Was Justice Served?

     The book, The Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, by Sherman Alexie, so far is about a Indian boy named Junior, who goes through medical issues and poverty with his family. He lives on the "Rez" a neighborhood where only people of color are living there, unfairly and with disrespect. Junior faces through many struggles as mentioned before because this book takes place during a time of injustice. One day he was forced to face another basketball team who was his new schools bigfest rival. He eventually won and the struggles with his friend, Rowdy, soon worked out fine. In this situation, justice was served because everything worked out and Junior's life was at least better than ever rven when he suffered some family losses. However, in my opinion, because this time is during segregation, justice was not served even though Junior was the first person to go to a all white school.

     One of the reasons why justice was served is because as mention, his friendship with Rowdy was  resolved. For instance, Rowdy was on the opposing team when they had their basketball game. After Rowdy's defeat, Rowdy realized how muchJunior was capable of living on his own and fighting for his own goals and he did that by defeating him and his team in a game Rowdy was really good at. This shows justice was served even when the situation was radical to face. One of the reasons why I think justice was not served is because I was expecting Junior to impct the white school more than he did. For example, after Junior won for his team, there was cheer, but there wasn't much cheering for Junior and his impact on how people of color and play well, and they have the skills and powerthat they have. However, because he lives in a segregated area, nobody pays attention to him and that is the injustice that I felt was not served.

     In conclusion, although main plot/conflict was solved and the justice that was gifen to Junior and those surrounding him was served, I feel that segregation in general that revolves around the characters, was not served because it was not put into an end, nor was the school where Junior transfered to was not heavily impacted by Junior.

Argument Essay (on YA books)

     YA literature has been part of teens over the course of 40 years, but nowadays, these books have been receiving an outstanding amount of hate and disgust. People, mainly parents, and authors have been debating on limiting access to these books because these books have been traumatizing and nauseating. However, YA fiction has been adored and been with adolescents for so long that limiting access to these books would be imprudent decision and will most likely cause more anarchy within teenagers, considering how chaotic the situation has already become.
     One of the reasons why access to YA books should not be limited is because adolescents are always connecting to characters within these books and are encouraged by them. For instance, in Sherman Alexie (author of award winning teen novel, The Absolute True Diary of A Part Time Indian) wrote an article, Why the Best Kids Books are Written in Blood, where steps in and explains why YA books have been written with some disturbing content. He mentions a troubling boy whose father is forcing him into being in the military. The young boy doesn't want to and would dedicate his life into writing books. The boy even says, “I want to be myself. Just like in your book.” He refers to Sherman Alexie’s book, The Absolute True Diary of A Part Time Indian, and mentions how he wants to be like the character in this book. We've learned to use the text to self strategy when making reading responses, so banning books would make this strategy useless. Also, in this article, Sherman Alexie mentions the fact that YA books have gruesome content because teens have been through these harsh and dark themes of these books. He states that he gets a lot of mail everyday from teenagers who love his book. A lot of them have even been through" rape, family lost, depression, gang warfare" and a lot more. These teens have specified how much Sherman Alexie’s book meant to them. This sums up the fact that YA books are meaningful to adolescents and should not be banned in any way, or anywhere.
     Another reason why access to YA books should not be limited is because these books also been around for educational and entertainment purposes and there is no law that prevents readers from reading these kind of books and writers for writing in a dark way. For instance, in the article, Teen Fiction Plots are Darker and Starker, by William Porter, he mentions a quote from famous author, David Levithan, saying, "Writers today feel this freedom to write what they want, light or dark...When you feel the world is broken, as an author you create an alternative world to try and fix it." What he is trying to say is that authors write for a purpose, to express their feelings and show teenagers that there are people who go through a time, but just show it in a fictional way. In addition, we've learned to use the text to self strategy when making reading responses, so banning books would make this strategy useless. Thus, limiting access to these books is a dreadful decision.
     In contrast, parents urge readers to stop reading YA literature because many of the stories contain sinister content that can fright teens. They claim that YA literature can give teens a bad view of Earth and give them ideas of being in a gang or do anything immoral. For instance, in Meghan Cox Gurdon’s article, “Darkness too Visible,” Ms. Gurdon claims that YA fiction contains too much dark content that include, rape, drug addiction, suicide, and more. Although this is true, it is not for the wrong, it is for entertaining, and education. Ms.Gurdon keeps generalizing the issue as if she doesn't know much about it. YA literature is still has its benefits. In addition, YA books cannot be traumatizing when adolescents are already going through the horrors that are within these books.
     All in all, the situation on YA books is dim-witted. There isn't a point in banning YA books when they have been a great success for the past years and have help change the lives of teens. Although there are books with gruesome content, banning these books won’t make the situation better. Do people honestly think that books will be banned for no one to read?

Champion by Marie Lu

      Champion by Marie Lu is the sequel to her book prodigy, which might be the final book for the Legend series. So far, this book leaves to an amazing ending, but the plot/conflict within this book surprises me. In the book Champion, it is an intense story, still with the two teenagers June and Day living in a dark world where America has been split about into two separate unions, the patriots, and the republics. June and Day live in the republic and the other side of America is called the patriots, however, they are constantly at war. However, in Champion, they soon learn that there is far more than just a war, but genocide. A new disease or plague that was made by the republic has suddenly been released and has been infecting innocent pedestrians. This book has showed me how war and genocide towards the innocence can badly affect someones ranking/placement within a certain place.
     One of the reasons why this books makes me feel sympathetic is because this book shows the elector (president in other words) losing his "fame and popularity" because of this plague that has been released. Recently, he just took his fathers place in being elector and gave a speech in being peaceful. However, ever since this plague has been released, people have started rebellions and protest against his place in being the elector of America. The story mentions the fact that he almost lost his place in being elector in the first place, even though his father was a good leader. This illustrates the fact that high class people are affected by war and genocide and it makes the situation almost unavoidable when you have so much power over the people that surround you. Furthermore, within June and Day, over the past books, they have become America's most wanted, but because of this plague, their presents is not as important then before, which also proves my point in how war and genocide changed peoples view of others.
     In conclusion, war and genocide are two things that everyone wants to avoid, but if it is done by accident, it can really affect someones position, and it can be more than one persons class. This book champion shows a good gist of what war and genocide can cause to people and that is one of the most important things that I absolutely enjoy about this book and the series in general.

Non Fiction Critical Analysis

  In, "Why the Best Kids Books are Written in Blood," by Sherman Alexie, author of The Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, wants to elaborate why YA books are having much more gruesome content for the past 40 years and how these books are not "traumatizing" towards teens, but helpful, entertaining, and even educational. Sherman uses teens themselves to support his statement of how YA books are not damaging teens, nor scaring them into thinking life as a bad, disturbing, and very frightening. Sherman also counters Megan Cox's claim in the article, "Darkness to Visible," and address's how Ms.Cox's argument is not sufficient enough and its mainly based on opinions and generalizes the situation.
  Sherman Alexie tries to persuade people to believe that YA books have gruesome content, but for a good cause. He mentions a boy who's father works at the military and wants his son to take his place. However the boy said, "I want to be a writer... I don't want to be like my father... I want to be myself. Just like in your book." He then explains how this moment was shocking and interesting because of how YA fiction would cause someone to read and write and not risk their lives at war. In addition to that, Sherman references teens at a ceremony who were impressed and inspired by his novel, The Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, and mentions the fact that some of these teens that have experienced "domestic violence, drug abuse, racism, poverty, sexuality, and murder" which were topics within Sherman's book. As mentioned earlier, Sherman Alexie counters Megan Cox's argument of why YA fiction should be banned, and states how topic within YA fiction would actually "scare" a reader when instead teens read YA books for entertainment and education, which sums up his argument of why YA books have gruesome content, but for a good cause.
  In my opinion, YA books are not as bad as people think they are. The point of YA books or books in general, is to entertain people. We choose to read these books because we are interested of the plots, characters, etc. People overreact to what they think, but never think about others and how banning these books will only hurt them. Honestly, it irritates me when people, like Megan Cox, exaggerate and just generalize the situation without giving any much thought about it. In addition, why would we want to ban books that have earned many awards, like this is just wrong to people, but mainly the authors who wrote these amazing books. If there is an issue, then that is your issue, why would you want to spread your hate to people that love these books. All in all, YA books should not be banned in several places, and I can understand why some of these books have gruesome content, and its for educational and entertainment purposes.

YA Book Blog (From Synthesis Page)

     Prodigy, by Marie Lu is the sequel the book Legend. This book starts off with our two protagonists, June, and Day. They have just escaped a secret American HQ, and Day was injured. So now they are in the city, hiding, with Day having an injured leg and they have become America's most wanted people. Throughout this book and the last book, one character stands out to me and that is June. June's traits throughout the plot has develop and changed as she starts to learn what is going on. In this book, June is; insecure, powerless, valiant, and gullible and its appealing to me because of how these traits have carried her on with her life.
    One of the reasons why June is insecure is because she is America's "most wanted" and is constantly being chased by police officers. The book even mentions that many corporations keep files of June and are constantly keeping an our out of her. One of the reasons why June is powerless is because she becomes to soft whenever a family member is killed or is missing. And its not just that, but also when she loses something that she loved for a long period of time. For example, during the first book, there was scene on a ship and a pilot shot June's mother in front of June. After the incident, June felt devastated and felt like she couldn't do anything with her life. These traits show what June really is than what the police officers think about her. She has feelings as well, but people are to blind to notice them.
    One of the reasons why June is valiant is because she stood up to America's navy called "the patriots" and saves her best friend Day from getting executed. She also manages to continue her life after a loved one is killed, even when it is very hard to believe for a while. The book mentions that June stands up to one of the main commanders of the patriots, Commander Jameson. Last but not least, June is Gullible mainly because she was embarrassingly tricked by Razor, another commander for the patriot union. Razor kept June and Day in a HQ that was part of the Patriots, but somehow, none of the two knew about it. Razor even mentioned that he worked for a big "secret" HQ. This proves how gullible June can be when the stakes are high.
     In conclusion, June's traits are appealing but are not noticeable within other peoples perspective. June is a interesting character and the way she handles her life in very unique way. Although she can be very mixed, her way of life is very appealing to me and it is something other people might be able to relate to.

Baseline Argument Essay

     Scotland, an enormous part of the UK, is being debated today on whether it should leave the UK and become its own country. With its economy rising, it would be the best thing for Scotland to leave the UK. Also, since Scotland's independence has been an issue throughout its history, the time has come for Scotland to claim their own independence and decide for their own future.
     One of the reasons why Scotland should leave the UK is because it is such a large part of the UK, and if what is true about their economy rising, Scotland can have a chance of being there own country. Furthermore, Scotland had a lot of history claiming their own history. It all started during the Battle of BannockBurn, when, "Scotland gains independence by defeating England," during 1314. Then, "In 1707, a bankrupt Scotland agreed to enter a union with England: Scotland gave up independence in return to access English markets." This shows that Scotland was its own country at the time, but because the economy was decreasing, the Scottish chose to become one union with England, which shows how Scotland wasn't able to be its own country for a long time, but because its economy has risen, I believe that Scotland can hold its own independence for a long period of time.
     On the other hand, some people may say that Scotland should not leave the UK and become its own country because it would be a long process for making its own trade market, currency, economy, government, ect. The upfront article even states how the religion would be, and what will it take to be a Scottish Citizen.  Furthermore, who will run Scotland? Will it be democracy? Scottish voters haven't thought about that. Also, Scotland is allowing people from age 16 and higher to vote for Scotland's independence which is unfair against the UK for keeping Scotland within the union.
     In conclusion, Scotland leaving the UK is worth the risk. With a high population and good economy, Scotland  has a good chance of holding their own independence if the people tried. It is also repeating history from when Scotland had their own independence.  

Faithful Elephants Reading Response

     Faithful Elephants: A True Story of Animals, People and War, by Yukio Tsuchiya, takes place during a time when Japan is in war. A zoo in Japan, namely Ueno Zoo, is taking the situation in a very negative way. The zoo keepers fear that bombs will strike the zoo, which will make the animals free and run away. As a result, they were "forced" to kill their three most talented elephants so that they don't escape. It is very ominous how one setting can lead to a smaller setting. If it weren't for Japan being at war, Ueno Zoo, and other settings and characters within the story wouldn't have been the way they are.
     For example, since Japan was at war, people in Ueno zoo became affected by it because now the zoo keepers think that a bomb will hit ueno zoo and then all of the animals would run away. The story clearly states "What would happen if bombs hit the zoo? If the cages were broken and dangerous animals escaped to run wild through the city, it would be terrible!" This supports the idea of how one major setting gives an impact on other settings. Furthermore, the zoo keepers then decide that "It came time for the three elephants to be killed," which shows that Japan being at war gives conflict to the characters as well. 
     Another example is when the elephants were found dead in another setting, the elephants cage. This happened after the zoo keepers forced the elephants to starve to death. The story stated "Both died leaning against the bars of their cage with their trunks stretched high in the air, still trying to do their banzai trick for the people who once fed them." Now the elephants cage and the elephants have been affected by the zoo keepers because now they are dead since the zoo keepers thought that killing the animals instead of letting them run wild was a better choice. This shows that how Japan had a bad influence on Ueno zoo, the zoo keepers, the elephants, and the elephants age. 
     In conclusion, this story shows how one big setting can affect other characters and smaller settings that lies within the setting. Although I feel that the zoo keepers were overreacting on the situation, they were still scared of the dangers that could have occurred during the war that japan was fighting in.

Reading Response #1

     Legend, by Marie Lu is about two teenagers, June and Day, who come from different republics in America. When they were 10 years old, they took a test to see who would live a good life and who would be sent into "labor camps." Labor camps are horrible, people would get tested on. Luckily, both of them passes the test but sadly, Day was forced to be put into these camps and then becomes a mass criminal and June is sent to catch him. This book is amazing, however I believe that this book is violent to be available to children. This book has too much violence and some parts can be very disturbing. 

     For example, in one part of this book, June, Day, and Metias (June's brother) broke into a hospital to complete a mission. Unfortunately, not everyone made it out alive. Metias was shot in the head and was instantly killed. This is not right for a kid. Also, this moment happens early in the book which will be to disturbing for a kid to read. Furthermore, Day was then blamed for killing Metias and was taken away and was brutally beaten. June then saves Day, but then these characters become the most wanted criminals in America. This shows us that not only violence is common within the book, but the characters are criminals, and we are suppose to care for them? 

     Another example was the part when June broke into a secret government facility called "Batalla Hall" where June rescues Day, who is nearly close to death after being blamed for killing June's brother. They bring a friend, John into the fight, and then John sacrifices to do Junes dirty work. This part is confusing because now our "protagonists" are bringing friends into fights that they should not be involved in. More over, there was another part when June's mom was killed by a pilot while they were on a ship. There is too much death within the book and it takes maturity understand why. However for a kid to read this, its not going to be pleasant for them.

    In conclusion, I highly would not let a child read this book. Although the details are well written, the violence and level of maturity to read this book are too high. I don't think kids would be able to handle a book like Legend.