[ Q u a i n t Q u a g m i r e s ]

Don't forget to check out Matthew's post too:  1984: The Musical (What I've Learned) I'm sure a lot of us heard about the fight at Urbana High School that happened not too long ago. Some members of the community thought that the violence was because of the school's too-lenient "restorative justice" policies. Regardless of whether this perspective is accurate, it's true that restorative justice needs to be employed with thought and care at school. Restorative justice: a system of criminal justice which focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. Contrary to what you might have heard, restorative justice does not mean students don't experience consequences. As one teacher has written (see link at end of post), "A helpful guiding principle is that consequences should always be educational in nature rather than punitive." Rather than, for example, suspend a student when they

To wrap up the last semester of high school, my best friends and I filmed 1984: The Musical . I hope to explain some behind the scenes but most importantly what I've learned about 1984 and dystopian propaganda. A 2-3 page stress letter or a whole musical from scratch? Our group and I chose the latter, and honestly, the time we spent on the musical was most likely exponentially greater than the time we would've spent on the letter. Last quarter, my group filmed a rap battle music video, and we needed six constantly working brains to finish the video on time. With a musical, we add a new element to the mix: actual acting and singing. As soon as we got a vague idea of what our musical was going to be like, we started to write a script and the lyrics of different songs. Tim (maybe Dante) had the fascinating idea to write the script and song in the perspective of Big Brother. In other words, our whole musical would behave as propaganda and would tell the story of how Winston was

NOTE: I STARTED WRITING THIS POST ON MONDAY AND WE HADN’T GOTTEN TO THE END OF THE BOOK SO THESE ARE MY PREDICTIONS FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE WEEK Is the Brotherhood even real? I don’t think so. At first, like a majority of people I spoke to, I believed that it was real. I believed that there was a secret underground resistance, headed by Goldstein or some other guy that was plotting to topple Big Brother. For a brief moment, I thought that Mr. Charington was part of it since he had a room without a telescreen. I was ecstatic when O’Brien revealed himself to be part of the organization. I thought to myself “yes! Winston was right!” And after a few minutes of celebration at the possibility of a revolution and overthrow of Big Brother, I started to doubt O’Brien and his intentions. Isn’t it a little fishy that he would be Winston’s only contact, and that he would never know the higher-ups of the organization? And the questions he asked Winston, like would he be willing

In class, we recently discussed what aspects of 1984 seem relevant to our modern society. When reading Goldstein’s book, his section on War and Peace stood out to me.    Goldstein justifies endless war through his idea that war brings stability both through its consistency and economic effect. These points about war seem pertinent to the U.S. We often view wars as idealistic and productive but there is much more nuance. The Spanish-American war, for example, had an ideological justification of freeing Cuba but led to direct U.S influence in the Philippines. Other examples include interventions such as creating a revolution in panama for a canal, Guatemala to preserve fruit companies, or installing a dictator in Iran for oil companies. Most wars stretch on, and are driven by economic policy, a bit like 1984. However, Goldstein points out that the effects of war go far beyond direct conflict. “Even when weapons of war are not actually destroyed, their manufacture is still a co

[This is my attempt to address both Brave New World and The Handmaid's Tale via creative writing.]

Throughout this semester, I have been curious about how we should define “utopia” in society. My interest in this question arises from the idea that the same society can exist as both utopia for some members, and dystopia for others. Perhaps these pockets of dystopia are what enable the utopia for others. Is the relationship between utopia and dystopia a zero-sum game, where if one end increases in magnitude for some group of society, the other end increases for another? Is it possible to conceive a utopia, in which no groups are sacrificed for the good of others? This is an idea that we have both talked and written about in class. When I consider this question, I think the way we define a “utopia” is key. As such a general term, individual definitions of what a utopia is can vary wildly. If you see your utopia to mean that you possess everything; that you own money and land and resources and power over others; that you hold a position atop a hierarchical, aristoc

Over the recent summer, I read 1984 by George Orwell. Reading 1984 and Brave New World showed me a shocking resemblance between fictional Dystopias and today's technologically-driven world.  (No Spoiler Alert) In 1984 , Orwell introduces a technology called a telescreen, a 24/7 personal surveillance camera. The thought of being watched for every second of your live is frightening. However, considering the amount of time all of us spend on social media, these telescreens bear an uncomfortable resemblance  to Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, and other social media outlets we use everyday. A consequence of interacting with our electronic devices so much? Numerous opportunities to get influenced and misconstrued by inappropriate and twisted reality and news. Additionally, with social media becoming more accessible to younger kids, the risk of leading young minds to erroneous conclusions is even higher. This is where the Brave New World part of the resemblance comes in.  Two thing

Quick plot summary of The Giver : there are no feelings, pain, war, color, etc., only happiness. When the community went over to this state, it removed those bad memories, but they can’t completely disappear, so the Receiver is the sole keeper of the community’s collective memory. This person bears the pain and has deeper emotions than everyone else. Jonas, a 12 year old kid, is the next Receiver. He is able to love, see color, etc. and is frustrated by the community. So he and the Giver plot for him to run away, and when he does, the memories he has will be released back into the community. That’s all you need to know for this next bit to make sense. My 3 rd teacher sat in the middle of circle of eager kids, all sitting crisscross-apple-sauce, anticipating story time. We would continue reading The Giver , a thrilling and slightly scary dystopia. We were at the part where the Giver had started transferring the community’s memories to Jonas, the next Receiver. The first memo

            I recently started a TV series called “The Man on The High Castle.” In the first season, it introduces an alternative world set in 1962 in which the axis powers won WW2. This series takes a huge bit of fictional liberty but the effort they put into this alternate timeline is fascinating. I expected the show to follow a prototypical arc of a rebel against the oppressive regime, like Star Wars, but the show has been more nuanced. In addition to resistance members, the main characters include an American SS official, and Japanese inspector. Some characters could be written as evil but are truly human. Similarly, the “heroes” of the story are neither perfect nor certain in their resistance. A viewer’s reaction might be “How could you live in this dystopia without rebelling” but we must remember that people did live under Nazi rule without resistance.   Nazism is perhaps the most cited historical dystopia 1 , and I’d like to address a common question. Why wasn’t th