Priority Post

No, I’m not making any type of religious statement – its the title of the book I’m reading for my first ISU. I finished it, and I don’t exactly know what to say about it. Calling it good is an understatement, but then again, it depends on your sense of humour. The book, by Ron Currie Jr., basically outlines what the author feels would happen in a world in which God dies. It’s an easy read, and now that I’ve finished it I’m not sure it’s the book I’ll write my essay on. I want to write it on postmodernism; the book is clearly postmodern. It’s plotline is fragmented being that the novel is really a series of short stories, and the element of black humour is evident in the title alone. I’m just not sure I could write an entire essay on it.

P.S. René Girard confuses me to no end.

As a principal, my main concerns would be to ensure that all the needs of my students have been met. I would ask myself such questions as, “Do my students have equal opportunities to those in other schools?”, “Have I done everything in my power to ensure their achievement?”, and “Is there anything I haven’t done, or some resource that I haven’t supplied my students with?”. My priorities as a principal would begin with making the school at which I was principal the best it possibly could be. I would make sure to offer as many programs, clubs, and classes as possible to guarantee satisfaction among the student body.

Sadly, this doesn’t seem to be the case in many schools. Principals these days seem to be less and less interested in what actually matters to students, and increasingly interested in things of little importance. I apologize, but when a principal is more concerned with the dress-code than the students you know there must be a problem. I’m tired of hearing that buzzing voice over the announcements each morning telling me about compliance with the dress-code. Being forced to read the code of conduct, instead of something more mentally stimulating, is degrading. Do you really think that’s all we’re capable of reading? Do we not have other interests? It’s like telling us that we are incapable of understanding much more than the vocabulary of an elementary school student.

I’d like to ask one question – what is it you mean by ‘business type environment’? Really, I’d love to get some clarification. I’m just awaiting the day that somebody shows up naked or in some form of lingere. Business-type environment could take on many meanings. Not everyone plans to be a CEO or work a desk job. Strippers are in business, are they not? Prostitutes run a business. Just because your ideal business is something of high-income and status doesn’t mean that there aren’t others.

Am I incorrect in my thoughts on such a topic?

“Standing on the beach
With a gun in my hand
Staring at the sea
Staring at the sand
Staring down the barrel
At the Arab on the ground
I can see his open mouth
But I hear no sound

I’m alive
I’m dead
I’m the stranger
Killing an Arab”

Albert Camus, a novelist and philosopher, creates a story that truly captures the absurdity of the world around us though the life of a man called Meursault and the murder of an Arab on the beach in his work The Stranger. Although Camus worked extensively on the topic throughout his life, one cannot just assume that his works rely on the use of absurdity, but rather, one must prove this. His work The Myth of Sisyphus is an essay which exposits on the philosophy of absurdism. Interestingly enough this work was released shortly after the publication of The Stranger, but this is not evidence enough to support the reliance of the novel on the theory of the absurd. Rather, the ‘Absurd Man’ portrayed by Mersault, the irony of the justice system under which Mersault is tried, and the search for meaning in the lives of his friends is reason enough to believe that a major theme carried in this novel is that of the absurd.

Camus comments on the absurd in his work The Myth of Sisyphus stating,

“It happens that the stage sets collapse. Rising, streetcar, four hours in the office or the factory, meal, streetcar, four hours of work, meal, sleep and Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday and Saturday according to the same rhythm – this path is easily followed most of the time. But one day, the ‘why’ arises and everything begins in that weariness tinged with amazement.”

According to Camus, the world is not absurd, nor is human thought, but comes from the realization that life, through recurrence, is meaningless and no human activity has more meaning than any other event or activity. The realization of this, and the addition of a search for meaning in life is where the absurd comes into play. Further, it was Camus’ belief that when an individual comes into contact with the absurd, he or she is left with few options including suicide, faith, or acceptance and concludes that acceptance of our freedom in the world is the most effective method of dealing with the absurd.

In Camus’ essay The Myth of Sisyphus he discusses the notion of the Absurd Man – one who has come into contact with the absurd and accepted his position as a truly free man in society. The Absurd Man has come to term with the fact that his life is meaningless, thus, his actions also have no meaning. However, how is a person such as this to act in society? Such a person has no restraints on their activity and no ethical rules apply to them. Justification of such actions, in itself, is absurd because there is no meaning for their action, and the action they have taken is also meaningless. More or less, any action is permitted, even those which do not fit societal norms.

Meursault, in himself, is an Absurd Man. His actions are those of a man who has come into contact with the absurd, though we are unsure of how or when this has occurred. Although this touch with the absurd cannot be determined through the novel, his actions are those of a man who has accepted his life as meaningless and who does little to work against this fate. He acts indifferently to the world around him, including his life in regards to those closest him, and feels no remorse towards actions that would appall the general populous. This is due to his acceptance of an existence devoid of meaning, and thus, his actions have no repercussions.

In the opening scene of the novel, we are informed of the sudden death of Meursault’s mother. He states, “Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe. I don’t know.” (Camus, 3).His approach to the death of his mother is devoid of any emotion, and is seemingly uncaring. He doesn’t even know the date of his mothers death, and is unsure of her exact age stating that she was “about sixty” (Camus, 25) and that he “didn‘t know the exact number” (Camus, 16). The lack of emotion Meursault feels towards the death of his mother is further engrained in the reader during the wake when Meursault does not cry, and is annoyed by the crying of other individuals in the parlor. “The woman kept crying” he stated, “It surprised me because I didn’t know who she was. I wished I didn’t have to listen to her anymore.”(Camus, 10). The fact that somebody who did not have much of a connection to Maman, as her son had never met the women, was able to show an emotion while her own son was not is proof that the death of his mother was meaningless. “Maman was buried now…I was going back to work, and…really nothing has changed.”(Camus, 24). Finally, we know that the death of his mother has little affect on his life because he reasons it “was bound to happen sooner or later” (Camus, 33).

The Stranger is divided into two parts, the first of which ends in Meursault’s murder of an Arab man on the beach. His reaction to this catastrophically life-changing event is much the same as his reaction to the death of his mother – he is not at all phased. When asked if he’d hired an attorney to plead his case, he inquired “whether it was really necessary to have one” (Camus, 63). Furthermore, he goes to say that he feels “the case is pretty simple” (Camus, 63), as if he doesn’t realize the wrong in what he has just done. These actions, although bothersome to the general populous, are to be expected of the Absurd Man. His actions are not affected by ethics that are considered to be a societal norm, and he should feel no remorse knowing that his actions have no meaning whatsoever.

Absurdists believe that although life has no meaning, people are determined to search for one. Although people know that no true meaning can be derived from life, they will do one of three things: accept absurdity, accept faith, or accept death. It is important, however, to note that the meaning people will eventually derive is not true meaning, but a meaning they have created as a method of dealing with the fact that life is meaningless. When referring to ‘faith’, one may refer to a variety of faiths that may be religious faith, or faith in abstract notions. Acceptance of faith may refer to literal religious faith, or simply may refer to faith in a concept such as love, both of which are true in the case of The Stranger.

Marie, Meursault’s girlfriend, before meeting Meursault has been unhappy with her life. Meursault comments on this saying “she looked sad” (Camus, 35). However, as she becomes more and more acquainted with Meursault, her moods are more frequently those of gaiety. One evening, “Marie came by” and asked Meursault if he “wanted to marry her” (Camus, 41). She took Meursault’s “arm with a smile” (Camus, 42) and from that moment was much happier with her position in life. It is evident through her found happiness that Marie has accepted faith as a meaning to her truthfully meaningless life – faith in her love for Meursault.

Absurdists believe that it is common practice for man to accept religion. This acceptance of a seemingly higher power, and a life after death puts the question of ‘why’ at bay, and allows man to feel as if his life has meaning, when in reality, it does not. One such character who could not face this reality but instead, turned to religion is the magistrate. The magistrate has accepted God as his savior. It is the meaning for his life and admits “if he were ever to doubt it, his life would become meaningless” (Camus, 69). However, this faith is false and blind.

Attempting to justify the acts of a person who has come into contact with the absurd is futile because these actions, in the eyes of the absurdist, had no meaning to begin with and therefore, there is no reason to attempt to justify such acts. Further, the justification, such as prison for a crime, would have little bearing on the life of an absurd person because they wouldn’t see the meaning in being punished for something which had absolutely no meaning or effect. The Stranger attempts to justify the murder of the Arab through trail, but cannot truly ever attain this because Meursault cannot see the error in his ways as the killing was just the act of a man who is free of ethics.

The court makes a rather large fuss over the act, and attempts to string together the chain of meaningless events leading up to the death of the Arab to explore motives. For example, the prosecutor attempts to explain Meursault’s irrationality in the following way;

“Gentlemen of the jury, the day after his mother’s death, this man was out swimming, starting up a dubious liaison, and going to the movies, a comedy, for laughs…The same man who the day after his mother died was indulging in the most shameful debauchery killed a man for the most trivial of reasons and did so to settle an affair of unspeakable vice.”(Camus, 94-96)

This, again, is representative of mans’ attempt to find meaning in a world devoid of all meaning. The prosecutor attempts to chain together a series of detached events, which have absolutely no meaning and in no way influenced the killing of the Arab in order to find reason for the murder. However, it is evident that there will never be meaning to this because it is an event that is subject to the absurd.

The reaction of Meursault who is representative of the absurd is further proof of the meaningless of the crime. Not only is it impossible for Meursault to relate the feeling of loss to the death of the Arab, it is futile to attempt to make him realize the effects such an action has on the lives of other people because he has been tainted by the absurd, thus thinking that all events are equally weighted. Meursault faces the murder with a sense of humor, and in regards to an attorney inquired “whether it was really necessary to have one” (Camus, 63). Furthermore, he goes to say that he feels “the case is pretty simple” (Camus, 63) conveying the message that the murder not only had little effect on his life, but little meaning in general.

As previously mentioned, once a person has been subjected to the absurd, he or she must make one of three decisions – accept the absurdity of life and live as a free person, accept faith in some abstract or concrete notion that brings meaning to life, or accept death. Being that Meursault has been exposed to the absurd, it is not uncommon that his character would have to decide his fate. When taking into consideration his final decision, one should also take into account the opportunities that Meursault chose to ignore, which inevitably, would have saved his life. Given the proposition of marriage, Meursault agreed, however, did not love Marie and so, could not have faith in the marriage. When asked to accept God, he calmly and politely declined the offer. Evidently, his choices led to his demise.

When asked by Marie if he’d like to get married, Mersault replied that “it didn’t make any difference to him” (Camus, 41) and that they could if she really wanted. This nonchalant approach to the institution of marriage and the idea of love shows that such a commitment has little meaning in his life. When Marie pointed out that marriage was serious, he said that it wasn’t (Camus, 42). It can be concluded to his reaction to the very idea of marriage, that this opportunity would not have brought meaning to Meursault’s life. Thus, he could not have accepted faith in such an institution, knowing that it had no meaning.

Inmates commonly accept religion in order to repent for their sins before they are to be executed. Meursault is given the opportunity to accept God, religion, and its explanation of life and meaning to it when the religious magistrate first visits. Reflecting on this, Meursault simply states, “He asked me if I believed in god. I said no.” (Camus, 69). The abruptness of the memory shows how little meaning it must have had to Meursault, and the lack of the use of a capital letter when referring to God shows that even He has no meaning. After being sentenced, Meursault “refused to see the chaplain” (Camus, 115). When the chaplain paid an unexpected visit, and again asked if Meursault believed in God, he replied no, and told the chaplain “you’re wrong” (Camus, 118) in your belief, showing that not only does God have little, or no effect the life of the Absurd Man, it also holds no meaning or at least certainly not enough meaning to continue on living.

Meursault, left with no other choice, accepts his death as being “sooner than other people, but everyone knows life isn’t worth living.” (Camus, 114). In stating this, Meursault admits that his life has no meaning, hence it having no worth and clearly holds little value for it. “Whether it was now or twenty years from now, I would still be the one dying.”(Camus, 114). Besides, “it doesn’t matter much” (Camus, 114). He, at this point, has accepted his execution, and allows himself to be killed. He does not fight for his life, and in this way commits suicide and completes the absurdist theory.

Finally, it can be concluded that the Albert Camus’ piece called The Stranger is a work composed out of the absurdist movement of WWII. Not only does it make use of an example of the Absurd Man explained in detail in The Myth of Sisyphus, it also details the irony of justification in a world tainted by the absurd, and portrays the likelihood of man to search for meaning in a world devoid of meaning, all of which are components required to prove the absurdist theory. Thus, it cannot be argued that the novel is not absurdist in composition, nor can it be argued that Camus’ work in philosophy did not influence the creation of The Stranger.

Bibliography:

Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. New York: Vintage International, 1955.

“Absurdism.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 May 2008, 03:00 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 2 Jun 2008 <“http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Absurdism&oldid=215882373″>

“The Myth of Sisyphus.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 20 May 2008, 18:32 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 2 Jun 2008 <“http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Myth_of_Sisyphus&oldid=213755444>

Camus, Albert. The Stranger. New York: Vintage International, 1946.

The concept of having an entire day, and only one day, a year dedicated to Mother Earth is something to scoff at. Were’re in a pre-apocalyptic state, and are in dire need of a change fast, but yet I can’t think of a single thing the population does any different on Earth Day than any other day of the week. When I think of Earth Day, I think of organized and scheduled events in order to reduce emissions, energy usage, and waste. However, am yet to have actually seen any such thing done on this day.  Shouldn’t we be concerned with the warming trend and melting polar ice caps? Are quickly rising sea levels of no concern?

What I find even more hilarious is the idea of Earth Hour. If you don’t know what it is, it’s where the populace is given the choice of whether or not to turn of their lights for an hour to conserve energy. If you ask me, this does little to nothing in regards to energy conservation. Many people don’t understand the sheer magnitude of the problem when they are faced with the words ‘global warming’, and as a result, will do little in the way of stopping it. If the government is so concerned with the energy we are using, there should be no choice. We should be introduced to forcibly initated black-outs.

Kyoto – another concept which makes little sense to me. Take in a breath of air. How’s the air quality? We’re slowly asphyxiating ourselves, and nobody seems to care. Hey, why don’t we attempt to cut down emissions, but only slightly, by sometime around 2012? Wait, wasn’t there already a goal set that was missed? Who’s to say that 2012 is likely?

Well, we could cut down the emissions in Canada. After all, laws ristricting carbon emission have been put into place and are continually becoming more and more rigid. However, what’s stopping companies from moving production plants into countries with less restrictions on production? Say ‘Good-bye Canada, Hello Mexico!” and watch our carbon emissions drop. What about that increase in Mexico’s emissions? Oh, don’t worry. It’s not our problem. We’re making a difference. Right?

Evidently, little is being done to stop global warming. Who’s to care when it’s something that will have little effect on our life, right? I mean, it’s only the lives of future generations – generations which our children, grandchildren, or great-grandchildren could be a part of. Don’t worry though. We’re taking small, insignificant steps, in an attempt to reverse the damage we have done. We’re just a self-centered population and because our damage of the environment will have little affect on us, we simply don’t care about it’s affect on other poeple.

We need to make a drastic change quickly, and stop making miniscule attempts to reverse such a large-scale problem.

     Each morning, alarm clocks ring and 1.39 million Americans wake up, intending to go to work, but where? Voluntarily, these people clean themselves up, put on their mandatory blue smocks, and head out to their workplace; they are going to Wal-Mart. Weekly, 167 million customers flock to the doors of Wal-Mart stores nation-wide to take advantage of their “low prices”. What is the real story behind the yellow smiley-face, and what are the real costs of such “low prices”?

     When you walk into a Wal-Mart store, what do you experience? Are the employees helpful? Do they seem to enjoy their jobs? Wal-Mart portrays a positive image to customers, one of having low prices and seems to be a great place to work and by all means, it may be, but few people are aware of what really goes on inside Wal-Mart doors. In 2006, Wal-Mart released statistics stating that its full-time employees were paid, on average, $9.65 hourly. These wages are approximately 37% lower than that of the national average wage of workers, which puts Wal-Mart employees well below the poverty line; the national average wage of a worker is $15.38. It is thought that another 24% of the store’s employees are should be considered full-time laborers, working upwards of thirty hours a week. However, Wal-Mart CEOs insist that these employees are part-time, and were not included in its statistics for full-time workers. Furthermore, in 2003 statistics were issued with information on cashiers, the second most common position at that time. On average, cashiers made about $7.92 hourly, which works out to $11,948 annually. The poverty line in the same year was said to be $14,983. What does this say about Wal-Mart? That’s for you to decide.

     Not only American workers are being exploited. In 2003, in 21 different states, 250 undocumented immigrants were arrested. Where did these people come from, and why? Wal-Mart promised a job, and safety from the hardships of such countries as Mexico and Russia to these illegal immigrants. Employed as janitors, these people worked seven days or nights a week with no overtime pay, or injury compensation. Many of these workers reported having been locked inside the stores until morning.

     Overseas, conditions for workers aren’t any better. Chinese workers toil between one hundred, and one hundred and thirty hours a week to make the toys many of your children or siblings love so dearly. In Wal-Mart’ Chinese factories, those that supply Wal-Mart with many of its products, Chinese workers make about 16.5¢ an hour. It would seem that in Managua, Nicaragua, conditions were better with many of its workers making about 23¢ hourly. However, there are many incidents that have surfaced of garment makers being forced to stay locked inside factories until the Wal-Mart quota was filled.

     This is not to say that Wal-Mart doesn’t take care of its employees. They do in fact offer benefits such as, for example, healthcare. The number of employees who can afford the portion those benefits remove from their already meager paychecks, however, is small in number. The Wal-Mart helathcare plan fails to cover over 775 000 employees. Don’t forget Wal-Mart offers these benefits. They intend to care for their employees.

     To put the icing on the cake, Wal-Mart has an anti-union policy. Managers believe their workers are already so cared for, that a union would serve workers no purpose. Managers are trained to spot any threat to the company, such as an employee who is likely to organize workers. Historically, only two Wal-Mart stores have ever sucessfully unionized, both of which shut down within a few short weeks. In April 2005, employees at Jonquierre, Quebec’s Wal-Mart were relieved when, after fifty-one employees signed union cards, they recieved union certification. Within a week, all of these people had lost their job – the store had been shut down. Moreover, in 2000, a small meat-cutting department of a Texas Wal-Mart unionized. Within a few short days, Wal-Mart released a memo informing its employees that Wal-Mart would be cutting out its in-store meat-cutting company-wide, further stating that it was an unnecessary and expensive asset to the company.

     Have you ever felt discriminated against- like a lesser person due to gender? This type of descrimination is refered to as sexism, and is very familiar to female Wal-Mart employees. In 2001, six women sued Wal-Mart when they were unable to find solace in a union. These women claimed to have been denied promotions that many of their male co-workers were getting, and claimed to be paid less than said collegues without reason. The case, The Dukes versus Wal-Mart, expanded to include 1.6 million current and former female Walmart employees, and to date, is the biggest class-action lawsuit ever.

     We, as laborers, know our rights as workers. We have fought for them. Why then, do we allow the employees of Wal-Mart, who are unable to find other jobs, to be treated so poorly? You are now informed, and know about the rights of Wal-Mart workers both in North America, and overseas, their benefits, and their inability to successfully unionize to fight for better rights. I question if Walmart employees should instead, wear an unhappy face on their smocks, as opposed to the smiley yellow one we are accustomed to seeing. After all, what do the employees have to be happy about?

      Humans posses the misconception that all actions are product of choice. Humans choose to do things, and hence, have produced some outcome. However, many philosophers would argue that all action is predetermined – choice and freewill are but an illusion. Fatalists believe that all events, including moral choices, are completely predetermined and exclude freewill and the possibility that humans could have acted otherwise. In the eyes of a fatalist, one might try with all their might to change the world, but since it is assumed that this action has already been determined, it will have no affect on the future. This is much the same in the case of Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass. Sometimes questionable, the actions of characters, as well as plot, follow this theory – every event has been in one way or another predetermined.   

    Characters play a vital role in the fatalistic world Through the Looking Glass portrays. How characters act in the looking glass world in comparison to how they act in the real world is a major contribution that makes fatalism in the looking glass world evident. Furthermore, how the looking glass characters act in comparison to the characters in the real world must also be noted. Character development is vital to the fatalistic views Carroll portrays in his work. Without it, the sort of ‘fate’ in the novel would sometimes seem an oddity, but nonetheless could pass as ordinary.

      For example, when Alice, the novel’s main character, accepts the position of a pawn in a life-sized chess game her personality changes drastically. When Alice becomes a pawn, her future as a queen has been determined. The eight spaces in front of her are the determined path she must take to obtain this goal, and any deviation from this path is strictly forbidden. One might say that Alice’s becoming a queen is ‘fate’. “Here something began squeaking on the table behind Alice, and made her turn her head just in time to see one of the White Pawns roll over and begin kicking: she watched it with great curiosity to see what would happen next.”(Carroll 26) A curious girl, Alice would go out of her way to discover and understand things new to her, but as soon as she becomes a pawn in a game, things change. “However, this was anything but a regular bee: in fact, it was an elephant…“I think I’ll go down and – no I won’t go down just yet.” ”(Carroll 52) If it had been up to Alice, and she had had a choice, she would have gone to inspect the elephant-bees. However, the chessboard has kept her on path and as such, she was unable to give into curiousity. Fate has other things in store for Alice.

     When reading Through the Looking Glass one might assume the White Queen to be rather queer with all her eccentricies. However, her character plays a vital role in portraying how fatalism appears more heavily in the looking glass world than in the world Alice is accustomed to. For example, in a conversation between Alice and the White Queen, the Queen stated that she remembers best “things that happened the week after next. For instance now, there’s the King’s messenger. He’s in prison now, being punished: and the trial doesn’t even begin till next Wednesday; and of course, the crime comes last of all.” (Carroll 88) This way of time essentially working backwards is proof that life in the looking glass world must in fact be due to fatalism. Otherwise, how would it be possible to punish somebody if a crime hadn’t yet been committed? It is because this crime has already been determined that this backward plot works.

     Plot is another aspect of Carroll’s work that plays into fatalistic ideologies. In many circumstances, portions of plot are revealed to the reader before they have in fact taken place. This revelation usually occurs in the form of a poem, which the plot will then proceed to act out. These poems are the form of ‘fate’ which are then acted out in the Through the Looking Glass’ plot without a single deviation.

     For instance, when Alice has passed into the sixth square, she meets Humpty Dumpty. This poem, Humpty Dumpty, is one that is extremely familiar to a wide audience, and appears in the book.

“Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall:

Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

All the King’s horses and all the King’s men,

Couldn’t put Humpty in his place again.” (Carroll 104)

After having talked at length with Humpty, Alice went on her way to advance into the next square. However, as she was leaving she’d begun a sentance that she never finished, “for at this moment a heavy crash shook the forest from end to end. The next moment, soldiers came running through the wood.” (Carroll 118-121) Following the fall of Humpty Dumpty, the King proceeded to send his men and horses, but was unable with his fleet, to put Humpty back (Carroll 122). The plot, in this and many other cases, parallels the poems Alice hears in her head upon meeting certain characters. Because Alice has heard these poems before the events within them actually take place, it is evident that they are meant to determine the fate of such characters.

     Further, upon meeting the infamous characters Tweedledee and Tweedledum, a song that is unfamiliar and only exists in the book rings through Alice’s mind. The song goes much like this:

“Tweedledum and Tweedledee

Agreed to have a battle;

For Tweedledum said Tweedledee

Had spoiled his nice new rattle.

Just then flew down a montsterous crow,

As black as a tar-barrel;

Which frightened both the heros so,

They quite forgot their quarrel.”(Carroll 68)

Later, when Alice had noticed an old broken rattle, Tweedledum got very angry saying, “But it isn’t old! It’s new, I tell you – I bought it yesterday – my nice NEW RATTLE!” (Carroll, 79) His next thought was “to have a battle.”(Carroll 79) Just as the battle had commenced, Tweedledum cried out, “It’s the crow!” (Carrol 82) which frightened both Tweedledum and Tweedledee so much that they ran away. This is another example of a work recited before a particular situation arises that dictates plot. The song, which is known previously to Alice, is quite obviously some premonition of Tweedledee and Tweedledum’s fates.

     Fate is a term that can describe many things: love at first sight, death, and even miracles. The idea of fatalism, that all events, including moral choices, are completely predetermined and exclude freewill and the possibility that humans could have acted otherwise, has consumed the lives of many philosophers. However, it is not only present in everyday life; it can also be found in literature. Through character and plot development, it is evident that it also consumed the entirety of Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass.

      Child labour is defined as work, done by a child under the age of fifteen, that is physically or mentally harmful, and interrupts their education and social development. The topic is heavily debated, and two viewpoints exist – child labour is morally wrong and child labour gives a source of income to poverty striken families. Although I do not in any way support child labour, the arguments in favour of it are strong.

     On the side against child labour, the only argument is that child labour is morally wrong. It is my opinion that many things could be considered morally wrong but are practiced in society nonetheless. For instance, take premarital sex. In many religions and cultures, it is strictly forbidden, but has somehow become, if not completely accepted, aknowledged as a common occurance in the Western society we live in today. Just because something is morally wrong, does not mean that it cannot be practiced and premarital sex is the perfect example of such an occurance.

     However, corporations, through child labour, do provide income to families who, otherwise, would have no source of income in povery striken parts of the world. Poverty is the reason many children go to work. In India, 37% of the urban and 39% of the rural populations live in poverty. Studies have “revealed a positive correlation- in some instances, a strong one- between child labor and such factors as poverty.” (Melara-Kerpelman, 1996.) This means that in some areas where child labour is practiced, less of the people in that area will live in poverty.

     Further, how would these children be making money if it were not for a job. Clearly, their parents are not doing much to provide for the family so where does that leave these children? My answer is on the street, maybe from lack of money, but most likely attempting to find a way to provide for not only themselves, but their siblings and parents. This may be done in a number of ways. The most common is pick pocketing, but in some countries leads to severe consequences. Two other common forms of ‘jobs’ done by children are theft and spending hours in the hot sun attempting to sell arts, crafts, or knick-nacks. Now I pose the question – which seems better, a job on the street or in a building doing work not unlike some of the jobs available to people here in Canada?

     Yes, I do agree that children should not be forced to work under such conditions, but what if the child has taken it upon themselves to become a provider where and when their parents cannot provide? I’m sure that there are circumstances where this is the case. Further, in many cultures, school is not a priority and learning to provide for a family is regarded as a more important skill than knowledge. What better way to provide than begin work at an early age? Besides, many of these families truly need the money, and it would be a terrible thing if they could not attain it.

     You may be asking what it is that I plan to accomplish in this class. I have asked myself the question many times, and my hopes for this course may seem simple, but to me, are qualities that I see as important. This year has been one of self-evaluation, and I have deemed myself to be lacking in certain traits that I see it fit that every human being should acquire. My goal in this class is to attain these such traits.

      It is my goal, not only in this class but everyday life, to allow people to finish talking before I make a remark or give my input. Interruption is an action that I consider to be extremely rude, and it would only be hypocritical of myself to interrupt another person. One way I plan to achieve this, is to raise my hand when I feel that I have some contribution to class discussion. Raising my hand more often is something I need to be working on, as it will prohibit interruption of the class and classmates. I do have one academic goal; I plan to achieve an eighty-five in this course after completion of my exam.

     To this class, I will contribute three things – smiles, courteous and polite behaviour, and input to class discussion when needed. I promise, no matter what my mood is on a particular day, to always enter the class with a smile and a positive attitude. This will, hopefully, cheer up other classmates, and bring a positive overall environment into the classroom. I will be courteous, respectful, and polite to all of my classmates, even if they do not necessarily posses these characteristics. Finally, when asked of me, or when I see fit, I will contribute to class discussion with only remarks relevant to the topic we are discussing.

     My teacher should expect a few things from me. First, it is expected that I will be respectful; I will listen when somebody else is talking and will raise my hand when and if I wish to speak. It is also expected that I will be punctual. When I refer to the term ‘punctual’ I am not only referring to being in class on time. When I use the term punctual I am also referring to assignments; mine will be handed in on time. Finally, it is required that when I do not understand a topic I will find time to ask classmates, or in cases when I cannot find a classmate to answer my question, will approach the teacher.

      In order to achieve my goals, I will have to rely predominantly on myself. Essentially, it is my choice whether or not to make an effort to attain my goals. If I do not make an effort, assignments will be handed in late, as usual, and my behaviours in and out of class will remain the same. In addition to myself, I will need my teacher to make an effort to remind me of due dates a little more often than it may be required for the rest of the class. Furthermore, if something I hand in is lacking in some aspect, I would like to be informed of where I have made mistakes in order to avoid them in future assignments. My last request of my teacher is that I be marked equally as harsh as the grade twelve students, regardless of the fact that I am in grade eleven.

     Success in my case will be hard to recognize, but undeniable when it has happened. I will know when my goals have been met. The only goal that could be observed would be the numbers 8 and 5 in black ink on white paper.

     If my goals are not met, I should be consequences with detentions. However, if my goals are fully met, all I expect to receive is a “good job.”