Imagination Social (Pretend this is in Spanish because all my previous titles have been in Espanol)

     I do agree that "we all have our social imagination as we are all capable to invent visions what should and might be."  The root of the question is really whether not human nature encompasses creativity.  To this question, the answer is an obvious yes.  However, the capacity of each individual's imagination has limitations.  One person can be more creative than another. We all seem to want a better society, but our solutions differ in the capacity of our creativity.  Like beauty and aesthetics, an ideal society is subjective.  Therefore, our solutions differ, but we all have solutions.  The spectrum of our solutions itself is beauty because of its wide range.  Honestly, to not think of solutions for a broken society would be ignorant and egocentric.  It is the beauty of our ability that becomes a useful power in our troubled world.  The next step in imagining solutions is to act upon them.  The power of action becomes a more useful tool as it allows creativity to come to life.  With proper determination, we all have the same capacity to let our visions be heard and possibly come true.  Action becomes the boundary between dreamers and activists.  Activists see their dreams become reality, and it is activists who truly change the world.  We cannot all be activists, as solutions will contradict each other.  Further, activists may change the world for the worse.  It is unfortunate, but possible.  Maybe dreamers are afraid to see their prized dream become a broken reality.
     In literature for example, utopian societies are huge examples of social imagination that do indeed become broken realities.  Through literature, we learn that social imagination only lasts for moments, until another group's social imagery becomes more prominent or powerful in the time frame.  In the hunger games, the system of 12 districts and one almighty capitol.  It works for 75 years, until the unrest of the people conceives a new vision for the well being of society.
     In divergent, the faction system works until one faction in visions a society controlled only by them.  This example also proves the point that with social imagination, everybody thinks his image is right.  Maybe, if everybody worked to build upon each others image, a collective social imagination would prevail. 
     To reinforce, we all do have social imagination, and we all can have opinions about what should be.  With that said, however, "should be" doesn't truly exist as everything shifts with the time and ever changing society.  

Tiempo y el Verdad

     The past, present, and future collectively encompass the concept of time.  They include experiences and lessons which lead to knowledge and memories.  Time reveals the meaning of our individual lives.
     To a person who believes in the principle of free will, time becomes a space of choices and decisions which lead to the end product: the entirety of his or her life.  These people seemingly formulate their own truth through their personal values and chosen ethics.  Humans who identify with free-will use their past, the surroundings in the present, and their hopes of the future to make a truth for themselves.  To clarify, a person who was poor in their youth, but surrounded with ungrateful rich individuals in their young adult years may hope for a future in which people live comfortably economically, appreciating the blessings.  This person uses time in a way to form a value of appreciation for having money.  People like so treat life (past, present, and future) in such a way where there is no universally defined truth, but rather a rich palette of individual truths.  In another example, my friend loves basketball.  Life is basketball.  Through reviewing his past, he noticed his athleticism was not up to par despite his great jump shot.  Currently, he trains early each morning to boost his endurance and stamina along with his quickness by running constantly and differently.  He hopes in his future to become professional.  He has formed the truth in his mind that by running and training he will become a better basketball player in the long run.  He hopes it will lead him to his hopeful truth of achieving his dreams.
     In contrast, people who believe in the concept of fate and destiny see time as a way to unravel truth.  These people accept the belief where each individual has a destined calling and end point.  It is a life where nothing is truly a mistake, as every choice is innate within the perspective of a higher power.  In this view point, life is a package, and a piece of wrapping is torn off each day.  The truth is the truth of all people, and each truth coincides with the truth unraveled to another person to make up one whole truth.  A man may be devastated due to a break up with one he thought he would marry.  However, the break up allows him to meet his true soul mate.  The future may open doors for kids who change lives.  Events from the past are explained through the present and future.  Further, the present is the obvious current truth and reality.  While the future is tricky, it is an awaited truth.  In fact, for both free will and fate believers, the future is still a symbol of hope as it can still change the unwanted outcome of the current truth.  To further explain, religious clergy can identify with this perspective.  Specifically, Catholics believe in a life devoted to God's will.  The outcome of their lives is not their choice, but it is God's preference.  Through people and prayers, he speaks to each Catholic and calls them to their vocation.  A priest at my church recalled he was never good at school, and constantly he wondered why.  When he received his calling to priest hood, he realized his talents and gifts were not in academics, but rather in helping and preaching the Gospel.  He knows his rest of time will be fully devoted to the Church.  In this way, past events were explained through the truth of a higher, more powerful being, God.
     Altogether, the question becomes an argument of beliefs between fate and free will as each would think differently of the concept of time.
 

Creo que Oedipus Rex....

     Oedipus Rex provokes major thought on all levels.  While reading the story, I kept thinking about Oedipus's complex character.  He seems like a man full of immense rage, yet he an adequate leader.  In the time of Thebe's plague, he strongly sought to ruin the pollution of the state for his people.  However, I find it so hard to believe he killed a man over such a small dilemma.  I am also so shocked Oedipus did not find the age difference between him and his mother weird.  It must have been at least an eighteen year gap.  Maybe it was common at the time, yet I still find it hard to believe.  I also found it disturbing how Oedipus used the brooches of Jacosta to stab his on eyes out: a little extreme, don't you think?
     Oedipus's major character flaws lie in his stubbornness and ignorance.  To begin, he unknowingly killed his father due to his thick head.  He also became extremely anger during a bar fight.  Still, when the messenger and prophet told him of his murder, he automatically accused the messenger of treason.  He could not grasp the thought of him being the killer, despite the wisdom of the prophet.  He even goes as far as to say prophecies do not hold true, dismissing the concept of destiny and fate.  His stubbornness is a product of his ignorance.  He must be clever as he solved the riddle of the Sphinx, yet how could he not put the pieces together sooner.  How could have not crossed his mind?  Even when he learns he is not the true son of Polybus, the King of Corinth, he assumes his mother is a slave.  He already has enough information from Jocosta and the many oracles and prophets to piece information together. 
     Oedipus must symbolize the ignorance of man and man's strong will to go against the unwanted.  His blinding ignorance may have been the reason for his unfortunate fate, which could not be over powered by any man.  Oedipus continually tries to deny the prophecies, or fate, but in the end, destiny will show itself.  Oedipus acts similar to Laius, who also tried rearrange his destiny.  Neither trials worked, showing the superiority of higher powers over man.  As discussed in class, Sophocles cleverly uses dramatic irony to put the role of man in perspective for the readers.  He creates the position of an ominous god for the reader, while the characters become the ignorant men in the world to show there is no evading what is already written - destiny.  By putting us the readers as temporary gods, he shows us the foolishness of when we try to escape fate as man. 
     Another thing I found intriguing was Creon's response to Oedipus accusing Creon of trying to take the throne.  Although it was a minor detail, I found it extremely insightful as Creon says the position of king is harder but equally beneficial as a lower position.  To me, this resonated the idea that a true leader doesn't do for himself so he may gain over his people, but rather he works so all his people may have the same benefits and an easier time.  As an aspiring leader, I found this to be a strong statement in the play.
     Overall, Oedipus Rex had a lot of depth for such a short story.

Symbolism and the Critique of the American Dream

     Fitzgerald believes the American Dream is only a yearning for money, and all those who only want money are corrupt from the beginning.  The symbolism reveals the American Dream can only be achieved through dark, corrupt ways.  Gatsby achieved his dreams through illegal ways.  Further, the valley of ashes and Dr Eckleburg's eyes show that all bad deeds will come back to haunt you, and they will be revealed in only a matter of time.  Gatsby had to pass the ashes, a reminder of his poor life.  The eyes and faded billboard show how the dream will END.  Dr Eckleburg no longer had his fame and lost his dream.  He observes the four characters in the pursuit of their own dreams in such a critical way.  Fitzgerald observes America in this same critical way.

Entry para Viernes, Cinco de Septiembre

"'Americans' shadow-boxing a ghost wearing red, white and blue yet you can only be white, work until your red, and die blue as the bag of  freedom suffocates you."

     I love the creative use of the colors of the flag.  Originally, these colors symbolize beautiful, patriotic concepts such as freedom and purity.  However in the same way the author put quotes on 'America', he/she seemingly puts quotes on the beautiful concepts like freedom as freedom only comes to those who are white.  She poses the question, "What is freedom or purity?"  I also love how he/she emphasizes the thought that the life of an "American" encompasses primarily work; a lack of living the dream void of work exists.  Additionally, I liked the subtle end rhyme.  It built intensity and rhythm.

Dinero y Diablo

They drown their feelings with alcohol.  And parties
                  A lot of parties.
Their parties are wealth.  All is money.
                  A lot of money.
      More money
               More alcohol
                      More parties
None of them stand different.
We all sin the exact same way.
     Immoral dependency.

¿Es La Vida de Pi Magical Realism o no? Part Dos Punto Cero

     I still believe Richard Parker did not truly exist; rather, he represents the conflict of Pi's survival as well as Pi's sanity.  The entirety of the book resonates the idea of assigning meaning to life by using stories , and most importantly beliefs.  Pi, a man who believed in three religions, used his beliefs to form his purpose before he got shipwrecked.  He extended this strong faith at sea when he struggled with going against his religions.  Richard Parker represented this "wildness" of doing what he didn't feel was ethical.  When telling the story to to others, he replaced his concept of his wildness with Richard Parker and unconditionally stuck with his belief that Richard Parker was with him.  He did this to show that his beliefs came first.  His beliefs were his facts and he used them to make sense of his actions and purpose.  Even his name suggest this; Pi is 3.14.  As stated in class, all religions have 3 common factors but many versions.  Pi's story had one true event, but Pi uses his ability to transform reality into better versions to show that a perspective of happenings is true through one's own lens.  After the group discussion and arguing Richard Parker's existence, my group and I came to the conclusion that his existence does not matter as either way the moral of the story stands true.  We must stick with our beliefs to assign meaning to life, whether that means Richard Parker is true or is not.

¿Es La Vida de Pi Magical Realism o no?

     Life of Pi is a work of magical realism and Richard Parker, along with all the other animals, did not factually exist with Pi on the boat.  In looking at Big Fish, a definite example of magical realism, one finds elements of the supernatural, elements of uncertainty and secrets, and elements of the common reality.  When comparing Life of Pi and Big Fish, one finds obvious similarities in those aspects of magical realism.  Therefore, it is safe to say Life of Pi is also magical realism.  Authors use magical realism to convey messages in a more creative way than the "boring" normal.  Martel uses magical realism in Life of Pi to enhance his message.  The entire novel portrays a message of looking through different perspectives to find bigger meaning in situations and to be open to all possibilities.  This message supports the main message Martel stresses - sticking with your beliefs.  Beliefs and values exist as people's way to assign meaning and purpose to their own lives.  They use their beliefs as guide lines to morals and perspective.  Pi believed in three religions, giving him more perspective.  He created the elaborate story of his adventure to instill in people's minds an argument of what to believe.  Through Pi, Martel attempted to test people's confidence in their beliefs.  Martel presents an idea of believing in what is improbable to add color and stimulation into lives.  Adversely, he also wanted those who didn't believe the story to be confident in their beliefs.  He continually stresses in the book that doubt, although necessary for short periods of time, is an atrocity in the long run.  Martel gives Pi as an example in that he did not give up on his belief that Richard Parker existed.  This shows that if we want to believe in something we think is beautiful, but not necessarily probable or even true, we should stick to it and support it unconditionally so that it may become a part of our reality.  People tend to want certainty, but we can't have certainty if we don't deliberately choose our own certainty.  In the end, we're going to live life through our own perspectives, how we choose to look at things. 

LEER

     People read for affirmation and distraction.  Books and stories serve as companions during hard times as they send the message of unity; no one is alone.  During hard times, stories in books send readers to different worlds, different realities.  Reading places a sense of hope that hard times will pass.  To be a reader, you don't have to read often.  You don't have to know every detail of the latest best seller, or know the writing techniques of Twain or Dickenson.  A reader is someone who enjoys to read.  All you have to do is read and enjoy it.  A good reader picks up whats underneath the text.  He or she realizes the message of the story and tries to analyze any further meanings.

     My favorite authors are J.K. Rowling for Harry Potter, Ray Bradbury for Fahrenheit 451, Suzanne Collins for The Hunger Games, and Brigid Lowry for Guitar Highway Rose.  J.K Rowling is that author for me who can take me out my reality and temporarily send me to a better one.  I liked how she didn't even know me, yet she could take away all my stress and uncertainties better than most of my friends simply through a book.  Ray Bradbury served as a teacher for me.  Fahrenheit 451 showed me how to use imagery.  It showed me the language it took to immerse readers and help readers see everything that's happening to better evoke emotions.  Suzanne Collins gave me (and maaannny others) thrill when life became a little boring and slow paced.  She gave me an action movie in the palm of my hands, and with every chapter, I rolled around in my bed giddy and shocked and furious and full of emotion.  Brigid Lowry came to me as an accident, a coincidence.  Looking back, I have no idea why that particular book stands out, but I can only guess it had something to do with the timing and my surroundings.  It has become a distant favorite because it was a book that I finished and thought, "This book is so delicate." I put it down and was afraid it would fall apart.  Honestly, it was cliche and typical, yet it really grasped me.  I almost envied this little world Lowry carefully put together.  It was definitely a simple read, nothing spectacular, definitely for teenagers.  I consider "good reader" part of my identity.  I love to read, much more than I love to write, and I do like trying to analyze relationships and events. 

     I learned to read because every night my mom would go over phonics cards with me and reads simple books with me.  I vividly remember poking her eyeballs and pushing her over trying to keep her awake so she would finish the night's book with me.  Reading stuck, and I read at home constantly.  I remember eagerly running to my mom and screaming, "I finished it by myself!" when I finished my first chapter book.  As a reader I am passionate, yet inconsistent.  I love reading.  I love reading factual information because I love knowing, and I love reading fiction because it forces me to open up my h blocked creativity.  But recently, time and reading have not been the best of friends.  With school and sports, all I ever have the energy to do is sleep.  Every once in a while, I'll push myself to read late at night, but I'll feel bitter sweet the next morning for staying up late.  As a reader, I want to do better in the sense that I want to read more, and I want to learn how to read faster.  By reading faster, I can read more in less time.  I choose to read books that interest me, usually realistic fantasy, but lately, going along with the trend, dystopian society books strike an interest.  I enjoy books that take me other places, but also booms that teach me things and give me new insight on common sitiuations.  I'm required to read books for school, but for the most part I enjoy them.  School is how I met Ray Bradbury.  However, I did not enjoy The Prince and the Pauper or Romeo and Juliet because I didn't like the subject matter or much of the era.  I fear readings that persuasively argue that life has no meaning because I am afraid they ring true.

     From this process, I reencountered my love of reading, and I realized how much I am missing.  I learned that all I need is time, and I should make time.  There should always be time.  This process seemed obligatory and not as enlightening as the process of writing.  I didn't have a problem with this process, it just felt more like homework and less like thinking freely like the first one did.  I think it's because it felt repetitive and there was less of surprise and less 'aha' moments. All in all, it was okay. 

ESCRIBIR

     Writing is a safe-haven.  It's a listener when all friends are gone.  People write to try and make sense of their thoughts as it's an organized way of thinking.  People write to keep records; they want their stories and feats to be remembered and they themselves strive to remember.  Writing also serves as a connection with others.  Someone across the globe experiencing the same experience can write in a such a way that makes others feel less alone.  It's motivating to know others can associate with your own life.  One can "earn" the title of a writer by simply writing.  However, one cannot force a true writer to write; they have to want to write.  They have to find that motivation in themselves.  Additionally, each prompt has to have a level of meaning and thought.  It's the writer's job to convince the reader a subject has a meaning, and the reader should allow the reader's to interpret the subject in a multitude of ways.  Readers should never read a paragraph and think, "There was absolutely no point to that."  A writer knows how to interest others while speaking about what they believe in.  He shouldn't write about something he thinks interests others if it doesn't interest himself.  Where's the passion in that?
     I honestly don't choose books by authors.  However, some writing styles I've enjoyed while reading certain books include that of J.K. Rowling, Ray Bradbury, Agatha Christie, and my best friend Christine.  Both my best friend Christine and J.K. Rowling have the talent of descriptive writing, something I wish I had.  I remember reading a paper Christine did on a day we spent with some friends.  She wrote in a such a way that made me feel I was right back in that day, having a great time.  Not only did she remind me of the detailed events, but she reminded me of my feelings and every aspect of the day.  I yearn for that talent.  J.K. Rowling had me immersed in Harry Potter.  I had a precise image of Hogwarts, Harry, and every other magical element to the novels.  I think the best part was talking to other people about what they imagined in their heads, and learning that they saw the same concept but in different ways.  With Agatha Christie and Ray Bradbury, I desired their brilliance.  Unfortunately, the only books I've read by the two are And Then There Were None and Fahrenheit 451.  But both amazed me in the same way the Harry Potter books had me under a spell.  The brilliance of mystery itself impacted me.  Everything Christie wrote had to be meticulously thought out and every detail accounted for.  What amazed me the most was the fact she aligned it with the poem, "Ten Little Soldiers."  She clearly had a passion for plotting out uncanny situations, and it speaks impressively through her work.  Bradbury's figurative language, although sometimes confusing, provokes depths of thought.  Some concepts he presented in the novel made me stay up and think at night.
     I believe I am a writer, and I can sometimes be a good one.  I believe 'writer' is part of my identity because I only consider the pieces that I feel passionate about to be good work, and I am unashamedly selective with what I am passionate about.  I believe you should be selective, as passions are things that stand out to you, and things that move you.  If everything moved you, you'd be a pretty unstable.  Further, I learned to write through doing.  I figured out my style and organization patterns and just stuck with it.  I am a passionate writer depending on the topic, but I think for the most part I'm quite analytical.  I tend to over analyze things and try to make sense of everything.
     I like to do writings analyzing whys of books, and I also like papers that force you to argue one side.  I feel as though I can write with an urgency and anger that conveys my thoughts passionately and assertively.  I fear and am required to do descriptive writing.  I find it hard to visualize something and write every detail, because I feel like my organization patterns disappear.
     Despite the length, I genuinely enjoyed this experience.  This made me analyze my writing style and writing itself, so I felt I could passionately and confidently convey my thoughts.  I was scared I couldn't write with enough depth, but I think I tried my best to cover all my thoughts in a way that others could relate to.

PHOTOGRAPHIAS

     In my eyes, the picture depicts a snake that ate an elephant.  Each picture has equal potential; they have equal chance to be a better story.  Although the criteria stands as a main factor in story telling, the most important feature is the story teller himself.  How he chooses to tell the story can add a lot of life to the overall story.  Most would be intrigued by a snake eating an elephant, but what if that's all the story entails?  A story containing a hat may include a long, life-threatening adventure with plenty of imagination and unrealistic details that added to the overall story.  Despite both having the potential of greatness, the hat seems to be the "lifeless factuality" as a snake cannot realistically eat an entire elephant.  We see hats everywhere in our life, and to us, as long as we see it, it is true.