link to classmate's responses to the questions.
Avid users of social media sites like Facebook seem to lack many self-developed opinions. With the filter bubble Ted talk fresh at mind, Facebook will show you more of what they think you agree with and therefore you never get the other side of the coin. Technology has created so many distractions that I do not believe we learn as effectively as we use to. Instead of reading books in our spare time, the average American watches 6 hours of television daily. This time could be spent reinforcing ideas previously learned earlier in the day or actually learning something new on your own. A positive that we have gotten out of technological advances is the fact that so many resources are readily available, we just need to find the motivation to reach out and grab them.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Filter Bubbles
Link to the Ted talk this post is about and also classmate's responses to the same questions.
We are being tailored to what an algorithmic computer program thinks we want to see. I wouldn't say that this concept is new to me but the TED talk was certainly the first time I have seen any in depth explanation of it. I am not one to fret about something like this, but I do understand why the speaker is hesitant to trust these programs. Why am I to be mad that my computer is showing me something I want to see? This is my perspective on the whole thing but I understand the points addressed in the video. I am not sure what the speaker wants, maybe a switch that can toggle this program on/off of your computer search? I guess this raises the question of how far will the internet go. We already know what the federal government has access to and nobody seems to be doing much to stop it. Technology is ever growing and I think we as humans will have to make fundamental changes to what we believe is right in order to allow this growth. The internet is a place where everyone should feel comfortable, but many do not. I believe my searches are effective enough and I don't see any reason to change my habits. I have never spent more than a minute looking for what I want on a Google search. You know what they say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
We are being tailored to what an algorithmic computer program thinks we want to see. I wouldn't say that this concept is new to me but the TED talk was certainly the first time I have seen any in depth explanation of it. I am not one to fret about something like this, but I do understand why the speaker is hesitant to trust these programs. Why am I to be mad that my computer is showing me something I want to see? This is my perspective on the whole thing but I understand the points addressed in the video. I am not sure what the speaker wants, maybe a switch that can toggle this program on/off of your computer search? I guess this raises the question of how far will the internet go. We already know what the federal government has access to and nobody seems to be doing much to stop it. Technology is ever growing and I think we as humans will have to make fundamental changes to what we believe is right in order to allow this growth. The internet is a place where everyone should feel comfortable, but many do not. I believe my searches are effective enough and I don't see any reason to change my habits. I have never spent more than a minute looking for what I want on a Google search. You know what they say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Literature Analysis #3: Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer
Topics/Events
1A. "Into the Wild" focuses on the stories and travels of Chris McCandless. He was a college graduated that decided to leave everything he had behind and live on the road. Without any sufficient amount of money he set off west, departing from Georgia. He traveled all over the country, most of which was without a car of his own. He hitched rides with anyone who would pick him up. He traveled for a couple of years before making his final journey, one to Alaska. It was here that Chris unfortunately died in a bus that he had been taking shelter inside of.
1B. The story of a young man who was fed up with the life he had been living and therefore set off on a cross-country journey that eventually led to his demise.
2. The author chose to write about Chris and others who had similar adventures because it was something he could relate to. The author tells a story of his own abandoning of society to be alone in the wild. He was able to relate Chris's story to his own and therefore thought he could portray it in an interesting way.
3. I chose this book because it was one that I had always wanted to read but never got around to do it. I had seen the movie and I knew it was a book. My sister happened to read it a couple of weeks ago, (right around the time we were choosing our lit analysis books), and she suggested I read it. The book caught my attention right away because I love reading things that are real stories but can still keep you reading, which is what the book did to me.
4. This book was very realistic. It mentioned things that I think many people can relate to. Chris was someone who could not stand the upper-middle class lifestyle that was presented for him. He was an independent person that did not like to get help from anyone. He had been this way since he was little and I guess one day he decided that he was done and took a leap of faith. He did not know how this journey would go or where it would take him but he knew it would be somewhere better than where he was presently. I think many people can relate to the feeling of wanting to get out of a situation and start new.
People
1. The author not only must create his character through interpretations, he must create through his interpretations of other peoples interpretations. That may sound confusing but the author never actually met Chris McCandless and therefore all information he got was from people who had met him. The author had to listen to these people's thoughts about Chris and interpret them in his own way. The author seems to write in a way that persuades you to envy Chris.
2. A) Chris McCandless: There is so much to say about him but I will keep it short. He was good at just about anything he set his mind to. He was a scholar in school, great at playing music instruments and the team captain of his high school cross country team. He was short but fit with dark hair and "angelic" eyes. He is someone that is completely caught up in his own thoughts, one that has many friends but would rather spend his time alone. He seemed very cynical by description. He was very intelligent and strong willed, it was impossible to change his mind or tell him what to do.
B) Jon Waterman: Jon was another adventurer who was only talked about for a few pages. He was someone who came long before Chris but had similar desires. He was a small man but very fit. He had a passion for climbing and at the age out 16 he scaled Mt. McKinley, becoming the third youngest person ever to do so. People who knew him described him as being very odd and unstable. His parents split up when he was young and his father abandoned him. He grew up fighting for himself and therefore wanted to live a life of adventure, deciding to "live off the land". It seems he died on 3/13/81, we know this as the last time he inscribed something onto a rock. It is believed that he died shortly after on the summits of Denali.
3. Both of these characters had interesting reasons for their abandonment of society and both had tragic endings. Readers are quicker to enjoy a book that has a character like Chris who they can relate to and the fact that you know he is going to die makes you read on. Jon was interesting to read about because it gave another perspective of someone who went into the wild.
4. He uses the words/thoughts of others to reveal who Chris was. Almost all of his descriptions of Chris come from people who had met him along his journey. Many more come from his family members. He gives you their thoughts on Chris and lets you build your own opinion on him. The information is presented to you and you are left to figure out what kind of person he was.
5. When attempting to describe Chris, he shifts to the use of dialogue that friends/family have told him. He provides readers with ample amounts of descriptions that were given to him by people who knew Chris.
6. Chris seems to be a static character. While he did make a decision to abandon his old life for a new one, I don't believe he is dynamic. His attitude towards his journey seemingly never changes and it does not feel like he regrets doing it. He is living the life he wants to live and feels good about it.
7. Although I enjoyed the reading and could relate to Chris, I did not come out with the feeling that I had met Chris. When it comes to reading I do not have the best imagination so it is hard for me to picture myself meeting Chris.
Style
1. The way the book is written makes it feel like a fiction book. I mean sure, everything that is written about actually happened, but it seems to good to be true. The way he describes Chris's life and his journey makes it sort of unbelievable. To me it seems that if this was written a little differently it could be a fiction novel that many people would buy and love.
2. The author describes people through dialogue. Most of the book is focused on dialogue and/or thoughts about conversations people had with Chris.
3. You can tell that the author envies Chris. He writes in such a way that would persuade you to like Chris. He describes him as a very likable guy who just had weird ambitions. His tone is one of respect and envy. The book makes you feel happy and sympathetic towards Chris.
5. The author mentions tons of newspaper articles and others that had been written about Chris. I haven't gotten around to looking them up and reading about them but I assume they would further my understanding of Chris as a person and his journey into the wild. He also gives a few transcripts of letters that were sent after the founding of Chris's body. It was crazy to see how many people criticized Chris for doing what he did. Why must someone be looked down upon for doing what they want to do? (assuming it is not something illegal)
Enduring Memory
I think the main thing that I will take away from this book is that you should do what you want to do. If you are sick of living one way, try something else, the worst thing that can happen is you DYING! This doesn't only apply for life changing decisions, if you are in a situation that is uncomfortable for you and you have a way of getting out, GET OUT. Sure, Chris died, but he sure had the time of his life. He did exactly what he wanted to and I bet that if he had the chance to do it again, he would. He seems like the type of person who would regret nothing as he would learn from his own mistakes. Life is actually pretty darn long so fill it up with whatever makes you happy. For Chris, this was the excitement of living off nothing but himself. He did not need the outside world, or so he thought. You can in a way relate this to Hamlet, both people were faced with decisions that would change their lives forever, and both took the road they believed was best. For Chris, it was one that he would be comfortable with while Hamlet did not know what to expect. If you were not thinking of reading this text, I suggest you do, it may be eye opening or even life changing.
2. A) Chris McCandless: There is so much to say about him but I will keep it short. He was good at just about anything he set his mind to. He was a scholar in school, great at playing music instruments and the team captain of his high school cross country team. He was short but fit with dark hair and "angelic" eyes. He is someone that is completely caught up in his own thoughts, one that has many friends but would rather spend his time alone. He seemed very cynical by description. He was very intelligent and strong willed, it was impossible to change his mind or tell him what to do.
B) Jon Waterman: Jon was another adventurer who was only talked about for a few pages. He was someone who came long before Chris but had similar desires. He was a small man but very fit. He had a passion for climbing and at the age out 16 he scaled Mt. McKinley, becoming the third youngest person ever to do so. People who knew him described him as being very odd and unstable. His parents split up when he was young and his father abandoned him. He grew up fighting for himself and therefore wanted to live a life of adventure, deciding to "live off the land". It seems he died on 3/13/81, we know this as the last time he inscribed something onto a rock. It is believed that he died shortly after on the summits of Denali.
3. Both of these characters had interesting reasons for their abandonment of society and both had tragic endings. Readers are quicker to enjoy a book that has a character like Chris who they can relate to and the fact that you know he is going to die makes you read on. Jon was interesting to read about because it gave another perspective of someone who went into the wild.
4. He uses the words/thoughts of others to reveal who Chris was. Almost all of his descriptions of Chris come from people who had met him along his journey. Many more come from his family members. He gives you their thoughts on Chris and lets you build your own opinion on him. The information is presented to you and you are left to figure out what kind of person he was.
5. When attempting to describe Chris, he shifts to the use of dialogue that friends/family have told him. He provides readers with ample amounts of descriptions that were given to him by people who knew Chris.
6. Chris seems to be a static character. While he did make a decision to abandon his old life for a new one, I don't believe he is dynamic. His attitude towards his journey seemingly never changes and it does not feel like he regrets doing it. He is living the life he wants to live and feels good about it.
7. Although I enjoyed the reading and could relate to Chris, I did not come out with the feeling that I had met Chris. When it comes to reading I do not have the best imagination so it is hard for me to picture myself meeting Chris.
Style
1. The way the book is written makes it feel like a fiction book. I mean sure, everything that is written about actually happened, but it seems to good to be true. The way he describes Chris's life and his journey makes it sort of unbelievable. To me it seems that if this was written a little differently it could be a fiction novel that many people would buy and love.
2. The author describes people through dialogue. Most of the book is focused on dialogue and/or thoughts about conversations people had with Chris.
3. You can tell that the author envies Chris. He writes in such a way that would persuade you to like Chris. He describes him as a very likable guy who just had weird ambitions. His tone is one of respect and envy. The book makes you feel happy and sympathetic towards Chris.
5. The author mentions tons of newspaper articles and others that had been written about Chris. I haven't gotten around to looking them up and reading about them but I assume they would further my understanding of Chris as a person and his journey into the wild. He also gives a few transcripts of letters that were sent after the founding of Chris's body. It was crazy to see how many people criticized Chris for doing what he did. Why must someone be looked down upon for doing what they want to do? (assuming it is not something illegal)
Enduring Memory
I think the main thing that I will take away from this book is that you should do what you want to do. If you are sick of living one way, try something else, the worst thing that can happen is you DYING! This doesn't only apply for life changing decisions, if you are in a situation that is uncomfortable for you and you have a way of getting out, GET OUT. Sure, Chris died, but he sure had the time of his life. He did exactly what he wanted to and I bet that if he had the chance to do it again, he would. He seems like the type of person who would regret nothing as he would learn from his own mistakes. Life is actually pretty darn long so fill it up with whatever makes you happy. For Chris, this was the excitement of living off nothing but himself. He did not need the outside world, or so he thought. You can in a way relate this to Hamlet, both people were faced with decisions that would change their lives forever, and both took the road they believed was best. For Chris, it was one that he would be comfortable with while Hamlet did not know what to expect. If you were not thinking of reading this text, I suggest you do, it may be eye opening or even life changing.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Vocabulary #8
cursory- hasty/not thorough or detailed
Ex. I performed a cursory review of the test because I did not have time to study.
impetus- force or energy
Ex. The approaching deadline gave impetus to the investigation.
pinnacle- peak
Ex. Most people reach the pinnacle of their career during their 30's.
contumely- insulting language or treatment
Ex. The little girl contumely interrupted my speech.
bereavement- grief
Ex. It took three years of bereavement to get over my grandmother's death.
cache- a collection of items stored in a hidden place
Ex. Many drug dealers have a cache where they keep their drugs.
consummation- the point at which something is completed
Ex. Many couples cosummate their marraige on their wedding night.
calamity- a disaster
Ex. Many hurricanes and earthquakes are considered calamities, causing billions of dollars in damage.
avarice- greed
Ex. Out of pure avarice, the young boy lunged for the last piece of cake.
fortify- strengthen
Ex. The military base made sure to fortify their defenses prior to the incoming attack.
erratic- unpredictable
Ex. The teenage girl was known for being erratic, often times changing her mind at the last minute.
ubiquitous- found everywhere
Ex. Poverty is one thing that is ubiquitous around the world.
fortitude- courage in pain or adversity
Ex. She endured her illness with great fortitude.
nonchalant- not displaying enthusiasm
Ex. The boy nonchalantly walked up and won the prize at the carnival booth.
affect- make a difference to
Ex. The cold weather began to affect my mood.
effect- a change that is the result or consequence of an action
Ex. One effect of drinking alcohol is impaired judgement.
misappropriate- dishonestly/unfairly take
Ex. Department officials had missappropriated funds.
pragmatic- dealing with things sensibly/realistically
Ex. The senator had a pragmatic approach to politics.
metacognition- understanding of one's own thought processes
Ex. He had a metacognition of the way his brain solved arithmetic problems.
devoutly- in a devoted way
Ex. The priest spoke devoutly of his love for God.
Ex. I performed a cursory review of the test because I did not have time to study.
impetus- force or energy
Ex. The approaching deadline gave impetus to the investigation.
pinnacle- peak
Ex. Most people reach the pinnacle of their career during their 30's.
contumely- insulting language or treatment
Ex. The little girl contumely interrupted my speech.
bereavement- grief
Ex. It took three years of bereavement to get over my grandmother's death.
cache- a collection of items stored in a hidden place
Ex. Many drug dealers have a cache where they keep their drugs.
consummation- the point at which something is completed
Ex. Many couples cosummate their marraige on their wedding night.
calamity- a disaster
Ex. Many hurricanes and earthquakes are considered calamities, causing billions of dollars in damage.
avarice- greed
Ex. Out of pure avarice, the young boy lunged for the last piece of cake.
fortify- strengthen
Ex. The military base made sure to fortify their defenses prior to the incoming attack.
erratic- unpredictable
Ex. The teenage girl was known for being erratic, often times changing her mind at the last minute.
ubiquitous- found everywhere
Ex. Poverty is one thing that is ubiquitous around the world.
fortitude- courage in pain or adversity
Ex. She endured her illness with great fortitude.
nonchalant- not displaying enthusiasm
Ex. The boy nonchalantly walked up and won the prize at the carnival booth.
affect- make a difference to
Ex. The cold weather began to affect my mood.
effect- a change that is the result or consequence of an action
Ex. One effect of drinking alcohol is impaired judgement.
misappropriate- dishonestly/unfairly take
Ex. Department officials had missappropriated funds.
pragmatic- dealing with things sensibly/realistically
Ex. The senator had a pragmatic approach to politics.
metacognition- understanding of one's own thought processes
Ex. He had a metacognition of the way his brain solved arithmetic problems.
devoutly- in a devoted way
Ex. The priest spoke devoutly of his love for God.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
"Roger Ebert: The Essential Man"
All work done with Jon Begg: Jon's Blog
Activity 14: Surveying the Text
Acitivity 19: Annotating and Questioning the Text
Roger Ebert was definitely an optimist and it can be proven with his own words. He avoided talking about the discomforts that life brought and focused on the brighter side of life. Even as he loses his ability to speak he claims "never yet a dream where I can't talk" which shows the audience that even though he has lost his ability to speak he never lost his perspective of life.
Activity 20: Analyzing Stylistic Choices
Q1: What details in the first two paragraphs convey a sense of the ordinary, behind-the-scenes routines of a film critic? What words of phrases suggest the longevity of Ebert's movie critiquing career?
A1: Chris Jones does a good job explaining what it is like to be a film critic. He pretty much explains what Roger does, or used to do, daily as a critic. He mentions how Ebert is the most renowned movie critic in the world, to be that famous as a movie critic, you must have been doing it for a long period of time.
Q2: How does Chris Jones distinguish Ebert from his fellow reviewers? Why is this contrast important?
A2: Chris explains that most of the movie reviewers that work with Ebert will come into the room looking like they were going camping. With blankets, food and a laptop, they would stake out the theater for hours writing reviews on their computers. Ebert, however, only carried in a pen and a notepad to jot down any notes he needed to write down about the movie. This contrast seems to get the point across that Ebert is old school and uses his memory as a sole source of knowledge.
Q3: How does Jones's description of Ebert's reaction to Broken Embraces help to understand Ebert's character? What words or phrases reveal Ebert's attitude toward the experience of watching this film?
A3: Ebert apparently loves the film and radiates in joy while watching it. Even though, when looking at a picture of the man he may look like a monster, he is a man with feelings and who is generally happy. Ebert "takes excited notes", this is one of the only ways to tell if he likes a movie or not, this shows how much he loved the film.
Q4: What are the connotations of kid joy?
A4: "Kid joy" suggests pure happiness. It seems as if the way he is feeling is careless, a kid running around in the sprinklers or having its first crush. One that is odd to find in an adult. Pure, innate happiness.
Q5: Why does Jones use the word "savoring" to describe Ebert's quiet pause after the film ends?
A5: It seems as if Ebert is overcome with happiness after witnessing such a good picture. He sits quietly staring at the screen and thinking back on how good it must have been. He is a simple man.
Q6: What does Jones mean when he says that the moment Ebert said his last words before losing his ability to cancer "wasn't cinematic"?
A6: This moment was not cinematic because he can't even remember it. In a movie, someone's last words are portrayed as dramatic and epic. Ebert vaguely can remember his last day with his voice, but at the time he was more worried about surviving than what his last words may be.
Q7: What details are important in Jones's descriptions of Ebert's second-floor library? What do the objects in this room suggest about Ebert's life?
A7: The library is basically where Ebert spends all of his time at home. His ability to get medicine and all of his favorite things are there; a record player, books, a leather recliner movie posters. This is where he wants his limited number of days to be spent, with his favorite things at home with his wife.
Q8: Why does Jones say reading Ebert's post-cancer online journal is like "watching an Aztec pyramid being built"?
A8: He says this because the simile shows how hard and long Ebert's journey to beat cancer has been. It is a monumental task that did not seem possible but in the end was accomplished.
Q9: What words and phrases suggest the post-cancer, post-voice surge of productivity Ebert experienced in his writing?
A9: "Feverishly banging the keys of his MacBook Pro", "more than five-hundred thousand words", "life's work", and "massive monument of written debate".
Activity 21: The Mock Interview
Activity 14: Surveying the Text
Q1: What do you know about Roger Ebert? If you don't know anything about him, try doing a quick internet search and see what comes up.
My answer: Roger is a movie critic who lost his jaw to a tragic battle with cancer. He had a long career as a journalist and a screenwriter, during his career he worked as a critic for the Chicago Sun-Times from 1976 until he died in 2013. He was also the first to win the Pulitzer Prize for Criticism
Q2: What kind of writing- what Genre- do you think this text is?
My answer: This text is defiantly a type of journalistic writing.
Q3:Do you notice anything interesting about the way this text looks?
My answer: It seems to be written in the point of view of Roger Ebert, but it states facts from multiple parties at once. In parts of the text the story is written in third person stating known facts and making theories about what Roger might have thought at the time. The other part of the text follows Roger in his daily routines, showing the reader what his life seemed too look like from his perspective.
Activity 15: Making Predictions and Asking Questions
Q1: What topics related to the issue of how society values life do you think Ebert might have talked about in this interview?
MA: In his interview I predict that he would have talked about dealing with the hardships that come with loosing that ability to talk. With the lose of his ability to speak he would face hardships that would be hard for most people to imagine. I predict that he will talk about the importance of perseverance.
Q2:Do you think Ebert's claim about the value of life will agree with Hamlet or not?
MA: I believe that Roger will agree with Hamlet. Both He and Hamlet faced great challenges in their lives, if they simply gave into the temptation to quit i doubt either of them would be recognized. With the first two chapters being about how Roger has learned to cope with his disability I think that they will both have the same conclusion on the value of life.
Acitivty 16: Understanding Key Vocabulary
ritual: always done in a particular situation and in the same way each time
Survival: the state or fact of continuing to live or exist especially in spite of difficult conditions
radiates: to go out in a direct line from a central point or area
savoring: the act of enjoying something interesting or enjoyable
cinematic: of or relating to movies
feverishly: involving intense amounts of feeling or activity
rudimentary: basic or simple
mandible: a part of the jaw
tracheostomy:the surgical formation of an opening into the trachea through the neck especially to allow the passage of air
tracheostomy:the surgical formation of an opening into the trachea through the neck especially to allow the passage of air
monologue: a speech expressing the thoughts of a single person
argument: an attempt to persuade someone of something
facsimile: an exact duplicate or copy
nuanced: a very small difference in color, tone, meaning
sentimental: based on, showing, or resulting from feelings or emotions rather than reason or thought
mystics: those possessing magical properties
intervention: to become involved in something in order to have an influence on what happens
The words: savoring, feverishly, and sentimental are all associated with pleasure.
I anticipate to find more words involving sensation and emotion because this text is an interview on Roger Ebert's personal life and difficulties.
salivary glands: glands that release the fluid saliva into the mouth
radiation treatments: the use of radiation to treat for cancerous cells in the body
carotid artery: either of the two main arteries that supply blood to the head
breathing tube: a tube placed in the body to allow breathing to resume as normal
G-tube: a tube used to feed a patient who cannot obtain nutrition thought the use of their mouth.
IV pole: holds the IV
Activity 17: Reading for Understanding
Through the text Roger seems to be more optimistic then pessimistic because he always points out the settle benefits of his condition such as the device that saved him. He also seems to keep an eye on the positive aspects of life in his quote "When I am writing my problems become invisible and I am the same person I always was. All is well. I am as I should be.".
Roger's argument of death is that he believes that there is no afterlife. He believes that the true value to life is to bring joy to the world. He believes that the best we can do is to try to make ourselves and everyone else around us a little bit happier. He never truly states his value of death directly.
Activity 18: Mapping the Organizational Structure
Through the text Roger seems to be more optimistic then pessimistic because he always points out the settle benefits of his condition such as the device that saved him. He also seems to keep an eye on the positive aspects of life in his quote "When I am writing my problems become invisible and I am the same person I always was. All is well. I am as I should be.".
Roger's argument of death is that he believes that there is no afterlife. He believes that the true value to life is to bring joy to the world. He believes that the best we can do is to try to make ourselves and everyone else around us a little bit happier. He never truly states his value of death directly.
Acitivity 19: Annotating and Questioning the Text
Roger Ebert was definitely an optimist and it can be proven with his own words. He avoided talking about the discomforts that life brought and focused on the brighter side of life. Even as he loses his ability to speak he claims "never yet a dream where I can't talk" which shows the audience that even though he has lost his ability to speak he never lost his perspective of life.
Hamlet would likely find the quote " We must try to contribute joy to the world. That is true no matter what our problems, our health, our circumstances. We must try." to be the most interesting because it matches perfectly with the beginning of the To be or not to be soliloquy. Hamlet asks if it is " nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles,..."
Q1: What details in the first two paragraphs convey a sense of the ordinary, behind-the-scenes routines of a film critic? What words of phrases suggest the longevity of Ebert's movie critiquing career?
A1: Chris Jones does a good job explaining what it is like to be a film critic. He pretty much explains what Roger does, or used to do, daily as a critic. He mentions how Ebert is the most renowned movie critic in the world, to be that famous as a movie critic, you must have been doing it for a long period of time.
Q2: How does Chris Jones distinguish Ebert from his fellow reviewers? Why is this contrast important?
A2: Chris explains that most of the movie reviewers that work with Ebert will come into the room looking like they were going camping. With blankets, food and a laptop, they would stake out the theater for hours writing reviews on their computers. Ebert, however, only carried in a pen and a notepad to jot down any notes he needed to write down about the movie. This contrast seems to get the point across that Ebert is old school and uses his memory as a sole source of knowledge.
Q3: How does Jones's description of Ebert's reaction to Broken Embraces help to understand Ebert's character? What words or phrases reveal Ebert's attitude toward the experience of watching this film?
A3: Ebert apparently loves the film and radiates in joy while watching it. Even though, when looking at a picture of the man he may look like a monster, he is a man with feelings and who is generally happy. Ebert "takes excited notes", this is one of the only ways to tell if he likes a movie or not, this shows how much he loved the film.
Q4: What are the connotations of kid joy?
A4: "Kid joy" suggests pure happiness. It seems as if the way he is feeling is careless, a kid running around in the sprinklers or having its first crush. One that is odd to find in an adult. Pure, innate happiness.
Q5: Why does Jones use the word "savoring" to describe Ebert's quiet pause after the film ends?
A5: It seems as if Ebert is overcome with happiness after witnessing such a good picture. He sits quietly staring at the screen and thinking back on how good it must have been. He is a simple man.
Q6: What does Jones mean when he says that the moment Ebert said his last words before losing his ability to cancer "wasn't cinematic"?
A6: This moment was not cinematic because he can't even remember it. In a movie, someone's last words are portrayed as dramatic and epic. Ebert vaguely can remember his last day with his voice, but at the time he was more worried about surviving than what his last words may be.
Q7: What details are important in Jones's descriptions of Ebert's second-floor library? What do the objects in this room suggest about Ebert's life?
A7: The library is basically where Ebert spends all of his time at home. His ability to get medicine and all of his favorite things are there; a record player, books, a leather recliner movie posters. This is where he wants his limited number of days to be spent, with his favorite things at home with his wife.
Q8: Why does Jones say reading Ebert's post-cancer online journal is like "watching an Aztec pyramid being built"?
A8: He says this because the simile shows how hard and long Ebert's journey to beat cancer has been. It is a monumental task that did not seem possible but in the end was accomplished.
Q9: What words and phrases suggest the post-cancer, post-voice surge of productivity Ebert experienced in his writing?
A9: "Feverishly banging the keys of his MacBook Pro", "more than five-hundred thousand words", "life's work", and "massive monument of written debate".
Activity 21: The Mock Interview
Hamlet: How do you feel you've been treated by other people?
Roger Ebert: I have tons of people who care for me and I have not had many experiences where I have been treated badly due to my illness. Therefore I believe I am treated well.
Hamlet: Are you afraid of death?
Roger Ebert: I'm less afraid of death but more afraid of not doing what I love to do. My injury has definitely inhibited my ability to do what I love but I have found a way to work around it.
Hamlet: Are there any benefits to suffering?
Roger Ebert: When you're suffering, you are forced to contemplate what you really desire. The benefit of suffering is that when you are forced to think what you desire, you are then willing to do anything to do what you want.
Hamlet: How do you approach challenges?
Roger Ebert: I approach challenges head on and I persevere through the rough patches. Life is too great to give up on when things get tough.
Hamlet: What was the hardest part about facing your challenge?
Roger Ebert:
Roger Ebert: How do you feel you've been treated by other people?
Hamlet: I feel I am looked down upon for no apparent reason. People in my life seem to dislike me for reasons I am not sure of. The people I surround myself with are backstabbing nincompoops. I have decided to not put up with it any longer.
Roger Ebert: Are you afraid of death?
Hamlet: I am not afraid of death, I am only afraid of not living. My life up to this point has been lived for other people. I plan to change that and live for nobody besides me.
Roger Ebert: Are there any benefits to suffering?
Hamlet: I believe there are benefits to suffering. I have suffered my whole life and it has led me to want to make a change. Having the experience of suffering makes you stronger than if you lived your whole life in happiness.
Roger Ebert: How do you approach challenges?
Hamlet: I approach challenges head on. I am prepared to kill my uncle without much hesitation. I believe I will continue to suffer until I make the change, so this decision is easy.
Roger Ebert: What was the hardest part about facing your challenge?
Hamlet: The hardest part was the realization that the change I am willing to make will be one that leaves me in a spot I am not comfortable with. To become a new person, that is the scariest thing I have ever faced.
Activity 22: Thinking Critically
1. I am more likely to believe what someone says about themselves rather than what someone says about them. However, in the case of this article, we have to base our knowledge entirely on what Chris Jones says. He can embellish or change what Ebert said while we have no clue if what he says is true.
2. Emotional pain is different than physical pain because physical pain WILL eventually go away. There is no telling how long emotional pain will last and therefore I think it is worse. Physical pain has an estimated time of departure, emotional pain may stay forever.
3. I find it amazing that Ebert is still battling cancer but has such a positive outlook on life. If he has already beaten cancer, his attitude wouldn't be as impressive. If I met the guy in real life I would have no clue that he had such a terrible fight with cancer (besides his obvious physical defects).
4. Ebert seems to be at peace with what may lie ahead while Hamlet is terrified. Dreams are a source of uncertainty for Hamlet but a sense of security for Ebert.
5. Ebert has made peace. He believes he has lived a good life and whatever happens after life does not matter to him. Hamlet cannot stand the idea of not existing and therefore is terrified of death. Ebert and Hamlet have opposite views on the subject.
6. When Ebert is writing/critiquing he can feel as if his voice is still being heard. When he wants to call his wife to his room he has to use a robotic voice. If he writes something on the Internet, he can picture millions of people still able to hear HIS voice and point of view.
7. The pre-cancer Ebert lived his life through microphones, speaking in front of hundreds of people. The post-cancer Ebert lives his life through his computer, potentially speaking to millions of people.
8. Ebert does not have time to prattle with every person he sees on the street. He has lost his ability to speak and who knows how much longer he will live. This has given his life meaning and has made him want to express himself and his thoughts in a permanent place. The internet and what he writes on it is so precious to him.
9. Ebert has "found an even greater joy in books, art and films than he ever had before". It seems as if his prognosis of death gave him a reason to LIVE.
10. Jones's tone throughout the articles is one of admiration. He mentions at the beginning that Ebert is the most renowned movie critic or all time. He also at one point says that he cannot believe he got the opportunity to do a piece of work on such an icon.
11. Jones describes this one hospital visit so dramatically to appeal to his reader's emotions. He want you as a reader to like Ebert and sympathize with him. He uses phrases like "drown in his own blood" to emphasize the severity of the situation and help you realize it is a miracle that Ebert is still living.
12. The mention of the "open smile" is pretty intense. Ebert does not have the ability to control the way his face looks and it always seems like he is smiling. This gives anyone who looks at his deformed face a sense of security so most smile back. It it awful for Ebert because he can never show his emotions, it always looks like he is joyful.
13. Words like "ravished", "savor" and "longed for" suggest Ebert's passion for life.
Activity 24: Process Quick Write
When I read a text that is full of information and quotes like this I try to take it in chunks. I find it hard to read the whole thing in one sitting. If I did try to read it in one setting I would find it difficult to differentiate between parts of the story. I would suggest taking the text part by part and jotting down notes intermittently to gain an understanding. When answering the questions, constantly refer back to the text to see if you actually know what you are talking about. I would also suggest reading it more than once. The first time you read it you should scan the article and take notes on it. After you are done with that, go back and read every single word carefully. If you do all of these things I can guarantee (I actually can't) that you will have a deep understanding of the text.
Activity 22: Thinking Critically
1. I am more likely to believe what someone says about themselves rather than what someone says about them. However, in the case of this article, we have to base our knowledge entirely on what Chris Jones says. He can embellish or change what Ebert said while we have no clue if what he says is true.
2. Emotional pain is different than physical pain because physical pain WILL eventually go away. There is no telling how long emotional pain will last and therefore I think it is worse. Physical pain has an estimated time of departure, emotional pain may stay forever.
3. I find it amazing that Ebert is still battling cancer but has such a positive outlook on life. If he has already beaten cancer, his attitude wouldn't be as impressive. If I met the guy in real life I would have no clue that he had such a terrible fight with cancer (besides his obvious physical defects).
4. Ebert seems to be at peace with what may lie ahead while Hamlet is terrified. Dreams are a source of uncertainty for Hamlet but a sense of security for Ebert.
5. Ebert has made peace. He believes he has lived a good life and whatever happens after life does not matter to him. Hamlet cannot stand the idea of not existing and therefore is terrified of death. Ebert and Hamlet have opposite views on the subject.
6. When Ebert is writing/critiquing he can feel as if his voice is still being heard. When he wants to call his wife to his room he has to use a robotic voice. If he writes something on the Internet, he can picture millions of people still able to hear HIS voice and point of view.
7. The pre-cancer Ebert lived his life through microphones, speaking in front of hundreds of people. The post-cancer Ebert lives his life through his computer, potentially speaking to millions of people.
8. Ebert does not have time to prattle with every person he sees on the street. He has lost his ability to speak and who knows how much longer he will live. This has given his life meaning and has made him want to express himself and his thoughts in a permanent place. The internet and what he writes on it is so precious to him.
9. Ebert has "found an even greater joy in books, art and films than he ever had before". It seems as if his prognosis of death gave him a reason to LIVE.
10. Jones's tone throughout the articles is one of admiration. He mentions at the beginning that Ebert is the most renowned movie critic or all time. He also at one point says that he cannot believe he got the opportunity to do a piece of work on such an icon.
11. Jones describes this one hospital visit so dramatically to appeal to his reader's emotions. He want you as a reader to like Ebert and sympathize with him. He uses phrases like "drown in his own blood" to emphasize the severity of the situation and help you realize it is a miracle that Ebert is still living.
12. The mention of the "open smile" is pretty intense. Ebert does not have the ability to control the way his face looks and it always seems like he is smiling. This gives anyone who looks at his deformed face a sense of security so most smile back. It it awful for Ebert because he can never show his emotions, it always looks like he is joyful.
13. Words like "ravished", "savor" and "longed for" suggest Ebert's passion for life.
Activity 24: Process Quick Write
When I read a text that is full of information and quotes like this I try to take it in chunks. I find it hard to read the whole thing in one sitting. If I did try to read it in one setting I would find it difficult to differentiate between parts of the story. I would suggest taking the text part by part and jotting down notes intermittently to gain an understanding. When answering the questions, constantly refer back to the text to see if you actually know what you are talking about. I would also suggest reading it more than once. The first time you read it you should scan the article and take notes on it. After you are done with that, go back and read every single word carefully. If you do all of these things I can guarantee (I actually can't) that you will have a deep understanding of the text.
Monday, October 14, 2013
Value of Learning
My group and I plan to read an analyze two selections; "Roget Ebert: The Essential Man" by Chris Jones and "What is a Life Worth" by Amanda Ripley. We plan to do the given assignments and create an understanding of the text that can be feasibly explained to the other students in class.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Literature Analysis #2: A Brief History Of Time by Stephen Hawking
Topics/Events
1A. This book is about Physics. Most of the topics discussed in this book are hard to grasp and I therefore felt lost a lot of the time while reading it. I found myself having to reread many of the chapters but I am glad I did. After completing the book, I feel like a have peered into the minds of some of the smartest people to ever live on Earth. People like Newton, Eisenstein, and Hawking. Hawking does the best he can to explain extremely complicated theories to people that have no background knowledge of the subject. He does a pretty good job at explaining it and I feel I could give a rudimentary explanation of most of the theories. He explains how all of these things relate the the universe and explains the origin of space. He goes into extreme detail about black holes and speaks deeply about the big bang.
1B. A book that is probably meant for people who have a simple understanding of Physics prior to reading it. The book gives great explanations of what time is and how the universe works.
2. The author chose to write about this subject because it is what he has devoted his entire life to. He has been studying space and theoretical physics for over 40 years and has developed some of the theories detailed in the book, so who better to write about it than him? He is probably the person on Earth that has the best understanding of theoretical physics and therefore can easily explain it to someone who has no clue what he is talking about.
3. I have always been interested in space so as I was wandering around the Santa Maria Public Library it caught my eye. I had obviously heard of Stephen Hawking and read the introduction to the book. It seemed like something I would enjoy. At first I did not want to keep reading because it was a difficult read, however after powering through the initial dislike, I found it was a very interesting topic that I ended up enjoying.
4. The book seemed very realistic to me. After all, he was basically explaining how we came into existence and what was to come of our future as humans, what is anymore realistic? I love reading and watching documentaries about space so I knew some of the basic principles he was talking about. I could connect most of the writing to stuff I had heard of before. It was when he started explaining difficult to understand theories when I began to check out.
People
1. A lot of the people that Hawking described in this book were dead long before he was born. He therefore had never met them and had to come to his own conclusions about how they may have acted. I believe he described most of them how they probably were, he is a very intelligent man, after all. Hawking seems to have a deep admiration for the physicists he writes about, as many of them came up with principles he would later use to further his career. Hawking also describes many of his colleagues. He is always admirable to those that have helped further the subject of astrophysics in the last century and seems to enjoy working with these people. All of them have a want to make sense of life and the universe. Unfortunately, they will all be dead before we are technologically able to figure it out.
2. It's hard to describe two people mentioned in the book as they weren't really described in great detail. They were all extremely smart people. If you think that reading about and trying learn these complex theories is difficult, imagine being the one who created them. What all of these people have in common is that they will be remembered forever. Hawking does a great job at making you feel like he knew these people. I mean obviously he never met Isaac Newton or Galileo Galilei, but he seems to know a lot about their work and motivation.
3. These people are interesting enough to write about because they all make scientific discoveries that are either still used today or are the basis of something that is used today.
Style
1. The author used more of a journalistic style where he focused straight on the facts and explained how they related to the subject he was discussing. You have to understand that the part of this book with characters in it was largely based on historical figures. He used these historical figures and stories about these people to explain how complex theories worked sand how they are applicable today.
2. The author does not really focus on describing the appearance of his characters, he is more interested in describing what they contributed to astrophysics and how it relates to the subject of the book. These choices kind of create an atmosphere that is dull to read. There are no real characters that you "like" because none of them are developed. The book was not supposed to be one that is telling a story of character's lives, however, it is just purely informational.
3. Right from the start you can tell the author loves the subject that the book is about. He in fact tells us his background in the subject matter and how his whole life has been devoted to it. This creates a tone of understanding, he understands what he is writing about and you call tell by the way he writes. If you've ever tried to explain something complex to a 5 year old, you know what I am talking about. He does this except in a way of explaining to a grown person without a background in the subject. The book creates a mood of learning. There is no reason to read this book other than to learn about astrophysics. He therefore creates a type of environment where you want to learn more, its hard to explain.
4. The author is IN LOVE with the subject. I would believe it if he considered himself asexual and his one true love was astrophysics. All jokes aside, he is meant to do what he does. He enjoys discovering things and teaching them to other people, it doesn't hurt that he is a freaking genius. The reason he wrote the piece is probably to get a wider variety of people interested in the subject and to make it less taboo. A lot of what he talks about in the book contradicts thoughts of a creator but he wants everyone to be able to read the book and take some kind of meaning out of it.
5. The author of the book becomes a name dropper. He mentions so many historical scientists that you have no choice other than to look up who they are. Sure, he gives a brief definition of who they are/were but leaves you with a large enough interest to look them up outside of the reading. I could look up any of the people he mentioned in the book and read extensively about who they are/were. This helped me gain a better understanding of who these darn scientists were that have tortured me by creating complex theories.
Enduring Memory
I expect to remember many things from this book. I HOPE to remember most of the things that were discussed but I know I won't always remember the theory of relativity or quantum mechanics. I will, however, remember simple things like the infinite expansion of our universe. I will also remember things Hawking said about God and why his existence is really doubtful. In meetings with the Catholic church, he was asked to help them decide where the church should lay its laws for creationism. They believed that they could set the time of creation at the big bang and that would still allow for the existence of a God, he reluctantly agreed. He knew in his head that this explanation was very doubtful, but went along with it anyway. This book in a way relates to the subject we are covering in class at the moment, the value of life. If what Hawking says is true, there is no life after death, why not live your life to the fullest? This gives some people no reason to live, but I believe it should give people EVERY reason to live. If you know that these 30, 50, 70 years were the only ones you will ever live, why not enjoy your life and make it great? Do not dwell in the past or worry about your future, after all, Hawking was told that his time of death was sometime back in the 60's. He did not expect to live very much longer after his diagnosis with Lou Gehrig's disease. This did not deter him from gaining his degree and pursuing a career in astrophysics. He can be a lesson to us all that if life puts you down, get back up, tell it to screw off and live life to the fullest.
1A. This book is about Physics. Most of the topics discussed in this book are hard to grasp and I therefore felt lost a lot of the time while reading it. I found myself having to reread many of the chapters but I am glad I did. After completing the book, I feel like a have peered into the minds of some of the smartest people to ever live on Earth. People like Newton, Eisenstein, and Hawking. Hawking does the best he can to explain extremely complicated theories to people that have no background knowledge of the subject. He does a pretty good job at explaining it and I feel I could give a rudimentary explanation of most of the theories. He explains how all of these things relate the the universe and explains the origin of space. He goes into extreme detail about black holes and speaks deeply about the big bang.
1B. A book that is probably meant for people who have a simple understanding of Physics prior to reading it. The book gives great explanations of what time is and how the universe works.
2. The author chose to write about this subject because it is what he has devoted his entire life to. He has been studying space and theoretical physics for over 40 years and has developed some of the theories detailed in the book, so who better to write about it than him? He is probably the person on Earth that has the best understanding of theoretical physics and therefore can easily explain it to someone who has no clue what he is talking about.
3. I have always been interested in space so as I was wandering around the Santa Maria Public Library it caught my eye. I had obviously heard of Stephen Hawking and read the introduction to the book. It seemed like something I would enjoy. At first I did not want to keep reading because it was a difficult read, however after powering through the initial dislike, I found it was a very interesting topic that I ended up enjoying.
4. The book seemed very realistic to me. After all, he was basically explaining how we came into existence and what was to come of our future as humans, what is anymore realistic? I love reading and watching documentaries about space so I knew some of the basic principles he was talking about. I could connect most of the writing to stuff I had heard of before. It was when he started explaining difficult to understand theories when I began to check out.
People
1. A lot of the people that Hawking described in this book were dead long before he was born. He therefore had never met them and had to come to his own conclusions about how they may have acted. I believe he described most of them how they probably were, he is a very intelligent man, after all. Hawking seems to have a deep admiration for the physicists he writes about, as many of them came up with principles he would later use to further his career. Hawking also describes many of his colleagues. He is always admirable to those that have helped further the subject of astrophysics in the last century and seems to enjoy working with these people. All of them have a want to make sense of life and the universe. Unfortunately, they will all be dead before we are technologically able to figure it out.
2. It's hard to describe two people mentioned in the book as they weren't really described in great detail. They were all extremely smart people. If you think that reading about and trying learn these complex theories is difficult, imagine being the one who created them. What all of these people have in common is that they will be remembered forever. Hawking does a great job at making you feel like he knew these people. I mean obviously he never met Isaac Newton or Galileo Galilei, but he seems to know a lot about their work and motivation.
3. These people are interesting enough to write about because they all make scientific discoveries that are either still used today or are the basis of something that is used today.
Style
1. The author used more of a journalistic style where he focused straight on the facts and explained how they related to the subject he was discussing. You have to understand that the part of this book with characters in it was largely based on historical figures. He used these historical figures and stories about these people to explain how complex theories worked sand how they are applicable today.
2. The author does not really focus on describing the appearance of his characters, he is more interested in describing what they contributed to astrophysics and how it relates to the subject of the book. These choices kind of create an atmosphere that is dull to read. There are no real characters that you "like" because none of them are developed. The book was not supposed to be one that is telling a story of character's lives, however, it is just purely informational.
3. Right from the start you can tell the author loves the subject that the book is about. He in fact tells us his background in the subject matter and how his whole life has been devoted to it. This creates a tone of understanding, he understands what he is writing about and you call tell by the way he writes. If you've ever tried to explain something complex to a 5 year old, you know what I am talking about. He does this except in a way of explaining to a grown person without a background in the subject. The book creates a mood of learning. There is no reason to read this book other than to learn about astrophysics. He therefore creates a type of environment where you want to learn more, its hard to explain.
4. The author is IN LOVE with the subject. I would believe it if he considered himself asexual and his one true love was astrophysics. All jokes aside, he is meant to do what he does. He enjoys discovering things and teaching them to other people, it doesn't hurt that he is a freaking genius. The reason he wrote the piece is probably to get a wider variety of people interested in the subject and to make it less taboo. A lot of what he talks about in the book contradicts thoughts of a creator but he wants everyone to be able to read the book and take some kind of meaning out of it.
5. The author of the book becomes a name dropper. He mentions so many historical scientists that you have no choice other than to look up who they are. Sure, he gives a brief definition of who they are/were but leaves you with a large enough interest to look them up outside of the reading. I could look up any of the people he mentioned in the book and read extensively about who they are/were. This helped me gain a better understanding of who these darn scientists were that have tortured me by creating complex theories.
Enduring Memory
I expect to remember many things from this book. I HOPE to remember most of the things that were discussed but I know I won't always remember the theory of relativity or quantum mechanics. I will, however, remember simple things like the infinite expansion of our universe. I will also remember things Hawking said about God and why his existence is really doubtful. In meetings with the Catholic church, he was asked to help them decide where the church should lay its laws for creationism. They believed that they could set the time of creation at the big bang and that would still allow for the existence of a God, he reluctantly agreed. He knew in his head that this explanation was very doubtful, but went along with it anyway. This book in a way relates to the subject we are covering in class at the moment, the value of life. If what Hawking says is true, there is no life after death, why not live your life to the fullest? This gives some people no reason to live, but I believe it should give people EVERY reason to live. If you know that these 30, 50, 70 years were the only ones you will ever live, why not enjoy your life and make it great? Do not dwell in the past or worry about your future, after all, Hawking was told that his time of death was sometime back in the 60's. He did not expect to live very much longer after his diagnosis with Lou Gehrig's disease. This did not deter him from gaining his degree and pursuing a career in astrophysics. He can be a lesson to us all that if life puts you down, get back up, tell it to screw off and live life to the fullest.
Melancholy Grad
Life is hard and these years have been some of the hardest. As time lingers on, I realize how tragic life truly is. This tragic life, however, can be changed for the better. Most problems have solutions, in my case, this solution happened to lead to a change in character. Most problems have simple solutions that will cause your life to be better and are therefore worth making. I suggest that if you problem has a solution that will change who you are, think twice about making it. Have a deep internal conversation, would you rather continue to live a life you despise, or one that is unknown? Even though you despise it, you are comfortable living it and may have a hard time attempting a change. I suggest making that change happen, life is not good until you make the change and are truly living. This may seem like a cliche, but I believe it is true. You will not enjoy life until you make an attempt to have fun and forget your inhibitions. You'll most likely dislike the life that begins after you make the change but you will get used to it and eventually enjoy it. Find a support group that respects your decision and follow through with it, relentlessly pursuing your goal. This is how I changed my life for the better and I hope many of you will do the same.
Thank you for listening to me babble on,
Hamlet
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
To Be Or Not To Be
Soliloquy
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them: to die, to sleep
No more; and by a sleep, to say we end
The Heart-ache, and the thousand Natural shocks
That Flesh is heir to? 'Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep,
To sleep, perchance to Dream; Aye, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death, what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes Calamity of so long life:
For who would bear the Whips and Scorns of time,
The Oppressor's wrong, the proud man's Contumely,
The pangs of despised Love, the Law’s delay,
The insolence of Office, and the Spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his Quietus make
With a bare Bodkin? Who would Fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered Country, from whose bourn
No Traveller returns, Puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of.
Thus Conscience does make Cowards of us all,
And thus the Native hue of Resolution
Is sicklied o'er, with the pale cast of Thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment,
With this regard their Currents turn awry,
And lose the name of Action. Soft you now,
The fair Ophelia? Nymph, in thy Orisons
Be all my sins remembered.
My interpretation
To become this unknown person or to stay comfortable in who I am,
Should I keep on living this tragic life,
Or stand up to the evil that is surrounding me,
By standing up, destroy the evil,
But become a person that I'd never think of could be me,
If I do stand up I will end the pain and suffering,
Maybe even get the chance to live life the way I want,
What can be accomplished when the struggles of daily life are gone,
Stop and examine this disastrous life,
Who could deal with the humiliations of life, the abuse from superiors, the insults from arrogant men,
The justice system is inefficient,
Why deal with this all when you can end it easily with a knife,
Who would struggle through a terrible life unless they feared the afterlife,
We would rather deal with the terrible life than face what comes after,
Contemplating death makes us all cowards,
Thinking too much makes us lose our will to live,
Actions that should be completed are put off,
Hamlet then is distracted by a beautiful girl walking past.
Thoughts
Hamlet seems like he has his stuff figured out. He know that he has to kill his uncle and is willing to do it. He doesn't, however, know how this will affect his character. It seems to me that he is not afraid to die, as he is not afraid of the afterlife. He speaks of the reason people go on living terrible lives is because they are afraid of what lies ahead after it ends. He, however, is not one of these people. He is willing to take action to end his suffering, whether that be attempting to make it better on the outside or eventually ending his life. He is willing to go against what the crowd believes is the right thing to do and take action. He knows that life is not getting any easier at its current pace and maybe a change in character will push his life in the right direction. He is scared of this change in character as it is someone/something he is not familiar with. Can you imagine making a decision that will COMPLETELY define who you are/how you live life. As we talked about during class, most decisions define who you are/how you live but this one is a decision that will be unchangeable. Hamlet will never be able to return to the life he was previously living. This soliloquy is him expressing his thoughts on the value of his life and how his life will be after the murder.
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them: to die, to sleep
No more; and by a sleep, to say we end
The Heart-ache, and the thousand Natural shocks
That Flesh is heir to? 'Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep,
To sleep, perchance to Dream; Aye, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death, what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes Calamity of so long life:
For who would bear the Whips and Scorns of time,
The Oppressor's wrong, the proud man's Contumely,
The pangs of despised Love, the Law’s delay,
The insolence of Office, and the Spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his Quietus make
With a bare Bodkin? Who would Fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered Country, from whose bourn
No Traveller returns, Puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of.
Thus Conscience does make Cowards of us all,
And thus the Native hue of Resolution
Is sicklied o'er, with the pale cast of Thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment,
With this regard their Currents turn awry,
And lose the name of Action. Soft you now,
The fair Ophelia? Nymph, in thy Orisons
Be all my sins remembered.
My interpretation
To become this unknown person or to stay comfortable in who I am,
Should I keep on living this tragic life,
Or stand up to the evil that is surrounding me,
By standing up, destroy the evil,
But become a person that I'd never think of could be me,
If I do stand up I will end the pain and suffering,
Maybe even get the chance to live life the way I want,
What can be accomplished when the struggles of daily life are gone,
Stop and examine this disastrous life,
Who could deal with the humiliations of life, the abuse from superiors, the insults from arrogant men,
The justice system is inefficient,
Why deal with this all when you can end it easily with a knife,
Who would struggle through a terrible life unless they feared the afterlife,
We would rather deal with the terrible life than face what comes after,
Contemplating death makes us all cowards,
Thinking too much makes us lose our will to live,
Actions that should be completed are put off,
Hamlet then is distracted by a beautiful girl walking past.
Thoughts
Hamlet seems like he has his stuff figured out. He know that he has to kill his uncle and is willing to do it. He doesn't, however, know how this will affect his character. It seems to me that he is not afraid to die, as he is not afraid of the afterlife. He speaks of the reason people go on living terrible lives is because they are afraid of what lies ahead after it ends. He, however, is not one of these people. He is willing to take action to end his suffering, whether that be attempting to make it better on the outside or eventually ending his life. He is willing to go against what the crowd believes is the right thing to do and take action. He knows that life is not getting any easier at its current pace and maybe a change in character will push his life in the right direction. He is scared of this change in character as it is someone/something he is not familiar with. Can you imagine making a decision that will COMPLETELY define who you are/how you live life. As we talked about during class, most decisions define who you are/how you live but this one is a decision that will be unchangeable. Hamlet will never be able to return to the life he was previously living. This soliloquy is him expressing his thoughts on the value of his life and how his life will be after the murder.
Vocabulary #7
cursory- hasty/not thorough or detailed
Ex. I performed a cursory review of the test because I did not have time to study.
impetus- force or energy
Ex. The approaching deadline gave impetus to the investigation.
pinnacle- peak
Ex. Most people reach the pinnacle of their career during their 30's.
contumely- insulting language or treatment
Ex. The little girl contumely interrupted my speech.
bereavement- grief
Ex. It took three years of bereavement to get over my grandmother's death.
cache- a collection of items stored in a hidden place
Ex. Many drug dealers have a cache where they keep their drugs.
consummation- the point at which something is completed
Ex. Many couples cosummate their marraige on their wedding night.
calamity- a disaster
Ex. Many hurricanes and earthquakes are considered calamities, causing billions of dollars in damage.
avarice- greed
Ex. Out of pure avarice, the young boy lunged for the last piece of cake.
fortify- strengthen
Ex. The military base made sure to fortify their defenses prior to the incoming attack.
erratic- unpredictable
Ex. The teenage girl was known for being erratic, often times changing her mind at the last minute.
ubiquitous- found everywhere
Ex. Poverty is one thing that is ubiquitous around the world.
fortitude- courage in pain or adversity
Ex. She endured her illness with great fortitude.
nonchalant- not displaying enthusiasm
Ex. The boy nonchalantly walked up and won the prize at the carnival booth.
affect- make a difference to
Ex. The cold weather began to affect my mood.
effect- a change that is the result or consequence of an action
Ex. One effect of drinking alcohol is impaired judgement.
misappropriate- dishonestly/unfairly take
Ex. Department officials had missappropriated funds.
pragmatic- dealing with things sensibly/realistically
Ex. The senator had a pragmatic approach to politics.
metacognition- understanding of one's own thought processes
Ex. He had a metacognition of the way his brain solved arithmetic problems.
devoutly- in a devoted way
Ex. The priest spoke devoutly of his love for God.
Ex. I performed a cursory review of the test because I did not have time to study.
impetus- force or energy
Ex. The approaching deadline gave impetus to the investigation.
pinnacle- peak
Ex. Most people reach the pinnacle of their career during their 30's.
contumely- insulting language or treatment
Ex. The little girl contumely interrupted my speech.
bereavement- grief
Ex. It took three years of bereavement to get over my grandmother's death.
cache- a collection of items stored in a hidden place
Ex. Many drug dealers have a cache where they keep their drugs.
consummation- the point at which something is completed
Ex. Many couples cosummate their marraige on their wedding night.
calamity- a disaster
Ex. Many hurricanes and earthquakes are considered calamities, causing billions of dollars in damage.
avarice- greed
Ex. Out of pure avarice, the young boy lunged for the last piece of cake.
fortify- strengthen
Ex. The military base made sure to fortify their defenses prior to the incoming attack.
erratic- unpredictable
Ex. The teenage girl was known for being erratic, often times changing her mind at the last minute.
ubiquitous- found everywhere
Ex. Poverty is one thing that is ubiquitous around the world.
fortitude- courage in pain or adversity
Ex. She endured her illness with great fortitude.
nonchalant- not displaying enthusiasm
Ex. The boy nonchalantly walked up and won the prize at the carnival booth.
affect- make a difference to
Ex. The cold weather began to affect my mood.
effect- a change that is the result or consequence of an action
Ex. One effect of drinking alcohol is impaired judgement.
misappropriate- dishonestly/unfairly take
Ex. Department officials had missappropriated funds.
pragmatic- dealing with things sensibly/realistically
Ex. The senator had a pragmatic approach to politics.
metacognition- understanding of one's own thought processes
Ex. He had a metacognition of the way his brain solved arithmetic problems.
devoutly- in a devoted way
Ex. The priest spoke devoutly of his love for God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)