Just Add Water Questions

1. How on Earth did the teenage punk manage to get control of the whole town?

2. Why is Charlene afraid of the sunlight/light in general? Is it because she's been hiding her indiscretions in the dark for so long that now, metaphorically speaking, she is afraid that the light will show her sins?

3. What kind of father offers to take his son to a whore house?

4. WHAT IS IN THE TIN BOX????

5.Why is Ray still in this backwater town? Why doesn't he just grab the blond girl and get out of there?

6. Why does the grandmother hate her daughter?

Your Own Little World

The article The Reality Tests was really hard to understand for me. I know very little about quantum mechanics other than it presents a theory of how the universe works contradictory to just about every other theory out there. So for the most part this article went over my head, there was a lot of it that I just couldn't follow because I don't possess the scientific background necessary to understand the concepts being discussed.

What I did get for the article was that there is currently a team of physicists who are exploring the idea of reality and what reality truly is. The idea that we create the world we see around us because of our limited ability to perceive true reality while rather frightening to me is really quite interesting. Apparently our human bodies can barely even begin to take in true reality because the way we observe the universe, through our senses, just isn't even remotely precise enough. So how do we tell what true reality is if our minds have to construct our own world because they are incapable of completely understanding the quantum mechanics reality? I don't know about you but this idea has my imagination up and running. This gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "in your own little world".

Faustian Economics

Ok so while I agree with the majority of this article there are a couple of parts that bother me. Toward the end of the article Wendell Berry talks about how to recover from our "disease of limitlessness". I wholeheartedly agree with his insight that humanity has this idea that natural resources are entirely limitless. I mean, do you realize that less than 5% of the water on Earth is fresh water?? That's not a lot...AT ALL. Yes, it is true that water does sort of recycle itself so that 5% will always be there but there is also the human factor, we keep growing in numbers, at an exponential rate. So in other words in the next hundred years we're in for some serious water shortages, and I'm not talking about just not having enough water to brush your teeth every night, I'm talking about not having enough water to SURVIVE on. Are there ways to fix this? Short answer: Oh of course, we simply have to cut down our use of water now. Just take shorter and fewer showers and stop using buckets and buckets of water to keep your lawn alive if you live in a desert; I mean come on...if you decided to live in a desert than why on Earth are you surrounding yourself with a lush green lawn after claiming to adore the great natural beauty of the desert? I don't buy it...that water could be much better used elsewhere. Anyway that whole rant right there was an example of how our natural resources are far from limitless, yet for some reason the majority of the Earth's population is intent on believing that it is. Perhaps they simply don't want to think about a problem as huge as this.

But unlike Berry, I don't think that we think of ourselves as "god-like animals", that believe that we can control all we touch. I think that it is more that we just don't CARE. We Americans have yet to experience the limits of our Earth's resources. I would bet good money that if you went to one of the dirt-poor villages in one of the third world African countries you would find people that are experts of water conservation and how to make do with little to no water where as you or I would cringe at the idea. The problem hasn't affected us yet so we do nothing about it.

The main thing that aggravates me about this article is the idea that we need to give up technology and our pursuit of knowledge to fix our problems. While I believe that it is true that technology and the pursuit of knowledge are a big part of the reason that we're draining the Earth dry of all its resources, I also believe that they are essential to help put things right. This problem has gone beyond being fixed by just stopping what we're doing wrong, we need actually fix it. Yeah, it would be easy to just stop making the problem worse but it will still be there, wouldn't it be better to try to get rid of it entirely. It would be harder and maybe we won't see any changes for the better in our generation but at least we can help ensure that there will be generations after our own.

Learning Through Conversation

Right, well first off, was there really no group learning before the 1980s?? I find that difficult to fathom...rows of students each in their own little worlds doing their own little projects. Perhaps it is because I grew up with group learning that it seems absurd that teachers never assigned collaborative projects until about 30 years ago. It just seems odd to me that no one thought of it before then, I mean, working in groups as a child is probably what helped me most in learning to function as a part of society as opposed to a complete independent. I believe that it is necessary for a child to learn how to work with others seeing as how he/she will eventually need to get a job that will most likely require him/her to be able to work smoothly with others such as his/her boss.

So back to the idea of the article, Bruffee talks about the idea of people learning through conversation, in other words, talking ideas over with other people is more beneficial than mulling them over in your own solitary mind. I completely agree with this sentiment. Everyone has different points of view and different values that they live their lives by, and trust me, there is no way that you will ever be able to imagine all these different perspectives all on your own. These other people are necessary for you to be able to progress to stronger and more concrete conclusions. There are certain things that you will not take into consideration when interpreting something, be it literature or science, that other people will.

Discussing everyone's various interpretations

will lead to a better understanding of the subject being discussed for everyone

which will lead to better communication between individuals

which will lead to a better society

which will lead to a better LIFE in general!

so anyways....

Discussing your ideas with others will help you better defend your argument as others with different philosophies than your own will be better equipped to challenge your ideas than yourself. Who knows, through arguing with other people you may find that you agree more with what the other person is saying through his/her counterpoints and examples and through that revelation come to a better understanding of yourself. There is probably some sort of really deep moral that I could write here...but I can't think of it at the moment...so I'm just gonna say, this whole collaborative learning conversation thing...DO IT!

that's all.

kthxbye =)

GREED

When I picture greed, I see a little green monster/goblin, sort of like the Cookie Monster in Seseme Street but evil and it eats money instead of cookies. It would be one of those monsters that lives in the dark corner of your closet that you never want to look into. And it comes out when you least expect it, usually when it's dark out. It's deceptively small. You think that you can control it but if you're not careful it can overpower you in seconds.

Oh, and it's also rather partial to composted tripe...;)

The Fear of Writing

I understand Derrida perfectly. I have always been a creative writer and every now and then I go into these sort of "writing moods" where I have an idea or concept that I just need to get on paper. It doesn't occur to me to wonder what other people might think about what I'm writing while I'm actually writing it; it's only when I finish it and reread it that I start to feel self-conscious about my ideas. And when I get self-conscious I get really self-conscious, I start to second guess everything, which is probably why most of the stuff I've written is currently stuffed in a folder somewhere...

I think people are afraid of putting there written ideas out for the world to see because they won't always be around to defend it. It's a bit of a one-sided conversation; you shout your ideas out to the world, but you won't necessarily get any responses. I guess in a way silence is what we're most afraid of, if what you say starts a conversation at least you'll know that someone was listening as opposed to completely ignoring you.

The Limits of Language

While I'm not really a huge fan of the way The Problem of Describing Trees is written, I do agree with the idea that language has its limits. Robert Hass talks about how words can only go so far when one attempts to describe an experience to someone else. I am very familiar with this concept that language can only do so much. As an actor it's my job to know how to describe abstract concepts like emotions to an audience of people who all may not have the same interpretation of a certain concept. And I can tell you straight up that words don't even cover half of it, movement and facial expression often work better to communicate an idea better than language. Combining the two of course works better than either one alone, but if I had to pick just one it certainly wouldn't be words, I would choose movement. There are many ways to describe how to, for example, peel an orange through language, but the action remains basically the same, so showing someone how to peel an orange visually is more effective than trying to explain it verbally. Sometimes there simply are no words to describe something, you just have to SEE it for yourself, which is probably why people would much rather see a play/movie than read a book, and why people learn faster by watching others or by experiencing thing themselves.