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.