Fast Food Nation Lecture

Although I dreaded going to it, I found Eric Schlosser's presentation very interesting. Several things have stuck with me from the lecture. A couple are just the straight facts. I personally am one of the Americans that drink enough Coca Cola products to make up for those who don't drink any. Schlosser's comment about McDonald's taking almost all the money you pay for a big gulp really struck home with me. This is probably because I am very unobservant in some parts of my life but have noticed, and wondered about, the giant sized straws that they use at MacDonald's. It is not as if they are any longer but rather wider. That combined with the 50 teaspoons of sugar estimated to be in a single Big Gulp, have made me realize that the friendly fast food place I loved as a young child was manipulating me as well as every other customer. There is something to be said when one feels shorthanded by a food company. It's depressing to think that there is no moral grounds in business, even a business that is so integrated in our lives like McDonald's.

A few other things I took from this lecture, which I surely will not forget, are the comments he made about the animal and worker abuse, and what is in a quarter pounder. Since I first realized I liked cheese on my burgers, I have loved the quarter pounder from McDonald's. After finding out that there are parts of thousands of steers from possibly five different countries in each one, I hereby state that I refuse to eat one again. He was very good at putting it in terms that one can understand... "Imagine you are married and only sleeping with one person - not much risk for getting sick right? Now, imagine you are sleeping with thousands of people..." That's disgusting. He followed this up about children and people who are immune suppressed have the most possibility of getting sick from McDonald's, I now understand why my mother, who is going through clinical tests for her metastatic breast cancer, refuses to eat there... although why she never shared with me her reasons I'm a little confused.

The animal and worker abuse Schlosser described was disgusting. I understand that people are not as animal focused in their lives as I am but still, the company needs to take responsibility for what it is causing to happen. If they are not going to do that, they need to take responsibility for the care of all of the workers of the suppliers they use. It honestly is a tragedy that this is occurring.

Jewett, Crumb, Sanders, and Silko

So, you know how every once in a while a particular passage speaks to you? More than others? That happened to me today in Scott Russell Sanders' "After the Flood." When he describes his time coming back to the place he loved so much as "this moment from dream [. . .]" (786), I fell in love with this work. In my opinion, that is one of the most intriguing ways to describe an unmet expectation; and how society has impacted the land he once loved. Everything in this passage from this part is described as grey, giving the impression of lifelessness or death. It is haunting and more importantly it connects with the reader on such a unique level that he is able to appeal to empathy in a way that most authors would come off as preachy. He does not make his experience sound as an appeal to society but rather uses it to speak for itself (although to be fair he does use language in a very subtle yet persuasive manner).

To couple this with the Crumb comic is a way to reinforce this idea that is shown in pictures and in text. It is almost as if they were meant to be read side by side.

Jewett's short story, "The White Heron," is an amazing story which deals with the issue of people ruining nature in a narrative way. This story portrays how youth can still stand up for the future of nature. While Sylvia understands what she can receive from telling the Hunter where the bird is she still values the bird's life more. I understand this is a very pessimistic view to share, but, I do not believe the story would have the same ending if Sylvia was in her mid to late twenties and was even less financially stable than she is currently. This story (to me) seems to touch on what the younger generation can do as long as they do not let themselves grow into the older. It's possible to suggest that Sylvia's grandmother would have done the same thing when she was younger. Yes, this conjecture lacks proof but I still think that Sylvia's age plays a huge role in this story.

I apologize to everyone reading this blog and who is following my trains of thoughts, it has been a stressful day and I'm practically writing in my sleep. So, yes, this is being cut short tonight, but expect longer and more easily understandable posts in the future.

Cronon's and Thoreau's Different Wildernesses

Upon reading Cronon's perspective on Thoreau's glorified wilderness I became very conflicted as to which author I side with. While Throreau brings about what one can learn from the wild and the importance of connecting with nature in the ways he had, Cronon's belief that the mystery behind nature is one that is self imposed by humans takes away from the majesty of Thoreau's writing.

Cronon's argument traces how nature used to be something related with fearing God and fearing evil to becoming something about beauty and wonder. It changed from a place of hostility to a place of revelation (no pun intended... the book of Revelations... haha). I love his line, "[t]he place where we are, is the place where nature is not." I found that to be the crux of his argument, proving that nature as we have come to define it, to create it, is something intangible so we can never really experience it without projecting our own beliefs of what it should be.

This is something that Thoreau disparages. In the pieces of his writing that we read he describes nature as being a reclusive place, as unaffected by society as it can be, which he resides for a period of time before returning to his community. He describes the enlarging air space as men affect nature and cut down its trees. While Cronon would explain this as men doing what they do and the only loss is not the actual trees but rather the significance that people have begun to attach to those trees.

From an English major's perspective, I found Thoreau's writing to be more textually appealing. It is written with beauty and he utilizes his own words rather than using others to speak for him. Because Cronon's essay (?) is written as a critique or rather a dismissal of several of Thoreau's points, that beauty is lost as he uses straightforward clean-cut words and sentences to convey his point.