The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold

Susie Salmon is killed on December 6, 1973 by her family’s neighbor, George Harvey. Mr. Harvey lures Susie into a hole he dug in the cornfield. When she tries to leave he rips off her clothes, gags her with her hat and rapes her. He kills her, cuts her up, and puts her in a bag that he takes with him before he fills in the hole. He puts the bag with her body in a safe and takes the safe to the local sinkhole. The lovely bones, by Alice Sebold, shows that one person’s death, can change everyone’s life’s.

Everyone is taking Susie’s death differently. The dad is deeply saddened by Susie's death and does everything he can to avenge it. He also feels guilty that he was unable to be there for her when she needed him. While he tries to focus his attention on his two surviving children, he always finds himself thinking of Susie as well. Him and Susie used to build ships in bottles when she was alive, after her death he smashed them all. “He christened the walls and wooden chair with the news of my death, and afterward he stood in the guest room/den surrounded by green glass. The bottle, all of them, lay broken on the floor, the sails and boat bodies strewn among them. He stood in the wreckage.” I think by the father doing this, it shows that the way he is getting through her death is anger.

The mom of Susie is taking her death in denial. After Susie's death she distances herself from her family and begins to resent her role as mother. She leaves the family mid-novel in order to pursue her life as an individual and to escape from the pain of Susie's death. By leaving I think it shows that she just wants to forget about what happened, and is partly denying that Susie ever died, and if she leaves, she will end up forgetting.

Overall the lovely bones by Alice Sebold shows that death can be taken in many ways. Anger and denial are two ways, but there are many more that come up in the book that show up in her siblings, friends, and just people who knew her.

Nonfiction Reading Response

The stadium goes crazy when they see high school senior, Zach Hodskins, make a basket. Not only is he a great basketball player, but he was born with out his left arm, which makes the fact that he is a good basketball player even more incredible. In the Upfront magazine the article, “The Natural” by Mike Tierney states that Zach’s parents thought he would “have a better chance becoming president than playing basketball for a college powerhouse.” This interesting and inspiring article shows us that if you try your hardest you will make it, no matter what.

In the article it says that Zach’s parents didn't want to treat him differently than his two older sisters. I think that this is a great idea because it makes Zach feel like a normal kid. Imagine getting treated differently just because of how you look. The article also says Zach, “started playing basketball at age five with is dad in the driveway. By third grade, he was hooked.” This shows us that from age five to being a senior in college, he has been playing basketball, and loving it. I can infer that that must have taken a lot of time and dedication. Also he never gave up playing just because he was different than everyone else. In addition this article provides us with a picture of Zach dunking a basketball, with a clear view of his left side. I think it was a great idea to add this picture in with the article. It makes the reader envision Zach’s life even more.

In addition the article says that Zach has four million views on you tube, of a video of his basketball highlights. This makes me wonder if a regular person with the same skill, but who had a left arm, would be this popular as well. Or do people just find it interesting because of his disability? What I don't like about this article is the title, “The Natural”. It makes us think that Zach was born being a great basketball player, when really he put a lot of time and effort into becoming one.

After reading this article it made me believe that anything can happen. It also made me want to learn more about people who were born/lost one of their limbs. I can imagine that it would be very difficult. Overall Zach Hodskins life must be very hard, and it was interesting to learn about it.

READING RESPONSE ON POETRY

Would you kill for a brand new pair of shoes? No, I don’t mean metaphorically, I mean literally. Would you kill someone for a new pair of shoes? In the poem, “Please Don’t Take My Air Jordans” by Reg e. Gaines, this is what the main character does. This poem is about a boy who feels the need to get new sneakers because his are torn out. But he doesn't have enough money for them, so decides to get them a different way. He decides to kill a kid and take his shoes. This poem shows that kids mostly care about style, and what other people think of them.

In the poem the boy who wants to get new air Jordans says, 

“but I really must get some new gear soon

or my ego will pop like a ten cent balloon

but security’s tight at all the shops

every day there are more and more cops”

From this we can see that this boy cares more about his “ego” than what would happen to him if he stole. Stealing is against the law, but he is willing to do it just to keep his reputation. This shows that this kid mostly cares about style, and will do anything to stay in style, including stealing.

I think this is a big deal going around nowadays. Kids feel as though they need to do certain things just to fit in and to be popular, in this case, have a new pair of shoes, just to fit in.

            Since security is tight at the shops, the boy decides instead of stealing from a store, he will steal from a person. He finds shoes that he likes on a guy and follows him till no one is around, then “POW,” he shoots him then runs away with his shoes.

 “the very next day I bopped into school

with my brand new air jordans man I was cool

I killed to get them but hey… I don’t care

cuz now… I needs a new jacket to wear”

This shows that the kid mostly cares about style, because he doesn't care that he killed someone, plus we can tell he is planning to kill someone again for his jacket. Overall the boy cares more about getting new shoes, then ending someone’s life.

Another example is when the boy shoots his victim:

“while laying there dyin all he could say was

please…don’t take my air jordans away…”

This shows that the boy who got shot for his shoes, cares more about his shoes being stolen than dying. You would think getting shot would make you worried about yourself, but instead he is worried about his shoes.

After reading this poem, I realized that there are more important things in life than wearing the latest fashion or brand. I think kids should also stop worrying about fitting in, and be themselves even though they’re not wearing the newest shoes or the latest jacket.

Reading Response 3rd Marking Period

Everyone has goals in life. A goal can be from getting a good grade on a test, to wanting to be famous someday. In the book “The Secret Story of Sonia Rodriquez” by Alan Lawrence Stomer, Sonia’s goal is to be the first one in her family to graduate from high school, and go to college, so she can pay back her dad for everything he has done for her and her family. Sonia’s dad jumped the border to get to the United States. He went through a lot just so he could provide a better life for his children. Because of this Sonia feels the need to pay him back. So far from reading this book I think the main idea is that having a goal in life can push you through anything.

Sonia has a lot of work to do around the house, “I cook, I clean, I mop, I sweep, I shine, I bake, I dust, I do laundry, change diapers, wipe countertops, and scrub the groopy grime off the tile floor in the shower, I even do windows.” As you can see this is a lot to do everyday. Plus she has to do homework, which keeps her up late everynight. From reading this book I have noticed that no one in her family is very thankful about all the hard work Sonia does around the house. They think that since she is a girl she is supposed to do it. Sonia’s mom is pregnant with her 8^th child, and expects Sonia to take care of the younger children, and do everything the mother asks her to do. Her brother sits on the coach all day eating Oreo’s and bossing Sonia around. Her uncle is always drunk and expects Sonia to clean him up. And her aunt thinks Sonia worshopes the devil because she doesn’t do her chores on time. So why does Sonia keeps doing them? Because she knows one day when she is out of the house and graduates college she will get a job so she can pay her dad back, but for now she has to go through rough chores at home. This shows the main idea because Sonia is pushing through her hard time at home, because she know one day she will graduate college and have a better life.

Another way Sonia’s goal pushes her through life, is with a boy she met at the pet store, she likes the boy, but knows she will not concentrate on school work if she keeps seeing him. And if she does not concentrate on school work she will never graduate. “I couldn’t risk having the stupid boy distract me from my goals. He’d really fuzzed up my brain for a few days, and I didn’t have time for that anymore…boys were absolutamente out of the picture for me.” As you can see Sonia is taking her goal very seriously. She is putting boys out of the picture, even though she really likes this one.

Overall the main idea of having a goal in life can push you through anything shows when Sonia’s pushes through her rough time at home, and when she decides not to see a boy she likes anymore. From reading this book I have realized that having a goal is a great idea, and decided that I want to make a goal for my life.

Nonfiction Reading Response

In the magazine Upfront, JFK His Death & Legacy 50 Years Later, there is an article on page 22 named, “Should Boys and Girls Be Taught Separately?” In this article there is a section of why boys and girls should be taught separately, written by Kathy Piechura-Couture. And there is a section of why they shouldn't be taught separately, written by Galen Sherwin. Each section includes arguments of why they are right, and evidence to support it.

In Kathy Pierchura-Couture’s paragraph it states that, “Single sex classrooms have helped close the achievement gap between boys and girls. It’s also changed attitudes: Girls in the single sex class think science is fun, while girls in the co-ed class say they don't like science. In a recent survey, 87 percent of parents said being in single-sex classes increased their child’s self-esteem and motivation.” What I don't like about this sentence is that we don't know if it is true or not. How do we know that the girls in the single sex class like science because they have a good teacher, and the ones in the co-ed class hate science because they have a bad teacher? We don't know if liking science and not liking science relates at all between being in a classroom with girls and boys, and being in a classroom of just girls, and just boys. It might be the teacher, which shows the study might not be accurate. Also in addition each kid is different, this shows that maybe some just don't like science in general and some do, which doesn't connect to being in single sex classes, or classes of different sex. To add on I think instead of showing a bunch of surveys, the perspectives of teachers and principals should be in this text. We only get to hear the authors thoughts, and surveys that she tells us about, but what about the people who watch the children in school with their own eyes? They are the ones teaching the children and know their personalities.

In Galen Sherwin’s paragraph it says, “When it comes to learning, every student is different. Some kids are more outgoing than others. Some like to move around a lot, and others prefer to sit still. This is true whether you’re a boy or a girl. That's why it doesn't make sense to put students into separate classes based on generalizations about boys and girls.” From this I can infer what the author is trying to say is just because some girls and boys don't feel comfortable around the opposite sex, doesn't mean all girls and boys should be in same sex classes, only the ones who feel most comfortable in them. The section also says, “School is where students should learn to work with kids who have different interests and strengths, Boys and girls need the chance to learn from each other too.” What the author is trying to say is making judgments on learning styles based on only gender, limits opportunities for boys and girls. They should have an education that teaches them, not stereotypes.

After reading this article it made me think about my school. I go to a boys and girls school. This benefits me because I get to see the perspectives of many different students. Some girls might agree on some things, and some boys might agree on others, and I get to see what that is like. In addition I have many friends that are guys, and if I were to go to an all girls school I would have never met them. I think same sex schools are fine if that is what the child is comfortable with, but no one should be pushed into a same sex school if they don't feel comfortable there. After reading this article I would like to read more about same sex schools, and see what they are like.