Chapter 12 lotf

• My reaction to the end of the novel: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. WHY DIDNT JACK DIE?? WHY DIDNT THEY ALL DIE?? IM SO MAD??? 
• I think that the reason that Ralph cried at the end of the novel was because during the events that directly preceded the "rescue" he was racing for his life. All of the boys pn the island had turned against him and he was on the very brink of his own death. Finally coming to the realization that everything was over. That he no longer had to go on living in a constant state of fear anymore. It was wayyy too much to handle especially when you had spent so much time trying to get rescued in the first place only to have to forget that because things had managed to get so damn bad. I dont blame him.
• Honestly, I dont know there are ohhh soooo many options to choose from. But i think that it would be so damn stereotypical to  choose jack but i mean thats the way the novel is set up. so yes i hate jack. hes a dick. Hes the reason that everything began to crumble in the first place. He the reason that everything on the island went as far as it did. Hes the reason why piggy and simon DIED.
• I don't know whether or not id recommend this novel. It wasn't something that i was too interested in because it primarily surrounded boys so there wasn't too much diversity. and on top of that i felt like i just didn't end up liking any of the characters because for some reason one way or another every single character managed to profoundly piss me off.

1. Ralph made the incredibly smart decision to head over to the other side of the island where jack and the band of savages were in an attempt to scold Jack into doing the right thing and into giving Piggy his specs back. because come one its already bad enough that hes fat and arsmatic.

2.The twins were "seeing Ralph for the first time" Because theyd never seen him so keen on trying to be the exact opposite of what jack had become.

3. The boys attempt to get piggys specs back was bound to fail because the boys lacked something pretty damn fundamental. Quantity. They were only 3 (4 if piggy had actually been useful) boys against the hoards of boys that decided to turn to the "dark side" and join Jacks evil tribe of savages.

4.Roger is a sick f*@k. No. Yes. No really he is. But to put that a little better it was just that he was the most malicious and malevolent of the boys, even more so than Jack. it said in the power point

5. The destruction of the conch is symbolically significant because the conch was the thing that served as the last bit of authority and order that was left on the island. With its destruction basically what would follow was the absolute falling out of any kind of order because the thing that had been the foundation of it had been, excuse my french, shreked.

6. Kids, for the most part, dont have to raise themselves. Therefore it was only natural for the boy on the island to elect someone that would lead them because thats the way that the boys had been brought up. The boys needed a chief.

7.To Jack: "why you gotta be like that??"  "What the hell is wrong with you"  "Who hurt you so much as a child that you felt a bigger need to get your grimy pathetic hands on meat that you didn't even NEED to eat, rather than focusing on the simple/mundane task of making sure that a fire didn't go out. Again, what the hell is wrong with you"

8. Im tired, i joined Jacks group thinking that it would be super fun and that it would all just be all play and rest and then eating. Don't get me wrong there is tons of that to go around, But something that has become blatantly obvious is the fact that if you don't do what Jack asks of you. You're in for it. I didnt see it for myself because i was playing with the other littleuns, but i could hear it.

The excruciating pain, the whimpers, the squeals. i thought that only pigs pigs could do... apparently so can we... On the bright side we got to paint our faces! The chief told us that when we were like this that we were no longer ourselves so we dont have to worry about anything because we're not actually doing anything wrong after all. I just wanna go home. But at this rate, is that even an option anymore?

1.The morning after Simon's death, ralph came out of the forset and started talking to piggy about what the boys should do, shortly after "samneric" joined them. their conversation: After coming out of the forest, ralph was the first to mention what had happened the day before as is shown when he said "simon" (goulding 156). piggy sort of just ignored it and moved on. Ralph in deseration and confusion asked piggy what they should do but after piggy's suggestion of calling an assembly ralph just begins to laugh hysterically at the thought of him still being considered chief. He then stopped and resumed blaming himself for what had happened to simon. he told piggy, who was trying to convince Ralph that it wasn't his fault, "Don't you understand, Piggy? The things we did--"(goulding 157) piggy again getting more and more relentless at trying to convince Ralph said, "It was an accident... that's what it was. An accident... coming in the dark-- he hadn't no business crawling like that out of the dark. he was batty. He asked for it... it was an accident"(goulding157). The boys then began to yearn for home. they agreed that they would not mention their involvement in the dance to sam or eric. The boys returned from the forest with wood for the fire. they mentioned the dance. all the boys had to say was, "we left early" (goulding158)

2. One difference between the perceptions of Simon's death on behalf of Ralph and Jack is the very acknowledgement that it was him that was killed in the first place. Where Ralph continuously throughout the chapter blames himself for the murder of Simon(quote in the section above). Jack never even referred to Simon by his name. another difference was the perception of what happened when he died. Ralph was fully aware and frankly scared that Simon was killed. where as jack claimed the the beast was disguised as Simon and that he was still alive and well. not that Simon was alive, the beast was apparently still alive.

3. Based on jacks order to have Wilfred tied up and beaten for no apparent reason as is stated by Robert "i don't know. He didn't say. He got angry and made us tie Wilfred up..." (goulding159). i can say that jack is getting more and more insane as time goes by.Jack still believes in the beast regardless of the fact that he killed it/simon and he even urges the savages to, "keep on the right side of him, anyhow. you can't tell what he might do" (goulding161). He's managed to open my eyes to the reality that evil can and does exist in humans regardless of how young a person is. the only question that remains is why? why did jack and Ralph develop completely separate in regards to their moral standings. Is it something that was decided when they were born? or is it something that you develop into?

4. honestly at this point ralph although logical, has been completely undermined by jacks persuasive abilities. Thus the power has now shifted from the unsure phalanges of ralph unto the unforgiving grasp of jacks tyrannical fist. we know this because on more than one occasion ralph has totally gotten his ass handed to him. on one occasion where jack totally took most of ralphs "loyal" underlings right from under his self-righteous nose, and another where ralph had no other choice but to go reap the glorious rewards of what jacks hunt had brought to the table.

The ambush??:
Piggy: breathes heavily, he cant see, he cant breathe, he gets stepped on.
Ralph:accidently punches eric in the face thinking hes the enemy
Sam: gets trampled by the fights going on all around
Jack: hones in on the sound of the heavy breathing, finds meatiest feeling kid, takes his glasses
Roger: probably outside waiting while he strangles a small animal.
Eric: "kicked" in the face (probably punched by ralph not gonna lie.)
Maurice: long forgotten

Ebola editorial.

1) the problem that Betsy identifies is that the average hospital cannot in anyway handle the Ebola virus.

2) she proposes that rather than trying to get other hospitals "prepared" for it that we just expand the four bio-containment hospitals.

3)Infection expert Sean Kaufman's view the CDC’s guidelines for protective gear in treating Ebola patients is that they're "absolutely irresponsible and dead wrong"

4)  Rep. Michael Burgess held up a pic of CDC chief Frieden in Africa wearing a protective suit that covered him completely. Burgess compared it to the "sluttier" guideline that the CDC has for its nurses and doctors.

5) after reading the commentary I'd like to say that I agree. What's the point of putting entire hospitals in danger when you can just take patients to specialized facilities where they're at less risk of infecting a ton of people. 

B) mother agrees

Article summary

The main idea of the article was that it wasn't a meteor that killed the dinosaurs... It was someone that they trusted. One example that supports this is that there is compelling fossil evidence that clearly points out the dinosaurs died suddenly and treacherously. Scientists at Berkley announced that dinosaurs were undoubtably killed by someone they trusted. They stated, "Our findings indicate that someone, we don't know who, spent at least 150 million years gaining the confidence of dinosaurs before abruptly betraying them and taking their lives near the end of the Cretatious Era." In addition the author goes on to say that dinosaurs were killed by letting someone gt close to them and that humans could too. 

The tone was ominous and vaguely threatening but also it sounded reliable and informational I would trust this.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/paleontologists-determine-dinosaurs-were-killed-by,37468/

Renzo Pulido-Ambrocio

January 25, 2015

English

ugh

I’m a high school student, a lot of things piss me off. Racism, Sexism, Homophobia, etc. Those are things that the average person under normal circumstances wouldn't like. But there are also a set of other problems that go unnoticed by most people, like censorship. Ignorance is one thing, you don’t want to see something or know about something? Then you don’t ask. The thing about censorship is that the choice is taken away from you. You no longer get a say in what you can and can’t see. Its done for you. We all know this too, after all were all at school aren’t we? If something is deemed “inappropriate” the obvious follows hide it or prohibit it. Because, “Out of sight, out of mind.” am i right?

There are so many flaws in schools all across the U.S. Sure schools are a fantastic concept... so is communism. Good in theory bad in practice as i've come to see it. Aside from my opinions about school in it of itself, what is the point in filtering what i can and cannot see whilst im there? Whats the point if i'm free to look at it on my own time? What is the difference? censorship is basically going a step behind what the schools intentions are, to educate me. Sure you can teach me about how to take the cubed root of  variable in a fraction but I will have never read Maya Angelou because just because something happens doesn’t mean we have to talk about it. There are things going on that are more relevant than “The Hunger Games” or “Maximum Ride”.

Why do i have to constantly watch what I say and what i do. I can see the difference between profanity and practicality. I want to be able to make a presentation and be able to speak what is actually on my mind rather than having it go through a filter so that everyone is comfortable. Why is it that i can't talk about rape and abortion without having to ask for permission if its something that we “need” to learn about. For gods sakes we’ve gotten rid of our sex-ed programs because they aren’t absolutely necessary to the education of young adults. Because its not like the information could possibly save someone’s future or anything? Why is it so easy for schools to just think its okay to hide important things. Sure those things are ugly and its not something that people exactly want to learn about. But some things are too important not to be taught and spread.

Diction worksheet thang

1. side...I only climbed on the spare

spar and leaned over the rail as far as I could, to bring my eyes nearer to that

mystery floating alongside.

2. The side of the boat cast a large think shadow onto the surface of the glistening water. But i was quick to spot a long pale object floating near the ladder. Before i could even begin to fathom what it was, I saw a light that came from what i made out to be the body of a naked man accompanied bye the flickering light of lightning in the night sky. Then I basically saw a headless body clutching to the ladder. Oh NO a hEAdlesS corpse!!!!!!!!!!!!! A cigar fell out of my open mouth and made a bunch of cigar noises because it was so quiet that they were actually audible. He looked fishy.

3.The "elevated" language makes the piece sound leaps and bounds more serious by comparison to the paraphrased version, courtesy of yours truly.

Questions 9-15 Leopard Man

9. Tom Leppard is called the Leopard man because he got tattooed to look like a leopard and he lives out in the wilderness.

10.The author of the article thinks that tattoos and piercings are just a way to get attention through shock value. He probably has these opinions because he's a closed minded prick.

11. The Leopard man is only different from other pierced people in the way that he lives. He's a hermit. That's literally the only difference that I think is substantial. In normal circumstances, people do not get their tattoos and piercings for the enjoyment and reaction of others. Unless they're not too smart. In which case we should just ignore them because they marked up their bodies for the wrong reasons.

12. The Leopard man lives on the outskirts of an Irish town if i recall correctly and he only goes in every now and again to get supplies.

13. According to the author people fear loners. This is probably due to the fact that "loners" aren't dependent on socializing or the opinions and feedback of others. They can live totally independent of most people and can function perfectly fine on their own. Also people tend to fear what is different.

14. The worlds most common and psychological disorder to date is conformity. The reason being that conformity causes us to surrender our individuality. And that individuality is a VITAL part of what makes us human. Losing that is basically losing our sense of selves, or well basically yourself as a whole.

15.The Leopard man is so happy because he's living the way that he wants to. Away from all of the pressure and judgement of society that everyone else would normally deal with. He is free of pretty much everything and is living the life of a cheetah... on a $500 budget.

Reading log prologue to part 2

U: it's pretty late right now so I'm not sure whether or not anything I think is accurate but at any rate I think what was really going on is that the author is trying to say something about the stubbornness of children about how they will do what ever they want regardless of them being abvised to do otherwise

Reading log chapter 4

P: I predict  that in the next chapter it will be the final story that is told before the journey to find the twins begins.

Reading log chapter 3

R: I was honestly really surprised with the fact that Lindo's plan worked out pretty much perfectly and that all of her efforts weren't wasted. Because it seems like everyone that I read something like this hat something HAS to go wrong, however this was obviously not the case. And I'm gererally proud that she was able to keep her promise to her parents whilst also keeping her integrity and self-worth

Reading log chapter 2

?:  I wonder what's the reason that an-mei decided to tell the story if her childhood? What purpose could it possibly serve? Does it serve any relevance to the rest of the story? Or was she trying to communicate some sort of story out of it?

reading log chapter one

S: in this chapter as the character talks  her mother, she reveals that she had lost everything on her travels back in China. this includes get twin babies, and is her mother's daughter of course so this means that she was not one of those twins. Her auntie then tells her before she is about to leave that the unfinished business was that she had recently located her missing children in China but that's when she died. it's now get daughters mission to locate them and tell them about their mother.

The Road- Cormack Mcarthy

     The Road by Cormack Mcarthy is the story of an unnamed man and his son traveling through a post-apocalyptic world trying to survive as long asd they can. On their journey for survival the father tries to keep his son from losing hope in the "new world." On this journey the man and his son ecounter different peoples good and bad, along with different obsticles  such as the mans cough that worsens as thhe novel progresses. The young boy gets sick as well and the man prepares for the death of his son but he makes a full recovery. The same cannot be said for the man because at the end of the novel the man succums to his sickness and dies in front of his son. The son waits there for three days until he is taken in by a family, he lives on.

      The main theme of the book besides literally survival, would most likely be not to give up hope, or to keep ones humanity. The novel takes place on a post apocalyptic world, a "new"world. This would normally mean that all rules and ethics are gone because survival comes first. Thats usually the case, however, in this novel the man and his son fight to stay ethical and moral to be the good guys. For example there was a point in the story were their supplies were taken from them. The boy and his father catch up to the theif. Once they do the father makes the man removes his clothes and leaves him as he left them. The boy stops his father and reminds him that theyre basically killing him and that theyre supposed to be good guys.
    The protagonists i would think are pretty round and dynamic the main character, of the man and boy, the man would most likely be the main character. The man is trying to keep his son from losing hope whilst his son serves as his fathers moral compass. Its a post apocalyptic world that these two must live in and they have to adapt to it without losing their sense of humanity and find reasons to goon. The man has one goal throughout the novel and thats to keep hid don alive until hr himself, dies.
    One very significant symbol throughout the book is the dreams. In the book, bad dreams are considered to be a good thing. They meant that there was still something to drive them foreward.Good dreams however, were considered to be the oppposite they signified acceptance of death, that one was ready to move on. The dreams are a vital component of the book because it helps build a connection in the readers mind as the father has more and more pleasant dreams toward the ending of the novel and his life.
  I chose this book because i wanted to see what an apocalypse looked like from a  literary perspective.Most of us have experienced the movies and the video games. I had completley forgotten about the middleman so i decided to pick up the road. Thats when i was finally able to begin what i deemed,the trial of tears.
   In the interest of time I will skip the connections and move on to the idea that i except to remember for a long time is when the father tells his son that he shouldnt just give up when things are difficult because in the "new" world survival is everything and giving up means dying. Ichose this because its blatanty abucus, but it was beautifully integrated into the novel with a good guy/bad guy theme.

Greek Drama Q&A

1. What kind of prize is given for dancing choruses of worshippers?
The prizes that the choruses vigorously competed for were a bull or a goat.

2. How many spectators would gather in the open-air theatre of Dionysos?
fourteen thousand spectators would gather in the open-air theatre.

3. How does the mask affect the voices of the actors?
The mask would amplify the actors voices.

4. Why was Antigone suspenseful to viewing audiences?
The suspense that the spectators felt came from their knowledge of the things that the characters

5. How is the shepherd to leave the infant on the mountainside?
Alone to die with his ankles pinned together.

6. What is the riddle the Sphinx gave to Oedipus?
"What creature walks on four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, and three legs in the evening?"

7. Who are Oedipus’ kids?
Antigone, Ismene, Polyneices, and Eteocles.

8. After Oedipus is exiled, who takes over Thebes?
Creon

9. What did the family do to the dead body?
Who's dead body?

A case for eating dogs response

Eating dogs has been a deemed a taboo all over the place, but the thing is that its not any different from eating any other animal. Aside from the dogs title, man's best friend, they have no unique qualities that set them apart from other animals that are regularly consumed by people.
There really is no reason why we shouldn't be eating dogs, and if anything it would be more beneficial to eat them. There's a growing problem in the economy with traditional meat processing being incredibly costly because of environmental factors such as energy usage. But the cultivation of dog meat would be leaps and bounds more affordable because of their abundance. Not so much in the homes of people but either on the streets or in shelters. Twice as many animals are put to sleep than are adopted. All of these euthanized animals could be used for meat and should be because on top of being widely available its also good for your health.
Eating dog would not only benefit our environment per less energy usage it also lowers the cost for meat production and the dog population would be able to sustain itself. This means less interference of humans with trying to force breed animals.
There aren't that many reasons that we shouldn't eat dogs just like we would eat any other form of meat. The only thing holding us back is our sentiment for the animal as a culture. But if we could get past this then we could improve on several aspects like meat shortage and to an extent prevent a form of animal cruelty.

Purpose Of Myths

Myths attempt to answer the following ?'s

• What is the nature of the universe in which we live
• How do I feel about how I'm going to die for sure one day
• How much control do I have over my own life
• How can I lead a satisfying life

4 Themes in Myhtology

• Parents often gods
• Those gods create humans
• Destroy 1 world of mortals through a flood
• There are heros that are the children of the gods

Whats the beginning of the universe

• Most major cultures describe the beginning of the universe as: Chaotic, formless mass that god or pair of gods seperates

What do epics/hero myths teach members of society

• They teach its members the appropriate attitudes, behavior, and values of that culture

Why do ordinary people identify with heros

• They do a ton of cool things but they aren't perfect. Those imperfections allow for identification 

Whats the foundation of matriarchal society

• Based on the fact that women could give life they were respected as such

What's Smigmund Freud's view of myths

• They viewed myths as an expression of the individuals unconscious wishes, fears and drives

Myths demonstrate that people posses

• Myths demonstrate that they possess the intellectual capacity to understand the world in which they live

How Schools Kills Creativity

After watching the Ted Talks I finally realized how messed up our education system is. Rather than praising people for their skills and natural talents. We romanticize academic excellence as if it were the only thing that mattered.  As a result there are several students who don't think that they have anywhere to go in life because they don't perform as well in those areas as others do. In addition several forms of art such as dance, painting, theater, etc, aren't truly considered valuable career paths but mostly hobbies. People who do excel in those areas are then forced to undergo judgement for doing something that they enjoy. There are several things that I have wanted to do but I never got the chance to because I was constantly told that i had to focus on my "core" subjects.      

Yet another journal entry

Whether or not something is interesting is completely up to the individual. Your likes and dislikes have complete control on whether or not you think something is interesting or not. But what I have seen over the few years that I have been alive is that comprehension also plays a large role in interest and enjoyment. After all, how can you enjoy something that you don't understand? For me something that i found super interesting was a show called Madoka I found myself completely infatuated with the show although for a majority of the first part i was completely and utterly lost.  But it was different for my friend who was also watching it at the same time as me but as soon as first set of credits came on she gave up on the show. It was confusing because of a whole time travel deal and there being different timelines within the episode but that is often very difficult to follow, so i can understand the reason for the confusion

Literature Analysis #1

Sophie's World

Jostien Garrder

Plot: The story begins with 14 year old Sophie Amundsen one day returning from school. She arrives home and checks her mail per usual, however this time she gets a envelope from an unknown sender. Upon examination of the contents of the letter she finds a sliver of paper that read,"who are you?" Sophie considers the question and answers it as best she can considering the questions' lack of apparent origin. Within the next few days Sophie continues to receive envelopes and it's soon revealed that the envelopes are given to her by her unknown sender in an attempt to teach her philosophy and have her think as such through teaching Sophie about the history of philosophy and several philosophers. The unknown sender then reveals himself to be a man by the name of Alberto Knox. Whilst all of this occurs Sophie also receives a post card from the father of a girl by the name of Hilde Knag wishing his daughter a happy birthday. Sophie then begins to connect the dots and feels that Hilde and the philosophy teachings are somehow connected.

Theme: Throughout the story there are several different themes but they all fall into the category of philosophy. For example one of the themes was that one needs to experience the good and the bad in order to see the difference between one or the other, this is so that you can truly appreciate how good something is by looking at its polar opposite. Another running theme throughout the book is free will because it hints at something that is later discovered in the book but it also explains how if fate were real then you could not do anything at all and you would be fine because no matter what you do you are going to somehow do what you were "destined" to do.

Why?: I chose to read this book because you(ostini) said that it was a book about philosophy, a subject that just so happens to be one of my keen interest. At first when I began to read I didn't like it very much at all because of the way that the book was written but as time goes on i got used to it. What kept me reading, I think, was when Alberto begins to ask Sophie all sort of questions about Philosophy and seeing the way that she personally thought about the matter.

Realistic/connections?: I wouldn't really classify this book as being realistic at all really. there were some things that were possible to occur in the real world but for the most part the book is/seems fictional. The book was also conveniently about philosophy, this allowed me to make several different connections to the book because it allowed me to answer the questions that were asked of Sophie, along with her.

Tone: The story for the most part was told in third person. I think that this made the author sound generally cold but the author also definitely provided clear insight into the mind of Sophie Amundsen. "She tried to think extra hard about
being alive so as to forget that she would not be alive forever. But it was impossible.
As soon as she concentrated on being alive now, the thought of dying also came into
her mind." I think that the tone i enjoyed the most was when the author spoke as the philosopher because he seemed much more charismatic that way "I must add that from now on I will no longer be able to deliver the letters
personally. It would be much too risky in the long run. In the future, letters will be
delivered by my little messenger." Whenever Sophie's mom showed up the tone changed to being more negative and it reminded me of stereotypical bad parent, "“Is he the one who told you about the rabbit and the top hat?” her mother asked.
Sophie nodded.
“He—he doesn’t do drugs, does he?”  "

Literary Devices:
1: Allusion: The author makes constant references to various myths of the past when he talks about the history of specific philosophers. " He therefore
assumed that everything was built up of tiny invisible blocks, each of which
was eternal and immutable. Democritus called these smallest units atoms."
2:Hyperbole " They are also unbreakable She couldn’t ever remember having seen a
broken Lego block"
3: Metaphor: ". Actually, we are the
white rabbit being pulled out of the hat. The only difference between us and
the white rabbit is that the rabbit does not realize it is taking part in a magic
trick"
4:Symbolism: There are several instances in which the author seems to unnecessarily note the color of things but as it turns out that's symbolism. "Sophie let herself quickly into the red house."
5: Situational Irony: " Could it be the messenger? Her heart
started beating faster. It sounded like a panting animal was coming.
The next moment a big Labrador pushed its way into the den."
6:Sensory Detail:" Although it was almost dark outside, she could make out the shape of a human
figure. It was a man, and Sophie thought he looked quite old. He was certainly not her
age! "
7:Imagery: "The girl in the mirror did not react with as much as a twitch. Whatever Sophie
did, she did exactly the same. Sophie tried to beat her reflection to it with a lightning
movement but the other girl was just as fast. "

Characterization: I think that Sophie Amundsen was a round character because she adapted to what was going on with her surrounding situations accordingly. The prime example being the fact that Sophie was able to adapt her thinking to that of a philosopher and to be equally matched to the likes of Alberto.
When initially reading the book it was more like I was simply reading a character above everything else. But as the story began to progress it became much easier to identify with Sophie and by the end of the book i felt like i had personally met her and Alberto.

Enduring memory:
Because the book was about philosophy it is difficult to pick just one of the many lessons that the subject entails. However if I must, i feel what I will remember for a long period of time is the lesson that Sophie had to learn about in the beginning of the book when Sophie realized that she had to experience the bad in order to be able to appreciate the good. Another idea was the one that you cannot really be living or being appreciative of the world around you if you don't question it. Because otherwise how are you going to come to understand it?