Betty's Bill

I really enjoyed David Ives' Sure Thing. The play depicts all the different ways this first conversation between Bill and Betty could play out. It’s hard to decide on who the protagonist is. It could be Bill since he is the one interested in Betty. The conversation, though, focuses on Betty. The audience learns a lot about her since Bill says exactly what she wants to hear. They are finally able to hit it off, but by now, they have already decided on how many children they want to have and they are already talking about marriage:

Bill: Do you still believe in marriage in spite of current sentiments against it?
Betty: Yes.
Bill: And children?
Betty: Three of them.
Bill: Two girls and a boy.
Betty: Harvard, Vassar, and Brown.
Bill: And will you love me?
Betty: Yes.

The hard questions and doubts are all taken out of the way even before the first date! By now the audience has a clear idea about what Betty is like and what she wants in a man. The play in itself, having only two characters and taking place all the while in a café, wasn’t too complex. I could easily picture the play in my head as I read it. It’s really funny though, how Bill keeps guessing at Betty’s interests to try and keep the conversation going. Even when Bill has lines that are more packed, it is Betty who has the whole say, the scene ends if Betty lost interest in Bill. This leaves Betty as the main character.

Seven-Year-Old Men

The description of the first graders as “men” by Sharon Olds in “Rites of Passage,” is somewhat disturbing yet, accurate. Although it does portray first graders appropriately, by wanting to act tough, it really gives insight into today’s society. Nowadays, kids don’t care about watching Barney and Teletubbies; they want to see movies like The Terminator, where violence is depicted as “cool.” As the parent illustrates her son’s birthday party, she doesn’t talk about all the games they play and how much fun they are having. Instead, the party seems like a kind of war between the six and seven year olds: “They eye each other, seeing themselves tiny in each other’s pupils.” The author’s sarcasm is clear as she speaks of the guests, “they gather in the living room—short men, men in first grade with smooth jaws and chins,” “a room of small bankers.” In her description of the cake, she compares it to a “turret.” The rite of passage from a boy to a man is toughness and violence. At age 7, these kids already want to become men but not by taking responsibility. If first graders believe that violence defines manliness, that doesn’t speak well about our society. “We could easily kill a two-year-old,” this realization calms the rest of the “men” down as they “clear their throats like Generals.” Knowing that they could kill a two-year-old relieves the boys of their insecurities to each other and they are finally able to get along “and get down to playing war.” What happened to “pin the tail on the donkey?”

Free Hugs

Billy Collins’ “Embrace,” illustrates someone who seriously needs a hug. As I imagined the “parlor trick” it made me laugh, but when Collins begins to describe the front side it just gets depressing. “…from the back it looks like someone is embracing you, her hands grasping your shirt, her fingernails teasing your neck.” This description on its own gives a feeling of nostalgia. Then the speaker gives a picture of what the “parlor trick” looks like from the front, “…you never looked so alone…you could be waiting for a tailor to fit you for a straitjacket, one that would hold you really tight.” The feeling is only increased. The poem seems funny because of the picture it depicts of the “parlor trick.” On a second look, though, the longing for an embrace, (rather than wanting to give the appearance of someone being all over you), gives the poem a really depressing tone. In such desperate need of a hug, the person embraces himself....

Where Have All the Good Women Gone?

“Song” by John Donne, carries a cynical and dramatic tone throughout the poem. As it presents different impossible tasks, it describes the most impossible of all: finding a woman “true, and fair.” Embittered by his belief in the extinction of true women, the poet goes onto say that even if you were to set out on a pilgrimage in search of such a woman, and “ride ten thousand days and nights,” you too would “swear [that] nowhere lives a woman true, and fair.” And even if you were to find one, she might be “true when you met her” but before you could make a move, “she will be False.” Although, the message is very pessimistic, I like the way it is expressed in a kind of magical feel, as it speaks of “falling star[s]” and “mermaid’s singing.” Instead of contradicting the work as a whole, it really complements it and proves the point: Among all the strange and rare wonders of the world, there is none like the faithful woman. Even if I do not agree with the message, I really liked the poem, it was easy to read and understand. The language was not complicated and the rhyming made the poem very simple, disguising the deeper message and the overall bitter tone.

The Gift of Inequality

The equality that was achieved in "Harrison Bergeron" is terrifying. I would much rather live in “the dark ages, with everybody competing against everybody else.” It is the inequality that makes this world such an interesting place to live in. The diversity of people and personalities keeps our lives spontaneous and random. You never know who you will meet. It is the people that surround us that make our lives worth living. Our dilemmas, challenges, sad and happy moments are all caused by the people around us. Without individuality what else is there? The people in the story did not have much to look forward to. Their minds and bodies were constrained. They did not know what they truly felt because they kept forgetting. They were zombies who lived just to breathe. Harrison Bergeron would rather live a couple of minutes free than spend a whole life manipulated by others. When we ask for equality, we sacrifice individuality. Achieving equality is impossible, even in “Harrison Bergeron” where everything was controlled. Tolerance and equality is a task that can be achieved through a bit of effort and without having to sacrifice the very things that make us unique. Personality is something that never stops developing while a person lives. Every experience we live molds us into the kind of person we will become. It helps each of us grow and mature. This was taken away from the citizens in “Harrison Bergeron.” They are no longer learning, reasoning, thinking, feeling, growing…. These abilities are what make humans the most complex of creatures. Once that is taken away, there is nothing left of the human.

Don't Mess with this Scholar...

In “Saboteur,” although Mr. Chiu is within reason to speak up against and be angry with the police, his revenge was wrong and cannot be justified. Mr. Chiu is a scholar which means that he has influence or knows people of influence. With this, he could have made the police pay for what they did to him, something he did have in mind at the beginning of his detention, “I shall report you to the Provincial Administration,” “he swore that once he was out, he would write an article about this experience.” These kinds of reactions would be more productive and civilized. Even a “common citizen” would have behaved in a more rationalized way. Innocent people paid for the crime of the corrupted police. He began an epidemic, “over eight hundred people contracted acute hepatitis in Muji. Six died of the disease, including two children.” I do not believe that Mr. Chiu could be satisfied with what he did. His crime was worse than the policemen’s. What angered Mr. Chiu the most, I think, was that his being a scholar did not matter at all to the police. “Don’t mistake me for a common citizen who would tremble when you sneeze. I’m a scholar, a philosopher, and an expert in dialectical materialism.” He even decided that “he might refuse to leave unless they wrote him an apology,” still believing that his being a scholar would intimidate them. All of his studies went down the drain once he was in custody. Admitting to the crime would have set him free, “your release will depend on our attitude toward this crime.” His pride did not let him admit that he was wrong. Although he was provoked, he did commit the crime he was charged for, “disrupted public order….” Mr. Chiu had a lot that worked in his favor to prove the police’s maltreatment of him. His wife was a witness of the policemen’s provocation, Fenjin was also abused by the police, and the conditions of the police station itself were all enough evidence to back Mr. Chiu. Once he was freed, Mr. Chiu could no longer rationalize, he had been humiliated and it was too much for him to take. “If he were able to, he would have razed the entire police station and eliminated all their families. Though he knew he could do nothing like that, he made up his mind to do something.“ In the end, he did not regain his dignity.

The Material and the Spiritual

In "The Rich Brother," Donald and Pete each represent personalities with different priorities. Pete only cares about the material, to him having money is the most important thing. Donald, on the other hand, is on a quest for God, he is "obsessed with the fate of his soul." Pete is not interested at all in the spiritual and Donald does not really have a care for money. Both brothers are unwhole and unsatisfied. This is reflected with the changing faiths of Donald, from Hindu to Christian. In Pete, his frequent spending is unending: sky diving, the sailboat, his new car. From the two, Pete seems to be the most successful person in the story. He is settled down, has a family, and is financially well-off. Donald, however, "was still single, he lived alone," did not have a stable job, and was "in debt to Pete." Even when this is so, Pete feels somehow threatened by Donald. He does not wish Donald well. The mere thought of Donald doing well is too much for Pete to bear because he does not feel that Donald deserves it. "And it came to him that it would be just like this unfair life for Donald to come out ahead in the end, by believing in some outrageous promise that would turn out to be true...." "What a joke if there really was a blessing to be had, and the blessing didn't come to the one who deserved it, the one who did all the work, but to the other." Or maybe Pete just wanted Donald to learn to work and take responsibility. Maybe Pete was just tired of taking care of Donald and wanted him to be successful on his own. At first, Donald shows an initiative to work, “I’m thinking of going into business, Pete.” It seems as if Donald finally learned his lesson and is ready to take responsibility and get on his feet. When he gives away the $100, though, it proves that he really has not changed. Donald was very giving; he liked to help out, which is not bad. The problem was that he was giving away what was not his. This is what irritated Pete more than anything: the fact that he had to pay for Donald’s mistakes. Still, Pete seems just as lost as Donald. He might be more settled down but he still lacks that “inner motivation.” “You don’t have any purpose in life. You’re afraid to relate to people who do, so you make fun of them.” Donald may not have money, but he is searching for something more real. Pete may have money, yet he is still empty.