Tag: Critical Thinking

New cover for “The Word Pool” ✨🥇 … Creative Writing and Sketching Book

New cover for “The Word Pool” ✨🥇.

Thank you to Miles Rogoish (www.mrface.art and/or IG: @milesrogoish) for the beautiful artwork for the book! “Shifting Identity” was the perfect art prompt for Miles. He recently discovered an appreciation for coffee, and this piece depicts that … his identity shifting!

The new edition on Amazon includes more artwork and short stories all drawn from the prompts in this book.

Our son, Joey, wrote a piece with the prompt, “Agonizing System.” It blew my mind!

A current student wrote a horror piece using “Campbell’s Mode” as an assignment in Comp I. I enjoyed it so much, I asked her if I could include it in the book!

There are millions of prompt possibilities in this book! And, there’s excellent information on continuous writing for those who claim writer’s block from time to time … and for those who don’t.

I’m pleased with this project, and I use it myself.

You need it. 😇❤️🙌

https://a.co/d/0cH1r6Z5

“Arnold, Shirley Jackson Wants Me to Go Against Your Sexist and Evil Traditions!” – OR – Little Janie for the Win!

“Arnold, Shirley Jackson wants me to go against your sexist and evil traditions!”

Sometimes students compose sentences that stop me. I read and reread them with appreciation and silent applause. Sometimes, not so silent. Sometimes, I copy and paste what a student wrote to my own social media bragging FOR them and about them. Proud, proud, proud. Sometimes I read them aloud to my husband and my father because they’re my ‘captive audience’ when I’m grading. (Earlier, I complained about a piece I was grading, and my father, bless his sweet heart, said, ‘You chose this.’ Very reminiscent of my daughter Kennedy’s response when I might feel a bit frustrated about grading. To him, I said, “Okay, Kennedy.” Ha. But, he was right.) This particular copy-pasted piece, however, from a student’s essay, is an entire conclusion paragraph that made me laugh. And because it made me laugh, I must share that laugh with you. So, for anyone who appreciates Shirley Jackson, I present my Comp I student’s concluding paragraph for her rhetorical analysis of “The Lottery.”

“As a story, ‘The Lottery’ is objectively gut-wrenching and horrifying. Why would anyone want to read a story about murder? You want to read a story about murder because it will make you understand that tradition is not always right. When Uncle Arnold shouts at the annual Christmas party, “Little Janie, why are you a plumber? That is a man’s job?,” you can shout back, “Arnold, Shirley Jackson wants me to go against your sexist and evil traditions. She is a critically acclaimed author, by the way!” You might not be named Janie or have an Uncle Arnold, but you do experience evil traditions that “The Lottery” helps you understand. By skillfully using ethos, logos, and pathos, she exposes the dangers of blind conformity and challenges readers to examine the traditions they accept. The story serves as a powerful reminder that just because something has always been done does not mean it should continue.”

If you haven’t read “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson, do so. Then, read a biography or two about Shirley’s life. Then, read “The Lottery” again. You’ll discover that not only is this author saying not to continue blindly following traditions, but she also is SCREAMING to the reader – “Don’t be trapped!” See, she was a trapped woman. She lived a life of abuse from childhood through her marriage, and her ‘cage’ killed her at the age of 48. Heart disease. It is a scientific fact that stress, anxiety, and fear have a direct correlation to heart disease. Shirley died at age 48. This woman, whose life was plagued with stress, anxiety, and fear, is SCREAMING to the audience, “Don’t be trapped like me!”

This touches me deeply. I was 51 when my heart almost gave out. 51 when I had open-heart surgery … much too young, but that is what a life lived in stress will get you.  No more of that in what remains of my days here in this life; each day is an opportunity to share my experience, strength, and hope. Each day I pray, “God, may I be of use to YOU today.” Then, I step into the day, live in the moment, and shine, shine, shine.

I also echo Shirley … “Don’t be trapped!”  Think. Explore. Laugh. LIVE. Go against the FLOW. Or, like my student wrote, say, “Arnold, Shirley Jackson wants me to go against your sexist and evil traditions!” 

I flippin’ love how the student wove in that Uncle Arnold and Little Janie bit. Hilarious – and powerful. Nicely done, my student. Nicely done.

The Good People Got On With Their Lives. A Short Story.

New story on Amazon. https://a.co/d/ccsHJb6

Some places feel wrong before you can explain why.

On a simple drive, Sarah and Tom pass through a town called Goodville—quiet and unsettling in a way that has nothing to do with what they can see. A single encounter leaves Sarah shaken, and the feeling follows them long after they put miles behind them.

At a roadside diner, a local named Ted begins to talk. What starts as conversation becomes something else: a portrait of a place where “goodness” is a rule, a ritual, and a justification—and where the cost of keeping life comfortable is paid by someone else.

The Good People Got On With Their Lives is a quiet, unnerving short story about moral certainty, social complicity, and the danger of calling something “normal” simply because it has always been that way. It doesn’t offer easy answers—only questions that linger.

Something Scary, Boo.

What’s scary is that people don’t mind getting their news from one-sided sources. Truly scary. And willfully blind. Ignorant is a better word. Willfully ignorant. Choosing not to see things from opposing perspectives. Choosing not to understand why someone might dare to hold a different thought. Never ask why that person holds an opposing view. Just willfully ignoring that opposing perspectives exist, and that only by seeking to understand why the other side is different can true perspective and sincere grounding for one’s own perspectives be found. We certainly don’t want to be accused of thinking for ourselves beyond one-sided news sources; we want to choose a side and hate anyone who opposes our held ideas. It is stunning – truly stunning – and not in a good way, not in a beautiful way – that such willful ignorance exists, and in abundance at that. Cognitive Dissonance. Biases. Logical Fallacies. They’re flowing like water rushing over Bridalveil Falls, and I am stunned. I shouldn’t be, but I am.

Despite it all, I will continue to teach critical thinking skills which incorporate calm, courteous processes wherein we know our audience, understand their perspectives, research opposing information, and address such with clarity and evidence – not seeking to win an argument but to, at the very least, inspire critical thinking in the audience. There is no place for anger, no place for emotionalism, no place for words like, anyone who has an opposing perspective “should be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives.” I saw those words on Facebook during COVID. On a colleague’s Facebook page. I’ll never forget them; I still work with this person. I don’t do social media with coworkers much anymore, and I keep an eye on that individual. That person is supposed to be teaching critical thinking skills … that scares me, too. How can an individual who believes anyone who opposes their ideas “should be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives,” teach any person anywhere how to be fair and participate in a true argument? It’s wildly insane.

To anyone reading this, please don’t get your news from just one source. Not just from CNN. Not just from FOX. Today, one of my students told me about “Allsides.com” – supposedly a fair and balanced site; I checked it out. I’m intrigued. I try to be open-minded and seek to understand why people who believe differently from me do just that … believe differently from me. It has everything to do with life experience, culture, and research (lot of or lack of). Why this doesn’t make sense to the masses will baffle me for the rest of my existence on this earth, I’m sure. So be it. That will not stop me from teaching and encouraging my students to think for themselves beyond what one news station or certain social media influencers say. I will continue to push them to experience multiple perspectives and draw conclusions based on research and paced thought, never rash emotion or bandwagon mentality. I will continue to grade their work not on whether I agree with their thesis statements, but on how well they support those statements with their evidence. I will also continue to show them that every one of us is valuable, no matter our perspectives, and that not a one of us deserves to be “shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives.”

Of course, I’ll draw this to a close in much the same way I end many of my classes. What I’m telling you here (think for yourself and don’t settle for one perspective) works for me, but you do you, Boo.

Let Me Be Clear – Rhetoric at its Finest

The buzzword in politics is “Clear.” Both sides say it, and as soon as it comes out of a politician’s mouth, I distrust them; I’m going to side-eye that individual from those words forward. It disappoints me. If you have actually researched and your argument stands on its own, there is no necessity for the words, “Let me be clear.” They’re rhetoric. Pretty words. A veil. A covering. It’s like liars who use the word “Honestly” to ensure you believe something they’re going to say. My response? How about no. If you’re a truth teller, you don’t need to qualify anything you say with “Honestly” or “Let me be clear.” Those words are rhetoric – words chosen with the intent to persuade a reader/listener. The actual definition, according to the Google Dictionary/Oxford Language, is “the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques.” The ART of using words to persuade. Rhetoric is fun and effective to use if you’re a politician because, well, most people do not think for themselves. We are like sheep joining a sheep circle, going round and round and round, just following whoever looks and sounds like the leader. Hence the term “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

“Let me be clear” is telling the listener to believe what you’re going to say – that you’ve done all the research necessary and you are trustworthy. What you say is clear and accurate. There is no need for a listener to question the authority of your words. You are clear. There is an element of imposed guilt on a listener if they dare to question the statement made by the individual who says it is “oh so clear.” That is in quotation marks, so you read it in my sarcastic tone. “Let me be clear” is an excellent tactic on many people, which is why it is used so often nowadays in politics and in the media. Listen for it. Start counting the number of times you hear it. Make it a drinking game when you watch the “news” (sarcasm again – they’re not reporters now, they’re commentators/opinion givers) if you’re not an alcoholic.

I tell my students to be aware of rhetoric – understand it. Recognize when it’s used on you. Know how to effectively use it on others if you so choose. Law. Politics. Sales. Media. These career fields exist on the back of strong rhetoric. Persuasion is the euphemism. Manipulation is the curse word. Rhetoric.

One of my major teaching points in Comp I is Stephen King’s brilliant, rhetorical move in the short story “The Man Who Loved Flowers.” My favorite paragraph in that piece is this:

“The radio poured out bad news that no one listened to: a hammer murderer was still on the loose; JFK had declared that the situation in a little Asian country called Vietnam would bear watching; an unidentified woman had been pulled from the East River; a grand jury had failed to indict a crime overlord in the current city administration’s war on heroin; the Russians had exploded a nuclear device. None of it seemed real, none of it seemed to matter. The air was soft and sweet. Two men with beer bellies stood outside a bakery, pitching nickels and ribbing each other. Spring trembled on the edge of summer, and in the city, summer is the season of dreams.”

“The radio poured out bad news that no one listened to:” is the opening line of the foreshadowing paragraph. In this paragraph, King tells the audience what the situation is, but it is sandwiched between “Don’t listen to this” and “None of it seemed real, none of it seemed to matter.” None of what King just had the radio say matters. Don’t listen to it. It’s not real. It doesn’t matter. And then, the air is soft and sweet. People are kidding around. And summer is the season of dreams. King effectively told the significant plot point but hid it inside rhetoric. “Don’t listen” and “It doesn’t matter.” And the reader falls for it. The reader doesn’t remember that a hammer murderer is on the loose. And that is the truth of the short story. There is a hammer murderer, and as the reader, you already met him, but you don’t know it. A reader in 1969 would have had further complications in pointing out the foreshadowing because each of the items that follow “a hammer murderer is on the loose” are actual things happening in May of 1963, in New York City news. That audience would be red-herring distracted from the hammer murderer. A rhetorical move well done. Well done. Personally, I find this paragraph of King’s to be brilliant rhetoric. Beautiful, actually.

I can appreciate rhetoric; I find it useful in the classroom, but I do not use it as a weapon. I use it to engage my students, to open minds to new ideas. I do not use it to manipulate or trick them. When I see that happening in media and in politics (and in sales – like car sales – my least favorite shopping venture), it grates on my ever-loving last nerve. “Let me be clear” … I think not. No, thank you. If you had anything of actual value to say, you would have no need to use a subversive, fad-driven, rhetorical device/buzzword.

Remember when someone on the news said J.D. Vance was “weird” – and within days, every station was using that same rhetoric-driven buzzword. The fad began, and people watching those particular news shows believed the word. Thus, J.D. Vance was indeed weird – declared by not only news stations and politicians but also SOCIAL MEDIA – and we all know that social media is reliable for information gleaning (again, sarcasm by me – I hope you do know to sift through anything you read on social media. It’s a rhetorical minefield). Social media, where information is validated because “everyone” says it. LOL … oh man. Seriously. Maybe it’s not that J.D. Vance is “weird,” it might just be that he is different from you – maybe he has a message that someone does not want you to hear or believe. So, rhetoric is employed, and he is called “weird,” so that the masses of people who easily follow and believe what the media tells them will distrust him. Please stop and think. If we are going to play that rhetorical game, J.D. Vance probably thinks that the individuals calling him weird are “weird.” Geez, people. Think for yourselves. Don’t fall for rhetorical terms tossed out by people who want to invalidate another individual – and we just let it happen. It’s far too easy for those skilled in the art of rhetoric.

Let me be clear ...

How about no?

Continuous Writing – From “I Can’t” to “I Can”

“I can’t write,” “I hate to write,” “I’m not a good writer,” “I don’t know what to write,” “Writing is hard.” These are all phrases I hear from students and people out and about in the world I bumble around inside, especially when those folks discover my occupation. “Oh, you’re an English Professor; I better clean up the way I talk,” or “I’d do terrible in that class; I can’t write,” they say apologetically and with much insecurity. Without fail, I say, “Oh please, anyone can be a writer, and if you took my class, I’d prove it to you.”

Anyone can be a writer. I believe that. In “On Writing,” Stephen King said, “Take any noun, put it with any verb, and you have a sentence. It never fails. Rocks explode. Jane transmits. Mountains float.” Wa-la, you’re writing. At its core, it’s not that complicated. You have thoughts. Write them down. Do you have more thoughts? Write those down too. You have no thoughts? Write that down. Write whatever is in your head. Write about having nothing in your head. I’m getting ahead of myself. Most folks, when told it’s time to write, absolutely freeze. Freeze or internally weep. Our problem is that somewhere along the way, someone said something that caused you to feel inadequate. And that inadequacy turned into the lies we tell ourselves about ourselves in the form of “I can’t,” which becomes “I won’t.”

I address this in my classes by talking about Word Vomit. As I talk about letting whatever is in your mind and your heart flood the page, a baby spews on the presentation screen behind me. The visual “helps” the students get this idea of word vomit into their heads. Spill yourself onto the paper before you or the keyboard in front of you, whichever it is. They’ll never forget that baby! Chuck Wendig, a writer and blogger I enjoy, calls it, in his article “25 of My Personal Rules for Writing and Telling Stories,” “Bleeding on the Page.” When I discuss his angle on continuous writing with the students, there’s a bloody spill on the screen behind me; in his article, he says to cut yourself open and color your words with your heartsblood! Here, he says it best:

“Don’t write purely to escape pain and fear. Mine it. Extract those wretched little nuggets of hard black hate-coal and use them to fuel the writing of a scene, a chapter, maybe the whole goddamn book. Cut yourself open. Color the words with your heartsblood. I am an advocate of finding the things you fear and opening old wounds to let them splash onto the characters and inform the tale at hand. We’ll know. We’ll feel it, too. This is where your experience matters — it’s not necessarily in the nitty-gritty of mechanical experience but rather in the authenticity of your emotional life. And this is true for the opposite, as well — write about the things that thrill you, that stir hope, that deliver unto you paroxysms of tingly exultation. Be true to yourself and we’ll all grok your lingo, Daddy-O.”

Bleed on the page. Word Vomit. Imagery does wonders for belief. Any of us can pour ourselves out in freewriting—absolutely anyone. My friend, Dr. Douglas Price – the Director of Faculty Development and Global Learning at Tulsa Community College- has recently developed a tool for continuous writing that he and another friend of mine, Professor Amy Rains, are fine-tuning and collecting data on. They received a DaVinci Institute award for their work this past year. Since then, I have gleefully welcomed Dr. Price to my classrooms to share his insights and incredible tool, which assists students in continuous writing – and beyond that, continuous thought.

The practice is continuous writing, without stopping, just letting words and thoughts flow. If you get “stuck” in the writing, have a keyword to fall back on and write that word continuously until a new idea pops into your mind, which you will then write and keep going! Something I like to do is write about being stuck, if I get stuck. When I have had “writer’s block,” I’ve written about it—the feelings involved, the frustration, the despair … and then I have some golden, authentic emotions I can give to a character at another time. Writing our authentic internal thoughts is excellent for multiple reasons: it teaches us to keep going, it frees us to stop worrying about what others will think, it shakes us clear of concern about mistakes and editing. Just write. No stopping. Go. Go. Go. Get it out. Write without stopping; we practice this in freewriting, rough draft writing, journaling, anywhere you need to get words from your head onto a page.

Dr. Price visited my classrooms this week, and we, the students and I (because I love to participate along with them), practiced Dr. Price’s tool for continuous writing.  During this visit, he specifically had us focus on comparisons. Take two words that have nothing to do with one another and see where your mind takes you as you continuously write. No stopping, just writing, and if you get stuck, write about it, or use a keyword to repeat until a new thought appears.

What follows are my freewriting examples from our exercises. I’m pleased with the results, as were the students pleased with their own.  All of these students, who weeks ago, before my class, and the words from King, Wendig, and me, along with Dr. Price’s two visits to the classroom, used to say, “I can’t,” which meant, “I won’t.” Now … they can, and they have, and they will.

Nametag & Parachute

They found it on the ground, not far from the parachute. Her nametag. It lay in the mud, surrounded by remnants of this and that, things unmentionable due to the tragedy of the accident. The parachute had not opened … and she plummeted to her death. The newspaper would tell all the details, but for now, standing in the midst of it, the coroner just stared at the nametag. Chelsea. Her name was Chelsea Street. A young woman, it appeared. Probably full of life and laughter, excited to jump from a plane for the first time. Or maybe she was an expert and had done this many times, only this time, the chute did not open. Time would reveal that information to the CSI team, but the coroner’s job at this moment was to observe the body, so she took her attention from the nametag which was an embroidered piece of fabric that still semi-clung to the jacket that lay a few feet from where Chelsea’s body lay indented into the ground.

“Sandy, take a look at this,” said a young man crouched near the body. His name was Dan, and he was her newest assistant. Most didn’t stay with her long; she didn’t understand why, but she had come to accept the revolving door.

Sandy stepped closer to the body, and she looked down at the woman whose life had tragically ended that morning. How did this happen, Chelsea? Did the chute not open as it should? She waited and, before long, Chelsea spoke to her only in a voice no one could hear but her. “I didn’t open it.” The coroner heard the words, let them sink in a moment, and asked, “You did this on purpose?” Chelsea replied, “Yes.” And Sandy knew the CSI would find no flaws in the chute.

Snail & Dumpster

It was a long way to the top, but Herbert kept going. He knew the ‘promised land’ would await him once he reached the top. He had heard about the inside of the giant thing from some flies that he knew, though his parents told him not to associate with the flies. They were bad seeds, his dad said. But Herbie wanted to find out what was on the other side, or even better, on the inside of the giant thing. One of the flies had called it a dumpster; Herbie had seen it plenty of times but never knew its name. It was unmentionable. Something his parents ignored, even though it was larger than life.

Stick to the rocks. Stick to the shoreline. Don’t go on the concrete. Don’t go where the people go. Stay safe. Herbie didn’t want to play it safely. He tried to “LIVE.” You know, like the flies. He wished he had wings instead of this shell. Being a snail restrained him. He didn’t like carrying around the weight of his room all day, every day. He wanted to sprout wings and be a fly, though he heard that snails lived longer than flies, so there was that. But heck, even in their short lives, they got to see things that snails never did … and so, that morning, Herbert had kissed his mother and told her he was going to snail school, only he didn’t go. He made his way to the concrete and slowly took his first slide onto the hard surface, not knowing how it would feel. It wasn’t so bad, so he kept going, and before long, though the sun had fully changed positions, he looked up and saw the giant dumpster before him. It was even bigger up close, and his heart swelled with excitement. At the top, he saw flies flying around, doing what they do, and he tried calling out, “Hey, guys! Hey, flies!” But no one heard him, so he found a spot where he could begin his climb, and Herbie began edging upward. So far. At some point, a fly noticed him and whizzed past him …

Cauliflower & Guitar

He strummed the guitar no more than five feet from me. The music was soft, and I was sleepy. I needed to wake up. Something, anything. And then, my food arrived. So grateful for something to do – you know, feed my face. And … there was cauliflower on my plate next to my steak. I did not order cauliflower. Gross. It’s one of the nastiest substances on this planet; I will not eat it. But I don’t want to cause a scene. This place is quiet except for the lullaby floating around in the space from that man’s infernal guitar. He plays on and on, and I think this concert is for senior citizens.

Looking around, no, there aren’t any of those here, but I seem to be the only person squirming in my seat because the music is so dull! My husband seems content with the food on his plate. His steak and broccoli sit there ready to become one with him, as they usually do when he orders them. It’s a routine, and he is happy. But they gave me cauliflower. Ugh. I can’t eat it anyway – even if I wanted to. Which I don’t. So … what to do with it? Everyone is distracted here. No one is paying attention to me. I wonder … I could break the cauliflower into little pieces and try to toss it inside the guitar. He’s only 5 feet away … I bet I could make it. I’m a basketball player after all. Naturally, I will think of making a basket!

Boat & Cello

My favorite piece of music is “The River Flows in You” – especially when done by Hauser, a member of the group 2 Cellos. His video for “The River Flowers in You” is filmed in a boat on a river, and he beautifully plays the melody on his cello. It is mournful, almost, and the setting sweeps me into emotional flow every time I hear it. It seeps into every fiber of my being, and I am on that river, not with Hauser, but alone … I am there, and I am sad, and I am content. I am hopeful, and I am relaxed, and I am mourning … so many things all wrapped up as the music soars through me and the water gently moves me along. They work in tandem with one another – I lie back in the boat and float on a sea of emotion, but gentle emotion, taking me to a place of serenity where I can be open and free and not have worries or concerns. It is a release, and I long for that at all times. I will play “The River Flows in You” with intent from time to time because I need that music. I need that song … in cello, and I remember the river. I am in that boat, and Hauser plays the melody, and I drift … drifting, drifting … ever down the river of emotion but gentle emotion, soft and sweet, though a tint of mournfulness because Life is serious … Life is to be lived and we are to rest and we are to exult and we are to be in the moment, and in this moment, I am all of those things. I want to be in this boat …

Curtain & Trees

She pulled back the curtains to let in the day.  The morning light spilled in and lit the room. Her eyes adjusted, and she flipped the latch to unlock the window. She heaved because the window was heavy and opened it, allowing the fresh morning air to rush into her bedroom. Ahhhhhh. The morning. There is nothing like morning. Nothing smells like morning. Especially here in the mountains. She smiled and looked out of the window at the forest surrounding her cabin. The mountain rose in the distance beyond the trees, and a few hawks circled above it all. She wanted to be nowhere but right here. A day lay ahead of her where she would play in the sunshine, wander through the trees, explore the base of the mountain, and perhaps skip rocks on the river. No pressure. No worries. No concerns. No sounds just birds, water trickling, and a car’s tires on gravel … Wait, that’s not the sound she should hear. The sound grew louder, and a car came into view – coming down the gravel drive set between dark rows of trees that overhung the simple road. It was her grandfather’s truck, and she wasn’t ready for his bellowing. Maybe she could pretend to be asleep. He’d get what he needed and leave. She pulled the curtains closed a bit and hid behind one of them, hoping he hadn’t seen her in the window. She was not in the mood to listen to any of his stories or help him hunt for this or for that that he left in the kitchen or the garage. It was always something. At those thoughts, she chided herself. He meant well. He always meant well. It wasn’t his fault that he had no volume level other than loud. Bless his heart. He’s hard of hearing … she pulled herself together, slipped on her flip-flops …

Mirror & Trains

She glanced in the mirror and adjusted her hair. A few strands were loosened from the wind outside near the train stop. She wanted to be presentable. No, she needed to be presentable. It has been two years since she last saw him. How has time flown like that? It is cruel, time. She saw the lines in her face were deeper, and she hoped he wouldn’t notice. She hoped that when he saw her, his eyes would light up and time would disappear. She kept looking at herself in the mirror and wondered how life had brought them to this space – to be so distant but love so hard. It was also cruel. Life. The mirror. All of it. He had to take a train. Trains make so many stops, and the time stretches far beyond what a plane ride would take.  Even what a car would produce. And so, it was the train, and time is cruel. She wiped a piece of loose mascara from near her eye and took a deep breath. Two years.  Okay.  You can do this. Her heart raced. Her hands were a bundle of nerves. She hoped he was just as anxious to see her, but she also didn’t wish feeling this anxiety on him, hoping he was happy and on an adventure. Who knows what they would do with their time? She hadn’t made a plan. She wanted whatever time they had together to be spontaneous. She left the restroom and made her way to the train platform outside, again in the wind, and the strands of hair she had corrected chose their own freedom and flew with wild abandonment in the air. The train whistle sounded, and she stared down the track … hoping this was his train!  But another train whizzed past. Not stopping. Ah, the anxiety. And then, another train came into view … and she prayed this was the one. It was time. It was time, ten minutes ago, but that time is cruel … and so, she waited. She watched, and the train came to a stop. Passengers filed off, and she strained to see him.  Desperate to see him, but he wasn’t there. Where was he? Person after person filed past her, and her heart sank. Maybe he had decided not to come. He didn’t want to see her after all. Her hopes dashed, but she understood. She understood that he hadn’t desired to prioritize her in his life after she had left all those years ago.

Why would he? She understood. She crossed her arms, rubbed her hands against her skin, and sighed. Deeply.  No one else remained to come off the train, and she turned to walk back into the sanctuary of the bustling train station, where she could disappear into the people and not be noticed in her sorrow and shame. Out in the air, on the platform, she felt a neon sign flashing above her saying, “Look at that mother who left her son years ago! She doesn’t deserve his love!” But you don’t know my story, she wanted to shout back at the sign and the people and the air.

Keyboard Warrior – Critical Thinking, Immigration, Courage, Cancelation, & Me.

Keyboard Warrior is not a title I choose for myself, but I want to state something on my mind right now, and I’ll get around to it. But first, I find it sad that I hesitate to write this, much less post it. We live in a world where some have a right to voice their opinions, and others don’t … unless they’re up for the being canceled or yelled at situations. Some choose not to voice their opinions because they see sharing opinionated thoughts as a lack of propriety or a breach of privacy. I’ve been told I overshare, which is funny because I don’t voice many thoughts regarding politics. However, I’m sure that was about some personal matters that particular individuals don’t like for me to talk about online. My perspective is this: if something in my story helps someone else to be brave, then what I went through and have become willing to be honest and vulnerable about is worth it. I will not be silent on matters such as alcoholism, emotional sobriety, loving your neighbor as yourself, recovery from major surgery, and speaking up for yourself when you’re in an abusive situation; there is life beyond what feels hopeless. I will not hesitate to write about any of those things; there are other topics, though, that I feel strongly about, and most often, I keep my thoughts to myself for a variety of reasons. A couple of those are that I see a lack of communication skills and a lack of value for/respect for opposing perspectives in the realm of social media – and in the workplace.

I’m sure I’ve mentioned this before, but I’m going to state it again because I still find it shocking. At the height of the COVID panic, I was ‘friends’ on Facebook with multiple co-workers; I am not any longer because I’ll never forget reading, “They should all be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives” on a co-worker’s Facebook thread. My co-worker agreed. Wow, thought I. They’d both be okay with my death … so that they, the “good” people, can go on with life. Until that “good” sect of folks ran into some issue on which there existed a disagreement and another killing off of “bad” people would occur … Perhaps this is a slippery slope, but I don’t think so. It is common sense.

I’ll never forget reading those words, and I’m watchful of that individual and of others. I hold different perspectives than the majority of folks I work with … and although many of them bring their opinions to work and put them on display in emails and meetings, I keep my own neatly tucked in my heart and mind because they do not belong at work. Our task is to teach students to think critically… sometimes I’m concerned about higher ed because we are contracted to teach critical thinking skills, but many complete this task with an emphasis on particular belief systems being the only “right” track instead of showing students the necessity of viewing multiple perspectives with an open mind and a respect for different opinions.

A truth taught in my classrooms is when emotion enters a conversation, it is no longer a conversation or true argument. It is at that point the beginning of a fight, of cancellation, of separation between people, dividing us … it’s sad, and it is a tragedy that people would rather spout angry words, cancel, shut out/shut down than listen, and try to understand where another person is coming from. I ponder this and conclude that my hesitation to share my thoughts/opinions (outside of work because I will not be convinced that work is a place where I can bring personal beliefs and opinions) is one of three things or a combination of each.

  1. I prefer to avoid conflict, which states that I have a lack of courage.
  2. I prefer to avoid conflict, which is because all roads lead back to my career, and that is something I will not jeopardize.
  3. I prefer to avoid conflict, which states that I value people over opinions. However, this third one makes me wonder if I am unwilling to speak my truth to others, does that then show a lack of care and concern for them on my part? Am I feigning niceness? Perhaps that depends on the issue at hand. Perhaps.

I’m still determining why I hesitate to speak my mind on matters outside of the issues I have no compunction about sharing from my soul—those charged issues that fall in the political spectrum specifically, I hesitate upon. However, on the issue of immigration, because it hits close to home, I think I will voice my opinion.

My son-in-law is an immigrant; he entered this country legally. He went through the required procedures because he is a respectful man who wanted to work in America. I applaud and support him and any who respect our nation and abide by its rules. I have a former student who is German; she also came to the United States through the correct channels to attend college. I have a friend who is of Kurdish descent from Iraq. Her family fled Iraq years ago on foot into Turkey and ended up in St. Louis through legal channels. She now speaks better English than most of us who grew up in the USA. She loves this country because she knows what it is like to live under real, and not perceived, oppression. Our First Lady is a former immigrant who went through legal channels to be here. To each of these people and to anyone who respects our nation and its laws, I welcome you!

Millions of immigrants in this country, however, chose to come in illegally. This is not right. It does not matter how “nice” they are. That is an argument I’ve heard regarding why undocumented people should be allowed to remain … they are “nice.” If they’re here illegally, they’ve broken our laws, and therefore, they are criminals according to our laws. Nice or not. Some people want to argue that undocumented immigrants add to our economy. To this, I say our government has been giving them money instead of spending our tax dollars on what the citizens of this nation, like the North Carolina flood victims, need. I do not understand how this is not a black-and-white issue for every citizen of this nation. America First. There is a system in place for legal migration to the USA. Does it take a while? Yes, it does. Is it flawed? Yes, it is. Does that mean it is to be disregarded? No, it does not.


If these people who are here illegally that our tax dollars are taking care of – just this past week, it was discovered that $59 million in tax dollars had been used by USAID to put illegal immigrants up in hotels in New York City – did not abide by our immigration laws and come here by correct means; doesn’t that also indicate that there will be continued disrespect for our rule of law? Absolutely. This can be seen in protests happening across this nation where undocumented immigrants are flying the flags of their nations of origin. There is a great lack of common sense here. If the nation you left to come here is so bad, why do you fly their flag inside our borders as if you want to bring that nation here … maybe that is the goal …. Maybe that is exactly what is happening. If so, it’s an invasion, and America is in danger of losing itself. All of this said, I realize some of the undocumented people are here for a better life, not nefarious purposes, and to them, I say, if you are so happy to come to the United States, do it correctly, abide by our laws with respect, and fly our flag. Pretty simple concept. One that almost every other nation on earth enforces through imprisonment and/or deportation.

Anyway, now I ask myself if I feel better having written this out, and to a degree, yes. But overall, no. I just want to get along with people and not let politics divide us. I want to be able to do my job without politics creeping into it. I want to treat others the way I wish to be treated and receive that same consideration in return. It makes me sad that this is often now how things work. It makes me sad to know that I’m a person that another individual would be happy to shoot in the head for having a different political belief. I don’t understand this in human nature, and it makes me long for my heavenly home.

Maranatha. Come, Lord Jesus.

Ursula K. Le Guin, Kay Allen, & Shelby Scott – Women Making a Difference re: Omelas

To Mrs. Kay Allen, one of my high school English teachers, if you can hear me or see this up in Heaven, THANK YOU for bringing the short story “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” to my attention and encouraging me to use it in my Comp II curriculum.

What a privilege to have had Mrs. Allen as a teacher – in 1988-89 and as a friend much later in life. Before she ‘moved to Heaven,’ I would tell her directly about student responses to Le Guin’s work. Today, I settle for a shout-out online to ‘let her know’ that time and again, Ursula K. Le Guin’s message has touched my students, opening their eyes to not just one but multiple horrifying dichotomies that exist in our world. Today, I graded, no, let’s use the word ‘read.’ I read a paper authored by one of my students regarding the impact of “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas.” To say that I am proud is an understatement. Today, I said to my student, Shelby, “You should be proud of your work; it is strong, argumentative, personal, and researched.” Her response was, “Thank you, that means a lot. I really did try my best to do Le Guin’s work justice.” She did, and with her permission, I share it here.

Shelby Scott * Professor Cunningham * ENGL 1213 * April 22, 2024

“The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” Rhetorical Analysis

A month ago, if you had asked me to name a short story capable of eliciting a range of emotions – shock, disgust, and anger, I would have struggled to find one. That was until I encountered ‘The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas’ by Ursula K. Lee Guin. This narrative, set in a utopian city known as the ‘city of joy,’ initially appears devoid of any hardships – a facade that is shattered as the story unfolds. It is a testament to the power of emotional storytelling. However, before we delve into the story’s intricacies, it is crucial to understand the author behind it.

Ursula K. Lee Guin grew up in Berkley, California, with her parents, Alfred Kroeber and Theodora Kroeber, both of whom studied anthropology. According to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, “Anthropology is the study of human beings and their ancestors through time and space and about physical character, environmental and social relations, and culture” (Webster). Later in her life, she would pursue a career in writing. She dabbled in many genres, according to the National Endowment for the Humanities: “including poetry, historical fiction, picture books, essays, translation, and, toward the end of her nearly sixty-year career, writing a funny and opinionated blog” (Phillips). Yet, she was mostly known for writing science fiction, which had become a blossoming genre a decade before Le Guin began to write due to the rise of technology. The online Encyclopedia Britannica can support this, “developments in technology, such as nuclear energy and space exploration, coupled with the end of World War II, ignited the public’s imagination surrounding ideas of space, dystopia, alternate futures, and militarization.” (Sterling).

Le Guin became a prominent figurehead in this genre, exploiting its unexplored prospects. The Museum of Pop Culture, located in Seattle, Washington, is dedicated to making creative expression a life-changing force by offering experiences that inspire and connect our communities, explains Le Guin’s method of writing. “She used the genre to convey her messages of anthropology, gender, environmentalism, and anarchism” (Museum of Pop Culture). “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” is no different, expressing themes of morality, happiness, and individuals versus society, all based in a utopian city. Throughout the story, the narrator tries to persuade the reader to consider Omelas a wonderful place. Describing the people of the town as never having lived complicated lives, as mentioned in the story: “They were not naïve and happy children – though their children were, in fact, happy. They were mature, intelligent, passionate adults whose lives were not wretched” (Le Guin). As the narrator goes on, the reader can sense that they want readers to be convinced that Omelas is all it’s made out to be. They try to explain that good things happen in this city. This can make readers wonder why all this persuasion is needed.

It isn’t until the reader nears the end of the story that they realize why the narrator went to great lengths to glorify Omelas. Hidden in a basement under one of the buildings in Omelas, a child is kept captive in a closet. They sit naked, in their excrement, malnourished and abused. The narrator reveals that this child is why Omelas is a city of joy, free from all pain and misery. It is like a stab to the gut for many readers, including myself, to learn of this. As the story progresses, the knife begins to twist as the narrator tries to explain why the child must be kept in the closet. They are a sacrifice, placed there to keep the people and the city happy. All of the people know of this child, and most are complacent with its treatment as long as they can continue without a complicated life. Thus, it leaves the reader with rage and disgust while encouraging them to think about our views of utopia and our perceptions of happiness. “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” is a short story by Ursula K. Le Guin, who skillfully uses Logos, Pathos, and Ethos to explore the themes of morality, happiness, and human nature while criticizing society’s idea of utopia and why it should never be achieved.

Throughout my Composition II class, I have read six short stories, all of which I have interpreted the Logos, Pathos, and Ethos to see if the author used them to help get their message across in a memorable way. Stories such as “The Story of an Hour” by Kate Chopin and “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman greatly impacted society and myself. I heavily considered writing about them for this essay. Yet, once I read “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,” the other stories I read were not comparable. One of the reasons for this is Le Guin’s use of logos. Logos in the literary world means to appeal to the audience’s sense of reason or logic. The use of logos can be seen throughout the story, with the narrator describing the city and the people.

From the story’s beginning, the narrator describes the luxuries the city offers, detailing all the things Omelas offers or doesn’t offer to try and convince the reader that the city is a utopia. Descriptions such as “They did not use swords or keep slaves. They were not barbarians… As they did without monarchy and slavery, so they also go on without the stock exchange, the advertisement, the secret police, and the bomb” and “What else belongs in the joyous city?… But as we did without clergy, let us do without soldiers. The joy built upon successful slaughter is not the right kind of joy; it will not do; it is fearful and trivial” (Le Guin). From these examples presented, the narrator is appealing to what might be the reader’s sense of utopia—describing how Omelas does not need an oppressive monarchy or slavery to function as a proper city.

The other example shows how Omelas does not need wars or the military to experience joy—acknowledging that joy derived from violence is not the right kind of joy. Yet, the second example is hypothetical. It can be hard to catch since the narrator does a good job sweeping the reader into the sweet details of this supposed utopia, but not all the descriptions of this ‘glorious’ city are accurate. The narrator does not know if the military exists in the city of Omelas, but if that’s something that will entice the reader, then there is no military. These theories blur the line between reality and fantasy. This can trick the reader into thinking some of these promises are true, and that’s what the narrator wants you to believe. The more the reader feels enticed, the harder it is for the reader to judge Omelas for its sin.

Moving on from Logos, the next from the rhetorical triangle is Ethos. Ethos Focuses attention on the writer’s or speaker’s trustworthiness. When considering the Ethos of this story, it’s good to look at the author’s life to understand why they write their stories. Understanding an author’s life, going all the way to the beginning of their life – can establish credibility with the readers and the story. As stated before, Le Guin was born in 1929 in Berkley, California, to her parents, Alfred Kroeber and Theodora Kroeber, both anthropologists. Due to growing up in such an environment, the influences of anthropology can be found in multiple works written by Le Guin. Works like The Dispossessed and Always Coming Home have Le Guin’s twist on utopian stories. Unsurprisingly, Le Guin would once again write about her ideas of utopia in “The Ones That Walk Away from Omelas.”

Yet, the reader might ask ‘why’ Le Guin would write so much about utopia, and there’s a plausible explanation. Le Guin started writing in the 1950s and continued her writing for the next sixty years. Many world events during this time would strongly influence writers – including Le Guin. One of the most significant events of this time was the Vietnam War, which began in 1955. The Vietnam War was a long and costly war against communist North Vietnam and South Vietnam, along with South Vietnam’s ally – the United States, who joined out of fear that communism would take over Asia if North Vietnam won. More than 3 million had died, and 58,000 of those deaths were American Soldiers. Many say that the U.S. should have never entered that war. A poll made in 1971 found on Britannica.com noted that “71% of Americans believed that the U.S made a mistake sending troops to Vietnam, and 58% said that the war ‘immoral’” (Spector).

The controversy and disillusionment of the war led to the birth of a new movement called the Hippie Movement. It was born partly to oppose the Vietnam War. Hippies advocated for peace and love, promoting tolerance and fewer restrictions in life. Many opted to leave society and join communes where they could live amongst other hippies—living a life of what would be considered taboo in regular society, such as participating in open sexual relationships, recreational drug use, and seeking out different spiritual practices that deviated from Christianity.

Readers will better understand Le Guin’s world and where the ideas of utopia come from if they know the time and history of Le Guin’s society. It has already been established that the narrator creates a lot of hypotheticals to make the city of Omelas more enticing. One of these hypotheses was the town orgy. The narrator fears their description of Omelas has become too ‘goody-goody.’ The narrator begins with this one-paragraph description of what the town orgy might be like saying:

“Let us not, however, have temples from which issue beautiful nude priests and priestesses already half in ecstasy and ready to copulate with any man or woman, lover or stranger who desires union with the deep godhead of the blood, although that was my first ide. But really, it would be better not to have any temple in Omelas – at least, not manned temples… Surely, the beautiful nudes can wander about, offering themselves like divine souffles to the hunger of people in need and the rapture of the flesh. Let them join the processions. Let tambourines be struck above the copulations, and the glory of desire be proclaimed upon the gongs, and let the offspring of the delightful rituals be beloved and looked after by all” (Le Guin).

It’s a lot to process, and it took me days to try and understand why Le Guin would write this. Sure, one can say that sex is appealing, and it sells, so it would be a no-brainer to add that tidbit. For some, the idea of people who readily offer themselves to those who are in need or desire sex would already be a utopia, and that’s precisely how most hippies saw sex. An excerpt from a book I found on the website Cambridge University Press called American Hippies by W.J. Rorabach – an American historian and retired history professor from the University of Washington, perfectly explained how hippies viewed sex and the human body.

“Hippies worshipped the human body…This elemental celebration was rooted in the philosophy of the hippie counterculture. The body’s existence was a matter of simple fact, and freaks reveled in facing facts openly. To do so was part of the search for authenticity. “Hippies despise phoniness; they want to be open, loving, and free,” noted the counterculture journalist Hunter S. Thompson. Glorification of the body is beautiful also expressed a preference for simplicity and honesty. Nothing, including the body, should be hidden from view. To hide the body was proof of impure motives. Mainstream culture’s prudish attitude toward the body was proof of its corruption. Nudity expressed purity” (Rorabach).

Now, comparing the story to the actual views of hippies, it’s not hard to see how Le Guin mixes her reality with Omelas. The idea of people being readily available to whoever desired them and encouraging copulation with the strikes of tambourines can be viewed as the hippies encouraging the authentic nude body. Encouraging all that the human body had to offer without any phoniness. Like how the narrator did not think it would be suitable for there to be a temple filled with beautiful priests and priestesses ready to copulate at any time; it should just be anyone who feels the need to fulfill other townspeople’s desires. Learning the details of Le Guin’s life and the world she lived in can help readers not only understand why she wrote about a hypothetical town orgy but the city itself. The city of Omelas mirrors the hippie’s idea of utopia. A town without slavery and soldiers, a place without a monarchy, where all types of love were celebrated without judgment.

It’s incredible how much Le Guin took inspiration from the world around her and used it in her writing. That’s why the ethos is so powerful; she skillfully shows her credibility without having to say it outright. A few Google searches were all it took, and I quickly understood what this utopia was based on. Using real-life details gives the author extra credibility and adds another level of immersion to the story.

Even though ethos is strong throughout the story, it can be difficult for some readers to understand it. It took me a few days, along with research, to grapple with the entirety of Le Guin’s message. The Pathos stood out the most in this story, as it seemed to jump right out and in front of me and give the gut punch of a lifetime. Yet, before I ramble about Pathos, readers need to understand it. Pathos is persuading an audience by purposely evoking certain emotions to make them feel the way the author wants them to. Le Guin was adept at conveying pathos in her message in a way that stands out from most of the stories I have read.

The over-explanation of Omelas can set off red flags in readers’ minds as they begin to wonder why the narrator feels the need to over-hype the city. Then, it is quickly understood why once the city’s dark secret is revealed. The narrator begins to describe that in a cellar or basement of one of the beautiful buildings of Omelas, there is a small, foul-smelling room, and in that room sits a child. The narrator calls that child an ‘it,’ taking away what little humanity they have as they go into depth about their living conditions. The narrator explains that they sit naked in this small room, in their excrement. Going on to say that the child is feeble-minded due to neglect. The description of the child is infuriating enough; descriptions such as: “It could be a boy or a girl. It looks about six, but is nearly ten. It is feeble-minded. Perhaps it was born defective, or perhaps it has become imbecile through fear, malnutrition, and neglect” (Le Guin). It is a disgusting and gut-wrenching read as more information is revealed.

The child is not afforded the luxury of a proper meal or even a kind word. Instead, people come to gawk at it with fear and disgust, or even worse, beat on it so that they will stand for their entertainment. The child has little to no muscle left on their body, their buttocks and thighs covered in sores from sitting in their own excrement continually. They are left in that closet for the rest of their days, and why is that you may ask; well, because the child is a sacrifice. This child is the reason Omelas is allowed to be continually joyful. Everyone knows about the child and understands why the child must be there. They know if the child were to be removed and shown even a mere smidge of kindness – the city would lose its joy, wealth, and abundance.

The narrator continues with their excuses for the people of Omelas. Going on to say: “They feel disgusted, which they had thought themselves superior to” and “Often young people go home in tears, or a tearless rage, when they have seen the child and faced this terrible paradox. They may brood over it for weeks or years” (Le Guin). This is interesting to me. This is supposed to be the city of joy; these people should be content never to be met with the face of hardship. Yet, they find themselves feeling negative emotions when faced with this child. In all fairness, some cannot handle the treatment of the child, so instead, they leave the city without a word. Never to be seen again. Still, even though they are upset to go, too disgusted by how their city must keep its prosperity, they never try to free the child. They leave without a word or trace. These people could do something; in a sense, they have nothing to lose. They no longer want to live in Omelas, assuming they no longer care for the others who decide to be complacent – in theory, at least one should be okay with freeing the child. It’s an infuriating fact. One of the few facts about Omelas that some readers may wish was just another fallacy by the narrator.

The pathos presented at the end of the story can leave an unforgettable mark on readers. Many people are already aware of the injustices many children in the real world go through each day. To read in graphic detail what the child in Omelas is going through could more than likely be a reality for a child out in the world. According to the American Society of Positive Care for Children (American SPCC), which is a nonprofit dedicated solely to the prevention of child maltreatment and raising awareness of the lifelong impacts of adverse childhood experiences – found that 4.276 million child maltreatment referral reports were received in 2022. Child abuse reports involved 7.5 million children, and 89.0% of victims are maltreated by one or both parents. Only 3.096 million children received prevention & post-response services (American SPCC).

These harrowing facts make the story weigh heavy on readers once they finish it. The child’s treatment in the story is the reality for millions daily. The child in Omelas will likely die in that closet one day, never being able to see the sunlight again and never being offered kindness. Again, this is another reality for five children each day. According to the SPCC, five children die every day from child abuse. It can and should make readers feel nauseous or angry when they read this story. If the emotional impact were not as strong, readers would not be left sitting there thinking about what they could do to help protect children and other victims of abuse better. This story is meant to stick into a reader’s mind, forcing them to truly consider what it means and what they can do to impact our society positively.

There are few meanings laden in this short story to leave a mark on the reader’s psyche. Our idea of happiness and utopia, and how easy it is for many of us to forget about those who are without a voice – constantly abused while we try and chase our selfish pleasures. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with trying to find personal joy in one’s life, far from it, but we as a society tend to get so wrapped up in our world that we hardly ever consider another person and what they may be going through. Even if topics such as child abuse are brought to our attention, many try to look the other way and shove their nose into something that will distract them from the fact. Stories like “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” remind readers that they should not be complacent in the injustices others face in our society while trying to chase the selfish idea of utopia. These stories are required to make an impact on society and ourselves.

That brings me to the impact “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” had on society and myself. While sleuthing around the internet, I could not obtain a clear answer as to how exactly the story impacted our culture. There are no blockbuster movie adaptations like “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Conell, and no widespread theory was made from the story’s events, unlike in the story “The Sound of Thunder” by Ray Bradbury. Yet, I think it had a better impact based on the story’s message. We as a society tend to sacrifice our morality for an easier life since many of us don’t want to face the hardships life constantly throws at us. If one were to sit down and think about it, we try hard to avoid negative feelings, events, conversations, etc. It can be understandable sometimes; it’s hard to be uncomfortable. Yet, especially in the age of smartphones and the internet, we’ve become deluded by the world around us. There have been many instances where an altercation has broken out, and instead of people intervening, they pull out their phones to take a video to post online for the whole world to see. To try and get fifteen seconds of fame. This is more commonly known as the bystander effect, which became known after the 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese when she was murdered on her walk home, and thirty-eight people were witness to it. According to Brittanica, The bystander effect is the inhibiting influence of the presence of others on a person’s willingness to help someone in need (Brittanica).

It’s a common phenomenon in our world. I witnessed it myself multiple times growing up and have shamefully participated in it. The most prominent memory I have of it was when I was in school, and my classmates and I just watched, some with glee, some with apathy, as a girl beat another girl’s head into a lunch table. None of us tried to stop her; some egged it on, enjoying the violent display before us. Yet, none of us tried to stop and help the victim. The girl stopped once a teacher finally found out what was happening and pulled her off the other girl. Thankfully, she was okay, but I’m ashamed of myself and my peers. Just like the people of Omelas, we allowed that girl to be continuously assaulted for our selfish joy.

It happens all the time. When people drive down the street and see a homeless person sitting in the sweltering heat, many avert their eyes and ignore them. They don’t want to interact with or think about them. We try so hard to forget the atrocities that happen in our world and our communities, electing to scroll endlessly on TikTok to try and continue on our dopamine highs until we reach a point where the dopamine doesn’t hit the same anymore—leaving some running around trying to chase a new level of high like a mindless zombie so they don’t have to think about what is going on in the real world.

Reading “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” thankfully made me sit down and think not only about its meaning but also about what I’m currently not doing. It made me remember all the times in school when I disregarded a child being bullied. All because I was taught it was “one of my business.” How I watched apathetically when that poor girl was viciously assaulted because she had supposedly said something about the perpetrator’s mother.

Since then, I’ve learned to pull up my big girl britches and speak up when others cannot, but I feel I can do more. Over the past few weeks since reading that story, I’ve felt like there is more that I can do for others. I’ve recently begun talking more about topics such as child abuse and better education for our state. Forcing people to wake up and stop worrying about ‘what this celebrity said’ or ‘what Travis and Taylor did today.’ Because it’s all just a distraction. A distraction many people are willing to fall for in the name of ‘entertainment.’ It’s more like media to rot your brain quicker. My main goal is to get the adults around me to give up apathy and pay closer attention to what happens around us. They must be mindful of the media they consume on a day-to-day basis. I’m not saying I don’t want them to enjoy some mindless fun here and there, but that’s all they consume. It’s just mindless entertainment. If people could comprehend what they read or watch, there might be more thoughtful conversations, leading to more action.

“The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” is a story that should be an essential read for many. Not only does the tale invoke strong feelings that most stories may not be able to, but it can also lead to personal introspection. Le Guin encouraged the reader to examine society and themselves and ask if we are living a life of comfort or continuous self-growth with the ability to help those around us. The story also allows you to look through the lens of Le Guin herself and possibly see how she viewed her society at the time this was written. Letting us see inside her mind gives the readers a better understanding of why utopianism can and shouldn’t ever be attained. She told us that happiness cannot be achieved without trials and tribulations. That is why “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” by Ursula K. Le Guin skillfully uses Logos, Pathos, and Ethos to explore the themes of morality, happiness, and human nature while criticizing society’s idea of utopia and why it should never be achieved.

I believe this story should always be included in the Comp II curriculum. It would be a disservice to future students not to include it. The story offers incredible usage of Logos, Pathos, and Ethos, engaging readers in a story that closely reflects our society. “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” forces us to rethink how we decide to live our lives and how we think about those abused within our communities. The story allows readers to start change within our personal and public worlds. If “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” were to be removed from the Comp II curriculum, it would be a missed opportunity for young adults to read this impactful story. They may never read it in their lifetime and get the wake-up call to rethink how they live, compromising their morality for comfortability.

Works Cited

Child maltreatment & neglect statistics. American SPCC. (2024, April 4). https://americanspcc.org/child-maltreatmentstatistics/#:~:text=4.276%20million%20child%20maltreatment%20referral,prevention%20%26 %20post%2Dresponse%20services.

Le Guin, U. K. (n.d.). The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas. https://shsdavisapes.pbworks.com/f/Omelas.pdf

Phillips, J., Heitman, D., Gillis, J. R., Tonguette, P., & Holsinger, B. (n.d.). Ursula K. Le Guin was a creator of the world. The National Endowment for the Humanities. https://www.neh.gov/article/ursula-k-le-guin-was-creatorworlds#:~:text=Born%20in%20Berkeley%2C%20California%2C%20in,and%20The%20Dispos sessed%20(1974).

Rorabaugh, W. J. (n.d.). Bodies, sex, and gender (Chapter 3) – American hippies. Cambridge Core. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/american-hippies/bodies-sex-andgender/ABA6ADB4F3379997E3E6006E46E590AF

Spector, R. H. (n.d.). The United States negotiates a withdrawal. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Vietnam-War/The-United-States-negotiates-awithdrawal

Sterling, B. (2024, April 5). Science fiction. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/art/science-fiction Ursula K. Le Guin. Museum of Pop Culture. (n.d.). https://www.mopop.org/ursulakleguin#:~:text=Celebrated%20for%20such%20science%20fictio n,gender%2C%20environmentalism%2C%20and%20anarchism.

The Antithesis of Critical Thought – A Battle Worth Fighting

“They should all be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives.”

These words, which I read on a social media post thread in the Fall of 2020, will never leave my head; they are etched there for all of the time I have left on this earth. They were written in response to anti-vaxxers choosing not to get the vaccine. The individuals in that conversation appear to believe that the world would be a better place if all those who did not get a C*V*D vaccine were killed off. THEN … the “good” people could get on with their lives.

Am I the only one who sees a lack of logic here?

I’m a Composition Professor, and my job is to teach Critical Thinking skills (the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. – The Foundation for Critical Thinking). These wildly partisan and close-minded, even hate-filled, words – “They should all be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives.” – were on a social media post written by an individual who also is a Professor whose job is to teach Critical Thinking skills in higher education. I find it beyond concerning that a person who is to teach students to not only think for themselves but also to question ideas and information and to write strong arguments can be of such an opinion, which is, in and of itself, the antithesis of critical thinking. (An Argument, in the manner used in Composition courses, is a statement or set of statements that you use in order to try to convince people that your opinion about something is correct. – Collins Dictionary.)

Common Sense (sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts – Merriam-Webster) states that if there are two sides to an issue and the side with the stronger amount of power goes ahead and kills off the faction with a differing viewpoint – within a short period of time, there again will arise an issue on which that remaining group of “good” people will find themselves disagreeing. Will the group in power apply the same “logic” as before? “They should all be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives.” It follows with that type of initial “thinking” that yes, again, the population gets halved. And so on and so forth.

Is this a Slippery Slope Logical fallacy (a course of action that seems to lead inevitably from one action or result to another with unintended consequences – Merriam-Webster)? Or is it straight common sense? I shouldn’t have to ask because the statement that started the conversation is without a shred of actual logic or critical thought but, rather it contains emotion and lack of consideration for opposing perspectives, including ‘science’ which contains evidence to the contrary regarding vaccines that people in power silenced and called disinformation. Why? Ah, there’s that beautiful word – Why.

True argument and strong critical thinking begin with an acknowledgment that people hold different viewpoints – the world around. Not just an acknowledgment but also the willingness to understand the WHY behind the beliefs and ideas of opposing perspectives. WHY is the keyword. Take some time to discover why. Consider other perspectives and why they exist. Think on those based and rooted in experience and fact. Challenge with calmness and rationale those perspectives based on feelings and baseless attempts at argument. These are easy to recognize if you educate yourself, as the curriculum does for my classes, in Rhetorical Devices (a linguistic tool that employs a particular type of sentence structure, sound, or pattern of meaning in order to evoke a particular reaction from an audience. – ThoughtCo), Logical Fallacies (an argument that may sound convincing or true but is actually flawed, leading to an unsupported conclusion. – Scribbr), cognitive dissonance (the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change. – Oxford Languages), confirmation bias (people’s tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with their existing beliefs. – Britannica), and nonverbal language (the act of conveying information without the use of words. Nonverbal communication occurs through facial expressions, gestures, body language, tone of voice, and other physical indications of mood, attitude, approbation, and so forth, some of which may require knowledge of the culture or subculture to understand. – APA Dictionary of Psychology).

In my Comp II classes, the first week begins with a biography of my life and some unique things about me. Then, I have the students tell something unique about themselves. Each one shares. After this sharing time, I stress how different we all are – and that our upbringings, our cultures, and our experiences shape our beliefs and values, and that none of us has had the same set of those – and because of this we will see the world through different eyes. I talk about how that should be exciting to us … It should entice us to talk to one another in an effort to understand the WHY behind beliefs and ideas, thus giving us an opportunity to learn and to grow and strengthen our own ideas. Then, I address how, unfortunately, we, the citizens of this spinning globe, gravitate only toward those whose thinking is similar to our own, and we are comfortable deciding that any person who has a different set of values or beliefs is wrong – and, in the case of the social media post on a colleague’s page – those with differing ideas should die off – seeing as only people who look like us and think like us could in any way be “good.” I tell my classes that we will rise above the emotion-based dramatic nature of ‘cancel’ culture (the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling as a way of expressing disapproval and exerting social pressure – Merriam-Webster), and we will remember that we are all different in beautiful ways, and it is a good thing that we see life from opposing perspectives and that we have the opportunity to look at life with a broader understanding of how small each of us is in the scheme of things, to know that there are bigger things than us at play in this world. In truth, we need each other. We need different ideas and perspectives if we want to … well, that starts me down another conversation, which I choose to reserve for another post.

In my classes, after the groundwork is laid for how to participate in true arguments and be critical thinkers, we discuss how being open to the ideas of others and being able to incorporate opposing perspectives into our arguments pushes us to understand where someone else is coming from, and how it also forces you to understand your own beliefs and WHY you hold the viewpoints that you do. Are your ideas based on assumptions, biases, and/or logical fallacy? Are they because your Momma and Daddy taught you to believe that way? Are they because CNN or FOX told you to believe it? Did you pick those ideas up at your church? Watching a TV preacher? Did your college professor fill your head with those ideas? Or do you have true facts, indisputable and verifiable from trustworthy sources – drawn from research that you yourself have conducted and weighed with logic and common sense sans emotional reactions? Where do the ‘facts’ come from? What are the motivations or beliefs of the sharers of those ‘facts’? Do not just believe what you read and what you are told. Deep dive into information on which you feel compelled to assert an opinion. On a consistent basis, I tell my students to listen in class but not to 100% take my word for it on multiple subjects. I tell them to research the information for themselves. Know why you believe what you believe. Know it.

Recently, a student questioned (outside of class) the source of some statistical data regarding a topic I shared in class. Information I shared with a desire for the students to apply critical thought to the matter – to look up information for themselves. The student wanted to use my information, though, for a research paper in another course. My source for that particular data was one I felt certain another professor might disregard due to political affiliation, so I dug in and assisted the student in locating information in that same vein from a Yale University-based study, which would be a more acceptable source of statistical data for a paper in that professor’s course – being that it was an Academic resource, not a news media source. Be willing to dive beyond depths of comfort and like-minded resources in making an argument. Using data from sources that the opposing perspective will trust or the ‘reader’ will trust is essential. In order to accomplish this, it is incumbent on the arguer to take time with research and knowledge. Think. Know why you believe what you believe and be able to back it up. I digress …

We are able, in class, to discuss topics like racism, consent, and politics because we establish uniqueness and common ground before stepping into ‘arguments.’ We research and bring information to the table, and we hold discussions in the classroom and in discussion threads online – maintaining respect for one another in the midst of disagreement and diversity. I insist on this – and by taking the time to lay the groundwork – this happens on a consistent basis. Most of the time, eyes open, new ideas form, and students find themselves growing in unexpected ways. If I can lead them toward critical thinking – using the rhetorical devices logos and ethos above pathos (Logos appeals to the audience’s reason, building up logical arguments. Ethos appeals to the speaker’s status or authority, making the audience more likely to trust them. Pathos appeals to the emotions, trying to make the audience feel angry or sympathetic – Scribbr) – then I accomplish a worthy feat. Pathos is important, but it is deceiving and manipulative if we get the prettified use of it in ‘argument’ in politics, religion, sales, and law … logical fallacies, cognitive dissonance, and confirmation bias abound.

Every semester, I tell stories. Lots of stories. My life is a playbook of lessons for others in the realms of critical thinking and communication skills. How not to do this. How not to do that. This is what happened when. You know, life events that brought me to this passionate space regarding communication and argument and seeking truth in a sea of serpents and chaotic drama. One particular story I tell every time I discuss the definition of argument and one of its foundational steps is about my daughters, who at this time are 26 and 24. This event occurred 10 years ago when they were 16 and 14, teenagers who knew more than me. Insert a smirk.

It was a sunny day … how’s that for a beginning? I do not remember if it was a sunny day, but I was cooking dinner. In my space, the kitchen. My domain where I stood most days fixing dinner for my family. The 16 and 14-year-old daughters-o-mine enter the kitchen, bringing their fight with them. We will not use the word argument, because this was in no way a true argument. It was emotion-packed – angry and self-seeking – and neither girl was listening (different from hearing – “In their definitions alone, it’s clear to see the big difference between the two. Listening requires attention, meaning it’s active. Hearing is passive — you can’t close your ears, so sounds will enter and be heard. This makes it involuntary.” – University of the People) to a word the other actually said.

“Mom, she ….”

“Mom, she …”

Back and forth they went, both trying to score Mom’s approval – to win the fight. My focus was on dinner, not on their inability to communicate with one another on a semi-rational level, and their mess of need for winning caused my concentration on the task in front of me which included chicken and seasonings to get off track. I turned around, spice jar in hand, and in a calm voice said, “That’s it. You’re neither one loving your neighbor as yourself.” I stared at them. Looking at one and then the other.

Silence. They looked at me. They looked at each other.

The fight was over … they had common ground.

Mom is crazy. 

They left the kitchen, no longer fighting, and I returned to making their dinner. Sheesh, people.

Common ground (a foundation of common interest or comprehension, as in a social relationship or a discussion. – Dictionary.com). It is a beautiful place to be, and we only get there by listening to the perspective of others, asking great questions like WHY, and drawing conclusions rooted in commonalities and solutions. Another way to put this is to treat others the way you want to be treated. Am I right? You want others to listen to you and to consider your thoughts, ideas, and opinions. So, likewise, listen to theirs. It’s not complicated.

I write this with the hope that one person will stop and think about the Why as they walk through their day encountering differing perspectives. Ideally, a movement of people who think for themselves would be fantastic … alas, this world and the status of it does not give me that much hope. Always at war. Here or there. Always fighting. Pointing fingers. Selfishness. Narcissism. Me, me, me, me. Dehumanization. Not seeing the value in others beyond being stepping stones to our own desires. You know … the “good” people getting on with their lives.

It won’t stop me, though. I will be an advocate for true argument, for critical thought, for considering the “Why,” for asking questions, for great conversations, for … peace.

I do not push my own politics on students. I strive to teach them to THINK FOR THEMSELVES because I do not want any of them to be sheeple (people who copy what other people do or believe what they are told and do not think for themselves. Sheeple is a combination of the words sheep and people. – Cambridge Dictionary). I have to do this, must do this, because there are those in my career field who preach the exact opposite from their podiums. They embrace cancel culture and indoctrination of masses of students into their own political ideologies. They say things like, “They should all be shot in the head so that the good people can get on with their lives.” Not only them but the news media, politicians, and some preachers are all set on telling people what to believe, and they do it in ways they know people will not question. CNN reported it; it must be true. FOX showed a picture of the breaking scene; it must be accurate. To this, I sigh, and I share here a quote I have in my Comp II syllabus. The portion in blue is what my syllabus holds, but the entire quote is appropriate to this discussion. Too often, “we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” ~ JFK

“The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie–deliberate, contrived, and dishonest–but the myth–persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” – John F. Kennedy – Commencement Address at Yale University, June 11, 1962

It’s a battle worth fighting.

Thoughts on Capturing Thinking

**Spoiler** This post is full of references to God and Scripture – and my understanding of God’s Will for myself … and for Believers … it may (I suppose) contain food-for-thought for those outside the moniker of ‘believer’ as well.

There are moments when being the bigger person is beyond difficult. I almost said days, but really, it’s moments. Let’s be honest – emotions are fleeting – and there are moments when everything in my emotional pallet wants to scream and stomp and lay out a litany of sins perpetrated against me that are kept hidden, secreted away for the sake of not the perpetrator but those around the perpetrator who might be further hurt and damaged by the knowledge that I hold deep inside than they already are by circumstances in our lives. I have evidence. I have proof. I have witnesses, but … and this but is important … but, it is more important to me that the innocence of those I want to protect is kept intact than my own vilification is allowed or my own ‘worldly’ (because it would only be in this worldly plane) or selfish need for ‘justice’ is satiated.

In moments like these, I recognize my emotional drunkenness, and I pray to God for the strength to keep my mouth shut and to let those things go – which, after each of these self-preservation moments in which I have paused and reflected, has become easier over time – though occasionally, a ‘moment’ arises in a crescendo where I selfishly want to be seen and heard and let the whole world know what I know and who I think I am! With an exclamation point, I concluded that previous statement because that desire can grow immense and become all-encompassing … for that moment. Despite a moment like that or the number of those moments, I more and more choose not to give in to my sinful desire for justification before men … because, truly, to what end do I need or want this ‘reckoning’?

My own selfish rise in the opinions of others whose thoughts regarding me matter not when it comes to my own entrance to Heaven? Yeah, wow … how about No – because what matters most is my relationship with God and what He thinks of me! Above all. And He … He knows my story. He knows my inmost thoughts and my emotions. He knows my heart, and He loves me despite my ‘moments’ and my past. It is to God alone that I am to look for justification and acceptance because it is Him alone who will determine my eternity! Amen to that. Yes and so be it.

I’m speaking this right now as a reminder to myself that in these moments when my selfish desires (emotional reactions) rise and cloud my better reasoning (my ability to think critically and logically), I must continue to look to God for the strength to keep my eyes on Him and His purposes for me, which are steeped in the logic and wisdom of God, as I walk through the remainder of my days in this early realm.

Isn’t it funny (not the best word here … perhaps, ‘sad’ or ‘ironic’ or ‘tragic’), though, how, in one moment, we feel confident of a perspective, and then, in another moment, we can be of a different feeling altogether. We, of our own accord, are tossed to and fro in our emotions … Me, I’m writing about me, though I say ‘we.’ I write this to remind myself right now that I am not my own. I am bought at a price. I am God’s according to I Corinthians 6 as well as many other passages in Scripture, and though I am speaking to myself here, I also hope that this glimpse into one of my inner struggles and how I wriggle and work my way through controlling my thoughts and my emotional responses on an ever-upward path of spiritual growth will be an encouragement for you to let God work out what has been ‘done’ to you by others and life’s events as you keep your eyes on Him and what His will is for your life. 

I can say with confidence that God’s will for me (and probably you, too) does not include tearing others down, spreading negativity, or trying to make myself better than any other person in the eyes of other people for momentary and prideful ‘power’ or control or earthly justification. Those things/behaviors/desires are not Godly. His will for me (for all of us) is, in fact, that I/we Love Him above All Else and that I/we Love Our Neighbors As Ourselves. Matthew 22:37-40. It is His will that we understand that, as it says in Hebrews 13:13-14, “So let us go out to him beyond the city walls (that is, outside the interests of this world, being willing to be despised[a]) to suffer with him there, bearing his shame. 14 For this world is not our home; we are looking forward to our everlasting home in heaven,” this earth is not our home. Heaven is.

Recently, I read 2 Corinthians 10, and it has me meditating on ‘taking every thought captive and making it obedient to Christ.’ After reading this passage and having listened to it in an audiobook format and discussing it with my husband, Patrick, I’ve been considering the idea that not all thoughts that enter my mind are from God. Pretty profound thought when I considered where else ideas might come from … it was an uncomfortable reality that confronted me. There are thoughts in my head that are not of good, but of evil … and evil comes from the Devil … and those thoughts in my head that are not of God or for God are from the one who wants my destruction, who wants me to be selfish, to be self-seeking, to be depressed, broken, to give up and commit to a life apart from God without my realizing it is even happening! No. No to that. And at this moment, I say No. And I pray that in all the moments to come, I will have the presence of mind and the Scripture filling my mind and my heart to take captive my thoughts and to make them obedient to God and His will for my life as I walk through the remainder of the days allotted for me, by Him, on this earth.

Here is I Corinthians 10. The words of Paul the Apostle where he, Paul, discusses making our thoughts obedient to Christ and being concerned more with what the Lord thinks of us than the world. From this point forward on this matter in this post, I defer to these words from Scripture relating to ‘moments’ in my thoughts and emotions.

“By the humility and gentleness of Christ, I appeal to you—I, Paul, who am “timid” when face to face with you, but “bold” toward you when away! 2 I beg you that when I come I may not have to be as bold as I expect to be toward some people who think that we live by the standards of this world. 3 For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6 And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.

7 You are judging by appearances.[a] If anyone is confident that they belong to Christ, they should consider again that we belong to Christ just as much as they do. 8 So even if I boast somewhat freely about the authority the Lord gave us for building you up rather than tearing you down, I will not be ashamed of it. 9 I do not want to seem to be trying to frighten you with my letters. 10 For some say, “His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing.” 11 Such people should realize that what we are in our letters when we are absent, we will be in our actions when we are present.

12 We do not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some who commend themselves. When they measure themselves by themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they are not wise. 13 We, however, will not boast beyond proper limits, but will confine our boasting to the sphere of service God himself has assigned to us, a sphere that also includes you. 14 We are not going too far in our boasting, as would be the case if we had not come to you, for we did get as far as you with the gospel of Christ. 15 Neither do we go beyond our limits by boasting of work done by others. Our hope is that, as your faith continues to grow, our sphere of activity among you will greatly expand, 16 so that we can preach the gospel in the regions beyond you. For we do not want to boast about work already done in someone else’s territory. 17 But, “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.”[b] 18 For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends.”

To be commended by the Lord is what I desire.