The JCI Prison Scholars Program

Category: student writing

  • May 17: Ed Fotheringill

    Guest post by Joshua Cahall

    unnamedToday’s class with Mr. Fotheringill was quite interesting to me considering I have very little knowledge about or interest in Buddhism. Some aspects of it seemed admirable and attainable, while other parts of it seemed a bit hokey. I do believe meditation is a very powerful exercise. I touched on it a little during class, about these Buddhist monks being discovered dead for days with no signs of decomposition. It’s just inexplicable. It shows somehow that this meditation they were in was so deep that the death of their physical body didn’t even cause it to decompose. I think this shows meditation can be an extremely powerful force in some individuals, maybe even all individuals are capable of this.

    I will say that the thing I absolutely love about Buddhism is its overwhelming promotion of peace. I’ve heard of many Muslim terrorists, but I’ve never heard of even one Buddhist terrorist. I think that shows its legitimacy and practicality.

     

     

     

  • May 17: Mike Sizer

    May 17: Mike Sizer

    Guest post by Steven Diffendal

    Prior to attending Dr. Sizer’s class, I did not possess the knowledge as to what distinguished a bandit from an outlaw. Dr. Sizer explained how historical facts differ from those of the folk legends that we have come to know.

    27e7df07bec10f9becdcb67d0a313158I came away from Dr. Sizer’s lecture with information such as when the term “bandit” was first employed. It was a term that was first used during the medieval era that referred to the everyday soldier. Dr. Sizer explained that the bandit differed from the common criminal in that the bandit shared the support of the population, for the bandit did not perform crimes that were of a predatory nature against the people. He was a person that stood up against social injustice and took a stand. He acted. He did not simply sit by ad observe, he responded.

    Prior to Dr. Sizer’s lecture, I did not realize that Jesse James was anything other than a criminal. I did not know how Jesse James began his escapades. I did not know him to be anything other than an outlaw. Dr. Sizer informed us that Jesse James came from a family that owned slaves, and that after the South lost the Civil War, many of those people were upset to have to give up their property. After all, slaves were not under contract, so they did not have to be given land, not did their owners have to pay them any wages. They were simply someone’s property. After the war ended and the South had to release the slaves, many slave owners were not happy. Jesse James was one of those who was not happy about the South’s loss and responded to what he believed to be social injustice.

    John Edwards, an editor during this era for the Kansas Times, was a Jesse James supporter. He wrote an article on September 29, 1872 praising Jesse James for sticking it to the people in power. However, law enforcement did not feel the same, and offered a reward for Jesse James. In 1882, Robert Ford shot Jesse James while he was hanging a picture on the wall. History thus refers to Robert Ford as the coward that shot Jesse James.

    Dr. Sizer explained history from a perspective that I had never heard before. He enlightened me about many facts that are not relayed today through the folk tales about legends that once lived. Thank you, Dr. Sizer, for taking the time to share with me many interesting facts as to what distinguishes a bandit from a common criminal.

     

  • May 2: John Peacock

    May 2: John Peacock

    Guest post by Joey McCarthy

    PeacockI would like to say that I felt honored to be able to hear John Peacock’s reading about his life, and how he came to find out his true heritage and roots. Like John Peacock, I am also Irish and Indian mixed. My whole life I was led to believe that my father was a Cherokee Indian. I have always had a sixth sense, if you will, when it comes to Nature, like I’m in tune with the smells and sounds of the woodlands. I also have the stubbornness and temper of an Irishman. I would love to go on a journey such as John Peacock went on, to find out my true roots. My father was never in my life, and when I got old enough to take care of myself, I met with him. Soon after, he was beaten to death and robbed for his money. I wonder if there is a way for me to find out if I am truly part Cherokee Indian or not. Any feedback would be truly helpful. I am honored to have gotten a glimpse into John Peacock’s life, and to hear intimate details about his Sweat Lodge experience. Thank you for coming to speak with us. Truly outstanding.

  • April 26: Ian Bourland

    April 26: Ian Bourland

    Guest post by Sig

    Throughout this semester, I continue to learn about things I know absolutely nothing about. I’m not sure how to feel about this. I guess I’m happy to be learning something, yet sad borgheze-20-638because I’m 46 years old and still don’t know shit!

    Much like Ian, I enjoy the act of looking at art, trying to interpret what the artist is saying. I appreciate the fact that Ian exposed us to all of the classic artists even though he “works” in the modern period. There are so many greats, so varied in style, I felt a brief inspiration to pick up a pencil myself and see what comes out.

    As a guitar player, I know how to create rhythm and atmosphere in a song. As I was looking at Caravaggio, I could feel the darkness in the self portrait as Bacchus in the same way I feel the darkness in a minor chord on my guitar. It’s a little spooky to me.

    I have seen Picasso’s stuff before and have always wondered what kind of drugs he was on to see objects this way. Ian made me remember something I read somewhere about an alleged confession by Picasso before he died where he claimed he hated the weird stuff he was painting (equating it with a kindergartner’s etchings) but he knew that’s what the idiots en masse wanted, so he prostituted himself just to make money. Imagine that – someone compromising for money.

    I respect and admire Ian for knowing his limitations (he’s not an artist himself) but still found a way to make art his life while doing a job he obviously loves. That’s a successful man, in my view. Keep up the good work, and thanks for coming.

  • April 26: Ian Bourland

    April 26: Ian Bourland

    Guest post by Sig

    Throughout this semester, I continue to learn about things I know absolutely nothing about. I’m not sure how to feel about this. I guess I’m happy to be learning something, yet sad borgheze-20-638because I’m 46 years old and still don’t know shit!

    Much like Ian, I enjoy the act of looking at art, trying to interpret what the artist is saying. I appreciate the fact that Ian exposed us to all of the classic artists even though he “works” in the modern period. There are so many greats, so varied in style, I felt a brief inspiration to pick up a pencil myself and see what comes out.

    As a guitar player, I know how to create rhythm and atmosphere in a song. As I was looking at Caravaggio, I could feel the darkness in the self portrait as Bacchus in the same way I feel the darkness in a minor chord on my guitar. It’s a little spooky to me.

    I have seen Picasso’s stuff before and have always wondered what kind of drugs he was on to see objects this way. Ian made me remember something I read somewhere about an alleged confession by Picasso before he died where he claimed he hated the weird stuff he was painting (equating it with a kindergartner’s etchings) but he knew that’s what the idiots en masse wanted, so he prostituted himself just to make money. Imagine that – someone compromising for money.

    I respect and admire Ian for knowing his limitations (he’s not an artist himself) but still found a way to make art his life while doing a job he obviously loves. That’s a successful man, in my view. Keep up the good work, and thanks for coming.

  • Lecture: Dr. Ruth Toulson

    Lecture: Dr. Ruth Toulson

    Guest post by Donald Gross

    (R.I.P Douglas Scott Arey)

    Wow! This particular lecture had to be one of the most, if not the most informative lectures that I have ever had the pleasure of participating in. I would never have guessed in a hundred years that a Q and A during the lecture would be so diverting, especially since the field of inquiry was basically about death, in particular the death transitions and rituals that are conducted in Singapore.
    It wasn’t just the lecture itself, it was the lecturer too. She wasn’t at all pretentious about anything. She avoided no questions, and answered them all with an acceptable response. It takes a very unique and special person to occupy the position that Ruth holds, and to be a female makes it even more special. She gave a very informative and interesting exposition. It was a very eye-opening learning experience to talk about the beliefs and customs of different cultures as they apply to the diverse parallels that lie between life and the afterlife.
    services-box-img-lppljwo0y2njfcs9v1i58j4vmyhphed168psofxir2    Ruth was truly the personification of someone who came to give a good lecture on Death’s rituals and customs. From her black attire to her mysterious tones and emphases that she used to describe certain events, she really came prepared to give a lecture on the subject of making the transition from life to afterlife. I’ve never hear the subject of death be described so eloquently. Ruth’s presentation was conducted so well that it actually seemed rehearsed, even to the asking of our unsuspecting questions. She presented us with Singapore’s complete traditions and rituals in detailed descriptions, beginning with the death of the person straight through to the embalming process. She also spoke somewhat discontentedly on the government-ordered ten-year exhumations.
    I also found the ceremonial rituals fascinating, especially when she was explaining the traditions regarding the Mardi Gras-like entertainment during the funeral, the color definitions, and the forty-day-long time frames of some of the funerals. I still don’t get the thing about why, if the ritual is performed incorrectly, the decedent becomes a hungry ghost.
    Even the personal tidbits that Ruth shared with us were very informative as well as enchanting. It was the first time I have heard there should be no charge for a child’s funeral. I enjoyed how she shared her family’s involvement in the business, along with her being the only white person to ever be employed by the African American Staff of March’s Funeral Home. That was the icing on the cake.
    In closing, I really enjoyed this lecture. I would really like to participate in a course based on Ruth’s book.

  • Topic in the Humanities 2/23/2016

    Topic in the Humanities 2/23/2016

    Inauguration Speech by Patrick Holmes, in response to guest visit by MICA professor John Barry

    My Fellow Americans,

    Today marks the dawn of a new age, a new beginning in which “We the People” will be reborn by an awakening of the Republic’s consciousness to guide our country back to the fundamentals that made our society great. In order to facilitate this rebirth, we must break out of that mass consumerist, military-industrialist fog that has encapsulated our minds, inhibited our spirits, and suppressed our creative abilities. In times as dire as ours, we need a leader who is not beholden to special interest groups, big banks and multi-national corporations that steal the best jobs from the American people and transplant them to overseas factories and pennies on the dollar. We need to get back to the fundamentals of small-town business mentality with a global outreach, where mom and pop can still make enough money to feed themselves and save money for a brighter future for their children, and our children.

    We need to bring back the prosperity of this country by chopping down the trees of Big Business, rooting out corruption on all levels of government, business, and our uniformed services, and to reinstall honor, integrity, duty and respect into our civil servants. After all, that’s what we are here to do. Serve the people. For the people. By the people. A country where, once again, a man’s word is better than the gold that he would now sell his children to procure.

  • Topics in the Humanities, Feb 16 2016

    Topics in the Humanities, Feb 16 2016

    Guest post by Sean Almond in response to class visit by conceptual artist Hugh Pocock

    I enjoyed the presentation you gave here at JCI. Your work and thoughts really opened my eyes to  new concepts of what art is, or could be. I thought that your piece “Volume” was brilliant. To utilize the museum’s own air system and the claim the air as your own, that was great. I also felt a connection to your invitation to dinner, showing how much technology is relied on even in the simplest aspects of our lives. Being in prison, I understand this, just from my interactions with family and friends, and how society is losing the more or less intimate art of communication. Everything is very impersonal now.

    I always thought of art as sort of “high-minded,” involving masterpieces, etc., and saw my own drawing as mundane, or mediocre. Through your work, I think I have a better understanding of art, and that it’s a more personal expression, and not confined to one particular set structure.

    Your work is now an inspiration to me, reminding me not to confine myself to a box, and to look at the world a little differently.

     

     

     

  • Topics in the Humanities Feb 9 2016

    Topics in the Humanities Feb 9 2016

    Guest post by Shane Barnett

    We were honored to have Professor Paul Jaskunas from MICA present to us the first chapter of his novel “Cybelle” this past Tuesday, a story about the coming of age of a rural West Virginia girl battling to overcome mediocrity. In his first chapter, Jaskunas illustrates the struggle of Cybelle to maintain her dysfunctional family while still managing to meet the demands of college so that she can attain the means to her lofty aspirations. So far, “Cybelle” is a somber story of the personal struggle that so many of us daily face. Such is life.

    Professor Jaskunas captivated his audience with his soft-spoken narration of the very intriguing depths of female nature, dealing with men and sex and where these things can lead when haphazardly approached. The story so far seems to be a description of the age-old inter-relationship of woman to man in using her assets to obtain the security she needs for survival, as she tries to overcome her dependence upon him – a vicious cycle of give-and-take that so often is our existence.

    Our class became a panel of critics full of questions and suggestions for the author. We wanted to know why he does what he does and how he does it. We wanted him to tell us more. What does Cybelle look like? Where is her story headed? Is she destined for success and the proverbial happy ending, or failure and tragedy? We did our best to exhume the details from the mind of our subject in order to ascertain the motive for his composition and the objectives for his forlorn heroine. From what I can gather, Cybelle has a long hard road ahead, but where that road leads has yet to be seen, even by Jaskunas himself, as he leaves us with awesome insight for our own development of plots and characters. “Let your characters be as chemicals in a scientific experiment … create conditions for them and see what reactions ensure…”

    Good luck, Cybelle!

  • advanced literature, dec 1

    Animal Farm is starting to get depressing, but I think we all predicted that. And not all the animals are having a hard time. As top pig, Napoleon is in the pink. He’s even going to market and bringing home the bacon. By the end of these two chapters, Napoleon’s regime is definitely worse than that of Mr. Jones. As Napoleon’s animal-farm-coverhenchman, Squealer circulates disinformation, blaming everything bad that happens on the absent Snowball. He also accuses certain animals of plotting secretly with Snowball, which is obviously untrue. What makes matters worse is that the animals admit it, internalizing their self-hatred. Napoleon doesn’t even have the decency to give them a fair trial; he just has them taken round the back of the barn and the dog rip out their throats. So much for Commandment Six, “No Animal Shall Kill Any Other Animal.”

    These two chapters are important because they show how the animals are being manipulated into following anything Squealer claims Napoleon has said. The animals are so obedient that they don’t even realize how gullible they are. The truth is, they’re so used to having someone else think for them, that they don’t even consider objecting. They just assume Napoleon is right all the time.

    Although he uses the word “Comrade” and uses the inclusive “we,” Squealer is starting to speak in a formal way, beginning to isolate himself from his fellow beasts. No longer is he an everyday pig. Though he denies that the top pigs have power over the others, his speech, charisma and closeness to Napoleon all give Squealer implicit authority.

    For example, when Squealer bans “Beasts of England,” he says, “In ‘Beasts of England,’ we expressed our longing for a better society in days to come. But that society has now been established. Clearly this song has no longer any purpose.” When he says “we,” he sounds as though he is speaking on behalf of the other animals, but he is also assuming that they all feel the same way. He is not open to disagreement or protest. He pretends to be a “pig of the people” but is actually authoritative and hard headed.

    Although the book may be getting depressing, I’ve got a lot to look forward to. I really love hearing the men’s responses to this novel, because they’re so complex and interesting. I’m used to listening carefully to the thoughtful responses produced by Mr. Arey, for example, and Mr. Doyle, and Mr. Simpson, but last wAnimalFarm1eek I wasn’t prepared for Mr. Barnett’s paper. There was really too much for me to take in just by sitting listening to it—I had to take a copy home and read it again. And then there was Mr. Drummond’s impressively close reading. He gets right in there and turn the words themselves into a code to be cracked, creating mysteries he alone can solve. The progress of the pigs may be disheartening, but that of this group is just the opposite.