If you had asked me four years ago, “Do you enjoy writing?”, my answer would have been a resolute “No”. No explanation, no elaboration, nothing. To be honest, I never felt like it was worth my own time (or anyone else’s, for that matter) to listen to what I had to say about writing—a subject which, let’s just say I’ve not had quite the “affinity” for. Was my answer perhaps, at least partially, based on such a sentiment being shared among my peers? Maybe. Was my lack of “affinity” towards writing all of my own doing? Very likely, too. Even writing this, my brain from just a year ago would have uttered the same feelings: “You don’t like writing, so stop thinking about it this much”. 

But in the eight years in which such an affinity has evaded me, my thoughts towards not thinking about writing, as it turns out (unsurprisingly), led me to think about writing all-the-more often. One thing led to another, and here I am, writing a final blog post for AP Literature—and I am enjoying myself? If blogging as a part of this course has taught  me anything, it’s that with a little bit of creative input, you truly can find enjoyment in anything. In previous English classes, I never enjoyed the freedom which blog-writing has granted me this semester; even days where we could “write creatively” never felt as such. Yet here I am, given true, boundless freedom of creativity, enjoying the writing process more than I ever have before.

One blog which stands out as particularly fulfilling was my “artist review” of sorts, where I ranked the discography of Kendrick Lamar, a generational talent in the hip-hop scene—a topic which, especially in the realm of academics, I don’t get the chance to discuss. Having the creative freedom to talk about such a topic, about such a passionate subject, fueled my love for the subject even more. My blogs felt like my own little world, with each reader, or visitor, fueling my enjoyment for building upon such a world.

Apart from the frequent writing in the form of blog posts, I found myself similarly developing a newfound enjoyment for reading, too, a commonplace throughout the entirety of this semester. Specifically, the novel I chose for the Voices Project, The White Tiger, felt like a breath of fresh air in the world of reading—just as I, through my blog posts, created a world unique to me, it was refreshing to see a unique voice, presented through the lens of a unique topic, in the world of literature. Though I highly recommend and adore The White Tiger, I have to be honest: the first fifty pages are a struggle, fortunately redeeming themselves by paving the way for an otherwise brilliant and eye-opening novel surrounding the Indian experience. Even though I, like the author and the main character, am of Indian heritage, I always found myself learning—a crucial takeaway from this project, and indicative of the influence under-represented voices hold in the formation of our own values, ideals, and worldviews.

So, as I wrap up my final blog of AP Literature, of high school, and perhaps of my life, what I’ve learned throughout my high school journey is this—don’t leave high school longing for more: longing for more friends, for a club you wish you would’ve joined, for an event you wish you’d attended. You only get high school once, so, especially for seniors, live it like that one Snickers commercial: like you’ve got “no regerts”.

Kendrick Lamar, widely considered one of the best hip-hop artists of the 2010’s decade, has one of the most critically-acclaimed catalogs that the genre has ever seen—with 17 GRAMMY awards under his belt, the statistics don’t seem to contradict such a narrative. Today, I will be ranking (subjectively, of course) all five of Kendrick Lamar’s studio albums from worst to best (Kendrick does not have a single “bad” album, but with so much quality in his discography, there has to be a last place spot).

#5: Section 80 (2011) – 7/10

Though a comprehensive debut studio album, filled with jazzy production and conceptually focused on Kendrick’s generation, its main criticisms arise from Kendrick’s performances themselves—not so much in terms of his rapping or his lyricism, which he has solidified even upon his debut, but rather in his approach and consistency towards his own music. As is common with an artist’s debut album or project, it often takes an extended period of time and exposure to the hip-hop genre to most effectively craft an artist’s “voice”, or musical inclination. In Section 80, we see Kendrick’s voice beginning to bloom, with vocal descriptions of life dealing with drugs, racism, and Ronald Reagan’s presidency (as a result of Reagan’s war on drugs), illustrative of his life in Compton as well as of others in his generation and community. Ultimately, while still a solid concept album in its approach to racial and social conflict, much of its spot in last place boils down to a novice Kendrick who lacked experience in the mainstream and its associated tools, namely top-end producers and features.

#4: Mr. Morale & the Big Steppers (2022) – 8/10

Kendrick’s latest studio album takes a different approach and direction when compared to much of his previous works, namely in its introspective nature. On Mr. Morale, Kendrick steps away from his otherwise more traditional topics—social and racial conflict, drugs, and more—in favor of discussing personal issues and state of mind. Included on the album are tracks such as Father Time, where he discusses his journey through fatherhood, as well as numerous mentions of his journey through a sort of therapy—when examining the fact that Kendrick’s last studio album came five years prior, Mr. Morale suggests reasons for Kendrick’s lengthy hiatus from music, perhaps taking time to reflect on his own experiences and work towards incorporating such introspective elements in his music. For many, including myself, it was not what was expected of Kendrick or from his music. Although a pleasant surprise, and nevertheless a great album filled with both touching and exciting moments, I rank it on the lower end of the list simply as a result of personal preference, as such introspective rapping, to me, does not hold the same appeal or provide for me the same level of entertainment as much of Kendrick’s prior works.

#3: DAMN. (2017) – 9/10

Released during what many would consider the height of Kendrick’s commercial success, the less-focused but generation-blending DAMN. features many of his greatest rapping cuts, with DNA in particular being a personal favorite off of the project. In many ways, the commercial success of the album can be attributed to its mainstream appeal, with more modern rap cuts and even hints of pop appeal, as seen in LOYALTY featuring Rihanna. One aspect of the album which especially appeals to me is the often darker, angrier nature in his delivery on a large handful of tracks, almost suggestive of the album title, “DAMN.”, as being rooted in frustration and distaste with those who surround him in the industry. For newer Kendrick listeners, too, I believe that this is the best album to begin with when taking a delve into his catalog, as it masterfully blends both accessibility on the production and lyrical ends while still being a concept album with diverse storytelling tracks such as FEAR and DUCKWORTH.

#2: good kid, m.A.A.d city (2012) – (10/10)

Kendrick Lamar’s second studio album, good kid, m.A.A.d city, is once again a concept album, focused on his experiences growing up in his hometown—his “m.A.A.d city” so-to-speak—of Compton, California,  a suburb of the city of Los Angeles. The suburb, which is often compared to that of Harlem, in New York City, is characterized by high rates of crime, violence, and gang activity. On good kid, m.A.A.d city, just a year after his bursting onto the scene with his studio album titled Section 80, Kendrick Lamar finds himself with a voice, one perfectly crafted for storytelling. The cover for the album itself reads “a short film by Kendrick Lamar”, a short but sweet foreshadowing of what the project entails—a series of lyrical tracks over darker, moody, and atmospheric beats, featuring numerous skits so as to progress the story, the concept, and ultimately the “film” which Lamar puts forward on good kid, m.A.A.d city. Much of its success can also be owed to the rise in Kendrick’s popularity, whereby he was able to secure features from the likes of Drake and Jay Rock while enlisting the help of renowned producer Dr. Dre as executive producer of the album. The cherry on top for Kendrick’s second studio album is his ability, despite the deep, conceptual nature of the project, to still generate hit records, with tracks such as Money Trees finding their way into mainstream culture even in 2024.

#1: To Pimp a Butterfly (2015) – (10/10)

The decision as to which album would take the number one spot—a heavily contested fight between good kid, m.A.A.d city and To Pimp a Butterfly—was no easy task. For the purposes of this blog, I had to pick a number one (ties are no fun) and thus went with the album which, in the present moment, I believe has an edge. To begin, Kendrick Lamar’s third studio album contains what I believe to be the best song in his otherwise vast catalog: Wesley’s Theory, a lyrically-dense discussion of race and wealth in twentieth-century America, characterized itself by Kendrick’s own experiences in his meteoric rise to fame. The track begins with a portrayal of Kendrick himself, overwhelmed by vast amounts of money which he previously lacked access to, and later shifts to a discussion of “Uncle Sam” and the United States, which he paints as trying to appease Kendrick—ultimately, a metaphorical means of highlighting economic exploitation of African Americans. Though hard to believe, such quality in the writing continues throughout the entirety of the album, with tracks such as “u” containing emotionally dense outbursts of Kendrick’s pent up anxiety, anger, depression, and exhaustion. To Pimp a Butterfly is a must listen, not solely intended for Kendrick fans, hip-hop fans, or even music fans. This is an album for everyone. I promise you won’t be disappointed.

 

Inspired by the conference weekend, military history, and a friend.

While many think about the Roman Empire itself, perhaps even countless times every week or simply as an ode to an emerging online trend, my weekly “Roman Empire” is similar, but in the same sense so vastly different that I felt the need to dedicate a whole blog to the subject. With the military history course just moving past the unit of ancient warfare, dedicated to the likes of Romans, Greeks, Macedonians, and Persians, two stand out as titans of their time—the Romans and Macedonians, creating empires stretching continents through their innovative approaches to war. But, as I continue to ponder myself, which side, or faction, would come out victorious in a pitched battle? Let’s take a look at the competitors.

Weapons Systems

Romans

The Romans are famous for their heavy infantry formations, often referred to as legions, donning their infamous red and yellow color scheme. In one hand, Roman soldiers wield a large wooden shield, spanning from the neck to the mid-shin—some of the best protection offered in the ancient world. Placed in the center of the shield is a metal “boss”, a circular piece of metal attached to the front of the shield. This cemented the Roman shield, known as a scutum, as both an offensive and defensive weapon, capable of deflecting melee blows and projectiles with its large coverage, while still being able to deliver a blunt, crushing blow when rammed into an enemy soldier. In the other hand, the legionary held a short stabbing sword, known as a gladius, with a blade length of just around two feet. It was among the sharpest swords of the ancient era, lethal when used in conjunction with the scutum to cut down unsuspecting opponents. But the gladius was similarly infamous for its double-edged nature—not only could it be used as a stabbing weapon, as was the case in most instances, but its slashing capability was just as effective.

Macedonians

While the Romans are well-known for their large shields, Macedonian soldiers also possessed a weapon of similar proportions—a thirteen to twenty-one foot long spear, known as a sarissa, the longest of any such weapon of the time, needing both hands to wield. At both the front and back of the sarissa is a pointed, razor-sharp tip, capable of piercing the heaviest armor of the era and lethal when thrusted forward. The back, unlike the front, additionally contains a metal counterweight, allowing a Macedonian soldier to carry the spear closer to the rear, granting more reach and length facing an enemy force. Critically, the pointed nature of the back of the sarissa served as a means of stability, with soldiers often driving the back of the spear into the ground to repel cavalry charges. Although the sarissa was a two-handed weapon, Macedonians still carried a telamon shield, strapped around the forearm and slung around the neck to still allow a two-handed grip on the sarissa. The shield spanned from a soldier’s neck to the upper thigh, mainly used to repel projectiles or unsuspecting attacks aimed at a soldier’s midsection.

Tactics

Romans

The Romans, with their scutum and gladius, emphasized flexibility on the battlefield, with each unit being homogeneous and therefore able to carry out the same, broad variety of battlefield duties. If needed elsewhere, they simply could turn around and make their way to a new location on the field, not hindered by unwieldy weapons or strict formations. Although Romans often fought in lines, the maneuverability and weapons systems of Roman soldiers meant that they did not need to strictly conform to the line formation, as they could both create gaps in their lines to move elsewhere and fill these gaps with relative ease. If flanked, it was relatively easy for a Roman line to disperse and retreat in good order, easily able to regroup at a new location and continue the fight. 

Macedonians

Though not nearly as maneuverable as the Roman legions due to the sheer size of their primary weapon, the sarissa, the Macedonian soldier embodied brute force, especially in conjunction with the faction’s main formation—the phalanx, an almost porcupine-like formation, with rows of sarissa-wielding Macedonians lined up next to one another, spears facing forward. In fact, the size of the sarissa made it so that soldiers as far as five ranks deep (not only the soldiers in the first line of the phalanx) were able to have their spears visible in the front of the formation. Upon forming, the Macedonian phalanxes would roll forward, presenting an impenetrable wall of spear and shield to anyone who dared to face the phalanx head-on. 

Conclusion

In a pitched battle, when considering strictly the heavy infantry and its associated tactics within each faction—the results would likely be inconclusive. Simply put, the phalanx lacks the flexibility to outmaneuver a Roman legion, but a legion lacks the sheer force to break through a well-positioned phalanx. In fact, a battle between the two did take place: the Battle of Cynoscephalae, fought in 197 B.C. between Macedonian and Roman forces, saw the legion and the phalanx collide. In examining the battle as well as tactical and technological theoreticals, this conclusion is further supported. The Roman victory at the battle came as a result of hesitation to hastily deploy the phalanx on the Macedonian left flank, whereby the more maneuverable legions were able to break the disorganized formation. However, where the phalanx met the legions in the center of the battlefield, the legions were pushed back and suffered heavy losses. Ultimately, in a pitched battle, the clear determination of a winner is next to impossible—an engagement between two vastly different ways of war rests on far too many theoreticals and decisive moments during a battle itself. Do the Macedonians keep their flanks well-protected? Do the Romans look for gaps in the phalanx? Do soldiers strictly remain in formation throughout the battle? All such questions cannot be answered even with such evidence, leaving a fact-based conclusion unobtainable (for the record, however, I’d want to see the phalanx win).

Upon a first read of Poem by E.E. Cummings, the “plot” of the poem, so-to-speak, seemed almost nonexistent. Like the poems of E.E. Cummings which I analyzed previously, it seemed to me that paraphrasing his otherwise complex, unorthodox, and often disjointed writing style was unworthy of even pertaining to any one plot. Confusingly, the poem’s second line contains the word “you’re” when it states that “you’re a sight to sing” (2), already leaving questions as to who this “you’re” was referring to in context of the speaker—moreover, it seemed similarly unclear if the poet, E.E. Cummings, had any relation to the speaker (or served to be the speaker themselves). Was the speaker talking to a lover, based on the use of “song” and “rosetree” when discussing their audience, potentially utilizing the romantic diction and imagery, respectively, which the two words put forth? Perhaps the “you’re” was a form of the second person, speaking directly to the reader, almost as if a compliment of sorts? In place of a futile plot approach, I decided to examine shifts in the poem, an approach more suited to my strengths as a reader of poetry, leading me to identify three distinct, digestible, and ultimately meaningful sections of Cummings’ poem.

Quickly, I realized that E.E. Cummings was conversing directly with nature. The word “earth” rapidly makes its appearance in the fifth line of the first stanza, where Cummings states that “as if an earth was playing at birthdays”, alluding directly to the presence of Earth—most likely figuratively as opposed to literally—in correlation with a happiness of sorts, as derived from its conjunction with “birthday”, invoking a jubilant tone through the traditionally joyous nature of one’s birthday. In the following stanza, the images of bees dancing “a honeydunce; whirling’s a frantic struts a pedantic proud or humble” (10) further bolstered this idea, eventually leading me to develop a thematic summary of sorts for the first three stanzas—in discussing the idea of nature along with the subsequently discussed idea of “giving is living” (17), I noticed a clear emphasis on the idea of nature’s processes as being generous, catering to its principle of “giving” as “living”.

Crucially, I ran into yet another problem when moving past the first three stanzas—I noticed a shift away from the discussion of nature towards mankind, but I had to ask myself why? Why was this shift, apparent to me in the mention of  “prose mind” (19), a reference to humanity’s greatest possession of its “mind”, given such an emphasis, given such a stark contrast from the previous three stanzas? The answer came to me in the form of continuation. That is, I learned that a poem is much like a test, where the emphasis on “moving forward” past difficulties is often what moves us past such hardship. So, I kept on the move, past the fourth stanza and up until the seventh stanza, where I finally began to see yet another “section” of Cummings’ poem beginning to take shape. The introduction of man’s existence, ultimately in the “grand scheme” of nature, was a tool utilized by Cummings to put nature’s grandeur and transcendence over man into deep perspective. In the the sixth stanza, the statement of “aeons of (trivial merely) existence, all when may not measure a now of your treasure” (34) directly compares mankind’s otherwise “trivial” existence in the eyes of the Earth, of nature, to the “treasure” of nature which does not hold the quality of being able to be “measured”—in essence, mankind struggles to recognize the governance of nature over all who inhabit planet Earth. By identifying this first shift, a transition into a second “part”,  so-to-speak, of Cummings’ poem, a vision of an audience began to form—perhaps Cummings’, through the speaker’s monologue, addresses humanity as a whole, looking to remind mankind of mother nature’s all-encompassing qualities of being Earth’s “ruler”, capable of worldly governance.

Yet after coming to such a conclusion, the proud discovery which I had made, the eighth and ninth stanzas led me to a second shift—specifically in word choice and consequent impact on tone—once again having me questioning this new section’s purpose in Cumming’s development of the relationship between nature and its beneficiaries (specifically through the lens of humanity). Whereas previously I remedied these difficulties through continuation, through simply reading “past” these points of hardship, I was simply not able to do so this time around; stanzas eight and nine are the final two stanzas in Poem by E.E. Cummings. So, as having already identified a shift based on word choice—the previous discussion of mankind as having nature as its “treasure”, as being gracefully ruled by natural process, morphs into a focus on the aspects that warrant nature to be such a “treasure” to humanity, namely in nature’s tendencies towards “emanation” and “creation” (47)—I utilized this very observance as a means of answering my questions, of simplifying my difficulties to the point of resolution. Crucially, I looked for continuations of this newly formed pattern, a pattern characterizing nature as transcending through creation. Ultimately, I was able to uncover subsequent elements of such a pattern in stanza nine, where the phrase “rose alive must three,must four and…five times proclaim fate isn’t fatal” (50) yet again emphasizes the idea of creation through the transition from “three” to “four” and “five”, like the multiplying of the aforementioned rose. When used in conjunction with the “fate isn’t fatal”, the final portion of Cummings’ poem ultimately discusses how nature’s creative aspect plays a part in its transcendence over humanity, as the rose (a symbol of nature) proclaims that the “fate” of the Earth, as it stands to lie in the hand so nature itself, can and never will be “fatal”.

After successfully navigating such difficulty, I still can’t really say I’ve identified an overwhelmingly apparent plot structure. At the very least, however, I can say that I now possess the tools to derive meaning from Poem by E.E. Cummings, ultimately a happy ending to an otherwise difficult process through difficulty.

New semester, new classes, and (hopefully) new me! Today, I want to discuss a topic which has always fascinated me, but a topic which has recently made its way into my formal education (which I am beyond stoked about, too!) as a result of “Military History”, a course offering here at North. While I would normally sit here and give you the rundown of what I am about to discuss, I’ve decided to cut out my nerdy dialogue and get straight into the meat of this blog. With only this last sentence to delay, I present to you my top 5 generals of all time:

5. George Washington (United States of America)

While many would consider him one of America’s greatest (if not the greatest) President throughout our nation’s short history, not many know the military genius which lay beneath that glorious, powdered hair of his. In fact, many would regard him as quite a poor tactician on the battlefield, and not without reason, either. Numerous times, such as during the many engagements he fought against the British surrounding New York, he would position his troops in such a manner as to leave them vulnerable to flanking—a huge red flag when it came to war in the American Revolutionary Era. However, this is not where his military genius stems from. Washington was the prime example of a true strategist, possessing critical knowledge of his enemy, and, therefore, how to wage war in such a manner as to target his opponent’s weaknesses and shortcomings. Eventually, he came to realize his tactical inability in the field, and embraced the role of a strategist instead, organizing large-scale campaigns and logistical efforts so as to keep the Continental Army in fighting shape (note: strategy refers to plans aimed at victory, while tactics are the individual maneuvers and actions which get are necessary in executing a strategy).

4. Genghis Khan (Mongol Empire)

As almost single-handedly pioneering history’s second largest empire at a time when modern technology was nowhere to be seen, Genghis Khan most definitely is a must-pick on any ranking involving military genius. Unlike George Washington, Genghis Khan knew how to win tactical victories, most notably through his innovative use of cavalry and terrain to his advantage—aware of the open plains of modern-day Russia, land which he desired to conquer, he ensured that an emphasis was placed on swift maneuver with logistics incorporated. His solution, though seemingly obvious in hindsight, was the use of cavalry on a much wider scale than any of the European armies at the time, even going so far as to create a newer, more technologically advanced form of the bow and arrow so as to suit the many horse archers amongst his ranks. The advent of mobile warfare owes many of its tactical keystones to the genius of Genghis Khan.

3. Alexander the Great (Macedonia)

In our early twenties, most of us would be completing our higher education, perhaps in the process of entering the workforce. Alexander, however, was busy bringing an empire to its knees. This was no ordinary empire either—in fact, it was the Persian Empire led by King Darius, the largest empire the ancient world had seen up to that point, spanning the entirety of the Middle East and spilling over into parts of North Africa and the Balkans. Of the two other generals discussed so far, Alexander possessed a unique trait—the ability to command boundless loyalty from his men, ensuring he had full tactical control over his troops when in battle. Though total control over decision-making might be of detriment to any ordinary general, Alexander did not fit the description of ordinary—as it turned out, he was a tactical genius of his own. One of his greatest displays of tactical skill came through his use of “defeat-in-detail” tactics, where he would ensure the largest, strongest portion of his army always did battle with the weakest, smallest portion of his opponent, thus guaranteeing victory no matter the total size of his army.

2. Hannibal (Carthage)

Hannibal Barca, most commonly referred to as simply Hannibal, was a mastermind of intelligence in warfare, using newly possessed knowledge of his foes to outwit, outmaneuver, and outfight them at every turn. Single-handedly, he almost toppled the early Roman Republic. His understanding of the Roman political system and the “consuls”, or leaders, which the republic elected every year gave him the upper-hand in nearly every engagement he took part in, even when facing the often larger, better-trained, and better-equipped Roman legions. Roman commanders and their armies were often hyper-aggressive, looking to gain as much glory and land as possible within their 1-year terms. As a result, Hannibal, on numerous occasions, led the Romans into a defensive trap, causing enormous casualties and crippling both the numerical strength and morale of Roman armies and citizens alike.

1. Napoleon (France)

Though probably a predictable choice for the number one spot, there is no denying the all-encompassing military genius which Napoleon possessed as a military leader. Like Alexander the Great, he commanded the unconditional loyalty of his troops,  transforming an army full of otherwise demotivated conscripts into a fierce, unrelenting fighting force. Like Genghis Khan, he emphasized mobility and maneuver warfare, making sure his army lived off the land rather than relying on cumbersome, momentum-battering supply trains. Like George Washington, he stressed the logistical independence of his troops, reorganizing his army into smaller corps systems with its own detachments of cavalry and artillery, ensuring they could move and fight independently. Finally, like Hannibal, he understood his enemies like no other—he knew the Prussian weapons were outdated, the British economy reliant on trade, and the Russian generals were hungry for pride. When you bundle all these qualities into a single man—Napoleon Bonaparte—you get the greatest military genius to walk the face of the Earth.

 

Welcome to your brand new blog at Naperville Community Unit School District 203 Sites.

To get started, simply log in, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.