Thomas Cole's "Oxbow"

Today was a nice break from our normal routine.  Discussing art can be as beneficial as discussing readings, or sometimes more.  As part of the Hudson River School of Painting, Thomas Cole painted "Oxbow" to capture a natural scene and present a lot of dichotomies. 

On the left hand side there is the chaotic and ominous wilderness.  There are fallen and cracking trees and a storm.  It's hard to say if the storm is coming or passing, but the angles of the clouds and rain make it look like it's going to the left, and passing away. 

The right side shows some fields and the curving oxbow portion of the river.  The colors are brighter, more vivid and cheerful.  It seems that people are in balance with nature because the river is left alone and the land is used for farming.  Neither side is "right" or better in my view, though Cole may prefer the order and beauty of the cultivated land.  On the bottom of the painting he shows himself painting the right side.  This side definitely looks more warm and comforting, but the dark woods are mysterious and captivating.

As to what these two sides may represent, I'm not sure.  The dark could be industrialization or the unknowns of the untamed frontier.  The light may be progress, industrialization, community, or stability.  If God were to be in the painting, He would be the clouds.  I see God as really dynamic, awesome, and powerful.  He can be merciful or destructive, peaceful or turbulent.  Just like clouds, God can take many different forms and have different effects.

Revisiting Walt Whitman

Rereading Whitman was a different read than the first time I went through it.  First I was trying to get the main points of his writing and had to generalize his arguments.  But the second time was more enjoyable because I was already a little familiar with it and could just enjoy how he writes.  He has a lot to say, and the content can be overwhelming.  I like his style even better than what he has to say.  Here's a quotation from his work that I find interesting:

"The problem of humanity...is to be finally met and treated by literature" (760).

I'm not sure what the problem of humanity is or what I can do about it.  I'm guessing it's a sort of feeling of incompleteness.  We often want to learn more, do more, and be more than we currently are.  Literature is a way for us to express ourselves and go about solving problems.

Organizing

At the end of class today we talked about the difficulties of organizing.  Like Petra, I am optimistic that we can do what we set out to do as long as we work at it.  One way to organize is to use the technology we have.  For Example, a Google marketing executive named Wael Ghonib helped organize the protests in Egypt that resulted in the revolution.  Just because we have more advanced technology doesn't mean we are less connected with one another.  We just have to remember to use technology as a tool in networking, and that the networks and relationships are what really matters.


Here's an article about Ghonib:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12400128

Group Paper

Here's what my group has so far, some main points we will expand upon and work on individually.  Here are some of our claims and questions about Putnam's argument:

1.  We need social capital to thrive as a community.  Trust and responsibility help foster voluntary associations and active civic engagement.  While Putnam supplies a lot of evidence, he needs more analysis and some examples are less relevant now.

2.  While there may be a decrease in overall social capital, it is more of a shift.  Our time and energy is just spent in different areas than it was before.

3.  Will anyone move forward  with effective solutions to this decrease in social capital?  How can we foster community?

4.  Are people aware of this issue?  Why or why not?  How can people better understand social capital?


So far so good.  Good luck with your group papers, everyone!   

Multitasking!

I am a terrible multi-tasker, yet I still do it.  Why do we focus our attention to multiple things at a time and how does that affect our productivity and social capital?  There are pros and cons to multitasking, and I think that there are situations where it really helps me get things done.  Thanks to the Oxford Learning Blog for breaking down some of these ideas:

http://www.oxfordlearning.com/letstalk/2008/07/25/multitask-or-not/


Multitasking can really help us in college as well as in life in general.  It's easy to switch your focus from one easy, simple task to another, like cleaning your dorm room to finding upbeat, motivating music to listen to.  Practicing this can help us cope when life is crazy busy and there are a lot of interruptions and distractions from what we really want to focus on.  Technology can really help us be more efficient and resourceful, but only if we limit Facebook and YouTube time per day.  Since it's not Interim anymore, we have to juggle several classes at once and work on getting everything done without the luxury of spending every day on one class.

Of course there are the dreaded pitfalls our parents warn us about.  It's hard to switch focus between more complex tasks like studying for chemistry and writing a research paper.  Too many distractions can be frustrating and nothing gets done.  As much as I'd love to watch Dr. Who with my friend next door, it's just not going to happen if I have to study lots of Sanskrit words for my theology test.  Often times my multitasking is really just procrastination since it looks like I'm getting a lot done, when in reality I'm just shifting my focus a lot.

Multitasking or not, social capital can be developed in many different ways.  At dinner it's great to get a break and not think about homework.  But I also enjoy doing homework with my friends because it's motivating and I can get help when I need it.  I guess it's always safe to have everything in moderation, even moderation.

Equality on Campus

In class today Paige and Dan brought up a really interesting idea of equality on campus.  There are differences among us in terms of income, where we're from, what kind of school we went to, and so on.  I love that here we try to see each other as equals, no better or lesser than anyone else on campus.

But this can create problems if we expect everyone to live up to this equality.  We are equal in that we treat each other fairly, but we are by no means the same.  Paige mentioned the economic inequalities that can be uncomfortable for the student who can't afford study abroad compared to the student who's parents can write a check and be done with it.

A similar discomfort is academic inequality.  When we were accepted to St Olaf, we were told to be proud of our accomplishments, that we must be smart to get in to such a great college.  And we are smart.  Only, academic success in high school is only one factor that the admissions staff looks at.  We're not all straight-A students and even though we all have a huge capacity to learn, try new things, and develop skills, some people will always be better than others in certain areas. 

We have to be careful not to assume that because we're all treated as equals, that our skills/background/abilities are equal too.

Sarah Palin

Our class discussion today felt really natural and lots of people got to chime in, which was great.  On the topic of voting, I agree with those who said that some voters don't care about experience or wisdom and make their decisions based on who is most like them.

Like Jake, I want the smartest, most prepared people to be elected as public officials.  If I need to have surgery I want an experienced doctor and if my car breaks down I look for the best-rated mechanic to fix it.  I can see how some may see incredible smart, experienced and polished people as elite and out-of-touch with middle-class America.  Still, I would rather have someone who is confident in their experience and ability to govern.  This is why I could not vote for someone like Sarah Palin.  Here is an excerpt from her about President Obama's ability to govern:

"See because our president is so inexperienced in the private sector and in government and in actually running anything and making any kind of budget that inexperience has really made manifest in some of the statements he makes."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/05/sarah-palin-obama-inexperienced_n_831879.html

Then again, Palin didn't make the best decisions about governing her town as mayor. 

While humble beginnings and upward mobility may be admirable, they can't reach the respect I have for knowledgeable people who always want to listen to others and learn about how to best govern.

Independence, Association, and Patriotism

In the paper we're writing for Monday, we're asked to show what de Tocqueville says about democracy.  That is a really difficult question to answer because he just has so much to say about it.  His observations and critiques are overwhelming because of the depth he goes into.  I'm going to write my paper about his views about independence, association, and patriotism.

Independence has immense benefits and drawbacks.  Being an independent person may mean you take care of yourself and don't rely on the aid of others (189).  You're the best judge of your own interest (82).  But this can also make you weak because you don't take full advantage of the help that's out there (672).  You may become isolated in your familiar and comfortable family and friends network, not engaging with others outside of it (697).  Then again, just because you're individualistic doesn't mean you don't care about others (526).

Association means voluntarily deciding to relate to, work with, and learn from others.  While the nation and the government may have huge, complex problems needing to be solved, civil associations can help in breaking them up into smaller, more manageable issues (523).  There are also religious associations that focus on the common good, sometimes to the point where pantheism emerges and everyone is seem as the same (451).  The common good is also reflected in the laws, which often affect the nation as a whole (232).

Patriotism and having a public spirit are really important for de Tocqueville, but he has reservations about its scope.  In the first section we read about many positive aspects of America and democracy.  The second section was much more critical and analytical.  While there is much to be proud of, we shouldn't be blindly patriotic to the point of dismissing our nation's faults.  He suggests cultivating our instinctive patriotism by being critical of America (235).  If we love our country then we will not settle for mediocrity.

Democracy and Other Nations

In chapter 9 De Tocqueville talks about the different kinds of options for forms of governments.  Comparing a democracy and an authoritarian government, he asks,

"...should we not rather steer toward the former than voluntarily submit to the latter? ... Is it not better to let ourselves be leveled down by freedom rather than by a despot?" (315).

This makes sense for the United States because we have a democratic system, but it may not work for every nation.  For example, would this apply to Egypt?  Their government is so different from ours that our system of government may not even apply, as much as we may like others to imitate us.