Category Archives: Issue 11

Forgotten Gems: Appendix 2 – To Greatest Hits or Not to Greatest Hits

Leave a reply

Christopher Rush

Had We But World Enough, and Time…

We would have dallied with Heartbeat City by The Cars and perhaps Savage Garden by Savage Garden and quite likely Machine Head by Deep Purple (which I listened to essentially non-stop this past summer) … and probably a few more forgotten gems of days gone by.  But, as we know by now, this exciting phase of our journey together is drawing to a rapid and not necessarily premature close, so we only have time for a few more thoughts on this and that.  One of the more important things to consider when entering the musical section of the Realms of Gold is whether to acquire or at least dally with the many diverse incarnations of “greatest hits” albums, or should one simply embark on a systematic, chronological listening of a band’s output in the order in which it first occurred.  As with most issues worth discussing, it is not so simple a decision.

To Greatest Hits

Some bands, even the best, have so much output it may be in one’s best interest to hunker down with a greatest hits volume or two for a significant period of time, especially if one is a casual fan.  Perhaps the best example of this is The Beach Boys.  I certainly don’t mean this as a derogation to one of the greatest bands of all time.  I’m in the process of acquiring all of their albums, but such is not a task for the layfan.  Listening to their regular albums is an eye- and ear-opening experience, not necessarily always in a positive way (who knew Brian Wilson felt that way about vegetables?).  Part of the issue, as we said, is the voluminous output of the band: not every album can be Pet Sounds, and not every song can be “Barbara Ann” or “Good Vibrations.”  A very understandable nightmare is being stranded on a desert isle with only “Fall Breaks and Back to Winter (W. Woodpecker Symphony)” to listen to.

If one only gets a single- or double-disc greatest hits from the Beach Boys, one will most likely miss out on some rather enjoyable tunes, such as “Do It Again,” depending on which greatest hits collection one gets (the Beach Boys have several).  Yet, if you do get a two- or three-disc mini-set of greatest hits, you will get most of the songs you want to hear from them on a regular basis.  It will certainly save a good deal of money, especially since their entire oeuvre is extensive.  Admittedly the recent re-issue series have made it more cost effective by doubling up their albums, though many of them are becoming out of print, so it still remains a bit of a challenge to get all the albums.  Thus, for most people, getting some Beach Boys greatest hits will more than suffice.

Another potentially good example of bands for which a greatest hits collection would suffice is at the other end of the output spectrum, such as Guns N’ Roses.  Their output is not that huge, compared to a number of popular bands, so acquiring all of their work would not be nearly as expensive.  The question, though, is “do I really want to own all GNR’s material?”  For most of us, the answer is most likely “no.”  Sure, we would enjoy having ready access to a couple of their songs, but most of their regular albums are replete with songs we wouldn’t want to hear once, let alone multiple times.  Thus, for a band such as GNR, their greatest hits compilation is a grand solution, especially as it also collects a number of non-album rarities one would like to have but would have great difficulty in cost- and time-effectiveness tracking down individually.

A third reason to get a greatest hits album is perhaps the most irritating, especially to fans who already have the entire output of their favorite band: sometimes a band (or their o’erpowering contract holders) will release a new song, a variant mix, or something not-yet-released only available now with a dozen or so songs you already have, likely in multiple formats.  This is rarely enjoyable for the die-hard fan, but it could be an ideal place to start for the newcomer to the band.  We are living in an age of re-releases, often with previously unreleased “bonus” material, and though this can get expensive, it is a good test for one’s level of fanaticism.  As of this writing, I have all the recent U2 re-release anniversary collections … except for the Achtung Baby sets.  I’m still waiting on that one, thinking it would be better for a Christmas gift than a self-purchase.  Some fans, though, may intentionally reject getting a “greatest hits” album from their favorite band just to get one or two new songs, especially since they aren’t “greatest hits” in any real way.  Certainly my least favorite greatest hits album I own is Collective Soul’s 7even Year Itch, which I acquired simply because it had two new songs not available anywhere else (at the time).  Considering my great affinity for Collective Soul, one might find this surprising, but we shall discuss that in a moment below.

In sum, a number of good reasons exist why one should consider being satisfied with greatest hits collections: immediate access to the best music of a band’s output too numerous to collect in its entirety, immediate access to the best music of a band’s output too dissimilar to your general tastes to enjoy more than what is generally accessible, and the possibility of getting a good start on a band “new to you” with some additional bonus material you wouldn’t find in the basic album releases.  As the introductory title of this examination intimates, our time in this present incarnation is intimidatingly limited — we have to make the most of it while we can.  Committing to a number of bands’ entire outputs can strain one economically as well as relationally, since so many good books are out there to be read, so many good games out there to be played, and, oh yes, time with Jesus and your family.  Contenting oneself to what can usually rightly be called “the best” of a band’s work can be the right solution.

Not To Greatest Hits

On the other hand, life’s brevity does not necessitate we settle for others’ opinions or conformity to the mainstream herd-like acquiescence.  Radio popularity is not innately inimical to quality music, but neither is it in any real way a meaningful standard.  A significant amount (if not most) of the best songs in the history of the world would not fall under the penumbra of “radio hit.”  Some publically funded radio stations still play lengthy classical numbers, and some usually late-night radio hosts (who have achieved some sort of fame in other arenas) tend to delight their cultured audiences with “deep cuts” and extended tracks, but neither of those are the issue here.

Sometimes you may hear a new song on the radio that is actually good; sometimes you may hear a good classic (of liberal denotation), so the radio is not always a waste of time, but the increasing sway of the radio and its dictatorial hegemony has been a significant deterrent to the dissemination of quality music in recent decades.  Perhaps we are in the waning throes of such a sway, as new media outlets are continually forcing once seemingly-implacable forces (cable television, radio stations, periodicals, the motion picture industry, and especially the increasingly outmoded “hard copy” home artifact such as an actual compact disc or even digital video disc) to rethink not only their strategies for success but also their very survival.  In an information age characterized by streaming and clouds and digitization, he who controls the access to information (or music selection) will have increasing control over aesthetic direction.  Perhaps the radio will no longer be king … but in any event, someone else will.  Do you want to be content with accepting whatever “they” say is a band’s best music?  Can you not judge for yourself whether the popular numbers are really a band’s best numbers?

If you are really interested enough in a band to actually pay for their music (admittedly, much of what I say here will make no sense to anyone under the age of 24), why not go straight for their output in the order in which they created it?  See how they developed musically and lyrically; see what influences affected their styles and attitudes with each successive album.  Not only will you get a better understanding of a band you claim to like, you’ll also have fewer duplicate tracks than had you started with a greatest hits album and worked backward.  Additionally, you will discover potentially numerous songs you enjoy, regardless of whether they are heard over the airwaves or selected for greatest hits consideration by companies most likely equating economic prosperity with aesthetic greatness, which we all know is utter shash.

A moment ago, I mentioned my irritation with Collective Soul’s greatest hits collection.  As I said, the fact I had to get 10 songs I already owned in order to acquire two new songs that aren’t even “greatest hits” was quite frustrating.  Loyalty to the band won out, but the irritation still exists.  Similarly, U2’s second greatest hits compilation, The Best of 1990-2000, had new songs written and released in 2002!  I was glad to get them, but I would have rather gotten what the title indicated, their greatest hits during that period of time, and acquired the other songs in a forum with even more otherwise-unreleased material.  Returning to Collective Soul, my main frustration with that collection is the jarring nature of the tracks in the order on the disc.  To me, each Collective Soul album is a cohesive unit.  I’m not saying they are all concept albums, mind you — I’m simply saying each album is a unified whole, with a beginning, a middle, and an end.  To rip a few songs out of context and shuffle them with songs from other albums, jaggedly traveling back and forth in time and style, is not as enjoyable to listen to as the entire albums.  This may be a personal issue, considering my great affinity for the band and their music, but it is an important issue worth considering when pondering whether or not to pursue a band’s greatest hits collection (especially as sometimes the versions of the songs you really want are non-traditional renditions without any warning whatsoever).

Thus, settling for a greatest hits album is not always the proper choice.  For a band in whom you have genuine interest, delighting in their entire output in the order in which they created it and grew artistically is definitely a better choice than settling for a statistical assessment from an Entertainment Finance major whose main criterion for a good song is revenue (no offense to the business majors out there).  If you are going to spend time with a band, why not be a dedicated fan and really delight in what the band has to offer, especially if it is a band whose lyrics you don’t have to blush over or skip when grandma comes into the room?

There is Always Time for What Matters

It’s not a simple “yes” or “no” question after all.  Sometimes it’s a good choice to go with a greatest hits album; sometimes it’s better to invest in entire albums.  When I eventually got into music listening/collecting, I did both for some bands.  Naturally, I started my Queen collection with their double Greatest Hits I and II — nothing wrong with that.  But now’s the time to move on to their entire history.  On the other hand, I’m quite content with my Billy Joel greatest hits albums (and River of Dreams).

Certainly we are not arguing for relativity in musical quality or aesthetics.  Beauty and Art are transcendental values wholly objective and not in any way subjectively constructed.  Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder.  Instead, we have an issue in which context is king.  Because “good music” is not relative, some bands are better than others.  Some deserve more of your time than others.  Some “great bands” can be easily condensed to one, two, or three discs of greatest hits without much significant loss.  Some “one-hit wonders” have albums that deserve more attention than most people are willing to give them (e.g., The Dream Academy created a great number of enjoyable songs far beyond “Life in a Northern Town”).  This way, you can discover a great number of “forgotten gems” you will treasure all the rest of your days.  Music is an integral part of a quality life.  There is time to find the bands and music you enjoy.  There is always time for what matters.

Juvenile Justice System

Leave a reply

Audrey Livingstone

Almost a century ago, the juvenile justice system was founded on a radical idea.  Because children are so different from adults, the law should treat them in a way that complements those differences.  The Progressive Era, which spanned from about 1900 to 1918, was a time of widespread social reform and provided the basis for the idea of a juvenile justice system.  In 1899, states began to notice the problem of juvenile imprisonment and consequently began building youth reform homes — a place where young people could be rehabilitated, not incarcerated, regarding their issues.  The public felt a responsibility to help juvenile offenders before they became immersed in crime they had already begun to take part in.

As the juvenile justice system began to develop, states took on the task of “parenting” the youths until they either changed or became adults (“parens patriae”).  They were not tried in adult courts anymore, and the cases took on a more informal aspect.  Oftentimes, they were not represented by lawyers, and judges took extenuating evidence and circumstance into consideration before sentencing.  The juvenile justice system evolved rapidly as these changes took place.  By the 1960s, juvenile courts automatically had jurisdiction over nearly all cases involving children under the age of 18.  In addition, transfers into adult courts could only be made per the juvenile court’s waiver.  And by 1967, new rights were available to minors: the right to receive notice of charges, the right to obtain legal counsel, the right to “confrontation and cross-examination,” the “privilege against self-incrimination,” the right to receive a “transcript of the proceedings,” and the right to “appellate review.”

Coming into the twenty-first century, there was a sudden rise in juvenile crime.  This occurred specifically between the late 1980s and the late 1990s.  Legislatures took action to make sure this rise in crime would not continue.  In 1974, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act was modified to allow states to try juveniles as adults for some violent crimes and weapons violations.  This act is what provides the most controversy regarding juvenile and criminal courts today.  The question on everyone’s mind is, “Should children be allowed to be tried in criminal courts?”

Some say no, children who commit violent crimes (murder, rape, etc.) should absolutely not be tried as adults.  For example, about twenty-one years ago, nine-year-old Cameron Kocher was tried as an adult for murder.  He fired a rifle outside of his window and killed his seven-year-old neighbor.  The prosecutor decided to try him as an adult.  A few of his reasons were he lied about the murder when he was questioned about it, and he slept during pretrial motions.  This showed a lack of remorse for what he had done and perhaps ignorance for the gravity of his actions.  This caused a giant uproar, and consequently Kocher was sentenced as a minor.

Another similar case took place in 2009.  Eleven-year-old Jordan Brown was charged as an adult with criminal homicide.  He shot his father’s pregnant fiancée in the head with a shotgun.  The judge originally ruled Brown would be tried in a criminal, adult court, but eventually (almost two years later) his case was transferred into a juvenile court, and he was tried there.  Both of these children were sentenced to life in prison until they reached the age of twenty-one, and then they were put on probation.

Those who disapprove of children being tried in adult courts assert children are immature in three different ways: their development is incomplete, their judgment is not yet mature, and their character is still in the developmental process.   Because of this immaturity, they cannot be treated as adults; they are not fully matured; they are not competent, responsible, and unlikely to change like adults are.  They are still impressionable and can be rehabilitated.  Can they really process information and plan crimes like adults can?  Of course not, they say.  Yet, we have increasingly younger children committing increasingly more violent crimes.

At the other end of the spectrum are those who believe yes, children committing violent crimes should absolutely be tried as adults.  If they are old enough to make an awful decision, like killing or raping someone, they are old enough to deal with the consequences of that decision, regardless of age.  For example, in February of this year, three thirteen-year-old boys assaulted and raped one of their fellow classmates, a thirteen-year-old girl, at a community park.  Because they were under the age of 14, however, they were kept in a juvenile court.  This caused a tremendous amount of controversy.  As one woman stated on the news in response to the case, voicing the opinion of the public, “If they are old enough to gang rape, then they are old enough to be tried as adults.  I have no sympathy for them.”  Another stated, “What is this world coming to when they can simply walk away?  And that is pretty much what will happen.”

Another case with a similar reaction took place several years ago.  A two-year-old English boy was taken by two ten-year-old boys.  He was mutilated and murdered.  The two ten-year-old boys then placed his body on a railroad track in hopes an oncoming train would cover up what they had done to the little child.  Instead, the body was found, and the boys were arrested.  The general reaction was absolute horror.  The fact children could do something so monstrous to a mere toddler disgusted everyone.

The children were tried in an adult court, to the public’s satisfaction, though they denied all charges brought against them — attempted abduction, abduction, and murder.  The prosecuting attorney in the trial successfully rebutted the idea of doli incapax, which assumes children cannot be held responsible for their actions.  Both of the young boys were evaluated by psychologists and found to have undoubtedly known the difference between right and wrong, and that purposefully causing harm to another was wrong.  The court came to the conclusion it was a cold-blooded murder, and the two boys were found guilty, becoming the youngest convicted murderers of the twentieth century.  The boys were kept in custody for eight years at different locations.

This point of view comes down to the fact a complete lack and disregard of morals cannot be fixed or rehabilitated.  This is absolutely true.  Everyone has an inner sense of right and wrong.  Everyone measures someone else’s actions against that sense of right and wrong.  This is why when these murder, assault, and rape cases appear in the media, the general reaction is horror.  Everyone knows what that person or group of people did was wrong.

While it is true children are developmentally immature in their teenage years, they are still fully aware of the rightness or wrongness of their actions.  A teenager who makes a decision to murder or kidnap someone has done just that — made the decision.  All who commit a violent crime have a choice before them.  Age has nothing to do with that.  A child who kills someone is fully aware of that fact.  The argument that child did not understand the gravity of his actions or did not understand what he did is absurd and cannot and should not be made, much less presented in a courtroom.

Everyone must be held accountable for their actions.  Just because someone is under the age of eighteen does not mean he did not understand the gravity and wrongness of the crime.  If a ten-year-old is old enough to murder someone, he is old enough to deal with the consequences of that murder.  He is old enough to deal with those consequences without the protection and cushion of a juvenile court. Excuses cannot and should not be made for youths merely because of their age.  If the severity of violent crimes committed by children was taken into account as much as their age was, they would certainly be tried as adults.

Bibliography

MacArthur, John T. and Catherine T. “MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice.” Established 1977. <http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.948173/k.D1D7/Research_Networks__Adolescent_Development_and_Juvenile_Justice.htm>.

Reaves, Jessica. “Should the Law Treat Kids and Adults Differently?” TIME. 17 May 2001. <http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,110232,00.html >.

Schwartz, Robert. “Kids Should Never be Tried as Adults.” CNN. 18 February 2010. <http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-18/opinion/schwartz.kids.trials_1_justice-system-juvenile-justice-cameron-kocher?_s=PM:OPINION>.

Wilde, Jessica. “Juvenile Criminals Must be Tried as Adults.” The Rebel Yell. 5 March 2009. <http://unlvrebelyell.com/2009/03/05/juvenile-criminals-must-be-tried-as-adults/>.

Gangs: True Societal Bottom-Feeders, or Misunderstood Assets?

Leave a reply

Kaitlyn Thornton Abbott

What are gangs?  Gangs, by definition, are “an organized group of individuals.”  When gangs are talked about, it usually comes with a negative connotation.  For example, gangs are usually associated with inner cities and trouble.  Albeit, it might be true there is certain criminal-esque intent behind the formation of gangs, there are aspects to gangs in neighborhoods that aren’t necessarily bad, depending on one’s perspective.

Being a part of a gang guarantees one a family environment for the rest of one’s life.  Being a part of a gang ensures everyone has each other’s back, regardless of the circumstance.  For example, Carlos T. Ramirez, Jr. speaks out about his life in one of the most well-known gangs in Texas.  He has spent a majority of his life in prison and explains the pros and cons of being a part of a gang.  When speaking about his life in the gang, he explains how they opened up their arms to him when his home life was not welcoming or loving.  As he gives his testimony about his former gang life, he reminisces about how for the first time in his life, he felt like he was a part of something special.  For the first time, he felt included.  For the first time, he was able to call on people and have them always be there for him.

Another benefit of being a part of a gang is it gives you financial stability.  The best part — it’s not taxed!  No matter what one plunders, and comes to have through the glamorous life of gang membership, the government can’t take it!  It’s like being a pirate, except the swashbuckling rogue has been transformed into a baggy-pants thug.  Who wouldn’t love that life?

Speaking of the thug life, it’s another added benefit of being part of a gang.  If one happens to have fathered a child out of wedlock, nobody is going to mess with that kid if they know the father is a member of a notorious gang.  So, even if the father wants to walk out on his family, one can see he still genuinely cares about his child.  Although most would consider a father walking out on his child an example of bad parenting, they should consider the positives it brings.  For example, it builds character. If children are forced to stand up for themselves without having anyone to fight their battles for them, they learn how to handle themselves and to evade situations that could end detrimentally for them.  It also allows the women to stand up for themselves.  Feminism is a huge part of American society; having a significant other walk out on the family allows them to work and find self-realization.

Many people are hesitant to say gangs are a good faction of society.  However, gangs are really only members of the police force without the badges.  They all share a certain uniform, usually a bandana that marks which group they are a part of.  Also, they all carry weapons.  Every police officer carries weapons not only to protect themselves, but also to protect civilians who might need it, such as people in the Witness Protection Program.  In comparison, gang members carry guns with them as well.  Unless fired on, they usually will not use them except in self-defense or as an act of retaliation, which, essentially is what the military does.

Gangs also encourage physical activity and finesse.  When one sees a gang strolling down the block, rarely does one see an obese member.  They encourage one another, strongly, to stay in great physical shape.  What happens if during an afternoon stroll, they are just suddenly attacked?  They must be in shape to defend themselves against any enemy.  Gang members can be seen at one’s local gym, but usually they will stick to working out in their own homes.  Lots of times, gangs will spend quality time together by playing street sports, like football or basketball.  Not only does this help build the bond between members, but it also gives them the competitive edge it takes to live the lifestyle they have chosen.

Gangs are also fantastic for reducing population.  Inner cities quickly become over populated, and there is usually no motivation to move out of slums.  That’s where our lovely friends come into play.  If they were not there to help with population control, then it would just completely overrun the city, and there would be even more children and mothers homeless.  The gangs really are a huge asset to the community; society would be lost without them.

Now, many people would not agree with my assertion gangs are a helpful part of our communities.  They tend to argue gangs are dangerous, that it only leads to drug usage, violence in the home, coarse language, and traditional values are no longer held sacred; instead they are traded in for casual sex and binge drinking.

Gangs may be dangerous; there is no denial of that.  But realistically, there are much more dangerous things in life than being part of a gang.  For example, driving a car!  It’s a huge, metal, deathtrap one willingly enters multiple times a day.  Not only do you put your own life in danger, you also put others in danger, too!  Being on the road is a much more life-threatening situation than being a part of gang is.  If one were to compare the potential threats of simply driving to work and being in a gang, the results would be astounding.  For example, Drivesafety.net gives the statistics of driving related accidents: there were 30,196 traffic related deaths in 2010.  In gang-related deaths … less than three thousand per year.

Gangs also do tend to run in the drug circles.  But going back to my earlier point, they are making money!  They make glorious amounts of non-taxed money, which they could be saving for their college education.  Not only are they using their God-given talents, they are also learning!  Mixing drugs is a simple matter of chemistry.  For them to create the drugs, they are learning the infinitely valuable lesson of which chemicals can mix with what without exploding.  If that isn’t a valuable life lesson, I’m not sure what is.

The violence in the home isn’t created by the gang presence.  The gang presence is a direct result of the violence found within the home.  When the fathers continue to abuse their children, the children try to find an escape.  Once they find themselves welcomed into the gang, they are taught to fight back.  Self-defense is not morally or legally wrong; so the “violence” caused inside the home life is really created from the parental figures; the gangs are simply a response to how the parents treat their children.

Many people will also argue gangs have given up traditional values and traded them in for casual sex and incessant drinking.  Realistically, that behavior goes far beyond the gang atmosphere.  Casual sex is something Hollywood has taken upon itself to glorify, not only in the movies and television shows it produces, but also in the real lives of the actors and actresses it employs.

All in all, gangs are not the blot on society they are portrayed to be.  Yes, they could use some bettering of their situation, but hey, so could we all.

White Christmas

Leave a reply

Nicole Moore Sanborn

This year, I experienced my first white Christmas.  You may be thinking “Uh…where was she about eight years ago when we had all that snow and a white Christmas??”  I was in Georgia in about 70-degree weather visiting my grandparents and preparing for my leg surgery on the 27th in South Carolina.  Most of you know about this surgery, so I will not take time to explain.  If you’re interested in hearing the story, feel free to ask me about it later; I’m very open to talking about it.  Also, if you’re wondering where I was two years ago when it snowed Christmas Eve and the 26th, I do not count that, because it didn’t snow Christmas Day.

This year, it wasn’t about the gifts for me.  My family and I traveled to Washington state (it takes three flights to get there and nearly an entire day of travel) to visit my mom’s sister and mother, who we rarely see.  My mom’s brother and his family came up from Nevada to join the fun.  Older readers, remember the retreat story from a few years ago when Dan Hardesty told the spider cave story, and a guy named Keith was involved?  Yeah, that was my uncle.  True story.  I got to see my cousins (mom’s sister’s kids) that are near me in age for the first time in about two and a half years.  One of the guys is 21 or 22 (I’m not sure), the girl is 19, and the other guy just turned 16.  They’re just about the most awesome cousins I could ever ask for.  Well, the 22 year-old can be mean, but that comes with the territory.  Bond, the 19-year-old (yes, her name is Bond, like James Bond, just to clarify), and I enjoyed the time together, catching up and discussing how college is going.  Bond is a freshman at Baylor University this year.  Britt, the 16-year-old (yes, my cousins have interesting names), is very nice.  He and I had many good talks about life and learning from mistakes.  Through our time together, we discovered he and I are a lot alike in struggles we either have gone through or are currently struggling with.  He attempted to teach me how to play Brawl on the Wii, but I’m still very horrible at playing video games.  Now, on to stories about my visit.

The first day, I interned at my aunt’s office.  She is the CEO of an international Market Research and Innovation firm, called New Edge, the Brewery.  While there, I listened in on part of a conference call with Pepsi.  I was shown recent work the company had done with Coors Molson (yes, the beer company) and Milliken (a textile company now developing wound care products).  I learned many things while at her office, and it confirmed my career aspirations.  I want to go into Business Marketing, focusing on the innovation and research side of things.

I was taught how to play Settlers of Catan, a strategy game some of you might be familiar with.  It is very competitive and quite fun.  I won one of the games, which was surprising since I was not familiar with the game until my visit (since it is a strategy game).  Admittedly, my family helped me, so I did not win entirely using my own strategy.  We also played card games.  Aunt Pam, Bond, and I successfully completed nearly all of the Christmas shopping December 23-24.  The stores were crazy, but the three of us were surprisingly good at making quick stops at a variety of stores.  A couple of days before Christmas, it snowed.  I was thrilled, because this presented the possibility of experiencing my first white Christmas.  Christmas morning, not all of the snow had melted.  I decided to call it my first white Christmas, even if it did not officially snow that day.  However, as the morning progressed, it began snowing.  Bond, Britt, and I made a giant snowman, approximately 10-12 feet tall, and named him “Big Bob.”  He was the biggest snowman I have ever made.  Pictures are on Facebook.  Unfortunately, my family and I flew back to Virginia the 26th, so our visit was cut very short.  My aunt and uncle invited me to return over the summer and intern at my aunt’s office, as well as spend time with my cousins.

One of the best parts of Christmas was seeing all of my family.  My younger cousins, a guy who is 12 and two girls ages nine and eight, were also with us.  I was able to see my grandmother while in Washington, which was very nice.  She is 83 now, and since I do not get the opportunity to see her in person often, I cherish the moments I am able to spend with her.  My grandfather passed away when I was about two, so I never knew him.  Flying home was bittersweet, but more adventures were to come.

We arrived home the 26th at nighttime.  The 27th was spent doing laundry, working, and preparing for our next trip.  The morning of the 28th, my dad and I began another adventure.  We drove down to the area of Charleston, SC to visit my dad’s sister.  My cousin is 24, and she was on a different vacation, so I did not get to see her.  My aunt, uncle, dad, and I went on many adventures.  We arrived around dinnertime on the 28th.  The 29th, my dad, aunt, and I went to the USS Yorktown.  For those unfamiliar, the Yorktown is an aircraft carrier used in World War II and is now open to the public.  No other aircraft carrier in the country is open for the public to tour.  We explored the ship, and I concluded I would not want to live on a ship like that for any period of time.  While the ship is large, the bedrooms are like barracks, the restrooms are public, and the whole time you live on the ship you are confined without portholes.  Inside the ship was much information about the history of the USS Yorktown, as well as information about how the sailors lived.  At the site of the Yorktown, the USS Clamagore, a World War II submarine, and the USS Laffey, a much smaller World War II vessel, were also open for touring.  The submarine was tiny.  My dad and I had to bend down to get through all of the passageways, and living spaces were extremely cramped.  Approximately 30-40 men would live on one submarine for extended periods of time.  This forced good crew relations, as they lived right on top of each other.  The Laffey was slightly more spacious than the Clamagore, however it would still not be fun to live on during a war.

The same day, we traveled to Ft. Sumter, where the Civil War began.  Presently, the fort is basically just walls with nothing but cannons inside, but we saw pictures of what it looked like at the start of the war.  Being on the fort was a neat experience, since it was where the Civil War started, and because we studied the Civil War in detail in history class.

We also visited the Hunley, the first submarine to sink an enemy battleship.  The Hunley was a part of the Civil War.  Unfortunately, all three crews that embarked in the submarine died.  The submarine was tiny, and in order to get into it, the crew had to have a 20-inch waist to fit through the entrance hole.  In order to make the ship move, the crew had to sit on a bench and turn a crank continuously. It was a very early model of the submarine.  The Hunley was submerged in restoration water.

We also attended a local minor league ice hockey game.  The Stingrays, the local team, won 3-0.

Walking the downtown area and seeing the Charleston museum was on our list as well.  The downtown area was beautiful, especially walking the “Rainbow Row.”  The old painted houses were beautiful, and I recommend walking downtown if you’re ever in the greater Charleston area.

We also toured a plantation. Middleton Place was very beautiful.  The gardens are very well kept, and many plants were in bloom even though it was the end of December.  The plantation demonstrated what times were like before the Civil War.  During the war, Middleton Plantation was burned to the ground.  The Plantation almost survived the war, as it was burned in the last few months of fighting.  One of the three buildings was rebuilt by the family and is now a museum featuring furniture similar to that of the Middleton’s, family portraits, and memorabilia.  Middleton Place kept horses, water buffalo, sheep, chickens, goats, and hogs.  It was, unfortunately, a slave-owning plantation.

After visiting South Carolina, my dad and I traveled to North Georgia, near Atlanta, to visit his parents for a day.  The visit was short, as we needed to return home.  My grandpa is currently fighting an illness, and we wanted to visit him.  My grandparents were planning to stay at my aunt and uncle’s house the same time as us but were unable when my grandpa became ill.  He is receiving treatment as this article is written.  His illness is not fatal.  He has an auto-immune disorder.  Since he is a born-again Christian, if treatment is unsuccessful he will be in a better place.  I believe he will recover.  My dad and I began the return home less than 24 hours after we arrived, but the visit was worth the trip.

Over Thanksgiving, my parents and I stayed at Massanutten, a resort outside of Harrisonburg, Virginia, where James Madison University is located.  While staying in Massanutten, we drove a couple of hours to Luray Caverns.  The caverns are worth the visit if you have never been.  Another highlight included watching James Bond movies when we were exhausted.  My family also drove a few minutes to the hiking trails in the Shenandoah National Park.  We went on a couple of hikes and enjoyed the outdoors and scenery.  On Thanksgiving, we drove about an hour and a half to Charlottesville (where University of Virginia is located) and went out to dinner (we made a reservation earlier in the week).  One of my favorite memories of the trip happened on the way to Shenandoah National Park.  As soon as we entered the park (we were still in our vehicle), we saw a wild black bear.  The bear looked like a teenager due to his size.  He was eating and digging for food on the side of the road less than 100 yards from the park entrance!  My family and I stopped and watched him for a few minutes, and I have a video and pictures of him on my phone.  Our family vacation to Massanutten was very enjoyable and relaxing.

As a whole, my holiday experiences this year were amazing.  The time spent with my extended and immediate family was very worthwhile, and I will cherish the memories forever.  My first real White Christmas, fun with cousins, and wild bear sighting were all gifts from God, and I wouldn’t trade the memories for anything.