Independent book Study

Michael Rintoul

Blog #1

The book I selected for the independent reading assignment is Why Your World Is About To Get A Whole Lot Smaller, by Jeff Rubin. This book is about world oil supply and the role it will play to end globalization. Rubin begins his book with the phrase, “What do subprime mortgages, Atlantic salmon dinners, SUV’s and globalization all have in common?”...... “They all depend on cheap oil”. In the first few chapters, Rubin displays his knowledge on the subject and he discusses some of his predictions that came to be. For example, during a speech at the Calgary Petroleum Club in 2007, Rubin predicted that oil prices would reach $150.00 per barrel. He was nearly laughed out of the room by the oil executives in attendance. As we know, he was not far off his prediction. In 2008, oil hit the $147.00 mark. Rubin goes on to state that we are consuming oil at a rate, that far exceeds reserves or the amount the Earth can produce. This very basic statement comprises the premise of the book. World economies over the last several decades have been closely tied to the price of oil. Cheap oil provides fuel to an economy and as an economy heats up so does the demand for oil. An increase in demand drives up the barrel price of oil. This in turn drives up the cost of production, transportation, and goods for sale. The effect of this cost increase cools the economy and a recession occurs. During a recession, demand for oil falls and as a result, so does the barrel price. The new availability of cheap oil provides stimulus to an economy and a recovery occurs. This cycle has been repeating itself for decades but according to Rubin, it will not continue. The basic economic law of ”Supply and Demand” dictates that as demand increases so does an item’s cost. As cost increase, so does supply. Rubin claims that as a result of depleting world oil reserves an increase in demand will not be met with an increase in supply. We are heading towards record high oil prices and record low oil inventories. We need to wean our economies off of oil and stop the rollercoaster. The replacement of oil sources will prove great for some economies but a mere disaster for others.

The 'White' Choice

"If there is no black and white, there can be no gray-since gray is merely a mixture of the two." (Rand 87)

Rand goes on to say that since there must. be black and white to create gray one must first identify what is white and what is black on the scale of morality. Once they know what is black and what is white the person will not do whatever the black action is on the scale because that is the bad or wrong decision and the only decision they will make is the white decision; "There can be no justification for choosing any part of that which one knows to be evil." In reality however, how often does society reflect deeply on their moral decisions and the consequences of the actions have and even then, how often does society make the 'white choice' after considering those consequences? And on top of all of this, can we classify things into categories as rigid as black and white in the first place or is everything gray? I thought this was an interesting concept.

Independent read interesting idea

My book for the independent read is "Shakespeare" by Bill Bryson. It's all about William Shakespeare, what we know about him, what we don't know, and what we want to know. As I read through the first few chapters, one idea jumped out at me. Bryson pointed out that although it is commonly believed that we hardly know anything about Shakespeare's life, we actually know more about him than other historical figures from this time period due to the sheer number of his works we were able to get ahold of. It was here that Bryson made the interesting point that the reason we feel we know nothing about Shakespeare is because we want to know more about him, not because we actually don't know anything about him. It was also interesting to learn that in terms of the time period, and compared to others who lived during that time, we have actually been able to learn a lot about Shakespeare.

Doesn't life require compromise?

The book I am reading for my Independent Study is called the Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand. It is an older and controversial book, originally published in 1964, that contains a collection of essays written by Rand and Nathaniel Branden, her professional associate.

"The next time you are tempted to ask: "Doesn't life require compromise?" translate that question into its actual meaning: "Doesn't life require the surrender of that which is true and good to that which is false and evil?" The answer is that that precisely is what life forbids-if one wishes to achieve anything but a stretch of tortured years spent in progressive self-destruction." (Rand 81)

Throughout the chapter, Rand attempts to convince the reader that there is no such thing as compromise because it involves the sacrifice of one's beliefs and a rational person would not do this. I disagree. I believe the idea of compromise is not to give up your ideals entirely, but adjust them according to what the other person believes. It is not the difference between good and evil. Good and evil is implying that one idea triumphs the other and that in turn reflects bias. I agree that by compromising good for evil the result will be partly evil, but it will also contain the same magnitude of good (assuming the compromise occurs halfway). Your beliefs are still taken into account, they are not disregarded when a compromise is made and the decision is not as self-destructive and conformitive as Rand states.

Assignment 2

"The reason is that you're not a genuine primitive: your imagination couldn't operate on such a world except in terms of the world you know". p18

I do not understand this line. I have an idea of what Mr. Frye means, but it is not clear. My first take on it, is that Mr. Frye is saying that if we did not have liturature my imagination would not blend with the world I know... If that is what he is saying, I do not agree with Mr. Frye, I think that is a very bias way of looking at it.

Herc

Framework to literature

In chapter two of The Educated Imagination, Frye expresses his opinion about the framework of all literature. “This story of loss and regaining of identity is, I think, the framework of all literature.” (pg.30) Frye’s opinion is intriguing and definitely has some truth to it, although no all literature shows it in the same ways. If you look at any piece of work my thought is that you will find a loss and regaining of identity depending on how in depth you look at it. This situation then leads to the emotional conflicts, and plot of the story.

Assignment 1

“One person by himself is not a complete human being…” (p.6)
I would have to agree with Northrop Frye. My personal thinking of what Mr. Frye means is, one person who does not go outside the box or think outside the box is not living the human experience. We were not made to be perfect; to be a human being in my thought is that you would have to go through happiness, sorrow, love and hate. All the things that make your character and how you act.

The general opinion I have, is that if you were by yourself you would not get the emotional feedback from a wall then another person. You need other humans around you to become a "human being".

Herc

Frye's Imagination

While reading chapter 2 the singing song, i was very intriguid by the writing style of Northrop Frye and the way that he thinks about things. One thing that I thought was intereasting was Myths tend to stick together to form a mythology. That is so because myths are conventional, because one myth inspires another. Similarly, in our culture, one novel inspires another. Frye does not accept the romantic theory that literature is uniquely inspired. "A writer's desire to write can only have come from previous experience of literature," says Frye, "and he'll start by imitating whatever he's read" (p. 40). This leads to conventions in form as well as content: "Literature can derive its forms only from itself" (p. 42), he says and again, "The writer of literature can only write out what takes shape in his mind" (p. 46), Literary conventions enable the writer to incorporate personal experience into literature.

Assignment #2

"There is no direct address in literature: it isn't what you say but how it's said that's important there. The literary writer isn't giving information, either about a subject or about his state of mind: he's trying to let something take on its own form, whether it's a poem or novel or whatever." (p.24)

I agree with Frye's statement and relate to it. It is what comes from the writers thoughts that make literature. I found it fascinating reading how Frye relates to many famous novels in chapter 2. Especially with books that I can also relate to. Frye's understanding of literature is astounding, he explains the fundamentals it takes to write good literature and helps me benefit from his knowledge, leaving me with a better understanding of the history of literature.

Recycle, Reuse Literature

Chapter 2, Page 23, “I’m not saying that there’s nothing new in literature: I’m saying that everything is new, and yet recognizably the same kind of thing as the old.”

I strongly agree with Frye’s comment. It is evident to me, and I’m sure others, that literature repeats itself, which is what makes it so fascinating. Recent works come across with a fresh outlook on an original idea each time. Although, by stating this, Frye contradicts himself with his previous comment in chapter 1 page 9, “Literature doesn’t evolve or improve or progress.” When literature repeats itself, one interprets their personal opinion, progressing forward with the fundamentals of the past. Lastly, one thing I found frustrating in this chapter is that he makes a lot of references to books and plays that I’m not familiar with, so I only have a basic idea of what he’s talking about.

literary repetition

In chapter two of Northrop Frye's The Educated Imagination, Frye talks about how all literature is very common. He states that all present day literature can be related loosely to the themes and plots of Greek mythology and other ancient literature. " literature can only derive its forms from itself"(22) i agree with Frye when he states this. I too believe that all literature although having its individuality it based on previous literature, I also believe this is very apparent in music throughout the ages the repetition is very noticeable. Frye really brings the theme of not being able to be a complete human being by oneself which relates to literature not being literature without the help of previous literature, when he states that " A writer's desire to write can only have come from previous experience of literature, and he'll start by imitating what ever he's read, which usually means what the people around him are writing" (19)

Blogging assignment #1

“Literature doesn’t evolve or improve or progress.” (p. 9)

Frye believes that the literary work of the classics, for example Shakespeare, will never be surpassed. The dramatic writings of these past eras will always serve as a model for future generations or “as long as the human race endures” (10). His expression that literature does not evolve, improve or progress simply states that we have already witnessed writing at its best. As Frye states in Chapter 2, “every form in literature has a pedigree,” (19) where we can trace its descent back. He believes that all writers write from a “previous experience of literature” (19). On the contrary, science evolves and improves as time passes; we know more today than we have in the past. I agree with Frye; present day literature is a modified version of the classics. For example, a reader can identify a stock character from a Shakespearean play to one from a twentieth century novel. Lastly, this quotation does have a connection to McCullough’s speech (#16 ...So there I was....I read...Don Quixote- for the first time in my life. What a joy!) After so many years, a classic is read and its excellence is thoroughly appreciated; “classic” being the key word.

Assignment 1

“One person by himself s not a complete human being…”

I think Frye is talking about how one human being on his own can never be complete because the person would not advance very far without other humans input and opinions. My opinion is that his words say it like it is. The impact of literature, society and judgment can be a major influence and define lives. The quote can be connected to literature and human communication. When we read the book stimulates our brains and could impose a greater depth of thinking on the person reading. The literature being read could ask fundamental questions and implant new thoughts into the mind that may never have been established without it. Literature, being written by another human, is an expression of creativity, and or detailed ideas about a subject and it brings in a new perspective and multiple bias thoughts which prod the mind further than possible while independent. This quote has a direct connection to paragraph 24 in “The Love of Learning”; “Make use of the public libraries. Start you own personal library and watch it grow. Talk about your reading. Ask others what they’re reading. You’ll learn a lot.” Undoubtedly this quotation sums up the whole message being portrayed by Frye. Reading and communication with other human sources is one of the most influential learning methods in the world, and makes us closer to being complete as humans.

Assignment #1

“…We tend to think of the sciences as intellectual and the arts as emotional: one starts with the world as it is, the other with the world we want to have.” (p.9)

Northrop Frye expresses that not only are sciences only intellectual and arts only emotional, but that a high level art and a high level science are similar and that "it's nonsense to think of the scientist as a cold unemotional reasoner and the artist as somebody who's in a perpetual emotional tizzy." (p.9) I agree with Frye's reasoning behind what one thinks of a scientist compared to an artist, though they are different, they demonstrate one's personal commitment and how strong of an effort they put in determines the outcome of their work. Both professions need intelligence to come up with ideas or experiments and without trying you will go no where. McCullough states that you should "Underline, make notes in the margins, and after a few years, go back and read it again…” which is generally what Frye mentions when he says you must go over what you said and think about it.

It's Our cycle

Overall I was really pleased with the chapter "The Singing School" however I had to re-read parts of the chapter over again… but in saying so I found I really enjoyed creating my own perspective on Frye’s work. Frye goes on throughout the chapter about the old linking to the new and I tend to strongly agree. For me I believe everything is a cycle with our imagination ...somehow and someway
We can re-create or adjust the old by being cautious or even simply being oblivious.
In simpler terms:
The old effects the present
As does the present to the future…
I always find myself thinking of new and possible understandings after reading his work… but I believe that’s the point
Our imagination is based on whom and what surrounds us and it’s simply endless
..Like a cycle.

The Common Theme

"A dim, misty outline of the story that's told so often, of how man once lived in a golden age, or a Garden of Eden, or the Hesperides."

One of the points that really interested me in Frye's second speech is his point of view on the garden of Eden story as the template for all creative literature. The story of the garden of eden is really the perfect example of how our "motive for metaphor" is to re identify with the world around us and to essentially get back to the garden of Eden. I think think its interesting that the more you think of it, the more examples there are that follow this template. Novels such as Harry Potter, where at the beginning Harry is estranged from the whole outside world, but by the end of the book he is integrated into the wizarding world. Also books like Fahrenheit 451 in which the protagonist is isolated and disillusioned but by the end of the book he has found a "garden of Eden" in a group of people that he feels connected to. I just thought it was interesting how many books follow similar templates.
Adam

Vacant Imaginations

“Every child realizes that literature is taking him in a different direction from the immediately useful, and a good many children complain loudly about this.” (p.3)

I sincerely agree with Northrop Frye when he states that children complain loudly when interacting with literature because they have to use their imagination to understand what they are reading. Now a day’s children are growing up in an environment where the imagination is suppressed because of instant entertainment such as video and computer games, and television. Rather than children developing their own ideas, it has already been handed over to them. Our generation has become lazy, and technologically dependent. This ultimately effects the ability to problem solve and to think outside the box, whether it’s involved with math, science, English, or any other application. This is because we are dependent on the answer already being there for us. McCullough states that learning is not at the touch of the finger, which is exactly why children today complain about literature. Literature has depth and requires time to understand; which is a hard concept to deal with when living in a fast paced and immediate world.

Literature Doesn't Change, WE DO

While reading through chapter 2, Frye's view stating that literature hasn't changed is quite interesting. He states “I’m not saying that there’s nothing new in literature: I’m saying that everything is new, and yet recognizably the same kind of thing as the old, just as a new baby is genuinely new individual, although it’s also an example of something very common, which is human beings, and also it’s lineally descended from the first human beings there ever were.” This quote had me shocked as I realized media in today’s society has more similarities than one would expect from a book or movie from so long ago. As almost everything in today’s society is advancing I questioned if literature could advance as well; it is evident that there are only so many emotions that directors can use when creating new media or books.

The View of Frye

Northrop Frye has a very refreshing view on literature that I haven't ever thought of. He points out that stories in general has similar structure (beginning/ending, roles, etc.) and makes you think of literature in a different light. It is explained that Literature has never really evolved, its been the same for ages and the only aspects that change are the small things such as characters, settings, style. I think stories don't change because it is the reflection of our morals and emotions, people can't just develop new ranges of emotions so that's why stories will frequently touch upon similar subjects. It came as a surprise that stories many years had so many similarities with the stories that we read nowadays.

Assignment #2

"I'm not saying that there's nothing new in literature: I'm saying that everything is new, and yet recognizably the same kind of thing as the old, just as a new baby is a genuinely new individual, although it's also an example of something very common, which is human beings, and also it's lineally you descended from the first human beings there ever were. And what, you ask, is the point of saying that? " (page 23)

Northrop Frye is completly right, I can not agree with him more on this subject. Everything is new to someone that has not read or tried it before and although it may be old for some humans it is new for others. Therefore everything is new for any human because no one has read everybook or played every sports game, so everyone is always learning.