Bertrand Russell's Four Desires

I have never read any argument more clearly supported than Bertrand Russell's claim that human action is ultimately driven by desire. He clearly articulates why it is that no matter what else happens, humans act upon four "infinite" desires: acquisitiveness, rivalry, vanity, and love of power. And for the most part, I agree with him.

His argument for acquisitiveness is especially strong. In AP European History, we went over the different theories describing human nature to come out of the Enlightenment. There were two main schools of thought: one that said humans are inherently good and mostly selfless, and one that said humans are naturally selfish. Russell makes a strong case for the latter. He perfectly captures the feeling of never having enough. Like the Estonian girls he met, I have plenty to eat, a bed to sleep in, and can afford various luxuries. And yet, I can't help but feel a twinge of jealousy when I see videos of people driving their limited edition Ferrari's. Some desire which I cannot stop makes me wish that I could afford such a thing, even though it may not increase my happiness level by all that much. I understand well the desire for acquisitiveness that Russell speaks of.

I do not, however, agree with him that rivalry is an infinite desire. He states that the world would be better if acquisitiveness was always more powerful than rivalry and that too many men would rather see their opponent destroyed than to achieve more for themselves. I understand often it is not enough to do your best, you need your rival to do poorly. This is extremely poignant with regards to sports. I know from experience that not only do you want to do well, you want the other team to play poorly. But outside of sports, I do not wish for the people around me to do worse, I only wish to improve myself. In conclusion, while I feel a desire to gain more, it is not overpowered by a desire for those around me to do poorly, unless it's with regards to sports.

I agree with Russell that vanity and a love for power are indeed infinite desires. I believe, like Russell, that humans are inherently narcissistic. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it appears to be true. Russell's example of children always shouting "look at this" is especially powerful. Children are supposedly born as blank slates, and are therefore an impression of their parents or major caretakers. This is important, because more often than not, parents/caretakers are very selfless, giving their attention to their children more than themselves. So if children are essentially molded by those around them, why would they be so narcissistic? They cannot help but want attention, because it is an inherent trait of human beings. Examples of people doing anything for attention are abundant in the world of technology and communication that we live in today. I agree with Russell that the desire for attention is an infinite desire. As for a love for power, I can understand why it may be the most potent, despite not being the most common: many people would rather not deal with the responsibility that having a lot of power comes with. But for those who seek power, it is impossible to resist. The reason it is so potent is because it combines acquisitiveness and vanity. Once a man experiences the ability to control another person, they begin to desire more and more control. This is why dictators throughout history often attempt to put themselves in charge of everything they can. Few, if any, have chosen to allow others any control, which goes to show how irresistible the desire is. Dictators throughout history are known for the ostentatious lifestyles just as well as their consolidation of power. All one has to do is look at the current leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-Un.

While the rest of his country lives in a society that is at a level of technology sixty years behind us, Kim Jong-Un lives in a palace, where he eats caviar as a snack. He also requires a family-like loyalty from all his citizens, and nobody is aloud to question him. Kim Jong-Un's lifestyle and ever-increasing control over his country shows the desire of acquisitiveness while his need for the endearment of his subjects shows his inability to resist his own vanity.

In conclusion, I believe that there are three infinite desires that dictate human actions: Acquisitiveness, Vanity, and a Love of Power.

The Little Wars

The chapter Ghost Soldiers adds to the harsh description of Vietnam. The narrator of the chapter is currently at base as a result of being shot. He tells the reader of the first time he got shot, Rat Kiley, the medic, had done an amazing job of treating the wound, allowing the narrator to return to fighting. The second time, however, the medic was a newbie named Bobby Jorgenson, who was so afraid to move that he almost let the narrator die of shock. Even after he got to the narrator, he did such a poor job of addressing the wound that it became gangrenous, and that's why the narrator is at base and not in combat.

The narrator is frustrated by his time on base. He mentions that although it does have its perks, he wishes he could be back in the fire, taking down "spooks" again. His frustrations come to a boiling point, however, when his old team returns to base for a little rest. The team appears tightly knit, with bonds like family, except this time, the medic is with them, and not the narrator. The narrator becomes upset because he should be with the team, but the medic, who is the reason that the narrator is out, is there instead. The last straw occurs when the narrator approaches Mitchell Sanders to ask him if he will help to scare Jorgenson a little. Sanders is disgusted by the narrator's intentions, and when the narrator mentions feeling that he is no longer part of the family, Sander's tell him that he guess he isn't.

What O'Brien is saying is that the war is always with soldiers, whether or not the enemy is the same one the whole time. The narrator, like many of the soldiers, is probably young. What this means is that he probably didn't have much of a life of his own outside the war. So when he is cut off from his family, he suddenly feels the need to exact revenge from the person who cut the bonds. The narrator mentions that prior to being a soldier, he never felt the need to take revenge. But the war had done something to him. It had changed something inside him. Even though he had left combat, the war was still with him. And now his enemy was an American soldier. This idea that the war never stops is an important one in The Things They Carried.

Speaking of Courage

Speaking of Courage is one of the most powerful stories I have ever read. It is set up as the story of Norman Bowker. It takes place after the war, and Norman Bowker is now back at home. He is driving around a lake. The lake, he mentions, is the only one for miles, so despite it's ugliness, it is a source of pride for the townspeople. During the drive, Norman thinks about many things, but his thoughts mostly circle around what the town is like now vs. what it was like before the war vs. Norman's experience in the war.

Early in the chapter signs that Norman is having trouble adjusting to normal life begin to pop up. For example, while driving around the lake, Norman passes two boys. He honks at them, but they do not look up. It is odd that the boys do not look to see who honked because the town is described as being quiet, so the boys most likely heard the truck. The next sign occurs when he thinks about talking to his old girlfriend Sally Kramer (now Sally Gustafson). Norman thinks about how he would talk with her briefly, asking her how she’s been and nodding at her answers. He Thinks about telling he how he almost won the Silver Star, but decided not to because she wouldn't understand. Later, Norman stops near a fast food restaurant. A woman, whom Norman thinks is a waitress, is outside serving cars. He honks but she apparently doesn't hear him. Nobody understands him, and he is frustrated by it. He thinks about how he could've saved Kiowa. He thinks it's a good war story, but remarks that the town didn't want to hear about the war, it wouldn't listen. It didn't understand the war. As a result, Norman cannot adjust to daily life, and ultimately takes his own life.

Speaking of Courage is a powerful chapter that uses Norman Bowker as a device for explaining why it was so difficult for veterans to adjust. 

Symbolism in TTTC

Weight plays an important role in The Things They Carried. Tim O'Brien mentions the weight of nearly every item that the men carry, both tangible and intangible. For example, Rat Kiley, the medic carries various medical supplies for a total of 18 pounds.. Henry Dobbins, a big man, carried a 23 pound gun and up to 15 pounds of ammo. But the heaviest things. On top of this, the men carry around 16 pounds of necessities, plus other heavy items such as guns and helmets. But the heaviest items are carried by Lieutenant Cross. What he carries goes beyond physical items. No, Cross carries responsibility for his men, guilt for letting a soldier die under his command, and the knowledge that the girl he loves, Martha, does not feel the same way about him. The average age of the men under Cross's command is just 19 years old. That means that Cross has been tasked with ensuring that these young man return to their families at the end of the war so that they may carry out the rest of the lives. Not only that, but these men have absolutely zero experience with war, and may not even want to be there (in Vietnam) fighting one. On top of this, Ted Lavender, one of Cross's men, was shot and killed because Cross was too busy thinking about the Martha. Whether or not he actually could have prevented the death, Cross believes that it's his fault Lavender died. So now, Lieutenant Cross carries the weight of making sure no more of his men die and the guilt that he already failed to protect one. Finally, to top it all off, Lieutenant Cross knows that Martha doesn't love him back. Here he is, half a planet away from someone he loves, and there's nothing he can do to figure out why she doesn't feel the same way. I cannot think of anything more frustrating than that. All together, Cross carries the responsibility for his men, the guilt of letting one die, and the frustration of loving somebody who doesn't love him back. Together, these things way more than any physical item the men have to carry.

Compassion and War

The first thing we learn about Lieutenant Cross is that he loves a girl named Martha. We learn that he has many letters from her, and that he likes to pretend that they are love letters. Even the knowledge that Martha doesn't love him back, doesn't stop him from constantly thinking bout her. But Crosses love for Martha is not harmless. In fact, because he was too busy thinking about her, Cross let Ted Lavender, a soldier under his command, wander away from their camp to go pee. As a result, Lavender is shot and killed. Cross realized that as the commanding officer, it was his job to keep an eye on his men. And he realized that his love for Martha kept him from performing those duties. Cross feels responsibility for Lavender's death, and decides that he can no longer think about Martha, essentially shutting out his love for her. Through Lieutenant Cross, O'Brien shows that in war, compassion and feelings get in the way of survival. This is why the Cross's men seem unfazed by Lavender's death. Since they have had to separate themselves from emotions other than fear and anger in order to survive, the men have become desensitized. This also explains why the normally "very gentle" Norman Bowker carries around a human thumb. Lieutenant Cross shows and his men are perfect examples of the incompatibility of compassion and war

The Importance of Don Quixote

Although I have already written one post about the writing style in Don Quixote, it is so unique I feel obliged to write another post about it. As I mentioned in the previous post, Cervantes speaks directly to the reader throughout the novel, and at some points, he even describes how difficult it was/is to write the book. Cervantes mentions early on that he would have liked to publish the book, plain and simple, without all the "...sonnets, epigrams and eulogies." (12), but that he can't, because without them the book will be viewed poorly by public and scholars alike. As an author, Cervantes claims that he cannot avoid being concerned about the perception of his book, and so he is in a stump, unable to write anymore without putting in the sonnets and other things. So finally, with the help of a friend, he decides to write the sonnets, epigrams, and eulogies himself. The result is that throughout the novel, random sonnets, latin phrases, and quotes from famous people appear, adding zero value to the novel whatsoever. So why would Cervantes go through so much trouble to include them? The answer is that Cervantes is satirizing the main view of literature of his time. Cervantes wrote Don Quixote during the 16th century, a time when only a select few scholars decided what was good literature and what was not. Good literature had to meet certain requirements. First, the best canon rarely included fiction; the few cases where fiction was considered canon were if the author was known to have written other books, or the book was considered to be the first of its kind. Second, the text had to contain sonnets, epigrams, and other often useless devices in order to be considered well written. This lead to a majority of the writing being pretentious and unnecessarily boring to the uneducated masses.

What Cervantes does by mocking the use of these sonnets is show the world, or at least Spaniards, that good literature does not need to obey the rules. He also makes it obvious that he is mocking tradition so that the lay reader will understand him. He does this by making the material in his sonnets almost exactly the same as what he had written earlier. For example, at the end of Part I, Cervantes includes several sonnets about Lady Dulcinea del Toboso, and Don Quixote and his companions. In these sonnets, he writes about the beauty of Lady Dulcinea, and the courage of Don Quixote. In other words, he writes in his sonnets exactly what he has written perfectly well throughout Part 1. Even to the worst of readers, it this is obvious. Cervantes also includes random quotes and latin phrases, which also add zero value. One such quote, "And they should go, as they say, adventuring away" is mentioned a few times. It is separated from the paragraph because it is a quote by some famous author, but it could easily have been included in the paragraph as Don Quixote's dialogue.

Don Quixote was voted the Greatest Book of All Time by the Nobel Institute for a few reasons. One such reason is that by the satirical use of sonnets, epigrams, eulogies, latin phrases, and quotes, Cervantes paved showed authors that they can be successful without including them, allowing for a much larger variety of literature than had been previously thought possible.