Camp Darfur Reflection

Camp Darfur and its whole entirety seemed to be a great impact on the people that participated one of the two days we held this event. It not only impacted the visitors but impacted me as well, with the speakers, information given throughout each tent, and the environment we created with the tents, stage, In-action projects, and installations. Even though not as many people came as we hoped and expected, I strongly believe that each person, activist or not left our camp with a more in depth knowledge of genocide and what is happening currently around the world. One thing I felt was really helpful for the visitors was what each person could do to make a difference at the exit tent. I thought that the exit tent was a great concluding aspect to get people more aware and in action. Another thing I really enjoyed was creating our tents, they really added to the whole event, while also providing an in-closed area to present each groups information. I really liked the way my groups overall presentation came out with the tent and our in-action project. Burma’s being one of the only in action projects put into camp Darfur was a big thing to live up to, and I was kind of worried about how it would turn out. Once we started presenting I felt that it turned out really well, and impacted the people that were present at the time. It made me feel a lot better when people would come up to our group and compliment the demonstration we had done, with compliments such as: “that was a great way to reach out to the people” and “the poems and quotes you read made the demonstration so much more personal.”
One speaker who really stood out to me was the Sudanese woman named: Rachel. She had a way of connecting to the audience with her stories from when she lived in Sudan and facts that I had never heard of in any of the US websites or news. I think it was so deep and personal because it was such a close connection to the events happening in Sudan currently and when she began to speak in her native language I felt even more connected and educated. It seemed as if the whole audience was captivated when she spoke, more so than any other speaker.
This whole project has educated me immensely, and I feel as if what I was before this project was like comparing a child’s knowledge to a wise old woman. Feeling this way made me want to educate society, and transform their childlike minds into a wise ones. Because so much of society does not know what is happening outside of America, we are so sheltered from the outside world, and I believe it is horrific that most do not know what is happening and how we keep repeating ourselves in history.

Not on Our Watch Discussion

Today's discussion in class was very well rounded. While listening to people's thoughts I realized that I had not though about that, or not thought about things that way, and made me change some of my thoughts on the book. One thing I thought was interesting was the comment Carl made when we were discussing the issue of the humor involved to add some sense of humanity, to realize that these are regular people committing these deeds. When Carl said that people like Don Cheadle and John Prendergast aren't regular people, they don't live the life of the average American, because they are celebrities. This then almost places them higher than society, resulting to be categorized as irregular. Before this comment I believed that these people were part of regular society, and were regular people doing these things, but Carl's comment made me think that, that is not the case, because celebrities are not regular people.

Not on Our Watch

Not on Our Watch by Cheadle and Prendergast is a very influential book, and I feel that the way the two authors created the introduction was a great way to start off by informing the reader of what this book will be discussing as well as keeping the readers attention. I noticed that throughout the third chapter, I knew a lot of the information because I was an informed reader. When it comes to most of society, most of the population does not know about the events going on in Sudan, and when an "average American" reads this book it seems that the reader would be well informed, because of the way the authors present the information.
The second chapter the book I thought was very useful, because it got to let the reader know more about the authors than just there fame and celebrity, I got to understand that the people actually doing something are regular human beings. It let you take a break from the facts of the genocide, and put a little character and human life into it.
One thing I was a little unsure of was the assurance of the authors, it seemed that they let the reader know that "we can do this!" and so much is being done, when it seemed that that type of assurance just made the reader feel like so much is being done already, that there is no need to help, because it seems there is already so much help being provided.

Trip to LA

While in Los Angeles, we discovered vast amounts of information I had not known the day earlier. I feel it was a very productive day considering all the things we explored were teaching us about something that affected our world in the past, what is going on currently, and what we could do to make our world more eco friendly. My favorite thing of the day was the Darfur discussion with Don Cheadle and John Prendergast. What amazed me the most was the amount of people that attended the talk, and how enthusiastic the crowd and speakers were. To know that that many people were enthusiastic and informed made me almost feel comforted because of the fact that people actually do know about this, and are wanting and willing to do something about it, even if it means contributing by attending a talk. I only wish that the people in Darfur will feel the same comfort I did during the community conversation soon enough. The first step of action is to inform society about the problem, and then go in and contribute your hands physically. To know that people like Cheadle and Prendergast (such high figures when it comes to the media) were physically going in and doing whatever they could to cease the madness. One thing that really got me was when Cheadle was talking about the woman he encountered that threw a mattress at him, and asked him if he was actually going to do something instead of committing to plans but never finishing them. He said that this was the time when he realized that he cant be one of those people that half-ass their commitments and was given a harsh awakening. This made me think about Bush's stand on Darfur, and his proposal that was made 2 years after we claimed it as genocide. To me it seems like this was a perfect example of a delayed reaction to something that can't afford wasted time. I realized that if our class had not researched more about Darfur in the previous week, I would have not understood more than half of what was discussed.

Third Post for "Night"

Pg 90 “It was pitch dark. I could hear only the violin, and it was as though Juliek's soul were the bow. He was playing his life. The whole of his life was gliding on the strings- his lost hopes, his charred past, his extinguished future. He played as though he would never play again.”

While reading this, I thought of the mini violin one is supposed to play during a sad experience in movies. It is a symbol of sadness, and sorrow. Keeping in mind that this was a true story, I though it was ironic that his dying friend was playing the violin, as almost the band that plays at someone's funeral party. This was not only Juliek's funeral song, it was for the many that had died that night, that day, and week, and month, and year. And to think that this boy, this man hadn't enough strength to get up, but had the power to play a farewell song to him and many others lying under the many dying and dead. I believe that Juliek was a real hero, because of the way he used his last strength to do something he loved, and provide for the people using up there last breaths. When I look at that I see a real hero, when you are doing something that will not only benefit yourself, but others. I think that even playing his violin was heretic, and nothing could have changed the fate of this man, but he changed the way he was going to die. He must have died happier than many of the thousands that died that night. So as they all lay there, unable to move because of loss of strength, that violin played, and made everyone at awe, and somewhat at ease, that's a real hero for you.

Pg 64 “I heard the voice of the officiant rising up, powerful yet at the same time broken, amid the tears, sobs, the signs of the whole congregation: “All the earth and the Universe are God's!” He kept stopping every moment, as though he did not have the strength to find the meaning beneath the words. “

People are loosing faith, loosing hope, in what they believed in so strongly before. Everyone is praying as if God will answer their prayers, even though they are starting to think that there is no God to answer to. This got me thinking about if there were a God, would he/she really let such a thing like this happen, and be repeated continuously throughout time? And if this is supposed to be a “lesson” as some people put it, then what would be worth learning when so many lives are lost? Coming back to the repeating history, and wars that keep happening because of the same type of fights between the same types of people. Why does this “lesson” keep happening over and over, if it is shown that we are repeating the same mistakes? And because of this would the question be: Is there really a God that looks after us and we look so highly of? Before reading this book, I believed in a God, to a certain extent, and now, thinking about it, I'm not really sure, because of the way our history keeps repeating and mass amounts of people keep dying, and our lesson is still yet to be learned.

Post three dialectic journal entries as you read the text.
Tuesday: Post 1
Wednesday: Post 2
Thursday: Post 3

Tuesday: Pg 37 "I did not move. What had happened to me? My father had just been struck, before my very eyes, and I had not flickered an eyelid...I thought only: I shall never forgive them for that."

This part in the book made me realize the effect of visuals on the people, and how much something can totally change your life, and perspective on things in an instant. It really made me think about how much visuals and sights can affect the way we act and react. When Eliezer sees his father being struck by a gypsy, he does not react, when he says the day previous to that, he could have fought for his father, and protected him. If people like Eliezer are loosing feeling and hope now, on the second day of camp, what will become of the many days, weeks and months to come? I don't think that the physical affects on the people even phased them throughout time; it was the things they saw that killed their light on the inside. That killed the emotions and feelings they had for themselves and other people.

AQOTWF End Reflection

Now that you have finished reading All Quiet on the Western Front, please discuss these three questions with your critical friends. Post a response to one of these questions on your blog. Be sure to integrate the responses of your critical friends in your answer...
1. What is ironic, or dramatically unexpected about the novel's ending?

The ending was very surprising to me because of how the author went along telling the reader that Paul died. I was a very short, non descriptive part of the book. It was on the very last page and a little paragraph at the bottom as almost if it belonged in a totally different book, this is because the rest of the book was so descriptive with its sceneries, the feelings of the people, and the overall setting. So when the ending arrived, and Paul’s death was read, it was so unexpected, especially the way his death was described, so short and non-descriptive. Another thing that was surprising about the ending was because the US media most always ends things on a happy note, the main character normally never dies, and there is always some sort of happy ending. So when the ending came up, subconsciously I was waiting for the ending to be somewhat happy and give Paul his life.

Dialect Journal #2

pg. 295 Paragraph 2 "Here the trees show grey and golden, the berries of the rowan stand red among the leaves, country roads run white out to the sky line, and the canteens hum like beehives with rumors of peace."
In this particular part of the book I think that Paul was trying to say that the eye is made to see peace after a war. When you look at a beautiful scenery, or nature, it reminds you of peace, and although the eye is seeing it, that might not always be the case. So while your looking at the golden leaves, or the country road fade out to the sky, a conflict in some other place will be happening at that exact some moment. And no matter what you do, beautiful sceneries or nature will never fully yield war, conflict or hate. And no matter how much you want that to happen, human nature will always take over, which will cause conflict to occur.

People instinct?

Read through chapter 10 by Friday, and complete the text by Tuesday, Feburary 19. Be prepared for an assessment of the entire text next week.
Write a minimum of two dialectic journal entries and comment on two student posts. Choose one salient quote and:
1. Explain what the quotation means in the context of the text
2. Why it is important/interesting to you.

Pg 273-74 “All other expressions lie in a winter sleep life is simply one continual watch…and store it up as a reserve against the onslaught of nothingness.”
This was the part where Paul was talking about how we gain our animal traits when in war. Once again connecting our survival to animals, and how they save us in the long run. I feel that this quote was a very strong quote that connects to what the book is about and how many of the soldiers were feeling at the time, and in the time of battle. Reading this part of the book, really made me realize how important humane nature, and animal instinct is. This is how the men in war go through battle, they have to watch all of their friends, and comrades die, and are still willing to go on with an attitude of an animal, and move on. This brought up an interesting question while I was reading; what other experiences do we go through, that are aided by the traits and mentality of animals? We think we are so above animals, when it seems we are almost always acting like them when it comes down to the basics of life.

A Poetic Prisoner-Abstract

A Poetic Prisoner takes place in a radio studio, with the talk show host reading a poetic letter dated back from the Battle of Sommes. During this scene portions of the poem alternate between the original poet in 1916, and the spokesman, 2007.
The young man writes his letter behind enemy lines during The Battle of Sommes in 1916 between the Germans and British. Patrick is in a trench scared to death that he will get shot by his own comrades, or be found by the enemy. He stays in the trench for two days, in spare of his own life. With nothing else on his mind besides the love of his life, he decides to write a letter to his fiancé.
The scene concludes with the spokesman expressing to listening that the author of the poem died, along with 700,000 others during The Battle of Sommes.

A Poetic Prisoner - Scene One

Robby: 21 years old, brown hair green eyes and, scrawny build. His hometown is in humble Virginia, where his family and loving fiancé live. Robby got drafted out to the army and is now fighting in WWI on the western front. His fellow comrades see his as a foul, close minded, flake, when he really is shy and self conscious so he maintains this mentality in fear of being considered weak. During a battle he finds himself stuck in a trench behind enemy lines and fears that he will be mistaken for an enemy. So all he can do is sit and wait.

AQonWF Monolouge

Read through chapter 7 for Monday. Now let's be a little creative!!! Write a minimum of a ten line monologue to perform in drama class on Monday. Write and in turn deliver the monologue (speech) as if you were a character in All Quiet on the Western Front. Be passionate, be thoughtful, be CREATIVE.
A monologue is a speech that one actor delivers in a play. Before you get started, consider these questions!!!
WHERE IS THIS PERSON SPEAKING?
WHO IS LISTENING?
WHAT IS THE MAIN THING THEY ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT?
NOW CHOOSE A STARTING LINE that will capture the audience's attention.


Muller: What would you guys do if the war ended now, just suddenly stopped? Peace was made, and no brutal fighting was to be had.
Kropp: No war could be ended in an instant, there are too many lives that have been ended, too many families have been ruined, and worst of all the government has lost too much money.
Muller: No but if it actually did happen, what would you do?
Kropp: Okay, well if the war suddenly stopped, for only god knows why, soon enough war would come upon us once again. Because there is always something to fight about, there is always brutal fighting to be had, and peace that will never be fully made. So if you think about it, we are only really a time in history, we are fighting for something, but soon enough, another conflict between two countries or two people will occur. But we have to do what is right…right? We have to fight for our country, and protect our families. And we are looked up at for killing people? So we have a war going on, and peace that will never be made, our messed up ways of solving conflict, people dying, families being torn apart, and money being lost. That is why I think war will never stop, especially so suddenly. This is not a place for dreaming or fairy tales.

Response to Discussion

I feel that our discussion was very productive. Thinking back, I realized that a lot of my opinions changed or varied throughout the discussion. So much went on during out discussion, it’s hard to remember all we covered. One thing that stood out to me was the whole indifference, and how you will act to your surroundings more than something that is not directly hurting you. When we first started talking about it, I believed that it is the case, people will react to something closer to themselves, rather than something in say, Africa. I think it all comes back to what Mariah said, it all depends on how you ere brought up, and what your morals are. While some would ignore the fact that a girl was screaming down the street, others would go out and see what was going on. So morals and upbringing has to do with a lot of decisions made in history and experiences. But then we always come back to, life and death, would people choose what they thought is morally right, or would they choose human nature?

AQonWF Response One

"At the sound of the first droning of the shells we rush back, in one part of our being, a thousand years. By the animal instinct that is awakened in us we are led and protected. It is not conscious; it is far quicker, much more sure, less fallible, than consciousness. . . . It is this other, this second sight in us, that has thrown us to the ground and saved us, without our knowing how. . . . We march up, moody or good-tempered soldiers—we reach the zone where the front begins and become on the instant human animals."
Why would Paul characterize himself and his comrades as "human animals"?

I feel that Paul was connecting himself and his fellow comrades as human animals because of the way being in a life and death situation can affect you, and give you that adrenalin rush. The teens enrolling and participating in the army made them become one, and totally changed Paul and his friends, because of the strenuous work they had to endure and the mental “workout” each man went through during this time period. They have almost become fearless, and like many animals in the wild, they have gained that sense of instinct, and protection towards themselves. Like a skunk in the wild, its instinct is to protect itself by lifting its tail and spraying its enemy. (I know really odd example.) I think Paul was trying to say that it is animal instinct to protect yourself, and an instinct is something that you don't have to think about, it is just happens. So when in war, it's all about connecting with your instincts and letting go of your thoughts because like Paul said, “ But had he not abandoned himself to the impulse he would now be a heap of mangled flesh”. (Pg 56) So I think that humans have the same instinct as an animal, but it is hidden because of how much we are forced to connect with our mind, instead of our instinct. It takes something that can alter your life, to make those impulses or instincts present.

Legacy of the French Revolution

After Napoleon abdicates in 1814, the revolution is officially over, and Louis XVIII is crowned King of France. Can you believe it? The monarchy returns!!! In light of our investigation of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era, evaluate the legacy of the French Revolution. Do you believe it was a success or a failure? Your response should be atleast 150 words.

I believe that the French Revolution was a success in some areas and a failure in others. Looking on the bright side, the National Assembly gained power and created a source of government for them; they published the rights of man and citizen, stating fair rules and laws that they wanted to be made. They decreased the Kings power and his source of government and protection, in a way he was almost under the National Assembly's feet. They definitely got what they wanted; to be treated equal. One thing I thought wasn't the best success was how crazed and radical the National Assembly got, especially Robespierre. The way him and the assembly handled punishment for the people who weren't one-hundred percent dedicated to the revolution, death was the choice they picked in order to punish those people and it ended up killing 40,ooo people from 1793- 1794. So I think that the majority of the things done for the revolution was successful, but when it comes down to 40,ooo plus people dying, I don't think all those lives were spared for the right sane reason.

Umm hi?

i have no idea what im doing...