iMedia: Life is Like a Cup of Coffee

“Life is like a cup of coffee”- a weird comparison but that is exactly what drew me towards this video. This video strikes me personally because I can truly relate to it, and I bet many others can also. Life is full of struggle, stress, and pain, but a large portion of this is caused by our own actions. The way we value and treat things in our life determines how we perceive life. We give such a high value to material possessions, but what value do they actually have? Does this type of value matter? Life is coffee; all the other material possessions, like jobs, money, and our “social rank”, are all cups. They are tools we utilize to contain life. I feel I sometimes overly concern about the materialistic values in my life this prevents me from enjoying the coffee. This video helped me to reveal that I need to strive to not care for the type of cup I hold life in, but to value the gift inside.

This affects our culture because in our capitalist society today we overly emphasize our cups in life. We compete and compare to always have the best cups possible. Yet, we also complain and struggle to find happiness in our lives. We wonder why is this so? When we erase the distinction between types of cups, we can find a deeper meaning to life. We erase the divisions between people. There are no Africans, Latinos, Asians, and Americans. There is no rich, poor, or middle class. There is no privileged and unprivileged. There are only humans. By focusing on life itself instead of the various tools that merely form its exterior will we be able to truly value it.

The video’s use of beautiful pictures, inspiring music, and a touching story help vocalize the message it attempts to deliver. This specific media matters because its message is one that should be passed to all people. Media is one of the best forms of communication. It’s crucial this inspiring story is contained in this specific type of media because that is the best way for people to learn its message. We know people look to material values first, so the video’s use of images and music is what appeals to them. If the story was merely written on paper, it wouldn’t be as popular with people. People would fail to notice it. An inspiring story within attractive media features is the method to spread the message.

Again this piece of media matters to itself because it is a symbol of looking to the more internal value of objects in our life. It matters to me because it helps me rearrange some of my personal priorities and it allows me to view life with a different perspective. It matters to others because it offers a solution to find harmony and happiness within the chaotic order of one’s life.

Connection: Cordelia and Antigone

When we were categorizing characters in King Lear into those who uphold Medieval values and those who uphold Renaissance values, one of the characters we saved for the end was Cordelia. She is one unique character. As I began to think about the qualities that make her so special, I found her resembling another character we studied last year. Just as Cordelia is to Shakespeare, Antigone is to Sophocles.

Cordelia is a noble woman in being able to sacrifice owning a third of her father’s kingdom in order to uphold her personal values. She doesn’t need to resort to publicly demonstrating her love for King Lear; in fact, that would make it artificial. Instead, she knows her true love is plentiful within her heart and that is the only place it has to be. Cordelia is also the most loyal to King Lear among his three daughters. She loves him, but not enough to go against her own values. In this way, she is very individualistic. She also attempts to help Lear once he learns of the betrayal of his other two daughters. Lear is traveling to Dover in order to be received by her French army.

Similarly, Antigone is a noble woman. The fathers of both characters eventually turn mad, yet they are both present to assist their fathers in the end. Antigone, the daughter of Oedipus, remained with her father until he died. Antigone heard with indignation that the body of her dead brother, Polynices, was to rot and be left for the dogs and vultures. Her brother was deprived of essential rites for those who died. Creon, the uncle of Antigone and also Polynices, published a decree prohibiting the burial of Polynices. However, Antigone violated this. When Creon questioned her, she admitted her actions. However, she didn’t regret anything she had done, similar to Cordelia. In fact, she also rudely responded to a higher authority. She said, “Because it was not God nor Justice that heralded the command. I did not think your proclamation coming from a mere mortal should transcend the eternal laws of God.” Just like Cordelia, Antigone had knowingly defied given orders to uphold her own beliefs. She would not be stopped in giving her own brother a basic burial. Although she respects her own uncle, she doesn’t respect him enough to violate her own values.

This relationship matters to me because it shows how a simple act can be grand. Furthermore, we see a more powerful position in women that is new to the era of when the stories were written. Both in ancient Greek and Elizabethan times, we see the dominance of males in political affairs. However, both characters illustrate the strength females have. We learned that Cordelia was a hybrid between Medieval and Renaissance values. This connection helps me to understand those values and attempt to find other characters in other works of literature with that same mix. Cordelia finding the middle ground between the two sets of values is rare enough, but to find another character from a different novel makes it especially unique. Antigone shows utmost loyalty to her father and thus forms her Medieval side; she is also individualistic, breaks the established order by defying Creon, and strategically finds a way to bury Polynices, which helps shape her Renaissance side. Forming connections between characters based on their values is interesting to me, and it helps open up deeper meaning in the characters I read about.

Dialectics: Politics and Morals

This week we listened to an interview with Quentin Skinner on Machiavelli’s The Prince. One of the themes that came up was the idea of ruling with brutality when necessary. He believed the ends justified the means; preservation of the state was the ultimate goal. However, don’t mistake this as always ruling viciously. He believed rulers had to resort to evil sometimes and when it was absolutely necessary. I found this interesting because it jumped around this struggle between political ends and moral ends. Machiavelli doesn’t dismiss morality entirely, but he politically defines the concept. He shapes it into the criteria for accepting cruel action. He does this because he knows that sometimes good results come from harsh actions.

Surprisingly, this idea jumped at me when the Global Activism speaker, Mary Njoroge, came to talk to us. In our discussion groups, we explored this dualism between ethics and politics. In the healthcare debate, yes, it’s morally right that all people should have access to basic healthcare services. However, is that the only reason why a fixing of our healthcare system is so important? No, it’s crucial for our economy since health care costs are undermining its capability. In history, we learned about the reasons slavery was abolished in other nations. Yes, moral revelations about its true horrors was a major cause; however, slavery led to constant tension and rebellion. The high costs in maintaining slaves and rebellion also assisted in its abolition. So in order for the U.S. to aid Africa with education efforts, is a moral incentive enough? Do we also need a political drive (i.e. helping Africa will drastically boost the global economy which in effect helps our nation)?

So often in today’s world, people try to separate politics and morals as much as possible. Politicians are viewed as the least trustworthy officials and religious leaders are the least informed of political events. Politics and moral are viewed as polar opposites. But are they really? Politics can be a necessary expression of ethics. Often, the only way to achieve an ethnic goal is through a group effort- i.e., politics. We live in a society run by politics. So when we practice ethics in relation to society, shouldn’t it be integrated with politics also? Humanitarian efforts that are translated into action are governed by political mechanisms. Our morality pleads with our conscience that we can’t watch and stand by as people starve to death. However, whom we choose to help specifically (or not to help) is a political question.

Each concept doesn’t stand as strong as they do together. In reality, politics/economics can’t stand isolated. The role ethics plays in politics is its premise and its tool. Similarly, there is no moral life unless economic and political life is established first. There can be no moral life that is not both economic and political. We can illustrate the relation between the two in the human figure. Think of our body as the “politics” and our soul as the “morals”. They both coexist and need each other to form one person. We should strive to think about this dialect more often in our lives. Maybe, like Machiavelli’s The Prince, this duality applies more to our leaders. When we seek to create effective policies, we should seek to incorporate a combination of political and moral incentives. The advantages of each will help attract a broader range of people. Our political views are shaped by our personal beliefs (or our morals), and our morals are shaped over time through “political” experiences. We need to eliminate this fear of mixing the two ideas and being afraid of those consequences. Combining the two and trying to find the middle ground gives us a stronger drive and purpose in achieving anything we want. Like they say, “two is always better than one.”