12/06 Catch 22

Almost coming to its end, Heller's story seems to have finally found its plot. Up until now hints have been made about the possible end or the actual main theme of the story but no real points were ever given. It is not until practically the end of the book when Yossarian "marched backward with his gun on his hip and refused to fly any more missions" (400). Seemingly, the entire 399 pages before this have just been setting the scene for the actual main theme of the story. Unfortunatley, I feel that Heller has wated too much time describing minor details about random characters. It seems that Catch 22 was meant to have a short story that ties everything together. I am not sure whether or not Heller will be able to do this, but the last few pages will be an attempt at this. As with the humor and comedy associated with the story, Heller kept up his end of the bargain. Classic comedic scenes such as the one with everyone asking Yossarian about the situation do help the story move along. Heller's book seems to be more of a list of long jokes than a story.

11/21/09 Catch 22

So far Heller has not done too bad but he has not pulled out a great story yet. As in my last entry, he has spent countless pages filling the story with unneeded information that few people may find funny. Heller seemingly writes small plots about side characters in order to have them interact with Yossarian in some way and add to the story. Still, Heller is able to add in humor now and then, as he writes the interaction between Yossarian and Milo. As Milo describes his method for buying eggs in Malta and selling them for even less amongst the troops, Yossarian has to ask "'Why don't you sell the eggs directly to you and elminate the people you buy them from?'" to which Milo obviously replies "'Because I'm the people I buy them from."(237) Seemingly, Milo buys eggs from himself and sells them at a prove that is even less than he bought if for. Yet somehow he gets the illusion in his mind that the syndicate he is a part of is making money when actually they are simply throwing money around and not gaining a cent. Heller has little jokes like these that tie into the story well, but do not change the fact that the plot is nowhere to be seen in this book. So far, I am unimpressed with this book's plot, storyline, and description of characters although the characters are very interesting.

11/15/09 Catch 22

Heller seems to be going rouge on his own story. He seems to want to tell 2o different short stories instead of actually writing one long one. Much of the time he spends on the story actually is spent on describing the side characters' past experiences that sometimes don't even relate to Yossarian (main character). For example, Heller spends many pages describing how Captain Black tried a moral crusade for his regiment. However, Heller adds humor none the less. When Captain Black did not get his desired position, and Major Major did, Captain Black asserted that since Major Major looked like Henry Fonda, "that Major Major really was Henry Fonda; and when they remarked that Major Major was somewhat odd, Captain Black announced that he was a communist." (116). Cleary using the humor of his time to make fun of a large portion of people, Heller was able to make a social/cultural connection. This is something he does often as his plot finally comes to surface that Yossarian is crazy because he is the only sane person left. While everyone else is apparently insane because they have little resent towards going into a dangerous mission, Yossarian is sane because he does everything he can to prevent the mission from happening. Heller has a great plot and the humor to back it up but he seems not to be abel to stay focused long enough.

Catch 22 11/7/09

Joseph Heller's Catch 22 doesn't seem to go anywhere so far. I have read a few pages but I have simply no idea what this book is about. It seems like the beginning is similar to the middle of a Kurt Vonnegut book where little details seem to make up most of the story. Unfortunately for Heller, the details seem to be pretty redundant and useless to the story and actually seem to make it less comedic while it should make it more. Little lines like "The Texan never minded that he got no reply" (11) or "They put the Texan in a bed in the middle of the ward, and it wasn't long before he donated his views." (9) seem to be the ending statements of whole paragraphs. I have not read much, but so far the main character Yossarian seems to be a horribly lazy and boring person. The story reflected around him seems to be so directed at others that the reader cannot find out anything important about Yossarian through his actions. The story so far has been a web of random details that have not yet been glued together.

11/1/09 Blog Reflection

1. My observations in my blog usually relate specific examples to the larger theme of the book. I often take quotes and use them to either support the author's ideas or criticize the book. I will take quotes from any part of the story and use them in order to get a better sense of what the author is truly saying in his story. I focused mainly on the book in general and how it relates to views today or how it describes its own purpose. The blogging experience really helped me as a reader. I had to look deeper into normal quotes and I had to get a context of the lines surrounding the quote. The blogging experience helped me to understand the hardest parts of my books as I was able to write my ideas out.
2. My goal for blogging in the second quarter is to look deeper into quotes and specific moments and maybe to provide a little more context. Most of the quotes in my blog have very vague context and for anyone seeing my blog to understand the quote, I must give them more information. I would like to improve my conclusions of these blogs because I am usually unable to sum up that part of the story or the idea in a way different than that of the author. I would like to make my blogs clearer as I feel they are often clouded with random ideas such as a list of notes and observations. I am interested in what I write in blogs but not so much that I would edit it until I feel it is perfect. To get me further excited about blogs I would like to see extra credit points be given out each week to two people with the best and most imaginative blogs. This would inspire me to try and write better blogs.

End of Hocus Pocus 11/1/09

Kurt Vonnegut decided to end his story with a little more determination that what he did with the rest. Instead of recounting little details, he takes the other way and decided to sum his whole story up into the simple idea that we are not worthy. That humans are not worthy of our own pride. Vonnegut leads the reader on with almost a whole page of random numbers based on famous people and events and at the end he cleverly and wittingly states that "just because some of us can read and write and do a little math, that doesn't mean we deserve to conquer the universe" (324) Although the book in its ideas were rather pointless and had no plot that was traceable, Vonnegut ended it with a quote worthy of a prize. When compared to other books of his such as Slaughter House-Five which spent the whole plot as support of the main idea, Vonnegut seemed to have become lazy part-way through this story. I would not recommend it to anyone as it is not even close to his best work.

10/26/09 Hocus Pocus

Kurt Vonnegut seems to have gone a little to far off in this story. In all of his other books such as Slaughter House Five and Slapstick, he often will drift into other topics but he does it with precision and focus. Here, it seems as if he just jammed a few ideas and tried to make it seem logical. He also tends to write specific details about events or people that are completely irrelevant. While describing watching a movie while in the Vietnam War, he says that "The whole front row was wheelchairs. The 2 soldiers had their feet wrecked some way , but seemed to be OK from the knees on up..."(175). He drifts on and on about topics that he does not ever fully describe. He simply writes observations that could be easily made. Out of all the Vonnegut books I have read, this is one of my least favorite for he offers very little comedy in what seems like years upon years of reading and waiting for an exciting event.

10/18/09 Hocus Pocus

Kurt Vonnegut did it again with this amazing story. After only one week of reading Vonnegut, I learned that Vonnegut has transformed what would be a boring introduction into a hilarious comedic opening. Vonnegut also takes a stab at the faults in modern society cleverly and quietly. When comparing the college founded by a dyslexic person for only dyslexic or troubled people, he describes how the library had an enormous collection of books. However, Harvard had "13,000,000 bound volumes...And almost every book written for or about the ruling class." (22) On the surface, Vonnegut's joke seems to be nothing and is usually read as a little comment. But by adding in that he is the grandson of Eugene Debs (someone who desperately disliked the ruling class) and describing his history as a military officer just to announce his conflict with his family's legacy, he shows his conflicting beliefs that are so vital to the story. Vonnegut simply writes what ever he thinks will be funny in his stories and it always seems like he ties it all together in some weird and hidden fashion.

The World is Flat 10/11/09

Friedman begins to end his conclusion in a completely original and abnormal manner. Instead of continuing on and on about the outsourcing of jobs and how it affects the United States, he interviews people who are still labeled at untouchables and how this is helping them to become prosperous. In India, the names of the people who were untouchables still give it away that that was their status. The parents of untouchable kids want their children to learn English so they can get jobs outside of India where they are not labeled as a person of lower standards. The personality among the untouchables seems to be that "around here, their names will always give them away as untouchables. But if they go somewhere else, and if they are really polished, with proper education and social graces, they can break this barrier." (568) Many of these people live in impoverished areas in which there is one school. This school represents the ability to attain a new future. However, without the extreme cultural diffusion that takes place between India and the United States, these untouchables have a chance to become successful professionals. Friedman's conclusion had me baffled and amazed. So many people talk about how bad it is that Americans lose jobs to Indians, but Friedman simply takes that argument and turns it on its head. He decides to show how much it had benefited people in India who have been oppressed for so long. It seemed like an awkward ending that really makes one look at all the aspects of globalization.

10/5/09 The World is Flat

Friedman recently summarized his greatest idea in this book so far. That "unfortunately, sit has been too long since America had a leader ready and willing to call on our nation to do something hard-" (388). Clearly, Friedman is right on the money, literally. For over 100 pages, he describes the same idea in specific details with statistics when all he had to do was simply state what it was he believed in. This has been the only bad part of my reading. Although the statistics were needed to prove his point, he stated the same idea in different forms after almost every sentence. However, now that he has disclosed his idea, I feel that the rest of the book might be more interesting. Already he has brought up visits from scholars, CEO's, and economists. But he has yet to quote someone from a government or political position. Their views might change his entire plot line.

9/28/09 The World is Flat

Friedman again reveals an amazing conflict that occurs with the use of technology. Believing that people now want specific information too fast and too easy, he believes that little is being done to obtain this information. I agree as more and more people are using search engines such as Google and yahoo, very few people are attempting to obtain information on new topics instead of just searching them up. As Yahoo's co founder Jerry Yang stated in the book "Today their attitudes are more presumptive. They presume that the information they're looking for us certainly available..." (180). However, I am curious as to why Friedman does not pick a side on whether this is good or bad. He clearly likes that people now can easily have huge amounts of information in a short amount of time and that this is a good "force that flattens" the world. Still, he never can decide to himself whether or not all of this new technology will keep benefiting us. He leaves it up to the reader. Friedman chooses to write an unbiased book which is great because a person can read it and then decide for themselves about the issues.

9/20/09 The World id Flat

The way Friedman has compared the economic situations in both America an Japan was amazingly detailed and perfect as was his clear description of the economic theory "what goes around, comes around" (29). His meeting with a CEO of a Japanese company and the conversation about outsourcing jobs to India and China really took me by surprise. I had not suspected that Japanese companies would outsource so many jobs to China but it turns out that thousands of their jobs are. However I cannot help but wonder if this is why Friedman is convinced that the world is flat (economically). Friedman's constant small jokes and puns help put a great spin on the book. When told about how Japan outsources their jobs to China, Friedman claims that he could only respond with "'Say what?'" (32). Still, he does add some insignificant observations that have nothing to do with the story or the point (at least not yet). I have read 70 pages of the book so far and I am definitely going to continue reading it. I also look forward to learning about other businesses around the world that follow the same economic objectives.

New Book 9/13/09

I picked out my new independent reading book The World is Flat bu Thomas Friedman. Friedman spends the first few pages describing his trip to India and how he believed it to be similar to Columbus's voyage to the New World. I feel that his first few pages brilliantly describe how although their trips were similar, Columbus was looking for a trading route for gems, spices, and silk while Friedman was looking for brainpower and knowledgeable workers providing the change of the definition of riches over time. Finally at the end of his trip, he claims that he found out that the world was indeed flat when looked at by a logical perspective. So far, the book is great in how it cleverly describes the general cultural diffusion that occurs. Instead of just pointing out how jobs in America are outsourced to India, Friedman takes one step further in seeing how many Indians are being assimilated into American culture. Friedman recounts that "Some had actually taken American names..." (5). I have no complaints about this book so far.

Timequake

Timequake was a great story about the whole world being brought back 10 years. It is supposed to be the year 2001, but the Timequake occurs which throws everything and everyone back into 1991 where they have to repeat every single action they have undertaken for the past 10 years. Kurt Vonnegut uses determinism in this book. It is cleverly shown through out the story as the main character Kilgore Trout completes actions that can be clearly predicted ahead of time. Also, Vonnegut's main idea is the essence of no free will. Everyone is forced to repeat their actions and develops a complete apathy for everything going on around them and Kilgore Trout is apparently not affected and continues living his life. He is able to revive others but Vonnegut cleverly adds his hidden comedy into the book. Still, the serious ideas of determinism and no free will are retained through out the story which makes it a marvelous read.

The Red Badge of Courage

The Red Badge of Courage looked like it could be a great book from the beginning. I have always been interested in military history and when I saw the title it appeared to be a book about warfare. After the first few pages it was clear that it was not just a book about warfare, but it was a story about a young Union soldier who is confused about his place in the army. Discontent about even having to be in the army, Henry Fleming decides he is going to desert his unit. This was a horrible choice in my opinion because he decided that he was not an important part of the army. This led him to believe that desertion was okay which is a pretty ridiculous idea for if every soldier believed that, then they would all desert. At this point, I simply despise Henry because he chooses to save himself instead of fighting like he was trained to do. As the story progresses, Henry finds a group of injured soldiers and simply tries to pretend he was injured. But he soon hears about his battalion's victory. Then, he returns to his battalion which is a clear symbol of him being a hypocrite. He decides that he feels guilty and only decides to return to is battalion because they have won a battle. In the final battle, Henry fights bravely and shows himself to be one of the best soldiers in his battalion. This book is very similar to Crime and Punishment in that they both involve characters that have epiphanies. The main character in Crime and Punishment turns himself in in the end just as Henry decides to redeem himself in battle.