Devil In the White City Blog #2

I do believe that the entire Fair, in its extravagant size and cost, an exhibition of arrogance. The world’s Fair, in fact, was made to surpass the Paris World’s Fair. America wanted to send their message to France that, they too, can also create a fair that would be treasure by many. France World’s Fair is the pass and Chicago’s World’s Fair is now the present.

        When first planning for a place to build the World’s Fair, cities such as Washington D.C. or New York City sound like the right place to build it. However, Chicago won the voting over those big cities. In the early 19th century, Chicago is not the place to have something as big as the “World’s Fair” since the town is too poor, it has no goods in it. Chicagoans were desperate that the World’s Fair can eventually turned their hometown into one a the top city in America. To accomplished such task, Chicago architects wanted to build a much better Fair compared to the one in France. Plus, they don’t want to fall behind from those of New York, Washington D.C. or even France, it's time for them to show their abilities.

        The World’s Fair was indeed built with arrogance. The World’s Fair is very big in size, and some believed that perhaps the Ferris Wheel supposed to replace the Eiffel Towel on Paris. Also, the Fair was supposed to last for hundreds of years, however, it cannot even stand more than six months. Since the architects changed the construction of the White City’s walls from granite to staff, it decreased its ability to stand. Even though it cost an enormous amount of money to build this World’s Fair, did not go to waste. Since the Fair did attracted thousands of people each day, it stimulated both Chicago and the nation’s economy. Although, it did collapsed after six months but America didn't lose any profit.

  The World’s Fair is indeed an act of arrogance, however, it does not necessarily paralleled with evil. Some places can have large gatherings of people as well but it’s not necessarily engender themselves in violence nature. There are many protests, like homosexual rights, in America where there are large numbers of people, but it don’t immediately start a serial killer.

      Chicagoans overcame many challenges to have the World’s Fair be built in their hometown. During the time, America wasn’t all that great. There weren’t many technologies or transportations than compared to now. People come to the Fair from all over the world to see the site would either stay in the nearest hotel owned by Holmes or find a different place to stay. The World’s Fair became a place where serial killers find it’s easy to do their work and go without getting caught. It’s just the situation that make the World’s Fair became the target of evil.

Devil In the White City Blog #1

       The Devil in the White City is a book about the World's Fair in 1893 and how it's full of good and evil. The book reveals that there is an “ineluctable conflict between good and evil”; these two go hand in hand. The World's Fair sounds like a magnificence place to be, a place full of new items that can only be available at the World’s Fair. Burnham and Olmsted, the creators of the fair, wanted this place to be the most amazing, unforgettable place that people have ever been. The World’s Fair drew many people across the world, it attracts thousands of visitors each day. At the same time, this place allowed young women to feel adventurous, and at the same time “safe”. However, if there is light, then there must be dark. Just like the quote suggests, good and evil exit within each other. Furthermore, the World’s Fair calls out to thousands of visitors, it also calls out to evil intender. Men such as H. H. Holmes looks at the World’s Fair as a place that would benefit his pocket.

These two characters, Burnham and Holmes, have a few essential differences between them. One of the differences is their view of the Fair. Burnham looks at the Fair as a happy place, a place that will offer news beginning to the visitors. He wants his visitors to be able to remembered and experienced an amazing time at the Fair. Burnham wanted to make Chicago the top city. On the other hand, Holmes views the Fair as a place where he can easily make money without being noticed. Another difference is their passion about their work. Burnham loves architecture. When he was young, he had experienced many jobs but never really stick to it. When he encountered architect, Burnham became passionate about it. He wants to do his best and make the best architecture, a factor that led him into building the Fair. Likewise, Holmes is not passionate of anything. He just wants money, in ordered to accomplished that, he kills people using the World’s Fair- built by Burnham and Olmsted - to reel in his victims.

Despite their differences, in a way, they both do share similar qualities. Both men are genius. Burnham is an amazing architect. He loves his job and always try his best by building the World’s Fair and the first skyscraper. Holmes, being a serial killer, is also a genius man. It’s hard to believe but Holmes is a smart man. He built a hotel full of complexity. Seriously, Holmes is not an architect but he can build something as amazing as  that complex hotel. The hotel has tons of rooms and stairs that led to nowhere. It’s built as a place where Holmes can easily accomplished his work. He kills people and sale their skeletons to local Colleges or Universities. Also, he graduated from college and has a license of a physician. He uses his license to gain trust from his customer. These two men indeed a genius but their views are definitely different than each other.

Second Semester Blog #2 A Modest Proposal

  The article, A Modest Proposal, written by Dr. Jonathan Swift, is about the difficulty times of poverty in Ireland. Dr. Jonathan wrote this article in 1729, where the Irish people was facing a hard time. Many people was hungry, “the roads and cabbin-doors crowded with beggars…” and infants grew up either became thieves, or left their country…  In order to improve their society, D. Jonathan Swift proposes the idea of eating children to save their society.  

He uses satire, anecdotes, and many (statistics) research to justified his idea of cannibalism. He then supports his idea by saying it is “for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick.”. Since the children are a burden to their parents, especially female beggars who are helpless in raising multiple children, the idea sounds like a good solution. 

Dr. Jonathan Swift gives a negative impression of having children, since they’re nothing but burdensome. With his proposal, it will help thousands of Irish people. 

He supports his idea of eating children by saying it will solve the problem of the kids being a problem to their parents, “prevent those voluntary abortions”, and as well as feeding those hungry Irish who have been starving for months. 

I find it funny because Swift is the one who proposes the idea of eating children to save Ireland. However, it’s not his original idea, since it was given by those who have been eating children. Nevertheless, he still supports his ideas in a positive light.

One thing that stands out to me the most is the numbers that Swift uses. It seems like Swift knows what he wants to say, and have well researched before he proposes his idea to the world. He stages that Ireland consists of roughly “one million and a half…thirty thousand couple, who are able to maintain their own children… fifty thousand… who miscarry… there only remain an hundred and twenty thousand children of poor parents annually born.” Swift lists these number as if he knows it by heart. I find it’s strange because he’s one in a million of them, yet he knows what is happening and how many people are having those problems. 

Another interesting thing is his tone. Swift uses a sarcastic tone when he talks about the Irish. He stages that “hundred and twenty thousand children already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed”, then he analyzes how many males and females children are there, in which he stages “one male will be sufficient to serve four females.” Also he compares them to sheep, black cattle, or swine. It’s like he doesn’t view these people as human beings, but as animals that breed baby and sell them to other people. 

Furthermore in Swift proposal, he also recommends buying the children alive, and roasting them like pigs. And the wealthy people prefer children to be plump and fat because they’re the best tasting children. Also, they can not pass fourteen years of age nor under twelve. 

After reading A Modest Proposal, toward the end of the article, he stages that “I profess, in the sincerity of my heart, that I have not the least personal interest in endeavoring to promote this necessary work, having no other motive than the publick good of my country, by advancing our trade, providing for infants…”. Swift shows that his idea was not for his own good, but for everyone. He wants to save his country and everyone from poverty by proposing with the idea of eating children. If people eat baby, it will increase the nation’s stock, boost the economy. The breeders (parents) will make profit and don’t have to be beggars anymore. This idea is quite ironic because people are not made to breed and eat their own kind, but Swift supports his idea with positive outcome, making it seems possible. 

I find his idea of eating children extremely gross, but at the same time, it is quite interesting. The idea seems crazy at first, but since Ireland is facing difficulty of poverty, the streets crowded with beggars, people are starving, many died, so consuming their own children will help their country seem like a good solution. Even though, Swift back up his claims with positive results, but is it possible? Since, (most) parents love their kids dearly, the idea of selling and eating baby, can they actually be able to do it?

Second Semester Blog #1

     In the book, "The Sun Also Rises", by Ernest Hemingway is a story about love problems. Jake Barnes loves Brett and Brett also loves him. However, they can't be together because Jake Barnes cannot provided for Brett needs. Jakes Barnes - one of the main character - doesn't have the heroic characteristics because he never goes for what he wants. He likes simple life and when Cohn gave him a beating, he hid under the table. Unlike Barnes, Pedro Romero, a young bull-fighter, possesses the characteristic of a hero. 
     Although Romero is not one of the main character of the book, but Hemingway gave him great qualities that other characters in the book don't have. Even though he's only nineteen years old, he is one of the greatest matador during the Fiesta. In the rink, Romero is not afraid of the bull, he allows the bull to come close to him but still be able to handle it. He stay calm in front of danger and hide his emotions. He doesn't let it affect his thinking. He's still young but a true man because he's not afraid to face the challenge whether to the bull or to Cohn. 
     Cohn have Romero a big beating but Romero never back down. He always stand back up and find away to return the favor. It seems impossible against Cohn - a professional boxer - yet Romero never give  up. 
     Romero knows how to live a life. He is also a drinker but never lets himself be drunk. He knows how to live in moderation whereas other always use alcohol to forget their miseries. 
     Also, he did slept with Lady Brett Ashley and started to love her, but he never allows himself to be destroyed by Brett, in contrast to Cohn, Mike, and Jake. 

     In the book, Hemingway only give heroic qualities to Romero because only Romero understand the values of life. He enjoys drinking and smoking, but not to forget the sad memories. He never give up even if he's hurt, and he doesn't rely on other like Brett does. Other characters give up when they have a hard time. They get tight and forget their misery and rely on other. 

     In modern days, we also hold similar view for a heroic traits. Almost everyone has their favorite hero. Hero like superman, spiderman, or batman are all made beliefs yet widely known. They were created to give people something to believe in or a little entertainment. Although these heros aren't exactly the same as Hemingway's hero, but they're someone that people look up to.
     Every hero has a weak side, like Superman is weak against kryptonite or batman that always bothered by Joker, but they never give up and always try to help the world from destruction. 
     Superman is a stoic person, he doesn't talk about his problems whatsoever. Also, he doesn't really show up unless there is danger. When he being exposed to kryptonite - although hurt- but he never show fear instead bravely faced it, just like Romero. 
     Similar with batman, he doesn't have super power like superman but he knows how to work with the items he has. He always there to help people when they're in danger and most of the time it's the Joker's work. Batman is not afraid of the Joker and his face never show fear. 
    Like Hemingway's hero, these heroes also doesn't let pressure affect their outcome. They stay calm and concentrate on how to destroy the bad guys. These heroes always come out on top and save the world.
     These heroes are made belief, but they also have a normal human side. Beside from saving the world, they live a normal life. Hanging out with friends, going to work, etc... They also have friends as well as lovers, but they never rely on anyone for help and they never get drunk to get away from their problems. 
          These heroes have serve their purpose of making people feel safe even just a little.

Blog #17

     After reading the article Saga of OJ Still Alters Our Lives by Mitch Albom, I want to disagree with Albom's argument. Surely the trial created a huge controversies and caught many people's interest but I do not believe it's the most important event in the 90s.
    In the article, Albom states that it created media, and people only talk about the OJ Simpson case on it. It's one of the most talked about case. If it weren't because he's famous, people wouldn't be too interested it in his case but view it as another murder case. So O.J. Simpson Case is not the most important in that decade because there are other event like the advancement in engineers and such.

Blog #16

     When people heard the word cowboy, they imaging rude and impulsive man. However in the essay About Men by Gretchen Ehrlich, she describes them having calloused hands and a sun-baked face. Her tone changes throughout the essay, it goes from sarcastic to warm and respecting. The stereotypical cowboy that we normally hear is not the actual cowboy. Her tone help us see the different when she tells stories about them.

Blog #15

   Everyone sure will have secrets in their lives. People needs privacy and secrets are the one that keep our privacy from others. In the essay, "Secrets We Tell" , Sante gives three reasons for secrecy:Soviet Union, internet, and confessional culture/media. 
   I don't really understand what the author is trying to discuss about Soviet Union, but I think it's about the privacy of that society. Like how the government doesn't want outsiders to obtain their real information in the Soviet Union, like the used of propaganda. 
  Next, Sante discusses about the internet. The internet is like a digital world full of secrets. We can go to news and there will be tons of news that will come up, from a girl got shot yesterday to a person that won a reward in science fair, etc.... Internet is a place full of gossips, we can easily obtain an information, well if we know how to search it right. Anyway, internet is a place where rumors spread the fastest. For example, this celebrity has tons of surgeries (fault) but within 5 minutes, thousands and thousands of people will see that topic. 
  Lastly, Sante discusses about our culture and the media. Since everyone has secrets, sometimes the only way to relieved themselves is to reveal the secrets, like to their best friend or to a dog/cat. As long as someone that will listen to the secret without making a big deal on it. I supposed that what Sante meant when he discusses about the culture.