carol's contemplations

Around a month ago, I obtained a job at a certain children’s center which helps advance their education. I, myself, had never been to one of these centers, but I’d heard extensively about them. The way it works is that students come in whenever convenient (while the center’s open) to turn in their homework, get new work, and do today’s packet. The younger kids sit at the back of the room, and my job is to help them out with whatever math or English concepts that they’re currently learning. Now, I have very conflicted feelings about the job. Previously, I didn't hold children in the highest regard. I thought they were annoying, unsanitary, troublesome, and not cute enough to make up for their flaws. But after working at this center, I’ve come to like and even love the kids there; the ones I work with range from 3-7 years old, so first graders and under. Don’t get me wrong, they are irritating and stubborn at times, but they are all remind me of Virginia Woolf's moth: “a bead o...

We, as humans, are forever attracted to quick fixes, and why wouldn't we be? Quick fixes are the evolutionarily logical thing to go with, as that they save time and energy. As 21st century citizens, we are spoiled by increasingly-convenient innovations and experience more of these "quick fixes" each day; we want everything at our finger tips, everything to be fixed with a single press of a button, an answer to our questions with a single "Hey Siri," and a solution for all our world problems with just one change. Jonathan Swift's "modest proposal" was one such easy solution. He satirized the proliferation of such simple fixes that claimed to do everything, from "contributing to the feeding... of many thousands" to the "inducement of marriage." Although, from an objective standpoint, Swift's proposal seems logically "good," he completely glossed over the moral implications and the probability of society accepting ...

"Literally and truly, one cannot get on well in the world without money." Straight to the point is the starting sentence of William Hazlitt's essay. Sans money, one's life is plagued with never-ending torment until its very end. I know many people who hold that same mindset, especially my parents. They've been on both sides of the fence, which gives even more merit to their belief. The rural Chinese village my parents grew up in versus cushy (in comparison) house we live in today are worlds apart, the main difference being money. Thus explains their motives behind pushing me to do well in school (to earn that bread). Therefore, I don't disagree with Hazlitt's statement; I've had the same adage (reworded of course) instilled into me since birth. I'd just like to add on to it. Hazlitt's claim seems to imply that the opposite situation is true: with money, one can get on well in this world. While I do agree, I do only to a certain degree. Mo...

After reading the section from Serving in Florida we were assigned in class, one statement really stuck with me. When Ehrenreich stated that the "only thing people have to call their own is the tumors they are nourishing and the spare moments they devote to feeding them," I thought it was an extremely interesting way of explaining smoking. We all have the destructive habits that we constantly indulge ourselves in, whether it be playing a video game for too long or wasting time on our phones. Smoking can be seen as a twisted form of  "self-love;" smokers are regularly taking time out of their day to do something for themselves, even though it harms them in the long run. After a hard day, they reward themselves with a cigarette which calms their nerves and makes them feel good immediately; in a way, the act is extremely familiar. In no way am I defending smokers or condoning the act, but the more I think about it, the more relatable it becomes. I, being an impul...