Semester II Meta Post: A Time of Reflection

The blog post that I thought best reflected both my growth in blogging and my ability to connect ideas throughout the year, with both topics of discussion in American Studies, field trips/experiences, and literature we have read this quarter was the blog post Physical Barriers Defining Chicago Neighborhoods.

I was writing this blog post when I was researching and writing my Junior Theme (the topic being segregation in Chicago), so it wasn't difficult for me to thoroughly explore the idea of physical boundaries within Chicago. Not only did this post relate back to first semester and our field trip to to this exact location, Hyde Park and Englewood, but it also connected to the literature we were reading at the time, The Great Gatsby. I related this very real separation of classes in Chicago to the separation of old money from new money in East Egg and West Egg. This topic also was connected to my Junior Theme, adding another layer of relevance to the post. Overall, I think it best demonstrates my progression throughout the year to being able to connect many different ideas and layers of topics we have explored this year in American Studies.

In the post, I also experimented with different ways of visually laying out my posts. I emphasized words I found key to my argument that really summarized the idea I was trying to convey to my reader, such as "separated" or "most dangerous neighborhood." This, I believe, created more of a dynamic for my reader, which in result peaked their interest in my topic.

I also believe I have grown as a blogger this semester by discussing and analyzing a wide variety of different topics.

First semester, I mainly focused on philosophical arguments and ideas (as discussed in my first meta post). This semester, I pushed myself to root my arguments in more current, factual topics that related more directly to class than my interests. I varied my posts this semester from my third quarter post about the obsession with fame in Breaking News: Disney Star Inadvertently Teaches Children About Safe Sex at Dr. Seuss Premiere (which links to heavily discussed topic of social class in America) to my blog post about a Ted Talk proposing educational reform in the post Education: Training Kids out of Creativity.

I believe my blog is a great way to see my progression as a writer, as a thinker, and as a citizen who is constantly questioning, discussing, and analyzing American society as we see it every day.

Education: Training Kids Out of Creativity

"All children are born artists. The problem is to remain an artist as we grow up."-Picasso

I recently watched a very moving Ted Talk in my Dance Lab class that focused on reforms in education and the way our current system is producing students that have been trained since the beginning of their education out of their creativity.
In this Ted Talk, Ken Robinson proposes an education system the nurtures (and not undermines) creativity in young children. I recommend you watch the clip I included from 5:50 to 6:33 to obtain the main idea of the lecture.

"As children grow up, we start educating them progressively from the waist up." - Ken Robinson

Our system of education is in the middle of a great revolution. With academic inflation (college degrees becoming useless to find jobs, most of which now requiring a BA or a PhD 10 years ago) combined with the emphasis of academic success, numerical test scores, and the growing fear of being wrong in young learners has defined the system of education. The arts are no longer valued or taken seriously in schools, being put on the bottom of the hierarchy of subjects. The arts, the roots of creativity, are being cheated in the education systems.

Here, Ken Robinson proposes to put just as much emphasis in a subject like dance as math is currently taught in schools today. The key to success for society and its progression is not memorizing formulas or mastering shakespeare's many sonnets, but to take understandings of academics and applying them in a creative, successful, unique way.

Why are school systems across the world rate core academics rated more important than the arts in the hierarchy-based system if creativity is now much more valued in society today? How do school systems "train children out of creativity"? Does New Trier's system, offering an intense academic learning environment & wide variety of arts, train its student in or out of creativity?

Money=Power: White Noise Blogpost

"These things happen to the poor people who live in exposed areas. Society is set up in such a way that it's the poor and uneducated people who suffer the main impact of natural and man-made disasters." 

-Don DeLillo, 112

In American Studies, we have been focusing on social class, economic class, and what comes with the territory of each. Here, DeLillo is commenting on society and the way it is organized. Those with less money have less power, right? Those with less money, according to DeLillo, are the ones that are supposed to take the main impact of disasters.

Are those who are poor more deserving of hardship and disaster? Why is society organized in a way that money means safety and power? Is money the way America actually measures how much power a person has? Is this a fair system?

Physical Barriers Defining Chicago Neighborhoods

In the novel The Great Gatsby, a book focused on economic classes in the 1920s, two neighboring communities are the setting for the story. Separated by a bay, the community of West Egg on one side and the community of East Egg on the other. West Egg is a neighborhood filled with "new money" and is much less fashionable than East Egg, where all of the glamorous, old money resides. Throughout the novel, the difference between the two are strongly emphasized, each town virtually defining the characters residing in it.

The separation between the communities is by a vast, gorgeous bay, which prevents the two neighborhoods from mingling. I found this description to be extremely similar to the city of Chicago and its neighborhoods of Hyde Park and Englewood. Hyde Park is a neighborhood that houses the prestigious University of Chicago, and is known as a well-respected, sought out upper class community that is virtually all white. To the west of the community is Washington Park, which is a large community park which separates itself from Englewood: a community that is made up of over 98% African Americans and is considered the most dangerous neighborhood in the city and the most dangerous in the country in 2010. My American Studies class actually drove through the neighborhood of Hyde Park, through Washington Park, and into Englewood. Through this experience, we really got to understand the extreme differences between the two communities.

Many believe that this park, like many other natural barriers within the city, are purposefully created to separate different communities. This is to prevent violence in the upper class neighborhoods inflicted by their neighbors and to prevent the converging of the communities. Do you find that physical barriers have an overall positive outcome on the city? Is it detrimental to the two communities? Is it racist or unfair?

Race-Based Public Transportation Funding

The CTA (Chicago Transit Association) has recently been questioned in their fairness in distributing funds for the different types of transportation used throughout Chicago. There are three main forms of public transportation by commuters in Chicago: CTA rail and bus or the Metra. The CTA forms of transportation are widely used by Chicago inhabitants, allowing them to travel within the city versus the Metra, which is a train for commuters from the usually white-dominant suburbs into the downtown business district.

Two commuters sued the state of Illinois, claiming that "regional funding has systematically under-funded inner-city bus and L train service for the benefit of suburban train lines, therefore denying equal transportation access to the region’s minority populations and violating federal and state law." Looking at the Distribution of Total Expenditures Chart on the left, it's clear that CTA is much more widely used then Metra (4.5 million versus 1 million). Also, the large majority of the Metra riders are white, versus on the CTA who only has 31% of non-hispanic whites--the rest are minorities. This clear difference between the two types of transportation in racial makeup raises the question: is the funding for public transportation racist? Or is it just a coincidence that the racial minorities' transportation is underfunded?

The Windy City Being Blown Away by Segregation

As we all know, Chicago is the most segregated city in the United States of America. Made up of over 200 neighborhoods and 77 community areas, it's difficult to mentally imagine just how divided up our windy city is. To the bottom right, there is an image of the Chicagoland area. Every dot that is placed on this map represents 25 people (pink=white, blue=black, green=asian, orange=hispanic) and where they live (according to the 2000 census). The black lines represent the official community area boundaries.

This image was attached with an article by The Chicagoist entitled Chicago Still the Most Segregated U.S. City. The 28% of whites maintain the majority of the north side and the suburbs of Chicago, while the black population (35%) are mostly found on the south and west sides.
When Mayor Daley was fighting for the 2016 Olympics, he said "Out of our diversity comes our city's greatest strength" (Chicago Reader). Unfortunately, diversity turns into segregation when the abundant amounts of races in a city are separated by community borders. The disruption of borders such of these can lead to extreme situations (like the race riots of 1919 in Chicago, started when an Irish man killed a black boy named Eugene Williams because he swam past his "racial boundary" into the Twenty-ninth street beach). Diversity, in many ways, is our weakness.
This constant tension between races and neighborhoods within our city creates many problems for Chicago. The disconnection and aversion from neighborhoods within a city creates discrimination against individuals, unequal treatment, and significant economic differences.


Why do you think Chicago is such a segregated city? Do you think segregation is a choice, or is it forced upon the citizens of Chicago? How would desegregating Chicago have a positive affect on the city?

Boredom: The New Justification for Animal Cruelty

I was listening to the radio yesterday morning, tired and groggy, when I heard this startling story.  A 22 year old man and a 13 year boy from the far west side Austin neighborhood of Chicago were arrested for animal abuse on Friday. These two individuals recorded videos of torturing 5 adult dogs and 5 puppies and posted their videos on YouTube. These movies contained horrific, violent acts towards the dogs, ranging from flinging them around in the air to putting duct tape on a dog's testicles, ripping it off, and pouring alcohol onto his genitalia. To read more about these gruesome acts, you can read an article from the Chicago Sun Times by clicking here.

Immediately after I heard this disturbing story, I wanted to hear what the two men had to say. How could they justify acts as heinous as these? The 22 year old man, Joshua Moore, described it as "not a big deal" and that they were "bored". Forcing animals to eat their own fecal matter? Pouring lemon juice down dogs' throats? Is this what we are naturally inclined to do for entertainment? Violence has become such a norm in American society today. We see murder and bloodshed daily on the news--whether on the radio or the t.v. or the internet. When we are not hearing about violent things happening in the world around us, we immerse ourselves into video games and t.v. shows that encourage kids to punch, shoot, and kill. Are acts such as Moore's due to the overwhelming amount of violence American society has exposed to its people? Are we now finding violent acts such as these "not a big deal"? What are the other factors that are prompting people to do these horrific things?

TV Tokenism in Comedy?

On the CBS television show How I Met Your Mother, Barney Stinson (one of the 4 main characters in the show) has always wondered who his father is. Barney also has a half brother named James who is African American and clearly has a different birth father. Despite this, when James finally meets his birth father, Barney is convinced he has also found the father he has dreamed of meeting for decades. At this turning point in the episode, Barney takes racist stereotypes that pertain to blacks and apply them to himself (basketball, gospel singing, etc.).

Although this episode does not apply to the TV Tokenism thesis created by Mr. Bolos specifically for network dramas, I found it interesting that the show chose a white man to deliver racist stereotypes and jokes to amuse their audience. Barney and the audience can both justify the offensive things the character is doing because of the mentality that if you are the minority, you can make fun of yourself, right? In the image above, Barney is inserting himself within his "fellow African Americans", as if saying "It's okay! I'm one of them!"
 I believe that comedies use racist stereotypes and jokes as a "cheap shot" and is an easy way to obtain laughs from their viewers. I personally find How I Met Your Mother a hilarious, light hearted comedy, but I admit most of their jokes lack sufficient depth. Barney, for example, saying that his newfound race explains why he was so good at basketball, is a prime example of an easy, racist one-liner. Barney was clearly talented at basketball before he "discovered" he was black, so why is it funny that he justifies his talent now? A caucasian man does not have to be African American in heritage to be good at a sport, such as basketball, but the audience still reacts to this mindless joke and encourages them to create more. To watch the clip for more examples, click the video above this text.
Enjoy!!!

Breaking News: Disney Star Inadvertently Teaches Children About Safe Sex at Dr. Seuss Premiere

For all my YouTube junkies out there, I found a video of Zac Efron that has recently gone viral to be very applicable to what our American Studies class has been discussing. There is a clip of Zac Efron walking on the Red Carpet for the premiere of the Dr. Seuss movie The Lorax. In this clip, you can see after Efron reaches to get something out of his pocket, a gold condom falling out and onto the red carpet in front of thousands of viewers (including children). To watch this funny clip, click here. You are probably wondering why so many people want to watch a condom fall out of Zac Efron's pocket. As a matter of fact, why do we care if he has a condom or is having sex at all? Isn't it a natural human urge and activity that millions of people participate in? That, my friends, was exactly what I thought. In American Studies today, we were discussing the two things that drive the human race: sex and death. Clearly, this idea that a celebrity dropped a contraceptive in front of thousands of viewers is amusing, but looking at the world around us, why would something as trivial as this get so much attention? There are hundreds of people dying every day across the world. Why don't they have over 3 million people looking at their names and lives instead of a silly thing that happened to a Disney Superstar on the glamorous red carpet? Are we, as Americans, just more fascinated by sex? By fame? Or do we just try to avoid death since it is so prevelent in out lives?

Objectification for a Cause

Today I was talking to someone about commercials and what makes certain ones memorable and appealing to consumers versus ones that don't exactly leave a huge impression. A huge portion of the advertising industry is involved with objectifying women. An example of this can be seen in a commercial for Kaiser beer: two men are on a beach and manipulate a beer bottle, which is controlling a young woman with minimal clothing on. It's difficult to explain, but to watch this promiscuous commercial, click here. I also found an image online of a St. Pauli beer commercial, making a connection between the woman ("drop dead" gorgeous) and the beer (just as "refreshing" as the sexy woman).
I found the ideas behind these advertisements very interesting. In society today, we are constantly exposed to objectification and sexualization of women to encourage men to buy products. Are actions such as these diminishing women and their rights? Is it wrong to use women's bodies to sell products, such as a beer? Are these commercials even, in a sense, violating women's civil liberties?

St. Valentine Not So Saintly

As we all know,today is a very exciting time of year. A day we all know and love. Yes, that's right: Valentines Day. Every year on February 14th, a day is set aside to acknowledge and celebrate the love we have for everyone in our lives, emphasizing romantic lust and romantic lovers. I had never really known how Valentines Day was "created", so like any curious American citizen, I googled it. I discovered on History.com that St. Valentine was a priest in the 3rd century in Rome. The Emperor (Claudius II) made the decision to ban marriage for young men because he believed single men made better soldiers. This outlaw of marriage outraged St. Valentine, and in response he rebelled by secretly marrying people. When this act of rebellion was discovered, Valentine was immediately put to death. Despite this gruesome end, he is still remembered as a man who kept love alive and is praised for it annually I found this new information very interesting, especially after our discussion in class about the drastic increase in prisoners in America. There are currently over 2 million prisoners in America at this moment in time. In 1970, there were approximately 300,000. This overwhelming change makes us question our laws and if over 2 million people deserve to be locked in jail, even if it's the most minor infraction of the law. On one hand, America idolizes the justice system it has and the honest way our country enforce the laws it creates. On the other hand, is there a point that we are taking these small steps out of line too seriously? Was it just to put Valentine to death when he was doing something so harmless? Preserving love--one of the most noble things to fight for?How can a governing system decide who commits a "minor" crime versus those who need to be punished for their actions?

Adapting in the Digital Age

For a friend's birthday gift, I bought the new Skrillex EP album Bangarang. When I was purchasing it at Best Buy, I found it surprising how long it has been since I have physically bought a CD. Now-a-days, everyone buys albums off of iTunes or downloads them off websites. A CD? Psh, what's that?

When I gave him the gift, we started talking about the technological age we live in and how depressing it is that everything is becoming digitalized. For example, Netflix has taken over the film industry, forcing Blockbuster (a chain of stores that holds physical DVDs) to go out of business. You can no longer go out and browse the shelves to find an interesting looking movie to watch on your Friday night. Instead you can sit on your couch and scroll through different movie titles until you find one that looks appealing.

It appears that this trend is continuing with everything--from tv shows to music to even books. In America, we encourage the continuous development of technology, but is there a certain point where we should leave society the way it is? Or should we embrace the change that Netflix, iTunes, the Kindle, and other sources of technology offer?

The Post of Meta Reflection

After I started to read the entries I have created the past semester for a reflective blog post, I got very excited. I had forgot about all the topics I have analyzed and and questioned these past few months. I first came to the conclusion that AIS has really triggered some thoughts that I don't think would have crossed my mind before I started the course. This is because I believe I was encouraged to really take a look at American society in a variety of perspectives and inquire why American society is this way.
During the first semester of school, I have noticed that I basically only discuss topics that interest me on a philosophical level. I like to choose blog post subjects that I find relatable (and usually controversial) in society. 24 Hours of Reality, for example, was a huge deal in my household. My family is very environmentally active and "is on a mission to save the world", so I came to the conclusion that a great way to inform my peers is to create a blog post about the event. 
The titles of my posts also have had a constant theme where I question the principles and morals of the topic I write about--particularly referencing the hardships adolescents go through due to the way society treats them. For example, in Curfew: Considerate or Controlling, I question the necessity of a curfew. "Why is the government allowed to dictate what time a teenager needs to be at their house?" I accuse the government of "dictating" their power over myself and my peers (the youth of the nation). By using this word choice, I create a really personal connection between myself and the argument instead of maintaining a neutral position on the analysis. This influences the reader to sympathize for me, taking my side.
Although I do make some convincing claims, I had a major problem during my first quarter of blogging: I used virtually no external evidence backing up my statements. In the blog post Raising the Standard in Standardized Testing, I scrutinize the ethics of the standardized by asking the question "How can [ACT] be considered a standardized tests when there are thousands of kids that aren't getting the extra  preparation that other students are?" Although this is an inspiring ethical argument that questions a generally accepted practice, I don't have a quote from an external source. After creating this post and receiving a helpful comment from Bo'Connor, I stopped creating posts without any evidence as backbone and have continuously created blog posts with evidence.
After this reflection, I have come to see that I have slowly evolved from exclusively ethical arguments and have created more and more posts that relate more strongly to our curriculum. During second semester, I plan to work on both analyzing my quotes in my blog posts in greater detail and choosing topics that have a greater relation to historical topics opposed to exclusively American society. I would also like to become more technologically savvy and learn how to crop video clips for posts, but I won't try to bite off more than I can chew. 
"American society idolize[s] individuals and supports those who actively fight for what they believe in" (A Stronger Voice). Hopefully through this next semester, I will hold true to these words I wrote and actively attempt and pursue improvement  in my blogging, in my expression of opinions, and my newfound ability to ask questions. 

A Little Perspective For the Leaders of Tomorrow

Last year, I participated in a program called The Harper New Trier Leadership Program. This program selected thirty kids from NT and thirty kids from Harper Township High School (an inner-city school on the south side of Chicago) and took us all on excursions in neutral areas, letting us get to know each other over a few months. Even after the program ended, I continued to stay in contact and maintain friendships with these kids, despite the different backgrounds we come from. I have become very good friends with a girl named Mayneatha who lives in Englewood (a neighborhood on the south side that is considered the most dangerous area in Chicago). When meeting up with her last weekend downtown, she told me about how there has been more shooting around her house than usual and that more people have been killed this past year than she can remember.
After hearing this, I came home and tried to do a little research. I found an article published four days ago talking about a 15 year old boy named Mark who was fatally shot on a porch when visiting his family. I read more about this kid to learn that he had a seven month year old daughter and was not associated in any gang violence, but unfortunately had friends who were. His dream was "playing football, [but] as a young father, his goals were more grounded, hoping to become a mechanic as an adult". To read the full article, click here.
Living on the Northshore, it's easy to forget about what is going on outside our community and to put our lives in perspective. Most of us have never left our "Northshore bubbles," and similarly even fewer have left "the hood" from Englewood. The article stated that Mark Watts is the 32nd person under the age of 20 to be murdered in Englewood since 2008. Mark Watts was added to this number when returning to his old home from Riverdale just visit his loved ones--and by doing so was brutally shot to death. It hit me when I read this that all the kids from Harper don't hear this as an elaborate story, but a reality in their community.


The Harper New Trier Leadership Program offered both groups of kids opportunities to meet people different from each other. Americans values being the land of opportunity--a place that anyone can go from rags to riches in just a heartbeat or through long, hard work. Could have Watts' death been prevented if more interactive programs, such as the Harper Leadership Program, existed in his community? Do you think that programs like the Harper Leadership Program has potential to change living conditions in Englewood for the better?


Also, consider this idea of mixing of socioeconomic classes. Is this strategy the "American" thing to do? Or is it more inappropriate for the American ideals that idolize social class ?