A take on Existentialism

     In class we took a little bit of time to discuss the Existentialist theory, which I found to be very interesting, however it seems like a bit of an extreme. The belief that life has no set meaning is understandable, but I believe that we as individuals create that meaning for ourselves whatever we may believe. I would be interested to view some of the other "denominations" of Existentialism to see how they commonly view life. This difference in views also makes me wonder if the society we were raised in affects our readiness to subscribe to Existentialist beliefs.
     In the play we are currently reading, Waiting for Godot, it is easy to see the sense of confusion in the characters. Although this sense of confusion is sometimes inward and not directed towards the world in general, it can represent the confusion that people feel when pondering existentialist issues. The scope of the questions raised is immense and cannot be answered by one man. In the play Oedipus the dominant theme of fate clearly contradicts Existentialist views. Life is a set path and cannot be changed as opposed to life having no meaning.
   This way of thought appealed to me so much because religion and how it relates to life is something that I often think about. I see religion as something that was created to give the direct meaning to life that is clearly denied in the broadest form of Existentialism. Hearing about these theories is very interesting because it shows me that many other people contemplate the same things.
     The Existentialist unit that we are doing right now is very interesting, but I feel at times that works of art representing this view are just like works puffed up by Ellsworth Toohey in The Fountainhead to appeal to the general public. It seems there is a fine line between supporting something with all you heart and following a movement because you know it will take you places.

The Implications of Fate

     Fate is an interesting concept that brings a certain sense of helplessness with it. As exemplified by the activity we did on the board in class, people have varying opinions on the matter. Some people believe that whatever happens is for a greater purpose and there is no way of avoiding what was meant to happen. Others believe that each choice in life is a chain reaction leading to many other choices and outcomes. Many people also fall in between this spectrum of views.
     I personally believe that in general every person can control their fate. If you have wanted to be something for all of your life and suddenly change that idea it is not because it was meant to be, but because you chose it to be. Humans are too unpredictable for there to be a governing force overseeing all of out actions.
    An example from my life is that I chose to save this homework until Halloween. It was not meant to be that I procrastinate on my homework, and any resulting "fateful" experiences from this are only coincidence. Sometimes trying to find a greater meaning in things is looking too far into something that without the context of fate would be easy to understand.
     This all means that I disagree with the point of view presented in Oedipus The King. The story serves to teach people that you can not escape your fate, while I firmly believe that there is no such thing as fate. It is interesting to think how this theme would have been essential in the time period it was made, but now it is contrary to modern views.

Let's Call It, a Broad Outlook (Monthly Blog)

     I truly believe that literature can mean something different for every person. You may hate a book, but that doesn't mean that another person can't find the impetus for their life in it. I had a friend who thought it was funny how people praised poems he whipped together in seconds as great works of art. The way I see it though, if that person wants to believe it is a great piece of art then let them think so! Everyone is there own person and everyone sees things differently, so why wouldn't we interpret literature differently? This isn't to say that there aren't some times when people can twist things to mean something horrible and violent, but in its most innocent form different interpretations of literature should be praised. These thoughts have been rambling throughout my head during our classes.
     In our first month of class, the Socratic Seminars have been extremely interesting and I found something uniting about all of the pieces of literature we read: there is something that you can apply to how you live your life that will improve it for the better in each novel. Some of these things may be small, and only change you in the slightest of ways, but there is still that change whether you notice it or not. This is what I see in literature. These changes can arise independently from the main theme of the novel too, because all that matters is what the novel meant to you.
     The main idea that I got from a novel was more of a reinforcement of previous beliefs. In Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead, Howard Roark follows what he loves, despite all the obstacles he faces. He is shunned by society and receives little work but he strives onward because he loves being an architect. In this manner, the book made me realize again that I don't want a job for money or appearances, I want it for how much I will enjoy it and I think that that is an important lesson for anyone who is questioning their future. Don't be a Peter Keating and base your life of other people's wants, focus of your own.
     This relates directly to me because I have no clue what I want to do for a career. People suggest things, and throw all the possible careers they can at me, but The Fountainhead is a healthy reminder that I should follow what I want to do. This progressive view seems be becoming more common too, because liberal arts colleges now encourage students to go in undecided. They have realized that experiences in college help shape what you will want to do, so why waste time on an uncertain major? In a way, it all relates back to my view on interpretation of books. People can tell you what a book means, but what you see in it is what really matters. So as you read Hugo, or Rand, or Thoreau, or Dr. Suess, think about what it means and how it influences you, and maybe that will be your guide in life.