We aren't organized, We organize ourselves

In AS class this week we talked about how the different area's of our community and cities are divided. Whether it be because of a railroad, a river, or a highway, there are divisions everywhere. Did people plan it to be that way? I know that in Wilmette, there are certain barriers that separate people such as the railroad. When I was little my elementary school was determined by which side of green bay road I lived on. When everyone was combined into middle school we all knew which area of Wilmette people lived in based on which school they came from. They were minor but barriers nonetheless.

The barriers are not specific to any region, they're everywhere. I visited Peru this summer and while I was in Lima, there was a clear line of where it was unsafe to go. We were in the city center which was right along a river. The bridge across the river had militia on our side, the side that wasn't covered in graffiti and smeared with dirt and trash. Why was it that 100 ft across the river was an area where no tourist could ever step foot when it was squeaky clean and 10 times safer where we were standing?

This is a photo of the militia by the bridge.

In class we discussed city planners being somewhat responsible. Personally I think that they have some part but that it mostly comes from people themselves. I feel like people make a connection to a place and bring their friends with them. That's why there's "segregation" in the different parts of Chicago. Like China town, for example. People move themselves with people they know and then it doesn't change. The children of the original people that moved to Chinatown didn't have to stay there. Other Chinese didn't either. That is when the barriers begin getting built, even though subconsciously. People start living in the same location. When there is a break in the normal pattern of streets and roads that sits near the edge of that location, the barrier is made and people stay within the same area,

In my math class, at first we were assigned seats but last week we were able to choose. Where did I go and sit? Right in the same desk as before. A lot of the girls came and sat in the same area, the boys in back, and the sophomores in there own little corner. Now everyday each person sits in the same seat. But can't we sit wherever we want? Yes. But would I now go and move to the other side of the classroom? Probably not. I've placed myself in "my" area and I wouldn't want to move even though I have all the right to. I've barricaded myself into sitting in that desk day after day after day....

StoryCorps

Recently in class we have been listening and talking about interviews and now we are in the midst of conducting our own interviews. Mr. Bolos suggested that we visit Storycorps.com, a website that contains different types of audio interviews.  I decided to listen to a few that pertained to 9/11, which we were discussing in class at the time. After listening to only one, I found myself bawling in front of the computer screen (I highly suggest you have tissues in hand if you decide to listen to some of them). Interestingly enough, when I decided to listen to interviews that were about seemingly normal relationships or experiences, I was equally captivated. Sure, the stories about getting sent to the principals office didn't evoke the same emotion as the story of a woman who was talked on the phone with her husband as he died in the World Trade Center. Somehow, each story was evenly intriguing. Somehow, the everyday occurrences seemed so important and were easy to get caught up in.

It might be credited to the fact that people love to talk about themselves and tell their stories. I believe it's much more fun telling a story about yourself than the story of someone else. Because of this, I feel like people put  much more passion into their interviews. They have the sentimental value attached to this story, even if it was simply a father talking to his daughter about how he met his wife. It is the importance that the interviewee puts behind their story that translates effortlessly to the listener. Or is it that the stories are easier to relate to? Personally I find stories about people who had a parent battling cancer only because I've been there myself. Its easier to listen to interviews between parents and children because I likewise have a relationship with my parents that I can compare the stories to. Fortunately, I did not have to experience 9/11. So as heart-wrenching as the stories may be, I have few experiences in my life that could possibly help me relate. 

Life graphs

I've never been disappointed with where my life has gone so far or how I've been raised.  I am perfectly happy and excited for where my life is headed. Of course I have had the occasional low points in my life but all in all the positives overweigh the negatives. All in all, if my life remained like this until I die I would be esctatic. But should I be aiming to better my life? Make my happiness reach a new level?

In AS class this week we read a lecture of Kurt Vonnegut. He was describing the life paths of people/characters using a "life graph". Cinderella's life graph started at the bottom, she worked her way up, it dropped low again, but then she got her prince and the line of her graph climbed straight to the top. This is the rags to riches story that American's are captivated by, the story that we constantly see in movies and in storybooks.  Another situation we read about was that of Franz Kafka, whose graph never led to the high point in his life but instead started, stayed low, and ended at the lowest. Its seems as if most people want their lives to be like a Cinderella story, even if they never start at the very bottom. Her graph became the way it was with hard work and good luck. My question is: what does it mean if my life graph is a straight line?

"Do you know for a fact?"

In AS class this past week we were discussing about when research and evidence becomes fact. Someone in our class asked, "If we have interviews, pictures, and websites all confirming the same thing, can we put it into our paper as a fact?". Our teacher suggested that instead of stating what is thought to be a fact as a fact, we should instead say something like, "according to a, b, and c...". This got me thinking: what if, no matter how much evidence of an event a person had, people still didn't believe it happened? What if there are artifacts, first hand witnesses, photo's, and writings but people still believed that what you believe clearly happened, was a complete fabrication?

Within the past week, a group of Imams visited the Auschwitz, a concentration camp created during World War II. Many people believe it will help decrease Holocaust Denial among the Muslim community considering that Holocaust denial has been increasing throughout the world. Get more information about this trip here. Before a few weeks ago I had never heard of Holocaust denial. To me, the Holocaust clearly happened and there was no doubt in my mind that a mass killing of 12 million people was fabricated. I am not sure why someone would want to deny what seems to be so obvious or what would make them feel as if a massive event like the Holocaust could never happen.

According to Wikipedia, a few key claims of Holocaust deniers include:

• The Nazis had no intention or official policy for exterminating Jews
• The number of Jews killed (about 6 million) is a huge exaggeration.
• The Nazis did not use gas chambers for the mass murders
• The Holocaust was made up by the Allies of WWII to demonize Germans.
• Testimonies from survivors include errors and misrepresentations, hence not trustworthy.
• Documentation (The Diary of Anne Frank, letters, photos etc.) was a fabrication.

I recognize that I do not know a whole lot about Holocaust Denial but I find it amazing that with all of the evidence that the Holocaust actually happened, people don't believe it happened. Maybe I find it more amazing than other people (you tell me) because one of my relatives survived the Holocaust in the Theresienstadt concentration camp. My dad's aunt/my great aunt Hilda and her family were placed in concentration camps and only my great aunt and her mother survived. Her entire family could have survived had they been allowed to enter Cuba after sailing from Holland. They were actually aboard a famous ship, the SS St. Louis, that was denied entrance into Cuba and forced to return to Germany where most of the Jews onboard were taken into Nazi control. You can read more about the tragedy here. After seeing the tattoo of my great aunt's prison tracking number on her left arm, there is no doubt in my mind that the Holocaust was a fabrication. How much more evidence is needed?