Sir Ken Robinson's video connected to Brave New World

     This video was very similar to Brave New World in my opinion.  As Robinson points out, our modern education system is based on the type of thinking of the Industrial Revolution, therefore, everything in school emphasizes efficiency and speed.  Similarly, in Brave New World, their society praises Ford because he was able to come up with an efficient ways to mass produce.  Also, the World State in Brave New World wants to keep manufacturing new people so they can take the place of the people dying and make sure the "machine" never stops, but it is unclear at what they are all working towards, is their goal to create a perfectly efficient way of producing people? If so, what purpose does this serve?  In the same way, modern education is focused on teaching students what they need to know so they can pass and move on to the next grade, but students in high school and below are not taught how to apply their knowledge.  Basically, when students graduate they are left with a brain full of knowledge, but no way to improve the world with it.  Students have little power to change this, they are forced to attend schools (which most follow this format) and can not do anything about it except take their ADHD medications and try to stay awake during class.  Similarly, when Mustapha Mond is reading Bernard's report about John the savage and Bernard criticizes the World State's society, Huxley writes, "Mustapha Mond's anger gave place almost at once to mirth.  The idea of this creature solemnly lecturing him-him-about the social order was too grotesque."  In relation to education, this reflects the idea that the people who enforce our modern system of education and implement standardized testing believe they know what is best for students and rarely listen to students' opinions on education.  Therefore, students are like Bernard, trying to make suggestions on how to improve the current system and the government, or whoever implements the education system is like Mond, denying any constructive criticism of the way things are and believing he knows what is best.

Built Ford Tough

     This quotation proves that society in Brave New World is just a machine, a machine designed to thoughtlessly produce whatever is needed.  The society regards characteristics that we think are inherently human as vile and disgusting.  Therefore, as Mustapha Mond refers to the time before the World State, he says, "The world was full of fathers-was therefore full of misery; full of mothers-therefore of every kind of perversionfrom sadism to chastity" (Huxley 44).  This society regards strong relationships with other people (such as a mother or father) to be dangerous, they regard it as the cause of all blight.  To remedy this "problem," they retard most of population and give them Soma to make the illusion of happiness permanent.  In this society, people are no longer human, but rather mindless robots and this suits the needs of the Alphas.  This system works for the Alphas because it creates stability in society.  The Deltas and Epsilons are unable to question why they do the same meaningless tak everyday because they do not have the ability to think, making them robots in a sense.  Furthermore, Bernard is regarded as an outcast to society because, although an Alpha, he does not follow the standard life that others do.  Huxley ctreats Bernard in this manner to augment how brainwashed the people are, he is the closest thing to being human in the futuristic society.  Also, the students on the tour magnify society's focus on efficiency.  They write down every spoken fact, without truly knowing what is going on in the baby-manufacturing plants.  Basically, the students know everything there is to know about the factory, but can not grasp what is actually happening there, but then again, no one can.  It is the focus on industrialization and efficiency that this futuristic society destroys human nature in the pursuit of technology.

Preparing for an essay on the Tempest

       In discussions of  "The Tempest," one controversial issue has been the subject of colonialism and whether or not Shakespeare supported or opposed the imperialistic habits of European countries.  On the one hand, political commentator George Will claims that literature is valuable because of its beauty and tradition and claims, "The supplanting of esthetic by political response to literature makes literature interesting as mere a mere index of who had power and whom the power victimized."  Will opposes the practice of reading a piece of literature in an unorthodox manner because he believes it discredits the beauty of the piece.  On the other hand, Aime Cesaire's "A Tempest" presents Shakespeare's play in a new light where the characters are not controlled by Prospero and Prospero is portrayed as seeking to destroy Caliban.  Cesaire's play magnifies the argument that Shakespeare wrote the Tempest to criticize colonialism when it was at its peak.  However, my own view is that Shakespeare wrote The Tempest so it could appeal to both colonialism supporters and those who opposed it.  In the Elizabethean era, Shakespeare wrote for the queen, so he had to make it look as though he was praising colonialism; however, textual evidence exists to support the viewpoint that Caliban is exploited by Prospero and that Shakespeare is arguing against colonialism.  Here enlies the true beatuy of the play, it can be interpreted in any way the reader wants.  In Elizabethean England, the people chose to accept the Pro-colonialism reading because they wanted to feel good about themselves.  In today's world, some people in society (with a slightly more suspicious reading) interpret the play to be criticizing colonialism.  The play is not great because of the classic beauty that Will describes, the beauty is that Shakespeare allowed for different interpretations of the play and that literary discussions could develop based on his work.
      In my essay, I will use Will's argument to augment the fact that some people argue that the traditional reading is what makes literature great and then use that to build my argument that literature is great because people can interpret it in different ways and then talk about their interpretations, therefore advancing knowledge about the piece.  I will use Cesaire's play to show how others support the anti-colonialism theme of the play and then use that to show how a different interpretation is beneficial because it may enlighten some people who have never seen the alternative way of reading literature for its unorthodox themes and show them there are alternatives to accpeting the classic interpretation of a piece.