Amusing Myself to Death by reading this book...

As Neil Postman brings his novel to a close, he caps off his final chapter by making a few concluding solutions.  One result that Postman organizes is that people are unaware of the content they are viewing.  The generalization is that we are laughing without realizing meaning.  Do we know the purpose behind our laughter?  The point Postman is trying to make is that people are laughing without thinking.  With entertainment hoarding our lives,  we begin to think less and less without caution.  Television is one of the main sources of junk.  TV serves society best with junk programs.  Television is dangerous when attempting to be serious.  Important, educational films like, documentaries and news programs are degrading themselves.  People can be watching these shows without knowing what's going on.  This goes to show that people have obtained the ability of being amused without knowing what is going on.  Neil Postman's last chapter is a solid wrap-up to his novel, Amusing Ourselves to Death because he is making his distinct points and opinions known. 

My Epic Fail of Silence

This last Friday, APLA students were given the task of expressing their verbal thoughts through art of charade and illustration.  Our voices were not to be heard from the beginning of first hour and continuing to the final moments of eighth hour. This chore was much more difficult than giving up Facebook for a whole day.  Trying to voice my opinions by drawing and acting out my thoughts was one of the toughest assignments to accomplish.  Based on Honesty System, I'm confident to say I failed. I slipped once in first hour breaking all code of conduct. After leaving AP Language, I attempted to remain quiet but I fell into the pressure of speaking about.  Each class period was just as flimsy as the next.  I started off silent and then caught myself in casual conversation with the desk next to mine. I feel that no good came out of this situation.  This day was so tragic, I even had to miss Alaina Brouckaert's weekly synopsis of the latest Grey's Anatomy episode... Darn.

Surf it, scroll it, pause it, click it -Technologic

Neil Postman's soul purpose in his novel and video interview at Calvin College was to reveal that public figure relies heavily on entertainment.  The title of his novel, Amusing Ourselves to Death unveils so much about society.  In his text, Postman explains how entertainment has affected all public discourse. He shows that people do not care if their communication has lost all meaning, just as long as they are being amused.  Postman says it best on page three, "We are people on the verge of amusing ourselves to death". We are a changing era. With the "Age of Exposition", we are caught in the new, deadly types of media.

In Postman's interview, he touches base with how we as people are becoming "pets" to our technology.  Society is always looking for the next, best thing. As we anticipate new technology, we become more comfortable and in-depth with our simple machines.  During the interview, Postman brings up the art of cloning and how soon it will become natural in our world.  He mentions how a sheep, frog, and even a jungle monkey were all created through this process.  Society relies on technology so much, that we are willing to clone actual, human beings for certain purposes in life.  This is enough evidence alone to show that technology is taking over our daily lives.  People trust and put their lives within technology's hands.  That is the point that Neil Postman is trying to make. People are becoming more and more dependent on technology.  Scoreboard: Technology: 1 People: 0

Civility and Debate

It is quite obvious that in Chavez's opening sentence, she believes while civility is a necessary component to debate, our public discourse and political discussions should not take a back seat in the midst of tragic events and heated arguments. 

Bellicose, inclined or eager to fight, was a good word choice, as it helps her description of the hostility in politics.  Since our nations founding, both parties have engaged in tense debate.  Chavez points out that the word, "campaign", originates from the French word, compagne, and was used in English to refer to the time spent on the battlefield.  In many ways, politics is very much a battlefield.  Whether on the floor of congress, or pundits on a cable news channel; people will always argue their political ideology.  Chavez makes it clear that our current heated public discourse is nothing new to the game of politics.

In my opinion, Chavez's main point is that extracting certain words from our public discourse, only harms it and places weakness on our ability to freely express ourselves.  I think the best point Chavez used was Mark Twain's, "Huckleberry Finn", and removal of the word "nigger" and replacing it with "slave".  To me, this is the best example as it exposes the absolute foolishness behind it.  I believe that, in the context in which the word was used, "nigger" puts a greater emphasis on the mistreatment of African Americans in that time period, more than "slave" ever could.

I do agree overall with Chavez’s article, I think we often try too hard to be politically correct and not offend anyone, and as she points out, these actions only coarsen politics.  As part of our rights, there is free speech, which gives us the freedom to freely express ourselves.  However, this does not mean we should publicly say whatever we feel.  As Chavez points out, we need to think before we speak.  There are countless examples of politicians and pundits crossing the line and going to too far.  Usually, the person who says hateful or discriminating things often pays dearly for it.  Words are simply words; it is the context in which they are being spoken that matters the most.  Avoiding metaphors that reference firearms and ammunition is outright foolish.  Maybe some people just need to grow a spine.