Final Exam Prompts

Here they are. If you have any questions about anything we’ve covered including the prompts for the final address them here so that everyone can benefit from your inquisitiveness.

AMS 1B / Fall 2009 Connelly, Franks, and Sansbury

Essay Questions for the Final Exam (in your Seminar Room)

One of the following three essay questions will be selected for the final exam, which will take place on Friday, December 11, 9:45 to 12noon, in our Seminar Rooms. The essay portion of the final will be worth 40% of the total exam grade.

Both the Beats and Weatherman (the Weather Underground Organization or WUO) criticized or attempted to revolutionize Cold War America. What is the form and substance of this criticism/attempted transformation of the social and cultural landscape of the United States? What were its results?

The struggle for democracy in America has pushed diverse Americans to claim membership in the People’s Club. Based on the readings and lectures, analyze this struggle for inclusion in the People’s Club. Have these struggles worked? Has the U.S. effectively become a democracy? In your analysis, focus on the post-World War II experiences of FIVE of the following overlapping groups: 1) African Americans, 2) Asian Pacific Americans, 3). Latino/as, 4) American Indians, 5) women, 6) gays and lesbians, 7) and the poor. Be sure to be specific enough to demonstrate you’ve done the reading and paid attention in class. Be sure to use the lectures, primary sources from Heath, and secondary sources such as Norton to back up your analysis.

Consider the post WWII women’s movement. 1) How does it compare with other “rights” movements? Other “liberation” movements? How do you explain the similarities and differences? 2) In what ways did the conflicts among women with different backgrounds and views hurt the movement? In what ways did they advance it? Draw on the lectures, the Norton textbook, and readings about post-war social movements for evidence. Be sure to use at least three of the following readings: Vicki Ruiz, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., selections from Sing a Battle Song, Audre Lorde, Combahee River Collective, and Gloria Anzaldúa.

1 thought on “Final Exam Prompts

  1. Nick Fisher

    (I did not have your email so i posted this if thats okay?)
    Bamboozled-Spike Lee-movie E.C.
    This film was directed by Spike Lee, one of my more favorable directors. He always seems to have an interesting method of cinematography and one does not know what to expect. In the film it became clear of how it would relate to American history, minstrel shows. The twist is that instead of white Americans in black face, they were black African Americans in even darker black face. The movie did generate some emotion personally, it made me sad and partially mad because it was almost in a way making fun of African Americans. It is only my opinion in my review but because African Americans put on black faces in a comedic way I felt like they were making a mockery of themselves. In history white Americans dressed in black face to entertain, but it would portray the other race in more or less a mockery. The actor in the movie who decides to create this show, was not, I believe doing it on purpose but more for attention and to cause a controversy. I do believe more controversy came out of the show than he expected and it was interesting to see what would come next and how everything would unfold. The theme of trying to “pupetize” African Americans and dehumanize them was very provocative. In the movie it shows how some the public would react if it were real life. Some were angered and some found it great. At the same time some would see the show and see it on a different level and both black African Americans and white Americans would come together and laugh and not be offended. They would leave the past the past and move on to simply enjoy the show. Not only did spike lee direct a great movie but he wanted to bring out history to the public in a more modern way and through the cinema. If I had to rate this movie I would declare this movie a 3.5 out of 5, it was a real thinking movie and I had to be fully engaged to understand its full meaning, even though I watched it I could see the obvious themes but some deeper themes were harder to recognize.

    American Dream-Barbara Kopple-movie E.C.
    The American dream was a very interesting documentary about Hormel and its workers. I have never heard of this film prior and it was very interesting. It showed the inner workings of what was going on and the cause and effects of everything. The large corporation Hormel slashed wages of the workers from about 10 dollars to 8 dollars, a significant drop. Workers obviously were not thrilled about this cut and were angered. The anger continued because the international union they were associated with did not back them on the local level. The biggest player for the local union would perhaps be the international one they were associated with but because they were not they hired another spokesperson named Ray Rogers. He tried to help the cause using statistics, data, graphs, etc. Hormel during this time did make a profit despite the cut to its workers. During this time inflation was very high and the profit they made seemed uneasy because calculating inflation, it was unsure. An only assured way was to cut the workers pay. The national union in a way blamed the local union because they tried to renegotiate terms and if they agree to renegotiate terms then it gives the company the right to rework any past guidelines and benefits. This film relates to history on the themes of unions and strikes. Throughout history, many unions have congregated workers to fight the powerful bosses and this process will never end. Whenever one side gets angered or believes that their rights are being violated, then there will be a controversy. One can see throughout history why bosses do what they do and why workers do what they do, its common sense. As a boss you want to give your workers the bare minimum for them to be happy and at the same time make the most you can make. For workers it is work as little as you can but gain the most you can.

    Enron: The Smartest Guys in The Room- documentary-movie E.C
    This film was a bit hard for me to follow. I understood the general scheme of the high executives but for the logistics of how they came to be was beyond my understanding. However I did understand some stuff and in more or less it was genius. Skiing who was a mastermind used a technique called market to market accounting which basically meant they could create any superficial number of what their profits were. Despite the slumping decline of money and false profits, they needed an outlet. Enron officials tried making phony “shell companies” to hide their debt. During this time however California was in a crunch on energy and while Enron officials were living large, they were living at the expenses of many. Enron was also tied down and traced to Bush on various levels. It was quite eye opening for myself to see how the elites can be traced to elites one way or another. These high Enron officials were moral-less in my opinion because of what they did at the cost of who. In finding out through some research Pai spent an insane amount of money on strippers with money that was not his is ridiculous. Spending millions of dollars of money that is not his sounds to me like a crime? In any case this corruption is seen with the abuse of power. Abuse of power can be traced to presidents such as Nixon and the whole scheme of the rich trying to get richer is a common theme. The only downside to Enron is that they got caught, they were masterminds and created a way, for a short time, of pure genius. Was it a bad thing they got caught, yes, but is their creativity and willingness a bad thing, no.

    IFC- Inter Fraternal Council-civil E.C.
    An important factor for the moment dealing with the IFC is the issue of loss prevention within fraternities. Most fraternities believe their Loss Prevention Program is good but the university police believe it is not. The loss prevention program is essentially based on how fraternities control big parties known as IFC parties. When a fraternity holds a party they must have it cleared by the school which is composed of fraternity members of various fraternities. Not all parties get accepted because the IFC is more important than it seems, just because they are all fraternities members they have to consider grades, loss prevention, recent problems, money, etc. The loss prevention program is how the fraternity deals with underage drinking, fights, women’s safety, and safety in general. The police argue they want more cops to patrol around after IFC parties. The fraternities believe they are doing enough and to some extent it relies on personal responsibility. For instance fraternities have a sober bro list which means they are at the party sober monitoring the house for theft, fights, vandalism, etc. For fights, however cops and fraternities work hand in hand, when a fight does break lose, fraternal brothers and the police restrain whoever is causing the havoc and remove them from the party. Also for underage drinking they put wrist bands on all those who are 21+ if they want alcohol. The sober bros also supposed walk girls home when they are alone to ensure safety but there are only so many sober bros and this is when personal responsibility kicks in. Another reason why the fraternities do not want more cops is because for any IFC party at the particular fraternity they hire cops to monitor the gates but if there are more cops then that will directly correlate to higher dues for fraternity members. I foresee this argument continuing and I believe some sort of negotiation will take place.

Comments are closed.