The Dangers of Technology

Since our summer homework is focused on technology, we are getting many different perspectives on how others think it affects us. It makes me question if technology is worth it. I have been focusing on the debates recently and there are articles about A.I. taking over and how harmful the internet and video games are to our health. One that I chose for myself is about texting and driving. New electronics may be entertaining and fun, but they can also put us at risk.

A majority of us are also taking APUSH, which is focused on Native Americans and Columbus. I wonder if life back in the time before Columbus came to America was better. It was much simpler. They did not have roads and cars and fancy screens. They only had the people and other tribes around them. They had a large community and treasured their family. If the technology Europeans used to sail here was never invented, our lives would not exist. The world would be tremendously different. There would be hunters and farmers that only have to worry about feeding their tribes or families. Everyone would have their own job that directly benefits one another. There would be no world wars or threats from other countries. No deaths from reckless behavior. Technology has its upsides, but are the downsides worth it?
-Aniya Steele

My Thoughts of BNW

Brave New World must be one of the most interesting books I have ever read. When I first began reading the book, the first couple of chapters were kinda confusing to me as we get to know the characters more. We have the director, Bernard, Lenina, and John. Many of them have nicknames, John aka the Savage, so that made it more confusing. But it is so fascinating on how they are able to reproduce without having anyone to carry the baby.
However as I read more of the book, it becomes more interesting with John now being the one of the main characters. I think that John has many different personalities though out the book. Bernard and Lenina meet him in his native tribe. With him being in love with Lenina, but can’t marry due to them not believing in marriage. This I think causes John to go how he is in the ending, making that ending appropriate to me. Overall, I think this book was very interesting and weird.

-Daphne Salgado

Social media is changing our ideologies

      As I was reading chapter one of Amusing Ourselves to Death, by Neil Postman I came across a sentence that made me realize what the internet has made our society become. Postman states," Indeed, we many have reached the point where cosmetics has replaced ideology as the field of expertise over which a politician must have competent control"(4). Many people decide to chose someone because they are considered "good looking" and not because of their outstanding ideas.
 
     Since, the media has become a large part of our lives and we are constantly on the web,our ideology on certain topics such as, physical appearance, has quietly changed. We have now started to define people that physically appeal to the eye as beautiful and attractive, because that is what we see on social media. We forget that physical appearance shouldn't be what defines beauty, but the way they treat others and what their heart has to give.

     I also thought that this topic related to one of the short articles from one of the debates, "The Constant Sharing is Making Us Competitive and Depressed" by Emerson Csorba. He writes about how we are so involved in other's lives while we are on social media that we start wishing for many things that we don't have many times leading to depression. This relates to one's physical appearance because we see many people with fit bodies and extremely nice and luxurious clothing. Many identifying this as beauty making people insecure because they don't have these types of things. We get caught up in this fantasy that we forget to appreciate everything we have and all the great things about it.

- Mayra Guerrero

Hypocrisy in the 1st chapter of AOTD

I finished chapter one of Amusing Ourselves to Death today, and there was one specific part of the first chapter that I couldn't get out of my head. Postman quotes Ernst Cassirer in conjunction with his argument:

"Physical reality seems to recede in proportion as man's symbolic activity advances. Instead of dealing with the things themselves man is in a sense constantly conversing with himself. He has so enveloped himself in linguistic forms, in artistic images, in mythical symbols or religious rites that he cannot see or know anything except by the interposition of (an) artificial medium."

I really disagree with what this quote is trying to say. It criticizes the current mindset of society that today people aren't capable of taking things at face value. Isn't that a good thing? I'll set up a hypothetical: take entity x. In Cassirer and Postman's ideal world, someone would encounter "x" in a very simplistic, and without much thought of anything else would "deal with it." I don't think that's good. I find it a sign of evolution mentally as a society. We don't take things at face value. We analyze them. What's wrong with applying metaphors to more easily understand things? What if entity x was super complicated. We would need to be able to apply some "artificial medium" like a metaphor or by comparing it to something else that's similar. Innovating ways to comprehend complex concepts is intellectual evolution; taking things at face value with little analysis is not.

Also I just applied a metaphor with entity x to try and explain my stance on this debate better. Without it, it would have been harder to spread my idea, and the spreading of ideas is after all very essential to the concept of free thought.

I also find this quote hypocritical to the main theme of both Brave New Worldand from what it seems Amusing Ourselves to Death - that consumption prohibits free thought (and how awful that is). Doesn't this quote discourage free thought? Taking something at face value without much thinking is in a way consumption. That wouldn't be engaging in free thought, someone in this situation would be letting all of the thinking be done for them.

Liam McDougal

Dystopian Society

The novel Brave New World illustrates a Dystopian society where the people live under the rule of a dictatorial government. A regime that has a ruler or party takes full control, and the rights of the people are overpowered. 

As Far as to where I am reading, the characters view their society as a perfect world, but the truth is, it is the contrary. Children are brainwashed to believe that social privileges are acceptable, and also that they belong to the class they are assigned.

 People have no power to choose their social class, where their lifestyles are determined. They can't have their own personal freedom. They have no right to think, to love, to feel sadness or pain. In short, People can't have a life.

Furthermore, I find this novel really intriguing because the author used a lot of important themes. He used themes like freedom, morality, values, and emotion that makes this novel unique from other books.

-Anne Reyes

The Error in This "Brave New World"

As I was reading Brave New World, written by Aldous Huxley, I began to question myself about our society. I began to imagine what life would be like without awareness that you don't have your own free will. It is basically imprisonment but to the people's minds it isn't. It's great that people don't have to worry about the struggles people go through in reality such as poverty, depression, and many others. 

Everyone would like to live their lives without having the pain inflicted from these unnecessary problems. However, their civilization lives by having their decisions being made for them by social class, Alpha, Beta, Delta, Epsilon, and Gamma. Our society isn't condemned to social classes which I prefer. Even though considerable problems wouldn't exist, freedom is priceless. 

Freedom is what makes life interesting. Your own will to choose your own destiny. John, the second protagonist, even says hardship is a necessary and crucial part of life and it's better to have freedom and go through those problems than to be a prisoner from the real world. His point makes a significant impact because even though those problems aren't preferred to go through, it's a small price to pay for salvation. 

Imagine yourself in this civilization. It's astonishing that sexual reproduction isn't needed to create new generations. Also, major problems are nonexistent. However, you're sentenced without your own destiny which is based off your social class. I'm curious to see your thoughts. How would you deal with it?
-Lyle Cuevas 

AF: Last Monday in June -- blog stats

Dang, when I say it like THAT, it feels like summer is nearly over!  One more "last Monday" and boom: we're back in the saddle.  Yikes.

A few stats:

Blog views all time:  1614
Blog views today:    198
People signed on:  49
People who've requested access, but have not responded:  21

Most popular post to date, with 23 views and 3 comments:  Aniya Steele's "There is No Such Thing as a Whole Truth" from June 21.

Student posts:  19
Teacher posts:  10 (including this one)

Get hot, kids.  Summer doesn't last forever.
⭐Ms. Fletcher

AF: What to do when a teacher makes a direct request?

Here is what I have asked you to do:

• Sign your posts.
• Use paragraphs.  
• Read the posts that we write (prefixed with "AF" or "KC") because we are your teachers, talking to you and we want your attention.  

If you READ the posts I've written, you will realize that I have asked you to SIGN your posts; I have asked you to use paragraphing conventions liberally, since reading online content formatted as ONE GIANT TEXT BLOCK is unfriendly.

Thank you for those of you who are following my instructions.  Believe me when I say that I notice.

PS.  Please consider the fact that post titles such as "Brave New World" or "Amusing Ourselves to Death" are not descriptive or useful since about 100 of us are reading the same books. Certainly, you could do better.  

⭐Ms. Fletcher

The Relationship Between Humanity and Artificial Intelligence

When reading the short articles regarding the overall role of artificial intelligence, I cannot help but note the huge surge of technology that has appeared in our society. As noted by author Faith Popcorn of "Artificial Intelligence May Usher in a New Golden Age", the ascendance that AI has had in recent years has been unprecedented, marked by reliance on factory robots, search engines (Siri), and a fast track towards connecting to the outside world. It's widely understood how dominant it is in our society, but I believe that there's an interdependent relationship between artificial intelligence and humanity. Mankind is the original pioneer of technology, and without our creativity and pursuit of the unknown, robots are limited and developmentally stagnant. Just as how Gary Kasparov points out in "As Robots Replace Old Jobs, Humans Create New Ones", robots flourish only with our allowance. However, AI is essential to the survival of our world, where they provide convenient services to man and aid in science, manufacturing, and technology. People are terrified of the idea of robots taking over human sourced jobs, and potentially depriving society of humane qualities because of  this newfound technological control and over reliance.

In retrospective, artificial intelligence and its domineering role can create job loss, where, hypothetically, artificial intelligence can potentially take over our society. It is with the human qualities, however, of imagination and invention that truly dictate how our world is controlled technologically, since we're the ones who are constantly inventing. I am wary of the danger that this technological dependence poses, since artificial intelligence has slowly become the motor behind how we manufacture, assemble, and sometimes function in our daily lives. While I acknowledge how imperative it is to have humans be one step ahead of AI, the power that these robots possess is only because of human ambition, and our ability to persevere and create. This interdependent relationship between humanity and robots remains balanced for the time being, as I am now fully aware of the necessity both robots and humans hold towards each other.
- Madison Nguyen

The Significance of Beauty Within our Society (AOTD)

While reading the beginning of Amusing Ourselves To Death, by Neil Postman, I've come across a major issue that's quite prevalent in our society today. Although this book was written decades ago, I find it quite intriguing how we as people can still relate to some of the content the author mentions. The issue is the thought of self-image and beauty. Body weight limits and beauty standards are subtly hidden within thousands of corporations today and Postman does a brilliant job at putting them on the spot. When he clarifies that because of our society, fat or obese people are automatically excluded from running for any high political office, the corruption within our government is being revealed. I felt this topic the most because I've read and came across articles regarding what the "perfect body image" is doing to our world today. People of all genders are spending thousands of dollars on these beauty products that promise to help them lose weight or have a "more promising" face when in reality they're most likely harming their own mental health and well being. It's all part of the cosmopolitan's publicity, which convinces people of all ages to invest their money into these billion dollar industries.

-Ma Khi Boyd

Brave New World

From what I have read so far, some of the events in this book sparked my curiosity, while others were harder for me to understand. I became curious in the beginning of the novel when I read about the ability to mass produce people. It made me wonder how they ever thought to go about this process in the first place. 

Shortly after, it was harder for me to comprehend why they would ever shock babies to stay away from something so beautiful as flowers. I understand that in the novel, people try to prevent others from thinking for themselves,  and this is why they dislike books. Despite their dislike for reading, I did not like that they would shock children into fearing books and flowers. The children that they do this to do not know why they got shocked, all they learn is not to go near these objects again.

 

Another part of the novel that I could not wrap my head around were their views on parents and marriage. I can't imagine a world without my mother and father in it, which is why I was confused when the people laughed about having a father, but flat out thought having a mother was ridiculous. Of course I have to take into consideration that a life without a mother and father is all they know. 

I felt bad for John as well, because he was in a world where he had a different way of thinking. When he talked to Lenina about marriage, she got annoyed and told him that it was a horrible thought. John cared for her, and liked the idea of spending the rest of his life with someone. I can't imagine how he felt knowing that the girl he loved was opposed to the idea of marriage. 

-Jasmine Gonzalez

Thoughts on Brave New World

                            I find that the concept of Brave New World was definitively thought-provoking and quite hard to believe. London became a utopian society where "everyone belongs to everyone else."  A place where nobody thinks for themselves and do as they please, but only under what the great Ford wants of course. Expanding their population by duplicating eggs called the Bokanovsky process and using hypnopaedia to raise them to believe everything they say. Taking soma to get rid of the "illusions of pain" and to push unpleasant thoughts from their mind as we see from Lenina when she meets Linda. To even think of that possibly happening in the future is unrealistic. There's absolutely no way for all of London  to fall under this and have everyone to all of a sudden convert to this new idea. People like John have their strong beliefs and won't allow themselves to be overcome by an rule that takes the freedom of being your own person away. To say that passion is an emotion unworthy of this "happy society" because it causes people to be unstable is absurd. Knowing that there's many people out there who are strong-minded people, there's no possible way for every single person to fall under this idea. There are just way too many factors to consider. We can't even get people to resolve the issue of pollution, so how are we in the future going to be able to get an entire city, let alone country, to oblige to such an idea as this one?
-Mya Tan

The societal norms of A Brave New World and why they are wrong.

In A Brave New World author Aldous Huxley shows  readers a bleak look at the future. In his future, there are a few social norms the society have to accept.  One of these norms that the society has to accept is that the lower classes are worse than the upper classes and are to be made fun of and treated as non-human beings. This makes me draw connections to pre-civil rights movement America. The lower classes and the way they are treated reminds me of African Americans segregation during the 30's, 40's, 50's, and Early 60's. The Epsilons, and Deltas are separated from the rest of society and treated poorly much like the african americans before the civil rights movement. Meanwhile the Alphas and Betas live nice lives and are allowed many more privileges then the Epsilons and Deltas, such as nicer living conditions much like the white people in pre rights movement America. Although it never happens in a brave new world, people like Dr. King leveled the playing field in terms of rights of different races.  This however brings up an interesting question. Did MLK and the civil rights movement truly end class and race segregation? One example i can think of is that almost all politicians are rich and there is hardly any person of major political power right now who is an every man's man, someone who is just an average joe. I'd like to hear you guy's opinion on the classes in a brave new world and on modern day class segregation.

Connections Between A.I. and Brave New World

While reading "Humans Should Challenge Technology by Becoming a Cyborg" by Neil Harbisson I was reminded of the human modification process described in Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. Harbisson believes that A.I. is going to outsmart humans unless humans can keep up. The way he suggests doing this is to alter our own bodies and increase our ability to function and do tasks at a more advanced rate. He finds this as an ethical way of keeping up as he has altered his own body and can now see "color beyond the visual spectrum."

This reminded me of Brave New World because they also altered humans but for a different reason.
In the novel they didn't so much alter but conditioned people to strive in certain situations. Similarly Harbisson wants humans to change and be able to strive in the new world of A.I. Is that a good thing? I'm not sure, but it would definitely be different to see more people with robot parts where they aren't necessarily needed.
-Jenée Turner

Silicon Valley and the tech industry's manipulation

I chose "Why Silicon Valley can't fix itself" as my second Long Read article, because I was curious as to what Silicon Valley was and why it needed to be fixed.  However, after perusing the article, I now have a deep understanding and strong opinions on the subject.

First of all, I discovered that Silicon Valley and the tech industry is simply manipulating us into handing them our time, money, and personal information.  They feed us lies and whatever information--true or false--we want to hear. 

In the article, the authors explain that Silicon Valley is suddenly eager to apologize for the damage that technology has done to society and willing to "redesign technology" to make it "healthier."  However, it is clear that their intentions are not to meet society's demands, but to take yet another opportunity to make profits.

This article opened my eyes to the extreme manipulation of the tech industry and that we seemingly do nothing about it.

- Annika Haibel

My Thoughts of the First Two Chapters of Brave New World

As I began reading the first two chapters of Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, I have mix feeling about this book. I was quite fascinated about the idea of the London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre being able to produce many babies without having someone carrying the child. Also, the fact that they can even produce thousands at a time. To me, this is a scientific achievement of human cloning. Maybe we will be able to do this in the future of the earth. Well, maybe not thousands of them but maybe a dozen, and I know it may sound crazy.
However as I began reading more, I don’t like the idea of how the director wants the babies to be hating on flowers and books by shocking the babies lightly. Also, the fact that they have to shock the babies 200 times in order for them to not like flowers and books, I think that is some type of cruel behavior. I mean why hate on books and flowers, they never did anything wrong to the babies!

-Daphne Salgado

Is It Really An Utopia?

Throughout the world of books, there are many novels that speak of a Dystopian future, and some that speak of an Utopian future.  In the novel Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, the setting takes place in an Utopian future.

During the first few chapters, the characteristics of this "utopia" are described with intense detail.  For example, they explain how people are breed genetically and mechanically, and each person is breed to do certain jobs.

As the novel continues, the characters make the setting seem like paradise, as if nothing is wrong.  However, one character, Bernard, seems like there's something more that he needs to do, as if they haven't served their real purpose.

The novel and movie The Giver has many similar characteristics to Brave New World.  To explain, the novel also takes place in a Utopian future, and people are given specific jobs.  However, there is no color, and emotions do not exist.  However, the main character begins to see things from the past, and tries to break everyone out of this "utopia" and go back to a place of happiness.

The events from that novel are causing me to begin to think that there was some kind of reason that the "utopia" in Brave New World was created.  Who knows, maybe it really isn't an utopia.  Maybe it's worse.

-Samuel Dawson

There is No Such Thing as a Whole Truth

There are many connections with everything we are given to read this summer. In the text Amusing Ourselves to Death, the author states how we hardly see the whole truth. I wholeheartedly believe this because everyone has emotions that they hide. We may not admit it, but we never tell anyone exactly how we feel. This is the hidden story. Sometimes it never is revealed. Sometimes we trust someone enough to tell them exactly what is on our mind. Postman's examples include historians and philosophers of the past. We will never know the whole story of what was going through their minds when writing or what their lives were like because we were not there to witness it. Both then and now we are in the dark about certain details of a story, some we didn't even know are hidden.

Now to my point of how this connects to our other readings. In our debate Media in the Age of Trump, each journalist has their own point of view and biases. Some see Trump as a liar and see most reporters as scared of writing stories related to him. Others are less harsh but believe there should be precautions. According to them, we aren't given the truth. They attempt to swat us to their side but do not provide any counter arguments to let us really think about what we prefer. Instead, we must read multiple articles to give us more of an idea of what is happening in our world today, but we never get every detail.

-Aniya Steele

My Biggest Issue with Brave New World

I believe that one of the most underrated in regards in its importance components to fiction would be the strength in the writing of characters. The reason character writing specifically is so important is because of how prominent characters are in the overall experiencing of a work of fiction. We, the readers are reading characters' reactions to their situation. Also, having fun and interesting characters just make the overall experience enjoyable, and vice-versa. When reading, we are experiencing a world, even if that world is in our head. I'd say that this principle is the same in real life: everyone enjoys meeting and interacting with pleasant, enjoyable, or at least intriguing people. Everyone doesn't like meeting annoying, non-enjoyable, and boring people. The same goes for literature. I don't like reading about characters that are not written well. It's just like having to encounter unlikable people in real life (isn't fiction supposed to be a form of escapism)?

If you don't believe any of that, just do some pondering for a moment. Think of some of the largest, most popular works of fiction every created. I'll give some examples: Harry Potter, Star Wars, The Office, the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Spongebob Squarepants. A common theme between all of these? They all have an abundance of unique, extremely easy to love, likable characters that help enrich their story and their world.

So here's my view on the character writing in Brave New World, broken down character by character

One of the very few good examples of a very good character in this book was Mustapha Mond. He gets introduced as this big scary, cliche "the man" or "manifestation of evil authority" character, yet at the end of the novel he's revealed to not be this way at all (it's too bad that up until this point he only made brief, one-dimensional appearances until he goes onto a two-chapter long tangent that fits all of his character development in it). Instead, he's a very intelligent, misguided man who is able to provide some very intellectually intriguing incite into philosophy, art, religion, and happiness. I don't agree with his views, but they are very interesting.

Lenina is very one-dimensional. Throughout the whole novel, she is just a normal sheep, sex-driven, consumed by the propaganda, "kool-aid drinker" like the rest of the "Brave New World." I get that having one of these characters in the book would have been very likely, but that still doesn't mean that the execution on her character is very stellar. Throughout the whole book she just goes along with the plot and provides he BNW-society view on the situations the other two main characters (Bernard and John) in a way that seems very preachy. Again, I realize that a character that served as this would have very likely been inevitable no matter the execution in the writing of the book, but that doesn't make it any less bothersome when she's constantly spewing out the state's propaganda and doesn't do anything else until around 3/4 into the book when she starts to get just a little bit of character development. I do think that the fact that she loves John yet has been so conditioned to not love that she only "likes" him a lot is some great character writing. Overall though she doesn't seem like she's contributing to the plot or overall narrative of the story until that part of the novel.

Bernard before his visit to the reservation is one of two small glimpses of interesting, compelling, and enjoyable character writing. He's challenging society. He's starting to wake up. He seems like he's going to be a great and interesting protagonist. He's got his love interest set up. Then, he goes to the reservation. His character then understandably takes a back seat to developing, fleshing out, and expanding upon the new characters and environment introduced. However, after getting back to society with John, his character completely changes to an unbelievable degree.

All works of fiction must operate within their own rules. If those rules are broken for plot convenience, that is very lazy writing. And that happens in this novel. His character drastically changes so that he is no longer the main character, he no longer fits the role of the protagonist - John does. Meanwhile, Bernard goes crazy with fame the rest of the book. The rule that the author breaks is just one of common sense - no one, regardless of situation, practically changes their personality to the point of becoming a new person, over the course of several days. Also, on top of all of this - the new Bernard is mean. He's destructive of personal relationships. That's not really that fun to read about someone like that. I can see the argument that it's supposed to be a representation of how fame goes to people's head, but still no amount of fame will change someone that much that fast - even in 2540.

John, by far had my least favorite character writing in the whole book. The part about his writing that I dislike the most is probably that he's ultimately set up to be a tragic hero. But, he's no deserving of that title. He's kind of a hero for challenging the order of the government he was under. But I would argue that he's not tragic at all. We constantly are supposed to feel sorry for him, but he's so unlikable and the way he analyzes certain situations is so disagreeable that I can't feel sorry for him. He's way too attached to his mother, and doesn't fully grasp the situation of her death. She was a horrible mother, and she ended up committing suicide basically. John cannot see this at all. The reader is supposed to feel sorry for John that his mother died, but he should have not really felt anything for her because of her lack of parenting. Another instance of John being unlikable is how he rejects his love for Lenina. He obviously really loves her (which I don't really understand, I never felt much chemistry between them), and yet he rejects the love for no good reason. I am honestly extremely perplexed as to why he rejects his feelings. Love is obviously one of the biggest marks of being uncivilized in this book, and his whole goal is to be as uncivilized as possible. That hypocrisy is very unlikable.

There was so much potential with his character. The interactions he could have had being uncivilized with a civilized world could have made for some great content, but most of his initial time spent in civilization is overshadowed by the public's and Bernard's view on John coming to civilization. He's supposed to be the voice of reason in the book, "the audience character." However his un-likability and brashness in his decisions tarnish the potential his character conceptually had.

Liam McDougal

AF: Homework

Yes, I have homework too.  I am working on homework right now.

Think of homework as a lifestyle choice.  Independent reading, writing, and working with like-minded peers is how we come to appreciate new ideas, to expand boundaries and then to move beyond those boundaries.  I am going to be 62 years old, and I still dread and love homework in equal measure.  But I only dread it until I start.  Once I start, I soon find myself in heaven.  I love the feeling of being totally immersed and engaged in the ideas and thoughts of others.  It moves the furniture around in my brain.  I get excited.
⭐Ms. Fletcher

Brave New World: A Nightmare

As I read Huxley's novel, Brave New World, I become increasingly disturbed by the genetically-engineered society that he describes.  Despite the painless life they live, the mass-produced individuals seem to cruise through life with little to no meaning at all.

Though they may be healthier and live longer lives as us today, I would never dream of being one of the futuristic humans Huxley imagines in his novel.  They seem to have fewer struggles, curiosities, and opportunities to explore ideas than we do, which would lead to a far more boring and quite frankly, futile existence.

To live in a world where are there are no families, no friendships, and no meaningful relationships would be horrid.  I think that the infamous saying "It is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all" applies here.  Such a life filled with no deep connections is not one that I would want to live.

- Annika Haibel

My Thoughts on Brave New World

While reading the novel Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, I was perplexed because of the complex vocabulary being used. After searching up a few words and their definitions, as well as rereading a few paragraphs, the novel started to appear as more interesting to me, since it was more straightforward. Despite my difficulty in comprehending the novel, I am actually enjoying reading the book.

When I first started reading the novel, I immediately noticed a few similarities between this book and the book Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. One being that both novels are based on a futuristic, dystopian society. Another being that the goals of this society are for everyone to be happy, but in reality, most aren't. The book is very weird at times, and sometimes I am left flabbergasted, and shocked as to what I read, but in a good way.

A trend I noticed in both Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World books is that in both novels, it mentions how banning books is a necessary step needed to be taken in order for everyone to be happy. This is because reading novels provokes people to think, and potentially leads people to question the rules in place. An example of this is that during Nazi Germany, Hitler banned certain books such as All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque because they weren't considered "ideal" for Germany since those types of books made Germany appear as weak. Books such as those would lead some people to question whether or not Germany really was the best. In order to avoid that from happening, Germany banned them.
-Jasmine Sohal

Thoughts on Room For debate

I have been working on the room for debate articles.  Many of these articles are thought provoking and interesting. My favorite article to write about however was How to Stop the Spread of Fake News. This article, as the name suggests, posed the question of how the spread  fake news can be stopped.  

The arguments where rather interesting. The arguments that stood out the most where by Annemarie Dooling and Nicholas Gavin. Dooling believes that the issue can be solved by algorithms. Gavin, on other hand, believes that the issue is one of user incompetence and their willingness to believe, and share, anything they read, not stoping to think about what they are sharing.

Overall, this debate sparks an interesting conversation of whether the spread of fake news is on users or companies. I believe that people should not be so quick to share what they read on the internet. There should be personal responsibility, as well as corporate responsibility, in checking the credibility of things posted on the social media and news sites. Of course, this whole issue brings about the question of censorship and freedom of speech. It's a lot to think about and consider. I would like to hear some other peoples views on this debate.
--Brandon Schmidt

AF: Reading The Guardian

I am going to contribute a little money to The Guardian so we don't have to feel guilty about raiding their archives for content.  Not much, but some.

And don't get wigged out by British spelling.  Don't you start adding letters where Americans do not use them.  We write "program," not "programme."  We write "favor," not "favour."  We love their journalism, but we do not have to emulate their spelling.
⭐Ms. Fletcher

AF: The Paragraph

The paragraph is an essential convention, ESPECIALLY when we are reading online text.  Please note how many of you are writing these long, endless paragraphs.  These are not very inviting to the eye.

An awareness of audience considers the readers' needs.  Do you notice how I make a bunch of little short paragraphs when I post?  That is because that creates a readable chunk.

Those super long paragraphs are a chore to read, and difficult to follow all the way through.  Understand that your reader has expectations, needs and preferences.  When I say "your reader," I don't mean ME.  I mean ANYONE who you hope will read what you wrote.  Give their eyes a break, and hit return once in a while.

Also, just a note:  I write for the laptop or desktop computer.  I know many of you access this on your mobile devices, and I have no idea how things look there.  The formatting may change.
⭐Ms. Fletcher

AF: Please. Read the instructions.

Do you realize the summer homework assignment is right there, 9 detailed pages, linked to that blonde?  See where it says, The Summer Homework, explained.  The Nitty Gritty. Click on the angry lady.

What does that mean?  "Here it is.  All explained.  All the details.  Click on this lady."

The lady is growling, "LOOK IT UP" and that is because it is only June 15, and I have received six or seven messages that say something like this:

• Sorry to bother you, but what is the blog? 
• What are we supposed to write about?
• Where are we supposed to write XYZ?

If you click on the angry lady, this is what you will see on the front page:

Blog Assignment — informal, academic writing:

• Pursue themes and questions raised by any text in the summer homework -- also, posts covering relevant news items, podcasts or other media are also welcome, 4 posts, 8 comments.  Ridiculously easy.

Then, when you read the detailed assignment (AP students are supposed to read instructions, don't you think?), I wrote the following:

Part IV:  Blog

This is our blog:  http://apbloggers19-20.blogspot.com

You will become a blogger this summer. Writing for an authentic audience with expectations is excellent practice for writers and thinkers.  You must be clear; you must discuss things that merit discussion; you must make sense. When you cannot make yourself understood, you are effectively silenced, no longer a part of the ongoing conversation and exchange in the world of ideas.

“If thought corrupts language, then language can also corrupt thought.”  — George Orwell (In other words:  sloppy writing reveals sloppy thinking)

The basic ground rules:

1. You must email us first so we can clear your participation on this semi-closed blog:  afletcher[at]busd.k12.ca.us or kcolln[at]busd.k12.ca.us
2. Your User Name should be your actual name, and please use a Gmail account that is NOT your school email.  It’s easy, free, and safe. You must sign each post with your real name.
3. NO TROLLING ALLOWED.  Absolutely, positively no ad hominem arguments [look this up if necessary].  You may question one another, ask for clarification, admit that you don’t understand what somebody is talking about, add a point that you believe somebody has missed, but you must NOT attack people.  Challenge ideas, ask for clarity, but maintain civility. If we have to step in, that will be your first and only warning. The second time, your access to the blog will be blocked and we’ll simply enter a zero for this part of the assignment, followed by a tense and uncomfortable conversation.
4. Please do not waste time with “Me too!” and “I agree with you!” responses in your comments.  Such posts are useless at best, and annoying. If you agree or disagree, EXPLAIN. Say something.

Start Four Conversations

You must write four posts — that is, you have to originate four conversations. You can write about ANYTHING you encounter that connects to our summer homework; you can write about the books, about what you read on The Long Read or Room for Debate, and about things that you read or experience that connect to what we are working on.

When you post, refer directly to what you are reading and the question you want to raise.  Use your questions from Postman, or use a passage in Huxley. (Believe me, once you start paying attention, modern media provides you with plenty to critique and think about.  After you have written your post, but before you publish, write a terse, descriptive subject line.  (A misleading or unclear subject line is annoying, don’t you think?)

These conversation starters should be at minimum 150 words long.  Anything shorter will not be effective. For example, these two paragraphs explaining that you must start four threads are 199 words long.

Respond to Eight Conversations

You must respond to other writers at least eight times.  You may also respond to a response. I expect some conversations will become quite lengthy.  Your responses should also be complete thoughts, fully explained. I don’t want to get all nit-picky on word counts; just don’t go overboard (rambling is never a good idea), and make sure you say enough to make a point.

These recommendations are on the low side.  You can definitely participate more than this.  We’d like to see you involved over a course of several weeks.  

A blog is a conversation, and it is rude to run into a conversation as it draws to a close and just blurt out a bunch of stuff without giving anyone an opportunity to respond.  In previous years, some people have tried posting everything in one day. That is not blogging; that is procrastinating and cramming.

• BLOGGERS WHO BEGIN THE WORK LATER THAN JULY 15 WILL RECEIVE 75% OF THE CREDIT THEY WOULD HAVE EARNED EARLIER.
• ANY BLOGGER WHO BEGINS THE WORK LATER THAN JULY 29 WILL ONLY RECEIVE 25% CREDIT OF THE CREDIT THEy WOULD HAVE RECEIVED EARLER.

Anything posted after 11:59 p.m. on Friday, August 2 will not be counted for summer homework credit.

⭐Ms. Fletcher

AF: Hey New Juniors

Hey kids,

It's a small thing, but may I just point out that "novel" is a word we use to describe works of fiction, and Neil Postman's book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, is NONfiction, [ie., NOT A WORK OF INVENTION, but a work of research and analysis.]  When we are talking about Postman, we call the book "a text," or "an argument, " or "Postman's work," and all like that.  

Huxley's book is a novel.  

And another thing: Huxley is not in any way saying that the world he has created is what he thinks WILL happen, or what SHOULD happen. 

One of the masters of the craft, Ursula K. LeGuin, calls science fiction a "thought experiment."  We ask ourselves, what would happen if we gave up our familial ties, and our romantic relationships composed of deep and enduring bonds -- what if we gave up LOVE -- for entertainment and a life of emotional flatness?  What if we could create a life with no pain, no heartbreak, no anxiety?  No ambition or social striving?  Or to quote a song from Pink Floyd's album The Wall, what if we could live our lives "comfortably numb?"  

Any rock and roll fans out there who know (or want to know) Pink Floyd...look into Roger Waters' work based on Amusing Ourselves to Death  It's a simple Google search, and a pretty interesting interpretation of Postman's work.
⭐Ms. Fletcher

My Thoughts on Ch. 3 of Brave New World

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley is an interesting read, but one chapter in particular stood out to me.  In my opinion this is a difficult novel to comprehend at first, but once I had cleared up confusing vocabulary or stopped to understand passages the novel became much more straightforward.
   Despite, the complexity of the novel I want to bring Chapter 3 up in a discussion.  This chapter is written in three scenes that consecutively continue one after another.  I find this an interesting writing choice as I have never seen an author write in this way before.  My guess as to why the author chose to write this scene in this way is to give us a first hand insight of the reality that the people live.  While, the reader also learns from Mond's speech their history and events that have lead human civilization to live this way.
   Additionally, the controller continuously emphasizes the importance of social and individual stability as seen on page 42.  He notes that strong emotions are unstable which is what previous societies were, due to family relations and monogamy.  Yet, as Mond tells his speech we learn that Lenina and Bernard contradict this statement.  Lenina had been with only Henry for a long period of time and doesn't see the need to be with others, while Bernard doesn't like how Henry and the Assistant talk of Lenina as a piece of meet that should be shared among everyone.  I found this very interesting since they are of the Alpha caste who would essentially be the last to steer away from the "rules" of the society.  I would like to know if anyone else found this chapter interesting and would like to add their thoughts on why the author set up this chapter in this way or any other topic in chapter 3 I did not already discuss.

 -Xela Dinh

Discrepancies Between Postman's Theses and Reality

After only completing eight chapters of Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman's bold claims have already shaped plenty of my opinions regarding the ideas expressed. Although some of Postman's ideas made me thoughtfully reflect upon the reality of contemporary society, others compelled me to jot down notes in sheer disapproval.

One of the author's major points against society's new visual medium of discourse, television, is that it has made entertainment the new standard for communicating. While the author believes that shows like Sesame Street blur the line between education and entertainment, the millions of kids who were educationally inspired by that show, especially in developing countries, cannot be neglected. Despite the dramatic shift brought upon societal discourse by the advent of television, the typographic tradition continues to exist. It is not as commonplace anymore, but nevertheless prevails in classrooms and academia. Furthermore, the author's accounts of television only mention the news when it is hardly a significant proportion of what is actually aired. Programs like documentaries and interviews inform viewers of topics ranging from influential figures in history to environmental issues. Accordingly, Postman's assertion that viewers are limited in their responses to what is reported on television can be refuted by numerous examples of political and environmental policy change because of mass media.

Postman is largely pessimistic about humanity and the world as he describes the general direction society was heading towards in the mid-eighties. Even though the author has thus far provided insightful speculations on the impact of modern media on society's future, most of it hasn't correlated with the present. Not yet, at least. Unchecked, television definitely could've become the soma of human society, but people have been able to utilize it as a tool to empower, rather than overwhelm the masses with knowledge over the past decades.

Do you think Neil Postman's arguments against television have translated to the real world? Is modern media proving to be a detriment to people and especially the next generation?

- Kevin Gomes

Amusing Ourselves to Death: The Implications of Modern Media

When reading Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, his subtle yet overarching message of public response and discussion in the age of television, technology, and show becomes more and more apparent. He emphasizes the vitality of media and effect each kind of media medium has on our society, such varying definitions of intelligence and truth between different eras of time. This emerging era of technology and television is the precedent to an increasingly vain and visually reliant world. Conversations in the past have had a factually based, rational, and complex nature, dissipating next to the power that imagery TV has over the American audience.

I agree, however, that human interest has recently latched onto more fantastical and visually stimulating aspects of media, instead of ones that are informational or grounded, found in printed novels or even literature. Screen reliant technology in general has made public discourse shift towards one centered around vanity, rather than concentrate on a message the media medium is attempting to deliver. I also identified such a materialistic transition in today's world, as the dominance of social media, cellphones, TV, and dating apps has increased public scrutiny of appearance. Printed words are meant to deliver information in a logical and analytically coherent order, but as this media medium is replaced with the ever so domineering TV, serious and rational discussions begin to vanish. There is no value to a subject's substance, but rather, their looks. However, Postman of Amusing Ourselves to Death points to the power of media and its implications on how our society functions, both in the past and present. From transmitting knowledge orally, written, printed, or televised, the construction of human society has been based on how we receive information, and how we therefore interpret it.
- Madison Nguyen

What I Though About Amusing Ourselves to Death

As I read Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, I have to admit that I sometimes got stuck on the vocabulary, and had to reread a few paragraphs. Though this is not a book that I would usually read, it still had topics that I was able to find interest in. I enjoyed the way that the author expressed his views on the world's transition from printing to the television. I agree that with printing, many people were able to understand different forms of communication with a more extensive vocabulary. What interested me the most was the support he had for his claims against the television. The television shows its programs based on the hope that it will keep the viewers entertained enough to continue watching. Even when showing serious matters or educational programs, the television still tries to find ways to keep the viewer's interest. They incorporate commercials in between the shows you enjoy as another way to get you to remain seated watching. These forms of entertainment are leaving people with the want to stay entertained. In the end, this book has given me more insight on why the television shows the things that they show, and how it has affected people overtime.
- Jasmine Gonzalez

AF: Trouble in Paradise

Hi Summer Bloggers:  We have encountered two blog challenges that we are trying to figure out:

ONE:  THE POST THAT RUNS OFF THE SCREEN.

This happened to Emily C.  This tends to happen in SOME cases, but not ALL cases, when the writer types their post in Google Docs or Word, and then cuts/pastes it into the text box.  If it happened all of the time, that would make sense, but it doesn't happen all of the time, just MOST of the time.  If this happens to you, please RE-TYPE your post directly into the text box on the blog.  

[A similar glitch:  SOME students are signed on to the blog with their s.busd.k12.ca.us email addresses, and everything seems to be working fine.  But the s.busd.k12.ca.us address does not work for MOST students.  If there are any geniuses out there who have a theory, I'm all ears.]

TWO:  THE COMMENT THAT YOU WRITE BUT IT DOES NOT POST

This just happened to Aniya S. and Jenee T.   I have no idea about this one.  I wrote a test comment on Jenee T's post, and it worked.

I'm waiting to hear back from Google Tech Support.  Again, if you have a theory, let's hear it.  But in the meanwhile, write your comments and save them with the confidence that this is going to get worked out soon, and you will be able to post them.

It's a cooler day today, so go spread a blanket under a tree somewhere and read!  Keep asking yourself what these texts make you think about.  Don't let words just slide over you like you're covered with non-stick coating.  Be disturbed, in a good way. 

Brave New World and the Power of Books

While reading Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, I couldn’t help but notice a parallel to Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. In chapter 9 it is mentioned that some books are forbidden, which reminded me of the main conflict in Fahrenheit 451 which was the pursuit of books and knowledge in a society where they are outlawed. However, what stood out to me most was two specifically works mentioned in both stories, the Bible and Shakespeare. This leaves one to wonder, why would such common books today be such important literature to burn and ban? These are books that most everyone has come in contact with or at least heard of so, what makes them so dangerous? The answer is that these books lead people to think for themselves, analyze the author, and finding new ways of thinking and understanding the world around them. Both literatures can be left to the reader's interpretation and many people will read them differently. In a perfect society, a simple book could destroy the whole order of things by causing multiple ways of thought. This exemplifies the power a book can hold, to make a society cower, not because they hold any physical ability but because they contain enormous thoughts. Thoughts that are written allows for more private and insightful topics to be discussed to a broad audience.

-Jenée Turner

Brave New World

The novel Brave New World is very interesting and a very believable plot that can happen in the future. From the beginning it show how a futuristic society is that has tried to make a perfect where everyone is happy wheres they are conditioned to do and want only the things they're supposed ,but they are taking away freedom as in freedom of thinking in themselves. The characters who do think for themselves they're unhappy, so it leaves the question is it better to be happy or free. John the "the savage" a normal human being compared to others echoes the concept to portray civilization as a corrupting influence rather than ennobling one. As in any tribal circumstance there are rules which Johns consumed as in the value of individual strength, masculinity, and is crushed that he is unable to prove to his tribe. This proves how powerful an influence the Reservation culture exerts on him. John rejects teachings from his mother, Linda, who is one of few to show concern for him. This is ironic how he says the city is trying to consume the city, but contradicts himself by his mother died from overdose of soma. A plot twist occurs at the end of the novel which is surprising in my eyes maybe as yours, which may question John conversation with the director. Overall the book was well written and the concept of how to be free or control is helpful by how to be control for your whole life and be like others or be free, different, but living to your belief of truth. --Jesus Irene

My Thoughts on Amusing Ourselves to Death

Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman is an interesting novel to me yet may be boring to others.  From what I've read so far, each chapter is dense and the vocabulary can be a lot to take in. For me, the book is interesting in the way Postman perceives and discusses how the world has evolved and changed. Slowly we have transitioned from writing and printing to image-based entertainment. Back then, people actually took the time to read, understand, evaluate, and argue through literacy. Nowadays though, television and photography has taken the world by storm.  Information given through television programs are all irrelevant and incoherent. There's a "simple language" that must be spoken for people to be able to understand what's going on. Even then, what's considered to be an educational program on T.V. still has an element of entertainment in it to appeal to young audiences. Moving on to a slightly different aspect, readers have to read slowly in order to be able to comprehend and analyze the text correctly. If you aren't interested in the topics discussed and you can't understand the complex ideas and wording, the novel may bore some of you. Overall for me though, Amusing Ourselves to Death is an interesting take on the concept that our lives are now centered around television and the entertainment it brings.                  - Emily Chang

AF: First AP test>>following directions, being professional

Please read my posts about REAL NAMES.  Again.  There are six of you using crazy names that do not match up with anything in Aeries.  Do you know anyone named Cheeseburgerfries123?

Also, there are 17 OPEN INVITATIONS.  That means you've requested an invitation; one of us sent it, and now it is sitting there, waiting for you to accept it, and it's getting ready to expire.  If it expires, you will have to ask us AGAIN, and...well, I just love that, don't you?  Doing things twice?

Yes, I'm feeling a bit crabby.

AF: Be patient

Just a reminder that Ms. Colln and I are busy wrapping up grades for the school year, so if we don't answer your blog request RIGHT AWAY, it's OK.  We see you.  We'll get to you very soon.  You go ahead and get busy reading so you will have something good to say when you sign on to the blog.  :)

AF - Very Important: Please read and pass the word

Let me start with the bottom line, and then I'll follow with the explanation.

The bottom line:  When you request an invitation to the blog, YOU MUST USE AN EMAIL THAT IS NOT your school email.  Sorry.  I thought that had been worked out, but it is not.

The explanation:

I set up this blog using my busd.k12.ca.us account, but the district has our network set up so that somehow, busd.k12.ca.us and s.busd.k12.ca.us do not communicate with one another.  (Discreet eye roll.)

I'm sure there's a good reason, but I don't know what it is.  It has something to do with your online security, I'll bet.  

Our choices at this point are to scrap what we have here and start over, and I'm pretty sure that would mean a new URL, which at this point would be disastrous...

...or we can just continue to do what we have been doing for the past 10 years, which is to ask students to use another gmail account.

[Good gravy, I just need a big DO OVER on that little blue sheet, don't I?]

Anyway, please use a regular gmail account.  Create one if necessary.  Using a "homemade" gmail account is great, it works, but please use your actual name.

The REASON I tried to ask you to use your school account in the first place is because I have had years and years of trying to figure out who I am talking to by looking at emails from ICYHOT675 or UNICORNBABE.  

Life will be fine this summer if you just use a gmail account with your regular name that will be in our gradebooks, and you write four posts and eight comments on the blog, and you read everything that Ms. Colln and I write on the blog.  

Speaking of that:  See the subject line, starting with AF?  That's me, Alexandra Fletcher.  When Ms. Colln writes, her posts will have a leading KC in the subject line.  Either way, these are important to read.