Part 1: The Mother Tongue

 

English: The only language with the word "artsy-fartsy"

While rummaging through book at home, I happened across the book shown above. The title immediately sparked my interest (after all, English is my mother tongue). I am hoping that The Mother Tongue will add to my knowledge of English, the universal language, and allow me to become a better writer. I have lots of high expectations, considering my parents praised this book highly when I told them I was going to read it. On top of that, the back of the book reads:

"Bill Bryson has joyfully mined the rich ore of English to produce a treasure of a book about the treasure of our tongue." --Richard Lederer, author of Crazy English

Bill Bryson was an American journalist who worked for The Times, in London, and The Independent. He wrote many bestselling travel books, including The Lost Continent, which documented his journey around the United States from 1987 to 1988. His books include A Dictionary of Troublesome Words, A Walk in the Woods, and A Short History of Nearly Everything.

I will also be starting a "beautiful-word-definition" for the posts of The Mother Tongue (I find doing this is relevant to the book), so here we go:

Links:

• Bill Bryson's website

Picture Source ("The Mother Tongue"): https://img0.etsystatic.com/032/0/6776881/il_340x270.570389374_jz2c.jpg
Picture Souce ("fernweh"): http://img.pandawhale.com/post-25612-fernweh-meaning-gif-aDM0.gif

Part 3: 1984

Next, they'll be saying "2 + 2 = 5"...Oh wait, they already did.

Am I feeling depressed today? Why, yes I am. Thanks to George Orwell's 1984, I'm feeling very, very depressed (this means you can assume that there will be majorly-extreme (yeah, obviously that's not proper grammar...I think...) SPOILER ALERT, aka you'll know the ending of the book by the end of this post). Considering I had a weird feeling after reading Animal Farm, this really is no surprise to me. 

The contradictory phrases shown in the picture above compose the slogan of the Party. Let's start out with "War is peace". In Oceania, that is somewhat true. In the beginning, there is a "war" (this is what the Party tells everyone) between Oceania and Eurasia (the enemy shifts to Eastasia later on, which shows how unreliable the Party is). This war unites all of the people against their enemy, so there is less fighting between "Oceanians" (just to clarify, I made that word up and I'll use it when I'm referring to the citizens of Oceania). Not only that, the Party forces the Outer Party Members to watch the Two Minutes Hate. During this time, the face of Emmanuel Goldstein, who is supposedly a traitor and the dominant enemy of Oceania, appears on a telescreen. Everyone watching is allowed to scream and curse at his face. In my opinion, this is genius. It's a great way for Oceanians to vent their emotions, so they won't feel the need to go against the Party, and to unite everyone. Next, "Freedom is slavery". All Oceanians are slaves to the Party, and because of this, they are free from the dangers of choice and free will. Other than that, I don't have much to say about this phrase. The Party probably incorporated it into their slogan in order to trick Oceanians into thinking that the way they were scrutinized and controlled by the Party was acceptable and tolerable. Lastly, "Ignorance is strength". Since Oceanians tolerate the Party's ruthless hold, this ignorance has strengthened the Party's rule.

While Animal Farm portrayed Communism in Russia, I felt that 1984 was symbolic of Nazi rule. Big Brother, the dictator of Oceania and ruler of the Party, symbolizes Adolf Hitler. Revisit the picture in the second post of Big Brother, and the mustache gives you a definite feeling of recognition, doesn't it? Not only that, the Party blames all of Oceania's troubles on Goldstein while Hitler blamed

Germany's troubles on Jews. This rallied all of the people against a common enemy and united them (just as I explained above in "War is peace"). It gets even better. Just as the Party has propaganda posters with Big Brother's face plastered everywhere, Nazi propaganda was just as prevalent. Whenever Hitler gave a speech (look it up on YouTube), the Germans were completely hypnotized by his voice, just as Oceanians love and cherish Big Brother. 

In the climax (here is the majorly-extreme SPOILER ALERT as I said I would include earlier), just as I predicted in the second post, Winston and Julia are caught by the Thought Police. An old man, Winston thought he could trust, turned out to be a secret-Thought-Police-agent. And not only that, O'Brien, who Winston thought was a member of the Brotherhood (rebels against Big Brother, supposedly led by Goldstein), was actually a loyal Party member. Part of O'Brien's job was to trick Oceanians, who wanted to join the Brotherhood, into thinking he was a member of the Brotherhood, then stabbing them in the back by capturing them. In a world where the government spies on all of its citizens and preys on their every move, everyone must wear masks and hide their inner and true selves. The following quote is an example of how Winston keeps his cool when telescreens are nearby:

"Winston turned round abruptly. He had set his features into the expression of quiet optimism which it was advisable to wear when facing the telescreen." (Orwell 7)

Sure, lots of websites say that 1984 depicts the consequences of a totalitarian government in the future, but it depicts our society too! Just as Winston must portray an image, the "good and obedient" citizen, we reflect a certain image of ourselves to others. It's purely human nature. We pretend to be someone we're not in order to impress others and hide our inner selves. While Oceanians do it so that they are not vaporized, we may hide behind our faces in light of a social and/or life-or-death matter. 

After he is captured, Winston is thrown in a cell for a long time and tortured by O'Brien. O'Brien's goal is to alter Winston's mind into loving Big Brother and make him become an obedient slave. Although Winston tries to hold it out and tries to stick to his gut, he fails to stand up against O'Brien, especially when he is experiencing an enormous amount of pain. In the end, Winston succumbs to the dark side. This quote, from the last page of the book, exemplifies his love for Big Brother: 

"[Winston] gazed up at the enormous face [Big Brother]. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother." (Orwell 375-376)

Well, if you can't beat them, you might as well join them. See why I'm so depressed? Most dystopian books I've read are written so that the good guys win in the end. In 1984, the bad guys win! This dark ending demonstrates how the novel serves more as Orwell's premonition of the future and his warning to the world, than an entertaining and "And-they-lived-happily-ever-after" story.

Time for a Kurt Vonnegut story arc! This is what I believe represents 1984:

Picture Source: http://mayaeilam.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/maya_eilam_vonnegut.png

In the beginning, everything's just dandy. Winston goes to work, comes home, writes in his journal, etc. Then, things get better bit by bit when he meets Julia and begins to have a secret relationship with her. Winston is happy with her, but wait--there's more! Winston and Julia visit O'Brien in his apartment and tell him that they want to join the Brotherhood. Finally, they have hope that the world can be better when O'Brien "enlists" them and Winston receives the book...but oh no. O'Brien is actually a secret agent working for the Party. The story plunges down into a deep hole as Winston and Julia are captured by the Thought Police. What's even more depressing (as I've mentioned before), is that the book ends with Winston loving Big Brother. 

"And I believe that totalitarianism, if not fought against, could triumph again." -- George Orwell
Quote Source and essay about Orwell: http://www.theorwellreader.com/essays/sedlak.html

How soon could a loveless and heartless world of totalitarianism come into existence? Sooner or later we could all be under the rule of a ruthless dictator, Orwell forewarns in the quote above. But is this true? I have doubts that the United States will become a totalitarian government any time soon, since we Americans love to pride ourselves in our "democracy" and "republic". Additionally, we love to get our hands dirty with the doings and affairs of other countries, especially if it involves a dictator, a Communist party, the oppression of the people, a lack of human rights, etc. Although 1984 was a serious good-mood killer, there are deep lessons hidden among the pages. If only Orwell had written an allegory about Communist China...I would read that.

Picture (at top of page) Source: http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/wp-content/uploads/1984_2_2_small.jpg

Part 2: 1984

Before the NSA, we had this...

Is it me, or does Orwell have a personal vendetta against Communism/totalitarian governments? One-hundred and seventy pages in, and already, I've lost myself to this alternate world of constant surveillance, men and women who have been deprived of their simple pleasures in life (I shall refer to them as the “stiffs”, aka those who work in the various Ministries and Departments, aka Outer Party Members), and stiff rules/laws.

The main character/protagonist, Winston Smith, is a 39-year-old man working in the Ministry of Truth. His job is to change news articles, especially those in "The Times" (not a very creative name...I'm pretty sure it's trademarked...), in order to suit the Party’s (ring a bell? hint, hint...Communism) ulterior motives. For example, Winston may have to rewrite an article about someone who the Party vapored and omit references to the person as if they never existed in the first place. SPOILER ALERT: While he is walking in the halls of the Ministry, he is approached by a young girl working in the Fiction Department and she places him a mysterious note that says: “I LOVE YOU”. They begin to have a relationship while plotting to overthrow the Party at the same time.

So far, the plot has been slow up until Winston and Julia (the name of the young girl) began having a relationship. I really hope there will be more action later on...I’m more of an action person; I’d rather read a book where there are guns blazing and people fighting, than a book where everything is in slow motion. What’s even worse, is a book where there is supposed to be action but there is NONE (hint, hint 1984)! Almost every dystopian/futuristic novel I’ve read has had some sort of violence and I am somewhat disappointed. Also, I had a premonition (while Winston and Julia were together) that Winston or Julia would be caught by the ThoughtPolice and be vaporized. My money’s on Julia to die before the book is over, and Winston to die at the end.

As I mentioned in the first post, I have already read Animal Farm (also by Orwell). For Animal Farm, it was more allegorical and more fable-y, while 1984, was more of a dystopian world. 1984 and Animal Farm are similar, since they both shed a negative and dark light on totalitarian governments. Also, the “governments” (considering that animals had some form of a government/hierarchy) in both books had slogans/manifestos. Compare the Party’s slogan from 1984 to the animals’ manifesto from Animal Farm:

The other day in German class, we watched a video about Ka De We, the largest department store in Germany. It is very high-end, and the 2,000 employees work day-to-day, trying to create the perfect shopping experience for their customers. The video focused on the maintenance man, who fixed various problems, from cleaning a water tank in the seafood section to restoring water to the restroom in a restaurant, as quickly as possible. This way, the customers would not get angry from their experience and never come back. We also saw one of the designers checking the displays in the clothing section of the store. I noted that he was very critical about other designers’ works. He commented negatively on jeans that were not evenly spaced when hung and price tags that were showing on a display (my response was: “This is not design. This is OCD.”). While we were watching, I made an immediately connection to 1984. Just as high-end department stores, such as Ka De We, create a seemingly “perfect” world, there are many “behind-the-scenes” happenings in order to hide the many imperfections and flaws. The maintenance man reminded me of Winston. Both do the “dirty work” of the higher power at play (employer/the Party) and both wear blue overalls! (The maintenance man in the video wore blue overalls, which happens to be Winston’s uniform in the book. Our German teacher told us that the blue overalls were actually the uniform of maintenance men in Germany.) The designer, on the other hand, reminded me of the Party in the book. He inspected and checked all of the doings of his subordinates to make sure that all was perfect for the customers (in 1984, I imagine the customers in Ka De We to represent the people of Oceania).

While Winston lives in such a seemingly flawless, yet cruel world, he dreams of a safe haven:

“The inexhaustibly interesting thing was not the fragment of coral but the interior of the glass itself. There was such a depth of it, and yet it was almost as transparent as air. It was as though the surface of the glass had been the arch of the sky, enclosing a tiny world with its atmosphere complete. He had the feeling that he could get inside it, and that in fact he was inside it…The paperweight was the room he was in, and the coral was Julia’s life and his own, fixed in a sort of eternity at the heart of the crystal.” (Orwell 184-185)

The paperweight (a piece of coral inside crystal) is an old artifact that Winston buys from a small shop. The true past of the world, not what the Party force-feeds the citizens of Oceania, constantly intrigues him. Within the paperweight, he is able to lose himself and imagine a world where there is free will and free love. I believe Winston's hope for the world to change will be the driving force that causes him to act rashly in some situation, which will, as I mention again, lead to his death. 

In the exposition of the story, Winston opens his newly-bought diary and begins to write in it. I was reminded immediately of the old and famous adage: "The pen is mightier than the sword". Even though Winston does not outwardly rebel the Party, he has committed “thoughtcrime” by being against the Party in his mind. He begins to keep a diary that outlines his inner and true thoughts about his current world. Winston wonders who he’s writing to in this quote:

“He wondered again for whom he was writing the diary. For the future, for the past—for an age that might be imaginary. And in front of him there lay not death but annihilation.” (Orwell 35)

Here, Winston realizes that no matter who is audience is, the path he is taking will ultimately lead to death. Deep down he knows that the Thought Police will eventually find that he has committed thoughtcrime and vaporize him and the diary altogether. The bird singing in the following quote, symbolizes Winston:

“The music went on and on, minute after minute, with astonishing variations, never once repeating itself, almost as though the bird were deliberately showing off its virtuousity…Winston watched it with a sort of vague reverence. For whom, for what, was that bird singing?...What made it sit at the edge of the lonely wood and pour its music into nothingness?” (Orwell 156)

Just as the bird's sweet music is being "poured into nothingness", Winston's efforts to somehow warn the future through his diary are in vain as well. As I said earlier, I had a premonition that Winston would be captured and killed at the end of the book. I see this metaphor, of the bird as Winston, as foreshadowing for something horrible that may occur later. 

While I was talking to my Language Arts teacher, he mentioned that George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, the author of A Brave New World, had exchanged letters and argued about which world they created would eventually become the future of the world. Orwell argued for the world of 1984, where the government kept the people in control by taking away all of man’s pleasures away. On the other hand, Huxley argued for the world of A Brave New World, where the government kept the people in control by giving them everything they desired. Both standpoints are interesting and I believe they have both integrated themselves into today’s modern society. In light of Orwell’s argument, governments all over the world have spy agencies that evaluate and scrutinize the actions of the people (supposedly to sift out terrorists from society). The United States have the NSA, Britain has CCTV and etcetera and etcetera. But in light of Huxley’s argument, many countries provide free health care for their citizens. Who knows? In the future can be either one of these fantastic and dystopian worlds, or a combination of the two, or neither!

Picture Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/1984-Big-Brother.jpg

Part 1: 1984 by George Orwell

 

This book cover reminds me of a quote from The Lord of The Rings about the eye of Sauron: "The lord of Mordor sees all."

So what does a strange story about "loveable" farm animals with their own manifesto have in common with a story about a society that is closely monitored by the government? We all know (meaning us intelligent human beings) that George Orwell has a hobby of conveying the negatives of a dictatorship/totalitarian government through his novels and for us capitalists, with a sense of nationalism, enjoy reading books that criticize other governments. And for that, "nationalism", I have chosen Book 3, the classic, as Orwell's 1984.

Animal Farm, which I read last year, was an allegory about the Russian Revolution/Communism. In my opinion, the story was very strange (I mean--who names a pig "Snowball"?), but it definitely got its point across (considering all I took from the story was: "Communism = bad" and "Don't name your pig "Snowball" otherwise your other pet pig named "Napoleon" will drive him and you out of your farm"). Hopefully 1984 makes more sense than Animal Farm and still drives its point home. 

Most of my friends have read the novel and have said they enjoyed it, so I am looking forward to reading the novel. Send me "happy reading" wishes!

Links:

• George Orwell Biography 

• The Perfect Animal Farm Glogster (not mine)

• IMDb 1984 Movie Trailer 

Picture source: http://haikubookreview.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/1984cover.jpg

Part 3: David and Goliath

Other Malcolm Gladwell best-sellers. I've already read Nothing, which, in my opinion, was very insightful, although it was a bit vague, about...nothing ; - ) ^[1]

Whew! The last page has been turned and the book has been placed back on the bookshelf (I'm giving myself a pat on the back as we speak). Time to move on to a classic book, which I am definitely looking forward to. 


You may wonder (even if you don't, you will): "Will I feel more insightful after reading this book? Would you recommend Gladwell to other readers?" My answer to you is "ehhhhh...it depends". For beginners, sure, go ahead and tackle his books. But for more experienced readers? It really depends on the reader. I was bored most of the time, even though there was some insight, and I will most definitely not touch another one of his books for ten years. Yup, I'm a picky reader and I dislike repetitiveness (considering his writing style has been very consistent with his past books). Also, please refer to my second post on David and Goliath, and read the interesting review on the book written by Joe Nocera. 

SPOILER ALERT: Between my second and third post for this book, I read Part 3: The Limits of Power. It basically explains that when one individual, group, nation, etc. uses power, oppression, and force to control those who they want to control, the outcomes are usually even worse (riots, rebellions, skirmishes, etc.). Gladwell uses the conflict between Britain and Northern Ireland, the good-doings of policewoman for teenagers who have fathers or mothers in jail, the story of a mother whose young daughter is kidnapped, raped, and killed, and the tale of a man who saves many Jews during the Anti-Semitic period in Europe (nope, not Schindler, although I do recommend watching Schlinder's List, the movie). I especially enjoyed the story of the policewoman, Jaffe, because she was helping families who were poor because their bread winners were in jail. Gladwell mentioned that teenagers who had fathers or mothers in jail were more likely to become juvenile delinquents (this goes along with the Britain vs. Northern Ireland conflict, because the teenagers felt like acting out against those, policemen, who had jailed their parent(s)/"oppressed" them). Jaffe, by sending those families turkeys on Thanksgiving and toys on Christmas, was supporting those teens and sending them a message that not all policemen were "bad". 

David and Goliath is definitely literary non-fiction. The "literary" part is as shown below:

"Walker and Davis pulled up alongside the Isuzu, using the weight of the motorcycle to pin Reynolds against her car. Calderon jumped out of the passenger’s seat, running around the back of the car. Walker blocked his way. Davis grabbed at Reynolds’s purse. He pulled out a .357 magnum handgun and placed it against her right ear. She resisted. He fired. Davis and Walker jumped back on the motorcycle and sped through a red light. People came running out of the Daily Planet. Someone tried to stanch the bleeding. Calderon drove back to Reynolds’s parents’ house but couldn’t wake them. He called and got their answering machine. Finally, at two-thirty in the morning, he got through. Mike Reynolds heard his wife cry out, “In the head! She’s been shot in the head!” Kimber died a day later." (Gladwell 151)

When I read this paragraph, it was as if I was reading a crime novel. In the beginning of chapters, Gladwell likes to begin with an anecdote/narrative that sets the scene for the rest of the chapter. And then there's the nonfiction part, the "evidence" supporting the argument (by the way, you don't have to read all of it...I just included it so that the paragraph was complete and not just a fragment of info/evidence):

"Let us go back to the theory of the inverted-U curve that we discussed in the chapter on class size. Inverted-U curves are all about limits. They illustrate the fact that “more” is not always better; there comes a point, in fact, when the extra resources that the powerful think of as their greatest advantage only serve to make things worse. The inverted-U shape clearly describes the effects of class size, and it clearly applies as well to the connection between parenting and wealth. But a few years ago, a number of scholars began to make a more ambitious argument, an argument that would end up pulling Mike Reynolds and his claims for Three Strikes into the center of two decades of controversy. What if the relationship between punishment and crime was also an inverted U? In other words, what if—past a certain point—cracking down on crime stopped having any effect on criminals and maybe even started to make crime worse?" (Gladwell 154)

Overall, my opinion of David and Goliath is wishy-washy. I enjoyed some narratives while others were quite a drag (like the last one). I hope that Gladwell's next book will be different, new, and even more brilliant than his past best-sellers. But as I said, I will probably not pick up another one of his books for ten years...(repetitive).

^[1]To find more interesting Gladwell books, search "fake Malcolm Gladwell books" in Google images. I dunno why you need to add the word "fake" to your search bar...'cuz these books are for real...seriously^.

Picture Source ("Wink"): http://www.marfdrat.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/wink-malcolm-gladwell-parody-title.jpg
Picture Source ("Nothing"): http://thenorthkoreablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/nothing-malcom-gladwell.jpg
Picture Source ("Vague"): http://media.salon.com/2011/02/24_2.jpg

Part 2: David and Goliath

"Gadsden would say later that he had been raised around dogs and had been taught how to protect himself. "I automatically threw my knee up in front of the dog's head," he said. Gadsden wasn't the martyr, passively leaning forward as if to say, "Take me, here I am." (Gladwell 124)

Halfway through the book and already Malcolm Gladwell has made my head spin. I have to say, I am quite tired (and perhaps frustrated!) of his style, organization skills, and technique, which has been very similar to that of Outliers. After canvassing the Internet, I found that many harsh critics agreed with me, and furthermore, called for Gladwell to adopt a new strategy/gimmick! The New Republic criticized David and Goliath, saying it was "less insightful than a Chinese fortune cookie". I definitely had a laugh out of that one.

SPOILER ALERT: The book starts out by telling the biblical story of David and Goliath, then it goes on to Part 1: The Advantages of Disadvantages (and the Disadvantages of Advantages). Gladwell explains how a disadvantageous middle school girls' basketball team uses the "full-court press" to come out on the advantageous side, how a small class of students is actually disadvantageous, and how a big fish in a small pond is more advantageous than a small fish in a big pond. In this section of anecdotes, Gladwell analyzes that Goliath, even though he seemingly has all of the advantages, does not. In fact, it is the underdog who has the advantages. Consider this quote from the middle school basketball story:

"He was an underdog and a misfit, and that gave him the freedom to try things no one else even dreamt of." (Gladwell 27)

Gladwell is referring to the coach of the girls' team, who decides to use the "full-court press" (basically just 100% defense on the basketball court) and make his team better during games. So, because the coach and his team were underdogs, the coach had to think outside of the box for the winning strategy that could transform his girls from losers to winners. This gave him the brilliant idea of the "full-court press". Even though it is a difficult strategy to carry out, the girls were able to climb their way to the championships solely on defense. Therefore, the coach apparently had the advantage all along.

In the "Big Fish, Small Pond" chapter, Gladwell interviewed a college student, Caroline Sacks, who had been incredibly gifted in science during her high school years. When she went to a prestigious college, her iron grip on her grades in scientific subjects started to slip. At the end of his interview with her, Gladwell asked:

"...would have happened if she had chosen instead to go to the University of Maryland--to be, instead, a Big Fish in a Little Pond. She answered without hesitation, "I'd still be in science."" (Gladwell 63)

In this chapter, Gladwell is saying that going to a smaller college and being an excellent student is better than going to a larger college and being a mediocre student. Sure, this is true, but when these students are in the career world, employers may pay more attention to a resume that says "Harvard" on it than, say, "University of Maryland". I'm not sure I fully agree with Gladwell's argument, because everything depends on the employer (why else do high school students go to college, especially a good college, if not to stand out on their resume?) and the field that the student is planning to work in. The truly brilliant and intelligent will persevere, while the others fall behind. Is that not what life is? Survival of the fittest? Even if Sacks went to the "University of Maryland", who knows if she was going to be the "Big Fish"? She could have gone there and still have been the "Little Fish"! After reading Chapter 3, the only thing I have to say to Caroline Sacks is: "Tough luck."

In Part 2: The Theory of Desirable Difficulty, Gladwell explores how dyslexia is an advantage, and how the underdogs Jay Freireich and Wyatt Walker (in separate chapters) became successful in their career and aspirations. After browsing through Joe Nocera's review of David and Goliath on website, which remarked that the dyslexia chapter was very messy and repetitive of what humans already know, I agree with Nocera's standpoints (refer to the link below to see the other critiques).The dyslexia chapter was not my favorite and it may have possibly been a waste of time. We all know that many underdogs rise during difficult times, and Gladwell just repeats this information once more. I was more pleased with the Freireich chapter, which I believe to be one of the only stories in the novel that were interesting. Long story short, Freireich was a doctor who found a way to save dying children from leukemia. His personality was aggressive and sometimes arrogant, and I found that I could relate to his "ruthlessness".

I have just finished the Wyatt Walker chapter, which is about D-Day during the Civil Rights Movement. D-Day was a successful campaign for the movement, since many historical pictures were taken then published in newspapers across the nation. The "climax" of the day was, perhaps, African Americans being sprayed with pressurized water (these pictures are famous for showing the harsh reality of the South). Not only that, the brutality in which the firefighters and policemen harmed the African Americans was shown in these pictures, which sparked discussions about what should be done in the South. D-Day definitely raised more awareness and gained many more supporters for the cause, but Gladwell explained that one of the pictures taken of that day was a "trick". Gladwell specifically analyzes the picture at the top of this post. At first glance, it may seem like the policeman and his dog are trying to harm the teenager, but in reality, the policeman was trying to pull his dog away from the African American teenager. When I read this chapter, Gladwell's analysis reminded me of the old adage: "A picture is worth a thousand words.

Hopefully the rest of the book will not be as tedious, mundane, and lackluster as the first half. I have not felt like I have gained any insight whatsoever yet, and perhaps that will be turned around as I continue reading. Who knows?

Links:

• Gladwell's harsh critics
• Nocera's review

Picture Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/Birmingham_campaign_dogs.jpg

Part 1: David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell

 The real question is: Why have so many Gifted students chosen Malcolm Gladwell books as their non-fiction book? Gladwell should analyze this phenomenon and write a book on it.

So what's the big deal about a half-"Jamaican (me) crazy"-haired staff (get it? Jamaican-me-crazy? You're making me crazy? For all of those who don't appreciate puns. I <3 Catelyn Huang. #catelynhack The sentence is actually supposed to say "half-Jamaican, crazy-haired staff writer...") writer at The New Yorker who was written multiple fascinating books? Malcolm Gladwell has become a symbol of analytical thinking in modern-day American society. His newest book, David and Goliath, explores the strategies, mindset, and actions of underdogs throughout history.

Most famously, the story of David and Goliath, for which the title was named after. Long story short, it's about David, who's the underdog (a shepherd boy), and Goliath, a giant. David kills Goliath using only a rock and a slingshot, and wins a war in the process. Dang, if only it was that simple to win a war, then tackling a Language Arts essay while procrastinating by writing on a blog should be no big deal...Anyways, I am well familiar with this biblical tale and every time I think of the story again, Goliath's sheer stupidity makes me laugh to my very core. After all, giants are merely people, but instead, everything about them is just magnified, in a sense. That includes their idiocy, clumsiness, and blindness to the delicate situation at hand (Malcolm Gladwell mentions this in the book). 

 

After reading Outliers (the entire thing, not just the flimsy section Mr. McDaniels handed us), I am definitely looking forward to David and Goliath and the entertaining anecdotes that Gladwell retells in his books. But I wonder--what more can we analyze about underdogs? We all know they use unique strategies to overcome their opponents, obstacles, etc., etc., so how does Gladwell take this a step further? What don't we already know about underdogs that Gladwell has come to the conclusion of based on historic events? I must admit, I wondered the exact same thing before I read the first page of Outliers. My thoughts were: What don't we already know about people who are outliers? After I finished the book, my only reaction was: "Ohhhhhhhhh" and I realized there is so much to analyze about and learn from unique individuals in our society. I expect that this book will give me the same epiphany as Outliers did and that it will guide me through difficult situations that may lie ahead.

Just as Cloud Atlas truly enlightened me about human nature and the interconnection of our lives, I hope David and Goliath will enlighten me about achieving the unachievable and conquering seemingly insurmountable challenges.

Links:

• Malcolm Gladwell's website

Picture Source: http://img2-3.timeinc.net/ew/i/2013/08/15/David-and-Goliath.jpg

Cloud Atlas Sextet

Here is the Cloud Atlas Sextet, written by Robert Frobisher, from the movie. Listen as you read my posts:

Cloud Atlas Movie Trailer

Part 3: Cloud Atlas

"Time cannot permeate this sabbatical. We do not stay dead long. Once my Luger lets me go, my birth, next time around, will be upon me in a heartbeat. Thirteen years from now we'll meet again at Gresham, ten years later I'll be back in this same room, holding this same gun, composing this same letter, "my resolution as perfect as my many-headed sextet. Such elegant certainties comfort me at this quiet hour." --Robert Frobisher, "Letters" (Mitchell 471)

Proposition: I have fallen in love with Cloud Atlas.^[1]

I must admit, I have been on quite a ride for the past week. It's been jaw-dropping, head-spinning, blood-tingling, breathtaking, and yes, mind-blowing to the extent of which I am currently emotionally and mentally unstable. David Mitchell is clearly a genius and a master of word and story manipulation (after all, is that not what a book simply is?). Cloud Atlas was beautifully and delicately crafted, and has something to offer to each of our lives. Trust me, your perception of life will change after you read this book.

As I mentioned in the second post, after the "Sloosha's Crossin'" story (which was just confusing and difficult to read due to the strange language and vernacular used), the stories are ordered backwards. Next came "The Orison" story, and even though there were some nice, philosophical phrases that I will most definitely quote later on in this post, I was disappointed at the end. SPOILER ALERT: Sonmi-451 reveals to the Archivist that the entire Union organization is in fact orchestrated by Unanimity (the government) in order to show how "dangerous" fabricants were to society and crush all hopes of equality (I believe this is the true climax of this story). Now, this is completely different from the movie. In the movie, Sonmi-451 and Hae-Joo (a pureblood working for Union and who has a brief relationship with Sonmi-451) are in it 'till the end. Both of their goals are to achieve equality for all fabricants. Meanwhile, in the book, Hae-Joo is merely a "hired actor", who pretends he believes in "equality for all", but is truly working for Unanimity. My reaction was "Ugh. What a terrible ending to the story I was most looking forward to reading when I picked up this book at Barnes&Noble." Moving on to "The Ghastly Ordeal" story, I especially enjoyed Timothy Cavendish and other seniors escaping the wicked nursing home (this story really makes me think about what my children may do to me in the future...terrible). Even though Cavendish does not reunite with his past lover, Ursula, as he does in the movie, I still loved the bar scene fight in the book (imagine a sea of Scottish people raining hell upon three annoying Brits from the nursing home and glee fills you up, doesn't it?). In the "Luisa Rey" story, there was much more blood being spilled than I anticipated, which is totally fine by me, but I was hoping that Isaac Sachs wouldn't die in a plane bomb (movie...) and guess what happened...? Yep, Sachs died. Honestly, I was much more happier with the "Letters" story. Frobisher is finally creating his masterpiece, Cloud Atlas Sextet. I was surprised when he fell in love with Ayrs's daughter, Eva, who he despised in Part 1 of the story, but it was one of those moments, the kind that comes and then goes. I must say, I was definitely waiting for his suicide, although the reason why was not as clear to me as it was in the movie. Was it because Frobisher was afraid of Ayrs's threats? Was it because Frobisher's vivaciousness died when Eva dismissed him in the ballroom? I may never know. Finally, in the "Adam Ewing" story, I must say, I was bored by the description of the cruelty of the Indians and the other characters. Sure, the part where Adam realizes Dr. Goose has been poisoning him was interesting, but the other parts...not so much. If I had time, I would definitely read word for word, but I must admit that I skimmed the parts that just rambled on and on. The language was also difficult for me to understand, since the story took place in the 1800s, and I have spent many nights looking up words and deciphering the meanings of the sentences. 

As in the first and second posts, I described the connection between all of the stories. As I learned in the Part 2's, there are still more reasons as to why Part 1's ended the way they did and why upcoming Part 2's began the way they began. Before Sonmi-451's execution, in Part 2 of "The Orison" story, Sonmi-451 requests to finish a film that she started a long time ago (referring to "The Ghastly Ordeal of Timothy Cavendish"). Again, the reader's perspective and the text/film that he or she is reading is aligned with a character's perspective. Although in the second post I wondered about the authenticity of Cavendish's story, I soon realize, as I flip the page and come across the Part 2 of "The Ghastly Ordeal", that Cavendish likes to refer to "Lars". Cavendish imagines that his story will be made into a film and Lars is Cavendish's imaginary director. So you can see that this further links Sonmi and Cavendish together. During the Part 2 of "The Ghastly Ordeal" story, Cavendish reads Half-Lives: The First Luisa Rey Mystery and finds that half of the manuscript is missing. His copy ends with Luisa being pushed over a bridge (which is where Part 1 of the "Luisa Rey" story left off). At the end, he is finally able to secure Part 2. At the end of the "Luisa Rey" story (Part 2), Luisa receives the rest of Frobisher's letters to Sixsmith, which leads into the Part 2 of the "Letters" story.  I already described the connection between the "Adam Ewing" story ending and the "Letters" story in my second post, but I did not describe how the beginning of Part 2 was connected to Frobisher. In the Part 2 of "Letters", Frobisher happens to find the missing half of the journal of Adam Ewing stuck under his bed. He picks up where he has left off, just as the next story is the second half of the "Adam Ewing" story. Still very complicated, as I remarked in the second post, yet still very connected.


A theme of "six" ripples throughout the novel and further connects the stories/characters. There are six stories, a character named Sixsmith who is sixty-six years old, the Cloud Atlas Sextet, Six Catechisms in "The Orison" story, and on and on...

Ready for some Kurt Vonnegut story arcs? The information given may be redundant, so go ahead and skip it if you feel like it. Here we go (I'm only going to include Vonnegut story arcs for my favorite stories so as not to make this post longer than it already is): 

"Half-Lives: The First Luisa Rey Mystery":

Luisa goes through a roller coaster of dangers and threats throughout her story. In the exposition, she is merely a diamond in the rough. As the story unfolds, the reader watches Luisa plow through obstacles persistently and quite stubbornly, determined to expose the illegal doings of a particular nuclear company. In the end, she succeeds and becomes known in the world of journalism.

"The Orison of Sonmi-451":

The story begins in a futuristic world of inequality and prejudice against those who were not born naturally (known as "fabricants"). Sonmi-451 aligns herself with Union, a group rebelling against Unanimity, the government. She is determined to make things better for fabricants in this cruel world, but things get worse and worse. First off, Union does not exist. It is merely imaginary; it was created by Unanimity to show how dangerous fabricants could be. And second off, Sonmi-451 is sentenced to execution just because she fought for her rights. It really couldn't get any worse.

"The Ghastly Ordeal of Timothy Cavendish":

Timothy starts out in the exposition as a publisher who unexpectedly makes big bucks out of an unfortunate incident. But soon, in the inciting moment, "thugs" begin to indignantly hassle him for their money, which he does not have. The lowest point of his journey is when his brother sends him to a nursing home, which is one of the cruelest experiences Timothy has to go through. However, he and a few others manage to escape and flee from the "prison" in which they were held, and finally, he is a free man.

Picture Source: http://happynicetimepeople.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/vonnegut-graph-3.jpg

Also, as I started explaining in the second post, human nature is the universal theme in the novel. Mitchell conveys through his stories how human nature is recycled and repeated over and over again across history and time. A quote from the movie that reminds me of this theme is (from the “Luisa Rey” story):

Javier: "What are you reading?"
Luisa: "Old letters."
Javier: "Why do you keep reading them?"
Luisa: "I don't know. Just trying to understand something."

Javier: "What?"
Luisa: "Why we keep making the same mistakes...over and over." 

Movie Quote Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cloud_Atlas_%28film%29 

Greed, hunger, desire, cruelty, kindness, sympathy, etc. All of these human qualities are in each of us. Cloud Atlas just expands these emotions throughout time and explores them in every character. Consider these quotes:

"'…What sparks wars? The will to power, the backbone of human nature. The threat of violence, the fear of violence, or actual violence is the instrument of this dreadful will. You can see the will to power in bedrooms, kitchens, factories, unions, and the borders of states. Listen to this and remember it. The nation-state is merely human nature inflated to monstrous proportions. QED nations are entities whose laws are written by violence. Thus it ever was, so ever shall it be. War, Robert, is one of humanity's two eternal companions.'" – Dr. Egret, "Letters" (Mitchell 444)

"Fantasy. Lunacy. 
All revolutions are, until they happen, then they are historical inevitabilities." -- Archivist and Sonmi-451, "The Orison" (Mitchell 326)

War and revolutions will occur over and over again in the history of mankind due to our "will to power" and the cruelty in our manner. Each main character in the novel is battling a war: Adam Ewing vs. "The Parasite"/Dr. Henry Goose, Robert Frobisher vs. Vyvyan Ayrs, Luisa Rey vs. Seabord Power Inc., Timothy Cavendish vs. Nurse Noakes & other nursing home staff, Sonmi-451 vs. Unanimity, and Zachry & Meronym vs. Kona. Some come out successful, while others do not. It is simply human nature to oppress and take advantage of the weak. As Dr. Goose so elegantly put it: "'The weak are meat, the strong do eat.'" (Mitchell 503)

When the words "cloud" and "atlas" came across the television screen, I was absolutely and positively flummoxed. What does "Cloud Atlas" mean? After reading the novel and seeing the movie twice, I finally understand. This quote, said by Zachry in the "Sloosha's Crossin'" story, exemplifies the meaning of the title (that is, if you can comprehend Zachry’s complicated language):

"I watched the clouds awobby from the floor o' that kayak. Souls cross ages like clouds cross skies, an' tho' a cloud's shape nor hue nor size don't stay the same, it's still a cloud an' so is a soul. Who can say where a cloud's blowed from or who the soul'll be 'morrorw? Only Sonmi the east an' the west an' the compass an' the atlas, yay, only the atlas o' clouds." (Mitchell 308)

Just as clouds drift across the sky and take on various shapes, souls wander through space and time and are re-transformed and redefined. As one dies, he or she is reborn as another. The theme of reincarnation and resurrection as another person permeates throughout the novel, especially through the characters with the comet-shaped birthmark (Robert Frobisher, Luisa Rey, Sonmi-451, and Meronym). All of these characters share a similarly-structured life story. They are all explorers and creators, yet they are all facing problems, obstacles, and various insurmountable issues. Some come out on the winning side, while others do not.

"But I saw you, my dear, dear fellow! How touched I am that you care so much! On the belfry's lookout, yesterday, at sunset. Sheerest fluke you didn't see me first...One more step up, you'd have seen me crouching in the shadows. You strolled to the north side--one turn my way, I would have been rumbled. Watched you for as long as I dared--a minute?--before pulling back and hotfooting it down to Earth." --Robert Frobisher, "Letters" (Mitchell 468-469)

Fate is a funny thing. Here, Sixsmith never realizes that he is being watched by his lover. If he did, if he by chance turned around and saw Frobisher, then Frobisher's destiny would be different. Instead of shooting himself with a Luger through the roof of his mouth, Frobisher could have still been alive! If only, if only...Each of us has our own destiny. Our paths may cross others, but our destiny is what it is. There's no changing fate and there's no turning back. Deep concepts like this are peeking out at the reader in the pages of the novel, just as Frobisher was peeking at Sixsmith. These concepts are explored to the point where the reader will have reached, perhaps, a so-called "nirvana" or enlightenment at the end of the novel. This is not easy for me to describe, but after the last page brushed past my eyes, I teetered on this stage of pure enlightenment. Did and do I still fully understand the full meaning of our souls, humanity, and the cycle of life, death, and rebirth? I'm not so sure. But I know for sure that I have not lost that touch of inspiration, of pure awe that Cloud Atlas gave me. 

Even after watching the movie and reading the book, my "soul" (I guess that's what I should call my inner-self and deeper-conscience from now on) and heart still holds tight to this novel of Russian nesting doll stories. I guarantee, there is definitely something that anyone--everyone--can take away from Cloud Atlas. I always like ending with a quote, so here goes: 

“I recall a yesterday and see a tomorrow. Time, no arrow, no boomerang, but a concertina.” – Timothy Cavendish, “The Ghastly Ordeal” (Mitchell 354)

Picture source: http://recordinglivefromsomewhere.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/cloudatlas.jpg

[1] This is from the quote on page 393, written down in a journal by Isaac Sachs: “Proposition: I have fallen in love with Luisa Rey.”