Honestly I don’t understand why this movie was made, I don’t see the purpose of it. It wasn’t a terrible film, but I wouldn’t watch it again. There were many things that I wasn’t expecting to happen throughout the film. There were good and bad moments, and some that were in between. For example, the main good thing for Kane is he is a millionaire and that must be pretty great. Kane has a gorgeous house and many other luxuries as well to keep him satisfied. Then we have the bad things, like his family situation growing up was pretty tragic for him. He was accused of having an affair with Susan, a upcoming singer which put bad publicity on him. Nothing ever really went his way and he didn’t even want his fortune. At the end, his wife even left him because of his actions, but he is too blame for it. I think regarding the American dream, anyone can live that. Not everyone can enjoy the American dream though, and not everyone wants it. Kane got the American dream and wasn’t happy with it. The American dream is far from what it is believed to be, and isn’t all happy and rainbows like people choose to believe, it comes with issues. 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 didn’t tell him the truth. They told Kane he was going on trips to New York, Chicago, and other places. Imagine the impact a lie like that could impact a person’s train of thought. 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 loads of cash like he ended up with either. I think he would have rather not had the money, because his parents didn’t want him. Kane also didn’t have the best experience with relationships either because he had the audacity to write a bad review on his own wife’s singing, who does that? Kane was a sad person deep down and i think it is safe to say it is mainly because of his childhood. In conclusion, this film lives you an idea of the way the world really can be and how devastating it can be for anyone, even rich people. Everyone is dealing with things no one knows about.
The theme of “The Love Song” by J. Alfred Prufrock, would be love. They develop this because the story revolves around the main character’s attraction to a girl. He wants to approach her, but spends most of his time questioning himself due to the lack of self love he has. He is lower on the social scale then the female he wants to approach, but the entire time he is contemplating his worth and self esteem all due to how he views a female. The theme of “Disillusionment of 10 o’ clock” would be judgement in my opinion. Everyone in the poem is very similar and not alive. They all are said to wear white gowns and be non exciting, but then you have the sailor. The sailor is repelled for being different and unlike everyone else, because when you stand out people judge you. The sailor has dreams of tigers and such, which in reality, makes him the most living and exciting person there. People are judged for being different even when they are more alive then the others. In “A Pretty How Town” would be loss. At some point in life everyone dies, nothing is forever. Even when you have no one, and people don’t acknowledge you, you still won’t last forever. In this story “Janis” was the only one who “Bob” had, but it all came to an end and they accepted that. The author views acceptance too life as important and views things for what they really are because that is important. Being aware of this will make someone hopefully more sincere and cause them to not be so selfish etc. Every poem we read has to do with people who are different associating with other things. Whether it is a female, or their appearance, they are viewed as different on a social scale. Be the person you want to be because you never know how it will go, and we don’t have an eternity to make it happen, and in every poem that is inspired one way or another. I think “A Pretty How Town” is the most important in our society today and my favorite one because people throw life around like a toy and don’t do the things they want too. Everyone treats each other terribly not realizing that one day we will all be gone, and it wasn’t worth it. People need to accept the idea of death and stop being such rude and selfish people so others can enjoy their life without the obstacles people are providing. I just think overall this poem gets the point across the best and is the most real to us today, and it matters. Hence, all of these pieces of poetry have a point in the real world.
I think “The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County’ was absolutely pointless and had no purpose. It was extremely random and I don’t know why someone would want to write about frog jumping. Twain satirized the people from eastern and western parts of the US. Twain wrote a whole story about frogs and how the man was bored by listening too it, but was the idiot for listening to it in the first place. I guess his goal was partially to show how dumb some of the cultural activities in other places of the world really are. Also, was the legless dog really necessary because that was just wrong. My anticipatory thoughts are that “The Adventures of Huckleberry Film” will be a lot better than the frog story, but will also have more depth and emotion. I don’t know anything about The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. This new story will also probably have a great deal of satire because Mark Twain is already known for it. The story has been mentioned to be more before, but I have never took a second look at it, but I think it will be okay. One thing I know is it includes some racism and is banned in the South for reasons regarding that, and probably is about people on the poor side. The film that we watched in class was honestly pretty creepy. The way the iMom talked and acted was weird, and she did end up cooking the baby so I guess she should be viewed that way. The director of the video satirized bad parents in general.It does do that too because there are so many parents out there who would choose partying over their children and trust anything, like how could you trust a robot with your baby? I think it also kinda satirizes robots because robots are believed to be so well put together and work. This robot got a deflect from the storm when the power went out, hence why she cooked the child. The film just made me really uncomfortable. Overall, everything we have read or watched is so much better than the poetry we did.
My experience with satire and humor is small, but I have experienced it. Me and my friends indirectly reference each other to insult each other. That sounds negative, but it isn’t as bad as it sounds. There’s always situations when people say things, but are too scared to directly reference the person, and that is a form of satire. For example, when someone says “well at least Also, I have seen shows and interviews that indirectly insult famous people or non famous groups of people in general. I personally enjoy offensive humor the most even if that isn’t too good. The humor has to affect you or it isn’t even funny. I hate memes and I do not think they are funny at all. Insulting humor is definitely the best of all time. I was looking for an example of offensive humor, but every video on you tube for offensive humor is blocked, and the photos are not funny. Also, I don’t know if the offensive humor would be appropriate. I think it is pretty self explanatory as to what it is. Satire seems to be an indirectly used topic and seems like it is used a lot more than we realize. I had no idea what it was until we learned about it, like I did not know what the name for this idea would be. I have no idea who Mark Twain is, he sounds a little familiar but I don’t know. I guess he wrote “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”, although I do not know what that is either. Mark Twain or, Samuel Langerhans Clemens, dropped out of school in fifth grade. That is kind of shocking because he did not have a grand amount of knowledge, but still managed to become a successful writer. It is hard to be successful with no general knowledge of things like literature. Mark Twain was also a steamboat pilot with a great salary. The outbreak of the Civil War ended his career in 1861 because it brought a halt to all civilian traffic. Hence, Mark Twain seems interesting, and satire is a strong element.
Vertigo was a stupid movie in my opinion. It seemed like it was gonna be exciting in the beginning of the film, but the end showed otherwise. I don’t understand the purpose of this movie at all. It was extremely complicated to understand and in the end both girls had died like wow that could have been a little happier. I feel like I sat through that movie for nothing, and it let me down in the end. Seriously though, what is the purpose of this film because I didn’t see one. Hitchcock did use some good effects to resemble different moods and feelings considering the year the movie was made in, and the time it took to make the movie. For example, the red zoomed eye and the change in music for different events. Also, I liked how they changed up the looks of Judy to show the difference, I didn’t even realize it was the same person at first. Although, things I did not like were the ending of course. Plus, how dramatic the angle of the camera was for the car rides. The editing was clearly not advanced at the time, and the actors weren’t even good. This would definitely not be my first choice of what to watch. Many things would have to be changed if this movie was made in modern times. Different effects, actors, scenery, and probably everything else. The fake fall would definite be made more realistically I would hope. I did expect many different things to happen then what actually did though. I thought Scottie was gonna jump off the church with Judy. I also thought Judy wasn’t the same person as before so I did get a little confused a few times. It makes it exciting how you expect so many different endings and end up with the last one that came to your mind. It had my head all over the place when they staged the death and I had to try to understand that. Hence, I guess the movie could have been worse, my feelings are extremely bipolar about it.
This work was very hard to understand and took a lot of analyzing. I believe the writer had many different views on life and supported all of them. The whole thing consisted of many thoughts in life. For example, society is the product of a previous society. Also that children are the people who decide the future of new society, while old people give us wisdom. The story starts with his thoughts on life and perspectives, and then eases in to his death. Our section seemed pretty self explanatory in general. It was mainly about his death and how the darkness was coming to him. He wanted to die peacefully and with positive people around him, he doesn’t wanna be miserable as he goes. The writer’s legacy will live on and he wants people to influence people even when he is gone. His commitment to a transcendentalism philosophy affected his writing and perspective. Many statements were things he believed, they were not scientifically proven. The writer’s view was spoken through the whole entire piece. None of this has to be agreed with or viewed the same by other people, such as myself. The most important lines would have to be “You will hardly know who I am or what I mean, But I shall be good health to you nevertheless,” explaining his legacy. Another one I think holds importance is ” The past and present wilt – I have fill’d them, emptied them. And proceed to fill my next fold of the future.” stating the main idea of death coming too him. Also, how he wants honest before the end, he wants the truth from god. All of them provide the main meanings of this story, and lead it up to the end. The work overall, I did not really understand. It is honestly pretty difficult to understand and the only clear part to me is our section because we analyzed it. As we go over it, I start to understand it more and more. I feel like this is a pretty truthful story though, and as you understand it, it all fits together well. Hence, “Song of Myself” is a work that takes thought and analyzing.
I don’t agree that “that government is best which governs least”. It was a stupid comment and it makes no sense. Our government does do a lot of stupid things and messes up quite often, but we still need it. The government is the core of our country, many things come from them. They keep the United States on its feet and provide us with money, food stamps, and much more. The government shut down for a couple days and things began to fall apart. Without our government we are faced with serious issues. Thoreau’s statement “Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect. and that will be one step toward obtaining it” is kind of difficult to understand. I feel like the majority of our people command respect, like we are a whole government. The people want the respect of our actual government. A democratic government gives us many things and commands our respect, but they seem to just wanna give everything for free and accept everyone so maybe their not the best option. Our people are strong enough to make a change in the government though, we just need to get our voice out. Civil disobedience today is still in tact today and has a big role. It is the base of all protests in the world and without it, what are we? Civil disobedience provides us with the ability to speak without being judged and tells us to believe what we want. The government doesn’t have to be appreciated, and just because you live here doesn’t mean you have to respect the government since they don’t respect us sometimes.Yes, it is still effective because if it wasn’t, they would never listen to the people. It used to be more effective, but now it is less. Our opinion matters when it comes to voting in any sort of election so that is us having a say in something government related. Thoreau feels negatively about the government as you know, and he isn’t the only one. Anyone can share their opinion though, and that is the meaning of civil disobedience..
Emerson and Thoreau both have really open minds and are very appreciative of life. They both value nature incredibly and believe you should live your life how you want too, do not waste your time. Emerson wrote more about being yourself and appreciating life for what is, while Thoreau wrote more about how life is short and we should live it to the fullest. They had somewhat different ideas, but they were alike for the most part. The first excerpt from “Where I lived, and what I lived for”, is about how Thoreau lived in many places and lived for adventure. He went to many places until he knew where he actually wanted to be. The farm that he bought was one of his more liked places, it was the only place he bought. Although, he ended up having to give it back. The second excerpt “The Conclusion” was more about not hating life because it is on you to be happy. Keep things simple, avoid unnecessary complications that are gonna cause you issues. For example, instead of counting to one million, count halfway. Thoreau’s experiment of living in the woods would give him some advantages. You learn how to live a completely different way of life, and get away from people for a while. You adapt differently so if something ever happened, you would be okay. Survival would be increased as well and it some circumstances it is important. Although, I think I would miss some people and social interaction. Going to long without other people can send someone crazy. Certain foods won’t be accessible either and some food is too good to let go. I like adventure and I love the woods, but I could not do this experiment. I would be scared of wild animals and I am so adapted to life the way it is, the change would be way to difficult. A modern reader who is reading transcendentalism should understand that it is okay to write about their thoughts and feelings rather than factual stuff. Speaking your mind sounds better than writing a history report. Hence, a lot can be pulled from all of the things we have read.
Arguing is a very consistent event. People argue over everything, no matter how dumb the situation is. I personally enjoy arguing, and that may be a bad thing, but who cares. I have learned through our debate and other discussions many things. Winning an argument can be easy, but it can be hard. I am good at it from experience and I just naturally am I guess. Although, I have heard people argue and they sound like complete idiots. You can not when an argument with a weak point. It is important to know what you are talking about and not make stupid comments. You shouldn’t be arguing if you don’t know what you’re talking about. For example, when I argue with my parents I feel like I am talking to a wall. Most parents are one sided and believe their older so they are always right. That is far from how it works, you have to be willing to view both sides of the story or you are irrelevant. I think learning about all of this has changed my way of arguing slightly. Maturity and common sense is more necessary than just blurting out random words. Think about what you are gonna say so you sound like you have an IQ. I believe different measures should be taken though depending on the argument. Big arguments need research and time to win, while stupid ones with your friends can be won with no problem. The persuasive speech part was difficult because it was new to me, but at the end I believed I may have had a chance. I made some strong points with something I don’t even agree with, and some people couldn’t do that. It would have been better if I cared about the topic, but either way it gave me experience which is good. This whole unit has impacted me because I care about this stuff. Things I enjoy take bigger effects rather than poetry for example. Hopefully, in the future, we may come across something like this again. As much as I didn’t want to debate, I would have enjoyed watching it. Hence, I do believe this was a good unit and we all enjoyed it equally.
My topic for the debate is Border Wall. My assigned position is to not build the wall, the con side. No, this is not my personal position on this debate. I believe the wall should be built to keep people out. The topic is extremely controversial for many, but I stand on building it for sure. I know that not building the wall will save the U.S. millions of dollars, and offer many people a chance at a new life and a new start. On google, I noticed they have a go fund me going to raise money for the wall. That is kind of stupid because if Trump wanted the wall so bad, he would pay for it and stop expecting otherwise. It also isn’t to great that he is shutting our government down. Although, it basically advises us of things we already know about. I plan to address the topic as best I can, although I don’t side with it which makes it hard. I will state my main point about the cost and how we are taking many peoples chance at a happy life away. Another point about how all the drama from the wall is causing problems for everyone because Trump is a broke whiny adult. This whole debate reflects on racism in a way because we are keeping different races out of our country, due to fear of job loss and terrorists. We judge others based on previous experiences in our country. Many people are upset and sad over these occurrences. Clearly, Mexicans and others would be sad about their chance being taken away from them. Also, anyone who supports the con side would show pity towards other countries. Then you have the people who don’t show sympathy for these people, such as myself. We are more excited about keeping people out because of our belief that you shouldn’t be able to run to another country when things get rough, so you should stay in your country. We feel more excitement and less emotion for those people than others. Hence, although I don’t support this debate I will do my best to win.