En Route to Ireland

If you know me, you know I love to travel. It doesn't matter where--I've visited large cities, hiked in many National Parks, road-tripped across eastern United States, and more. To me, there is always something special to experience, whether it be a location's culture, nature, food, sights, or a mix of these elements.

I love to travel, regardless of the destination

International travel, in particular, thrills me. There's a beauty in understanding and accepting cultures beyond my own, whether it be celebrating my Chinese roots of speaking French with natives. So, I'm excited to say that my travels abroad will continue this summer as I study abroad at University College Dublin (UCD) in Dublin, Ireland.

I am absolutely thrilled! The history of Ireland has always fascinated me, especially now with the British exit from the European Union beginning to solidify. It potentially creates issues between the Northern Ireland-Ireland border, which in the past has resulted in violent confrontations. It'll be interesting to see how the effects of the exit reverberate throughout Ireland in my time there.

The beautiful University College Dublin

Of course, with great excitement also comes some nerves. It will be the first time in my life I've lived for an extended period of time abroad. I will surrounded by an unfamiliar culture, language, and people.

Many of my initial questions--What will I eat? What's the weather like in the summer?--were answered with a quick internet search, but there are also some more nuanced cultural aspects, such as the use of slang, the vast influence of the Irish language on the country (for instance, their prime minister is known as the Taoiseach, which translates to "chief" in English), and the intricacies of the different local and national train and bus systems. All of these are unfamiliar, yet I'm excited to learn about them.

Boxty, or traditional Irish potato pancakes

My good friend Sanjana, who's also going on the trip, has already met with me for brunch to discuss our plans in our six weeks in the country. We took the opportunity to get to know the basic geography of Ireland and to find potential travel destinations. We're excited to visit famous landmarks throughout Dublin, including the Book of Kells in Trinity College, the famed Grafton Street, St. Patrick's Castle, and more.

Grafton Street, Dublin

Outside of Dublin, we're hoping to visit the Cliffs of Moher and Galway to the west, Killarney National Park to the southwest, and Wicklow Mountains National Park just south of Dublin. As an avid runner, hiker, and big-city enthusiast, it'll be the perfect mix of stunning nature and large cities.

The picturesque Cliffs of Moher

Because I will be living there for six weeks, I want to dig deeper than usual tourist destinations and understand where natives come from in terms of geography, language, food, and more. These aspects are the most fascinating parts of traveling to a foreign country. To immerse myself in some of the culture, I plan to learn Irish step dancing and work with other Irish students at UCD. Additionally, with roadside cafes becoming increasingly common in Dublin, I look forward to sitting down with a cup of strong tea, a local newspaper, and potentially a chat with a local.

Tea with Irish soda bread

Overall, despite my nerves, I'm really looking forward to my study abroad experience. I know it will be a great chance to experience a new culture, meet new people, and see some stunning scenery. -MC

Mao and Me

     Growing up, the extent of my knowledge of Chinese history came from my grandmother. My six-year-old self would often sit on her lap as she told me the horrific deeds of the xiao ri ben (which translates directly to "small Japanese" but is used colloquially as an insult to the Japanese people as a whole). She described in gory detail how the xiao ri ben invaded China like unwelcome pests, burning down villages and raping women before killing them. Well, she censored out the latter part, but still her intent was clear -- the Japanese were trouble. Looking back, her hatred for the country and its people makes sense; she grew up in the 1940's and still recalled the lasting effects of the Nanjing Massacre. Little did I know that my grandmother was telling me tales of the Second Sino-Japanese War, in which Mao Zedong played a major role.

The Nanjing Massacre resulted in the deaths of over 200,000 Chinese

     Mao was always a vague, distant idea for me growing up. Yes, I knew he had something to do with the rise of communism in China during the Second World War, but he was largely just that creepy portrait in Tienanmen Square I saw when I visited Beijing in 2009. Though I didn't fully grasp the Chairman's significance, I could have sworn his eyes followed me around the plaza.

Mao is always watching. The text translates roughly to "Long live the People's Republic of China".

     Born and raised in the US, I've always associated "communist" with "evil", so I was surprised to find after doing some research that Mao was actually a significant leader in the Second World War. He allied with Chiang Kai-shek of the Kuomintang (who I originally viewed with more sympathy because he was not a communist) to drive out the Japanese with the help of guerrilla tactics and the United States' aid.
     So an ally of the US must be good, right? Not quite. Following Japan's surrender to the Allies on September 2, 1945, Mao's Chinese Communist Party and Kai-shek's Kuomintang clashed, beginning the second portion of China's civil war (the first, 1927-1937, was interrupted by WWII). After an additional four years of war, Mao came out on top and created the People's Republic of China, forming the communist state we know today.
     Overall, Mao's impact on China and the world is morally questionable. Yes, he improved the status of women and education standards in China; he increased life expectancy and modernized the nation. Yet, his 1960's Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution policies were massive failures. The former led to more than 45 million deaths. The latter was responsible for the Down to the Countryside Movement, in which Mao displaced 17 million "fortunate" youth to the rural countryside to experience a more "rustic" life. The work in the countryside was notorious for its unforgiving nature; my eldest aunt, who farmed from dawn until dusk, often went sleep hungry.

Chinese propaganda for the Great Leap Forward.

     So, Mao contributed to the end of Japanese occupation of China, thus rendering my grandmother free from the xiao ri ben's grasp, but his actions nearly caused the starvation of my aunt.
    In the end, much like everyone else on this earth, Mao was neither wholly good or evil, black or white. I leave it up to you to decide. After all, Mao and me, we've got a complicated relationship. -MC

Use the Force, Alice

It's good to be back.
     Recently in 12AP, we read Hermann Hesse's Siddhartha, which traces a young man's journey to enlightenment. Along the way, he encounters plenty of obstacles -- some intrinsic, others a result of circumstance -- not unlike the main hero of 1977's Star Wars, Luke Skywalker. In fact, upon closer scrutiny, it's surprising just how many parallels the two works have.

     Most notably: life. In the former work, the river is the symbol of life. It is the "yearning voice" of life itself, fraught with "pleasure and sorrow... laughing and lamenting".  The latter half of the novel is largely Siddhartha learning to embrace the river's wisdom, which culminates when he hears the river's laughter and restrains himself from foolishly pursuing his son. He listens, so the river guides.

The river guides Siddhartha towards enlightenment and therefore peace.

     In Star Wars, the life force is literally called the Force, which is unconstrained by time and binds together all living objects. Much like Siddhartha, Luke's journey throughout the film serves to attune his senses to the Force and allowing it to flow through him and guide his actions. At the end of the film, his character growth is demonstrated when, at the urging of his mentor Obi-Wan, he abandons his ship's target system and instead utilizes the Force to aim and eventually destroy the Empire's Death Star.

Luke hears the voice of his mentor, Obi-Wan Kenobi

     The two works differ, however, in their use of female characters. (I'd also like to point out that neither passes the Bechdel test. That is, neither have multiple female characters, let alone female characters who talk to each other.) Siddhartha's female character, Kamala is used as a femme fatale; she is beautiful, with lips like a "freshly-cut fig", and her attractiveness prompts Siddhartha to change. He obtains a job to earn money, clothes, and presents, all of which Kamala desires in a mate.

Mata Hari, the quintessential femme fatale.

     On the contrary, Princess Leia is a stark contrast from the traditional princess archetype. Though she does get saved by a knight in shining armor (or in this case, Stormtrooper gear), it is her wit that shines through. She jabs her rescuers -- "Can someone get this walking carpet out of my way?" -- and she certainly doesn't care how others may view her. Frankly, she doesn't need to because she is also the leader of the Rebel Alliance. Now, that is not to say she is above civility, but rather that she has gained the respect of her peers to throw off the frivolous, conventional giggles and sighs of female characters.

     Yes, it's typical of me to turn this into a post on feminism, but it's important to note the cultural impact of both works. Hesse brought traditional Hindu and Buddhist values to the west whereas Star Wars began an era of unconventional female characters. Regardless, I greatly enjoyed both. -MC

The Orange Contagion

It's frightening how fast our world has become filled with intolerance and ignorance. We may not have an oppressive Big Brother constantly peering over our shoulders and censoring our information, but we still wreck havoc just fine all by ourselves. 
     Today, over six hundred cities across the world are participating in the March for Science. They are marching to celebrate science and to call for scientific evidence-based governmental policies. Science was founded to prove facts, and it is not something that can be denied once proven again and again. As such, global warming is real, and vaccinations save lives. The evidence behind these facts are indisputable, yet somehow they have become "alternative facts" that some choose to ignore.
     This is merely one example of ignorance, but it's safe to say that in our present day world, ignorance breeds conflict (both political and physical), not bliss.
     The fact that the President of the United States is a strong stander against global warming and has questioned the validity of vaccinations shows just how far ignorance has diffused into our society, and it's horrifying. That's not to mention his strong views on anti-immigration and blatant racism against Muslims, who he wrongly accuses to all be terrorists.
     Unfortunately, such extremist views have been spreading rapidly from the U.S. to other countries in the five months that Donald Trump, the orange man, has been our president. I've given this phenomenon a fitting name - the Orange Contagion.
The increasing popularity of France's far right-wing party, le Front National, or the National Front, only confirms my fear of the contagion.
     Marine le Pen is the head of the party, France's very own Trump. Not unlike her American equivalent, le Pen is advocating to ban the hijab in public places, stating that they are too "conspicuous" to be allowed. As if that wasn't bad enough, she has also asserted that France was not responsible for the war-time round-up of Jews, even though the French police rounded up about 13,000 Jews, most of whom were later deported to Auschwitz.
     Unfortunately, it seems we have brought this upon ourselves. We, as the American people, advocated for Trump long and hard enough so that he became a viable candidate, then proceeded to become president. France is faced with a similar decision, with the first round of their elections taking place tomorrow.
     These two people are armed with the weapon of fear, especially the fear of terrorism. While this is not an unfounded concern, the focus on banning religious expression and immigration only diverts attention away from the true issues. Thus, we have been "drowned in a sea of irrelevance" (Postman).
 It seems our government has no need of concealing information, as Big Brother infamously did in 1984. After all, even when the facts are presented to us, we stubbornly stick our fingers in our ears and call it a day. -MC

God bless America...

...and vive la France

For more information on the French election, watch John Oliver's latest video:
https://youtu.be/hkZir1L7fSY

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/10/marine-le-pen-doesnt-deny-that-french-jews-were-handed-over-to-nazis-but-she-claims-france-is-not-to-blame/?utm_term=.67c275f4667f

A Field of Verbal IEDs

     Recently, in a Times article I read, the author discusses how her college-aged daughter has now been converted to the side of P.C. language. Words such as "microagressions" and "cisgender" have now become a part of her daughter's vocabulary. So, one wrong mix up of gender pronouns or incorrect nomenclature earns her a dagger-like stare or groans of pity from her daughter. As a result, her house has become a field of "verbal IEDs", where she must always watch where she steps (or, in this case, speaks).
     Our nation has become much like this author's house. In our case, however, the battle is between political parties, and their weapons are P.C. phrases.
     This is not to say that all P.C. language is bad; Its intentions to eliminate bias on the basis of race, religion, or gender are admirable. But, merely altering semantics is not enough to sew shut the ever-expanding chasm that has split the nation.
     Virtually no difference exists between "abuse vs. torture" and genital mutilation vs. genital cutting"; They are all abhorrent (Okrent 771). These phrases are synonymous, and the minute differences in connotation are only the result of politically fueled battle. They waste time and distract from the real issues. Ultimately, if we can't agree on semantics, we should at least agree to disagree. -MC

Their points are one and the same.

Survival Town

Setting: Survival Town, Nevada. Sixty miles north of Las Vegas
Date: May 5, 1955
     It was a clear, early morning. Looking out, it seemed like a perfect town; Tidy houses and electrical substations were visible and homes' pantries were well-stocked with typical canned and packaged foods, like any other American home. But there was no bustling of breakfast being prepared, no yawns of children rising for school, no purr of automobile engines. In fact, there was no sound at all. The residents had been petrified, although not from fear. They were mannequins.
     Survival Town was built by the United States government in order to evaluate explosions' effects on people and buildings. It was a part of the covert Operation Teapot, which aimed to establish an effective strategic method of dispensing deadly A-bombs.

A mannequin before...

...and after. He would've been burned alive

Mannequins were dressed like people and placed in varying areas of exposure - outside, inside, in a vehicle, and so on. If the clothes were burned by the blast, it meant that a human would have been burned alive. The bomb, named Apple-2, was dropped shortly thereafter.

     Though it is apparent today that these tests caused cancer and distress to those living near the sites, they were deemed necessary at the time to "fight the Communists". The fear of hostile takeover by the Russians only fueled the "rampant...McCarthyism" (Williams 929), which began when Senator Joseph McCarthy ran around the government accusing various officials of being "loyalty risks" to national security.

     This was in a time where the Atomic Energy Commission assured nearby residents that radiation levels were "only slightly more than normal radiation which you experience day in and day out wherever you may live". Dead sheep were a common sight, and the rabbits fled.
     So, consider this: The Cold War wound up not requiring nuclear weapons (or, for the most part, violence), so why do we insist upon keeping a multi-billion dollar stockpile today? What are we so afraid of? -MC

Sources:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/sep/21/building-the-atom-bomb-the-full-story-of-the-nevada-test-site
http://time.com/3675016/nevada-a-bomb-test/
http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/joseph-mccarthy

The Unmarked Hijab

Disclaimer: I've incorporated my own political views into this post. It is not my intention to offend anyone, and I apologize if I will.
     As I read Deborah Tannen's "There is No Unmarked Woman" the other day, alarm bells went off in my head. They were screaming "Donald Trump" like bloody murder. Truly, as Tannen went on to describe how she "considered the clothes of each woman" she saw and paid no mind to the style of each man, I immediately though about our great President's unequal treatment of the sexes (Tannen 552). He is the type to peg Tannen as a "male-bash[er]" when she states that men, unlike women, have the option of going about their day unmarked and are not viewed as objects of affection or targets of sexual impulses.
     Really, though, I think being "marked" versus "unmarked" is dependent largely on your own perspective. I'm not saying this applies in every case - after all, I don't think the misogynist President will ever cease to judge women by how "tight or revealing" their clothes are - but this is especially true for hijabi women, who are followers of Islam.
     In American society, hijabs are sometimes seen as a symbol of oppression; Why should these young women be forced to cover themselves up? They are occasionally marked as ignorant followers of religion without the ability of free thought. In fact, in extremists' views, the hijab poses a danger to America. It is a reminder to them that all terrorists are Muslim (which, of course, is false). Thus, hijabi women are marked even more deeply. 
     However, in many cases, hijabi women feel as though the hijab completes them. It frees them from the burden of our society's obsession with physical appearances. In that sense, it renders them unmarked. They are able to remain modest and to be viewed for their intellect rather than physicality. 
     These women have the right wear their hijabs proudly and to be unmarked in their own way, a point enforced during the Women's March in Washington D.C. on January 21, 2017.

Protesters at the Women's March

It is not the hijab that marks them, but rather society's ever-negative view. -MC

P.S. If you need a pick-me-up, just watch this video, titled in French "Hijabs for All: The March for Women". It depicts two Muslim women helping pin American flag hijabs to other supporters of rights. The moment at the 32 second mark is particularly heartwarming.