Aim: How does the exposition of Lord of the Flies set up the novel to question how society structures the transition from childhood to adulthood?
Do Now: To start off today’s lesson, we worked on a document with our groups about actions that need a legal age required and we had to try to guess the legal age for each action.
My group’s guesses:
Drink alcohol: 21
Drive a car (with a license):18
Serve in the Military: 17
Attend School (upper limit requirement): 16
See R-rated Movies: 16
Vote: 18
Consent to Sex: 18
Get Married (without parental consent): 18
Get an abortion (without parental consent): 16
Make personal finance personal finance decisions: 16 Rent a car: 16
We then shared out what we thought the legal age for each action is:
Group 5 said the legal age to drink alcohol is 21, Group 4 said for driving a car without a license the legal age is 18. However, William misunderstood the learner’s permit with the driver’s license and thought that one can drive at 16. Ms. Peterson explained that with a learner’s permit one is supposed to be in a car that has no brakes and someone else would control the brakes. My group shared that one has to be 17 in order to serve in the military. Joel disagreed with my group and thought that it should be 18 so that one is a legal adult. Our class had confusion about what the upper limit requirement meant so we had to talk about that and then we understood that it meant the age at which one has to stay in school until before one can drop out. Group 3 said that the upper limit requirement to attend school is 16; Group 6 said 18 for R-rated movies; Group 4 said 18 to vote and 18 for consent to sex; Group 5 said 18 to make personal financial decisions; lastly, Group 6 said one has to be 25 to rent a car.
The Actual Results:
Drink alcohol: 21
Drive a car (with a license):17
Serve in the Military: 17 (with parental consent) 18 (without)
Attend School (upper limit requirement): 16
See R-rated Movies: 17
Vote: 18 (17 in the primary election if one turns 18 the same year)
Consent to Sex: 18
Get Married: 18, 16-17 with parental consent, 14-15 with consent from a judge
Get an abortion (without parental consent): No legal age now (18 until very recently)
Make personal finance personal finance decisions: 18
Rent a car: 25
Group Discussion/Class share out:
Upon seeing the actual results, we had a group discussion on “Did any surprise you? Do any seem particularly unfair? Which ones, and why?” and then shared them with the class later.
The one result that surprised me the most was the fact that one has to be 17 years old to watch R-rated movies but one can be married at 14-15 if the judge consents to it. My group was also confused as to why one has to be 18 in order to control their own personal finances because we know that some banks, Bank of America, allows one to open an independent bank account at 16. We also thought that it was unfair because many teens work part time jobs where they get paid, which means they have to pay taxes as well so they should be able to manage their personal finances. There are also cases of teens being entrepreneurs where they bring in income as well.
When the class shared out, Joel shared that he thought that the 16 drop out age was a little weird, as the person would be in the middle of their junior year when they have all the important exams, such as the SAT and AP exams. However, Ms. Peterson explained that the average student who drops out of high school is one who isn’t college bound or isn't that willing to think about any of the exams. Then, Edward shared that he believes the fact that one needs to be 21 to drink in this country is unfair because in every other country it is 18 or younger as in America, one can serve their country at the age of 18, one can drive a car, one can vote, dropout of school, and one can get married yet one can’t drink alcohol. William then shared that he thinks the legal age to drink alcohol is higher in order to try to prevent those teens who had newly got their driver's license and are inexperienced in driving to drink under the influence. Ms. Peterson added on that the reason the legal drinking age will stay mandated to some extent is because one’s brain, specifically the frontal lobe, is not fully developed until one’s mid 20s-30s and because of this the ability to make rational decisions sometimes is skewed and in order impede the more extreme inability to make rational decisions while someone is under the influence of alcohol, the age will stay. Lastly, Nadine shared that the fact that someone can get married at 14 is extremely disturbing.
Connection: The fact that people can get married at 14-15 in the United States can tie back to Edgar Allan Poe, where back in the day life spans were short so people naturally got married at an earlier age. Therefore, in some states and places that age is not something absurd. Edgar Alan Poe married her cousin Virginia Clemm when she was 13.
Reading:
We independently read the article “How Old is Old Enough?” Rampell (2009) from New York Times. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KUKFXAzGtvqo6XgVD5bA-SjGzD4xILT1/edit
Note from the article:
The line between childhood and adulthood is very blurry or inconsistent. Such is the case for situations like drinking, driving, fighting in the military, and so on.
The age at which adulthood is set differs for many reasons: welfare of the child, utilitarian reasons, pragmatic reasons, economic reasons.
Sometimes, the threshold for adulthood is for the protection of the welfare of the child, as with statutory rape laws or even movie ratings.
Other times it is for utilitarian reasons for purposes of not harming the teenager nor being hurt by the teenager.
Pragmatic reasons include sensible acting like the case in which 19 year olds cannot drive a rental car yet they are driving the tanks for the military.
As for economic reasons, whatever rules benefit a certain group, they would change the age for adulthood as they see fit: A law financial aid office would allow the teenager to rely on their parents financially until they are thirty while a health insurance company decides that the teenager should be able to support themselves at 19.
Scientific studies by Professor Laurence Steinberg have found that young teenagers seek out risk and are unable to control their impulses even if they can differentiate good from bad. These studies convinced the Supreme Court in 2005 that executing convicts for offenses committed before age 18 was unconstitutional.
As young people develop different skills at different stages, it makes sense to judge on their rights and responsibilities incrementally.
We then discussed philosophies about possible theoretical situations with those around us, such as what to do if a 12 year old murdered or raped someone? Armed robbery? Identity theft? And other crimes and how they would be tried.
Celeste started off the class discussion by saying that it depends on the situation and how emotionally mature the child is and have to examine if they understood what they did and that will be used to assess what needs to be done to help out the child and if you just put a child into jail they might not understand why and the child would just be angry and confused which would not benefit anyone overall. Sofya added on that it really depends on the case and to say if hypothetically two teenagers that come from the similar backgrounds and one teenager stole a book from the store while the other boy came into the store and robbed it at gunpoint; the teenager who robbed the store would be tried as an adult while the teenager who stole the book would be charged as a juvenile as the crimes are different and “adult crimes” get adult punishment. We then discussed the question “what if a child goes and murder a parent who has been abusing them for their entire life”. Joel said if there were a court case, they can claim ptsd and mental distress, from years of abuse on end they can claim self defense as well, the ptsd will help them get a lower sentencing and prevent them from being executed. Safya says that the case depends on the judge and the report one has because in the case of the Menendez brothers, it was described in great detail how they were abused yet they still got life in prison. Ms. Peterson added on that there were other aspects of the Menendez brothers’ case that seemed iffy to their claims as they went on a shopping spree after and there were signs that they were planning the murder for a long time.
About the Menendez brother case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1ncuW-bLsw
In addition, Nadine said that when comparing identity theft with killing someone, one can fix the problems of one but the other can’t be fixed, the person will be gone and that the child should not be tried as an adult in the case of identity theft but in the case of rape and murder, the child should. Although, identity theft is very hard to clear up once it happens and it can even take up to 10-20 years for people to clean up everything. Edward said that identity theft is a serious crime, when crimes are serious the children should be tried as an adult; a crime that is not serious would be a child stealing from a store. Group 2 had an interesting take as they explained that at 12 years old, a child's brain is not fully developed yet, so they have to grow and mature first and get back on the right path in life so they shouldn't be charged as an adult. The chemicals in the brain could have gone out of control and caused the child to make whatever decisions they made.
This is an article explaining why children should not be tried as an adult:
https://jlc.org/issues/youth-tried-adults
Spirit Reading:
We read a small excerpt from chapter 2 of Lord of the Flies where they have to kill a pig for food (SURVIVAL) but Jack hesitates.
Chapter 2 summary analysis: https://study.com/academy/lesson/lord-of-the-flies-chapter-2-summary-quotes.html
We then discussed the following questions:
How does Jack feel when confronted by these new acquaintances about not stabbing the pig? Is this related to his age? Something more?
Group 3 said that in this scene it is everyone’s first time doing something so it feels super unfamiliar and uncomfortable for them. Group 5 said that since it is Jack’s first time harming something and although it has to be done to survive, it probably doesn’t feel morally right as the boys come from a time where they were not the ones doing the killing as they can buy food at the store. Joel added on to his group’s response that it is his internal conflict ﹣ despite his age, he is conscious that this is crossing the threshold into savagery, one is killing another being to preserve themselves and it is on the barbaric side.
We also discussed why we deem killing by stabbing to killing by a shooting to be far worse.
Cody said since one is closer to the victim and the killing is slower, it is more disturbing.
Kenneth said that when one shoots someone, it is a lot less commitment and one won’t have to think about it too much since it is a lot easier but when one is stabbing someone they have to commit to executing the full action. Joshua said that when one stabs someone, they can feel the inside of the living being, such as their muscles, and see the blood gushing out and could be very disturbing while with a gun, it is a one and done job.
Ms. Peterson helped us draw the correlations by explaining that when one stabs someone, it is up close and personal with direct contact with someone and one will feel the blood, the muscles, and everything being sliced through such as bones. This is considered to be a much more angry and aggressive and personal type of attack. Shootings can happen at a distance and therefore it is less personal.
Discussion connection to Lord of the Flies:
The boys in the story are still British school boys who have not yet transitioned into savagery and killing the pig would have crossed the threshold from being civilized into savagery. Jack was unable to kill the pig because he and the other boys are still conditioned to obey the rules of society and behave civilly
Summary:
Foundational piece: The boys were escaping the war and the plane was attacked and they ended up on an island.
This is showing how in many different circumstances, age is not the main determiner of what should be done.
Reflection:
Today’s lesson put it into perspective how there can be so many different points of views on the age that we deem as acceptable for an action and that age might not always be the best determining factor. One could have grown up in an environment where they were forced to mature faster than others, as shown in Lord of the Flies where the boys were stranded on the island without adults so they had to make decisions for themselves and try to survive. It is starting to become apparent that the coming-of-age theme is one of the major themes in Lord of the Flies and they will be faced with various emotional and mental changes, such letting go of how they were conditioned to obey the rules of society and behave civilly, as well as physical changes as they will endure physical obstacles they will have to face. This will force them to become more “manly” and savagery. I also realized that there are many laws still present in the United States today that do not conform to today’s societal values. The fact that one can marry off a 14 year old is disturbing to a lot of us but yet many state laws have not caught up to modern times and are deemed socially acceptable in some places. Sometimes people will not be able to come to a consensus about different situations, such as if a child should be tried as an adult if they had murdered someone. Some would say the child should not be tried as an adult because the child isn’t mature enough to fully understand what they did while others can say that if the child committed a big crime like that, they should get the punishment for that crime. There are also other factors that contribute to if a person is ready for a specific action like the environment they grew up in and experiences they might have had.
No comments:
Post a Comment