Emily's Honors 10 Blog

Contemporary Novel

2008-08-28T13:44:00.000-07:00

I read Selected Poems by Edna St. Vincent Millay for my contemporary novel. Edna St. Vincent Millay was born in Rockland, Maine and went to college at Vassar. She wrote many poems through out her life and was highly acclaimed for them. Through her poems you can tell that Millay lived her own aspects of the American dream.
Millay liked to experience the world around her fully and she would strive for anything; in her poem Renascence she said:

“The sky I thought is not so grand;

I ‘most could touch it with my hand!

And reaching up my hand to try,

I screamed to feel it touch the sky.”

Millay always looked for her own way of life. In her poem The Singing-Woman from the Wood’s Edge she explains how her parents differed in ideas and from then on she always made her own choices.

“And yanked both ways by my mother and my father,

With a ‘Which would you better?’ and a ‘Which would you rather?’

With him for a sire and her for a dam,

What should I be but just what I am?”

Edna Millay was a feminist and believed fully in perusing what she wanted, and she became the first woman poet to win a Pulitzer Prize. She always did as she pleased or what she thought was best. Portrait by a Neighbor shows her independence and her insistence to do only what she wanted.

“Before she has her floor swept

Or her dishes done,

Any day you’ll find her

A-sunning in the sun!

It’s long after midnight

Her key’s in the lock,

And you never see her chimney smoke

Till past ten o’clock!”

Edna St. Vincent Millay lived maybe not how most people would find decent, especially in the 1920’s; but she lived with her own ideas, beliefs, wonders and passions. Part of the American dream is to be able to live unoppressed in your customs and beliefs, which Edna Millay did and expressed in her poetry.

Source:
Selected Poems of Edna St. Vincent Millay. New York, NY: Gramercy Books, 2006.

Frederick Douglass: Thematic Question

2008-08-28T12:05:00.000-07:00

How do you think Douglass' autobiography helped to promote an end to the evil institution of slavery in the United States?

Frederick Douglass’ autobiography caused quite a stir among Americans when it was published in 1845. Many people in the North did not know what slavery was like, and even more had never heard about it first hand from some one who had lived in it. Frederick’s autobiography detailed his life from as much as he knew about his early years and parentage through his struggles as a slave and all the injustice he had seen up to his escape and freedom.

Most people who read the autobiography were shocked and appalled at the events of cruelty and mistreatment of the slaves. Children were taken from their mothers at birth in what Frederick could only explain as “to hinder development of the child’s affection toward its mother, and to blunt and destroy the natural affection of the mother for the child.” Slaves were often brutally beaten to the point of their faces or bodies becoming disfigured. Frederick wrote of a female slave he had met who was “So much…kicked and cut to pieces that she was oftener called “pecked” than by her name.” Slaves were beaten and underfed in most cases but worse than that to Frederick was that they were not educated, and would be in a vast amount of trouble if found trying to educate themselves. Frederick realized at a young age that slaves were kept in ignorance to keep them as slaves.

The complete exposure of the cruelties in the narrative written by an eye witness who had experienced some of the horrors himself was extremely jarring to those who read it. The words that Frederick wrote coaxed anti slavery feelings into a blaze. His autobiography was support for abolitionists who were already campaigning for the end of slavery, but it also won supporters to the cause who otherwise would not have know much about slavery.

When Frederick reached his freedom in the North he dedicated the rest of his life to help in promoting the end of slavery and advocating equality for all races as well as women. He delivered many speeches but eventually there was suspicion as to if he ever really was a slave; that maybe it was just a clever act to win supporters. By writing his autobiography, Frederick was able to put down that idea and continue speaking and writing believed.

The autobiography was popular and translated into many languages and was read in America and many other countries besides. The autobiography won the anti slavery movement supporters through out Europe and America. The wide spread popularity of Frederick’s life story brought him much popularity especially with European women. The European women bought Frederick’s freedom and were able to get him a printing press as well for him to further promote the end of slavery.

Frederick Douglass’ autobiography helped to promote the end of slavery in the United States by providing many people who did not have a good understanding of what was going on in the world of slavery much needed reliable insight. It proved that Frederick was who he claimed to be and that he had a right to speak out against all the awful things he saw. It also gave Frederick the popularity that allowed him to continue writing, publishing, speaking, and convincing people of the wrongs of slavery for the rest of his life.

Source:
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. New York, NY: Penguin Group, 1997.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee Author's Intent

2008-08-25T12:16:00.000-07:00

Dee Brown was a librarian and then became a professor of library science. He died at the age of ninety-four but in his life time wrote many books that have to do with frontier life and Native Americans. His most famous and best selling book was Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, which tells the Indian’s side of the Americans settling the west.

Brown was not an Indian himself or of Native American decent, but he grew up in an area where there were many Native Americans. He would hear their stories of their past and ancestors and he realized that the history usually learned and the way the media portrayed the Indians was not the same as the stories he heard. He did research and wrote Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee to expose much of the treatment of the Indians that wasn’t widely known and to show how the Indians felt about what was happening to them at that time.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee details how many Europeans worked to settle the land in the west and most in an unpeaceful manner towards the Indians. Many bloody battles were had and reservations set up. Many Indians who tried to act peaceably with the Europeans were misused. When peace treaties were made they were usually broken, or made with unreasonable demands on the Indians. At the Battle of Wounded Knee, which is considered one of the last major European Indian battles, the Indians gave up their arms in hope of avoiding major conflict, the English cruelly massacred men women and children. In the book Dee Brown quotes Louise Weasel Bear who said “We tried to run but they shot us like we were a buffalo.”

When Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee was published in 1970 many people were unaware of much of the cruelty that the Indians had suffered and little was known about their culture as well. The contents of the book shocked many people as they learned the little spoken of truths. People were able to see and better understand the Indian motives and culture, and with both stories, the European’s and the Native American’s, were better able to understand the whole picture of the settling of the west.

Dee Brown wrote his book Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee to express the little known standpoint of the Indians during the early years of America. From it a depiction of Native American history and culture was finally seen by many people who had never heard it, and since then Native Americans are better understood.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: Thematic Question 2

2008-08-23T19:17:00.000-07:00

What does the victor owe the defeated after a conflict?

The accounts of history are more often written by the victors than the defeated; and many times the defeated has no voice at all. The motives, plans, and excuses of the triumphant are the ones most told and because of this the winning side is often seen as the side that deserved the victory.

The Europeans that came into the new world of America came for different reasons. Some wanted religious or political freedom, some money, some adventure, and others any opportunity they could find. Once they came they began setting up their settlements, towns and trading posts. The Europeans wanted the American land because they saw how untainted it was and how much potential it had.

The settlers brought their culture and ideas with them to America to set up along with their homes. They established their churches, stores and schools to make the land into a livable and acceptable society. All of the Europeans had their ideas of how people should behave and the world should be run and were going to do what it took to make the new land what they believed it should be.

Most of the Europeans believed that the Indians were in the way. The Indians were a hindrance to what many of the Europeans were trying to do in America. The Indians did not dress or behave the way the Europeans did and they were on the land that the Europeans wanted. The Europeans were trying to progress and many found the Indians were backwards and needed to be civilized or taken care of in another way. When changing the Indians did not work some found it not only necessary but justifiable to move or destroy them by violence.

The Indians lived on the European’s new land; but it wasn’t new to them. The Indians had lived there for centuries before. They knew and loved the land that their ancestors had lived on before them and were buried in. It was sacred to many of them. The Indians watched as the Europeans came on to their land and set up their lives. The Europeans spoke, dressed and behaved different than the Indians did. The Indians saw the Europeans pushing in to their lands, and often without kindness.

Some Indians tried to welcome the white people, and some did the opposite, but in the end it didn’t matter; the white people began trying to change the Indians. Some Indians changed willingly, but others did not understand or want the European ways. The Indians saw themselves as being oppressed as the Europeans tried to press their ways upon them.

The Indians wanted to live their lives in their culture, but were met with aggression from the Europeans who found them unruly and in the way. The Indians who wanted to live their lives as they had before the white people arrived, and the Indians who refused to leave the land of their fathers found themselves in the midst of violence, reservations, terror, massacres, and eventually, a form of defeat. The Europeans succeeded in wiping out or pushing aside the Indians that lived on the land first.

The victorious party owes the defeated it’s story. When the Europeans killed or moved the last of the Indians and began telling the stories and writing the histories of America; how and why the Indians were displaced, the Indians should have been able to speak as well. The victorious owes the defeated the ability to tell the world and the people to come their motives, feelings, and reasons for fighting the battles they lost.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee Thematic Question #1

2008-08-16T10:25:00.001-07:00

Why does the story of “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” begin in 1492?

In 1492 Columbus set out on a sea journey, on a route that he believed would lead him to the East Indies. He traveled under the financial aid of Spain, hoping that his way would make a better trade route. When Columbus landed on the 12th of October, he was convinced that he had landed in India. In fact, he was standing on a whole different continent that most of his world had no idea existed.

Believing he was in India, Columbus called the people native to the land he was now on “Indios” or Indians; thinking that they were people of India. Even after the realization that the land was not India, the name had already been used many times and stayed. This was the first misunderstanding of many that separated many of the new settlers from the Native Americans.

Columbus sailed back to Europe and told of the land he had found and the people he had found there. The Spanish began to send explorers and missionaries to this new land; and some Spaniards went on their own in search of gold or mysterious fountains. This was the beginning of the rush of Europeans that streamed into the Americas.

English and French were quick to follow, spreading into the land already occupied by the Indians. With Spanish, English and French men all coming into the Indian territories, confusion, hostility, misunderstanding and change for both parties was certain. The English however, seemed to have the most conflict and lasting changes with the Indians; or so it would read from a history book.

The culture of the Indians was drastically different from the culture of the English; and neither group understood the other. Wamditanka an Indian of the Santee Sioux said “The whites were always trying to make the Indians give up their life and live like the white men…If the Indians had tried to make the whites live like them, the whites would have resisted, and it was the same with many Indians.” When the English came and saw the ways in which the Indians lived, they did try to change them, in many different ways; but almost all ended up in violence.

Some Indians complied with the white English people’s requests; others started out seeking good will with the white men, but became fed up with their forceful and often cheating ways, and some never tried at all. Red Cloud said: “If white men come into my land again, I will punish them again.” In almost all cases the confrontations or submissions ended in Indians being pushed out of their land, or bloody fights.

The fights and battles between the English and the Indians only escalated and became bloodier their treatment of each other only worsened. The Indians adopted the European weapons when they could but not their culture and the Europeans would not let the Indians be in their culture and continued to try and move change or kill them.

When Columbus landed in America by mistake he could hardly have known that he was going to start the first wave of countless Europeans that would come to the land; but it was the beginning. Europeans came with their ideas and wants and found the Indians to either need changing or to be moved out of their way, and when this wasn’t as easy as they wished it to be, loss and bloodshed followed, escalating up to the point of the massacre at Wounded Knee.

Frederick Douglass

2008-08-03T15:50:00.000-07:00

Frederick Douglass was a slave in the 1800’s. He hardly knew his mother before she died due to the separation between parents that usually occurred for all slaves. He was never sure who his father was, though it was whispered that it was his own master. If it was his master who parented him, it did not help him against the cruelties of slavery; and wasn’t expected to, as very few of the mulatto slaves were helped in any way by their white parents. As Frederick said, “slave holders have ordained, and by law established, that the children of slave women shall in all cases follow the condition of their mothers”. Frederick did follow his mother into slavery, and met much harsh treatment and saw many things starting at an early age. Frederick wrote the events of his life to show people the cruelties, injustices, and unchristian ways of slavery.

When Frederick was sent to Baltimore, he found he was living with a mistress much less experienced in the ways of slavery, and from her he learned his letters. This was a crucial point in his life. Besides getting the foundations of his learning, this brief teaching from his mistress showed him the biggest reason why the white people were able to enslave his race. Education leads to freedom; or at the very least a greater hunger for it. The more he read, the more he began to fully realize the horrors of slavery and how completely unreasonable, and inexcusable it was and resolved not to stay in slavery forever and to escape when the best chance came; or die trying. Frederick learned the arguments against slavery and placed them beside his own experiences to see the truth. He wrote about this to show the world what they didn’t want to see.

Where ever Frederick was he saw cruel treatment of slaves. Countless horrific episodes or comments are scattered through out the pages of his life. He wrote about the first terrifying scene he saw that, “he made her get upon the stool, and tied her hands to the hook…her arms were stretched up at their full length, so that she stood on the ends of her toes…he commenced to lay on the heavy cowskin and soon the warm red blood came dripping to the floor.” Beatings were not the only offences that slaves endured, lack of food, separation from families and friends, and verbal abuse were also very common. Frederick watched this happen to those around him and felt the pains himself. He wrote all these things so people could really see what was happening and could not deny the cruelty without a stone heart. He wrote so the tortures his fellow slaves endured wouldn’t slip by without any notice at all.

Often, through out the writings of his life, Frederick spoke out on how unchristian the ways of slavery are. He was appalled by the cruelty of his Methodist masters who professed that they had great faith and were very religious, sometimes even twisting scripture to justify themselves. Frederick went as far as to say that “Were I again reduced to the chains of slavery, next to that of enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me.” He could not accept the things that these slave holders would do as anything but far from Christian. After reading pieces from the book The Columbian Orator, such as a narrative between slave and master and speeches on Catholic emancipation, he knew it wasn’t Christian; and wrote to prove it.

Frederick Douglass knew first hand the inhumanity of slavery, and just escaping himself was not enough for him. Thousands of other slaves were still suffering, and their children looked to the same fate. Many people in the North did not know the full extent of the horrors of slavery. He wrote the truth of slavery. He wrote all the events in his life so that they would be exposed undeniably, and the world, after seeing would be held accountable to change its ways.

Virtue

2008-07-21T12:25:00.000-07:00

I chose to practice the virtue of Resolution, because I don't feel like I make that many, and often when I do I don't follow completely through with them. Franklin defines the virtue of resolution with two short simple sentences: "Resolve to preform what you ought. Preform without fail what you resolve." I hope I do well with this because it seems like something I already should be doing.

Sunday:
Today I made a pretty simple resolve, but it wasn't the easiest to keep however. I resolved to not get frustrated with my siblings on the long ride to and from church. It is about an hour and a half ride one way, and I have six younger siblings, so it can get a little crazy and I often get stressed out, but today I think I did pretty well. They kicked my seat, got loud, and put (accidentally) a dirty shoe on my book, but I took a few deep breaths and just read some of Ashley's Autobiography.

Monday:
Today I resolved to make my bed all week. I kind of slack off in that area and my mom doesn't like it too much. So I made my bed, but otherwise I didn't do anything special. Not the best day.

Tuesday:
I made my bed! I'm finding this more difficult than I thought at first because I don't know what to resolve. I don't want to just make something up, but I'm getting a little desperate!

Wednesday:
Franklin said "Resolve to preform what you ought." So if I just resolve to do every chore and help out when I should, does that count? Anyway, that's what I did for today.

Thursday:
So today was another failure to think of something good to resolve to do, but I do all the regular things I'm supposed to do today; including making my bed, and making the bed for Ashley to sleep in with new clean sheets and all that. =]

Friday:
Today I did all the usual things again, but I did resolve something else! I've been meaning to start running again and get back in shape, and so, I figured now was a good time to start. So, I did. =]

Saturday:
Today was bad. I didn't go running because I got some bad news and didn't really feel like doing much of anything, and didn't. Kind of a bad way to end the week, but the circumstances weren't so great, however, virtues are virtues and should probably be practiced at all times. Most people don't usually like excuses. I plan to continue my running resolution though tomorrow.

Evaluation:
I think besides my last day I did pretty well. It was hard trying to think of something to resolve every day, but eventually I decided to think of everyday as one big resolution to do my best at "preforming what I ought". That might seem pretty simple but it isn't always as simple as it seems. And besides my last day, I did try every day to follow through.

History: Author's Intent for A Midwife's Tale

2008-07-13T20:11:00.001-07:00

Laurel Thatcher Ulrich is a professor at Harvard University and also a historian of women and early American history. Along with A Midwife’s Tale she has written other books including Well Behaved Women Seldom Make History and Good Wives and The Age of Homespun. A Midwife’s Tale was likely her most recognized and won the Pulitzer Prize for history and was the source for a documentary. Ulrich had three main reasons for writing her book A Midwife’s Tale; for Martha, for women, and for herself.

Martha Ballard was an incredible hard working woman even by eighteenth and nineteenth century standards. Martha took care of her neighbors through sickness and troubles while maintaining her own home and watching over her family. She delivered over eight hundred and fourteen babies, carefully documenting each along with her daily activities. The fact that Martha kept such a diary that documented so much was amazing; but few other people seemed to feel this way. Ulrich realized the unique and remarkableness of the diary and of Martha herself and wanted to give them some justice. Many people found Martha Ballard’s diary to be dull or to have too many topics that related to sexual behavior, so not much was done with it. Ulrich wanted to change that, and so wrote her book; not as a substitution for Martha’s diary, but to shed some light on the importance of the diary and on Martha’s unique and laborious life.

As a feminist, Ulrich was especially drawn to Martha Ballard’s diary. Through her diary one can see that some of the common assumptions about woman during Martha’s time might not be completely true. It is clear in the diary that women not only kept house and garden while raising children, (hard work in itself) but many also had other jobs such as midwifery, or in the area of textiles and were business women in their own way. Ulrich wanted to show the importance of women in early American communities as they don’t always get their due; she wanted to show all the work that women really did do.

As a historian Ulrich was interested in Martha Ballard’s diary on a personal level as well. By researching events in Martha’s diary Ulrich delved into many historical documents and learned a great deal of history not only about Martha, but about the community in which she lived and other historical events surrounding the diary and revelations on the ways people lived during Martha’s time.

The history of Martha and the history hidden in her diary, also the ability to explore the roles of women in Martha’s time and show their crucial place interested Ulrich. She wanted to give Martha Ballard’s under appreciated diary some of the attention it deserved, and so with these reasons combining she wrote her book A Midwife’s Tale: The life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812.

History Post 2: A midwife's Tale Thematic Question 2

2008-07-12T13:52:00.000-07:00

What was the role of a Midwife during the late 18th and early 19th century Maine? What changes did Martha Ballard see in medical practices during her life time?

In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century midwives had many duties and were often skilled in more than just delivering babies. Being a midwife at that time was hard and tiring work for skilled women. During Martha’s career and especially toward the end, male doctors became more common and pushier and began to change medical practices of the time.

Being a midwife was difficult for many reasons. There were troubles and annoyances, even dangers before they even got to the birth site. Midwives had to be prepared to be called at any hour of the day or night while they were busy or sleeping. “Snowd. I was calld at 7 hour Evening to see Mrs. Mthews who is in labor. I tarried all night. Slept none.” (1) Martha was almost always deprived of sleep, because delivering babies was not the only thing a midwife had to do. When Martha arrived home after a tiring delivery had to be prepared to finish her house hold work of baking, mending, washing and more before she could act on the thought of rest.

Braving the travel to the patient’s house was often a dangerous part of being a midwife. Crossing rivers in the night and the cold of winter, and being thrown from horses were only some of the troubles encountered by Martha Ballard and other Maine midwives.

Midwives had to be prepared to deliver babies and know what to do if the birth did not go properly on its own. Not only did they have to know how to deliver babies, but how to care for them or their mothers if they became ill. Many Midwives were not just skilled in midwifery, but also often in herbal medicines, and treatment of the sick. Martha Ballard made many hundreds of sick calls as well as the calls that came from mothers in labor. This often called for extra work at home for the midwife, such as more gardening than the average woman because of the special herbs needed and also medical attention for family members as well as those who pay for the service. “I have done my hous work and dug gardin.” (1)

Originally a midwife was much more common to be called for a delivery than a doctor. If a doctor was called it was usually only in extenuating circumstances. The midwives were very competent and the people knew it. During Martha Ballard’s time this began to change, especially toward the end of her life, doctors called for sickness and births were becoming more common.

For a time it seemed as though doctors knew their place; and that place was taking care of the more serious issues. Midwives delivered babies unless there were serious complications and then a doctor was called. For sicknesses or discomforts healers had their herbs. Doctors were sometimes consulted or even worked with without real competition or hostility, and midwives and healers were even invited to attend dissection autopsies. “I was Calld to my sons to see the Desection of the Son of Esquire Davis which was preformd very Closly.” (1)

Quietly competition came and grew as doctors became more determined to deliver the services that had long since been the woman midwife or healer’s tasks. Many midwives and healers disapproved of some of the doctor’s methods such as bleeding and always seeming to use the most drastic methods first. “They inform me that Dr Page says it must be opined, which I should think improper from present appearance.” (1) They also did not like the lack of experience of some doctors, midwives and healers had to stand by quietly as they were slowly pushed out of the way. Eventually it became unfitting for a woman to perform the duties that they had been practicing for so long.

Being a midwife in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries took skill, diligence, competence, sacrifice and the good heart of a neighbor. Being a midwife meant long days and nights of hard work, whether for their practice or what was expected of them as a woman running a house hold. Martha Ballard delivered over eight hundred and fourteen babies in her life time while also keeping up her house, taking care of her own family and tending to hundreds of sick people. Male doctors eventually took this away from the women, making midwife and healer duties not fit for women and therefore taking over their practice, but they couldn’t keep the women away from medical practices forever. Women began trying to gain their rights to attend the sick once again. Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell became the first woman in the United States to graduate from medical school, and one of her followers, Mary Hobart, who was related to Martha Ballard, was herself a pioneer in the medical world of women.

Source:
(1) A Midwife's Tale by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

Honors English 11 Spirit Bear 2

2008-07-11T12:45:00.000-07:00

While on the island, Cole works very hard on his Totem Pole almost every day carving animals that have taught him something into it. I chose to research the totem pole to understand them more fully seeing as Cole’s totem pole is very important to him and seems to help him calm himself.
For Native American’s on the Pacific Northwest coast totem poles are a long running tradition. Edward Malin, author of Totem Poles of the Pacific Northwest Coast, thinks that totem poles started by the Haida people in the Queen Charlotte Islands and from there it spread to the Tsimshian and Tlingit and then down to British Columbia (Where the Spirit Bear is from) and northern Washington state. As the poles progressed through the different areas they also expanded from being used as house posts to other things like memorial markers and funerary containers to symbols that expressed clan or family wealth, position, and importance.
Some anthropologists think that Native Americans did not start making totem poles until after the Europeans arrived, however the Native American’s oral tradition says differently. Because totem poles are made from wood they decay easily and relatively quickly so there is no evidence beyond oral tradition for evidence except that the forms and designs of the poles are so distinctive and developed that it seems to support that they aren’t the tradition is not a very recent one. European wood carving tools did spur the amount of poles made though.
Totem Poles are still made today, but in order to have one you would have to be willing to spend a lot of money. The real totem poles are made from only one tree usually cedar; only one solid piece, hand carved, and carefully painted.
Cole used his totem pole to symbolize all he had learned and together he and Peter found forgiveness and balance and together completed the totem pole carving those feelings into a circle on the top.

Works Cited

"American Indian Totem Poles." Nativelanguages.Org. 11 July 2008 http://www.native-languages.org/totem.htm.

"Totem Poles." Crystalinks.Com. 11 July 2008 http://www.crystalinks.com/totempoles.html.

History Post One: A Midwife's Tale

2008-06-30T14:28:00.000-07:00

Why is there so little evidence of women’s roles in the early 19th century? What revelations does Ulrich’s research bring?

In the late 18th and early 19th century Maine women had many roles and were crucial to the family. The women were the glue of the family, house keepers, business people, and neighborly companions. Much about the women’s lives beyond keeping house was not known large to do with the fact that most women did not keep written records. With the help of Martha Ballard’s diary Ulrich looks into her life and the life of the other women as well.

We learn most about history from written accounts. The parts of history that are the most hazy are the ones with no documents, literature, or any form of writing to go by. Many women in the nineteenth century did not keep writings on what they did through out the day or their transactions with neighbors; at least not that survived. Because of how little written material there is that would show what the women’s roles were, little was known and the general assumption was that they worked hard, but the work did not extend far beyond the door of their homes. Ulrich’s research, backed up by Martha’s diary shows that to be untrue, and that women played many roles in the home and community.

Martha Ballard’s diary is so unique because it chronicles the life of a woman day to day, and not only that but it shows that she, and other women in the town, had important roles in the community as well as the home. The diary and the research conducted around it by Ulrich gives important and rare insight into the life of the nineteenth century people of Maine, especially the women.

The common conception of the nineteenth century woman is on many levels true. Women worked in the garden and sewed, mended, cooked, worked the flax, spun, had and raised children. They taught their girls how to do all the work that they did, and together kept up the house. For most women though, and Martha in particular, this role of home body was not the only one.

The men were not the only ones who did business. Again, lack of record is likely the reason for the little realization of this. Another reason might be because the business often didn’t require currency, and was more of a trade system. The women would trade service for goods or goods for goods. Much of the women’s business was done with other women, but doing business with men wasn’t something that didn’t happen. The occasional trade of service or goods for money usually came from doing business with men.

Women were neighbors to the very extent of the word. They had a strong social network that exceeds what many people have now. The women came together to help when another woman was going to give birth, and often stay the night. After the baby was born women would come to help the mother until she was able to get back to her daily work. Women would go to each other’s homes and pull flax to help and to be able to take some as their own. Women would send their daughters from home to home to learn from the other women and single women would also move about the town in the same manner.

Apart from these roles some women had another attached to them that was more of a profession. Martha Ballard was not only the home maker, part time business woman and neighbor; she was also a midwife and healer. She would travel around the near by towns, helping the sick and delivering babies, being paid in money, credit or goods. All this she would do without letting her other roles as a woman slip. Having a profession the way Martha did was not a role that all women had, but it was not uncommon.

Women in nineteenth century Maine worked hard, and were not confined to one role. Because of Ulrich’s research into the contents of Martha Ballard’s diary, more light has been shed on the home maker, neighbor, business and professional roles of these women.

Touching Spirit Bear

2008-06-25T17:50:00.000-07:00

Edwin tells Cole that “Off the coast of British Columbia, there is a special black bear called the Spirit Bear. It is pure white and has pride, dignity and honor.” I was interested to find out if the bear was more of a legend, or if it was something people could actually still see. Also, because the book is called “Touching Spirit Bear” I figured there would probably be a lot of interaction between the bear and Cole and that it would be important.
Spirit Bears are not just a legend, but in order to see one you would have to go to Princess Royal Island or Gribbell Island and areas around there to see one because that is the only area in the whole world that they exist. I thought these were two nice pictures of them: http://sudoku.com.au/Prizes/H337.jpg and http://www.kermode-terrace-bc.com/spirit_bearcub1.jpg. Because they have lived mostly secluded for so long they do not have a natural fear of humans.
The Spirit Bear is called the Kermode after a British zoologist named Francis Kermode from the British Columbia Provincial Museum who helped W. T. Hornaday in learning about the Spirit Bear.
I learned that the legend of the Spirit Bear comes from the Tsimshian people, and that for a long time they were called Moksgm’ol. When the earth was in an ice age, the Raven decided to change the world back to green plants but as a reminder of the ice and snow turned every tenth Black Bear white. The Raven also gave them special powers. One was to be able to dive deep for fish and the other to be able to lead special people to their places. I think that maybe this is what the spirit bear in this book will do for Cole; he needs the help.

Works Cited:

"Legend and History." Spiritbearyouth.Org. 25 June 2008 http://www.spiritbearyouth.org/spiritbear.php?page_id=7.

"Princess Royal Island." Britishcolumbia.Com. 25 June 2008 http://www.britishcolumbia.com/regions/towns/?townID=4014.

Leadership. The last Honors 10 History Essay

2008-06-11T22:19:00.000-07:00

Abstract: This paper will discuss what was required of leadership to guide the colonies into a working government and how The Founding Brothers achieved this not as individuals but collectively and because of this created a unique form of government. Support comes from Founding Brothers by Joseph J. Ellis, http://www.britannica.com/, and class notes.

The American government was not established with firm rules set for what should happen and how the country should be run; instead checks and balances were set up that give the people freedoms but protect the rights of others. This precarious tug of war that keeps the country stable came about because of the unique leadership and unusual but affective collaboration of Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Hamilton and Madison, that is continued today. The formation of this government required these men to use their opinions, skills, quirks and passions in a mix as the Founding Brothers.

Leadership is not up to it's full potential when only one person is leading. In order for something hugely important to be lead, such as the establishing of the American government, and for it to succeed there needs to be a collaboration of leaders who stop each other as much as they help. The Founding Brothers did this, using their personal talents to progress and preventing destruction to the country by checking the other's flawed ideas.

Washington possessed the qualities the people of the country needed to see in their leader. He was physically impressive, could command the room and was a person of great integrity. Washington had lead the army through the war and was regarded as hero among the people. Everyone; most of all the Brothers, realized that Washington was the only choice for the country's first president. Washington fulfilled the needs of the country at the time. He was a figure of strength that the new government needed for people to trust that there was stability in there government. When after two terms he resigned, he exemplified the true non-marnachial government that had begun to be established. However, as skilled a president as Washington was, he was not perfect and could not have had as affective a terms as he did if not for other members of the Founding Brothers. Washington had wonderful charisma, but compared to some of the Brothers he was not as masterful at the higher level politics. He often collaborated with Madison and especially Hamilton when it came to very official business and articulating his ideas; they even helped him write his famous farewell address.

Just as Washington would not have had the ability to hold office the way he did without the help of the brothers, Hamilton also was not a one man show. Hamilton on his own was skilled in the area of finances. He set up the national banking system and is considered the father of modern capitalism, and was very useful in military areas, but he too needed to be checked. His confidence in the early American army was over estimated, and when Washington set him up in charge of the armies he would have sent the country to it's doom by putting it into a war with England and France. Adams used his presidential powers to prevent this from happening. Hamilton and Adams also disagreed about where the power of the government should be. Hamilton believed that it should be a National power, while Adams leaned more to local control, leading to our systems today that incorporate both.

Madison was a convincing speaker in congress, but he also worked closely with many of the brothers quieter and more behind the scenes. He and Jefferson had a close relationship and when Jefferson was in France; he was his chief corespondent for knowledge about the affairs of the developing government, and when Jefferson came back Madison remained his confidant and someone he trusted. Madison knew how to get inside peoples heads without them hardly noticing.

Ideology belonged to Jefferson. He had the most opinionated ideals and wanted only purity for the government he was helping to mold. Unfortunately, all though these ideals were perfect for the constitution, his actions were not always prompted by the same motives and sometimes his high ideals left him short when he failed to see the bad sides of things. He had a naivety that caused him to not just see the best in things, but refusing to see the danger. When vice president to Adams he was enthralled with the French Revolution and wanted Adams as president to support it. Adams knew better and could see past the mask of ideals that blocked Jefferson's view to the mess that the French were in rightfully refusing to take any part in it and reprimanding Jefferson for his blind oppinion.

Adams was quite level headed and intelligent and played a key role in convincing the congress of war with England. He was the second president and carried the country though his time without serious issues. He often had the insight to prevent some of the other brothers from leading the country into catastrophes; namely Jefferson and Hamilton. Even with these traits he was not a favorite of the people and didn't have the personality type that many people wanted to see leading and making decisions for their county, so people like Washington and Jefferson balanced him out for the public.

The leadership needed for a newly born country required many things; more than one person could possess, but all the Founding Brothers stepped up to the challenge and in doing so created a government unlike any other. This government took from each of the Brothers their best contributions brought forth through their own individual leadership style. It needed the image of Washington, the financial savviness of Hamilton, the brains of Madison, ideals of Jefferson and Adams cool head.

Each Founding Brother possessed particular aspects in their personality that spoke leadership; but as they were all human and thus flawed; none of them could lead a new country alone. Their collective leadership qualities were needed to balance out the other brother's ideas that were doomed to failure and establish a working government. One man could not have done it alone; all the Brothers best qualities were needed to have what was required of leadership necessary to start the government of the United States of America.

Updated Version

2008-05-13T22:54:00.000-07:00

2008-05-13T21:56:00.000-07:00

The Chronicle April 30^th 1775

April 2^nd 1775

Dear Editor,

For some time now the Northern colonies of New England have been persistent in campaigning for war with our Mother Country, and the articles in your paper have been very supportive of the idea. I have been rather shocked and concerned by this strong one sided propaganda your paper has been publishing. Though I do believe there is ground for upset feelings, the idea of all out war is preposterous. We are still Englishmen and have our duty to the crown, and more importantly we are Christian and have our duty to God. It is true our rights have been stepped on, but despite how your writings would lead one to believe, war is not the answer and there is still time for negotiation. I feel that this side of the argument has been slighted and your readers deserve and need to hear it.

Respectfully,

A Friend

April 10^th 1775

Dear Reader,

Of late our paper has been rather one sided, but for the simple reason that we are showing what is happening now and what currently needs top be done. For some time now England has been traipsing and trampling all over our land, rights, property, and all around over stepping her authority to the point of bloodshed. I believe decisive action must be taken. This action is to declare war with England. Other methods have been tried and all have failed. The only thing left that can be done to preserve our freedoms and establish fitting government for this country, is to wean ourselves from the Mother Country who is forcing us like a child to do all she commands under the threat of punishment; refusing to let us grow into ourselves. So we must do it on our own, and the only way left is by force.

The English clearly have no respect for the colonies as they have continually show through their tyrannical actions. They have passed act after act, putting taxes on more and more items. They have forced us to use only their currency to control us and secure their own profit, while the Quartering Act has subjected us to intrusion by British soldiers; causing a ruckus and endangering our families. The English forced the Coercive Acts on us; however these Acts are better known as the intolerable Acts because that is exactly what they are to all the colonists. In Boston 5 colonists were killed because of the forceful arrogant English soldiers. Force must be met with force. All this is done to us without care by the English, no peaceful negotiation has helped, and certainly will not now.

The Editor

April 16^th 1775

Dear Editor,

In your response to my previous letter, I found it strange that you continually referenced those you regarded your enemy as "the English". Do you forget that we are all still Englishmen? As Englishmen we have our duty to the King George and the government of England. England is our country, and we can try to have a say in our government, but in the end we are English and are under England. Would you really have us all separate ourselves from our heritage and fight brother to brother?

Making war with Our Country is far from the will of God and no one who calls himself a Christian should be able to have a clean conscience if he agrees with the idea of this war. Killing is against God's law, and the only violence scripture warrants is God commanded, and by scripture we are bound to authority; the authority of God, of our parents of our King and of our Government. Perfection won't be reached until the after life, so if we must work and suffer for our rights then we will. When the Chosen People were held in captivity they did not rise up with weapons against their captors, but in time God saved them.

There are always alternatives to war. There are always more peaceable ways to find a solution to a conflict, and we can find a compromise to spare us war.

Respectfully,

A Friend

April 22^nd 1775

Dear Reader,

By this time it is too late to keep trying for peaceful solutions. In a perfect world we would all like to solve our problems without the troubles of violence; but as you have already said, perfection can not be reached in this world, and therefore war must at times be had.

In essence, the war has already begun. While our fellow colonists stood guard protecting their own ammunition that the British were attempting to take by force in the town square of Lexington, a shot was fired and war began. Eighteen of our country men died shedding blood for the cause, and in Concord a battle has already been fought where our men found the strength to push the British troops back. My dear Reader, it is no longer a question of whether we should make war or not for war has found us, and from Concord we can see that our cause has a chance of winning while we fight for our homes, rights, children and freedom.

The Editor

2008-04-14T20:22:00.000-07:00

My Son William,

We have had little Correspondence over the past revolutionary Years, as you had chosen the opposite side of your Father despite my urgings. Those Years are over, are you now to accept your Father, as you once did, before this Rift broke out between us? You were proud to have me before due to my accomplishments in writing, inventions, and science, maybe now you will again because again I have found Success in our Revolution.

Tho' we were both on opposing Sides of the Cause, and I clearly knew your views did not follow mine Own, I never called you Torrie. I had wish'd tho' and hoped that you would realize the Virtue and good Purpose before it triumphed and join in the Cause. Also that in not joining, it was because you did not realize the true goodness of the Cause and all it would bring. As you are my Son I will give you the Benefit rather than Doubt.

We, I say we meaning Myself and my fellow Patriots, have won this war for Liberty and Independence, and I honestly and sincerely Hope and Desire that you will come to realize the immense Goodness and Possibilities that have come from the process of this Revolution and will come from the New Leadership. I have worked for This, and as your Father hope that you indulge in it and learn to appreciate It. Hereafter, I wish that you would, as you are now living in it without choice, will come to feel as though a Part of this which your own Father has worked to achieve.

I remain even now your humble Father,

B. Franklin

Change Over Time the Continual Revolution...

2008-04-08T11:32:00.000-07:00

Abstract: This paper will show how between the time of Jamestown to the beginning of the American Revolution, the Native Americans were in a constant state of cultural revolution, specifically pressured on their self suficientness, identity, and politics. Support from http://www.pilgrimhall.org/, http://www.historypoint.org/, and specific support comes from "The Earth Shall Weep" by James Willson.

Contact between Native Americans and Europeans between the founding of Jamestown in 1607 and the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1776, constituted a continuous revolution for the Native Americans. The Native Americans changed from a self sufficient people, dependant only on themselves, to needing European supplies. The Native American identity was altered completely from personal and independent to collective, and their politics, originally used to show status, changed to survival.

Before the Europeans arrived in America, the Indians were self sufficient and did not live in hardly any way like the Europeans. The Indians lacked many of the technological advances of the Europeans. While the Europeans were making advancements and heading toward industrialization, the Indians were living off the land through hunting, gathering of food, some through small means of farming. They had self made clothing, weapons, simpler tools and many religions all differing greatly from Christianity. To the Europeans the Indian way of life was backward; however the Indians lack of progress did not hinder them from getting along in their part of the world. When the Europeans arrived in The New World they brought with them technology that was totally new and different to the Native Americans. Not only did they bring things like guns, larger scale farming methods, and other tools, but they also set up trading posts. The trading posts helped introduce European good farther than just close range to the colonies, because traders would often swap their European goods for furs to send back across the ocean. Some Indians did not involve themselves with the goods and many did. In some circumstances, such as when violence brakes out between the two sides and one has muskets while the other only bows, Indians could hardly do without the European technology. The longer the Europeans were in America and the more the Indians interacted and traded with them, the more dependent the Indians became on the European goods. Some Europeans used this to their advantage. James Willson says:

"Metal tools and weapons did not simply alter the lives of the tribe who acquired them: They also affected enemies and neighbors, who suddenly found themselves at an enormous disadvantage and were forced to seek their own sources of European goods in order to feed and defend their people."

Willson also quotes a Hudson Bay worker in his book The Earth Shall Weep as saying:

"I have made it my study to examine the nature and character of Indians and however repugnant it may be to our feelings, I am convinced they must be ruled with a rod of Iron to bring and keep them in a proper state of subordination, and the most certain way to effect this is by letting them feel their dependence upon us... In the woods and northern barren grounds this measure ought to be pursued rigidly next year if they do not improve, and no credit, not so much as a load of ammunition, given them until they exhibit an inclination to renew their habits of industry. In the plains, however, this system will not do, as they can live independent of us, and by withholding ammunition, tobacco and spirits, the Staple articles of Trade, for one year, they will recover the use of their Bows and spears, and lose sight of their smoking and drinking habits; it will therefore be necessary to bring those Tribes round by mild and cautious measure..."

More and more Indians slowly became dependant on European goods. Not only did the dependence cause them to need the Europeans, but it also caused them to behave more like the Europeans in some ways because of the use of the European tools and goods.

The Europeans saw the different Native American tribes as all being simply Indians. The Native Americans originally however, identified themselves very differently. The Native Americans did not view all their tribes as being one big group as the Europeans did; but this perception changed over time. Before the Europeans were inhabiting America, the various Indian tribes were distinctly separate and independent. That is not to say that there was no contact or interaction at all between tribes, but that they were different from each other and they were certainly not dependant on each other in anyway. Their cultures were similar but each tribe was distinctly its own separate independent people. As the Europeans began to stifle Indian culture and drop understanding and fairness Indians fight back. The Powhatans rose against the English people of Jamestown because of their unfairness; but the English quickly put them down. Eventually the Indians realized that in order to stand a chance against the Europeans the tribes would have to join together. When the Puritans in Massachusetts had become too cruel and forceful toward the surrounding Indians, many Indian tribes joined together and fought against the English in the first Pan-Indian War; King Philips War; bringing them together. Slowly, though the Native Americans still had separate tribes, they began to think of themselves as together and all Indians.

When the Europeans first settled in America the Indians wanted to show them that they were still the dominant power, and to do this they used a custom of their culture. The Indians brought gifts to the Europeans to show that they were powerful. The Europeans did not understand the intent of the gifts at all. many Europeans thought that the Indians gave them gifts not for any serious reason but because they were not as intelligent. Wilson explains, "Their 'generosity' was not naivete, as many Europeans thought, but neither was it cynical opportunism." When the Indians realized that the Europeans were taking advantage of the gifts and not seeing them as a sign of the Indians power, politics began to go down hill. As the European treatment of the Native Americans worsened, the Indians rose up against it with violence. The Indians were either quickly beaten back or hasty treaties were made up. Carl Clausewitz said "War is a continuation of politics by other means," and this was true for the Indians. When the treaties fell through, and the treatment was clearly not going to improve, the Indians banned together and made war on the Europeans. This had a affect on the Europeans be did little to change the way they regarded the Indians. Eventually the Indians realized that they could not stop the Europeans from coming or send them back, and that things were not going to get better for them or go back to the way that it was before the Europeans came. So, the Indians changed their tactics of survival again. As the French and English fought each other, the Indians took sides to their best overall advantage; fighting along side Europeans.

Though European contact caused constant revolution for the Native American culture, in making the Indians dependant on the European goods, changing their identity, and their waring politics, some things in the native American culture could not be changed. native Americans have always had a strong attachment to certain places connected to their religion, and even now Native American peoples who are moved from their places do not hold up well, and often have problems with alcoholism, drugs, or depression. Some make pilgrimages to their sacred places like the journey the descendants of Wounded Knee made. Many Native Americans still use their old organic forms of medicines, while others preform traditional dances, and almost all carry on the Native American oral traditions. Even though European culture revolutionized the Native American culture it could not wipe it out.

2008-03-25T19:40:00.000-07:00

Francesco Hayez

The Kiss

Edmund Blair Leighton

Stitching the Standard

Jamestown and Massechusetts

2008-03-06T18:31:00.000-08:00

Abstract: This paper, using the book The Earth Shall Weep by James Wilson, will show the differences between the Massachusetts colony and the Jamestown settlement and that the reason for this was due to the totally different reasons for the colonies existance.

The English colony of Jamestown and the English Puritan colony of the pilgrims in Massachusetts, did not have the same outcomes with their interactions with the Native Americans. Both peoples came from the same country, lived in close proximity to the Indians, and had to interact with them. When looking at trade, the colonists motives for being in America, religious motivation, and the Powhatan Uprising and King Philips War, it can be seen that the reason for the difference was the in the completely unlike reasons for the settlemets existances.

Jamestown was established for trade. The people's main intent was to have exports for England. James Wilson said in his book The Earth Shall Weep"...The settlers concentrated on producing tobacco for export to England and continued to rely on their ability to wheedle or bully food out of the Native Americans or...take it by force," showing how the settlers of Jamestown were not as interested in learning how to have a stable colony; they were making money and being supported by the Indians. The Puritans in Massachusetts, however, did not live in a colony built on trade. They did trade with the Indians; but they were interested in stabilizing their colony and becoming self dependant. They wanted to live their seperatist religion and keep their culture with only those who were just like them, because that was their reason for being in America.

Jamestown was established to make profit and the people who were there came to make money; it was for business, whether good or not. The people of Jamestown wanted to continue trade with the Indians, but also wanted to take their food for themselves. To do this the Jamestown settlers kept the Indians in check; not through complete violence, but certainly by fear. James Wilson expresses this saying, "...Some settlers did make a heroic effort to live peacefully and deal equitably with the Indians...Smith believed this was dangerous sentimentality." In contrast, the Massachusetts colony wasn't founded with the main intention being profit through trade with the Indians. The settlers of Jamestown planned on interaction with the Native Americans, Wilson says "The Virginia Company had anticipated that Native supplies would be needed for the first year. It instructed the colonists to [not offend the Indians]," it was a large point of their being in America. The Puritans came to Massachusetts for a very different reason. The Puritans came to America with people of their own nationality (because they did not like to lose their English culture) to escape the oppression in England of their separatist religion. Indian interaction wasn't a priority, and was not even in the plan. If they had known how much they would have to interect with the Native Americans they might not have come. They left England because their religion differend from the people in England. They left the Neatherlands because of the cultural difference, and the Indians had both these differences and to the extreme.

The people in the Massachusetts colony had strong religious ties to their Puritan faith. The fact that they were Puritans and so religious, affected the ways in which they dealt with and interacted with the Indians surrounding them. Having already left England and the Netherlands because of religious and cultural differences, it is clear that the Puritans were very serious about how they were to be living and how they believed the rest of the world should as well. The Puritans did not want any Indian way of living to rub off on them; but they were set on changing the Indians. They pressed their culture and religion on the Native Americans, and even established 'Praying Towns' directed by John Eliot to fix the Indians. The correction process bassically involved changing Indians into Englishman. Wilson explains "The converts equipped with English tools learnt European skills...and made themselves useful to the colonists." These things did not have the best out comes though, and were one of the biggest factors that lead to King Philip's War. The people of Jamestown differed from the colonists of Massachusetts because they lacked the religious fervor of the Puritans. Jamestown was not an exceptionally religious place, and this was a help to them in dealing with the Native Americans because they did not push religion on the Indians in the way that the Puritans did. The people of Jamestown were not good to the Indians; but the lessened religious pressure was an asset in at least minimizing the conflict between them.

The Powhatan Uprising came about do to the conflicts and misunderstandings between the Powhatan Indians and the people of Jamestown. The Indians gave Jamestown a surprise attack and killed three hundred and forty-seven people. King Philips War came about for similar reasons; conflict between Indians and near by settlers. This time however the settlers were the Massachusetts Puritans, and instead of an uprising of Powhatan's, it was a bloody Pan-Indian War. The Uprising was devastating to Jamestown, but was short lived and trade continued. The King Philips War in Massachusetts was different; it lasted a year and when it was over, and the Indians defeated, the "Indian resistance in southern New England was effectively broken."

The settlements of Jamestown and Massachusetts differences existed because of the completely dissimilar reasons for why the colonies even existed. The Puritan colony was settled ina way that the Puritans could practice their religion and keep their culture, so when natural differences arose between them and the Indians, they reacted in ways that would close the conflict but protect the foundational purpose for their colony. Jamestown did the same, but because the reason for their settlement was for trade, the relation ship with the Indians, though not good, did not escalate and crash in the same way that the Puritans did. This is because they were protecting a settlement with a different purpose.

Primary Cause of Conflict

2008-02-14T08:14:00.000-08:00

Abstract: This paper will show that the root of conflict between Native Americans and Europeans was because of different religious beliefs and culture. Support comes from The Earth Shall Weep by James Wilson, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations by David S. Landes, and http://www.wyandot.org/jogues.htm. the importance of the essay is to show that the drastic differences in culture caused the most conflict, and these differences were caused by different beliefs.

The primary cause of conflict between Native Americans and Europeans was do to their totally different cultures; which resulted from their conflicting religious beliefs, such as the ways of viewing time, the difference between ideas regarding place and space, differences in work ethic, and simply the different religions of themselves.

Fresh out of the Humanistic Revolution, Reformation, and going through the Scientific Revolution, the European culture was, in the 1500s through 1700s, in a linear time mindset; was sceptical, inquisitive, progressive, and Christian.

In general terms, Native American culture at that time was in a cyclical time mindset; had nature related religions, was unquestioning of its natural surroundings, and seemingly almost stationary; without progression.

The Europeans lived in linear time; the world began and time had been steadily moving forward in a straight line. This idea had roots in their religious beliefs that God created the world and after an uncertain amount of time had elapsed the world would end. Linear time. However time wasn't just a strait line; it was also a line of progression. The Europeans were constantly trying to advance and progress towards betterment. the reason for their striving for progress was also likely connected to their religious belief about being cast from Eden. Their belief in having been cast out because of their own failure, built their desire for and need to progress. This made their linear progressive time. The American Indians, however, viewed time as more of a cycle. Nature cycled around them from season to season, and in this same way their time cycled too. This had much to do with the fact that Indians did not view themselves as above nature, but a part of it. Also, because nowhere in their beliefs were they ever deprived of something better, they did not try to progress to betterment. They were satisfied with the way they were. That is not to say that they did not progress at all; but that their progress was little, slow, and not necessary to them. This caused conflict between the two when Europeans came to America. The Europeans did not understand cyclical time and that it was reason why the Indians were so behind them in advancements; they saw it as the Indians being uncivilized. This view caused the Europeans to, for the most part, either have minimal contact with them, take it upon themselves to teach the Indians their better ways, take advantage of them, or to clear them out all together.

The different Christian religions of the Europeans were all spacial religions; meaning that the religion wasn't connected to one place, and you could practice it anywhere. The Europeans did not have any physical thing or place that they were particularly attached to that was needed for them to be Christians. The American Indian's religion on the other hand, was directly related to place. Whether because their ancestors where buried in a particular place, or because it had been important in their creation story, specific places were important and part of the base of their religious beliefs and rituals. This caused problems when Europeans wanted to move the Indians to different places, because the Indians did not want to leave their sacred places, or when Europeans wanted to mine or farm (or any other place altering movement) the Indians became angered, and the Europeans could not understand; or didn't care because these ideas where foolish.

The Europeans had a strong work ethic.

They meant to progress, they meant to make money, and at least for many of them this was at least in part due to their religion. David S. Landes, in his book "The Wealth and poverty of Nations" speaks concerning Max Webbers ideas about protestant work ethic. "Protestantism..promoted the rise of modern capitalism...by defining and sanctioning an ethic of everyday behavior that conduced to business success." The Native Americans worked differently than the Europeans. They worked doing what they had to. They only grew the food they needed for one year; they were not interested in mass farming, and they certainly had no factories. The Europeans saw them as being behind and backwards. Some innocently tried to offer help which was accepted or denied, while others used it as a way to dehumanize the Indians making it easier on peoples minds to dispose of them. As James Wilson puts it in his book The Earth Shall Weep, "Some nineteenth- and twentieth-century scholars have viewed [Native American's] system not as real farming at all."

The fact that the Europeans and the Native Americans had such different religions was conflict in itself. The Europeans believed that their religion was right. In fact, every branch of Christianity believed that only it was the right religion. The Indians had their own religions, and generally didn't have a problem with others having theirs. That perspective went along with their beliefs about places being sacred; they believe because of their place and aloud you to believe your beliefs because you have a different place. The Europeans tried to convert the Indians to forms of Christianity. Some Indians Willingly converted, but it didn't always work out so easily. Some Indians were extremely angered by missionaries, such as some of the Iroquois who chewed fingers of off Father Isaac Jogues. Things went the other way as well; most Europeans saw the Indians as savages because of their difference in religion.

The Native Americans and Europeans found conflict because of how drastically their cultures differed; the way they saw time, how they worked, the space or place of their religions, and just their religions on their own. All these things are either directly related to, or are outcomes of their religious beliefs; making the difference in their religious beliefs the prime cause for conflict between the two.

Essay Question of Mine.

2008-02-08T15:45:00.000-08:00

Compare and contrast Linear and Cyclical time; explaining how it affects culture, and realate it to Native Americans and Europeans.

Mid Term

2008-01-16T08:14:00.000-08:00

Abstract: The statement to "cultivate a skeptical faith, avoid dogma, listen and watch well, try to clarify and define ends the better to chose means" made by Landes concerning the trend of the past 600 years is only half right. Support for this essay comes of knowedge from The World Is Flat by Friedman, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations by Landes, and wikipedia.com. The importance of this is to show that countries do follow a trend, but do not see the "ends".

From the beginnings of Humanism, through the Reformation, The Scientific Revolution, The Industrial Revolution, and now in the Flattening or the World, change is constant. But is the trend of all those years, as Landes says in his book The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, that we should "cultivate a skeptical faith, avoid dogma, listen and watch well, try to clarify and define ends the better to chose means"? More simply, is the tendency in attempting betterment and progress to never trust someone else's Truth, to challenge, to be aware of others success, and finally to first look at the consequences of actions before acting on them, so as to find the best way to get to the desired outcome.

Humanism started the close of the Middle Ages and was the beginning of the Renaissance. Humanism began with the belief that although God and getting to heaven were important to them, their lives on earth could have meaning and purpose as well. People began focusing more on the sensual human experience, most drastically expressed through art and its change from the middle ages to the Renaissance.

Eventually Humanism developed into not just believing that the individual life has meaning of its own, but it caused people to begin to question The Church's authority. The humanistic Revolution pushed "skeptical faith". Humanism made people wonder about other aspects of life besides religion and caused them to question long held beliefs; "avoiding dogma". People began to learn from Greek literature and philosophies, and they became even more skeptical of the ways in which they had been living and The Church which had taught them these things. Humanism seems to follow (Middle Ages to the left, Renaissance to the right)

most of Landers definition of the "trend", in that it caused questioning; but were the people basing their questions and actions on an end goal? Were they planning ahead and using the best means to get to a predestined outcome? Could they have for-see the Reformation and Scientific Revolution? Or did they happen as an unpredicted affect?

Erasmus was a Humanist who, although he did not want division in the church, played a part in bringing about the Reformation. He made editions of The Old Testament, and added into it Humanistic touches, and would criticize the Catholic Church. Though he played his part in causing people who read his works to question some of the practices of their Catholic religion he remained a catholic himself, and it was Martin Luther who really made the Reformation happen. Luther wrote his 95 theses, or criticisms of The Church which were printed, distributed, and read by hundreds. Eventually Luther broke away completely from The Catholic Church, with a religion or his own, and many followed him. Among many of Luther's ideas, was his institution of "solo scriptora" meaning that the truth is in the text and you find it yourself, what you find is truth for you, and only you can find it. Luther challenged The Church and it's dogma, the Reformation gave many people a more skeptical faith in their superiors, but was Martin Luther planning for the end outcome of his revolt? Was it really his plan for hundreds of religions to break off of each other after his example? Could he possibly have been thinking that the shake in Catholic authority would help bring about the Scientific Revolution?

Humanism through the Reformation brought questioning, skepticism, and rebellion from The Church, there wasn't a better time for science to follow suite then while the flame for answers was flaring. The Scientific Revolution came about and tested Faith, tradition, The Church, and formerly believed science. The publication of Diderot's Encyclopedia created conflict with some of it's articles that contradicted Church doctrine. Galileo, following the Copernican idea of a sun centered universe, shook Europe with his work to prove heliocentricism over the traditionally believed earth centered universe theory. As science pulled away from tradition and The Church people were put in a place where they would have to believe science that said it had proof, or their religious faith that said it had Truth. Was the Scientific Revolution testing other's truths, learning from others, and challenging dogma and faith? Yes. But was the plan of the scientists and those who followed them to be the start of a continuing and worsening science versus religion, creation versus a godless universe battle? Was it their plan to lead into Industrializing Europe and beyond? Could they have thought all that?

Science and it's machine inventions such as the steam engine and spinning wheel fueled the Industrial Revolution. Farmers, due to new farm equipment, were able to produce more food than was needed for their family, and so were able to sell it. Because people could now purchase food, not every one needed to be a farmer. This freed people to be able to work in factories.

Britain excelled and for a long period of time led Europe at industrialization. Britain pulled ahead because they saw the benefit of producing goods in an industrialized way and how it would be good for their economy. For a long time other countries, like Spain, did not follow the example. Spain, having great wealth from the New World chose not to take part in industrializing their country and bought instead of keeping up exports to maintain their wealth. However, when countries like France and Germany finally decided they needed to follow Britain's example, they did the smartest thing they could have; they didn't start at the beginning and work their way to Britain's present position. Instead they started right with the newest ideas, forms of machinery and practices. This in turn brought them ahead of Britain who, instead of embracing the ideas and advances of other countries, clung to their secret, but old ways of doing things, falling some what behind. The Industrial Revolution is the perfect example of "listening and watching well". When Britain took the leap into industrializing they were doing just that, they realized the advantage and took it. The rest of Europe when it followed the example of Britain, and continued to push forward also was "listening and watching well". But were the owners of the factories and the inventors of the new machines and other technologies aware of the huge part they were playing in progressing the economic flatness of the world? Could they have known they were bringing about our society today?

From the beginning of industries we have moved to where we are now: an ever flattening economic world. Technology is progressing rapidly as we try to keep up with it. Out sourcing, in sourcing, off shoring, supply chaining, and automating and informing all come with it. Countries are connected, businesses are connected, ideas and information are shared and spread quickly and easily. The flattening of the world is also a good example of "listen and watch well". People who succeed in The Flat World are people who are conscious of the advances made around them and who not only keep up, but stay ahead and never let their neighbor learn something without taking advantage of the knowledge, putting it to use and building off of it. But as these technologies and advancements progress seemingly always greater, farther, and faster, are we even looking to an "end"?

Clearly, from the Humanistic Revolution to the Flat World, the trend has been, as Landes stated, to "cultivate a sceptical faith, avoid dogma, listen and watch well". The Humanists were skeptical of faith, the men of the Reformation avoided dogma, those in the Scientific Revolution were both skeptical of faith and avoiding dogma, the Industrial Revolution and The Flat World both exemplify times of listening and watching well. The end of Landers statement however, "try to clarify ends, the better to choose means" does not really hold true. The early Humanists, the Reformists, Scientists, and Industrializers could not have seen the ends, or rather, beginnings that would eventually come of their actions, and in the flattening world in which we live, we aren't looking for ends.

2008-01-13T18:27:00.000-08:00

History of the Newport Public Library

Emily Thibeault

Ms. Lind & Mr. Viles

Honors English & History

12/18/07

Thibeault

Outline

I. Introduction

A. The Newport Public Library assists people and fulfills its mission statement.

II. Sub-topic One

A. Mission Statement

1. Living up to

III. Sub-topic Two

A. Newport Public Library Association

1. Founded

2. Becoming a member

3. Dissolved

IV. Sub-topic Three

A. Locations

1. Town Hall

2. Present Building

B. Donations

1. Land

2. Money

V. Sub-topic Five

A. Historical Society

1. Library and Historical Society together

VI. Sub-topic Six

A. Friends of the Library

1. Support and Fundraising

2. End

VII. Sub-topic Seven

A. Current Librarians

1. Who

2. Positions

Sub-topic Eight

A. What is in the library

1. Books

2. Computers

IX. Sub-topic Nine

A. Technological increase

1. People coming

2. Inter Library Loan

X. Conclusion

A. Mission Statement and Community

Thibeault 2

Emily Thibeault

Ms. Lind & Mr. Viles

Honors English & History

12/18/07

History of the Newport Public Library

The Newport Public Library has been around for over one hundred years. Over this time it has changed in many ways, keeping up with the time and technology. From its beginnings to its present state now, the Library has been growing and expanding; and will continue to do so. The Library has been an important part of the Newport community and has assisted the people in many ways; and still does.

The Newport public Library’s mission statement is separated into three parts and reads as follows:

1. To select, organize, preserve, and make freely available to the people of the community printed and other materials within the limitations of space and budget, which will aid them in the pursuit of information, education, culture and recreation.

2. To keep up to date in the field of information technology focusing on practical applications related to Library Science.

3. To preserve and develop an environment in the library that is “user friendly” and safe for the patrons and staff (Archives).

Since the library was founded in the late 1800’s it has been following closely the words of the mission statement and always working to improve.

Thibeault 3

The Newport Library Association started on April 22, 1899 (Archives). This association was made up of a small group of members who paid and kept the library going. In order to be a part of the Newport Library Association you had to be recommended, and then your admission was put to a vote which would then decide if you would be included. After some years all adults in the town of Newport were technically considered members of the Newport Library Association, and all were invited to help vote library trustees until 2000 (Archives). On May 10th, 2000 the Library Association dissolved (Archives) and the Town of Newport took over the duties of the Association. The Town of Newport now takes care of the library’s needs. All of the library’s funding comes from The Town of Newport, and the staff is also hired by it.

The Newport Library was not always in its present building. It was first opened in the Newport Town Hall; next to the Police Department. At this time the library was quite small, only a few hundred books were in the collection and people who used the library paid dues. The building that now houses the Newport Library was built in 1954 (Archives). The library could not have been built had it not been for the Newport Women’s Club who bought the property on Main Street that it stands on in 1937 from Dr. L. H. White, and donated it (Archives).

Another huge benefactor towards the building of the library on Main Street was Mrs. George Payne. Mrs. Payne donated seven thousand dollars in memory of her husband; George Payne. This donation was enough money to complete the library construction, and a room inside was dedicated “The George J. Payne Reading Room” in the Payne’s honor (Archives).

Thibeault 4

The Newport Historical Society and The Newport Public Library were not always in two separate buildings as they are now. When the building on Main Street was constructed both the Historical Society and the library were in it. The library with all its books held the top ground floor room, while the Historical Society kept its history in the bottom floor of the building.

Tillie Burke formed a Newport addition of the nation wide Friends of the Library group (Leigh) in 1988 (Archives). The Friends of the Library sponsored many fundraising and just fun not money related events for the library, such as art shows, Children’s book Week, teas, candidate nights, writing contests, reading groups, and book sales. The Friends of the Library ended between 2000 and 2001 when the Town of Newport began taking over from the Library Association and the situation involving money and funding became confusing. It is expected to start up again in time (Leigh).

The current librarians are Mrs. Leigh, a “Full time part time librarian” in her own words; meaning she is at the library ever hour it is open, but because of the number of hours she works she is considered part time by the state. The other librarian is Mrs. Brenda, and actual part time librarian, who among other things is always in charge of the Friday Craft after Mrs. Leigh’s Story Time.

The library is now planning another move to expand and create a safer environment for its users and also to converge once again with the Newport Historical Society. The new building will be built across the street from the current building, and is planned to get started in the fall of 2008 but still need 200 thousand more dollars (Leigh), and as Mrs. Leigh said “they plan on it, that doesn’t mean it is going to happen.”

Thibeault 5

The library has a 6,000 dollar budget a year. Usually Mrs. Leigh spends 300 dollars on adult books and 200 on children’s books a month (Leigh). She tries to get one or two non fiction books each month but as she says “I consider this more of a fiction library. That’s what people around here want. I do try to keep up the non fiction section though.” The library has been keeping up with the times with five computers along the wall for easy access to the internet, or just for writing papers.

Many technological advances have been made in the past years such as the ease of being able to research and read online. It has been speculated that this would cause a drop in the number of people who come to the library, but Mrs. Leigh says “Not at all. Not here. Not everyone has a computer. So people come to use them. And people still like books.” One of the many technological advances made by the Library is the removal of the card catalogue, which has been replaced by the Solar Maine Catalogue (Leigh), which allows then to take part in Inter Library Loan.

The Newport Library is a very important part of the community. It provides a resource for information and friendly assistance and by keeping up with technology it helps the community stay updated. The Newport Public Library has grown and changed buildings, those in charge of it and its librarians are constantly working to better the library experience for the residents of Newport. By keeping up with technology and the continual work toward perfection the library is living up to its mission statement, and creating a positive affect on the town of Newport.

Thibeault

Works Cited

Benouski, Genie. Internal Library Archives

Leigh. Personal interview. 12/15/07

Thibeault

Works Consulted

Brenda. Personal Interview. 12/15/07

The Industrial Revolution. Mental or Physical?

2007-12-23T18:45:00.000-08:00

Abstract: The process of the Industrial Revolution represented primarily a mental revolution. Sources for the essay includes: The Wealth and Poverty of Nations by David S. Landers, schoolshistory.com, and library.thinkquest.org. The importance of this paper is to show how revolutionary changes can't just be physical, and that they have to be accepted by people, and will change the way people see the world around them.

The Industrial Revolution posed both mental and physical revolution; but primarily mental, because every invention and new process starts with a mental idea, every new process takes human mental acceptance to be used and thrive, the way it effected people for and against it, because of the changes in ideas about class and how people perceived each other, how spirituality changed, and how the mental changes still show up today.

Every invention or process starts with a mental thought process; more specifically, a scientific thought process. At the core of every invention is a scientific thought process. The water frame, which was one of the biggest machine contributors to the Industrial Revolution, works by the force of moving water to move paddles on a wheel, causing it to turn. This rotation would then be channeled to the machinery it was powering. Before all this could happen, someone likely empowered by the Scientific Revolution, had to process the ideas. They had to put together the ideas of the power of water, the ability of one objects motion to affect another, and how to make that useful. Then experiments could be made, and then the water wheel could be put together to power multiple machines and allow factories to be possible.

The steam engine had to go though the process of scientific thought to get to it's best point. From a steam powered pump of water, to blowing air for furnaces, it evolved through the work of James Watt into an engine instead of just a pump. From there it was developed further through science and invention to be used for trains and to power machinery for factories.

Every invention starts with a mental Scientific thought process, that will bring the physical aspects to life. Once the physical part of the revolution starts more mental changes occur. A change has to happen in the minds of the people for them to accept the new physical developments. Otherwise, the physical changes would not continue and there would not be any revolution at all.

Before many of the machines and factories of the Industrial Revolution were put in full motion, the way people lived and worked was different. There were no, or very few factories; most people supported themselves. Almost every person, with the exception of some artisans, was their own farmer, many things were on barter basis, and businesses were mostly held in the home. As better farming tools and techniques became available, farmers were able to produce more food then just needed by their own families. Being able to buy food instead of having to grow it yourself, freed up some people to have the opportunity to have other jobs. As factories began to be set up, the positions were filled by those who no longer had to farm for their needs. I the factory products were produced cheaper and more rapidly than if the same products were being made by specialized workers in their home by hand. The factories took job away from most of these specialized workers, but they also allowed for more products than were necessary for the area so they were able to be sold for extra profit for the country.

This was a big change, and in order for it to take place the mentality of the people had to undergo much change itself. It took time for people to accept and adapt to the new machines and the new way of working that they brought with them. It was an extreme mental change for them to go from the thinking of a person who works in his home making four pairs of socks a day, to some one working in a factory helping to produce hundreds a day. Or someone who farmed for himself and his family, and now produces enough for multiple more people. Most people eventually adapted the way they thought about work to fit the new ways in which they were being expected to work; but some refused. The people who clung to the old ways and were against what the revolution was pushing for were called Luddites. Luddites were protesters who often broke machinery to make their point. They protested because of the jobs that were being lost due to machinery, the reducing of wadges, and the quality of what was being produced. The Luddites did not mentally accept the changes coming at them so in consequence did not go along with the revolution presented before them. Because they did not change mentally from the old ways, they were not revolutionized themselves; if every person had acted in this same way, the revolution wouldn't have had much of an affect.

The Industrial Revolution caused huge change in the way people thought about each other. Mostly because of the development of factories, social classes were once again very pronounced. The Under Class of poverty stricken and mostly jobless people were at the very bottom. Next came the broad category of Working Class. The Working Class ranged from unskilled workers at the bottom, to skilled at the top. After the Working Class came the Middle Class; mostly merchants, and then the Upper Class. The Upper Class was reestablished due to people who excelled at commerce and industry. Where before people were on a more equal level, the Industrial Revolution heightened the class separation. Upper class factory owners would look down on the working class who worked for them, and the higher parts of the working class felt they should not associate with the lower part of their class.

The mental state of people's minds changed more than just in class distinctions. Making money became the biggest priority. People started spending more time away from their families and church to make more and more money. Competition was more heated. People wanted the best possible, and if their neighbor had better, they wanted to get better than that. People's mindsets changed and became more affixed with material things.

The Industrial Revolution was primarily a mental revolution, and many of the mental affects can be traced to today. Most people's priorities are still centered around money in one way or another, and people compete more than ever to be at the top and to have the best. Though there were physical aspects to the Industrial revolution, because the machines helped power the changes; but the changes happened in the mind, and all the beginnings of anything physical, starts with something mental.

Truth Can Not Contradict Truth. So When Do We See The Truth?

2007-11-18T22:53:00.000-08:00

Truth is sought by all people; whether to find purpose, how something works, how to deal with things, or to find what is real. How to define and discern Truth has created conflict for many years; starting strongly around the 1600-1700's during the Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment, and continuing today, where Faith and what scientific progress has to say clash.

Before the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment people generally found Truth based on logic and science, but ultimately Faith. For anything involving religion, tradition, or things that would attempt to disprove long believed tradition, faith was the superior and deciding factor. From the Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment came the idea of the need for materialistic evidence for truth. That the evidence or opinion of a number of scientifically learned men could over rule long believed matters of faith. Neither way is bad in itself; but when materialistic views attempt to disprove and throw out matters of faith, conflict arises between people on either side; and those confused and stuck between the two. Some examples of this in history would be the battle between Heliocentricism and Geocentricism, and the scientific contributions in the Encyclopedia that went against Church teachings. Conflict still rises in modern times with the idea of Creation versus The Big Bang Theory and Evolution.

Copernicus proposed the idea of Heliocentricism (a sun centered universe) but Galileo was the one to really bring about conflict with the Church through his publicity of the Copernican idea and his continuing effort to show the evidence he believed to prove it as truth. The Church was opposed to this because it had always taught that the earth was the center of the universe due to other scientist's (such as Bacon) beliefs, and ultimately the scriptural passages of the Bible that seem to suggest an earth centered universe. Galileo said all the proof could be seen through his telescope; that there was enough material evidence to prove his theory, and faith was not necessary. The Church however did not agree. If it came down to having faith in the Bible and the scientists who believed in the teachings of the Bible, or believing Galileo and his material evidence, it was obvious for them to choose faith. Galileo still held to his Heliocentric Copernican ideas because the material evidence was more to him than faith.

The Encyclopedia was created in the in the 1700's by Diderot and a few contributors. The Encyclopedia was a resource to things of every subject; math, science, history, food, specialized skills, and more. It was a relatively new concept to have such a variety of information available to practically anyone, and consequently the Encyclopedia became very popular. Some of the scientific articles in the Encyclopedia were written based on the beliefs of scientists who believed what they thought to be truth due to the form of logic they had used to arrive at their conclusion. For them the logic was enough to prove the idea as truth. Some of these logic derived scientific "truths" contradicted church tradition and teaching. The Church disproved these ideas because it did not believe that the logic used by some scientists was enough to over rule the faith they had in their long held traditional teachings. Diderot believed that the logic used by these scientists and himself was enough proof for truth, but the Church was afraid of publishing true facts along with Diderot's ideas that went against church teachings. The Church did not feel that these ideas were well enough proven and that having them written in a book with proven facts could confuse the people.

The beginning of the world is very controversial today. Christian Creationists have faith in the Bible and God, that the world was created by God. In the past one hundred years another idea for the origin of the world has become widely accepted called The Big Bang Theory which simply put says that due to density and temperature the universe has expanded to it's present state. This theory totally throws out the idea of God creating the world, causing conflict that is still unresolved. The scientists and those who follow them believe the evidence found in favor of The Big Bang Theory is enough to suffice for truth. Those opposing believe that the evidence is not substantial enough and that their faith in God is more solid than the evidence presented against his existence. Neither side gives way for the other because if one is true, the other is utterly wrong.

Another theory that is conflicting with creation is the Evolution Theory. The Evolution Theory was proposed by Charles Darwin, and is the idea that over time animals and plants have evolved to their present state slowly from a previously existing form. This theory conflicts with Creation because it says that humans animals and plants evolved, and in creation God created the animals and plants and then humans from dust and bone. If evolution were to be truth then the Bible, the basis of all Christianity, and any other evidence to prove otherwise would be wrong. Many modern scientists firmly believe in evolution, but people who believe in creation of life by God generally stand against evolution because of their faith and the belief that the theory is not firm enough to be truth. But the Evolution Theory holds enough ground for many to take it as truth.

Because of the conflictions between finding truth through only materialistic science or using faith, many things have changed. Firstly, Galileo and Copernicanism, and the articles against church teaching in the Encyclopedia brought stronger questioning of the Church, and more than that, it made science seem separate from religion; where before they went hand in hand. The church tried to compromise with Galileo by having him write a book showing both views equally on what the center of the universe was and have the Pope's opinion placed in the book. But Galileo firmly believing in his sun centered universe wrote a completely biased work that insulted the Pope. The compromise failing the separation between modern science and religion grew. Now, with the Big Bang Theory and Evolution, modern science is often completely against religion all together, so that if you wanted to believe in the science of today it would be almost impossible to have religion at the same time. Some compromises have been tried, such as the idea that the seven days were not literally seven days but a longer span of time allowing for evolution to take place, or that if there was a Big Bang, God caused it to happen. For the most part though Christian people believe these theories go against God and their faith, and that the evidence is no where close to enough for it to replace their truth. Religion and modern science have never been more separated.

What it comes down to is there are people who will believe material evidence, but when it challenges a matter of their faith, Faith prevails. This is because they will trust their religious tradition and God more than the evidence that another man can put before them. There are also people who need materialistic evidence that can be presented before them; that they can use their senses to try to comprehend. They need something that is on their level, not above them; they will trust that, and find it truth before they will consider something that is beyond their comprehension, as faith would require. Both sides know that if one alone is right the other must be wrong. There can not be two conflicting truths; they would not be true. So one side must be right, but neither will give in to the other. Both these views will continue to exist, and so long as they do, conflict can not be avoided.

Consilience

2007-10-25T18:59:00.000-07:00

Galileo, Cigoli, and The Church, all came together to create a significant, unique, impact on the world. The three, through their friendship, conflictions, and impacts on each other, all combined as one to foster the beginning of a conflict still going on today.

Galileo Galolei (2/15/1564 - 1/8/1642 pictured at right) was an Italian astronomer, and also mathematician, philosopher and physicist. Galileo studied and found proof for Copernicanism; the belief that the planets and earth revolve around the sun, opposing the belief that heavenly bodies orbited the earth. Some of his other astronomy accomplishments were: Improving the telescope, discovering four of Jupiter's satellites, observing sun spots, and craters and mountains in the moon. Unfortunately, due to his Copernican ideas and writings he was called to Rome and eventually put under house arrest.

Lodovico Cardi (1559-1613), is an Italian architect and painter who is better known as Cigoli. His paintings are very religious related, and one of the most famous of his is "The Sacrifice of Isaac." (pictured at left) He was a student of Buontalenti; who decorated the Boboli Gardens, and was also a member of the Accademia del Disegno; which is an art school in Florence, and the first drawing school in Europe.

The Church in the Renaissance time was still a big political part of the world as well as religious; practically as it had been in the Middle Ages. The head of the Church; the Pope, was set up in Rome, with bishops and priest spread throughout Europe to administer to the laymen. The Church handled the spiritual well being of the people, many financial issues, and had a huge influence on political matters and who got into different offices.

Galileo Galolei and Cigoli were good friends, who helped and influenced each other. Cigoli helped to get Galileo into the Accademia del Disegno where he learned chiaroscuro. It was with the help of this technique, that while looking at the moon with his telescope Galileo came to the conclusion that the moon had mountains and craters; instead of just seeing blotches and wondering about the discoloring. Galileo's discoveries concerning the moon's surface caused his friend Cigoli to incorporate these ideas into his painting. Cigoli's painting "Assumption of the Virgin" (pictured at right) shows the Virgin Mary standing on a cratered moon, where before paintings depicted the moon as smooth.

The Church had a very large influence on Cigoli's art. This is clearly evident simply by the fact that all his known pieces are of religious scenes. In a time when Humanism was flourishing, Cigoli could very likely have painted other images and not have been out of place, but he chose to paint on a holy level, because of his Christain faith and the influence that it had on him. Though as in his "Assumption of the Virgin" he chose to incorporate scientific elements he learned from Galileo, but did not stray from his religious theme.

The Church affected Galileo in a big way as well. The common belief before Copernicus and even for a time after him, was that the earth was the center of the universe and that the planets and sun went around it. Copernicus, however, proposed the idea that the sun was the center of out universe. Galileo adopted this theory and through his studies began to adamantly preach it. The Church and other scientists such as Bacon, disapproved of this because it went against what they taught, and after some time Galileo was condemned as "suspected of heresy," and placed under house arrest until he died.

Cigoli, Galileo, and the Church all played a role in creating a huge impact on the world. Cigoli's influence on Galileo helped him to make discoveries and keep studying astronomy, which lead to his further enthralment in Copernicanim. Galileo's testaments to the Copernican theory brought opposition from the Church. Neither the Church nor Galileo changed their minds at the time. This was the first serious science versus religion conflict, and not the last.

These three separate, though related, components: Galileo, Cigoli, and the Church, brought the beginning of a still on going struggle between some aspects of modern science and religion. Today there is still controversy between religious beliefs and what is accepted as scientific facts or theories. The theory of Evolution being the most conflicting of them all, because unlike Galileo who only questioned one aspect in the religious belief system, evolution throws out the whole idea of the existence of God at all. From the simple beginnings of science and religious friction, has come the complete displacement of God through science, which once went along with religion.

Political Map Of Europe

Revolution

2007-10-14T20:15:00.000-07:00

In order for a Revolution to occur it takes more then just one aspect of life to cause a big enough change. However, the most causative piece of PERSIA in revolution is Society. Society is, according to dictionary.com, "an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes." Therefore most all other aspects of PERSIA (politics, economics, religion, intellect, and aesthetics) fall in some way under Society, until as the cause for revolution behind society grows, these other aspects blow up into their own causes.

In the Middle Ages practically every person was Catholic. Society was based around Catholicism. People went to church together, and all had the same ideas about getting to heaven and what that meant for them. As the Renaissance started coming in things began to slowly change. Tim Parks in Medici Money expresses how the people began getting upset with how some of the Church men were dealing with society. How some church officials were said to have disregard their vows of chastity, or commit such sins as usury, when they were quick to punish lay men for such offenses. Perhaps it was not how church men were dealing with society, but the fact that they were in it so much that was upsetting. The problems that people and some clergy and officials of the Church had with the mistakes of other church officials and popes grew, until this piece of society exploded into it's own piece of the cause of revolution.

Social classes in society play a part in bringing about revolution. Jacques Barzun in From Dawn to Decadence, explains how in France there were two types of people, peasants and nobles. Eventually artisans and merchants were able to make more money and rise above the peasants, but because of the way of society, they could not rise into a very high social standing, even if they were more rich then all the nobles around, because they were not born into the title. Tim Parks also demonstrates the separation of class when he writes about how there were regulations on what people who were plebs could and could not wear, and even eat. Eventually such obvious separation of classes and regulations on the lower class becomes infuriating, for the plebs, and/or those who feel as though they are more fit to be in high noble classes but can't get there. These things will lead to another cause for revolt, leading to possible revolution.

When societies values are changing and the government, whatever type it may be, or a large amount of the population, is not going with these changes, it causes friction, and quite possibly revolution. In the American Revolution the people of America were tired of the way the king in England was not treating them how they wanted. The were tired of the excessive taxes, tired of not having the representation they wanted, tired of trade regulations, and were becoming more interested in more liberal, democratic and republic ideas. England was not compromising and neither were the Americans. Result? Revolution. In the French Revolution the low classes of France wanted change. For years the poor and middle class had wanted change and they didn't seem to be getting it from the nobles and the King, and then by the time they had a few nobles on their side pushing for them it was too late. They had gotten to the point where it was all or nothing, some change wasn't going to satisfy them, they wanted liberty, and they would kill for it. Result? Revolution. In the time of Medici Money, the values of people were changing. The people were becoming frustrated with funding all the petty wars going on, and as Humanism flowed in people's attachment to the church, though still rather strong, began to change, and art changed. The Church and the governing system were not quite ready for this, and clashes rose up. Result? Revolution. In Germany, Martin Luther's religious values were changing. He brought out completely different ideas about religion, one being "Solo Fidelis," by faith alone, another being "Solo Scriptora," by script alone, meaning only the Bible has authority. Needless to say the Church wasn't impressed, but Luther wouldn't change, and he gathered followers. Result? Well, Revolution of course.

There is no one cause for revolution. Revolution needs causes from multiple aspects of PERSIA to take place. When friction starts to happen in more than one aspect, that is when the beginning of a revolution is formed. When analyzing revolution to find the most causative part of PERSIA in revolution, Society is the root. The other parts of PERSIA are important because of society, because of how they affect the way people live and interact with each other, which is society. From within society each other aspect of PERSIA grows until it explodes into its own huge cause for revolution, but unless the other parts affect society, they will not bring about a revolution.

Humanism and The Flat World

2007-09-27T22:05:00.000-07:00

The Flat World and Humanism in their revolutionary aspects affected people in many similar ways, however, they still had contrasting aspects as well. Both empowered people, drove them deeper into discovering art and passions, and both have aided in the quenching of the thirst for knowledge. By using what we know of Humanism and how it affected the world reasonable predictions about The Flat World can be made.

Humanism began to change people by giving them the idea that their individual lives had meaning. Before Humanism the whole of peoples lives was centered around getting to heaven and only that. Things they did in their lives meant nothing, except it's relevance to getting or deterring them from heaven. As Humanism developed and spread people saw their lives as having a greater purpose than being just a stumbling block to getting to heaven. Heaven was still important to them, but instead of a stumbling block, there lives became something that was for meaning, and naturally because of the changed outlook, the way they lived their lives was changed.

The idea of The Flat World and it's technology is that people from every part of the world are now much more collaborative, competitive, and connected to one another because of advanced technology. The business world is becoming more open with equal opportunities for many people all over the world, and the numbers are growing. In the Flat World it is an extremely competitive race to the top, and you have to run it to make it anywhere.

Humanism and The Flat World both inspire a strong force of human empowerment. Humanism empowered people to find meaningful things to do with their lives for themselves as well as God, instead of being fully one sided. People began to delve into art and much of the style was changed. Humanism caused people to question, to dig deeper into their lives, to find how or if what they did in their lives affected the world or others. The Flat World is also empowering people. In the Flat World, because you have to be so competitive with a greatly increased number of people, many are being empowered to strive for better and better education. Not only does the Flat World empower people to strive for better education but, like Humanism, it is giving people power and opportunity to let their lives and opinions affect the world, but with the Flat World it is through internet resources like blogging.

Both the Flat World and Humanism made art and passion more important. Humanism caused a change in art that brought more realistic pieces. The images had not just a part of life in them, but were life captured in a moment. Peoples passions became important because now that humanity in itself was something special, the passions that make humanity what it is became something to be thought on, admired, and cultivated. In the Flat World artistic abilities and mindsets along with passion are very important. Now, with so many people competing for your job in this flattening world, it is crucial that you have something special to offer to get the job. If you and another have the same ability but the other person has more passion, or better artistically inclined ideas, you lose out.

The availability of knowledge is something that Humanism and The Flat World have had a hand in. Humanism encouraged asking questions and learning because learning has to do with the human experience. Because Humanism encouraged learning, more people began to be able to acquire knowledge, and it became desirable to obtain it. Knowledge has never been easier to come by than in the Flat World. The internet makes access to countless forms of knowledge attainable, and easily at that. Anyone with some way of having internet access can acquire knowledge on practically anything. In the Flat World knowledge is not only desirable, but necessary.

Humanism had more of an affect on the Catholic Church, while The Flat World affects economy rather than religion. Humanism caused people to appreciate life and the significance of it in the present and future, which lead them to question the things in their lives, including the Church. Eventually the questioning became stronger and later caused a rift. The Flat World does not appear to be causing trouble for a particular religious power, however, it is affecting the economy. The technology in the Flat World is affecting hierarchy of superpower nations and powerful businesses, because the playing field is being leveled. Countries that formerly were lower on the list are rising because of the empowerment their people get from the Flat World technology to rise to higher positions in the world. Large scale businesses won't always be able to dominate over every other company, because the smallest business, as long as it has the right technological access, can connect with anyone in the world.

From the history of Humanism you can make the conclusion that ultimately, Humanism and The Flat World will lead to many of the same things, but with opposite intentions. Humanism questioned, encouraged education and knowledge, grew in passions and art, for the reason of giving their lives purpose, for aesthetic development, and becoming better people with more understanding of their own nature. In the Flat World, though maybe some people have the same intentions as those of the time when Humanism began, most seek greater knowledge and cultivate their passions and creativity because they are competing to get to the top of a practically flat economical world, not to improve for greater meaning, but for greater job and standing, quite possibly just because they must. Before Humanism people strove for one goal only, to get to heaven; then they discovered other ways to identify themselves and give their lives meaning. In the Flat World people still use these things to help identify themselves, but once again, like the time before Humanism, they are striving towards one ultimate goal, only this time, instead of being eternal happiness in heaven after death, it is for corruptible money, power, and/or fame until death.

The World Is Flat #6

2007-08-29T17:48:00.000-07:00

My personal feelings and ideas towards the The World Is Flat have been a little bit confusing to say the least. I don't believe that I will be very directly and dramatically affected by the flat world, but still I am sure to be affected in some way. As of now, I think it affects me more in that it goes against some of my ideas, than how it affects my life. My friends seem as though they will be pretty well off in this new flatter than ever world, seeing as most of them seem to grasp the concept of it, and are very excited about the prospects of it. Those of them who maybe aren't as enthusiastic about the flatness of our world are very intelligent though, and should be able to do quite well. I myself am still slightly confused about the flat world, so maybe what I need from teachers, parents, and those more intelligent than me is more information, to give a clear understanding, so I am sure of what I am doing and how to do it. I do not really see any way my future will be hindered, at least by the flat world, seeing as I plan to do some musical theatre and then become a mother. All in all I am not quite sure yet where I stand on my ideas about the flat world, resent is a bit strong, but embrace is a bit strong on the other side. I know I can live with it, and I know there are good things involved with it, but I am certainly not over joyed at the whole concept of it.

The Once and Future King: The Candle In The Wind

2007-08-28T10:34:00.000-07:00

Under Arthur's rule England has become a much safer place, might against right is more in check, and the arts are beginning to prosper. Unfortunately, Mordred and Agrivaine, in their hatred for Arthur and Lancelot are desperate to destroy them. To accomplish this they make plans to boldly bring the affair of Lancelot and Guenever to light to Arthur, then bring him proof. Arthur has worked so hard for his ideals and new Justice laws that if found out he would have to prosecute his best friends, or undermine his own authority and betray all he has worked for.

Gareth, who loves and looks up to Lancelot, warns him of Modred and Agrivaines plans and tells him not to go to Guenever. Lancelot, however, does not listen, and he and Guenever are found out. After killing Agrivaine and all the guards who had come for them but Modred, Lancelot escapes to his own castle.

Arthur is forced to put Guenever to death under his laws, but on the day she is to be burned Lancelot flies in to save her. Arthur and Gawaine are both actually glad for this, but the joy soon leaves when it is revealed that the unarmed Gaheris and Gareth were both killed.

Peace is attempted at by banishing Lancelot from England and having Guenever sent back to Arthur, but Gawaine wants revenge on Lancelot for his brothers deaths, so he and Arthur lay siege on Lancelot in France. While they are away Mordred is in control, and totally corrupted by cruelty. He plans to tell England that both Arhtur and Gawaine have died, that he will take Guenever as his wife, and worst of all, declare himself king.

A letter from Guenever is sent to Arthur explaining to him Mordred's plots. After reading it Arthur decides to leave off fighting Lancelot and return to England to right what Mordred is doing. Another letter is also sent, this time from Gawaine to Lancelot. Gawaine forgives Lancelot for killing his brothers and bids him return to England to help Arthur. He also tells Lancelot that his is about to die.

The night before Arthur's armies are going to meet Mordred's, Arhtur is in is tent contemplating war, the reasons for it, and how to prevent it, when he sends for a page. He tells the page the story of a king, his ideals and how might should always be used for right. He also tells that there will be a bloody battle and all will die but one page. He sends this page off to spread the ideas he spoke of so that they are not forgotten.

This is the way that T.W. White ends his book The Once and Future King. In many ways it is utterly tragic. The destruction of all the good that Arthur tried to, or did accomplish, came from within, from his friends, his wife, his family, and even some bits from himself. The trickery and lust of his half sister which lead to Mordred. Arthur listening to prophesies and advice concerning his son which lead to trying to kill Mordred, which heightened Mordreds cruelty. The affair between the two people he loved most, which caused sorrow for Arthur and his undeniable duty to punish them. Gawaine's pride and stubbornness to have revenge on Lancelot, and Arthurs own inability to say no to it, all contributed to the bloody and sorrowful end. Tragedy and sorrow follow through the tree latter books. No matter how much good is done, no matter how much good is intended or how much good is strived for, tragedy follows and happiness is short lived. You would think that this would leave the reader feeling hopeless and like there is no point in trying to do good, but at least for me, this is not the case. No matter how awful the circumstance, Arhtur never stopped trying for his ideals, he believed in them, even at the end, when all seemed lost he wanted them to stay alive, so someday, someone could try again. The ideals were worth all of it, and because of all that happened people could learn. It wasn't all tragedy, because ideas were born, and progress was made, and even though everything seemed to fall apart, all was not lost, because the ideas stayed. The last few lines of this book made the end that was hopeless, full of hope, when T. H. White wrote the words:

Explicit liber regis quondam regisque futuri

The Beginning

Faustain Bargain

2007-08-23T08:43:00.000-07:00

In the play Dr. Faustus by Christopher Marlowe, Faustus is a learned man but he desires more knowledge, and so he resorts to dark magic to give him the knowledge. He sells his soul to the devil in exchange for life for twenty-four years and a demon Mephistophilis to serve him in what ever he asks. Despite being coaxed by the Good Angel and some of his own thoughts to repent, Faustus couldn't overcome his temptation to power and knowledge. In the end, though Faustus was willing to give everything for the deal he made, he regretted it, but it was too late.

Faustus was willing to give anything at all to obtain knowledge and power. That is the meaning of Faustian bargain. To have such an obsessive and greedy desire for intelligence and power, that you would give anything or all to obtain it. There might also be a little bit of a hint that you will regret it, that it won't turn out as you wished.

The World Is Flat #5

2007-08-20T12:35:00.000-07:00

Friedman believes that the flat world is indeed a good thing for America. His reasoning is that, although many people are worried about the loss in jobs for Americans if we have free trade agreements, that there is no need to worry. This is because he believes that although there may be lumps of jobs lost in places, there will be new jobs in smaller amounts all around. He thinks that with jobs going to other countries, money also goes and so the other countries economies are boosted, and the people want more and better things, like computers or cars, or smaller things and that with this desire and the better means they will buy more from us. In this way it is sort of like a circle. He also firmly believes that there are always going to be more jobs created, because not everything that is going to be invented has been, and not every idea to be thought has been used. Also, he is sure that there is no limit to jobs for creative minds, "idea-generated jobs" people who can find new ways to do things, more efficient ways of doing things, or anything new or helpful in general. So, although jobs may be lost, and some wages decreased, in the long run, the flat world will be a good thing for America. That is, if actions are taken to make sure that America's people are educated in the ways they will need to excel in this world and it is made sure that we have and keep enough of our own resources going so as not to be over taken. The key is 'if'. America can prosper in the flat world but only if these things are taken care of and taken care of correctly.

The Once and Future King: The Ill-Made Knight

2007-08-17T12:15:00.000-07:00

In the third book of The Once and Future King, The Ill-Made Knight, the french boy Lancelot, son of the french king Ban, meets King Arthur. Arthur tells Lancelot of his attempts to end might being used without good cause, and asks Lancelot if he would help him when he is older. Lancelot agrees and spends his his time in France working to become a great knight, and becomes more and more dedicated to Arthur. Finally after training of years he comes to the court of Arthur.

In the beginning Lancelot hates Arthur's wife Guenever, because he feels like she is in his way of being close to Arthur, but as time goes on, Lancelot and Guenever begin to have an attraction to each other. When Arthur and Lancelot come back from wars with the Romans, they are even more tightly bonded, but seeing Guenever, Lancelot knows that she could get in the way. Tired of fighting his love affair with Guenever, Lancelot leaves on a quest. On his quest Lancelot has many adventures and fights against might being used in the wrong way. Every one he triumphs over he sends back to Guenever to repent. When he returns, it is even harder for him and Guenever to fight temptation in their affair. Through all this Arthur blinds himself to his best friend and wife's affair and instead focuses his attention on trying to find a way to divert his knights from their obsession with games and competing for greatness amongst each other.

Over whelmed with hatred for himself Lancelot leaves on another quest. On this quest he saves a beautiful girl named Elaine, who could only be saved by the best knight in the world. Elaine's father Pelles invites Lancelot to stay at his castle, but Lancelot is lonely there, missing Guenever. Elaine loves Lancelot but knows that he only loves Guenever and won't be with her so she tricks him. While he is drunk, Elaine has her butler tell him that Guenever is near and waiting for him. He flees to her and in the night he doesn't realize that it is really Elaine waiting for him, and by morning she is baring his child, who she says she will call Galahad. When Lancelot realizes, he is furious, believing that now that he has slept with a woman he can no longer preform miracles, so thinking that he has nothing left to lose, he goes back to Camelot and begins sleeping with Guenever.

When Guenever realizes the a woman named Elaine has Lancelot's child, she is crazed with anger. At this point Arthur has realized the affair going on but refuses to recognise it. Meanwhile Elaine comes to Camelot, and once again tricks Lancelot into sleeping with her. A raging Guenever confronts Lancelot and Elaine stands up for him saying she tricked him, but Guenever is still crazed. Lancelot goes mad and jumps out Guenever's window and runs away. After Lancelot runs off insane, various accounts of a strange wild man who may be Sir Lancelot float about.

Eventually Elaine finds Lancelot and has him taken care of until he comes out of his madness. Lancelot starts living with Elaine, and goes by the name Le Chevalier Mal Fet, french for "the ill made knight. At a tournament Lancelot defeats all opposers and meets with two knights from the round table who he reveals his real identity to. These knights convince him to come back to Camelot.

Much of England has been doing well and improving under Arthur's ideals, but there are still problems, so Arthur decides that maybe just ideals are not enough so sends his knights on a search for the holy grail, which is supposed to be the cup Christ drank from at the last supper. After searching many knights give up with no luck and come back to Camelot, but holy knights like Galahad and Bors keep searching. Galahad defeats his father Lancelot making him the greatest knight, and leaving Lancelot feeling distressed. He decides to make reparation for his sins and when he returns to Camelot he does not continue his affair with Guenever. Guenever is very upset by this and demands he leave on a quest instead of torturing her, so he goes.

Camelot is starting to fall apart and Mordred and Agravaine are trying to destroy it more and try to ruin Guenever. While Lancelot is gone, Guenever has a banquet an sets out apples because Gawaine loves them, but another knight poisons them and the blame is rested on Guenever. Sir Bors agrees to fight for her cause, but before the fight takes place Bors finds Lancelot and he fights for her instead, saving Guenever. Later her innocence is proven by Nimune.

Lancelot goes to visit Elaine, but soon leaves her and she realizes that Lancelot does not love her and never will so she commits suicide. Soon afterwards Guenever is captured by Sir Meliagrance, and Lancelot goes to save her, which, of course he succeeds in, but he also begins his affair with Guenever once again.

At the end of this book a man with unhealable wounds comes to Camelot to be healed by the greatest knight in the world, and no can heal him, until Lancelot lies his hands on the man. The man is cured, but Lancelot finds no joy in preforming this miracle, and instead cries in sorrow.

One of my favorite parts in this book is the confrontation between Guenever and Elaine. After Lancelot goes mad and jumps out the window Elaine seems suddenly less child like, and stands up to Guenever, speaking against Guenever's love affair, which I don't believe Guenever had ever heard before. Elaine seems suddenly Clam, stately, and only slightly cruel, while Guenever is beside herself. Elaine Questions Guenever on why she had to drive Lancelot mad. She had The greatest husband in all the world, but she could not leave Lancelot for someone else, not even a girl who loved him and bore him a son. When Elaine leaves, walks out with just the cutting, but true words, "Yes, he is mad. You have won him, and you have broken him. What will you do with him next?" The whole scene is tragedy, and yet I think it is Elaine's finest moment, and makes you think more about Guenever, and in different ways.

Arthur has been spending his whole life trying to better his kingdom. Making sacrifices and doing all he can to bring the world to higher ideals, and for periods of time it seems to be working and progressing well, but there is always something else to be fixed and worked on. Towards the end of the book we realize that Arthur's kingdom and ideals are on the decline, despite all that he tries to do, despite his best intentions and all he suffers, but he doesn't stop trying. The most depressing thing, is that we really realize now that it is going to be Arthur's family and and the ones he loves most that bring down his ideals and all he has fought for and suffered to accomplish.

The World Is Flat #4

2007-08-11T08:58:00.000-07:00

Having a flat world has many potential negative consequences. One being, when you are outsourcing so many of your countries jobs who really is benefiting? On the one hand, it might seem as though it could be very good for both sides, the country who outsources the jobs get the work done cheaper and the consumer gets better products probably for less, and the country being outsourced to gets more jobs with a decent wage for their country and this helps their economy. On the other hand, the country outsourcing the jobs loses jobs for people in it's own country. Also, for an American perspective, how long will it be before we become the country being outsourced to, instead of the big country outsourcing all it's jobs? As we build up their economy with jobs, they won't stay poor countries accepting our low wages. For them this is good and really it is a good thing to help boost other peoples economies, but if this happens, it won't be cheap like it was to outsource to these places, and then where do those jobs go, back to America? And then, will the jobs still be cheap? Or, what if these countries begin outsourcing to us? What will that do to us, and how will we feel then? I think maybe our pride might be slapped around a bit if anything close to that happens.

Another problem is, when countries are expanded and based all over the world it is harder to tell what kind of company it really is and where it's loyalties are. Maybe it is an American company but a lot of the parts are made in China and the company has head quarters in India. It gets rather jumbled that way. Also, it must be harder to tell how your country really is going business wise, because unlike years ago when if businesses in your country were going well your country probably was doing fine, but now a business in a country really doesn't have to have that much to do with the country at all, it could be more involved and important to somewhere else.

Another thing is cheap working employees with bad benefits. It is harder to find out what to do about that. People want cheap products and in order to make them cheaper, in the long run, it seems companies pay their employees less and give worse benefits to do so. The problem is now these employees are have bad benefits and not so decent wages, which is no good, for us to have cheaper prices. But are we really paying that much less? Many of these employees with bad benefits we will have to pay for with our tax money. So what do we do.

A problem that when I was reading I saw as pretty big in my own mind was when Friedman brought up and kept mentioning Karl Marx. Friedman was saying how many of the things Marx wrote about are extremely similar to what he is writing about now. Possibly I am over reacting but when someone starts talking lightly about how what is going on in society today seems very like what a huge communist writer spoke of, a red light comes on. We have all this talk about capitalism, and then Friedman tells how Karl Marx described capitalism as "a force that would dissolve all feudal, national, and religious identities giving rise to a universal civilization governed by market imperatives." What bothered me the most about this was that some of it was things I had already been thinking of that sounded like they were happening and others were things that Friedman seemed to be hinting at. While reading this book I had started to think on my own that it seemed almost like a basically universal civilization would be something not so far fetched. The way businesses are disregarding boundaries and different countries are all starting to use the same products. Also, the way businesses are so important to everything and changing so much the way we live, who is to say that they won't be a serious part of our government? It would seem to me that anything that resembled something Marx had been writing about should be taken very seriously, and it is frightening to think that our world might be headed toward something like what Marx wrote about. People should be taking steps to make sure that our countries don't turn out to the way that people like Stalin, who was a Marxist, made their countries.

Another thing that bothers me is the lack of personal contact. Everything is machines, and technology. The kind of job you get and if you are successful is becoming more and more about how tech savy you are and less about your character and how your people skills are, and just how decent of a person you are. I think it is a little excessive how heavily we rely on our technology. Not to mention there are different kinds of smarts. Repeatedly in this book Friedman states how in order to keep up people will have to be able to move up in the technological world, by having new things to contribute and by thinking up new ways or better ways to do things technologically. Not everyone can do that. It is as simple as that. It doesn't mean that they aren't smart but people have different ways in which they excel. Also, if mediocre jobs keep being outsourced, this could be bad too. Some people need those jobs, we can't all manage businesses or be the head of something. Middle man jobs are needed. It seems to me that if this flat world is going to work, and work for more than one country, or one class of people, many things are going to have to be worked out.

The Queen of Air and Darkness

2007-08-03T08:10:00.000-07:00

The second book in The Once and Future King, The Queen Of Air and Darkness, sets a different tone than the happy childhood story of Arthur in the first book The Sword in the Stone. The second book starts the hardships and tragedy that follow Arthur through his life while he tries to set up just ideals and better England.

In the beginning we see the Orkney boys Gawaine, Gaheris, Agravaine, and Gareth, and their mother Morgause, and the disturbing life they lead. Morgause is obsessed with herself and her sick beauty, paying little heed to her children's upbringing, showing them cruelty, and then random moments of affection to make herself feel perfect. The boys struggle with their lives and the confusion put forth by the mother they love. All show deep scars to their character do to their mother's poor parenting.

While fighting some of his Gaelic aggressors, Arthur has many discussions with Merlyn and Kay about might and right, and how might should be used. Merlyn states his opinions but forces Arthur to come to his own conclusions. Arthur finally puts down his opponents, and begins to start forming his ideals, his moral code of chivalry and decides he should have knights at a round table to avoid quarreling among the knights about rank.

In the end unknowing that Morgause is his half sister Arthur is seduced by her natural charm and a charm she wore around her neck, to sleep with her, and nine months later she gives birth to Mordred.

T.H. White is a perfectly wonderful writer. He weaves controversial subjects like war, and how it should be used into into his story thoughtfully and touchingly. His own opinions are obvious but there is room for discussion. Merlyn does not believe in fighting unless in self defence, and when Kay states that he thinks that if you had a valiant ideal but, people are to stupid to convert to it that you could use aggression for their own good, to make them understand it was for the best, Merlyn gets angry and makes reference to World War II and Hitler.

The Orkney boys are a tragic example of the effect that your lifestyle, surroundings and influences can have. Each of the boys loves his mother but all suffer because of her influence on them. they are never sure what is right or wrong, because their mother doesn't say, she will punish or ignore on a whim. They try to please her by catching the unicorn that she wanted, and at first she fails to even notice what they had done, and when she finally does notice, she has them beaten. Her flaunting of her sexuality and appeal ruins her son Agravaine, because he becomes confused and loves his mother in a way that he shouldn't.

In all the book is becoming more deep and the tragedy of it is starting to come out. Arthur has realized the basics of his ideals and plans to better England, but he still has the struggle to try to have them realized and followed ahead of him, and he will have to do it with only the help of Merlyns teachings sense Merlyn is soon to leave.

The World Is Flat #3

2007-07-28T16:12:00.000-07:00

Convergence, as Friedman describes it, is the coming together of certain elements, to together rapidly flatten the world. These elements work together to flatten the world and without them being converged, they could not work as they are and as they have and none of the other flattening processes would have had the same effect without it. Friedman also states that he believes that it is a Triple Convergence, and there are three specific things that make it up. These are:

First, the equipment and technology that has developed. Work flow hardware and software, things like one machine that can do multiple tasks. Also, the continuing improvement of mostly all technological hardware and software. And finally, that this technology is becoming more and more accessible to people and places all over the world, connecting and allowing people all over to collaborate and compete with one another.

Second, the adaption of people to the use of all the new and improved technology being offered them. This is extremely important because what good is specialized technology and new equipment if people can't take advantage of it and can not use it? With out innovative thinking, and with out people learning the skills needed, new technology would be fruitless. Also, the new ways people have developed to run their businesses. Such as the UPS taking advantage of the opportunities offered them, helping their business to thrive by using insourcing for companies large and small to help them, or Wal-Mart supply chaining their stores and keeping track of the items sold.

Third, people who before were not very involved in business with others from far distances because of their economies, all came onto the playing field because of new technology that enabled them to do so. Because of this billions of new collaborators and competitors arose from China, Eastern Europe, India, Russia, Central Asia, and Latin America. All these new people who joined the flattening world not only joined, but stretched it farther because more of the world was now opened up.

These three convergences all together have helped flattened the world more, and more quickly by coming together. The first convergance flattened the world by opening it up, allowing distance to no longer be a huge barier against the communication and colaboration of people. This became more useful and more flatening when the people started to adapt and use the technology to better their businesses, which was the second convergence. All this was expanded and made more of the rest of the world flat when the billions of people who had not collaborated before began to join in, which was the third convergence. All together they flatten the world greatly as the Triple Convergence.

The Once and Future King: The Sword and the Stone

2007-07-20T10:58:00.000-07:00

The Sword and the Stone, the first book of T.H. White's The Once and Future King, tells of Arthur when he is a boy until the point when he is made king. Arthur lives with his foster father Sir Ector and his foster brother, Kay. While in the woods one day looking for Kay's hunting hawk, Arthur met the wizard Merlin, and brought him back to be his and Kay's tutor. Merlin, knowing that Arthur is destined to be king, teaches him lessons that will help him in the future. Many of these lessons consist of turning Arthur into animals for him to see their different ways of governance. Arthur also finds some little adventures when he meets King Pellinore, and when he and Kay meet Robin Wood (not Hood). In the end, Arthur while looking for a sword for Kay, finds a sword that had been stuck in an anvil. The person who could pull this sword from the stone was the rightful king of Brittan, not knowing this Arthur pulls the sword out to take it to Kay. When it is revealed what sword it is and how it was obtained, Arthur is made King.

I love this book. If I had a favorite book, this would likely be it. I really like the dialogue, and how, unlike Mallory, White delves deep into the characters personalities, reasoning, and feelings. The book is written very well and with a lot of feeling, as though White wants you to not be in the story, but in the people in the story. Mallory made events into a storyline, and did well with that, but T.H. White took events and looked at why people would do the things they did, what effects they would have, and what lessons they could teach. The story seems almost secondary.

My most favorite part in this first part of the book was when Merlin and Arthur first meet, and Merlin realizes that they have only known each other for an half hour. It breaks my heart when Merlin says "So little time to pas?" and the big tear rolls down his cheek. The whole idea of him living his life backwards is really tragic to me. When he meets people, it is his last time ever seeing them. When he met Arthur, he already knew things that would happen to him, and probably knew him better than anyone else. Arthur was his best friend, but the last time that he gets to see him, Arthur doesn't really know him at all. It is confusing, and just sad.

I love this book so much, I have already read it so I can very well make predictions, but I am so happy to read it again. It proposes so many things to think on, it is more than just a story.

The World Is Flat #2

2007-07-06T07:16:00.000-07:00

Technology has been steadily progressing and slowly changing the way humans interact, until recently. Now, with all the computer and internet technology that has been being developed and improved technology has been reshaping human interactions at an incredibly rapid speed.

Huge numbers of people all over the world have computers at home and most all of them now have internet access. Just this one thing has changed so much on its own and helped lead to many more changes in interaction. With their internet access people can communicate so easily and fast. You can send a letter to your friend a couple towns away and it will get there in a couple days, or you send an email and it gets there in a second. Because of computers allowing you to digitalize information and the internet allowing you to send it around, people can connect with each other faster and easier.

Businesses have taken advantage of this to expand, or find cheaper or easier ways of doing things. Because of just how easy it is to be in touch with people at far distances, many businesses have taken advantage of the fact that you can hire people cheaper in other places than where your business is located. This is called outsourcing...you can hire some one in another state, or maybe some one from India to do the job for you cheaper, and maybe more efficiently too. Businesses no longer have to rely only on people in the towns close by or even the people in the country of the business. If you don't want to outsource, you could always offshore your business, move the whole thing to another country, maybe China, hire workers from there and still sell your products in America, and if you want to have a web site, you can sell to people all over the world. Businesses like Wal-Mart supply chain their stores. They place their stores all over the country and world, then set up distribution centers around that work 24/7 supplying all their stores. Technology enables them to track when their individual products run through the scanner as you buy them to know when, what, and how much to restock.

Computer and internet technology that enables people to upload has changed interaction dramatically. Any average person who has internet access can upload. And you can upload practically anything. As I sit here blogging I am uploading my thoughts about uploading. Thousands of people blog and upload onto the internet their thoughts, views, ideas and information. People upload news, information, photos, videos...and just like anyone who has internet access can upload, anyone with internet access can access the uploads. It is a fast, easy, and generally free way to share with most of the world, basically anything you want to, and anyone who wants to can see. Think of youtube...everything is uploaded. The internet is full of uploads...the internet is uploads.

With all the uploading, there is information about almost anything you could be looking for on the internet, and with more being added every day, someday maybe everything will be. So, when people are looking for information on a subject, where do they look? More often than not, the internet. It is very convenient, and with search engines, relatively easy. The internet is a number one resource. You can read newspaper articles on the internet, find a recipe, look for a job. You can research online, and if you see words you don't know, there are dictionaries on the internet. Why get up from your computer when it is all there?

Businesses can market to places and people across the globe now. Whether it is a huge business or a small one, with technology today, any of them can go across country or international. From the UPS synchronizing global supply chains for any size business, to having your business online, it is becoming very common and not too hard to expand and/or go global with your business. This means your business can market to people every where. It also means your business has competition from every where. If you sell internationally, you will have to compete that way too. But it doesn't just mean competition, it can also be help. Your co-worker might be from another country, or some parts that your business needs cheaper you might get from a business in another country or state.

Cell phones allow you to be mobile. People can talk to others from practically anywhere. And pretty soon (if there isn't already...I think there might be...) there will be international calling with your cell phone. You can take pictures with your phone, listen to music, and recently, be able to go all over the internet on your phone. You can pay bills on your phone, not by talking to someone, but by pressing some buttons. Pretty soon all your information will be on your cell phone, and you'll pay for everything with it too.

All this seems to me to be good in the obvious ways, convenience and such, but I am a little bit sceptical of if it will be mostly good. For one thing, if people all over the world can buy and sell and working like they aren't distant from each other, will they lose their unique cultures? And is that already happening?

Le Morte d'Arthur

2007-06-24T09:48:00.000-07:00

The Le Morte d'Arthur excerpts begin by telling how, when Arthur was born son to Uther Pendragon, king of Brittan, he was, at Merlin's advising, sent to be taken care of by Sir Ector. Arthur was still a boy living as son to Sir Ector and brother to Ector's son Kay, when Uther died. After Uthers death an anvil with a sword stuck in it in the church of St. Peters bore the inscription, "Who so ever pulls out this sword from the stone and anvil is by right of birth king of all Brittan." Many men tried to pull the sword out but did not succeed. Eventually a tournament was to be held that would decide who was to be king. Sir Ector, Kay, and Arthur were all in attendance at the tournament, but Kay, having forgot his sword, begged Arthur to fetch it for him. Arthur could not obtain Kay's sword but was determined that he should have one, and seeing the sword in the stone pulled it out and brought it to Kay. Confusion followed and tests to the truth that Arthur really was the one who pulled the sword from the stone, but eventually Arthur was proclaimed king of Brittan.

The second part of the excerpts are about Arthur's greatest knight Sir Lancelot. Lancelot went on many questing adventures including saving many knights from Sir Tarquine who imprisoned and treated cruelly all the knights whom he had beaten. Sir Lancelot was imprisoned by four queens who cast a spell on him, but was saved by king Bagdemagus' daughter, and to repay her, fought and won a battle for her father. He helped many other women in distress, killed giants and always defended the laws of chivalry.

The last excerpt tells how while Arthur was out fighting Lancelot, Modred faked Arthur's death on the battle field and had himself made king, and tried to have Gwynevere made his wife. When Arthur heard of all this he came to fight Modred. Bloody battles followed. In the last battle between Arhtur and Modred, almost every man on both sides was slaughtered. Arthur did kill Modred, but he suffered a deadly wound and was brought to and buried in a hermitage in Glastonbury, where he was morned by Bedivere and the former Archbishop of Canterbury.

Thomas Malory seems to have a differant way of writing. he doesn't seem to find it impotant or nessisary to have discriptions. There is very very little discriptive work, it was very to the point. I feel like it is more about what happened then about the characters, they don't seem as developed. That could also be because it wasn't the whole book that was read. Even like that though, I still liked this reading. I love Arthurian legend and would like to read the rest of this book, all the middle parts that weren't in the packet. I just find Arthur and his story, and ideals, really interesting. My favorite part when I read anything about him though is always the end. "Here lies Arthur, the once and future king." It gives me shivers every time.

The World Is Flat responce #1

2007-06-18T19:11:00.000-07:00

Friedman says "the world is flat". When he says this, what he means is that in the world of buisness the "playing field has been leveled", countries are on a more equal level regarding buisness. This is because of the ease in which people can communicate. It is no longer difficult for people in different countries to to have speedy communication. People can as easily do buisness with people on the other side of the world, as easily as with those in their own country, state, or even city. It is as though there is no longer distance, and the world is a much smaller place. People doing buisness are no longer competing only with those in a close or even medium sized proximity to them, but other buisness people everywhere. Also, the flatness of the world caused by easy communication makes it possible for people anywhere to take advantage of eachothers personal, cultural, or any other assets.