School Isn't School

William Ralph Inge wrote an interesting quote that states: "The aim of education is the knowledge not of facts but of values." I feel like Mr. William makes a valid point: the aim of education is knowledge of value, or at least it should be in my opinion. However, even if I agree that the aim of education should be value, I disagree that it actually happens because in schools today, it's set up in a way that students can't think for themselves. The school system tries so hard to make everything fair with grades and facts that must be learned in order to get a good grade. Schools get us to learn the type of math that we end up not using in our everyday lives and that to me is like wasted time. I agree, calculus gets your brain going and expands the way you think which is good, but does that really let people know the type of person that you are, for example? Schools want us to have at least a little understanding of everything. However, when you're in the real world and you're stuck with adult problems like not having good credit, biology isn't going to help you.Why do we have to cram a bunch of facts of court cases and definitions? I believe that we should challenge our brain, but also challenge others to really understand the value of  our value. In my opinion, things of value are how to file taxes, maintain good credit, the house mortgage, etc. and it could be taught at schools to really prepare us for life.

There are different definitions of value. Adult things that I mentioned above are valuable to our lives. They're essential to maintaining a steady life. High school is a place where you get a little bit of everything to understand what you like so you can have a focus on that specific subject in college. College teaches you more about your focus and then you get a job. However, the problem with that is that doesn't really teach you VALUE. To me, I feel so caught up with grades and homework that I forget who I am. Education is the art of learning something you didn't know before. Someone can't teach you value because that comes within yourself. Whatever your morals and beliefs are, that is what you value most. Something I find interesting is, for example, the people who are running for president. Each candidate is explaining what they value most and what they have to offer the country. Some citizens may agree with one candidate while the others may agree with the other candidate. People will fight for what they believe in, even if it creates tension between a friendship. No one can change one's values and I feel like that should be taught at school. I think that's what William Ralph Inge meant by the aim trying to be more on value. Schools should teach us how to stand up for ourselves and speak up to defend what we believe in, not debating whether when the Spanish-American war was. Facts will be around forever, but I feel like there should be time taken out of the school day to remember what you believe in and maybe even challenge it.

You're Unoriginal

I didn't realize that literature has a lot in common with music. The title says "One Story" and they mean it. As more years go by, stories become less unique because you've heard it before somewhere. The reason I say literature is the same as music is because the example that Foster uses at the end of the chapter makes so much sense. We borrow from others without even knowing because it's been around for so long we've become familiar with it. Foster was right when he says that familiar literature never leaves us and it becomes a part of us. He uses someone playing the guitar as an example and he just plays what he's heard throughout his life. Of course the non musician is amazed because he doesn't understand music. However, the musician says it's no big deal because he's playing what he's heard. In fact, a famous musician would look at him as unoriginal based on his playing of familiar tunes and nothing else. They're not new compositions nor are they his. This could be an advantage because not everyone is familiar with literature. However, the person who is can immediately tell the resemblance from other texts and where they're from. Whatever story we try to create, it's going to sound like something that has already been written no matter what. Sometimes authors borrow from each other but they do it in a nice way. The author can create a sentence just how the other author would, mimicking the language and structure for example, and then credit them for being better at it than they are. Or for new authors that are rookie writers for the first time can write something and believe it's original because it's theirs and they wrote it. It doesn't mean it's actually original because it could've been used before. 

Not only does it happen with texts, but with ideas as well. Now a days, it's hard to create something unique. If you want to write a story about a man getting abnormal animal or insect powers, that's already been taken by Spider-Man. Something as crazy as putting all the fairy tales together, that's not unique anymore because they made a move out of that. Something that doesn't involve people but cars: Fast and Furious. Cars turning into people sounds like transformers. We may borrow from others as freely as we'd like because ideas in literature are out there on our fingertips. Additionally, it's also difficult to find the originals of something new when it was first created because even if you did find it, it's not going to sound like what you just read. Especially if it's from so long ago. Things change over time. Sometimes they even create the same thing on purpose. For example, the movie Karate Kid. It was made a long time ago and then a new one was made with Jackie Chan and Jaden Smith. The movie titles are also the same, just the fact that they're different eras, they reflect the views and beliefs of that era. I just think it's cook how literature shares a lot of other texts to create something new. Some authors even use allusions in their texts. The point is that Foster is right: everything is one story because everything is shared.

Life-Part Two (Rebirth)

Automatically while reading this chapter, I thought of Forrest Gump. When Foster brings up the idea of rebirth, it reminded me of Forrest saving Lt. Dan. Foster includes the story of two brothers and surprisingly, the stronger one dies. The weak brother is then  upset and wants to commit suicide because he feels that it should've been him that had to die, not his brother. But at that moment, when he comes up from the water, it appears he has been baptized. Conrad, the weaker brother, takes on life with a new perspective because the near death experience allowed him to be born again. He can't really understand his new position in life, but he slowly accepts it. When he talks with a professional therapist, it becomes clear to Conrad that he has always been strong because he had the strength to hold on to the boat while his brother didn't have the strength. In Forrest Gump, Forrest is sent to the Vietnam war as a soldier. One day in combat, he sees Lt. Dan near his death so Forrest decides to save him since he knows it's the right thing to do. Lt. Dan gets so mad at him because he was supposed to die in the battlefield with honor like the rest of his family had. He had his whole life planned out: he goes to war, fights in combat, and dies with honor. Forrest saves him and that wasn't in the script. Lt. Dan later finds Forrest after a couple of years since the incident. He thanked Forrest for saving him since he never did and Forrest didn't recognize him since he was in a wheelchair without any legs. During the middle of the movie, I feel like Lt. Dan was reborn because Lt.Dan swims away to make peace with God and later goes to Forrest's wedding with a new pair of legs and a fiancee. It makes sense because in the movie, he specifically states he's making peace with God while swimming in WATER. The symbolic scene of him swimming away to be with God was when he was getting baptized which is why he comes back a new man with a new life.

Something I didn't really pay attention to was how many times something specific can happen. Foster uses an example from "Song of Solomon" and points out how Milkman got wet three times. Three is a holy number in baptism because it signifies the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In his last swim, he's more happy with himself. He is reborn. This chapter has shown me that I have to pay attention to things like water, clean or dirty, similar actions to being born, if there's a change in behavior, and maybe the number of times it happens. When I said clean or dirty water, I was referring back to the example that Foster used from "The Horse Dealer's Daughter." A young woman nearly drowns herself and a doctor saves her. She's covered in slimy and smelly fluid, but is later cleaned up and wrapped in a blanket. The scene itself is birth. However in this case, it's rebirth. Everything is described similar to a birth and the fact that the young woman nearly drowns portrays that she would've actually died if it wasn't for the doctor being nearby to save her. The young woman's life sounds like she was lost because before she was going to kill herself, she cleaned her mother's grave wanting to be with her again. A mother being taken away is just as unfortunate as the feeling afterwards. After being reborn thanks to the doctor, hopefully she has the strength to continue and find a new and better life. I don't really know how the story ends because I haven't read the book, but that's my guess. I understand the title of the chapter because if the character doesn't come up, obviously the character dies. But if the character does come up, there's a chance they'll be reborn and have a new beginning to their life with a different perspective.