Similar to Tristan, I myself am also an international business minor and empathized with Sam's presentation. There is somewhat of a dichotomy at play between the business major state of mind and the english major one, yet I don't think the void between the two is as vast as some would have it seem. Shakespeare's work is rife with microcosms and macrocosms, and by framing the business major in this light, one can find the connecting thread between these two mediums.
In order to illustrate my point, an example from my Microeconomics 204 class will be utilized. Economics is all about applying mathematics to real life concepts and policies. It may seem completely unrelated to the world of English Literature, but Tristan touched on an important subject when he elucidated for the class the ways in which Shakespeare can be translated into the language of Econ. Every microeconomic graph represents a story, condensed and simplified version of the larger picture.
This graph will seem like gibberish to those who have not been trained in beginning economics (I still struggle, and there is a small possibility that I'm completely misinterpreting this example) but it is basically a microcosmic, graphic representation of a Bozeman Daily Chronicle article titled, "Is Economy Best Birth Control? U.S. Birth Rates Decline Again". This article states that as the economy declines, so does the rate of birth in the US.
The vertical, left hand side of the graph shows the income of a consumer at its initial level in 2007, and then the declining income as the depression hits in 2008. The horizontal line of the graph represents the total fertility rate for the consumer, first at its initial level in 2007, and then again after the depression struck. The curving lines titled U0 and U1 actualize the consumer's happiness level. In 2007, the consumer's happiness level (referred to as utility) is farther right than the consumer's 2008 utility line. Graphically, these lines are saying that the consumer was better off in 2007 when her income was higher and she could afford more children than in 2008 when her income declined, and subsequently, the amount of children she could afford.
The vertical, left hand side of the graph shows the income of a consumer at its initial level in 2007, and then the declining income as the depression hits in 2008. The horizontal line of the graph represents the total fertility rate for the consumer, first at its initial level in 2007, and then again after the depression struck. The curving lines titled U0 and U1 actualize the consumer's happiness level. In 2007, the consumer's happiness level (referred to as utility) is farther right than the consumer's 2008 utility line. Graphically, these lines are saying that the consumer was better off in 2007 when her income was higher and she could afford more children than in 2008 when her income declined, and subsequently, the amount of children she could afford.
This graph, while granted is in a completely different language then the one we english majors normally deal with, is simply a microcosmic sampling, a bottom translation if you will, of the english language we familiarize ourselves with on a daily basis. The larger picture is reflected in a small portion of space, the macro echoed in the micro, and the similarities between the terms microeconomics and microcosms, as well as macroeconomics and macrocosms, are no mistake. The business major may seem like a completely different mindset than the english major state of being, but personally, I haven't found it to be so. I walk a balancing beam between both worlds, and just as I've been trained to do with literature, I've found connecting shafts between the two. In this class, we've discussed how art imitates life and life imitates art. This economics graph is, in its own language, a perfect artistic representation of life.
No comments:
Post a Comment