History Always Repeats Itself

The Tempest, written by William Shakespeare in 1610-11, basically tells the story of the Europeans when they colonized the Americas.  It may not seem so at first, but the resemblance between colonization and the context of The Tempest is seen once the reader looks into the content of the play. What is ironic, however, is the time in which Shakespeare was written, the time colonization occurred, and how we, Colombians, question our true identity today.  Shakespeare wrote his play in the 1600's, colonization occurred during the 1700's, and in 2014 we are still questioning who we are and how we precisely came to be as a country and society.  Retamar expresses this in his article.

The slavery of Caliban and Ariel is the same slavery seen during the colonizations.  They are influenced by outsiders and are forced to learn their language and cultural aspects.  The same thing happened to the natives living in what is now Colombia during the 1700s.  Like Caliban and Ariel, they were forced to learn the language since that is the base of any culture/society.  In The Tempest, Prospero teaches his slaves english.  The slaves have a thick accent when they speak it and constantly curse since they did not learn it properly.  The same thing happened when the Spanish came and conquered "Colombia".   The natives began to constantly hear the spanish language being spoken, so they had to learn it.  They did not learn it how the spanish did causing them to also have an accent and speak it informally.  However, eventually their children begin to learn the language as the spanish children do since that is the only language they hear the people speak.  This causes a new form of spanish to be created.  The accents change as well as the wording.  Today, Colombians and Venezuelans use different syntax to express the same idea and have different accents.  Retamar stresses that Latin America has an identity like all of the continents that were conquered.  This is true since Colombia began the same way any other country did, but they began to mold their own version of the spanish language and mesh their cultural ideas with the Spanish's cultural ideas.  

The direct relationship that can be seen between The Tempest is Caliban and the Colombian natives during the 1700's.  They were both enslaved and FORCED to drop their own cultural and pick up a new one.  They had to learn a new language, dress differently, eat different foods, grow different crops, use new techniques and material to work the land, etc.  The same relationship, but in a higher social status, is seen between the Spanish and Prospero.  Both are able to control their slaves however they please.  They have a dictatorship over the people and have strong influences on them, both negative and positive.  

Retamar eventually opens up a debate by dropping an idea on his readers, which forces Latin Americans to reflect upon their true identities.  One begins to compare their own country, like Colombia, with others to see if they truly have their own identity since they were all explored and conquered in the same form. As barbaric it may have been, they all received the same treatment which allowed them to form into different societies, therefore creating their own identity as a country.  Due to all of the relations between Caliban and Latin America, it is impossible to not compare the two and begin to question one's own heritage. 

Oh… My Bad…

… Those "three black dots" appear everywhere! Any place you can possibly type or write something, you will most likely see them appear! It seems as if everyone and their mother are using them in absolutely everything.  They are in style at the present time.  They seem to be replacing other punctuation marks that we should be using on a daily bases.  The author acknowledges that they are "replacing commas, question marks, and even periods".  They are being used incorrectly and no one has seemed to notice.  Ellipses are actually meant "to show omissions from within a piece of text". In other words, they are used to symbolize that there is more information, but it is being withheld from the paper.  He makes a funny comment about something he wrote in an email.  He says:

All Star Game………….” Who knows what I meant by that one. At no point did anyone reply with, “What the hell are you talking about?” or “Could you please give me a bit more information here?” And of course none of those folks mentioned anything about the ellipses.

This is so true! Even I do it all of the time.  I actually did this in a conversation I had the other day with Natalia Ordoñez (fellow student in the same section).  I wrote to her, "pero oh well, ya paso…" That is obviously not the correct way to use the ellipses.  I am not going to give her more information or anything.  However, I also notice that I put the ellipses when I have sent an incredibly long text but am not still done with my news.  This is obviously a bad habit.  Natalia mentions this in her blog post, … (yes, that is the title).  I could not agree with her more.  We really do use them in our "emails, letters, text messages, and formal papers." EVEN FORMAL PAPERS! Have we gone nuts?! For some reason, we really do believe they can be used to create "emotions" in our messages.  This habit is like cracking your knuckles or biting your nails.  It's a terrible habit that NEEDS to be STOPPED.  This goes for everyone and their mother.  Calm down on the freakin ellipses.

Comman, We Don't Need Commas

In the the article, Will We Use Commas In the Future?, commas are not absolutely necessary in the english language.  They are like Louis Vuitton purses or expensive cars.  We don't need them, but they are stylish.  For example, I would have not needed to put the comma in the previous sentence.  I could have written: "We don't need them." They are stylish. Of course, we would need them if we were writing a super duper long sentence but seriously?! Who writes an eternal sentence?! Especially now a days?! (See? I could have used a comma there. I chose not to.) People now write short sentences.  They get straight to the point.

Commas aren't the easiest punctuation to use.  They can be used to separate two independent clauses, to create a pause, etc. Even the author makes it clear in his article how difficult it can be to use commas.  He says that they are "tough to master and easy to mess up." To make it even more complicated, there isn't a specific set of rules for them.  It all depends on your "style guide" and whether or not you are confident in using them.  Commas are like clothes.  You can't use something that doesn't feel right.  That is the problem most people face in writing papers or even sentences.  They try to use commas to seem more intellectual.  Well I have some shocking news for them! People can still sound intelligent without commas.  All they need to do is write the sentences in the correct format.

I honestly don't think it would be a big deal if we stopped using commas.  They make writing more complicated for most people.  I believe that people would even feel more confident about their work without commas.  Additionally, since writing is linked with speech, couldn't we just write the way we speak? We basically do that anyways.  We don't use commas when we speak.  We just say what we need to say in order to have a conversation.  Commas are just a waste of time.  Like I said before, they're like a purse or car.  They aren't necessary, but they sure are stylish.

Don't Stick With the Status Quo

One should never stick to the status quo.  High School Musical taught us this in their first film because they showed that everyone has similarities with the people they would have never expected.  They would have never realized this had they not broken the status quo.  They taught us that things change, even if we do not support the change that is occurring.  It's time prescriptivists realized and accepted this idea.  Although they don't focus directly on the changes going on in life, they need to accept that things are constantly changing, even in grammar.  

Bryan A. Garner is a prescriptivist and Robert Lane Greene is a descriptivist.  They are in a heated debate about one literary rule: " "Which" must introduce a "nonrestrictive" relative clause (a mere extra bit of information). Only "that" can introduce a "restrictive" clause (a crucial bit of definition)." (6th paragraph).  Garner believes writers should still follow that rule, while Greene believes that people should ignore it since it doesn't always apply to what the writer is writing.  I, for one, completely agree with Greene.  

Greene tells Garner that the world of language is constantly changing.  We basically write in the form in which we speak.  This includes the "real-world mess of dialects and slang" (3rd paragraph). Therefore, it's a rule that isn't a "part of standard English".  He even uses various examples to support the idea that changes in life affect the changes in grammar.  When I say changes in life, I am referring to the changes in eras, slang, ideas, etc.  it all ends up having a direct affect on grammar, since new ideas are born.  One example he uses is the Bible.  He states that Garner's interpretation of the Our Father is incorrect.  He says that the Our Father should actually be, "Our Father (which art in heaven), hallowed be thy name." Greene disagrees because Matthew was "obsessed with the opposition between heaven and earth" (26th paragraph).  He also directly mentions the form in which African Americans write, and the fact that many people do not have the best education.  

In the end, he comes up with a "meta-rule" for the English la guage, in terms of writing.  His rule is: 

"When a proposed rule and actual usage conflict, the proposed rule is false, and actual usage should be our guide." 

In other words, when one rule is rarely used, it should not be a rule.  However, when a rule is constantly seen, it should be considered an actual rule in grammar.  This defends the idea that things change.   If writers, like prescriptivists, didn't acknowledge this, we would continue to use rules that were invented 50 years ago.

I think his new rule should be considered in all languages, in terms of their grammar.  Things around us are constantly changing! Our slang has gone from "that's so rad" to "that's sick".  Imagine if we were still using rules that were invented 50 years ago! Where would the English language be? Would we still be using phrases like "art thou" ? Writing and speech are directly connected with each other.  If there were more prescriptivists in the world, instead of descriptivists, our language would be very different.  Things would never change.  In conclusion, change is GOOD!

You Can Always Count On Your Parents

Something I realized is that you can always count on your parents.  It doesn't matter how hard life gets or how awkward. Whenever you need someone to lean on, they're there. Ali makes that very clear in the ending of her novel.  Her last words were, "he was there to catch me wen I leapt. (232)" Thats exactly how I feel about my dad.  That's what got me thinking about children's relationships with their parents.  It doesn't matter what negative things happen. At the end of the day your parents are still your family.

As mentioned in my previous blogs, Ali as a very complicated life.  Many things happen that no one can even try to comprehend.  Her dad dies, she finds out all of his secrets, realizes she is more like him then she could have ever imagined, etc. It must have not been easy, but she learned to deal with it and move on.  However, in the beginning she does share her frustration with her dad, but in the end she expresses her appreciation and understandment.  This graphic novel made me think of a mexican comedy, Nosotros Los Nobles.

The movie is about a rich family. A man owns a very successful company and has tree kids, two sons and a daughter.  Unfortunately, his wife died while his children were very young.  This caused the father to give them whatever they wanted.  That made them turn into spoiled brats who knew nothing about the meaning of life.  So, to get teach them a lesson, he forms a scandal and tells his children that the government is after them.  They are forced to move into their grandparent's old repulsive home and are told that they need to find a job.  In the end, the children find out about their father's lie and decide that they want nothing to do with him.  The three children move into their grandfather's home, fix it, continue working, and end up becoming successful (obviously not like their father).  However, in the end he shows up for his son's birthday and apologizes.  The children realize he only had their best interests at heart and welcome him back with open arms.

Although the plot is very different from the graphic novel, it has the same conclusion. Ali ended up realizing that her dad really wasn't a bad guy.  He just had many mistakes and didn't realize how much he was hurting his kids.  In the last pages, Ali explains that she still loves her father and that he cared about her very much.  Yes, he made many mistakes, but he was still there for her.  The same goes for German Noble (the father).  He messed up by working too hard, almost like Ali's father, but he never stopped caring about them.

The lesson taught by the graphic novel and movie is to never give up on family.  They really do care about you, especially your parents.  They makes mistakes just like we do.  They are not perfect.  We just have to be patient and realize that they have our best interests at heart.  They love us and would practically do anything to make us happy, even when that doesn't seem to be the case.  They will always be there to catch us when we leap.

There's More To Flowers Than Meets the Eye

Flowers play a crucial role in this graphic novel.  

They come off as any other object, but they actually contain a lot more meaning than meets the eye.  At first, they introduce flowers as Ali's father's obsession.  His "favorite flower was the lilac" (92), and he even had a book on them! You know the "unhealthy obsessions" some girls have with One Direction or Maroon 5? Well, he had them with flowers, as odd as that sounds.  I'm sure that if flowers could move and talk, he would scream at the sight of them.  Basically he would have the same reaction teenage girls do with their favorite male singers.   He would literally make his children plant all types of flowers all over their yard.  Ali and her brothers even began to ask, "Isn't this illegal?" (93) 

As previously mentioned, the flowers in this novel have a large significance.  A flower is seen as beautiful, delicate, soft, etc.  Those are the perfect words to describe Ali's father.  He is delicate and has a dream of being the most beautiful creature to have ever walked this earth.  It's obvious by the way he treats his daughter.  He constantly tells her to wear barrettes, pearls, pretty dresses, and even straw hats.  He even tells her that he'll "wale" her if he sees her "without it" (97).  What the heck does

that even mean?! So her father will basically slap her if she doesn't wear a stupid barrette? That's insane! It's as if he wished he were a girl and she were a boy.  They are just trapped in bodies of the opposite sex.  

Finally, the flowers represent her father's feminine side. In other words, the whole fact that he is gay and hits on younger boys (NOT MEN).  He is basically a flower that is scared to bloom since he fears that he will not be accepted into society.  However, he is a flower none the less.  This is proven on page 100 when Ali finds a picture of Roy (Ali's babysitter).  It's a picture her father had taken of him... half naked... on the bed... Now that is just creepy.  

As explained above, flowers have a large significance in the novel.  Ali introduces them as any other object, but as the reader continues reading, he/she can see the similarities between the lilacs and Ali's father.  They are both delicate, feminized, and they connect with each other since he is obsessed with him.  In other words, Ali's dad is basically the human version of a flower.  

What… The… F…

It has been psychologically proven that children copy their parents' behavior.  That is why children, many times, are very similar to their parents. Alison, in Fun House, is proof to that. Once she got away from her parents, she realized that she is a lot more like her father than she would have realized back home.  She found out that she is a lesbian and decided to admit it to her parents.  When she does this on page 88, she writes a letter to her parents.  Her father called and seemed to be very please, but her mother refused to talk to her on the phone.  Her mother sent her a letter later expressing her disappointment.  Later on, her mother calls her and tells her how father is gay and had sexual interactions with boys, not only men.  From there, Ali shows how she falls for her partner and how she found out about her father's exact death.

I don't know how she can possibly live in that environment. It would drive me insane! Living in a some what normal family stresses me out enough as it is. I cannot imagine having a gay father who is also a CREEP.  Actually, the gay part isn't that bad.  What really is scary is the creep part and the fact that her mother stayed with her father. I don't think I could ever stay with a man once I found out he was gay.  It wouldn't be right.  I definitely would get a divorce and possibly go to the cops if the man were a pedophile.  Of course, it's difficult to understand since I'm not living it myself.  I feel really bad for Alison.  I don't know how she didn't run away.  Her life is definitely anything but a walk in the park.