Trumbo

My favorite part of the book so far has been chapter VI. I really like the way Dalton Trumbo constructed the chapter. The way he flows through sentences, ignoring convential punctuation, and the way he uses short sentences, like “But we’re not. I must have been asleep. I must have been dreaming. It’s so hard to tell” (page 82), entices me. I find myself reading to a rhythm, like a song follows a beat. It seems in this capacity that the timing of a story is more evident. Time merges together much better when commas don’t separate past actions from the present. It’s a different kind of clarity, instead of telling you when things happened, it allows you to decide when time happened – which is a more direct reflection of our mental understanding of life. I find that this is a very intuitive style of writing. It eliminates counter-intuitive elements such as errors in comprehension that overtake the brain’s processes in more important aspects of reading – such as understanding what is going on. I feel as if I could read the chapter over and over again, and it would be no more boring than telling a good story over and over again. It makes sense in spite of the transition from paper to voice – something that is not as easy when punctuation dictates how you say everything.

Umperialism

Blog – discuss this essay in relationship to the book

This pro-imperialism essay is deeply rooted in nationalism. Likely an extension of other movements at the time, particularly the Manifest Destiny, this essay encourages America to spread its government to places around the world, such as "Porto Rico", Cuba, and the Philippines. The essay does not directly advocate war, but one gets the impression from reading it that the author would not be opposed to war if it meant that the US could spread its democracy around the world. The author supports his claims with references to England and France, powerful countries and US allies, that have colonies around the world. The author predicts that US imperialism will give the US a stronger economy as it takes over valuable trading partners. The book, Johnny Got His Gun, is clearly anti-war. This essay tries to dance around the subject of war, instead focusing on the glory of having colonies. War would cut into the point the author is trying to make.

Comparing

Blog – discuss this essay in relationship to the book

"America has lost just once" page 769 "invincible"

"American the Beautiful” by Dinesh D’Souza is one of the most biased, and ludicrous, essays I have ever read. The whole thing is pathetic, a case of propaganda and Republican ignorance. The whole essay is about how great we, as Americans, are and how we are shaping the world for the better - more freedom, more individuality. The Muslims (a couple times he/she admits that she is talking about fundamentalists, but overall that point is hiden), according to D'Souza are the antithesis of freedom. They are the antithesis of America. Therefore, they must be bad! As he/she puts it, we are "richer, more varied, and more fun... and morally superior". Because those are totally measurable categories that present no sort of bias, we must fight them all off! It turns out, that in Dinesh D'Souza's quest for nationalism and patriotism, he/she is doing the exact same thing that he/she claims the Muslims do. The hypocrisy is pathetic. We are definitely the most fun, most free society! The Patriot Act is definitely just simply there to ensure our freedom! Christian extremists are just as liberal as the rest of society! They certainly aren't even comparable to those Muslims! The war against Muslim extremists will be fast and decisive for America with the whole nation backing this awesome imperialism! And our women can wear what they want! The essay is pathetic.

Johnny Got His Gun is very much the opposite of this essay. Johnny Got His Gun is a completly anti-war book. Dinesh D'souza directly advocates war, at least in this case, against the Muslim fundamentalists. Johnny Got His Gun directly speaks against all wars.