Almost Never (Malcolm X Part 1)

Integration. Is it possible? Malcolm X is completely opposed to it. There was something he said specifically that rattled my perspective of the world for a bit. ”I don’t care how nice one is to you; the thing you must always remember is that almost never does he really see you as he sees himself, as he sees his own kind.” Woah.

I don’t want to blindly generalize an entire group of people. I can only make judgments from what I’ve experienced personally. Taking a realistic view of the subject, I’d say that Malcolm X is right. But the only reason I say this is because he leaves some room for exceptions. In the quote he says “almost never”, and those two words are what redeem his statement for me. The “almost never” leaves room for people who genuinely see everyone as equals. I believe that those people exist because I’ve met them.

As for the others…sometimes they don’t even realize it. Racism continues to thrive in our society. Racism is not solely alive in the South or in other environments that seem far away from here. Racism occurs every day, in Chicago, at Whitney Young, probably even amongst your friends. I’m not trying to put race into everything, not at all. I simply think that denying a problem’s existence is just as bad as supporting the problem. Denying that racism is still going on won’t make it go away. So what will? I’ll be honest and admit that I don’t have a solution. Change has to be individual before anything concrete is accomplished. So think, reflect, and do better.

            

Frankly Speaking

I could go on and on about how great this book was and why I like it and such…because that’s all true. Frankl’s story is amazing and I found his explanation of logotheraphy insanely interesting as well. But there was something that frustrated me. The existential vacuum. It’s not that I don’t understand the concept. I do, very well actually. I, like many others, sometimes find myself sinking into this state of restlessness. I know the feeling, I know the boredom and I know the sense of worthlessness. What I do not understand is the reason why. Why does the existential vacuum exist? How did life get to the point where the simple acting of being is not enough? Is this phenomenon attributed to human nature or has it recently developed because of the digital age? There are so many possibilities and factors to think about. There may not be answers to these questions, but at least considering them could be worth something. My hope is that through understanding the existential vacuum I might fall into it less. 

Music Review: Equal Worses

Equal Worses is a new band, but so far they’re showing tons of promise. Dr. Philosophy formed the band at the beginning of September, though I doubt even he expected the success it would become. Despite being its creator, Dr. Philosophy is not the lead singer of the band. In fact, his musical instrument of choice is a tall wooden stick, which can occasionally be heard in the background of their songs (but is mostly used to keep the rest of the band in check when they get too rowdy). It’d be impossible to list all of the band members and their respective instruments, as it has a total of 27 members. However each member contributes to the band in a way that leaves listeners intrigued, if not completely confused.

Most of Equal Worses’s songs are composed of a cacophony of sounds that can be portrayed as a deep battle between ideas that are equally as bad, hence the name Equal Worses. My personal favorite song by Equal Worses is “The Absurdist Existentialism of a Nihilist.” This track is 47 minutes long, and consists of, guitar rifts, triangle melodies, some a capella work, and an amazing oboe solo. However the highlight of the song is a hostile argument concerning the meaning of life. The band never reveals what the meaning of life is, but the song definitely gets you thinking.

Unfortunately, none of Equal Worses music can be found online. However, if you’re dying to witness the band’s antics, it can be found in room 201 during 6^th period.

Angels On The Moon

 These blog questions have been getting more and more personal as the weeks go on…sorry but I’m not feeling it. Alone is dark. Alone is empty. Alone is scary. Alone is real and I can’t tell such a real story through such fake means. I can’t tell my story to a computer screen. I can’t share intimate moments with you. Do you even care? I doubt it.

What I can do, is share an experience where I’ve had to portray feelings of loneliness, desperation, and solidarity. Naturally, this portrayal was through dance. Last year for the Guys and Dolls show (this year it’s on February 2^nd at 7 and it’s going to be amazing, so come out and support because we’re fierce) I was in a dance where Nica, our choreographer, wanted to tell a story using us. Have you ever been alone in a crowded room? That was basically the theme of the dance. Four people, all reflections of each other and all feeling alone. But of course when we’re alone we feel so isolated that instead of reaching out to others we reject the idea that anyone else could be feeling the exact same way. Therefore we retreat even more deeply into ourselves and lose the chance to relate to others. My “reflection”/ partner in the dance was Jocelyne. I danced with her doing the same movements at the same time but without realizing that there was another person there. And when I realized it, I became shocked at the notion that there could be someone out there who felt alone too.

Later in the dance, there was a part where I had to break free from the bubble of isolation and reach out to the other dancers. After dancing a solo, I had to run back to the others and let them know that they weren’t alone. I was their angel on the moon. The lyrics in the song at that point were “This is for all of us.” And it really was. It was for the dancers, for Nica, for the team, for everyone in the audience who had ever felt alone, and it was for you.

At first this was all choreographed. The expressions of shock, disbelief, fear, and hope were all things that Nica had told me to do, and so I did. But after a while, it became more than choreography and suddenly I wasn’t just telling a story of loneliness, I was telling my story.

I Know This Means Something

Is enjoyment enough to give one’s life meaning? I think so. So if you’re asking me what is something in my life that means something to me, you could just as easily be asking me what I like to do. But can that same thing have a deeper philosophical context? Sure.

Archery. Before I even continue, do not even start with the Katniss jokes. I do not try to be the Mockingjay. I’m not running around trying to save the citizens of Panem. I did not start shooting because of those books or that movie.  I started shooting 3 years ago, while in Virginia, because the opportunity presented itself, and archery was always somethig I had wanted to try. The mythology intertwined with archery is lovely, but it still carries a combative and sinister underlying tone.  

After trying it that summer in Virginia, I learned how beautiful it could be. When I returned to Chicago, I immediately started searching for a local range, and I found one. The range I go to is about 9 miles away from my house, but it happens to be the only indoor range in the city and the drive is completely worth it.

It started off as a few classes a month, then I joined a league, then I got my own bow and arrows, then my dad set up a target for me in my backyard, and soon I was competing and shooting at stray raccoons in my free time. Now I’m going to the range once a week, at least, and practice outside whenever the weather is nice(and oftentimes even when it isn’t). It is not just a hobby anymore, but it is not exactly a lifestyle either. Now it’s just a part of who I am. An archer.

Archery is simple. Load, pull, aim, repeat. If the shot is bad, all I have to do is keep trying until I figure out what needs to physically be changed. But archery comes with its complexities too. While I’m shooting it is as if I feel exactly what archery means to me as I hold the bow. The tension I feel while pulling back the string is more than just physical. It represents all archery has taught me and I feel all those little lessons accumulate into something greater that is waiting to be released. When the shot is finally released, it’s bliss. An arrow straight to the heart.

You're Not Golden(Direction This Class Should Take)

I don't think I can answer this question without saying something mean. I've tried patience. That didn't work. 

One of our first assignments was to read that thing in the "about philosophy" book. Did anyone do that? Seriously. One of the most important things that was in that chapter basically said that philosophy is difficult. It's difficult to learn about and it's probably even more difficult to teach. It’s rare that people will completely agree on what is being said. Anyways, the book said that to combat the chaos that the class could turn into was to have discussions and not arguments. I think what some people (you know who you are) in our class forget is that you don't have to win. You don't have to win because the class is not about you. We're all just here trying to develop and share our thoughts. And the truth is that no one really knows so no matter how zealously you defend your opinion, you could still be wrong. Instead of trying to be right all the time what you need to do is sit down and listen. Listen to what is being said and instead of trying to argue about it, just think about it. Let it marinate in your mind and lead you to new ideas. I can guarantee that everyone in the class would benefit more if we didn’t have to sit through numerous angry tirades. I'm glad you have so much passion about what you believe in...but calm down. 

You don’t have to be so LOUD. 

The Election

This is probably the worst blog question we’ve had so far. It deals with other people and it is way strange thinking for them. I have to guess Camus’s and Voltaire’s choices based on their writing and philosophies and the characters we’ve read about…ick.

Anyway Voltaire and Camus are voting for…no one. That’s right. Both men probably wouldn’t vote at all. Voltaire finds happiness in simplicity. In Candide Voltaire’s ending advice is to be content tending your garden. I think that he’d stay true to his own advice and be content in his garden without worrying about the world around him. This means that he would sit back, let the election happen, and deal with the results, whatever they may be. Also in Candide, Voltaire constantly demonstrates his disgust for politics and rulers. Governments are corrupt, man is evil and I doubt Voltaire would think that voting in an election would change that.

Camus is a bit harder to think for. His absurdist view on the meaning of life is tricky. There may be meaning, but there may not. So how who would he decide to vote for? Would he vote at all? Possibly he may think that his vote matters but more than likely he’d see no point in voting.