Cody AP Blog

1. How does Bokononism try to solve the problem of violent, religious dogmatism?

Bokononism breaks the stereotype of religion which makes itself out to be an institution that forces its beliefs on others. One of the first things written in the Books of Bokonon is that everything included in the religion is a lie. Here you can see that Bokononism shows a very different view than most religions share. Sparknotes shows us a point that Bokononism offers its followers the illusion of having some sort of purpose in life. It may say that mankind will never understand human existence or life in general, but it also offers the comfort of having some sort of meaning. The Bokononist religion does not push its intentions or standards on people, forcing them to choose whether or not they want to change their way of living. It actually provides them with a more meaningful idea that there is a purpose in life.

2. How does Felix mock the prevailing notion that “evil” is humanity’s biggest problem?

Evil itself is not the biggest problem, however a person who holds evil can be considered a big problem. Felix Hoenikker was a great scientist that created the atomic bomb. Hoenikker did not care about the responsibilities that come with the great power he had in being a part of that. This contributes to Felix’s indifferent emotions when it came to people, including his family. He didn’t really want anything to do with people, simply because he was not a people person at all. Felix Hoenikker was conveyed as someone who approached his work as if it were a silly game like Cats Cradle, throughout this book. Vonnegut is mocking the fact that there are people out there such as Felix Hoenikker who are incapable of understanding the destructive power they may yield. Hoenikker approaches work as a game when really his job is so serious that even he himself didn’t want to think about the power he had and did not want to take responsibility for it.

3. How does the commencement speech delivered at Frank’s high school graduation mock the valorized status that science occupies as a means to discover “truth?”

The commencement speech at Frank’s high school places an overly high value on science. This may be simple sounding, but it actually is considered high level satire. Dr Breed is the one giving the speech and he tells the graduates that he hopes that most of them consider jobs in science. He says that the trouble with the world is that people are too focused on superstition instead of science. He also says that science will someday find the basic secret of life. This sentence is completely ironic because science does not find the basic secret of life, but rather creates the atom bomb, and then ice-nine too. Not only is science not a clear path to truth, it essentially can be considered a path to destruction or chaos in an already chaotic world.

4. How does Vonnegut satirize humanity’s obsession with the “truth?” Why does he satirize it? Why does he think it is dangerous?

Vonnegut uses the Books of Bokonon to satirize the human obsession with truth. Bokononism allows Vonnegut to create a reality where people knowingly follow a religion based on lies solely because they feel safe and don’t have a worry in the world. It’s ironic that people will follow these shameless lies, because they obsess over the fact of knowing the “truth”. Vonnegut really makes a big joke of truth so the people will shrug it off and not pay so much attention to it. The reason for this is to keep the people from focusing on such a complex and subjective subject as the truth, and feeding them lies that will ease their minds. As shown by other infamous leaders quest and desire for truth Vonnegut tries to stay away from that and create a different atmosphere.

living life without illusions is almost impossible. For me it is especially difficult because throughout the day I am in many different environments that cause me to change the way I act. Not necessarily because I want to but because it is what’s best for the current environment I’m in. At school I act different than at home and at home I act different than when I play sports. It’s hard to not think about whats best for the current situation you are in and aim to make it a good experience even if it means altering how you act to make others see what they like to see. My parents say they can tell I act differently at home than at school. At school I try to act happy or hide my true feelings while when I’m at home I feel there is no need to hold those feelings back. If they are sad feelings I am in the hands of my family who can comfort me. My parents don’t think I do it for personal comfort but more for comfort of the environment I’m in. A good example is when I play baseball. There are certain times when I have to pretend to be happy or supportive when we are doing really badly even though I myself am having a bad game. I don’t do it for myself but to try and show the team that they can count on me no matter what the situation is. My brother also notices the different way I act in sports than at home. He realizes the pain I have endured from family troubles but even tells me how proud of me he is because I am able to not let it drag me down while I play. He notices that I don’t let it effect me at all and even if there is reason why I could be mad he respects me for being able to play through it without showing signs of struggle.

Watching Mel Gibson’s version of the play Hamlet was probably the most interesting to me. Although it was the last film version I watched it kept me the most intrigued throughout the play. I thought this movie portrayed the scenes out of the book almost exactly how I pictured them in my head. The main issue for me was the touchy feeliness of Hamlet and his mom Gertrude. Their connection was way too close for me to bear. I couldn’t believe it was happening but that was probably the weirdest part for me out of the whole film. Even though this film had the action I desired and the acting I felt fit the play, it was still a little uninteresting. This is probably due to the fact that I have already seen two other film versions and I was just tired of the play in general. I think I would have liked this movie much better if it was the first one I watched because it portrayed the play very well while only being two hours long. My favorite aspect of this whole play is the ambiguity it brings just like the play. You see Hamlet in the background sometimes and wonder if he knows people are watching him or not, which contributes to the whole idea of him pretending to be crazy. I thought this was a very clever element and it made the movie that much more interesting even though it was the 3rd version I watched.

This article helped me look at Hamlet from a different angle. It analyzed the political aspects of the characters and how the political aspect of that time period came into play when Shakespeare wrote. I found it interesting that Shakespeare received his theme from the time period where it was common for rulers to kill other kinsman to gain power or stay in power. To read that really made me wonder why that was the case. This posed a question in my mind about Claudius that was later answered in the essay. Claudius’ actions were actually meant to do what was best for him and how he could raise himself up which makes sense because he killed his own kin to receive the power he wanted. Although this essay posed some interesting ideas and a very understandable argument, it seemed to drag on and on about the same few points making it a tad boring. However it was still interesting and gave me more insight on why Shakespeare chose the themes he did when writing his plays.

This modern day version of  Hamlet was a very interesting movie. I was hoping that with the modern day setting would come modern day language as well as everything else. The way the characters dressed was way more modern but the language was the same only cut out in certain parts. If the movie was made more modern then I think they should have made the language more modern too. The main part that caught my attention would be how Hamlet used his videos and film skills to portray his thoughts. Instead of the play that he put on in the Branagh version to portray Claudius’ murder scene he uses video clips. Hamlet’s character in this movie is similar to the way I see him as I read the play. He isn’t one to take much action and he is so indecisive he over analyzes everything. Instead of the over- acting I saw in Branagh’s version, Ethan Hawke seemed to under-act. His motions and voice was so monotonous except for a rare outburst. No action is seen in this movie except for the last scene where Laertes shoots Hamlet. That was unexpected but helped remind me that the setting of this play was modern and it added a nice little twist to the movie. This version was definitely different than the first one I saw but it made me look at the play a little differently and added to my cultural eye.

This film version of Hamlet was quite interesting to say the least. Scenes from this movie definitely helped me envision how the scenes in the book were being played out. I was able to take the ideas from the film and use them to help me understand the images from the book. The scene in the movie where they are having the big party is totally different than I imagined in my head so that was interesting and provided me with a different lens to view this book with. Besides the fact that this film was four hours long it was pretty interesting. One of the biggest things that bugged me was how over the top the actors acted in certain places. Hamlet for instance took some things over the edge with his loud voice, and crazy actions such as dragging Ophelia along in the main hall. Of course Hamlet was supposed to act insane sometimes but I felt like sometimes the actors took it over the top with some of the things they said. This version helped me understand some of the things going on in the book that otherwise I had no clue about before. There would be some places in the book where I wouldn’t know what was going on but being able to go back and picture the scene in my head gives me a better idea of whats going on or at least how it should be portrayed. This movie was long but very entertaining and kept me interested. Overall I would say I enjoyed this play and all the excitement it brought.

This essay was very interesting and kept me intrigued the whole time. I could really feel the passion that Alice felt for her “hero” Zora. Alice went to great lengths just to find out more things about Zora and how she lived her life. The funniest part for me was the way she lied to everyone and told them she was Zora’s niece. It wasn’t the fact that she lied but more the fact that the people that did know anything about Zora in the first place didn’t pick up on the fact that she was lying to them. Her countless trips to find different people that might be able to tell her more about her “aunt” Zora were very in depth. From the way she approaches Zora’s grave to the conversation she has with the monument man and Dr. Benton, she creates vivid imagery for the reader. It really helped me to understand what was actually going on and what the visual aspect of it looked like. Then towards the end, she is so involved and interested in her exploration she misses her plane back home, but she doesn’t even care or think twice about it. She had seen and heard so much she was willing to pay some extra money for another ticket just because she felt it was worth the visit. Throughout all the interviews she has, Alice is able to connect Zora’s life to many different similarities in her books. Alice even talks about how she won’t cry when she sees the long forgotten grave of Zora because she feels Zora wasn’t a teary kind of person herself. I think Alice sort of grew into her role as Zora’s niece because of the way she cared and thought about Zora. Although she lied the whole time she was able to receive more information which helped her in the end to make Zora known again. She wanted to give Zora the attention she deserved, so she went and tried to relive Zora’s last days so she could make it known to the public.

Mrs. Turner definitely likes the white race to say the least. She practically worships the white race along with all the other “gods” she talks about. She reminds of a person that nobody really likes to listen too but you don’t want to be rude too. Since Janie isn’t outright telling Mrs. Turner to leave she doesn’t because Janie is the only one that will listen without showing her true feelings about the situation. Mrs. Turner envies the way Janie looks but feels like she is throwing it all away because she married a dark black man. She is a white person stuck in a black person’s body. She talks about how she hates the black people and how they are always laughing, singing, and causing a ruckus. She must have been taught those views through her parents because normally you don’t just grow up as a black person hating your own race! Not only does she hate her race, but she also puts them down. She criticizes them on everything they do and she puts the white onto a pedestal. She feels that whites are more mature and would let the black people in with them so long as they weren’t as bad as they were. She is just a crazy woman that keeps telling her beliefs until she can get someone to agree with her or relate to her which is why she talks to Janie because she feels like they can both relate to each other fairly well.

Janie isn’t mad about Tea Cakes gambling because she realizes that it is apart of him. She is more worried about the imaginary people that will criticize. She is so understanding to the gambling because it is also being done for her. Tea Cake is gambling to win her money so she can’t be angry at him for trying to do something for her. The money represents a few different things. First she felt safe with money. When she found out that it was gone however she became scared. She lost the trust she originally had. Within losing that trust she began to have her doubts about Tea Cake and thought of all the bad things. When she ended up regaining the money her love and trust were instantly restored. She couldn’t help but being happy with Tea Cake even though he took her money in the first place. Money had a huge effect on Janie and her way of thinking.

The mule represents women and even more specifically black women like Janie. She is compared to working with mules when she is married to Logan Killicks, then when she is married to Jody she can never say anything. Jody won’t let her speak her mind and oppresses her. Women are compared to the mules as a mode of work. They work like mules work and they don’t have a say in what happens to them. More specifically Janie and the mule can be compared because the mule gets picked on and has no say in what happens as does Janie. Janie can’t control her situation because the women aren’t considered as equal as men. Defenseless.

The  buzzards just add to the effect. They end up communicating together as they circle the body the way jody and the townspeople communicate, and then they just destroy the body by eating it just like they destroyed Janie by holding her back. There was nothing she could do because once she started to speak up she would just get shut down. The buzzards end the mules agony sort of like how many things tend to die off in reality. Racial views or rather the equality of sexes has diminished like the buzzards made the mule’s defenseless life go away.