Online Discussions

I'm happy to report that I am impressed with my sophomores.  We have read Vonnegut's Player Piano and "Harrison Bergeron," and followed that with a short piece from The Economist.  Then, I asked them to blog about the connections they had made with regard to the dystopias presented in Vonnegut's work and the rather cynical view of the American Dream described in the article.  Not only did I ask my students to share their own thoughts, but I also asked them to deepen the discussion by commenting on their peers' remarks. 

Here's their exact prompt:
To what extent is Vonnegut's America (as described in Player Piano and "Harrison Bergeron") our America?  Is the society described in the story/novel a fulfillment of the American principle or ideal of equality or a perversion of that principle or ideal?  What about our own society?  If the two ideals—human excellence and equality—are in conflict, which one should we hold more dear? Must one be pursued at the expense of the other? Are there some areas in life in which we wish for equality more than human excellence and others we don’t?

Be sure to support your remarks with apt and specific evidence to bulwark your claims.  Type for 20 minutes in response to the above questions, then read some of your classmates' remarks and add two comments of your own.  Remember that your comments to their posts should be respectful and should work to further the conversation (a simple "I agree" will not suffice).

All I can say is, "Wow!"  Many of my students had some really good things to say in response to this question.  I was blown away by some of the connections they made and awed by the way they interacted with each other and deepened the conversation.  For example:

When I was reading Player Piano and “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut, I found the America Vonnegut described in both the novel and the short story to be quite different in some ways from our America today. I found the greatest difference was in “Harrison Bergeron”. In our society today, I feel that to an extent, people do want to be equal, and may make changes and sacrifices to be equal to others. The situation is different from “Harrison Bergeron”, however. First of all, in “Harrison Bergeron”, it is the government forcing people to be equal. People do not have a choice, and are severely punished for breaking the rules. There is even a Handicapper General, who makes sure that everyone is equal. People are given handicaps to ensure that no one has any advantages over anyone else. In our America, our situation is different, because the government is not forcing people to be equal. Instead of People being held to a standard of mediocrity, people in our society today generally strive to improve, instead of holding themselves back.
 
The America Vonnegut describes in Player Piano is more relatable to our America today. In America today, there is talk that the middle class is shrinking. We are becoming increasingly dependent of technology, and our world is becoming ever more mechanized. In Player Piano, there is no true middle class at all. If you are lucky enough to have a high IQ, you belong to the upper class. If your IQ is not high enough, you basically have a choice between joining the Army or the Reeks and Wrecks. In our America, your success is somewhat dependent on your IQ, but also your motivation. In Player Piano, motivation does not really seem to a major factor in your position in life. In our America today, personal decisions and choices do have an impact on a person’s life, and a motivated person does have some control. Whether or not this is true in the future remains to be seen, but for right now, Kurt Vonnegut’s America is only our America to a small extent.
 
The society described in Player Piano is a perversion of the American principle because in the novel there is no middle class, and no real opportunity for upward mobility. “Harrison Bergeron” is a perversion and a fulfillment of the American ideal of equality because everyone is equal. No one can be “better” than anyone else. In the story, however, there are no opportunities for self -improvement. People are equal, but on a mediocre level, instead of on a level of success and achievement, which is the American ideal of equality. Everyone should have the same opportunity to work hard to improve themselves, better their lives, and be successful. That is why the ideas of human excellence and equality are not completely at odds.

or:

Vonnegut's Player Piano and Harrison Bergeron contain two different ideas. Player Piano argues for societal welfare over efficiency and elite social classes. Harrison Bergeron argues for individuality over absolute equality. Today's America contains elements of both stories.
 
In order to discuss Harrison Bergeron in the context of today's America, a distinction between fairness and equality must be made, especially the type of equality shown in Harrison Bergeron. For example, if runners were completely equal in a race, the better runners would be handicapped or have to run further in order for it to be equal. Fairness, on the other hand, would have all runners competing in the same conditions; an equal starting chance. The 'equality' that shows up in Harrison Bergeron has yet to make an appearance in American law. Fairness, however, has secured itself a place in law, in the form of civil rights.
 
Player Piano's support of societal welfare over efficiency and a ruling class has relevance in today's society. With jobs being sent overseas and a shrinking middle class, the issue of corporate interests versus national employment makes itself apparent. The question to be asked is whether supporting corporate expansion (through letting them secure cheap employment overseas) or national employment (by providing incentives for companies to hire within America) should be valued. There's a limited number of management/executive jobs and if the 'grunt work' is being completed on foreign soil, then many Americans will find themselves without jobs.
 
Human excellence and equality, in their most basic forms, are not mutually exclusive. Equality should be secured for everyone at the start of their lives. Choice is what sets people apart, and that is the point of fairness. From that starting point of equality, individual talent can flourish.

Several peers across three sections of this course responded to the above post, and the discussion truly flourished.  I'm so proud of them.  Who said sophomores had to be sophomoric?