal in books, and it is really shown in literature if you look deep. Even the smallest thing might become a very important symbol, if you see through its semi-translucent surface. There were four books that I read, which really exemplified how symbols, however subtle, are very important. The first book I read was The Alchemist, by Paolo Cohelo, about a young man who goes to the pyramids to fulfill a prophecy, Sky Raiders, by Brandon Mull about a boy ripped from his home, and enslaved in another dimension, Vietnamerica By Gio-Bao Tran, a true story about an Vietnamese-American boy learning his families history from the Vietnam war, and A Thousand Splendid Suns by Kahled Hosseini, a story about two girls living in Afghanistan. Symbols throughout all genres have many symbols that are very important.
In fantasy books symbolism is a lot more free, because you are able to play around with everything that surrounds the character. In The Alchemist, the main character, Santiago at first calls a Character known as Melchizedek "old man", but later, calls him "old king" this subtle change in speech makes a big impact o how we see into his thoughts. He is a lot more reverent of the "old king" now, and also we can see how his thoughts changed throughout his journey. In Sky Raiders, the main character Cole, gets very suspicious of people. At one point he just asks "Weren't you just trying to get rid of me?" Cole is letting all of his insecurities rise up into his character, and he is trying to absolve himself from his insecurities. Cole is trying to keep his luxury of trust, but at what cost? Symbolism in non-realistic fiction is a lot easier to play around with, but not necessarily more meaningful.
In realistic fiction, and non-fiction, symbolism is a little less free, but sometimes that can make it better. These books have often fewer, but more meaningful symbols. In Vietnamerica, Gao-Bao's parents receive a letter from Paris, France. This letter represents all that their family could have been had they moved to France. It represents both the good and bad about that scenario. Also, this letter represents the stark difference between the western world and Vietnam. This is a non-fiction story, so this letter had worth to Gao-Bao's family. In the book A Thousand Splendid Suns, the main character Marian has ice cream which she had so longed for in her life of poverty, once she had married in an arranged marriage. This first represents all the hope that she has for her new marriage, and her longing for something sweet to hold in her life. Secondly it represents that something that at first seems sweet, may really be ice cold. Even the smallest and subtlest of things can hold symbols that pack a really big punch.
All of these symbols, and all symbols throughout the literary world have at least one thing in common with all of the other symbols. They all represent things that are accentuated in their respective story later on. These symbols may seem very subtle on the surface, and their appearances may seem too sneaky, they are all catchable, and once you catch those symbols, they can make a world of difference in the story. Symbols like these are everywhere, both in books, and in real life, so we can use the knowledge obtained from these symbols to help us with our real life struggles, and to parse all of the information thrown at us. These symbols can help us understand our world.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part One Extra Credit symbolism-- Caesar Crossing the Rubicon
Caesar Flickerman is a very important (and dastardly) figure in all three Hunger Games movies, but his evil side is especially accentuated in The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part One. He really shows how puppeted he, and the rest of Panem (their country) is by the capitol. Caesar is the host for the Hunger Games (a gladiatorial competition in which 24 "tributes" fight to the death), so he obviously has the wrong taste in entertainment. In The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part One, Caesar is interviewing one of the victorious tributes, Peeta Malark, and Peeta is clearly forced to say exactly what Caesar told him. In his interviews with Peeta crossed so many boundaries (hence the title of this blog post), including talking about sensitive subjects to the very people who can't handle those subjects, and also being, as many people call him "the ultimate coward". Caesar has earned that title, and is the epitome of the capitol's crude and suzerain way of life.
In The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part One, Caesar frequently interviews Peeta. He asks Peeta unfriendly and cruel questions about topics like his love for Katniss, and his feelings about the rebels and the Hunger Games. In one case, he even has Peeta beaten by "peacekeeping troops" for telling Katniss that she is about to be attacked by nuclear weapons. Also, they turn Peeta into a living, breathing weapon, and Caesar just seems to keep being materialistic and content. Furthermore, his interviews are in front of millions of people with topics no one would want to talk about in front of anyone. Here is an excerpt from one interview. "It costs your life," says Caesar. "Oh, no. It costs a lot more than your life. To murder innocent people?" says Peeta. "It costs everything you are.""--pg 23 of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay. We can easily discern that this is because of his thoughts on his own suzerainty that he has the guts to ask this question. He would not to his equal, because he is "the ultimate coward". Grossly, the symbol of the capitol's way of life that he represents is reeking off of him in scenes like this.
Caesar is also in my opinion defamed by his nonchalant way of asking these questions. In the first two Hunger Games books, he just casually introduces twenty-four tributes that are about to fight to the death, and only one will survive. Oh, you know, just a Saturday afternoon stroll. In the interviews with Peeta, he has a fake kind of emotion that is supposed to bring the people of Panem rallying towards The Capitol's cause, but he is seeming not to want to linger too long on opinions that Peeta has that disagree with his. Again, a perfect depiction of the ultimate coward. While Peeta is getting beaten by peacekeepers, Caesar just blankly stares at the situation. He is exemplified as the person who barbarically will sit by while there is something terrible happening, and as in the Hunger Games, actually condone that act. He is a Capitol idiot, and an ultimate coward.
Caesar is the biggest window that the people of Panem have into the way of life of the capitol. He is a terrible person, and acts as such. He is a person who can not face his own enemies until he has complete control over them. He is seen all throughout Panem, and is clearly the biggest villain to the rebellion's propaganda team. Caesar is the spitting image of the ultimate coward, and so are most of the people living in the capitol, but he is really the only one of them that we get to see in his full atrocity. Caesar Flickerman is the ultimate coward, and this post shows proof.
In The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part One, Caesar frequently interviews Peeta. He asks Peeta unfriendly and cruel questions about topics like his love for Katniss, and his feelings about the rebels and the Hunger Games. In one case, he even has Peeta beaten by "peacekeeping troops" for telling Katniss that she is about to be attacked by nuclear weapons. Also, they turn Peeta into a living, breathing weapon, and Caesar just seems to keep being materialistic and content. Furthermore, his interviews are in front of millions of people with topics no one would want to talk about in front of anyone. Here is an excerpt from one interview. "It costs your life," says Caesar. "Oh, no. It costs a lot more than your life. To murder innocent people?" says Peeta. "It costs everything you are.""--pg 23 of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay. We can easily discern that this is because of his thoughts on his own suzerainty that he has the guts to ask this question. He would not to his equal, because he is "the ultimate coward". Grossly, the symbol of the capitol's way of life that he represents is reeking off of him in scenes like this.
Caesar is also in my opinion defamed by his nonchalant way of asking these questions. In the first two Hunger Games books, he just casually introduces twenty-four tributes that are about to fight to the death, and only one will survive. Oh, you know, just a Saturday afternoon stroll. In the interviews with Peeta, he has a fake kind of emotion that is supposed to bring the people of Panem rallying towards The Capitol's cause, but he is seeming not to want to linger too long on opinions that Peeta has that disagree with his. Again, a perfect depiction of the ultimate coward. While Peeta is getting beaten by peacekeepers, Caesar just blankly stares at the situation. He is exemplified as the person who barbarically will sit by while there is something terrible happening, and as in the Hunger Games, actually condone that act. He is a Capitol idiot, and an ultimate coward.
Caesar is the biggest window that the people of Panem have into the way of life of the capitol. He is a terrible person, and acts as such. He is a person who can not face his own enemies until he has complete control over them. He is seen all throughout Panem, and is clearly the biggest villain to the rebellion's propaganda team. Caesar is the spitting image of the ultimate coward, and so are most of the people living in the capitol, but he is really the only one of them that we get to see in his full atrocity. Caesar Flickerman is the ultimate coward, and this post shows proof.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Quarter Two Cycle One Synthesis Page Reading Response: A Tangled Web of Social Issues
There are so many social issues in books, and they intertwine in interesting and disturbing ways. In the two books I read, Cat's Cradle and The Kite Runner, there are many apparent social issues.The Kite Runner is a story about an afghan boy (the story follows him through to manhood) named Amir who has a stable life in Afghanistan, until the Russians invade, and he is a refugee in america. His father is his "frenemy", and he is in the upper class of Afghanistan. Cat's Cradle is a book about a man writing a book on one of the fathers of the atomic bomb, and on his way, goes to an island known as San Lorenzo, and learns that the father of the atomic bomb also had a much more sinister weapon. There are issues including things such as destruction, deadly weapons, religious persecution, and issues with parents and marriage. These different issues intertwine, causing and feeding to each other, and mutually create distress and terror in the people in the area. When these issues appear, there is no escaping them, you have to face them and deal with them. These social issues are looming over many, and are a threat to much of the world. These social issues are everywhere, and they connect into a tangled-- and deadly web.
In Kite Runner, there are many complex and worrying social issues. The first of these groups of issues present in the book is family. Amir's family goes through a lot of turmoil, both internal and external. When Amir is a child, his father never appreciates him, because he is "different" pretty much. Also, his mother died in childbirth, and his best friend's mother ran off with a troupe of dancers-- a fate devout Muslims consider worse than death. Amir's family alone would be trouble enough, but that is not all. Also, the country they live in has many issues. Afghanistan had a monarchy that was deposed by democratic rebels, creating an upset in the balance of power. After a decade or so of the democracy, the USSR came in and created a puppet communist government. And to make matters worse, the Taliban came to mess things up even more.Throughout the story, Amir has had so many troubles and social issues. There is a problem, and once you deal with it, you\have another.
In Cat's Cradle, the social issues are much more large scale and *Spoiler Alert* (the world gets destroyed). The first major group of issues is war/violence. In the story there is a substance called ice-9, which freezes any water it touches under 128 degrees Fahrenheit. This example obviously affects the world of the book, because it destroys it. Also, there are people who get hanged for any crime that they commit. Whether it be petty theft or mass murder or even believing in a religion called Bokononism, you will be hanged on the "hy-oo-oo-kah" (inside joke for readers of the book). This greatly affects the main character, and the world around him. The second major group of issues in the book is equality. San Lorenzo prides itself on being a catholic country, and will kill anyone and everyone who openly practices a religion that secretly all of the San Lorenzans believe in. Furthermore, there is also a big controversy in the book about the castle company, which owned all of San Lorenzo, and practically enslaved all of the natives for sugar cane farming. These both are really not good ways to show the equality of different groups.
These issues may seem like isolated phenomena, and you may seem to want to dissociate yourself with them, because you do not want to face them. But, as Cat's Cradle and The Kite Runner display, even to stable lives, things can upset and destroy. Because we can not fully grasp what is going on right now, we can grasp how people have to deal with issues. We are perpetually very focused on what goes on that pertains to us, but if we reached out, we could do genuine good in this world.We need to work together to untangle such a troubled world, and destroy the bonds between social issues, and end those social issues once and for all.
In Kite Runner, there are many complex and worrying social issues. The first of these groups of issues present in the book is family. Amir's family goes through a lot of turmoil, both internal and external. When Amir is a child, his father never appreciates him, because he is "different" pretty much. Also, his mother died in childbirth, and his best friend's mother ran off with a troupe of dancers-- a fate devout Muslims consider worse than death. Amir's family alone would be trouble enough, but that is not all. Also, the country they live in has many issues. Afghanistan had a monarchy that was deposed by democratic rebels, creating an upset in the balance of power. After a decade or so of the democracy, the USSR came in and created a puppet communist government. And to make matters worse, the Taliban came to mess things up even more.Throughout the story, Amir has had so many troubles and social issues. There is a problem, and once you deal with it, you\have another.
In Cat's Cradle, the social issues are much more large scale and *Spoiler Alert* (the world gets destroyed). The first major group of issues is war/violence. In the story there is a substance called ice-9, which freezes any water it touches under 128 degrees Fahrenheit. This example obviously affects the world of the book, because it destroys it. Also, there are people who get hanged for any crime that they commit. Whether it be petty theft or mass murder or even believing in a religion called Bokononism, you will be hanged on the "hy-oo-oo-kah" (inside joke for readers of the book). This greatly affects the main character, and the world around him. The second major group of issues in the book is equality. San Lorenzo prides itself on being a catholic country, and will kill anyone and everyone who openly practices a religion that secretly all of the San Lorenzans believe in. Furthermore, there is also a big controversy in the book about the castle company, which owned all of San Lorenzo, and practically enslaved all of the natives for sugar cane farming. These both are really not good ways to show the equality of different groups.
These issues may seem like isolated phenomena, and you may seem to want to dissociate yourself with them, because you do not want to face them. But, as Cat's Cradle and The Kite Runner display, even to stable lives, things can upset and destroy. Because we can not fully grasp what is going on right now, we can grasp how people have to deal with issues. We are perpetually very focused on what goes on that pertains to us, but if we reached out, we could do genuine good in this world.We need to work together to untangle such a troubled world, and destroy the bonds between social issues, and end those social issues once and for all.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Non- Fiction Reading Response 11/11/14
The article "How The Murder of Four Teens Started a War" by Patricia Smith really shows how a chain reaction can cause a large conundrum in this crazy world. The article tells the true story of three Israeli teens that were kidnapped murdered by a Palestinian militant group, and then a Palestinian who was murdered by Israeli militants in retaliation. Then the article goes on to talk about how all of this (among other things in the past) started a seven week long war with hundreds upon hundreds of deaths, drawing great international scrutiny. The author frames this in a very specific manner to incite thought in you about how such a large scale event could be caused by four murders. (Granted, these are terrible acts, but should not have caused a full blown war).
The author used many powerful "loaded words" to emphasize her point. She used the word "bludgeoned" for example to show the inhumanity and cruelty in events such as these.The definition of the word bludgeon is: to beat repeatedly with a cudgel or other heavy object. She also used words and phrases such as "extremist", "militant", and "murdered in cold blood", as well as "beast", and "anger" to show how devoted and determined both sides were to their cause, and what extent they were willing to go for that cause, to see it through to victory. For example, in the article it states "Israel's existence was secured, along with the seeds of Arab anger." to show how the two would in the future have a very hard time coexisting. It furthers this by stating later that "Hamas doesn't even recognize Israel's existence." The people on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have valid and legitimate problems, and there is a lot of difficulty in figuring out how to solve problems like these.
This article really strikes a chord with me. I have cultural connections to the middle east, and these problems are valid and important issues. The teens being murdered was the result of the widespread hate and contempt in the middle east. When I heard about the three Israeli teens being murdered on the news, I pondered for hours on how and why people would do things like this. But, even in the darkest times, people need to find solace. The mother of the Palestinian boy who was murdered emphasized the need to coexist rather than wipe out the other side, so that issues like murder won't arise. The aunt of one of the Israeli teens, and the uncle of another seconded this notion. This article touched on a lot of deep, important topics, and the author brought out all the flavor in those tidbits by usin loaded words.
The author used many powerful "loaded words" to emphasize her point. She used the word "bludgeoned" for example to show the inhumanity and cruelty in events such as these.The definition of the word bludgeon is: to beat repeatedly with a cudgel or other heavy object. She also used words and phrases such as "extremist", "militant", and "murdered in cold blood", as well as "beast", and "anger" to show how devoted and determined both sides were to their cause, and what extent they were willing to go for that cause, to see it through to victory. For example, in the article it states "Israel's existence was secured, along with the seeds of Arab anger." to show how the two would in the future have a very hard time coexisting. It furthers this by stating later that "Hamas doesn't even recognize Israel's existence." The people on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have valid and legitimate problems, and there is a lot of difficulty in figuring out how to solve problems like these.
This article really strikes a chord with me. I have cultural connections to the middle east, and these problems are valid and important issues. The teens being murdered was the result of the widespread hate and contempt in the middle east. When I heard about the three Israeli teens being murdered on the news, I pondered for hours on how and why people would do things like this. But, even in the darkest times, people need to find solace. The mother of the Palestinian boy who was murdered emphasized the need to coexist rather than wipe out the other side, so that issues like murder won't arise. The aunt of one of the Israeli teens, and the uncle of another seconded this notion. This article touched on a lot of deep, important topics, and the author brought out all the flavor in those tidbits by usin loaded words.
Thursday, October 23, 2014
Reading response to "Darkness too Visible"
In the article "Darkness too Visible", by Megan Cox Gurdon, the fact that young adult books have become more and more dark is addressed. Also the article addresses the reality that things that many adults wouldn't read are frequently on the bookshelves of a twelve year old.Megan Cox Gurdon is strongly against how so many teens are reading books about sex, violence, and drugs, all in graphic detail. And the thing she finds most perverse is that many of these things in books are simply put in there gratuitously.
The author emphasizes these things strongly using loaded words such as: "black-rot body parts" "nightmarish" and "gruesome". Imagery also affects the story greatly. She uses strong imagery in words including: "She had gouged her belly out until it was a mess of meat and blood." That phrase makes me literally nauseous. Also, Megan Cox Gurdon uses grisly quotes. For example: "She had sliced her arms to ribbons", which makes me really think that she is strongly getting her point across by using shock.
Megan Cox Gurdon supported her claim by using shock and surprise to gross out and repulse her readers. She also strongly uses counterclaim about how having a book about something you are going through, however repulsive it may be can help you cope with your issues, but then she rebuts, saying that it might in fact encourage people to engage in this destructive behavior.
Although I disagree with Megan Cox Gurdon's opinion that young adults shouldn't be allowed to read books like this, I agree with her on the grounds that violence, drug abuse, and sex in stories should not be as gratuitous. I also agree with her tat books like this should not make up the entire young adult genre. So, overall, although Megan Cox Gurdon did not convince me of her main point, she made a lot of points that I can really agree with.
Sunday, October 19, 2014
Blog post for 1st reading response
Jonathan Singer 809 10/5/14
Us humans can not keep having our sense of duty. We care only about ourselves, and not about the issues if others. Most people in the world have too much of a sense of duty to themselves, and not towards others. The two books The Kill Order by James Dashner and Foundling by D.M. Cornish each focus on numerous themes, and the themes in both books are very similar. I would like to focus on the theme of duty in this post. The book Foundling is about an orphan who gets enlisted in the imperial lamplighters, a service to fight monsters off the central road. On the way to the conscription office, though, he gets shipwrecked and meets a very dangerous woman and they face monster attacks their friends death and finally through much struggle ultimately make their way to the lamplighters’ conscription office. Rosamünd is always steadfast in the face of danger. In The Kill Order is about a world after horrifically destructive sun flares killed about half of the population. In the book, there is a bio-weapon released and it is spreading like wildfire, killing all indiscriminately but after a while the people who don’t die turn insane. Protagonist Thomas and his friends have to fight their way to safety at every turn. People, both fictional and real are too dutiful to themselves and not at all dutiful to others. Thomas will do whatever it takes to get him and his friends to safety.We are too caught up in our own troubles that we do not pay any attention to the struggles of others.
The theme that I would like to focus on is duty. Duty is a very broad ideal spanning everything from greed (duty to yourself) to dying to save another. The ideal of duty is found more in Foundling than in The Kill Order although it is still present in The Kill Order. In Foundling, the main character Rosamünd is steadfast in his sense of duty especially about his service that he pledged to the emperor although many more tempting offers have appeared. In The Kill Order the sense of duty is duty towards yourself as shown in the will to survive. The main characters will go to any extent to survive including killing thousands upon thousands of people. They have no remorse, no mercy, no respect towards others. They are the epitome of duty oneself.
Duty is present in other forms too. Another form of duty that is present in The Kill Order is morality. There are organizations willing to obliterate millions upon millions of defenseless, innocent humans for nothing but personal gain. They do not care about others lives, and therefore are clearly not dutiful towards those people. On page 436 of Lamplighter “some people can be downright lethal” and, according to Webster's New Dictionary of the English Language, the definition of lethal is "causing death". The woman in the story did not only cause the death of her enemies but also to her allies by bringing them into dangerous situations. Her servant was killed, along with scores of monsters. She even harms the protagonist Rosamünd, while they all fight against orcs and monsters. As it says on page 317 in The Kill Order killing the man was his only goal and, according to Webster's New Dictionary of the English Language, the definition of killing is "causing the death of". Thomas did not care how it was done or who did it, all he wanted was to see the man dead.
To make a long story short, in Foundling, Rosamünd is always dutiful towards others. He will obey and serve to the very end. He will always do what he thinks is right. Thomas from The Kill Order however, is only dutiful to people he knows and loves. He will do anything for his friends, but anyone else should not cross his path. They both have their own view into the murky waters that are the ideal of duty.
We can connect these to our lives in the real, modern world. As you may know there is a famous saying, that the Spaniards used in their colonization of the Americas, “For God, gold, and glory!” That is a sense of duty to yourself. But there is another famous saying, by Calvin Coolidge “Honor has been the reward for what he gave.” signifying duty unto another. In the world today there are far too many acts of selfish duty. ISIS for example is killing people for personal gain, “For gold, God, and glory.” But, thankfully, there are always good people in this world. There are always those few people saying “Honor has been the reward for what he gave.” People such as those fighting diseases like Ebola who are risking their lives for the good of the world. They always do things out of selflessness. Both books have duty. They are both very similar. Both tell us one main thing: To try to bring the selfless duty out of our natural tendencies of selfish duty. Tuesday, September 9, 2014
The Grapes of Wrath
Over the summer, I read The Grapes of Wrath. The Grapes of Wrath has many main themes, but in this response, I would like to focus on 2 in particular. The first one would probably be the theme of discrimination, as in California there was a lot of discrimination against "okies". The second would probably be poverty, as they were all being pushed out by banks and tractors.
On the theme of discrimination. The theme of discrimination happens all through the last 250 pages of the book. While they are trying to work in the peach fields, the administration of the field made the wage unbearable, to the point where you could not feed your family off of that. They lowered the wage because in their eyes the "okies" were sub-human. Also, in the hoovervilles, the police were abusive to the Oklahomans, because they were a scapegoat for their problems. This in my opinion because when any hard times appear, someone is going to blame it on a person or group of people. We can also infer that it was partially the peach field owners greed, and partially their anger as well that made them discriminatory. In the book, protesters are slaughtered, and unions ripped brick from brick because people are having a hard time adjusting to the reality of a hard time. The police officers just don't want to deal with this struggle.
The second theme is poverty. All of these families are going halfway across the nation, because their property was disowned, only to find work that practically would give 1 person 5 cents an hour. But they still graciously accept the slower embrace of starvation rather than accepting their impending doom. They are promised wages of 50 cents an hour, and receive 10 cents. The people in hoovervilles are willing to scrape the bottoms of boxcars for dust, which they make "fried dough" from. These people are changing in a different way to hard times. While the native Californians are demanding more, the Oklahomans are accepting less. They have nothing to return to, so what else can they do besides scraping the bottom of the barrel? They react by going completely to the other side of the spectrum of madness. But, their efforts are valiant, and they, though crazy, are deserving of respect.
These themes are really what ran rampant all through California in that time period. These reactions really shaped the story. The thing we have to take from this is to , when times are hard, do not support a scapegoat, or accept being one. Although the Oklahomans had no choice, if more of the Californians had stood up for them, maybe they would have been in a better situations. And their efforts would be almmost as valiant as preacher Culver's, who was willing to die for his cause, or Tom's, who was willing to kill for his.
Over the summer, I read The Grapes of Wrath. The Grapes of Wrath has many main themes, but in this response, I would like to focus on 2 in particular. The first one would probably be the theme of discrimination, as in California there was a lot of discrimination against "okies". The second would probably be poverty, as they were all being pushed out by banks and tractors.
On the theme of discrimination. The theme of discrimination happens all through the last 250 pages of the book. While they are trying to work in the peach fields, the administration of the field made the wage unbearable, to the point where you could not feed your family off of that. They lowered the wage because in their eyes the "okies" were sub-human. Also, in the hoovervilles, the police were abusive to the Oklahomans, because they were a scapegoat for their problems. This in my opinion because when any hard times appear, someone is going to blame it on a person or group of people. We can also infer that it was partially the peach field owners greed, and partially their anger as well that made them discriminatory. In the book, protesters are slaughtered, and unions ripped brick from brick because people are having a hard time adjusting to the reality of a hard time. The police officers just don't want to deal with this struggle.
The second theme is poverty. All of these families are going halfway across the nation, because their property was disowned, only to find work that practically would give 1 person 5 cents an hour. But they still graciously accept the slower embrace of starvation rather than accepting their impending doom. They are promised wages of 50 cents an hour, and receive 10 cents. The people in hoovervilles are willing to scrape the bottoms of boxcars for dust, which they make "fried dough" from. These people are changing in a different way to hard times. While the native Californians are demanding more, the Oklahomans are accepting less. They have nothing to return to, so what else can they do besides scraping the bottom of the barrel? They react by going completely to the other side of the spectrum of madness. But, their efforts are valiant, and they, though crazy, are deserving of respect.
These themes are really what ran rampant all through California in that time period. These reactions really shaped the story. The thing we have to take from this is to , when times are hard, do not support a scapegoat, or accept being one. Although the Oklahomans had no choice, if more of the Californians had stood up for them, maybe they would have been in a better situations. And their efforts would be almmost as valiant as preacher Culver's, who was willing to die for his cause, or Tom's, who was willing to kill for his.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)