The Literary Chaat

 In 2026 vertical farming has evolved to being less of a futuristic miracle and more of a practical tool that has clear value. Since the AP prompt, there’s been a clear shift in the market from trying to replace traditional agriculture to focusing on a few key crops. Many of the pros haven’t changed since the prompt. Vertical farms can produce food year round, with less land, and are unbothered by weather events. They also fit well into our ever growing cities, solving a pivotal problem in bringing fresh crops to consumers. Additionally, new technology has made vertical farming way more efficient. Farmers are using better LED lighting, smarter climate control and more automation to reduce waste and increase throughput. At the same time, the industry has begun to be more careful about energy use, because of the struggles faced by early farms due to electricity costs. Furthermore, AI has been implemented to optimize everything from heating to fans to lighting as well. On the business...

  In “Words Don’t Mean What They Mean”, Steven Pinker explains how humans rarely say exactly what they mean. Instead, we opt for more polite language to continually manage/ negotiate relationships. This indirect speech hasn’t disappeared, but rather evolved. Today, double speak presents itself in text and DMs instead of sitcoms. Pinker’s example from Seinfeld where George mistakes “come up for coffee” for its literal meaning demonstrates how meaning can hide beneath the surface of a message. Today, a similar effect can be seen when people text things like “wyd”. Although to some it may seem like a simple message asking what someone is up to, depending on the time of day it can be a sexual invitation similar to coming up for coffee. Additionally, text has opened up a new avenue for confusion due to a lack of tone. A simple haha can mean either laughing or someone is upset with what you said. Furthermore there’s words which genz has changed the meaning of. A well known example is the...

  On the surface, Terence Fletcher (from Whiplash) and the unnamed French teacher (whom I will refer to as Cynthia just because) seem much alike. Cynthia throws chalk at students while Fletcher throws chairs. Both render their students mute through sheer intimidation. Both seem to make their classes slowly consume their students' lives. Grouping them together is easy and natural but the dichotomy of their intent is obvious in the outcome of their students. Cynthia’s cruelty is entirely baseless. As much as I don’t want to sympathize with Fletcher there’s a deeper reason for his attitude towards his students. Fletcher’s ideology is built around a hatred towards the words “good job”. Any positive reinforcement simply makes students complacent with what they are and should be avoided. Only by degrading students, could you increase their motivation to improve. With every insult, slur or object he throws at students his intent is almost surgical. This approach doesn’t work 99% of the ti...

  Anthropologists have long observed a curious new subset of the Nacerima known as the Tsirout. They’re easily recognizable by their traditional garments, often wearing linen pants and sandals. This subset of the Nacerima possess a unique ability to venture through foreign lands with unshakable confidence as if the lands are their own. One of such lands is Aindi but one must question why? Upon arrival the Tsirout instantly pull out their talking rocks to document their experiences. Yet the tribe only chooses a select percentage of these experiences to share with the Nacerima. Immediately upon entering the new land they’re faced with luxurious huts, replicating those found in the west, several of which are taller than those in their native land. While exploring the Tsirout stumble upon magnificent parks and temples dedicated to foreign gods, created with a precision unfound in their land. Yet their gaze begins to drift, almost magnetically, toward corrugated metal and open drains. T...

  If you can’t handle spice, you may have taken a look at dahi puri and decide it’s not for you. Its small, crispy shells may remind you of its savoury cousin pani puri but this time with a devilish, deep red sauce drizzled on top. But if you walk away, you miss what it actually is. The adventurous few that decide to take a bite first taste a unique mixture of tanginess and sweetness. The threatening red sauce is actually a sweet tamarind chutney that’s gentle on the palate. What once seemed like a threat is actually much more nuanced. The problem was never the food. It was the assumption. In “Just Walk on By: Black Men and Public Space”, Brent Staples describes the same concept at work in a far more consequential way. A woman sees a tall, black man walking behind her at night. She begins to run. The judgment happens before any evidence or interaction with the woman never seeing a Yale graduate, only a mugger coming to get her. As a society our mindset when it comes to judgment is ...

  Women and Men both notice lots of small differences amongst themselves, but humans naturally see more differences in groups they belong to  than those they don’t. I feel like the claim Deborah Tannen makes in “There is No Unmarked Woman” doesn’t accurately capture this nuance. Although I disagree with Tannen’s claim, I agree with several of her points. For example her argument on honorifics does raise a valid concern. The word preceding a women’s last name does reveal far more information than that of a man’s, and resultantly can lead to unwarranted judgement. It’s a good example of how linguistics can mark Women similar to endings like “-ette” and “-ess”. These endings portray women’s roles as more trivial than that of Men and demonstrates how misogyny slips into our everyday language without many of us realizing. However, claiming that there is “no unmarked woman” while simultaneously suggesting that men are unmarked seems hypocritical and oversimplifies how social marking...