Time Magazine's Picks for the 100 Greatest Toys of All Time
Mayhem, the Most Interesting Man Alive, and the Old Spice Man -- action figures for a new generation
From War Toys to Peace Art
Code Pink! Just say no to war toys.
War Toys -- don't think these are for kids.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
My sample paper, posted by request
ERW - Comparison
Martin Luther King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail" and Malcolm X's speech, "The Ballot or the Bullet"
Alexandra Fletcher
ERW Writing Sample
March 15, 2011
Voices for Freedom
We look up and find ourselves 50 years down the road from the American Civil Rights movement; its history, its stories and its voices — although compelling — seem distant to our modern ears. We live in times where the thought of turning dogs against our own people, or subjecting young men, women and even children to high-pressure water hoses as an instrument of control seems unbelievable. And although racism has not been eradicated from our society, we acknowledge the progress we have made. We listen to the voices of the past to learn something about the path we took to get here, and to perhaps learn something to help us continue along the road of racial parity and true multiculturalism.
One voice of an undisputed giant of the American Civil Rights movement, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., rings clear in his letter from Birmingham jail, as he explains the reasons behind his work and the goals of nonviolent direct action. A Christian minister, King is called by the gospel to work for the cause of justice, and explains to his white audience the intellectual and moral underpinnings of the work that has landed him in a jail cell. Balanced against Dr. King is another voice — that of Malcolm X — another leader in the fight for civil rights. In his speech, The Ballot or the Bullet, Malcolm X explains that he has no interest in the understanding, the participation, or the assistance of the white majority in his quest for full civil and human rights, and economic parity for African Americans. So although these men shared a goal of full and unfettered participation in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, they also shared a deep frustration with the reluctance, the sluggishness, and the blatant unwillingness of the white majority to cede to African Americans these rights that we hold self evident. It is in the articulation of their goals as freedom fighters, and in their response to white resistance, that we can see their unique contributions to the cause of Civil Rights in this country.
From his small jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama, where he had nothing to do but “write long letters, think long thoughts and pray long prayers” (37), Martin Luther King, Jr. patiently and articulately explains to the eight white clergymen who had written a public appeal for “law and order and common sense” why he has broken the law, and why he is sitting in a jail cell. With great moral authority, and citing both religious figures and American patriots, King makes the case for justice for African Americans. He explains that the time for negotiation is over because negotiation has failed; the time for patience is over because “twenty million Negro brothers [are] smoldering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society” (12). He explains the difference between a just and an unjust law, carefully pointing out that it is our moral responsibility to break a law that “degrades the human personality” and “ends up relegating persons to the status of things” (13). King cites religious and historical examples of people who have resisted injustice by breaking the law, and who accepted the consequences of their actions “openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty” (16) — even when those consequences were death. Knowing that the religious examples would have special spiritual resonance with the clergymen to whom he writes, and that the historical example of Adolf Hitler’s Germany and the extermination of the Jews would have deeply emotional and ethical meaning as well, King writes to convince his white audience of the absolute justice of his cause. He seeks to win them over by moving their consciences and their hearts.
In addition, King expresses his deep frustration with the white moderate directly to this same white audience. They represent the white moderate stonewalling African American civil rights. He directly engages with these men, telling them in no uncertain terms that their reticence to immediately see the rightness of his cause is baffling and disheartening. King writes, “Shallow understanding of men of good will is more frustrating than the absolute misunderstanding of people of ill will” (19); in other words, their inability to see the moral imperative of the Civil Rights movement is even more difficult to deal with than the outright terrorism perpetuated by gangs like the Ku Klux Klan. It is the smiling face mouthing supportive words but offering no action to back them up that ultimately leaves King with no alternative but to bring strongest moral pressure that he can to bear on the situation: nonviolent civil disobedience. He writes to the white clergymen, “I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause, and with deep moral concern, would serve as the channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure. I had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed” (28).
Malcolm X, in his speech The Ballot or the Bullet, alludes to the fact that it is an election year — 1964 — and that fiddling around with the white power structure may need to come to a halt. If it is not possible for African Americans to gain rights through legitimate channels, such as voting for elected officials that will write and enforce laws that enable black people to flourish in this country, then Malcolm X suggests that perhaps it is time to take a more confrontational course of action. Malcolm X could not be any less interested in engaging the white power structure, and asking for rights to be granted. Where Dr. King is disappointed, Malcolm X is ready to claim his God-given rights by building a solid economic base from which to work, and fighting, if necessary. He speaks directly to a black audience in Detroit, Michigan, and boldly asserts that it is time to stop “[acting] ignorantly and disgracefully, boycotting and picketing some cracker…trying to beg him for a job” (12). He tells his audience what they know already: that “the white liberals who have been posing as our friends have failed us…and we [must] stop turning to them and turn to ourselves” (17). INCOMPLETE
Martin Luther King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail" and Malcolm X's speech, "The Ballot or the Bullet"
Alexandra Fletcher
ERW Writing Sample
March 15, 2011
Voices for Freedom
We look up and find ourselves 50 years down the road from the American Civil Rights movement; its history, its stories and its voices — although compelling — seem distant to our modern ears. We live in times where the thought of turning dogs against our own people, or subjecting young men, women and even children to high-pressure water hoses as an instrument of control seems unbelievable. And although racism has not been eradicated from our society, we acknowledge the progress we have made. We listen to the voices of the past to learn something about the path we took to get here, and to perhaps learn something to help us continue along the road of racial parity and true multiculturalism.
One voice of an undisputed giant of the American Civil Rights movement, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., rings clear in his letter from Birmingham jail, as he explains the reasons behind his work and the goals of nonviolent direct action. A Christian minister, King is called by the gospel to work for the cause of justice, and explains to his white audience the intellectual and moral underpinnings of the work that has landed him in a jail cell. Balanced against Dr. King is another voice — that of Malcolm X — another leader in the fight for civil rights. In his speech, The Ballot or the Bullet, Malcolm X explains that he has no interest in the understanding, the participation, or the assistance of the white majority in his quest for full civil and human rights, and economic parity for African Americans. So although these men shared a goal of full and unfettered participation in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, they also shared a deep frustration with the reluctance, the sluggishness, and the blatant unwillingness of the white majority to cede to African Americans these rights that we hold self evident. It is in the articulation of their goals as freedom fighters, and in their response to white resistance, that we can see their unique contributions to the cause of Civil Rights in this country.
From his small jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama, where he had nothing to do but “write long letters, think long thoughts and pray long prayers” (37), Martin Luther King, Jr. patiently and articulately explains to the eight white clergymen who had written a public appeal for “law and order and common sense” why he has broken the law, and why he is sitting in a jail cell. With great moral authority, and citing both religious figures and American patriots, King makes the case for justice for African Americans. He explains that the time for negotiation is over because negotiation has failed; the time for patience is over because “twenty million Negro brothers [are] smoldering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society” (12). He explains the difference between a just and an unjust law, carefully pointing out that it is our moral responsibility to break a law that “degrades the human personality” and “ends up relegating persons to the status of things” (13). King cites religious and historical examples of people who have resisted injustice by breaking the law, and who accepted the consequences of their actions “openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty” (16) — even when those consequences were death. Knowing that the religious examples would have special spiritual resonance with the clergymen to whom he writes, and that the historical example of Adolf Hitler’s Germany and the extermination of the Jews would have deeply emotional and ethical meaning as well, King writes to convince his white audience of the absolute justice of his cause. He seeks to win them over by moving their consciences and their hearts.
In addition, King expresses his deep frustration with the white moderate directly to this same white audience. They represent the white moderate stonewalling African American civil rights. He directly engages with these men, telling them in no uncertain terms that their reticence to immediately see the rightness of his cause is baffling and disheartening. King writes, “Shallow understanding of men of good will is more frustrating than the absolute misunderstanding of people of ill will” (19); in other words, their inability to see the moral imperative of the Civil Rights movement is even more difficult to deal with than the outright terrorism perpetuated by gangs like the Ku Klux Klan. It is the smiling face mouthing supportive words but offering no action to back them up that ultimately leaves King with no alternative but to bring strongest moral pressure that he can to bear on the situation: nonviolent civil disobedience. He writes to the white clergymen, “I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause, and with deep moral concern, would serve as the channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure. I had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed” (28).
Malcolm X, in his speech The Ballot or the Bullet, alludes to the fact that it is an election year — 1964 — and that fiddling around with the white power structure may need to come to a halt. If it is not possible for African Americans to gain rights through legitimate channels, such as voting for elected officials that will write and enforce laws that enable black people to flourish in this country, then Malcolm X suggests that perhaps it is time to take a more confrontational course of action. Malcolm X could not be any less interested in engaging the white power structure, and asking for rights to be granted. Where Dr. King is disappointed, Malcolm X is ready to claim his God-given rights by building a solid economic base from which to work, and fighting, if necessary. He speaks directly to a black audience in Detroit, Michigan, and boldly asserts that it is time to stop “[acting] ignorantly and disgracefully, boycotting and picketing some cracker…trying to beg him for a job” (12). He tells his audience what they know already: that “the white liberals who have been posing as our friends have failed us…and we [must] stop turning to them and turn to ourselves” (17). INCOMPLETE
Friday, March 11, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)