December- Managing Your Own Future

Many of the novels that we have read throughout the hero unit have all dealt with the idea of fate. From Oedipus, to Hamlet, to Okonkwo, all of these characters were undeniably fated. The events of all of those stories revolved around their fate and their trying to deviate from it, which was proven impossible by the events that followed. However, in Slaughterhouse Five, Kurt Vonnegut went against that norm. I believe that there is a plan for everybody, however, not that there is no way that they can change that. Billy Pilgrim is fated as well but he does not give in to it. In real life, I think people are more fated by their own nature. It may feel like we are following a path but really I think that we are subconsciously determining it for ourselves. Billy stands for himself and doesn't really let life push him around. Billy's own individual nature is what determines the course of his own life. I like this idea so much better than the idea that there is no way that we can change our fate and whatever we are meant to do is set in stone. I just find that idea to be so unrealistic. Reality is never set in stone and the idea of managing your own future as seen in Slaughterhouse Five, seems like a much better one to me.

November- Cultural Relativity

Culture is an extremely relative term that differs from place to place and adapts over time. The two cultures that are presented in Hamlet and Things Fall Apart are so different from each other and from our own society today, that it is almost funny that the same word can be used to define them all. When looking at another culture, it's easy to think that what they do is weird or strange, but customs and traditions are all relative to wherever they come from, so it is impossible for them to be right or wrong. In James Rachels' "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism", he says "the customs of these societies are all that exist. These customs cannot be said to be 'correct' or 'incorrect' for that implies that we have an independent standard of right and wrong by which they may be judged." Basically, since every culture's customs are so different, there is no way for anyone to say what's right or wrong. For example, in the 17th century Danish society in Hamlet, they have Christian morals, and kings and queens, and it is not too far out of the normal to have a sword fight with someone. Whereas in Things Fall Apart, they grow yams and live in huts and it is common for one man to have several wives. Today, in the United Sates in the 21st century, these things sound pretty crazy to us. However, even though we live in the same time period, things that sound normal to someone form the United States may sound completely crazy to someone from Japan. For example, in America, eye contact is considered respectful, especially when speaking to an elder. In Japan on the other hand, that would be extremely disrespectful. It would not be possible to determine which country is wrong or right in this scenario because as James Rachels said "cultural relativism is a theory about the nature of morality." It would not be possible to say who's morals are wrong or right so therefore, it's impossible to say who's cultural norms are wrong or right. From Hamlet to Things Fall Apart to today, no two cultures are exactly the same. What is normal to one person, could be completely insane to someone else, no matter what scale it is looked at on, culture is relative without a doubt, and is constantly adapting and evolving.

October- Good vs. Evil

October 28, 2015 Good vs. "Evil" The classic poem "Beowulf" explores the ideas of good vs evil in a stereotypical way. In the poem we see the traditional archetypes of the hero who is big and strong and saves the day, and the villain who is ugly and hated and an outsider. Because "Beowulf" was written so long ago, the ideas presented are pretty shallow and only present conventional ideas. Back then, society hadn't progressed to what it is now, obviously, and so that must've been the only way they really saw good and evil. Today however, I think that we've experienced so much in society that there are tons of ways something can be perceived as either good or evil. Today we obviously don't have real Grendel like monsters, or heroes like Beowulf, they take the form of very different things. In our world today, something that could be considered evil or a monster may be something like somebody who is extremely racist or discriminative and takes particular actions in order to enforce what they think. The hero in today's world may be someone who takes action against things that are wrong or stands up for what they believe in or for someone else who they see being put down. I think also that many people's perceptions of good and evil have been disturbed. It seems to me that people will look for any way they can to frame something as evil and put a spin on things to make things that are really innocent, into something evil for their own benefit. Also in today's movies and tv shows it is no longer the cliche hero vs villain story, they are often presented as somebody who is seemingly normal. They are not always the typical ugly, outsider or muscular superstar like in Beowulf. For example, Superman is a normal, everyday reporter. From the outside, he doesn't look like a hero at all, and nobody knows that he is the best super hero around. The idea of a hero and a villain is really all subjective. Whether someone sees something as good or evil, is all opinion based. Today, or visions of the typical hero and bad guy have drastically evolved from time of "Beowulf" but as individuals, we will never stop holding people to those titles.