Junior Hunter National Championships with European Blend

Extreme Dependence on Technology

An Extreme Dependence on Technology 

There are currently a lot of issues occurring in the world right now due to the Digital Age. The Digital or Information Age is the name dubbed to the present time which involves every aspect of daily life being affiliated with some sort of technological device. Prior to this generation, technology started to advance while people were in their mid-thirties. This allowed the people from the Baby Boom era to be able to grow up without technology, and still be able to reap its benefits as an adult. However, the current generation, was born into a world obsessed with technology. When families go out to eat, the children at the dinner table are no longer drawing on the kids menu with crayons. Instead, they are furiously tapping at an iPad or iPhone screen playing a game or watching a movie. While this may not seem like that large of an issue, it is actually harmful to the developing brain. Studies show that excessive technology use at a young age can lead to other mental problems later on in life. 

Even if you didn’t use technology at a young age like the children today, the current society is forcing you to incorporate technology into your daily life. From Instagram and facebook being used in the work place, to skyping with family members, everyone in the United States today has begun to completely shape their life around their technology. So, when the internet shuts down and or you do not have access to that technology, people go into a state of temporary insanity due to the addiction that almost everyone in society has developed. 

However, the largest issue that has resulted due to the digital age, is the corruption of the teenagers who are the future of this country and of society. The decisions they make will shape the future of the United States. However, due to an addiction to technology, there are increasing risks that are creating issues for these teens and for society. 

Technology is not all bad. It gives people unlimited access to information and can lead to discoveries in medicine and science. However, it is when it completely saturates your life that it creates problems. People stop interacting face to face, and being only communicating via the internet. The information age has benefits, but its unintended consequences and damaging effects of overuse might begin to trump its good intentions if society continues with this extreme dependency. 

Art in the Form of Equestrian Show Jumping

Art in the Form Equestrian Show Jumping 

What is art? Is it simply a physical creation such as a painting or work of literature, or can actions and ideas also be considered art? There is a plethora of art forms that impact many people’s lives on a daily basis. Art can be so common that it can make a difference in one’s life without them even noticing. Almost anything nowadays can be manipulated in a way that one can argue its artistic value. This is due to the fact that humans have a constant desire to create and discover new things that can stimulate the mind. It is from this desire that emerges a wide spectrum of art genre. However, there are specific criteria that define what truly makes something a work of art. If the work is not useful or able to induce an intellectual thought process, then it is hard to consider it a piece of art. In addition, art can be defined as something that is taken from the outside world, and recreated it into something new via the artist’s personal style and creativity. If the work cannot do that, it cannot be considered a work of art.

In regard to actions as an art form, it is often controversial as to wether or not an action can be classified as a work of art. Actions fall into the same category as every other controversial art form. However, if it can stimulate thought and be recreated into some sort of new idea, then it should be definitely be considered art. An example of this type of art, would be Equestrian Show jumping. Equestrian, almost like any sport, should be considered an art form. To start, the anatomy and majestic nature of the horse itself is beautiful and breathtaking, but the animal itself is not a work of art because they have not been manipulated or changed into something different. A painter can sit down and create a painting of a horse and that is considered art. An equestrian rider can do the same thing. However, instead of enhancing the beauty of the horse on a canvas, they are doing so on a public stage, in a show jumping ring, jumping around a set course. 

In order to develop the idea of Show Jumping as an art form, it is necessary to further define the criteria that categorizes various works as art. According to the novel, “The Art Instinct”, by Denis Dutton, there are twelve characteristics of art that are universal across all cultures. In chapter three of this novel, Dutton describes the list as, “Characteristic features found cross culturally in the arts that can be reduced to a list of core items, twelve in the version given below, which define art in terms of a set of cluster criteria (Dutton 51). Basically, Dutton has comprised a list of criteria that define what makes something a work of art. If the work cannot fit in to any of the categories, then it should not be considered an art form. The twelve criteria as listed in “The Art Instinct” include direct pleasure, skill and virtuosity, style, novelty and creativity, criticism, representation, special focus, expressive individuality, intellectual challenge, art traditions and institutions, and an imaginative experience. Dutton qualifies this list when he says, “Taken individually or jointly, the features on this list help to answer the question of whether, confronted with an art like object, performance, or activity, we are justified in calling it art” (Dutton 59). 

This chapter from “The Art Instinct” discussed the question, of what art is and what is required of a piece to truly call it artistic. The ideas brought up in chapter three pose the following questions; Is Equestrian art and what makes it so? Is the aesthetically pleasing beauty of a horse and riders movement a type of art aesthetic? Does the technical skill and work that goes in to the sport contribute to this aesthetic? There are multiple aspects of the sport of Equestrian, and show jumping in particular that correspond with Dutton’s criteria. Esteemed professionals in the Show Jumping world have published their ideas on why they believe Equestrian show jumping is a type of art aesthetic. In particular, George Morris, one of the best and most admired figures throughout the equestrian world, describes the incredible technique, skill, and style that goes into creating the perfect course. In his book, “Hunt Seat Equitation”, everything he describes follows the criteria given by Dutton. Morris himself believes equestrian to be an art and describes the art in detail throughout his career, teachings, and in his published works. In the introduction to his book, Morris states that riders need to, “Think about riding as a science, but love it as an art. Approaching the sport with this mind set will allow the rider to continue learning” (Morris 1).  

After researching and using personal experience, it is possible to qualify each artistic criteria within the sport of Equestrian in order to prove that it truly is an art form. First off, the work needs to generate direct pleasure. There are multiple ways in which riding generates pleasure for both the horse and the rider. To start with, in order to be successful in the sport, the horse and rider need to build such a strong connection with each other that they move as one body. They make decisions, win, and lose together. In addition, Discovery News reporter Linda Tanner wrote an article that described this unique relationship. Tanner said, “Horses and their human riders can develop such a close connection that the two go into a state of co-being.

The phenomenon may be unique between horses and riders, since both move as one and often physically change over the course of the relationship to conform to the other. Intense cooperation is also key” (Tanner). This type of connection can only occur when the horse and rider completely trust and love each other. The relationship itself generates direct pleasure, however the real pleasure comes from the sense of accomplishment the pair gets when they reach goals and accomplish new things together. George Morris comments on riding generating pleasure when he says, "If riding were only blue ribbons and bright lights, I would have quit a long time ago. It is so much more than that.” While it is true, riding is a competition, the competition is not what makes it an art. The happiness that occurs from the sport is what creates the beauty and aesthetic of the sport. So, for the first criteria, the art must result in direct pleasure. The relationships that are formed and the thrill of the ride itself, create an aesthetic pleasure which fulfills that criteria.
The second criterion required for Equestrian to be considered an art, is that it must involve skill and virtuosity.  Contrary to the common opinion, riders aren't just sitting while the horse does all of the work. Without the rider, the horse would not do anything. Again, the horse and rider become one body working together. Whatever amount of effort is put in by the rider, the same amount of effort is reciprocated by the horse. Thus, it takes a great amount of skill in order to jump a horse around a course of jumps properly. The remainder of the book “Hunt Seat Equitation” is about how the rider’s position is supposed to look, the proper technique for certain skills, and the correct way to stay in connection with the horse. All of these thing require talent, effort, and skill, which would be considered a part of the art aesthetic.
When it comes to style, every rider has their own style that cannot be mimicked. The style of the rider is unique and it can adapt when the rider is on a different horse. For example, Morris discusses the proper position needed for the Equitation  divisions in Show Jumping. However, certain riders prefer a slower pace, or a more seated position while coursing. There is a variety of factors that can be changed when the rider is making decisions around a course. The decisions they make affect their style of riding. So, it is true that this aspect of equestrian is a part of the art aesthetic because each rider demonstrates their unique style when they are in the show ring. Style and the other criterion of expressive individuality, are similar in this case. The style of the rider is also the way they express their individuality within the sport. The most famous riders are all known for something specific. Whether that is the exquisite and precise technique or how the rider looks on the horse, style and expressive individuality are all fulfilled by the way the rider chooses to ride their horse.
Another criteria for the art aesthetic is that it has to involve novelty and creativity. Yes, there is a set course of jumps that all of the riders have to complete. However, one can be creative in the way they approach the jumps, turns, and pace. This goes hand in hand with style, because it is also affected by the decisions the rider has to make on course. Every rider enters the ring with a plan of how they are going to effectively complete the course. However, every rider’s plan is different and often it is the one who is most creative and takes the most risk on  course that will end up winning the division. This creativity aesthetic is also representative of the criteria that the art has to be an imaginative experience. Creativity and imagination go together in the sense that the ride is different for every horse and rider pair and the decisions they make together change throughout the course. Even if a rider goes into the course with a plan, the plan never stays the same. The rider often needs to act creatively in order to fulfill the obligations of the course. So, both the criteria of imagination and creativity are fulfilled. 
Criticism is a major part of the sport in general, so this part of the art aesthetic is automatically filled. The whole idea of the sport is that the horse and rider are judged on how well the horse jumps and now well the rider looks while riding the horse. The judges are constantly criticizing and critiquing positions and styles of the riders. In addition, the rider’s trainer is also always going to be making changes and telling the rider what they are doing wrong. The criticism that is involved with the sport is effective and develops another criteria for the sport to be a  work  of art. The idea that the art has to be intellectually challenging is another aspect that must be fulfilled in order for the work to be considered art. Dutton describes that art needs to “utilize the combined variety of human perceptual and intellectual capacities to the full extent” (Dutton 57). Besides from just feeling a problem and fixing it during the ride, the rider is also aboard a large animal that could severely injure them at any moment. It is a relationship completely built on trust and the work that must go in to building this relationship is very challenging. So besides the usual intellect that is required for fixing a problem during the ride, the sport requires a lot of intellect in order to be successful.
Dutton discusses the criterion of representation by saying, “ representation imitates real or imaginary experiences of the world” (Dutton 55). This is relative to the idea that art is taking one idea and transforming it into a new idea that is more beautiful than it could ever be in reality. The horse is already a beautiful animal when it is in the wild, but the animal itself is not art. When the rider gets on the horse, they become one body and the rider highlights different aspects of the horse’s beauty as it jumps. The rider is supposed to ride the horse in a way that it can jump and move its best as it is going around the course. This is representative of the horse in nature, but its features are extended into a new and beautiful way.
In addition, equestrian is very traditional. There is a set guidelines of how things are to be done. This follows the aesthetic of institutions and traditions. it rarely changes and judges are very firm on their traditions. It is why that such books such as Morris’s exist. Every rider knows what is expected of them via these traditions.
Equestrian show jumping is not a very common sport. It is known to be the sport of the wealthy and many famous and people in positions of power partake in the sport. Also the idea of show jumping is very uncommon. This in itself makes the sport a special focus, which is another criteria for Dutton’s art aesthetic. The art cannot be something that everyone can do,  and it has to be special and focused for each individual.  The world and sport of Equestrian Show Jumping is not something that everyone can be apart of and be successful at. They need to have the resources and the drive in order to be successful. Dutton says, “the artistic experience is bracketed off from ordinary life” (Dutton 55). Riders at the top level of show jumping travel almost every week to a show to compete. There is rarely time for life outside of the show circuit. Show Jumping is far from ordinary because the rider is befriending and partnering with an animal that is unpredictable and they dedicate all of their time to this single sport. It is something that is far from ordinary and the art definitely has a special focus in regard to its aesthetic.
There are many things that people can argue to be art. Equestrian Show Jumping follows  all of the criteria in order for something to be considered a work of art. These criteria are universal across cultures. This proves that show jumping is an art due to its technical difficulty, its beauty, and its intellectual requirements that make it into the beautiful aesthetic that it is. Equestrian Show Jumping takes the natural beauty possessed by the horse and changes and represents it in a new way by highlighting the animal’s athletic talent as well as their beauty. The beautiful, challenging nature of the sport and the creative process that goes in to training and riding can only be described as an art aesthetic. While this aesthetic is different than the other common art forms such as drawing or music, it is equally if not more creatively challenging than the common art aesthetic.

Works Cited

Dutton, Denis. The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, & Human Evolution. New York: Bloomsbury, 2009. Print.

Morris, George. Hunt Seat Equitation. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Tanner, Linda. "Horse and Rider Enter State of Co-Being : DNews." DNews. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2014.

New Culture

Shocker of the hour, is that my blog has actually had some readers in the recent days.....this is in some  ways a double edged sword because a lot of the things I write on here are very generalized, even though they are based off of very specific events.

So I wanted to touch a little more on the topic of culture in the south since it is an idea that is very new to me moving all the way across the country. In a previous post titled, "Southern Gentlemen; Southern Fraud" I wrote about the images that certain southern people try to keep up with. To an extent, I have encountered a lot of this in Kentucky. However, a lot of my frustration is a culture issue. I am simply not used to a lot of the practices of southern society and it is terrifying jumping into a completely different world that is so different from my own.

In addition, I am going to be very specific when I say that my previous article had nothing to do with the Kappa Alpha Order at Transylvania. The men that are apart of Kappa Alpha are all amazing, respectful, gentlemen that live up to the reputation of being a classy, southern gentleman. These guys should be an example for people everywhere because they are some of the best friends that I have made at Transy and in Kentucky. The men I referred to in my previous article, are the ones that claim to be southern gentlemen, but are unable to put their money where their mouth is. That article was based on a specific event and is not meant to be generalized. As a Californian, I was unaware of how the term Southern Gentleman could be perceived and how it seemed as if I was talking about the KAs. Again I want to clarify that they are the few guys that are honest and respectful towards everyone they associate with. The Kappa Alphas actually practice what they preach and it is quite refreshing.

While new cultures bring huge challenges as I embark on this new part of my life, I have learned a lot of valuable life lessons from this culture. The first one is that it is not all bad, as I made it seem in my previous post. However, I have learned how to differentiate between my real friends who are here to help me through my transition from California to Kentucky. As a whole my encounters with people who put on a front for society have showed me what not to look for in a friend.

So while it has been  a big struggle for me moving to something totally new and having some hard times with certain people, I have also found a new family out here that helps me to become the classy, young woman that I desire to be. To those people, the Tri Deltas and the Kappa Alphas, I now speak directly to you when I say that you guys are all amazing friends and friends like you are a major reason why I decided to move out to Kentucky.

To my amazing sisters, you guys have been incredible and I love every single one of you. The struggle of moving to the south as been hard because it is so different from the society I am used to. While it has been hard trying to adapt to this, you guys have been my rock and I am so happy to know that no matter what you guys will always be there!!! DL <3

Holiday Travels

I have always wondered why people make such  a big fuss over the holidays. Often, as you get older, the holidays become less of a time for relaxation, and more of a time for added work to an already busy schedule.

For me, I am looking forward to going home for the holidays simply because I don't have to do my own laundry, I can get out of the dorms, and return home to less responsibility. However, as I sit in the airport and examine those around me, I see countless families hurrying their children through the terminal. Their eyes and faces show the added stress that they are encountering. As I am headed home, I hope to get away from the stress that college brings, but I never know what surprises are truly waiting for me until the plane lands on the tarmac in Orange County.

So to all those who are traveling this holiday season, good luck and try to keep your heads on straight. For those staying home try to enjoy a sense of relation. Happy Thanksgiving!

Understanding Vulnerability

Take each step knowing the outcome. Try not to leave anything to chance because that leaves you vulnerable and gives others the opportunity to hurt you. In order to shield yourself from the pain that comes from vulnerability, understand all of the possible outcomes, and emotionally prepare yourself for the route that you choose. 

Life is a game, but there are no directions that come in the box. It is up to you to figure out the rules as you go. 

Never forget where you come from. History always repeats itself. Don't be ignorant and naive. Take control and ensure your future by learning from past mistakes. Never succumb to failure. Always try to  be the person you imagined as a child and never stop trying to achieve that. 

Failure and vulnerability is not an option. Be true to yourself and your choices.

The Facades of Southern Society

As a first year in college, attending the historic Transylvania University in Lexington, Kentucky, I have come to realize many misconceptions about college, the south, and its people in my first semester which is now coming to a close.

Originally from Seattle, Washington, my family and I ventured south to the infamous Orange County, California when I was a young girl. Growing up surrounded by plastic women, tacky television, and "new money" wealth, I never thought I would encounter a place where I would meet more fake, classless people. However, there is a whole new level of double identity with southern men and women who on the outside keep up the facade of classy gentlepeople. However, on the inside, they are deceitful, two faced, and rarely speak in the black and white. 

I have come to realize that the people here are here focused on keeping up an outside image then they are on openly expressing their opinions. They say one thing to your face, then turn around and whisper something different to their friends behind your back. Gossip rules the conversations surrounding southern women, and frankly, it is far more intense than the common run of the mill gossip that occurs in every social circle. In Southern California, I am fully aware of the opinions that my acquaintances hold. However, here in Lexington, I am kept completely in the dark. The only thing southern women are better at than making moonshine, is keeping their secrets. I much rather the open, blunt, cattiness of the image obsessed, social climbing California girls, than I do false pretenses presented by two faced, well polished, "southern belles". 

Never mind actors in Hollywood. They are actually quite honest about their snobby, self centered, personalities. The acting that I have encountered so  far in the south as been oscar worthy. No one is what they seem and that is unfortunate because on the outside, their wholesome, classy presences are enticing and attractive. In the end, it is much more preferable to know what you are dealing with when it comes to personalities. The con artistry that makes up the southern society, is by far the biggest surprise that my first semester of college as provided. 

Aesthetically pleasing Graffiti

An interesting thought, Graffiti. Following my research on a study on modern museum art, vs street art, I found my self very defensive towards Street Art. In the essay, “The White Cube of the Museum Versus the Gray Cube of the Street: The Role of Context  in Aesthetic evaluations” by Andreas Gartus and Helmut Leder, the authors are experimenting to try and define the role of art and wether or not aesthetic preference can be defined. In specific, the study is trying to determine the difference in aesthetics and utility between graffiti, street art, and the contemporary art one would find in a museum. Their ideals on what makes an artwork aesthetically pleasing, are based off of a list they composed that describes what they believe to be the basic characteristics of art. In addition, they believe that the personal characteristics of the viewer change the aesthetic quality of the artwork. I agree that personal characteristics do change the aesthetic of the artwork for that specific person, but i do not think that is something that can be defined or experimented. However, it is an interesting idea to see if context of the art changes the aesthetic in regard to modern art, versus street art. 
In regard to the study, Gartus and Leder issued two questionaries to their test subjects to determine their artistic preferences, and included those responses in their evaluation, along with their information and variables involving contextual factors concerning aesthetic processing. The authors believe that when “ concerning contextual influences on art appreciation, the initial classification of an object as an object of aesthetic interest is often a necessary precondition for the aesthetic processes. When this reclassification, which is facilitated by contextual factors, is missing, the object might not be fully aesthetically processed and experienced” (Leder and Gartus Pg 312). 
In order to define the aspects of an artwork that make it aesthetically pleasing, Gartus and Leder attempted to control the variables of these contextual factors in their experiment. The thesis presented by Gartus and Leder in their experiment is that the context in which one views a piece of art work changes the attractiveness of the piece. To test their thesis, the authors took forty images of modern art typically found in a museum type setting and relocated the work to an urban type setting typically where one would find graffiti. Vice versa, street art pieces were relocated into museums where they could be viewed as modern art. 
Different artworks were rated on a nine point scale. Forty art images and forty scene images were used in the study and shown to two different experimental groups that were formed based on their answers to the questionnaires. The art images were artworks that one would typically see in a museum. These classical artworks are the pieces that are commonly referred to as beautiful, or aesthetically pleasing. The scene images were photos taken of street art, and urban graffiti. The results of the study found that different experimental groups both “ had a higher positive influence on the ratings of modern art than it had on the ratings of graffiti art”(Gartus and Leder pg 316). 
I do not agree with Gartus and Leder concerning their thesis and basis for experimenting and evaluation. First off, I feel that while the results were interesting and an idea to ponder, the control groups used to evaluate the artworks were skewed because of the inaccuracy of the questionnaires. The questions for both the modern art category and the urban street art category were not the same. When creating the questionnaires it seems as if Gartus and Leder had a bias towards the modern museum art. This was relevant throughout the experiment and i feel it greatly altered the results. 
So even though i feel that the experiment itself needed some modification in regard to test subject and control groups, I still do not concur with the idea that a general aesthetic of an artwork can be determined. While Gartus and Leder were testing to see if location and the general context of the art work made a difference in a persons opinion on the beauty and attractiveness of the art, it was also a test that would reinforce their original thesis that art is defined by basic concepts of art and of personal aesthetic preference in regard to color and style. 
I do not agree with this. First, I do not believe that the location or general context surrounding the art changes the aesthetic in a negative way. Graffiti, for example is typically located in an urban setting. While it is located under bridges and  on the side of buildings, I find it to be beautiful because it represents a culture and an ideal of the area that has been tagged. When one takes a piece of modern art and places it outside in an urban setting, I feel that the location only enhances the beauty of the modern art. Same goes for street art. When it is placed in a museum setting I think it takes away much of the beauty, emotional valence and captivation that it demands from the public on the side of a building. This is in part because street art is a response to the urban life surrounding the artist. it is often an emotional release that responds to the intense nature of street life. it is an aspect of culture that is very undervalued. Now, when one ponders the aesthetics of modern museum art, it is true that these paintings and works of art demonstrate incredible skill and exemplify beauty. However, when taken out of a museum and placed in a urban setting, these pieces come to life in a way that creates a new basis for thought and emotional evaluation by the viewer. 
However, another idea presented in the study, was the idea of Graffiti vs Modern Art and wether or not Graffiti and street art could be considered art. Basically it came down to wether or not the art was aesthetically pleasing. I agree with the authors that the aesthetic experience is the most important part of art. However, I disagree with them concerning the aesthetic experience of graffiti. I think graffiti is beautiful and I find it aesthetically pleasing contrary to the opinion of the authors.
In regard to defining personal preference in art aesthetic, I refute the thesis by Gartus and Leder because I believe that art preference is not something that can be defined. They say, “ Our findings suggest that an appropriate context can indeed be important for the evaluation of different styles of art, at least in interaction with the specific interests of the viewers”. This is a complicated topic because I do not think that the specific interests of viewers is something that can be studied. Since every person has a very different interpretation of what they consider to be art and of what they desire in a piece of art, I do not think it is humanly possible to conduct a study wide enough to touch on every opinion and type artistic preference. 
Gartus and Leder had an interesting idea to see if context altered the aesthetics of a work of art. However, I think they conducted the experiment based on bias and less on facts. I feel that their bias towards modern art was evident in their tone and data in evaluating the responses of the test subjects. In addition, I do not think that their original thesis describing that an art work’s aesthetic comes from the basic visual characteristics of art is one that can be studied or valued because it is hard to define what art is supposed to be on a general level. Art can be more than just drawing and painting, and I feel like throughout the context of the essay and experiment, these ideas were not well represented by Gartus and Leder. Like I previously stated, It was as intriguing idea, but it should be redone in a way that involves more controllable variables and tests both sets of art work inside museums and in an urban setting. In addition the experiment should be redone without bias. I feel that if another person completed the same experiment, they would not get the same results as Gartus and Leder. 

Ignorance- Is it really bliss?

I have always found the saying "ignorance is bliss" captivating. How could not knowing something be a good thing? I  have come to the conclusion that ignorance is choice and if you choose to be ignorant to something it must be for good reason. For example, if someone you know and love is involved in something illegal, you might choose to be ignorant to their actions because you don't want it to affect the relationship. However, one might want to know about these actions if the person is at a danger. It is truly up to the person to decide if they want to be informed or in the dark about something. This choice can be for good reason, but I have a problem with ignorance when it turns into someone not being a good citizen.
Watching the news yesterday, there was a segment where camera men went out into the streets and asked normal people completely made up and ridiculous questions regarding the current situation with Russia and the Ukraine. One of the questions was, " do you think the lulu lemon military force of  Ukraine should be acting upon Russia?" To my astonishment, people answered the question as if it were not completely outrageous.
My point being, that I think people need to take time out of their day to inform themselves and to be a good citizen. We are lucky enough to live in a free country, and we should take advantage of those opportunities by voting and informing ourselves on national affairs.

Spiritual Freedom

I always find it funny when books say they are “life changing”. I have read many books that have made this claim, and while they were moving or thought provoking in some way, they did not completely alter my thought process as they claimed they would.  To my surprise, Spiritual Freedom by Father Dave Pivonka truly lived up to the hype of being “life changing”. While I read this book, I felt like it was written just for me and no one else. While it made be silly, but while I read, I kept imagining God whispering into Father Dave’s ear saying, “hey can you write about feeling alone, Madi needs to hear about that right now.” In the end, Spiritual Freedom tugged at my heart strings at all the right times and really prompted me to look my idea of freedom in general as well as teaching me about freedom with my relationships and my faith. When I started this book, I was in a really hard place with all of my relationships, including my relationship with God, and by the end of this book I felt like my heart and mind had just reset them. I truly had a new mind set on my life and its problems and I feel like this book opened up the door to a fresh start for me in my life.

               Prior to reading this book, I believed freedom to be escaping the protective bubble that parents and school had secured you in. I thought that I could only escape that bubble by running away to college away from the life that had once made me feel like I was confined to a jail cell. My entire high school career I had looked up to my brother because I felt like he had more freedom than I and I was so anxious for college so that  I too could finally be free to make up my own mind and not have to answer to anybody in regards to my decisions. I blamed all of my suffering on those around me. Frankly, I never thought it was my fault, but in reality, nothing is ever a one way street and It was hard for me to face the fact that  I had contributed to the cause of my problems that I am constantly getting mad at God or my family for.

 In chapter six of Spiritual Freedom, Freedom’s Gateway, Father Dave said something that made me feel like he was speaking directly to me. “It’s hard to except the fact that life is hard. We want it to be easy so that we don’t have to get hurt. The problem is that in our desire for life to be easy, we spend a lot of time running from or ignoring the reality that is life.”  I realized that I had never done anything to actually fix the things in my life that were putting so much strain on my heart and relationships. I spent so much time whining about my problems and I should have spent that time seriously looking at the situation and trying to fix it. God isn’t a magician. He isn’t going to wave his magic wand and make all of my dreams come true just because I came to him, begging him to take away my pain. What would be beneficial in that? Absolutely nothing. Yes, God will always be at my side and not matter what, he has a solution to my problems and that is heaven. Heaven is something that we have to strive for. Would we really be working towards pure happiness if we could have it here on earth? No we wouldn’t be. It took a lot for me to accept this, but I realized that I want to be challenged. I want to be tested. I want to go to heaven and give God a big hug because I did it and I endured through everything with him at my side. I realized that I won’t get to do that if I don’t go out into the world to learn the lessons that God has in store for me.

While I was reading, there was one thought that I had that was quite shocking to me. When Father Dave said, “In order to grow deeper in freedom, you must decide to be free. It may seem obvious that if someone is bound then they would want to be free, but that is not always the case. Sometimes bondage seems more preferable because it is familiar.” I read this line about twenty times. I guess I had never considered the idea that maybe I was keeping myself from being free. I had numbed myself to the pain and I clung to the daily arguing and craziness just because it was the only thing that I knew.  Sadly, looking back on my life I realize that this was how I acted. In a weird way, I felt like the fighting with my Mom was just a part of everyday life and without it, I wouldn’t know what to do with myself. This was a hard revelation to come to because I realized in part that I had been clinging to the things that were making me unhappy. Breaking this ideal opened up many doors for me with my relationships with my family and it is often crazy to think that the answer was always right in front of you, you just had to grab it.

I had never asked God to set me free, I had only ever complained to him about what was occurring. After reading this book and following the prayer guides at the end of each chapter, I decided that freedom is hard, but it is something that I want to work towards. One of my all-time favorite quotes is “Freedom is not Free”. This was peculiar at first, but in the end it makes so much sense. No one is just going to hand you freedom. It is something you have to earn for yourself. Life isn’t perfect, nor should I be, but the freedom to experience love and act in God’s truth is what carries you through the hard times.

 

 

Gideon vs Wainwright...the case that changed the public defender system

The Miranda Rights are rights that are read to people when they are arrested for a crime. One key phrase in the Miranda rights is, “You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to you.” This right to an attorney no matter of financial situation was a right that was gained in 1963 Supreme Court case Gideon V. Wainwright, when Clarence Earl Gideon appealed to the Supreme Court in order to gain his right to counsel.  In the book Gideon’s Trumpet, Anthony Lewis provides a detailed description of the case and the process of appealing to the Supreme Court in general. This story is the detailed description of the poor man who took his case to the Supreme Court and changed the law of the United States. 

               The book opens with Gideon petitioning the court in forma pauperis, which means in the form of the pauper (Lewis). This type of petition allows the prisoner to petition the Supreme Court without following the usual protocol of filling out required forms and paying the usual fee. Instead, the only thing the person filing the petition must do is present a written confirmation stating that he is unable to pay the costs required by the courts (Lewis).  In addition, Rule 53 gives even more leeway to the litigant presenting the petition. Usually, the litigant must file forty copies of the petition, however under Rule 53, an impoverished person only needs to file one copy, and it doesn’t even have to be printed. Gideon took this rule to heart and submitted his petition handwritten, in pencil, on papers issued to Gideon by the prison (Lewis). In addition to his Supreme Court petition, Gideon included his application to the Florida Supreme Court asking for the writ of Habeas Corpus since he believed he was illegally imprisoned and Florida’s denial of the application and the date, which proved that Gideon was petitioning the lower court’s decision within the ninety day deadline. Gideon chose not to give any personal information in his petition, leaving much room for speculation about who this prisoner was (Lewis).

Clarence Gideon was a perfectly likeable white man with a cordial personality, however he was no stranger to the court and prison systems as he had been in and out of prisons most of his life.  At the time of his petition to the Supreme Court, he was 51 years old and imprisoned for breaking and entering into the Bay Harbor pool room with the intent to commit petty larceny (Lewis). Gideon claimed his conviction lacked the “due process of law” stated in the 14^th amendment (Lewis). He made this claim on the basis that he had asked for the aid of counsel, but was denied by the Florida state court because the law in Florida at the time stated that the only time a person can be provided with counsel is when they are charged with a capital offense.  Previously, the Supreme Court had stated that a person does not automatically gain the right to counsel, however, Gideon’s case would be the one that would reversed its previous decision (Lewis).

After introducing the reader to the court case of Clarence Gideon, Anthony Lewis continues on to give the reader background information on the Supreme Court by primarily describing it as an institution.  While the characteristics of the court presented by Lewis are related to Gideon’s case, it is also made evident that these characteristics are applicable to every court case in history. After discussing the characteristics of the courts, Lewis also describes how the court chooses which cases to bring to trial and the procedures it takes in order to make that happen.  Lewis also continues to examine the result of Gideon’s petition and why he was denied counsel. Gideon’s point remained the same as he stated that without counsel, he was not given a fair trial. This resulted in the courts deciding to hear Gideon’s case and to question whether or not the case of Betts v Brady should be reconsidered (Lewis). This time, Gideon was offered counsel in Abe Fortas. The storyline continues as Gideon’s case is recounted and it was decided that this case did not fall under the same accounts of Betts rule.  After Lewis recounts judicial proceedings and gives a background look to the life of Clarence Gideon, he gets around to describing the previous cases that also addressed the issue of the right to counsel.  Following these descriptions the actual arguments of Gideon’s case were presented, followed by the decision writing process and the importance of effective counsel in a case of this magnitude. At the conclusion of the book, Lewis recounts a statement about the role of the courts in the United States and includes an epilogue which presents Gideon after his trial concludes (Lewis).

The decision made by the Supreme Court in Gideon V Wainwright was a decision that changed the courts and the judicial system in the United States forever. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black delivered the decision on March 18, 1963. Within that decision the courts made reference to previous cases which dealt with the right to counsel (Landmark Summary).  One of these was Powell v Alabama, which declared that if charged with a capital offense, the defendant has the right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one themselves. In regards to felonies and trials in state courts, the decision made by the Supreme Court in Betts v Brady declared that counsel was not automatically given unless there was certain circumstance such as illiteracy that forced the courts to do so (Landmark Gideon).   Gideon felt that this was unconstitutional due to the 6^th and 14^th amendments which state that a defendant has the right to counsel and the right to a fair trial with the due process of law.  This time around, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gideon and declared that a defendant has the right to counsel even if they cannot afford one because it was essential in order for the defendant to receive a fair trial under the due process of law. This decision officially overturned the decision made in Betts V Brady, which means that Clarence Gideon was a poor prisoner who enacted to make the Supreme Court change its mind (Gideon v Wainwright).  

The decision on Gideon V Wainwright did not automatically over turn his conviction. Instead, he was given the opportunity for a second trial, with an attorney to represent him. Five months after the Supreme Court rendered it decision. Gideon’s second trial proved that the Supreme Court had made the right decision. W. Fred Turner defended Gideon in his trial and was able to find discrepancies in the “eye witness testimony” given by the prosecutor’s witnesses.  A person without a law degree or with minimal understanding of the law would not have been able to find the issues with these testimonies which eventually proved that Gideon was innocent all along (Lewis).

After the Supreme Court rendered its decision on Gideon’s case, it had a great impact on the courts as a whole.  Instead of having to prove a special circumstance, defendants were able to have counsel even if they could not afford one.  Gideon v Wainwright set a precedent for future cases with similar issues so that the right to counsel would not be withheld from any defendant, for any reason.  In addition, the public defender system had to make some changes due to the decision. Prior to the case, public defenders were not in high demand because they were only needed in cases where defendants were charged with a capital defense.  With public defenders in such high demand following the decision, the state courts had to ensure that these attorneys were prepared to deliver a successful criminal defense.  If the public defenders given to the defendants were unqualified, then there would be no benefit to having them in the first place. As a result, Florida and other states started to have qualified public defenders in all of the state courts (Right to Counsel).

The decision in Gideon v. Wainwright allowed the Supreme Court to apply Due Process under the 14th amendment to all citizens accused of crimes, and regardless of financial ability to pay.  It overturned a previous ruling in Powell v. Alabama which allowed courts to appoint legal counsel selectively at the state level, declaring it unconstitutional to keep American citizens from their 6th amendment right to legal counsel (USDOJ).  It helped the Supreme Court set a precedent for what was considered a “fair trial.”  If someone was not a legal expert, there was no way that they could know whether they should take a deal, whether an indictment was bad, or how far they should push their case.  Because even the most savvy and intelligent person could falter when representing their own case, it was decided that lawyers were a necessity and not only for the people who could afford them (USDOJ).

After the Supreme Court decision, Florida complied and hired public defenders to work in all sixteen of its state circuit courts.  For the first time everyone, would have legal counsel, even at the state level, and even when accused of crimes that were not under national jurisdiction.  More than two thousand people were freed due to the Gideon decision, and in order to accommodate the people who could not defend themselves in the future, and to keep people protected equally under the law, Public defenders needed to be appointed.  The decision was also important because it made it impossible for the courts to force someone charged with a crime to face his accusers.  There could be no prejudice based on wealth, education, or class (Right to Counsel).

The Warren Court used Gideon v. Wainwright to expand the rights of criminal defendants.  It especially helped in the areas of fair criminal interrogations, with a lawyer present, the right to remain silent and not to incriminate one’s self in the absence of an attorney, and the right for any criminal defendant to be informed of these basic rights.  It also said that a defendant could only waive his or her right to council, by pleading guilty, no contest, or otherwise, if they were fully aware of the charges being brought against them.  This saved countless people who were accused who might have had language barriers, or other impedance to understanding their rights (Gideon v Wainwright).

The new right to counsel opened up all kinds of cases and circumstances in the court room.  In the state courts, while it was required for the defendant to be given counsel if needed, some instances allowed the courts to waive that right. For example, in the case Doughty v Maxwell which took place in Ohio, the courts decided that a person waives their right to counsel if they plead guilty.  Some states agreed with this and stated that a guilty plea eliminated the defendant’s right to an attorney. Contrarily, in federal law, it is a lot more difficult to waive the right to counsel. 

In regards to the decision itself, I believe the Supreme Court was justified in its decision in Gideon V Wainwright.  The constitution offers an opportunity for the people to be protected in a free society void of government oppression. This case goes along with the loose interpretation of the constitution assuming that the original framers left the responsibility of understanding and applying their intent based off of what was best for society as it evolves. This was one benefit of having such a vague constitution. The benefits of it are relevant in Gideon V wainwright because the rights expressed in the 6^th and 14^th amendments did not give any specifics as is pertained to when the right to counsel could be provided for the defendant. I think the decision went along with the spirit of the constitution because it gave more freedom to the people and made it harder to prosecute defendants.  As it pertains to interpreting the amendments that were used as evidence in Gideon v Wainwright, I agree that in order to have a fair trial, one must have an attorney. Without an attorney, the trial is unfair because an uneducated person will have a limited understanding of the trial proceedings and of the law in general.

Due to the forward thinking of the Warren Court in Gideon v. Wainwright, the freedom and liberty of every American, are protected by due process under the law.  This makes it difficult to convict someone of a crime without representation and understanding of their rights.  It was easier to convict someone of a crime and did not provide the defendant with fair opportunities so.  As a result, I believe that the Supreme Court was correct in its verdict in regards to Gideon v Wainwright and it went along with the spirit of the constitution as it pertains to the liberties possessed by every American. 

 

 

Works Cited

"Gideon V Wainwright 1963." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 26 Feb. 2014.

"Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court." Gideon v. Wainwright. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Feb. 2014.

"Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court." How the Case Moved through the Court System. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.

"Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court." Summary of the Decision. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.

Lewis, Anthony. Gideon's Trumpet. New York: Random House, 1964. Print.

"Right to Counsel." LII / Legal Information Institute. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.

"USDOJ: Access to Justice: Fifty Years Later: The Legacy of Gideon v. Wainwright." USDOJ: Access to Justice: Fifty Years Later: The Legacy of Gideon v. Wainwright. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.