Extended Reflection: World Fair's Influence on America

In what ways does the Chicago World's Fair of 1893 change America? What lasting inventions and ideas did it introduce into American culture? What important figures were critically influenced by the Fair?

The influence that the Chicago World’s Fair may not seem great at surface value, based on the fact that many Americans remain oblivious to the grand event held in 1893. However, it impacted America far more than first perceived. The World’s Fair changed America’s view of the world, and vice versa. This was America’s attempt to show the world it had the potential to be a leading power. The many exotic, fascinating, and exciting events and exhibits at the fair introduced Americans to the many different cultures of the world.

 The construction of the fair was a huge obstacle and the way it was overcome was quite amazing for the time. The wood frames of the buildings were put up first, and then in an effort to save time, they were spray painted. No longer did individuals have to paint with brushes. This quick and easy way of using hoses to spray the paint onto the building surfaces quickened the painting process. Francis Millet was credited with this new technique of painting, and in the end, his “spray painting” idea was a huge part of getting the fair up and running on time. Another huge part of the pre-fair process was the electricity. Upon further investigation I found that Nikola Tesla, the Serbian inventor/mechanical engineer, along with the Westinghouse Company was picked to power the fair, over American inventor Thomas Edison. Tesla’s cost of powering the fair came at a much cheaper price than Edison’s. Edison, mad at losing the deal, did not allow Westinghouse or Tesla to use his bulbs. Instead Westinghouse came up with their own bulbs that were more efficient than Edison’s. The Chicago World’s Fair ended up being the brightest event on earth in 1893, thanks to Tesla and the Westinghouse Co.  This “electricity race” if you will, led to a brighter future for America, as electrically powered light bulbs became a strong contender for household lighting. Phosphorescent bulbs came about as a result of Tesla’s involvement in the lighting of the fair. A few other notable inventions came about in the forms of food. Cracker Jacks were first introduced at the fair, along with other traditional modern American foods. Juicy Fruit gum, Quaker Oats, and Shredded Wheat are just a few. Perhaps the most influential and iconic invention at the fair was the Ferris wheel. This engineering marvel was designed to rival the Eiffel tower, and definitely succeeded at this job. It has become an icon at many American fairs, however all those are miniature versions. The original was designed to fit 40 people into each car.

The Fair managed to impact Walt Disney, who drew from the fair’s magnificent scenery to help him design his theme parks. L. Frank Baulm’s Emerald City in the Wizard of Oz was his recreation of the White City. The Fair showed the world the magic of its individual countries and cultures, and discreetly boosted America to a position of power, by stimulating the economy, and gaining the nation some respect.

America's Arrogance?

In describing the collapse of the roof of Manufacturers and Liberal Arts Building, Larson writes "In a great blur of snow and silvery glass the building's roof—that marvel of late nineteenth-century hubris, enclosing the greatest volume of unobstructed space in history—collapsed to the floor below" [p. 196–97]. Was the entire Fair, in its extravagant size and cost, an exhibition of arrogance? Do such creative acts automatically engender a darker, destructive parallel?

America is known for its flashiness and extravagance. We want to be the biggest, fastest, and baddest nation around. One event in history that displays this greater than many others: The Worlds Fair. Set up in Chicago in the short amount of 3 years, this magnificent city showed the tenacity and audacity that America had. It contained glorious buildings like the Manufacturers and Liberal Arts Building, and contained amazing contraptions that had never been seen anywhere in the world before. The Ferris Wheel was America’s way of “Out Eiffelling Eiffell” and shows that the fair was built to maintain the nations pride, rather than solely taunt others arrogantly. However, the fairs denial to implement a cost limit or resource limit shows the real motive behind the fair. This was America’s chance to show the world that it was the greatest nation, and by far. It was not meant to match other countries, it was meant to outdo them.

When something this creative is created then of course it engenders darker parallel. In this case Mr Holmes could be considered that parallel. In the broader scope that seems to be a relevant statement to many things. The United States, with all its intellectual, creative, and athletic potential and ability is matched by its criminal activity. That seemed to be a big theme in the book, where the greatness of the fair is the spotlight, but in the background there was always that criminal presence and history with Holmes. The display put on by America’s extravagant world fair was not solely arrogance, but was also the pride that this nation is known for. Throughout the course of the book, Burnham emphasizes that he wants to do it not only for Chicago, but for the United States as well. The idea of “out Eiffelling Eiffel” sounds like pure arrogance but I believe is a more prideful motive. As a nation that came from nothing, it is amazing that we came to such a prominent role in the late 19^th century. To celebrate such an accomplishment the World Fair was necessary. It was not just a way to celebrate, but a way to prove that America deserved to be one of the leading nations in the world. America still remains the arrogant nation to others and prideful nation to itself, but I believe this is justifiable. Other nations had their world fairs and although they were not as grand as the one held in Chicago, Im guessing they were just as expensive and time consuming. The world we live in is one based on material possessions and physical beauty. In order to fit in, one must appeal to both those criteria. The Worlds fair was simply America’s way of fitting in, whether it was pure arrogance or patriotic pride is determined by one’s point of view.

Evils Imminent Reflection

Extended Reflection Journal (BLOG) : In the note "Evils Imminent," Erik Larson writes "Beneath the gore and smoke and loam, this book is about the evanescence of life, and why some men choose to fill their brief allotment of time engaging the impossible, others in the manufacture of sorrow" [xi]. What does the book reveal about "the ineluctable conflict between good and evil"? What is the essential difference between men like Daniel Burnham and Henry H. Holmes? Are they alike in any way?

Before Larson begins his story, he gives this note about the "evils imminent" during a time like the late 1800s chicago. There are contrasts all throughout the book, and even the title offers its own contrasts in the words it uses. The Devil usually resonates a bad connotation, as he represents evil and sin, while the White City immediately gives the feeling of cleanliness or purity. The book displays conflict between these good and evil contrasts by showcasing the men Daniel Burnham and H H Holmes. Burnham, the good, is focused on “engaging the impossible” and giving everything he has for this Worlds Fair. Throughout the book Burnham faces extremely challenging obstacles as the book progresses through Part 1. He is given the opportunity to create the greatest event in history and he wants to prove that he can handle the responsibility, not just for the U.S., but to prove Chicago is worthy of such an honor. Holmes, the bad, is engaged in the “manufacture of sorrow” and goes on his killing spree by leading his victims to his hotel. Holmes is able to build his own Worlds Fair Hotel, and uses his incredible charm and good looks to manipulate the young women visiting Chicago to view the Worlds Fair. By fending off police and creditors, Holmes was able to go on the first serial killing spree. From the surface it may seem like Holmes is a madman, but his charm and the creepiness of his murders is so engaging it makes you wonder if he really is as evil as he seems. The “ineluctable conflict” here is apparent, as even though these men seem to have nothing to do with each other, they are both connected by their passions. Oddly enough, they are both blue eyed and passionate. Burnham is passionate about architecture, which in the end produces The Worlds Fair, one of the grandest events in history. Holmes passion for killing leads him to create his hotel during this Worlds Fair and manages to pursue his passion discreetly. Even though they never meet formally, the conflict between good and evil is unavoidable. Their fates were intertwined, as shown in the book. However they represent more than just an architect and a murderer. Burnham shows the fight and spirit that America has to always be the best, and by managing to build the fair shows his determination and will, and the will of America as a nation. Holmes shows the contrast to that: the seedy underbelly of America that we are unwilling to confess openly, but we allow to take place anyway. So although they are very different men, they are alike since they both represent aspects of the gilded-age and even modern America, and are both passionate about their work.

Blog 3 Satire

Satire is a literary form used to make fun of certain topics or ideas in the name of a good laugh, and at times for more. When used properly, satiristic Ideas can be seen as almost plausible, but never actually possible. But when used properly, (a smart, sharp piece of work underneath the hood, even if it may have a cartoonish look on the outside with some humor tossed in for good measure) it can be a very effective way for an author to get their point to the reader without having to actually state their point. It is becoming used a lot more in modern day situations than I thought. Ranging from specific cartoon shows to SNL and even some radio stations, the range of satirists in modern times is very broad. Often times the things they poke fun at are just for that- fun. But every once in a while there are the bigger issues that are brought in, and even though they may be controversial, some topics can be very enlightening as well when, viewed in a satirical spotlight. Just to give some examples of modern day satire users in television: The wacky cartoon show Family Guy and its creator Seth McFarlane, the popular TV show Saturday Night Live, the comedic The Colbert Report, the controversial and always hilarious South Park and its creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone and the list goes on and on. But satire is not just showcased in television. There are examples of satire in music, movies, radio, and even video games! I was surprised when I found some of the video games I played were seen as satirical. Here are some examples of the above-mentioned kinds.

Blazing Saddles, the 1974 western movie that satirized racism, Hostel, the dark horror movie that satirizes the darkness of human nature, The Onion News Network, a magazine publication that pokes fun at contemporary themes, the artist “Weird Al” Yankovic whose musical parodies poked fun at the original artists as well as others, and then the video game entitled Fallout 3, which satirized war and post doomsday life.

Now all these examples are good and well, but what do they do? Well when something is satirized, there are a few things the satirists want to do. At certain times the satirists want to show how stupid an idea or concept is, and simply aim to do that. Such is so with the article we read from the onion news article about MagnaSoles. All the claims the inserts were making were obviously untrue, and the onion compared this with modern advertisements to show how dumb they are. That’s all. At other times the satirists try inform the viewer/ listener of a different situation. Such is the case with the TV show SNL. A few weeks ago an episode aired and the popular “Weekend Report with Seth Myers” came up. One of the topics was about the president in Libya. One of the actors came out dressed as the Libyan president and started cracking jokes about how he was killing his people and such. The jokes were funny, but I didn’t realize how bad the situation was. After watching I later looked up the rebellion in Libya to find that a lot is going in there. So intentionally or not, the satirists can often make people realize about local, national, or even global issues. Another situation of the same type, though this may sound corny is the video game Fallout 3. The game is set in the future, but the game world was destroyed in the 1950’s era, leading to many of the historical figures of that time being talked about in game. Things like bomb shelters and president Eisenhower were in the game, and we are just now learning about them in history. So once again, the satirists can educate the viewer on purpose through certain elements.

I believe the example we read in class was a good case in the next reason for satire. To propose new ideas. A Modest Proposal was a very believable piece at first. The way the author presented his idea was legit and logical and made it seem as if he actually had a modest proposal… That is until he actually revealed his idea to eat the babies of the poor population in order to decrease the number of poor children. When I stated the idea, it sounded absolutely absurd! But when the author proposed it he actually had a backing, the actual ways they would do it and such. This was actually a satire of their government, and how it could not control the population, but it was an easy way for him to propose a new idea. The magic of satire is that the humor can throw off and weird thoughts the reader gets whilst reading. I would have immediately stopped reading if the article had been dull and just proposed the ideas with no flare. Another thing we read was a letter written regarding beavers. The beavers had begun to build dams along a river in a mans back yard. These beavers did not bother the man, however the city did not enjoy their habitats. As a response to a city letter the man writes how the beavers have every right to be there and to build. By personifying the animals, he makes a good argument and honestly makes the city look wrong. This example was particularly good because of his use of the word “dam” in almost every dam sentence. The end result was a clever letter that showed us what satire really is. The end result of all satire however is humor. Though all may not bring new light to a situation, they all can make you laugh, whether it is out loud or a little mental chuckle. But those satirists who can make you laugh and inform you are special. The ones like SNL and the onion present ideas and issues and can make you learn while also laughing.

BLOG 2 (Hemingway's Heroic Code)

In order to examine how Romero displays the qualities defined in Hemingway’s code of ethics, we must first return to Romero’s introduction into the story. Romero is described as a handsome, dignified young man, who is an exceptional bullfighter. He “saved his bulls for the last when he wanted them, smoothly worn down” and “always worked to the bull”. He is able to work with his bulls at a very close distance, wearing them down until he feels like ending the fight. This description of Romero’s type of bullfighting reinforces Hemingway’s code, by showing how Romero handles himself assuredly and confronts the danger head-on. Bullfighting is an unpredictable… “hobby” and many find themselves standing far from the bull and taunting it then pulling away at the last second. However, Romero exhibits his physical prowess, and mental toughness by working closely with each bull he fights.

One thing that is noteworthy about Romero’s role in the story, is how he is juxtaposed with the other men in the book, mainly Jake, making his qualities seem much better. He is introduced considerably late in the story, allowing time for the men such as Robert, Jake, and Mike to show their true colors, and how “weak” they really are as male characters. Hemingway’s hero would be some one who handles himself surely and faces his problems head on. With Robert, Mike, and Jake, it is obvious they cant handle themselves surely, especially since they are all drinking so much. Also Jake cant really face his troubling situation with Brett head on so instead he just rolls with the punches and lets her control him. It is easy to see how contrasted Romero is to the other male characters in the book. One interesting thing I noticed was how the only way Romero displays Hemingway’s hero code, is in the bullfighting ring. When outside of the ring he is still seen as handsome and dignified, but I don’t feel as though he emulates the same characteristics he does when inside the ring.

So how does Romero display the qualities of a hero? Basically by the way he presents himself and moreover, the way he fights in the ring. I think that if Romero was introduced as someone other than a bullfighter he would not have the same impact. The bullfighting is the way Hemingway portrays him as a hero.

As for modern day heroes, there are quite a few people and professions that fit Hemingway’s description. Personally I believe that a hero is brave/courageous and doesn’t necessarily exhibit grace under pressure, but is able to handle pressure and can take a challenge. The classic examples of firefighters and the police force are great for this description. Both firefighters and police officers go to work unsure of what is going to happen, and sometimes they end up in very stressful situations. It is these situations that separate these courageous people from ordinary citizens. Firefighters must display their grace under pressure to get rid of the fires that they fight each day. If they were ungraceful, there is a risk that the fire might spread. Police do the same with the criminals they face. If they did not exhibit grace under pressure, they run the risk of letting criminals go free.

If looking at Hemingway’s description in a wider lens, you may notice there are more heroes than you realized. Politicians, Teachers, Zookeepers, Soldiers, and many more could be considered heroes based on Hemingway’s description. While the latter is automatically assumed to be heroes, since they die for their country, the other three may seem a little random. However the way I see it, each of those professions face difficult situations, and in order to perform their jobs correctly, the must “display grace under pressure” and they all handle themselves assuredly while facing their “dangers” head on. In my opinion Hemingway’s description of a hero is sort of hit or miss for modern heroes, but it is easy to see how Romero displays the characteristics in his section of The Sun Also Rises.

Reflection on The Execution of Tropman

Is it really necessary for ruthless criminals to be sentenced to execution? There are many viewpoints on this topic, but in the execution of tropman, by Ivan Turgenev, it is seen as an unnecessary and even barbaric act. In mr. Turgenevs essay about a convicted mans execution, it is easy to see how he feels about the situation. The way he describes the whole night easily makes the reader want to take up his side of the argument. He is reluctant to even go to the execution at first, and I thought it was interesting how he kept feeling the burden of guilt come up throughout the execution process.

He presents the situation in a somewhat subjective tone, but for the most part his examinations were correct. The crowd was getting hyped for no reason. Turgenev is able to show how simple the humanPsyche becomes when there is a chance to see something that is a rare opportunity. Many people came to this execution, but only the front few could even see... I thought this was an interesting point because so often humans will do un natural things to say they were part of something big. Turgenevs inclusion of this analysis greatly helps his critique against capital punishment.

However his subjective tone does take away from his argument in the long run. He keeps talking about the cons of the execution and how barbaric everyone acts just to be there, but not once mentions the pros of the execution. This may be because tropman was young and perhaps innocent, but every essay needs to look at the counter argument and try to acknowledge it.This essay is talking about an execution a long time ago, making me feel that it's analyzations are not necessarily true about people in modern times. Nowadays the criminals on death row are put to execution for much worse crimes, but they are not a public event. I believe the only fuel Turgenev had for his argument was the fact that the crowd acted so differently than normal humans would. If the people had gathered respectfully and watched the execution quietly take place, this would be a totally different story.

I remember last year we had a debate on whether capital punishment was justified or not, and my view on the topic was picked for me. Now that I can choose for myself, I realize how hard of a decision it is. There are people that deserve to be executed, but we as humans do not have the right to simply take another life. Like ghandi said "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." I think that simply because of the way he describes the event, I am going to side with Turgenev on this argument. Capital punishment is one injustice that should not exist.