After listening to Iris Chang (author of The Rape of Nanking and Chinese in America) as well as discussing her approach to presenting her studies and work in our class discussion, I noticed a change in my own outlook. While I was sitting in the conference room listening to her describe the great "atrocities" and her comparisons to other tragic historical events, all I could think of was the emotional aspect of those occurrences. She seems reasonable in the way she identified "Power" as being the source of these wrongdoings in Nanking and on our own soil in the past. She mentioned that genocide -- and I assume she meant to include other acts against humanity -- tend to occur in three stages: (1)economic depression, (2)political dictatorship/instability (in which they take advantage of the bad economy as a reason for change), and (3) ethnic scapegoating. She supported her stance well with evidence from different historical events (Turkey, Japan, Germany). She made democracy sound very commendable and praiseworthy since it offered the opportunity for citizens to (1)bear witness (educate the public; accumulate evidence to hold government officials accountable), (2)direct intervention (i.e., the westerners in Nanking who establish the Int'l Safety Zone), and (3)passive resistance ~ civil disobedience (the power of incction to promote social change; i.e. MLK, Ghandi). And although she seemed to suggest that a democracy would save us from power-hungry government officials, I couldn't help but think about the war we are in right now. And how although we live in a democratic society how we could also fit into the first three stages of the "Power" criteria she listed.

Discussing her approach to her speech in class was also interesting. After her speech a man in the front frow (assumed to be of Asian ethnicity) asked a few questions which seemed to alarm if not offend Chang. I doubt the man was out to offend her, but what ran through my mind when someone mentioned that he could've been a Japanese man was whether or not she would have reacted the same way to those questions had a person of another ethnicity asked. I would like to think that she would not, but at the same time I expected her to say something about how her reflections on the Japanese that she speaks about is not directed or in any way related to the Japanese generation of today. I was disappointed she didn't mention anything like that, because if I were Japanese and had been sitting through a speech like hers I think I would've felt a bit uncomfortable. Not due to shame -- after all, what's there to be ashamed of? you weren't the one who bayoneted babies thrown in the air -- but rather, I think I would've sensed or at least imagined each of the listener's changing their outlook on Japanese people. Its kind of hard to describe in words. But even so, if a speaker is speaking harshly about the acts of people of my ethnicity -- even though I was not apart of the whole ordeal -- I would still feel  uncomfortable to sit through it. It seems to isolate a certain group within the audience. I feel she should have addressed that issue in the beginning of her speech. Then again, I wonder why the Japanese guy sitting next to me left? He had a notepad to take notes on (probably for an assignment) but instead of taking notes he listened for the first 20 minutes or so and left.

I remember a quote/phrase that goes something along the lines of writing extraordinary events in ordinary writing and ordinary events in extraordinary writing. I thought back on this quote when Mr. Lovas brought up Chang's approach to presenting her work. She used very graphic words such as slaughter, atrocities, beaten, tortured, among others that I can't think of at this moment. It made me compare her style with what Eggers does. She uses extraordinary writing to describe extraordinary events, which provided the emotional impact. Even so, I prefer Eggers approach in the way he makes his events sound so simplistic and the way he uses ordinary - as-if-it-didn't-matter-much writing. Almost an indifferent approach. If you read the passage I responded to in the previous entry (seven), you'll notice how he doesn't comment on events on an emotional level. He describes them like ordinary events. No special, flowery writing to describe the death of his parents, but his writing is conversational. I prefer that much more than Chang who chose to dramatize the historical events with statistics and graphic words. It seems to have more of an effect, to speak of extraordinary things in ordinary language.

I was only able to read up to page 178 in AHWOSG before today's class which was a few pages shy of the Real World interview Eggers goes to. Still, I found the discussion regarding his interview interesting. He described himself as the ideal midwesterner that would represent "tens of millions...who grew up suburban and white." (205) I overheard one student mentioning that he sounded desperate. I agree, but at the same time it probably sounded that way because Eggers knows what "type" of person they want or actually, need, on their cast. He even mentioned it previously when describing the employees of his start-up magazine:

"Now to diversify. We are obsessed with seeming diverse. Not in terms of actually having an incredibly diverse staff or anything -- but in terms of appearing diverse, thus when photo opportunities arise, we panic. We must look like the perfect cross section of young America! For the cameras we need three men and three women; three whites, one black, one Latino, one Asian."

Ironically, even though they call the show the Real World, how real is it, when you have the media making such an effort to diversify and dramatize events that go on in the house. I admit, I've watched a couple of episodes out of sheer boredom, and just for the amusement of watching, but I don't think that the show itself can possibly reflect real life. After all, these cast members know that they are going to be aired on national television and will have those minutes of fame. I don't see how itd be possible to actually go about living a real life when you have cameras on your tail wherever you go.

--aesun