A Quick Review of The Great Gatsby

There is something grand about F. Scott Fitzgerald’s work that makes even the wildest individual stoic and introspective. When I first read The Great Gatsby in my freshman year of high school I’m not sure I completely grasped the weight of Fitzgerald’s message. After re-reading and watching the film (which is, unlike most novel adaptations, quite good) I started to appreciate the complexities of Fitzgerald’s love triangle and ingenious central message.
The novel itself is narrated by Nick Carraway who describes a love affair between a man named Gatsby, (a Great War veteran) and his life long love, Daisy (a kind of clueless aristocrat). While Gatsby has, for the majority of his life, pursued Daisy romantically, he has been blocked by many (often unfortunate) circumstances. The Great Gatsby is Jay Gatsby’s last attempt to rekindle his lost relationship with the, now married, Daisy Buchanan.
To me, The Great Gatsby epitomizes all that is great and evil about American society. While Jay Gatsby made it to the highest levels of society through his own hard work, he fell victim, like many others before and after him, to the harsh mistress of money. When he finally gets Daisy’s attention again, after many years, he has nothing human left to offer her. He is forced to show her instead, not the kind and compassionate Gatsby that she remembered, but the various possessions that he has accumulated through his journey to the highest levels of American aristocracy. While Fitzgerald does a great job in showing the positive powers of “true love” he also depicts, equally well, the danger of unmitigated affection. As a high school freshman, I did not glean this information from my first read. However, the ultimately enduring part of The Great Gatsby is that the book’s characters appear to change as you do. While I see Gatsby now as haplessly soulless, and Daisy as a fiend, other people, may see the roles in a completely different way. This effect, while a simple illusion (the actual lines of the book never change), ultimately makes The Great Gatsby and enduring work. In a more general way, the real power of The Great Gatsby is not its realistic characters, its plot, or the suspense of the affair, but its truthful view of love and attraction.

My Epic Introduction

I've decided to post the introduction to my end of term paper for FYE. It's in no way finished but I'm quite proud of the introduction so far. I will post the entirety of the paper when I finish.

About the capitalist states, it doesn't depend on you whether we (Soviet Union) exist. If you don't like us, don't accept our invitations, and don't invite us to come to see you. Whether you like it our not, history is on our side. We will bury you.
-Nikita Khrushchev
Russian Soviet politician (1894 - 1971)

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.
-Ronald Reagan
40th president of US (1911 - 2004)

In February of 1917 something was happening in Russia that would fundamentally alter world politics and, ultimately, determine U.S. foreign policy for the next 90 years. This event, the Bolshevik Revolution, began in the streets, among the angered labor force of the once great Russian Empire. The people would, in time, make their way to the lavish palaces of the high aristocracy tearing down centuries of accumulated excess. The revolution, pushed by popular sentiment, hunger, and oppression, would only come to a stop at the Winter Palace, where after protracted resistance; the Czar’s government would finally surrender. Here “the people” made their stand. Here, the Czarist monarchy, which had stood for generations, would meet its bitter end. Eventually, through the work of Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Leon Trotsky, and Alexander Kerensky, the Russian Empire would become the United Soviet Socialist Republics.

At the same time, across an ocean, a very different revolution was taking place. In 1917, the United States stood on the precipice of war in Europe. Raking in great dividends from war loans to the Allies, and making nearly two billion dollars in war contracts with their brethren across the Atlantic, the United States was prospering. With the Russian state officially withdrawn from the war, the German divisions of the Eastern Front were pushed to the Western Front were they bolstered the German lines. Now that Germany had the “upper hand” in the Great War, U.S. involvement seem necessary for the preservation of England and France. Urged by American capitalists and justified by a series of German blunders (the Zimmerman telegram, the sinking of the Lusitania, and, in general, and Germany’s declaration of unrestricted submarine warfare) President Woodrow Wilson asked Congress for a declaration of war on April 6, 1917 and officially entered the Great War on the side of the Allies. Upon entering the war, capitalism was proclaimed (unofficially) the standard in regards to American economic and political structure. It can be argued that, without the collective might of the capitalists and industrialists, the United States would never have been able to make war on Germany. After the war, President Wilson would marshal the United States into the image of “super power” and “protector of republicanism” through his famous Fourteen Points. Promising self determination to all colonies of empire, Wilson would set the standard for United States intervention. Later, Wilson’s “Open Door” would be the opening through which the United States would see the Cold War. From the end of World War II to the collapse of the Berlin Wall the United States would attempt to "make good" on Wilson’s promise at the end of the Great War: All nations have the right to determine how they will be governed.

Cartoon of the Day

I think this describes a few of us...at least a few people in my generation.

The Dying (or Dead?) English Language

For each weekly group lecture in my FYE class (a kind of freshmen seminar) we are required to write a "thoughtful and coherent" review of the day's lecture. I have little trouble in "voicing my opinion" of these lectures. Due in large part to paying for my own education, I hold all of my classes to rather high standards. FYE is no exception. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these FYE lectures have been an educational joke, and, at the end of the day, they leave me pondering the state of national education. I have enjoyed (i.e. learned something) from only three lectures out of the year long class. This horrifies me. Worse, it worries me that I seem to be the only person who genuinely cares.

This week's lecture stands as a perfect example of these Wednesday lectures. Since I loathed the lecture, finding it both poorly supported and disastrously organized, I wrote what I deemed to be an adequate review expressing my disappointment. These weekly reviews are turned in online, and, after turning in our reviews, we are able to look over our classmate's reviews as well as our own. So, it only makes sense that, in order to receive the respect of you classmates, you would turn in a polished piece of writing. After all, the directions do state, quite clearly, that your review must be coherent. Apparently, I am the only person who thinks this to be a necessity. After turning in my review, I decided to open up a few of my fellow classmates' reviews to read. As it turned out, I wasn't the only person disappointed by the lecture. There were several people who expressed their confusion regarding the lecturer's points and opinions.

While disagreement with the lecturer was progress for my class, out of the reviews, only one bothered to employ some kind of editing. I was horrified by the grammar, the spelling, and the lackluster responses of most of my fellow students. In nearly all of the reviews that I have read my classmates still (even after years of high school English) cannot properly differentiate between 'too' and 'to' and 'your' and 'you're'. I saw people apply emphasis to a word by capitalizing its first letter (something that I believe was discontinued in the 17th century). I saw, frequently, the incorrect use of semicolons, colons, and commas. While I am certainly not a saint when it comes to punctuation, I make sure that someone else reads over my work before I turn it in. Or at the very least, I have the computer perform a spell check. What has happened to responsible writing in college? Will my generation see the ultimate end of the English language?

Don't even get me started on text messaging....

I have nothing to contribute this week except another picture from the museum.

Sorry.

The Delusional

Like so many people in the world today, I am enraged. This particular rage does not come from the Obama administration's inadequate handling of the economy, the encroaching neo-socialism of my generation, or even the archaic step backward that we have taken in regards to gay rights. No. My rage today is directed toward the imbecile who penned the FYE congratulation letter that I received in my mailbox today. Don't get me wrong. I am honored to receive such recognition. However, this congratulation was laughably wrong.

For your great pleasure, I offer the following:
"Although a majority of your accomplishment can be attributed to your own hard work and dedication, we like to think that the FYE program assisted in that success."

*Ahem*...Surely this was not written by faculty, no one's that presumptuous...right!?

It appears that the delusional FYE administrators believe that my academic success comes in part from my experience in FYE. Quite honestly, I'm not sure how I can appropriately emphasize how very wrong they are. I'm quite certain that I have learned absolutely nothing from my time in FYE. In general, the FYE program is a joke. The faculty, confused. The curriculum, terribly disorganized. But hey, at least we have a stable budget to support such programs, right!?

Of course, I shouldn't be so harsh on FYE. After all, they did show me why some people succeed and others fail. I now see the inherent (?) stupidity of college students and I am fully aware of my generation's lack of respect for education. So, congratulations FYE, you've taught me bitterness and given me even less regard for the human race as a whole. Thank you.

On pics and profs

I'm doing a small experiment with the picture inserting thingy on blogger...so you, my fair readers, are gifted with one of my favorite pictures from our recent trip to San Francisco.

I am looking into compressing all of the pictures so that I can send them in email form to those of you who expressed interest.


Now...to something resembling an article...

In my opinion, there are three distinct types of teachers: the terribly boring "old guard", the middle grounded baby boomers, and the sickly bubbly, completely unproductive, new teachers. As I progress in my schooling I am rapidly developing my own idea of the perfect teacher. While I enjoy the straight forward style of my political science professor, I find him, at times, to be incredibly boring. While I enjoy the way in which he allows the facts to speak for themselves I often find myself wishing that he put just a bit more excitement behind them. Perhaps this has something to do with the age in which these professors were taught but it is evident and pervasive throughout Sonoma's faculty that there is a continuum in teaching method.
This analysis is certainly not perfect. There are some that break out of their "age group" and attempt a different style, and there are also those that fall between categories. However, I find that the worst of all the types is that of the bubbly, completely "interactive" teacher. Why has this become the "model teacher"? Are we losing interest in the real subjects and looking for entertainment in the classroom instead of learning? If that is the case, then I'm not sure I'd like to teach. I don't see the professor as an entertainer, and while, sometimes, it may be appropriate to liven up one's audience, it should not be the focus. Sadly, I have seen many teachers, new to the field, take up this position as entertainer, and, quite frankly, it horrifies me.

Just something to think about.

A Few Brief Notes...Seriously...

While I am not known for my brevity this will be, as the title states, a brief note.

First, I feel I need to "publicly" acknowledge the fantastic job that Monica did on my banner...it really is awesome!

Second, I hope that I can update this blog with some regularity. Those whom I have promised to email on a daily basis will attest to my rather abysmal promptness in that department. So...I guess there isn't much more that I can say...I'll get to it when I get to it.

Was that convoluted enough?
Good.
I'm practicing my politics.