The Golden Compass

There was much to admire about this book, but enough to leave a distaste in my mouth for the overall reading experience. I had trouble reading names in this book, first and foremost. I found myself flipping pages trying to remember who was who, and reading words two times, trying to pronounce them correctly. I am kind of OCD about that. Even Lyra was killing me not knowing how to say her name. I went with "Leera" over "Lie-ra" but don't think I wasn't second guessing myself for most of the book. Some children might have enjoyed the mystic names and intrinsic peoples of the book but I surely didn't. Plus, the whole anti-establishment movement (kind of reminds me of the go-green cult in present day society) really doesn't sit well with me. I would rather read a Christian Allegory than a fantasy reality (good oxymoron). Nonetheless, here are some further thoughts about the book:

The Daemon in the book is what I (I don't want to say enjoyed) the most but what had me nodding my head in agreement. I do believe in soul. In a spirit. Outside the novel I do believe that's true. So to have a part of my reality come into play with this fantasy fiction, there was a connection that could be appreciated. The whole intercision of the Daemon and person was a scary thought. Even the absoluteness of the Daemon after puberty is something which almost deals with death. In this real world the only thing that is absolute is death (and taxes we know..) So to have something be permanent and unchanged is as serious as death in that you can not fix what is done. It can not be undone. However the person themselves can be undone and the whole plurality of person vs daemon takes stage. Going back to pronunciation did anyone else pronounce Daemon like "Matt Damon"? Terrible. I was reading this hanging out with my Daemon, and thinking how absurd spelling is in The Golden Compass. The biggest problem I had with this book was staying interested and finishing. I wonder if anyone in the class enjoyed this book thoroughly and look forward to hearing from you. Maybe some of you can respond with your favorite moments in the book?

Christianity, Redux

Redux? I didn't want to visit it for a first time. If there's one thing you never discuss with a man it's religion and politics, because you will never swing him and he/she can never swing you away from your beliefs. I fail to understand why people can not fathom the simple reason why we are the way we are. If I show you a shirt and say is this shirt nice, you are likely to respond based on your beliefs. I can tell you this is the top of the line cotton with the newest fashion cuts, but if you don't like it, you just don't like it. Why people force their religion or beliefs on others is bewildering. It's not a belief anymore if you make someone 'believe' it. That's just me. Let's get into the reading:

I was content with reading The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I was never into fantasies as a child, and looking ahead I can see we will be talking about Dystopias. I'm not talking about The Golden Compass, just my normal ordinary life when religion comes up in class on Monday (*Zing). As far as The Lion goes, I think it's great, imaginative and a must read for children. Alternate universes engulf the imagination of young ones and can help build reading skills. The adjectives used in the book help describe what is not there and allows for readers to build vocabulary and reading skills. For example Lewis could have said "Her face was white" and stopped. Children would have maybe imagined their grandmothers or maybe a teacher with too much makeup.. anyone could have fit the mold of this white face, but by describing it as, "Not merely pale, but white like snow or paper or icing-sugar" Lewis allows for a child to then explore their imagination and press their minds to discover what this face looks like. The child could then jump to a polar bear or something else with a white, snow covered face. The word merely adds flavor to the sentencing, and with the context clues the child learns a new word which is how you build vocabulary as a young reader. He uses describing words (or adjectives as adults should say) which connect the child to the story. Children know what snow and paper look like, but surely can connect with icing sugar. Lewis didn't choose to say white like a 65' Thunderbird or white like Freddie Mercury's pants in 1985 at Wembley Stadium (mainly because the book was written in 1950) but you see how he picks his spots. I would love to analyze his writing more than make the comparison or argument as I am sure we will have in class over whether Aslan was Jesus or the Witch was Satan. But I understand we have units to cover so I will gladly try and add any input I have to the conversation :)

Children Favorites

As a child I read both The Cat in the Hat and Where the Wild Things Are. As I scrolled through YouTube not longer than 3 weeks ago I came across a Cat in the Hat DVD Trailer >>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IL-NdQXyeE&feature=related

First let me begin with my dislike for any movie adaptation of these classic books. When you watch the movie you get the sense that something is left out and you feel empty when watching them. However, upon further analysis you may want to consider the opposite. It isn't that the film leaves out certain qualities or traits  that leave us feeling empty. It's that they add certain features an effects that fill up our appetite for imagination. As a child, you are left free to "fill in the blanks" with your own imagination. Outside of what is concrete and written, you can imagine 'Things 1 & 2' and monsters any way you choose. It is this aspect of the books that trump any film adaptation. A great story is only half written. The other half needs to be imagined and connected with the reader. Looking back and re-reading these books I felt that the books were simple and not as complex or rich as I once believed them to be. I realized that the books never changed in X amount of years. I changed. I stopped filling in voids and could not make connections. Whereas I would before admire the Cat in the Hat's ability to fix any situation, I stray from that and ponder the unreasonable ability to clean a house with such grandeur. It never once occurred to me as a child that this was a talking cat roaming the world with gay abandon. My imagination let me fill in whatever voids this story had, and the empty crevasses were filled with my own plot "richeners", which led to a complete reading of these children books.

In a similar note, it wasn't too long ago, shortly after the film adaptation came out, but long enough for it to find it's way to Netflix, I watched Where the Wild Things Are. I was disappointed. I remember the transition from Max making his way to the Island took years in my head as a child. In the movie the plot moves so quick and it just didn't feel as special. These books were not meant to be recreated or fabricated in different ways. They are books. They are meant to be read and admired as such. I plan on bringing in one of my favorite books to class, one which connects adulthood with childhood, and is another favorite for children.

Harriet the Spy

In a breath of fresh, fishy air, we move away from historical works of fiction to a more centered, plot derived work with Harriet the Spy. This cunning display of children's honesty, shows how a simple journal, and better yet children can be mean. They define the saying "The truth hurts". When reading this red flags hit when I realized that the protagonist in the story is actually someone I wouldn't want my children to be necessarily. Whereas the other female protagonists have had a curiosity  Harriet has a strange one. It's unusual for a child to want to be a spy, yet I can only imagine what this novel would have done to children years ago. When I was younger and read "Holes" I told my friends to call me zero and was biting into (unsweetened) onions for show.

I think Children have the ability to follow what they read more so than any reading group. Whereas an adult might read a book like "Blink" and try to meta-cognitively adjust their life, children are more likely to copy and mimic actions that amuse them. I wouldn't be surprised to see my child carrying a notebook analyzing my ugly face wondering why my mother would or would not hate me. Harriet is a great role model to children, not of what to do necessarily, but what to expect if you are honest, yet hurtful to your friends, family and neighbors. Parents could use this book maybe and turn her role model into an example model of what not to do. But on the flip side, kids will be kids and the best lessons are learned through experience. Harriet learned many lessons when she loses the journal. She learns to keep her valuables. She learns not to put all her eggs of information and "spy secrets" in one spot. She learns what can happen if you lose a friend, and how friends quickly become enemies.

I did like this book, but I wasn't into the spy or investigator scene. I remember my principal reading Nate The Great to us when I was in 3rd grade thinking this is lame as heck. But I wasn't an ordinary 3rd grader. I was like Harriet now that I think about it, always aware of my surroundings trying to dissect everything. Maybe I'm much more analytical now of the work because I am trying to view it from a different perspective? Not too sure, I might have like or even loved this book when I was younger but I'll never know. Regardless, interesting read and a good change of pace for the upcoming works I think!

Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry

It's amazing how far we've come from lynching black people for racist reasons, to electing them as Presidents of America, showing our 360 on how we view race. Just like voting, race comes first and gender comes second, so I guess we can plan to see a female in office not too far from the present. Nonetheless, Roll of Thunder, Hear Me Cry is a good children's fictional work that depicts the elements of racism in the 1930's so well. A Child's imagination can not possibly imagine humans torturing other humans, whether it is burning them alive, the way they speak and act towards them or how they could frame each other, children aren't really exposed to that sort of thing, and are in fact more innocent. I believe this book would hit the strongest notes with teenagers ages thirteen to fifteen, because they can connect the dots and realize why people act the way they do, while shaping their views going into adulthood. They can connect with Stacey whether it be the fact that he is facing a life dilemma of growing up or staying a kid, or the fact that T.J is a trouble making "friend". We all have had our share of "friends" who we may no longer talk to for one reason or another, and that's one aspect that is not given enough light to children, I believe. But that was not the purpose of the book, and instead it choose to tackle racism and the overcoming of that trench of darkness.

In McDowell's analysis of the child agency in the novel, she speaks about how the oppressive standard of living strengthens the characters. An interesting point she makes is how the oral tradition of history is more beneficial than the learned book tradition of common day students in that it is a "lived" history and students/family members are able to memorize dates and connect with the events because it is real, alive and special to them. I think it is important to note how she examines the "infantizing" of African Americans. I never gave it too much thought before but that is a good connection, and a fine way to explain how whites have treated blacks, for lack of a better word, in the last century. Everything they do is aimed to "inferiorize" (my word, add it to Websters) the blacks as much as possible. White supremacy was very much a real attitude and still is in certain parts of the world. It's been a long way coming, and we still have a long way to go, but this novel is a good starting point for children looking to gain a sense of the past, while trying to shape their outlooks for the future.

Understanding the Ojibwa

Although fictional, you have to believe that this book stills gives a good overview about the Ojibwa. One thing I had trouble with is the lack of affection adults have towards different cultures or the history of cultures. Anytime I think about Native Americans  I always remember my childhood, whether it be books, movies or storytellers alike. Why do we stop caring about Native Americans as we get older? They too care about family. They too have stories to share that discipline the youth and give us scruples to follow. Regardless, in almost a paradox, here I am as an adult learning or relearning about Native Americans, although I can't say I remember Ojibwa Indians as a child. Its good to see Erdrich spread her culture and explain to the world her customs and traditions, I think. It was cool to get the two views right back to back, between ordinary white folks, and ordinary Native Americans. The Indian life reminds me of the country life, where you work hard, play well, and enjoy the simple things in the world. Can you imagine The Ingalls or Omakayas family working in downtown Detroit at Quicken Loans  No, they are above that lifestyle. Can you imagine how weird it would be to explain small pox or malaria and the reasons for it's spread or how to cure yourself from getting it? I'm sure they would prefer hearty soup, a blanket and a fire place to sweat it out rather than some Tylenol and antibiotics for everyday sicknesses.(Well everyday to us. They were deadly to them.) But about the book, I believe the writing style can be appreciated for its enticing narrative. There's something about "the struggle" that is so contagious when reading, that the reader wants all to go well, but subconsciously enjoys overcoming hardships, whether its disease, or food shortage or property problems. By having these stories filled with morals the reader is forced to read with a purpose, and aggressively engages in the book.

Little House

You want to talk about nostalgia? This book takes me back to grade school when we would read Little House and play "The Oregon Trail" on our computers. I was never into this book as much as other kids were, but I have a new found respect for it if you will. I recently moved for the first time in my life and I had some hard emotions giving up the only house I ever knew, with all the memories and good times. The security of moving into an unknown area felt weak at best. I can only imagine how the family felt from the point of view of everyone in the house. As a father I'm sure Ol' Pa Chuck had a lot on his plate to bear, not knowing the Unknown. Ma was trying to gather the family and keep them together during the rough times and the kids were worried about insignificant oddities outside of survival. I think its cool though looking back now how as a kid I seen this as a book, but now I can appreciate it's historical merit. We tend to stop telling the youth stories now through families and I see a noticeable shift to computers as the means of sharing social stories and whatnot. What would have happened if Ma, Pa and Mary couldn't tell Laura the story? We would lose out on one of the greatest American Historical series in literature. As I said on day one I am a fanatic of words and language, which is why I believe I have such an eclectic taste in music, so from this book I can extract what language was like in the 1800's and that is so unique. I'll never live in the past, at least I don't think. This book tells a story that is so important for that regard. Shouldn't we all write our stories down? Won't our stories be meaningful to students of the year 3000 learning about the 21st Century? These are all things I believe we should do in order to follow the lead the Ingalls shared.

Kim

Being at Wayne State we see plenty of homeless people. The other day I was eating at Epicurious which has a $5 one topping large pizza. I ordered it and couldn't finish it all by myself so I took a carry out with food with me. As I walked to the UGL I seen a homeless man picking for cans. I figured I was full and he could use the meal so I asked him if he would like some pizza. The man nodded and took it graciously and sat down instantly to eat the meal. I really had nothing to do that day so I decided to talk to him, and try to understand why he was where he was. As I spoke I noticed he had a hard time talking. After about 15 minutes I had conversed with the man (his name is David) to write a short story about his life. Turns out he was impaired as a child and went to a special school because he couldn't talk. He likes Wayne State and every Sunday a man gives him $50. He seemed content with his life for the most part but I couldn't shake that this man probably went through his entire life thinking this is how life is. For him this struggle was not so. It was normal. He told me his favorite food is pizza and hamburgers. I'll be sure to take him out to eat sometime if I catch him again.

I could connect to Kim the same way I connected to David. I admire the toughness of being able to adapt to life, and accepting whatever life you live. Sometimes I wish I would have served my country rather than come to college, for I feel a larger sense of nobility sacrificing my time for a greater purpose. I had a tough time with this book, not because the language was hard, but I couldn't read it without pondering life every 30 minutes. I don't know if anyone has ever been through specific hardships but if anyone could tell me about life as an orphan from personal experience I'd love to hear.

What William Blake Showed Me

You ever have a person who uses a particular vocabulary or even their own created language that rubs on you? William Blake is that type of guy. With his works, the more I read, the more I begin to speak like him and suddenly my life becomes a poetic, illustrative dialect. Unfortunately, nobody seems to like the way I speak after reading Blake so it doesn't go very far. But one thing I picked up on is his love for language and bringing nature into his works. For the last two days I've been referring to every child as a lamb, which even in modern day society may make sense, its still very unusual. He seems to incorporate the lamb and the child in his works quite frequently, most notably in "the lamb" "spring" and "tyger" I felt (excuse the lack of capitalization). But the language is capturing, and his word choice rings with me, for example:

When he says, "He is meek, he is mild" (The Lamb). I love the word meek here because although meek and mild (alliteration) are pretty similar to the palate, he sifts these words out that somehow still contrast each other. It's kind of like when you find two things that are similar, but after a complex and critical review you seem to find a distinction. Meek is definitely a word I'm adding to my temporary (hopefully longterm) vocabulary.

The connotation I get with a lamb is somehow innocence, which I think plays well with his whole Songs of Innocent/Songs of Experience classification. There's depth in his works and I see how he relates to the idea of a child in his poems. The one thing I would rather see him do however is have a much more lost train of thought so to speak. I want to see him explain things to the child (Uhh I mean Lamb) in an unfiltered stream of consciousness. Too late to request things from Blake now, I suppose :/

The Puritan Brand

I really love children, not in the "To Catch a Predator" way, but everything about them makes me smile. There's something about them, the innocence mixed with the honesty its so brutally pure. They have potential to grow, yet are sensitive in every aspect. I do not believe Puritans were alone in believing in incorporating God in everything they do, but they have a drive to constantly put effort into upbringing children. I forget where I read it, but someone was researching why adults and humans in a general sense care for children so much. It was found that the reason we invest in our children is because that is our sole possession, and our only representation in the afterlife. What makes us as humans want to continue living and spread our legacy to the world even after we die? Even in times of War, between the most gruesome enemies, there is a basic human principle that children should be off limits. Why do they get this preferential treatment and immunity? Just some questions. Now for some reflection.

It's interesting to see how there has been a shift in recent years from children learning through literature to children learning through television and internet. One person I'm going to talk about this semester I feel is my niece Yara. I've been able to watch her progress over the course of the last year and can see how she picks up language from Dora and certain words that we read to her from her leapfrog books. Children are so different because you need to catch their attention completely to be able to teach them methods. Children really are "Blank Slates" and we need to fill them up accordingly.  The methods which we choose will be continually revolutionized to adjust to the ever growing technologies of the future.

Genre's and Television

Another thing discussed in class that I want to talk about here real quick is when it was said that a Genre defined by a group of people. When that was said I couldn't stop thinking about television and more importantly distinctions between men and women. When you want to depict a male watching TV the first thing that comes to mind is ESPN, SportsCenter or and other sports television. In contrast, when you think of females you are quick to depict LifeTime, ABC Family or any soap opera on local channels. Granted these are broad (I have enjoyed some lifetimes movies myself- but I never cried I swear) but its interesting how these different "Genre's" of television are defined by a group of people. Any thoughts?

Second Day of Class

 So here I am two hours early on campus at the UGL because I didnt want to drive an extra 20 minutes on the highway behind stop and go traffic. But can you blame me? Where else in the world would you find an angry bunch of hundreds of cars filled with people who are upset because they think their time is too valuable to be wasted slowly moving through traffic? Driving is a mentally anguishing thing if your mind is not in the right place. I'm not much of a talker but there were some things in class that I thought about while everyone focussed on writing their stories.I think it was said that children are brave. I'm not so sure about that. I was sitting in my backyard the other day with my neice who is less than two years old. She was throwing a tennis ball around the grass when the ball went near the shed with the hornets nest. As she "Bravely" went to get the ball I was dreading my life wishing she could have been inside away from the flying heart-attacks. You see as a kid I was stung on my ear and because it left a bitter taste in my mouth I never liked anything that could sting. I picked her up and took her inside, no harm, no foul. But this was one instance where ignorance was bliss, most definetly. On the flip side, when we went to the basement to watch cartoons and I turned off the lights she started crying. I dont know if she believes in monsters yet, but something scared her. This ignorance was not so blissful. So in answering are children brave, I think it is sufficient to answer, "Ignorance is Bliss" =)

First Blog Post

I'm trying to figure out how all of this works. This is pretty user friendly, yet also rich in detail. I want to try and publish this and see if I can continue writing..