American Aristocracy: Vrai ou Faux?

Today in class we continued to discuss the idea of the American Dream, most of us seem to agree that it is based on personal sentiments. However, Mr. Laz briefly mentioned an interesting point that I felt like addressing. He asked if we felt that there is an ‘American aristocracy’.

Most people pride themselves in the inclusiveness of the United States. United is a pretty important word, it means agreed or in harmony. Of course there is a division among the classes in the United States, that can’t be avoided, but does anyone consider the wealthy or privileged classes to be an aristocracy?

In my personal opinion, I don’t think it is an intentional aristocracy (if that makes any sense). It just seems that the way our society works does not lend itself to a true ‘ruling of the masses’.

Jasmine mentioned today that children of affluent families have a better chance of getting into some of the more elite schools. I was at my SAT prep class the other night, and they were telling me some of the factors that contribute to getting into college (SAT scores, GPA, extracurricular activities etc) but the last thing they mentioned was the ‘do-any-of-the-buildings-have-your-last-name-on-them’ factor.

So, when children of lower class families don’t get into the top schools, or go to school at all, some people would argue that they aren’t receiving the proper education they need to make ‘well-informed’ decisions about…elections for example.

A single mother working three jobs is probably less inclined to vote than a stay at home mom living in an affluent community (such as my mom). People would argue that they should vote in order to help their situation, but I can see why to a single mother working three jobs, finding food to put on the table for your kids at night is a lot more important than picking the ‘lesser evil’ out of a pool of candidates that you will never meet or be directly impacted by.

I’m too lazy to look it up but is there any statistic showing if a certain amount of unregistered voters make below a certain income?

As always feel free to chip in.

February 5 Class

"If you smile at me, I will understand because that is something everybody everywhere does in the same language." - CSN

Happy Super / Fat Tuesday Everybody!

Today in class, we continued our discussion of the "American Dream."
- Grace and Amy brought up relevant examples of successful millionaires who had worked their way up from rags to riches. One such example is Chris Gardner, who's life is portrayed in the movie, "The Pursuit of Happyness". (Another movie Laz suggested watching for an example of the American Dream was "The House of Sand and Fog")
- The American Dream was only loosely defined as possessing wealth / being successful. To achieve the American Dream, one must believe in the American Dream. As Donna mentioned, one can't exactly be an "aspiring fascist" and hope to make it. America doesn't have a national religion or language that all must observe, but Americans do expect everyone else to embrace capitalist ideals on which the economy is founded.
- This "AD" and the idea of achieving success is drilled into children's heads from the time that they are able to talk. Adults love to ask, "what do you want to be when you grow up?" as if a five-year-old knows the answer.
- Arka suggested that the "AD" wasn't uniquely American, but simply packaged as American; hundreds of years of European history was compacted into a few documents which became the foundation of the nation.
- Americans still have the mentality that hard work determines success. While there may be exceptions dependent upon circumstances (luck, connections), in the majority of cases hard work has generated profitability. There is no denying that laziness is not tolerated and productivity is highly valued. Americans look upon those on welfare with disdain. Some are of the mindset that poor work ethic is why certain nations of Africa are as impoverished as they are, and that they shouldn't wait for handouts but rather work harder.
- The "opportunities" are available, it's just up to the individual to seek them out
- There is a comforting sense of purpose in doing work, as if one's life has more meaning because they have a job and fill a position where someone needs them. The "AD" may even be the physical work itself, and not the riches. Money doesn't always buy happiness.
- We ended our class discussion with the question of the rich's obligation to the poor. The rich class is resented by the poor class for their excessive wealth, and the poor class is resented by the rich class for perceived "laziness". Though resentment doesn't improve matters, it can't be eradicated. This issue even reaches a local level. Moorestown is obviously a wealthy town and most residents have high-paying jobs. But because parents work so hard and earn such high paychecks, the children begin to feel a sense of entitlement, as if somehow they have a right to spend their parents' money freely, being members of the family unit. Perhaps its just the mindset of the next generation, or the way parents treat their children, or both, but youngsters today have begun to exude a sense of arrogance; that they are better than neighboring towns because they in fact can spend more money than the others can earn.

~Ashley

The American Dream?

Recently, the topics and issues surrounding the frequently-heard expression "the American dream" have become more pronounced than usual. Two of my friends handed in their term papers today about how the American dream had either died or altered to become a mad race to acquire and use illicit drugs. In class, we got onto this topic because of Crevecoeur's frequent allusions to the "American dream;" in my opinion, however, the 'AD' is so loosely-defined that it can really refer to anything, as Arka brought up. This convenient piece of information has helped millions to achieve what they call their dreams. In most cases, though, I think that the American dream symbolizes a rags-to-riches success story for immigrants to the country; it's for this reason that so many immigrants are now coming over our borders, legally or illegally. I think the real reason that the 'AD' continues to survive today when success (in all its forms) are so difficult to achieve is because of a vocal minority of people who have fulfilled the dream itself. For example, Snoop Dogg, Demi Moore, Sarah Jessica Parker comprise three of only a few people who are very open about their humble beginnings and the rise to certain success. While our society strongly emphasizes education as a certain road to success, there are plenty examples of those who achieved without an education and those who fail with high qualifications. But what, exactly, is success?

February 4th Class

Hey it's Allison.

Today in class, Mr. Lazarow began our discussion with a newspaper article about the governmental tax stimulus package. The author of the article argued that the money being given to tax-payers should be called rebates as opposed to bonuses. The author conducted a study to support his assertion that proved that people are more likely to spend the extra money if it is called a bonus, and less likely to spend it if it is refferred to as a rebate. Yet another example of how semantics can affect the way people percieve things...

After our brief Hayakawa flashback, we continued our discussion of Crevecoeur's "What is an American". We decided that the document had an international audience and that it was propagandistic. It was also noted that Crevecoeur refers to the Europeans that he is appealing to as a "crowd of low, indigent people, who flock here every year" to make them feel useless and make them want to move to America to gain a sense of purpose. He also says that hard work trumps everything and that nothing is for free, even in America. However, he is also quick to let his audience know that it is much easier to rise economically and socially in America than it is in Europe because in America, there isn't an aristocracy to hold down the rest of the population.

When Mr. Lazarow mentioned that "What is an American" is the beginning of the notion of an "American Dream", the questions really started flowing. We discussed whether or not we believe in the "American Dream". We reached the conclusion that the high level of abstraction makes the idea believable and makes it applicable to many different people. We reached the end of the period when we began to ask if there is a ceiling of success in America and whether or not one needs a college educatin to be successful.

Does anyone have any thoughts about those unanswered questions?

The American Dream

Today before the end of class Laz asked us to think about what the American Dream meant to us and whether or not it was attainable.

I think it is a common belief that the American Dream is to come to America or to be born in America with no money and to somehow become successful and rich. This is not my idea of the American Dream. I define success as being able to achieve the goals you set for yourself and to be able to support yourself independantly. Not everybody in America can be affluent, and defining the American Dream as strictly monetary makes it too difficult achieve.

I feel that if a person works hard enough, he or she can become his or her own American Dream. I know it is virtually impossible to go from being poor to in the upper class, but with hard work you can move up the social ladder. Slowly my family grew form poor immigrants to what we are today. My grandfather dropped out of high school at the age of 16 to join the navy and later worked on the railroad until retirement. My grandmother was a Catholic elementary school teacher. They had a modest income, but worked hard to help my father get through college. My mother paid for most of her college education waitressing at a diner. It was difficult, but my family moved from a lower social class.

Destined to be an American

Hey guys, it's Jasmine.

We talked about the idea of destiny a couple days ago, when we were discussing Phillis Wheatley. She used classical references to imply that Americans were destined to become the inheritors of the ancient worlds. In Crevecoeur's "Letters from an American Farmer," he writes, "Americans...they will finish the great circle." He is referring to the knowledge that they brought over from Europe that would one day "cause great changes in the world." This seemed to be a statement of destiny - the Americans, from the start, had a duty to improve the world. Next, he states, "The Americans were once scattered all over Europe...". To me, this implies that they had always been destined to be Americans. When they were still living in Europe, they didn't know yet, but there was something in them that made them innately American. Sooner or later, fate would bring them together in the New World.
So do you think that Crevecoeur was trying to say that the useless were destined (from the start) to become useful, the poor to become rich, etc. in America? Did they have some sort of destiny to fulfill (like becoming "this American, this new man...you will find in no other country.")?

“For what avail the plough or sail, or land or life, if freedom fail?”

This is Stephanie.
Alright. So I’ve decided to post this ASAP because of the miniscule-almost-nonexistent chance that I might forget to do so later.

Okay so today we finished up Wheatley with a few notable points concerning “On Imagination”. First of all, we introduced the era following Neoclassicism: Romanticism. The main aspects of Romanticism are Imagination, Nature, Individualism, and Symbolism, all of which were somewhat incorporated into Wheatley’s poem. (However, it must be remembered that Wheatley is considered to be Pre-Romantic, because she still incorporates some neoclassic elements into her works, as shown at only the very end of this poem, which I’ll explain later.)

Before I get to the intense stuff, Mr. Laz described three segments of Romanticism: Early Romanticism, which mainly emphasized the components of the new American nation; Gothic Romanticism, which analyzed the characteristics of the human psyche, and included poets such as Poe; and Transcendentalism, which is where you get your Emerson (and where the title came from).

Wheatley begins with a detailed description of the sheer power imagination contains, that it might turn winter to spring (note the natural aspect); this is clearly the majority of the poem quantitatively, and demonstrates the romantic aspect of Wheatley’s writing. However, at the very end, precisely the last two stanzas, she confesses that she realizes winter never left to begin with. This ‘realization of reality’ is what essentially shatters romantic trends of thoughts (which is seen throughout history: that hopeless, fragile yet aesthetic thought that is broken by war, and moreover, reality).

Next, we briefly began Crevecoeur in “What is an American.” Again, a feature of Romanticism is highlighted in the realization of the uniqueness of a nation. The work was seemingly intended for a international audience; the defense and logical buttressing of a new nation is the essence of the piece. Also, aspects of tabula rasa were emphasized, especially the fact that the individual is not just allowed a blank slate, but the whole nation. An appeal was made to the more misfortunate Europeans because of the demand for workers, so Crevecoeur implores these people to immigrate to America and help write its history, and work for the greater cause.

Or, as Mr. Laz says, “To get many French people to come over and die”.