meher! @astronomeher-blog - Tumblr Blog

the Grind!!!!

okay so I am super super close to being done!!! heck ya! I’m really not proud of my work ethic but imma be real, life ain’t easy lately. Anywhoooo I’m probably most proud of my literary criticisms except something I never clarified is how to actually quote a source. This may seem so dumb bc I am a senior but have you ever had to quote a source within a source within a source??? idk how but I ended up with like 5 apostrophes at the end of my quote but I could only reduce them after playing with my sentence structure. Also, the internet is so confusing when it comes to looking up grammar rules.

I guess I’ll say I’m overall very enlightened about Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and I really surprised myself by not being stupid. I’d like to thank the Internet for making this project possible, Spotify for providing the sick jams, and They Say I Say for teaching me how to make a coherent sentence.

Gn and Gbye :)

#aplit19writing

the writing

So far, I think that general intro and the section about the criticisms that align with my views are the hardest for me to write. Mainly, I am having trouble connecting all these varied ideas into one coherent essay. I haven’t even thought about how I need to write intros and conclusions yet which is stressing me out. Also, I’m having trouble with deciding which sources are reputable/finding the most trustworthy background sources. I think I can make informed guesses as to what inspired Dick but obviously, I can’t know for sure. Since I have to be honest here, I know a lot of people have been talking about how ahead they are or that they have a million criticisms. Honestly, I’m a little stressed out because I feel like I am severely underprepared but like I just don’t think that adding too many criticisms will benefit me because I’ll get more confused.

The section about criticisms that do not align is much easier to write because I am only focusing on one criticism/encompassing idea there. I also think the annotations weren’t so difficult because they are specific sections that I picked out because I knew I’d have a lot to say about them and could relate them to my criticisms.

#aplit19writing

criticisms, research, etc...

bro I feel ENLIGHTENED reading my criticisms because I'm actually understanding what they’re saying and I feel like I can connect them to my book easily and can make well-informed decisions about whether or not I agree with the information presented. I’m kind of a little behind on the writing and I have everything started, I just really need to sit down and grind out the writing ya know. At first, I picked these sections of the book I wanted to annotate but now I actually kind of don't think they are good sections and I’m struggling to find better ones. I guess the problem is that my sections are just so long because I’m trying to encompass everything.

#aplit19writing

reading the work #5

The end of my book seems almost like the last laugh by the author towards the main character. Deckard uses all the money he got from killing androids to buy himself a real animal. However, as revenge, Rachael kills his goat. Then Deckard is driving and finds a toad; elated, he runs home to his wife who promptly tells him it is an android. I guess it just reinforces the whole lack of true distinction between androids and humans. In the end, when thinking about all the killing he did, Deckard says,

“Mercer said it was wrong but I should do it anyhow. Really weird. Sometimes it’s better to do something wrong than right.”

I think this line encapsulates the dilemma which makes us human: empathy and whether or not what we are doing is right or wrong. This book is kind of abstract but it makes me a little scared about how I might be losing my own humanity and empathy, and how I see society losing its empathy towards others as well. I think that with the advancements in AI, the whole android-human-rights debate thing will become prevalent in the next century at least. Just recently, Google started an ethics board to guide it’s AI development. AI is beginning to take over our world--with self-driving cars, rovers in outer space and Sophia the robot, we need to start talking about our relationship with technology and how far we truly want to proceed. It truly is crazy that we live in an age when a lot of science fiction is actually starting to become a reality.

#aplit19readingthework

reading the work #4

lil fun fact: this book was written in California, specifically San Francisco, and I was reading it while I was there! It was cool because as the author mentioned certain streets and created visuals, I could literally see them from my apartment.

back to the book, which has me. irritated. as. hell. basically the main character Deckard is now with this other bounty hunter, Phil, who has no empathy and can kill w/o a second thought. Deckard is coming to this revelation that this could be him in the future and then Phil suggests that the reason he has trouble killing is because he is attracted to female androids. The events that late transpire between Deckard and a female android, Rachael, remind me heavily of films such as Her and Ex Machina. It just really kind of sucks that Rachael in the novel existed as a character for Deckards fulfillment. I wish there was more from the perspective of her, or any other androids, or even other women. Also, there are so many weird robot women fantasy tropes that exist in science fiction (but I guess similar exist in every other genre as well). Phillip K. Dick’s writing is very interesting. It’s sort of choppy but it really feels like you’re in the heads of the characters and the way they/people usually experience things; you think about it suddenly, briefly.

Something i’m confused about is in regards to Mercerism—the main religion for people on Earth. Basically they uncover it to be this huge scam and basically William Mercer wasn’t real—just an actor who recorded clips. I wonder if the author is trying to remark on the concept of religion and it’s validity. On the other hand, it is this entity that people merge with which allow them to be more empathetic—more human. A lot of the writing and thoughts in the novel are all over the place but I kind of like this aspect because it makes the reader draw his or her own conclusions. It’s pretty deceptive though; you’d think at first glance that the book wouldn’t be so difficult to read but it’s the content which really makes you think.

#aplit19readingthework

reading the work #3

Something I’ve noticed so far is that there aren’t many female characters (I’ve counted about three) and none who haven’t been sexualized yet. I guess that’s just something to think about ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I’ve been trying to research the tech that’s been mentioned in the novel thus far to see whether or not it exists today and the amount that does is surprising. With AI advancements, who knows how long it’ll actually be before androids evolve and the themes of this book become reality (hint hint terminator). A tech advancement I did not know about is the research that’s being done to artificially alter our moods through a machine similar to the novel. Also, Elon Musk is trying to connect our brains to computers...but who knows really. I guess it makes me wonder what truly would distinguish us from these robots as we become reliant on technology to think and make our decisions for us.

I read another article which compares Deckard and the androids to the black lives movement of today.

“Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? seems truer to our blander, bleaker present, in which a clockwork bureaucracy blandly declares that certain lives are worthless, that only a chosen few people are worthy of protection, and that equality under the law would somehow hold the nation back. The central insight of Black Lives Matter is that the state is programmed for petty hatred and genocidal violence, and that bystanders’ apathy or resignation constantly gets in the way of lasting change”

These lines from the article particularly stand out to me because I just how true they rang. Furthermore, something I never truly realized was the different characters’ perspectives regarding the androids. Rick Deckard regards androids as lesser (feeding into the police brutality metaphor) while J.R. Isidore mostly regards the androids as equals. Since the book is from a third person omniscient point of view, it is mostly up to the readers to decide how they feel about the androids. Thus, the author is never truly conclusive about whether or not the androids are bad and whether or not they deserve to be killed. Again, something to really think about.

#aplit19readingthework

reading the work #2

Rick Deckard, one of the main characters, is a bounty hunter (although also a member of the police?) who is tasked with killing androids who’ve escaped Mars and made their way to Earth. My question becomes: why? Apparently, it’s because the self-aware robots pose a threat to society, but in my opinion, most of the androids encountered by Deckard seem to be harmless and trying to live normal lives.

There’s this religion that a lot of people on Earth follow called Mercerism. Basically, people use a special Empathy Box in order to fuse with their leader, William Mercer, and in doing so they learn about empathy somehow? idk I’m still confused about it. Although, Deckard doesn’t seem to be very empathetic. He kills to make money in order to buy himself a real animal--considered to be status symbols since most animals are extinct. I feel like Deckard somewhat exemplifies the concept of the anti-hero, or at least my understanding of the concept because he’s doing what is deemed the “right thing” by his society, even though his own morals are a bit convoluted. On the flip side, there is a character, J.R. Isidore, who seems to be very empathetic. He is labeled as part of the dumbest, most useless members of society--except he seems to be the most empathetic character. I haven’t yet figured out what the author is trying to say about society and all that, but this is what I’ve figured out so far.

Another interesting aspect is the way in which androids are detected: empathy tests. These tests bring into perspective who actually should be considered the android since Deckard himself lacks so much empathy.

#aplit19readingthework

(finally) reading the work #1

I’ll be honest. I’ve literally read the first two chapters of my book like 4 times because every time I take a break I don’t understand what’s happening and then I have to reread everything all over again. this being said, things are beginning to make more sense as I continue reading.

this book is set in a dystopian future and is kind of scary because it seems like a very possible reality. basically, most people on earth have left and emigrated to Mars, on account of a war which left the earth mostly inhabitable. those who’ve stayed live a pretty dismal life, including the use of a machine to dial in synthetic emotions to make them feel happy. TBH it’s like Wall-E but on drugs.

I’m sensing themes of humanity, loneliness, and lots of questions about morality. The author utilizes a ton of imagery which is really neat but he also uses a ton of strange words to relate to concepts which aren’t really understood until they are developed later on in the novel. this means that I have to be patient when I read and I’m kind of not very good at that lol.

#aplit19readingthework

selecting the work

Choosing which book to read was rather, um, ᵈᶦᶠᶠᶦᶜᵘˡᵗ to say the least. I wanted to choose a book that was not only set in a dystopian future but was also 𝓯𝓮𝓶𝓪𝓵𝓮-𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓬, which proved to have its challenges.

I pondered over lists of lists dystopian works and unfortunately, most of the ones I was interested in were written fairly recently and thus did not have much criticism to them. The most prominent author I could find was Margaret Atwood, and while I greatly enjoyed The Handmaid’s Tale, I wanted to broaden my literary prowess. I found another book, The Girl Who Was Plugged In, written by a female under a male pseudonym. Since this book was written a long time ago, I assumed it would have much scholarship but sadly, it did not. Unfortunately, while I was drawn to other female dystopian novels, there weren’t many whose scholarship was high and whose plots piqued my interest enough for me to be dedicated to them over the next several months.

I also looked over lists of science fiction novels. In the end, I chose Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick. I found it to have a pretty interesting plot, and I really like the types of questions that novels set in dystopian futures usually present. I won’t lie, I definitely read the reviews before choosing this novel, because if I’m going to be working on this book over the next several months, it’s going to have to be a book that I won’t get bored of. There is also a fair amount of scholarly criticism online, in addition to inspiring the movies, Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049, which contain their own scholarship as well. I think these additional resources will greatly aid in my research report. I’d love to explore the relationship between the book and its adaptations because I feel like visual works often prompt a different viewpoint and understanding. I read online that the author also gave somewhat of his approval on the screenplay of the first Blade Runner before he died, and that makes me trust the movie as an additional source a little more.

#aplit19choose

Magnetic Fields

Where am I going?

Do I seek the beyond or

Something familiar?

Magnetizing;

They pull me in

deeper and

deeper

But I must escape their field.

Polar opposites;

We aren’t meant to be together.

Still, I am comforted

In their embrace. Like a compass

They point.

Telling me where

I must

go.

But, I, too

Know my

direction

#aplit #poetry

simrankhurana

Mother Earth

Learn from our mother Earth

From her storms,

And from her calms.

Hear her rage,

as we have caused it,

but feel her love and protection,

for her motherly instincts will not fade

despite our destructive behavior.

We build her up, and we break her down.

we burn her, we poison her,

even though we need her.

Our mother earth endures the anguish,

for she loves us in the way

the sun loves the moon

and the stars love each other.

There are many keen men in this world,

men with plenty to preach.

But our mother earth,

she is the wisest of all.

She has stayed quiet while

watching, hearing, and feeling us

for billions of years.

The poetry of mother earth is never dead,

we just need to listen.

(via simrankhurana)

Rebel without a Cause vs Perks of Being a Wallflower

so... I would say that RWAC is pretty unrepresentative of teens today. I’ve never really met anyone who’s gotten in a knife fight or gone on a chickie run. That being said, a lot of the movie had to do with underlying struggles of identity and family which I think has been a universally shared teen conflict. On the other hand, POBAW deals a lot with similar issues such as trying to fit in and family conflict but diverges and moves to other issues such as depression, abuse, and suicide.

In terms of characters, the ones in RWAC pretty much looked like adults and while they made some pretty dumb teen decisions, they had this aura of adultness to them like they were kids stuck in the body of a grownup and forced to be adults. With POBAW, the teens did a lot more typical teenager things, and when they made mistakes they were more understandable and believable. I think the whole concept of rebellion in RWAC was pretty outright and physical- guns, fighting, etc. A lot of pieces of fiction in this time dealt with rebellion in this way too, like the Outsides. In POBAW the rebellion was somewhat physical (like when Charlie does drugs) but also varied across all the characters in ways that wouldn’t necessarily be outright, like how Sam has short hair, defying the idea that pretty girls need long hair and how Charlie is studious yet fun and open, defying the notion that people can only belong in certain categories. A lot of teen movies today take this kind of attitude.

I believe that the speaker of Rebel Without a Cause must’ve been an adult trying to appeal to teens because often times, movie writers are adults. I don’t really know what it was like for teens at this time and none of my family grew up here so they don’t really know either, so I can’t really speak to how realistic this movie actually is. I feel like the purpose of this movie might’ve been more for entertainment rather than to give teenagers a voice. With POBAW, I believe that the speaker was also an adult but the audience was teens and adults alike, with a purpose to give teens a sense of comfort in their adolescence but to show adults how it can sometimes feel in this day and age.

When speaking to my parents about teen rebellion, they really didn’t have much to say. In India, there wasn’t really much rebellion and a lot of their perceptions of American teens were based on movies that they only realized were fake after coming to America.

#aplang18movienight

do u SEE what i mean?

glasses, right.

Gotta love these round, concave pieces of glass I wear on my face that prevent me from slamming into door frames (even though I do anyway).

But, really though, glasses are quite a unique invention. Yes, everything comes from something and the modern glasses we have today are no exception. Glasses themselves come from a weird history of using bones and precious stones to block the sun’s rays, but the first pair of corrective lenses was actually inspired by looking through a fishbowl. The concept of glasses and the invention itself are actually quite original, though. Why else would someone decide to carve into a piece of glass and affix them to their face? Other than refinements and improvements in technique and precision, glasses have remained a relatively unchanged invention at their base.

It’s interesting to see the types of impacts glasses have had over the years. Glasses are unique in that they are both a corrective necessity and a fashion statement. Imagine whole stores dedicated to picking out the cutest headgear. That’s right, you can’t. On top of that, glasses have led to a specific medical field: optometry. They are a unique blend of science, aesthetics, and practicality.

On top of this, glasses have also had a significant social impact. Glasses can be seen as a sign of “intelligence” even though we know that vision problems can be caused by hereditary factors as well. In pop culture, glasses can signify “nerdiness” or be used to denote ugly characters before their transformation. We’ve created glasses in thousands of shapes, sizes, and colors. Glasses are even sold without prescriptions as fashion accessories.

Lastly, glasses have inspired a “spin-off”: contacts. While contacts are pretty similar to glasses, you can’t really make a bold statement and sometimes if you aren’t careful around heat you can melt your contact to your eyeball.

All in all, glasses are an important object to society which I feel contain misleading connotations. We use them for fashion, to see, to appear more intelligent. We need special people to tell us how blind we are and prescribe us the correct number at which our glasses should be shaped. We need special people to just make glasses. Glasses are an entire business in and of themselves. After all, where would we be without glasses?

#aplang18remix #thishasbeeninmydraftsforahotsecond

By studying the natural effects of a large volcanic eruption, scientists could learn about how we might deliberately cool the planet in the future.

okay, so I just came across this really interesting article that was published recently, and what’s really cool about it, is the interaction between humans and natural events. Volcano eruptions cause the Earth to cool down, so scientists think that by spraying certain chemicals into the environment we can simulate this effect. This type of engineering, known as geoengineering, is super fascinating and furthers the idea that we should keep studying the natural world in order to better ours

#aplang18secondary

the nature of humanity

Human nature is a funny thing. The very concept of “human” and “nature” being used together is a funny concept too, because, as humans, we tend to destroy nature. No, this isn’t some 21st-century propaganda, it is fact. From the moment we began to spread, to seek out new lands and conquer new areas we began the extinction of countless species. And it’s ironic that for the amount of effort and time we are putting into saving individual species by putting them into reserves and finding ways to repopulate them, it is almost human nature to expand and then destroy.

Humans have even found ways to alienate themselves from the *possible* extinction of one of our ancestors. The way we portray the Neanderthals as stupid and slow creatures when in reality they were much smarter and more alike to us shows how we are trying to distance ourselves from the idea of causing their extinction, and therefore, distancing ourselves from the laws of nature. It all sounds a little far-fetched, but why is it that we cannot accept the blame? we always try to find answers and excuses as to why we aren’t in the wrong, but why not understand our faults and work harder to fix them?

But, could it be that we’re next in the extinction line? There is nothing evolutionary that can prepare us for the unexpected nor can we rely on previous data to prevent what we don’t know.

All of this, the sixth extinction, or human-caused extinction, is vital to understanding the world we live in because we very well may be causing our own demise by fulfilling a desire that is so fundamentally human:

Curiosity.

#aplang18reading

Biodi(e)versity

If you’ve ever thought about the north pole, you’d probably imagine a white, icy, barren landscape. Now, think about the Amazon rainforest. You’re probably seeing tons of animals and myriad of flora and fauna.

This pattern is referred to as the “latitudinal diversity gradient” or LDG. It was noted by the naturalist, Alexander von Humboldt. It’s kind of funny because the book I picked before this one was all about the life of Humboldt and his influence, and look where he popped up. But LDG basically means that the closer you get to the equator the more types of plants, animals, etc. you’ll find. Nobody really knows why this is the case though. Biodiversity is an important facet of the survival of the planet. Kolbert has made that clear throughout the book. What’s particularly scary is how humans have impacted the biodiversity around the planet in ways we don’t even understand. Millions of years ago, in the age of Pangea, animals spread across this huge landmass without natural barriers like oceans to stop them. Not only animals roamed but bacteria, fungi, and even plants could travel as well.

As humans spread around the world, and into areas that were thought of as “isolated”, they brought diseases and animals that have greatly reduced the biodiversity of certain regions.

Kolbert refers to the interconnectedness caused by humans as the “New Pangea.”

All the time we refer to certain animals as “invasive species” but in reality, we are the most invasive of all. When we cut down forests to make more space we essentially force other animals to evolve into being able to survive without space. When we build new condos, shopping malls, car dealerships, it is at expense of the animals and plants who live there. This cycle is ultimately going to harm us, and without taking preemptive measures we can only hope that our demise doesn’t come as soon as we think.

#aplang18reading

is it an animal? a vegetable? a mineral? no! it’s coral!

ah yes corals, the ocean’s very own rainforests.

teeming with hundreds of species, corals could be considered ecosystems on their own. Not only do they provide housing for species, but they are also alive! Some species of coral photosynthesize their own food, while others catch theirs. The animals they attract are also food for other animals, so it’s pretty obvious how valuable corals are to ocean life.

Corals “grow” through calcification in the water. With a myriad of problems nowadays, such as the warming of the oceans and the acidification of the oceans, corals are having a pretty hard time growing and surviving. One particular problem corals face is coral bleaching. Between 2016 and 2017 it is estimated that around half of the corals in the Great Barrier Reef were hit and killed by this very serious problem. As the article states, the window to save Great Barrier Reefs is rapidly closing, which is a very serious deal. Imagine coming home to your apartment only to find that it has been bulldozed. For a lot of species, it'd be pretty much like that.

Plus, would you rather have the ocean look like this

or like this

THIS???

or this >:(

I rest my case.

But in all seriousness, this really connects to my last post and how we need to save marine life. One of the ways we can do that is by lessening our carbon footprint. Even the smallest actions can snowball into huge effects. I found this article about the carbon footprint of buying a sandwich and it shows how even a small action such as bringing your own lunch from home can have a better impact on the planet. Not only that but making meals at home is a lot healthier than eating out at a fast food restaurant, despite the convenience of the latter. It’s kinda messed up how the world works. It’s cheaper to buy packaged and processed food than to make it yourself just how it is cheaper at first to buy an electric car than a gasoline powered one (although studies have shown that in the long run, it is actually less expensive). I can’t really blame people for trying to save their money but the whole system is just so unfair.

#aplang18reading #aplang18secondary

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

meher!