Freedom vs Equality
Many of the question below are taken or adapted from http://www.whatsoproudlywehail.org/. This website claims to make American citizens through literature. They have some intriguing questions to which I think you will have some equally intriguing answers. As always, post your responses to the questions in the comment section below. Please relate each answer to the short story. Quote where possible.
We will look at different aspects of he story.
The Society- answer each question
- Why do you think 2081 America adopted its practices of making everyone equal in brains, beauty, and brawn?
- Is it a good thing for people to believe that no one is better than anyone else? Would it be a good thing if, in fact, no person were better than any other person? Why or why not?
- Are there positive aspects of this society? What is it lacking?
- Why exactly do you like or dislike it?
Harrison Bergeron, the character- answer each question
- Do you cheer for Harrison's success, and if so, why? What do you admire about Harrison? Are there aspects of his behavior that concern you?
- Do we have any idea of what sort of ruler he might have been? What kind of government, pursuing what goals, might he have established? (See, in particular, his instructions to the musicians and his selection of his empress.) Would he (and his goals) be better or worse than (those of) the Handicapper General and her agents?
- Harrison Bergeron declares himself emperor. Is his desire—and his capacity—to rule an example of the problem that made the push for total equality necessary?
“Harrison Bergeron,” the Story- answer each question
- With whom do you think Vonnegut sympathizes in the story? Does he present Harrison as a hero, or is the story heroless? Why?
- What is being satirized in this story? Why do you think Vonnegut wrote it?
- Is Vonnegut’s story finally a cautionary tale about the importance of freedom? Of individuality? Of excellence? Or is he aiming at something else?
Overall- answer at minimum 3 questions. Must answer #5
1. Is the society described in Vonnegut’s story a fulfillment of the American principle or ideal of equality or a perversion of that principle or ideal?2. What, if anything, do we owe those of our fellow citizens who are worse off through no fault of their own? What, if anything, do we owe those of our fellow citizens who were dealt a poor hand of natural talents?
3. Hazel says about the stammering broadcaster "That's all right- he tried. That's the big thing. He tried to do the best he could with what God gave him. He should get a nice raise for trying so hard." Which should society reward and respect most: personal effort or actual accomplishment? What is Vonnegut saying about this through this story?
4. Most would not want to live in Vonnegut's 2081 America; however, would you object if society sought equality not by handicapping the gifted but by lifting up the not-gifted, say through genetic engineering or biotechnological enhancement?
5. In May 1961, about five months prior to the appearance of Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron,” Newton Minow, then Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, gave a memorable speech, entitled “Television and the Public Interest,” which challenged his audience as follows:
I invite each of you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder . . . and cartoons. And endlessly commercials—many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all boredom. True, you’ll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it.
Since 1961, TV has grown in leaps and bounds, making Americans even more addicted to it than George and Hazel and their society were. But has it remained the “vast wasteland” that Vonnegut parodied and of which Minow spoke?
The society
ReplyDelete1)The society had most likely been fed up with the way that some people are treated differently because of many aspects such as financial issues, race, gender, intelligence and much more.
2)No, it is not a good thing to have nobody be better than anyone else because then everyone is the same and there would be no interesting characteristics about a person
3)yes there are positive aspects because the very few characters we meet were happy with their lives, which is ultimately the most important thing. It is lacking details within each character.
4)I liked this short story because of how quickly each event happened, causing you to want to keep reading
The character
1)I do cheer for Harrison because he was different and wasn't afraid to show it. I admire how confident he was and how he followed through with what he wanted to do. It concerns me how violent, loud and disrespectful he is, but is a part of who he is.
2) I think he would be very demanding and not very sympathetic of the citizens. I think his goals would be better than those of the Handicapper General because he was the one who was different so hr would want to expand his differences.
3) Yes i think it is because he thinks he has more power than anyone else and because he is bigger, smarter and more athletic
The story
1)I think Vonnegut sympathizes with Harrison because of his differences. I think he presents him as a hero because that is what Harrison wishes for himself.
2)Harrisons differences are being satirized in this story because he is distinguishably different
3) this story is a tale of the importance of freedom, individuality and excellence because Harrison expresses individuality and strives for freedom and excellence.
Overall
1)Society in this story is a pervasion of the ideal of equality because all of the citizens believe they are living with equality.
2)Throughout this story and through this quote, Vonnegut is saying that rewards and respect is based off of effort, showing they are all equal if they don't all get the same results.
5)I think it has stayed this way with some aspects, and not with others. Through television, everything is negative and telling us the wrong thing, proving Vonnegut and Minows thoughts.
Hannah, I totally agree with your answers for almost all of the questions. But, I disagree with the fact that you said that there were positive aspects to he society because the characters were happy. This is because although the characters seem happy, I do not think that they actually are. I think that they are happy simply because they are "forced" to be. They do not know what true happiness is and instead of living purposeful lives they are forced to just go through the motions.
DeleteHannah I completely agree with your first point. Society was absolutely fed up with discrimination and all the problems it caused.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Society
ReplyDelete1. People are always treated differently. There is discrimination, judgement, and pressure to be better than everyone else. Many people probably cracked under the stress of trying to be the smartest, the most fit, the most talented and the most attractive. The American government was almost definitely fed up with it, and decided to make everybody equal.
2. People need to understand that someone will always be better, and someone will always be worse than you at something. We, as humans, have accepted that. There is nothing wrong with people having different strengths and weaknesses. We need to know who is good and bad at certain things. Humans are diverse creatures, and we cannot be subdued into being exactly the same. Everyone needs to know what they're good at, what they're bad at, and what they can and cannot do.
3. The one positive of this terrifying society is that there is no pressure to be as good or better at anything than anybody else. Everyone can simply live clueless, boring, yet happy lives of total equality. The story lacks certain aspects of society: what people do for a living, who makes all the executive decisions. Who is in charge? Is there someone who is allowed to be smarter, someone who orchestrates all this? I would like to know more in that regard, that is what the story lacked.
4. I liked the out-of-the-box thinking that Vonnegut brought us in this story. It was interesting and offsetting to think of such a peculiar reality, one that is a possibility, albeit a very distant one.
Harrison Bergeron
1. I do support Harrison, and I admire his bravery to break away from ridiculous, depressing social norms. It took an immense amount of courage to do what he did, knowing that it would most likely result in a serious punishment. He knew how horrific this society was, and he did not want to conform. But, it was a little peculiar that he called himself the emperor. I think he lost his mind a little bit, and that is a little unnerving and odd.
2. Harrison would have a been a dictator, based on his lack of trust for all the other people in this society. He would most likely go to great lengths to make everyone do their best, using threats and intimidation to make sure that no one was equal. His goals would be much better, because they would allow more freedom, opposed to the complete lack of freedom that the Handicapper General has allowed.
3. Yes, his desire to rule over his subordinates was definitely a cause of the problem. Along with that, his knowledge of his superior intelligence, strength, and power, gave him the idea to be the 'emperor', for he knew that he could control whomever he wanted. People like him were certainly a large reason for the handicap system
The Story
1. Vonnegut portrayed Harrison as the hero in "Harrison Bergeron". His ability to stand up to the evil, oppressive rule of the Handicap General proved that he was, indeed, a hero. Along with that, Harrison knew that death was inevitable after breaking out of prison and going on to live TV. He sacrificed everything in order to attempt to change a few minds, to spark a revolution. Harrison stood up for something he believed in, even when no one else stood with him, and that makes him a hero.
2. Vonnegut is satirizing all the people that think no one should be better than anyone else. The people that are sad because they are not as smart, or as pretty, or as talented as others; the people who think it's unfair that they drew such a crappy hand in life.
3. Vonnegut wrote this story to show the importance of freedom, individuality, and excellence. These traits are invaluable, and without them, life is a meaningless wasteland. We should not take these opportunities for granted, and Vonnegut is warning us in this story that, one day, our freedom and our ability to excel may be taken away.
Lily, I really like your answers for #2 and #4 for "Society". I completely agree and you articulated the ideas really well. For #2 under character, I like how you said "dictator" we had similar answers, but yours was right on point with the use of that word.
DeleteLily, your answers are elaborate and detailed, and overall excellent. I especially admired your answers for "The Society;" they were eloquent, articulate, and very well-stated.
DeleteOverall
ReplyDelete2. We owe our fellow citizens empathy. We need to understand that they were born a certain way, and as hard as they may try, they will never be the best at certain things. We will allow them to try, and to work. We owe them respect for their efforts, and fair treatment without discrimination. We do not, however, have any obligation to give up our gifts, skills, and talents so that they may feel special, or equal in any way.
3. We should respect and reward effort, let people know that hard work is important, but we should not regard it any higher than actual accomplishment. Those who succeed in their tasks are actually making progress in the world, improving themselves and others. Yes, hard work and effort are important, and without them we would have accomplished nothing. But trying and failing over and over again is pointless, and no one should be rewarded for what they cannot do.
5. Yes and no. Television has some very pointless things, like stupid sitcoms, pointless game shows, and trashy reality TV. But, many people do enjoy television, and it is not a waste of time if it is truly being enjoyed. There are also many shows with substance. Educational programs, movies based on historical events, and dramas and comedies with important morals. People also have the ability to bond over television shows, share their love and hate for programs, characters, episodes, and series. My favorite show, "Chicago Fire" returned on Tuesday, and my brother and I both love it. Yes, it may be pointless to watch an overdramatized tale of good looking Chicago firemen, but it also serves as a way for me and my brother to relate, something to agree on. On Tuesday, one of our favorite characters, Paramedic Leslie Shay, died when the roof of a building collapsed. This was a traumatic experience for my mother, brother and me, and truthfully, I have still not gotten over her death, the death of a fictional character, almost 3 days later. My point is that TV pulls us in, distracts us from what is truly important, but it is powerful. Television can make us laugh, cry, love, hate, and even grow together. So, yes and no. Television is and is not a vast wasteland.
I love your response to question 5! Even though you gave no spoiler alert before spilling what happens in Chicago Fire, I really enjoyed your comparison and how you related it to the story. I completely agree with your thoughts on the positive and negative effects TV has on its viewers.
DeleteYour response to question five was awesome! I loved the comparisons between the good and bad effects of television, and could relate to Leslie's death on "Chicago Fire"
DeleteThe Society
ReplyDelete1. I believe American society in 2018 might have adopted practices that regulate people's abilities and individuality in order to form what the government thought was a perfectly equal society, where no one was better than anyone else in any way possible. They may have done this in order to encourage peace and prevent rebellion.
2. It is definitely not a good thing that no one is better than anyone else in this dystopian story. If we were all equal in our talents and abilities, then no one would be challenged to excel at a particular subject nor would they have anyone to look up to or aspire to be.
3. The only positive aspect I can find in this society is that issues of discrimination are no longer a problem. Race, gender, age, and other topics that vary with each person do not make a difference of treatment in this society. The most significant thing this society lacks is emotion. People are not able to feel immense joy or sadness, which are key in the development of people's beings. For example, Mrs. Bergeron did not feel when her son died on television.
4. I dislike this society strongly because people are not able to be themselves and be the best they can be. Talents and beauty are hidden through "handicaps" and freedom of speech results in immediate death. I believe that individuality should be praised and people should have the freedom to share their talents with the world, in order to benefit others.
Harrison Bergeron
1. I support Harrison's success because of my strong disapproval towards this society. I believe that Harrison's outburst may provoke more acts of rebellion. My only concern is that Harrison should not have been so disruptive, as he could have ignited a larger rebellion in a more thought-out, clever way.
2. Although Harrison's wild, aggressive actions may have been caused by his extensive time in jail and heat of the moment, I believe Harrison would not be a successful sole ruler. I agree with Harrison in his defiance against the ways of the society, but the way he handled his beliefs amongst others was not very wise and quite scary. He exclaims, "I am the Emperor! Everyone must do what I say at once!" His forceful attitude and strict commands prove he was not capable of ruling a country, and therefore, would be worse than the Handicapper General and her agents at ruling, but better than them when it comes to morals and beliefs.
3. No, I do not believe Harrison's wish to become ruler is an example of the cause of the society's ways because he does not represent an issue of inequality. He simply represents someone who disagrees with the current way of life that is required of him and the laws that regulate ability or beauty.
The Story
ReplyDelete1. I believe Vonnegut sympathizes with Harrison because he depicts him as someone who is willing to stand out and although he has this courage, he ultimately ends up dying because of it. Vonnegut creates Harrison as a hero, although his acts will go unnoticed and without any affect on anyone. He is a hero in the sense that he stands up for what he believes in, and is able to defend those who are not physically able to believe.
2. Harrison's outburst and his parents' reaction to his death are being satirized in this story. The way in which Vonnegut writes these parts of the stories is almost humorous. He gets the point across without being too dark or grotesque. Instead of a horrific, awful reaction to their sons death, Mrs. Bergeron is saddened for a moment, then forgetful of the whole incident right after, while Mr. Bergeron was busy grabbing a beer.
3. I believe the purpose of Vonnegut's tale was neither to warn the readers about the future, nor was it to persuade the readers to prioritize freedom over equality. I believe that Vonnegut is simply trying to make a judgement about modern society, and create a story revolving around a dystopian world that mixes up his judgement of a society in an extreme, unrealistic way. Why does he do this? I believe he does this to explore possibilities and create inquiry within his readers minds.
Overall
2. I believe that we owe our fellow citizens who are worse off the ability to learn and explore opportunities. I agree with the idea that everyone is good at something. One's talents may not be revealed until they realize what they are passionate about and it is only possible to make this revelation if they can explore the vast amount of opportunities the world provides.
4. I would definitely be more open to the idea of lifting people up instead of bringing them down, but I would still object to this if it were present in a society because it is essentially the same things with less of a physical pain aspect to it. There would still be a lack of individual success or emotion which I find the most important aspects of a society. How could you excel in what you love if you are not allowed to be different in your ability? This question is one of the most predominant reasons why I would not be happy in this society.
5. I have never not had a television, it has always been with me throughout my life and I find this consistency extremely refreshing. I use television for entertainment purposes and nothing more. But, even though its use in my life may seem unimportant and rather pathetic, television unites people. It provides a common ground where people can share emotion together, whether the emotion being expressed differs from one another or not, it gives us the ability to bond. In this way, television is certainly not a vast wasteland. It does turn into one when you become consumed and obsessed with something that will never be a reality.
Brooke, I love your last answer. I never though about it that way, but I agree. Some things on TV can evoke feelings and provide a common found. Nice Job!
Delete1. When ever there is inequality, it leads to competition. Competition ultimately leads to disagreements and disputes. By the elimination inequalities and differences, it's easier for society to function.
ReplyDelete2. Yes and no. I don't think it is fair for a person who has worked their entire life vs a person who does not frankly care, to be treated the same. The person who worked more has earned their respect fair and square. However, if a person is better merely due to race, gender, religion, etc., it would not be.
3. No, it lacks individuality.
4. I dislike the weights put on people, the over-controling government, and making people feel bad for being pretty/ugly.
1. Yes, he understands how important freedom is and it's worth dying for.
2.Even though he seems mean, he would allow freedom and equality. For example, he takes off the ballet dancer's mask, and the glasses of the musicians. He does not appear to be the type of ruler to make a law code, or even have law enforcement. People should reward actual accomplishment over effort. If everyone only tried their best, nothing would be accomplished. I do not believe he would have many rules, but possibly a spoken/unspoken class system with him at the top.
3.No, societies need a leader with brains and confidence.
1. Vonnegut sympathizes with the citizens, and make the government the antagonist. He makes Harrison a villain, who in my eyes, was the protagonist.
2. The idea of true equality and people acting as if we all are equal, even if they treat people differently based on appearance/ beliefs.
3. I think that he is aiming at the balance of freedom and equality. 100% of either is a bad thing.
3. Society should award and respect accomplishment, but also recognize personal effort. Vonnegut is trying to get people to think about how this would apply to our current society.
4. No, if people who needed extra help and we can engineer it for them, we should.
5. I believed that it has changed with all of the benefits from TV. Personally, I have acquired a lot of information from it!
T.V. is cool and all but at the end its all just the same stuff, but i do agree with societies needing a leader. I mean without one how would we survive as a society???
Delete1. I think everyone in 2081 has adopted its practices of making everyone equal in brains, beauty, and brawn because the government was afraid that they would be over ruled or run by the people, and that they were afraid they would be smarter then them.
ReplyDelete1. I think yes it’s good to have everyone be the same but without that diversity we would not be able to really have a diverse and cosmopolitan country.
2. Yes the positive aspects is that everyone would be safe and sound, but it’s lacking creativity and uniqueness.
3. I dislike that you are being controlled by the government at all times, you can’t really excel in anything either witch is lame. You wouldn’t really be able to watch sports anymore or anything.
1. I do cheer for Harrison’s success just because he brought some type of uniqueness and didn’t want to be brain washed just like every other person. At the same time I do not like how he wants to become a king that all is very bad and not just.
2. If Harrison had succeeded he would have been terrible and killed innocent people. He would have had him be a king and he would run everything and tell people what to do and how to do it. I think they would have been better surprisingly just because it would be better than having lead balls on your body all day long, 365 days out of the year.
3. I do not think his push for total equality was very smart. He basically just went in there and had no back up plans.
1. I think Vonnegut sympathizes Harrison as a hero and a lesson. I say this because yes, Harrison is a bad kid but at least he knows he doesn’t want to be brainwashed by a government and he’s taking action!
2. I think that Vonnegut wrote this to show that the government is slowly taking away our freedom as people; I really do think this short story is also showing a lot of feelings.
3. I think this is a cautionary tale and it shows us how much we should use and enjoy our freedom of just having freedom, and what a big deal it really is to have.
1. Vonnegut is trying to say that we should really appreciate people who try because everything doesn’t always happen perfectly and you are going to have to try to succeed.
2. I would not allow the government to take away our freedom in the first place! It is right to be free and that’s how it should stay! I think that people having special abilities is what drives are nation to success and great diversity.
3. It’s truly amazing how Vonnegut wrote this short story and it still is a possibility in the future. The government really does keep taking our freedoms away and nobody is really doing anything about it…..
James, I agree with what you said about Vonnegut sympathizing Harrison as a hero and as a lesson. Vonnegut wanted to show someone rebelling as a message that different is good, and everyone being the same is bad. I also agree with what you said about how the government is slowly taking away our freedom without anyone really noticing. Sometime in the near future, I could imagine the government trying to make everybody equal and take away our money and distribute the same amount to everyone in America. You did a great job being concise in a ll your answers and proving points in many of them!
DeleteThe Society
ReplyDelete1. In an attempt to make everyone equal, the government disregarded everyones special talents in order to stop discrimination. Being smart, beautiful and strong are most peoples top values or wishes, so the government stopped competition and made everyone the same.
2. Someone will always be better at something than you are, and someone will always be worse, and that is okay. It's not a bad thing for different people to have different strengths and weaknesses.
3. The society has gotten rid of competition, so there is no need to stress about being the best because everybody is the same. On the other hand, everyone is clueless and can't think for themselves.
4. I enjoyed this story becuase it was quick and to the point. There was no "fluff" or needless information, and I really liked the writing style of Vonnegut. The story was different and everything happened fast, so you wanted to keep reading.
Harrison Bergeron
1. I support Harrison because he is brave and stands up for what he believes in. The only thing that concerned me was that he called himself the emporer and seemed a bit unstable.
2. Harrison would have better goals because they would be more focused on diversity and freedom, which would be a drastic change compared to what the Handicapper General allowed.
3. Yes because he is much stronger and smarter than anyone else. Others like Harrison caused problems for the society, due to their superior intelligence and power.
The Story
1. I think Vonnegut sympathized with Harrison, and portrayed him as the hero. He was incredibly brave and stood up for what he knew was right, even though he knew the consequences. Vonnegut also shows Harrison as a hero because he is different in a society where people are all the same.
2. Vonnegut is is satirizing everyone who thinks people should be the same. He is giving them insight into what it could be like if no one was different.
3. Vonnegut wrote the story to show the importance of excellence, freedom and individuality. Without these three traits, life would be boring and meaningless because no one could do anything if there was no freedom
Overall
1. In this story, society is a perversion of the idea of equality because everyone thinks they are living equally.
2. We should not discriminate against someone who is different or special, just because they are different or special. We owe our fellow citizens respect for their differences, and we all need to understand that no one is exactly the same.
5. I am indifferent because television often portrays pessimistic ideas and emotions. With that being said, t.v. can also move you emotionally and inspire you.
The Society
ReplyDelete1. I think the society made everyone the same in every way because a lot of people probably were tired of being made fun of for the way they look, or talk. The government I think maybe thought that it would be a lot easier to look over all of the citizens if they were all the same and equal.
2. I think that it is better that no one thinks of themselves as better than other people because that usually causes a lot of social class issues. I think that it would be a good thing if no one was better than the nest person so there aren’t any issues between race, gender, age, etc.
3. I think that the only good aspect about this society in the short story is that everyone is the same. The way that they made everyone the same is not necessarily the best way, but it is good that they are. I think this because in our world today, we have too many things inline that makes one person feel better than the next.
4. In the short story, I liked that everyone was the same and there were no differences separating some of the characters from others. I disliked the way that they made people the same, by putting weights and chains on them and buzzing in their ears every time they over think something. I also dislike the way they don’t have any emotions, and if they do, they get their emotions swept away by loud sounds in their ears.
The Character
1. I cheered for Harrison’s success because to live in a society with everyone the exact same must have been hard and it was nice to see someone to take a stand and go against the norm. I admired that Harrison did what he wanted to do and go against the laws and to risk his life to put a point across that no one should be weighed down an changed to be like everyone else. I think that the fact that at age fourteen, it concerns me that he wants to be the emperor of the society.
2. I think that Harrison would not have been a good leader because at the age of 14 he would not know how to run a society. I think that the kind of government he would run would have been extreme just like the one he was trying to get out of. I think that he would have made people work under him and he would have tried to be the highest person in the social classes. I think that in the end, if Harrison had become the emperor of America, it would have ultimately been worse than how the handicapper general ran it.
3. I think that the fact that Harrison wants to become emperor is why the HG had pushed to make everyone equal in the first place. The push for total equality had probably been rooted from people trying to be high in social classes and to be the best over all other people.
The Story
1. I think Vonnegut sympathizes the parents of Harrison. In the short story, the author portrays Harrison as being the outlier in the story. His parents watch him get killed over live television and when the mother starts crying, her emotions get erased by a loud sound in her ear and she can’t even remember that her son had died.
2. I think that the thing being satirized in the short story is the way that America had made everyone different. I think Vonnegut wanted dark humor towards weighing people down with chains and weights to bring a serious message across that different is good, but taking away differences is too extreme.
3. I think that Vonnegut’s story is a cautious warning about limiting freedom. I think this because the world is where it is at today by how different people are. Everyone is different, therefore they have different ideas and it is a cosmopolitan society, whereas if freedom was taken away, everyone would be the same, and there would be nothing cosmopolitan about the society anymore.
Overall
ReplyDelete3. I think that society should reward effort over accomplishment. Although its nice to accomplish things, I believe that its better to try and get it wrong than to accomplish something and not be satisfied with the outcome. I think that throughout the short story, Vonnegut is saying that effort is better than accomplishments. He proves to be saying this through his writing by showing Harrison try to get out of his handicaps and to become emperor, but in the end failing and getting killed by the HG.
4. I would not object if society sought equality by not handicapping, but lifting up the not-gifted. I would not object because although it is a form of taking freedom away, it is a less extreme way of making everyone the same, if America ever had to go that far. i thin that this is not so much of a bad thing because unlike the short story, the improved society would not have sacks full of weights around necks or chains or ringing sounds in their ears.
5. I think that the evolution of the television has remained to be the “vast wasteland” that Vonnegut had talked about. People are more and more addicted to television every day. I think that in the short story, George and Hazel and the rest of the society were glued to their televisions because there was no physical activity they could do or something to occupy themselves with.
1. I believe that 2081 America adopted its practices of making everyone equal in brains, beauty and brawn because people were tired of being treated differently according to race, appearance, how smart they were, etc...basically many people were tired of feeling like other people were better than them. The American government decided to eliminate discrimination by making everybody equal in every single aspect of their lives.
ReplyDeleteNo, I don’t think that it would be a good thing for people to believe that no one is better than anyone else because then nobody would be recognized for their achievements or strengths. In order for nobody to be better than anybody else, everyone would have to be the same, which would not be good. In order for a society to prosper, there must be people with different strengths.
3. No, there are no positive aspects of this society. It is lacking individuality and freedom. These are two very important qualities that I believe should be a part of any society.
I dislike everything about this society. I believe that everybody should have the opportunity to do the best they can. Restricting this opportunity to make some people feel better about themselves is simply ridiculous. Everybody has a talent. Everybody has a strength. Everybody has something that they are particularly good at. Also, everybody has a weakness or something that they are bad at. Instead of making everybody equally strong and weak in all aspects of their lives, everybody should be allowed to have their moment to shine and to reach their full potential.
Yes, I definitely do cheer for Harrison’s success. I admire his bravery to break the barriers that his government has put into place. He was clearly different from everybody else. Typically, people try to blend in when they are different but I respect Harrison because this is certainly not the case in his situation. I was slightly concerned about Harrison’s violent and aggressive way of showing his dissaproval. However, I understand where he is coming from. After all, if I had been forced to be “equal” to everybody else I would be pretty furious too!
I think that Harrison would be a dictator. It is clear that he does not trust the people around him. Yet he would be fair ruler, unlike the current government in 2081. By fair I mean that he would give everybody a chance to be the best person they can be. Harrison would definitely push the citizens to do their best and be the best that they can. He would help all of the citizens reach their true potential. His goals would be better than those of the Handicapper General because instead of bringing everybody down, he would lift everybody up. Instead of hiding what they are good at, he would let people show it.
Yes, I think that his desire and capacity are some of the reasons that the Handicap system was installed. However, I also think that his crazy desire and violent outburst is also a RESULT of the Handicap system because he became extremely fed up with the system in place and he wanted to do something about it by standing up to the government and taking over.
1. I think that Vonnegut sympathizes with Harrison in the story. I believe that Harrison is presented as the hero because he was the only character courageous enough to stand up for what he believed in. He was clearly the bravest and strongest character in the story. He tried to start a rebellion even though he knew that it most likely would be unsuccessful. As a reader, you admire his bravery.
2. People who believe in total equality are being satirized in this story. Also, people who complain about “not being good at anything”. Everyone is good at something, and I think that Vonnegut was trying to prove a point of what would happen if people just stopped trying to be the best they can.
Yes, I think that his story is a tale about the importance of freedom, individuality and excellence. The story shows how dreadful life would be without these three things.
Overall
ReplyDelete1. The society described in Vonnegut’s story is a perversion of that principle or ideal. I think that the idea of everybody being treated as equals is a good one. People should all respect one another and be kind to one another, despite their differences. Yet, there should BE differences. Everybody should be allowed to be their own person but still have respect for other people. People should simply embrace their differences and treat each other as equals, instead of eliminating differences to make people treat one another as equals and with respect.
3. There needs to be a balance between the value of effort and accomplishment. Effort should be appreciated, admired, praised and recognized. Actual accomplishment should be rewarded and celebrated as well. Not only should actual accomplishment be recognized, there should also be a substantial reward for actual accomplishment.
5. The quality of the programs on TV ranges from pointless reality TV, to funny sitcoms, to cooking shows. TV in general is not a vast wasteland. Of course, there certainly are some trashy shows on TV but there are also some really good ones. Some shows are simply meant to entertain while others have a deeper meaning. You can learn a lot about life from some movies and you can walk away shaking your head about others. For example, after watching an episode of “Naked and Afraid” I kinda just stared at the TV wondering what the heck I had just watched and who came up with such a stupid idea to make a show out of that. Yet, after watching the movie “The Help” I felt terrible for the pain and suffering that so many people endured throughout that time period. Also, people can bond through TV. If two people share a common love for a TV show it is a great conversational topic that seems to never get old.
The Society
ReplyDelete1. I think 2081 America adopted its practices due the 'unfairness' of the world. People are pushed to be the smartest one in their class, the valedictorian, or to be the best lacrosse player, or to be the most attractive person in the room. Not everyone can have everything. We hear stories of people not feeling like they meet other's standards and committing suicide. I think by trying to equalize everyone, the Handicapper General believed they would remove the pressure of life.
2. I think it depends on how you look at things. Some people just wind up in bad or unfair situations and it isn't their fault, but on the other side of things, some people don't work for what they deserve. Take a trash man and Kim Kardashian. A trash men can be a pretty tough job and most don't get payed enough to last a few days let alone a year. Kim Kardashian is famous because her dad was a famous lawyer. She married Kanye West, but he only knew her because she was a celebrity. I don't think she even has a job, but she is royalty compared to the trash man.
3. I don't think there are any positive aspects in this story. Each character can feel no emotion for more than a few seconds without forgetting it or having them taken from their mind through buzzers. Each person can not show their unique abilities, they are forced to hide them behind literal and figurative masks.
4. I don't like the society due to the fact that the people don't have a life. They don't experience emotions, they can't remember memories, and they are forced to hide. I feel that by attempting the equalize all people, they enslaved them.
The Character
1. I do cheer for Harrison's success because he is going against the harsh rules that the general has set up. He shows extreme bravery and courage, but his rash decisions get him killed in the end. He should have more carefully devised his escape so that he could have freed more people. I think it was worth it for him though because his last moments alive are some of the happiest moments of his life and he dies next to his empress.
2. I think though Harrison might have freed everyone eventually from their bonds, he wouldn't have been a good leader. We see he says, "I am the Emperor! Everybody must do what I say at once!" This shows us that he was probably overpowering and controlling. Harrison wouldn't have trusted other people to be in the government so he would run the country. He probably would have also had the people in Handicapper General tortured or killed because he hated them so much. His goals would be better because people wouldn't have to wear dog collars wit lead in them or masks to cover their beauty, they would be somewhat free.
3. Yes, Harrison believes he should get whatever he wants, thats hows his empress is chosen, so because he thinks that he is better than everyone else, he is actually just starting a new problem.
The Story
1. Vonnegut sympathizes with Harrison. We see that the climax of the story is when Harrison breaks out of his bonds and dances with the ballerina. He is presented as a hero. When is tries to escape and is shot, Vonnegut tries to evoke the emotions of sympathy and disappointment that the hero is dead.
2. Harrison's ability to fly and break unbreakable changes is being satirized. Vonnegut writes about it to express the extreme emotions going on, even in a world devoid of emotion.
3. Vonnegut wrote this story about the importance of freedom and individuality. The Handicapper General brought about equality, but without freedom, equality is nothing. Everyone is unique and trying to make everyone the same, dulls the individuality of each person.
Overall
ReplyDelete2. I think we owe fellow citizens a helping hand. Many people don't want pity. Not only will pity make them feel worse, it will get them no where in life. If we took the time to look around us, we would notice all the people in need of a friend. Sometimes all people need is a presence, but if there is something else you can do, try to do it. If someone stinks at a sport, help them out, have a pass, shows them a few of the basics.
3. I think society should award personal effort more than accomplishment due to the fact that everyone is different. Just because that broadcaster stuttered, at least he tried to say something. The person who tries their hardest at everything, even if they aren't good at it, is the one who will win in the end.
5. I agree with Minow in a certain sense. Sitting, watching TV for a whole day is extremely boring and excessive. On days when I'm sick and I watch TV and sleep, I get so bored that I wish I was at school. On the other hand, Minow doesn't talk about watching a couple of shows. On weekends, I love curling up and watching a show, even if it is completely fake. I love the detective shows and I always tell my mom I'm going to be one,even though I know it is completely different than real life. Television connects you will other people. Feelings can be evoked, like Lily mentioned, during some scenes and you can jump for joy or cry in despair.
1. They made people equal this way to eliminate competition. Another reason they might have done this was to eliminate discrimination.
ReplyDelete2.It would be nice if everyone was equal. However, you can see that even a screwed up system like this could not prevent other people from having more talent, strength, or intelligence.
3.A positive aspect of this society is that even though everyone is basically constantly tortured, what with the giant bags of lead around their neck as well as government issued radio ear pieces to keep people from thinking, at least they are so unable to comprehend their situation that they don't really understand they're being tortured.
4.I dislike this society. The thing is, I can't imagine living like this, but in this messed up 2081, I PHYSICALLY can't imagine living like this because of the radio piece in my ear making some random noise every 20 seconds.
1. I do cheer for his success. I admire how he tried to break free from his handicaps and how he hated this society. However, on the other hand, he could have picked any other place in America to barge in on instead of a ballet studio that was being publically broadcast on TV.
2.He would have been a Marx kind of ruler. Things would seem better at first, but then people smarter than him would eventually overthrow him, and society would go into some kind of dictatorship, or maybe a government system even worse than communism. He would have tried to establish some kind of government that had people working together to try to bring out each individuals talents, so his goals would be more noble, but the end result would be just as bad or worse.
3.I don't think being overly ambitious is any reason to handicap every single person in America. Also, you can't really call this a "push" for equality. More like a brutal beating for equality.
1.Vonnegut is sympathetic to the people of America, who are being restrained and handicapped because of natural intelligence or talent. I think of Harrison Bergeron as more of an anti hero, because I don't know if he was really doing this for the people, or if he was just batcrap crazy.
2. Vonnegut was satirizing the government, and he probably wrote it due to the ongoing tensions between the United States government and the Soviet Union about the pacification of Congo, or maybe just because he disliked the government.
3.Vonnegut was talking about all those things, but I think the importance of freedom was the point he emphasized most.
1.Vonnegut's society is a perversion of equality, the American dream. It is a forced form of equality, and Americans hate being forced to do things, especially by the government.
4.If I was considered one of the non gifted, I wouldn't object to lifting myself up artificially if I had the choice of either staying the way I am, or getting artificially enhanced into, essentially, a David 2.0.
5.Ha! Television has not grown in "leaps and bounds" but instead has mutated into a kind of drug that millions of people across the world are addicted to. If television from the 60's was a "vast wasteland" then television in 2014 is "earth after 2,000,000 nuclear wars and a zombie apocalypse". The Brady Bunch might have been trash back then, but compared to the Bachelorette, it's a Van Gogh.
1.) 2081 American adopted its practices in order to evade the human fear of difference. Fear of difference often drives people to harm others, and the 2081 American government sought to eliminate difference all together in order to protect the population from their human nature. However, by doing so, the government destroyed all aspects of individuality in society, which presents as much, if not more of a problem as social inequality.
ReplyDelete2.)
Believing that no one is better than anyone else is not only a lazy mentality, but it is also not factual. Believing that nobody is better than anyone else is simply not true, because the spectrum of people is extremely wide ranging from below-average to exceptional. This mentality is lazy, because believing it would eliminate all need for hard work and competition, two crucial aspects for advancement and achievement. This would also be true if no person was better than any other person.
3.) This story presents a society that benefits the weakest of people, so it presents no scenarios for disappointments, discouragements, or hurt feelings. However, it is lacking in achievement and advancement. For an example, Hazel is not discouraged at all, because all people are at her physical and intellectual level.
4.) I like this society in terms of a literary environment: it creates a great setting for imminent conflict Coming from an environment that I recognize as a generally “above-average” environment, I myself would despise the society if it so existed.
Harrison Bergeron, the character- answer each question
5.) I certainly do cheer for Harrison’s success, because it is very easy to empathize with him. With childlike frustration in his young age, he is fed up with the fact that his individuality is constrained by the government. I admire the fact that he still has a perception of individuality, even though the government sought so hard to silence it. (“I am a greater ruler than any man who ever lived!” (Vonnegut, 218)) I feel concern for his character, as it is inevitable that he be harmed in someway, as it is naturally dangerous that he is on the opposing side of a powerful government.
6.) As much as I admire Harrison, I believe that he would not have made a good leader, for this story presents two extremes: freedom and equality. I believe that Harrison would opt for freedom to the point at which the population would be threatened, as he would essentially reciprocate the Handicapper General’s strict regulations. It is likely that he would allow for freedom, almost to the point of anarchy. Therefore, he would not be a good choice to institute as ruler.
7.) This is possible, but it is not the only reason, as difference presents enough threat to something as delicate as a society that the government found it a priority to eliminate it. Eliminating difference also eliminated people like Harrison, so the government opted for this very effective method of keeping people in check.
ReplyDelete“Harrison Bergeron,” the Story- answer each question
8.) Vonnegut sympathizes with anybody above average who is forced to give up their natural abilities for the sake of protecting society and an oppressive government. Harrison is depicted as a hero, as he is present as a character who is passionate about breaking out of the social norms that handicap and humiliate him. The fact that he stands up to the government and exploits his differences makes him a very heroic character.
9.) Society is being satirized in this story, as society is being depicted as an institution that is afraid of its own individuals and force them in ridiculous ways to hide their differences. As readers, we find this environment to be ridiculously unfair in its norms, but our society possesses many norms that make it behave in much the same way the society in the story does. Vonnegut wrote this story to expose the similarities between the social institutions.
10.) This story is not only a method of praising freedom, but it also exposes the aspects of our society that indicate fear of difference, especially when “Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, came into the studio with a double-barreled ten gauge shotgun. She fired twice, and the Emperor and the Empress were dead before they his the floor. (Vonnegut, 218)” The government did this out of fear of their differences threatening their delicate way of life.
11.) Societies thrive on balance. The balance be explored in this short story is the balance between freedom and equality. Though equality is the aspect that is particularly antagonized, it is also shown that equality is required in order for the society to survive. It is evident through Harrison’s declaration of: “’Even as I stand here... crippled, hobbled, sickened- I am a greater ruler than any man who ever liver! Now watch me become what I can become! (Vonnegut, 218),” we see that too much power to those who are above average is extraordinarily dangerous. We owe those with below-average talents equal chances to advance and achieve, as this allows for talent to simply complement hard work. This is the perfect combination of equality and freedom.
12.) I believe that society should reward actual accomplishment, as it is more of an incentive for people to work harder. Even though the broadcaster tried, he accomplished nothing that contributed to society. George tells Hazel that she is “as good as anybody else (Vonnegut, 216)” to be the Handicapper General, which shows that by putting a silence on personal achievement and relying solely on effort there are no advancements whatsoever in society, as all people remain at a certain level of advancement on which they cannot improve upon.
13.) Reading the text from the speech, I see no difference between today’s television programs and programs from the ‘60’s. However, it they have changed at all, I assume that programs have gotten even more sadistic to appeal to the secretly gruesome cravings of people. Being one that personally does not find television desirable, it is easy for me to say that television today is the same “vast wasteland” that it has always been.
I agree with your answer to #12. Accomplishment provides incentive, even though effort is a positive thing. In the end, it is the people who accomplish that make a definite difference in the world, compared to those whose simply try.
DeleteThe Society
ReplyDelete1. 2081 America likely adopted these practices because people were becoming increasingly secure about their flaws and weaknesses, and wanted them done away with, so the government intervened and handicapped everyone who was gifted in any way so that everyone was equally flawed.
2. It is not a good thing for people to believe that no one is better than anyone else, because it is simply not true; some people are better than others, this is a fact of life, and whether one likes it or not it has to be accepted. It would also be a bad thing if no one really was better than anyone else, because if everyone had the same skill set there would be no exceptional people to help society improve and progress.
3. This society does not really have any positive aspects. It has a total lack of individuality and freedom, and people’s talents are uniformly suppressed.
4. I dislike this society because it totally suppresses people’s individuality and talent. Human ingenuity, the most important resource in the world, is totally wasted because everyone’s gifts are brought down to the lowest common denominator. This suppression of individuality and talent also takes away the freedom of the people.
Harrison Bergeron – The Character
1. I do in fact cheer for Harrison’s success, because the society he lives in is terrible and he seems to be the only chance for it to change for the better. I admire his total confidence and audacity in challenging authority so boldly. However, his absolute confidence is a double-edged sword; he seems incredibly narcissistic, and his belief in his total superiority to all other people would suggest that he might be cruel to his subjects, seeing them as lesser beings.
2. Harrison might well have been a somewhat authoritarian and cruel ruler, as his personality suggests. But he would almost definitely not suppress people’s individual talents, like many authoritarian rulers would, because this is exactly what he is fighting against. This is also supported by his criterion for empress; whichever ballerina is brave enough to stand will be the empress. This seems to suggest that Harrison might well create a “survival of the fittest” society, where anyone with the talent and the courage can do well for themselves.
3.Harrison’s desire and ability to rule is a prime example of why the “everybody is equal” society he is trying to overthrow was created in the first place – to prevent extraordinarily talented people from taking control of society.
Harrison Bergeron – The Story
1. I think Vonnegut is sympathizing with Harrison in this story. He is presenting Harrison as a hero, but a complex one, with flaws. Harrison is an incredibly egotistical person, and the combination of his incredible ability and his belief in the inferiority of others makes him a potentially very dangerous person. However, he is trying to overthrow an oppressive, tyrannical regime with terrible ideals.
2. The idea that everyone should be equal is what Vonnegut is satirizing in this story. While equality is an admirable ideal, Vonnegut takes it to ridiculous proportions in this story. Vonnegut may have written about it in response to communism, which was a major threat to the US in that time period due to the USSR, and its central ideal of treating everyone equally.
3. I do not believe that Vonnegut’s story is a cautionary tale so much as a complaint about what he saw as an over-emphasis of the idea that everyone should be treated equally.
Overall
ReplyDelete1. The society in this story is a massive perversion of the American ideal of equality, as it hugely overextends that ideal to the point of making each and every person identical in ability, which is obviously a ridiculous goal for any person or society.
4. I would be alright with a society of equal ability in which the less talented were lifted up to the level of the very gifted. While this massive change in the structure of society might scare many people simply due to its scale, it is, at heart, nothing more than giving people with few talents a better chance in life, which is undeniably a good thing.
5. I agree that TV is to a large extent a “vast wasteland,” because while some programs are truly excellent and artistic the majority of TV shows are cheap, trashy entertainment.
Society
ReplyDelete1. The American government, seeking a way to control the population from revolution or from actions and thoughts that they disagreed with, took to these extreme measures in order to obtain their power.
2. It is good as a mindset, as it keeps arrogance in check and helps to promote a kindness that helps to shelter the self confidence and feelings of others, yet in reality we all have different strengths. I do not think our society nor our civilization would be as effective if we were controlled to be average, or to be something that we simply are not. Our current-day society thrives off of new inventions, and from the various types of goods & services that we provide for each other. The iPhone wouldn’t exist right now if absolute equality was necessary.
3. The one positive I see from this society is that those who are average or below average do not feel as underprivileged and defect. This society is lacking any growth or innovation.
4. I dislike the lack of freedom from this society, and how the government has succeeded in wiping out the joyous, and inspiring aspects of life. These practices prohibit everyone from the experience of true emotion, preventing us to grow as people. This life is utterly boring and incompetent... Can you even call this living?
Character
1. Yes, I do. It is a defiance against the overpowering authority, and a leap into the real world of passion and intellect. I admire his audacity, if only for five minutes, for he died with the knowledge of what it feels like to dance, to smile, and to think for himself. The aspect that concerns me is how he calls himself “emperor,” as if intending to only be another dictating figure.
2.I feel like I need a little more background on Harrison for a full conclusion, but I believe that he would be somewhat better than Handicapper General. He would prioritize freedom more, yet I may predict that those with higher capacities would have an exceedingly better opportunity judged by the way that Harrison talks about his own capabilities.
3. Based on the fact that he announces himself emperor, I believe that his intent was indeed to rule the people, hopefully better than their current leader.
Story-
1. I think this answers lies with the way you view freedom & equality. Personally, I say that Harrison is the hero for his stance against the government, and I sympathize for his parents, as they could not even recognize their own son’s death due to the mental handicaps, and also because they cannot truly experience the ups and downs of life.
2. Vonnegut may have had a problem with the idea of the loss of freedom, perhaps surrounding an event that was recent to the writing. This idea of what society would look like if equality outweighed freedom, is the satirized feature.
3.I think that Vonnegut aimed to tell a tale of the freedom for individuality. He wants to stress that readers should embrace their differences, and should have the capability of doing so.
Vonnegut uses equality as an example in this story, but I think he means to emphasize extremities in general rather than equality specifically. If the world was ruled solely by the smartest, best, strongest, and fastest, would the world still be impeded socially? Though achievement and advancement would be virtually limitless, society as a social structure would not thrive. I interpreted the government's actions as actions with good intentions for keeping order, and I'm sure Harrison's actions would also be with good intentions. However, as Mr. Dilworth has said to me, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions." Good intentions can soon become extremes, and detrimental to society as we see in this story. I strongly agree with your answer to number one, as society can not always abide by individual opinions, rather, society thrives on balance. This story highlights the lack of balance between freedom and equality.
DeleteOverall
ReplyDeleteI think that Vonnegut’s story is a portrayal of equality taken to the extreme. Society stresses this idea so far that equality becomes oppression
2. I believe that we owe our fellow citizens equal opportunity. I hope that they can receive an education, so that they can develop the necessary skills. We can help them explore paths that fit their unique skill set. We cannot force everyone to take advantage of their opportunities, but we can at least provide it.
5. There is no denying that many find themselves addicted to TV. I believe that the term “wasteland” applies on only some of the television programs. I see “Keeping Up With the Kardashians” and other pointless realities/competition shows and I recognize the wasteland that Minow described. On the other hand, I believe that some are thought-provoking, and not completely worthless, such as documentaries. Unfortunately, television can hold many dangers, as it captures us so entirely. It is an opportunity for groups to feed us lies through the media, and for networks to plant opinions and beliefs into society through the programs. To an extent, television could very well act as a thought dominance.
The Society-
ReplyDelete1. In 2081, America has become a land of extreme political correctness. Already we have to say, “Happy Holidays!” instead of “Merry Christmas!” Although this doesn’t seem bad, and it isn’t on its own, it is easy to imagine in 77 years just how simple it would be to attempt to re-enact this short story.
2. It is not a good thing because if everyone was no better than anyone else, there would be no need to compete and try and best one another.
3. The positive aspects of the society revolve around no one being offended. In this society, everyone appears to live life fairly uneventfully and fairly happily.
4.I dislike this society because it infers that individuality as well as competition, both financially as well as in other aspects of life, are negative traits.
Harrison Bergeron-
1. I cheer for Harrison’s successes because he is the hero of the story and embodies American individualism, however, he is also bold and rash.
2. Harrison would be a good ruler, but a bad leader. As a ruler, he would have created laws that give him power, but also empower others. He encourages defiance, however also understands that he will put those who attempt to defeat him in their place. However, he would not be able to see himself as equal his subjects.
3. His desire to rule could seem concerning, and when faced with that problem, it could seem that total equality would be a good solution.
1. Vonnegut would like us to sympathize with Harrison, because Harrison embodies the American ideologies and traits. He presents Harrison as a hero, however, Harrison’s ideas are not much better than the HG.
2. Vonnegut is attempting to satirize the American population, because he wants to show how the population has lost its uniqueness and individuality.
3. Vonnegut’s tale is cautionary of how America has become complacent with being uniform.
Overall-
2. We owe it to our fellow citizens, be they more advanced than us or not, that they can receive a chance of an equal education as well as an equal chance in the job market.
4. Any manual tinkering of the genes of our species in such a large scale fashion could be immensely dangerous. We could risk our futures as a rational society when attempting to use genetic engineering, which is why I would not want to live in a society with it.
5. Television has not changed much within the last 50 years, however our access to it has. It is now even easier than ever to enjoy TV anywhere, anytime. That is especially dangerous. As long as we can limit our time we use on the television, and make sure we use it for effective uses such as watching the news or weather, it is fine.
The Society
ReplyDelete1. 2081 America adopted its practices of equalizing all of it's citizens because it took too literally the American maxim that all men are created equal. It believed that not only should all men be treated equally, but also that they should behave, think, and perform equally.
2. It is not a good thing for people to believe that no one is better than anyone else because it just is not true. There will always be things that some people are better than others at doing. If no person were better than any other person, then there would not ever be any achievement. No one would be able to make his or her own future because no matter what, everyone else would be just as good at what they wanted to do.
3. The one and only positive aspect of this society is that the people with the least brains, beauty, and brawn have no need to worry that they will be completely useless. But with this equality, all individuality is taken away and in the story, any sad, exciting, happy, or generally memorable experience is immediately forgotten.
4. I do not like the way the government has used the ideals of America to justify handicapping its citizens, brainwashing them all into thinking what they are doing is helping the people and making them all mentally and physically subnormal.
Harrison Bergeron, the character
1. I cheer for Harrison because he is an amazing example of a human being that is able to break through all of the government's oppression and shows the human condition to always want to be better.
2. Harrison's rule would have been extremely dictatorial, doing everything on his whim and to please himself, he would not have made a good ruler. But it would have been better than the old government because he was so eager to let people do their best and to show off their talents and abilities and did not suppress and part of them.
3. The way Harrison acts is the problem that led to the policies that are in place, but the policies themselves have amplified his desire to control his own life and be great even more.
“Harrison Bergeron,” the Story
1. In the story Harrison is the hero because he represents what all the other people want to be able to do, to rip off all their handicaps, but are not brave enough or stupid enough to.
2. The policy that everyone should have equal opportunities is what is being satirized in this story. Vonnegut wrote it to show people at a very extreme level if what the effects of a communistic government would be like in America, where we value equality so highly.
3. This story is a cautionary tale about giving up freedoms to make society a better place and how much freedom can be taken away before society is no longer benefiting from the changes.
Overall
1. The society in Vonnegut's story is a perversion of the American principle of equality. The story takes it and implements it totally and completely where today we have less equality, but also more freedom, another defining American principle.
2. We owe at least our support to those of our fellow citizens who are worse off through no fault of their own. We can help them find their calling. Taxes are also paid by most citizens to give people opportunities through education.
5. Television has remained the vast wasteland that Minow described because it will never be able to accurately document human nature. There will always be something left out. Stories will always have a theme that needs to be adhered to, reality will always be wildly dramatized, and information will always be incomplete.
Society:
ReplyDelete1) People were sick of being treated differently because of their age, race, gender, class, and more.
2) No, because then everyone would be the sane and there would be no competition, and it would just be boring.
3) Yes, because the characters in the short story were happy with what they had, which is what people want in life.
4) I liked how the author had the idea of the story, it was very creative because you would never imagine a world where everyone is equal and they don't have their own freedom.
Character:
1) I cheer for Harrison because he wasn't afraid to be himself. I admire Harrison for him not caring what other people thought of him. Im concerned of how has so big and that he scared people but he can't change that.
2) I think he wouldn't care what other people thought and be selfish. He would allow more freedom than the Handicapper General would. But, his goals would allow people to believe in their own ideas and have freedom.
3) Yes this is because he thinks he can rule over everyone because he has the intelligence and size for it.
Harrison Bergeron:
1) Vonnegut sympathizes Harrison in the story because he's different from all the other characters. I think he is a hero because he fights for what he wants and thinks is right.
2) Harrison is being satirized because of his differences. He wrote it to show that people are not all the same
3) He is showing that equality and freedom at the same time and if there is too much of both it is bad.
Overall:
1) In this story I think it shows the American principle of equality.
2) In the story its showing equality so not really, people won't get credit for any special things they offer to life because everyone is treated equal.
5) I don't think television has become a "vast wasteland" because some channels are interesting and people learn from them. But, yes some shows can be a "vast wasteland" but people watch them because they are entertaining.