The Hunger Games of Life Seminar Post-Write

Post-seminar writing:

1.  Reflection/Self-Assess 

      This seminar I feel started out kind of slow but seemed to pick itself up after a while of conducted conversation.  After being asked specific questions about "Supersize Me," The Hatchet, and The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race, I got the feeling that this project is going to be very interesting because everyone has their own opinions and philosophies in a way toward our food culture.  The Food Revolution, occurring around 10,000 years ago, has of course impacted our past with trade, cultures and accessibility, but is impacting our current society much more radically than it has in its past.  From fare trade of food, to fare distribution of our food surpluses on this planet, this food epidemic is very much affecting our society. (Every 1 in 7 people is starving on this planet).  There are the "fat cats" as people refer to them so often, of the rick stock-brokers of Wall Street that in a lot of ways are living a life of ease with what they receive in terms of food.  There are also so many people who feel that eating at a fast food restaurant, as bad as it may be for you, is their only option with food costing what it does.  From seeing Supersize Me 4 times since its debut in 2004, I am familiar with what this food is capable of doing to the human body, but it is also important to know where this food even comes from.  Yeah this food is fast, its easy, its somewhat tasty, but the thing that really turns me off of going to these fast food restaurants is the common knowledge of where their meat, vegetables, and other ingredients come from.  The meat industry is one of those things that I can't get enough information about once I start researching it, but it also never fails to give me a sour taste in my mouth towards society and animal cruelty.  I think that in this seminar I found myself stuck between a rock and a hard place because there were several moments that I did join in in the conversation and seminar, but I am also surprised that I did not speak up more, let alone dominate the conversation because I am so personally invested in this topic.  I think I talked an appropriate amount and because I feel that a lot of seminar-ing is based on listening and absorbing the thoughts and claims of others I feel that I completed this seminar with something around an A or and A-.   My peers seemed to have very sporadic thoughts, and I don't know if it was the day, time of day, group or what, but the seminar seemed very guided.   Meaning we did not really dominate the conversation and take off with sporadic ideas and thoughts, but in a lot of ways I thought that the seminar was slow moving and Jessica had to steer the seminar in every-which-way.  There was nothing completely outstanding about what people said in my seminar, but overall it was interesting to hear that a lot of people would choose to live as hunter-gathereres versus on the McDiet.  I feel that because so many people do like the ease of fast-food in our class and eat at McDonald's semi-frequently I was surprised by the fact that they would rather live like Brian than Morgan.  I agreed with this of course, but I also have such a distaste for fast-food that it makes me somewhat bias in a way.  I think that this changed my thinking about the text in the way that something about how Brian's situation was portrayed in the book was something that a lot of people became fond of, enough to want to do it themselves.  I love eating, cooking and living in the wilderness- I have ever since I hiked the Colorado Trail, but I also feel that a lot of what the book suggested about Brian's situation was untrue or slightly fictional.

Cat's Cradle Seminar Post-Write and Synthesis

1- Reflection
Looking back on the seminar, I think that first of all, Cat's Cradle is probably my favorite book that we have read this semester.  We have read multiple books, all of which were different yet enjoyable, I still found myself looking at Cat's Cradle like a book that I would enjoy reading out of class as well.  I think that coming out of the seminar it seems like a lot of students feel this way as well.  I think that everyone had a different feeling about this book or claim that they were trying to defend, yet for the most part the themes in this book were easy enough to grasp for us to have an in-depth conversation about and still mostly agree.  I think that I brought a lot of good points to the fishbowl without overtaking it.  I also felt that I did not take over the conversations when there were times that I could have.  I did come in late and due to that I missed being in my original group which could have impacted the conversation a little bit but at the same time I enjoyed the group I was in.  The group itself I also feel did a really good job of clarifying points and bringing new claims to the discussion.  Overall I think that I deserve an A on this seminar based on the rubric.
One thing that in particular struck me as surprising, which I'm sure is true for everyone is a comment that towards the end of the conversation Elliott made about Africa.  Not that I even view this as a reoccurring theme our discussion encountered, but it was still very surprising that he would say that he "looses respect for people in Africa who are suffering from AIDS, starvation and thirst, as well as people who make an effort to help these people." WHAT? To me this was extremely weird and almost ignorant thing to say, especially in Humanities class.  This, hopefully, was not what he was implying to say, but at the same time definitely made the conversation more interesting and... louder for the time being.  Other than that comment I think the conversation in our seminar was really self-guided and a positive seminar.

2- Synthesis
One claim that I want to make about the text is that I believe Felix Hoenikker was a coward.  The reason I think this is because I made the assumption that he commit suicide at the beach house.  He was, as we discussed, a fairly selfish person who made discoveries and invented things based upon curiosity without thinking about what his discoveries could potentially do to others, even life itself.  When the Hoenikker children were recounting the events that happened on the day that Felix Hoenikker died it gave me the impression that the way he died was entirely different.  This is what really happened.  Felix Hoenikker brought his children to the beach house with him to give him an excuse to let them go off and play while he could play with his latest toy in private.  While they were out running errands and playing on the beach, he began to look into the ice-nine and what it could in fact do.  Whilst playing with it, he realized just how risky and potentially life-ending it could be and began to do some serious reflection.  He saw how simple and instantaneous it was for the ice-nine to transform surrounding water and that it could happen to any form and body of water, including people.  Realizing that he did not want to be held resposible for the end of life itself and seeing the human population all die, himself included, he ended his life early.  By sitting comfortably down and watching the ocean around him, knowing that he would never see it again, he got comfortable, and touched his lips.  The end.  By doing this he still ended humanity, and left his already neglected children to fend for themselves for the rest of their lives.  This is why I now think of Felix Hoenikker a cowardly and selfish man.