"Thinking Outside the Box"

      Plato and Sartre both characterize our thinking as something that can be manipulated and altered with the encounter of different things. In "The Allegory of the Cave", people's limitations are controlled by their "closed mind", this is represented by the shackles that the people are burdened with (or are they). Then Plato implies that in order to escape the shackles one must want to do so. The characters in Plato's allegory have settled for what they have, and really have no determination to step outside of the box; in this case, the shackles. In "No Exit," we see the experiences of three people in hell. These people don't come to the terms of being in hell because their expectations of hell are much different than what they are truly experiencing. They subconsciously decide not to help each other figure out what is going on with them, they are to stubborn. Instead they create a new personal hell, and begin torturing each other. These stories are similar in their characters struggles as well as their authors use of mood, diction, and metaphors. The characters in both are unable or unwilling to figure out their problems and reach out into new possibilities and knowledge to free themselves from their restraints or a so called hell.

     Sartres' use of mood directly coincides with Plato's use. In both writings the two great thinkers portray the mood through their characters minds.  The character's all are in the mind set that they can't reach out to things beyond what they see.  Sartre's character's don't question why they are where they are and Plato's character's don't particularly want to make the effort to escape where they are. The shackles "aren't too bad" so they let their minds settle for something so simple, like the shadows.  While the people's in Plato's are to stuck in the "norm", Sartre's characters can't accept anything the other is saying there fore they wrap themselves up in a personal hell that they cannot escape.
    The diction in each of the writings are both very sophisticated.  This adds to the in depth meaning that both are trying to portray. The words in each of the works, to me, make the story what it is today.  The intense word choice and placement gives the pieces more meaning to me.
    In "No Exit", the characters themselves represent the shackles that obstruct one's thinking or actions, meaning your mind or thoughts can be controlled by outside forces such as other people. These characters are limited with their thinking because of isolation and also by what they are told. The characters need to look beyond what others think and define themselves by what they think.  

Lit Terms

Oxymoron: 

A figure of speech in which two contradicting words or phrases are combined to produce a rhetorical effect by means of concise paradox.

EXAMPLES:     "freezer burn", "jumbo shrimp", "original copies", and "same difference"

** this video is just to better understand the word and it's meaning.

Understatement:
The opposite of hyperbole; saying less than you mean for emphasis


EXAMPLES:
A good example is when you get in a car accident and you call up your parents and say "oh it's just a scratch" when there is a huge dent in your car. This is an understatement to save yourself from more trouble


Another example is when some one says "it just rained a little" when really the neighborhood or city is flooded.


Last example:

Self Search

When I searched Shannon Murray on Google I found a plethora of random sites.

-One site was a site for disabled models
-There was a music/ myspace site
-There was a bunch of Facebook sites that were not me
-A lot of sites were modeling related

These sites that popped up when I searched myself have no real relation to me.  I thought it was weird that  all of the top sites it showed me were Facebook related.  This just proves our research on filter bubbles because I was an avid Facebook user Google thought that that would be my most interested site when I searched Shannon Muray.

Literature Analysis

Brave New World
by: Aldous Huxley

1.  The plot of this novel starts with the introduction of society in a new way. A place where drugs are praised, sex is everywhere and basically things "after ford" are the complete opposite of what we know today.  Human life has been almost entirely industrialized — controlled by a few people at the top of a World State.The first scene, offering a tour of a lab where human beings are created and conditioned according to the society's strict caste system, establishes the antiseptic tone and the theme of dehumanized life. The natural processes of birth, aging, and death represent horrors in this world.Bernard Marx, an Alpha-Plus (or high-caste) psychologist, emerges as the single discontented person in a world where material comfort and physical pleasure — provided by the drug soma and recreational sex — are the only concerns. Scorned by women, Bernard nevertheless manages to engage the attention of Lenina Crowne, a "pneumatic" beauty who agrees to spend a vacation week with him at the remote Savage Reservation in New Mexico, a place far from the controlled, technological world of London.In the Savage Reservation with Lenina, Bernard meets a woman from London who gave birth to a son about 20 years before. Seeing his opportunity to gain power over the D.H.C. — the father of the child — Bernard brings Linda and John back to London and presents them publicly to the D.H.C., who is about to banish Bernard. Shocked and humiliated by the proof of his horrifying connection with natural birth, the D.H.C. flees in terror. Once a social outcast, Bernard now enjoys great success, because of his association with the new celebrity — John, called "the Savage."Reared on the traditional ways of the Reservation and an old volume of the poetry of Shakespeare, John finds London strange, confusing, and finally repellent. His quotation of Miranda's line from The Tempest— "O brave new world / That has such people in it" — at first expresses his awe of the "Other Place" his mother told him of as a child. But the quotation becomes ironic as John becomes more and more disgusted by the recreational sex, soma, and identical human beings of London.The three face the judgment of World Controller Mustapha Mond, who acknowledges the flaws of this brave new world, but pronounces the loss of freedom and individuality a small price to pay for stability. Mond banishes Bernard and Helmholtz to the Falkland Islands and rules that John must stay in London. Lenina's attempted seduction provokes John's anger and violence, and, later, the death of Linda further arouses his fury. At last, John's attempt to keep a crowd of Deltas from their ration of soma results in a riot and his arrest, along with Bernard and Helmholtz Watson, an "emotional engineer" who wishes to be a poet. When his two friends leave for their exile, John determines to make a retreat for himself in a remote, secluded lighthouse outside the city. There he tries to purify himself of civilization with ritual whippings and vomiting. Drawn by the spectacle of his wild penances, reporters and crowds press in on John, who becomes a public curiosity — a kind of human animal in a zoo. When Lenina appears in the crowd, John furiously attacks her with the whip. John's frenzy inflames the crowd, and, in accordance with their social training, the violence turns into a sexual orgy, with John drawn in more or less unwillingly. The next day, when John awakes from the effects of the soma, he realizes in horror what he has done. The novel closes on an image of John's body, hanging lifeless from a wooden beam in his lighthouse retreat.

2. The theme of "Brave New World" is that of Freedom and Confinement, seen as one.  The citizens of Brave New World's futuristic society are in a constant state of imprisonment. But because they've been conditioned to love their servitude, no one seems to have any problem with this. Well, almost no one. As one character so deftly points out, being happy all the time is its own sort of prison; being a human is about having the right to be unhappy. The prison bars are made of brainwashing sayings, of drugs and promiscuity, and not of iron or steel. Because confinement happens in the mind, so too is freedom a mental state.

3. The author's tone in "Brave New World" is very serious. The authors tone was serious.  It had a sort of humor to it, but overall the idea of the novel was almost depressing.  He spoke very straight forward and made it seem like things were horrible, the promiscuous people, the sex, the drugs all made it clear that the authors tone was a very serious one. The tone was also very satirical, do to the fact that it is like our society backwards. Also because of how he uses "ford" in place of a god or christ figure.

4. Five literary elements I was able to see in this novel are diction/ syntax, satire, setting, symbols, and imagery.

Diction/ syntax: Example, "Just to give you a general idea," he would explain to them. For of course some sort of general idea they must have, if they were to do their work intelligently – though as little of one, if they were to be good and happy members of society, as possible. For particulars, as every one knows, make for virtue and happiness; generalities are intellectually necessary evils. Not philosophers but fret-sawyers and stamp collectors compose the backbone of society." The author writes colloquial, but in a sophisticated manner. You can tell he wants to appeal to many readers, but at the same time he wants to portray what's going on in a very serious way.

Satire: Brave New World is a satire because it is today's society, backwards. Sex is glorified and celebrated, and monogamy, where in today's society is seen as the "best" way, is laughed at and tossed aside. Another satire in the book is the class and race system being simplified into colors of clothes, ("I hate khaki"), I personally think that this is hilarious, simplifying it so a moron can understand it. Another satire is the use of drugs. Throughout the book the characters indulger (or over-indulge) in the taking of "soma", which takes them on a relaxing high of some sort that is referred to as a "soma holiday". This is satire because in today's society drug use is strongly frowned upon, wherein Brave New World, not using the drug is frowned upon and considered not "normal". Yet another satirical bit in Brave New World is the people that live on the reservation in New Mexico, and how they do things much in the way that we do today, and they are referred to as "savages" and primitive beings. One of the things that disgusts people of the New World the most is natural child birth, opposed to the popular "jar birth" of the New World. Those are four of the biggest satires on modern society in the book. Everything is backwards.

Setting: England, Savage Reservation in New Mexico.  2540 a.d., referred to in the novel as 632 years, "After Ford", meaning 632 after the first model T car was produced.  The setting gives the novel suspense because it's hot and dangerous in the reservation. Also it allows the reader to have an imagination because this is all happening so far in the future.

Symbols: The drug soma is a symbol of the use of instant gratification to control the World State’s populace. It is also a symbol of the powerful influence of science and technology on society.

Imagery:  There is use of "animal imagery", the author uses unique description of animals and their actions to convey a point with in the novel for example, "straight from the horses mouth." 

My Big Question

-Does our thought process affect our outcomes in life? Does positive thinking create a positive result? And vice versa. Do our minds have more control than we think, considering people do say "if you believe it you can achieve it." Is this true?

"There is no real excellence in all this world which can be separated from right living."

-David Starr Jordan

I Believe I can Fly ( flight of the frenchies). Trailer from sebastien montaz-rosset on Vimeo.

This video really intrigued me because it showed that people have no limits. We can do what we want. While yes this is very dangerous, it's just cool to see people push the limits and actually live life to it's fullest. They are experiencing things not many people will experience in their lives and it really amazes me. I can't wait until I get to go SKY DIVING!

Hamlet Essay Redo

        A sense of “self” is something someone can only determine, literally, with in themselves.  How your thoughts connect with your actions, and how your actions coincide with your morals.  Your sense of “self” is just you and your mind.  Hamlet and other characters with in the play of Hamlet have a sense of “self“ that is complicated because they all have different intentions at hand.  Hamlet’s sense of “self” is to avenge his father’s death, but his actions state otherwise showing him as a very confused character. Ophelia, Guildenstern, and Rosencrantz all really have no sense of “self” because they do not think for themselves, instead they let others influence all there actions.  Then there is the King and Queen whose actions all show that they almost have no sense of “self” at all, meaning there morals and standards are so low that their minds cannot tell the difference between right and wrong.  The idea and context of each characters sense of “self” defines the plot within Hamlet because each action that is portrayed in the play is solely determined on the individual characters “self” decisions.

           

            The play Hamlet is a combination of revenge, confusion and sadness that leads into a tragedy of an ending. The play is written to captivate its audience and allow them to know more than every other character present within the play does. I feel Hamlet, the character, had an indecisive state of mind, and was caught between his thoughts and his actions. This is where we see his revengeful threats not coinciding with his conclusive actions. The performative utterance came into affect because it didn’t really matter whether Hamlet talked about what he did and whether he actually followed through with it.  Words can speak just as loudly as actions do in many cases.  This is so in Hamlet’s case because his words, or thoughts, define him as a character not his actions; even though he did not follow through with his revenge his utterances throughout the play defined him as a character. Hamlet’s words, not actions, impact the characters specifically through out the play.  Ophelia is thrown into a sense of madness when Hamlet reveals his real feelings towards women and Rosencrantz was called out by Hamlet with numerous offensive lines.  The performative utterances’ impact the play because no character had to actually carry out any kind of action to stir the pot of drama and suspense they simply had to use their power of speech.

           

            Diction and Syntax proved to be greatly cherished in the writing of this play because each line has a point to it, while having a point, it also has a separate interpretation.  Shakespeare wrote each word down, but not everything we see is the intended interpretation because one persons mind differs from their neighbor.  This idea therefore shows that everyone’s self-overhearing will alter the meaning for another person if discussed.  Hamlet words are faulty, in a sense, because he never follows through with any of his revengeful actions, but this does not mean they have no meaning at all according to De Boer. This idea leads into the fact of how Hamlet’s words don’t constitute his actions, but it does effects the performative utterance intended by Shakespeare with in the play.

           

            Performative Utterances’ impact on my self over-hearing is different than what I would have thought in the beginning of the play.  With De Boer’s paper in mind I see myself realizing that the words with in the play have more of an effect on the plot than the actually actions or events that are carried out.  The words are the focus and the importance.  As I read, and thought thoroughly about the play, my mind altered greatly. I went from thinking Hamlet was a coward who wanted to kill himself to thinking his words/ thoughts were not in sync with his actions, making him more complicated than first thought.  The idea of self-overhearing allows me to replay each and every soliloquy stated by Hamlet and form it as my own in my mind, making it different.  Sometimes I learn it’s not what I think and sometimes I alter it to make it what I think, after all our minds change things to make them what we want them to be right? What we want to remember is what we do remember, and that is what I feel self-overhearing his; learning in your own mind from event, words, or even plays like Hamlet.  Your interpretation is the ultimate learning cycle come to an end.

           

            The idea of self-overhearing, and performative utterance now reminds me to put meaning behind my words, and if they result into actions, put meaning behind that too!  The experience and exploration of these ideas will reflect my real world experiences because I will not allow the end result of my words to be my demise, like what was seen in Hamlet. Reflecting on certain experiences and allowing your mind to change the past is what our brains are trained to do and this is seen consistently through out Hamlet. Hamlet talks himself in and out of things all of the time in the play, and I can closely relate to this idea.   I feel, that if you put stronger meaning behind your words, the actions will portray your ideas, but even if no events come about, your words are still a meaningful impact.  This idea completely differs from what people hear everyday, “actions speak louder than words,” but with the idea of performative utterance in the play and in my own life experiences, (with De Boer’s paper in mind) words can impact people in the same way as actions do.  Overall because of self-overhearing and performative utterance, the power of words can overcome the power of actions in the right context and the right state of mind, this is seen through Hamlet as well as real world experiences.

"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same." 

We're Creating Something Beautiful

Throughout my time in this class I honestly have learned to give myself a little more credit than I do. I learned other people believe in me more than I had thought and with a little push I can do the things I never thought I could. Dr. Preston does test me.... al lot; I tell him I can't and he comes right back saying, "oh but you can". This class has honestly put me on a better path with in myself because it has built up my confidence in many ways, through writing, through speaking, through reading, and even through my overall confidence in myself. Take the Hamlet soliloquy for example, I gave up the day it was assigned and good ol' Dr. Preston pestered me and pestered me and kept telling me I could do it until I finally took his word for it and tried. What do you know, I did, and I did really well actually. I have learned a lot from this class, not only about school, but about what awaits me in the real world. I know now that my words mean a lot more than I had thought, and I do have an effect when I speak or try and make a point. All thanks to this course so far.

I feel as if this class is leading up to so many successful people and it amazes me. It's creating confidence in more people than just myself because we are all getting our ideas out on the web, whether people read them or not, I feel the whole concept is just a great experience. The song I chose is just describing the success I see within our class because I know each and everyone of us is on the right track to accomplishing great things, "something beautiful". The song is talking about a relationship, but I'm using it in a different content, he's waiting for the beauty of success that the world holds for him. I know this class will only better me as a person as the year goes on and I am actually excited to be pushed to the best of my ability. It's a good feeling when you achieve what you never thought you could and the ultimate goal in my mind after this class is getting into a good college! I hope that is something that I achieve in the end.

Roy Christopher's Video Chat

I really liked the video chat that we had with Roy Christopher because it was so different. I didn't stay for the whole thing, but while I was there it was very interesting.

Roy Christopher, despite all the input and ideas he has on technology doesn't have a smart phone?? That caught me by complete surprise, but it kind of gave him more of an edge to how he analyzed thing because it wasn't all at his fingertips like it is for us.  Another thing that I really retained from the video chat was the quote he said, "program, or be programmed".  This statement really stuck with me because it's saying, to me, that you don't have to stick to the status quo, you can start something yourself rather than follow someone else.

Another point that was made by Roy Christopher was how he is optimistic on the idea that, while technology is thriving, he feels books and things on paper will not disappear. I liked the idea of this because I feel like the world cannot just jump completely out of the old ways, there has to always be something to remind us of our roots.  Having this said, Christopher has trust in our generation, meaning the future is in our hands and he believes we'll do right with it, and I liked the confidence he had with that idea.

These are the main ideas or highlights I took away from the video chat, and it was really just a super cool experience to hear from people out in the real world. People who know so much more about social media than I do because it really put things into perspective for me.

Hamlet Beowulf Comparative Essay

     In the plays of Hamlet and Beowulf we see two comparable "heroes", one being Hamlet, and the other being Beowulf. Although both are heroes in the different ways, they are heroes all the same according to the time.  Both characters are faced with numerous challenges that they must overcome and this leads to their over all demise in the end.  Both are seeking of revenge and then they ultimately lose their lives in a manner at which classified them as an "epic hero". The differentiation between the two is not their actions or death, it is their authors.  Author's of both works have very diverse diction and syntax as well as the use of tone in describing the plays through their own eyes, while the characters remain heroic.
     Hamlet, the play, is an intricate play on emotion and actions.  As we have seen throughout the play of Hamlet, the reading of performative utterance, and Hamlet’s character as a whole, it is clear that all of his actions depend solely on his thoughts (even if they really only remain within his thoughts). The language used with in the play form a complex meaning as it is spoken by the characters. The words can be taken into context in many different ways, but nonetheless they have impeccable meaning.  For example, in the following passage, “Tis not alone my inky cloak…/nor customary suits of solemn black,/Nor…forced breath/No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,/Nor the dejected ‘havior of the visage…/with all forms, moods, and shapes of grief,/That can denote me truly,” Hamlet's strong language and ideas form the mindset of how complicated of a character he really is. This idea leads to the fact of how the language with in the play really does have a huge impact. The word choice and arrange meant used by Shakespeare really makes the words seem more important because you can tell each word was placed in a specific spot for a reason.  Shakespeare's tone with in the play was on that was very ominous. He used little details such as starting the play at midnight to give the play that eery feeling that it had. Overall Hamlet's use of performative utterance through diction, syntax and tone made the play what it is today and it is what truly contrasted Hamlet from the play of Beowulf.
      In Beowulf we see the author’s use of syntax and diction in a different way; it creates a unique and balanced flow in helping convey the main points. Beowulf was a “hero” and was proud of it; and everyone knew it. His performances were often overly exaggerated to make it seem more than what it was. The performative utterance seen through Beowulf's actions in the play set a solid tone of bravery and heroism unlike that of Hamlet.  An example of Beowulf’s bravery is the seen following passage: “Over all the world, or between the seas, / Or under the heaven, no hero was greater." The words seen in Beowulf were used as strong language to make the play seem like a godly one. Beowulf proved to be an epic because of the way it was written and the way the tone was set from the beginning and that is why it is so famous today; because it is a classic tale of a great hero.
     Overall, “Beowulf is much admired for the richness of its poetry - for the beautiful sounds of the words and the imaginative quality of the description.” While Shakespeare is mostly known for his “complexity of human characters.” And each author contributes greatly in using language to depict each of the protagonists' characteristics and make them unique to the situation they derive from. Through this we see in Beowulf how his strength in his actions makes him who he is; whereas in Hamlet, he is a man who proves strength through his own thoughts. Beowulf knows he’s a hero and is constantly ready to jump into the next battle. Yet, Hamlet is too weak to make the decisions. He was always contemplating on what he should do. This idea, being their both hero but one doesn't truly know he is, sets the different tones with in each play.  Throughout each play we see the characters act upon what they think is right and they do so for the sake of revenge, this is shown through each authors use of performative utterance, but it ultimately leads to the death of two tall tale heroes.

Literature Analysis

Literature Analysis on "The Sun Also Rises"

1. Jake Barnes and his friends live in the contreversial, self-indulgent world of post-World War I Paris. There, they occasionally work, but spend most of their time partying, drinking, and arguing. From Jake’s perspective, we meet the cast of characters that populates his story: the most important among them are Robert Cohn who is down-on-his-luck, a Princeton grad and unsuccessful writer. We are also introduced to Lady Brett Ashley, an exciting, beautiful, and unpredictable British divorcee.  Although Jake and Brett are actually in love, they aren’t together, presumably because a mysterious war wound has rendered Jake impotent. Cohn falls in love with Brett as well and, despite the fact that she’s not terribly impressed with him, she secretly goes on a trip with him to San Sebastian. Cohn is smitten, truly, madly, deeply in love. Unfortunately for Cohn (and for everyone, for that matter), Brett is engaged to a wealthy, charming, and drunkard man named Mike. Jake’s other friend Bill returns to Paris from a trip and a plan is derived, everyone agrees to go to Spain for some fishing and the running of the bulls in Pamplona. On their fishing trip, Bill and Jake have a splendid time with each other, but the relaxation quickly comes to an end. They return to civilization and meet up with Brett, Mike, and Cohn in Pamplona for a weeklong activities of bullfights, alcohol, and high drama. Jake has a true passion for bullfighting, but everyone else is simply there to have a good time. Brett begins a rather scandalous affair with a young bull-fighter, Pedro Romero. Jake feels terrible for many reasons one being the fear that he has corrupted Romero in some way by introducing him to Brett. Cohn’s infatuation with Brett leads to arguments with everyone and, finally, he beats the unfortunate Romero to a bloody pulp. As the fiesta winds down, everyone leaves Pamplona in various states of anxiety, depression and frustration. Jake heads to San Sebastian, where he intends to be alone for a while. Unfortunately, desperate telegrams from Brett arrive immediately. He goes to her in Madrid, where she is alone, having sent Romero away. For the first time, we see Brett truly vulnerable, afraid, and guilty. The future looks just as bad, Jake and Brett agree again that, even though they love each other, they can’t be together.

2. The main theme I recognized in the novel was that of love. This is the best theme that i could find because of Brett. Everyone is so infatuated with her and multiple people "fall in love" with her. Yes, love is corrupted in the novel and usually triggered with the idea of sex behind it, but although this is so I still feel as if the whole them revolves around love because even the environment is romanticized; it's in Paris.

3. The tone of the novel is sort of somber, and detached from reality.  

Examples of this are through these three quotes:

•"I mistrust all frank and simple people, especially when their stories hold together"

•"I was a little drunk. Not drunk in any positive sense but just enough to be careless."

•"'Listen, Jake,' he leaned forward on the bar. "Don’t you ever get the feeling that all your life is going by and you’re not taking advantage of it? Do you realize you’ve lived nearly half the time you have to live already?"

All of these examples show how the author has an odd kind of negative outlook on life, which makes him tone almost depressing.

4. Literary elements that portrayed the tone and theme were not very hard to spot through out the novel.  The symbols were the first thing that i recognized with in the novel, one being the bull fighting. The fighting of the bulls symbolized that some kind of drama was going to show up with Jake and his friends, whether it be a casual argument or a controversy about Brett. Another two literary techniques I saw in the novel that led me into what the authors tone was through diction and syntax.  Hemingway would right with very sophisticated language with a lot of detail and he would make very wise, but somewhat whimsical statements. For example, "Caffeine puts a man on his horse and a woman in his grave." The structure of the sentences were kind of condensed which also led to the depressing or conservative tone. Another literary technique that I could identify was that the author used a lot of comparison within his writing, especially those that portray women as almost scandalous. "And with them was Brett. I was very angry. Somehow they always made me angry. I know they are supposed to be amusing, and you should be tolerant, but I wanted to swing on one, any one, anything to shatter that superior, simpering composure."  The last literary technique I saw with the novel is the allusions that are seen such as the references to greek mythology.

Tools That Change The Way We Think

"Back in 2004, I asked [Google founders] Page and Brin what they saw as the future of Google search. 'It will be included in people's brains,' said Page. 'When you think about something and don't really know much about it, you will automatically get information.'

'That's true,' said Brin. 'Ultimately I view Google as a way to augment your brain with the knowledge of the world. Right now you go into your computer and type a phrase, but you can imagine that it could be easier in the future, that you can have just devices you talk into, or you can have computers that pay attention to what's going on around them and suggest useful information.'

'Somebody introduces themselves to you, and your watch goes to your web page,' said Page. 'Or if you met this person two years ago, this is what they said to you... Eventually you'll have the implant, where if you think about a fact, it will just tell you the answer."

In response internet use of media and other technological advances have changed my thinking tremendously in many different ways. I rely heavily on the internet for everything including social media, homework, and entertainment. Does this mean it has changed my thinking? I think so. The fact that a computer generates a lot of thinking for me makes thinking about thinking, well, difficult.
I feel as if Google and other search engines have taken over our thinking in a sense. This idea of "the filter bubble" is a prime example of this. As well as filtering our information google has also led it to be easier to not really research on our own, but to rely on "keywords" and "specific examples" to research itself. This has influenced my thinking, in part, by making my mind a little more lazy than generations before. Smart phones were non-existent "back in the day" and a lot of people had to physically open a book to get the information they needed to acquire. This is what makes this new generation so different, our thoughts and dependencies all rely on the use of the internet.
Social media on the internet also has a huge impact on my thinking and i'm sure it does to many others as well. Sites such as Facebook and Twitter and even blog sites are constantly influencing our thought process. When we read everyone else's thoughts, online, our thoughts begin to consist of their thoughts, so it makes the idea of thinking about our own thoughts very difficult. This is not to be confuse with the idea that people are solely influenced by the internet, although by the way that teenagers use the internet these days what they say and do, is clearly affected, in a small part, by social media.
The internet not only influences the minds of this generation it also occupies a lot of our time, sometimes it takes away from time in which we should be focussing on more important things. I know from personal experience that Facebook takes me away from my homework all the time and it gets me to thinking is really worth it? Social media takes away from my priorities and I honestly feel that it affects my thinking in a negative way as well. Although Facebook, Twitter and all the other social sites do connect many friends, in the end the time we use dwelling over other peoples problems could be used to think about solutions to our own issues.
The internet has so many advances that we should all be very thankful for in our time, but we truly don't know if it's for the best. In the past ten years technology has been outrageous, in sense that the social world is magnificent. Everyone enjoys the internet and really who in the right mind wouldn't? Unless they really looked into what is going on. I'm not saying the internet is taking over the world, but I am saying it has a large impact on all of our minds and whether its a good or bad impact is really for you to decide.

In Search of

Eli Pariser: Beware online "filter bubbles" | Video on TED.com

   Filter Bubbles? I learned exactly what a filter bubble was from this video because before this I wasn't to sure there was even a such thing. I also learned that things are being filtered out of my reach everyday due to some "algorithm" that some one else wrote that decides what I like and don't like, or more technically what I will be more prone to look at. The rest is all just filtered, which is kind of off putting. This information makes me think a lot differently about my online searches, or Facebook. How does this filter really know me? It just knows what I click on and not what I may truly be interested in that now I am potentially missing out on. It makes me want to click on anything i might even be remotely interested in so that I will have a bigger filter bubble with more ideas. Which is absurd to have to do.

   Having this said my search in the post "Who was Shakespeare" needs to be altered.  To better vary my information I'm going to use different search engines and double check the information I already have. Hopefully by doing this my details on Shakespeare won't be filtered like the rest of the information on the internet!

Notes on Hamlet

  Hamlet has evolved significantly in my head and I think its partially due in part to the main soliloquy that we had to master, "To be, or not to be...".  This really put me through a lot of strenuous time consuming grief!  Now that it is mastered I feel that I am more intrigued with actually understanding what Shakespeare is meaning in all of his lines, instead of just simply reading them with no interpretation.
  Character's such as Hamlet have truly changed in my mind because he is no longer some weird guy with a lot of issues.  I feel for Hamlet as the play goes on because he allows the reading in on more and more insight of his personal thoughts.  A character that is complex makes me more willing to try and "crack their code, I get excited when I finally decide on what I think Hamlet means.  The ghost has also evolved in my mind.  The ghost was confusing in the beginning, but as the acts go on I see that he has a more complex meaning to it.  I feel as if the ghost is also an insight into Hamlet's mind in some way because he is no ordinary ghost that just comes and goes as it pleases.  Having this said I feel as if Hamlet's struggles have peaked and are going to begin to come together for him.  I feel as if Hamlet will finally get it right in the next few scenes and ease his mind in a the best way possible.

Who was Shakespeare?

  To me Shakespeare is some beyond human figure who is an amazing writer.  Ever since I was little Shakespeare just seemed so godly by the way people described him and then when I read his work for the first time (back in the day) I was sure he was not of this planet. As I moved higher into my education I realize the significants of Shakespeare and his work.  But still we all have that lingering question who is Shakespeare really? Who is this guy beyond just his writing, and to be honest it is very hard to pin point facts about him.
  According to some articles Shakespeare Shakespeare was a man from the small, country town of Stratford. Many people, however, reject the conventional view of his existence, and argue that Shakespeare was the pen name for Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, and that the Earl of Oxford had to conceal his authorship for social and political reasons.  Shakespeare's works contain a vast amount of knowledge, knowledge that the Stratford man could scarcely have acquired. Shakespeare knew the Greek and Roman classics; his works refer to the tragedies of Sophocles, the dialogues of Plato, and many other ancient classics. Shakespeare also had a firm grasp of politics. Shakespeare had a deep knowledge of legal matters, not just an intuitive understanding of the law, but a knowledge of legal details and specifics. These Examples almost complete deny the fact that Shakespeare was merely not Shakespeare.  He was an amazing, poetic, play writer who will go down in history for his work.
  My thoughts on Shakespeare have greatly changed especially this year, but I still do not believe the fact that there is no Shakespeare. I feel as if it is just some people flirting with the possible idea of it and some people caught on and the idea blew up!  I feel now with the interesting background and the better understanding of Shakespeare I feel more intrigued to truly look into his work and interpret it on a whole new level.


http://www.ljhammond.com/essays/shak1.htm


http://shakespeare.about.com/od/shakespearebasics/tp/Who_Was_Shakespeare.htm

"To Facebook, Or Not to Facebook?..."

   Facebook is fun, exciting, and outrageously easy; so what person in the right mind wouldn't love it?  When I first found Facebook I thought it was the coolest think since Myspace.  Contacting friends and sharing your ideas was so easy and at the click of a button I was able to do exactly what I wanted, no questions asked.  It is so simple and in our society, that is what most people cherish about Facebook, the simplicity.
   I personally didn't get a Facebook until I was fifteen years old and I fell in love. I have been working with computers my whole life so when this whole ordeal came about I knew first hand how to maneuver it, even the privacy settings.  It is really disheartening how Facebook refuses to recognize the privacy issues it have for children under the age of seventeen.  I feel if it has been seen as a probably a big corporation like Facebook should shift to fit it's users needs and desires, but according to the NY Times article this is not so.    Even as someone who is computer savvy I still did not know some of the things it was describing in the article, which is unsettling.  Being a new customer of the Iphone it is also very weird to think that everything I do or post is potentially posting my exact location, unless I make the correct changes.  For some one who does not know this is so vulnerable, children who are unaware are potential to predators stalking there every move.
  While, yes, I admit to being a Facebook addict at the same time I wish there were liable changes that we could see in the privacy issue.  Facebook is fun and it's great to keep in touch with family and old friends, but in the hands of the wrong person things could go wrong, fast.  I believe some things should change with in Facebook to ensure its' users protection.

"Don't be Hamlet"

    "To be, or not to be, that is the question, " in the soliloquy delivered by Hamlet, the reader is opened up to the inner thoughts of the main character.  Throughout the play you get little pieces of his true thoughts and emotions, but in this soliloquy he let's the audience in on something he is so troubled with.  Should he kill himself? Should he seek revenge? What is the best solution in the situation Hamlet is encountering? The fight in Hamlet's own mind to literally choose life or death is the true dilemma of the entire soliloquy. It is seen within the speech that he ponders on the fact of suicide and I think the idea is ridiculous.
   The fact of the matter is that Hamlet is completely depressed, but suicide is not the way to solve anything.  Hamlet states, "Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;" Meaning his conscience is almost literally "eating him alive" making him think things that are irrational, due to the series of unfortunate events he has recently been through. Suicide is not the answer though; it never is. He reflects upon his religious ideas and knows that it is a sin to act upon these thoughts, but life is so rough he cannot decide his own fate. Hamlet debates back and forth in his own mind, pondering life and death, depression and revenge, and he cannot come to a certain verdict. "To grunt and sweat under a weary life, but that the dread of something after death," He is uncertain of what follows death, and wonders if his struggles are worth the pain.  Retiring to the unknown scares Hamlet and I feel his overall thoughts will be altered due to the immense uncertainty of what would be in store for him if he did in fact commit the "dreadful" act.
   With my own regards to life and it's importance (no matter how hard it may be sometimes) I feel that Hamlet should not commit suicide.  The act of committing suicide is more cowardly than not avenging his father's death at all.  He is less of a man by killing himself, then he would be if he just sat around for the rest of his life crying.  The debate he has with himself is understandable because of his depression, but his decision in the end will prove how courageous of a Prince he really is.  It will prove his "nobility" in the eyes of his people, and over all it will prove to himself that he is a stronger man than he originally thought he could be.
   Overall the soliloquy is an in depth analyzation of Hamlet's depression and within the speech he is trying to decide if his life is worth living anymore. "To exist, or to not exist," is the literal definition of the first line of spoken by Hamlet revealing his struggles and thoughts.  Is killing himself going to fix everything? Or is the afterlife to unknown to be risked?  Hamlet ponders upon these ideas over and over in his head, only to still come to uncertain conclusion, no closer to a real conclusion than he had when he started.  Suicide is not the answer by any means. Courage is found in how a person reacts to certain   situations at certain times, and while Hamlet does questions his existence, it also seems to me that he will reveal his true persona and make the right decision in the end. That is Life.


Hamlet's Soliloquy:


"To be, or not to be: that is the question:

Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action. - Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember'd."

Literature Analysis

Literature Analysis Questions on All the Pretty Horses


1.  This novel consists of three guys' journeys from the United States into through the Mexican border. The novel has three main characters John Grady Cole, who runs away with his friend Rawlins on horse back, at the age of sixteen after his grandfather passes away. Another character is Jimmy Belvins whom the other two boys meet along the way.  The novels goes on to talk about the boys struggles in Mexico along with a twist of a love story in it. In the end all the boys split up through out all their difficulties and John Grady finds himself with out a home or any sort of family.
2. The theme of the novel is the strive for independence and freedom in ones' own mind.  Another theme could be coming of age because these were young boys who didn't know what the world held for them and they were rudely awakened in Mexico.
3. The author's tone is sort of hopeless.  An example of this tone from McCarthy is, "The wind was much abated and it was very cold and the sun sat blood red and elliptic under the reefs of bloodred cloud before him." Another example of the hopeless tone shown in the novel is, "The closest bonds we will ever know are bonds of grief." I thought this was an example of this tone because not many people think that they have a bond with grief, that's sort of a depressing statement. The last example from the text that i found was, "Those whom life does not cure death will."
4.  Literary elements that i found in the novel that helped me better understand it were diction, imagery, description, tone, and the use of metaphors.  In the novel the description McCarthy used really put me right there with John Grady especially when he says, "They rode out along the fenceline and across the open pasture-land. The leather creaked in the morning cold. They pushed the horses into a lope. The light fell away behind them. They rode out on the high prairie where they slowed the horses to a walk and the stars swarmed around them out of the blackness. They heard somewhere in that tenantless night a bell that tolled and ceased where no bell was and they rode out on the round dais of the earth which alone was dark and no light to it and which carried their figures and bore them up into the swarming stars so that they rode not under but among them and they rode at once jaunty and circumspect, like thieves newly loosed in that dark electric, like young thieves in a glowing orchard, loosely jacketed against the cold and ten thousand worlds for the choosing." This whole passage let me grasp the way the author writes in a completely different way than usual. The way he wrote allowed me to stay focused on the novel.  The tone especially helped understand the theme in the end. With in the novel if the author would have written in a joyful tone I would never have grasped the true struggle that the three boys; John Grady, Jimmy Belvins, and Rawlins, had gone through in Mexico.  When they are abused in jail the way McCarthy tells the torture being done really sets the tone perfectly for the reader to interpret the theme accurately.