Math should be Victimized over the Arts

There are many parrelles between the way Sir Ken Robinson characterizes the state of education today and the society of in Brave New World. The first one is using anestics to take control over the individual and get them to conform. In education this has been shown to be down through ADHD medication, in order to get kids to focus on school when they are not fuctioning as themselves but as zombies. Invertively they should reform the lecture or system instead of the students. Human nature will never change completely, however the school system can to become more effective. This compares with Brave New World in the sense that they use Soma in order to get over problems or numb themselves to the society in which they live. The text states that ,"Again twelve stanzas. By this time the soma had begun ... to work. Eyes shone, cheeks were flushed, the inner light of universal benevolence broke out on every face in happy, friendly smiles. Even Bernard felt himself a little melted". It has become a coping mechanism for them in correlation with the school systems use of ADHD medication to cope for the lack of focus and insuffiency. Additionally the way he described the school system as industrial draws a parallelism to Brave New World as well. There society is based off proficency and has an assembly line mindset similar to that of our education. The arts do not matter anymore instead all the focus has been on the proficentcy of standardized test. In theory the better the school's scores the smarter the kids, when in reality that is only aspect. Kids are being stripped of not necessarily their creativity but losing the ability to distinguish that the world is not all black and white, there is more than one answer. As a result the focus of proficecency in both worlds has doomed its citizens with the inablity to think past what is considered "right".

Evvvvrbody in the Club get TIPSY

     A new book appears to have redirected our attention, in short congratulations everyone we are done with blogging about the Tempest. However the new text associated with our discussions, Brave New World, appears by the first four chapters to be anything but pleasant. Nevertheless it is evident that partaking in this literary “artwork” will be interesting and mind harboring, therefore chapter three must be taken into account.

     In regards to chapter three, it provides the reader with a glimpse of Huxley’s Brave New World, pertaining to the drive of society and its social structure that constitutes this perceived utopia. In doing so, the population becomes manipulated and told what they should want instead of individual desires as motivation. For example, Mustapha Mond refers a world before Ford and the world in which they live, in correlation with the contrast of Ford and Freud. He emphasizes the people’s enjoyment of consumption as well as its negative counterpart. The world controlled by the consumption of goods and recreational sex, there is no real enjoyment or passion in this modern utopia. Unfortunately in order to replace or to fulfill these human needs, chemicals have been produced in order to supplement nature. Soma is used in order to dull the perception of emptiness with no after effects,  other than loss of individualism, human characteristics, and the ability to feel. With this drug dissatisfaction is numbed as well as rage. In doing so the chance of a revolution is eliminated and the utopia can continue to strive without question. Soma in short prevents an authentic human being. In fact Mond refers to a previous time as, “our ancestors were so stupid and short-sided that when the first reformers came along and offered to deliver them from those horrible emotions, they wouldn’t have anything to do with them.” This exemplifies the contrasting views about previous society to current. That is only a gist of what the Brave New World pertains to.   

snap!crap!pop! ... this preparation is a flop

In the discussions of George Will, Stephen Greenblat, and Aime Cesaire, one controversial issue has been the interpretations of literary readings. The right of whether to include political perceptions  and understand writing to be an art form  as an alternative to an objective reading of the material. On one hand George Will argues that the text in contact with should be approached with a conservative technique, only addressing the objective issues and internalizing the information presented as black and white. However on the other hand Stephen Greenblat perceives literary work as art. He takes a liberal stance on the issue and believes that the work can be interpreted as grey. Greenblat encourages individual opportunity to create own opinions on the material as well as welcome political viewpoints to be presented.  Others, Aime Cesaire, even maintain through his script of The Tempest that the underlining issues become apparent and obvious through it. This brings forth an objective view by providing what he believes should be gained through the work as well as allowing leeway for opinions. Nonetheless my opinions on this issue contrast from those presented in these articles. I believe that all literary work should be presented as a grey canvas and open to all perceptions. Authors have do have a purpose for creating their “masterpiece” however not everyone sees the world through the same light. In retrospect politics make any conversation more inviting to arguments as well as the opportunity to express individualistic opinions to shed light on the mindset of the reader. With that said literature in my opinion isn’t a black and white subject and cannot function with only objective intentions. Politics make it more controversial and open to freethinking but mustn’t over shadow the author’s purpose. Therefore it should convey all views and give room for all mindsets to be expressed. There are endless opinions to any one given question.