Thoughts on "Babylon Revisited" (CC)

        Out of all of the short stories we have read so far this month, my favorite is, by far, "Babylon Revisited". I really enjoyed the character development, as well as the overall plot. Charlie's actions and thoughts show us that he truly has changed from who he was long ago. While his sister-in-law may have her suspicions, we, as the readers, know that Charlie really does want to take his daughter back and become a responsible and worthy parent. I really didn't like Marion's character. I can understand that she wants what's best for Honoria, but I can't ignore the fact that she doesn't give second chances. The moment Charlie made a mistake (the locking-his-wife-out-in-the-heart-of-winter incident), Marion's image of him was tainted eternally. She lost all faith in the idea that he could become responsible and worthy of his wife and daughter, and took out her anger by keeping Honoria from going to stay with her father. Even when she did start to give in, a single occurrence that wasn't even Charlie's fault took away the glimmer of trust that had started to grow within her and shrouded her in doubt and stubbornness once more. Speaking of that occurrence, I was even more frustrated with Duncan and Lorraine than Marion -- mostly Lorraine. Lorraine was so tied to the past experiences she had shared with Charlie that she failed to see how he had changed and therefore kept pushing towards him in fruitless attempts at getting her way. Her and Duncan were the final straw that set off Marion. All three of these characters were so troublesome to Charlie's reunion with his daughter that I almost wanted to rewrite the story and give it a happier ending by leaving Duncan and Lorraine out completely.
        The part of the story I liked the best was the second section where Charlie is having lunch with Honoria and they attempt to get to know each other a bit better. I thought this part was simply adorable, with Honoria and her father conversing in a playful manner at first, and then delving into deeper thoughts -- like Honoria's mother. You can tell in this scene that all Honoria wants is to be with her father, as well as the fact that Charlie is, indeed, up for the challenge of becoming her actual guardian. That's why I was so sad in the end when it was determined that it could never be, that Marion would not put Honoria under Charlie's care. Charlie struggled throughout the entire story, simply striving to find a way to make amends with Marion so that he could finally live together with his daughter, and all of his efforts were simply slammed into a wall. The problem was never resolved, and that made me sad. I really liked the story line and the way it was written, I just wish the ending could have been happier.
        Well, that concludes my thoughts on "Babylon Revisited", as well as my blog posts for AP Lit. One more week to go, guys. Hang in there! :)

Rainy Days Can Be Beautiful Too (CM)

     

        Rain. One of the most common forms of precipitation in the world. Many people dismiss it as an inconvenience or something that simply dampens the mood. Compared to songs like "Singing in the Rain" that actually appreciate the importance of the rain, how many more songs signify rain as a form of burden or hardship? A lot. That's for sure. The "sadness" of rain is used frequently in movies - especially with deaths. I've seen so many movies that have a graveyard scene shot in the middle of a rain storm. Yes, it enhances the sadness.  Yes, the majority of people seem to be quite a bit gloomier on cloudy days. Yes, people tend to say that it's beautiful outside when the sun is shining high in a blue sky. But even so, can't rain be beautiful too?
        Today, as you all know, was quite a rainy day. At no hour did the sun shine too brightly behind the mass of darkened clouds above. I heard many comments at school about how frustrating rain is to some people, phrases like, "Aggghh. It's still raining?", "Why does it have to be so gross out?", and just plain "I hate rain". Well, on the contrary, I love rain. So much. It is literally my favorite form of precipitation. You want to know why? I, unlike the majority of the population, find it truly beautiful - even more so than a bright, sunny day. Little drops of water falling from the sky? It's like the world is raining tears of joy. The feeling of rain on your skin ("Unwritten" anyone?) is revitalizing, giving you a burst of energy with its chilling touch. And how could I leave out the fresh, comforting smell of rain as you stand beneath its misty blanket? I've come to associate that smell with Spring. New growth, new beginnings, new adventures to come.
        When you were a little kid, didn't you ever go out in the rain and splash around in the puddles? I sure did. I also loved jumping on the trampoline. The water made it bouncier and a whole lot more fun. I only had to be weary of thunder, because jumping on a trampoline in the middle of a thunderstorm may not be the best idea one can think of. However, when it does storm, turning off all of the lights and watching the magnificence of it all unfold through the window is another common hobby for those of us who appreciate rain and all it brings with it. Have you ever taken a nice, long walk in the rain? I did just today. In fact, I brought no umbrella. I hardly ever do. I don't feel the need to walk through life trying to avoid something so simple, yet majestic as rain. It is so refreshing to walk down glistening streets and just listen to the sounds of raindrops hitting the pavement. The peacefulness of a rainy day will always make me smile.
        To sum things up, who cares if you get soaking wet? Rain is fun and perplexing, a part of the world that we have always known and accepted. Even if people find it saddening or frustrating at times, they should at least be able to recognize it for what it is. Beautiful.

The Impact of Acting on the Actors Themselves (FW)

       Okay, so I know that I talk way too much about music and acting in my Free Write Posts - it's just who I am. Plus I can't ever think of other things I want to write about. Well, lately I've been feeling quite nostalgic as two weeks ago I performed in my last musical at Black River. I've been in plays and musicals at this school since fifth grade, and they've really shaped me into the person I am today.
        So, what I wanted to talk about was how important I think acting truly is, for the audience, yes, but also for the performers themselves. Let me explain. At least for me, there's no doubt that I love watching musicals and plays performed by others, but in all honesty, I find much more enjoyment in participating in plays myself. The feeling you get when you perform like that - it's just amazing. Being up on stage is something that is a reward in itself. That's why so many people choose to be in shows that don't pay them any money. They do it because they love to act. It allows them to express themselves in such a way that both the audience and the performers enjoy. I don't know much about the experience of performing professionally (like in movies or TV shows, etc.) but I know for sure that all forms of acting productions have huge impacts on the audience (of course), but even more so on the actors themselves.
       I honestly love plays and musicals. They allow actors to continuously hone their skills in both dramatic techniques, as well as in memorization. When I was in eighth grade, I didn't get into the musical Grease that our school put on. The next year, the choir directors switched halfway through the year and we therefore had no musical. At this point, I was so stressed out because I didn't have any lines to memorize. I know this may sound weird to some of you, but not having anything to memorize can be devastating for some people. It makes you feel like your mind is out of shape and needs a work-out to regain its full capacity. That's why I ended up getting involved with the Holland Civic Theatre that year. It felt so good to have something to memorize and block out again. Luckily, those were the only two years I didn't participate in a show at BR.
        It's also the people you meet along the way that draw actors to their hobby. Being involved in a show usually causes you to grow close to the cast you are working with. That's also why no show is ever the same experience. Different people are involved and it's always so sad on closing night when you realize that you may not ever be in a show with these exact same people again. I'm sure there are casts that some people can't stand to be around, but I've been fortunate enough to have great people to work with in all of the productions I've been in so far.
        Sometimes I wonder why I love acting so much. I guess it's because something about becoming a different person - a character in a story - is just so intriguing to me. You end up getting so enveloped by that new persona that they almost become a part of you. Sometimes they even effect your daily life. For instance, after playing Dorothy Gale in The Wizard of Oz, I couldn't stop saying things with "Oh" in them because I said them so much in the play (seriously, I said "Oh my!" and "Oh dear!" and just plain "Oh!" like fifty times in that show). I still, to this day, say "Oh my goodness!" instead of saying "Oh my gosh" like I used to before tenth grade. Another example is how in the months before performing "The Boyfriend", me and my friends would always accidentally say certain phrases in a British accent before realizing that we were doing it. The things we pick up from plays...
        Okay, so by now I'm probably boring you from going on a tangent about the impacts of acting on actors, so I'll leave it at that for now. For any of you who haven't participated in any theatrical productions, I challenge you to do so sometime in the future. Acting is one amazing experience. It may seem strange or hard if you've never really done it before, but you never know, maybe you're amazing at acting and you never knew because you never tried. Haha! Well, I'll stop writing now. :)
     
     

Reading Deeper into the Ganguli Family's Life (IR)

        I am now about two-thirds through The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri. For the most part I am still enjoying the book, but there was this super long stretch where I just got bored with the content. The beginning had lot's of things happening very quickly and time gaps further boosted the pace of the story. Once Gogol was in his late twenties, however, Lahiri slowed down the pace a lot. This wouldn't be a bad thing, as it provides more development for certain aspects of Gogol's character, except for the fact that the events within this section of the book just weren't as compelling to read. It didn't help that I got annoyed with some of the characters - mainly Gogol and Maxine. I really have enjoyed the parts about Gogol's parents. They're own life story is interesting to read about. Lahiri hasn't really focused in on Sonia as much as the other characters, and I kind of wish that she would, simply to retain a sense of balance and understanding of the Ganguli family in its entirety. On the other hand, her personal life is not as relevant to the main story line, which encompasses Gogol and his own experiences throughout life.
        The boring section in the book did end after a while though. When Gogol's father dies from a heart attack, the plot takes a new turn. So many things start happening as the family struggles to adjust to the sudden death of of their beloved family member. Although it was devastating or the characters, I feel like they almost needed something like this to happen, just to get their lives together again. Ashima was too dependent on everyone else and needed to learn how to stand on her own two feet, at least with a little less support. Sonia felt very distant throughout the novel, very rarely appearing to take part in the family's main story line. By moving back to help her mother, Sonia could pick up past relationships and establish a better connection with her family.
        And then there's Gogol. Gogol had been drifting through life, simply trying to find an escape from his family's history and beliefs. By constantly pushing himself away from those that he truly knew, Gogol was concealing the truth that he loved his family and its traditions more than he wanted to admit. This shows when he starts pushing away from Maxine and connecting better with his mother and sister, as well as honoring his father's memories with a melancholy persona. So, even though it's heart-wrenching to lose a family member in the blink of an eye, I feel like Gogol's character especially needed such a tragedy to occur in order to stop making lame excuses and feats of denial and finally accept who he is, the background he is from, and the type of person he wants to be. Therefore, I think that this event will slowly lead to a resolution for the various conflicts in the novel. So, I guess I'll see where the story leads next.

The Namesake (IR)

        Believe it or not, we're reading our last independent reading book for AP Lit. Crazy, I know. Well, for my last group book, I'm reading The Namesake, by Jhumpa Lahiri. If you remember correctly, Jhumpa Lahiri was also the author of Interpreter of Maladies. I love the style she writes with -- it's crisp, clear, descriptive, and easy to follow. The phrases flow very smoothly, unlike some books I've read this year (a.k.a. The Sound and the Fury and Heart of Darkness). The only problem I had with Interpreter of Maladies was that because it was made up of short stories, you couldn't get very attached to the characters or the events that occurred. The Namesake, however, makes it possible. It's a complete novel rather than another set of short stories. Therefore, it's easier to let myself relax into the story-line and let it all seep in gradually. It makes Lahiri's writing a whole lot more enjoyable.
        The Namesake is like taking one of Lahiri's short stories to the next level, lengthening it into a bigger picture. It follows a family from India as they grow accustomed to the ways of America. After the introduction of Ashoke and Ashima Ganguli, new to America and trying their best to settle in, the story focuses in on the birth of their first child. The newly-fledged parents have difficulty thinking of a name to put on the boy's birth certificate, as it was custom in their culture for other family members to give the child a "good" or formal name, and then to give the child a more familiar second name -- a "pet" name -- that would be used with family only. Ashima and Ashoke, new to the identification system used throughout America, end up putting what would be the child's pet name on the birth certificate. And so, Gogol Ganguli is born.
        The main sense of conflict within the story so far is the prominent hardships that come with a shifting of cultures for the family. Here are just a few: Ashima has great homesickness for her old home in Calcutta, Ashoke must grow accustomed to the ways of America while at the same time raising a family, and Gogol and Sonia (Gogol's younger sister who is born a few years after him) grow up in a family with different customs than those that they learn in school. One of the recurring conflicting elements of the story is Gogol's name. He can't seem to find anyone in his country with the same name, nor can many pronounce it right. It doesn't bother him too much when he's little, but once he gets a bit older, he starts to see the downsides of his name. To make matters worse, he slowly learns the truth of his namesake (hence the title) Nikolai Gogol, a historic figure who wasn't quite as amazing a person as his parents had always made him out to be. All of these conflicts ebb within the pages, magnified slowly over time.
        Speaking of time, Lahiri uses many time jumps in the book. In my opinion, these are performed brilliantly, skipping a few years and picking up the story in a spot in the Ganguli's life that easily connects back to the past. There was one spot where I missed the transition into one of Ashoke's flashbacks and got slightly disoriented about time and location, but I was able to pick up the plot again quickly enough.
        The character development tops everything off. Lahiri has a way of sharing the thoughts of each of the individual characters rather than just one, making the story much more constructive. I really like how The Namesake is written. I'm not too far into it yet, but I feel like it's going to be a very good book. Onto the next chapter! :)

There Will Come Soft Rains (PR)

There Will Come Soft Rains

Sara Teasdale, 1884 - 1933

(War Time)

There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,

And swallows circling with their shimmering sound;

And wild plum trees in tremulous white,
And frogs in the pools singing at night,

Robins will wear their feathery fire       

Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire;

And not one will know of the war, not one

Will care at last when it is done.

Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree

If mankind perished utterly;

And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn,

Would scarcely know that we were gone.  

At the last BR choir concert, all of the choirs were singing songs with the theme of poetry. The middle school choir (Vocal Elements) was asked to sing "There Will Come Soft Rains", a piece based off of the poem by Sara Teasdale. I had to think extra hard about the words of this song because I was asked to conduct it as the Vocal Elements TA. Besides the excitement over the fact that I was going to get to conduct a song, I was also thrilled that it happened to be a song that I sang when I was in Vocal Elements in 6th grade (Time flies, doesn't it?). Of course, when I was in sixth grade all I thought about was getting the words ad pitches right rather than letting the meaning of those words sink in. The song lyrics aren't written exactly like the poem itself, but most of the words are the same. After looking at the piece again after six years, I saw that although this song is a beautiful piece with phrases of spring's magnificence (like in the first phrase -- "There will come..." to "sound") , it has a haunting element to it as well. Take last few stanzas. They talk of war and the destruction of mankind, not something one would expect in a shimmering song about spring. Seriously -- the melody and harmonies to the song are beautiful. Hidden behind that veil of beauty, however, is what I interpreted as a statement about the world itself. While history plays through it's course, nature prevails. People fight, war breaks out, traumatic events occur that change the outlook on life itself and still, the natural world continues on, never skipping a beat. The animals continue to live, the plants continue to grow, and the world continues moving forward.
        In the musical score, a phrase that doesn't actually appear in the poem was added to form the chorus. The pre-chorus consists of the poem's last three stanzas, ending on the sorrowful idea that Spring (being personified as a living being) would never even notice if mankind disappeared from the world, perishing in its own spiral of destruction. Then, the piece leads into a powerful cascading melody -- written as "And it will rain." "It will rain" is then repeated twice more to put more emphasis on the fact that the world still cries out for the tragedies that take place within it. Nature may be able to keep on living without humans, but the world is so much better with them. While there is tragedy within the world, there is also greatness and hope. Good people live and good things happen, as do the bad. This is one of the reasons I prefer the lyrics to the song based on the poem rather than the poem itself. I really liked that added-in phrase "It will rain". It really connected the two aspects of humanity and nature in three simple words. I may be biased from being a choir person, but it's the way I feel. The poem could be interpreted in different ways as well, but this was the level I got to after thoroughly analyzing my choir music. Ha! Well, I'll post a video I found on youtube so that you can actually see what I'm talking about. You can tell from the music the melancholy feeling that comes layered beneath the beauty -- especially in the pre-chorus. :)

*Things Fall Apart* Versus *Mulan* (CC)

        Okay I know this is a little bit unrelated to our class discussions at the moment, but the whole theme of women being undervalued as less important than they actually are has gotten me thinking about just how great the movie Mulan is. Oh yes, Disney. When I was younger I watched so many Disney movies. I had a VHS player in my room so I would watch the same movie every single night for like three months and then change it, because I loved falling asleep to the music and story lines. For a while it was Beauty in the Beast. And then it became Mulan after one of my sisters rented it from the library and had to pay a fine to buy the movie after we lost it for a month. Then we found it, and I watched it. Over and over and over again. Let me just say, I have no regrets. Mulan is one of my favorite Disney movies of all time. I think one of the reasons I loved it so much was that Mulan had so much heart as a character -- she was brave, and stuck to her own beliefs of what was right rather than obeying the moral standard. Pretending to be a boy marching off to war may have seemed an impossible task to her in the beginning, but she pulled through after putting in hard work and effort, and in the end proved that women could be just as brave and capable as men.
        One of the many reasons I haven't really enjoyed reading Things Fall Apart so far is that it takes place in a culture that simply brushes aside the views of women. For instance -- take this quote from the book:

“Ikemefuna came into Okonkwo’s household. When Okonkwo brought him home that day he called his most senior wife and handed him over to her.
‘He belongs to the clan,’ he told her. ‘So look after him.’
‘Is he staying long with us?’ she asked.
‘Do what you are told, woman,’ Okonkwo thundered” (Achebe 14).

As displayed, Okonkwo takes advantage of his title of "father of the house" and burdens others with his own pending issues and forces them to simply accept them for what they are, no questions asked. The women encourage this behavior by obeying his whims and accepting his words without fighting about it. Although this is simply a part of such a culture, I don't support it. I much prefer everyone being able to deal with problems together, compromising rather than having one person declaring what should be done without consulting the other. I also disapprove of the idea that no one can speak out against an action the community wishes to take, even if it goes against moral reasoning, like the execution of Ikemefuna, an innocent boy who just happened to be forced into a deathly predicament. Why couldn't Okonkwo have spoken out for this boy? Ikemefuna was killed just like that, and no one dared to speak out for fear of going against the Oracle and the community itself.
        And this brings me back to Mulan. Mulan was scared to go against her community and their laws as well, but she still did it, because she felt in her heart that it was the right thing to do. Had she pulled an Okonkwo on the situation and simply sat back and watched, her father would have most likely died fighting in the war, and the great war itself could have been lost without the smart actions she was destined to make. What would have happened if Okonkwo had spoken out for Ikemefuna? Would the boy still be alive? Would the community have shunned Okonkwo? There's no telling what would have happened, as Okonkwo didn't take that risk. He decided to remain in his peaceful little community bubble, trying to ignore the splintering guilt building up inside him for going along with the common plan, and aiding in the execution of a boy he once thought of as his own son. In terms of characters and their choices, I much prefer Mulan's story.

Concluding Thoughts on *The Scarlet Letter* (IR)

     

        I recently finished reading The Scarlet Letter. I have to say, I enjoyed the book a whole lot more than I initially thought I would. The plot was really pretty interesting and I was always wondering what would happen next. Also, the text was, for the most part, straight forward. There were, of course, times when I had to reread a few sentences to make sense of what had happened, but that's reasonable for a pre-1900s novel. Compared to other older books, The Scarlet Letter was written wonderfully. I have enjoyed reading this book much more than The Sound and the Fury and Heart of Darkness. The plot is captivating and the character development adds another element to the story.
       However, that doesn't mean I liked all of the characters. I mainly liked Hester and her great willpower to stay strong when everyone was against her. Arthur Dimmesdale was okay, and I obviously disliked Roger Chillingsworth, seeing as he was the antagonist of the novel and always caused trouble for Hester. And then there's Pearl. Those of us in The Scarlet Letter reading group refer to her as "the devil child". She comes into the story as this strange little girl who grew up alone in exile with her mother and seems to find joy in her mother's anguish. Pearl has a sense of pride in the fact that she is the child of the woman with the embroidered scarlet letter on her gown, and she is therefore convinced that she is special compared to the other children in her community. She also acts very wild and appears as more of a rebellious little girl. When around other children, she acts tough and harshly, never having the opportunity to make friends or establish bonds with others. This is most likely due to the fact that she has lived in isolation with only her mother, but I still dislike her attitude and actions throughout the book. She knows that the scarlet letter is emotionally painful to her mother, yet she does whatever she can to remind Hester that it is there. The one time in the book that Hester actually takes the letter off, Pearl freaks out and throws a temper tantrum. She simply won't accept the fact that her mother took it off. Her stubbornness forces Hester to cave in and put it back on and Pearl becomes agreeable again. Okay that was a long rant about Pearl. I just never really grew fond of her character. Let's just say, she annoyed me deeply.
         Anyways, The Scarlet Letter is a really good book. It shows a true struggle for redemption and the ability to stay strong. I may not have enjoyed every moment of it, but overall, the story was great. The words were full of meaning and flowed smoothly along. I'm glad to have had the chance to read The Scarlet Letter. It's a story I shall never forget.

Taking a Look at Some Older Music (CC)

      So, as soon as we started talking about the Heart of Darkness unit in class, I remembered a song that I have grown to love. I would hear and read words like "Congo", "civilization", and "native population", and phrases from the song would keep on replaying in my head. Now, every time I open Heart of Darkness I hear "Bongo bongo bongo, I don't want to leave the Congo, oh no no no no no!". Not many of you probably know of this song, as it's an older one from 1947. It's called "Civilization" and is sung by The Andrews Sisters and Danny Kaye.
        The song itself is a humorous satire about a group of "civilized" people who are settling into a native village, trying to convince them that "civilization is a thing for [them] to see". The song is portrayed in the view of the native "savages" and shows that they don't really want to join the "civilized" people. They are happy in the Congo and would rather not change the way they live. Here, take a moment and listen to it if you have the time:

         I love this piece, as it's catchy and full of life. The humor embedded within the song makes it even greater. Normally I don't listen to this type of music, but I have to admit, oldies hold a special place in my heart. I love songs like "Dear Laughing Doubters", "Everybody Wants to Rule the World", "Don't Stop Believin'", "Imagine", and so many more. They have a certain feel to them that differs from a lot of the music from the present.
        Take, for instance, "The Sound of Music". This movie musical was huge. Produced in 1965, Julie Andrews and the other actors and actresses just made the movie thrive. The music was so warm, so real, that families all over the world fell in love with it. In 2013, "The Sound of Music Live" was performed, with Carrie Underwood as the lead. Although many people enjoyed the production itself, there was a different feel to it than that original movie. There is something sentimental about these old musicals - "The Sound of Music", "Fiddler on the Roof", "Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", "Annie", etc. - that it would be impossible to replace them. Sure, some remakes can be pretty popular. "Charlie and the Chocolate Family" and many "Annie" remakes were very successful. However, the old versions can never be replaced. Both versions can be amazing, but they don't often completely cover up the original. Imagine if someone decided to film a new "Wizard of Oz". It would be extremely difficult for people to forget the heart-felt voice of Judy Garland in this well-known classic. We can try to recreate works of art in a different light, but we can't replace them, nor can we replicate them in all of their beauty.
        Okay, so this conversation may have drifted away from the Congo on a long chain of thoughts, but the overall point is, the music of the past should never be forgotten. It is part of what has allowed music to evolve as far as it has now. Music is always changing, rearranging, becoming something more than it was before. That's what makes every song a piece of art - expressive and unique in its own distinct way.

Our Hobbies Define Us (FW)

        Today I found out that I got into this thing called the MSVMA All-State Honors choir for the second time. It's the third stage of a yearly high school choir competition that takes a really long time to explain, so I'll skip the explanation and just say that the All-State level is a choir of around 120 of the most talented singers in the state. This is something that I honestly freak out about. I love having the challenge to memorize five new songs in like a month, including those tiny (yet not so tiny) details like exact timing, pronunciation (for the foreign pieces), and interpretation. The notes are the easy part. It's challenging, yes, but I love every minute of it. The point is, I am super thrilled about this (more than you can even imagine) while whoever is reading this is probably thinking something along the lines of  "Who in the world takes on extra work like that and finds things like memorizing music fun and entertaining?". And we come to the point of my blog post: Our hobbies define us.
        This is something I've always found intriguing. How is it that one person can excel at one thing and then totally fail at another. I guess it's because we hone our skills in one main area or a few, and then the rest of our abilities in life kind of waver. Some people enjoy sports and invest all of their time into them, others cannot even understand how they work. Some people are brilliant at playing piano, others have issues distinguishing the names of the keys. It all depends what your talents are and how much you enjoy doing those things. I find that a lot of times, what you are talented at becomes what you love to do.
        Of course, capability is another thing. I love to perform in musicals. I've got the acting and singing down, but the dancing part - that's another story (Ha! I am truly terrible at dancing). It's not that I don't want to dance - in fact I wish I could dance with the gracefulness of an actual dancer. No, the fact is that I might just not be capable of dancing in the first place. Sure, I can block out a few simple moves like the grapevine or the box step, but I don't think I will ever be able to dance easily like a dancer could. It's just not one of my strong points. Still, that doesn't stop me from trying. We all try at certain points in our lives to do things that we may not be at all good at. Sometimes we do so as a simple joke, other times because we actually want to get better at that specific task. And, as long as we have the potential for growth and are willing to work hard enough, we can, indeed, improve our abilities for that particular skill. If we don't have the capability to grow in that skill, however, improving can be nearly impossible.
        So, in the long run, we tend to stick with what we are good at, or with what we love to do. I love the fact that everyone is unique. We all come from different backgrounds and love to do different things. Sometimes that individuality brings us together, showing that people who like to do completely different things can still find joy in hanging out with each other. This works the other way too, of course. People with the same hobbies can be brought together in a special way as well - a bonding between individuals who all share the same or a similar hobby.
        Either way, having a hobby is good for us. It defines us for who we are. If I didn't sing all the time, I would be a very different person. In fact, it scares me as to how different my entire life would be. Seriously, imagine your own life without one of your greatest talents. How strange would your life have been? One simple difference can change the entire make-up of your very being. Quite terrifying, right? Well, I'm glad that we are who we are. Everyone has their own strengths, their own weaknesses, and their own lifestyles. It's part of what makes us human. A hobby is something we find joy in - something we can honestly say has changed our life for the better - something that gives us true meaning.

My First Look into *The Scarlet Letter* (IR)

     

        For the third independent reading book of the year, I find myself reading none other than The Scarlet Letter. I have always been quite a bit curious about this book, as I know others in my family who have read it and found it interesting. It's about a woman named Hester Prynne who gets punished by the Puritan community for committing the act of adultery. They force her to wear a scarlet letter "A" - hence the title - on her gown in order to plant a seed of guilt into her body and mind that will stick with her forever, never allowing her to forget this deed that she has done.

        The story has unfolded into a variety of interesting characters - Roger Chillingworth, Mr. Dimmesdale, and especially Hester's growing daughter - Pearl. Pearl is a key character, as her development in life reflects off of her mother's, as well as establishes her being as a living reminder of Hester's infamous crime. The members of the Puritan community scorn Hester for what she has done - even the children despise her - but to make matters worse, their hatred spreads all the way to Hester's innocent child, who in turn, toughens herself up from all of the ridicule. The story follows the mother and daughter through their struggle to live in a world that has been hardened to forgiveness. 

        The Scarlet Letter really causes you to sympathize with the protagonist. Hester's punishment makes her seem so lonely and isolated from the rest of her community, and I would never wish that on anybody. Everyone makes mistakes, some worse than others, but is it really fair to completely disown them? Okay, so I may be one of those optimistic people who believes in second chances. I know that in certain cases a second chance isn't really a good idea, but still, should we punish harshly, or learn to forgive the grave sins of others and move on to a brighter future, allowing them to learn from those past mistakes? I guess this is one of those books that really makes you think!

        Although I wouldn't declare this a favorite book, I am enjoying the story line quite a bit. It's interesting to follow this little duo of characters along on their journey for redemption. The writing style can be a little bit wordy in some spots, but I'm not complaining. Compared to the thick stream-of-consciousness style of my first independent reading book - The Sound and The Fury by William Faulkner - this novel is very well written. I find myself wanting to read more and more to see what events may ensue. Well, I shall be looking much further into The Scarlet Letter. Until the next time! :)

A Look at "If" by E.E. Cummings (PR)

                                       If

If freckles were lovely, and day was night,
And measles were nice and a lie warn’t a lie,
Life would be delight,—
But things couldn’t go right
For in such a sad plight
I wouldn’t be I.

If earth was heaven and now was hence,
And past was present, and false was true,
There might be some sense
But I’d be in suspense
For on such a pretense
You wouldn’t be you.

If fear was plucky, and globes were square,
And dirt was cleanly and tears were glee
Things would seem fair,—
Yet they’d all despair,
For if here was there
We wouldn’t be we.

- E.E. Cummings

     
        The first time I read this poem, I really liked it. The structure, the rhyme scheme, and especially the overall meaning - they all stood out to me as very well balanced. I interpreted the piece as a statement by Cummings that all of the pain and struggles that we, as humans, go through each and every day of our lives are what define us. How we deal with those obstacles makes us who we are. It is very widely known that we learn through our mistakes, analyzing what we have done wrong or could have done better, and adjusting ourselves to grow in our capabilities. Cummings uses phrases like, "earth was heaven" and "tears were glee" to describe a world of perfection in terms of all things being good and beautiful. However, he shows through words like "despair", "suspense", and "sad plight" that a world where all of these ideas are opposite would be corrupted, as no one would be the person they were meant to be. Life wouldn't play out the same if we never struggled. All of those times we wake up dreading the day to come only make us stronger once we get through it all. If everything was mixed around and those struggles weren't really struggles, life would become like a failed attempt at a utopia, as we would never really grow, never strengthen our minds and hearts for the reality of life. By living in a world with sadness and deceit, we enable ourselves to become distinct individuals - individuals who have lived unique lives which define us through our experiences. We have good days and bad days, but without the bad ones, how would we truly appreciate the good? If every day was sunny, wouldn't we miss the rain? Life is comprised of not only good things, but bad things as well. It helps to maintain a sort of balance (just like the poem) - building us up with all sorts of experiences while challenging us to try our best in life to succeed in whatever it is our hearts desire. 

        So, that's how I interpreted the poem. It could have a different meaning for different people, but this is what makes the most sense to me. The dynamics of the poem were all important - each individual element. The three six-line stanzas, the listing of opposites, and the final line of each stanza. They all contribute to the balance of the poem, as well as its meaning. I truly loved the structure of Cummings' piece. By tying everything together within the poem, he made the words and meaning sink in much more effectively than they could have if written any differently. I love reading well-balanced poems such as these. They make everything tie together and simply make so much more sense. Until the next poem. :)