Strawberry Fields Forever (The Strawberry Milk Story)

After an experiment in isolation for Freshman Writing Seminar, I went out with three kids from the third floor of my dorm to get some Late Night Food (It's the devil's food. So addicting and bad for your body. Don't do it.). Since I was really hungry I got popcorn chicken, sour cream and onion lays, potato chips and Strawberry Milk. Now, I love strawberry milk. I don't know why. It's not the taste, its not that its good for me, it's just something I love. After I finished my late night meal, I decided that I wanted to drink my milk. I opened the pink cover...and saw what appeared to be normal white milk. I turned to Marc (one of the kids), and showed him the contents and he told me that it probably just wasn't shaken up enough. So I closed the bottle and shook it a bit. I then opened it and saw it was still white. After telling me that I should man up and drink the damn milk, I took a sip. My mouth went numb. The milk had somehow turned into Novocaine and numbed my lips. It was ridiculous. I looked at the date written on the bottle. It had expired two days previously. I was outraged. However, that didn't stop Marc from taking a sip. He then exclaimed that he wanted to vomit. After a bit of prodding, I went up to exchange the milk. The man behind the counter just told me to get another one. So I got another one. And I opened it to find that it was in the same condition. This was egregious. I then asked if I could just take an orange juice instead (gambling that it wouldn't kill me). As Marc and I walked back to our dorm with our two companions, I decided that I wouldn't stand for this. We pay 51K a year to come to BC with 5K going toward meal plans. When I got back to the common room, I turned on my computer and fired off an angry email to BC Dining Service recounting the story in a manner which was not as eloquent as the version you've just read. But what follows is the legitimate ending of my email to the BC dining Service:

" We pay 2,500 in meals for overpriced food. Could you please do us the courtesy of [at least] keeping the food fresh?"

I have yet to hear back.

Feeling Out of Place?

For Freshman Writing Seminar, I decided that I would do something that would take me out of my element. Something which was both new and a bit of a culture shock. I decided that for lunch, I would sit alone. Normally, I would have lunch with a couple of my friends if they were free and talk about the usual topics (politics, philosophy, religion...yea. right.) or strike up a conversation with a stranger in the lunch line and see where it would go from there. However, I'm completely comfortable eating with strangers or with friends because I'm a naturally social person. I like being able to interact with others so in order to feel out of place, I purposely separated myself from everyone and sat alone. It was one of the tensest 20 minutes of my life. I would have done the full 40 if I hadn't been so rattled. Sitting alone at a table was a very unusual experience. I didn't have anyone to talk to and it felt isolating. I was sitting there eating alone as everyone around me enjoyed the company of others. I wouldn't be surprised if someone pointed me out sitting there, alone, eating two slices of the worst pizza Upper has to offer (wheat crust, are you kidding me?). So as I sat there I felt extremely uncomfortable and paranoid and each move I made was scrutinized by imaginary eyes which only my mind could focus on. It was ridiculous. After 20 minutes I called a quits. Paranoia was the last thing I needed at that point. That night I appreciated the company of my friends at late night. It felt so much better because I could talk, crack jokes and shamelessly flirt with people as opposed to sit alone and feel somewhat sorry for the position I had put myself in. However, the Universe was not through with me yet... (To Be Continued: Strawberry Milk Story)

Literary Analysis

Ernest Hemingway's "Hills Like White Mountains" is a story which is open to interpretation. From the reader's standpoint, Hemingway uses simple diction and structure to create an elegant short story. While many people have tried to offer and interpretation, each person has their own idea of what is happening and what the couple are talking about in their conversation. The plot of the short story itself is simple: a man and a woman have a conversation in a Spanish bar as they wait for the train. Neither character is named or described, which allows to reader to imagine anyone they want in the scene, which allows the reader enough room for personalization and to become more invested in the actual story. Although never explicitly indicated in the story by Hemingway or the characters, the couple seem to be discussing the abortion of a pregnancy (supported by the fact that he says its a common procedure which is safe and alot of people do. Times haven't changed much have they?). From the conversation we can determine that the couple are traveling together constantly, while exploring their bodily desires in a casual fashion. When the woman becomes pregnant, however, the man tries to pressure her into getting an abortion. While she is at first reluctant, his nagging mixed with the drinks she takes in cause her to agree to the procedure in the end. The relationship between the man and the woman and their views on life appear to be the main themes of the story. While the man insists that he is not trying to force the woman into making a decision he pushes hard to get his way. At the end, he crosses the tracks with the baggage and orders a drink alone while pretending that he is the voice of reason. Throughout the conversation, the woman expresses her disappointment with the life they live and possibly their relationship. While they drink the "Anis del Toro", she complains that it tastes like liquorice and that all the drinks they try to enjoy taste the same. This can be seen as a metaphor as the drinks represent the experiences of the couple. Despite their varied desires everything always ends the same. While the woman thinks a baby can change things, the man still imposes his will upon her. Their relationship is clearly dominated by the man and as a result neither are incredibly happy.

The Democratic Party In Action

Looking at the Democratic Party's website before an election is like walking into a dirty alley. The walls are covered with dirt and obscene statements. With the election only months away, the Democratic Party's website is devoted to the destruction of John McCain and the establishment of Barrack Obama. Now, normally, I'm not political in the slightest, but this election year I don't support any of the major candidates. In fact I fully intend to vote for Mickey Mouse. That's how much faith in politics right now: I feel that a corporate slogan/cartoon character could run the country better than either of these two men. They both try to establish themselves as the saviors of this country but in truth, they are just politicians. No matter what, we can't please everyone. But that hasn't stopped the Democrats from trying.
By simply logging on to the homepage the first thing that caught my eye was a Ad of George Bush getting a hug from John McCain. Ok. I don't know where to begin with this. The slogan of the photo says "John McCain: More of the Same" and goes on to list all the times McCain has agreed with Bush. Ok, I'm surprised. Wasn't McCain a Republican to begin with? And a patriot? Of course he was going to support Bush. Back when Bush became president, he had the Dixie Chicks publicly scorned when they voiced their disapproval with the nation's choice. Sometimes you just have to agree. Especially when you're a member of the party. But I digress. The Democratic Website offers many ads which hope to convince potential voters like myself that Obama is the candidate for me. He wants to do so much to help me, as an individual, that I have to read about all the ways he's going to, if elected. The left side of the website lists a few articles about Obama, while the right side has all these links to information about John McCain
. It seems that the Democrat's website talks more about McCain than Obama. Among all the articles present the most common accusation is that McCain is just more of the same. Bush's third term. By appealing to the nation's dissatisfaction with the Bush Administration and associating it with McCain, the Democrats think they can win. It's their ballgame to lose. Even I'm getting tired of reading Bushisms. There are only two links to information on Obama. The rest are about the problems America caused under Bush and how McCain will continue to spread these problems. The intended audience is clear. Middle class and lower class Americans are all meant to see this website and vote Obama in November. I just don't believe that it was done in the most effective way. Instead of presenting their candidate in a dignified manner, they have instead devoted themselves to the destruction through smear tactics. However, the Republican Website resorts to the same sort of tactics in order to try and convince undecided voters that their candidate is the right one.
By simply listing what is wrong with the other candidate, both parties avoid presenting their candidate properly. Instead of making their pages glorified Facebook profiles listing all of the candidate's political ambitions and what they hope to accomplish as president, the sites are just bulletin boards about what's wrong with the other candidate. Instead of being honest, the two parties are just dancing around the issues and making it seem like the only thing wrong is with the other candidates. Realistically all their doing is playing of the tensions between each other to act like spiders and snatch people up. Obama will win. But will we be happy with that out come? Only time will tell.

Tentative Concert Plans (Not An FWS post)

At the moment I have two concerts on my "MUST see" list. Coldplay and Jack's Mannequin. I have tickets for one, but the other might be harder to get. The Jack's Mannequin tickets go on sale Saturday at noon and I'm determined to beat the rush to get them. However, That would mean waking up at 9, getting to the Pleasant Street Train Stop by 10 and getting a good spot outside of the Paradise Rock Club so that I can get some decent tickets. Last time I attempted something like this, my friend and almost got kidnapped by a creepy old taxi driver (but that's a story for another time). To complicate matters, I had to go out and buy a new textbook for my Calc Class and lost the 88 bucks I had set aside for the concert. So that means I have to run home on Friday, use my debit card to get the money I need, stay the night, drive back to campus early in the morning, and then race to the trains on Upper. It's going to be a long day. But I still have Coldplay tickets. So no matter what I'm gonna be seeing a concert this year. But Jack's Mannequin only plays Boston once every two years, so to quote superbad "I would do unforgivable things" to see them perform live. Yea, no witty comment in this one...just felt like killing time

Reading Images

Banksy's selected graffiti include some very interesting pieces which have clear traces of social commentary involved. The two pieces I chose to analyze are "Swept Under" and "Sale On Christ" which clearly have a satirical value to them.

"Swept Under" shows a maid lifting up a curtain to deposit and hide the dirt she cleaned up only to see a brick wall instead of space. While Banksy could have easily colored the brick to make it look like the scene is from the inside of a wealthy family's house, he left the brick in for the purpose of a social commentary. The graffiti was left on a brick wall to highlight a social commentary on the situation on the streets. While the maid is supposed to keep things clean, she merely deposits the trash under a curtain, removing it from view but not removing the actual problem. This is often a criticism of society itself in that while we imprison criminals we do nothing for their rehabilitation or simply try to hide the wrong doing that occurs in society by "sweeping it under the rug" in order to keep up the appearance of wholesome conditions. Such striking social commentary is aimed at the politicians who do nothing to try and legitimately help the society in which they live, but rather do what they can to keep up appearance until the next election.

"Sale on Christ" is a piece of art that seems to be a commentary on the secularization of society by having turned our backs on religion for consumer goods. In the painting the women who pray and worship Christ when he is on the cross are surrounding a large red sign (a contrast to their gray bodies) which says "Sale Ends Today." This can be interpreted as the women praying for the extension of the sale so that they might get an extension or that sales on Sunday may have replaced the desire to worship Jesus. Nevertheless, most people who see graffiti such as this cannot help but think of the fact that there is a clear relation to religion becoming less of a domineering force in our lives as commercialism takes a more important role in our lives.

Textual Analysis

In high school, my English class placed a heavy emphasis on literary analysis. Having read works by Camus, Shakespeare, Tolstoy and Keats in that class, I have had to analyze prose, plays and poetry. To me, analysis is looking for hidden motivations and symbols in texts and drawing conclusions about their possible meanings with supporting evidence, and then relating what I find back to the overall mood and tone of the text. For prose writing, I had always been more inclined to search for symbolism related to life and death in the context of the character and the story so that I could start with the smaller picture and see how it relates to the big picture overall. Anything that would advance the plot or alter the mood would be a starting point. For poetry, I would take a different approach by focusing on the rhyme schemes and the symbolism in the structure in relation to the content. But in both cases I would always be looking for a hidden meaning instilled into the work by the author.


Ben Killips' essay "Hopper's Nighthawks: Comfort in Despair" serves as an analysis of Edward Hopper's painting Nighthawks but for the most part I felt that it fell short of its potential since much of it seemed like complete speculation to me. Since art is such a tricky subject to analyze and draw conclusions from, speculation is a key, so my disagreement with Killips may simply stem from the differences in our interpretation of the painting. While Killips sees this as a reflection of desperation and loneliness in the world and the emotional turmoil of the times, I see it as a rather hope inspiring painting. Since it is painted from the point of view of someone walking on the streets of a city, the night seems to be brisk and dark. However, then you notice the bright diner, which shows people sitting at a table in conversation enjoying their drinks with the light from the diner piercing the dark night outside and casting a warm inviting glow towards others. In my own interpretation, I don't see suffering on the expressions of the people in the diner but instead see a passive expression as they place their orders. To argue that Hopper's painting is a mere reflection of the times would be an insult because art is meant to transcend time and be accessible to all by empathetically appealing to the viewers emotions. For that reason, I cannot see the connection between Nighthawks and Pearl Harbor or the overall bleak undertones. Optimism seems to be the only thing expressed through the contrast of colors because of the appealing nature of the diner in comparison to the darkness of the night. To argue that there is an internal struggle within the people in the painting would be stretching the argument. Killips' analysis is a product of his own interpretation of the painting and is fairly well done since he focuses heavily on the contrast of colors, the artist's period and background while providing his own interpretation. While I agree with some of the points presented in Killips' paper, because of my own interpretation I couldn't agree with everything he wrote. In relation to Hacker's criteria, Killips' essay is very well done since it starts with a summary of the visual text and then analyzes the piece while backing up his arguments with the design elements he felt were key to the work. However, I felt that he present too much of his own ideas as fact rather than interpretation. Killips lacked confusion and was too sure of his argument for me to be completely convinced.

The Explination For "A World Without Rules" Title

Anarchy. Simply put. The reason I chose that for the title of my blog was meant to be an ironic statement since writing is all about literary rules. The line is borrowed from the Dark Knight posters that were on the internet in the weeks before the movie was released. Since the Dark Knight is the best movie ever made (Just my opinion. But It's true.), I felt it would be only fitting to at least highlight that aspect in my blog (since I can do an insanely creepy imitation of the Joker). But this doesn't mean that I will be keeping the Dark Knight theme indefinitely, it just means that, for now, you need to look at a really scarred dude whenever you go on my page... Now that I think about it he never really does tell us how he gets his scars. Oh well, guess that'll be explained in the sequel.

Banichek Predicts Death?

So yea...there was a mind reader in Devlin Hall on Saturday. After a night out with some friends for dinner we decided to go to the mind reader. When we first arrived he looked like one of my old history teachers...I should email him in prison....anyway, we sat down in the middle and observed how he acted. He talked on the phone for a little then he just acted like a creeper. The room filled up slowly. It was a rainy night so understandably the turn out was not big. At one point some girl walked in with a wet coat and yelled "I CAME ALL THE WAY IN THE RAIN SO THIS BETTER BE GOOD". She looked kinda familiar but then again I'm terrible with names. Besides it was only then that I'd noticed the 3 knives in the Banichek Death Trick Box. Anyhow, Banichek started his show and mindf*cked everyone. After making a friend of mine destroy a fork with her mind, I started talking about how weird it was that he was able to manipulate the entire show. Then he called on me. The whole backdrop of his technique was that he had a dream about a card that some girl in the audience had years before and that he had written it down on a piece of paper and wrote his location and date of the dream on the paper and sealed it in an envelope. Said envelope was sealed in a yellow envelope with a "?" drawn on it.

"(thinking) Oh crap. You've got to be kidding. You're making my friends break forks. The least you can do is let me talk in shock and awe."
B: "ok, you're going to help me. I need you to give me a date. Name a Month"
Me: "(thinking) ok, so this guy knows nothing about me. There's just no way. So to prevent him from manipulating me, I'll use my birthday...but not my real birthday. The birthdate I use when I fake online survey forms."
Me: June
B: "Name a Day?"
Me: 11
B: "Year?"
Me: 1989 (one year before my birthday)
B: Does this day have any significance for you?
Me: Yes
B: Birthday?
Me: Yep
B: ...ok. Well did you think of another date prior to this?
Me: (lying) Yes
B: Oh? What was it?
Me: March 10, 1990 (ex girlfriend's birthday)
B: ANy significance?
Me: uh yea.
B: what?
Me: My...friend's birthday.
B: ok, you can sit down

So he does his trick. Magically it was the girl's card. He also manipulated some other kid into saying New York (the location). Then came the surprise. The Date written on piece of paper...

...was 6/11/89. Needless to say it was a shocking experience. I'm sure that if I asked he'd give me my date of death. Then I'd be screwed. If I knew when I was going to die, then I'd be pretty freaking pissed. Because it would make every second that much tenser knowing EXACTLY that my heart can only last so much longer. Weird feeling and it got me thinking. So I refrained from asking Banichek any questions and left with my friends. This has absolutely nothing to do with FWS but I thought it would save me from having to retell it.

Why I Write (or Myself as a Writer)

When I think about myself as a writer, I'd like to think that I'm fairly good. Because who wants to start off by saying that they suck at writing? Anyway, my writing abilities have been fairly well developed thanks to my high school English Classes. I was on the school newspaper and wrote for their entertainment section by doing movie reviews. I also wrote an article about my high school's science fair which was published in 10 of the 13 newspapers it was submitted to. So yea, I'm kinda good. But all bragging and ego inflating aside, as a writer I tend to try and have a sarcastic and faux witty style so that I can make people laugh a bit. I like to keep my sentences short and sweet but admittedly I do write some pretty long sentences. My writing style has been influenced by several prominent authors which include Dennis Lehane, Earnest Hemingway, Tucker Max, Dave Barry and Matt Taibbi . Thus the sarcastic side of most of my writing. I tend to write out of a necessity to empty out my mind. I'm always thinking about things so it can get a little cluttered so writing serves as a filing system for me. As a creative outlet, writing helps me get rid of the excess internal energy by making me think a bit more. That said, I don't just sit around and write prose. I also dabble in song writing and poetry (apparently there's a difference but I honestly can't draw the line. Oh well, shades of gray.) As a writer, I also tend to over analyze things from a literary perspective and lead my readers in a certain directions so that they can see things the way I see them.

George Orwell's "Why I Write" is an essay which documents his beliefs about his writings and his inspiration. He starts by saying that his writing was a haven for loneliness and that it would help him create his own world as a way to compensate for his failure in the real one. He then lists his early successes and failures in order to highlight the fact that while writing is in his nature, he is by no means perfect. He notes that he knew how to be descriptive and that early development was the drive of his writing . He seems to suggest that writing is about being able to control your emotions such as anger and aggression in a mature way so as to avoid writing trash or immature works of literature. He claims that the 4 great reasons to right prose are: egoism (I totally agree with this point), aesthetic enthusiasm, historical impulse and political purpose. While he was clearly a political writer (see 1984 and Animal Farm), I don't believe that one author needs to only gravitate to one. I believe that to be a good writer you need to have a balance of the 4 motivations. However, Orwell makes a point to say that he wanted to make political statements in an artistic manner since it would be heavily influenced by injustice and would champion justice in a manner that people would be attracted and enthralled and be able to see as Orwell sees. In the end however, he captures the idea of a writer perfectly when he says that writing is a struggle with the instincts of the writer and the personal demons which serve as motivation and yet still contains the author's personality.