Do the Right Thing Response

First, in a new post, please write a paragraph response to this question:  What similarities / differences do you see between Do The Right Thing and "How Bigger Was Born"?  What are the specific ideas and examples used by each text to make their points?  What conclusions can be made as a result of this comparison / contrast?  (Note - this is an analytic statement, not a personal one, so you should avoid using "I" - stick with what is expressed in the film and essay)

 

The character Buggin' Out in the Spike Lee's film "Do the Right Thing" demonstrated many similarities in both action, and characteristics to the way Richard Right described the different people who impacted the creation of his character Bigger. An example would be Bigger No. 1, who was described by Wright when he wrote, "There was a boy who terrorized me and all of the boys I played with. If we were playing games, he would saunter up and snatch from us our balls, bats, spinning tops, and marbles" (434). It seems as if this boy simply bullied Richard and his friends because he craved power and put others down to make himself feel better. In the film, Buggin Out had a very similar attitude because it seemed very unlikely that he was THAT upset by the pictures on the wall, and it appeared that he was looking for any reason to sabitage Sal's Pizzeria. Both of these characters demonstrate a lack of good intentions or reasoning for doing stupid violent things.

Next, in the same post but a new paragraph, respond to this question: What are your personal (emotional, critical) responses? What are your feelings, at the movie's end, for Mookie, for Sal, for the police, for the community, for Radio Raheem? Who does--and who does not do--"the right thing"? Whose actions seem meaningful, purposeful, humane? What has been earned, learned, or lost? (Note - this is a personal statement, so should be all about the use of "I")

 

At the end of the movie, I was very surprised with the way Mookie through the garbage can through the window to start the riot that ultimately burned down Sal's Pizzeria. I felt as if Sal acted as a father to Mookie, and Mookie betrayed Sal in the worst way by destroying Sal's greatest accomplishment and crushing everything he had worked for. It made me think that in the end, is race the most important part of a person? When Mookie, Sal, Vito, and Pino were standing on one side, and ALL of the other black people were on the other side, I remember thinking about how it must have been hard for Mookie to be standing on the opposite side of every other black person there. Then Mookie not only crossed to the other side, but started the riot. I feel as if Mookie did not do the right thing at that moment because he betrayed his "family" simply because he felt more of a dedication to his race. Sal was innocent because he was simply feeding his custumers when Radio Raheem and Buggin' Out stormed into his restraunt with disrespect and bad intentions. In the discussion yesterday, people said that Sal did the wrong thing by smashing the radio, but I would have done the same thing because Raheem and Buggin' had no right to violate Sal's property like that. I that everyone made mistakes in the film except for Da Mayor because he always had good intentions no matter what in didn't let his race get in his way in the end when he tried break apart the conflict.

Document 6: Teaching in the South and in the North

After longer than a decade following "Brown v. Board of Education,"  New York's integration in education still had a very long way to go. C Herbert Oliver was a minister from Alabama who understood the horrible education given to blacks in the north when he moved to NYC with his family. In an interview with "Eyes on the Prize," Oliver distinguished the difference in black education between the North and the South. His son was gifted in mathamatics and recieved good grades in Alabama, but within a year after moving to New York, he was flunking math. At the old black school in Alabama, Mr. Oliver was able to talk with the principle whenever he pleased about his children's education and discuss the issues - but when he attempted to meet with the principle in NY about his son's grades, he had to wait a half an hour to hear that his son was doing fine in school - which didn't make sense because he was flunking math and wasn't getting any homework assignments.

1. According to Oliver’s account, what were the key differences between the education of blacks in the South and in the North?

In Alabama, his son recieved education from all black teachers and went to school with all black students. His son was doing great in school. It was when he moved to New York when his son struggled with school. It seems to me like Oliver preferred segregation in schools because his son recieved a better education when he went to an all black school.

Document 5: Why We Are Not Racists

This document is from the book written by Seale, who was a part of the BPP (The Black Panther Party). This group supported communism during the cold war. They were afraid that the public would interpret their intentions and beliefs in the wrong way, so they used this document to help explain that they had America's best interest in mind, and their intentions are for the good of the people. Their solution to the racism present in America was to fight the capitalism government with basic socialism.They believe that the upperclass white people are taking advantage of the lowerclass black people through the unbalanced American imperialism, and the only solution to the problem is to establish proletarian internationalism. 

3. Explain what Seale meant by each of the following:

“We do not fight racism with racism. We fight racism with solidarity.” - Some may see the socialistic ideals displayed by the BPP as some sort of a reverse racism, but they believe that their beliefs do not display racism, but solidarity (integration).

“We do not fight exploitive capitalism with black capitalism. We fight capitalism with

basic socialism.” - Unlike many other black organizations during this time, the BPP did not believe in "Black Capitalism," but socialism.

“We fight imperialism with proletarian internationalism.” - They believe that imperialism is what causes all the racism in the country, and that integration is the only road to real equality.

Beloved: Memory, Rememory, and the Power of the Past

After you complete your reading for today, we'd like you write your journal entry for chapter 9 as a blog post.  The focus of it revolves about the issue of Memory, Rememory, and the Power of the Past - what is the novel saying about these topics at this point?  What are the challenges and issues that arise when the past is either raised or specifically avoided?  When is it embraced - when is it hidden - why?

I feel as if Sethe is experiancing moments that reflect on her past in order to remind her of something tragic that happened somewhere in Sethe's past. An example of this is when Sethe was recalling old memories of Baby Suggs as she was sitting on the old rock in the Clearing. She wishes for a massage from deceased Baby Suggs, and suprisingly she starts to feel fingers on her shoulders, but then it starts to get violent and she realizes she is being strangled. When Beloved kisses her neck, Sethe smells milk in her breath, and shockingly says “You too old for that” (115). Beloved's breath and touch reminded her of her deceased daughter, and Sethe went into shock and started denying what seemed to be true. When Denver confronted Beloved about the strangling, Beloved insists that "the circle of iron choked it" (119). What could this mean? Could it have anything to do with the past references to "Iron Eyes?"  I feel as if Sethe is trying to avoid parts of the past that involve the death of her baby daughter, while Beloved is trying to expose it. I cant help but feel Beloved is trying to get some sort of revenge on Sethe. Is it possible Sethe could be responsible for the death of Beloved? is that why Baby Suggs's "faith, her love, her imagination and her great big old heart began to collapse twenty-eight days after her daughter-in-law arrived" (105). Sethe must have been involved in something tragic shortly after she arrived to 124. Possibly the same tragedy of the baby's death?

Ralph Waldo Emerson's "Self-Reliance" Response

Emerson believes that a person's place in society is defined by their accomplishments in which they achieved themselves. These accomplishments can be achieved by believing in Transcendentalism. I believe that Emerson defines Transcendentalism in the following passage: "When good is near you, when you have life in yourself, it is not by any known or accustomed way; you shall not discern the foot-prints of any other; you shall not see the face of man... the thought, the good, shall be wholly strange and new..." In other words, to become truly accomplished, one shall not base their life off the ideals of others, but one should mold their own identity from something entirely new and original. Emerson states "Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, ... and Jesus, ...and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood." These individuals named were Transcendentalists. They believed against the comformity in which everyone else followed. Instead, they expressed their own interpretations and beliefs about the values that they truly cared about. It's ironic how these people were originally Transcendentalists who were truly hated by the comformists, and now the comformity today is completely based around these people. It's as if there is a cycle between Trascendentalism and Comformity. A person is defined in society by their personal accomplishments in which they used transcendentalism to achieve. A society is a mixture between people who follow comformity, and people who follow transcendentalism. The definition of an individual within a society is based off their decision to become either an independent, or a comformist.

Rev. Terry Jones Disrespects The First Amendment

Terry Jones along with his church is planning on burning copies of the Qu'ran to remember the ones who were killed on September 11th, 2001. I think that memorials for our fellow americans who died that day are essential, but Rev. Jones is being inconsiderate and  discriminating against the muslim religion when he declares he will burn their holy book. Terry Jones is blaming an entire religion for the evil of only a few individuals. I don't understand why he thinks it's okay to judge an entire culture based on the horrible actions of a small group of gentleman. Although these muslim men deserve the worst of all punishments, doesnt mean that ALL muslims believe in the psychotic beliefs of those individuals.

The first Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excercise of thereof..." This means that the constitution favors no certain religion, and there is no law against practicing ANY religion. Terry Jones is being shameful to his country when he threatens an entire religion, for excersizing their constitutional right of practicing their own religion. There is nothing wrong with building a Mosque on ground zero, and the constitution itself says so.

Thomas Paine's "American Crisis" Response

The very first sentence of this passage discribes the entire text perfectly. "these are the times that try men's souls"(p.51). This quotation means that the way a man or woman goes through difficult times or  crisis, determines the outcome of their life after it is over. My mother always told me "you can't appreciate the good without experiancing the bad." I think this connects perfectly because this is exactly what Thomas Paine is trying to say. "I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection"(p.53). Thomas Paine is not only looking out for the Americans of his time, but for the far future of America, which makes him a true patriot. Paine made a wonderful analogy between the British controlling America and a theif breaking to his home. "...if a thief breaks into my house, burns and destroys my property, and kills or threatens to kill me, or those that are in it, and to 'bind me in all cases whatsoever,' to his absolute will, am I to suffer?"(p.53) This is a very powerful analogy and I feel as if Paine used it to connect the situation with the British, to the lives of average Americans.