Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

 n our first Socratic Seminar for the novel Kite Runner we had a great introduction to the story. While I generally kept my own opinion my peers showed me new ways to look at Amir and the relationship he shared with Hassan . I was even forced to think of things I hadn’t such as maybe Amir was too young to properly handle the situations he was put under. This opened many ideas about whether Amir was a victim as well and if he is in what way? He longed for love and acceptance by his father so much that he became jealous towards anyone that his father favored. My peers even helped me to strengthen my previous ideas. For example even though Hassan is poorer he is so much stronger that Amir emotionally and is able to protect Amir regardless of how he is treated. Hassan understood Amir so well that he could predict what he was thinking.

The statement that Amir's father was not a very good father was very accurate to me. He didn't really try to find ways to connect to his son and simply love him for the person he was. Many times Amir could plainly see the disgust or irritation in his father's face. This forces Amir to never feel good enough for everyone else or as if he didn't get the "right traits" to be successful. I didn't agree with the statement that he made these horrible decisions because he was too young or scared. I believe he didn't save Hassan because he was selfish. He even states how Hassan's misfortune was the price he had to pay to win his fathers love. Amir was old enough to understand right from wrong and help his friend in dire need. 

Being able to make our own questions worked really well for the seminar. We were able to talk about the things we thought were the most important. More importantly parts of the book we really understood and could connect with. This allowed us to have a deeper conversation.

Since this book has so many controversial topics While making our own questions was helpful it also limited us in a way. Both groups had very similar questions and this showed in the second group. Also a better distribution of people would be helpful. There was a clear difference between the first and second group where the first conversation was more interesting and heated. A better distribution of people may influence other to speak up more and be apart of the conversation.