I was born, raised, and still live in the epicenter of cultural desperation, within the borders of San Diego at least; Paradise Hills. As a child, it never particularly struck me that not only my aesthetic features, but my overall tendencies towards iconoclasm, were remarkably individual in nature in comparison to my peers. I suppose the wide-eyed and ever encompassing innocence of childhood would indeed take away from the vortex-like thought patterns that we call analytical thought, so it's understandable why certain observations didn't come to the forefront of my perception until adolescence.

According to all demographical statistics that I have seen, this microcosmic neighborhood is populated by primarily Latinos and Pacific Islanders (who most group into the unnecessary generalization of "Filipino"), who have come here either through the Naval Force or because of the supposedly eternal American delusion that our land is an oasis of opportunity and democratic representation in a world populated by post-Cold War communists. It should be noted that both of these cultures have spent centuries being bombarded and colonized by superpowers in an attempt to claim land and assimilate the native people, and this is where my dominating point lies; even on a second generation level, these cultures are in a constant pursuit of assimilating themselves to what they believe to be American. I recently dropped out of high school due to dissatisfaction with the local Academia as a whole, but I've never lost interest in observing my peers from an outside standpoint. Many Pacific Islanders and Latinos in this country find it hard to truly bring together their native culture and the conventions of the land they live in now. Every individual I find has a tendency towards avoiding individualism. Many of their parents are somewhat recent immigrants who believe success lies in the subsistence that is the expected American lifestyle, so this generation has been raised from a very early age to believe that a blind synergy with the shallow image of their place of residence is the road to overall fruition. That's how you get teenage Filipino-Americans dressing like thugs, but with voices and identities that completely contradict this image they assume that they understand.

It's an interesting concept, really. That an entire generation of Americans will live the rest of their lives believing that an undying mentality of injudicious acclimatization will lead them to the promise land.

Comments

SDaniels Aug. 9, 2009 @ 1:31 p.m.

Hey Micsquared, you are on your way as a writer. My unsolicited advice (from someone still with a long way to go herself but lots of study) would be:

a: "As a child, it never particularly struck me that not only my aesthetic features, but my overall tendencies towards iconoclasm, were remarkably individual in nature in comparison to my peers"

...Avoid pumping up your intellectual image as a child. It has not gone over well with readers since the 19th century, is hackneyed as hell, and a form of public masturbation.

b: "this generation has been raised from a very early age to believe that a blind synergy with the shallow image of their place of residence is the road to overall fruition.:

Avoid overloading your sentences with words. I know, there are so many juicy ones, but you'll end up sounding like a frilly- collared hack--a bad writer cannot revise or edit. One might say 'anal,' because one has to retain all one's s***.

ust say it straight and powerfully, letting one of those ripe juicy words in. Let me see if I understand this sentence:

"My generation has been raised to believe that a reverence of the idea of the neighborhood will carry one out of it."

Is this what you meant? Good luck, and keep writing!

0

rickeysays Aug. 9, 2009 @ 6:28 p.m.

This "artists" mentality the two of you share guarantees you will never understand the world or the people in it, because you view them through the prism of your own ideology. If you want to understand, you must approach life as a scientist, with an open mind, observing things as they are, THEN forming hypotheses to try to explain what you've observed, and testing your hypotheses. But remember, to get to the truth, you can't be afraid of what the truth might be, or bias your hypotheses with what you WISH it to be.

Writing like this is like looking at a Picasso. It's an interesting and thought-provoking "take" on life that bears little resemblance to the real thing.

0

SDaniels Aug. 9, 2009 @ 7:23 p.m.

rickeysays wrote: "If you want to understand, you must approach life as a scientist, with an open mind, observing things as they are, THEN forming hypotheses to try to explain what you've observed, and testing your hypotheses."

That's rich.

Seriously, what makes you the arbiter of the scientific method? I've never observed you to employ it in any way; your thinking, at least on the Reader site, appears to be entirely dependent upon anthropomorphic fallacy and reductive or tautological non-conclusions, as well as reliant upon an almanac-style, fast and easy, bigoted categorization of "the world and the people in it." Why level such a statement along with a cliched and pointless label like "artistic mentality," on top of yet another "empirical fact" about the limited abilities of myself and the writer of this blog?

I seriously hope you are no longer teaching, rickeysays.

0

SDaniels Aug. 9, 2009 @ 7:35 p.m.

Are you going to discourse forth for us now about how this writer's rather blowsy style resembles cubism? Or how Picasso's work bore no resemblance to "real world" things?

0

Sign in to comment