Mainstream vs. ? (Post 26)

"Mainstream is a Myth."

The main reason that the term "mainstream" can be classified as mythical is in large part due to its dynamic implications. The term "mainstream" refers to what is fashionable and/or acceptable at a certain point in time. However, this notion is constantly changing, and as such the idea of something being "mainstream" changes with it. Moreover, who is to say what exactly is widely acceptable, especially considering the infinite array of viewpoints that may exist over any given topic? The answer is not a simple one, and may vary depending on the region that one may live in. Therefore, it is pure speculation that may lead to the localized definition of what mainstream really is.





Photo Credit: http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/cwl/lowres/cwln198l.jpg

Free at Last? (Post 25)

The question posed is how Linda achieved her freedom. For starters, I would like to pose another question. Did Linda ever really attain freedom? On a surface level, one could say that yes, Linda was technically a free woman living in the north, mostly due to her lucky escape to New York. Even though she disdained the subversive methods with which she arrived at this state of being, she was technically free. However, I would have to argue that once someone has been owned, they can never truly be free. This is due to several causes. Cause one is that they have had valuable time in their life forcefully taken away from them, and therefore the owner will always have that. That is not something that can be returned or forgiven on either part. Cause 2 is that while she may have attained a technical freedom, I do not believe that her owners would ever fully recognize the existence of such a state.

Important Unimportance (Post 24)

Frederick Douglass explains in his article "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?" how this date is of relative unimportance to blacks as a race, as it did not promote the causes of black America of the time.  I say this to mean, America gaining its independence, its "Freedom" if you will, did not translate onto the population as a whole.  The fact that there were still those in servitude would not let the country be called entirely free.  

I would have to say that Douglass makes several good points about how keeping people in servitude will hold back a nation from true freedom, however I would have to say that there are more important issues to be dealt with.  At the time, the 4th of July may have not seemed like much as there were not immediate changes in the way we conducted business, however the break off from England allowed us the more direct control that would later allow us to free slaves and make other changes to improve black America's situation.  Who knows what may have happened had the 4th never occur ed?  There's still the chance that we may have still had slavery to this day (the fact that it doesn't exist in either England or the United States now is irrelevant, as this is strictly hypothetical).  On one level, the 4th of July may have not seemed like much, but on the grand scale it may have made all of the difference.

Incidents in Reading a Book (Post 23)

While reading this book, there are many descriptive words that come to mind.  Terms like anger, sorrow, disbelief, joy, and confusion all describe feelings that this writing invokes.  On the whole, this writing is almost surreal due to the horrible events that a slave could expect to have happen over the course of a lifetime.  Let's find the interrupt of the discourse.  In grade school, we were taught about how slaves were whipped, beaten, and how numerous other forms of physical abuse were afflicted upon them.  However, this does not even begin to cover the intense psychological and emotional abuse these people were subjected to.  From being scammed out of their money to being denied a temporary leave to pay respects to their recently parted relative, very few people felt compassion for the slaves.  As numerous others have said, the fact that this writing was at one point true to life makes it all the more compelling to the reader; its surreal nature makes one slip into the warm confines of fiction, only to be jerked into a realization of the factual nature of the writing.

That's just my parents talking. (Post 22)

 Photo credit: 
As children, humans will formulate their beliefs and ideas largely based upon those held by their parents and those who are in frequent contact with them.  As a result, they have beliefs and ideas instilled within themselves by others before they are capable of making those decisions and judging the ethics of situations on their own.  This is both good and bad.  Most parents have their children's best interests in minds,and will typically try to do what they feel is in the child's best interests.  However, in some cases, parents have ideas that are detrimental to a society, and when those beliefs are passed down to further generations, there is greater reluctance for these values to be challenged and therefore changed. because the people holding the ideals have generally always felt them to be the correct way of thinking.  Looking at this phenomena biologically, there are neurological pathways, a repeatable sequence of neuron-firing, that is more commonly known as thought.  These pathways are much more easily formed (as they form canal-type pathways) at a younger age than later on in life.  Therefore, it is biologically harder to change thought later on in life, rather than at a young age when parents will typically have greater access to them than anyone else.

For comical representations of this, watch Brian in Season 4 Episode 4 (Don't make me over) of Family Guy, or Princess Clara in Season 1 Episode 1 of Drawn Together (Hot Tub) where both characters explain how their prejudices in their "adult" life were based upon prejudices held by their parents when they were young.

Rippled Reflection (Post 21)

Contrary to the initial intent and purpose of this question, I do not find the image presented in this document to be much differed from that I have received in US history, as well as in some of my own personal research.  Let me start by saying that I do not blame jefferson for these racial prejudices directly, rather only mildly find fault in his semi-hypocrisy.  At this time period in history, it was generally accepted b the white majority that african americans were inferior, merely because of the color of their skin.  Jefferson was not intentionally racist, rather was going along with the notions of the time.  Let's face facts, the fact that he even suggested a removal of slavery (gradual or otherwise) made him somewhat better than those entirely dedicated to it.   Jefferson had his faults like any of us; it was his importance in relation to the founding of this country that has cast a shadom over his negative aspects and caused up to concentrate on his more patriotic actions.  

Tucker v. Loman: One Night Only on INDemand PPV! (Post 20)

The contrast between Willy Loman and Cora Tucker is a case of delusional concept versus active participation and action. Willy Loman has a dream. He wants to be a great salesman. His belief is that in order to do this, all he really must be is well liked. If nothing else, as long as he is well liked, he will be a successful salesman. Unfortunately, this is inherently wrong in that without effort and a clear view of reality, it doesn't matter how much people like you. Had Willy been more conscious of his reality, then he would've seen that what he was doing in order to increase sales was not working, and that he maybe needed to revise his strategy. Cora Tucker is Willy Loman ^ -1. Cora saw a problem and did what she needed to fix it, or at least bring light to it in order to incite a movement that would resolve the issue. She had a much clearer view of reality, and was more open to different approaches to solve an issue. The main problem here, is that Willy was convinced that there was only one way to skin a cat, and the adage says otherwise.