The sources about the Trojan War, really helped me to understand it. Although it will take a while to get used to all the names of places and gods, I understand the basic gist of the war. The only thing that still confuses me, is if the Trojan War actually happened? It it is true that there was a war, to what extent to the legends tell the truth. Did the gods have anything to do with it, was Achilles real? All those questions are still unanswered, and at this point, probably can’t be answered. The sources also showed me how creative, smart, and cunning Odysseus’ was. Instead of using brute strength to win, he used his mind. I think this aspect of Odysseus will come up a lot in Homer’s The Odyssey. I actually didn’t mind the first two books of Homer’s poem, but at times, I have to re read parts to understand them.

Everyting went pretty well for me the first semester. I liked the books we read a lot, especiall Huck Finn, and A Lesson Before Dying. For my independent reading book I read V For Vendetta and really enjoyed it, especially because it was a graphic novel. I hope we continue to read in the next semester, altough I’ve heard that The Odessy is really boring. The discussions about Huck Finn and the essay went well, but I’m still confused about satire in the book. I can pick up on the really obvious ones, but I really didn’t see a ton of satire in the book, even though there is a lot. Other than that everything is going well, but will be going so much better after midterms.

I listened to the Sacha Cohen interview about Borat. After I listened to the interview I had more of an appreciation of the movie, and started to realize how smart Sacha was in playing the role of Borat. As we have discussed in class, a lot of people found the movie offensive, but really, if you watch the movie, the character Borat says very little, and allows the people to expose their feelings. If anyone thinks the movie was terrible, I think they should definetly listen to this interview, and really consider what made them hate the movie so much. Was it that the character was racist, sexist, etc., or the fact that seeing how prejudice Americans can be made them uncomfortable?

After I read a little from the slave narratives, I was really shocked. A lot of the narratives explained how bad the masters were, and what little regard they had to their slaves. The first part of Isacc Mason narrative really got me going. To think that someone would feel compelled to slap every slave they had before they finally died. It really made me sick to read that most slave owners regarded the slaves as animals, property, and not at all as people. The narratives really gave me an inside look into the feelings and positions that slaves had during the time of slavery.

I would like to say I know a lot about slavery, but in reality, I think there is so much to learn. In my mind, slavery is one of the darkest, and most important times in American History. It’s horrible to think that anybody could justify owning a person because it benefited them. I think reading the slave novels would really help me to understand the real feelings that slaves had about slavery. And to expose the truth about life at the plantations

For some reason, my computer won’t let me see the clip, however, I have seen the Colbert Report, and I’ve found it very funny. I like the Colbert Report along with the Daily Show, because they both deal with important manners in a funny way. Every time I have seen either show, I find them extremely satirical. It is obvious, and funny how they pretend to act the way they do. Although the Colbert Report is funny, it generally touches on some important topics during the show. Normally, Stephen Colbert takes the position of what is blantantly wrong, or imoral etc., in order to expose the truth behind the segment. I really like the show because it’s a great example of satire, and probably reaches to a lot more people than the news does, yet somehow manages to convey some very serious points.

I thought that today’s discussion on Iraq really helped me to understand what the current status is of Bush, and of the conflicts in the Middle East. I found the article we read on the Iraq group’s plan on how to continue with the dilemma of Iraq really interesting. I payed special attention to it also, when I found out it was bi partisan. Today, concerning the huge issue of Iraq, I think both parties need to start to talk and work together. I was shocked when I found out about the oil prices and Dick Cheney’s company. It’s amazing what people will do for money. It ridiculous to think that an American company would intentially hurt the U.S. troops and economy just for personal gain. When I finished reading the article we were given, I thought the group had put together some great ideas. Hopefully Bush will consider, and adopt most of their proposals. I also liked today’s discussion, because I realized what other conflicts were going on in and around Iraq. I had no idea that the Arab-Israeli, and Sunnni Shiite problems were so big. If Iraq is going to end in a succesful way, Iraq is going to need all the help it can get from neighboring countries, and hopefully and decrease in religous tension.

The article I read was about the recent shooting that left a groom dead late of last month. I read this article at

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/27/nyregion/27fire.html?ex=1322283600&en=357cf73362b1de61&ei=5088&partner=rs

In case anyone would like to see it. The article explained that one of the main reasons for the shockingly high number of shots fired was “‘contagious shooting’ — gunfire that spreads among officers who believe that they, or their colleagues, are facing a threat.” I read the entire article, and came to understand a lot more about the incident. I found it a lot different than what I’ve been hearing. It seems that everytime a big incident happens, key facts get left out in the spoken recollections of it. According to the article, the police may have been right to start shooting, however, this is only one article. The thing that I found most shocking, and irritating, is the article only gave one side of the story. Other than the reference to Al Sharpton and the speech he made, the article never an explanation or feelings from the family or friends of the victim. Whether the police were wrong or right in the incident, I found it almost racist that the story would not publish an account from the other side. I feel that the reporter must have been somewhat racist to leave out the personal accounts. In an incident so controversial, how can a writer forget to include a explanation from the other side.      

I believe that satire is popular because it is funny. Although people might feel uncomfortable watching satire, they like it because it’s funny, and also because it’s probably the most easy way for people to realize social problems. I think many people an groups are interested in it, because it allows issues to be expressed with less public scrutiny. I like satire a lot because it is funny but also has a deeper meaning. Some of my favorite examples of satire are South Park and the Daily Show.

“You could get all sorts of recognition for your credit [if you were a teacher]. Now, if you got “out of your place,” you’d still be in trouble.”

As I was reading this quote, along with many others, on the Jim Crow pages, I was reminded a lot of Grant and his role in A Lesson Before Dying. The first part of the quote reminded me about how much respect Grant gets from the Black population. He is always reffered to as Proffesor, and is regarded with a lot of respect from many people. Although the white people regard him as Proffesor, most do not say it with respect, and say it almost as an insult. The second part of the quote relates a lot to the conditions, and unwritten rules between the whites and blacks in A Lesson Before Dying. If a black person were to get out of line, or to say something “disrespectful” to a white person, there could be consequences. As another part said on the Jim Crow Pages, “Yes Ma’am,” and “Yes Sir,” were the norm in society. I thought this was terrible, but true.