Category: Reading Response

I Think My Answer is Probably Yes

amschmi1Leave a comment

Step One:

  1. The context is millions of men, women, and children are dying in Syria because of the civil war; Americans have become cold and turned against helping the refugees, meanwhile we mourn the loss of a dog to great extent.
  2. The purpose is to make the reader think about priorities and what really should come first in this world.
  3. All human lives have value, but also that a human’s life is worth every bit as much as a golden retriever’s.
  4. Logos: examples of what past presidents have done in situations that are similar to Syria’s; pathos: children and dogs are the two things that touch the hearts of most
  5. The article begins somewhat informal, as he talks about his dog and how she would have won the Nobel Peace Prize, but then the tone switches to formal as he gets into foreign policy and almost a political debate about what our government has done in the past that they should be doing now
  6. He uses sarcasm when addressing this issue; his exaggerations make the reader think and reflect on their personal values
  7. n/a
  8. bias might include comparing Syria to the Holocaust which I believe is a slight exaggeration at this time; he uses little evidence that is specifically relevant to Syria, instead he brings in evidence of what past presidents have done, but does not give us specifics on what is actually going on

Step Two:

The most effect strategy to me is comparing something almost everyone loves, dogs, to what everyone should love and care about most, human life. I don’t know if that has a specific name, besides using pathos to connect emotionally to the reader, but I find that this strategy of making an American treasure seem minuscule after juxtaposing it to the most valuable thing on earth makes the reader stop to think.

Kernel – What Ever Happened to Frank Snake Church and Search Engine

amschmi11 Comment

(by: Amber Schmidt and Kaitlin Havens)

Throughout Sherman Alexie’s “Ten Little Indians”, the theme of identity is brought up time after time. Frank Snake Church and Corliss particularly struggled with the ultimate battle of Who I Am vs. Who I Am Supposed to Be. Corliss, who “wasn’t supposed to read the books she read and [who] wasn’t supposed to say the things she said,”(Alexie 41) found herself an outsider in a room full of family due to being “too young and too female and too Indian to be that smart,” (Alexie 41.) Frank Snake Church however, found himself lost in his own home due a lack of family. Although Frank mostly is at war with himself and Corliss usually battles it out when members of her family and community, both characters could agree that the reflection they see in the mirror is not how they feel inside.

In What Ever Happened to Frank Snake Church, Frank finds himself lost after the death of his father. He decides to get into the best shape of his life and play college basketball as a “second wind”.. Playing ball was always his dream until the death of his mother when he was a teenager which resulted in him hanging up his basketball shoes for good in order to honor her memory. Alexie juxtaposes the idea of Frank giving up basketball to honor his mother with him retaking up the sport to honor his father. Compared to Corliss who reads poetry despite her father and uncles in Search Engine, Frank does what he does in remembrance of his parents. Frank Snake Church is chasing after his dream which in essence is chasing after his late mother and father while Corliss runs away from her father and tribe and chases a poet. Both Frank and Corliss go on a quest, but endure different demons, which include age and mental illness for Frank, which ultimately leads to a much different gain in self knowledge. Frank learns after his knee injury while playing with college kids that even though both his parents are gone, he is going to be fine.

In relation to the short story mentioned above, Sherman Alexie wrote Search Engine which is about a girl named Corliss who is also struggling with identity.  She is constantly being patronized by her Native American father and uncles because she loves to read poetry.  She accidentally stumbled onto a book of poems written by a mysterious Spokane indian, Harlan Atwater.   She became very interested in him because she was also a Spokane indian.  She asked around her tribe about this Harlan Atwater guy.  No one seemed to know who he was, or know about the book.  She ended up finding his phone number, calling him, and getting turned away by his rude attitude.  She was determined, however, and found his address.  She was nervous, but made a trip to Seattle anyway.  She ended up getting lost and asked a homeless man for directions to Harlan’s house. Although not finished with her quest, the homeless man unlocks some self knowledge by introducing her to the idea she has a lot more in common with being homeless than she ever thought before.  When she wandered up onto Atwater’s house, she had no idea what or who she was about to come in contact with.  When Harlan opened the door, she was devastated with what she saw.  She described him as being “homely.”  After a heart to heart conversation with the poet, she finally realizes that she needs no one’s approval but her own, and must learn to let things go.  She said to Harlan, “you’re a lost bird,” (Alexie, p. 40) which is exactly how she feels.  In a sense, she is similar to Atwater because she does not exactly fit the description of a typical Spokane, like he does not. Harlan wanted exactly what Corliss has and vice versa.  Corliss is unable to fully be herself because of the constant negativity towards her interests, but gains the self understanding and confidence in order to try anyways.

In these two short stories, Corliss and Frank both struggle with finding themselves.  They are both looking for acceptance and for happiness.  Corliss finds her happiness in poetry while Frank finds his in basketball.  They both battle their demons and conquer them, regardless of what others think. However, they are also completely different. Corliss found Harlan and learned from what he told her, while Frank found Russell and got in shape to play basketball again to honor his late parents and discovered that he had become too old to continue  playing. These stories broaden the outlook of the real world as well as teach the balance of what you want to do, can do, and are supposed to do.

 

Reference Citation:

Alexie, Sherman. “Search Engine” and “What Ever Happened to Frank Snake Church.” Ten Little Indians: Stories. New York: Grove, 2003. 1+. Print.

Kernel – Lawyer’s League and Notes of a Native Speaker

amschmi11 Comment

 

In “Lawyer’s League” by Sherman Alexie and “Notes of a Native Speaker” by Eric Liu, both authors bring to the table their opinions on being a different race and ethnicity in modern America.  Alexie is an African American/Indian trying to make a name for himself in the world of politics. Liu is an Asian American tackling the challenge of being a “banana” head on. Although these men are of different skin tones and heritage and have a different way of coping with the pressures of living in the United States while their ancestors were born elsewhere, I think they could both agree that sometimes, for those without “white privilege”, the American Dream isn’t all that it cracked up to be.

Sherman Alexie introduces his character as a “graceful monster.” He was the product of a football player and a ballerina which led to a “biracial revolutionary leftist magician with a twenty-foot jumper encoded in [his] DNA.” Alexie describes a character that strives to be the first politician who is truly trusted by the Indian tribes, but it is clear in this story the insecurities that exist being a mixed man in white America. In story format, the author takes us through a series of events letting us into the thoughts of the politician such as his inability to ever be with a white woman even if he loved her because of what people might think. It becomes apparent after the character punches a racist man in the nose during a basketball game that Alexie’s character still hasn’t fully figured out how to an Indian man in a white society. Unlike in Liu’s text, Sherman writes of a man that is aggressive, forceful, and, in my opinion, less effective in his tactics to get other people to see his worth despite his darkened skin tone.

“Notes of a Native Speaker” began as a list and then transitioned into Liu’s characters specific thoughts instead of fast forwarding through time while telling a story. The Asian American man in the text discusses what the process of assimilating into a white man is like. The character reveals that at first this “whitening” development was almost his guilty pleasure as he felt himself lose touch with his long life of Chinese heritage. However, in a confident tone he discloses that he no longer feels ashamed and he is proud of where is in life and pleased with the white family he just recently married into. In contrary to “Lawyer’s League”, Liu creates a character who is conformable enough in his own skin to allow whites to call him an “honorary white” and Asians to call him a “banana” and simply say that he has “moved away from the periphery and toward the center of American life.”

Both works of literature share with the reader the ins and outs of being a man of color in America’s white society. One text shows a point of view where the man is angry about racism and takes a hawkish approach against the white man who belittles him. The second text depicts a colored man embracing the opportunities the United States has for him. Both themes can relate back to one common parable: life gets hard, but it’s what you do with it that matters.

Kernel – Shitty First Drafts and Perfectionism

amschmi11 Comment

In “Shitty First Drafts” and “Perfectionism”, Anne Lamott discusses the importance and inevitability of one of the most important parts of the writing process. Lamott does, however, take two different approaches in her attempt to convey this idea. In one essay Lamott presents the guideline of first drafts to be the absence of perfection while the other essay highlights the presence of “shittiness” that should be in every rough draft. I think both works allow the reader to see that no matter what you call it, your first draft is essential to the writing process and isn’t supposed to be “How to Kill a Mockingbird” quality just yet.

Lamott seems to write “Shitty First Drafts” to a somewhat less formal audience. She discusses strategies like letting characters say ‘”Well, so what, Mr. Poopy Pants?”’ as well as treating the voices in your head like helpless mice and trapping them into jars. Lamott stresses the importance of just getting your “shitty first draft” down, no matter how silly, or shitty. She opens up about writers not having a naturally occurring flow of words streaming out of them as some may think. She paints the picture of Herman Melville having the same trouble getting started as that poor tenth grader whose mom made him take AP Lang. In fact, Anne Lamott assures us of this: “We all often feel like we are pulling teeth, even those writers whose prose ends up being the most natural and fluid.”

“Perfectionism” was written in a way that encompasses all parts of life, instead of just writing. Lamott approaches this piece of writing as a general rule of thumb, instead of simply a rule of literature. She says perfectionism “will keep you cramped and insane your whole life.” Lamott challenges the reader to take a step back from unrealistic expectations of perfectionism in all aspects, including first drafts. Instead of puerile technics mentioned in “Shitty First Drafts”, the author suggests turning to your God in order to break free from the unflawed point of view, in writing as well as life.

Both works highlight the need of a rough draft, in the rawest sense of the term. “Shitty First Drafts” focusses for the most part on writing within itself, while “Perfectionism” breaks that mold and allows the reader to apply the text to every facet of their life. When broken down, both themes can be related back to taking a step away from the voices in your head telling you everything has to be untarnished and just letting the words flow.