Ancient Literature in our Modern World

Hello all,

My name is Oly Carrasco and this is my second semester at Baruch.

Back in my country I completed 129 credits in Civil Engineering, but later in my life I decided that my true call was the business field. I obtained an Associate’s degree in Business Administration-Accounting last year and decided to come to Baruch and pursue my Bachelor’s degree in Accounting with a minor in Organizational Psychology.

I work full time as an HR Operational Assistant at a company called Allied Barton Security Services handling union benefits paid to the employees. My interests academically are business operations, math, and generally everything related to numbers and money!

I’m also happily married and have 6 year old boy, he is the love of my life!

My favorite book is “The Secret”. I read it and feel that it changed my life. Before reading that book I didn’t believe in any of those theories of energy and the fact that you can attract good and bad things to your life and that is the book is all about. But I realized that if those principles are so true in physics (one of my other favorite fields) why not applying them to our own life?

The portion of the book I didn’t quite understand is the following:

“My goal in this book is to review and intervene in each of these debates. First of all, I challenge the idea that the transitional turn in literary and cultural studies can simply be linked to recent developments related to what we have come to call “globalization”. In fact, this turn has roots that run back through theoretical developments in the humanities and social and political movements outside of the academy that began in the 1960s. In addition, I argue that it is a mistake to approach globalization itself as a contemporary phenomenon and that it makes much more sense to take a historical overview in which globalization is dated as the beginning in at least the sixteenth century and covering a time span that includes the long histories of imperialism, colonization, decolonization, and neocolonialism.”

During the entire reading it was kind of difficult for me to identify which “side” he was supporting. Especially in this paragraph the author seems to be arguing against both theories instead of leaning towards one.