Three Topics from the Kennedy to Discuss in Class

1. Coach Dambrot (p. 115)
2. How people jump to conclusions about "the word" (p. 102)
3. Who has right to use "the word" (p. 103)

Does Kennedy approach the views from all sides?

I believe the best way to eradicate the “N-word” is not to simply sweep it under the rug and ban it from ever being spoken, but rather to educate people about it and why it is so controversial. When kids get older, it is something they will be able to understand more, but it is something that if we lose sensitivity over or lose the original meaning, we could repeat some of the same mistakes that we have now.
Kennedy shows us that some people just shut down when they hear the “N-word” that they don’t see anything good that might come from being associated with that word. Again, the book Nigger Heaven was looked down upon by people who didn’t read it. He thinks that people should actually know what they are talking about rather than just assuming, because after centuries pass and knowledge is passed as well, through generations, it is important to still examine the meaning to keep what the word stands for known, and not to use it. (p. 102)
In Boston Public, the principal didn’t want the teacher to even discuss the Kennedy novel, because he didn’t want the school board, parents, students, and community mad at his poor choice to let the class continue talking about the “N Word”. The white teacher tries to ask the students why it is different for him to use the word than other black students. The other students explained to him that it seemed racist when it came out of a white person’s mouth.
At abolishthenword.com, we see that the opening statement is that all of the black men who were lynched were probably called the “n” word before they were hanged. This site says that any use of the word is degrading and it should be stopped. “The “N” word is not a term of endearment. It cannot be reapropriated. We cannot redefine the “N” word or re-spell it to make it positive” (about us page).
Overall, I think Kennedy came from many angles, or as many as he could, and showed them to us.

Thoughts on introduction and 1st Chapter of N*****

I thought the different ways Kennedy came to conclusions about the word was quite interesting, explaining the diametric points at which this word was used. A racial slam towards blacks coming from whites, and a common greeting for some blacks, this word's meaning should definitely be explored. I especially liked how Kennedy gave stories of well-known black people within society, naming Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods, and telling of their struggles this word. However, with today's changing society, and as this word comes more into the vocabulary as a greeting, I think it was wise to put Oliver Wendell Holmes's advice into print: '"a word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged." A word is instead "the skin of a living thought (that) may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and the time in which it is used."' This meaning that throughout time, although this word has signified violence and has even been the "glue" of some friendships, becoming a common greeting. Although, as you can see I do not feel comfortable using this word, and however we may try to get the taboo off of the word, I will not be the one to start; this was also addressed in the book. Especially memorable in the book were Eminem's words, who's colleagues are many black rappers, saying, "it just isn't in my vocabulary".

"The Allegory of the Cave"

This part of The Dialogues of Plato was interesting, because, when you think about it, the average person is "in a cave" of disillusionment, to some extent. Those who have had bad experiences and have better ones after are known to have knowledge to share with others (the philosophers) and steer people away from certain things. This book made me question, however vain it may seem, makes me think, "What if everyone else doesn't exist and the world is created like a board game where I am a participant and everyone else is just another part of completing the game?" I thought this theory was interesting, although I find it fascinating that the things we see aren't considered the only type of "sight". We are tricked, and the philosophers see how to open our eyes.

Books 2 and 3 of the Republic

With Plato using the Socratic method, much like Socrates did (hence the naming of the technique after him) it is easy to see why some people think Plato's words were mixed up with Socrates'. These two books showed the foundation of a town (they refer to it as a state), and that theoretically, "virtue is part of statesmanship and true politics is ethics in action" (p. 239). He suggests that a man specialize in his own department, whether it is being a "guardian" over the state, or a shoemaker, blacksmith, or something of the sort. He suggests censorship for younger children that only exposes them to truthful moral things. If they grew up on lies, a "moral deformity" their foundation would be weakened and it would threaten their ability to protect the state (p. 255).

I liked this section, although I don't necessarily agree. When would the state let the children think for themselves? At what point is a brain ready for "lies" or slight fables when it has been denied it since birth? Should not a world that already has lies be a place that one can know of the corruption and combat instead of being ignorant? Also, I think people can hold more than one position, but I can see where if one person held two, they might be persuaded in doing something that benefitted themselves, and it would donate less time to what they are supposed to be doing for the community.