I like the novel so far and find it interesting. Huck seems like a fun character to be the main character because he is adventurous and is mischievous. I like how when his father was drunk and chasing Huck with a knife he did not shoot his father and then in the morning he said he had the gun out for a guy who was trespassing on the land. Also later that day Huck went out early to check the fishing lines and he found a washed up canoe. His first thought was to show his father and sell it. His second idea was what I liked. He hide the canoe in hopes of going fifty miles downstream to get away from his father. This made the story interesting and foreshadowed future events. Such as, I think Huck is going to get supplies and leave his dad. He will also fake his death in some way blaming the trespasser. This covers the trail and Huck will be free to go without someone finding or following him. Also Huck’s dad doesn’t seem to be too bright so that also helps the situation. The novel is better than I expected because there is a decent amount of action already in the novel and Huck is a great main character. Also the book is well written and has a lot of different components. I like the way the author includes little details such as how Huck values his dad and did not kill him and wanted to show him the boat but ended up not showing him and selfishly kept it for himself. The only thing I do not like is the fact that Huck could have died so easily and there would not have been a story. I find this unrealistic because his dad should have been able to kill him easily. Also how do you hide a bot where his father won’t find it but where he will remember where it is at? In total, I am looking forward to reading this book and finding out what Huck will do next.
I did not like the story the celebrated frog. It was written well and used humor and satire efficiently but i found the story kind of weird and not that relevant. Who is going to care or watch a frog contest. Also you could look at it as abuse towards the frogs. The point it was trying to make was obvious but it was still corny and unusual. I enjoyed making the book trailers. I thought it was neat alternative to taking a ten question quiz on book. Also the quizzes do not show if you read the book or not. The trailers show how much the reader read and how they took the information. So far Huck Finn seems like a good book. I think it will be about smiley and Huck going on adventures and discovering the world. In total the book looks like it will be a good read and I am looking forward to reading it.
My reaction to the work is confusion. He uses phrases that are hard to understand and relate to. I liked section 4 the most other than my section because of its detail and it was the easiest to understand. Also the ability to inspire people in this poem is great. The line, “I have no mockings or arguments, I witness and wait” I like because it shows patience and how he is willing to wait for things to come. This is important because it shows he is not rushing or pushing for things to happen. Also the line, “Trippers and askers surround me, People I meet, the effect upon me of my early life or the ward and city I live in, or the nation” is important because he is surrounded by people who do not do anything and are lazy. This creates a need for the author to break the norm and this is where the poem is inspiring. In total section 5 is the best because it is inspirational. It relates to society today because a lot of people sit back and wait or procrastinate. I myself sometimes procrastinate such as this blog is an example. The poem offers inspiration for this and is basically saying good things come to those who wait. But the reader can not get confused about this meaning. It is not saying don’t do anything and be lazy but don’t rush the big things in life. I do not have any specific questions but just need to understand the total of the work a little more and possibly read it again. Some of the story makes sense and some of the story I am lost in and do not know what they are talking about. Some of the phrases he uses are confusing as well. Overall the story was well written and is one of Americas most influential poem for a reason. I would rate the poem a 9/10 because of it’s ability to reach the audience. I would not give it a 10/10 only because I do not fully understand the work in its entirety yet.
I like the film so far but I do not really understand the story behind the movie. Why does the guy not like heights and how long ago was his accident from the movie. Why is he following the girl around and how is she not creeped out or wondering why is this guy following me. Also what is controlling her and why does it only happen part of the time. Is it from a ghost or is she in another life. Also why does the girls husband pick this detective and not another one and why does he trust her. I did not like how the movie glitched everywhere and was choppy. How did the guy save her from the bay and she did not remember anything. Why did he bring her back to his house and not tell her husband. I predict that the two fall in love and he loses his friend. I also think that going to the place where she had her dream and she dies there. He then will have to tell his friend that his wife died because he killed her on accident. I also predict that the main character will have to face his challenges of vertigo and overcome them to either live or save someone else. I do not understand the painting that the girl drew and its importance to the movie. What was it supposed to symbolize and represent. I also predict that the vertigo will go away forever because he faced his fear and will not need to stay on the ground all the time. I really do not have any critique for this film because I do not fully understand the film. But in total I liked the movie and its main idea of facing a challenge and solving a mystery.
I agree with the statement, “that government is best which governs least.” I agree because the government is way too involved and makes a lot of matters way more complicated than they need to be in my opinion. I think that a lot of situations that the government tries to fix could go unfixed or work themselves out. Also, I agree with the statement because a lot of the situations the us gets involved in we have no part in getting involved and let the countries where there is conflict work it out and be their problem where we would not have to waste time money and resources. But we do need a government but not too involved and it’s impossible to run the country without one. I think it is a fine line of where the government needs to get involved and one way it can be crossed is for safety because safety should be the governments number one priority. It is the government’s job to protect us and are debt to them for security is taxes but why do they get to set tax brackets and decide who gives more or less. Also, I believe the government should help those who can not(not someone who is lazy but someone who physically or mentally can not provide) help themselves. Through benefits and aid. Civil disobedience is still very effective today. It plays an extreme role in how our country makes decisions and what actions the country takes. It affects these decisions because government try to appease everyone and even other countries. By standing up and protesting, it reminds governments that they are only in power because of the obedience of its people and it is the “peoples” government. A government can’t be a government with no citizens, they run the government through elections and such. The government can punish people who disobey but that can just cause more hatred and anger in the country, and eventually leading to roits. This is why civil disobedience is still effective and used today.
Thoreau and Emerson have the same views when it comes to living your life. They both think that you and only you control your life and what you do. Both agree that others have a little bit of influence on your life but they should not control it. In “Where I Lived and What I Lived For?” the concept is to be simple. He says that we worry about unnecessary things that we should let go. The idea of money can not happiness is also discussed. Also how less fortunate people should not be upset that they are poor but be happy for life. Overall your life is yours and nobody elses so go out and live it for yourself and not let people influence you greatly. This is why the passage is similar to “Where I lived and what for.” The woods experiment showed how simple life can be. It also described how you can be pressured by society and how it can influence you. In the woods experiment one would not have to worry about pleasing others and could focus on their own goals. Living in the woods would increase your ability to only worry about yourself and only yourself. Living in the woods would help you but not anyone else who you are close to and that would not be good for society or your family. I could not live in the woods because I would get bored and worry about others. I would also probably go crazy. I feel like I would start talking to myself and think it was other actual people. Overall, only you can determine what way you want to live your life and whether or not have others influence you. Society can be very influential but it is always your choice and no one elses. I think that the modern reader should learn to live their own life and limit society’s influence on you and your choices. It may be a difficult challenge to avoid society and its influences but it must be done to live a simple life to its entirety.
The purpose of ir is to get kids reading and grow your vocabulary. Offer rewards for reading books. I selected Hit Count because it is a football book and I like football. After reading the first chapter I think Ray is going to get hurt from football. I like the book so far. I do not have any concerns about the assignment and the idea is really cool.
I do not really know anything about transcendentalism. Other than to move beyond. Im not sure if that means to just move beyond or if it means spiritually move on. I believe that man is naturally good. I agree with man needs society to keep in line and to learn what is right and wrong in life. I argue this because without society there is nothing man can learn from and how would they improve the life of others without society to teach them. The stories were very confusing and didnt make sense. Also the idea of transcendentalism is also very confusing.
School uniforms have been argued for years and by many different people. They argue through a variety of ways but mainly verbal at meetings and such. I argued with facts and statistics and some emotional appeal to get the readers emotions into the topic. My peers construct the same argument. Adults construct the same type of arguments with just a little more development of ideas. The best debate other than my own was textbooks and tablets. I liked this debate because it wasn’t so uptight and they both had good points about the subjects. I have the same thoughts just that they are more developed. I added a few more ideas as well. I learned that arguing is more than just yelling back and forth but having a debate can be very instructional and a successful way to sway opinions. I thought it was pretty easy to develop the debate. I thought it was easy because all i had to do is research and report the statistics.