Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Student Choice Essays: Block D

Post them here.


Sarah N said...

Beloved Pets Everlasting, an article posted in the New York Times by Eric Konigsberg gives us all insight to what the future holds. The article tells the story of two puppies, Mira and Missy Too, clones of the late Missy. Also giving others the possibility of loving the dogs they’ve loved for so long. Unfortunately along with the excitement of a new puppy you once knew, every new discovery has it’s flaws.

When a human family member passes away it’s not as easy as going online, placing an order, and having it shipped in eight to ten weeks. So why should pets be? Being humans, a lot is lost in the average lifespan, every loss making a person stronger in time. What if a human didn’t have to suffer any kind of loss, then it would be pain free right? Wrong. The pain suffered is the pain felt knowing something so dear to one can just be replaced like a bag of chips. Ultimately teaching children not to appreciate what they have been given. They would believe that what they have could be replaced in the blink of an eye. Although the practice of cloning is not entirely healthy for a person to do, the results are something amazing, like never before.
Born between December 2007 and June 2008 were the cloned of Missy, an “amazing dog; superior intellect, incredibly beautiful, obedient, phenomenal temperament” Says Mr. Hawthorne who knew Missy well. The embryos of the clones were created by joining Missy’s DNA with a DNA stripped egg of another dog. Then set in the uterus of yet another dog, explaining some slight differences in the clones. Seeing dogs cloned makes one wonder how long it will be until we see people being cloned. The discovery of cloning is amazing and only the beginning, which can be scary at times.

If the cloning of dogs or sheep eventually leads to the cloning of humans I’m not sure what would happen. Husband and wives would clone themselves as children to raise, but would the children end up falling in love like the parents once did? How would we feed a new population of scientific doubles? What would be our punishment for meddling with nature? Hopefully these questions would be considered before anything drastic happens. Before the world is overtaken by the goals and fantasies of some.

B Moreau said...

As the human experience continues into the modern age our literary achievements continue to grow at an exponential rate. However with a more ignorant youth and a rising new novels become popular, the youth of today as well as school administrators considering removing traditional texts and replacing them with popular new age manuscripts. However tin the process we are forsaking our cultural history and our native language of English in an unforgivable and naive manner. In this age of globalization we must protect our language from Hispanic and other cultures resistance to naturalization laws.
Thus I have come to the conclusion that traditional texts such as William Shakespeare’s plays being the cornerstone of modern day English must at all cost be preserved and remain in school curriculum. While it is wise and advisable to peak the interest of today’s youth it is however not advisable to do so at the expense of the future of today’s youth and that of America.
Now I am not specifically targeting the Hispanic community I am merely advocating the continuity of a culture in which today’s and future youth are brought up in English and are able to read this country’s constitution without a foreign language class.

Kristy said...

“A good wife always knows her place.” A guide to being a good wife would state. Women are made for pleasing their hardworking stressed out husbands, or are they? Well to a point. I believe that women shouldn’t be treated like a spa worker, or even a slave! The good wife’s guide was published back in 1955. In today’s culture, this would be pushed aside and scoffed at.

It is always nice for a wife to warmly welcome home her husband, but to be completely saturated with their husband’s needs is completely absurd. A stay at home mother is not and easy task. Thy must cook, clean, and take care of the children all day! Now the wife must put a 110% into her husband. “Arrange his pillow and offer to take off his shoes.” A guy can easily do that himself. The wife must listen to her husband go on and on about his day, while she sits there becoming a taciturn.

In present day America these orders are now the person’s choice. In the 1950’s, this would be looked upon very highly by the women. Their husbands, and even their friends, could pressure these ideas into the women’s head. For example if their friend Sally would do everything for her husband, he might brag about her and she will then feel satisfied, but with a feeling of depression. Because she is just pleasing him. “Don’t complain if he’s late home for dinner or even stays out all night. Count this a minor compared to what he might have gone through that day.” Are you kidding me? For their wives know, the husband could be cheating on his wife. If the wife interrogates him, he may become violent and malicious and strike his wife. So, therefore, the times have changed and a good wife is viewed differently.

A wife in the 1950’s was subservient to their husbands. These times have changed, which makes this reading archaic. A good wife always knows her place, whether it’s being a trophy wife or a present day working mother and wife.

Anonymous said...

“A good wife always knows her place,” states that a wife has to be good at all times. We hear this in “The good Wife’s guide,” article in the “House-keeping monthly,” in 1955. The article is ominous to women.

Today and fifty years ago have different aspects. Fifty years ago, the husband was the despot of the house and the wife had to slave over him, “make him comfortable. Have him lean back in a comfortable chair or have him lie down in the bedroom. Have a cool or warm drink ready for him.” Fifty years ago, husbands made their wives subservient. The article is scoffing women: “Listen to him. You may have a dozen important things to tell him, but the moment of his arrival is not the time. Let him talk first-remember, his topics of conversation are more important than yours. ” Now today, women have equal rights with men. Back in the day, the article may be right, but now it is insulting women’s rights. Modern time, wives look good for their husbands like back in the day: “Prepare yourself. Take 15 minutes to rest so you’ll be refreshed when he arrives. Touch up your make-up, put a ribbon in your hair and be fresh-looking. He just had been with a lot of work-weary people.” ”Be happy to see him,” what if your mad at him? Do you still have to be happy to see him? Also, why should the women have the dinner ready: “Have dinner ready. Plan ahead, even the night before.” Today and fifty years ago is not the same.

In the past, women may have not that many rights but today women and men are equal. There is no leader in the household, but there are leaders. The wife and husband work together; as one. Back then, women had no rights but today men and women have equal rights.


Anonymous said...

B.A. Jones
The master writers, such as Shakespeare, are integral parts of our culture, what would be the impact if high schoolers were not forced to read the classics? The societies of today rest on the bones of the old, that is even more so for literature.
The point is, we need the classics, such as Orwell or Golding; more modern books do not have the same zest and mastery of words as the old. If we were to read only modern books then the history of our modern language would be denied it’s chance to fester in our minds. English as a language has it’s history and culture in the “old” works (old being relative) .The more present day the novel the more devoid of the grace older books have. The old novels are so key to English as a language because the authors had to rely upon their best writing because they had a much more limiting vocabulary. It seems that newer works are made so shoddily as to oh so bluntly display their contents.
So be wary of the not so subtle play for reader s and their change , because the works of the present go only as deep as the cover. May Shakespeare’s literary

Anonymous said...

For the last few centuries one man’s work has been quoted, redone and retold over and over. It has inspired modern writers, strengthened it to make it concrete and last through time. This man was William Shakespeare. His work, and other masterpieces of his era; has been in high school curriculum for years. We should continue to observe the old cultural history than use modern titles. The evolution of English has resided in the last couple of centuries; we should study the work of these extremely articulate individuals that have blasted our language in the direction of improvement. By studying the mastery of these legends, will enable the progression of the language to be expressed eloquently for future writings. Modern writing is important in the fact that it is new age and is what English has evolved to. However it is untested; it is bias to our modern views of the current state of the world. Most of the modern titles have been inspired by the old literature; the same literature these new writers studied. If it inspired modern writers; we should study it further to inspire more. The writers of the past should be studied. There writing is inspiration to many modern writers. They studied them and were inspired. This is why the legendary work of our past writers should stay in the curriculum; and continue to teach, inspire and push our language past its current potential.
Anthony B. B.

cassie said...

The Good Wife’s Guide is a guide directed towards stay at home wife’s and or mothers. It is also directed towards women without jobs. It is directed towards women with children. This guide is viewed very differently today because people’s aspects are different today.
The Good Wife’s Guide is filled with an abundance of assumptions. One of the assumptions is that the husband was a good husband. “Remember, he is the master of the house and as such he will always exercise his will with fairness and truthfulness.” How does the author know some of the husbands are not wife beaters. Also another assumption is that the women actually have children. “Prepare the children”. The family might not have any children or want any children. That is how this guide would be viewed differently today.
The Good Wife’s Guide is demanding. This article is filled with commands. “Have dinner ready. Plan ahead, even the night before, to have a delicious meal ready, on time for his return.” That would be better if it was a suggestion. Also “Don’t complain if he’s late home for dinner or even if he stays out all night.” The author does not know the mans intentions of why he would be staying out all night or getting home late. Presently men cheat on women a lot more than back in the 1950’s. Women perceive staying out all night or being late as the men are cheating on them. That is another reason why present day this article would have a different effect on people.
The article The Good Wife’s Guide would currently be very demeaning towards women. The 1950’s seemed to be perfect but there was a period of great adversity. Women did almost everything that they were told to do. This would be very demeaning towards women. The 1950’s seemed to be perfect but there was a period of great adversity. Women did almost everything that they were told to do. Men had all of the rights and women had none. Housewives presently are respectable women and being a housewife takes long hours and is a hard job. But, this article is based on the assumption that women are incapable of doing many tasks and do not do enough as a housewife. At the moment women aspire to do more and their ambitions are different. Most women stand up for them selves. Women would not accept this article because they have voices. Also some men would not accept this because they would not like their women as robots.
-Cassie S.

Anonymous said...

In many countries around the world, women play an important role in their society. Usually, the women within a household are to cook, clean, and care for their family. However, over time the role of women has changed. Women today in America and other countries in Europe, have the same rights as men. Although many countries still follow the old traditions, the rest of the world has moved on. The concept of being a “maid” in a house hold rarely exists. The Good Wife’s Guide clearly explains what women were supposed to do in the past. Women were specifically told to cook, clean, and care for the family, but more specifically for the husband.
The duties of a woman have certainly changed over the years. In the past, women were expected to be “maids”. Today, women are expected to less. They are not expected to clean the house everyday, or cook. The archaic concepts seem to be out-dated and the world has moved on. Technology has played a huge role in the changes. Instead of refreshing the air with a nice scent, there are little plug-in air refreshers that automatically do it. Women do not have to cook at much, if at all because frozen food is available, and can be cooked by using a microwave. The food can be ready in a matter of one minute and the wife’s job is all done. The technology of today will continue to get better and the diminutive role of a woman will only get smaller. Caring for a family will continue to get smaller with the technology advancement. If a child is sick with a fever or a cold, there are medicines that will cure the person of the sickness and the wife’s job is done. The women in the world will begin to be less important in the household, and much more important in the society.
Cooking, cleaning, and caring for the family is all certain concepts that were expected of a woman in the past. Today, it is quite different because of the advancement in technology. If wives in the past had the use of the technology today, their lives would have been different.

Panos N.

Anonymous said...

“A good wife always know her place,” is how “The Good Wife’s Guide” dictates a woman to be in her daily life in the 1950’s. “The Good Wife’s Guide” was written in House Keeping Monthly in 1955. If this article were to be printed today, it would be nothing more than a joke. However, in that time period it would be the exact opposite.
The standards of woman in the 1950’s are archaic subsequent to the publication of the article. The author of this article told woman instructions on how to be the perfect wife in society’s eyes. For example,”Prepare yourself. Take 15 minutes to rest so you’ll be refreshed when he arrives. Touch up your make-up, put a ribbon in your hair and be fresh-looking. ” 50 years later, the expectations of woman are raised excessively. Young woman are not brought up to fulfill these requirements any longer. Woman should not have to live up to the principles of an article such as, “Make him comfortable. Have him lean back in a comfortable chair or have him lie down in the bedroom. Have a cool or warm drink ready for him.” Women have more talent than cleaning, cooking, and tending to their children and husband.
Today’s society does not expect as much from woman as they did 50 years ago. Woman are more valuable and important in modern times because they help with expenses in the household, keep the household in line, and some woman have even changed the world as we know it. In 1955, there was an article printed telling woman the “right” way to live. When in reality most women exceed the potential of men.

N.Tarrie Period D

Anonymous said...

“A good wife always knows her place.” The idea that a wife always has to be her best is depicted in the excerpt, The good wife’s guide by housekeeping monthly. The title of the excerpt only uses the adjective “good.” This title tells the reader that the author’s intentions for writing this excerpt is that a wife needs to have an innate instinct to cook, clean, and remain benevolent at all times. One must think: “what would, the perfect wife’s guide be like?” “Prepare yourself. Take 15 minutes to rest so you’ll be refreshed when he arrives. Touch up your makeup, put a ribbon in your hair and be fresh looking.” This quote explains to the reader that the wife must look her best in front of her husband. “Have dinner ready. Plan ahead, even the night before, to have a delicious meal ready, on time for his return.” The wife must take the time to plan ahead, and go out of her way to cook dinner on the exact time of the husband’s arrival.
In today’s time there is no time for a wife to accomplish so many tasks. The idea that a wife has to look her best, cook, and clean almost seems archaic. During the 1950’s there was no war and most of the world was peaceful. So back then had a lot less stress, and being a good wife was expected. Not all wives today are all stay at home moms. Some women have switched roles with the man, were the man stays at home and the wife provides the money for the family. “Make him comfortable. Have him lean back in a comfortable chair or have him lie down in the bedroom.” A stay at home wife usually has many tasks to complete in the day, so by the end of the day they are just as tired, if not more tired than the worker in the family.
People are always saying how they want to go back to the 50’s, but in the wife’s prospective this wouldn’t be a pleasant time. The good wife’s guide is all about how the wife has to act. But why doesn’t it talk about how the man should act? The reader must wonder how the wife is feeling while she is caring for all of the husbands needs. Why shouldn’t the husband look his best and do some work around the house?

By, Alex D.

Anonymous said...

Brianna R
Block D

As ones read What is the What, by Dave Eggers, one will make generalizations regarding the Dinka people. In the book, we classify them as kindhearted, trusting, and thoughtful human beings. On the other hand, American culture is the complete opposite. Due to the different advancements and resources that are given to Americans, we have a different way of life and are classified differently. American culture is extremely unlike the Dinkas.
“Where I lived in a hut of plastic and sandbags and owed one pair of pants. I am not sure there was evil of this kind in Kakuma refugee camp.” Valentio, a Dinka in What is the What, expresses how different the culture between Kakuma and now America. Valentio tells about his plastic hut while we have strong brick built opulent houses. Unlike Dinkas, Americans are greedy people. We need the best possible and Dinkas are easily satisfied. Dinkas are pleased with the one pair of pants and Americans have outfits for numerous days. As Dinkas are able to easily share with one another, Americans are generalized as wealthy and greedy, people.
As a Dinka, they believe manners are just a part of life. It comes to them naturally and they are over all generalized as polite people. Dinkas in What is the What, are just able to walk into neighbor’s homes without anyone questioning them. They are trusting to each other to be respectful towards one another. If this situation happened in America, one might feel invaded and tell one to leave. We are more independent and it takes Americas to gain trust other then it coming naturally to another person. Americans are even on the line of being rude unlike the Dinkas who are kindhearted and sharing. Dinkas are hard working for what they have. Dinkas have to work for food and to make shelter. Americans simply just go to the store to get things they need. This shows that we are sluggish humans compared to people around the world.
Throughout looking at American culture compared to the Dinkas, there is a big difference. We have things handed to oneself as Dinkas are willing to work to receive what the need in life. Since we have so many privileges, we get carried away with things that we really need. Generalizations can mean many things to different people. To Americans, generalization could be a harmful. People around the world think our way of life is much different and we are greedy people. For Dinkas, generalizations are a excellent thing because people believe that they are kind. Everyday, one is making generalizations about things and people around us.

Anonymous said...

As one reads What is the What, by Dave Eggers, readers make generalizations regarding the Dinka people. The Dinka are believed to be kind-hearted, trusting, naïve, etc. But how do others see the American citizens? Americans are perceived as chubby, ruthless pessimists. Americans prove our perceptions through daily events.
In America, unfortunate events happen daily. People are killed, robbed, etc. These happenings make citizens untrustworthy and pessimistic. Most people think the worst-case scenario before doing something. English native, Jean, gave her view of the American people, “Most English people view Americans as loud and large.” By large she means American people generally weigh more. After visiting other countries, one will see the change in attitude after they cross the border. Americans see simply having manners like for example, holding the door for someone, an extra good deed for the day. But usually in other countries, these manners come naturally. This attitude allows other countries to view America as ruthless. I, myself, have visited Canada. While I was there, I noticed the Canadians were very understanding and weren’t pushy whatsoever. While driving, I saw no road rage, which is very common in America.
Readers can’t help make generalizations while reading books like What is the What, but are they harmful? Yes, generalizations are a form of prejudice. But nothing can stop people from making them, they are made everyday.

A. Murphy period D

Anonymous said...

Gender has always been a tender subject when it comes to equality. Since the beginning of civilization the woman has always been looked at as the lesser sex. Weather it be in sports or in politics, the woman always seemed to fall short, or so it was portrayed. In the article The Good Wife’s Guide from the may 13, 1955 issue of Housekeeping Monthly the author’s goal is to create a mold in which the perfect housewife would form. The author gives directions to how a good housewife should act in order to please her husband. Today this article seems insulting and demining towards women, but 50 years ago this article would be accepted by both men and women alike.

The article says that “A good wife always knows her place” which today would be taken as an insult towards women and their rights. However, 50 years ago many women did not work and they had much less rights than they do today. Most women were housewives and the behavior described in the article was accepted and accepted by people. Women were expected to be on top of every household duty and to keep her husband and family happy. This was what was acceptable and normal during these times.

Back then the average housewife would tend to the children and household chores, shop for groceries and prepare meals for her husband and family. Today normal housewives are pretty much the same except for a few details; today, women have more of a choice, they do not have to be housewives. Women can be whatever they want and event if they chose to be a housewife they are not expected to do all the things listed in The Good Wife’s Guide. To day some women who are housewives also have part time jobs. Because f the changes in lifestyle between then and now most people would see this article as archaic and amusing because of the major progression in woman’s rights.

lindsay G.

Anonymous said...

In our modern-day world, there are many different types of people spread across the globe. There are Hispanics, Frenchmen, Germans, Africans, Americans, etc. Presently, more and more people are being generalized; this only means that as a whole, a people can be or is historically classified by having certain characteristics, or use generalizations. Hispanics, for example, are usually classified as tan skinned, usually to always have black hair, medium or average height, average weight, and have been known to have facial hair. This is an example of a generalization. Since we are currently reading What is the What? , written by Dave Eggers, we now know enough about the native African people called the Dinka, to generalize them with almost accurate precision. For example, most Dinka are tall and lanky, dark skinned (almost purple), homeless, bald, or have little hair on top of their heads (mostly the men). Their attributes include trusting, kind hearted, independent, forgiving, generally poor and uneducated properly, lean, but can be unaware, gullible, or naïve. In other words, if God decided to examine any Dinka at random, that this is what He would find; same goes for a Hispanic person.
Americans, on the other hand, can be quite sporadic and just the opposite in the generalizations of others. Sadly, more and more Americans are becoming obese, ignorant, selfish, greedy, lazy, ill-tempered, cold-hearted, sinful, and inconsiderate, more people are succumbing into debt, poor and homeless, and severely impatient. Most Americans are so enticed in their daily lives and what they are currently doing, that they will not even take a second to stop and pay attention to the small things that people do for one another, like someone holding a door for them, or helping them pick up something they dropped. They won’t acknowledge that person, and more commonly that not, would blow that person off and just continue their routine, instead of being courteous in return. Something that the Dinka posses that is very admirable is their “policy” of being courteous; what is common courtesy to Americans, which they can either decide to do or not do, is exactly the opposite for the Dinka; they are expected by others and themselves to be courteous to everyone and anyone. Even though the Dinka have little personal items and possessions, they are willing to share them with others for as long as they need, and most Dinka would never steal from someone. Americans would jump at the chance to steal something, even if it was offered to them out of generosity and gratitude from another, only to receive personal gain from it, which is the anti-Dinka way of thinking.
America, only one out of many countries, and one of the seven continents, is considered “the melting pot of the world” by many cultures and people. Many people, in desperate times, whether that be genocide, or a famine, etc., so there is a large number of immigrants among the populace, which represent many different heritages. The Dinka are generally only one or a few at most, different heritages. Between the generalizations of Dinka versus Americans, Americans are less etiquette-like and do not share some of the same views or responsibilities as the Dinka. What makes the Dinka such a kind and trusting people is how they react to others and how they base their culture.

John N.
English D

Mike said...

I like the picture.