What You Like is Not Always Good

Criticism and Fiction by William Dean Howells serves to ask readers to really consider and analyze a literary work instead of labeling it good because they like it. It seems as though our logic of good and bad isn't always applied to literary works like it should be. In our lives, if a person likes alcohol to excess and is an alcoholic, it is still bad even though it feels good. Howells states, "Their taste has been perverted by their false criticism, which is based upon personal preference, and not upon principle; which instructs a man to think that what he likes is good, instead of teaching him first to distinguish what is good before he likes it" (Howell 1). Howell believes Jane Austen was the last author to have a mastery of this art. Her writings were good because she treated the matter she wrote about with entire truthfulness. Her principles, not personal preference, are evidenced in the book. This is what Howell believes distinguishes her writings from those of bad writers. Anthony Trollope followed Jane Austen's suit, except his instinct was to much for his ideal. He believed the civic relations and a bourgeois soul were equivalent to life, however his literary works expressed beauty in life. 


Fiction is a declining literary sector because it had become based upon fads and not the authors beliefs and principles. Vampire books have become very widely written, not because writers like vampires, but because it is a popular topic and will sell a lot of books. Fiction is "continued debasement as an art" (Howell 1), due to this developing economic standard. Jane Austen's book is popular because it encompasses not only romance which is a popular sector, but also because Austen really placed her beliefs in the book and when we read her books we can take a little piece of the Jane's principle pie. 

It's A Hardknock Life For Us

Life in the Iron Mills is a very depressing story which follows the lives of workers in an iron mill. The story develops by setting the scene which incases a smoke-covered factory in which hunger and poverty rates run extremely high. Some people are so poor that they can not even afford the mill's cheap housing and instead have to sleep on the stacks of the iron dust. After that sad description, we learn of Deborah, a work-working woman who is quite homely. Her body shows years of malnutrition and hard-labor. She is delivering a sandwich to a worker named Hugh. She walks many, many miles and once she arrives and gives Hugh the sandwich she can tell he is eating the sandwich out of pity instead of hunger.


While at the mill, the group realizes four strange men walking around the factory. Instead of continuing their work like they normally do when the routine inspections come along, the workers, this time, stop their work and analyze the strange men. They seem to be discussing voting amongst the workers. The men stop and recognize a small, beautiful statue of a woman. The level of detail and detail in the woman in tremendous. The artist, Hugh, should not be forced to work in these slums because he has potential to be a great man. All he needs is money to dig himself out of this hole- money that he has no way of acquiring until a friend named Deborah gave him stolen money. Hugh puzzled over whether to keep the money or give it back but ended up deciding to keep the money because he was "worth it". In the end, Hugh should have given up the money because he is later arrested and sentenced to nineteen years in prison. While in prison, Hugh commits suicide. 


The meaning of the story is very confusing. While it serves to show the truth on the American industrial industry, it also shows that America was not the land of prosperity that it set out to be. America has said to be the land where someone can go from nothing to something with enough hard work and dedication. This story rejects that opinion because Hugh had worked many hard years in the iron mills, and when he finally got his break to become something, the prison door was shut in his face. Hugh didn't steal the money and he was seemingly penalized for believing in himself. 


Hugh is the model of many American hopefuls who end up becomes nobodies. How many wannabe starlets move to LA or New York only to end up working in McDonalds or some other lower society position. The opportunities are open for those who already have their foot in door. No door will magically open unless you already have the means to make it happen. 


Question: Have you ever felt as though your dreams were smashed because of where you fell on the social ladder?

"Nope, I have the caffeine patch. It's my invention. Each patch is the equivalent of 12 cups of coffee. You can stay up for days with no side effects. Ahhh! Sorry."

                      In Jamais Cascio's article, he talks about how technology is not an evil, like "Is Google Making us Stupid?" argues, in fact, the truth is quite the opposite. Cascio believes that technology is making us smarter. He believes that all the details and tid bits increased technology made available, is picked up by our brain and stored away for future use without us even consciously doing so. Cascio calls this automatic gathering of information, fluid intelligence. The technological advancements for fluid intelligence go hand in hand with pharmaceutical improvements.  


                      Cascio says that in the drug field, scientists created a drug, called modifinil, that allows you to stay up for 32 hours straight without completely confusing your sleep schedule. In addition to pushing off sleep, the drug also allows people to think more alertly and with more clarity and focus. A Cambridge study supports Cascio's findings. "concluded the modifinil confers a measurable cognitive-enhancement effect across a variety of mental tasks, including pattern recognition and spatial planning, and sharpens focus and alertness" (Casico 3). Casico concludes that through the use of technology we get smarter, and our fluid intelligence increases. 


                     I think the findings in Casico's story to be eye-opening and kind or startling. The sleep process for humans is not only a time for physical rest but also a time for mental and emotion regeneration. A sleep deprived person can act recklessly and foolishly because their brain is hindered from exhaustion. According to Casico's theory, the brain would find a different way to refuel and while sleep-deprived it would actually work more efficiently. I find this dangerous because it goes against our nature. I believe that humans need that time everyday to sleep just to remain sane. Hustling and bustling artificially for 36 hours is unhealthy and has to have detrimental effects somewhere else on the body. 


Question: Would you truly like to be able to stay awake for 36 hours straight?

Am I Getting Dumber?

"Is Google Making Us Stupid?" by Nicolas Carr unwraps a big problem in American society- the way in which we learn. Nicolas states before the internet was so widely used and accepted he would have to spend  days gathering information for a project but now with the internet this research takes only hours. This is due to a change in the way we learn. How often do we skim an article without even realizing we aren't really focusing deeply on the details? I know I personally do this a lot and it kind of scares me. Us Americans especially have so much information at our fingertips and yet we don't utilize this gift as much as we should. We skim the paragraphs, click an other link, skim that article, and repeat. Our brains now learn in little bits and pieces because we are constantly going back and forth between documents.

In addition to the quality with which we read and the way we learn, I think Nicolas should have touched on the quantity of material we should know but dont and google daily. By this I mean, I still have to google cooking conversion tables while I'm cooking even though I should have them remembered by heart. Because of the readily available materials we are less likely to remember things. This is because if we forget something we googled, we can always google it again.


Question: How many google searches do you search per day?