These past couple of readings for AP Composition have been long and complex. Yet they all hold the basis of transcendentalist views. Transcendentalism describes a simple ideal of believing in themselves and thinking about the word beyond their five sense, and more what they feel themselves.
These readings have been my favorite in terms of their content that is very quotable and their push for individualized ideas. I love the use of imagination and thoughts to describe different aspects of life. But I am too much of a logical thinker to be a true transcendentalist. For me personally, looking at events and finding the reasons for why they may have happened has always been the 'norm' for me. Its not a cynical view, but philosophy isn't something that I can handle. With all of these recent news headliners, I can't help but consider the outside facts. However, it is very hard to ignore my own thoughts and beliefs.
So, transcendentalist, no. Someone that relies on themselves and holds to their own ideals, absolutely.
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Book to Movie... Occasionally Effective
The 2013 film version of The Great Gatsby offers everyone a great story, even for those that have not read the novel. The film compares to the novel, but also offers some additional emphasis and provides some meaning in different ways.
All of the stylistic aspects and motifs in the novel are clearly depicted in the film. Worthy of praise, but easily ignored by those who have not read the book. This happens in all literature to film adaptations, but Fitzgerald's heavy use of symbolism isn't depicted clearly in Luhrmann's use of cinema symbolism. It seems to get lost in translation.
The biggest change in the film is the way that Nick tells the story. He is telling it from the future and the novel doesn't clue up to that version. He is in a mental institution with serve depression and heavy drinking problems and is telling the story, or writing the story, to his therapist. This is a major change, but clears up any confusion that a movie goer may have in terms of who is narrating and who he is. Luhrmann successfully bridges the gap between the avid readers and the casual movie viewers, and everyone in between.
The readers are pleased to see his faithfulness to a story filled with symbolism. The green light, the eyes, and the flowers are depicted clearly; however, the aspects that are found only in the narrative text are left out on occasion.
This movie is great and all film adaptations receive criticism due to budgets and time, leaving special parts of the book out of the movie. The plot line is simple and as are the characters, all of these things are transferred effectively. The contrast between some lacking motifs in the movie and the excessive motifs in the book leave a gray area and vast differences.
All of the stylistic aspects and motifs in the novel are clearly depicted in the film. Worthy of praise, but easily ignored by those who have not read the book. This happens in all literature to film adaptations, but Fitzgerald's heavy use of symbolism isn't depicted clearly in Luhrmann's use of cinema symbolism. It seems to get lost in translation.
The biggest change in the film is the way that Nick tells the story. He is telling it from the future and the novel doesn't clue up to that version. He is in a mental institution with serve depression and heavy drinking problems and is telling the story, or writing the story, to his therapist. This is a major change, but clears up any confusion that a movie goer may have in terms of who is narrating and who he is. Luhrmann successfully bridges the gap between the avid readers and the casual movie viewers, and everyone in between.
The readers are pleased to see his faithfulness to a story filled with symbolism. The green light, the eyes, and the flowers are depicted clearly; however, the aspects that are found only in the narrative text are left out on occasion.
This movie is great and all film adaptations receive criticism due to budgets and time, leaving special parts of the book out of the movie. The plot line is simple and as are the characters, all of these things are transferred effectively. The contrast between some lacking motifs in the movie and the excessive motifs in the book leave a gray area and vast differences.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Mentality for Guns
In our country, the Constitution is only referred to or followed when it is necessary to provide an explanation for why someone has the right to do something. The "gun crazy" Americans are likely only to know the second amendment of the U.S Constitution. While I do not 100% oppose the use of guns in our country, I still firmly believe that guns shall only be used for sport or protection. What I am very opposed to is the murder of innocent people, I do not feel I am making any assumptions when I say that my fellow American citizens will most certainly agree with me. I do feel, however, that I am in a minority when I say that the way to stop the 11,000 murders by gun is to pay attention to mental health.
In the Bowling for Columbine documentary, very little was said about the mental health of the various gunmen in these massacres. America has a very negative stigma about mental illnesses. If one were to look closely at the shootings that have made national headlines, to look beyond the fact that these people had guns in the first place, to look beyond the minute to minute details of the shooting, an ability to see the mind of the gunman is most crucial. The two shootings that were discussed in detail were the shootings Columbine and Flint, Michigan and it is clear that those that committed these horrible acts had poor mental health. Interviews in the documentary confirmed the state that these two teens and one boy were in were not healthy.
I feel very strongly about these issues. The political figures that are at the center of this nation wide debate will never be able to please the whole country, but a reasonable approach to gun control will be indirectly, through mental health. Though, this will not be considered 'gun control', it will be 'unnecessary deaths of innocent people control'.
I feel very strongly about these issues. The political figures that are at the center of this nation wide debate will never be able to please the whole country, but a reasonable approach to gun control will be indirectly, through mental health. Though, this will not be considered 'gun control', it will be 'unnecessary deaths of innocent people control'.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Sound and Fury
The main debate in the movie was about whether or not a cochlear implant should be utilized in order to hear. A cochlear implant is a device that is placed on the surface of the brain and is hooked up to a hearing aid on the outside of the head. It allows those that cannot hear the ability to hear. This surgery is an invasive one; physically, emotionally, and mentally.
The deaf world and the hearing world are two very different worlds and it is hard for those that are able to hear to recognize. In McFarland, there are no deaf students, maybe very hard of hearing, but not deaf. The documentary, "Sound and Fury" helped me realize how complex this culture is. There are so many aspects to these two worlds that it is hard to understand exactly what the other has or doesn't have. The two families, Peter's family and Chris's family, have children that are deaf.
Heather is four and is interested about getting an implant and having the ability to hear. Her parents don't agree because they want her to be a part of the deaf culture. Being able to hear will change her identity and will confuse her on her status, her status in the deaf world and hearing world. Her family is very proud of the deafness, but feel that she would be afforded more opportunities with the implant.
Peter is a newborn twin that is deaf. No one in his immediate family is deaf and getting the implant will make his life much easier, that is what his family believes. His parents turned to the implant right away. It was not supported because many thought that they were ashamed of his deafness.
These two views caused a lot of tension in the families. Some discouraged the implant, some encouraged it. Those that encouraged it were able to hear, those that disagreed with it were not able to hear. The family that was opposed to the implant was more adjusted, so to speak, with the deaf culture, while the family that wanted it wasn't as exposed to that lifestyle.
These debates involved a lot of definition and commonplace. Chris's family wanted to give their son the ability to hear because they had never experienced deaf life themselves. Peter's family was opposed to it because all that they knew was a deaf life. They wanted to keep it that way. Deafness was a part of their identity.
The deaf world and the hearing world are two very different worlds and it is hard for those that are able to hear to recognize. In McFarland, there are no deaf students, maybe very hard of hearing, but not deaf. The documentary, "Sound and Fury" helped me realize how complex this culture is. There are so many aspects to these two worlds that it is hard to understand exactly what the other has or doesn't have. The two families, Peter's family and Chris's family, have children that are deaf.
Heather is four and is interested about getting an implant and having the ability to hear. Her parents don't agree because they want her to be a part of the deaf culture. Being able to hear will change her identity and will confuse her on her status, her status in the deaf world and hearing world. Her family is very proud of the deafness, but feel that she would be afforded more opportunities with the implant.
Peter is a newborn twin that is deaf. No one in his immediate family is deaf and getting the implant will make his life much easier, that is what his family believes. His parents turned to the implant right away. It was not supported because many thought that they were ashamed of his deafness.
These two views caused a lot of tension in the families. Some discouraged the implant, some encouraged it. Those that encouraged it were able to hear, those that disagreed with it were not able to hear. The family that was opposed to the implant was more adjusted, so to speak, with the deaf culture, while the family that wanted it wasn't as exposed to that lifestyle.
These debates involved a lot of definition and commonplace. Chris's family wanted to give their son the ability to hear because they had never experienced deaf life themselves. Peter's family was opposed to it because all that they knew was a deaf life. They wanted to keep it that way. Deafness was a part of their identity.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Fictional Worlds
Fictional means not real, correct? I spend the majority of my free time, if there is any, reading fictional stories or watching fictional movies or TV shows. These story lines intrigue me and are a part of who I am. The stories that are very far fetched (sci fi, fantasy and dystopian) are the ones that I tend to read or watch, but also try to stay away from. The most prominent, creepy stories are The Walking Dead, Divergent, or a books series titled, The Dead and the Gone. All Disney cartoons, and other in that genre, are fair game, however. All of these stories have a 99.99% chance of happening, but still give me the willies.
Regardless of the chances, I will forever fear the possibility of myself getting caught in these stories. The tension in the story and the characters scare me because I am set on the fact that if I was put in these situations, I would not make it. Nothing gets more irrational than this; because it is fictional! Meaning, the story is untrue and is purely a figment of the author's imagination. None of the events or people or ideas are real, so why do I fear them? How I would react if these situations became non-fictional is beyond me. It would not be pretty.
On another note, I would be thrilled to be placed in a Harry Potter setting and most of the Disney stories as well, but the scary situations (and you know what I am talking about) are a no fly zone.
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
'Blurred Lines' is Lot of Things
This conversation, the one about what 'Blurred Lines' is truly about and how it can be perceived is one that could be stretched and dissected for a long time. With all of the songs out there that highlight sex and parties one wouldn't pay much attention to the lyrics, but many have. I, myself, didn't think much of this song because for me, if it's catchy, I like the song. Upon listening to the lyrics more closely last year, I quickly discovered what it was about. I shied away from it on the radio and gave it a thumbs down on Pandora, partially due to to the fact that it was overplayed and then because it just made me feel uncomfortable because I was paying attention to the lyrics more at that time. Until last week, when we started to dive deeper into the song, did I realize that it may have a rapey feel.
The essay by Tricia Romano is highlighted with the comments from other essays. It exemplifies the title and the feel. The title, 'Blurred Lines' is viewed as the line between consent and rape and many of the feminist writers feel that it gives the notion of rape and male bravado. On the other hand, Jennifer Lai talks about how cocky it is, but not rapey. Lai gets at the fact that while it has phrases that sound very assuming, they do not go beyond the boundaries to say, "'I know you want it, and I'm going to force you to have it.'" This gives a very bad rep to cocky men and their assumptions. But this author doesn't feel like it is something to concern yourself with.
I do agree, with both points. You need to choose for yourself if this is something to worry about and to talk about. I will not worry about this topic of discussion, but I do feel, as an individual, that this is a song that I do not want to hear. But I also won't condemn it. This song is just another song in our music industry. As much as a feminist I may be, I will not get too opinionated because the two essays tie up the perception. The song's message is about how you perceive it, just as it is with all forms of art.
The essay by Tricia Romano is highlighted with the comments from other essays. It exemplifies the title and the feel. The title, 'Blurred Lines' is viewed as the line between consent and rape and many of the feminist writers feel that it gives the notion of rape and male bravado. On the other hand, Jennifer Lai talks about how cocky it is, but not rapey. Lai gets at the fact that while it has phrases that sound very assuming, they do not go beyond the boundaries to say, "'I know you want it, and I'm going to force you to have it.'" This gives a very bad rep to cocky men and their assumptions. But this author doesn't feel like it is something to concern yourself with.
I do agree, with both points. You need to choose for yourself if this is something to worry about and to talk about. I will not worry about this topic of discussion, but I do feel, as an individual, that this is a song that I do not want to hear. But I also won't condemn it. This song is just another song in our music industry. As much as a feminist I may be, I will not get too opinionated because the two essays tie up the perception. The song's message is about how you perceive it, just as it is with all forms of art.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Autobiography of a Face
I know a book is good if it leaves me stumped. The book, "Autobiography of a Face," by Lucy Grealy, left me thinking even a month after I had finished turning it's pages. This story is heavy, not in the physical state, but the contents. It's a hard thing to describe to someone that hasn't read the book. I think that is why I am still thinking about it, the book has a complexity to it's story. Any story about pediatric cancer, disfigurement, the concept of beauty, and a yearning for self acceptance will have layers upon layers to it's story.
There are very few books that I have read that have caused me to underline, highlight, and tab the pages. There are so many things in books like these that come to my attention. I was very impressed with the book, because while it is truly non-fiction, it didn't seem like it. It is a very beautiful work of literature that was written very well. In the afterword, written by her very good friend, Ann Patchett stated, "She wanted her book to be judged on it's literary merit and not its heartbreaking content." She also made it very clear that while she is writing about her life, she didn't remember it to every minute detail. She made her point, "She was making art, not documenting an event." Maybe I haven't read much non-fiction, but I do know that most non-fiction books document something, not tell a story. She didn't want to be an inspiration, she wanted to write.
It is clear that she spared the readers a lot of pain and suffering. A story about one's life can never be fully written. If all of the details about her life were included in the book those that read it would be crushed by it's weight; this is what I mean by saying that the book is heavy. When Lucy Grealy added a note that she found her disfigurement more of a hardship than a cancer that was essentially terminal, you knew her life was a difficult one. It is very clear that one of her greatest joys is the publication of this book.
There are very few books that I have read that have caused me to underline, highlight, and tab the pages. There are so many things in books like these that come to my attention. I was very impressed with the book, because while it is truly non-fiction, it didn't seem like it. It is a very beautiful work of literature that was written very well. In the afterword, written by her very good friend, Ann Patchett stated, "She wanted her book to be judged on it's literary merit and not its heartbreaking content." She also made it very clear that while she is writing about her life, she didn't remember it to every minute detail. She made her point, "She was making art, not documenting an event." Maybe I haven't read much non-fiction, but I do know that most non-fiction books document something, not tell a story. She didn't want to be an inspiration, she wanted to write.
It is clear that she spared the readers a lot of pain and suffering. A story about one's life can never be fully written. If all of the details about her life were included in the book those that read it would be crushed by it's weight; this is what I mean by saying that the book is heavy. When Lucy Grealy added a note that she found her disfigurement more of a hardship than a cancer that was essentially terminal, you knew her life was a difficult one. It is very clear that one of her greatest joys is the publication of this book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)