At first glance, Kazimir Malevich’s “White on White” might seem to be a confusing or in some regards a meaningless artwork. This was exactly my initial reaction until I decided to listen in on a lecture that a MOMA employee was giving about this artwork. This Oil on Canvas was created in 1918 during a time when Russia established a communist government. It represents one of the major artworks during the Suprematism era, an art movement which emerged in the early 20th century that focuses on basic geometric shapes and limited color usage. The richly textured surface and imperfect design speak to the external reality of the world we live in. Malevich uses the shades of white as an abstract concept of infinity. This draws a directly parallel to the communist ideology which seeks to destroy class divisions and establish an equal socioeconomic order amongst its citizens. The square in the middle represents the upper class while the white field represents the lower class. It’s interesting to note that the seemingly floating square is positioned at a tilted angle. This represents the communist revolution in which the upper class being overthrown by the lower class. The darker tone white square in the middle slowly fades into the white background as if it has almost been reduced to nothing. This signifies the merging of the different social classes within a communist society. This picture blends the different variations of white and tonality to display a sense of limitless and novelty. Perhaps this artwork shows Malevich’s view towards the communism order.

-Benny Chan

Manifestos aim to promote a certain policy or goal to an individual, group, or society. Sometimes the most effective strategy used to achieve that goal is through the utilization of radical language. Radical language captures the intense emotions of the author and conveys this sentiment to the audience. It also enthralls the reader and could potentially create a large following. When used correctly, radical language could enhance your message, but if used recklessly, it might harm your reputation. Both the Black Panther Party and SCUM Manifesto had a different approach of using radical language as a revolt against societal norms.

The Black Panther Party effectively used radical language to support the Civil Rights Movement. This unique writing style of “We Want, we believe” summarized the main issues that affected the black community and offered possible solutions to these issues. For example, one of their issues was their lack of freedom and one possible solution they offered was to become leaders of their own communities (Black Panther Party 1). Another issue was fair trials for black suspects and the proposed solution was granting them juries of their peers, attorneys of their choice and freedom from imprisonment while awaiting trial (Black Panther Party 2). Notice that this style of writing was considered radical because it denounced the social norm that was segregation by offering various propositions.

On the other hand, SCUM Manifesto didn’t effective use radical language to support the feminist movement. Valerie Solana’s ostracizing of the entire male population by using demonizing adjective works in direct opposition to feminism. She says, “The male is completely egocentric, trapped inside himself, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, or love, friendship, affection or tenderness” (Solana 1). This will make many men hate feminism and thus shun away a large group of potential supports.

Benny Chan

Benny rushed out of his house then went right back in. He hadn’t realized that it was raining so he frantically searched for an umbrella. Afterward, he rushed out again making a sharp right turn towards the end of the street. The smell of cigarettes and wet garbage filled the air. He ran across the street with the blinking red stop sign and accidently stepped on a huge puddle that had accumulated from the rain. However, he wasn’t too troubled by this little accident. The only thing that was on his mind was getting to school on time for his Philosophy quiz. As he approached the 8th Avenue train station, he saw the Manhattan Bound N Train had arrived. He swiped his MetroCard and quickly rushed down the slippery steps all while holding the handle. He jumped into the train and took a seat next to a middle-aged lady.

Anna stared at Benny as he sat down. She wondered why this young man seemed out of breath and why his shoes were soaking wet. She saw him rummaging through his backpack, his face growing increasingly distressed with each passing moment. What was he searching for, she thought. Could it be his headphones or perhaps he forgot something at home? What a strange fellow she thought to herself. This question was answered when he pulled out his Philosophy notes. Benny seemed immersed by these notes and before he knew it, the train had arrived at 14th Street Union Square. From there, he transferred to the 6th Train and got off at 23rd Street. He then made a right turn which led him to Baruch College.

-Benny Chan

I don’t agree with Freud’s depiction of a child’s evolutionary relation with their family. He begins by saying “for a small child his parents are at first the only authority and source of all belief and wishes to be like his parent of his own sex” (Freud 237). This is generalizing the definition of family by limiting it to a mother, a father and a child. In our current society, the definition of family has certainly expanded. Also, while it’s true that a child is heavily influenced by his or her environment, it’s not limited to parents. Personally, I learn from my teachers, friends and other family members. Freud also says that “a child with siblings feels regrets at having to share parental love” (Freud 237). This is a foreign concept to me. I have siblings, but I don’t regret having them even they’re acknowledged and I’m not. Freud mentions that when a boy grows up, they are more inclined to feel hostile impulses towards his father as opposed to his mother and even replacing them with a family of higher social standing (Freud 237-238). The child wishes to be liberated from the influences of their parents when they grow up (Freud 237). I think it natural that as a child grows older, he or she thinks of what their life would be like if they grew up somewhere else. However, to say that they feel resentment towards their parents is a bit of a generalization. Finally, Freud says that neurotics is a condition derived from children who failed at the liberation from their parents (Freud 237). There are adults who still listen to their parents and they’re not mentally unstable. In these respects, I find it difficult to relate to Freud’s Family Romance.

-Benny Chan

In the poem “Song of Myself” by Walt Whitman, the term “untranslatable” is used to reference that the idea of self-identity can never be fully expressed. The concept of self-identity inherently evolutionary and infinite. In the first section of the poem, the author diminishes the idea of self-identity entirely by alluding to the notion that everything in nature is somehow connected. He says “For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you” (Whitman 3) and “Born here of parents born here from parents the same, and their parents the same” (Whitman 8-9). He is effectively saying that trying to differentiate ourselves from one another is meaningless as we are all intertwined by nature. However, when we transition into the second section, he seems to diverge from that initial idea and bring up the concept of self-identity. The author presents us with sensations that he would like to indulge in. He says “I breathe the fragrance myself, and know it and like it” (Whitman 19) as well as, “It is for my mouth forever…. I am in love with it” (Whitman 23). As we can see, this is a stark contrast to the first section with diminishes the concept of self- identity. The author does this to show that self- identity is in a constant state of evolution. In the sixth section, the concept of self-identity is lost due to its infiniteness. When asked by a child about the nature of grass, the author seems puzzled. He could describe their physical features but there is much than just that. As he remains baffled, an important question arises. If everything in nature is connected as he claims in the first section, and grass is part of nature, if he doesn’t understand the nature of grass then that means he doesn’t understand his own identity. As a result, the term “untranslatable” means everyone is constantly searching for their own identity.

-Benny Chan

Jane Eyre’s character of self- integrity is brought into light by Emily Dickinson’s The Soul selects her own Society. The first two lines of the poem states “The Soul selects her own Society, Then Shuts the Door” (Dickinson 1-2). Here, the soul alludes to Jane Eyre’s uncanny characteristics. A mix between perseverance and resilient, Jane Eyre’s unique attributes are shaken by none. In the second stanza, it states that the soul is unmoved even in the presence of an emperor eventually kneels to her (Dickinson 5-8). Here the emperor is a direct reference to Rochester who eventually acknowledges Jane’s ideas. After Rochester proposes to Jane, he takes her shopping. He attempts to shower Jane with expensive jewelry and outerwear. Feeling untrue to herself, Jane rejects Rochester’s gifts. She says “And then you won’t know me, sir: and I shall not be your Jane Eyre any longer, but an ape in a harlequin’s jacket, a jay in borrowed plumes” (Bronte 232). Jane claims that it is unnecessary for Rochester to indulge her with these gifts for the fear that her own true self might be lost to materialism. Unwittingly, Rochester eventually conforms to Jane’s wishes. The notion of “ample nation, choose one” (Dickinson 9) illustrates the many encounters that Jane had with Mrs. Reed, Mr. Bocklehurst and even Rochester who would obstruct Jane’s character and steer her from her own path. “Then close the valves of her attention, like stone” (Dickinson 11-12). However, in all of these instances, Jane is unwavering like a rock.

-Benny Chan

For most of Jane Eyre’s childhood, she has endured much oppressive and submissive treatment from the Reed household without resistance. Then comes the pivotal moment when she musters up the courage to speak out against her aunt. “SPEAK I must: I had been trodden on severely, and MUST turn: but how? What strength had I to dart retaliation at my antagonist? I gathered my energies and launched them in this blunt sentence…” (Bronte 35) To understand Jane’s actions we can look at two works from Audre Lorde: The Transformation of Silence into Language and Action and The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.

In Lorde’s The Transformation of Silence into Language and Action, she states that “if you keep ignoring the part of you that wants to speak out, it gets hotter and hotter and one day it will just up and punch you in the mouth from the inside.” (Lorde 42) Jane has been containing much of her anger within herself until it reached its cap. The cap finally broke when she remembers the promise that her late Uncle Reed forced her aunt to make which was to treat Jane like her own child. Realizing her aunt had broken this promise, Jane finally had the confidence to go against her aunt knowing that her own uncle was supporting her. Lorde also states that “My silences had not protected me. Your silence will not protect you.” (Lorde 41) After all these years of abuse, Jane realizes that this unethical treatment isn’t going to end anytime soon if she remains silent. To stay silent is to accept the belittlement and inferior status placed upon Jane by her aunt. By lashing out, Jane is able to criticize her tyrannical aunt’s wrongdoings and more important validate her own status as an equal human being.

In The Master’s Tool Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House, Lorde states “Those of us who stand outside the circle of this society’s definition of acceptable women; those of us who have been forged in the crucibles of difference — those of us who are poor, who are lesbians, who are Black, who are older — know that survival is not an academic skill.” (Lorde 2) The essence of Jane’s mistreatment was due to that fact that she was a poor orphan who was placed under the care of her aunt. In the Reed household, Jane was viewed as inferior and a burden due to her social status. However, Jane affirms to Mrs. Reed that she too is human. “You think I have no feelings, and that I can do without one bit of love or kindness; but I cannot live so: and you have no pity.” (Bronte 35)

The Age of Enlightenment has a profound impact on our world today. Using reason as the guidebook to governance, ethics, and truth, as opposed to blindly following the authority of a specific group, humanity is able to topple the kings and queens of Europe and usher in a new age of scientific and philosophical thinking (Norton 4). It served as the foundation modern society for centuries. However, this foundation is starting to crumble in the American politics with the newly elected President Trump and his administration.

Donald Trump’s recent executive order to ban Muslims from seven different countries is a direct consequence of individualism. Ever since the 17th century, people feared that commitment to individualism might lead to social alienation and lack of moral responsibility (Norton 3). Donald Trump and supporters of this ban seek a divide between “us” and “them.” In reality, we are all human beings regardless of our background. America is a land of immigrants and by not allowing immigrants in is a complete contradiction to American values.

Donald Trump’s stance on climate change is irrational and deprived of any logical coherence. Despite the abundance of empirical evidence and the general consensus of the scientific community, he still refuses to accept the fact and take the necessary action. Instead, he diminishes the power of the Environmental Protection Agency. This means he is either deliberately ignorant or he is in alignment with special interest who benefit from this. I think it’s both. These kinds of selfish and irrational acts are exactly why monarchs fall and democracy for the people flourish (Norton 6).

Although we thank Enlightenment for advancement in countless subjects, it seems as though the United States government are going back to a period of irrationality and monarchy. Humanity is being divided and we act based on fear rather than reason. It’s time to usher in a new Age of Enlightenment.