Lincoln's Quote

“A house divided against itself cannot stand… I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.” --- Abraham Lincoln

This quote signifies that the quest to obtaining a forward movement, two sides cannot constantly fight. “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” similar to how progress cannot be made if there is no final decision. Lincoln symbolizes a deadlock in progress by stating that the government “cannot endure.”

Historically, Lincoln was the President who fathered freedom for slaves. This quote states that no progress can be made if the remainder of the government chooses to keep slavery alive, thus contradicting his ideologies of every individual being free. This reflects upon the social movement of abolishing racism , as directed by Lincoln, who claims that the United States cannot have “permanently half slave and half free;” instead, all citizens must be free from the vice grip of racism.

Romanticism in its Artistic Form

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-Jkktpp9QI
^Experience Haydn's Creation

If I could understand what all the high-pitched singing was about, I’d imagine pleasant lyrics. The male’s deep voice contrasts with the female’s high-pitched voice, distinguishing them even as they sing simultaneously. Similar, are the cellos and violins. Overall, the singing and use of both high and low-pitches provide a powerful tone. The sensation of victory is evident throughout various intervals, such as 1:58 – 2:14. “Hayden’s Creation” appears to be a reflection on the overwhelming freedom of emotions, which was popular in its time, the romantic era. The composer’s relation to the coexisting environment may relate to overthrowing tyranny, thus freeing individuals, both physically and mentally. This is evident lyrics, and instrumental music, as they produce a euphonic, yet dominant music "creation".


http://www.google.ca/imgres?q=delacroix+liberty+leading+the+people&start=306&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=881&gbv=2&addh=36&tbm=isch&tbnid=kvEr_TWt_YtwKM:&imgrefurl=http://blog.krrb.com/2012/01/17/making-dreams-happen-1-slogans-that-changed-the-world/&docid=mM5b1OD0v8KdLM&imgurl=http://blog.krrb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/La-liberte-guidant-le-peuple.jpg&w=640&h=515&ei=qMCET-vrEob20gGM1-znBw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=989&vpy=278&dur=3138&hovh=201&hovw=250&tx=145&ty=144&sig=107147044888733297443&page=13&tbnh=154&tbnw=205&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:19,s:306,i:110
^March with Delacroix's Liberty Leading the People

The title alone suggests that liberty shall influence the people, thus causing a revolution. In this painting, we can see a central female character; literally leading people with a firm grasp of the French flag (likely reflecting upon the French Revolution).This female character portrays liberty in a personified manner. The use of weapons and deceased bodies imply an overruling, which in this era, represents freedom. This related to the abolishment of tyranny, and the establishment of freedom for individuals, the primary movement of the era. The lone female character suggests a supernatural element, as if liberty is strong enough to kill others and persuade humans to do the same, yet in an alluring manner, illustrated by the dress and mass of men following her.

http://www.bartleby.com/101/610.html
^An "Ode to the West Wind" by Percy Shelly

Poets in the era of romanticism have often referred to nature as forms of inspiration. This poem, following the trend, makes direct ties in relation to nature. The undefined setting is illustrated by the use of various natural elements, such as wind, leaves, as well as the presence of autumn, spring, and winter. Nature was often used to enforce philosophical reflection, which is evident amongst the fifth segment; the speaker utilizes the movement of nature, to reflect his own personal actions:

"Drive my dead thoughts over the universe"

Thus, the natural elements become a source of his own artistic expression; pursuing the trend set in the romantic era effectively.

Who Would've Thought?

          I've heard it all, from “Stop Kony 2012” being the long lost salvation for the children of Uganda, to Kony actually being falsely portrayed by the media. In a world practically controlled by social networking, there is always someone looking to rebel against a large social movement. But they often have legitimate reasons, as they support their videos or blogs with strong evidence.
          So who can we really trust? Yes, "Stop Kony 2012" has a couple million views, websites, merchandising, and the support of celebrities, but can we really put faith into this movement? Jason Russell, the co-founder of "Stop Kony 2012," the man who appears to have such a close an innocent connection with his infant son, has been arrested. You'd think it would be for protesting, or damaging property (both of which I would support, because sometimes barbaric actions prove more effective than peaceful protesting), but he was arrested on other charges. Not to take a cheap shot at him, but the man we once thought was a saint sent to this world, so to speak, was arresting for public intoxication and sexual exploitation. So, to put this in layman’s; the dude was drunk and masturbated in front of a bunch of people. Alcohol is crazy, huh? It can make supposedly good people do bad things and make the angels look dim-witted demons. Would you trust this man, or even the movement as a whole? On a personal note, I still would. I never really was crazy about the whole thing, but some inappropriate actions do not determine his morals and his intentions to make the world a better place. Try telling that to the media. Oh shit, how the spotlight will burn on him.

Appealing Links:

Interview with Kony! Not really a bad guy?
http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhEk16p80re9j8X31h

Full story of the arrest.
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1147729--kony-2012-co-founder-of-stop-kony-movement-arrested-for-lewd-behaviour-reports

Kony's a "Buncha Bull"
http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh5AgnC2E2AgAzcsxy




Who can we really trust?

" That'll teach the ****** "

     Stanley Milgrim's experiment sheds some much needed light on the human psyche. About 88% of us (both men and women) have fantasized about murdering someone. However, upon seeing the impact that violence has on the victims, the numbers decrease. Upon being told that they must continue to carry out the experiment, the numbers decrease further. Many different attributes can inflict a difference in the numbers, but statistics will remain statistics. But would this experiment change if the victim was someone so hated, that possibly a high-voltage electrical shock is deserved? A few names come to mind; Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden, George W. Bush, or the New England Patriots when they lost the Superbowl (this is obviously a joke, the Patriots are an exceptional group of people). Would you be more inclined to press the button? Would you be inclined to press it repeatedly? Imagine the joy you can experience by avenging the many people that have been trampled on. Or you can imagine the tragic pain that you will be responsible for inflicting upon a fellow human being.
     Let's use someone mentioned in the "The Bad Show"; Gary Ridgway, better known as the "Green River Killer." Presumed to have killed over 90 women, most of which were prostitutes, he has been given a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Now, let's picture him as the victim of Milgrim's experiment. He no longer is bestowed the title of an "innocent victim." Perhaps the person conducting the experiment, and therefore presses the button, is given Ridgway's prior history and is well aware of his murders. They'd be more likely to press the button, and therefore uphold the pride in knowing they have avenged the many deaths that he has caused. Assume you were friends, or related to a female that was killed in Ridgway's actions. How would the typical human then react? Possibly even more willing to cause pain upon him, neglecting their morals and ethical integrity to redeem what has been lost. Pacifist views would likely be ignored, momentarily. As humans, we tend to feel a sense of guilt when watching one of our own kind suffer. But this can be altered with giving reason to cause violence, in an attempt for people to right a wrongdoing. Ironically, electrocuting a human with potentially enough power to kill him is not ethically right. "Two wrongs do not make a right," but as humans our willingness to do wrong is increased when we are given the potential to achieve revenge.
     Maybe violence is not the answer to our problems. Some people have never harmed a fly, so to speak. In all seriousness, how reluctant is the human population to kill a fellow being? Milgrim's experiment would surely give people the overall power to kill; altering the victim to meet the needs of revenge could drastically change the overall aspect of murder being justified based on the victim's actions. Could you stand to watch another human suffer, foaming at the mouth and violently shaking from the impact of the electrical voltage? Or would you watch, satisfied with knowing that what you have done is in memory of the unfortunately murdered? Would you press the button and end the life of a human (a human with the possibility to change his actions and better himself while living in the custody of federal prison; a fate better than death)? Or would you be ready to press that button at any given moment, enthusiastic to send the bastard to hell where he belongs. Everyone is different, and has their own personal opinions. What they think, and what actions they would actually carry out is unknown.
What would you do?

Parallel Personalities

Sigmund Freud developed the theory of the Oedipal Complex. Used to describe a son’s sexual attraction to his mother and jealousy towards his father, this theory was originally developed when Oedipus, the mythical king of Thebes, fulfilled the prophecy which foretold him killing his father and marrying his mother. In Mishima’s The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea, Noboru falls prey to the Oedipal Complex as he becomes enchanted by his mother’s physical beauty. Like Oedipus, he is blissfully unaware of the attraction he experiences. He compares Fusako’s naked beauty to the physical beauty of the sea, “Her shoulders, like the shoreline, sloped gently downward” (Mishima, 7).

            This theory also states that there is a jealousy or hate towards the man who takes you away, intimately, from your mother – your father. The mythical king of Thebes killed his father, whereas Noboru finds peace knowing his father is dead; “Therefore, his [Noboru’s] own father’s death, when he was eight, had been a happy incident, something to be proud of” (8). 

            Sophocles and Mishima create the characters Oedipus and Noboru who are parallel to each other in terms of the Oedipal Complex.

Intentions

From prior understanding, we know that the author of Sailor, Yukio Mishima, committed suicide at the age of fourty-five. However, merely reading the inside cover of the novel will not reveal his reasoning or his intentions behind committing suicide. To start things off, we should know that Mishima was loyal to the beliefs of a Japanese Samurai. The form of suicide executed by Mishima is known as seppuku. This is only conducted under two possible circumstances: a punishment, or killing oneself honourably rather than being dishonoured at the hands of an enemy. Mishima prepared a speech in an attempt to convince fellow Samurais to overthrow the government. However, to no avail, he was booed off the stage on which he spoke. He then decided to commit seppuku; he would rather die an honourable death than to live dishonoured by his own members. Thus the life of an actor, poet, model, and author was ended with the disembowelment of his inner organs, primarily the stomach area. Hopefully you, the reader, take an emic perspective and not view this ritual as “stupid,” regardless of your Westernized ideology.

Here is a link of Mishima’s final speech. Nearing the end of the video is what I assume is the speech that he was booed, causing his suicide. However, it does not actually show him being booed, rather it shows soldiers ordering him to get down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Bi2YA_r-QQ

“Human beings are not strong enough to die just for themselves”

-         - Yukio Mishima