About the exam -.-

Well, I don't necessarialy describe the exame as "difficult", because that just sounds flat and empty. Rather I'd say it was hard. I am complety sure I won't get a fullmark because: first, our teacher is K. Second, I didn't finished half of the exam. Why didn't I? I focused mainly on the 3 last questions. If they were worth more, at least if I answered them right, I could get something like a 6 and I would pass. Of course, I hate just passing, I like getting good grades; and I know pretty well that to get them, I must work hard. The problem was that the exam wasn't exactly meant to be finished. We just couldn't write and analyze that much in only 40 minutes. It was really long, I would say; not structured for a class time. However, I had analyzed the topics and knew what I should do with my notes, but still, I couldn't finish. I would like the teacher to be more explicit on his classes and not just leave us work and check on how we're doing; but making sure everybody is understanding and creating a critic analysis as for not getting such low marks or our tests.

"Harrison Bergeron"

Hi K!! O.o
I really liked this story, it reminds us of a topic we don't usually think of: equality of chances. The story pretends to show us how a society would be like if we all could have the same physical and mental abilities. This brings me to many different thoughts.
Certainly, in government and in most of religions, we humans are meant to be "the same". But, extrapolating this idea, how can we apply this concept in reality?
Obviously, we might start by eliminating all ranks and cathegories between people and countries. There couldn't be someone thought as higher or lower than anybody else. We would also need to make all people own the same: material goods should be given in an equal way. Of course, all people must have the same chances: like at work, for example. A chemical engineer could give the news report at night, or a painter could study the human genome. You can imagine what a chaos it would be.
If we could accomplish all this, the next step would be to homogenize all concepts: beliefs, likes, dislikes... this would certainly eliminate all chances we have of being unique as persons, which is what defines each of us. At this point, we would have produced the final rupture to existencialsm: nobody can be the same to anybody. As simple as that. It's nature: it's been proved that every snowflake is different to another.
I've wondered many times how it would be like to meet yourself at street... having the same routine every day... nothing what to talk about...
We could try to make everybody equal, and indeed, this is kind of the maxim for the ideal society, but we're not really realizing what this concept means.
Reading Harrson Bergeron I came up with all of this, and I also realized that in less that we can even start to homogenize concepts, there would be rebels protecting identity. Identity, the real expression of ourselves.
I've always thought that expression is what gives life to reality. And thinking of a reality without expression... it wouldn't be a real life then.... What ends up breaking our dream of equality.
Well, after all this ,I may dare to say that real equality is an unreachable dream. Though, the idea is always good, and we can make it come true the way we think it would be the best.