Now that Casey Anthony has been acquitted, should the general public show mercy by accepting the court decision and leaving her alone?
Yes the general public should show mercy and leave her alone. Basically, because it is cyber bullying, disrespecting her, and its clearly none of their business. She does not deserve such , as she has already been acquitted and they should respect her.
Setting up a facebook page and gathering nearly 39,000 likes for an I hate Casey Anthony page is unreasonable and immature. They do not empathise with Casey's position, and indeed makes her a villain . This is cyber bullying, inflicting harm , social, psychological harm on Casey, and she does not deserve it. Take yourself as an example. Put yourself in Casey's shoes : You did not intend to kill anyone, and within a blink of an eye, the netizens express hatred towards you. They do not even understand your position. Its cyber bullying, as Casey would not only feel uncomfortable, she might breakdown. They should show mercy, and let the court decide; since they have acquitted her, let it be ! The masses have no right to judge or determine her treatment.
I feel that the public is also disrespecting her. They do not bother much about her feelings and take no consideration the implications that appear imminent. For example, if you were wrongly accused of killing your own daughter, and people continue judging you based on an act you did not do, that is a total misconception. And if they continue bugging you on it, will you not feel like you were stepped on? They do not listen to you, they listen to what they think it is; they just ignore your emotions. How would you feel? Not just sad, but disrespected ! Definitely the public should show some mercy ! Their "justice" appears very detrimentally, and consciously despises Casey, and is an obvious disrespect to her. Why can't they just be merciful, and take a step back?
Finally, it is more than clear, that the death of Casey Anthony's daughter is none of the public's business. They are by no means related to Casey, to them, its just another death. Why make a fuss out of it? For example, if your daughter passes away, and if you see a more than 30,000 people poking their noses into the matter; they did not encourage her or motivate her, they despised and disrespected her. I would not mind as much if her relatives poked their noses in. But think about it, random strangers amounting to tens of thousands all criticising your actions. Excuse me, justice is not meted out this way.
Casey's daughter's death is already a setback, plus the constant public cyber bullying her, I doubt she can handle this crisis. I think that we should just leave her alone, and not be busybodies, and try to be just.
Benedict (:
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
Online Lesson #11
Speech :
Should gender prejudice be punished by the government?
Should gender prejudice be punished ? Yes . It inflicts harm on the victim, consciously or unconsciously, and the harm may not be just a surface wound, it may be a scar, that lasts forever. I am here today discussing if gender prejudice has the severity to deserve the government's intervention. My honest opinion being, no. Definitely, gender prejudice, like all other prejudices, have pernicious effects. However they strictly do not deserve any government punishment. Without government punishment, other solutions will still stop gender prejudice.
Firstly, one very important solution, would be time. As time goes, people grow. As people grow, they become more mature. Maturity has the grip on gender prejudice; the less mature you are, the more likely you are to insult someone, and vice versa. The innate maturity itself, is self-sufficient to curb gender prejudice. For example, if you look at my younger cousins. Janelle, is 5 years old this year, and Timothy is 3 years old this year. Many a times, at family and relative gatherings, I often see them quarrelling. Janelle would shout " Boys are losers ! Girls are the best !" Timothy would stand helpless, running back to my aunt. They are just small kids, and lack the maturity to think for themselves. They blatantly speak in order to hurt the other person, or to ensure superiority. On the other hand, I do not see my 15 year old cousin and 17 year old cousin fighting over such things. I do not see one shouting at the other " Boys are losers ." I do not see them fighting over gender. It is obvious that only the younger children have this problem, whilst the teenagers find nothing at all to quarrel about. Government punishment can be very severe, and are to punish , and to correct, any wrong doings. Though gender prejudice is wrong, it does not require the government to step in, as time would be the solution. As one ages, he becomes more mature. Gender prejudice then only occurs to the immature, and ironically, government punishment should only be given to the mature. Reason being , the immature lacks the consciousness of his thoughts; he does not know what he is doing. So putting it into a simple way of saying it, when government punishments are for the mature, gender prejudice only occurs in the immature, hence both government punishments and gender prejudice cannot go together. They are by nature, two like poles of a magnet.
Secondly, besides maturity, gender prejudice is natural. It is part and parcel of growing up. We are all inborn with this inclination to assume prejudice over another gender. Be it a 77 year old man, or a 3 year old child, both of them would have ever said the catchphrase " Boys are losers, Girls are the best ", in their life. Not because they are forced to, or it is some imprinted law, but its because God made us this way. The nature of us, human beings, include trying to be superior. We, as humans, are ethical egoists, always hoping for anything that benefits us. Definitely, inborn we want to be superior. For example , when I was a boy, I recall I was in Bridges Montessori, and I was just 6 years old. I recall the awesome friends I had made, and the teachers who were so helpful to me. However, some days, where I felt inferior or lonely, I would naturally find myself talking to some girls. I would insult the girls, asking why are they so short. I would insult the girls, asking why their name is so funny. I would insult the girls, asking why did they have long hair. The girls, who were more mature then, shrugged my truthful opinions off. However, some days, the girls also insulted me. They would ask why I was so naughty, they would ask why I was so noisy. As the years went by, I realised I had always been doing that to satisfy my inferiority. It is a natural instinct. Aside maturity, I feel that it is natural for us to feel inferior, and wanting to insult the other gender. Without a doubt this does not require the government's intervention. We cannot expect them to place a fine or jail term on us whenever we do something natural. It is equals to fining anyone who burps.
Lastly, other than maturity and nature, gender prejudice also can be solved and overcame by reasoned and gentle talks. Definitely you do not reprimand, or lambast a small boy for doing something natural. Though it might be negative to the other gender, one could just gently have a speech, discussing about the topic. For example, whenever Janelle hurled insults at Timothy, like those mentioned before, Timothy often runs back to his mother. His mother then, would tell Janelle's mother what was going on. Following that, Janelle's mother would talk to Janelle about calling someone names, and insulting Timothy. After awhile, Janelle stops insulting Timothy. But when Timothy realizes Janelle now has a " weak point", he goes on calling Janelle fat, and more. There is a cyclical continuity in this, until one reaches maturity, as I previously said. Such reasoned and gentle talks are short-term solutions till one reaches maturity. As such, I do not agree that government strictness should apply to immature children.
Humans, in the nature of our growing up, in the immature being we were, often experience gender prejudice. It is not justifiable for government to intervene with nature. Why not let simple talks and time resolve the matter, instead of harsh punishments that seek short-term correction? You cannot correct and punish nature, just let things be as it is, and with simple talks, they can solve the problems till maturity. Gender prejudice is not justifiable for government punishments.
Benedict (:
Should gender prejudice be punished by the government?
Should gender prejudice be punished ? Yes . It inflicts harm on the victim, consciously or unconsciously, and the harm may not be just a surface wound, it may be a scar, that lasts forever. I am here today discussing if gender prejudice has the severity to deserve the government's intervention. My honest opinion being, no. Definitely, gender prejudice, like all other prejudices, have pernicious effects. However they strictly do not deserve any government punishment. Without government punishment, other solutions will still stop gender prejudice.
Firstly, one very important solution, would be time. As time goes, people grow. As people grow, they become more mature. Maturity has the grip on gender prejudice; the less mature you are, the more likely you are to insult someone, and vice versa. The innate maturity itself, is self-sufficient to curb gender prejudice. For example, if you look at my younger cousins. Janelle, is 5 years old this year, and Timothy is 3 years old this year. Many a times, at family and relative gatherings, I often see them quarrelling. Janelle would shout " Boys are losers ! Girls are the best !" Timothy would stand helpless, running back to my aunt. They are just small kids, and lack the maturity to think for themselves. They blatantly speak in order to hurt the other person, or to ensure superiority. On the other hand, I do not see my 15 year old cousin and 17 year old cousin fighting over such things. I do not see one shouting at the other " Boys are losers ." I do not see them fighting over gender. It is obvious that only the younger children have this problem, whilst the teenagers find nothing at all to quarrel about. Government punishment can be very severe, and are to punish , and to correct, any wrong doings. Though gender prejudice is wrong, it does not require the government to step in, as time would be the solution. As one ages, he becomes more mature. Gender prejudice then only occurs to the immature, and ironically, government punishment should only be given to the mature. Reason being , the immature lacks the consciousness of his thoughts; he does not know what he is doing. So putting it into a simple way of saying it, when government punishments are for the mature, gender prejudice only occurs in the immature, hence both government punishments and gender prejudice cannot go together. They are by nature, two like poles of a magnet.
Secondly, besides maturity, gender prejudice is natural. It is part and parcel of growing up. We are all inborn with this inclination to assume prejudice over another gender. Be it a 77 year old man, or a 3 year old child, both of them would have ever said the catchphrase " Boys are losers, Girls are the best ", in their life. Not because they are forced to, or it is some imprinted law, but its because God made us this way. The nature of us, human beings, include trying to be superior. We, as humans, are ethical egoists, always hoping for anything that benefits us. Definitely, inborn we want to be superior. For example , when I was a boy, I recall I was in Bridges Montessori, and I was just 6 years old. I recall the awesome friends I had made, and the teachers who were so helpful to me. However, some days, where I felt inferior or lonely, I would naturally find myself talking to some girls. I would insult the girls, asking why are they so short. I would insult the girls, asking why their name is so funny. I would insult the girls, asking why did they have long hair. The girls, who were more mature then, shrugged my truthful opinions off. However, some days, the girls also insulted me. They would ask why I was so naughty, they would ask why I was so noisy. As the years went by, I realised I had always been doing that to satisfy my inferiority. It is a natural instinct. Aside maturity, I feel that it is natural for us to feel inferior, and wanting to insult the other gender. Without a doubt this does not require the government's intervention. We cannot expect them to place a fine or jail term on us whenever we do something natural. It is equals to fining anyone who burps.
Lastly, other than maturity and nature, gender prejudice also can be solved and overcame by reasoned and gentle talks. Definitely you do not reprimand, or lambast a small boy for doing something natural. Though it might be negative to the other gender, one could just gently have a speech, discussing about the topic. For example, whenever Janelle hurled insults at Timothy, like those mentioned before, Timothy often runs back to his mother. His mother then, would tell Janelle's mother what was going on. Following that, Janelle's mother would talk to Janelle about calling someone names, and insulting Timothy. After awhile, Janelle stops insulting Timothy. But when Timothy realizes Janelle now has a " weak point", he goes on calling Janelle fat, and more. There is a cyclical continuity in this, until one reaches maturity, as I previously said. Such reasoned and gentle talks are short-term solutions till one reaches maturity. As such, I do not agree that government strictness should apply to immature children.
Humans, in the nature of our growing up, in the immature being we were, often experience gender prejudice. It is not justifiable for government to intervene with nature. Why not let simple talks and time resolve the matter, instead of harsh punishments that seek short-term correction? You cannot correct and punish nature, just let things be as it is, and with simple talks, they can solve the problems till maturity. Gender prejudice is not justifiable for government punishments.
Benedict (:
15 minute writing
Rupert Murdoch's UK newspaper News of the World was recently found to have illegally hacked into the phones of British royalty, famous actors, murder victims, and families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Source: "Murdoch's Watergate?" Newsweek, 10 July 2011, http://www.newsweek.com/2011/0
It is not ethically right, as it intrudes the privacy of many, strike fear into people, the result is not worth the process.
Rupert Murdoch's UK newspaper News of the World hacked into the British royalty, and victims, all because they wanted information for their articles. This is an intrusion of privacy, and is not ethically right. For example, if someone broke into your house, just to find what computer brand you are using. He notices its an Apple computer, and jots it down in his notebook, then leaving. Though he did not steal or anything, he trespassed the territory of your house. What I am saying is that the newspaper hacked into the British Royalty just to get information. Though they did not use the information for bad means, they still took it; it is morally wrong, and shows a lack of integrity. They intruded the British Royals privacy, without asking, and it is ethically wrong.
The newspaper from now on be known as - the newspaper that hacks -. From that incident on, I think people from all states would have an increased awareness of the capability of technology now, which can enable hacking easily. Everybody would be fearful, and living in apprehension, hoping no one gets their private information. For example, a small boy, about 1.2 metres in height, sneaked into your house, stealthily into the kitchen, and grabbed some food, running off. You saw him, yet cannot give chase as he was very small and flexible. In the future, you ensure a double lock on your door. In this case, people would fear their information being taken away with what such complexing technology can offer. Once bitten, and twice shy. It is ethically wrong then, to instil a constant bubbling fear in the citizens' hearts.
It is ethically wrong, as the result is not worth it. What you get in the end, is not worth the trouble. For example, you walked into a provision store, hungry. You noticed you had no money, and thought of stealing. You grabbed a few boxes of chocolates, and sprinted towards the exit. Unfortunately for you, the shopkeeper caught you, and you were taken to the police station. That is an example of a worthless gain - chocolates- but a severe punishment. You try to fulfil and satisfy short-term gratification, like the chocolates, without thinking of the severity. You should have asked yourself : is what I am doing, worth it? It is wrong then, to get information from the British Royals, families, just to write an article. Is going all over to the extremes to get some information worth it? I doubt so, and they made a wrong choice.
Benedict (:
Source: "Murdoch's Watergate?" Newsweek, 10 July 2011, http://www.newsweek.com/2011/0
It is not ethically right, as it intrudes the privacy of many, strike fear into people, the result is not worth the process.
Rupert Murdoch's UK newspaper News of the World hacked into the British royalty, and victims, all because they wanted information for their articles. This is an intrusion of privacy, and is not ethically right. For example, if someone broke into your house, just to find what computer brand you are using. He notices its an Apple computer, and jots it down in his notebook, then leaving. Though he did not steal or anything, he trespassed the territory of your house. What I am saying is that the newspaper hacked into the British Royalty just to get information. Though they did not use the information for bad means, they still took it; it is morally wrong, and shows a lack of integrity. They intruded the British Royals privacy, without asking, and it is ethically wrong.
The newspaper from now on be known as - the newspaper that hacks -. From that incident on, I think people from all states would have an increased awareness of the capability of technology now, which can enable hacking easily. Everybody would be fearful, and living in apprehension, hoping no one gets their private information. For example, a small boy, about 1.2 metres in height, sneaked into your house, stealthily into the kitchen, and grabbed some food, running off. You saw him, yet cannot give chase as he was very small and flexible. In the future, you ensure a double lock on your door. In this case, people would fear their information being taken away with what such complexing technology can offer. Once bitten, and twice shy. It is ethically wrong then, to instil a constant bubbling fear in the citizens' hearts.
It is ethically wrong, as the result is not worth it. What you get in the end, is not worth the trouble. For example, you walked into a provision store, hungry. You noticed you had no money, and thought of stealing. You grabbed a few boxes of chocolates, and sprinted towards the exit. Unfortunately for you, the shopkeeper caught you, and you were taken to the police station. That is an example of a worthless gain - chocolates- but a severe punishment. You try to fulfil and satisfy short-term gratification, like the chocolates, without thinking of the severity. You should have asked yourself : is what I am doing, worth it? It is wrong then, to get information from the British Royals, families, just to write an article. Is going all over to the extremes to get some information worth it? I doubt so, and they made a wrong choice.
Benedict (:
15 minute writing
Based on the severity of the accused crime, was it fair for the media to form a premature opinion about Strauss-Kahn's innocence? Write in ABC/PEEL format.
I feel that it was not fair for the media to make such a trial on Strauss even before the court judged him. Mainly because there might be some hidden agenda and reason to his doings, and his motives are not as perceived pernicious. Secondly , the media judged his whole personality, ignoring his contributions, based on one act, which has yet to be even trialled in court. Thirdly their judgement is biased and unclear, without any clarification.
I think that Strauss Khan might have a reason for his actions, and it is not fair for the media to judge him. For example, if someone from a big authority was threatening you to rape the woman, and puts your life at risk, would you do it? If the Mafia comes after you, and asks you to target this particular girl, you would be compelled to, though it goes against our morals. Realistically speaking, one should follow his kanthian perspective of thinking, if Strauss was forced to, complied to raping this woman, then I doubt it is fair for the media to trial him. My stand is that definitely something has happened before, that forced Strauss into raping the girl . Thus it is unfair for the media to judge.
I think that Strauss shouldnt be judged by one act alone, ignoring all contributions. For example, if Mr Lee Kuan Yew is caught for stealing, the media would create a huge outcry for it, and all his efforts would go down the drain. And from then on, he would be viewed as a thief-only. It is only fair, when the court judges Mr Lee accordingly for what he has contributed, and the severity of the crime, for the media to make their decision. I think Strauss would only be judged properly after the court rules a decision, and not before, as the media tends to overlook all of one's benefits and criticise. It is not fair to judge on based on one act. The media has yet to confirm the total procedure and wants to judge Strauss, it is unfair.
The media's judgement is bias. The media is but yet a bleak source of information, and does not hold true information. More often than not, they exaggerate their points, and make it seem interesting. Such is unfair. For example, in the recent bullying case of a volleyball coach "pulling" the students hair, "tossing" him to the ground, " bashing" him up. I doubt the media was there. I doubt that such a specific description could be come up by 8 year olds. The media tends to exaggerate, and its not fair at all. I think the court should judge Strauss and not let the media exaggerate the whole thing into a big matter.
I find the media very selfish and unfair is they trial someone. It is not their duty to trial , but it is the court's duty. What the media should do, is wait till the sentence is out, then judge them accordingly.
Benedict(:
I feel that it was not fair for the media to make such a trial on Strauss even before the court judged him. Mainly because there might be some hidden agenda and reason to his doings, and his motives are not as perceived pernicious. Secondly , the media judged his whole personality, ignoring his contributions, based on one act, which has yet to be even trialled in court. Thirdly their judgement is biased and unclear, without any clarification.
I think that Strauss Khan might have a reason for his actions, and it is not fair for the media to judge him. For example, if someone from a big authority was threatening you to rape the woman, and puts your life at risk, would you do it? If the Mafia comes after you, and asks you to target this particular girl, you would be compelled to, though it goes against our morals. Realistically speaking, one should follow his kanthian perspective of thinking, if Strauss was forced to, complied to raping this woman, then I doubt it is fair for the media to trial him. My stand is that definitely something has happened before, that forced Strauss into raping the girl . Thus it is unfair for the media to judge.
I think that Strauss shouldnt be judged by one act alone, ignoring all contributions. For example, if Mr Lee Kuan Yew is caught for stealing, the media would create a huge outcry for it, and all his efforts would go down the drain. And from then on, he would be viewed as a thief-only. It is only fair, when the court judges Mr Lee accordingly for what he has contributed, and the severity of the crime, for the media to make their decision. I think Strauss would only be judged properly after the court rules a decision, and not before, as the media tends to overlook all of one's benefits and criticise. It is not fair to judge on based on one act. The media has yet to confirm the total procedure and wants to judge Strauss, it is unfair.
The media's judgement is bias. The media is but yet a bleak source of information, and does not hold true information. More often than not, they exaggerate their points, and make it seem interesting. Such is unfair. For example, in the recent bullying case of a volleyball coach "pulling" the students hair, "tossing" him to the ground, " bashing" him up. I doubt the media was there. I doubt that such a specific description could be come up by 8 year olds. The media tends to exaggerate, and its not fair at all. I think the court should judge Strauss and not let the media exaggerate the whole thing into a big matter.
I find the media very selfish and unfair is they trial someone. It is not their duty to trial , but it is the court's duty. What the media should do, is wait till the sentence is out, then judge them accordingly.
Benedict(:
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
15 minute writing
Involve more than 2 people doing something from two point of view. ( Narrative Piece)
First piece :
The man peered left, and right, up, and down, making sure nobody was aware of his presence. Step by step, cautiously, he tip-toed his way through the middle section of the Marina Office, eyes switching gazes. All he knew he had to take the Rouble Document, an ancient and preserved document known to contain all the bank account numbers. Fraught with obnoxious greed, he had agreed to undertake the up-heaved task of betrayal, satisfying himself only. He sneaked his tiny yet agile frame timorously in the rooms, searching for the Document; he knew the CEO had left it somewhere. The fans stayed stagnant still, the walls carrying a seemingly terrifying banner of warning.
The sepulchral quietness was not of comfort; he had to make specific sounds and idiosyncrasies to relieve the crushing fear and trepidation that phenomenally re-captured his being. He knew he had to do this quick and fast, but at the same time, he had two twitches. He started to regret his actions and question himself for such a greedy cause. He also started to suspect someone following him.
His heartbeat accelerated; his heart palpitated furiously against the sheer vulnerability of his ribcage. The silence was broken. He heard a small, timid squeak from behind. Was it a mouse? Was it a cat? A human? He could never ascertain. All he was sure of , was his determination to fulfilling his ennui and inner weariness of money/gold. He edged towards the CEO's room, then proceeded to the manifold drawers which loomed and leered towards him, pressurising him. At the same time, he was oblivious to a muffled scream and light footsteps tailing him. He continued his search, smirked, and brushed off his fringe. As he was scrambling and searching tediously for the Document, he did not see a tumbled dustbin lying on the floor; it seemed like a ferocious tiger. Unconsciously, he stepped on it, and fell on his back with a huge thud. He moaned and groaned, getting himself back to his feet. He turned back, and spotted a teenage girl. They both screamed......
Second Piece
She was punished by her father, the CEO of the Marina Office Club; she had to stay up in the office for one night, as a severe and mental punishment. Kneeling on the carpeted and blanketed floor, her thoughts turned wild and all over the place. She had never felt this scared and lonely.
She heard a footstep.
Out of curiosity, she got up, and looked around, trying to find any perpetrator. Suddenly, a middle aged man appeared, seeming rather panicky, tip-toeing through the office. She determined to follow him, and trusted her instincts that she was up to no good. All the while tracking him was petrifying. She had to control her screams and manage her impulse.
When she noticed he was approaching her father's room and drawers, she whipped out her handphone, and attempted to dial for her father. After awhile, she saw, right before her very eyes, the intruder tripping over a dustbin. Giggling, she tried to hide herself, and connect the phone call. But she was too late; he had turned behind already. In shock, she screamed when she noticed who the 'intruder' was.
-benedict (:
First piece :
The man peered left, and right, up, and down, making sure nobody was aware of his presence. Step by step, cautiously, he tip-toed his way through the middle section of the Marina Office, eyes switching gazes. All he knew he had to take the Rouble Document, an ancient and preserved document known to contain all the bank account numbers. Fraught with obnoxious greed, he had agreed to undertake the up-heaved task of betrayal, satisfying himself only. He sneaked his tiny yet agile frame timorously in the rooms, searching for the Document; he knew the CEO had left it somewhere. The fans stayed stagnant still, the walls carrying a seemingly terrifying banner of warning.
The sepulchral quietness was not of comfort; he had to make specific sounds and idiosyncrasies to relieve the crushing fear and trepidation that phenomenally re-captured his being. He knew he had to do this quick and fast, but at the same time, he had two twitches. He started to regret his actions and question himself for such a greedy cause. He also started to suspect someone following him.
His heartbeat accelerated; his heart palpitated furiously against the sheer vulnerability of his ribcage. The silence was broken. He heard a small, timid squeak from behind. Was it a mouse? Was it a cat? A human? He could never ascertain. All he was sure of , was his determination to fulfilling his ennui and inner weariness of money/gold. He edged towards the CEO's room, then proceeded to the manifold drawers which loomed and leered towards him, pressurising him. At the same time, he was oblivious to a muffled scream and light footsteps tailing him. He continued his search, smirked, and brushed off his fringe. As he was scrambling and searching tediously for the Document, he did not see a tumbled dustbin lying on the floor; it seemed like a ferocious tiger. Unconsciously, he stepped on it, and fell on his back with a huge thud. He moaned and groaned, getting himself back to his feet. He turned back, and spotted a teenage girl. They both screamed......
Second Piece
She was punished by her father, the CEO of the Marina Office Club; she had to stay up in the office for one night, as a severe and mental punishment. Kneeling on the carpeted and blanketed floor, her thoughts turned wild and all over the place. She had never felt this scared and lonely.
She heard a footstep.
Out of curiosity, she got up, and looked around, trying to find any perpetrator. Suddenly, a middle aged man appeared, seeming rather panicky, tip-toeing through the office. She determined to follow him, and trusted her instincts that she was up to no good. All the while tracking him was petrifying. She had to control her screams and manage her impulse.
When she noticed he was approaching her father's room and drawers, she whipped out her handphone, and attempted to dial for her father. After awhile, she saw, right before her very eyes, the intruder tripping over a dustbin. Giggling, she tried to hide herself, and connect the phone call. But she was too late; he had turned behind already. In shock, she screamed when she noticed who the 'intruder' was.
-benedict (:
Monday, July 18, 2011
15 minute writing
Would you lend Bassanio the money if you were Antonio?
If I were Antonio, I would lend money to Bassanio, as he is an adventurous risk taker, sincere in clearing debts, and sincere in courting Portia. Given the solid friendship I have with Bassanio, it would be much more easier for me to lend him money, trusting him to return.
I feel that Bassanio is an adventurous risk taker, and that he would be able to return my debts. He is an adventurous risk taker through " In my fellow schooldays, when I had lost one shaft, I shot his fellow of the self-same flight The same self-way, with more advised watch, To find the other forth; and by adventuring both, I oft found both. "( Act 1 Scene 1 Line 140-144) This is proof, that he is a risk taker. In order to find his first arrow, he shoots another arrow in the same direction and observes it more clearly, this way he can locate the two arrows. The same here, if Antonio trusts him and lends him the money, he will be that adventurer risk taker again, and get back two arrows. In this case, twice the debts he owes. They will be returned by a rich lady he wants to woo, Portia. Though this requires trust, Bassanio's character alone is significantly essential, and he puts a degree of hope that he might get back even more of what he owed. Thus, with a risk, Antonio would lend the money.
I feel that Bassanio is sincere in clearing his debts with Antonio, and as such, Antonio would have no qualms and fear that Bassanio would not return the loan. It says "And from your love I have a warranty To unburden all my plots and purposes How to get clear of all the debts I owe" ( Act 1 Scene 1 Line 132-134) This is obvious proof that he wants and is truthful into clearing the debts. And if Bassano shows such sincerity, I doubt that Antonio would restrain himself from lending the money to his good friend.
Lastly, I feel that Bassanio is sincere about wooing Portia. From"O my Antonio, had I but the means To hold a rival place with one of the,, I ahve a mind presages me such thrift That I should questionless be fortunate." (Act 1 Scene 1 Line 173-176) It shows that he is willing to hold rival places to all the other rich sailors around the world, despite his relative poverty, and will do anything to get her. It also shows he puts matrimony over money and is attested by his sincerity. Antonio, being Bassanio's good friend, would definitely want to see him happy and having a good life, thus he would grant such an opporunity, and I see no objection in Antonio lending the money to Bassanio.
Though there might be risks, and Bassanio already owes debts to Antonio, I feel that he will still lend money to Bassanio, his good friend, mainly because of his risk-taking personality and sincerity.
Benedict(:
Thursday, July 14, 2011
15 minute writing
Apple's decision could cause inconvenience, frustration, and lesser profit for Apple. Apple do not allow books, music, movies to be bought in the app store due to the rampant piracy. Though it is secure, there are pernicious effects of their decision.
I think that for the IPhone users, everyone would feel inconvenient. Without the freedom and mobility to buy movies, and books from app store, us users may feel irate and exasperated. Itunes is the largest market, but Apple still disallow such sells, thus we have to look and scourge for other sources. For example, last week when my brother told me about this movie called " The Rock", I immediately went on youtube and searched for the trailer. I thought of downloading and buying the movie. I searched the app store, and that was when I realised that Apple do not sell movies at all. Thus, I went looking for it at another online source. The fact that Itunes lacked the availability of movies, made me waste my time searching and finding. I think that if they do not vary their apps and allow the sale of movies, people like me would feel that the App store is ineffective and inconvenient.
I think that us Iphone users will feel extremely frustrated. For example, my brother used my phone the previous day, and wanted to find a song, so that we could buy and download it. The song was rather vintage and antique. He went to the app store, and found that NO music or songs were sold. My brother had been longing for this song, and he thought that the app store might have it. Hence, he felt extremely exasperated and almost threw my phone. This might raise awareness of the lack of products the " largest market" offers, and that people can get easily frustrated without entertainment they search for.
Most importantly, the Apple management would be at a loss of profit despite their wages. Itunes is a huge market, and that they earn their profit mostly from the apps people buy. From the sales they earn money. Don't you think they could earn much more when they allow the sale of movies and songs? For example, if Apple stop selling apps anymore, due to their fear of piracy, the whole phone would be bland, and nobody would buy it. There would be no demand at all for the product. With the sale of movies, the profits are deemed to increase abundantly and they can earn more. They are stopping themselves from earning a huge sum because of fear.
I think that there is inconvenience, frustration and a loss of profit, if Apple continue like this. They should risk their privacy for better gain, and profit.
Benedict(:
I think that for the IPhone users, everyone would feel inconvenient. Without the freedom and mobility to buy movies, and books from app store, us users may feel irate and exasperated. Itunes is the largest market, but Apple still disallow such sells, thus we have to look and scourge for other sources. For example, last week when my brother told me about this movie called " The Rock", I immediately went on youtube and searched for the trailer. I thought of downloading and buying the movie. I searched the app store, and that was when I realised that Apple do not sell movies at all. Thus, I went looking for it at another online source. The fact that Itunes lacked the availability of movies, made me waste my time searching and finding. I think that if they do not vary their apps and allow the sale of movies, people like me would feel that the App store is ineffective and inconvenient.
I think that us Iphone users will feel extremely frustrated. For example, my brother used my phone the previous day, and wanted to find a song, so that we could buy and download it. The song was rather vintage and antique. He went to the app store, and found that NO music or songs were sold. My brother had been longing for this song, and he thought that the app store might have it. Hence, he felt extremely exasperated and almost threw my phone. This might raise awareness of the lack of products the " largest market" offers, and that people can get easily frustrated without entertainment they search for.
Most importantly, the Apple management would be at a loss of profit despite their wages. Itunes is a huge market, and that they earn their profit mostly from the apps people buy. From the sales they earn money. Don't you think they could earn much more when they allow the sale of movies and songs? For example, if Apple stop selling apps anymore, due to their fear of piracy, the whole phone would be bland, and nobody would buy it. There would be no demand at all for the product. With the sale of movies, the profits are deemed to increase abundantly and they can earn more. They are stopping themselves from earning a huge sum because of fear.
I think that there is inconvenience, frustration and a loss of profit, if Apple continue like this. They should risk their privacy for better gain, and profit.
Benedict(:
Monday, July 11, 2011
Online Lesson 10
Fictional narrative piece :
Alessandro Del Piero crept up the stairway, clutching his shirt convulsively, and with foolish temerity, pushed the door ajar. He heard the clinking of bells from above, and felt the first breath of air-condition caress his skin. Twitching a curved smile, adjusting his attire, polishing his hair, Del Piero stepped in the office.
"May I look for the administration?" Del Piero mumbled a forced cry. The sporadic scribbling of pencil lead, and the constant chit-chatting of a few. "Hello?" Del Piero said again. There was nobody attending to him. A well-dressed, polished and clean-cut, tall and upright man sauntered into the lobby, sniggering in sarcasm " Do I smell a Jew?" Del Piero shuddered for a split second, and struggled to raise his hand. " Yes Sir, I am a Jew" . The man took a quick glance, and signalled for the security to bring him out.
Del Piero found himself lost for words, indignant. He attempted to convince the man to stay, but the burly security guards were gargantuan and completely blocked off his view. In a muffled voice, the security guard in the furbished suit gruntled " You leave this area on your own before your corpse does." Despondent but not surprised, Del Piero walked down the stairway, as he anticipated this would happen. He had even applied for the job of a garbage man, and a maid, but he was rejected. Del Piero just hoped in all his heart for humanity to be fair, and for Jews to be treated in sincere equality.
Expert Circle
Topic 1
1. Why is William Shakespear not considered a likely candidate for the authorship of Shakespear's works?
Basically, there was no confirmation in the first place, that there was a William Shakespear, with the degree of mystification shrouding the question. Many doubts and unknowns, with very little evidence, may substantiate his absence. One reason is also, that if there was a Shakespear, it is recorded that his education level is significantly low, and he cannot be the one to write such superb, profound and distinct language, as written in all plays. The real author of Shakespear did not want to reveal his identity as there were many political issues revolving the plays, and had hidden attacks against the monarchy.
2. Who are the possible candidates?
- Edward De Vere
-William Stanley
-Thomas Middleton
-Christopher Marlowe
-Francis Bacon
3. Who is the most likely candidate?
Edward De Vere,
many plots and experiences are from his personal experiences .
Topic 2
1. Who was Elizabeth I?
She was born on the 7th July 1533 and died on the 24th March 1603. She was queen regnant of England and Ireland till her death. She was the daughter of King Henry VIII
2. What were England international relations when Elizabeth was queen?
In the early years, England was military engaged with Scotland and France. Relationships grew friendly with Scotland after the overthrow of Mary, Queen of Scots, and a military treaty was signed. Relationships was worsened with Spain and Elizabeth sent an army to Netherlands in 1585 to put it under her protection. In 1588, Philip II of Spain responded by sending the Spanish Armada of over 100 ships to go to war with England. However, the English defeated them.
The population of Ireland often rebelled against the authority of the queen. There were many rebellions in the 1570s to 1590s. In the Nine Years War from 1594-1603, the Irish defeated the English in 1598, but were defeated in 1603, after Elizabeth’s death. A peace was then signed between the two nations.
There were friendly diplomatic and trade relations between England and the Barbary States, the Ottoman Empire and Japan during her reign.
3. What was Shakespear relationship with Queen Elizabeth?
Queen Elizabeth was a huge supporter of the arts in England, mainly she supported plays and masques, in fact she even wrote poetry herself. She attended plays at the Globe theater where Shakespeare wrote and his plays were performed. Shakespeare’s plays were admired by Elizabeth and were also popular with the royal family. Shakespeare’s group performed several of his plays in front of Elizabeth I. It is believed that Elizabeth suggested the subjects of several of the plays that he wrote.
During the last ten years of her reign, the Lord Chamberlain’s Men performed at court thirty-two times, compared to thirty-seven performances by all other companies combined. Queen Elizabeth I was the ruler during the time of Shakespeare’s life.
She enjoyed plays, dances, and other entertainment during her rule. Queen Elizabeth I liked when plays were acted out for her. She was very fond of Shakespeare’s plays. In some of his play, Shakespeare cleverly hinted passages referring to the Queen and other events that affiliated during both of their life time.
The Puritans were not happy with the theaters and shut down all the theatres in London. They claim that the theaters were a major cause of the plague. The real reason why they shut them down was because people were spending time going to plays instead of praying. Queen Elizabeth I reacted to this by forming own group of performers. Her goal was to bring the law of theaters back into business for her people.
4. Compare Elizabeth I to Portia from The Merchant of Venice. How is Portia’s character a tribute to Elizabeth I?
She is very much like an independent woman who has rose to such high ranks like today’s Michelle Obama or Condolezza Rice. She is a strong-headed woman. Queen Elizabeth I had the same character as Portia. Perhaps Portia was an inspiration drawn from as well as a tribute paid to Elizabeth I who was a patron of Shakespeare’s works. Queen Elizabeth I had been famous for the defeat of the Spanish Armada She had also created an Elizabethan Era in which English dramas and plays had flourished during this period.
She is celebrated as the ruler of a golden age. Her work on the throne is enormous and helped to give England its own identity. She was a successful monarch and also another strong woman like Portia. The Pope once commented, “She is only a woman, only mistress of half an island.” Portia is seen as a witty, rich, powerful, beautiful, romantic, strong-willed, independent and strong-headed individual, much similar to Elizabeth I’s character.
Topic 3
1. What was the hygiene like in the Elizabethan Era?
It was poor and was plagued with diseases These diseases were due to overpopulation. The diseases also spread very quickly due to the people living in a close community. The filthy living conditions, crowded cities, and poverty also caused many of the feared diseases. Baths were also not taken regularly. Three baths were taken a year by peasants and the lower classes, while people in the upper class bathed about every week. It was considered unhealthy to wash hair often. There was also no flush toilets. There was no sewage system as running water did not exist.
2. What was diet like in the Elizabethan Era?
Fruits and vegetables are given to the poor as they are deemed unworthy by the rich. There was a differentiation of diet relying on one's wealth and ranking.
3.What was recreation like in the Elizabethan Era?
Large crowds of both men and women of all classes flocked to see bear baiting or bull baiting.The average Elizabethan was not sensitive to the spectacle of physical suffering, either in human beings or in animals. hey, too, were rough and violent like the sports involving animals. Common men played football It was extremely violent as there were few rules. Fencing was one of the most popular of sports.
4. What was accommodation like during the Elizabethan Era?
Many mansions , and small houses were built. There was a housing boom !
5. What was dressing like during the Elizabethan Era?
Elizabethan Women’s Clothing - gowns, hats, corsets, underwear, collars, ruffs and shoes. Elizabethan Men’s Clothing - doublets, breeches, underwear, collars, ruffs, hats and shoes.
Elizabethan clothes provided information about the status of the person wearing them. This was not just dictated by the wealth of the person, it also reflected their social standing.
Topic 4
1.
What was Venice like during the 15th and 16th century? Comment especially on its demographics and culture.
Venice started declining in the 16th century after various attacks like the Kingdoms of France and Spain. However, Venice flourished and was an important trading centre and art centre due to its stable political climate. There were over a 100000 people living in Venice in the 15th and 16th century. Venetian craftsmen produced various decorative arts, including sculptures, lace, glassworks, paintings and ceramics. Merchants traded wool and silk and various other products.
2. Why was Venice important during the 15th and 16th century?
Venice was a centre for Renaissance culture in the 15th and 16th century. Architecture, art, music and literature flourished in Venice. The printing of books in the Italian language was initiated in Venice and contributed to the Italian Renaissance. The Venetian School polychoral compositions were famous throughout Europe in the late 16th century.
3. How is Venice a choice setting for the plot of this play?
Venice was not a forbidden place for the Jews, and that they could work there and work for money. Another reason is that probably Edward De Vere has visited Italy and has a personal revelation or understanding.
Topic 5
1.What was the dominant religion in England and Venice in the 15th and 16th century?
It was Roman Catholicism.
2. Why was there such animosity between Jews and Christians?
Judaism and Jews were seen as threats to Christianity and were often prejudiced against and discriminated for many centuries. Jews were also discriminated for political and financial issues. The New Testament rejected Judaism and criticized the Jews, which led to further hatred and hostility between the two religions. In addition, rulers often prosecuted and exiled Jews as they were seen as threats to the political stability of the nation.Christians saw the Jews as inferior and that they should be ostracised due to their religion.
3.In what ways did Christians discriminate against Jews in 15th and 16th century Europe?
Jews were expelled and restricted in many countries across Europe, including England, Spain, Austria and Portugal. In countries, which allowed Jews, they were forced to live in a certain part of the city (ghettos) and could only engage in certain occupations that were deemed as socially inferior, like tax and rent collecting, peddling and money lending. Jews were forbidden to own land and had restrictions on how the could dress.
Topic 6.
1. In what sort of building were Shakespeare’s plays performed?
-Public theatres
-Private theatres
Public theaters were larger than private ones and held at least 2,500 people. They were built around a courtyard that had no roof. Public theaters gave performances only during daylight hours because they had no lights. Private theaters were smaller, roofed structures. They had candlelight for evening performances. Private theaters charged higher prices and were designed to get richer people.
2. How did the physical constraints of the theatre affect the language of Shakespeare’s plays?
The theatre was open air and there was no scenery around. To make the play seem realistic, Shakespeare would have to describe the setting and time of each new scene to the audience through dialogue or action in the play. Thus, the language of Shakespeare’s plays are often very descriptive in nature.
3. What sort of people acted in plays? What sort of people went to see them?
Only males acted in the plays and no women did. People from all classes went to see the plays as the minimum price of a standing ticket was very cheap and anyone could afford it. Richer people were willing to pay more money for better seats.
4. How was “The Theatre” viewed by Elizabethan society?
The theatre is the earliest purpose-built public London theatre known to Shakespeare. The Elizabethan society viewed the theatre as a place to relax to watch plays. It is also a place for important people to watch plays. There was definitely a differentiation in wealth and standing in the society at that time.
5. Similarities between modern Shakespeare’s Globe and the ancient Globe theatre
The modern day theater was based on the 1614 building, about which more information survives.
Much of the way the present performances are performed in the ancient way, there are no spotlights, plays are staged during daylight hours and in the evenings, there are no microphones, speakers or amplification.Also, all music is performed live on instruments; the actors can see the audience and the audience can see each other.
Both buildings were constructed entirely out of wood.
Differences between modern Shakespeare’s Globe and the ancient Globe theater
The modern version has a larger stage and broader staircases than the ancient theater.
The “pit” (where people would stand to watch the performance) of the modern theater has a concrete surface as opposed to the earthen ground covered with strewn rush in the original theatre.
The seating of the modern theater, at 857, is about 2 times more than the typical audience size of the original theatre.
The modern theater has fire retardents all over the place to prevent another fire, which happend in 1613 and burnt the original theater down.
1. Why is William Shakespear not considered a likely candidate for the authorship of Shakespear's works?
Basically, there was no confirmation in the first place, that there was a William Shakespear, with the degree of mystification shrouding the question. Many doubts and unknowns, with very little evidence, may substantiate his absence. One reason is also, that if there was a Shakespear, it is recorded that his education level is significantly low, and he cannot be the one to write such superb, profound and distinct language, as written in all plays. The real author of Shakespear did not want to reveal his identity as there were many political issues revolving the plays, and had hidden attacks against the monarchy.
2. Who are the possible candidates?
- Edward De Vere
-William Stanley
-Thomas Middleton
-Christopher Marlowe
-Francis Bacon
3. Who is the most likely candidate?
Edward De Vere,
many plots and experiences are from his personal experiences .
Topic 2
1. Who was Elizabeth I?
She was born on the 7th July 1533 and died on the 24th March 1603. She was queen regnant of England and Ireland till her death. She was the daughter of King Henry VIII
2. What were England international relations when Elizabeth was queen?
In the early years, England was military engaged with Scotland and France. Relationships grew friendly with Scotland after the overthrow of Mary, Queen of Scots, and a military treaty was signed. Relationships was worsened with Spain and Elizabeth sent an army to Netherlands in 1585 to put it under her protection. In 1588, Philip II of Spain responded by sending the Spanish Armada of over 100 ships to go to war with England. However, the English defeated them.
The population of Ireland often rebelled against the authority of the queen. There were many rebellions in the 1570s to 1590s. In the Nine Years War from 1594-1603, the Irish defeated the English in 1598, but were defeated in 1603, after Elizabeth’s death. A peace was then signed between the two nations.
There were friendly diplomatic and trade relations between England and the Barbary States, the Ottoman Empire and Japan during her reign.
3. What was Shakespear relationship with Queen Elizabeth?
Queen Elizabeth was a huge supporter of the arts in England, mainly she supported plays and masques, in fact she even wrote poetry herself. She attended plays at the Globe theater where Shakespeare wrote and his plays were performed. Shakespeare’s plays were admired by Elizabeth and were also popular with the royal family. Shakespeare’s group performed several of his plays in front of Elizabeth I. It is believed that Elizabeth suggested the subjects of several of the plays that he wrote.
During the last ten years of her reign, the Lord Chamberlain’s Men performed at court thirty-two times, compared to thirty-seven performances by all other companies combined. Queen Elizabeth I was the ruler during the time of Shakespeare’s life.
She enjoyed plays, dances, and other entertainment during her rule. Queen Elizabeth I liked when plays were acted out for her. She was very fond of Shakespeare’s plays. In some of his play, Shakespeare cleverly hinted passages referring to the Queen and other events that affiliated during both of their life time.
The Puritans were not happy with the theaters and shut down all the theatres in London. They claim that the theaters were a major cause of the plague. The real reason why they shut them down was because people were spending time going to plays instead of praying. Queen Elizabeth I reacted to this by forming own group of performers. Her goal was to bring the law of theaters back into business for her people.
4. Compare Elizabeth I to Portia from The Merchant of Venice. How is Portia’s character a tribute to Elizabeth I?
She is very much like an independent woman who has rose to such high ranks like today’s Michelle Obama or Condolezza Rice. She is a strong-headed woman. Queen Elizabeth I had the same character as Portia. Perhaps Portia was an inspiration drawn from as well as a tribute paid to Elizabeth I who was a patron of Shakespeare’s works. Queen Elizabeth I had been famous for the defeat of the Spanish Armada She had also created an Elizabethan Era in which English dramas and plays had flourished during this period.
She is celebrated as the ruler of a golden age. Her work on the throne is enormous and helped to give England its own identity. She was a successful monarch and also another strong woman like Portia. The Pope once commented, “She is only a woman, only mistress of half an island.” Portia is seen as a witty, rich, powerful, beautiful, romantic, strong-willed, independent and strong-headed individual, much similar to Elizabeth I’s character.
Topic 3
1. What was the hygiene like in the Elizabethan Era?
It was poor and was plagued with diseases These diseases were due to overpopulation. The diseases also spread very quickly due to the people living in a close community. The filthy living conditions, crowded cities, and poverty also caused many of the feared diseases. Baths were also not taken regularly. Three baths were taken a year by peasants and the lower classes, while people in the upper class bathed about every week. It was considered unhealthy to wash hair often. There was also no flush toilets. There was no sewage system as running water did not exist.
2. What was diet like in the Elizabethan Era?
Fruits and vegetables are given to the poor as they are deemed unworthy by the rich. There was a differentiation of diet relying on one's wealth and ranking.
3.What was recreation like in the Elizabethan Era?
Large crowds of both men and women of all classes flocked to see bear baiting or bull baiting.The average Elizabethan was not sensitive to the spectacle of physical suffering, either in human beings or in animals. hey, too, were rough and violent like the sports involving animals. Common men played football It was extremely violent as there were few rules. Fencing was one of the most popular of sports.
4. What was accommodation like during the Elizabethan Era?
Many mansions , and small houses were built. There was a housing boom !
5. What was dressing like during the Elizabethan Era?
Elizabethan Women’s Clothing - gowns, hats, corsets, underwear, collars, ruffs and shoes. Elizabethan Men’s Clothing - doublets, breeches, underwear, collars, ruffs, hats and shoes.
Elizabethan clothes provided information about the status of the person wearing them. This was not just dictated by the wealth of the person, it also reflected their social standing.
Topic 4
1.
What was Venice like during the 15th and 16th century? Comment especially on its demographics and culture.
Venice started declining in the 16th century after various attacks like the Kingdoms of France and Spain. However, Venice flourished and was an important trading centre and art centre due to its stable political climate. There were over a 100000 people living in Venice in the 15th and 16th century. Venetian craftsmen produced various decorative arts, including sculptures, lace, glassworks, paintings and ceramics. Merchants traded wool and silk and various other products.
2. Why was Venice important during the 15th and 16th century?
Venice was a centre for Renaissance culture in the 15th and 16th century. Architecture, art, music and literature flourished in Venice. The printing of books in the Italian language was initiated in Venice and contributed to the Italian Renaissance. The Venetian School polychoral compositions were famous throughout Europe in the late 16th century.
3. How is Venice a choice setting for the plot of this play?
Venice was not a forbidden place for the Jews, and that they could work there and work for money. Another reason is that probably Edward De Vere has visited Italy and has a personal revelation or understanding.
Topic 5
1.What was the dominant religion in England and Venice in the 15th and 16th century?
It was Roman Catholicism.
2. Why was there such animosity between Jews and Christians?
Judaism and Jews were seen as threats to Christianity and were often prejudiced against and discriminated for many centuries. Jews were also discriminated for political and financial issues. The New Testament rejected Judaism and criticized the Jews, which led to further hatred and hostility between the two religions. In addition, rulers often prosecuted and exiled Jews as they were seen as threats to the political stability of the nation.Christians saw the Jews as inferior and that they should be ostracised due to their religion.
3.In what ways did Christians discriminate against Jews in 15th and 16th century Europe?
Jews were expelled and restricted in many countries across Europe, including England, Spain, Austria and Portugal. In countries, which allowed Jews, they were forced to live in a certain part of the city (ghettos) and could only engage in certain occupations that were deemed as socially inferior, like tax and rent collecting, peddling and money lending. Jews were forbidden to own land and had restrictions on how the could dress.
Topic 6.
1. In what sort of building were Shakespeare’s plays performed?
-Public theatres
-Private theatres
Public theaters were larger than private ones and held at least 2,500 people. They were built around a courtyard that had no roof. Public theaters gave performances only during daylight hours because they had no lights. Private theaters were smaller, roofed structures. They had candlelight for evening performances. Private theaters charged higher prices and were designed to get richer people.
2. How did the physical constraints of the theatre affect the language of Shakespeare’s plays?
The theatre was open air and there was no scenery around. To make the play seem realistic, Shakespeare would have to describe the setting and time of each new scene to the audience through dialogue or action in the play. Thus, the language of Shakespeare’s plays are often very descriptive in nature.
3. What sort of people acted in plays? What sort of people went to see them?
Only males acted in the plays and no women did. People from all classes went to see the plays as the minimum price of a standing ticket was very cheap and anyone could afford it. Richer people were willing to pay more money for better seats.
4. How was “The Theatre” viewed by Elizabethan society?
The theatre is the earliest purpose-built public London theatre known to Shakespeare. The Elizabethan society viewed the theatre as a place to relax to watch plays. It is also a place for important people to watch plays. There was definitely a differentiation in wealth and standing in the society at that time.
5. Similarities between modern Shakespeare’s Globe and the ancient Globe theatre
The modern day theater was based on the 1614 building, about which more information survives.
Much of the way the present performances are performed in the ancient way, there are no spotlights, plays are staged during daylight hours and in the evenings, there are no microphones, speakers or amplification.Also, all music is performed live on instruments; the actors can see the audience and the audience can see each other.
Both buildings were constructed entirely out of wood.
Differences between modern Shakespeare’s Globe and the ancient Globe theater
The modern version has a larger stage and broader staircases than the ancient theater.
The “pit” (where people would stand to watch the performance) of the modern theater has a concrete surface as opposed to the earthen ground covered with strewn rush in the original theatre.
The seating of the modern theater, at 857, is about 2 times more than the typical audience size of the original theatre.
The modern theater has fire retardents all over the place to prevent another fire, which happend in 1613 and burnt the original theater down.
15 minute writing
Write several paragraphs (200-350) words of descriptive narrative prose without using adjectives or adverbs.
The man impersonated a grin, beaming to himself. He took his time, sauntering down the Hillway Walkways, scratching his knee as an idiosyncrasy, whistling, and letting his thoughts go wild. His shirt embodied a happiness, while he skipped down the path. Though his shoes were tearing apart, his elation excited him forward; he was looking forward to the birthday party.
The trees swayed along with the wind, the leaves rustled and create a crispiness in the satisfaction. Preferably not, perspiration dripped at his forehead, and began to damp the back of his shirt. He quickened his footsteps upon the touch of a drizzle. The drizzle soon turned into rain. And subsequently, unfortunately, it turned into a downpour. Clutching his head, he let out a sigh. He walked a long way from home without an umbrella and he hoped to take refuge at the party.
Upon arrival at the party destination, he heaved relief and comfort. It was short-lived when he spotted a sign on the front porch reading " Party Cancelled". Following that he wailed in exasperation, and grumbled in a nettled manner .
Benedict
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
What would be the effect of Asian society from such imbalance ?
From the selfish selection of the sex of babies, many prefer boys to girls. Definitely, there will be an imbalance. It is like a weighing scale tilted at one end . Well, what has it got to do with the Asian societies?
Naturally, with more males than females on Earth, the males' orientation of love might change. If there are fewer women, the guys would seek to males to satisfy their needs. Since there is a lack in females, males turn to males, and switch their orientation. For example in Thailand, where homosexuals are allowed, in the Bangkok streets I do see many males dressed as females, with make up on, and beautiful blouses . This is normal for them as it is their culture. However, if the whole of Asia turns relatively homosexual, it is just not right and unfair to humanity. Think about it. The whole of Asia being homosexual and giving of culture as an excuse ? No way, God created Adam and Eve for a reason and not Adam and Steve.
Though this perception is far fetched and futuristic, it can be realistic. The internalisation of one to convert its orientation is terrible . Imagine a boy raised up liking boys and falling for other males . Wouldn't that be disgusting ? Definitely the Asian society will change from such an imbalance. If there are gays, where would babies come from ? The global population will decline, and our economy will be globally unsustainable- without talent . Take Singapore as example, in the 1970s we lacked manpower and our economy progressed slowly. Not only we lack trained workers, our economy is affected as well. This is a base example that shows the deterrent effects of a decline in population to the economy. Not only will Asian societies all take homosexuality as a culture, it is just a deficiency to the original state of humanity.
-Benedict (:
Naturally, with more males than females on Earth, the males' orientation of love might change. If there are fewer women, the guys would seek to males to satisfy their needs. Since there is a lack in females, males turn to males, and switch their orientation. For example in Thailand, where homosexuals are allowed, in the Bangkok streets I do see many males dressed as females, with make up on, and beautiful blouses . This is normal for them as it is their culture. However, if the whole of Asia turns relatively homosexual, it is just not right and unfair to humanity. Think about it. The whole of Asia being homosexual and giving of culture as an excuse ? No way, God created Adam and Eve for a reason and not Adam and Steve.
Though this perception is far fetched and futuristic, it can be realistic. The internalisation of one to convert its orientation is terrible . Imagine a boy raised up liking boys and falling for other males . Wouldn't that be disgusting ? Definitely the Asian society will change from such an imbalance. If there are gays, where would babies come from ? The global population will decline, and our economy will be globally unsustainable- without talent . Take Singapore as example, in the 1970s we lacked manpower and our economy progressed slowly. Not only we lack trained workers, our economy is affected as well. This is a base example that shows the deterrent effects of a decline in population to the economy. Not only will Asian societies all take homosexuality as a culture, it is just a deficiency to the original state of humanity.
-Benedict (:
Monday, July 4, 2011
10 minute blog writing . Sentences of less than 7 words .
Her hands were bound. Her legs were tied . She had never felt this constricted . A stale air clogged the sepulchral silence . The moon possessed an killer, ominous glare . A glare that pierced , that tore . A glare that permeated her courage . The tenebrous night was shrouded by an inimical gloom . The gloom suffused as did a certain melancholy . The thick torn raffia strings had robbed her . They robbed her of power and dignity. She managed a muffled scream . She struggled sturdily . She teared . The four walls loomed and leered. Her perspiration dripped from her forehead. The bulk of her weight dragged her down. She wriggled, and twisted . Just then, the door knob turned . The door creaked open .
Benedict (:
Benedict (:
War-Literature Poetry Questions
1. From the first poem, " Six Young Men", the poem describes war as a killer machine, where people living a moment ago, might turn out dead the next moment . The poem dramatises war and expresses sudden, inescapable and shocking deaths.
The second poem " Hero", describes war as a patriotic platform for the brave soldiers to be able to readily display their courage and bravery by dying for the nation . Not only do the parents feel appreciative, the nation thinks it is nationalistic.
The third poem " Disabled" describes war as a cruel killer, and merciless. When the soldiers fight for their country, they are not honoured and appreciated, but abused and neglected. The poem shows how the disabled from the war are treated badly , and are not treated as they should be .
2. In the first poem, the words" overnight" and " decades" both hold an element of time, and thus they are incorporated to create the mood . The mood involves sudden death and unnoticeable kills . They are related to time, and these words are rather related to them .
In the second poem, the words " gentle triumph" expresses how the mother of the war victim, feels proud and appreciative of his son . They are soft and kind words to express happiness and victory . They are incorporated to create a mood of patriotism and nationalism .
In the third poem, the words"blood-smear", "veins ran dry", "queer disease" , incorporate a bloody, cruel mood of the poem . These terribly brutal words show that war is merciless, and successfully incorporates the mood.
3. Assonance and end-rhymes are used. An assonance on the letter "o" in " soul " , " goal " , expresses a saddening and murky mood, which are the after effects of war . This assonance puts a low , monotonous tone on the words to evoke a sense of melancholy. End rhymes in the poem " Disabled" like " eyes" and " wise", "dole " and "whole" , creates a certain tone, structure and rhythm the way the audience should read the poem . In this case, the rhymes would fasten the tone of the poem . It may be to emphasise on the sorrow of the after-effects of war , and that the author does not want to talk about it , and hopes the audience reads it faster , with the hastening tone.
4. The poems enlightened to me that war was not just a battle between two countries, involving guns. I have understand the effects of war. War is not just a normal fight . War is a blood-shed platform that involves passion, patriotism, nationalism, love, bravery, courage. We tend to belittle the effects of war . War may bring about fear and terror , resentment and hatred. War veterans' parents surely would feel grieved . War is just unfair, and is a cyclical catastrophic movement . War does not only include guns, they include nuclear bombs, chemical bombs, which have after effects of radiation., which may affect the innocent . War strains relationship between countries, and the bonds are broken. We overlook the patriotism they soldiers' possess , and we think they are foolish . In fact, they are brave and convicted. I always thought war was just people shooting people.
Benedict (:
The second poem " Hero", describes war as a patriotic platform for the brave soldiers to be able to readily display their courage and bravery by dying for the nation . Not only do the parents feel appreciative, the nation thinks it is nationalistic.
The third poem " Disabled" describes war as a cruel killer, and merciless. When the soldiers fight for their country, they are not honoured and appreciated, but abused and neglected. The poem shows how the disabled from the war are treated badly , and are not treated as they should be .
2. In the first poem, the words" overnight" and " decades" both hold an element of time, and thus they are incorporated to create the mood . The mood involves sudden death and unnoticeable kills . They are related to time, and these words are rather related to them .
In the second poem, the words " gentle triumph" expresses how the mother of the war victim, feels proud and appreciative of his son . They are soft and kind words to express happiness and victory . They are incorporated to create a mood of patriotism and nationalism .
In the third poem, the words"blood-smear", "veins ran dry", "queer disease" , incorporate a bloody, cruel mood of the poem . These terribly brutal words show that war is merciless, and successfully incorporates the mood.
3. Assonance and end-rhymes are used. An assonance on the letter "o" in " soul " , " goal " , expresses a saddening and murky mood, which are the after effects of war . This assonance puts a low , monotonous tone on the words to evoke a sense of melancholy. End rhymes in the poem " Disabled" like " eyes" and " wise", "dole " and "whole" , creates a certain tone, structure and rhythm the way the audience should read the poem . In this case, the rhymes would fasten the tone of the poem . It may be to emphasise on the sorrow of the after-effects of war , and that the author does not want to talk about it , and hopes the audience reads it faster , with the hastening tone.
4. The poems enlightened to me that war was not just a battle between two countries, involving guns. I have understand the effects of war. War is not just a normal fight . War is a blood-shed platform that involves passion, patriotism, nationalism, love, bravery, courage. We tend to belittle the effects of war . War may bring about fear and terror , resentment and hatred. War veterans' parents surely would feel grieved . War is just unfair, and is a cyclical catastrophic movement . War does not only include guns, they include nuclear bombs, chemical bombs, which have after effects of radiation., which may affect the innocent . War strains relationship between countries, and the bonds are broken. We overlook the patriotism they soldiers' possess , and we think they are foolish . In fact, they are brave and convicted. I always thought war was just people shooting people.
Benedict (:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)