Freedom Of Speech September 28, 2008

           

Supreme Court Justices: 1919

Our freedom of Speech that is outlined in the first amendment is quintessential to out modern society.  Without this freedom, we, as citizens, would live in constant fear of saying something “wrong”.  Without our freedom of speech, the government would the power to restrict some of our natural rights, which allow our country to be the “land of the free and the home of the brave.”  If the government protects this right, we have the ability to express ourselves freely and speak out against any injustices in our ever changing society.

            The case of Schenck vs. United States that was brought to the Supreme Court in 1919 addressed this issue.  Charles Schenck was arrested for distributing leaflets opposing the draft to over 15,000 people.  His message to young men involved with the draft was that they should “not submit to intimidation” and to utilize their rights.  During this time, the United States was involved in World War I.  The draft was very important for the greater good of the country: its defense.  Schenck’s actions went against the common good, and he was therefore arrested.  He was “charged under the espionage act with conspiring to cause insubordination.” (NY Times)  It states in the preamble that the one purpose of the constitution would be to “provide for the common defense”.  However, there were still questions as to the constitutionality of Schenck’s arrest.  Was his arrest a violation of Schenck’s freedom of speech?  Does it matter that it was a time of crisis in the country?

Charles Schenck

            After three months of deliberation in the Supreme Court, the Justices decided that Schenck’s imprisonment was in fact constitutional. It did matter that the country was in a time of war when Schenck said what he did.  At any other time, he would have been protected by his freedom of speech, but during war time, his words endangered the country as a whole.  His words were so powerful that they could have led to a weakening of the United Stated Military.  This could have been devastating to the country during war.  Supreme Court justice Holmes stated that Schenck was “attempting to cause insubordination in the military and naval forces of the United States, and to obstruct the recruiting and enlistment service of the United States”.  Holmes proposed a “clear and present danger” standard that clarified the Supreme Court’s reasoning.  He stated: “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”  The decision of the Supreme Court was one example of an independent judiciary.  The Justices had to make their decision free from any biases.  They could not favor congress, the president, or Schenck, thus making an independent decision. 

            I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in this case.  The right protected by our freedom of speech is very important, but the safety of our country is even more important.  The constitution was made to “ensure a more perfect union, establish tranquility, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense…”  Schenck’s imprisonment was completely constitutional because he was jeopardizing the “common defense” which the government must “provide for”

Freedom of Speech Case

 Sources:

Bill of Rights Institute. Bill of Rights Institute. 28 Sept. 2008
     <http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/Teach/freeResources/
     LandmarkSupremeCourtCases/#SpeechGen>.

Cornell University Law School. “Schenck vs. United States.” Supreme court
     collection. Cornell University. 28 Sept. 2008
     <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/
     USSC_CR_0249_0047_ZS.html>.

Schenck v. U.S. Appeal: 1919 – “largely Instrumental In Sending The Circulars
     About.” 28 Sept. 2008 <http://law.jrank.org/pages/2807/
     Schenck-v-U-S-Appeal-1919–Largely-Instrumental-in-Sending-Circulars-About.html>.

Waldron, Jeremy. “The Great Defender.” New York Times. 3 Feb. 2002. 28 Sept.
     2008 <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/
     fullpage.html?res=9C05E2D71E3BF930A35751C0A9649C8B63&scp=2&sq=%22Charles%20Schenc
     k%22&st=cse>.

Wikipedia Encyclopedia. “Schenck v. United States.” Wikipedia. 28 Sept. 2008
     <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States>.

OMG She’s Pregnant! September 23, 2008

       

Good people.  How do we define good people?  Are they moral?  Are they innocent?  Are they Godly?  The essay Good People that appeared in The New Yorker made me stop and ask myself these questions.  It is valuable because it made me think about how I thought of “good people.”  In the essay, we make the connection that Lane A. Dean Jr.’s girlfriend is pregnant.  We get the impression that they are essentially “good people” because they are very religious and care deeply about the issue.  They do not dismiss their mistake, but rather think through it.  In most cases, we take religious people to be good because they usually follow the example of Christ- the ultimate good.  They are God fearing people, and struggle on whether or she should have an abortion.

            In most cases, I personally believe that abortion is wrong.  I came to this decision in the past because I saw it as a get-out-of-jail-free card.  I thought that most people who got abortions did not care at all about the baby or their actions.  Good People made me reconsider my previous ideas.  It told me the story of otherwise perfectly decent people, who simply made a mistake.  Just like the rest of us, they are sinners.  Unlike the rest of us, however, their simple mistake caused a GIGANTIC upset that they must overcome.  No matter what they decide to do with the baby, the memory will still be there, and affect them for the rest of their lives.

            From now on, I have a different view on good people.  I must first consider their situation, and know the whole story before I judge for myself whether or not they are good.  Since it changed even a small part of how I think, Good People has value.  It is very important in shaping who I am and how I think, despite the fact that it was hard to read.

 

 

My Decision is FINAL! Well…maybe not… September 11, 2008

The stream of consciousness technique is most effective to me when Mrs. Dalloway is reflecting on her choices regarding Peter.  She sits there mending her green silk dress (something highly uncommon for a woman of her social standing) continuously second guessing herself, wondering if she made the right choices all those years ago.  This is something that I often find myself doing.  When I have time to zone out and just think, (which doesn’t happen much these days) my mind wanders through my decisions, analyzing each and every one of them individually, yet still quickly.  Just like Mrs. Dalloway, I find myself wondering “why”.  Why did I not play volleyball this year?  Why did I give away that shift last Thursday?  Why did I put off my homework until the very last minute?

At this part in the novel, Mrs. Dalloway’s mind revealed to me that I am not the only one who second guesses things.  She wonders “…why did I make up my mind- not to marry him?” (p.40)  She gives us the impression that she had made up her mind all those years ago, and therefore married Richard, but now she wonders why.

Peter wonders why as well.  It does not make sense to him why she would marry someone who “asked impossible things” and “made terrible scenes” (62).  Mrs. Dalloway’s mind informs us that she finds Peter’s constant criticizing annoying.  However, I see it as a sign of love.  He loves her enough to care about what she wears, how she is treated, and so on.  I believe that Mrs. Dalloway’s subconscious picks up on this, and it makes her second guess her love for both Richard and Peter.

I got the impression from both Peter and Mrs. Dalloway that they have an undying, unconditional love for one another.  This is why Peter was “more unhappy than I’ve ever been” (41) since she left him to marry Richard.  It is also why he “wept without shame” (45) in front of her.  “No one understood him, felt with him, as Clarissa did….” (45).  They connect, and give each other a sense of calm in times of need.  This may be one factor keeping their love alive.  It preserves an “exquisite intimacy” that can never die no matter how much they annoy each other.

During the time in the novel where Peter and Mrs. Dalloway briefly reunite, I could feel for myself the tension, longing, anxiety, and love in the room.  The stream of consciousness technique makes this possible.  It puts me right in the middle of the action; right in the middle of the two minds.  It is only from this position that I can fully understand the true meaning of what is happening.

This situation in Mrs. Dalloway and Peter’s lives led me to think about all of the people that I care unconditionally about.  It reminded me of the people that, no matter what they do, or how angry I become with them, I will always love them the same.  No matter how much I want to hate them, I simply cannot.  (There have actually been instances in my life where I have gotten mad at myself for letting myself forgive someone too quickly.  If that makes any sense.)

It is only the stream of consciousness technique that would allow me to realize this.  Therefore, it is very effective. (For me at least.  What’s it like for you?)

Where Literature Meets Logic September 9, 2008

If you want my honest opinion, at first, reading a stream of consciousness novel was the most confusing thing that I have ever attempted.  Following the thought process of Clarissa Dalloway proves to be very complicated.  This is partially due to the fact that each and every individual’s mind is unique.  Mrs. Dalloway’s thought process is very different from yours, mine, or anyone else’s.  This fact creates a very complex, yet still enjoyable novel.

            I find the stream of consciousness technique present in Mrs. Dalloway very interesting because I can relate it back to my own thought process.  Any one person never focuses on one single thing.  Our minds continually jump from one thought to another.  Ideas overlap, jumble together, and conger up even more thoughts.  Even now, as I sit on my computer, my mind jumps from the unusual warmness of the room, to the shimmer of the pearl ring on my finger, to the messy sketches in a framed portrait, and to my desire to focus and finish this blog post.

            If I simply wrote down every idea that came through my mind, the document would be incomprehensible to anyone other than me.  The stream of consciousness technique allows my mind to connect with the mind of Mrs. Dalloway in a subconscious way.  However, in order for me as a reader to understand her thought process, the stream of consciousness technique provides some structure to her thoughts.  This structure allows her thoughts to flow in a pattern that is comprehensible to the reader, yet still reveals much about Mrs. Dalloway that a simple observer would have not seen.  We see her “sensory impressions, memories, opinions, and insights.”  This allows us to put ourselves into her position, and more clearly see her point of view.

            Seeing Mrs. Dalloway’s point of view is very important to the context of the novel because we see her reasoning behind the decisions that she made.  One of these is her decision concerning who she loved, and would marry.  The stream of consciousness technique allows Mrs. Dalloway’s subconscious to reveal her exact opinion regarding Huge, Paul, and Richard.  Her thoughts of these three men flow together, showing us the similarities and differences between them.  This causes my overall experience in reading the stream of consciousness novel to be positive.

            My mind understands logic the best.  Therefore, a direct comparison of Mrs. Dalloway’s love interests helps me to understand her to the fullest.  When her thoughts and ideas are laid out as they are in the novel, my mind can easily arrange them into its own logical form.  As I break down the facts that are provided for me, I also break down Mrs. Dalloway’s complex character.

            Although it seemed confusing at first, the stream of consciousness technique present in Mrs. Dalloway is very enjoyable.  After I broke it down, and understood how it worked, this strategy allows me to analyze Mrs. Dalloway’s character in ways that I never would have been able to before.

WOO-HOO Modernism!! September 4, 2008

• Many different eras have considered themselves modern including the Renaissance and the Enlightenment period.  The Victorians also believed that they ushered in a “truly modern age”
• There were many literary and scientific advances made towards the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth.
• These discoveries propelled society into a more “predictable” state.
• The purpose of many important discoveries and inventions were to serve humanity.
• The theory of evolution that was proposed by Charles Darwin was a major “object of study.”
• Many people became interested in forming theories and systems that would explain things on a very large scale.  Darwin, Auguste Comte, and Karl Marx are some examples
• Comte outlines a science of human society
• Nietzsche, a German philosopher focused on advancements for the individual, and not society.  He believed that a truly free human being lived in a world that “lacks transcended law” (God).  This greatly influenced the early 1900s.
•  Modernism- term for general changes in “attitude and artistic strategy” that occurred at the beginning of the century.
• Mainly refers to a group of writers who forced more on clear images and “common” speech.
• They looked at art as an object (literally) rather than a “statement of emotion”
• Modernists changed the way that people saw things by changing the way that reality was represented.
• They expressed the “uncertain nature of reality” through contrasting appearances in art and literature.
• In literature, they made “unexpected connections” or “sudden changes of perspective”
• They often employed interior monologues.
• Modernists mixed fantasy into their works, but it still related to real world problems or events.
• The balance of tradition and experimental style make up modernism.
• Postmodernists gave a formality to modernism that it did not have before.
• Virginia Woolf developed her own kind of modernist writing that she attributed to her innate “feminine consciousness”
• She always keeps body and mind connected in one entity.
• She creates patterns through different points of view.
• She reminds people that subjectivity is key both in literature and in everyday life.
• She was a feminist who let it show in her writing.  She addressed feminist issues such as their identity and role in society.
• She was one of four daughters of a Victorian editor
• She was educated at home by her parents, and studied in her father’s library.  She did not have the opportunity for outside education.  She attributed this to being a woman, and writes about it in her short stories and novels.  Her anger with this situation shows through in these.
• She expresses a “plea” that women writers can be equal to men.
• She became a part of a group of writers called the Bloomsbury group
• She was not yet writing fiction, but rather writing reviews, teaching, and an active part of a feminist group
• Her husband encouraged her writing
• She “explores the structures of consciousness” through her writing, which has the ability to evoke concrete feelings.
• She manipulates different perspectives to evoke different feelings and to allow the reader to make different connections.
• She relies greatly on the imagination of the reader, and gives it “great importance”

Proposal September 2, 2008

Gentleman or villain, handsome or rough, wealthy or poor, cheerful or angry.  Each of these pairs describes two opposing characters in Wuthering Heights: Edgar Linton and Heathcliff.  As opposites of each other, these two men emphasize specific characteristics in the other that could have otherwise been overlooked. Through the comparison and contrast of these two characters, Emily Brontë allows her audience to see the ways that people during the Victorian Age viewed the poor.  The upper class felt as if they were better than the lower class because of their upbringing, social connections, and economic status.  As Edgar and Heathcliff clash throughout Wuthering Heights, we make the connection for ourselves concerning upper and lower class relations, and how these interactions do not necessarily make what we want to see happen in the romantic story possible.