Kite Runner

• Women- In the book women are basically second class citizens in the Islamic world. They have to cover their faces and wear long clothing that is very conservative. They are subject to their husbands wants. This is completely opposite from women in America who have every right that the men have; this is a hard habit to break for the Afghani refugees who still follow the customs of the place of their birth.
• Betrayal- Amir and Hassan are as close as brothers in the early part of the story, but they are of different classes and that makes the relationship awkward in public and other situations. Amir’s betrayal of Hassan by not helping him in his time of need seems to stem from the fact that Hassan seems to be Baba’s favorite and Amir just wants the attention he deems that he deserves. Amir feels horrible for not helping Hassan, but deep inside he feels that Hassan deserved what he got as a sort of retribution. When Amir gets older and wiser he realizes the error of his ways and wishes more than anything that he could go back and change is action.
• Brothers- This story has an interesting view of brothers because for the majority of the story Amir and Hassan do not know they are brothers and Hassan never knows. Amir, when he learns the truth, feels horrible for putting Hassan down and treating him badly when Hassan treated Amir as a brother and loved him more than any other. The story takes a note from the story of Cain and Able who were brothers and their strife for the praise of their father causes the death of one of the brothers. Amir doesn’t directly kill Hassan, but he feels that through his actions he could have stopped his death. The story of brothers is one that has been told with many different variations throughout time and the story in Kite Runner is completely dependent on Hassan and Amir being brothers.
• Guilt- hidden vs. open- Hidden guilt eats away at you and causes you to second guess all of your decisions. Open guilt makes you feel relieved to not have to carry the burden, but a powerful secret that is out in the open can cause major pain to all the parties involved. Amir hides the guilt he feels when he allows Hassan to be sexually assaulted, but every time thereafter he can barely stand to see Hassan. Once the secret is out though it causes the breaking up of a family, in this case Ali and Hassan leave the household of Baba and Amir when Ali learns of what happened to Hassan. This takes a weight off of Amir’s shoulders, but it adds the weight of remorse at what he has caused.
• Redemption- When Amir learns of Hassan’s death from Rahim Khan he sets out on a mission to relinquish himself of the guilt he feels at Hassan’s death. Sohrab is Hassan’s orphaned son and Amir learns that he is still in Kabul so he sets out to help the manifestation of his guilt so as to ease his pain. When Amir goes through the long process of bringing Sohrab to live with him in America he sets his conscience free in his mind because he helped his dead half-brother’s son to have a new life in a new land with new opportunities.
• Exodus- With the arrival of the Russians many families seek shelter in other countries so as to escape the persecution and control of the Communists. Then when the Russians leave and the Taliban take over everyone believe that Afghanistan will go back to normal and this is not the case. Baba and Amir leave when the Russians move in; they take an oil tanker to a neighboring country where they then leave for America. This is a hard thing to do because leaving your country of birth is like leaving your identity. Amir and Baba have to start over in a new and strange land; Baba’s wealth is almost nonexistent in America and their large home is Kabul is tiny compared to the mansions in their new city. They leave their identity in Kabul and when Amir goes back he feels suddenly whole again, as if a piece of him suddenly found its way back into his being.
• Fathers & Sons- Amir and Baba’s relationship is one of constant tension. Amir wants the attention that he can’t get from Baba because he isn’t the son that Baba had dreamed he would have. Amir strives his whole life to make Baba like him and this is one of the causes of his slight dislike of Hassan because Baba seems to like Hassan much better and has to include him in everything they do. The patriarchal society is a common type of society where the father is the main bread winner and he is the boss, what he says goes. The conflict of Amir stopping at nothing to gain his father’s approval is one of the underlying conflicts throughout the story culminating with Amir winning the kite battle.
• Class distinction- Hassan and Ali were Hazaras and Baba and Amir were Pashtuns; this was a master servant relationship in the outside, but on the inside they were all close friends. Many Pashtuns outside of this relationship looked down on the Hazaras and viewed them as second class citizens; this leads to many of the conflicts in the story, mainly the conflicts between Ossef, Amir, and Hassan. Ossef believes he is better than Hassan because Ossef is a Pashtun and Hassan is not. Ossef also sees Amir consorting with a Hazara and views this as punishable by any means he deems necessary. The underlying hatred the classes show for each other is an old world stigma that is part of their culture and is the cause of many genocides and wars.

2.

• Parallelism- In the book the author puts Amir and Hassan’s relationship on a parallel to the invasion of Afghanistan by the Russians. Their country is going towards demise the whole time that they are growing up and when their relationship culminates with Hassan and Ali leaving not long afterwards their country is invaded by the Russians. When you get in-depth in the story you focus on the personal struggle, but you forget the bigger picture even though it is there; Hosseini brings you back to the world wide view and then back to the personal level with precision.
• Character Foils- Khaled Hosseini uses contrasting characters to show the major differences in each and to show how their differences are needed by the story to make it flow. Amir and Hassan are complete opposites; Amir is rich and haughtier whereas Hassan is poor and very congenial, the author plays them off of one another to show how their differences when they are together create a storyline that is really complex emotionally.
• Foreshadowing- Throughout the story the running of the kites is talked about; it is a big accomplishment to win it and Amir wishes to win it to makes his dad proud. It doesn’t occur to you until it happens that maybe this event will be the best day for Amir and the worst for Hassan. When the Amir cuts the last kite and Hassan runs off promising to bring back the kite you get a feeling of unease as a long time goes by without Hassan’s return. Then the turning point of the novel occurs and somehow you felt something bad was coming before it actually did.
• Flashback- Amir continuously has flashbacks of him and Hassan walking with the last kite and blood dripping off of Hassan’s pants into the snow. This is a powerful flashback because the author uses it to show how guilty Amir feels about that moment when he could have helped Hassan, but instead he did nothing. Khaled Hosseini uses flashbacks to recall us to particular instances throughout the story where major events happened that will continue to influence the story until its end.
• Positives and Negative aspects of the writing- The author had a clear idea in mind and he followed it to create a great novel. It is a flowing story of brotherhood and the relationships between sons and their fathers. The story follows the invasion of Afghanistan by Russia and its eventual control by the Taliban so that the reader could have an idea of the time period when this story takes place. Negatively I think that the novel was slightly more graphic than it needed to be, but it is all opinion because I assume that the author deemed everything in the novel as necessary for him to be able to tell his story.

3.
• Settings- Kabul, Afghanistan, 1970’s/ Fremont, California, 1980’s- Kabul vs. Fremont, Pashtun vs. Hazara, Afghanistan vs. Palestine, Women in America vs. Women in Afghanistan, Afghanis who stayed vs. Afghanis who left.

4.
• Minor characters- Farid was Amir’s transport when he went back to Afghanistan and they learned to like each other one Farid learned of Amir’s plan to rescue to his half brothers child from an orphanage. Soraya is Amir’s wife and she brings stability to his life and a love that he has missed since Hassan had left his life. She encourages him to bring Sohrab to live with them in the United States and she actually sets up the transfer of Sohrab to America. General Taheri is Soraya’s father and he allows the marriage to happen even though he saw Amir talking to his daughter directly which is against Afghani custom. Rahim Khan is Baba’s best friend and Amir’s mentor. He calls Amir to Afghanistan to come seek out Sohrab and he is also the person who tells Amir that Hassan is dead and also that Hassan was his half brother. Ali was married to Hassan’s mother; however he was not Hassan’s father. He was the servant in Baba’s house and he looked after Hassan and Amir when they were younger. He takes Hassan and leave Baba’s house when he learns what had happened to Hassan in the alley.

5.
• Symbols- Shah Faisal Mosque was to Sohrab a symbol of purity and it comforted him. Flying of the Kites signifies Amir’s desire to be free of his guilt and to gain his father’s praise. Slingshot used by Sohrab to partially blind Ossef, it was also used by Hassan to threaten Ossef when Amir and him were kids. It was a symbol of Hassan and Amir’s bond that was permanent and lived on through Sohrab. Baba’s Black Mustang was a physical representation of how Amir saw his father; the strong man that everyone respected and some feared. The oil tanker signified how the Afghanis felt leaving their county, they felt smothered almost like they couldn’t breather as in the drum of the tanker.

college

So i've kinda sorta chosen to go to mercer because I can go many different directions in that college and it's a really good school. It's so expensive and they offered me a large scholarship, but I would still owe around $20,000 and thats not chump change. So i have to get started applying for scholarships so as to make it easier. It's not definited, but I'm strongly leaning in favor of the Bears.

Veni, vidi, volo in domum redire

I went to Kema's Hobby to turn some books in for store credit and believe I should have gotten more, but it's cool because I got a book in great condition that I'm really excited to read...eventually. I have so little time and so much i want to do. Eventually I will read it, but when exactly that time is I have no idea.
Club soccer is almost over, then I will get a short break and then indoor soccer will start. Once that ends school soccer and club soccer will start again. So basically I play year round which only means I get more practice and do what I love all the time.

Research Paper Rough Draft

Ethan Parrish
Sharon Aiken
English 1101
November 17, 2009
Alexander, the Great Strategist
Alexander the Great was the son of Philip, who was the king of Macedonia at the time. Alexander did not come from obscurity and neither did his brilliance and great ability to command. His father was a great general and leader of men in his own right. Alexander was a great commander because he learned to adapt and innovate. These traits and many others lead to the successes that he garnered throughout his short life. Through learned strategy, adaptation, and a superior intellect Alexander the Great conquered the majority of the known world in an organized and efficient way that was before his time.
From an early age Alexander gathered the knowledge he would need to lead his grand armies. He served in the cavalry of his father’s army before he inherited the empire. These hands on approaches coupled with a high level of learning set Alexander up to be very complete strategist. When his father was killed he inherited a well trained army of veteran soldiers. The army was based around heavy pike men with a supporting cast of very mobile light cavalry and infantry that could fill any gaps left by the heavier ground units (Fisher). Philip, Alexander’s father, had planned to invade the area known as Asia Minor before his untimely demise; Alexander decided to commence with the invasion as arranged. He gathered an army of 30,000 that was composed of pikemen, infantrymen, and also engineers; 5,000 cavalry was also included in the force (Fisher).
The most important of his early battles was the conflict at Issus. This fight was against the main Persian force that outnumbered him by a very significant amount, one estimate is 600,000 to 75,000 (A.C.). As the story goes Alexander hears that the Persian king Darius is waiting for him in Syria and leaves the city of Issus to go confront him, at the same time Darius is camped in an area that would make an effective battlefield for his superior cavalry (Plutarch). The problem from the Persian side is where is Alexander? Many of them believe he is being cowardly and waiting for a move to be made by the Persians before he will come out of hiding, they don’t know that he is looking for them. So Darius decides to make the move and go to Issus where he believes that Alexander is camped, when Alexander hears that Darius is on his way there Alexander turns his force and fast marches to the city. On arriving, Darius realizes he has made a large tactical gamble and will lose miserably if he does not escape the city where Alexander was rumored to be, but in actuality he was not. The terrain around the city is rough and made up of rolling hills that make his numerical superiority in cavalry void (Plutarch). Alexander helps himself by arriving in a very timely fashion to discover his information was correct and the Persians were in the city. This is where Alexander’s tactical greatness comes to light; to start the battle the Macedonians don’t attack, but try to invite the Persians to attack a much smaller force (A.C.). Alexander’s right wing was launched into the center of the Persian formation where their king was stationed and the Persian front gave ground very quickly to the stoic Macedonians who were better trained and had clear instructions due to Alexander’s open lines of communications with his commanders. This was a small victory for a small force, however the phalanx endured some bad luck as a gap opened in their ranks and the Persians leapt forward into the breach and to counteract this Alexander brought his cavalry behind the Persians which effectively cut them off from their main force (A.C.). Cooler heads did not prevail in the Persian camp as Darius, seeing these early Macedonian victories, decided to retreat hastily to fight another day. This is one of Alexander’s most written about battles because it showed the Persians that they weren’t the only ones in the Aegean anymore. The significance of the battle is also shown in the fact that the Persians lost around 100,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry, whereas the Macedonians lost only 450 infantry (A.C.). This is a staggering kill to death ratio that would be more likely to be seen today with our system of small kill teams attacking large targets; Alexander is seen from this point on as a master tactician and his men loved him for it almost as much as his enemies hated him for it.
Alexander, now that he had shown exceptional skill at open war, decided to try a siege of Tyre. This surprised many people because Tyre was an island with very high walls and they also controlled the sea (Chinnock). He started to build a ramp from the mainland to the city which would be a vast undertaking today under terms of peace. The Tyrians controlled the sea and so they would send out ships to disrupt the construction and destroy and kill all that they could (Chinnock). Alexander decided to build a wider ramp so that he could put war engines on it that could deter ships, also he gained the use of many ships because of his reputation and the cities he had conquered (Chinnock). This was a new type of warfare to Alexander and he shows his ability to adapt to every situation and even incorporate his enemies’ techniques of waging war. He was beaten back several times during the siege and had to recoup and change his plan of attack. The Tyrians at one point sailed out and caught the Macedonians napping or close enough to it that they were able to destroy many of the Macedonian ships before Alexander rallied his troops and actually snatched victory from the jaws of defeat (Chinnock). Then Alexander launched an attack and actually gained the walls by attacking from many different points so as to confuse the defenders then he put bridges up on the walls and gained ground on the Tyrians who were slaughtered. Alexander innovated many new battle techniques and also new siege engines that would be used throughout the Mediterranean world.
Alexander created the first use of strategy in warfare on ancient battlefields. Pre- Alexander battles were mainly decided on who had more men and who could pay for better weapons; with the inclusion of an intelligence factor Alexander changed the way war was waged in its entirety. He championed new techniques, such as luring a larger force into the middle of his army and then using his flanks to encircle the enemy and effectively trap them. He incorporated navies into his military system and sought newer designs that were used for sea warfare for a long time after his death (Fisher).
The use of highly mobile troops that had an adequate form of communication all throughout the formations and were more highly trained than any other force were some of the key elements of Alexander’s victories. He used less troops than most other empires, therefore they could traverse large distances faster and did not need as much food or pay. Alexander was a proponent of using strategy as opposed to might; he was more of an artist than a general. He was the Michelangelo of the sword and the Rubens of the shield. He truly deserved the title of the Great if for no other reason than he did everything he set out to do on the battlefield and once he set his mind to a battle he would find a way to win with the least casualties to him and the most to his enemies. Alexander the Great was a true champion to his people and to his art of strategy which is still studied today. He conquered the majority of the known world before his death at the age of thirty-three and controlled the single largest empire ever all because he could out think his opponent and was in command of one of the best armies in the history of the world.

Xenocide

I'm at the end of the Ender series and I must say it has been really interesting. Xenocide is the last installment and so far it has been great. Orson Scott Card writes in a style that is all his own. Today I have to miss soccer practice to finish up my research paper which doesn't bother me too much becuase I could use a break. Also, my topic really interests me so when I'm writing the paper, it doesn't feel like work to me. LOng day ahead...

11/11/09

Today I tried to go to the library to get some more sources for my research paper, but of course it was closed for veterans day. Also I don't have a library card because you can't get a card by yourself until your eighteen. Stupid rule I think so. So now I have to use the internet as my only source for the moment which is not my favorite at all. Oh well at least I'm writing on an interesting topic.
I got accepted to Georgia Southern today also, but I have no interest in going there so i'm disappointed it wasn't one of the other colleges I applied to that emailed me my acceptance letter. Now to the annotated citations page.

Alexander the Great

I've decided to write my research paper on Alexander's battle tatics throughout his military campaigns. I have always been interested in military strategy and the great commanders of past times. So naturally this was an easy topic for me to choose and I'm hoping to write a very good paper on it. -I would rather excel others in the knowledge of what is excellent than in the extent of my powers and dominion. -Alexander the Great

Final draft/ comparison paper

Ethan Parrish

Sharon Aiken

English 1101

November 5, 2009
Is the Glass Half Full or Half Empty?
Concerning Next and Jurassic Park
Few names are more known for science fiction writing than Michael Crichton’s. Two of his novels are at the forefront of all others, Next and Jurassic Park. They are very different novels that have a similar base. Both have major centralized conflicts and conclusions, but in many ways they diverge. Two of the most influential science fiction novels of our time, written by the same author, that have few, very large similarities and many small differences.
Next was written for entertainment, but it has major value as a warning to humanity. In essence the novel warns against meddling with our own genetics. Jurassic Park carries a similar warning, but it warns against meddling with the genetic material left behind by the earliest masters of the continent, the dinosaurs. Next hits closer to home because of the research pertaining to stem cells. Scientists are coming ever closer to being able to grow human organs and the ability to change genetics is not as far away as people might imagine. Jurassic Park brings a conceivable problem to light, but it will be close to impossible for scientists to bring this fiction into reality because viable genetic material from dinosaurs is about as hard to find as it was to actually map the human genome. Both of these novels present situations that are nigh from impossible and closer to being a reality than many people would like to consider.
There are many conflicts that are central to the storylines of both novels. In Jurassic Park there is the obvious man v. nature conflict, but there are several man v. man conflicts as well as the inherent man v. God struggle. Next differs only because there is no man v. nature conflict. Jurassic Park exemplifies the struggle with God because it shows men that are trying to do God’s work by creating and altering life, Next also has this struggle, but instead of creating life man is simply altering people which is supposed to be an ability allowed only God. Michael Crichton in his novel Next portrays many negative relationships between people. The characters tend to be all antagonists in Next as opposed to Jurassic Park where there is a clear division between good and evil. Each novel displays Michael Crichton’s masterful use of inner struggles and the outward struggles that always tend to be present in everyone’s life.
As an author Michael Crichton isn’t known for being an optimist in the normal sense of the word. In both novels the stories end with people dying, being arrested, or just being broken. In Next the large corporations are indicted for misuse of science and the heads of the companies are broken men. In this story God wins and it portrays the majority of the population as inherently good while it still ends badly for a minority of the characters which tend to be the puppet masters. It could be viewed as optimistic or pessimistic; the glass is half full or half empty. Jurassic Park comes to a close with the creator of the rogue fossils being eaten by said fossils, it is the ultimate irony. The protagonists escape unscathed and humanity is saved, but it still shows that some people are inherently bad and will stop at nothing to upset the normal order of the day. Either way you see the world as either inherently evil or inherently good, both novels can come to terms with all of your opinions and views.
Most importantly these novels both come to terms with all facets of humanity. Neither novel takes a single side in the argument of transcendentalists and anti-transcendentalists; the debate that has been carried on for many decades by authors, poets, and great thinkers alike. Both can be picked up and read and be viewed from many different perspectives. Michael Crichton created two very intuitive crowd pleasers that will continue to draw audiences into the fold of science fiction writing for many years to come.

Veni, vidi, volo in domum redire

I applied to college for the first time last weekend and it was a long/annoying process. Then once I get letters back I have to choose which college to go to and I just really have no clue what I want to do in life. Oh well I have time to think, I'm not gonna stress over it and waste my senoir year freaking out about the future. You only live once so I'm gonna enjoy my highschool years before I actually have to participate in the "REAL" world and whatnot. "I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 96% how I react to it." -Scipio Africanus