Being Peace
Being Peace Seminar Reflection
India Waller
The present: meaning the period of time now occurring. It is so simple yet so complicated. Simple because it is a constant and is something that we take for granted. Complicated, because though we can define it in our language there is really no way to describe it. And though it is a constant, most of us rarely truly access it. The present is fleeting, it is something that is known by all and experienced by few. To be truly living in the moment you must completely let go of the past and the future. As it says in “Being Peace” when explaining what we need to do to access the present: “We will try not to lose ourselves in dispersion or be carried away by regret about the past, worries about the future, or craving, anger, or jealousy in the present.” In this quote we see how living in the present does not mean you lose the past or don’t plan for the future, it means that you do not let those things dominate what is happening in the present. To truly live in the present you must be content with what is going on in the current moment.
In our society the present is usually hidden by what has happened or what we think is going to happen. We are always planning for the future. Most of us rarely do something in our lives just to do it. Usually it’s for something that has happened or that is going to happen. For example, when I study for a test I’m usually not doing it to expand my knowledge, but to get an A on the test. I don’t appreciate that knowledge as it is, and I am not content with that moment as it is. For the most part I do not live in the present, but there are times when I am completely happy and content in that one moment and I believe I am living in the present. This quote from “Being Peace” really rings true for me; “We have to be in the present time, because only the present is real, only in the present moment can we be alive.” When your worrying about the future and fussing over the past you are not living in the now therefore you are not living at all. When I am in the present I feel alive. I’m content, happy and completely free. It usually happens when I am doing something that I love. For example when I ride my bike I am not pulled into the future or dwelling in the past; I am living in the moment. Happiness and living in the present share a common denominator of contentment. To achieve each you must be content. I believe it is practically impossible to be completely content in every moment, but it is something to strive for. As the quote goes, “Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you’ll land among the stars.”
The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas
The Other Child’s Suffering
India Waller
It is my tenth birthday; as I wake up I am immediately filled with excitement. I watched my father bake and construct my three layer cake yesterday and walked in on my mother wrapping a large box in colorful paper that seem to giggle each time it moved. The day is finally here, the big one zero, two digits. I wriggle out of my bed in one gleeful motion. Not bothering to change out of my PJs I skip down the stairs. I am greeted by a chorus of happy birthdays. Everyone is smiling up at me from the dining room table. They remind me of a group of puppies waiting expectantly for the kibble to come. The day seems to fly by like the zap of a lightning bolt. We eat cake, open presents, laugh, smile, and do everything that is supposed to happen on a birthday.
As the sun begins to fall behind the snow covered mountains my dad approaches me slowly with an expression I had never seen before. His lips are tilted down slightly and his forehead is crinkled with lines. This expression sends waves of shivers down my spine; this expression wipes the smile off my face. He stretches a steady hand out to me expectantly. Hesitantly I slip my small smooth hand into his large callused one. He then begins to pull me gently out of our house, on to the street, and towards a destination unknown. It is dark out now but we continue to walk steadily. I am scared, a feeling I have never felt before. I’m not sure why but I know something is not right.
We soon reach a large beautiful building but instead of walking in the door we continue on down a flight of stairs to a stained, old wooden door. My dad begins to open the door slowly. I try to pull away from his firm grasp but he will not yield. The door creaks open. My heart is beating like the flapping of a humming birds wings. All I see is black; my heart pounds in my ears. Then I am assaulted by a stench that burns my noise and the sound of a frightening moan of pain. Shocked I take a step forward. What I see stops me dead, my throat tightening with a cry of horror.
A child barely recognizable cowers in the corner surrounded by filth. I am a statue; grief and confusion hit me like a stampede of horses. I feel broken, I feel frozen. Why? What? I feel a gentle tug on my hand, but I cannot move; I am frozen with fear. My eyes cannot stop looking, my nose cannot stop smelling, my ears cannot stop hearing. I feel another tug, harder this time. I still cannot move. I have been robbed, robbed of my innocence and of my childhood. I am stuck in the body of a child but carry the burden of an old man.
Strong arms scoop my legs out from under me; I am too weak to struggle. I am swiftly carried out of the room, up the stairs, and onto the street. My father sets me gently back on my feet but my legs can no longer hold my weight. My knees buckle and I drop to the ground like a rock. My head hits the ground hard but I feel no pain, all I feel is grief. My father looks down at me with concern and speaks a single dead phrase; “It has to be.”
With that he scoops me up again and begins to walk. Guilt and hate surround me like an unwanted blanket suffocating me. Hate, hate for myself, hate for my father, hate for the child, and hate for Omelas. My limbs suddenly come to life filled with anger. I began to kick and struggle, trying desperately to be free. Shocked, my father drops me. I land hard on my back and struggle to my feet. I give my father one last hard, sad, angry look and turn and begin to walk slowly, purposefully. I know not where I go but I know I must go. Omelas, my family, my friends, everything I know has disappeared and all that is left is the child, the suffering, the horror, and the guilt. I must go. I must walk.
Happiness (Question 2)
India Waller
Happiness is a greased pig. It is pink, loud and slippery. Happiness is a mixture of red and white. White being good and red being bad, both being essentials of happiness. To explain more we have to think about contrast. What makes something unique? I believe that what makes something unique is not being something else. There cannot be good without bad therefore there must be both to achieve happiness. You need both red and white to make pink. Happiness is loud because everyone can hear happiness calling. Everyone wants happiness. Happiness squeals with joy, and contentment. Happiness means a state of well-being and contentment, or that is the definition according to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. I like this definition because it is very open ended and leaves room for interpretation. I feel contentment is a huge part of happiness. It’s not being joyous all the time it’s not being rich, it’s being content with what you have. The only problem is that it is rarely reached. This is where the slippery part comes in. We as a human race are seldom content; we always want more or something different. Contentment is fleeting. Contentment is harder to hold on to then a greased pig. Therefore happiness is hard to hold on to. To have happiness you must be pink, you must squeal with contentment, and you must have a bar of soap to wash off the grease.
In the story of Omelas they have master the act of catching the pig. As it says in the beginning of paragraph three, “They were not simple folk, you see, though they were happy.” This quote shows contentment in happiness, because in our society contentment means no drive which in turn means un-extraordinary and simple. The author uses our perception of happiness to help further our understanding of what makes people happy. To be content but not simple, is not an easy task. In this story we also see that happiness is the norm. Everyone is happy, and those who are not leave. The importance of good and bad in a society to have happiness is emphasized in this story as you see in this quote; “[...] they all understand that their happiness […] depends wholly on this child’s abominable misery.” The happiness in this city has to be countered by an evilness. There must be a balance in the world. I think this is one of the main points the author is trying to emphasize in this story. That there cannot exist only good, there is no place possible that does not have a child in the closet. The world must be balanced, the world must be pink.
All Quiet on the Western Front
Seminar Reflection All Quiet on the Western Front
India Waller
Lori’s Choice Question:
The truth of war depends on the person, so this quote represents the truth of war for a soldier. “In quiet hours when the puzzling reflection of former days like a blurred mirror, projects beyond me the figure of my present existence, I often sit over against myself, as before a stranger, and wonder how the unnameable active principle that calls itself to life has adapted itself even to this form. All other expressions lie in a winter sleep, life is simply one continual watch against the menace of death; ---it has transformed us into unthinking animals in order to give us the weapon of instinct --- it has reinforced us with dullness, so that we do not go to pieces before the horror, which would overwhelm us if we had clear, conscious thought --- it has awakened in us the sense of comradeship, so that we escape the abyss of solitude--- it has lent us the indifference of wild creatures, so that in spite of all, we perceive the positive in every moment, and store it up as a reserve against the onslaught of nothingness. Thus we live a closed, hard existence of the utmost superficiality, and rarely does an incident strike out a spark. But then unexpectedly a flame of grievous and terrible yearning flares up.” -All Quiet on the Western Front (page 273 middle of paragraph 2)
I chose this quote because I feel it really shows what war does to the soldiers fighting it, which to me is the truth of war. The truth of war does not come from the logical mind of a philosopher, nor does it come from the mind of a General standing over his map, it comes from the experiences of the ones fighting it. This quote shows how war hardens and dulls a person, how it turns one more creature than human. It also speaks of how the only thing a soldier has is his comrades. It speaks of the “hard existence of the utmost superficiality” but also of the “grievous and terrible yearning”. All these things are horrible truths of war.
I chose this quote because I feel it really shows what war does to the soldiers fighting it, which to me is the truth of war. The truth of war does not come from the logical mind of a philosopher, nor does it come from the mind of a General standing over his map, it comes from the experiences of the ones fighting it. This quote shows how war hardens and dulls a person, how it turns one more creature than human. It also speaks of how the only thing a soldier has is his comrades. It speaks of the “hard existence of the utmost superficiality” but also of the “grievous and terrible yearning”. All these things are horrible truths of war.
I would represent this truth through a piece of art work of some kind. A picture is worth a thousand words. If I can figure out a way to portray all the emotions and things that is a result of war in a picture of some sort that would be amazing.
Reactions:
A concept that was disgust during seminar that was very interesting to me was the question; “when is war necessary?” Before this seminar I had never really thought about it. Of course I had thought about war before “its bad blaaa blaa blaa” but I had never really thought about why the wars were fought. When is war the right thing to do? Is it ever? At the end of the discussion most of us agreed that there are occasions when war is necessary. An example of a war that was necessary to fight was WW1. Our logic was that the slaughter of thousands of innocent people was a good enough reason to fight. What would have happen if the war hadn’t been fought? This discussion was interesting and eye opening. It helped me look at war, and fighting in general with a new perspective.
Detailed Response:
The death and destruction is nothing compared to agony and depression. Nothingness is preferable to feeling. The soldiers in that trench were not affected so much by the pain of the animal. The heart wrenching, ear piercing cry of the innocent, that’s what they reacted so strongly to. “We are pale. Detering stands up. “God! For God’s sake! Shoot them.””(Remarque 62) These innocent creatures suffering was the thing that upset them the most. Death they have numbed themselves to. So, why is the horses pain that much worse than a man’s pain. I believe that there is three reasons for this. One, horses do not grit their teeth and fight the urge to scream they let it out which intensifies the noise which Implies more pain. Second they are innocent loyal creatures, pure in a way. Pure things should not die such a horrible death. Third, they could not see the animals therefore the cries seemed like screams of agony from the world.
“It’s unendurable. It is the moaning of the world, it is the martyred creation, wild anguish, filled with terror, and groaning.” (Remarque 62) To these men of death, the only way to survive is to become “unthinking animals”, all the death “has reinforced us(them) with dullness, so that we(they) do not go to pieces before the horror, which would overwhelm us(them) if we(they) had clear, conscious thought.” These quotes come from AQotWF page 273. The cries of the horses awaken feeling in these men. It reminds them of the pain that they have tried their best to ignore. The horses cry of anguish turn into their cries of anguish. But the pain is too much; it is unbearable just like the screams of the dying noble beasts was to their tortured minds.
Connections:
In seminar we talked about how the soldiers reacted so much stronger to the deaths of the horses than the men. I can relate to this in the way that when I read the book Where the Red Fern Grows I balled my eyes out but when I watched one of those war movies with my brother I feel almost nothing when a man gets stabbed.
Slaughterhouse Five
Seminar Reflection Slaughterhouse Five
India Waller
Reaction:
In seminar we were asked whether Slaughterhouse 5 is an anti-war novel. At first it was banter of yes’s and no’s based on events in the book, but then we began to look closer. Someone, not quite sure who, said that maybe Vonnegut’s truth of war for this book was not in the events but in the undertones of the book. This got me thinking about how we are affected and how we are influenced. It brought me back to propaganda and how we are affected by words and images. There is direct order but there is also a less obvious way to manipulate. Leaders can make people do things out of fear or love but it is most effective when people are doing it because they believe in it. When we read Slaughterhouse 5 we are being affected in ways we don’t even know. The best of writers are able to manipulate us in ways we are unaware of. The phrase “passive aggressive” was used to describe Vonnegut. Instead of stating his truth of war outright Vonnegut gives us subtle nudges and hints and lets us figure it out for ourselves. An example of this is when Billy is at his anniversary and has a break down. Vonnegut doesn’t tell us directly what the break down is about, he wants us to come to a conclusion ourselves. It seems to me that every piece of good fiction is propaganda of some sort, expressing the authors opinion in one way or another.
Detailed Response:
Billy is a strange character; he gets abducted by aliens, travels through time and looks like a flamingo. He’s dull, emotionless and matter of fact. The question is does he have these adventures because he’s insane, or is it the truth, or maybe he just made it up? I believe Billy needs to believe he has no control over his life, and that things will happen no matter what he does. On page 115 of Slaughterhouse 5 Vonnegut writes: “Whatever poor Billy saw through the pipes, he had no choice but to say to himself, “That’s life.”” This passage really shows how Billy transfers his emotions into inevitability. Billy does this because he can’t stand the responsibility of free will. It is so much easier to transfer that responsibility to fate.
Vonnegut uses Billy to show a part of human nature that is in all of us but we don’t want to acknowledge it. That attitude of, “I’m just one person so I can’t make a difference”. “Billy fled up the stairs in his nice white house.”(Vonnegut, p. 176) This was when he had the breakdown on his anniversary; I believe that Billy is realizing that he’s telling himself this lie. This quote shows how having a “nice white house” doesn’t mean much in the end, it’s what you do for other people that makes your life worth living. Maybe Billy realizes this after the plane crash and that’s why he finally shares with other people about his experiences. What I love most about Vonnegut’s novels is that he leaves them open for interpretation.
Connection:
In the seminar we talked about whether Billy’s “so it goes” attitude was a good or bad thing. I connected this to when my 7 year old cousin died and my aunt and uncle had two different way of grieving. My aunt was the opposite of Billy, she wouldn’t let go of him or more over wouldn’t let go of the grief. My uncle on the other hand refused to grieve and just wanted to move on. I used this to show that things are never good in the extreme. You need to be able move on but you also need to be able to grieve. Billy doesn’t do this he never really takes the time to acknowledge his feelings, bad or good, he just is. Kind of like the idea that one needs to go back to go forward. I don’t think Billy is ever really happy in his life because he’s never really sad in his life. There is no happiness without sadness.
Lori’s Choice:
The main characters in both the books take on this unfeeling attitude. Billy because of his experiences with time travel and the Tralfamadorians, and Paul because the horrors of war were only bearable if he disconnected himself commpletly. “When a Tralfamadorian sees a corpse, all he thinks is that the dead person is in bad conditions in that particular moment, but that same person is just fine in plenty of other moments. Now, when I myself hear that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is ‘So it goes.’” (Vonnegut, p. 27) In this passage we see the belief of the Tralfamadorians, and how it affects Billy’s emotions. “Katczinsky has died. Then I know nothing more.” (Remarque, p. 291) This shows how war sucked the feeling out of Paul. Both characters went through experiences that caused them to become robots. Maybe Vonnegut used Billy and the Tralfamadorians to show how experiences and knowledge shape our character. Slaughterhouse 5 is full of many hidden meanings, it might be that Billy made up all the time traveling and aliens so he could escape the truths of the horrors of war. Billy and Paul are quite similar. One escaped into darkness, and the other into insanity.
(Figure 1) (Wade, 2008)
Instead of killing and hurting their oppressors they changed the mindset that was oppressing them. They eliminated the separation. In America today racists are shunned and looked down upon. This equality didn’t come because the black people beat the white people into submission, it came because they made people listen to them and they made people see the truth and in turn changed the norm. Peaceful protests change the way people think and inspire people to use peaceful means to change an unjust situation.
Violence vs. Nonviolence
Peaceful Fighting
India Waller
Fighting is part of human nature. It is impossible for everyone to agree, but how you fight is a choice. To truly change an unjust situation, the attitude of the oppressor must be changed. Temporarily pushing back the oppressor is not a solution, only a stopgap measure. Violence is like putting a piece of gum on a leaky pipe rather than replacing the pipe itself. It’s bound to leak again and it was obviously a faulty pipe in the first place so it will probably leak somewhere else. By using violence and hate to change an unjust situation you’re not actually getting rid of injustice you are just changing the oppressed into the oppressor. As Gandhi says, “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”(Attenborough, 1982) Only truth, love, and peace will bring truth, love, and peace. Most unjust situations brew from ignorance, greed, hate, and separation. Therefore truth and knowledge are key parts of a peaceful resistance. Although violence has been seen as a rapid way to change an unjust situation, non-violence tends to bring about better long term results.
Hate, violence and cruelty only lead to more suffering. Changing an unjust situation takes more than changing who is causing the injustice. Violent means only lead to violent ends. As Richard Deats says in his article Active Nonviolence: A Way of Life, “Gandhi taught that one must not work for a noble goal by evil means, for means and ends are interconnected just as the seed is to the tree.”(1991) When you use violence against an oppressor it gives them an excuse to hit back. Violence antagonizes and acts as a challenge towards the oppressor. When there is an attack, the people being attacked are going to want to attack back. Violence gives the oppressor reason to use violence against the people, and not just to counter an attack but to regain control and keep control. It´s like a brawl. It starts out with a conflict between two people or two groups, and then someone throws the first punch. There´s some surprise from the first blow but soon the person who was hit recovers and hits back. After that it´s a free for all, each person trying their best to gain control over the other. Then friends join and chaos and destruction ensues. The fighting escalates and more are hurt and more destruction is caused. At the end of the brawl one side may be better off than the other but the bar is still in ruins and people on each side are bruised. The tension and conflict between the two sides is still present. The fight did not solve the conflict, it just destroyed the bar and beat down one side until they could no longer fight. A victory won through violence will probably be fought again when the weakened side has recovered. The means and ends are connected. Discrimination, hate, anger and violence may solve one problem but more problems will emerge involving discrimination, hate, anger and violence.
Not only can nonviolent resistance achieve the designated goal, but it changes the mindset of the oppressed. The logical thing for the oppressed people to do to the oppressors is to get revenge. Nonviolence shows the oppressed another way to deal with conflict besides violence. As Nelson Mandela said in his speech, “An ideal for which I am prepared to die” in front of the Supreme court of South Africa, “I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination.”(1964) The quote shows how using nonviolence can lead to the discovery of what cause is truly being fought for. In this speech Mandela does not talk about taking over and defeating the enemy, he talks about having a free world with equal rights and equal opportunity for all. Nonviolence takes some of the brutality out of fighting and puts bravery, passion, and intelligence in its place. The fact is that when we have success with a method we are bound to use it again. As we saw in India after the Indian’s great victory in their peaceful war against Britain, they began to fight amongst themselves. Muslims were fighting against Hindus; there was great separation between these two religious groups. Without a common enemy, their internal conflict became front and center. There was violence and discrimination between these two groups but in the end, with the help of Gandhi, the country came together. Without Gandhi and the nonviolent movement’s success the country probably would have turned to violence and who knows how much damage would have been caused. Nonviolence resistance changes the mindset of the oppressed and prevents future violence.
Not only does nonviolence change the mindset of the oppressed but it also changes the mind of the oppressor. In Gandhi there is a scene where a police officer is on trial for giving the order to shoot into the crowd of Indians having a peaceful gathering. In this movie the people doing the questioning looked horrified and sounded disbelieving.(Attenborough, 1982) Their reactions don’t seem like such a surprising or significant thing, but we must remember that it was at a time when Social Darwinism, as portrayed in Figure 1, was considered fact.
When images and supposed science is telling you that black people are less than you it takes a lot to side with one of them over “your own.” In this movie scene you can see the humanity being brought to the surface. You see the mindset starting to shift. Another example of a peaceful fight changing the attitude of an oppressor is the Civil Rights Movement. If they were to have fought discrimination and oppression with violence, that would have only instilled more fear which in turn would have increased separation and hate between the races.
(Figure 1) (Wade, 2008)
Instead of killing and hurting their oppressors they changed the mindset that was oppressing them. They eliminated the separation. In America today racists are shunned and looked down upon. This equality didn’t come because the black people beat the white people into submission, it came because they made people listen to them and they made people see the truth and in turn changed the norm. Peaceful protests change the way people think and inspire people to use peaceful means to change an unjust situation.
Fighting injustice with nonviolence changes how the outside world views both groups involved and provides a new way to handle conflict. When you hear about the people of a country rebelling against their government, violence comes to mind. Violence, killing, and destruction do not make one feel compassion and understanding. By protesting in a nonviolent way the outside world views the rebellion in a completely different light. The South Africa divestment campaign is a good example of an outside force hearing and sympathizing with the people of a country who are using nonviolence to protest their government. It also shows how nonviolence is used at a national scale to change a situation. To give you a little background, the South Africa divestment was where the United States and Brittan, along with a few other countries, protested the South Africa Apartheid. This Apartheid was basically a law that forced racial segregation. To protest this, other countries refused to trade with South Africa, basically saying that if the government didn’t change some of the ways it was running South Africa it would be cut off from the outside world.(Investopedia, 2008) (Knight) This is an example of how a nonviolent protest got the attention of outside forces as well as showed these outside forces a way to help in a nonviolent way. They used their power (trade) to protest the injustice happening in South Africa. It was nonviolent protest at a national scale. Nonviolence is not only used for rebellion it can be used to change any unjust situation. It is a way to change an unjust situation without using hate. It is a means that brings about the desired end.
Peaceful protests are effective. They change the mindset of the people, inspire more peaceful solutions, and create better long lasting outcomes. Out of all the nonviolent ways to fight proposed by Richard Deats in his article Active Nonviolence: A Way of Life I believe the most effective way is education. Speaking truth brings around understanding and compassion for those who were wronged. A great example of education being used to facilitate change is Mandela’s speech, “An ideal for which I am prepared to die.” In this speech he is very honest. He really makes the world see the truth. He really emphasizes the similarities between white and black people. He attempts to make the point that the two races are not so different. There is also a lot of talk about equality. Consider this quote: “I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunity.”(1964) Nelson Mandela really uses this speech to portray truth. In this speech he owns what he did and explains why he did it. I feel that his main goal with this speech was not to defend himself but to show these white people that the only difference between blacks and whites were their skin color. Most racism and bias comes from ignorance. The white people of South Africa for the most part were not evil and cruel people. They were just fed the idea that they were superior. Truth is a powerful tool that if used correctly can bring freedom. Gandhi visited Britain to observe the working condition in factories. He was welcomed with open arms. Gandhi changed the mindset of superiority in these people by speaking truth and drawing parallels between the two races. Through truth and kindness Gandhi gained respect and changed the way people thought. Nonviolence may not bring immediate results but it creates long lasting change.
The human race has had a history of violent conflict. We have fought for resources, belief, greed, and power. We fight with our families and our friends. Conflict is unavoidable, but how that conflict is dealt with is a decision. Nonviolence is an appealing way to deal with conflict but it takes a lot of dedication, patience, and bravery, as well as a strong leader. At this present moment nonviolence is not plausible in every situation but it gives us as a human race something to strive for. As Thich Nhat Hanh says in Being Peace, “If I lose my direction, I have to look for the North Star, and I go to the north. That does not mean I expect to arrive at the North Star. I just want to go in that direction.”(1987) This quote is basically saying that it’s not the destination that’s important it’s the journey. We may not reach total nonviolence but we must attempt to reach that star.
Jihad vs. McWorld
Backwards or Forwards?
India Waller
McWorld is a political force created through the demands of economic and ecological powers to become integrated and united, thereby uniting nations. It is a world where it is not the governments that has the power but the transnational corporations. There is no war and astounding technological advances. This world is all about productivity and prosperity. In my poster I chose to promote McWorld and discourage Jihad because I think that McWorld is a better option for our world than Jihad as well as it was easier for me to create a poster from this view point. The reason I chose to depict both the positives of McWorld and the negatives of Jihad in one poster was because I wanted the audience to have a choice. My goal was to make them feel as if they were the ones choosing the future, but portraying each in a way that glorifies McWorld. In Benjamin R. Barber’s essay he talks about how McWorld in moving forward while Jihad and the retribalization of the world is moving backwards. I wanted to really emphasize and skew this idea by representing Jihad with an old decaying man in tattered robes. This also demonized the enemy by making the man look inhuman. I represented McWorld with a hamburger because fast food restaurants are a perfect example of globalization. These restaurants are in every country. Also I feel fast food is always received in a positive way which I liked because it shows how McWorld is not perfect but better than Jihad. As almost every humanities teacher will tell you, nothing is perfect, something can always be improved.
