The biggest fault I see in Malcolm X is that he excluded people of white skin such as myself from his movement. This is evident in the movie scene in which a white student asks him what she can do to help his cause, and he bluntly responds,” Nothing.” How much of the Critical Race Theory tenet number five did Malcolm X consider? The tenet states that every individual has a complex and compound identity described by inter-sectionality and anti-essentialism. X wrote off the entire white population as not being able to help his cause for equality between black and white. His reasoning that black and white communities should be split to allow both cultures to flourish before integrating them is a good argument, but regarding the entire white population as entirely unhelpful doesn’t seem like a good solution.

Later in the film after he goes to Mecca, Malcolm X is more accepting of white help. He communes with muslims of all skin colors and backgrounds and loses his mega-apprehension to anybody of Caucasian background. The film doesn’t ever show a white person in his close circle, or even really at the majority of his rallies. I wonder if he would’ve told that white student something different after he came back from Mecca, but his untimely demise cements that question in mystery.

Five Muslim Women - Panel Discussion

Last week I attended the "Five Muslim Women Speak Out" panel discussion. I heard short testaments from 5 different Muslim International students at Gonzaga University-- Nuhan, Manih, Aham, Rwang and Ana (excuse my guessing on spelling) . Their objective was to address some of the misconceptions that Americans have about Muslims and explain some of the difficulties that they have faced since coming to America.

Nihan first explained what she thought were some of the misconceptions about Saudi Arabia-- addressing specifically what she thought was great about her country: the holy city, the lack of discrimination, the sense of time that comes from praying 5 times a day, and the pride in individual people. "I am so proud to be a Saudi Muslim," she states. She did explain some struggles she had at various dinner parties or other social events. "Their attitude toward me changed as soon as they found out I was Muslim," she explained. I felt this really demonstrated the first tenant of racism that- Racism is ordinary.

Manih came next as she explained she came to the United States to get her masters in ESL. She presents the misconceptions that she thinks Americans have about Saudi women's rights. She says that in Islam women were regarded as equals. For example, they had the right to an education as the government sends thousands of women abroad to be educated each year. Women also have the right to reject the spouse that is chosen for them and the right to divorce him. Men are the ones in responsible for obtaining the dowry before the marriage. The women can seek elsewhere to help him obtain the needed money, but it is still the man's responsibility. "I am treated like a queen," she explains.

Aham, who is getting her Master's degree in Communications in the fall explains some of her biggest tribulations since coming to America. She has a strong relationship with her family, but as she must work and go to school, she doesn't have many people to help her. Her son must be in day care for 7 hours a day and she is worried about him being unable to learn Arabic and the Islamic religion. The struggle she described made me think of some of the poems in Summer of the Black Widows, specifically the first and the last poems. When Alexie explains how he is going to "weave a story." When we take the time to listen and learn from cultures, we are much more empathetic with what individuals from these cultures have to say and are much more willing and apt to push for social change.

Rwang tells the audience about some of the culture differences she sees between the United States and Saudi Arabia. "Our entire culture is based upon our religion," she states. She states that practicing religion is much different here because there are not a lot of mosques and it is easy to forget to pray on time. Another difference is that studying here means "mixed" classes-- both men and women in the same class. At first this was difficult for her but she is learning to adjust. Still, she can't argue or talk to boys the same way that American girls can in a classroom setting. Rwang was the only of the 5 women who did not wear a ji'hab on her head. She was worried about the discrimination she might face, but due to the accepting nature of the people she has come into contact with in the United States, she is reconsidering her decision.

The last women on the panel to speak, Ana, came to the United States to study English as a 2nd language. She further discussed the ji'habs that Muslim women wore, explaining that they were a traditional symbol deeply rooted in their culture and religion. Back in Saudi Arabia all of the women would be wearing a full face covering, but they fear discrimination and not being accepted so resort to only wearing a head covering.

I was especially intrigued to hear about all the drastic changes that are occurring for women in Saudi Arabia. All five of the women agreed that the Middle East was progressing in the amount of rights they allotted to women and believed it was a good thing. Right now, there is one mixed gender university. All but one of the women are learning to drive cars in America. They hope that in upcoming years they will be able to drive at home in Saudi Arabia as well.

After each women had the chance to speak, there was a chance for audience members to ask questions. During this time, people seemed very curious about women's rights, especially having to cover their hair and not being allowed to have contact with men. At one point a Muslim member in the audience stood up and reprimanded the girls for not adhering to their faith properly. You could really feel the awkward tension in the room as the girls tried to answer his questions and ignore his condescending remarks. After making him leave, the host of the even explained that this man came from an Egyptian Muslim background. While his faith was not different in foundation. It was much different in practice.

I really enjoyed hearing from all the women and especially meeting a few of them after the discussion. There really is no comparison between reading about a culture and having the opportunity to experience it. I gained a lot of experience in thinking about how difficult it really must be to be living here and practicing your religion when there are so many barriers against you. It reminded me of the Rwang had explained the difficulty she has just fasting during Ramadan when everyone else around her is eating. It made me stop to think about how difficult it really would be to live in a culture where you are the minority, trying to practice something so drastically different from the rest of the population. Still, I was very glad to hear that all the women have, for the most part, felt welcomed and not judged.

Underwood Samson

Yesterday in class, we talked about the meanings of names in The Reluctant Fundamentalist. When it came to the company Changez worked for, Underwood Samson, we talked about how "underwood" could mean old-fashioned or outdated, and how "Samson" could relate to strength.

What we did not talk about is that Underwood Samson abbreviates to U.S.

So is this Hamid's commentary on American businesses? That they are solidly built but outdated? Or is it an ironic association, because American businesses are weak (look at the economy) even though they are constantly trying to push boundaries? I tend to agree with the second take, using the World Trade Center as an example. In Fundamentalist, Hamid says, "I stared as one--and then the other--of the twin towers... collapsed.... I was caught up in the symbolism of it all, the fact that someone had so visibly brought America to her knees" (72-73).

Many viewed the towers as the epitome of American business and capitalism--a testament to U.S. strength, security, business ventures, and modernism. But they proved themselves weaker than anyone thought was possible when they fell on September 11th, as Changez obviously felt about America and its businesses in general. For this reason, I think the name "Underwood Samson" is a bitter, ironic commentary on the state of affairs of U.S. business.

Workshop Day on Deveare Smith

Good job to all the groups that presented last Thursday! I thought they were all interesting and informative, but my favorite was definitely Nate and Erica’s presentation on music. Before last Thursday I had only heard a little bit about “jerkin’” but never about “dougie-ing” or “hyphy.” Of course, when you think of California you think of it as a center for hip hop and rap and dance, but this presentation helped me realize that it really is its own culture and has something to say to society. The artists want to express their desire to have fun, their individuality, and stress the fact that they don’t care what the rest of society labels them as.

I also thought that this presentation fabulously illustrated the point in Loewen with which they connected it. They mentioned Loewen’s discussion of the concept of civilized versus uncivilized. In America’s past, this applied to the Pilgrims and early settlers and the fact that they considered themselves as more advanced and plainout better than the Native Americans, partially because they didn’t try to understand or get to know the natives and their culture. In the context of music in California, Erica explained that mainstream society might view these types of music as uncivilized, because they are different than most types of music we are used to. However, the fact that society does label it as “uncivilized” is what has helped unify the people who share in creating and enjoying these genres of music. The artists thrive under the thrill of going against what mainstream society expects.

Saudi Forum

The issue of headresses came up a lot at the forum with the five Saudi Arabian women. Only one of the women there was not wearing a head covering, and the four wearing them all had colored ones instead of the stereotypical black. The correct color of head coverings was debated there as well as when it’s appropriate to wear them. The ladies said that head coverings don’t necessarily have to be black, and that they only wear them in the Middle East because that is the cultural norm. This prompted one practicing muslim in the crowd to interject that that teaching was a false one, and that it is only proper for Muslim girls to wear black head coverings. Right there is an example of differences within a culture that leads groups to arguments and fights. The second tenet of Critical Race Theory is that racism is a social and not a biological construction. Similarly, the women were making the argument that only allowing black head coverings is also a social construction. The man contesting this was expressing the Sufi opinion found in Egypt and other places in the Middle East. The women were on the modern Islamic side that doesn’t require as many strict rules as the Orthodox Sufis. This is an example of the rivalry within Islam that has led to many wars and conflicts.

Islamic ladies discussion

I attended the discussion forum for the five Muslim ladies that came to Whitworth to talk about their views of America and some topics of misunderstanding. I really enjoyed the discussion and learned a good deal from it.

The tenet of the Critical Race Theory that states that "racism is ordinary" clearly stood out to me in the dialogue. The girls openly said that they came to America expecting the worst and fearing intense persecution. I would be the same way if I was to travel to Saudi Arabia, I would definitely go with a fear of what was going to happen to me. It is human nature to expect the worst from someone that is different then you. This can be seen in race relations, because people always place stereotypes of the worst possible situation to an entire population.

Just like we saw in Lowen, the whites regarded the Native Americans as savages and uncivilized people. They feared that the Native Americans would do terrible things if a white was to get captured. Upon closer inspection however, it is clear that there is no substantial difference between whites and people of color. It is all a mental thing.

The Order of Myths

The Order of Myths film we watched in class yesterday was a very eye-opening documentary. First of all, I had no idea that Mardi Gras was such a big deal in Mobile, Alabama. I just new the stereotype of how New Orleans is associated with Mardi Gras not how Mobile, Alabama celebrated Mardi Gras in 1703 before New Orleans was even a city.

I was surprised to learn about how segregated Mobile is when it comes to the biggest of their celebrations. The MCA and the MAMGA are two entirely separate organizations who accomplish the same thing except one is white and wealthy while the other is black and middle to lower class. It's the classic case of the debutante society versus the working class with the black servicing the whites. It's an example of what Loewen said in Lies My Teacher Told Me: "young white adults have less tolerant attitudes toward black Americans..." (171). This proved somewhat true for Mobile in 2007, but there were brilliant exceptions, as well. A young white debutante named Brittain didn't wish to participate in the MCA court at all and could be seen in a kitchen talking with an older black woman she clearly respected. She explained how though the white families loved their black servants, they did not treat everyone equally.

The black MAMGA king and queen, Joseph and Stefannie, made a huge effort toward integration when they attended the all-white MCA coronation. They were graciously accepted though everyone was quite surprised to see them in attendance. I thought this was a step in the right direction even though the parades are still segregated and racialized. Brittain also seemed to approve of this and said that there was a time no too long ago when it couldn' have happened and she still didn't think the MCA was ready for the entire black MAMGA court to attend their proceedings.

It was also cool to see the MCA king and queen attend the black MAMGA Comrades Ball and interact with everyone there, dancing and having an apparently good time. Sadly, they were the only whites there, making the stark segregation even more apparent.

The Conde Explorers, the only mystic society that is openly integrated is another sad tale. It is a wonderful effort at better race relations, but there is only ONE white member, which speaks sorrowful volumes about my own race in that area.

I think my generation needs to open its eyes and step up to the plate so to speak in order to make race relations better. America deludes itself into thinking we are all so wonderful when in reality, like Loewen talks about, race relations are only minimally better in most places. I was severely shocked to learn from this film about the 1981 KKK lynching of a 19 year old black boy in Mobile, Alabama. That is terrible and not all that long ago! It's just an example of what Loewen keeps reminding his readers about how our history is whitened and made all rosy.

The Radiant Child - Extra Credit

After watching the documentary film, Jean-Michel Basquiat: The Radiant Child, I have a new appreciation for the artist. Just seeing his work and hearing briefly about him in class, I didn't really connect with Jean-Michel Basquiat. His art didn't appeal to me and seemed childish in nature, but after learning who he was as a person, what his art meant to him, how he worked, and what went into it, I really respect the tragic life of this artist.

He was part of a culture in 70's New York called the "Downtown 500" where all the different genres of artists came together. They gyspy/hobo-like lifestyle many of them lived was incredible. I can't imagine such dedication to my own art - I mean, I have heard the term "starving artist" or "starving writer," but I knew I could never do that to my family, so my art will always be on the side of a more practical career.

Another amazing thing about Basquiat is that he left home for good at a mere 17 years of age! I was no more ready to leave home and be entirely independent at 17 than a young child is! Basquiat was one driven individual, even from a very young age. He wanted to be famous and was determined to achieve his dream. He was young, intelligent, and multilingual, everything going for him except for his race.

Even though many black and white artists and higher-ups respected him (like Annina Nosei and Andy Warhol), he was still not accepted by "high art" art galleries like he desired. They even compared his work to that of a "primate" or someone "primitive" - the blatant racism in these remarks is astounding! It goes back to what Loewen talks about in Lies My Teacher Told Me how "uncivilized" is bad and how the Native Americans were considered "primitive" and "uncivilized" so they were treated differently and very poorly. Basquiat experienced the same on a different and more modern level.

I think the biggest thing that I respect about Basquiat (besides his youthful genius) is the way in which he worked at times. He would have the tv on, several books, music playing, and people conversing while he hopped from one painting to the next as he acquired inspiration from the stimuli around him. He would sometimes even walk across his own work!

The quick rise from a graffiti artist to an infamous painter in just two years proved fatal to Basquiat. He was under a lot of pressure to paint masterpieces and to create certain pieces (which made him violently angry). In order to focus, Basquiat began using heroin even though he was well aware of the ill effects of the drug. The pressure he was under lessened when he took time to work in a private studio in LA or when he vacationed in Hawaii, but he couldn't seem to stay away from the NYC crowd, scene, and drugs. Eventually, he got clean in Hawaii and upon his return to LA told Tamara Davis (producer of the film and his friend) that he would die if he got into the drugs again. That was exactly what happened. He returned to NYC and died on August 12, 1988. He was only 27 years old.

I can't help but to wonder what would have become of Basquiat had he not gotten into heroin, had the pressures of celebrity and racial tension not been so high. I have a new respect and eye for his work now and would actually like to see it in a museum someday, especially some of his later and actually a little more morbid work.

Standards

During last Tuesday's class we discussed how many times teachers in schools are under qualified. Many times they are teaching in fields that they are not qualified for. Maybe one of the fields they are teaching in they are qualified for, but the others they are not. This often happens in small schools that have low budgets. Then even when teachers are qualified many times they can not teach what they want because they have to stick to the strict curriculum. Often time they have to stick to the curriculum that is laid out in the text book because that is what the school requires of them or they are not educated enough to teach the subject without doing research for themselves outside the text book. They have to stick to the curriculum in order to fulfill requirements and make sure that their students measure up when it comes to standardized test times. When discussing this in class I just kept thinking how disfunctional this is and how students being taught this way really does not benefit anyone. It does not benefit the students because when you get to the real world I feel like you are always required to think outside of the box. Anyone can memorize what they are told and fit the mold. It is those that think for themselves, take initiative, are creative, and THINK that are sought after. This also does not benefit the teachers because if they are not researching the subject that they are teaching they are not learning anymore about the topic, but just repeating the same facts over and over again. Year after year. They probably are also not enjoying their job as much as they could be if they got to add their own creativity and style in. As Loewen says we are scared to let kids think for themselves in school because heaven forbid they think for themselves and question something. I agree with Loewen's point being that  keeping people in a mechanical sort of mold where they are not challenged to think for themselves is wrong. It does not benefit anyone.

Survey

 While taking the survey I realized that one of the common things in it is gender issues. This is one of the things that I think about the least on the Whitworth campus and during classes. I feel like Whitworth does a good job addressing racial issues at least it has with the classes that I have taken this far, but I do not think that any of my classes have really talked about gender unless you count my interpersonal communications class, which is specific to this topic. I'm not saying that this is a good thing or a bad thing. I just realized while taking the survey that it really is not something that I think about and that the independence and rights that I have today, while being of the female gender are kind of taken for granted. I think that it was good for me to think about gender issues and remember that things have not always been the way that they are now for women.

Teaching about African Americans in the Wars

The workshop presentation on teaching about African Americans in the War was an eye opener to how little my history class taught about other races. It is one thing to read Loewen and hear about how the history books do not teach enough, but this presentation caused me to think about my education and I realized how little we talked about African Americans. Through this presentation I learned that when African Americans served in World War II it acted as a catalyst to the Civil Right's Movements. During the Civil War the Union used lots of blacks while the confederates only used 50, which is not really all that surprising since I'm not sure why they would want to fight for slavery. The fact that blacks served as much as they did and fought for America's freedom when they could not get freedom for theirselves really surprised me.

Urban Presentations

I felt like the presentations concerning urban life and culture were very informative in mostly more creative ways than we have yet seen.

Kyle and Cody's presentation on urban art made me a lot more aware and curious regarding all of what I would have previously considered "graffiti." I had not heard of a difference between graffiti and street art before. Also, I generally stereotyped all of such illegal "art" as crude and meaningless even if it did look cool. I now have a greater appreciation for what many of these artists do. I plan to follow up that appreciation by watching Jean-Michel Basquiat: The Radiant Child.

I was especially entertained by the music presentation by Erica and Nate. Coming from a more suburban place where the music and dance scenes are not that big of a deal, but boat races, the county fair, and nuclear waste are, the background and examples of music and dance cultures that I had heard mention of was very interesting. I had previously heard of "jerkin'" and the "dougie," but didn't really have a concept of them. The hyphy movement I had not heard of at all. The fact that in an area I would have deemed to be terribly similar (being a Washingtonian and not a Californian myself), has such varying and multicultural music is wonderfully intriguing to me.

The presentation I connected with the most was Emily L. & Caitlin's on the Freedom Writers movie. I have read the book and seen the movie. Both are very powerful and moving representations of Erin Gruwell and her students' stories. Having read Twilight LA 1992 now and realizing that much of what Freedom Writers portrays was a reaction to the Rodney King riots really helped me to truly understand the racial tension and conflict between Gruwell's students.

Malcolm X -the film --> Extra credit

Watching the video of Malcolm X after reading the book was a good way to fully understand everything that took place in the book and tie everything together. While reading the book I would try to picture things in my head, but since clearly I am not from Malcolm’s generation it was hard to imagine everything. Watching the movie helped make things more clear and realistic.

The beginning of the movie showed Malcolm in Harlem and all of his brightly colored suits. This helped paint a better picture of what the culture was like then. We learn about what happened to Malcolm’s father and family by flashbacks in the movie that are not completely clear without having read the book. The movie also does a great job of showing the Lindy dancing, which is another thing that I am not familiar with so this also made things more realistic. 

The movie did a good job of showing how Malcolm changed and transformed from growing up as a young boy without a father facing racial trials, to a young adolescent starting trouble, his involvement with drugs, him losing it, then going to prison, and finally turning into the minister Malcolm X. 

In the book we read about Malcolm’s life, but the movie causes us to think about how many people were affected by Malcolm X and his teachings. In the last scene of the movie I think they did a great job showing Malcolm X’s death. In the book we read how it happened, but we do not see all the people that were there or how upset everyone is or the riots that it started. The movie did a great job depicting this last scene and showing the dramatic ending and despair to African American’s that came with Malcolm X’s death.

Malcolm X

In Malcolm X we get the true story of someone. We see the good and the bad and how Malcolm transforms from a young boy that has to do with racism to a rebellious adolescent, to a boy that likes to lindy hop, to someone that smokes every once in awhile, to someone that is addicted to drugs, burglarizing, and packing a gun. Through his story we see his human nature and faults that can happen to anyone. However, like Loewen says these faults are usually only shown in minorities sucha as african americans. In the history books many of our great leaders such as Lincoln had flaws and did things that would definitely not be acceptable as a leader of America, but they were not exposed. This is also illustrated in Malcolm X. When Malcolm was hustling most of his clients were white business men that most likely went to church and had a family at home. Then on the side they were doing disgraceful things. No one would have thought that upstanding businessmen would be taking part in something like this because as Loewen says whites are portrayed as only doing honorable acts, but as we know they have faults just like everyone else. I think that Malcolm X is great because we see someone's whole story. He is just a normal human being that has flaws and through series of events those flaws and weaknesses got magnified. I think it is admirable when someone can reveal their whole self, the good and the bad.

"A Day in the Life

When reading "A Day in the Life" I had a lot of thoughts running through my head. This January I went to Guatemala on a medical mission trip. I drove by houses that were similar to the one in the story. After reading the story and learning how the people viewed me as a white person coming over I realized a lot of things. The people there are just trying to survive. When we set up medical clinics and tried to help them they probably did not listen to what we were saying about preventing them from getting sick again or Jesus. They just wanted to get medicine that they could. They also probably looked at me and saw me in a way that I did not want to be seen while I was there. I wish that I had read this before I went there. When I go again I want to make more of an effort to speak the language and learn their culture. It wasn't that I did not respect their culture because I do. It was just that when I was there I did not think about how this is survival for them, and that they probably dressed nicer than usual and appeared to be more okay than they actually are when we came to set up the clinics. The story was definitely an eye opener to me. It made me thankful for what I have, but it also made me want to make a change.

Native American Presentations

I really enjoyed doing the presentations. I thought that it tied everything that we learned from reaing Alexie and Loewen together. Its one thing to read about how history textbooks are wrong and spend time with Alexie's petry, but then to do research and see how thins are being affected today in society was very reinforcing. I enjoyed learning about the artists and musicians. I found that very interesting. However, I thought that it was sad that in order for Native Americans to be successful and make a change in their lives they feel like they have to leave their people on the reservation and try to conform to a way of life in white society that is against their nature and that most of them are not comfortable in. I also found the presentation on healthcare in the reservations very interesting. I knew that there was alcoholism on the reservations, but I had know idea that alcoholism, suicide, and diabetes rates were so high. Those are the type of things that you do not see on the news or read in the paper. I think that doctors who are trying to help them while respecting their culture, and beliefs they have about medicine are doing a great thing.

Airplanes

I also questioned and wondered that Andrea. It seemed like in someways the two ideas were very contradicting to eachother.
In Thursday's class the Alexie poem "Airplane" really made me do some thinking. It made sense to me when Alexie says "Up here, where no Indian was ever meant to be" that he feels like he does not fit in in the modern world and he wants to go home. Later at the end of the poem when he talks about everyone coming home I felt confused. It was like he was saying that traveling and learning new cultures is not a good thing and that we should just all go home to our original homes. For many of us that is now impossible. We really are a multicultural culture now. There are rare people that are pure bread so to say, so I do not see how anyone could really return to their home because many of us have such a mix in us. In a way it makes traveling and exploring new cultures seem like a bad thing because the result is always change. This could also be seen in Loewen. Loewen talks about how Lewis and Clark and some explorers were at peace with the Indians at first and had not completely set out to change them, but then they quickly started describing them as savages. It seems that when one culture invades another a change and mix of culture is unavoidable and I am not really sure how I feel about this.

Interracial Marriage

When doing the reading for class today I thought it was interesting how Loewen and Alexie were talking about half breeds. In "How to Write the Great American Indian Novel" Alexie talks about how when Native Americans are written about in stories they are portrayed as tragic. The hero has to be white or a half breed. Then if the hero is a woman she has to be beautiful and she has to be in love with a white man. So, in Alexies writing the half breeds are considered heros because they have a bicultural background and can help deal with the differences between the two. Loewen talks about how Spanish and French would marry indian women, but not the English. According to Loewen New England and Virginia forbade interracial marriage. This was interesting to me to think about. I thought it was interesting how with the French and Spanish it said the men would marry indian women, it did not say that the French and Spanish women would marry the Indian men. I also find it interesting that to Alexie the half breed was like a hero. Does this mean that the Native Americans wanted to overcome the racial differences more than the whites, since the whites forbade interracial marriage?

Elegies

I enjoyed what we did in class with Alexie. Hearing the poems read out loud help me to not only understand them better, but also it makes them come alive more and seem more real and personal. I'm starting to understand Alexie's symbolism more and see patterns in his writing. I like how he continues to get more and more personal. In Elegies the way that he sets up the poem is good because I think the first line "This is a poem for people who died in stupid ways" catches the reader's attentioin. At first some of the stupid deaths almost come across comicly. I think he does this to keep the readers attention then the deaths start to feel more tragic, and at the end of the poem he gets very personal about his sister and the ending really is devastating. We talked about the trajectory of the poem in class and we said it goes from background to more personal, and I also think it goes from more mediocre feelings to feelings of tragedy. I think the poem Fire as verb and noun is also set up very creatively. When reading the poem you feel fire almost as an emotion and then you also have an image of fire in mind so it appeals to the reader in more than one sense. I also enjoyed learning about the symbolism in tattoo tears.

Alexie and Loewen

I really enjoy Alexie. When I first read it I usually have trouble understanding it, and what the point of it is. As we pull it apart in class and discuss the meaning of it I have started to understand it more and learn how to interpret it for myself. I also think that Alexie does a great job of building on points and setting us up for what he wants us to get out of his poetry. I really like the poem "Why We Play Basketball". I love sports so I enjoyed this because I could relate to what Alexie was talking about as he waits to see if the shot is good or not, and how playing a sport gives you a break from reality and it is something you can control. I liked this poem because of that, but then when we talked about the symbolism of the 5 lines and 5 stanzas I enjoyed it even more because I learned that the poem was even more profound than I realized.
Another poem that I like from Alexie was the one about the porcupines. If one of us were to pass a dead porcupine on the road we would not think anything of it. Kind of like how we do not really think about how Native Americans used to live or how different this location is now compared to when Native Americans lived here. To me this poem not only showed the importance that the porcupine had, but it also symbolized the change in the way of life for the Native Americans from before white people came to their new life on the reservations. I think that it is easy to forget that things used to be drastically different from how they are now.
The reading in Loewen has continued to be interesting to me. It looks like there are mixed feelings about Loewen. Some support him and some say that he is hypocritical. I too have mixed feelings when reading. At first I kind of thought that he was being hypocritical because he talked about how history books only tell one side and that they are boring, but he too was giving us a history lesson. However, then I was thinking about it and I realized that no matter who is writing about a subject they will always be viewed with a bias in some sense. Unless you write something that is extremely neutral there will always be someone that disagrees with you. That being said, I think that I like Loewen. Clearly he has a negative view of how American history is portrayed, and I think he has very good reason to. After reading about Christopher Columbus I was shocked about how little history I really know. Although Loewen may sometimes jump off track or say drastic things I think that his main goal is that people look for accurate, truthful history. I was horrified about how Christopher Columbus treated the people that he conquered. I knew that he enslaved some of them, but I had no idea how horrible he treated them. When I think about all the ways that the textbooks have glorified the United States it makes me wonder how different ( if different at all) our country would be if the people grew up learning the real history of their nation.

Loewen

After reading "Lies My Teacher Told Me" I started thinking about my highschool history class. It surprised me how much I agree with everything being said. History was my least favorite course in high school, even though it was always an easy A. The text book was by far my biggest text book. I hated the end of chapter reviews. Each chapter sounded the same. I procrastinated studying for it so I would just cram everything in at once and then forget it after the test. It was never interesting because as the reading said everything always turns out okay. The United States always pulls through, always does what's right, and is full of heroes. After realizing all of this and thinking about this I felt disappointed in the education system. Making everyone heroes is hypocritical to me. Along with this if so many students dislike history I do not understand why we do not change the system, and make textbooks that tell the history as it really happened. I understand why it is important to try and make kids grow up patriotic about the United States and proud of their country, but at the same time I think that a change should be made so that everything is not so idealized.

4/21/11 Workshops

I enjoyed learning about the different purposes behind different ubran arts. I really enjoyed Dan Witz’s art. I like art that makes you think, like the pieces where Witz featured people trapped in cages. It’s encouraging to see people in urban areas using art (instead of violence or nothing) to communicate to the world, since we’ve learned that the world would not otherwise take time to listen and understand their perspective.

The urban population seems to use music for the same purpose as they use art. Music is used to create an identity/belonging and communicates a certain people group’s story to the rest of the world.

It was very surprising to me that poverty is more prevalent in rural areas. I am from a rural town and I’ve noticed much more obvious poverty in Spokane than I did in my home town. I wonder why this is. Maybe it’s because people in small towns take each other in more often instead of leaving people on the streets; just because in a small town you probably personally know that person, whereas in a big city the people you see on the street are anonymous to you so it’s easier to do nothing.

Race

I recently went to see a play called Race by David Mamet. Not surprisingly, it had a lot to do with race, and a lot of connections to CRT and Loewen. The play dealt with a white man accused of raping a black woman. He hired a lawyer team made up of one black and one white man; their assistant/secretary was a black woman. Throughout the play, each character took a stance on the alleged rape based on his or her ethnicity. The black woman reacted the most violently, and eventually she sold out the defendant to the district attorney.

Loewen says that "the very essence of what we have inherited from slavery is the idea that it is appropriate, even "natural" for whites to be on top, blacks on bottom" (144). This is evident in Race when Susan, the assistant, raves about how "the white man" has historically taken advantage of black people, especially black women, through slavery, salary, and sex. This also relates to CRT tenet #1, which holds that racism involves white-over-color ascendancy. The man the firm is defending is very rich and has no idea that he has exhibited racist tendencies throughout his life. Racism is such an ordinary part of his life that his motivations for raping the woman were steeped in white-over-color ideas.

The play was stamped with many references to both CRT and to Loewen, but perhaps the most interesting statement has no direct connection to either. This statement was, "Only a black man can talk about race." Food for thought.

5 Arab Saudi Women Narratives

I did not get our of this what you will probably expect, what I gleaned most from this event was the vast differences between not just our two cultures, christian and muslim, but between the different types of Islam as well.
For starters, the differences in our culture in the United states is inherently different from that of Saudi Arabia. The most obvious reason is that their culture stems from and is based on their religion of Islam. Our culture, if you must say it is based on anything, would realistically have to be on capitalism. Our different values stem from this. Islam leads to the values of purity, honesty and respect, which is also symbolized in the wearing of the Hijab or head scarf and the abijah (body covering... probably spelled wrong). The values of the U.S. lead to freedom yes, but freedom to fight for more and more money in order to survive and gain power... not really all that great in my eyes..
During the panel we also learned of the striking differences between the different (for lack of a better word) branches of Islam. It is similar to the differences in Catholicism and protestantism. For example, the Shiites believe that their Ayatollahs are divine by God to be like the Pope, and Sunni Muslims don't believe like that about their Imams in that in comparison to Christianity, they are more like Pastors. The differences between the branches was extremely evident at the event because their was a heated argument between the women that were asked to speak and a Suffi Muslim that was in the audience. Finally Professor Raja Tanas had to step in to stop it several times before the vehement man left. This argument was over the wearing of the Hijab because they had different beliefs as to whether it was their culture that required it or the Qur'an or a mixture. (Similar to christianity's many debates) The result was injury on both sides because both strongly belived what they were saying and only wanted the others to not be misinformed so that they would not risk damnation.
A connection to Crt is evident in that tenet six was practically screaming at the audience. "Every group has a different story to tell in history." US citizens have a different culture and story to tell about history, the way things came about and how things are now. The different sections of different religions have different stories to tell in terms of how they interpret their own history and what is important to them. Who is really to say which has more value or is right, they all have a part to play.

Twilight

Anna Deavere Smith very effectively reveals her purpose in compiling the accounts of individuals whom she interviewed following the race riots in Los Angeles in the early '90s. She moves from vivid accounts of physical encounters and victim narratives to anecdotes that indicate a sense of helplessness at achieving a desired goal. A movie producer hoping to achieve greater racial unity on her set notes how, "It was a fake euphoria we all felt. It was the euphoria of, 'Look at what's possible not what's real'" (212). This comment seems to press a certain urgency upon the reader to address racial tension or inequality the second it arises.

A few pages later a Democratic senator from New Jersey notes how, "the moral power of those institutions have to be brought to bear in the public institutions, which in many places are not fair. To put it mildly. Right? And the application of the law before which we are all in theory equal" (217). The discontinuity between the dream of a multicultural region without tension, riots, and violence and the reality of what lies outside this man's window speaks clearly to Deavere Smith's purposeful selection of personal accounts for inclusion in this larger narrative. She presents reality, as defined by the individuals who experience it. This honest portrayal of perception speaks more loudly than statistics, legislation plans, or police goals.

Final Thoughts on Twilight

Anna Deavere Smith did a wonderful job compiling such a large collection of diverse opinions from the LA area after the Rodney King trials and riots. From people like Julio Menjivar, an innocent bystander, to Mayor Tom Bradley, I think she did a good job of really presenting an objective view through so many biased first person accounts.

Even Loewen in Lies My Teacher Told Me, mentions how that "in 1992, Los Angeles exploded in a violent race riot, triggered by a white suburban jury's acquittal of four police officers who had been videotaped beating a black traffic offender...Almost every child in America saw this..." (336). Loewen may present the "cliff notes" version in order to succinctly argue his point that children are not as sheltered as parents would like them to be and that they know not all police officers are "friendly," but even he finds it important to mention.

Combining these two arguments just shows me that the LA riots of 1992 are very important to American history. Why aren't these discussed more in our high school classrooms? Much could be learned from the differing opinions and controversy. But it's just that -- the differences and controversy -- that makes textbook boards and school districts steer away from putting much more than a brief mention of this in curriculums. Loewen describes how this could offend parents and funders, so it's just left out. What about those people offended because it's left out? Publishers can't please everyone, but at least they could provide more objective and broader-exploring material for the next generation to learn from. It would be more interesting, too.

I have learned a lot just from these two books -- Lies and Twilight -- and think it would be beneficial to put such material in cirriculums. Kids need to be allowed to form their own opinions on race and politics. If they are show all sides, they are better equipped to do so, better equipped to be the good citizens that textbooks claim to be trying to mold, because they can think fro themselves and make knowledgeable, informed decisions and opinions. Controversy sparks interest and interests can help motivate students to actually learn!

Loewen Thesis

At the very closing of the twelfth chapter of his book, Loewen seems to drive home the very thesis upon which his entire case rests. He writes, "Does a people mean only European Americans? Perhaps openly facing topics that seem divisive might actually unify Americans across racial, ethnic, and other lines" (339). The cultural climate survey which we have been administering clearly shows the same sort of hesitancy or ignorance surrounding issues of racial diversity. Many responses of "No strong feelings" indicates a person's inexperience with or unease about addressing the topic of race at Whitworth. Where is the distinction to be made, however, regarding the bold conversation which needs to be had about race and a respectful inclusion of inidividuals from all ethnicities? How much of the problem is our own inaction and how much is institutionalized? Loewen seems to think a large portion of the blame rests on the shoulders of public instructors. Students, however, also have their role in the prolongment of racial tension and prejudice on campus.

Illusions of Progress

Last week, we talked about illusions of progress as they relate to the Los Angeles riots. There was a prime example of this in today's reading, page 212. Paula Weinstein tells Smith that she has the sense of a changing community. After the riots began, people of all ethnicities were coming together to give food to those who needed it. Weinstein implies that she expected this peaceful cooperation of "multiracial and multicultural" to continue, and to come even closer together over the Rodney King verdict (210).

But then, a year later, nothing is different. In fact, white people are sending their children out of the city, and race relations are just as prejudiced and fear-fueled as they were before. The media, Weinstein thought, led the "retreat" of the multiracial advances made at Diane Watson's. Weinstein reflects on the short-lived, supposed harmony, saying, "It was a fake euphoria we all felt" (212). The progress made in the aftermath of the riots was lost.

Thoughts on Mrs. Young-Soon Han

The part that hit me the most from today’s reading was the interview of Mrs. Young-Soon Han, the Korean former liquor store-owner. Imagining a sweet little Korean lady slamming her fist on the table as she shared her feelings and memories about the riots was shocking to me; a little old lady, and especially a Korean, who would typically be more reserved than most, showed such emotion about her the discord between Koreans and Blacks. Reading her words helped me to empathize with what life was like for minorities, especially the Blacks and Koreans during those times. One line she speaks is, “I wish i could live together with eh [sic] Blacks, but after the riots there were too much differences.” I think that this line really expresses a common desire that many people share, the desire for unity and harmony amongst the many different races and culture groups in our country, but also the frustration that our society makes that an impossibility at times.

Malcolm X the Movie

I watched the movie Malcolm X and thought it was a great visual aid to illustrate the autobiography by Malcolm and Haley. I thought that Denzel Washington did a great job of portraying Malcolm X. He really brought to life his crazy life in Harlem in the beginning, and the influence of white people on him (frying his hair to make it straight and getting caught up in the looting business). I also thought it was great that the movie quoted word for word some of the passages in the book, for example his conversations with Baines in prison and some of his speeches towards the end of the movie. It is one thing to read about the character of Malcolm X, but for me, being a visual learner, I think seeing his life acted out on the screen will greatly help me to remember the legacy of Malcolm X.

In Chapter 7 of Loewen, "The Land of Opportunity," he talks about the fact that American history textbooks portray our country as equal, stating that we are composed largely of a middle class. We all think of America as the "land of opportunity," where anyone can turn rags into riches. Of course there are people who have proved that this is possible, but, as Loewen points out, the U.S. is a very stratified country in which "the richest fifth of the population earns twelve times as much income as the poorest fifth" (213.) It is also a place in which both poor, middle and upper class students believe that the situation of the poor is their own fault since they are not taught about the economic processes that keep the poor, poor, and the rich, rich. According to Loewen, our education is meritocratic, meaning that our social status is determined by personal merit, and thus, many of us believe that we get what we deserve.

What I really appreciated about Malcolm X was that his story forces us to come face to face with meritocracy from the perspective of the Black minority. Considering the fact that Blacks in Malcolm X composed the lower class and had low-level, underhanded jobs such as pimping, dealing and robbing, what would our meritocratic society tell us is the reason that Black people are in the situation they are in? Because they are smart enough or don't possess the skills to earn a better living like white people. Watching Malcolm X made me see that this is the way many people view lower-class minorities, when in reality, our society may be stratified because of the economic system. Or maybe it is because, according to the Critical Race Theory, the dominant white society has exploited Blacks based on their needs, meaning that, in the case of Harlem, whites' desire for prostitution and gambling and drugs forced African-Americans to fulfill that need by taking on those jobs.

As Loewen is constantly saying, there is so much that American history leaves out or omits on purpose, and this really has a crippling effect on the way people from different cultural backgrounds interact. I'm thankful for the story of Malcolm X, because it goes against the grain and exposes the ideas that textbook writers apparently don't want us to think about. And the fact that Malcolm's story was taken a step further and made into a movie is a bold step in this path to cultural awareness in our history.

Jean-Michel Basquiat: The Radiant Child

I found this movie to be highly enlightening because it went far more in depth than our student presenters had time to do. I found his rise to fame interesting in that it wasn't what you would typically see in America today. Usually today people begin their fame by being related to somebody famous and then moving from there. Jean-Michel on the other hand did not have that advantage and yet still became famous. This would go against what loewen talks about because although we see economic stratification, it seems that there is more possibility for upward mobility than what Loewen believed. On the other hand, Jean-Michel could very well be an exception. Although he began his art career from the streets, his life was not always like that. The movie explains how he had grown up in a middle-class household because his father had a good job and how he was also multi-lingual because he learned his parents native languages as well as english; this to me is a sign that perhaps he did not really go up at all in terms of economic level but rather went down and then back up? I also found the outright racism shown toward Jean-Michel Basquiat interesting because although I know that racism is shown all the time, it seemed a lot more drastic and sad when shown blatantly towards people that we can see. For example, Jean-Michel tried to get cabs to get back to his loft even after he became famous but because he was black, many cabs would keep going and he would have to wait an inordinate ammount of time for something that white people take foregranted. Crt 1 was also shown during a television interview that Jean-Michel gave because the interviewer mentioned Jean-Michel's work as being primitive and representing black people's art in this way. Jean-Michel knew right away the racist ideas that ths implied and even called him out on it. "You mean ape? Like my work is primitive like that?" (or said somethinglike this) Jean-Michel expected this kind of racism even though he did not like it and stood against it but, after all, he saw that racism is ordinary and you are going to have to expect it in life regardless of whether it is wrong or not. This made me very sad because it called into question why all of these rich white people were buying all of his paintings at all. Is it because they had some sort of wierd fascination with the 'black primitive's art?' Because they thought it represented the black people whom they did not understand? I wanted and want them to like his painting for the paintings not because of some false ideal that they think he represents. Like they think that having a painting from a black artist will make their status go up. Why even bother then? Jean-Michel recognized this and wished that people from the lower class could afford his paintings because then they would be appreciated by far more people and seemingly for better reasons. That is why he envied Madonna, because her music could reach anyone. Thus, I respect Jean-Michel Basquiat and I wish that he could have been appreciated as much when he was alive as he is now.

Malcolm X Movie!

It was so fun to watch the Malcolm X movie. It brought the book and characters to life! It was cool to hear the way Malcolm talked when he was younger and to see the way he spoke as well. Hearing and seeing Malcolm speak made the change in him, after his conversion, so much more drastic. The way he speaks and carries himself afterwards make him seem as though he is an entirely different person.

I was excited to hear some exact quotes from the book. This happened a lot when the movie would flash back to stories of his childhood. To read those stories is one thing, but to see little kids running out of a burning home, to hear the hate in the KKK’s voices, to see the train coming for Malcolm’s father; that was much harder to see than to read. It was so much more graphic and real to me. It’s crazy how blatant racism used to be. Racism today is harder to see because it tends not to be done in such obvious acts. Racism is still ordinary, that has not changed. People just are more often racist in quieter ways.

The movie was good. It was entertaining while very informing as well. Throughout watching the movie, it would become understandable to anyone (not only people in this class) why Malcolm believed what he did. Although I don’t know if (and hope not) all would believe as extremely as he does (against whites), I can’t imagine someone watching the movie and not coming away with a new view point, and hopefully some compassion and desire for true change. The only negative thing for me was how it seemed to drag on toward the end.

It is hard to believe that before this class I had no idea who Malcolm X was or why he is important. “It is not only radical or currently unfashionable ideas that the texts leave our – it is all ideas, including those of their heroes. –Frances Fitzgerald” (Loewen 172) That I did not know who Malcolm X was, when he is so important to the black community, is proof of this statement by Fitzgerald. We need to know these stories.

Ray

The movie “Ray” gives a more in depth outlook into the life of Ray Charles Robinson, one of America’s most renowned African American musicians. Much of his work revolutionized the musical world, especially as he combined R&B with Gospel, somewhat causing a controversy within the African American society. Throughout the movie, Ray has a reoccurring sight of touching a limb in murky water, a memory of not only his brother drowning in a washtub as a child but also the guilt he constantly has carried with him ever since then. After the loss of his brother, he slowly begins to come blind, but with the tough love of his mother learns to find his strength in his greatest weakness, as he learns to use his hearing as a form of sight. His mother is constant appearance throughout the movie, to remind Ray of his morals and his true character.

Throughout the movie, despite the time period being around the CIvil Rights movement, Ray does not really seem to have any race related struggles. As he becomes more and more successful, he begins to deal with addiction and infidelity, one particular downfall being his impregnating of one of his mistresses A moment that stuck out as far as racism is related occurred in the midst of his rise to fame. As he is about to perform a concert, a man approaches him about the segregation in the concert. Ray decides to cancel the concert, in response to the segregation and as a protest. This particular instance demonstrated multiple tenets in CRT, one particular being that racism is ordinary. Also, it demonstrates how race is not a biological construction but a social one. By the creation of this segregated concert, they prove that racism is something created by society, not necessarily from birth.

Basquiat!

I want you all to know, my new computer background is a Basquiat. Riding with Death it is called. Now, perhaps I do not fully understand it, for art has never been quite my passion and truly, a lot of the expressionist works just confuse me and baffle my understanding of why anyone would purchase such items. (Part of this comes from a trip to the Pompidu centre in Paris... I'm a little scarred to tell you the truth. Ask me later if you want o know what i'm talking about).

Yet what is so great about Basquiat is his story! Sure, most of his paintings look like kids drawings (though I do find great meaning in some of them, just a few must just be for silliness' sake); but where he came from and what he did is marvelous. Even the information that I found on him did not make him out to be as great a historical character as the documentary revealed. Truly, quite the life he made for himself, not to mention in only 28 years, as opposed to our normal 80+ white-haired grandeur.

Working from the streets up, he just went for it and did what he could to make a living, but ended up making a killing. Much of his story, even discounts what Loewen was saying to some degree. Loewen talked about how the american dream is to work your hardest and make it into stardom, yet only the people from privileged backgrounds can truly do so. But right here is an example of one who fought against, and found a good bit of luck. While he was clearly put down because of his color in some cases, just the fact that he got to the level he did puts some color against Loewen's viewpoint.

In any case, Basquiat was a brilliant young man who unfortunately died before his time. I shall have the greatest admiration for him and proudly tote a crappy reproduction of his somber picture; which I admire greatly.

Ray Charles movie

I recently watched the extra credit film on the life of Ray Charles, and was amazed by what I learned. When he was seven years old, Ray witnessed the death of his younger brother. Images of his death haunted him all his life and surfaced during times of stress or events which caused him to feel inadequate. Ray experienced racial prejudice and also suffered from harrassment due to his visual impairment. His mother fights for a better life for Ray and practices tough love, forcing him to rely on his own abilities to solve problems and get through life. He becomes addicted to heroin, yet eventually quits because his addiction threatens to destroy his marriage and his connection with his family. Critical Race Theory could be easily applied to many instances which the film illustrates. Ray refuses to perform at a Georgia venue which segregated the concert arena so that whites would have better places to sit and stand. This indicates the first tenet of CRT which states that racism is ordinary and involves white-over-color ascendancy. Ray is banned from ever performing in the state of Georgia following this incident. Much later in his life, however, Georgian political leaders re-invite him to their state and publicly apologize for their previous decision. One of his friends tells Malcolm, however, that "A black man is a boy in Mississippi, Ray. Even if he's 80 years old." This comment illustrates that race is more of a social construction than a biological distinction. Breaking down this social construction and analyzing its intricacies leads to more fair policy and social action.

Twilight & Malcolm X

What would Malcolm X have said about the LA race riots?

Would he have said that African-Americans were finally taking a stand against injustice? That they were finally speaking out against police brutality and the corruption of a system that, like Maxine Walters stated in her interview, were kept in a state of "unemployment, hopelessness, and despair" (167)?

Although Malcolm X frequently denied any violent tendencies, I cannot help but think that he might have used the 90's race riots as a catalyst for his separatist movement. He would have cited the inequalities between the Rodney King and Reginald Denny beatings as more proof of the white man's oppression of the black masses. I think that unlike many in Twilight who are horrified by the injustices and violence, Malcolm X might well have turned them into the master example for his separatist ideas.

Malcolm X Movie

Last week I viewed the Malcolm X Movie with Denzel Washington. Other than the fact that it was three hours long, I enjoyed the movie. It did a good job of giving viewers a visual idea of what life was like in that time period. The amount of racism by both whites and blacks was astonishing! I expected to see a great deal of White hate Blacks, but did not realize that the hatred also goes the other way.

Many of the tenets of the critical race theory were demonstrated in the movie. Tenet three, "Race is a social thing, not a biological thing", was clearly shown when Malcolm visited Mecca. He saw Muslims of all different colors brought together by their common belief in Islamic teachings. This showed him that the color of a man's skin does not effect the way his mind or heart works. Another way that this tenet was shown was at the very beginning of the movie in the barber shop. Malcolm is getting his hair straitened to "look white". The group who did the presentation on the movie, during our presentation day on Malcolm X, recognized and described this also. Tenet five was also shown, "Every person is complex and can not be easily described". This Tenet was shown in the wide variety of views that are demonstrated in the characters in this story. There are whites and blacks that range all across the scale on racist issues. This shows that a person does not simply have a preordained agenda simply because of their skin color.

Jean-Michel Basquiat

After watching the documentary on Jean-Michel Basquiat last night on channel 7 I believe I have a clear understanding of the artist and how he lived his life. Basquiat art is something I have never been familiar with, but I have grown up seeing pictures of Basquiat with his crazy dread locks and I have always wondered who the individual was. I believe the documentary did an amazing job telling the story of Jean-Michel’s life, fame, and what other people thought of him. Throughout the documentary Jean-Michel was compared to Picasso and other great artists like Warhol (who he later worked with) and it is crazy to think that I have never heard this amazing artist’s name! He was considered one of the best artists because he mixed graffiti with classical works and also used strong cultural influences in his work. He introduced a new style to the artistic world. I learned that most art critics did not like his work because it was so new age and different from what they were use to. I also learned that he first struggled with becoming a famous artist because he was black. Many critics showed racism toward him and his work because he was a different kind of artist and he was black. I enjoyed learning that before he was famous he sold post cards and to make money. I learned that he was influenced by culture aspects of life and it played a role in his work. He made paintings called “the irony of negro policeman” and “The history of Black People”. I learned that he used his art to help society realize social issues and how it could be changed. Jean-Michel Basquiat was also known for creating new, up to date art, with his own style, from art that was created by famous artists like Picasso. He basically copied a famous picture and put his own ideas into it. I really enjoyed the documentary and I learned some amazing things about Jean-Michel Basquiat that I did not know before.

The Radiant Child

Last night I watched the documentary on Jean-Michel Basquiat on PBS. I thought it was a very well done movie. It was interesting to me some of the praises that people were saying of Jean-Michel. They were saying he was one of the the best artists this world has seen, and comparing him with other greats like Picasso and Warhol. It was also a pretty sad story about how he really was attacked by the media. It's strange that such a great artist who is said to have such an impact on the world of art wasn't even respected by the art critics of his time.

One of the reasons why he wasn't respected so much seemed to be because of his race. In the 80s many people thought that the issue of race had long since been solved, but we see here that even famous artists like Jean-Michel had to face the harsh realities of race relations in America. Often in articles about him they would be blatantly racist towards him.

Before last weeks presentations, I had never even heard of Basquiat. This is also something that is very weird, considering how great of an artist he was. This may also have to do with race and him not being the typical anglo artist. He was able to not only create beautiful works, but he was able to communicate messages and promote social change in his art. Though someone may look at a painting and think it was just a bunch of random scribbles and lines it all had a deep meaning. I also really liked his ability to take something that an artist did and play off it with his own style. It seems that all greats who are ahead of their time often die young, and that was the case with Jean-Michel. Despite being only 27 when he died, he created over 2,000 works of art.

Malcolm X Movie

Over the weekend I watched the movie Malcolm X on YouTube and despite the bad quality, I really enjoyed being shown the life of Malcolm X after finishing the book. It helped me make more sense of the life story of Malcolm X and it made it seem like I was alive and present during his time. When comparing the book and the film and I found that in both presentations of Malcolm Xs life, the story was exactly the same. The movie followed the book pretty well (there were events in the movie that happened at different times than in the book) and even used some of the exact same lines and quotations from the book. Both presentations of the story help portray Malcolm's ideas about how racism affects life, and how Malcolm’s life had an impact on the rest of the world and other individuals. Though both the stories were the same, there were a few additions and modifications to the movie to maybe help make it more entertaining. In the movie, Malcolm X learns about the Muslim religion and Elijah Muhammad through a made up creator named Banes, who was another inmate while in the real story and in the book Malcolm learns of Muslim through Reginald one of his siblings. Another difference was the movie did not show the relationship with his siblings and his love for his mother as the book did. Another difference I noticed was that in the movie, his wife Betty played a greater role, while in the book, she was not spoken of as often. The book also provides us with each of Malcolm's reactions to encounters with white people while the movie did not do it in such great detail. The last thing I want to comment on was how the book helped explained the life of the African American in those times while the movie did not. Even with the differences in the book and the movie, I still feel that both represent Malcolm’s life story with great truth. I enjoyed reading the book and watching the movie equally and I enjoyed learning about his life because I have never studied Malcolm’s life in such detail.