The Connection Within Me

We have finally finished Song of Solomon and overall, I thought it was a pretty interesting book with an unclear but satisfying ending. Throughout the book, there were many references to flying that have been abundant in African American culture. At the end of the book, there is a part where a bird "dived into the new grave and scooped something shiny in its beak before it flew away". This shiny item was actually Pilate's earring that was on her father’s grave. After she was shot, the bird scoops it up and flies away, signaling that Pilate was finally free. This is just one of the references to flying in the book. I noticed that there are very few white characters that are seen throughout the book and when mentioned, there is no flying associated with them at all. For example, the white peacock could not fly at all because its abundance of jewelry. This made me connect Song of Solomon to basketball. It is very similar actually. During the 2015 NBA season, it was recorded that 74.4 percent of all NBA players are black. This is a significant number compared to the 23.3% white players. It is just like Song of Solomon where there is only a tiny amount of white people seen and many African Americans. Also, in basketball there is a saying that goes "White men can't jump". This means that white players are not good at dunking the basketball because they do not jump high. Meanwhile, many black NBA players such as LeBron James, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant are high flying dunkers. When we say jumping, I think of it as flying because of how they are gliding through the air. This is also very similar to Song of Solomon in that many of the black characters learn to fly, but the white characters physically cannot. I think Morrison wrote this book in a way to praise black people and what they can really do, and the National Basketball Association is a clear example of what Morrison is trying to portray. 

The Animals Within Me

This week in class we read over half of "Song of Solomon" and it is starting to make a lot more sense. Furthermore, there was a point in Chapter 8 where a white peacock appeared during Milkman and Guitar's conversation. It comes to a point where Guitar tries to catch it but it then jumps onto a Buick. Looking deeper into the scene, the peacock, with all its jewelry, is representing a symbol of wealth and power. When it jumps onto the car so Guitar cannot get to it, it is showing its higher status compared to them indicating that the peacock is supposed to represent the white people in the society that are above the black people. At one point when Milkman asks what Guitar is going to do if he catches it, he responds by saying that he is going to "eat him". This just shows how desperate the black people in the country are to get revenge for what they have been suffering through for decades. This got me thinking. If the white people were described as peacocks, what would the black people be described as?  The white peacock had jewelry to show wealth, but most black people did not have much money. Also, this animal would be dark to represent the black people. Many often look at peacocks because of their attractiveness and the strut that they walk with. This is just how white people get all the attention in society where everything evolves around them. On the other hand, at this time black people did not get any attention. I think the perfect animal that would represent black people at this time would be a Vulture. They are black and they are often looked at with disgust. Still, they are an important part of society because they are scavengers that eat dead remains of animals. Some of these remains are harmful to other animals, which is why they are necessary. This is how black people were at these times. Although they were overlooked, they contributed to society and the country as a whole would not function without them. In the book it said that "Milkman wanted boats, cars, airplanes..." which is exactly like vultures. They also want to be equal in society due to all the hard work they do every day.

                                                                                                     

The Disgust Within Me

In class this week we started to read a new book called Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison and let me tell you, from the first chapter it was the most confusing book I have ever read. So many things were thrown at me at once I couldn't process it all. Right at the beginning when it was blabbering about how the name "Doctors Street" came to be, I quickly realized that I was in for a nightmare. If the whole book was just going to keep describing little things that were really no interest to me, I was going to have a hard time next week. As I read further though, things slightly changed. It was still describing things very in depth but the things that it was describing was very hard for me to wrap my head around such as breastfeeding. Later it was describing Porter on the rooftop urinating on women's head. This got me thinking. What is the point of depicting these awkward actions. Does it help move the story forward? I think the point of this content is to really develop the story to its true worth. Just like Maus, it depicts everything, good or bad, to make the story create the moments that people often don't bring up. This type of thought is very important when creating a story. You have to decide between reality or criticism from others who think it is unnecessary to add these details. As I continue reading, I will keep an eye out for these types of details and how it changes the scope of the book.

The Transparency Within Me

In class this week we started to explore the different viewpoint on the topic of covering up a controversy. This has been an issue that has been reviewed over constantly with no clear solution. When parents hear on the news or from a friend of a terrorist attack or a shooting, what do you think comes into their mind first? They would think of their children first, trying to protect their innocent souls from the destructive society that we live in today. The problem is, when do we stop controlling their vision. As they grow older and mature into what we are today, as you keep hiding the violence from them, they can look right through you. There would be no point of hiding the truth at this point. This would then bring up the question of why we have to protect them when they are little? What would be the difference of telling them then vs now? This is the truth in human philosophy. Someone at the start of civilization must have come up with the idea that kids should be protected from the evils of society. This idea is portrayed through movies all the time with statements like "You will learn when you are older". How does this relate to violence shown in the news you may be wondering? It is the feeling of security in one's family circle. The thought of seeing your little child depressed because of the gruesome pictures they see in the news breaks your heart and breaks the mold and craft of the family you created. You want them to learn about the real world but you realize that it is not suited for someone so fragile. Instead, these kids should watch something that helps stimulate their brain and open up the creativity in their imagination. This will help them be ready for the real world because their problem solving would be at a top-notch level. As "media companies increasingly have to deal with horrifying images of war and terrorism", we should realize that the problem of these horrifying images is not linked with adults, but it is the stunting of growth for future generations.