English 170, English One, Yearbook

It’s Not Over Until the Fat Lady Sings (I AM the Fat Lady!)

Written Response #7

Why do you think McCarthy ends the novel with the image of trout in mountain streams before the end of the world? “In the deep glens where they lived all things were older than man and they hummed of mystery” (p. 287). What is surprising about this ending? Does it provide closure, or does it prompt rethinking of of all that has come before? What does it suggest about what lies ahead? Was the ending satisfactory to you? Why or why not? How might you have ended this novel?

Posted on May 29th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | Comments Off

Baby - the Other, Other White Meat

Blog Response #4

Read the following article and answer the questions found at the end of the text.

The term “mob mentality” is used to refer to unique behavioral characteristics which emerge when people are in large groups. It is sometimes used disparagingly, as the term “mob” typically conjures up an image of a disorganized, aggressive, panicked group of people. Social psychologists who study group behavior tend to prefer terms like “herd behavior” or “crowd hysteria.” The study of mob mentality is quite fascinating, and it is used to analyze situations which range from evacuations gone awry to the moment when demonstrations turn violent.

The larger study of herd behavior considers groups of all animals, not just humans. People have been observing group behavior of flocks, herds, gaggles, pods, kindles, and other assortments of animals for thousands of years, but it was not until the early twentieth century that observers started applying scientific theories about crowd behavior to humans. Several books published in the teens discussed mob mentality, along with various ways to combat it.

When used in a pejorative sense, the term implies a group of people which has gotten out of control. For example, in a news story about a store sale at which people were trampled, the journalist might use “mob mentality” to describe the selfish behavior of the people who attended the sale. Such stories illustrate the desperate actions which people will involve themselves in during a period of resource competition; people may mob trucks with relief supplies, trample each other at big box stores, or riot in the streets in response to resource scarcity or a perceived scarcity.

However, “mob mentality” is about more than just crowds which have gotten out of control. The field of psychology is very interested in the ways in which human behavior change in response to new social situations. People behave very differently in small groups of individuals than they do in big crowds, for example, and their behavior in crowds is affected by a wide variety of factors.

The study of group behavior can analyze situations to see where, when, and why they went wrong. Stock market crashes, for example, can be precipitated by mob mentality, as people start to panic in response to fluctuating markets. The evacuation of the Titanic, in which a small fraction of the available lifeboat space was utilized, is another great example of mob mentality, illustrating the need for organized evacuation plans and drills so that people know what to do in an emergency.

The study of crowds has also been used to study grim topics like the rise of antisemitism in Germany under Hitler, the riots between Muslims and Hindus which broke out when India was partitioned, and the genocide which took place in Rwanda in 1994. Psychologists hope that by studying mob mentality and crowd behavior, they can prevent such events from recurring.

Smith, S.E. What is Mob Mentality? WiseGEEK. 2008. Conjecture Corportation. 5 Feb. 2008 <http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-mob-mentality.htm>.

Blog Questions:

1. What evidence is there that the people in The Road are function at the “mob mentality” level?

2.  Who might be more susceptible to “mob mentality”? Adults or teenagers? Or is there a difference?

 

Posted on May 28th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | 5 Comments »

The Long and Winding Road Leads To…?

Written Response #6

The Road takes the form of a classic journey story, a form that dates back to Homer’s Odyssey. To what destination are the men and boy journeying? In what sense are they “pilgrims”? What, if any, is the symbolic significance of their journey?

Posted on May 28th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | Comments Off

The Whole Truth and Nothing but the TRUTH!

Blog Response #3:

Read the following article and answer the questions found at the end of the text.

Honesty and Deception in a Complex World
By Chris Wood, Vice President, Santa Fe Institute

Can we justify being less than fully truthful to a spouse, child or aging parent to avoid causing them pain? Even this seemingly simple question demonstrates that intentions and motives add immense complexity and depth to the roles honesty and deception play in human interactions. Attempting to understand phenomena such as honesty and deception in their broadest social, biological and physical science contexts is a central research strategy of Cormac McCarthy and his colleagues at the Santa Fe Institute.

“You dont believe me.
I believe you.
Okay.
I always believe you.
I dont think so.
Yes I do. I have to” (p. 156).

That interchange between father and son in The Road exemplifies the patchwork of truths, part-truths, “white lies” and deliberate deception that permeates our interactions with each other. The moral and ethical values many societies place on telling the truth may compete with other important motives. Differences among cultures in those roles complicate the picture even further. The oath our judicial system requires of witnesses—”to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”—acknowledges that truth and falsehood are not a simple binary distinction and emphasizes there are numerous ways, in addition to outright lies, we can cheat the truth.

While we usually think of honesty and deception in the context of human communication, it has long been known that animals use elaborate means of deception. Some nonpoisonous butterflies, for example, have evolved wing patterns similar to those of poisonous species as a means of deceiving and avoiding predators. Animal communication was initially thought to have evolved as a means of facilitating social interactions by the interchange of reliable information. In the competitive world of natural selection, however, deceptive communication becomes as important as reliable communication in achieving competitive advantage. If senders could benefit by deceiving receivers, then the frequency of deception would increase. Receivers would in turn evolve means of disregarding deceptive signals, creating what John Maynard Smith has called an “arms race” in which honest and deceptive strategies are “at war” to enable greater fitness. A branch of mathematics known as game theory, originally developed in economics, has become widely used in evolutionary biology for understanding interactions among such competing strategies.

The complex interplay of honesty and deception in the evolutionary context becomes dramatically richer and more nuanced when we consider the intentions of human senders and receivers. (The nature and extent of intentions and other mental states in nonhumans is an important focus of current philosophical and scientific inquiry.) Scientists and philosophers have suggested that the selective advantage of the ability to evaluate the mental states and intentions of others may be one of the important forces driving brain evolution in higher primates and humans. The concept “theory of mind” is now widely used to refer to this ability to attribute mental states (such as beliefs, desires and intentions) to others. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that the size of our neocortex (the region of the brain that has enlarged most extensively in humans compared to other primates) has been reported to correlate with the rate of deception in primate species.

Is the level to which we are capable of deception a reflection of our evolved nature? Is there any value in being able to deceive others?

Posted on May 27th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | 6 Comments »

Carrying the Fire

Written Response #5:As the father is dying, he tells his son he must go on in order to “carry the fire.” When the boy asks if the fire is real, the father says, “It’s inside you. It was always there. I can see it” (p.279). What is this fire? Why is it so crucial that they not let it die?

Posted on May 27th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | Comments Off

“There is no God and we are his prophets” (p.170)

Written Response #4

 

Read p. 161-174

 

a. What is the significance of this meeting on the road with “Ely”? Why does this old man call himself “Ely”? Hint: What biblical allusion is McCarthy making here? How does the biblical story of Eli relate to the Ely of The Road?

 

b. What do you think Ely (or McCarthy) means when he says “There is no God and we are his prophets”?

 

Posted on May 22nd, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | Comments Off

Survival of the Nicest?

 Blog Response #2:

Read the article below and then answer the following questions:

a. How does this article relate to The Road? What conclusions can we draw about McCarthy’s belief about human behavior and survival?

b. McCarthy envisions a postapocalyptic world in which “murder was everywhere upon the land” and the earth would soon be “largely populated by men who would eat your children in front of your eyes” (p.181). How difficult or easy is it to imagine McCarthy’s nightmare vision actually happening? Do you think people would likely behave as they do in the novel, under the same circumstances? Does it now seem that human civilization is headed toward such an end?

 

Selfishness and Altruism in The Road
By John H. Miller, Research Professor, SFI, and Professor of Economics and Social Science and Head, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University

“Yes. But in the stories we’re always helping people and we dont help people” (p. 280).

The starkness of the human interactions described in Cormac McCarthy’s The Road illuminates one of the most fundamental questions that arises about human nature: Are we fundamentally selfish or altruistic? The answer to this question has perplexed scientists for centuries, including McCarthy and his scientific colleagues at the Santa Fe Institute.

True altruism requires not only that we are nice to one another, but that we also do so at a real cost to ourselves without any expectation of any possible gain. Consider that while a honey bee may sacrifice itself by stinging an attacker to save the hive, its hivemates are so closely related genetically that the act provides some benefit to the sacrificial bee (or, at least to its genetic material). The biologist J.B.S. Haldane nicely summarized such a situation when he was asked whether he would give his life to save his brother and answered, “No, but I would to save two brothers or eight cousins.” Being nice to someone with an expectation that they will be nice back to you in return also doesn’t qualify as true altruism. Leaving a large tip at a restaurant you frequent is a far different act than doing so at a roadside diner that you will never return to again.

In recent years, social scientists have begun to do experiments designed to highlight human altruism. For example, suppose that you are given a pile of 20 one-dollar bills, and in private you are allowed to pocket whatever portion of the pile you would like and place the remaining money (if any) into an envelope that will be given anonymously to someone else. How much money would you give away? Would your choice change if, say, for every dollar you gave away the other person received twice (or half) that amount?

It turns out that the vast majority of the subjects participating in such experiments behave in a manner that reflects very thoughtful decision-making behavior. Moreover, while about half the subjects do tend to be fairly selfish, the remaining subjects often pass substantial amounts of money to others. We are just beginning to understand the limits of such behavior. For example, if you give subjects a bit of “moral wiggle room'’ (by perhaps letting an initial coin flip—that can be easily overturned—determine their choice) or reframe the problem as taking money away versus giving money, very different patterns of behavior emerge. 

 

Posted on May 22nd, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | 7 Comments »

Style on the Road to Nowhere

Written response question #3:

We have to stop, he said.

It’s really cold.

I know.

Where are we?

Where are we?

Yes.

I dont know.

If we were going to die would you tell me?

I don’t know. We’re not going to die. (p. 94)

McCarthy has an unmistakable prose style.  What do you see as the most distinctive features of that style? How is the writing in The Road in some ways more like poetry than narrative prose? Find an example in the text (like the one above) that reads more like poetry than prose.  Write it down and note the page number.  Explain how your example is like poetry. Are there any specific poetic terms utlized in the passage? What about form and structure? Syntax? Be prepared to share your answer with the class.  Bonus: Write your own “poem/prose” ala McCarthy’s style about a topic near and dear to your heart.

Example:

We have to leave.

Yes.

The snow is to my knees.

I know.

I cannot find the cat.

You cannot find the cat.

Yes.

Hes under the snow.

Yes.

Would you tell me if he was dead?

Maybe. Hes not dead.

 

Posted on May 20th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | Comments Off

“It’s the End of the World as We Know It…and I Feel Fine!” (R.E.M)

Blog Discussion Question #1:  Read through the following article and then answer the questions at the end (on the blog).

The following article is from the Sante Fe Institute.

 

Extinction and Reemergence of Life
By Doug Erwin, Senior Scientist and Curator of Paleobiology at the National Museum of Natural History of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington D.C., and part-time resident faculty member of SFI

If Cormac McCarthy knows what caused the cataclysm in The Road, he’s not telling, and we’re all left to speculate. Was it a nuclear exchange? A massive volcanic eruption? The impact of an extraterrestrial object? We don’t know, and in some sense, it does not really matter. But we do know a good deal about what happens after such events. Geologists and paleontologists (who study fossils) have studied how plants and animals responded to the six great mass extinctions of the past 600 million years, as well as smaller events such as massive volcanic eruptions. The first organisms to reappear are often ferns and weedy flowering plants that reproduce and spread rapidly. In the sea many microbes and some algae spread rapidly.

The deforestation described in The Road would release nutrients from the land into rivers, lakes and the ocean, encouraging further growth. Eventually slower growing species would begin to reemerge. Understanding these events is a great scientific challenge, because new ecological communities would most likely operate with different rules than communities that exist before such catastrophes. Why this should happen is not clear, but it emphasizes that the aftermath of such catastrophes may not be a rebuilding of previous relationships but the construction of an entirely new world.

What do you think happened to the earth? Why doesn’t McCarthy ever tell us specifically what happened? What is the affect of his “not telling” on the theme and tone of the novel?

Posted on May 20th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | 7 Comments »

The Beginning

Read the first paragraph of The Road.

Written Response question #1: What is the tone of this paragraph? List the words that give this passage its tone.

 Written Response question #2: What is the signifigance of this vision? Why does McCarthy begin his story with this vision?

 

Posted on May 14th, 2009 by hiltsl
Filed under: Novels | Comments Off