A Response to Kyle Madsen’s "A Response to Michael Pollan”

Hello Kyle. I am very glad that you took the time to read my article. However, you seem to have missed a key point. At the beginning of my piece I said, “And even in the face of this derision I decide I am going to bother, there arises the whole vexed question of getting it right. Is eating local or walking to work really going to reduce my carbon footprint?” I then concluded, “If determining the carbon footprint of food is really this complicated… I’ll just buy the imported chops at Costco, at least until the experts get their footprints sorted out.” With these lines I was stating that calculating our carbon footprint is complicated and can be very inaccurate. These complications may dissuade or prevent people from taking the time and effort to reduce their carbon footprint. As a solution I recommend people garden in order to benefit the environment and themselves.

 In your response you said, “I would have liked him to discuss how we as consumers could buy more fuel-efficient cars, avoid plastic packaging, drink tap water, and buy products from green industries.” If I were to do this Kyle I would go against my entire argument. You wish me to be the scientist calculating the carbon footprints that I referred to in my piece. I am the confused consumer like you, not the scientist. My mission was to simplify the process for my readers and therefore I recommend that they garden. Also, you referred to gardening as, “hours of backbreaking labor.” I find this very interesting. Gardening is something my 75-year-old grandmother does for fun. I suggest that you put down your iPad and garden. From the sound of it not only will you be helping the environment but you will also be fighting the growing epidemic of childhood obesity.

Live Long and Prosper,

Michael “Faux” Pollan

A Summary of "Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight"

Clifford Geertz and his wife visit a Balinese village where they are, “invisible men.” The village ignored them and refused to acknowledge their presence. One day the couple joined the village in running from police after a cockfight and hid out in a local couples’ home. After this event the couple received acceptance from the entire village. The Balinese were tickled by the foreigners running from the police and everyone in the village wanted to hear the Americans’ story. Through this acceptance Geertz was able to start learning about how important cockfights were with Balinese culture. Balinese men have a, “deep psychological identification” with their cocks and the, “double entendre is deliberate.” The Balinese men spend enormous amounts of time with their cocks, feeding them, grooming them, or, “just gazing at them with a mixture of rapt admiration and dreamy self-absorption.” Animal-like behavior is considered repulsive and babies are not allowed to crawl. In the cockfights this,”animality” and men meet and battle in a, “bloody drama of hatred, cruelty, violence, and death.” Geertz then shifts his essay to the rules and standard practices of cockfights. Cockfights are held in a ring and begin late in the afternoon and usually 10 fights comprise a program called a, “sehet.” The rules of cockfighting are written on palm-leaf manuscripts and have been passed down over the generations. Handlers tend to the cocks during the fight and will even resuscitate the bird. The umpire has absolute authority and Geertz never witnesses any villager complain or question an umpire’s judgment. Betting is also a very large part of the cockfights and can get very complicated. Geertz learns that the village always supports the local cock just as an American town supports the local football team. The cockfight embodies the culture, social networks, and rituals of Balinese life.

Quote from Clifford Geertz Deep Play: notes on the Balinese cockfight

"Whenever you see a group of Balinese men squatting idly in the council shed or along the road in their hips down, shoulders forward, knees up fashion, half or more of them will have a rooster in his hands, holding it between his thighs, bouncing it gently up and down to strengthen its legs, ruffling its feathers with abstract sensuality, pushing it out against a neighbor's rooster to rouse its spirit, withdrawing it toward his loins to calm it again. Now and then, to get a feel for another bird, a man will fiddle this way with someone else's cock for a while, but usually by moving around to squat in place behind it, rather than just having it passed across to him as though it were merely and animal."

To me this whole passage seems to be suggesting that there is some kind of perversion existing between these Balinese men and their birds. I also thought it was funny that Geertz refers to the birds as "cocks" throughout the entire work, except in this quote. Nice job dodging that bullet Geertz.

A Summary of J. Fitzgerald's OWS Article

Jason Fitzgerald, an English student at Columbia University, begins the article by discussing how the Occupy Wall Street Movement has shifted in the eyes of America from where it started. The movement seems to be on pause due to the winter months and has become a side note for journalists who are primarily focused on the upcoming presidential election. The movement is no longer full of enigma and energy as it was in late October/early November. While some may think the movement has run its course others believe it is simply hibernating and will come back stronger than ever in the spring months. Due to the media, protests, police intervention, and human mics the movement has been branded in the minds of the nation. When people think of the Occupy Wall Street movement they now think of, “that left-wing activist thing that puts up tents, sponsor rallies, … and gets Michael Moore excited.” The movement must break this branding or, “reification” in order to bring back the power of the movement and recaptivate its audience, which is the, “99%”. Fitzgerald than states to view Occupy Wall Street as a claim: “that private interest is a public problem.”  Fitzgerald then begins to explain that Wall Street has a high seat of power by representing the health of the nation and that if this is to be then the people of the nation should have a voice in what happens on the stock market. The argument is that only few wealthy people can afford to have an influence on Wall Street and those few use that power to control the stock market for their personal gains. In this system the average income earning citizen has no control over what the stock market does and will either benefit or pay for the top 1% decisions. Fitzgerald wraps up the article by inviting his readers to find new ways to challenge the status quo instead of pondering what, "those people" in the Occupy Wall Street movement will do next.

1st Post!

My Definition of Strong Reading

Strong Reading is when a reader devotes a large amount of attention and time to a text, interpreting it with their personal ideas and experiences while also being considerate to different perspectives.

Reading With and Against the Grain

One book that I read against the grain was a biography of JFK. Even though I read this book in middle school and don't remember many specific details I mention it to people often. The reason I mention it is because I can't recall ever fighting with a book the way I fought with this biography. Every sentence seemed biased and skewed. The biography even managed to ignore JFK's use of painkillers and stimulants during his presidency. Anything that could possibly raise a doubt to JFK's character was conveniently left out. Throughout the entire book I was frustrated and found myself fighting the author's viewpoints and reasoning. 

One book that I have read with the grain is the Bible. I was raised in a Christian household and count myself as a Christian today. When you have been raised to believe something your entire life the last thing you do as a child is question it. Instead we try to have faith, love as Jesus loves, and look for examples in our lives where we can help others and share this love. To question it seemed wrong. I never did ask questions until one day when I was talking with a fellow Christian, a bible study instructor, and he told me that I should ask questions. He said that by asking questions and finding answers through every day life and prayer our faith grows stronger. So I'm not condemning reading the Bible with the grain, I still often do. I just discovered that reading with and against the grain both have their benefits and that I shouldn't be afraid to practice both with everything I read.