Our Fascination with Rags to Riches

Nowadays, I would be hard-pressed to find anyone who hasn't heard of the internet sensation Susan Boyle. The instant celebrity made her fame on a reality show in Britain, and has since been playing on youtube non-stop. This is just another classic example of our love for the story of one who started with nothing and went straight to the top. And I have no doubt that if this woman was in her twenties and much more attractive, she wouldn't have recieved the unbelievable attention she has now.
But the more I hear people talk about this sensation that took everyone by surprise, the more suspicious I get. I believe that most T.V. networks are well aware of our fascination for this kind of story. And to think that no one had known this woman could sing is a stretch. My synical grandpa has this same view, with a lot more certainty. He is positive that this is just another "reality" moment on TV that isn't completely reality.
We all know how popular reality television has become over the past decade. And many realize how far from reality these programs will stray to keep its viewers hooked. I mean, let's admit it. Real life isn't always that exciting.
So I guess what my grandfather was trying to convey was to hold a certain view of skeptisism whenever possible.

Tea Party like its 1773

I have been alive for only 17 tax days in my life. But only one was met with a revolutionary-style protest...as far as I know.
Apparently, this year about 800 Americans were fed up paying taxes that they didn't want to pay. I thought that was part of the American dream? I was under the assumption that people, whether they knew it or not, were indirectly funding some projects they might not agree with. But living in a democracy, we try to appeal to the majority, while accepting the fact that the losing side would just have to deal with the representatives they didn't want. It seems like life today is filled with sacrifices that the nation makes in order to make the majority happy, even if that majority is 50.1%.
So in my honest opinion, I think some people are getting a bit grumpy about something they know that they have to deal with as Americans. Im sure these same protestors have gotten thier way (politicaly) in the past, and had no problem that some fellow Americans just had to deal with it.
A question that keeps on occuring in my head is this: Should we as Americans just accept defeat when we aren't part of the majority, or should further advocation of one's less common beliefs be allowed and acceptable? On one hand, we as a nation were born through that "never die" attitude. Yet on the other hand, how could we get anything done as a country if only unanimous decisions were followed through with?

U.S. vs Them

Our new unit revolving around the American war experience has really forced me to think about what our image as a country has become. Since the early 1900s, we have made some questionable decisions in terms of forighn policy. Many of our imperialistic actions (especially in the Philippines) have revealed what our true goals are. Although we seemed to want to believe we minded our own business, I have come to the conclusion that our "business" may lead us across the world. I found a slightly dated article showing our former president Bush's view on our foriegn policy of choice. Looking back, it is very interesting to see how far we've come since one of our more unpopular president was preaching anti-isolationism. Now president Obama seems to be right on track.
It seemed to me like the war in the middle east wasn't largely supported by the public. I was very much expecting more progress in this direction when the Obama's moved into the White House. But now I am seeing a comeback to the pouring of money and troops into the conflict across the world.
Looking back on earlier articles is very interesting, and a good way to "check up" on any promises you watched disapear from the media.

Lincoln vs. Darwin

I was very interested when just minutes ago, sitting on my computer, I visited the Google website. I don't know if you've ever seen it, but it's actually pretty cool. On certain dates they change the logo to represent the holiday or event. So, as we all know, today is Abe Lincoln's 200th birthday. And upon opening google, I was shocked to find them celebrating Darwins birthday instead!!!

Now take a deap a breath and think before you punch a hole in that computer screen of yours. I know what you're thinking. "How could they commit such an atrocity?!?!" I mean, this isn't anyone's 200th birthday they're choosing to ignore. This is the guy on every penny I have.

And I have a lot of pennies.

So I began to think, "What does this tell me about what Google truly values?"
They apparently thought more people would be expecting to see some Darwin recognition today as opposed to remembering Abe.

They obviously weren't at New Trier today.

I guess, to put it plainly, the guys and girls at Google just don't have that same obsession with our 16th President that the social studies depatment does.

Army Commercials

As soon as we were given the assignment of finding something overly romanticized, I knew what I was going to criticize. It was something that I see regularly, and I wouldn't be surprised if I see it again before I go to sleep. I'm talking about those glamorous Army commercials trying to recruit kids to join any of the armed forces.
They usually all have some very dramatic music playing in the background, while showing how much joining the army will improve one's life, or how cool people look in the uniforms. They portray all soldiers as highly-respectable people living the "American Dream." They come from the working class, looking to serve their country. And then after a short time lapse, they come out of the army with families and great, successful careers. All of the soldiers are good-looking men or women who seem to be far away from any kind of combat. If these commercials showed any of the horrors of war, very few people would even consider signing up.
Becoming a servant of our country in any way is a great thing, but these commercials that I see almost daily overly romanticize the life one would lead after joining the army. First off, the advertisements completely neglect to tell the viewer the risk they would run joining the army, and the dangers that come with becoming a soldier. Currently, we are still in a war overseas. That war has produced thousands of American casualties. Death is a part of war, but when commercials like these over romanticize becoming a soldier, they make it something it is not.

Superbowl

First off, I hope I don't offend any die-hard superbowl fans out there. But if there is anything more romanticized than the media frenzy surrounding one single football game, I would be highly amused (among other things).
I sat and watched what used to be a great display of sportsmanship and athleticism turned into product after product thrown at me in so many ways they begin to lose their uniqueness. The game itself seems to have become just another opportunity for crazy, out-of-the-box marketing schemes (which I guess must be working considering how much these companies pay per commercial).
Maybe I'm going crazy, but lately I've been a bit put off by the fact that many viewers watch the superbowl simply for the commercials. Now I've got to give some credit to these genius marketeers, who no longer have to break a sweat over getting their product's name out to the public. They have instead found a way to have potential customers flock by the millions to their T.V. and actually look forward to hearing what new kind of car they can't afford, or what new drinks still actually taste the same.
So I'm actually trying to speak for the football fan, and maybe there are still a few out there, who actually wants to watch an hour-long game in an hour and not feel the consequences of a nation overly romanticizing a single sporting event.

How Far We've Come

In our new age of google and this blogging thing, our class has been one of many things to adapt and use this "progress" to our advantage. The argument that the way we aquire knowledge has fundamentally changed is very interesting, and I as a 16 year old interprets this claim differently than someone who grew up learning how to "deep read." As we began reading "Self-Reliance," I began to notice what exactly Nicholas Carr was talking about in his article. Deep reading requires a lot of concentration and I believe it is an aquired skill. That is why our older generations have began to notice this change in thinking behavior. For us kids, this change has been implanted in our brains much earlier, and therefore, I accept the fact that I prefer short, concise pieces of information. I am used to having not necessarily a shorter attention span, but one that calls for a different medium to process information as efficiently.