The Luck of Roaring Camp

I choose to discuss “The Luck of Roaring Camp” because of how it made me react to the baby’s untimely fate; as I was sitting on my bed reading for today’s class, I literally threw the book away because I was so mad at how it had ended. Then today in class as we were discussing the story, I asked the question what was it about the story specifically that made me react so strongly to its plot twist? It is a pertinent question I think, because the storyline is so subtle and full of hope that by the time you get to the end you are very heavily emotionally invested in the outcome. And what outcome would be more captivating than the destruction of that object of attention? I’ve noticed this pattern of ending the story with a death or some kind of tragedy in all of the short stories that we have read so far in this class, and probably should have expected something similar in this story, yet it took me completely by surprise.

The intensity in a short story must by necessity build up very quickly. The author only has so many pages in which to write and thus you must quickly get to know the characters enough to care about what ultimately happens to them. Though “the Luck” could indeed have grown up in the camp and become a healthy and happy young boy, this is something that the reader expects and though it would make for a happy ending it isn’t that exciting or captivating. When something unexpected occurs to us, we usually end up trying to figure out why, which leads to a deeper contemplation of the text. If Harte had a deeper meaning he was trying to communicate to the reader, abruptly ending the story is an effective way to spark that.

The biggest thing that I was left wondering after I finished reading this story was what is going to end up happening to these men? They all began to change when the baby came to their camp, cleaning up their lives and their language to make themselves more appropriate company. With the baby dead and gone, will they continue to try to improve themselves as they did when they had “the Luck”? Will they fall back into old habits since they no longer have a motivator? Or will the death of the baby leave them further changed? The story ends before these questions are ever answered, so it may have been intentional on Harte’s part to get the reader to think about what occurs beyond the scope of the text. On top of that, the reader is left to wonder whether the gold brought up by the storm will prove adequate replacement for the loss of the baby. Before Luck came into their lives their money appeared to mostly be spent selfishly and frivolously on gambling and things. As different men then they were previously, will this new wealth be spent sensibly or will it be just another tool for them to fall back into old habits?

The short story format leaves many a question to be answered and is quite useful in demanding deeper reflection upon the material.

The Yellow Wallpaper and Desiree's Baby

Though short stories as a genre are considerably shorter than a full length novel, the manner in which we read them differs considerably and often leads to second or third readings of the text along with careful scrutiny of individual passages. This has been a particularly troublesome genre for me so far since I tend to be a fast reader. Both of our readings this week I have read through, come to the end, and thought to myself "how did that end up happening?" Short stories require much more attention to detail than do novels, which may unveil their secrets over the course of 600 pages.

Though I happen to disagree with our professor that the narrator of The Yellow Wallpaper was dead the entire story, I did benefit from our reading back over of the text and the highlighting of various details that I miss the first time I read through it. What we have read in this genre so far has shown me several parallels between short stories and mystery/thriller movies; you are lead along for most of the story to believe that the plot will resolve itself in a certain manner, but at the end something completely unexpected happens yet is somehow strongly supported by what has already occurred. Both almost always require another viewing or reading, and both usually leave the audience in doubt as to whether the events they witness occurred exactly how they were described by the narrator. Earlier in the story the narrator assumes that the room must have been a nursery at some point, then towards the end exclaims “How those children did tear about here! This bedstead is fairly gnawed!” (Gilman 514). However, only 9 lines later she says that “I tried to life and push it until I was lame, and then I got so angry I bit off a little piece at one corner—but it hurt my teeth” (Gilman 515). Was it really children who had gnawed up the bed before they came to live there? Or was it her all along? Or was it a woman who lived there previously who went through similar circumstances, such as with Sybil in A Whisper in the Dark? Because of the narrators’ psychosis at the end of the story, we cannot ever know for certain. But because of her psychosis, we are persuaded to read over the story again multiple times in order to understand how her condition developed.

Insanity always confuses things when mentioned in a story, even if it does not truly exist as in Desiree’s Baby. When Desiree realizes that her baby is part black, she is told that it means that she must be part black too. She is quick to say “ ‘It is a lie; it is not true, I am white! Look at my hair, it is brown; and my eyes are grey, Armand, you know they are gray. And my skin is fair,’ seizing his wrist. ‘Look at my hand; whiter than yours, Armand,’ she laughed hysterically” (Chopin 519). As he proceeds to throw her out we believe that she is simply crazy and in denial that she is black, with the supporting evidence that no one truly knows who her parents were since she was adopted. But in the end, we learn that it is Armand himself who is half black, and that there was nothing wrong with Desiree to begin with. Again, careful reading shows us that this is true, for example, when Desiree says that her hand is even whiter than Armand’s.

Both pieces speak out strongly against the treatment of women of the time, especially in regard to mental disorders, and both require careful reading to discern all the meaning that exists in their few short pages. 

Week 10 - Little Lord Fauntleroy

I think that we would all like to believe that in an ideal world, an authors’ gender would not be associated with certain stereotypes of writing. But when we found out that Frances Burnett was indeed a woman, too many things about the text suddenly clicked for me to say that the gender of the author did not affect the way the story of Little Lord Fauntleroy was told. Indeed one of my first thoughts upon reading this text was how differently boyhood was depicted from that of Tom Sawyer or Ragged Dick, and I was looking forward to blogging on the topic. Gender of the author does play an important role in the telling of the story, though I think that the difference between the way Tom Sawyer and Little Lord Fauntleroy are told has mostly to do with how Twain based his story on how he remembered boyhood, and Burnett based her story on how she idealized boyhood from the perspective of a mother.

Cedric Errol is presented in Little Lord Fauntleroy as quite different Tom Sawyer or Ragged Dick in their namesake books. Tom is rough, tricky, impulsive, and frequently disobeys his aunt. Dick is wryly humorous, street-smart, and rebellious in a “cool” way. Cedric reminds me much more of Ellen Montgomery than either of these two boys. He is mostly friends with only adults, he cares a great deal for his mother (in fact neither Tom nor Dick had a proper mother), he wears his hair curly and long, and he is finely dressed. I have to imagine that these descriptions of Cedric as such a “beautiful” boy much have sounded effeminate to a 19^th century audience as well as this modern reader, and until we discovered that Frances Burnett was indeed a woman I had wondered at what the intent of creating him like this had been. Now I do not think it is too much of a stretch to compare this story more easily to the didactic tale of The Wide, Wide World than to the other depictions of boyhood we’ve read about so far; Ellen is the ideal daughter, and Cedric seems to be the ideal son.

In fact, Burnett tells us that Cedric’s “greatest charm was this cheerful, fearless, quaint little way of making friends with people.” She goes on to state that “he had never heard an unkind or uncourteous word spoken at home; he had always been loved and caressed and treated tenderly, and so his childish soul was full of kindness and innocent warm feeling” (446). That is certainly a very different description of a young boy than from what the male authors said of their own characters. Well we can see very plainly in Tom Sawyer that Tom causes his aunt no end of grief, and what mother would want to be put through all that with her children? Though we can’t take these texts as artifacts, we can probably argue that Tom is much closer to being a typical boy of the time than is Cedric simply because Burnett could never have experienced boyhood intimately enough to write of it as accurately as Twain or Alger. Little Lord Fauntleroy was probably intended by Burnett to temper troublesome boyish qualities and attempt to make young boys (like young girls) more manageable to a mother.

Week 9 - Tom Sawyer

Tom Sawyer is quite a quotable little book, even from the little that we have read of it so far. Though there exists a plethora of possible blog-able quotes, there was one passage in particular that I felt was worth noting. Right after Tom escapes from Aunt Polly, on page 402 Charles Dickens comes out of the text to tell us that "he was not the Model Boy of the village. He knew the model boy very well though -- and loathed him."

Stopping there, that quote seems largely out of context with the previous dialogue. Out of a rather comical scene featuring one of Tom's many boyish pranks, suddenly he is juxtaposed against some seemingly perfect imaginary being and we are made aware of how strongly he resents this comparison. This passage gives us a brief glimpse inside Tom's head, but is at first seemingly out of context. However we are soon given more insight into these puzzling words upon the entrance of the "citified" boy with an "air about him that ate into Tom's vitals. The more Tom stared at the splendid marvel, the higher he turned up his nose at his finery and the shabbier and shabbier his own outfit seemed to him to grow" (403). This city boy becomes the personification of this "model boy," and we can see that Tom dislikes him instantly because he represents everything that Tom is not. The city boy is wealthy, well-dressed, and well-spoken. He wears shoes on the weekday, and a necktie, whereas Tom does not. Being a confident young lad, Tom takes an instant dislike of the boy probably because his finery throws into stark relief Tom's own ratty clothes and makes him feel self-conscious. Being also proud, having someone make him feel self-conscious cause him to become angry and pick a fight with the boy. It is most likely a move designed to show that boy that he is not better than Tom in all areas, despite the city boys' bragging. 

Tom resents this "model boy." Loathes him even. Not only for the reasons as represented by his encounter with the city boy, but also because the model boy represents a part of the population he doesn't ever see himself resembling. Tom is lazy, he tricks people, lies to his aunt, and gets into a host of other mischief. He wants the glory that comes with being the model boy (such as winning a Bible and impressing the new girl) but doesn't want to work for it. He doesn't think he has the capacity to even be the model boy, so he doesn't try, and just simply lives life his way. Why should he try to fit the image of what everybody else thinks he should be when his tricks and his cleverness win him the same things with less effort? Being crafty is what he is good at, and I know if I were him I would resent being told I have to act a certain way too. To a 12-year-old boy, it must be next to insufferable.

Week 8 - Ragged Dick

One of the first things I noticed about the story Ragged Dick was how different everybody's expectations were for Dick than they were for previous female characters we've read about.  Dicks quick witted and colloquial speech endears him to others rather than provoking a rebuttal. Though he possess numerous faults as stated by the narrator, he is often referred to as "our hero" rather than being offered suggestions on self improvement. His ambition and work ethic are praised; things we never even heard mentioned in our previous stories. Young boys are clearly more free to operate and advance in society in spheres other than the domestic one.

We have read that little girls are supposed to be well mannered, helpful, pretty, and polite, much like Ellen Montgomery from The Wide, Wide World. We have watched bad things happen to girls who were lacking in one or more of these areas, such as when Gerty from The Lamplighter attacks Nan Grant and gets kicked out of her home, or when Sybil from A Whisper in the Dark throws a temper tantrum and gets sent to the insane asylum. These rules of conduct that guide young women are entirely different for young  boys like Dick (the simple fact that he holds a job is proof of this; consider Capitola from The Hidden Hand). The narrator openly admits that Dick "wasn't a model boy in all aspects," yet continually refers to him as a hero throughout the text (339). Dick supports himself by living on the street blacking boots, working for a living, whereas Sybil's only option to keep herself financially stable seemed to be to get married.  Boys and girls appear to have clearly divided duties to which they are expected to attend, and when people blur that line (such as Capitola dressing like a boy) it can make society uncomfortable.

Aside from simply being allowed more freedom than girls, boys of this time seem to be pushed towards what we would call achieving the "American Dream." Dick's industrious nature is constantly highlighted throughout the story; Dick buys himself breakfast almost everyday from the money he earns in the mornings, and chastises his friend Johnny for not earning the same fortunes, calling him lazy. Though he is still poor due to his extravagant spending habits, towards the end of this excerpt we find that Dick does have some rather large ambitions. He tells his new friend Frank that "I really wish I could get somethin' else to do... I'd like to be a office boy, and learn business, and grow up 'spectable" (389). We see finally that, despite his frequent jokes at his own poverty, he really just wants a dignified, legitimate place amongst the rest of society. Frank telling Dick the story of Dick Whittington was no coincidence either; it stuck me instantly as highly didactic and one of the few similarities I could see between this story and our previous readings (391). Dick Whittington (who shares the first name of our protagonist) starts out as a street boy just like Ragged Dick and grows up to become wealthy and "Lord Mayor of London" (392). This story combined with Frank's statement that "If you'll try to be somebody, and grow up into a respectable member of society, you will," tries very plainly to tell the young boys reading this story that no matter where you come from in life, you can be accepted by society if you will just work hard.

Week 7 - A Whisper in the Dark

By introducing the concept of insanity into the story, Alcott warns the reader not to get comfortable with what they are reading because they can no longer trust their perceptions. Being unable to know what is coming can be scary by itself, and introducing that into A Whisper in the Dark allows Alcott to manipulate that unease to catch onto and hold the reader’s attention. It makes the reader feel like they have to keep reading because unlike our other stories, this one doesn’t seem to have the guarantee of a happy ending. 

Since the story is being told in the first person, we are receiving all of our information from one source: Sybil. But in the second half of the book, she is committed to an insane asylum after throwing a tantrum. Though she loudly insists that "I am the best judge of my own health," we can't really be certain that she is (229). She could be unable to accurately judge her own health due to her skewed mental state and really does need to be put away.

As to how insanity being present in the story affects the reader is quite a different story. Even though when I started reading the story Sybil seemed like a perfectly stable young woman, being brought to the insane asylum really does make you doubt if what she is seeing is real or not. For example, when she is sleeping walking and hears “through the keyhole came a whisper that chilled me to the marrow of my bones, so distinct and imploring was it. “Find it! For God’s sake find it before it is too late!”” (235). The reader has no present guarantee that this is anything except the product of a deranged mind, so it begs you to continue to read to find out if Sybil really is insane or not.

Though we find out in the end that Sybil’s mother is indeed present in the story as the other resident of the asylum, she had no impact whatsoever on Sybil’s upbringing; the typical mother/daughter relationship was almost entirely absent. Almost. In many of the other stories we have read, the children typically have loving, caring mothers who try to help them to become successful in the world, such as Mrs. Montgomery in The Wide, Wide World and Marah Rocke in The Hidden Hand. Though Sybil’s mother has a very limited role in her life (that isn’t even discovered until after she is dead), she is the one who effectively hands Sybil her freedom from the asylum by hiding the key in the dogs collar.

But at the same time, her mother was legitimately insane. Though we again only find this out at the end of the story, Sybil must live with the knowledge that her mother was never a suitable guardian for her. For a society that put so much value into the relationship between a mother and a daughter, to have someone tell you that at times you may not be able to trust yourself, but also not be able to trust the people that are supposed to be looking out for you, would produce quite a chilling effect indeed. 

Week 6 - Uncle Tom's Cabin

Uncle Tom's Cabin seems to be a perfect example of a "poster child" cause, in this case the cause being to abolish slavery. Throughout the 80 or so pages of the novel that we read this week, we were introduced to several different groups of slaves, most all of which featured a child. In the very beginning of the novel we are introduced to Eliza "leaving the only home she had ever known, and cutting loose from the protection of a friend whom she loved and revered." (243) Though she was owned by a family that treated her kindly, she decides to risk her own life running away to spare her son the cruelties of being sold to the south, which as we read on we learn is much worse than being a slave in Kentucky. The main audience for this novel I assume was women and mothers, as the novel makes many more examples of children being split from their parents. And what mother reading this novel wouldn't be heartbroken by Aunt Hagar begging Master Haley "buy me too, Mas'r, for de dear Lord's sake!--buy me--I shall die if you don't!" (318) These passages are heartrending; I can imagine the horror white women must have felt back then in learning that every day poor black mothers were being separated from their children forever, and how much these feelings of horror and outrage must have galvanized the population into action.

I don't feel that the novel is drastically changing how we should interpret children's literature. I think what it does is to take the preexisting idea of children as being pure, innocent beings and shows how the institution of slavery perverts and destroys the rights children have to grow up safe and loved. There is no goodness in a 10-month-old child being sold apart from his mother, let along not being allowed to say goodbye to your child, no matter how you spin it. (326) Books like The Wide, Wide World and The Hidden Hand showed American audiences how children should be raised, how they should act, and what qualities should be encouraged. After reading these earlier novels and having formed a schema about what is "good" about childhood, we can see from Uncle Tom's Cabin that the "goodness" of childhood is absolutely absent in the black community of the time. Harriet Beecher Stowe plays on these conceptions like a master musician to show to the reader of the time that slaves have feelings and families, that this institution of slavery is tearing apart their lives, and that no child of any race deserves this kind of treatment.

So, though the theme and mood of this book are obviously drastically different from previous texts that we have read,  the theme of childhood as something to be protected is simply saturated in the text. In just 80 short pages we have three different stories of mothers being separated or threated to be separated from their children (if I've counted correctly), and one young mother even kills herself after the loss of her baby. (329) Uncle Tom's Cabin shows us how children aught to be raised by showing the audience story after story of children who obviously haven't had the luxury of a safe and comfortable childhood.

Week 5 - The Hidden Hand

Let me just start off by saying, wow! I really enjoyed reading the beginning of this novel! I was actually rather upset that we weren't reading more of it, and I couldn't have said the same about either The Wide, Wide World or The Lamplighter. I may go by the library in the next few days and see if they have it!


Well, seeing as how that just gave me the inspiration to write this blog posting, I'm just going to follow along with this train of thought. This novel is quite a departure from the previous two books we've read. The previous novels contained Ellen, a prim and proper young girl who is the epitome of a young lady, and Gerty, a not so nice or pretty young girl but one who strives hard to be 'good' all the same. Now, we have Capitola. She decided to dress in boys clothes so she can work to feed herself rather than starve. She talks back to Old Hurricane in a teasing manner, both dressed as a boy and after she is revealed. She is fearless when faced with the trapdoor in her room, and as is evidenced by her decision to even start dressing like a boy, she takes her future into her own hands. Capitola is nothing like either the perfect little Ellen or ignorant and helpless Gerty. Why does Southworth make this sudden departure from conventional domestic fiction? Both The Wide, Wide World and The Lamplighter were bestsellers in their times. Why try to reinvent the wheel? Or, is Southworth inventing something completely different, with a completely different message? This seems to be exactly like the "furious kind of a novel" (Warner 31) that we have been told is bad for women.

I believe that one of the biggest reasons that this novel is so much more rapidly paced and features so much stronger characters than the other novels is the manner in which it was first published. Professor Irvin mentioned in class that The Hidden Hand was first published as a serial in a newspaper. I can imagine that if I were an author, I would want to hook my audience right at the very beginning so I could continue being published. This explains the clean breaks between chapters as well, which reads rather well from the perspective of a modern reader. The characters I can imagine were created with specific purpose as well: Old Hurricane is that feisty old man everyone has encountered and loved to hate; Traverse is young and handsome, described as having a "nobel form [and] graceful air" (Southworth 190); Marah Rocke provides us with a delicious bit of drama and scandal; and Capitola is that tough little free-spirit that all girls wish they could let loose sometime. That is another part of why I believe that The Hidden Hand was so successful: though Capitola was not what you would call a conventional young woman of the times, she is edgy, spunky, and makes you wish that you could be having her adventures. Women who did not get out of the home much could pick up a paper and read about this girl who makes them feel that they are out experiencing the world as well.

Week 4

It is not a surprise to me to find that, a century and a half after Cummin's The Lamplighter was published, our expectations about the roles of women in society has progressed as far as it has. Women are now allowed to vote, most hold jobs even after they marry, and there is now less importance put on being a mother and having children. Some women choose to focus on their careers and never marry. Others may choose to marry young or stay at home and not work. The important thing is not that a modern woman does one or the other, it is simply important that that she have the option, and the ability to make her own choices. It's not that expectations are any different. The ideal role of a woman (in the eyes of a man) hasn't kept pace with progress. The difference between these two texts is simply the number of options available to either girl in their own time.

The first thing I noticed about the video prompt was the theme song singing "smart girls have more fun." Obviously, the message of this show is not going to be the same message should, for example, it had been produced under the values system of the 19th century. Amy Pohler features on her show different girls with different talents and says that they are all equally valid ways of living. In The Lamplighter however, as in our other readings, we are shown that girls of that time were all brought up and prepared and trimmed and shaped to fit the mold of what women were supposed to be. We can see from the examples of Nan Grant (and Gerty on occasion) that having a temper or being strong willed was a bad thing: it makes you kill kittens or gets you beaten.

However, we are encouraged to like Emily Graham and Mrs. Sullivan. Both represent the virtues Gerty should strive to embody: selflessness, piety, motherhood, and beauty. Both women are easily distinguished from Nan Grant, who was ugly and mean. Now of course modern women are told how to act and behave as well, but we really have the freedom to choose from many "socially acceptable" models to choose from; no one is going to alienate a woman in this day and age for reading books, playing soccer, or becoming a lawyer.
Gerty is simply encouraged to "be quite a nice little housekeeper."

In the prompt video, the little girl Ana says "don't think about what you have to do to get people to like you or to have more friends. You probably want people to like you for who you are." While this is a very common line of thought today, it was not the case in Gerty's time. To be a proper young woman Gerty is supposed to know how to clean the house, make toast, pray to God, and all these other things that are just expected of her. And she is taught that that is what she wants. Her opinion doesn't really matter. Amy Pohler's show is all about asking young girls their opinions which shows the difference between how many more options Ana has growing up in the 21st century even at such an early age.

Women back then had fewer options because they simply had fewer rights. Nowadays when a woman can do just about anything that a man can (at least in our country), there exist multiple ways in which she can choose to express herself without fear of social rejection.

Week 3

This week we have read an excerpt  of Susan Warner's The Wide, Wide World. Reading this text, it becomes apparent that Ellen's parents function to provide an example to follow and to be teachers to Ellen (though this is mostly to do with her mother, as the father is largely absent). Mr. Montgomery serves as the example of what a man should be: someone who (if he must work) provides for his wife and children and insures their security, as is exampled by him insisting that Mrs. Montgomery be taken overseas to improve her health. Mrs. Montgomery is to Ellen the example of what she should be: a humble servant of God, an obedient wife, and a composed and gentle woman.

Mothers' role is to provide and take good care of Ellen while father is out making money for the family. She does her best to see that Ellen is acquainted with God and to provide Ellen the things that she needs to grow up into a lady. Against even the wishes of her physician, she leaves the house to insure that Ellen has a Bible perfectly suited to her, a writing desk for proper correspondence, and even a work-box so that Ellen may mend her own clothes when Mrs. Montgomery has passed (which she suspects may be sooner rather than later). Mr. Montgomery, on the contrary, takes almost no part in the raising of Ellen. He is not featured in the story but once at breakfast. While Ellen and his wife sit at home all day doing whatever it is that they do, he is at work making the money that will go towards doctor bills and other such expenses. Ellen is brought up almost entirely by her mother, yet the ultimate authority figure in her life is instead her father. Since father has commanded that Mrs. Montgomery will go overseas and that Ellen will stay behind, it shall be done, and neither of the women contemplate disobeying him. Since he provides the means by which they live off of, both defer to him, and they both take care of the domestic activities so he does not have to.

To Ellen, her mother is the ultimate source of love in her life as well as the most trusted. She even tells her mother how she doesn't know how she could ever love God more than her, even as her mother says that she does indeed love God more than Ellen. Since father is so frequently absent, her mother is really all that Ellen has. Naturally, she is much more emotionally invested in her mother than in her father.

Week 2

Sanchez-Eppler states in the beginning of her introduction that children are both “objects of socialization” and “forces of socialization.” As I’ve gathered from the literature we’ve read so far, this is true, and what I take to mean that children’s literature is used to propose a set of values to be modeled and vessels in which to instill these same values. Children will guide the way into the future, but we must prepare them to guide us in the direction that we want to go. Though the value of childhood “specialness” was beginning to be recognized, children were still being seen as “culturally irrelevant” since they were still dependent upon adults. They were not studied or taken seriously because adults believed that children were basically drawings to be colored in with their favorite colors, and such it was reflected in the purpose behind the literature to teach them morals. But at the same time, while they wrote with an emphasis on teaching morality, their writing constituted the importance of children to society by the simple fact that they saw it important to educate them.

MacLeod makes several claims in Children’s Literature for a New Nation, two of which are that the stories are mostly lacking in setting and that they strive strictly to teach morality. Well even in our very first reading this seems to be untrue. Rip van Winkle is filled with beautiful descriptions of the Catskills Mountains which sparked the imagination of even this modern reader. In addition to that, the main character seems to come out on top, waking up to find his shrewish wife deceased and having “arrived at that happy age when a man can do nothing with impunity.” True, many of his friends were gone and his dog no longer remembered him, but the story is lacking in a “dire consequence” that results from the faults of the characters. Rather, this story seems to cautiously advise against the vice of sloth while building a detailed setting to hold the attention of the children it was made to be read to. Morality is important, but it is not overwhelming. Setting is more important than MacLeod gives it credit for because you have to have something to hold your audiences’ attention, and setting does that very well.

As is mentioned several times in our reading, children’s literature is mostly meant to be understood by adults. Adults are the ones writing the literature and are frequently the ones reading it to the children. Therefore it would be prudent as we are reading to think critically about what the author is trying to communicate to the children, as it is most likely going to contain commonly held values or anxieties of the time.

First Assignment

Hello, my name is Sarah Fulkerson. I'm from the small town of Mansfield, Texas, about 25 minutes south of Fort Worth. I am a sophomore pre-law Economics major with a minor in Political Science.

I came to TCU my freshman year because I wanted a small university experience, so I could get to know professors on a more personal level. Also I liked it because it is rather close to my home. I maintain good relations with my family so I like to visit often.

If I was made Chancellor of TCU, I think the first thing I would change is the way the dining plans are organized. Last semester I calculated that I spent about $17 every time I swiped my card to get into Market Square. I just don't eat $1800 worth of food every semester so it's silly that I should be mandated to buy a dining plan that costs that much.

I think a good teacher is always patient with their students, accessible outside of the classroom, willing to repeat or further explain an idea, knowledgeable about their topic, and always prepared for class. Good students are willing to put forth the effort to learn what they are being taught, always in attendance, and prepared for classroom discussion and tests.

If I could have dinner with any three living people, they would be my late grandmother, Coco Chanel, and Greg Mortensen. I would have dinner with my grandmother because I never got the chance to really ask her about her life and my mother as a child. Coco Chanel as well, because I admire her prowess as a business woman during a time when women were expected to stay in the home. Finally, my hero Greg Mortensen, who risks his life day in and day out to build schools for children in remote parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Hmm, what are three things you should know about me? Well, I tend to write quite a lot, in case you haven't noticed by now. I consider myself to be a good writer and I rather enjoy it. I really, really, really want to live in New York someday, and hopefully practice law there. Here's a random thing about me: I'm terrified of the ocean. I hate swimming in it unless I can see the bottom, and usually I don't even do that because I hate sand. And seafood. Just about anything even associated with the ocean I don't like.

3 things I'd like to know about you: Anybody here from out of the country? I love traveling! Does anybody else besides me love old movies? Gone With the Wind, North by Northwest anyone? And who else could care less about American Idol?

I decided to take this course because I've always found American literature to be highly organic and a true product of the American spirit, so I wanted to learn a little more about how it works and what the major themes are throughout our history.

Well inside the classroom I do a lot of reading for my political science classes, as they're simply reading intensive courses. Outside the classroom though I do try to stay up to date with what is going on in the world. One of the first things I do every morning is check the headlines, both national and international. I have a large interest in the Middle East, so I love books such as The Kite Runner, A Thousand Splendid Suns, and 3 Cups of Tea. Like my parents, I also enjoy books in the fantasy genre, from authors such as R.A. Salvatore and Mercedes Lackey and novels like Wayfarer's Redemption and Medalon.

I don't do too much writing outside the classroom, and when I do it is usually bursts of creativity that I don't tend to expand upon. I've always wanted to write a book, so I'm kind of waiting for that one idea that I'll fall in love with and expand upon. I do it well when I do write, but I don't ever show it to anyone, for reasons known only to psychologists.

Though I at first wanted the color scheme of my blog to be black, I ending up choosing the one you see now. I always try to be a happy person, so I like to surround myself with things that exude positive energy. The humor I do use tends to just be a bit of dry wit now and then as I see appropriate, but usually I take no large steps to include it. I've started this blog out with just cut and dry information and tried to sort it out by question so that the reader can easily acquire the information that I'm trying to say. I am a well organized, efficient person, so I'd like my blog to reflect that.

For the benefit of Professor Irvin: I have read, understood, and agreed to the terms of the course syllabus. Thanks for reading.