Creating Yourself

"Life isn't about finding yourself, it's about creating yourself."

George Bernard Shaw

For what I hope is an obvious reason, this quote made me think a lot about the creativity aspect of our class, but also about a blog post I wrote earlier this year. In this previous post, I considered the idea that education stifles creativity, that we lose creative ability because it is not actively used during school. However, this quote made me reconsider the idea all together. Maybe it's not so much that we've lost it, just that we mask it- call it something else- and forget that we have the ability to use it.

When I was younger, I was taught in school that being creative is a way to distinguish and set yourself apart from others. In terms of school, this meant thinking outside the box and coming up with individual ideas and projects. But by time I had reached seventh or eighth grade, this creative way of thinking wasn't valued so highly, and success in school was focused more on the output rather than the path taken to get there. In my previous blog post, this is what led me to believe that schooling forces us to lose our ability to be creative. However, I failed to realize that creativity is necessary beyond a schooling environment and that it is the fundamental of individuality.

The quote by George Bernard Shaw says that "life is not about finding yourself." "Finding yourself" implies that who you are yet to become already exists, you just have to look for it. Like George Bernard Shaw, I would argue that this is inaccurate because you do not already exist, not until you create who you want to be. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I was wrong in my other blog post. We can't lose our ability to be creative because we use it all the time. We are creativity in it's purest form.

In my personal opinion, our American Studies reflects life in the sense that neither are possible without creativity. What do you think about this quote? Is creativity a fundamental of life, or does it just a skill that has the ability to be lost?

The Little Engine That Could

One of the books I remember from my childhood is The Little Engine That Could. In this book, a little steam engine is too small to carry herself and the rest of her train cars up the hill. So she leaves the cars at the bottom and goes to search for help. She eventually finds another young steam engine that is willing to help her and together, the two engines return to the bottom of the hill and begin to pull. Slowly, the other cars start to move. As motivation, they chant "I-think-I-can, I-think-I-can" until they reach the top of the mountain, where the little steam engine says thank you and sings "I-thought-I-could, I-thought-I-could" as she continues with her journey.

The phrase "I think I can" holds a lot of meaning. The train believed in her ability to find a way to get her cars up the hill, and her self-motivation and determination allowed her to find a solution to the problem. At a young age, children that read this book learn that it is not a weakness to ask others for help, but most importantly that if you think you can do something, you can.

The Hunger Games

The other day in class we talked about how advertisements use and exploit children to get certain results from the viewer. Prior to this, however, we talked a lot about civil liberties and human rights. I recently read a book called The Hunger Games that relates and parallels to both of these units. This book takes place in a future society that has evolved from America, and a society in which the government has ultimate control over the country (the majority of the people in this society have lost all simple liberties and are extremely unhappy). This is one view of how repression of civil liberties could be taken to the extreme in the future, to the point where citizens are at complete mercy of governmental control. It directly addresses the government's ability to repress civil liberties during times of peril, but also how this repression can continue beyond the perilous time. Here is a passage:

"Just as the town clock strikes two, the mayor steps up to the podium and begins to read. It's the same story every year. He tells of the history of Panem, the country that rose up out of the ashes of a place that was once called North America. He lists the disasters, the droughts, the storms, the fires, the encroaching seas that swallowed up so much of the land, the brutal war for what little sustenance remained. The result was Panem, a shining Capitol ringed by thirteen districts, which brought peace and prosperity to its citizens. Then came the Dark Days, the uprising of the districts against the Capitol. Twelve were defeated, the thirteenth obliterated. The Treaty of Treason gave us the new laws to guarantee peace and, as our yearly reminder that the Dark Days must never be repeated, it gave us the Hunger Games.

The rules of the Hunger Games are simple. In punishment for the uprising, each of the twelve districts must provide one girl and one boy, called tributes, to participate. The twenty-four tributes will be imprisoned in a vast outdoor arena that could hold anything from a burning desert to a frozen wasteland. Over a period of several weeks, the competitors must fight to death. The last tribute standing wins.

Taking the kids from our districts, forcing them to kill one another while we watch -- this is the Capitol's way of reminding us how totally we are at their mercy. How little chance we would stand of surviving another rebellion. Whatever words they use, the real message is clear. 'Look how we take your children and sacrifice them and there's nothing you can do. If you lift a finger, we will destroy every last one of you. Just as we did in District Thirteen'" (19-20).

In this situation, the government exploits children in order to maintain power over the people and ensure that another uprising does not occur. Based on what we have discussed in class, why do you think The Capitol has chosen to use children? Also, at what point do the people of a country become at the mercy of their government? When does the government's focus shift from protecting the people to protecting the government's power?

A Silver Lining

I recently read an article called In Recession, Americans Doing More, Buying Less. This article emphasized an upside to the current American economy, stressing that economic turmoil allows individuals and families to separate necessities from excess, and recognize that experiential activities trump material possessions.

This article emphasizes that people today are letting the recession influence their lives in a positive way instead of a negative way, embracing simple but often overlooked activities like going to museums and the park with their family. One man in particular, Mr. Moyota (an artist and freelance art director in advertising), is "trying to teach kids that you don’t need to have expensive toys to have fun... You can make it fun, from anything.” I think that this is an important fundemental that has been overlooked in recent times, in part due to the focus shift of advertising we have been talking about in class. Material possessions- for both adults and children- may play a factor in happiness, but in no way create happiness. They are catalysts that lead to easier lifestyles, but not always better lifestyles.

I can reflect on my own life and say that I, too, am victim to this. I take so many aspects of my life for granted and am unable to appreciate them for all they are worth. Although the economy has not affected me in a major way, I have had other experiences that have taught me to embrace what I have instead of mourning what I don't have or used to have. I think this is the lesson that the recession has taught so many Americans. They have realized that money is important, but the things it can buy are not necessary. There are countless activities you can do for free, and many people are noticing without an abundance of money, these activities can be more rewarding than expected.

The recession has forced Americans to understand the power of money, but also how this power influences their experiences, priorities, and happiness. In this respect, the cloud does have a silver lining. But why is it that a negative event- such as a poor economy- is necessary for people to see the positive aspects in their lives? Why can we not see how good we have it until it's threatened or lost?