I searched through what seemed like an endless amount of blogs from classmates, until I finally found a blog post I disagreed with. Cristina Samper said in one of her blog posts that "historically, there is proof that when there is no balance, things tend to lean in to absolute chaos and disaster." I examined this statement for a while, and resolved to agree with it. Then, as I read more and more blog posts, I kept thinking about that remark, and I came to the realization that I, in fact, did not agree with it!
It's a valid point of view, though. There is much evidence to back it up, as Cristina clearly showed, but there is a counterargument for each point she made. She explained that once Douglass learned to read and write, "he lost his sense of balance. He was never content, never satisfied with the amount of learning he obtained, and gradually he became his own teacher of language." However, this doesn't translate to her original thought of "absolute chaos and disaster" always being created from and unevenness. Rather quite the opposite, this unbalance in Douglass' life didn't lead to disaster, but rather to triumph and resiliency in what was ultimately his escape to freedom.
No comments:
Post a Comment