Within Dawn of the Dead directed by George Romero there is a multitude of parallels between the film and the seven theses discussed by Jeffery Jerome Cohen within the article Monster Culture (Seven Theses). During the first scene of the movie, a doctor and an interviewer are having a heated discussion on this unexplainable epidemic. The doctor states that this issues has gotten out of hand because the masses have overlooked and underestimated the gravity of the situation. Furthermore, ignoring the issue has caused this catastrophe, and the doctor goes on to say “if we listened…if we dealt with the with the phenomenon properly without emotion, it wouldn’t have come to this”, meaning that if there was just a cold-blooded mentality, the problem would have been resolved. However, this creates a paradox that can be related to what Cohen discusses in his article. The zombies; diseased and infected individuals should be exterminated in a monstrous rationale of emotionless slaughter. This ‘fire with fire’ mentality is just as lurid and morbid as how the zombies infect their hosts. So in reality there is no difference between the zombie and the human. Within Cohens third thesis he describes such dilemmas as “a deeper play of differences, a nonbinary polymorphism at the ‘base’ of human nature” (5). Essentially, the ‘monster’ plays off of human instinct and human nature, because it is created by us. It is the embodiment of us, the vile reality that we turn a blind eye to.
The topics of empathy and compassion are both discussed by Yo-yo Ma and Paul Bloom, more specifically the positive and negative connotations concerning empathy. Within “Necessary edges: Art, Empathy, and Education” by Yo-yo Ma it is argued that empathy can be just as valuable in society as critical thinking. Ma exclaims that “because the world economy is so hyper-competitive, much of the focus in education…is on STEM…As important as that is, it is short-sighted, we need to add the empathetic reasoning of the arts to the mix” (Ma, 279), Ma emphasizes that the strict focus on content-based knowledge detaches us from each other. Alternatively, Paul Bloom explains that “understanding people is important, but is not necessarily a force of good. It can be a force of evil as well.” (Bloom, 1), Bloom brings about the argument that though empathy might seem “great on paper”, it does have limitations and flaws. Personally, I do understand Bloom’s concern, however, I believe that it is the role of an individual to morally decide when empathy should be used. We all have a moral compass, so to speak, and I feel it would be of great benefit to better incorporate empathy more significantly into the education system.
After the peer review session on Monday (10/7) I received a lot of feedback about expanding on my own personal argument and expressing more of what I had to say. Additionally, the possibility of adding onto my counterargument. Of course there we edits to be done grammatically, more specifically in the regard of sentence structure, run on sentences, wording, and simple typos. Furthermore, I did receive a good balance of positive feedback as well. Others felt that my evidence was very sufficient, and that my overall paragraphs were well written, aside from some of the slight grammatical errors. Also, the quotes I bring in from other authors and activists that also fit into the subject.
When taking into account all of the feedback that was given to me I decided to rework my essay to fix the grammatical errors, so that it allowed for more calculated changes in what I wanted to do with expanding my paragraphs and then reorganizing them to allow the expansion of my own opinions. After implementing more of my own opinions, I put more effort into strengthening my counterargument. I realized that my counterargument was not as clear as I thought it was, so I made it more apparent for the reader to see.
Within the essay “Preface and The new Civil Rights” by Kenji Yoshino, the reader delves into the harsh realities of true and false selves. Yoshino starts his essay with a concise, yet potent statement of “Everyone covers”. In essence, that we all desire to be socially accepted and to avoid social isolation by whatever means possible. Additionally, how we tend to cover up our real emotions and beliefs, or “true self” as Yoshino calls it, in order to assimilate to social norms. Yoshino asserts that following the modern day social norms of essentially hiding your true identity is not progressive, nor is it healthy for an individual, and we should rather embrace a lifestyle that displays one’s true self. Additionally, the irony of civil rights movements focusing on differences, rather than looking towards all the commonalities we share.
Yoshino brings forth captivating evidence from the civil rights movement, “At the end of their lives, both Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X argued for this transition from civil rights to human rights.” (Yoshino, 457). This is an excellent point, the civil right movement was not fighting for civil rights, but rather human rights. Along with this, we should embrace commonalities, rather than emphasize discontinuities. When relating back to the concept of true and false selves, we should rather focus on what commonalities we share with others, rather than focus on what drives us apart. Zach de la Rocha once said, “Yes I know my enemies. They’re the teachers who taught me to fight me, compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite, all of which are American dreams”, in a sense it comes down to that it is the individual who fights their beliefs and gives into conformity, assimilation, and submission to the norm, just so that we feel accepted. Additionally, we should face this hypocrisy of our true and false selves by removing the disparity between the two. Finally, we should find self-acceptance paramount to conforming to the beliefs of others.
Throughout the article “We are a camera” by Nick Paumgarten the topic of the Go-Pro Camera comes under vast scrutiny, and for valid reasons. Paumgarten gives background information on the founding of the company itself, sharing that it was originally a device made by some surfers that just wanted to easily record their stunts with a waterproof camera. Eventually, the brand increased in popularity it became a layman’s tool for recording any sort of stunt or family event. “The company wants to capitalize on the mass-market home-video urge, the camera’s aptitude for capturing what GoPro’s president, Tony Bates called ‘life’s greatest moments,’ and yet retain its reputation as a kind of philosopher’s stone, capable of transforming ordinary experiences into magical footage” (Paumgarten, 306). What Paumgarten is saying is completely sensible, there is a whole population of people falling for their gimmick. It is just like the classic Andy Warhol quote “everyone will be famous for 15 minutes”, essentially saying that everyone is chasing this possibility of going viral on the internet from their simple ‘home video’.
Henry Sylvester
Professor McCathy
ENG 110, Section L
September 4, 2019
Unfollow the Extremes
Within the journalists Adrian Chen’s work titled “Unfollow” the essay encompasses the
story of Megan Phelps-Roper. Along with this, Chen uses Megan as an example to present the question “does social media work as a platform to change one’s ideologies or concepts of society?”. Additionally, Chen uses Megan as proof that social media does, in-fact, result in socializa- tion, which also changes and challenges viewpoints.
Throughout the essay we see Chen noticeably pinpointing specific details which slowly start to show Megan’s change in views. Initially, Megan comes off as a brainwashed, homophobic, anti-semitic, racist, and radicalized individual. However, as the essay progresses there is in- creasing evidence as to confirm that Megan is questioning her actions. For example, we first see that Megan was indoctrinated from other people of the church, like Shirley “Obedience was one of the most important values that Shirley instilled in said Megan. She would sum up the Bible in three words: ‘Obey. Obey. Obey.’” (Chen, 76). Yet, as the essay progresses, so does Megan’s views as to how polarized her opinions are; when Megan picketed the soldier’s funeral she start- ed to have thoughts of doubt “the word that comes to mind is hateful ‘disgust.’ Like ‘How could you possibly do this?’ “ Phelps-Roper said. But, before the picket, she asked her mother to walk her through the Bible passages that justified her actions. ‘I’m like, O.K., it’s there,’ she said ‘This is right.’ She added” (Chen, 78). This goes to show that Megan had some self-awareness about
how despicable people had her out to be, and she obviously abhorred that. When Chen uses the evolving voice of Megan, it makes the mental transition she is going through even clearer.
Furthermore, Chen uses Megan’s entire journey as vivid evidence of change. If an argument arose towards the point Chen was trying to make, the point is clear; social media for Megan resulted in a inarguable change in her life for the better. Chen wrote this essay essentially like a story allowing the reader to connect with Megan towards the end, and feel a little bit of sympathy for her. At first the reader sees Megan as an extreme religious zealot. However, she discovered through social media that religion in not an ultimatum of whether or not someone is a person worthy of respect, but rather a way that we can share our diversities and connect. What social media is also presented as, is a means to challenge or change one’s opinions and beliefs for the better. Muhammed Ali once said “The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life”, essentially saying that it is human to change our opinions, and we should embrace changes in our lives. Chen’s essay about Megan not only displayed how social media positively changed her life, but how it can the readers for the better.
