Walt Whitman’s A thousand Splendid suns

29 09 2012

The change of perspective in a poem depending on the connections it has with the author’s life

 

    At the first glance, the person behind “Give Me the Splendid Silent Sun” sounds like a boundless, greedy, exuberant young soul. The ‘youthfulness’, a motif accompanying the poem is created by the indecisive yet exited and expectant mood of the poem – 3 attributes characteristic to a young person, who has not yet been disappointed by life. The presumption that a youthful person wrote the piece turn out to be wrong, and as we can see for ourselves, the poem has been “written in 1865”, when Walt Whitman was 46 years of age. Apparently, the author was a very vernal 46 year old man.

 

     Another thing that might change one’s view of the poem is author’s belief in “America as the great democracy” and “the sense of equality and community among all the people”. Clearly, the writer was a patriot of his country, a detail that emphasizes even more the vivid description of both of America’s rural and urban lives, information that gives depth and reason for the observant way the details are handled and presented to the audience. America is depicted as a glorious, fair country, with a place for everyone. “Give Me the Splendid Silent Sun” is no longer a contrasted portrayal of nature versus city, but an aesthetical tribute to America.

      Whitman has been a witness to the impact the Civil War has had on the American society. Seeing his brother after was motivated him to assist medically the hospitalized Confederate and Union soldiers. Line 30 has been put in brackets, and for a reason: it’s a fresh breath of realism in the middle of the utopian context. The awareness of writer’s experience turns the line into a little back-to-reality drop of grief which slows down for a split moment the crescendo of ebullience that is being build up from the beginning of the poem.

       According to a prior research, Walt Whitman’s sexual orientation was either homosexual or bisexual, information that clashes with the lines 8 and 25, in which the poet talks about his desire for both short and long relationships with women, making the poem only half-autobiographical, only seen through the eyes of another person. This argument can be justified with the given information on Whitman which states that he “attempted to project himself into the identities of ordinary Americans from all walks of life and to incorporate their lives into his own”. Therefore, Walt Whitman was mostly a passionate observer of life and his poems can testify for that.

Anunțuri




Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice Gone Wrong: a rant about silent irritations.

29 09 2012

No sugarcoating, here’s the deal: we’re young, sometimes angry and we rarely talk about what we feel. By that I don’t mean the organized, double spaced kind of emotional expression, with a deadline attached to it. No, I mean the basic on-the-spot anger.

There are some specific kinds of situations where you’re expected to lay back and keep quiet. Sudden misogynist joke, half-serious homophobic statement, some sort of mocking comment about something we feel passionate about, etc. There’s plenty of material to choose from. We’re surrounded by things we’re not supposed to be openly honest about, unless other people do so first. Not rude, but honest.

One of the first problems, the root of all evil, is that our generation supports indifference. Caring isn’t cool, it’s better to have a sarcastic comment about everything and it’s ok to be unmotivated, who needs passionate attitude towards life when we’re all ~smart individuals~ who ~struggle with the society and the weight it lays on our frail shoulders~ on a daily basis? First of all, welcome to the real world. Second of all, caring is the coolest thing ever, forever. So when someone who happens to be of the male gender comments on something that involves mostly the female part of the community (that you happen to be part of), go ahead and get angry.

Things that made me frustrated recently: “Rihanna deserved it”; “slut-walkers should be ashamed”; legitimate rape and its magical consequences; “no more Oreos for me, because of (gasp!) The Gay Advertisement”; “Women should not be allowed to do abortion because I said so”- random dude. The list goes on and it includes Jane Eyre, girls who have these cults where they worship each other and take pictures in the mirror and I will stop here.

I dare you; I double dare you to make a list like the one above. Thank me later.

Truth is, honesty can be misinterpreted for rudeness. And it usually is. And you get scared and you keep it inside. No need to spoil everyone’s evening with a feminist comment, eh? Blend in, laugh and rant later. You go guys, keep up the good work, talk behind backs, smile and say nothing at all. Good job, y’all. There goes your trophy and the title of ‘Miss Too Good for This’ and “Mister I Don’t Care’. Meanwhile, for the rest of us I have prepared a list.

1)     Care. Self-explanatory. Accept it and acknowledge the responsibility. Defeating ignorance is arguably the next best thing to post-break-up ice cream.

2)     The impact (or lack of?). Is the person worth it? Was her/his statement a simple blurt made out of ignorance or purposeful desire to piss people off? There’s two types of people: type A) considerate of different options and opinions or type B) a fixed I’ve-been-taught-this-was-leave-me-be. No need to struggle against the wall.

3)     Humor. Don’t force it. Basically try not to make the person look like a fool, present your perspective instead (hard to do with the pancake-make-up-bimbos but still manageable)

4)     Question. ‘You’re wrong and I hate you’ used to work when life was simple and the moon was made out of cheese. The method that works the best is (ta-dah!), the question. ‘What do you mean by that?’; ‘Do you know that’s actually sounds offensive?’, etc. Justifying your peculiar sort of homophobia/ sexism/ racism/ whatever-ism is very frustrating business. Bonus: extra time to think of a comeback.

5)     Don’t be ashamed. Unless you’re purposefully hurting someone. Mother Nature gave you a mouth; life filled it with words, might as well do something useful about it. A little burn in your stomach is your cue that THOU SHALT SPEAK. So, yeah, do that. It’s all about ~facing fears~ and dealing with life and becoming this big honest person. After supposedly you’ll become a successful person with lots of good things happening (bad too: honest straight forward girls have this lovely descriptive word attributed to them all the time that starts with ‘b’ and ends with ‘itch’. OH WELL). Honesty is pathological if used correctly. You can make thing happen. You have this power. Use it, and use it well. And don’t treat it like something unordinary. The idea that blunt truth is frowned upon is past vintage and already in the ancient era of morals, move on. Say it, dammit.

6)     Don’t preach. Don’t try to ‘convert’ everyone. You’re entitled to your own beliefs and so is everyone else.

7)     Don’t laugh. As simple as that. ‘I am not amused’.

8)     If they say ‘Chill. It’s a joke’ just punch them in the face. Seriously. And then belly-dance your way out of the room singing ‘Here I go again’ by Whitesnake. Go hard or go home.

 

Hypocritically,

What’s-her-name.





How should the Roma be integrated in Romania using the principles of WEB DuBois and/or Booker T. Washington?

29 09 2012

Roma people: every Romanian person seems to have his very own passionate or passive-aggressive opinion about them. Every Romanian citizen will bring forth examples of their own experiences with them, and the endless ways these Roma People have wronged them and how they, as a whole race, are inferior to the whole gloriousness that Romanian nation presents in its current state. Roma people are the black hole we throw every complaint into: the blame for the situation in the country, our position in the world, the credibility, the economy, the condition of the city, etc. The question is: does this reputation come as a discriminatory legacy or is there a ring of truth to it? And if there is, and if their reputation if it’s true, how can we fix this situation?

  On one hand, Roma people have just the same rights that every other Romania citizen has, so there’s no civil rights to be demanded on their behalf. However, what makes them disrespected by Romanian people is their lack of willingness to do anything. Their contempt and lack of motivation to improve their living condition and to fight for this country, to leave something good for the future generations is one of the characteristics most of Romania people will mention when describing their dislike towards them. They simply live in this country; they do not belong to it, and not because of some social barriers created on no grounds, but rather on the self imposed state of social exile that was part of their national heritage since the beginning of time. Roma people have a history of freedom and social disadvantage for a long time: society did not accept them for they had no desire to be chained to anything or anyone, including homes, jobs or money: They did not have to fight for their freedom, because their view on ‘freedom’ was different that the view of others, meaning that they did not need the society to be content with it, for freedom was their life. This lifestyle has latter been a reason of irrational torture, especially during the Holocaust, which made their development even slower and harder, even impossible in some cases.

This leads to the other side of the argument: does the right to do a thing include within itself the circumstances to do so? Will the right to get free education and right to vote provide people with the push from behind to do so? We can see that it doesn’t necessarily. In Roma communities, girls raised in miserable conditions and treatment get impregnated at an early age, and any sort of escape seems too brave and naïve to consider. The right to create a future is just a bitter joke that Roma people have chased laughing at, and Romanians have never found funny to begin with. Born with the idea that no bright future awaits them, Roma people find no motivation in trying to communicate properly with the white folk. Why earn the respect of someone living a parallel life, unbothered by the daily struggles a Roma has to deal with? Romanians look at them and see bugs crawling in mud, but they do not realize that they DO crawl towards something far, far away, and that the reason they are slipping down and making to progress is because the ground that supports them is unstable and hostile and unlikely to help their cause in anyway.

So, under the circumstances, what shall one do? Is it a question for each individual to consider, or for a whole ethnicity to decide? Honestly, the approach to this issue need to be a slow but persistent one: slowly and patiently both races need to approach a stage, a compromise equally good for both sides, so that in the end they will support each other and make the country a better place, for nothing makes a country more unstable than a struggle within itself. Romanians need to acknowledge the skills Roma people have and can master under the right conditions, and Roma people need to work harder to grow themselves into their potential, their very own best. That’s why Booker T. Washington was right: the road is hard and the weather is difficult, but creating a new path to the destination might not be the right decision, for more loss the walkers will bear when walking on unknown, forestry roads, unprepared for the physical involvement of it all than those who gain power by walking and not stopping on the road which leads precisely to where they want to arrive and are supposed to be, to belong.

 

Sources:

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-10-24/news/1993297017_1_romania-jews-gypsies

http://www.ajaykamalakaran.com/2012/03/blame-it-on-gypsies.html

http://www.economist.com/node/11579339





UN: Success or Failure?

29 09 2012

Buddhas of Bamiyan

Cred ca voi continua sa postez eseuri ce le-am scris pentru scoala. Poate ajuta pe cineva.

The question of UN’s efficiency has been controversial issue to the world for a long time and it still is currently. The main arguments that people have against it are the stalemate that the veto vote sometimes provokes when taking crucial decisions and planning actions; UN also is considered a vacuum of money: money which do not go into its original purpose: preserving peace everywhere. It’s of course true that the U.N. humanitarian help can be effective, and U.N. peacekeepers have helped stabilize many post-conflict situations, however, the ‘post-’ part of the ‘conflict’ might be a bitter enough argument against it as well: the inability of the UN to prevent a conflict/genocide/war from happening . One of the issues which UN has been unable to solve was the affair of the Buddhas of Bamiyan.

The two Buddhas, 175 and 120 feet tall, were believed to date to the seventh century. The statues were discovered by archeologists, standing 19-metre (62-foot) high along with scores of other historical relics in central Afghanistan near the ruins of giant statues destroyed by the Islamist Taliban seven years ago.[1]

Some 1,500 years ago, the valley was a busy node on the trade route between China and India, in a part of Asia where languages and religions – Buddhism, Hinduism and, later, Islam – coexisted. It was also home to a great Buddhist monastic center, one that nurtured epoch-changing religious concepts and produced a fantastic new art, including the world’s largest rock-carved figures of the standing Buddha.[2]

 It was in March 2001, when the Taliban and their sponsors in Al Qaeda were at the zenith of their power in Afghanistan, that militiamen, acting on an edict to take down the “gods of the infidels,” laid explosives at the base and the shoulders of the two Buddhas and blew them to pieces. To the outraged outside world, the act encapsulated the horrors of the Islamic fundamentalist government. Even Genghis Khan, who laid waste to this valley’s towns and population in the 13th century, had left the Buddhas standing.[3]

The UNESCO envoy, Pierre Lafrance, a former French ambassador to Pakistan, headed to Islamabad in hopes of negotiating with the Taliban. This however was already a lost cause, because of the UN’s lack of control over things such as a county’s sovereignty. The minister of the country was very stubborn about his religious beliefs, and has been quoted for saying „We do preserve our ancient heritage, but we cannot keep statues that are incompatible with our beliefs,”[4]

       UN’s UNESCO was in a very unfavorable position, just like Mr. Matsuura, the UNESCO’s director general has put it: „Words fail me to describe adequately my feelings of consternation and powerlessness as I see the reports of the irreversible damage that is being done to Afghanistan’s exceptional cultural heritage,”. After the collapse of the statues, in 2008, the UN has made a plan to start rebuilding the statues back to their former glorious shape. However, they will never replace the 2000 year old Buddhas and what they represented to humankind and its histoy.

Now, the reason for the creation of UNESCO, among others, was to prevent national and global cultural heritages from being destroyed or ruined. This time, it failed. The ruling Taliban authorities in Afghanistan have rejected a plea from the United Nations for them to stop destroying the country’s Buddhist statues. A plea was all that the UNESCO was able to give, and that’s why the UN is a failure in many cases: they can only watch the world burn, the cities crumble, and not be able to intervene with the situation, because the authorizes or the political structure of the country stands against it, and they have no right to go against a country’s sovereignty unless the country has agreed to give them the right to do so. So UN is too dependent on the political regime and religion to make changes when they really matter. UN tries, and maybe it would’ve done something if it had the chance, but in this case it did not. All the lost chances and the ruined artifacts and national heritages left behind to symbolize just a new ineffectiveness of the UN are and will forever be the reasons why UN is a failure.


[1] „Afghans Unearth 19-metre Buddha Statue.” Permanent Mission of Afghanistan to the United Nations in NY. N.p., 8 Sept. 2008. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://www.afghanistan-un.org/2008/09/afghans-unearth-19-metre-buddha-statue/&gt;.

 

[2] Cotter, Holland. „Buddhas of Bamiyan: Keys to Asian History.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Mar. 2001. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/03/world/buddhas-of-bamiyan-keys-to-asian-history.html&gt;.

[3] Gall, Carlotta. „THE REACH OF WAR; From Ruins of Afghan Buddhas, a History Grows.”The New York Times. The New York Times, 06 Dec. 2006. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/world/asia/06budd.html?pagewanted=all&gt;.

[4] „UN ‘fails’ to save Afghan Statues.” BBC News. BBC, 03 Apr. 2001. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1201763.stm&gt;.

 





the age of silence

29 09 2012

“The first language humans had was gestures. There was nothing primitive about this language that flowed from people’s hands, nothing we say now that could not be said in the endless array of movements possible with the fine bones of the fingers and wrists. The gestures were complex and subtle, involving a delicacy of motion that has since been lost completely.

During the Age of Silence, people communicated more, not less. Basic survival demanded that the hands were almost never still, and so it was only during sleep (and sometimes not even then) that people were not saying something or other. No distinction was made between the gestures of language and the gestures of life. The labor of building a house, say, or preparing a meal was no less an expression than making the sign for I love you or I feel serious. When a hand was used to shield one’s face when frightened by a loud noise something was being said, and when fingers were used to pick up what someone else had dropped something was being said; and even when the hands were at rest, that, too, was saying something. Naturally, there were misunderstandings. There were times when a finger might have been lifted to scratch a nose, and if casual eye contact was made with one’s lover just then, the lover might accidentally take it to be the gesture, not at all dissimilar, for Now I realize I was wrong to love you. These mistakes were heartbreaking. And yet, because people knew how easily they could happen, because they didn’t go round with the illusion that they understood perfectly the things other people said, they were used to interrupting each other to ask if they’d understood correctly. Sometimes these misunderstandings were even desirable, since they gave people a reason to say, Forgive me, I was only scratching my nose. Of course I know I’ve always been right to love you. Because of the frequency of these mistakes, over time the gesture for asking forgiveness evolved into the simplest form. Just to open your palm was to say: Forgive me.”

„If at large gatherings or parties, or around people with whom you feel distant, your hands sometimes hang awkwardly at the ends of your arms – if you find yourself at a loss for what to do with them, overcome with sadness that comes when you recognize the foreignness of your own body – it’s because your hands remember a time when the division between mind and body, brain and heart, what’s inside and what’s outside, was so much less. It’s not that we’ve forgotten the language of gestures entirely. The habit of moving our hands while we speak is left over from it. Clapping, pointing, giving the thumbs-up, for example, is a way to remember how it feels to say nothing together. And at night, when it’s too dark to see, we find it necessary to gesture on each other’s bodies to make ourselves understood.”





O prietenă din aceea…

14 05 2012

E o Dorothy tânără în tricouri negre şi largi,încălţări roşii ca în poveste,înşiretate pe gleznă.
Vrăjitorule din Oz,cum ajung acasă?
 Ruj mat,roşu creponat.Dungi pe pleoape,să se asorteze cu ochii.
Buze roşii ca sângele,părul ca de smoală,piele de zăpadă.
E o Albă-ca-Zăpadă mâncătoare de mere roşii,imună otrăvii lor.Nu are nevoie de tot soiul de prinţi pe cai albi şi săruturi.Flăcăii bărboşi nu au nevoie de cai albi,de păsărele ciripitoare peste tot.
Rapunzel în turn,ea se uită în sus şi drept în jos.
Îşi taie manual părul şi-l aruncă pe fereastră.Vântul îl ia pe sus şi-l ascunde în buzunarele bărboşilor pletoşi maisusamintiţi.Celibatarii nu au de unde a ştii unde anume e turnul prinţesei.Oraşul e mare şi înnalt,prea multe turnuri smucite în labirinturi cu semafoare,împodobite cu ordinul „buline roşii de pericol seismic”.
E o fată…
Are o atmosferă ca un câmp magnetic în jurul ei. Are un miros de cântăreaţă în întuneric. Se cuibărește ca o pupăză și cântă ca o inima frântă, miorlăie cuvinte și zâmbește luminos când înfige cuțite în piepturi. As vrea să o prind din nou dar am zburat mult prea departe, mult prea târziu. Am rămas cu cuvintele, măcar. Le împrăștii pe ciment, le las duse de vânt. Auzi.





Gusturile Muzicale ale unui Somnambul Iluminat.

6 05 2012

ce este muzica:
-răspunsul la ”de ce adormi așa de târziu”
-răspunsul la ”pe cine vei lua cu tine pe o insula pustie”
-o colecție de sunete lucrate, încâlcite, mișunătoare, special pentru o tânără duduie așa ca dumneamea
-*metafora adâncă și plina de inspirație*
-etc. etc.

‘muzică nocturna pentru persoane care adorm cu chitare în pat’

Mogwai – I Know You Are But What Am I? (live)

Julie London – Cry Me a River

Low – Lullaby

Pur și Simplu Sunete de Noapte pe care le ascult uneori.

Robin Pecknold – Katie Cruel

^notă: Dintr-un interviu cu Devendra Banhart am găsit-o pe Dalton, pe urmă m-am îndrăgostit de Katie Cruel, pe urmă am nimerit în Narnia youtube-ului prin sugestii și sugestii clickclickclick, și l-am găsit pe Mr. Fleet Fox cântând așa ceva. Ca atunci când am aflat ca lui JS Foer îi plăcea Joseph Cornell în colegiu.

Cat Power- Say

^Moon Prix este albumul meu favorit din lume,

Santo and Johnny – Sleepwalk

^ din Ghosts pe Futureshorts.