This was a good film and I liked it because of that. It had a lot of good parts throughout it and with Mr. McGarry explaining it parts that wouldn’t have made sense, actually made sense. One of the good parts was the early life, I found this interesting because it showed what the story was going to be without actually giving away what the whole story was about. It was also sort of weird because he was saying how with his family was the last time that “I was loved”. It showed what they were trying to figure out over the whole film. In general I liked the whole thing, I liked how they filmed a lot of it and there were a lot of good parts because of that. Since I liked it, I really didn’t see much bad in the movie. It was a well made movie for its time, and that it couldn’t have been made much better for when it was made. But one or to things for the bad, was the ending, because it was a dead ending. With that it left me a little bit confused. The way that the character acted at times and some of the decisions that he made didn’t make sense. The only ugly that I really saw that was how Kane treated his friends, and at some parts of the film where it was made to make you cringe.
Taking things away from the film, the theme is about how it is important to have friends and family and how money can not replace them. His final word towards rosebud because it was the last time he felt loved, even when he was one of the richest men in the world was when he was sledding at his house, before they took him away. Then Charles can’t accept people for who they are and has to make them to fit better with him. He also isn’t happy because no one loves him. He never achieved his quest for happiness because he could never work with those who would have helped him because everything had to be his way.
The three poems; “Disillusionment of 10 o’clock”, “anyone lived in a pretty how town” , and “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, all have a similar or recurring idea of their theme and how it functions and develops in the works. There is two main ways to take these poems; looking at them as dark poems or looking at them as light poems. The darker themes are at times easier to see in the poems because of the word choice and the way that the poems are set up. Like everything else with poetry the theme of the poems can either be right out in the open or the readers are going to have to read more into the poem until they are able to figure it out. The poems are then also connected with each other because of the themes that they have and when they were written has no effect on that at all because a poem is a poem and it doesn’t matter when it was written. Then of “Disillusionment of 10 o’clock”, “anyone lived in a pretty how town” , and “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” I found “anyone lived in a pretty how town” to be the most applicable to our current society because it can be seen as a love story or even as just a story about a relationship between two people. Which is what people have everyday and it tells of how two people can get along and what can happen between two people over time. As for which poem that I liked the most or hated the least of them was “anyone lived in a pretty how town”. This one was the best out of the three because it was enjoyable to read especially when you change the ‘anyones’ and ‘noones’ to actual names like Mr. McGarry had told us to. It made the poem more personal in a way then because it wasn’t just a general poem then it was one that actually had a purpose then. Also it had more of an effect on the tone of the poem and what the reader felt when reading it because there were names and not just a general wording there. So it made things more interesting to read making it the least hated and actually liked.
I thought that it was a good story and that once you understood the meaning of it, it was pretty funny. The use of humor in this made the story better and enjoyable to read. I have heard that it was good but I don’t really know what it is all about. People have said that it is a good story and I am looking forward to reading it. He will bring the characters to life really well and he will bring the points that he is trying to make either really subtitle or it will be right there in your face. This will help make the story interesting and fun to read. It was really weird and it didn’t make any sense until Mr. McGarry (you) explained it. The kind of people that are having kids today that shouldn’t be having kids. I found it to be pretty funny because it is true.
When it comes to satire and humor it is all around, it’s in shows and movies, and everyday life. There many places that you can find humor between those that I mentioned and more, like on social media. For me most of my experience with satire and humor comes from shows like the Simpsons and Family Guy. There are other places that I have seen examples of satire and humor especially in everyday life because there are a lot of funny things that happen throughout the day. As for what kind of humor I enjoy the most I enjoy physical humor. It’s not always the best thing but it helps to keep the day interesting. If you look up “that’s a moron” on youtube its a parody of that’s amore and it is full of physical humor. Also some animal photos with them doing different things can be funny as well. Along with animals and people there are some funny gaming videos out there. Thinking about this now there is a lot more funny and interesting things that I see everyday which only makes things even better especially when you aren’t looking for them.
As for when it comes to Mark Twain I know that he is a classic writer, and I know that he has lots of satire and humor in his works. Along with that I know that he has written lots of stories that to some may be considered controversial works and that leads to them possibly being banned in some places. Also looking up somethings on him I figured out that I knew some of the stories that he has written. Then something interesting about Twain I found is that the date of his death (April 21) is the same day as my younger brothers birthday. It is a little weird to think about that but it is something. There are other things out there that might be more interesting, but I found it ironic. But with that I also found that he was the 6th child in his family. Meaning that he had lots of older siblings who aren’t as known as what he would be come.
There are many things about the movie “Vertigo” that are brought to the attention of the viewers and each of them are different for everyone. For me my initial thoughts about this movie were that it was a good movie. Also for the time that it was made that it was a really well made movie. As for what impression I got from it was that it was simply what I have said before. It was a good movie and was well done for the time that it was made during. Now for me these next couple questions are a little different because they are really about the movie and I didn’t really get to see it that much because I was out sick for two days in the middle of it so I ended up missing most of it. As for what I did like about it was simply just seeing the movie and what it was about and how it was made. For what I didn’t like was only see the beginning and the end, also known as the first 10 minutes and the last 10 minutes of the movie. I wish I could have seen more of it so I would actually know what had happened in the middle and how it all lead up to the ending of the movie from the beginning of it. Since this movie was made in 1958 and it had the effect on people back then and this would have been considered a scary movie then and for some now as well. There are a few things that would need to be changed for it to really be effective for the modern audience from the older audience. Since this movie was made 61 years ago and technology has improved a lot since then the new age technology can be used to really make the graphics a lot better and even more effective then what they originally were. The cars that are being used and the setting that the place is in can also be better sold with what is happening as well. For example when the cars are driving around and following one another it can actually look like that is happening and really make the audience get into the movie.
My initial impression and reaction to the poem Song of Myself was not one of a happy kind. Poetry in general is no fun but this poem and the work that went with it did not make sense at all. To add to it not making sense I didn’t see what the point in learning this was all about or really how it would help in the real world. When I got the sections that I did, I didn’t mind them at first because they were shorter then some so I really didn’t mind that I got two sections because of this. The first section that I was assigned was section 9. Now section 9 did make some sense because it could be looked at as it being about Jesus and how they should follow in his example and not him. Another way that section 9 could be looked at as how westward expansion was good because it allowed people to grow mentally. The other section that I had was section 14. This section unlike section 9 was more confusing. Section 14 was about how people should be able to work together as a group. His devotion to the Transcendentalist philosophy had this, in my mind a negative effect on his writing because it made his works very confusing. The most important line from these two sections is “Ya-Honk he says and sounds it down to me like an invitation.” This line was the most important line between the two sections for two reasons one being that it is a fun line and that since it is fun to say and read, it makes that two sections a little more bearable to suffer though. The other reason that it is important is the actual reason of the poem, being that it can be look at how Jesus calls to his flock to lead them. This line also helps the reader figure out what the theme of the work could be. The main difficulty that I had with this poem of Song of Myself really was just not understanding the meanings of anything that was in this poem at all.
After reading Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” I found that I disagree with the statement that was made early in the work. “That government is best which governs least,” this is because the government should take care of its people and not sit back and watch them that is because it is their job. The government is there to help the average person with their lives when they are struggling and are in need of support to be able to get back on their feet. While at the same time they also have to be able to let the people have the space that they need to be able to accomplish little things in their own lives, like forming their own businesses, applying to jobs and other tasks and jobs that are like those. While my kind of government, that commands my respect, really is the kind that will and does put the people first in their plans and not just say that they do but actually do it and show that they do. This is because when it comes to the government and its people, the people should really be the most important part of the whole entire thing because without the people there really is no government because they are not only the ones who make it up but they are the ones that elect those who are involved with it. Which also means that without putting the people first the government doesn’t exist which would also mean that order really is no longer there. So with the people being put first like they should be then order is present and there are less problems in the world because they can communicate with those that they elected into the roles of power and get problems solved most of the time. Then the role of civil disobedience in today’s world is in a way similar to that of the old ones. It is to help the people in their lives and what they want to be able to do. When looking at this and seeing if it is still effective today or not, or even just effective in general. It comes down to seeing that sometimes it is more effective sometimes then it is others.
Why are we learning this, Transcendentalism, what is the point of it. But since we learned about transcendentalism and Thoreau and Emerson’s thoughts on it and read things on it too. There are some connections that I made between Thoreau and Emerson. Both of these men had worked to explain the thoughts, ideas and ways of transcendentalism. Now by working to explain it they both had also looked to be able to spread and show the word of transcendentalism and its ideas and ways. Another thing is that one of them had actually lived it while the other one just talked about it without actually living it. Then there is the beginning and the end of the from the excerpt. The main point in this was showing how he started out as not the best person that he could be, but by the end he saw that he could be a better person by living with nature and finding a way to see how man is good. While looking at Thoreau’s reason for going out into the woods and leaving society behind, it really wasn’t for the betterment of himself. It was all about getting out of paying taxes and a little bit about the actual lifestyle of a transcendentalist which is the one benefits for him while doing that. As for me it could be refreshing and could also help clear your mind. As for what I would miss, I would miss people and interaction. With all of that being said yes, I could go out and live in the woods. When thinking about what the modern reader and what they can or should take out of the reading about transcendentalism. There is a few things that can be taken away. One of them is that conflict in people is still a thing because it happens most times when people have to make a choice about something or anything really. With that said most times people don’t know what the effect of their choice is going to be until after they have made them, but usually people can make good choices and it shows. That also leads to how long it takes for people to be able to make these choices well on their own, for some it doesn’t take long but for others it can take some time. Another thing that can be taken away from this is, not to judge someone without knowing them because like they say in transcendentalism, man is good.
For my argument in general I ended up picking that I would have to support the legalization of recreational marijuana, even though I personally am against it. By doing this project it made me see the way that I argue in general and on paper. Another thing that it made me see about my arguing style was that I usually argue with a lot of fallacies and opinions, but I hopefully will be able to fix that and win more arguments in the future. Also it helped to show how my classmates argue and how they form their arguments. Seeing how my classmates argue and form them I was also able to see a difference between student and teacher (or adult) argument formation. Adults have a little more experience and knowledge when it comes to backing up their arguments which help them be able to win or lose an argument depending on the situation. When it came to picking the topic that I would have to be arguing for, I ended up with the pro side of legalization of recreational Marijuana. After getting this topic I thought that it would be hard to argue for it since I am against it the idea of legalizing recreational marijuana. The one thing that changed for me was the thought of it being hard to argue for something that I am against, but as I was working on the project I found it to be easier than expected. While my thought process on the difficulty of the argument has changed my mind is still against it. Writing this speech wasn’t as bad as I originally thought it was going to be because I found plenty of good sources that I was able to use to show why I was right in this case. This also made me think not only about my side but the other side too, and it helped to see why people want recreational marijuana to be legalized. The overall writing of the speech was a bit difficult because I am not that good when it comes to writing in general but I was able to get it done eventually.
My topic for the debate is to support the legalization of recreational marijuana. I have to support The legalization of it. I personally do not support the legalization of recreational marijuana as I have seen the effects of it on people who say they regularly smoke it. I know the people who want it legalized argue that many people already do it and people will always do it anyways. They argue that police resources can be spent elsewhere and that to many people will get jail time and fines if they keep marijuana illegal. The people who support it also believe that legalization will help the economy and create jobs. Also, They say that the government will regulate the quality, sale, and the tax on it. The people who are against legalization argue that the risk of impaired driving, ER visits, and crime goes up with the access to marijuana. I know these are probably facts and statistics I have to go up against which will be tough. I don’t think the person I am debating against believes in marijuana being illegal because of how they related to getting their topic side so hopefully they might see some of the facts biased in some way. With a basic google search you get about 6 news articles on the first page and about 77,900,000 results. But for facts you get mostly pro marijuana with very few cons. The pro Marijuana articles say that the legalization of marijuana will help the economy greatly and create a lot of jobs. They also said that the police could focus on other issues. To approach this topic I will do my research and stay away from my emotions against it. I guess i’ll also try to get my opponent to be emotional and steer them away from the facts and arguments that would be very bad for me to try to answer or disprove. For the emotion brought into play I don’t really plan to get emotional myself but rather get the opponent angry or tilt them by presenting facts or rebuttals that just end the debate for them.