My reaction to this film was I thought it was okay. it was better than some of the other things we have read or watched this year but it wasn’t anything special. I wish it was in color because it would be more appealing to modern day. The movie itself with the filming, acting, and script wasn’t bad at all. I thought the acting helped show the characters feelings very well along with the background music. the filming was very good especially for being for back then. They both helped get the message across throughout the film. For example the angles they used to show theme and illusion was very good like what they angled the camera view up to Kane to show him bigger almost showing him more dominate. As for the film portraying the “American Dream”. I thought it showed it very well. It showed him being given up by his parents with the hope to have a better and more successful life. he worked throughout his life, made money, went through different marriages, and taken care of by a stranger. Even though he reached their goal of being rich and successful, he still was alone and may not have been happy having to grow up without his parents and given up. Charles is not happy with it because the reason for his money is not a happy one. His parents sent him away to live with a banker and lied about it. The money he was living with was an inheritance from his terrible parents on his 25th birthday, and that probably hurt him. Kane wasn’t used to having a lot of money like he ended up with either. Kane also didn’t have the best experience with relationships either with his wives, for example he wrote a bad review on his wives singing after he helped her get to the opera house. Kane was upset throughout his life and i think it was all because of his childhood. This film gives you an idea of how even though you may have all the money in the world that doesn’t mean you are happy.
So I should get a 100% on this since I turned it in on time but on the classroom because my blog cite wasn’t working and I told you that and you said it was okay 🙂
Considering i thought we were done with poetry and I hate poetry, analyzing it, and writing blogs about it, I didn’t enjoy these poems. The theme within these three works i feel is all about society. he is connecting everything back to society and relating it to society in a way. the works develop theme through a build up. they all start off simple and build up into complex and detailed work. in the poem The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock i feel like the theme was him wanting to talk to a girl not not feeling confident enough to do so and not thinking he was good enough for her. he was scared and it is actually relatable. the next poem was “Disillusionment of 10 o’clock” by Wallace Stephens. i felt the theme of this was having to do with being perfect. I feel like it’s about society having to be perfect or having to follow the rules and not be different. the reason I think this is when it talks about people wearing white basic clothes to bed and not colored gowns. Just like in today’s society we are always comparing ourselves to the “perfect” body, person, or way to act. Especially in girls we see someone that we think is perfect and try to be exactly like them. he last work was “anyone lived in a pretty home town” by e. e. cummings. this one was the most confusing one because the way it was worded and having to read it so fast. i have the least understanding of this poem but if i had to try my best on what the theme is i would guess it’s about society eventually dying and pretty much just the path of society and our lives. i liked the first work the most because i feel it is the most modern and relatable one and the easiest to understand.
My initial thoughts on “The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County” was that it was a pretty normal short story with a few weird words. It was written expertly on Twain’s part. The way that Tawin managed to write how the characters would “speak” is amazing. From what I have heard, he was the first to have done so. I actually read the short story in the accents of the characters. I didn’t get who the main subject of satire was until we went over it in class, but afterwards I was surprised to say the least. There was as much humor as their was satire. In the beginning, the satire was obviously aimed at Simon Wheeler. As the story progressed, I didn’t notice that Simon was simply wasting the narrator’s time. The point got across to me very clearly after that.
My anticipatory thoughts on Huck Finn is that the little robber group is going to break up, and Huck is gonna try and set them to life style that the Widow is trying to set him to. That is going to backfire on him and they’ll turn their backs on him. That’s how I think things are going to play out. I know that the they just made the rules for the group and the consequences. I think that Huck is going to fool them into being good by making them think that they are “robbing” people. I know that someone is going to get fooled.
I thought the short film iMom was funny and horrific in a way. I knew something bad was going to happen near the end of it when the lights went out. Bad mothers and mothers who look for a easy way out were being satirized. The way that the kid and the iMom got closer was creepy to say the least. The presentation certainly exceeded my expectations and the commentary was normal until the close to end when it looked like some underage stuff was about to go down.
I do not really watch much tv or anything but if I do I like sarcastic type of humor. The example I used to represent the type of humor I like is a clip from family guy. In the clip the guy is telling a story about when he lost his legs and talking about how insurance companies screw people over. In the story he is laying on the bed as the doctor calls the insurance company saying they can do a surgery to save his legs but they say its too expensive and just give him a wheelchair because its cheaper. This shows humor that insurance companies don’t care about your needs and only themselves. Mark twain is characterized by a broad, often irreverent humor or biting social satire. His writing is also known for realism of place and language, memorable characters. He is mainly famous for his work in “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”. Something I found interesting about Mark that doesn’t have to do with his writing is that he was saved 9 times from drowning in the Mississippi River. Maybe after having serious or scary things happen to him in his lifetime he decided to bring humor to cope with these times. Another thing interesting about him is that he wanted to be named after The Pen name Mark Twain, which comes from a river boating term meaning “Two fathoms” (12 feet).
i thought vertigo was actually interesting especially for a older film. the idea behind it and they way they tried to put mind tricks and symbolize things without having the technology of today. the anticipation and build up was good and had me at the edge of my seat a lot of the times but i was mad that the ending wasn’t good enough for how much of a thriller it was. at first when I was told it was suppose to show vertigo I was expecting to get dizzy and stuff but i am disappointed that I didn’t because that is what i was looking forward to the most. I did like the plot twists and and surprises that came along with the movie that kept me interested. what I would change for a more modern audience is obviously special effects like when it was showing him having a mental breakdown to get a more interesting effect. the ending would also be changed to actually have a good ending and not make the audience disappointed and angry. overall i actually enjoyed the film.
when I first started reading this work my initial reaction was I had no idea what was going on just like all of the other work we go over in this class. But once we go over it in class together and talk about it, it helps a lot. Even though we do go over it and i get a better understanding I still don’t like to analyze it because I am not good about figuring what each line means. The section my group was assigned wasn’t as mad as I thought it was going to be. It talked a lot about him working on himself and instead of talking about changing to actually change. this section was good because it is relatable and a common thing that happens among people. Whitman talks a lot about transcendentalism in this poem so it’s not as hard to find it because he mostly talks about goad and nature. One way he uses this is how he compares grass to society. He also talks about society by saying how people should embrace himself and the world as much as he does to be happy. One of the lines I feel is important is from section 6, “And to die is different from what anyone supposed, and luckier”. He means by this line that people should not fear dieing but to celebrate life. the difficulty I have with this work is the same difficulty I have with all the work we do with poems. It is difficult for me to analyze and understanding what it means, but the more we do the better I think ill do.
I agree that the government is best which governs least. I feel that people should take into their own accounts of what they should do and the government should not be so intentive into the comings and goings of its citizens. A government that commands my respect is one that really pays attention to the needs of its citizens, not one who is going to sit back and watch as its people suffers. A respectable government should be one that really acts like a leader than a boss. They should be showing what the people should do and be showing how things should go and follow the rules they make instead of saying something and doing differently. A dictatorship is a prime example of a boss like a leader. A leader who shows people by example and rewards well is a real kind of person you want in charge instead of someone who sits behind a desk and tells you what to do. Civil disobedience is good because it keeps violence to a minimum in situations that could turn bloody. Over the years revolutions and protest have been bloody and violent with lots of death, rape, and vandalism. In the past few years, the protests have been a lot more peaceful (not including Antifa), and have been actually almost a better way to protest giving better results than violent ones. If his essay can effect such great figures such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. then it must be a very valuable and useful message that comes off of it. In some cases civil disobedience is, maybe not ok but more understandable, violence is never acceptable unless you or yours are threatened. Like if a violent dictator is trying to come to power by force and a revolution is in the process than it is understandable to be violent back.
They are both pro natural settings, in addition to this, they both seem to want to live far away from society and in seclusion.I think the main idea from the first portion was to stay on your feet and keep moving until you find the place where you can “be one” with nature. There was a part where I got a “be humble” vibe from it. When he sold the farm back for free and didn’t want the $10, he really showed that you don’t need much in life to enjoy it and others may need it more than you. Another idea that he got across was that living in a simple house (with the bare minimums) would fit you as fine as a house with a lot of furniture.The main idea from the second portion was that God will see that you do not want to follow/be with society and you will find yourself happy wherever you are. He says life is like water in a river. This is another great idea mentioned in this excerpt. There are going to be times when life is flowing fast and times when it’s slow. There will be times when it is a all time high while at others it will be at a all time low. I personally like the main idea from the second portion better because it is true life advice that will actually help if you choose to follow it.The benefits would be not having to deal with stupid people. There are always gonna be people that whenever they open their mouth, whatever they say will irritate you. I personally would miss all the good food that I am unable to cook and I would miss interacting with my friends. A few days alone without any interaction to other people would most likely result in me talking to myself an absurd amount. I could most likely pull it off for a few weeks if I had a few recipe books.A modern reader should realize that the message that was being sent for to help better them. Whatever message they got out of the expcerts was along the lines of “For self betterment, choosing the natural route is best”.
when it comes to argument everyone want s to be right. nobody wants to be wrong of course. if your anything like me I sadly am a sore loser and always want the last word. But the one type of person that I can’t stand are people that always have to be right. Like there is a difference between people that want to be right and that HAVE to be right. When a argument occurs it is usually because people disagree about something. When I find myself arguing with someone I usually end up getting so annoyed that I give up even if I am right because i just want it to end. But other times they know i’m right and give up. I am not a very good arguer if i would admit it. I usually loose because I just sound stupid and don’t have any facts to back up what i’m talking about. there are some rare occasions that I win only because they don’t care enough to keep going and it’s over something stupid like what a bird is. After learning techniques and ways to win a argument I still am not good at it but it has helped me in way. I can see different sides of arguments I couldn’t before. I still have trouble with writing persuasive things but I have definitely improved since the beginning of the year.
The topic I got for the debate is the con side to modifying school days. I don’t really know much about this topic so I am going to have to do a lot of research. Other than it sounding pretty self explanatory, I do not know if they mean instead of 8ish hours of school they want 6 or 4 days a week instead of 5. My assigned position for this topic is the con side. So I am supposed to argue that it is wrong to shorten the school day. I can not really say if this is my personal opinion for the topic yet because I have not done research for it in order to state my opinion. Without information and research I do think I will be agreeing that We should NOT modify school days. I think school days are fine right not. If I would have to change anything it may be the start time. A benefit I could think of may be that we could have more free time to do things and school work could be flexible. when I search this topic into google I get many debate sites talking about the pros and cons for the topic. These sites will be very helpful to use for my debate. I am not very good at debating even on a regular bases so I am interested in seeing how I do for a researched topic. I am planning on having as much information as possible in order to win. My logical approach will be to look at the other side and be prepared for what they may come at me with so that I can attack there argument quickly. I can use how education is very important and if we shorten it then kids can’t learn as much as they would be able to. The emotion part for this topic can be how kids that don’t get education would be lucky and grateful for what we have. Also, what may happen if we don’t learn as much.