skip to main |
skip to sidebar
1957. That is the year Dr. Seuss wrote the "ultimate Christmas story". 2007. This year, people still remember that green old hermit today, and this cartoon does a good job of capturing new Christmas trends and old Christmas traditions. The cartoonist devises this small still-life story in order to show how Christmas has evolved from sitting in your home watching Christmas-themed movies to going out and buying the biggest and best gifts from the major retailers. The cartoonist has a good point though. Kids of today don't care about Rudolf, Jack Skellington, or even the Grinch for that matter; all they want is IPods, clothes, and video games, not a marathon of classic Christmas stories on TBS.
The two sides of Christmas are displayed here perfectly. First, you have the innocent mom with here Rudolph vintage Christmas sweater on that she probably got when she was a young "lass", combined with her ecstatic facial expression that shows she is not joking when she see the Grinch on TV. This is the old Christmas tradition the artist shows. Next, we have the transition period (mind you this is a still-photo) as the stereotypical mom hands her VISA credit card to the suit-and-tie clerk the present is shown to us. She carries her four bags probably each worth more than 100$ because she is paying with her credit card. Also, the clerk has the "another stupid show" look on his face cause he has seen it a million times and it was old the second time he saw it. Even without the words this cartoon tell the story of the fast pace of our American lifestyle. Now, excuse me I must go watch Nightmare Before Christmas, before its to late and they decide to burn all the VHS Tapes.
Very interesting article this week by Jason Whitlock about Sean Taylor's death. A reasonable person would assume that Jason would talk about the unfair and unjust killing of an innocent man and how we all should pray for his family and mourn this loss, but Jason goes down a different road. Instead of talking about the depressing circumstances surrounding Taylor's death, Whitlock discuses the anger and the blame that he feel should be put on his own race for this unjust death. He blames hip hop music and the "gangster mentality" of the new generations of blacks for Taylors death. Frankly, I couldn't agree with him more. He brings up the unheard of argument that his own race is what is corrupting our society today. He doesn't blame past discrimination or present prejudice, he blames the music that the blacks are creating and he blames the mentality that the new generation of blacks have about murder and the like. I believe he does a perfect job of bringing up an undiscussed topic pertaining to Taylor's death. He will likely receive criticism for his explanation, but at least he voiced his own opinion that others were unable to discuss, and bring this topic to the table of debate. Among the various parallels Jason uses in his article, this parallel speaks the most. "Meanwhile, our self-hatred, on full display for the world to see, remains untreated, undiagnosed and unrepentant." These words go directly to the heart and convey a summary of the whole article. If I was included in this group of people that Jason talks about I would be at a slight outrage but at the same time feel contempt with myself because I see that he is right. He is justifying his reasoning not only with one choice word but the parallelism used in "untreated, undiagnosed and unrepentant.", speaks volumes more than just saying "untreated". It is used in such a way to say that this hatred is spread far and wide and nobody has done a thing to fix it. It is only getting worse in Jason's eyes and he is displaying his feelings in one brief sentence to the entire black community. He uses this parallel very efficiently to clearly state his main point in one sentence for everyone to understand.
So now with one simple line from a song, Hip Hop is Dead by Nas: "What influenced my raps? Stick ups and killings, kidnappings, project buildings, drug dealings criticize that, why is that?" He says this without any regret at all. Now, we can clearly see why Jason Whitlock does not want his race and our world to go down this horrific road anymore.
Betsy Hart writes a blog this week about how dancing in schools is taking it way to far and something should be done to stop all this "sexual" mayhem. I could go on for hours about this but I guess I should make it much shorter because this is a school assignment. I firmly disagree with this woman in the sense that she goes as far as to call dancing "foreplay". Yes, she does make her points to say that dancing provocatively is sexually arousing to some students and she has a point that we shouldn't be dancing so much as to arouse each other. While the rest of the parents in America may agree with her on the fact that dancing like this can be dangerous, I, being a young male, do not. From my perspective no boy in my school would ever take the sexual arousal they receive from a dancing girl and end up raping them in the parking lot, let alone anywhere else on the planet. No guys or girls have the mentality as soon as they walk off the dance floor at the end of the night, they have been so sexually aroused by some harmless dancing that they must go fulfill their sexual needs on some girl who gave them that feeling. That's mindset is ridiculous.
Although I strongly disagree with Betsy she does use the rhetorical question very effectively in her writing style. The most demanding rhetorical question is this: "Because "sexiest child" is yet another competition for parents to engage in?". Second in a string of rhetorical questions attacking parents, this question stood out most to me. It is straight and to the point of attacking the "cool" parents of today's world. It also conveys her point that to be "cool" is not to let your child get raped in a parking lot just so they can have fun for a few hours at a high school dance. You don't have to win competitions to be the "World's Best Parent". Betsy is saying to all parents out there: "Do you think you are cool when your child is in jail or hurt?" That, I believe, is the real question she is asking.
You can see Betsy Harts article here
Most women would conclude that any man who has ever said derogatory statements about a woman will always be the same sick man in their eyes, but Laura breaks out from the normal and says how influential this man can be and how he can be forgiven and things forgotten because hes been punished accordingly. This brings me to my own understanding of her points. If a woman decides that she will continue to accept a man that has degraded women then I and everyone else should also agree with her and accept this man back it society. It also seems to me that this man is very influential and he is needed on the air to tell his listeners what they want to know about a certain event or person. In conclusion I would accept this man because of all the better things Imus has done in his life that Laura expresses.
I believe Isaiah Thomas's quotes concerning the differences of a black man and a white man pertaining to what they can say to a black woman are most influential in this column. Isaiah's comment is the most relevant to Imus's situation in the sense that they were both talking about the black woman population and degraded that population as if it was alright. The example works well because it shows a clear cause, Isaiah was not punished at all while Imus was "swiftly and severely punished" for his actions. She does a great job proving her point through all the examples she used.
If you would like to read this column it is accessible here
