Diana Castellanos Post #1
We have thought about how objects influence our daily life, but rarely do we think about how objects have gotten us to do their bidding for them. For example, the apple has become a staple in the households and diets of not only many Americans but also people all around the world. But do humans have too tight a grip on the existence of apple? From the reading, “In Search of the Primeval Apple Forest” in the book Apples by Frank Browning, I have learned that the apple has traveled throughout history by being transported by humans and other mammals. But I’ve also learned that science and the search for sweetness has changed and stopped the way the fruit evolves. Farmers now grow only a select few types of apples that can easily be marketed and sold to the public. But scientists realized that this technique could eventually kill the apples, and have tried to keep up the evolution of the apple by visiting the start of its history: the apple forests of Kazakh. I think it’s important to re...
The lecture on the short-handed hoe is the one that intrigued me the most among the past few lectures. Before the class started, I did not think that such tool has great significance and rich history. However, I learned that the short-handed hoe has played an important role in the power dynamics between individuals, especially in the olden times. It was an instrument of torture, surveillance, and indifference. It also symbolised the struggle of farmers as they bend down for hours under the authority of land-owners. These accompanying meanings urged my to think more about how the different objects we use today are associated with certain ideas. As I did, I realised that objects such as the short-handed hoe is not necessarily symbolic of hardship. Having a backyard garden and using a short-handed hoe is definitely not a sign of inferiority. Instead, it is the way land-owners treated people using the tool that gave the tool its associated meaning of inferiority. Ultimately, I believe that an object is not inherently symbolic of something good or bad. A pencil can just be as dangerous as a knife if the former is used to stab people. But, if it is used to write, we get the saying "the pen is mightier than the sword." Ultimately, I have come to realise and believe that the meaning of an object is dependent on how that object is treated and used. It is not inherently good or bad.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your view. Whether an object can have a positive or negative impact on the surrounding environment is entirely depending on how it is used. This is one of many popular arguments that people bring out when it comes to the topic of whether the private ownership of guns should be banned.
DeleteI agree with your response on the short-handled hoe - how the hoe may not necessarily a sign of hardship. The landowner inflicting punishment on workers as a result of not putting forth their best effort is the cause of the negative connotation associated with the short-handled hoe. However I feel that the hoe is definitely a symbol of the workers' affliction.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFrom the lectures of weeks four through six, the lecture on living things, specifically flowers, has stood out the most to me. I learned that although flowers can be mass-produced, flowers travel thousands of miles before being used in the flower business. The floral industry uses the phrase "say it with flowers" as a marketing strategy to attract people who want to use bouquets as a way of expressing emotions they simply can't put into words. For the working poor, flowers are representations of hope and beauty. Bouquets are sent to loved ones not only on big occasions such as Valentine's Day and weddings, but also used to ward off evil spirits and mask body odors during funerals. An outside example that relates to this lecture is the Hong Kong style rose. This type of flower can last for at least three years and is environmentally friendly. Hong Kong florists withdraw the rose's natural nutrients and inject a glycerol-containing solution so that the plants can hold their shape and color for years without water, oxygen or sunlight. Though these flowers are costlier than the average bouquet, as Professor Kaplan mentioned in lecture, they "operate symbolically beyond sentiment," and portray identity and social status.
ReplyDeleteI would never think flowers to have such a big an influence as it does. One simply doesn't think twice about where your flowers are coming from when you are handing a bouquet of flowers to your parents or significant other. There is also a language of flowers, used throughout the world, such as Europe and Asia, throughout centuries. They would use flowers to convey messages. For example a lily means chastity purity and everybody knows roses symbolize love.
DeleteThe idea that Hong Kong florists do that process to roses is very intriguing. It is very interesting learning about what lengths people will go to to keep material objects, such as flowers, around for as long as possible. This process also lends itself to the idea that these florists are making flowers truly a material object since they are taking the life out of the rose since those roses now last for years. I am arguing that a rose cannot be considered 'alive' anymore after its normal lifespan has passed, therefore, by creating roses that last for years, those roses have long surpassed the lifespan of normal roses, and then cannot be considered living anymore.
DeleteThe lecture on rifles has provided me an interesting idea on how to approach my paper on the airplane. As we all know from the lecture, the M-16 is a great gun in term of accuracy and lightness. However, these cutting-edge advantages are greatly reduced when M-16 is used under dusty and humid weather condition; the dirt will prevent the bullet to be expulsed smoothly from the gun barrel, leading to jamming issues that require the soldier to reassemble the whole gun in order to fix the problem. On the battlefield, the life of soldiers can be decided by every single second of the action that they took and wasting time fixing gun jamming will detrimentally reduce their chance of survival. This is specifically true for the Vietnam War since the Viet Cong favored Guerrilla tactics over any other methods of combat.
ReplyDeleteMany soldiers at the time admitted that the outcome of the Vietnam War for the US could have been better if they are allowed to use the old M-14 instead of the new M-16. The question is if this fact is true then why the US army still reluctantly stick with the M-16 throughout the whole long period of war. The answer to this question can be summarized in one word: “money”.
At that time, many US governors owned shares of weapon manufacturing companies. As a result, the companies who won the contract in providing military weapons to the US army were not the ones that can make the most effective guns, but they are the ones that had close relationships with the lawmakers. This means that US military soldiers are not well equipped relatively to their opponents, and the governors prioritized their private flows of income over the lives of soldiers. The lesson we learned from this event is that being the best product of its kind in term of functionality does not fully guarantee that it will become popular and well accepted on the market.
The story of the M-16 is quite similar to the way of how the Concorde, the fastest commercial aircraft that humanity has ever developed, died out. Concorde is a British-French passenger aircraft that can travel at twice the speed of sound. At the time of development, the plane cut the flight time in half for most routes. However, due to the high manufacturing costs and it can only carry up to around 120 passengers (compare to around 300 passengers for Boeing 777), each flight ticket price for Concorde is on average 30 times more expensive than the cheapest ticket price available for that route. As a result, in combination with the negative impacts from the September 11th event, the demand to fly on Concorde diminishes, and the production of this aircraft is discontinued in 2003. Similarly, to the story of the M-16, we can summarize the death of the Concorde using the word “money”. On the other hand, the word “money” here is used to denote the high mass production costs of the Concorde which led to the diminishing in the demand for the product itself. Again, Concorde is another example showing us that being the best product of its kind on the market does not guarantee its longevity and success.
Your point of view on functionality versus popularity is something that is very interesting and true. Being the best product does not fully guarantee that it will become popular and accepted in the market. There are indeed other variables that affect it, especially those of political and economic ones. I believe that you can definitely talk about the dynamics between the two in your paper on airplanes.
DeleteFor me the cod fish was a surprising living "object". Who knew a fish could be responsible for both peace and war. That cod fish has been an important object for hundreds of years for multiple different ethnic groups all around the world, from the vikings, indigenous people, settlers, upper English class, and slaves. They are all connected through a fish. For me it is sad to say that it has been reduced to a fish stick. No, not even that, fish sticks are not made of cod any more. As soon as the cod fish became an object of mass production, fisherman have been overfishing to compensate for the high demand of this product, causing a huge population decline. Nowadays, the cod fish is not as significant today as it was hundreds of years ago, but still has great historical significance. I wonder if there are other fish out there with such a strong presence in history, maybe salmon.
ReplyDeleteA lot of things are changing about fish and fishing as well. Whale fishing, Shark fishing, and other fishing is becoming illegal as we realize how bad over fishing is on the environment.
DeleteI agree with your opinion on how sad that it is that overfishing is causing a population decline. This reminds me of the dolphin fishing in Taiji, Japan. Taiji is known for capturing dolphins to sell to marine parks such as SeaWorld but the dolphins that do not meet the "standards" to be sold are killed in the cove. These mass killings are causing a decline in the number of dolphins around the area. However, the government is allowing these killings to continue because the business is profitable to Japan.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is no doubt that the gun is co-constituted by people to symbolize the power of authorities and the struggles of soldiers. In the lecture, we discussed that ads that promoted guns back in the 19th century were heavily associated with wholesome and pleasure of hunting while connecting those elements to the bigger picture of the business and the associated with perfect aims. Besides of its role as a weapon and self-defense tool, the gun was also a gift for the holidays in the 19th century. I found this ad in a magazine called ‘Boy’s Life’ and it was a picture of a young boy, who received a gun as a gift from his family, expresses excitement. This ad shows that many people connect with the gun as one of their transitional objects from-boy-to-man moments in their lives. This enriches the meaning of the object as the gun not only plays a transformative role in American culture but also connects with different individuals and their experiences. The transformative nature of the gun is reflected on that of many previous objects such as the flower and the telephone.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a really good point. The connotation around guns have done a complete 180 and are now extremely negative. I believe this is why there is so much controversy around the topic of guns. We have a generation who grew up with guns and learned the responsible use of guns clashing with the newer generation who have only seen the effects that guns can have when they are in the wrong hands.
DeleteThroughout the course of this quarter, I have learned that there are numerous ways to approach writing a paper about an object. Since an object is a materialistic item, there are many qualities to it, such as its design, use, history, and aesthetic appeal. Depending on the author, a paper could focus on any one of those qualities, or even a combination of those qualities. Some authors decide to focus on the history of the object and how it came to be the object we know of today, while others opt to focus on the design of the object and how the design has influenced those that use the object. In writing my research paper, I aim to combine these two types of writing. I plan to focus on both the design and functionality of my object as well as detailing the history of my object and how it came to be the object we know it to be today. I feel that elaborating on both topics will allow me to create a very detailed image and history of my object, and therefore an effective research paper. Overall, as there are many styles and approaches to writing a research paper on an object, I plan to combine two of these approaches in order to fully explain my object and its significance.
ReplyDeleteThe most recent lecture covering rifles made me realize how many things around us are made to break down on purpose in order to increase profits. There are plenty of things around us that are essential to everyday life, and I'm certain these things could be improved to near perfection. However, the industry dictates that we get whatever they feel like giving us. In the end they give us OK products that most often fail in the long run. Learning about the evolution of the US Army standard issue rifle was also really interesting. Such an important part of the your job as a soldier was so poorly made, and it made being a soldier that much harder. I can now see why the war was so opposed by the general society.
ReplyDeleteI was struck by the same realization that planned obsolescence is prevalent in far more industries than just our apple products. It's disheartening to recognize that corporations are more motivated by profit than providing a quality product even when it comes to weapons that could save American lives.
DeleteIt's definitely saddening to see a nation capable of such innovation handicaps it in order to pursue profits. I'm curious to know what the genuine breaking point of this ideology will come into fruition where civilians demand appropriate recourse.
DeleteSince we talked briefly about Mattel during the gun lecture, and I like toys, I guess I'll talk a little bit more about Mattel. Mattel was founded in in 1945 with headquarters in El Segundo California. They are a toy company that produce many brands, from Fisher-Price, Hot Wheels, Barbie and many more. I guess we will talk more about Mattel later when we talk about the barbie doll as well. They have a presence in 40 countries and territories and sells toys in 150 countries. They are second highest grossing toy company after the Lego company. It at first sold picture frames, then later dollhouse furniture. Their first hit toy was a ukulele toy called "Uka-a-Doodle." The barbie doll debut in 1959 and is the companies best selling toy. They also introduced Chatty Cathy, a talking doll which inspired many makers to also make talking dolls, flooding the toy market. Later in they released Hot Wheels in 1968. They bought many companies, such as Fischer Price, and now investing in other media such as TV and Video Games. Info from wikipedia again.
ReplyDeleteI find the study of American toys extremely fascinating, especially the label of certain toys to certain genders. I would love to read a research paper regarding the marketing strategies behind selling toys to certain demographics as well!
DeleteOne of my biggest takeaways from this class so far is the relationship of objects and their development to each other. For instance, in the case of my object, the microphone, it is essential that I be acquainted with the history of the telephone. The microphone, as it turns out, is completely dependent on the pursuit and realization of the telephone. The first legitimate microphones are telephones first came into being in the years 1876, 1877, and 1878. All relevant inventors, like Alexander Graham Bell, David Edward Hughes, Emile Berliner, and Thomas Edison were all piggybacking off each other and fighting over patents. The nature of inventors and their relationships to each other is something I've never really seriously thought about. The concept of patents is an interesting one, and it is even more interesting to hypothesize what society would be like without the implementation of patents. Would that entail a communistic society? What if the Russians had won the cold war? What would that have meant for the innovations and creations of technologies?
ReplyDeleteIt is very interesting to see how business would inspire technological innovations. However as we saw in lecture for the refrigerator and guns, business process can end up slowing down or preventing further development if it is more profitable to do so.
DeleteI found the rifle lecture to be really interesting because it connected a lot of the ideas we have previously explored in class. It was easy to relate to the refrigerator lecture because both topics explore how industries push forward their most profitable product, not necessarily their highest quality product. The electric refrigerator was chosen over the gas refrigerator just as the M-16 was chosen over a more useful and sturdy alternative in the interests of trade deals and low cost of goods.
ReplyDeleteThis lecture also connected to the aluminum lecture in regards to material and technological development shaping society. Advances in weaponry technology changed warfare, and thus the outcome of colonization and many conflicts in the 19th century.
This lecture also shares similarity with the telephone lecture because it describes a monopolistic corporation. Both Winchester and Bell controlled the landscape of their respective industries and led the charge in development.
In summary, the rifle lecture reinforces the topics we have covered in class including the fact that industries choose the products that are available on the market based on profit rather than quality, the way materials shape our world, and the ability of large corporations to influence societal development.
That was something I really did admire about this lecture too, it is pretty significant when a professor can relate past material to new. Bottom line, profit is all many manufacturers care about, for large corporations do shape the industry.
DeleteThe past few lectures really instilled in my how much symbolic and intrinsic value all these cornerstone objects have. It's truly incredible that an object like a short handled hoe or rifle has so many implications tied to the history of the United States; these objects have transcended that of being just a tool; they talk about a time period, a set of ideologies, and identify a class of people. These tenets are definitely something I will take into consideration when I write my own essay on watches; I can speak about the utilitarian value they had in the time they were manufactured and how watches like those that were meant for aviation identify people of the past and truly speak to a time period.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said, at first when I read about this class I thought I wasn't going to learn anything interesting because in my mind objects are objects. However, it was quickly shown that all objects have history, no matter how small and how circumstance and wealth could influence what we see in the market. The most beneficial isn't what is always shown.
DeleteLooking back on recent lectures, I would have to say the one not too long ago on the short-handled hoe really caught my attention. It is crazy to think I have seen this item for gardening and have not thought twice about it being used on a daily basis for workers and how that may impact them. When Professor Kaplan started listing all the side effects and detrimental consequences that come with its use, I was blown away. I also did not know that this length of a hoe is illegal and symbolized how times would finally change for the many Mexican workers facing the repercussions. Learning about Cesar Chavez and the organized labor movements he led, puts into perspective how strikes and advocacy movements can really change how things are handled. Chavez secured labor raises and improved conditions.
ReplyDeleteRelating this to an outside source, as a stretch, I saw a connection between Chavez and the worker strikes that have been on around campus. In both cases better pay is a necessity and something desperately wanted by the people offering services. It is quite riveting to think that such a simple tool caused a desperate need for change, just as when one UC worker realized their pay was not enough for what they are putting in, many others did too. The short-handled hoe was the starting point for changed that impacts farmers even today, and all it takes is one person to follow through with that transformation.
I completely agree. I was astonished that this went on until so recently. I cannot believe that society was so course for so long.
DeleteThe refrigerator is a key example of how wealth and influence can determine whether a product will ever face the public or stay in the dark. After learning that even though one fridge was better than the other, the one with the most influence is what surged and what is being used today. It made me wonder about all the other objects whose developments could have been improved but weren't due to the fact they could not get any resources. Although to many it won't be shock, I did not expect that even something like the refrigerator would be treated this way. It was a wake up call.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteEMMA JAMES 5:10 SECTION: Growing up around agriculture has exposed me to several different tools and methods for harvesting and planting. I've always been familiar with the long handled hoe, and never knew the difference between the short handled hoe and the long handled hoe. In the lecture covering this object, I became informed not only of the history of the long handled hoe as a tool, but the oppression that lies behind it. The importance of analyzing objects in our everyday lives and the way that we use them can inform us of our history not only in America, but Californian agriculture. The fight and struggle for fair labor conditions, wages, and rights is ongoing, and can be represented through objects like the short handled hoe. Gaining insight on the objects around us can give Americans the opportunity to correct our unfair labor practices in agriculture and countless other fields.
ReplyDeleteI love how you brought in your agricultural background while taking the topic of the short-handled hoe into consideration. It's interesting to see the perspective of someone who is familiar with the field of agriculture, and to take in their experience with the short vs. long handled hoe. I feel like the fact that you personally didn't realize the difference between them until this class further validates the idea that they were used to oppress a specific group in history.
DeleteWhen I first started to want a pair of Doc Martens, I remember seeing a lot of the idols I had wearing them. There was always a certain stigma associated with these shoes which is a funny thing to think about. All shoes serve the same function, some more than others; but the function that peaked my interest is the statement they reinforce. An object I can compare this to is the refrigerator. Yes, it served the function of allowing ordinary people store their food more effectively but it also began to symbolize a better life. Doc Martens aren't just shoes, they're a symbolic representation and appreciation of the working class, of a societal progression of subcultures.
ReplyDeleteI think that symbols in society are really fascinating things-- isn't it so crazy and cool to think that shoes can make a cultural statement? And the associations that our brains can make when connecting multiple objects is also really strange and interesting. In hindsight, we can see that owning a refrigerator in its early days was a really big deal, and probably a sign of wealth, but it's likely that most consumers at the time really had no idea that they were also buying a status symbol when purchasing their refrigerator. Any purchase we make today comes with a political, social, or economic statement, and it's very difficult to navigate this maze of symbols in day to day life. If you're tackling this kind of subject in your research, I think that's very impressive
DeleteWhen we began the in-class conversation on guns, I was entirely convinced that the themes and lessons from the lecture would hardly apply to my own object: the hamburger. Incredibly enough however, the discussion on guns resulted in a very relevant idea to my topic, the idea being the fact that corporations and lobbyists often lead others to buy a worse product for the wrong reasons. As we learned in class, the M14 and M16 were heavily lobbied for as the military standard for the United States, and yet failed the reasonableness test when put up against other modern weapons such as the AR-15. The reason why any of this is relevant to the hamburger ties into a very important historical moment I will talk about in my own paper: the writing of "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. It is common knowledge that the horrors of the meat-packing industry in the early 1900s were finally revealed to the public by Sinclair, and the book ushered in a lot of reform and transparency in fast-food restaurants, including in the first American hamburger chain, White Castle, which existed at that time period. In my own research, I am learning how the poor practices of the meat-packing industry (the hamburger equivalent to the M16) were brought to light, and what political action was taken to ensure that better products were brought to market.
ReplyDeleteI watched a video on swings lately. They were talking about how Americans have incorporated them into their backyards. When I was a child, it was rare that to have a friend with a swing set in their yard. To me, it was a luxury to go to the park and ride on a swing with my siblings and parents. These fun architectual designs found in public spaces were becoming a part of the every day household more and more. The video I watched claimed that it was a "new way to connect with the family," but I feel like a family can bond more by taking the occasional walk to the local park and spending time playing on the swing set, rather than enjoying the swing set in the backyard for a few weeks after it is built and then forgetting about it, like one does. As a child, the swing set was an adventure, a privilege, and an experience that I shared with my family. The more normalized and "everyday" an object becomes, the more it loses this allure.
ReplyDeleteI find your point about "normalizing" everyday objects very important. Normalization is essentially what shapes our society and what objects we depend on for daily use. For example phones and technology has become normalized to the point to where new generations cannot imagine life without it.
DeleteOne thing that I have found very interesting in this class is that the best version of objects are not always the ones that get mainstream manufactured. In the beginning of the quarter we talked about how the gas refrigerator was just as good as the electric one, if not slightly better, but due to power and manufacturing interests, the electric refrigerator became the one that was more highly sought after and used and is still the version that we know today. We saw this theme again when we talked about rifles. Throughout different American wars, often the best models were not chosen for government contracts even though they could save many lives. The political interests and money would lead to an inferior rifle to win the contract, with little regard for the human lives that they would lose. It's interesting to see the theme of power promoting lesser objects throughout American objects but sad to see that money can trump saving lives.
ReplyDeleteI also was very intrigued by this exact issue in regard to what was standard issue in the American army. It seems logical that the government should turn to the most effective and trustworthy weapons and value keeping up with the technology of opponents in order to bring as many of the troops home safely as possible. But they clearly don't do that as they view war as a forceful business transaction where their standard issue supplies are the supplies that the best and most persuasive salesman stood up for. It is eye opening to see that preserving life is not always the government's strongest motivation.
DeleteThe two lectures we had about guns reminded me of a recent book I read a few years ago titled The Gun Culture by Tony Hart, which stipulated that the 1873 Winchester repeater did more than win the west, it created modern gun culture. Before repeating rifles, guns took a sizeable amount of time to reload, making them an impractical weapon of defense for a single homestead when faced with multiple assailants, so the modern myth of a ‘self-reliant frontiersman’ defending their homestead with a blunderbluss or musket, is revisionist history, and did not become true until the rise of the Winchester and colt six shooter. These guns were widely successful and lead to the onset of large scale manufacturers and corporate interests. Ironically it was later in the interests of these same large scale manufacturers of repeated weaponry to downplay their own importance, by tying the use of fire arms to the founding mythos as a fundamentally American ideal, rather than ideal that only became feasible part way through the western era.
ReplyDeleteYes I agree, the more usable the gun became it was more attractable as a gun interest. In today's society, we can also see an influx in gun manufacturing ever since gun debate has become a divisive topic.
DeleteThe lecture of guns shows the close relationship between profit and product, how companies would often choose a more profitable design at the expense of their consumer. The product would still be mass advertised to convince the audience that the design is the best choice such as the current government proclaiming the m4 to be the best standard issued gun currently. And through these advertisements many people see firearm as a central part of the USA identity due to it's role in the revolutionary war, fulfilling Manifest Destiny, and WWII. This in turn helps the mass production of weapons, thus showing how the product and society are all interconnected.
ReplyDeleteI also thought about the profit design in terms of the military contracts. I thought it was quite strange that the military would make troops use inferior technology when better is available. The superior performing tools should be the ones that move and be further developed, so it is strange that the mass produced standardized, but inferior guns were used instead all because of military contracts.
DeleteThe data and history behind the use of various firearms throughout America that was covered in the readings for Thursday and next week Tuesday was very interesting to me. Personally, I have never held a real rifle or handgun, so I tend to associate the weapons with war, social misconduct, and a tool of fear. I was specifically interested in how the readings and videos portrayed the use of the guns such as the M-16 along with the detailed maintenance that was necessary to keep them operational during the Vietnam War, along with the page in the reading regarding the common myths about firearms. Yes, guns became mass produced and increasingly innovative as new technologies such as injection molding became common for their designs. The fact that a material object such as a gun has the power to take life in the hands of enemies and other people with bad intentions is largely why they cause such great controversy in our current society. In the scope of this class, the hand gun and rifle did become increasingly modernized, used new technological advances, challenged gender roles (for example if a woman was qualified to protect her home and property with such a device, or how society viewed the celebrity gunslinger Annie Oakley), is used as a recreational tool as well as a tool for oppression, and they have stirred up many debates. The gun is surely a multifaceted tool for recreation, protection, and fear making it an everyday object that everyone knows about and tends to associate strong emotions with.
ReplyDeleteThese objects – the clock radio, the teacup, the bowl – are unremarkable objects, in the sense in which I use them every day and have given them very little thought since I first purchased them. Yet they are integral to defining who I am (both physically and socially) as a human being, acting as a daily physical interface between myself and the world. While these objects may have been manufactured by acts of human agency, they also in turn shape me as a user and consumer of them. They mediate a wide range of interactions between myself and other objects and human beings, while themselves constituting a part of my physical world. For example, when I make a cup of tea and hand it to a family member in the morning, the teacup helps mediate a gesture of care and affection. Years of use of similar teacups mean that my hand has grown accustomed to the shape and feel of the cup, which I handle with adeptness and ease, without having to think of how to balance it between thumb and forefinger while I rush about the house.
ReplyDeleteI think that this is a really good point. You never really think about how objects, such as the clock shape your everyday life and dictate how you move throughout the world. In an object-human relationship, it is not always the human that has the control.
DeleteThe lecture of the short-handed hoe really enlightened me to the effects that a single item can have on society. The short handed hoe forced people to in a sense bend down and be treated as tools by the employers. The key point that stuck to my mind was the comparison and power of choice. Someone working on their own gardens with a short handed hoe could stop and take breaks to stand and stretch, while the workers we saw could not. Standing up for them was a sign that they weren't working, and was reason for being fired. This inhumane cruelty - not even allowing another human a chance to stand and stretch- is an inconceivable prospect in modern times. But with the past, the single invention of a tool caused the suffering of many workers and jobs, resulting in a big revolution for rights and fair treatment. I like the thought that as time moves on, more and more big changes can occur for workers everywhere so they can receive the treatment they truly deserve for their work.
ReplyDeleteI thought the lecture on the rifle was particularly interesting. Consumers don't realize the process that their objects go through before they are for sale on the shelf. It is heart breaking that so many soldiers lost their lives due to a faulty gun that was made poorly only due to business and government profit desires. The lecture on the rifle also reminded me of our first lecture on the electric vs. the gas refridgerator. The refridgerator is yet another example of how little say the consumer actually has in the products being produced for them. Even though a product might be better in all ways, and safer, corporations that have the money and the power ultimately decide in the end.
ReplyDeleteI agree, the wealthy were the ones who could decide what type of product to sell to consumers and were able to exploit them. They could also afford the best products for themselves, such as the multi-round shooting guns.
DeleteI found Thursday's lecture on the rifle particularly interesting. Due to current events and the ever-escalating problem of modern gun violence, this lecture stuck with me the most. A specific part of lecture that I found really eye-opening was the part where Professor Kaplan explained how long it used to take to load a rifle. Considering modern adaptations made to rifles, and how many more rounds can now be fired at once, it's almost foolish to compare gun control of the past to gun control today. It was also interesting to learn about the culture and history behind the popularization of the rifle. I felt compelled to learn more about the association with Western culture and militarization. I was shocked to learn about how many soldiers' lives were lost due to the fact that big corporations put money over human lives. It was a concept that I hadn't considered and it was eye-opening. I also thoroughly enjoyed talking about the Winchester Mystery House, because as someone who is from San Jose, it was exciting to talk about something so close to home.
ReplyDeleteI thought the lecture on rifles was very interesting. I used to play shooting video games that would use those exact guns mentioned in lecture, and I never thought that these guns were so poorly made. These guns would jam all the time on the battlefield, yet these were the guns supplied to our troops. Also, the innovation of the multi-round shooting gun was so expensive that only the wealthy could afford it, leaving the troops with low quality guns. What also interested me was how guns grew in popularity within Western culture. These guns were portrayed in "Old Western" movies and were also used to recruit young men to the army, thinking it was cool to be carrying around these weapons.
ReplyDeleteFrom the past lectures, the object that interested me the most was the flower. It interested me the most because I already knew some information on the history of flowers and how they became popular. But in the lecture, I got in-depth information. For example, the trade of flowers is bigger than I believed. I knew that flowers came from different parts of the World, but I didn't know that there was one place that sold million upon millions of flowers every day. Another interesting thing is how each type of flower represents something different. The idea of "saying it" with flowers has changed the way that people buy flowers for others. With that in mind, one wouldn't think that flowers have a such a big effect on the economy, but it does. For example, Professor Kaplan explained how each flower arrangement or bouquet comes from different parts of the world and in which price includes the expenses that it took to arrive to the florist. I find it so interesting and amazing that a single flower can involve so many different aspects that one wouldn't normally think of when buying an arrangement.
ReplyDeleteI also found it interesting that flowers came all over the world. From the reading i found it really interesting how Ecuador sells about 40 million dollars worth of roses to Russia. These flowers make their way to the buyers who make bouquets and sell them in retail stores. Flowers travel all around the world, sending messages of hope, support, love, sorrow, and congratulations. The transportation of flowers is truly amazing.
Delete