Innocent until Guilty

“My father had tried to keep his land holy and pure, but perhaps it was impossible. Perhaps the llano was like me, as I grew the innocence was gone, and so too the land changed.” (Anaya 167-168)

The concept of losing one’s innocence throughout the book Bless Me, Ultima really interests me. When I was thinking about what stories were written about a young boy’s journey to becoming a man, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn came to mind. I thought it very interesting that both main characters, Antonio and Huck, had a black and white view on the world. Antonio was a completely pure child, just as all start out as, until he began to witness what the world did to people: rage, death, and carnal desire. And yet, even after witnessing these, he’s still innocent, although he doesn't see himself so. He believed either you were completely innocent, or you were doomed to destruction: a completely black and white view.

Like Antonio, Huck Finn also viewed the world similarly, but from a contrasting perspective. Huck is much older than Antonio, and has seen a lot more sin, in a sense raised by it. Yet, he’s still innocent, because his knowledge of right from wrong was a child’s. He had no religious education until his foster mother taught him. But everything about religion made little sense to him, resulting in this passage suggesting men are either completely clean or damned:

“…I would take up wickedness… for a starter I would go to work and steal Jim out of slavery again; and if I could think up anything worse, I would do that, too; because as long as I was in, and in for good, I might as well go the whole hog. (Twain 26)

Why, even coming from completely different mindsets—one knowing he was “wicked” and the other wanting to stay innocent—do these two boys see only the black and white? What does this say about childhood? Does there even need to be a grey? 

A Lovely New View

“Thank you Eurydice. Thank you for this new day.” (Orpheus in Black Orpheus)

                 The film Black Orpheus was a fantastic movie. After thinking about the plot, I realized that it was very similar to A Walk to Remember. Or I guess I should say that A Walk to Remember is similar to Black Orpheus. In both movies, it starts with a boy, confident and popular, but shallow and unfaithful. And then, he meets a girl.. the girl that will change his life. She gives him a purpose, and he learns about himself in the process of learning to love her. In the end, the girl passes away, and the boy- turned into a man- is left with a new perspective.

                 

The ending scene when Orpheus has his monologue, speaking of what he now believes. (1:42:00)

                 

Very similar to the ending scene when Landon reflects on what Jamie taught him.

                 Both men were changed by love, love that was unexpected. It can even be argued that it was unwanted. What is it about these stories that strikes our own hearts so strongly? Is it true? Can love really change a person’s character so quickly and so completely? I believe that it can. In fact, it may be the only way that one’s heart can truly be changed from a cold and distant heart to a warm and giving one. Love is able to sneak into the small cracks of a stone heart. Orpheus had a hard heart, aware that he was able to get away with doing whatever he wanted. Landon was the same way, but in a high school sense, able to do whatever he wanted to the other students because of his popularity. Why do you think love is so powerful that it can change how someone thinks, not only about the one they love, but also about their whole view on life?

Pursuit for Greatness

“But man's greatness consists in the very fact of wanting to be better than he is. “ (Carpentier, Kingdom of this World)

The book that this quote is taken from, Kingdom of this World, was a hard book to get through— not only because of the wording and style of writing, but also because of the actual subject material. The confusing story-line was full of base actions, tyranny, and horror. And yet in the middle of all the chaos, there’s this line, speaking of man’s greatness. Man, great? After all they've done and are doing? Yes, even after all of the sin. This book attributes greatness not to actions of the past, but to those that are planned for the future.

Often, a man’s life is analyzed by his actions, who he affected, etc. If he didn't know too many people, touch anyone, or accomplish anything great, then he is often deemed a failure. However, "The Pursuit of Happiness" with Will Smith is a great example of how untrue this is. The main character had an honest life, but it was unsuccessful. His wife left him for hopeless and he was stuck trying to take care of his kid without a job. According to the quote by Carpentier, this does not matter. The fact that this man wanted so badly to take care of his son and be a better father made him a great person.

And yet, is merely wanting to be better enough? I certainly can want to do a lot of things, but until I put desires to action, how can it count toward anything? I can think that someone is exceptional, desire for them to know it, and yet if I don’t tell them so, they can never feel the confidence-boost.

So, what makes a human great? Man’s greatness is more than a desire, it’s when we work toward our better self. Should we be looking at our past actions for judgment or just for guidance?

Who's Future

“Everything is there: the minute history of the future, the autobiographies of the archangels, the faithful catalogue of the Library…” (Borges 83)

This short story, “The Library of Babel,” was AWESOME. Immediately after reading it, as well as during, I thought of the episode of Dr. Who in Season four: “Silence in the Library.” These two stories are incredibly similar. Both stories have an infinite number of books and these books are people— their story, their very essence. In these libraries, there was every single book ever written and that ever would be written. A quote from Dr. Who to match Borges’: 

“Spoilers. These books are from your future. Don’t want to read ahead, spoil all the surprises.” 

What I want to dig into is the idea of knowing one’s future. Is it good or bad? Desirable or not? I think that in order to come to an answer, we have to figure out what reasons cause the want to know, both as an individual and as a society. There are countless examples of human fascination with the possibility of knowing one’s future. With fortune tellers, visions, and claimed spiritual visitations, humanity tries to imagine that the future is something tangible that we can look into. In the Library of Babel, the people kill each other in their search for the one book that tells of their lives, expecting to find an object that will just give all the answers.

The fascination with one’s future may be because humanity seems to fear the unknown. Perhaps it is a part of our nature, an instinctual feeling. Humans study things, probe, and experiment, all in order to find out and record all that we can. Unlike Socrates, we are not satisfied with knowing that we do not know. The need to know is what drives us, and our future is something that can never be discovered by probing with a stick. So, are there cases when knowing your future could help you? Or would it destroy you?

Here is the scene from Dr. Who showing the library. While it doesn't have hexagonal galleries as in "The Library of Babel," it gives you an idea of what such a library could be like.

Who is Maria?

In the movie Maria Candelaria, the priest was the only person in town that respected Maria for who she was, and did not accuse her for what her mother had done. A very important line that he spoke to the people of his town can perhaps show the whole message of the movie.

"You accuse this woman, but who accuses you? Because you, all of you, murdered Maria Candelaria's mother by saying she brought shame to this town with her bad behavior." (Maria Candelaria 1944)

To tell the truth, the connections that were made in class between Maria and the Virgin, or Lorenzo Rafael and Christ are not so apparent to me. I can see how it is possible, but really cannot seem to accept that this is what the main point of the movie was. Rather, the first thought that came to mind when I finished the movie was how Maria Candelaria seemed to represent Mexico as a whole and their relations with the rest of the world.

Especially in today’s society, it seems as if the indigenous people are often viewed as the bad guy, or people that do not deserve complete acknowledgement. In the United States illegal immigration is often a topic of conversation and jokes, and anyone from Central or South American descent is lumped into one category, without any separation between the different countries or cultures. It could be argued that becoming successful and socially accepted into high positions is much harder for Americans that come from these southern countries. This is similar to Maria, who was shunned because of her background, and not because of anything she herself had done.

I believe that Maria Candelaria is a representation of racism not only against Indians in Mexico, but also against Hispanics in the world. How else could this movie be interpreted? What makes this film a success? And why is Maria Candelaria such a hero?

Simple Complexity

I would like to discuss an oil painting by Tarsila do Amaral: Central Railway of Brazil. In the Latin American art book it stated,

"The [city themes] have the flat facades of modern buildings, and no perspective, although space is constructed by overlapping and diminution of scale... The cityscapes, railways, etc. suggest a kind of industrial primitivism." (Ades 134)

The thing that caught my attention most when i first studied this painting was the way Amaral was able to portray a complex scene with simple shapes. Just as the quote states, there seems to be an oxymoron: “industrial primitivism.” Amaral showed the complex world of industry to look like a primitive society.

This made me wonder, is our world that much different from earlier societies? Even with all our gadgets that men have created in order to satisfy wants, humanity still has the same base desires as any other time period. Societies are still looking for the best way of living- for the most profitable lifestyle, whether physically, mentally, or spiritually.

Take government for example. Philosophers from as early as Greek or Roman time periods (Aristotle specifically) searched for the most just form of government. As much as we have excelled in technology, it seems as if the ideal government has still eluded us, although we have reached a couple steps closer.

Technology did not further understanding. The more we know about the universe and the physical properties, the more the complexity of it all seems to baffle us. The more humanity knows, the more it is aware that it does not know. While our landscapes have become full of tall buildings, airplanes, etc. the inside emotions and thoughts, as well as our problems, seem to have stayed roughly the same.

What makes society different than the societies of the past? Or what makes us more complex? Did the Central Railway of Brazil capture the truth of the industrial world?

More than Halloween

“The only things that interest me are those that are not mine.” (Ades 312)

I've got a bike, a laptop, a good place to live, etc. and yet I want a car, a new television, a bigger living room... As a typical human being, I am confident that I am not the only one that is unsatisfied with what I have. Even the people that average citizens would consider lucky, rich—maybe even happy—are constantly searching for more. 

An example of that annoying desire that always seems to accompany us, the desire for something different, is illustrated in the movie A Nightmare Before Christmas. Jack Skelllington is the Pumpkin King of Halloween Town, loved and praised by all. He is terribly good at what he does, and yet he becomes bored, an actor sick of the act. Here is Jack’s lament over his current life (you don’t have to watch all of the videos, unless you love the songs like I do):

And then, Jack comes across Christmas Town and likes what he sees. Think about how Jack represents us, and Christmas Town is everything that we don’t have.

Why is it that humans always seem to be searching for something more? What are we searching for? Perhaps it is love; perhaps it is religion. And all the little things that we think we want are just objects to take the place of those which are most fundamental. Seeing someone else’s happiness strikes us with jealousy, and we want what they have. And yet very few people that society would deem as “happy” are truly satisfied. 

Are you happy? Am I? That may be one of the end results that we should strive for in life: the state of wanting nothing. Until we have acquired perfect content with who we are and what we have received, we cannot be happy.