Futurist Manifestos

In “The Futurist Manifestos”, when explaining the futurist movement, it is clear they wanted everything to be original and rebellious compared to older works. They wanted to “glorify war” and “destroy”. Out of all the initial things said what do you think would be hard for people to go along with? And What might be the most controversial?

What was the reason?

In  “All things fall apart” Both the clan and the Christians try to justify their own religious beliefs, the Christians wanted land to build a church that could help bring in more people, and In order for the village leaders to prove they were right they wanted to denounce the Christians beliefs. In chapter 17, it says, “They did not really want them in their clan, and so they made them that offer which nobody in his right senses would accept” (Pg.148). By giving them land on the “evil” forest they wanted to make sure the Christians were set to fail, but they did not. Do you think that the Christians succeeding in the forest could be a sole cause for why many villagers join after?

Ladies’ Paradise

In the Ladies’ Paradise, by Emile Zola, it is obvious that Zola depicts this story with women being materialistic, whereas the men are opportunistic. The women brag about their personal belongings in discreet ways, the men use the women to their advantage and by doing so they put their own personal gain in front of their relationships. Why is it people with “class” lack morals? What do you think this says about the society and time they lived in? Do you think everyone was as egotistical as they were?

Make it make sense

In Duties to country, by Giuseppe Mazzini, it is obvious that Mazzini thinks to have a country there must be unity. On page 285 it says, “ There is not true Country where the uniformity of that right is violated by the existence of caste, privilege, and equality-where the powers and facilities of a large number of individuals are suppressed or dormant-where there is no common principle accepted, recognized, and developed by all”(Mazzini,Pg.285). What Mazzini means when he says this is that no one should be above or below anyone else. Even though he believes this he is suppressing the beliefs of other people. Do you think that when he says stuff like this, he realizes he’s going against his own words?

The Twelve Demands

In the address by the Hungarian parliament and Demands of the Hungarian people, citizens wanted change to occur and therefore demanded for twelve demands to be fulfilled. Due to the government’s lack of following constitutional direction which prevented the development of the constitutional system in Hungary it would be difficult for change to happen. But If the Hungarian people got their demands, which do you believe would be the hardest to attain? And why? Also do you think some people would argue against these demands?

is criticism good or bad?

In On Liberty and The Subjection of Women, Mills believes that opinions must be at their truest form to be imposed upon others, but he also thinks that there is no way to confirm the truth because there is no “absolutely certainty”. Even though he knows opinions cannot be confirmed fully he deems it necessary for these opinions to be out in the public. In chapter 2 he says, “Wrong opinions and practices gradually yield to fact and argument: but facts and arguments, to produce any affect on the mind, must be brought before it” (page 27).He’s pretty much saying that wrong opinions and practices create facts and arguments. By having these opinions in the public, it allows for the individual to learn from the criticism being brought by facts and arguments. But do you think that criticism is always supporting the individual? Do you think that criticism might just harm and degrade others?

Importance of Women

In the “Characteristics of the women of England”, Ellis exaggerates that middle-class households could only be successful if the women focused solely on the well being of their household. She describes these women as “… guardians of comfort of their homes” (page 156). Without women the house will go into chaos. Even though, a key factor of success in these houses were to have women, they were still going without recognition. Why is it that women play such a huge role in England yet get no recognition? Was it because they would always be seen as inferior to men or because no one really saw their actions as being important?