Hypocrisy: Donut Deny

I've always understood that being a hypocrite is a natural thing: it's easy for anybody to watch Honey Boo Boo and say "Wow, they should get off their couch and start doing some stuff that could positively impact the world" when the viewer himself/herself is sitting on the couch watching reality TV. However, the three articles we studied in class this week showed me that our nation and its values are planted in hypocrisy. 

Every Fourth of July, everyone celebrates the work of our founding fathers, including our buddy Thomas Jefferson, for granting us independence. However, the freedom they asked for is not the same as the freedom I have today as an Asian-American. I don’t like the term Asian-American, because my nationality is just American, but for the purpose of my argument, and also in the eyes of our founding fathers, I am Asian-American. Decades after the US became an independent country, our “leaders” still continued to oppress the people of their country. If I had been alive during the time of the Revolution, the nation’s independence would not have granted me freedom, but instead a change in my oppressors. The Declaration is a list of grievances against the King, which, if reworded, could be used against the creators of the document. So, that’s exactly what the feminist movement did. Their document cried of oppression of every kind; their accusations against men seemed endless. Stanton was not mistaken—it is true that the women of the nation at that time were significantly inferior to the men. However, in 1848, when the Declaration of Sentiments was signed, many women were still unafraid to treat their slaves the same way that the men treat them.

All in all, even though centuries have passed and the movement for women’s rights is still ongoing and racism is still prominent in people’s everyday lives, I sure am glad to be alive now instead of back then. 

I Donut Know Where to Start

Let me just put it out there that reading the end of The Scarlet Letter was infuriating. If there is any literary term for the antonym of Verisimilitude, please let me know, for as of right now, I’m just going to make up my own word for it—TheEndofTheScarletLetter. I could rant for pages, but I’ll just touch up on the basics.

The tragic hero, Dimmesdale, was thoroughly disappointing. Even when he was ignorant and overly pious in the beginning of the novel, at least he had his own backbone. In the scene at the woods, he dared to say “I pray you, if thou hast any means of pacifying the child, do it forthwith! … Pacify her, if thou lovest me!” Words cannot describe how disturbed I was by this dialogue. By taking in Dimmesdale, Hester is basically taking in another child. Does he really think that she’s choosing to have Pearl be this wild rampant of a child (can you tell I dislike Pearl also)?

In the end, when Dimmesdale repents his sin to the community, he decides to just drop dead and leave his family behind. Sure, I understand that his death did have symbolism and that it created dramatic effect and character development, but just because it is the seventeenth century does not allow one to defy the laws of universe and drop dead whenever he pleases! If anything, I thought that revealing his sin would make him stronger in the way that it did for Hester. Dimmesdale is supposedly the tragic hero, but to me, he is the most tragic tragic hero I have ever read about.

I feel as if I’m always super angry after reading an archaic classic; what they used to find beautiful and romantic (i.e. Romeo and Juliet), I just find humorous. It’s a good thing that Hester is a strong, independent woman who don’t need no man. 

A symbolism of Pearl in the modern day society

I'm Running Out of Donut Related Title Ideas

Before we began The Scarlet Letter unit, scarlet, to me, was just a pretentious way of saying red. I spent a good few minutes trying to search "The Scarlett Letter" on google, but instead just continuously ending up with Scarlett Johansson all over my search results. 

Since then, I've heard the class discuss many connotations of the colors red and scarlet. In class, red was always seen as the color of the devil—dark and evil. We always assume that any red is the color of sin, which is why Hester has to wear her symbol in scarlet, and why she dresses pearl in all red to remind her of her sins. Even Wikipedia, the most valid source of all time, mentions how “scarlet is often associated with immortality and sin, particularly prostitution or sin.”

Yet, I’ve grown up knowing red as a color of celebration and happiness. In the Chinese Culture, red is commonly seen during Chinese New Year and weddings. Whereas brides in the western world wear white, Chinese brides are clad in vibrant red. White is worn to funerals instead. It’s difficult to categorize colors with a specific connotation when they could have completely different meanings to different people with different backgrounds and cultures. Besides, how can you assume red is all bad when you've got these?

Donut Identify Me With My Weird Blog Theme

I have always heard that high school is a good time to find your identity. However, similarly to Hester's situation, a high schooler does not simply find his or her own identity, but is instead branded with one. I’ve noticed that many times, people are known more by an activity that they participate in or an event that impacted their life than their name. Unfortunately, I am a hypocrite in this case.

        I don’t go to football games. Maybe it’s because I’m scared of that mono-infested donkey head or whatever animal it is, or maybe because I can’t see over anyone’s head in the student section of the bleachers. I am possibly the most ignorant student in all of Troy High when it comes to football; I can only faintly tell you how it works and what its objective is. In a school of 1.4 thousand people, it is easy for me to be completely unfamiliar with Troy High’s football and the people involved in it, while still maintaining a (pitiful) social life. Someone could give me name of a football player, and I’d just blink and stare back. However, if he or she said “Number 99? Neon-pink-spandex-shorts-for-spirit-week dude?” I’d automatically be able to envision the face of the person—forever pink spandex football dude number 99 instead of his name, Austin Mahoney. There is so much more to Mr. Mahoney that I will never know about, but he will never be able to escape the identity that I hypothetically branded him with.

        Maybe Mr. Mahoney will one day go to college in Austria and create a new path for himself, but he must not forget that high school is just a microcosm of the “real world”. Unless he beats society to its own game, the cycle will repeat, and Mr. Mahoney will be branded once again.

You do you, Austin Mahoney. 

“Donut Stereotype: They’re All Demeaning and Offensive”

As the daughter of two Asian immigrant parents, I am no stranger to stereotypes. I've probably heard them all--short, bad driver, smarter than average. For years, I've told myself that I would defy these stereotypes—maybe not the short part, but “I will be a wonderful driver, thank you very much.” However, the more that I think about it, the more that I realize that I am not ashamed to fall into every single Asian stereotype. 

(I don't know martial arts, but I wish I did).

Stereotypes were not created out of thin air—they are stereotypes because they are common. Do all Canadians have a fiery passion for hockey? No, but a lot of them do. Are all Caucasian girls clad in a long Northface parka and Uggs in the winter time? No, but a lot of them are. We create our own stereotypes—people did not originally jump to conclusions about a certain group of people to shame them, but instead to speak what they know and what they have observed. I’m not saying that it is acceptable to stereotype. However, I am saying that it is inevitable. Everybody does, and everybody will, the difference in it being conscious or subconscious. How the certain groups of people react to the stereotypes are what causes the dramatics. It is not uncommon to see these kinds of posts that joke about the actions of the “basic white girl”. Conversely, if an article was posted about the actions of the “basic black girl”, the “basic Indian girl”, etc., the internet would explode. One article is classified as a list of humorous stereotypes, but the others are classified as just flat-out racist. If a filmmaker portrays a new Asian immigrant with broken English and a bowl of rice for lunch, it is considered an offensive and racist stereotype. However, if the filmmaker instead portrays the new immigrant with perfect English and a slice of lasagna for lunch, it is still considered offensive and racist because the filmmaker tried so hard to defy the stereotypes that he made it seem like the Asian culture is inferior. All in all, there is no way to win with stereotypes, but there is also no way to avoid it. 

Donut think too hard: Is Your Reality a Lie?

Where does the fine line between truth and fiction fall? 

The answer is no where. There is no line between truth and fiction.

With the power of technology, language, and anonymity, rumors and lies now hold a powerful place in everyone's daily lives. How can one tell if an article holds the whole truth? If a picture is worth a thousand words, how many of those words are untrue? Take for example, the story of Zilla van den Born. This Buzzfeed article tells her story of how she was able to trick all her friends and family that she was on a vacation in East Asia for six weeks just with the power of Photoshop. Describing this experiment as "the ultimate fakecation", the article reveals the pictures she used to pretend as if she was interacting with the people and the activities of East Asia.

However, even an articles that "reveals the truth" can hold its own white lies. Another article contradicts the Buzzfeed article by actually mentioning the motive of van den Born. She did not do it as just a joke to fool her friends and family, but instead to prove "how easily reality gets distorted". It isn't difficult to find the irony in this situation.

In Tim O'Brien's novel, The Things They Carried, O'Brien utilizes the power of verisimilitude. After chapters followed by chapters of intense passion and exhaustive imagery and detail, he suddenly reveals that his book is not a memoir. Later, I learned that the book isn't just interlaced with fiction; it was 90% fiction. He even applied metafiction (basically the fancy word for fiction-ception), which, personally, made me put the book down to rethink my priorities. But why did TTTC's reveal of the untruth of his novel boggle the reader so much? What makes the novel any more convincing than any other realistic-fiction story? 

O'Brien's trick was to utilize the overlap between fiction and truth. He looked for elements that could exist at both ends in the spectrum, and the big factor was emotion. 

The world has many barriers: mountains, the ocean, language, culture, to list a few. However, emotion is universal. Sadness from a young American girl will cause the same ache as the sadness from an old Tibetan monk. Fiction contains the events of imagination but the emotions of truth. O'Brien took advantage of this knowledge and extracted empathy from the reader, something that readers do not usually encounter in regular works of fiction.

So, knowing that fiction can easily cross over to reality, can reality cross over to fiction? The scary conclusion is that reality and truth are based off perspective. What one perceives to be truth may be different from what another perceives it as. In this situation, parts of one's everyday life is a lie.

It's hard not to over-think life after realizing that our every day lives are paradoxes. What more do I not know about my existence? If I can't control my own truth, does that mean I can't also control my own fate? Are we simply the virtual simulations of human life in a more powerful force's game of Sims 24? 

As of now, thinking too hard will do no good. As long as one perceives themselves as truthful, he/she will be able to live in the bliss of fiction.