High Five Choir

I am a part of the High Five Choir at New Trier, and the choir was recently featured in the Chicago Tribune. If you have time, check it out!

Click Here to watch a video of High Five

Click Here to read the article

Walking in an Airport Wonderland

The Holidays are here, and for many of us, that means travel! After recent talks about airport security in class over the past week, I began to think about how much airport security has evolved since 9/11, and whether some recent security measures are a violation of civil liberties. At the beginning of 2010, the TSA began adding full body scanners into airports as a means of security. Some say that these body scanners are a complete violation of people's right to privacy, but are they? Is the nation justified in doing this, as long as it is for the protection of the people?
This is a commonly brought up question, and I think it can be almost impossible to answer. I completely see both sides of the situation. The country wants to make our lives a little safer, but have they gone too far this time? It's interesting to think about. If you find yourself in an airport over vacation, try to answer the question. Has airport security gone too far?

Secrets secrets are no fun, unless they are for everyone.

After learning about the Vietnam War on Friday in class, I drew a couple of parallels between the Vietnam war and the Iraq war, most notably in what our government told us, or rather didn't tell us, about those wars. During the Vietnam war, President Lyndon B. Johnson declared that reason he went to war with Vietnam was due to the Gulf of Tonkin, and the torpedo of an American ship. However, there is much speculation as to whether or not the torpedo of this ship actually happened.
 But one of the main reasons that we went to war with Vietnam was to stop the spread of communism. This somewhat resembles the current war in Iraq. The commonly known reason for going to war with Iraq was that the American government believed that Saddam Hussein was collecting materials to build weapons of mass destruction, however this too was never proved. Some are saying that the actual reason we went to war with Iraq was so we could gain access to their oil reserves, but once again this is merely speculation, and has not been proved. I thought it was interesting that in both cases our government did not tell us exactly what was happening with the war, or why we went to war in the first place, and it reminds me of what we have been discussing in class. When, if ever, should the government be allowed to hide important pieces of information from citizens of this country? In my opinion, never. Even during perilous times, American citizens have a right to know what is going on in their country, rather than being left in the dark.

ThanksGIVING

Happy Thanksgiving everyone! During this holiday, it always crosses my mind that there are so many people less fortunate than myself, who don't get the privilege of sitting down to a delicious thanksgiving dinner like I do. Thats why I was so happy when I found this video. It tells the story of a charity in Ohio that serves thousands of hungry people on Thanksgiving. Here is a link so you can watch the video Click Here!
It's so nice to know that there are people in the world who are willing to spend their Thanksgiving helping others in need. I think that that is what the holiday is all about.

A Modern Day Wizard

Last night I got the opportunity to go see Tom DeLuca, the hypnotist, at New Trier. His claim to fame is being able to hypnotize people and then proceed to make them do completely outrageous things. Some of these "things" included hypnotizing a boy to believe he is Jackie Chan's younger brother, or hypnotizing another person to believe he is America's greatest spy. Needless to say, it was hilarious, and Tom DeLuca really convinced me that hypnosis is actually possible.
Now, I know this could seem like somewhat of a stretch, but in some ways, his act made me think of The Crucible, and how Tom DeLuca is like a modern day wizard. He "possesses" others, and makes them do whatever he wants, somewhat like The Crucible. Those accused of witchcraft in The Crucible are often accused of possessing their victims as well. After thinking about it more, it seemed interesting to me how witches in the Crucible were persecuted and put in jail, but now, "wizards", such as Tom DeLuca, are paid to perform and entertain people. Why do you think throughout time witches and wizards changed from being criminals, to being entertainers?

Harry Potter: A Defender of Civil Liberties

In the spirit of the opening week of Harry Potter (5 more days!), I decided to start to re-read the seventh book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Originally, I wasn't looking for anything in particular, but suddenly, around the middle of the book, I began to notice some connections to what we were discussing in American Studies! (Crazy, I know.) It all started with the break in to the Ministry of Magic. Harry and friends were all breaking into the Ministry of Magic and stumbled in on a court case involving a Mrs. Mary Cattermole, who was under suspicion of being a Mudblood (A wizard or witch born from two non-magical parents). This was one of many court cases involving thousands of Mudbloods who were accused of stealing their powers (rather than being born with them) and who were considered a threat to society. As I continued to read, I began to see some civil liberty violations going on. These people were citizens like everyone else, the only difference being they were born from two muggles. Yet, they were being put in Azkaban (prison) for something that was clearly out of their control. However, some may argue that this was a time of war and the imprisonment of Mudbloods was merely a precaution.
The situation in Harry Potter somewhat resembles the Japanese Internment Camps during World War Two. Japanese Americans were put in camps across the west coast after the bombing of Pearl Harbor in order to ensure national security, but many thought that that was a complete violation of the Japanese American's civil liberties. But once again, it was a time of war, so many considered it essential for the safety of America. However, both situations bring up an important question that we have been discussing in class. Should civil liberties be limited in times of war? In my opinion, they should not. Rights are rights, and they should not be taken away under any circumstances, but it is definitely something to think about.

Lost and Found

This week during our school's Literary Festival I had the privilege of seeing Davy Rothbart, the creator of Found magazine. This magazine is compiled of lost letters, photos, notes, advertisements, or anything that someone finds and sends in. The reason that I found this magazine so interesting is that every letter or scrap of paper that they find, they deem significant. While other's may think of these letters as trash, to them it is treasure. Oddly enough, this made me think about the books we read in school. The books we read in class are most likely chosen by the teachers because they are of some literary importance. These books are deemed significant by the school, and therefore they are chosen as our class curriculum. But after learning about Found magazine, I began to wonder, what makes these books more important than any other piece of literature? What makes them more significant? In my opinion, the letters published in Found are in some ways more significant than the books we read in class. They are true accounts of human emotion that would be hard to come across in a classroom book. Rather than being edited and scrutinized under a magnifying glass, they are handwritten, rarely edited, and come straight from somebody's deepest thoughts. And in my opinion that makes them almost more interesting and significant than most of the books we read in school. So the next time you come across a piece of paper being shuffled across the floor, pick it up, because you never know what it could say.

Based Off of True Events

The other night, I watched the scariest movie I have ever seen. It being Halloween weekend, I figured that it would be a fun idea. The movie I watched was called The House of the Devil. It was a low budget, independent horror movie about a babysitter who finds herself actually sitting for satanic worshippers. At the very beginning of the movie, during the opening credits, five words showed up on the screen. "Based Off of True Events." I immediately became uneasy, I thought, "if this was based off of true events, it could happen to me!" But as the movie went on, I realized that this idea was far fetched. While it definitely was terrifying, the plot was so unrealistic that I began to wonder what true events this movie was based off of. Perhaps it was loosely based off of the accounts of satanic worshippers in the 80's (the movie was based in the 80's), or perhaps the director was simply adding those five words in order to make the viewers of the movie more terrified. Either way, I wondered why the director wanted to make his movie, which was clearly a work of fiction, seem more like non-fiction. Perhaps it is because we are living in an era of reality television. People are suddenly more interested in watching what is real, rather than what is made up. And perhaps that is the reason why the director added those five words. Although there was some historical credibility, it was not to give his viewers a history lesson, but rather to get them more interested in his movie. But it brings up a good question that we discussed in American Studies. "Can there be truth in fiction?"

Bloggin' Ain't Easy

Please assess "Waiting for Superman"

Blogging makes me nervous. The idea of putting all my thoughts and opinions out there, for all the world to see, is enough to make my stomach turn. As much as I hate to say it, I do care what other people think of me, and as I write my blog every week, I am often worried that what I write may offend someone, and may cause someone to disagree with me. And that is why I believe that my blogs this quarter have been somewhat bland. Instead of branching out on my own, and actually writing blogs that I truly find interesting, I merely write about what we have been discussing in class.  For example, every single one of my blog posts contains a phrase along the lines of "this idea ties into what we were learning this week in AIS." Don't get me wrong, I do find a way to tie it into everyday life so that it is somewhat interesting to the reader, but none of my posts are very original. Even as the quarter went one, the outline of each blog stayed the same. I would state what was learned in class, and then discuss my views on it. The writing improved, but the style did not. I think this is because I am still getting comfortable with blogging, and writing down my opinions, but I hope that will improve during the second quarter. One positive change that I noticed in my blogs throughout the quarter was the fact that my blogs got shorter. I no longer feel the need to make every blog an essay. They can be short and sweet, and I think that makes them easier to read, and easier for me to write. Next quarter, I hope to do some extra posts about 'random' topics that I find interesting instead of only writing my average one post a week.  However, this quarter there was one post that I was particularly proud of. It connected into class and into my personal life. The title of the post was "Waiting for Superman." I thought that this specific post tied in what we learned in class, and what I experience everyday, quite well. I truly enjoyed writing it, and hope to write more posts like this next quarter.

White Wedding

Every morning when I check my email, I am usually bombarded with articles that are really of no importance. But today I came across an article that was not only interesting but also related to American Studies. It was called "Why Wedding Dresses are White." I instantly clicked on it because I thought that it would tie in really well with what we were discussing in class. We have been reading the Narrative of Frederick Douglass and have been discussing the issue of race for a few weeks. One of the ideas that we have discussed is why certain colors are given a specific meaning. For example, black is usually thought of as evil, dark, bad, scary etc...while white is more pure, and innocent of a color. And that is what I thought the article would say. I thought the reason wedding dresses were white was because they symbolized purity and virginity and innocence. But what surprised me most is that wedding dresses were not always white. Many wedding dresses used to be black, or purple or red, which I thought was strange because those colors, in my opinion, are not usually associated with innocence, or happiness, or purity. Another interesting fact was that wedding dresses first started being white after Queen Victoria's wedding. She chose a white dress because according to the article she wanted to show her people that she could run her country in an economic way, and white was the cheapest color fabric to use. And that idea stuck. So while many people think that wedding dresses are white because they are supposed to symbolize purity, they might be surprised to know that the color was chosen for political and economic purposes. This article showed me that not everything has to be related to race and color, and that was a refreshing change.

Waiting for Superman

I would definitely consider myself a person who often complains about schoolwork. My idea of a 'normal' evening is coming home from school, stressed and tired, and complaining to my parents or my brother, or anyone who will listen for that matter, about the amount of schoolwork that I have. And I feel like this is a relatively normal occurrence for many of the students that go to New Trier. This idea of mine was backed  in American Studies as we watched a trailer for the documentary Race to Nowhere. This film, directed by Vicki Abeles, is a documentary focusing on the amount of pressure students of all ages get in this generation of schooling. It focuses on many ideas that I find stressful as well, such as applying for colleges, or the amount of homework the average student gets every night. The makers of this movie agree with what I thought; that the workload students are getting each day has just become too much, and something has to change. To them, school has just become too much to handle. 

However, last night I went to see a movie, and as I was sitting through the trailers, something caught my eye. It was a preview for another documentary about school, only the premise of this movie was entirely different. It was called Waiting for Superman. 

This film as well focuses on the problems of America's educational system, only instead of discussing the schools that are academically taxing, it talks about five promising young students, who wish to leave their current schools "that inhibit, rather than encourage, academic growth" and get accepted into better, private schools. The film talks about how so many students attend schools that are not academically taxing, but wish to do so. They wish to receive a better education. It was interesting to me that there could be two documentaries, both focusing on the problems of America's educational system, out at the same time, but both being entirely about different problems. And after learning more about Waiting for Superman, it  became obvious to me which problem was more prevalent in America. 

There are few public schools out there that are as good as New Trier, and after learning about Waiting for Superman, it became obvious to me how many students would benefit from attending a school such as ours. Majority of the schools in the country don't have the facilities or the resources that we do, and the education of the students that go there is obviously lacking. These students, and those portrayed in the film, strive for a good education, while I complain about the one I am receiving. I believe that I, and many other students, take the education that I am getting for granted, and should not do so, because there are so many out there that wish to go to a school like ours, but can't. And I believe that this is the problem in the educational system that needs to be changed.

Tolerance vs. Acceptance

I participate in New Trier's High Five Choir, which is a school choir mixing students from the general education population, and students from the special education population at New Trier. One of the main ideas that we stress in that choir is Acceptance, not Tolerance. A simple Dictionary.com definition of tolerance is this: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own. Another definition from that same website is: The act or capacity of enduring, endurance. Endurance. Endurance is a concept that I believe many American's are all too comfortable with. For example, in terms of sexuality, many people state that they "tolerate"or "endure" gay marriage. Or on the same lines, many people "tolerate" interracial marriage. But instead of tolerating, why is it so hard for people to simply accept?  In High Five we discuss how acceptance is key because instead of just learning to tolerate someone who differs from you, it is so much easier to just accept them for who they are. Instead of criticizing someone's differences, why not embrace them?
Now this is much easier said than done. Clearly people as a whole cannot change their opinions overnight and learn to accept certain things that they once found difficult to endure. But it brings up a good question: Will people in America ever be able to accept all people and idea's, rather than simply tolerate them?

People Are Red Over The Color Purple

This morning while I was on the computer checking my email, I stumbled across an article listing 10 banned books that you might not expect. One of the books listed was The Color Purple by Alice Walker. The book focuses on an African American female living the the south during the 1930's, and tells mainly about her struggles as a lower class black citizen living in the south during that time. 


I thought that this tied in well with what we were discussing in American Studies this week.  We were discussing President Obama's "A More Perfect Union" speech, and how he declares that "so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation." This got me questioning, why was the book The Color Purple banned? The article states that it was because of issues of race and abuse, but I believe that the problem can be traced deeper than that. Was the book banned because America is still racist today? Or perhaps it was banned because of feelings of guilt. Feelings that there are still disparities between the black and white population today, and the white population feels that they have to ban, or bury any evidence that these disparities still exist. Many would argue that there are no such disparities in the country today, however, I personally believe that this is not the case. When you look around, one can find that there are still dividing lines between African American and white people, in terms of education, social status etc. Why these dividing lines exist is hard to say, but I think that it brings up a good question: Why do disparities between African American and white people still exist today?

1989-2010. AFter Nineteen Years in Office, Daley Retires

After a record of nineteen years in office, Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley announced on Tuesday, September 7th, that he will not be running for re-election next fall. As Daley put it " "I've done my best. Now, I'm ready with my family to begin the new phase of our lives" (http://cbs2chicago.com/local/mayor.daley.retirement.2.1900359.html) While Daley clearly seems to be ready to retire, many people, certainly those of my generation who have not known another mayor, are worried about what will come next.

Having grown up in Chicago almost my entire life, I have not known a mayor other than Daley, which is why it certainly comes as a bit of a shock that he will not be returning to office. It is safe to say that I, and most likely many others, are worried about the future mayor of Chicago, and what he or she will have in store. However, I believe that this is because I have a biased opinion of Mayor Daley. Last week in American Studies, we were discussing how information in textbooks and many other pieces of work differ because of author's biased opinions, and I believe that this idea is coming into play now. Many people are saying that his retirement is a good thing, but many others, such as myself, are concerned.  Perhaps if there had been a number of different mayors in Chicago throughout my lifetime, I would not be so worried about Daley retiring and having a new mayor step into office. However, I feel that Daley did such a good job, with huge achievements such as Millenium Park, that the next mayor will not live up to such high expectations.

Clearly, not everyone has the same opinion as I do. Many are excited for Chicago to have a fresh start, and are looking forward to seeing some changes. Especially those who have lived long enough to have known other mayors than Daley, and perhaps do not have such a biased opinion. And although it concerns me to see Daley retire, it will be interesting to see what the future of Chicago holds. 

Redemptive Arc: Story of my Life.

Last week in American Studies, we were discussing Kurt Vonnegut's idea of the Redemptive Arc. He stated that in every story, there is a common theme, or outline. It starts out with your protagonist, living a relatively happy life. Then, he, or she is faced with some terrible misfortune,  but after all the struggles and sadness, they somehow pull through, and end up happier than they ever were before. For example, consider Harry Potter. At the beginning, his life wasn't too bad. Sure, he lived under the stairs, but he was still well fed, clothed, and had people to look out for him. But once he got accepted into Hogwarts, it all started going downhill. He had several near death experiences, the most powerful dark lord of all time was after him, and he was only eleven. Seems like he most definitely experienced some misfortune. However, at the end of the story, even he was able to come out on top, and he was able to experience true happiness.

Now, I completely agreed with Vonnegut's idea that this occurs in many stories, but I did not think that it could apply to real life at all. But then I got to thinking, my life, and most likely many others, certainly follows that path.

I (the protagonist of my life) started out with good fortune. I was born into an upper middle class family, I lived on the North Shore, clearly things were going my way. But I, like most people as well, have been faced with many challenges and struggles in my life. Now these misfortunes may not have been as severe as others. For example, I was not trying to fight off a dark lord at the mere age of eleven, but they were still misfortunes. Maybe I got a bad grade on a test, or maybe my family was going through hard times. However, these misfortunes have only made me stronger, and I have learned from them every time.

The Redemptive Arc is not just for stories, it clearly applied to many events in my life as well. Does everybody's life follow that path? Probably not. But it is definitely worth thinking about.

Nerf gun enthusiast? I don't think so.

In a consumer driven world such as ours, it seems to me that people are no longer judged by their personalities, but rather by their belongings. We know that someone is successful based off the fact that they have the new iPhone, or a brand new sports car, rather than actually talking to them and learning about them. And it got me thinking, if I were to disappear tomorrow, would my belongings be an accurate reflection of who I am?

Looking around my room, I see a few things that stand out to me. A pile of sheet music, scattered across the floor, a Nerf gun, a cell phone, and a backpack stuffed with school supplies. But if someone were to glance at these items, would they be able to truly understand me? Is it possible for someone to look at one's belongings, and instantly know everything about them? No. This idea ties into what we were learning this week in American Studies, and the problem that historians are faced with every day. Anyone could glance around my room and easily draw the conclusion that I am a Nerf gun enthusiast, with a passion for writing songs, but they would be dead wrong.  It is almost impossible to know everything about a person based on artifacts that they left behind, therefore it is so important to continue to collaborate and corroborate with others to make sure that you are getting correct information. For example, if one were to look around Tiger Wood's house, they would probably guess that he was a fantastic golfer, based on hundreds of golf clubs and trophies. But without further research, they would have no way of knowing about his many affairs and scandals, therefore their information about him would be inaccurate.

 There is no way one could know everything about me by simply looking around my room. There is not one object that sums up my entire life. In my opinion, one must rely on more than just their belongings in order to truly get to know a person.

My First Post!

Creating a blog is much harder than it looks.