More Than a Name

A name symbolizes much more than just a word labeled onto you. It is something that you were given at birth permitting you with a sense of individual identity, and is worth holding onto. The tradition of the women in the relationship giving up her maiden name after marriage can easily be asserted to problems, including gender inequality. This controversy behind the tradition goes way back, showcasing how women are inferior to men by giving up there name, expanding on their spouses legacy and robbing them off their family tie. Although a single name throughout a whole family is easier and creates a closer knot between siblings and parents, it also takes away from the identity behind the wife's maiden name. Even though it is the tradition is for women to change their maiden name once married, there are other options such as using a hyphen or just keeping it as is. Thankfully, today we modernized the tradition by giving the women opportunities as to what they would like to do in regards to their name. Today, I don't think this is as big of a deal considering women of our generation are given the upper hand to choose and there are many other traits in which define a person other than the name originally labeled onto you.

Passionate not Over Exaggerated

Merriam Webster dictionary simply defines the word "feminist" as "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities." In respect to this, although I have not given the subject much thought in the past, I guess I am a feminist. It is known that feminists may have a bad reputation and single story behind them for being bossy and over dramatic. Ironically, I believe their would not be a need for this word to even exist if we didn't treat people, which hold the contrasting sex, differently from each other. My view of the subject is if one feels the need to express or represent there gender against the stereotypes already labeled on them, there must be reasoning behind it. I believe it is unfair to label the one's simply restricted by society based on gender when we are all human and contain the same ability to function socially, physically, and intellectually. 

The Full Story

The quote "How (stories) are told, who tells them, when they're told, how many stories are told are really dependent on power" by Chimamanda Adiche showcases how the theme in which we have been discussing over this year, the danger of the single story is derived. By only giving a voice to the victors in society, creates gaps and bias' in stories. Going back to the theme we  have talked about this year, blocking out the voice from the marginalized people in society sets up for incomplete stories only giving one perspective. As shown in Adichie's novel, The Thing Around Your Neck, diving into the first story we read, "The Headstrong Historian" the storytelling is told by the people in society holding the up most power and knowledge. Ayaju, a friend of the protagonist, and also a slave descendant, possesses the power bringing the most experience beyond the villages boarders holds the position of the main storyteller. By submitting our attention to the victors which hold the power to tell the stories, there is easily room for the story tellers to reshape a story to their own benefit. In my opinion, outside knowledge is always notable, however by only hearing the voice of the victors and most knowledgeable in society, we don't make room to finish the story from the common perspective. 

A Vivid Understanding

Sijie's novel, Balzac and the Little Chinese Seamstress, allows it's readers to truly engage themselves into the history when learning about the re-education system. Learning about the time of Mao's Cultural Revolution in the form on a fictional book provides a more personal feel making the history behind it more alluring to the reader. What appeals to me most about learning the history within this novel, is the idea that we our following the journey of the two boys who are going through this process themselves. These everyday encounters that the two boys go through, helped me understand what it was like living within the re-education system in a more vivid way. It entices me how we get to witness the true atmosphere what it was truly like living in this time period on a more personal account rather than reading a textbook with strait facts. I am excited to learn more and continue to follow the journey of these two village boys to see what happens next!

Self Reflection

English II has definitely been more challenging than last year, however I believe I have grown a lot from the beginning of the year. I do my best participating in class and also working hard outside of class to improve my reading and writing abilities. Although I do believe that I have grown as a writer these past few months, there is a lot of room for improvement within my writing. I have trouble with the habit I have formed, telling not showing. I struggle juxtaposing the two as I always have but this year I hope to come to an epiphany. Something that I have increasingly picked up from this year, is understanding the deeper meaning behind text rather than taking the literally meaning. In regards the quizzes, I seem to be doing well in vocabulary, however slack in reading comprehension. Nonetheless, I can already see improvement from the beginning of the year and hopefully continue to progress with my new routine of thoroughly reading and annotating, rather than leaving it to the last minute. Overall English II has been successful and I am confident to grow into a more avid reader and writer throughout the year.

Banned Books

For this weeks journal entry we were assigned to write about our views on the governments right to ban books. It came to my surprise to just how many books have been banned over the years. A few of my favorite books such as The Complete Persepolis and The Perks of Being a Wallflower have been banned due to their excessive use of alcohol and other drugs, only representing the imperfection of reality. It was truly bewildering to see how much  power the government holds, especially in what we expose ourself's to. Enforcing the restriction of the books we read, in my opinion, is something the government does not have the right to do. It is understandable how the government censors and challenges the books we read, in order to shelter their power. However, this idea of censorship does not hold me back into something I am willing to divulge myself into, for it sounds like a personal rather than political ideal.

I believe competition pushes us to our limits. With complete equality, comes mediocrity. If everyone is a winner no one will push them selves to reach their maximum potential or even know what potential they carry.  Similar to Harrison in the short story "Harrison Burgeron" by Kurt Vonnegut, I am opposed of living in a society with complete equality, because it takes away from individuality and allows everyone to live life giving their bare minimum.  It is important for children to compete with each other to prepare for he real world. I believe in rather praising children for all being equally "perfect", we need them to be exposed to failure in order to survive in the real world. Without failure, their is no strife to be the winner. Shielding children from this matter in today's society gears kids away from the feeling of winning by making everyone the winner. So how will we really push ourselves to victory if we don't know what it feels like?