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?