Why I Hate Sarcasm

I hate sarcasm. Nothing makes me angrier than when someone responds jokingly to a serious question. People use sarcasm in order to try to appear as the class clown. Well, these jokes are not funny. In fact, sarcastic comments, in certain situations, can result in a fatality. 

Let me give you an example. Let us say that an actor was having a seizure in the middle of a play. You, being a doctor, ask the person next to you whether or not you should go and help. In turn, that person sarcastically says that there is no need to go and help as this is just part of the play. Unless you caught on to the sarcastic comments made by your neighbor, it is likely that the actor who was having a seizure could be seriously injured. This is why sarcasm should not be tolerated in society today - a small misunderstanding can be devastating.

Another reason sarcasm should not be tolerated is because of its effects on someone else's self-esteem. Let me give you another example. Let us say you are talking to your friend about the most recent chemistry test. Your friend thought he did poorly, and you did too. Instead of saying that you thought you did poorly, however, you sarcastically say that you thought the test was the easiest one yet! If your friend doesn't catch on to the sarcasm, this will really put a dent in your friend's self-esteem. Having a poor image of oneself is never a good thing.

Finally, sarcasm should not be used because it can give people invalid information. For example, if you ask a friend who killed JFK and the friend responds sarcastically that it was a conspiracy theory led by Lyndon B. Johnson, then you might not catch on to the sarcasm and believe that for the rest of your life. This incorrect piece of information will eventually spread to your children and close family, and will create a misconception that will make you look stupid until you are corrected. This ties back in to the self-esteem aspect. 

Oh, man. Don't you just love writing satires? ;)

The Plot Against America: A Review

The Plot Against America was an interesting read, possibly even the most interesting school-required readings I have completed to date. 

The story takes place in the 1940s in the United States. It is centered around Philip Roth (who is also the author), a boy who grows up in a Lindbergh-led America. Lindbergh defeated FDR for the presidency claiming that a vote for FDR was a vote for war. This seemed to work as all races voted for Lindbergh except the Jews. The Jews disliked Lindbergh due to his anti-Semitic speech that blamed the Jews for World War II. After his election, the story follows Roth's life and all the obstacles that he has to hurdle. Programs like the "Just Folks" and "Homestead 42" aim to help Jews assimilate to American culture (according to Lindbergh and his advocates), but are protested by Jews. I won't give too much more of the plot away - it's quite interesting.

*Beware, if you continue reading, there may be a few spoilers*

If there was downside of this story, it is that it did not live up to all of my expectations. I expected something dramatic to happen; maybe Lindbergh would set up concentration camps or help Hitler in his conquests. Maybe he would use the civilians army to attack Britain and make a dual-headed monster (with Germany) that controls the entire world. Unfortunately, though, all that happened was Lindbergh went missing and FDR regained the presidency. The plot was interesting and his writing style made me want to continue reading, but I think he could have come up with a much more exciting ending. Maybe Philip Roth, the author, was trying to get across a much bigger picture that I am not seeing right now, but I wish this story had a commercial-esque ending instead of a mysterious one that relied on the reader's inferences.

The Ultimate Smackdown: Fiction versus Nonfiction

"Fiction tries to run, but non-fiction is too fast!"
*smack*
"Ohhhhh, non-fiction had one good body slam right there. I think fiction might be out of this fight."
*one, two three*
"And that's the fight, ladies and gentlemen! Non-fiction prevails once again!"


This is what I think should ideally happen if fiction and nonfiction ever fight to see which one should be read more in primary and secondary school.  After reading an article on the Washington Post, I found that there are other people who have similar beliefs. Fiction is a fun read, one that is used to divert one's attention. Non-fiction is more difficult to read and it requires an attention span. Although  reading non-fiction is widely regarded to be more beneficial to one's intellectual development than reading fiction, students in grade-school read fiction more because of one simple fact - students don't have an attention span long enough to sit down for an extended period of time to analyze literature.

Now, I must say that older fiction and realistic fiction, for the most part, do have some value, but modern fiction is primarily useless as it is only written for commercial value. Take, for example, the Harry Potter Series. I love the series, but what did I gain from reading all the books? Nothing. There wasn't really a moral to the story and the text was simple to read: no difficult words, no phrases to ponder, etc. An even better example is Twilight. Absolutely no literary value. These books are very popular with today's youth (and yes, it is still better than watching TV), but they don't help us in any way.

As college approaches, students like us need to be well prepared to think about what we read. If non-fiction is not integrated into our curriculum, then more students will be left behind. Forget, NCLB; NCLB only focuses on the grade-school education, but it should be more farsighted and realize that those who read very little non-fiction will be impaired when they seek higher education.

Existentialism in Oedipus Rex

One day in class, we discussed how self-importance was a characteristic of existentialism. Well, after reading the first par of Oedipus Rex today, I can't help but to notice the selfishness that Oedipus Rex displays.

Take, for example, his talk with Kreon. Kreon claims that he is a sane man, so he would never want to take over he throne because it would result in a lot of stress. He wants to have extra freedoms, but he does not want to be overwhelmed by too much authority. Oedipus thinks that Kreon is trying to sabotage him so that he can win the throne. After all, it is hard to believe a seer who says that you killed your own father. Eventually, though, this conversation exposes how self-centered he is because he wants to banish Kreon from the kingdom without taking his story into account. His greed for power blinds him.

Another example is the discussion the priest had with the Oedipus prior to Kreon's arrival to the kingdom. Oedipus claims that he feels the pain and suffering much worse than every other citizen because he is the people's king. This isn't exactly vanity, but it shows that Oedipus lies in order to connect with his citizens. He is living a comfortable life in the palace, while all the average citizens are struggling to survive through the plague. Stretching the truth can relate to being selfish because it shows how he is trying to maintain a reputation so that he won't be overthrown as king.

My DI group discussed existentialism in Oedipus Rex and we all concluded that there are plenty of examples that show this philosophy. I guess Jean-Paul Sartre wasn't the first to invent existentialism. That honor goes to Sophocles.

The Horror of Thesis Statements

I've been writing thesis statements ever since sixth grade. Why, then, is it so difficult? Well, for starters, thesis statements aren't a plug-and-chug equation anymore. I can't just write "In [story name], the author conveys [theme] utilizing [literary device 1], [literary device 2], and [literary device 3]." Thesis statements incorporate much more now. For example, the short story analysis prompts ask specific questions that make the equation-like thesis statement invalid. Prompt 1 asks the writer to talk about the significance of the spiritual reassessment or moral reconciliation to the story and to cite evidence to support the claim. Literary devices won't work in this thesis statement. A general theme of the story also won't work. Instead, one has to use a theme that discusses the significance of the spiritual reassessment and use evidence (instead of literary devices) for support.

Thesis statements are the source of many nightmares. I think it's simply because I am having to step out of my comfort zone and analyze the text. Before, themes used to be a short phrase; now they are long and specific to the story. Every action, every word spoken has to be looked at with a critical eye.

A poor thesis statement will result in a poorly written paper. Perhaps the importance of the thesis is why it's scary. I just can't grasp the concept that one sentence has to summarize the whole paper. If that one sentence is poorly written or does not incorporate enough detail, then the rest of the paper is useless.

Catch-22 Review

Catch-22 was an interesting novel, to say the least. The typical story is chronological and authors often introduce their characters in the beginning of the novel. Mr. Joseph Heller, the author, chose to defy these unwritten guidelines. He took a risk, and it worked.

Mr. Heller jumps around in the story, manipulating time every chance he gets. I was often confused and had to reread several passages so that I understood the passage. Additionally, Heller often throws characters into the book as if he's adding ingredients to a soup. It's all very random and they get mixed into the plot very quickly. Take, for example, Milo. Milo is a major force in the black market in this book and he pops into the story at random intervals. It's almost as if Heller is trying to confuse the reader.

As for Mr. Heller's motives in writing his book in this atypical way, I believe that he did so because he wanted to "stand out of the crowd". It's a cliched phrase, but I think that was one of his main motives. I also think that his ordering of the events and chapters was symbolic. He claimed that many people in the novel were insane, so, by organizing his chapters in a puzzling way, he made a point (accidental or not) that he fell under the same category.

Despite all of the confusing and contradictory situations in the novel, I do believe that Joseph Heller's Catch-22 is worth everyone's time. It is a dense read, and it requires a lot of outside thinking, but the story has a lot of themes that are applicable to our life today. The ubiquitous humor is also a plus.

Go Digital or Go Home? That is the question.

In AP Environmental Science this year, there were about 20 books fewer than there were students. Guess who was one of those 20 students luck enough to get a digital copy of the textbook instead? Yes, that's right: me.

Now before I go into more detail about implications of going digital, I would like to talk about my own personal reactions to the online software. 1) It's inconvenient. I see all of my classmates working on their homework whenever they get free time. They just flip to the page with the questions and then back into the chapter to find the answer. I, on the other hand, have to wait until I get home and then load two pages (for convenience): one with the questions and one with the chapter itself. Now, I would be fine with the online forum if it were not so difficult to navigate. The user interface has not been developed to a point where it is as easy to use as a textbook, where one simply just flips the page. Honestly, it's annoying having to jog your memory so often to remember what page a certain definition was on. In a book, I use pictures and other 'landmarks' to find where I need to look for the definition. So basically, I only have the one problem of inconvenience. I can't utilize my spare time at school or in the car to do my homework, and instead have to waste time at home to do so. Additionally, the interface is not nearly as user-friendly as a textbook.

Okay, now for other factors that play a major role in this possible switch. 1) Going digital will save millions of dollars. Okay, so this is a nearly impossible statement to argue. Saving millions of dollars is definitely worth the inconvenience. The money saved can be used to improve facilities and teacher education. In addition, the money can be used to buy tablets, which will allow students to work on assignments even when they're not at home! 2) Going digital will allow juveniles to become more familiar with technology. Okay, let's face it. The world economy is being dictated by advances in technology. If students remain complacent over using technology, then they will be left with the worst jobs in the market. Employers are looking for applicants who are comfortable with using certain software because it allows for better organization and more efficiency in the workplace. Students are forced to use online books will be better prepared for the job market. And lastly, 3) Going digital will allow students to be exposed to new resources that will promote a better learning experience. Even though the software I am using does not have interactive videos and additional information on certain topics, I have heard of softwares that do have such accessories. These addendums will allow students to better grasp the information because they can find answers to their questions very easily. 

Athough I do not like my online book, I do believe that with some time and funding it is possible to create a very easy and interactive interface that will promote a student's academic growth. Saving money, assimilation with technology, and enhanced resources will allow students to grasp content an perform better in class.