http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SMN0307H-0-5795&artno=0000265492&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=student%20backpacks&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=Y&ic=N
http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SMN0307H-0-5795&artno=0000159829&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=what%27s%20that%20beeping%20in%20student%20backpacks&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=Y&ic=N
the first one is about how violence may be caused by everyone bringing backpacks around: this can be one of our arguments for disallowing them at school.
the second one is about how cell phone use increases with more people bringing their backpacks to school: this can be our second reason for disallowing them.
and tomas, the one that you found in class is a good one about how the heavy backpacks are extremely bad for our backs and can cause serious long-term back problems. this can be our third argument for disallowing them.
now, we just need a few arguments for allowing backpacks at school.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Water for Elephants Week 3, Post B
“I can’t find myself anymore. When did I stop being me?” (111). Jacob thinks of this quote when he is looking in the mirror at himself after Rosemary brings his breakfast into his room (110). When he looks in the mirror first of all, he says that he should be used to seeing what he looks like, but he just isn’t used to seeing the old man yet. I personally think that this is horribly depressing and I just started to cry when I read it. Can you even imagine that? Looking in a mirror, and seeing someone that you don’t recognize, even though it’s been you, for many years. That is horrible, just awful. As sad as it is, I can understand what he means. People obviously change as they grow older. In the second sentence of the quote, Jacob probably was thinking of a man that he knew as “himself” a long time ago, and he is just now realizing that he isn’t that man anymore. This would be like me saying, ‘Whatever happened to that cute little six-year old that wore dresses to school and was three feet tall?’ It just doesn’t make much sense to think like this, because you never will be the person you once were, and nothing can change that. Once you change, you’re changed and you can never go back. Once Jacob ran off to be in the circus, he was in the circus, and nothing and no one could stop him now. Because of how he changed (going to the circus), he will always be someone that was in the circus. Because he didn’t do any of his veterinarian’s essay at college, he can never go back to that college. So there are some ways that I understand what Jacob’s point, but in some ways it’s a pointless thing to say. Once you do something to change your future, you can’t go back to change your past.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Water for Elephants Week 3, Post A
VOCAB:
1. misnomer (91) : an error in naming a person or thing.
2. Gargantuan (125) : gigantic, enormous, and colossal.
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
1. “her skin is mottled and cracked like a scorched riverbed” (125) This is a simile describing the elephant’s skin, but using the word “like”.
2. “Huh?” (121) This is an onomatopoeia. It’s a sound, not a real word in the dictionary.
3. “Sure, I said. Maybe if you’re a rutabaga” (110) this is a personification because Jacob is talking about how it might be fun to go participate in the bingo nights. He’s saying that if you’re a rutabaga it’d be fun. But rutabagas can’t go to bingo nights, so it’s giving human characteristics to an inhuman object.
QUOTE: “But I shouldn’t complain, this being circus day and all” (110). This quote is significant because it shows how important the circus is to Jacob even now, because he remembers being in it when he was much younger. He still enjoys the thought of the circus coming because he gets to go see its show.
THEME: The emerging theme of the book right now is still the same as it was in the last section I read.
1. misnomer (91) : an error in naming a person or thing.
2. Gargantuan (125) : gigantic, enormous, and colossal.
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
1. “her skin is mottled and cracked like a scorched riverbed” (125) This is a simile describing the elephant’s skin, but using the word “like”.
2. “Huh?” (121) This is an onomatopoeia. It’s a sound, not a real word in the dictionary.
3. “Sure, I said. Maybe if you’re a rutabaga” (110) this is a personification because Jacob is talking about how it might be fun to go participate in the bingo nights. He’s saying that if you’re a rutabaga it’d be fun. But rutabagas can’t go to bingo nights, so it’s giving human characteristics to an inhuman object.
QUOTE: “But I shouldn’t complain, this being circus day and all” (110). This quote is significant because it shows how important the circus is to Jacob even now, because he remembers being in it when he was much younger. He still enjoys the thought of the circus coming because he gets to go see its show.
THEME: The emerging theme of the book right now is still the same as it was in the last section I read.
A Civil Action Reflection
A Civil Action, written by Steven Zaillan and Jonathan Harr, is a movie about Jan Schlichtmann, a rich and self-centered personal-injury lawyer who is asked by the small town of Woburn to help them with their biggest problem ever. One mother named Anne Anderson lost her young son because of the contaminated water in their town. She called Jan while he was on a radio show once, and he, of course, said that he would definitely help the small town of Woburn with this problem. However, he didn’t really mean that. This is the point where the plot begins. I liked this film. It showed how one extremely over-paid and self-centered lawyer could be changed by such a small and almost meaningless town. Jan did a complete turn-around: he went from not caring about the families that had lost members (because of the water) to only caring about them, and nothing else, not even his money or his law firm collapsing underneath his feet. It was very effective in getting this point across. The characters played their parts very well, and made a huge amount of emotional appeals, to try to get the audience to actually feel the pain this town was going through. I think that emotional appeals always help someone get their points across to an audience because they make us think about people and experiences that we’ve had that dramatically changed our lives.
There were many dramatic aspects to this film, but I think two that most average people notice the most is actors and lighting. They are probably the two that audiences pay the most attention to. The first things you see, is the actors. But, you might not even see the actors if the lighting is very dim or very light. So I think the lighting plays an important role in films as well as everything else that makes it what it is. First of all, the casting for this movie was all chosen excellently. For example, John Travolta playing the part of Jan was perfect. He definitely can look like a self-centered personal injury lawyer, because of him looks and how good he is at acting rich and egoistic. Another example of extremely good casting is Robert Duvall playing Jerome Facher. In this movie, Duvall plays a kind-of ‘bad guy’ almost. I think he plays it well, and that he enjoys being the villain and crushing Jan Schlictmann’s dreams of winning the case against Beatrice. As a last example, Anne Anderson is played well by Kathleen Quinlan. She’s sort-of a deep person one might say, and she plays a character that fits her personality. I’d say that Anne’s character was soft-spoken, thoughtful, sweet, and definitely not self-centered. She is, in some ways, the opposite of Jan Schlictmann. The second important dramatic aspect of this film is the lighting. One good example of lighting in this film is when Jan and his partners at law are sitting in their ‘office’ with every light off except for a small lamp on the reception desk. This is when there are movers coming in to take all their stuff away because they need to get all the money out of it as they possibly can. All the lights being out in the office of the law firm is a really good choice of lighting because it shows how the lights have “gone out” in the hearts of the other attorneys in Jan’s law firm. Jan is the only one left that still has some hope of winning this case. Everyone else, especially James Gordon (their financial advisor) wants to just give up the case because they think that with no money left, no other employees besides the 3 attorneys and a secretary, there is no way to win the case. So they might as well just give up on it entirely. The lighting shows the audience all of this information by just being really dim. It was a good choice.
There are also cinematic aspects to every film. Two very important ones are photography and camera movement, because they give the movie lots of dimension and make it interesting to watch. One scene in the movie is good because it pans the site of the excavating and digging by the geologists Jan hired. Jan is walking by the work site and talking to Jerome Facher at the same time, so the camera pans their conversation, but behind them, the panning allows the audience to see just how big a project it is to figure out what chemicals were where at one time. There were other places where photography and camera movement were used, and they made the movie more interesting than if every shot was a still, medium shot just of people talking to each other. Another important one is editing, which also makes many movies more interesting than if all the shots were the exact same duration. I really liked how when in the end, Jan was realizing something about the case. It was as if his mind was constantly thinking back to things that had happened during the case for that brief two or three minutes of the movie. It was a really good use of editing because it left the audience wondering what Jan was thinking about and why all those little clips from earlier in the movie were so important. We don’t know what’s going on in Jan’s mind at this point in the movie, but we’re hooked, so we want to know what he will do with all those little flashbacks and realizations he just had. Sounds and music were used well too. Really classy and fancy classical music was playing in really nice high-end scenes. Like at the Harvard club, when Jan goes to talk to the man that might give him eight million dollars. It is a fancy place where a lot of rich people go, so they play music that very wealthy and smart people will know and appreciate. All these cinematic aspects of film make movies more interesting and much more fun to watch.
A Civil Action is much like the play All My Sons, in some ways. They both deal with ethical dilemmas that have to do with innocent people dying if they make a certain move. They both have a protagonist that is self-centered in the beginning and then changes at the end. Like Joe, the protagonist of All My Sons, he starts out by defending himself by saying that money and a successful business was more important than protecting the lives of twenty-one innocent pilots. Then he changed, and realized that what he did was completely wrong (in his opinion) and he had no other choice but to shoot himself on the last page of the play. He is like Jan because in the beginning, we see just how self- centered he is and how he wants to do anything but take on the Woburn case. The only reason he took it on was because the two defendants were Beatrice Foods and Grace Chemicals, two very large corporations that would get Jan a lot of money if he won the case. He took on the case because of his selfishness. But, in the end, he changes and money becomes less important to him than the families of Woburn. The only way that A Civil Action and All My Sons differ is that whatever Joe does now, it won’t change anything that happened. It was in the past, almost ten years ago, and he can’t change what he did then. But, Jan can influence what might happen in the future in the town of Woburn. If he wins the case and becomes able to clean the chemicals up, then no more innocent and helpless citizens of Woburn will die because of contaminated water.
A Civil Action was a good movie. I really enjoyed it, however some people might not like it. it was a kind-of political and law case thriller. Some people might not like this kind of film, but I think that these kinds of films are really interesting. But, if people like ethical dilemmas mixed into a political thriller, then they should definitely see it. the main reason I liked it was because Jan was changed so much by a small, simple and not wealthy town. His life changed completely by the end of the film. He’s in bankruptcy court, and the judge is asking him where all his assets went. But instead of using the word assets, or belongings, or money, she used the term “things by which we measure one’s life by.” I think this was the wrong phrase to use. This is because Jan doesn’t measure his life by material things anymore. He measures his life by the people you change and the things you do to help society. What are the things you measure your life by?
There were many dramatic aspects to this film, but I think two that most average people notice the most is actors and lighting. They are probably the two that audiences pay the most attention to. The first things you see, is the actors. But, you might not even see the actors if the lighting is very dim or very light. So I think the lighting plays an important role in films as well as everything else that makes it what it is. First of all, the casting for this movie was all chosen excellently. For example, John Travolta playing the part of Jan was perfect. He definitely can look like a self-centered personal injury lawyer, because of him looks and how good he is at acting rich and egoistic. Another example of extremely good casting is Robert Duvall playing Jerome Facher. In this movie, Duvall plays a kind-of ‘bad guy’ almost. I think he plays it well, and that he enjoys being the villain and crushing Jan Schlictmann’s dreams of winning the case against Beatrice. As a last example, Anne Anderson is played well by Kathleen Quinlan. She’s sort-of a deep person one might say, and she plays a character that fits her personality. I’d say that Anne’s character was soft-spoken, thoughtful, sweet, and definitely not self-centered. She is, in some ways, the opposite of Jan Schlictmann. The second important dramatic aspect of this film is the lighting. One good example of lighting in this film is when Jan and his partners at law are sitting in their ‘office’ with every light off except for a small lamp on the reception desk. This is when there are movers coming in to take all their stuff away because they need to get all the money out of it as they possibly can. All the lights being out in the office of the law firm is a really good choice of lighting because it shows how the lights have “gone out” in the hearts of the other attorneys in Jan’s law firm. Jan is the only one left that still has some hope of winning this case. Everyone else, especially James Gordon (their financial advisor) wants to just give up the case because they think that with no money left, no other employees besides the 3 attorneys and a secretary, there is no way to win the case. So they might as well just give up on it entirely. The lighting shows the audience all of this information by just being really dim. It was a good choice.
There are also cinematic aspects to every film. Two very important ones are photography and camera movement, because they give the movie lots of dimension and make it interesting to watch. One scene in the movie is good because it pans the site of the excavating and digging by the geologists Jan hired. Jan is walking by the work site and talking to Jerome Facher at the same time, so the camera pans their conversation, but behind them, the panning allows the audience to see just how big a project it is to figure out what chemicals were where at one time. There were other places where photography and camera movement were used, and they made the movie more interesting than if every shot was a still, medium shot just of people talking to each other. Another important one is editing, which also makes many movies more interesting than if all the shots were the exact same duration. I really liked how when in the end, Jan was realizing something about the case. It was as if his mind was constantly thinking back to things that had happened during the case for that brief two or three minutes of the movie. It was a really good use of editing because it left the audience wondering what Jan was thinking about and why all those little clips from earlier in the movie were so important. We don’t know what’s going on in Jan’s mind at this point in the movie, but we’re hooked, so we want to know what he will do with all those little flashbacks and realizations he just had. Sounds and music were used well too. Really classy and fancy classical music was playing in really nice high-end scenes. Like at the Harvard club, when Jan goes to talk to the man that might give him eight million dollars. It is a fancy place where a lot of rich people go, so they play music that very wealthy and smart people will know and appreciate. All these cinematic aspects of film make movies more interesting and much more fun to watch.
A Civil Action is much like the play All My Sons, in some ways. They both deal with ethical dilemmas that have to do with innocent people dying if they make a certain move. They both have a protagonist that is self-centered in the beginning and then changes at the end. Like Joe, the protagonist of All My Sons, he starts out by defending himself by saying that money and a successful business was more important than protecting the lives of twenty-one innocent pilots. Then he changed, and realized that what he did was completely wrong (in his opinion) and he had no other choice but to shoot himself on the last page of the play. He is like Jan because in the beginning, we see just how self- centered he is and how he wants to do anything but take on the Woburn case. The only reason he took it on was because the two defendants were Beatrice Foods and Grace Chemicals, two very large corporations that would get Jan a lot of money if he won the case. He took on the case because of his selfishness. But, in the end, he changes and money becomes less important to him than the families of Woburn. The only way that A Civil Action and All My Sons differ is that whatever Joe does now, it won’t change anything that happened. It was in the past, almost ten years ago, and he can’t change what he did then. But, Jan can influence what might happen in the future in the town of Woburn. If he wins the case and becomes able to clean the chemicals up, then no more innocent and helpless citizens of Woburn will die because of contaminated water.
A Civil Action was a good movie. I really enjoyed it, however some people might not like it. it was a kind-of political and law case thriller. Some people might not like this kind of film, but I think that these kinds of films are really interesting. But, if people like ethical dilemmas mixed into a political thriller, then they should definitely see it. the main reason I liked it was because Jan was changed so much by a small, simple and not wealthy town. His life changed completely by the end of the film. He’s in bankruptcy court, and the judge is asking him where all his assets went. But instead of using the word assets, or belongings, or money, she used the term “things by which we measure one’s life by.” I think this was the wrong phrase to use. This is because Jan doesn’t measure his life by material things anymore. He measures his life by the people you change and the things you do to help society. What are the things you measure your life by?
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Water For Elephants Week 2, Post B
“I cling to my anger with ever ounce of humanity left in my ruined body, but it’s no use. It slips away, like a wave from shore…then I let myself drift because there’s really not use fighting it” (69). This is an incredibly deep and thoughtful passage in the book. I can’t believe how true it really is to probably many elderly people’s lives. I talked about this topic a lot in my last book’s blogging. I think that the two main characters of these two books have completely different opinions of aging. Morrie, from Tuesdays with Morrie, wasn’t ashamed of getting old, and, in the end, dying. However, the main character in Water for Elephants, Jacob has a different view. When he does become old and close to death, he will definitely be ashamed. He doesn’t want to be waited on at all, he wants to keep his independence and liveliness exactly the same as it was when he was young. Morrie actually kind of liked being waited on like a small child again. He enjoyed it every time that it could happen. Jacob really didn’t want to have to give up his liveliness and independence. He “clung” to it, but eventually gave it up. He couldn’t fight the aging process anymore. I think I probably have the opinion of Jacob. I wouldn’t enjoy being babied and waited on for everything.
Water For Elephants Week 2, Post A
VOCAB:
scuttle (51): a short, hurried run
maniacally (53): Characterized by excessive enthusiasm or excitement
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
“Falling back like a disgraced puppy” (53): this is a simile describing Camel when he tries to talk to Uncle Al. It uses the word “like” so is therefore a simile, describing something.
“Swallowed whole by people, horses, and wagons” (53): this is a personification because it gives human characteristics to some non-human objects and things.
“I’m blubbering like the ancient fool” (64): this is also a simile because it uses the word “like” to describe what he was doing.
QUOTE:
“ You want to drug me. You want to turn me into a jell-o eating sheep.” (69). This quote is talking about how Jacob doesn’t want to take a certain depression pill, because he doesn’t want to turn into one of the patients that eats Jell-O like a sheep that follows the flock and doesn’t do their own thing.
THEME:
This theme of this book in these three chapters was that you can’t let yourself become a sheep in old age. You can’t lose your individualism. Because once you’ve lost that, there is nothing else to life.
scuttle (51): a short, hurried run
maniacally (53): Characterized by excessive enthusiasm or excitement
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
“Falling back like a disgraced puppy” (53): this is a simile describing Camel when he tries to talk to Uncle Al. It uses the word “like” so is therefore a simile, describing something.
“Swallowed whole by people, horses, and wagons” (53): this is a personification because it gives human characteristics to some non-human objects and things.
“I’m blubbering like the ancient fool” (64): this is also a simile because it uses the word “like” to describe what he was doing.
QUOTE:
“ You want to drug me. You want to turn me into a jell-o eating sheep.” (69). This quote is talking about how Jacob doesn’t want to take a certain depression pill, because he doesn’t want to turn into one of the patients that eats Jell-O like a sheep that follows the flock and doesn’t do their own thing.
THEME:
This theme of this book in these three chapters was that you can’t let yourself become a sheep in old age. You can’t lose your individualism. Because once you’ve lost that, there is nothing else to life.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Water for Elephants: Week 1 Post B
Dear Sara Gruen,
Wow. I just love your book. This is a great story. The thing I love the most about your writing is all your wonderful descriptions of the things happening in the story. One thing that I think is cool is how this is just a novel, a fictional story. But you tell the story with such good information and descriptions that it sometimes seems to be like a memoir. What I also like about your writing in this book is how the main character is constantly flashing back to his time working with the circus. He’s in the nursing home in the present time, but they are little sections. Then right away, you might switch right back to an experience at the circus. And this is all without warning, which can be sometimes confusing, but if you remember the other half of the plot when you’re reading the other half, then you won’t be confused. I think that this style also keeps readers hooked on it. if something really interesting happens in one half of the plot, and then you immediately switch back to the other one for a while, then the readers (or at least I do this) really almost need to keep reading until you write something next that’s in that interesting part of the other plot. Thank you for writing this book! It’s great, I can’t wait to finish reading it! I’ll probably finish it pretty soon at the rate I’m going!
Emma
Wow. I just love your book. This is a great story. The thing I love the most about your writing is all your wonderful descriptions of the things happening in the story. One thing that I think is cool is how this is just a novel, a fictional story. But you tell the story with such good information and descriptions that it sometimes seems to be like a memoir. What I also like about your writing in this book is how the main character is constantly flashing back to his time working with the circus. He’s in the nursing home in the present time, but they are little sections. Then right away, you might switch right back to an experience at the circus. And this is all without warning, which can be sometimes confusing, but if you remember the other half of the plot when you’re reading the other half, then you won’t be confused. I think that this style also keeps readers hooked on it. if something really interesting happens in one half of the plot, and then you immediately switch back to the other one for a while, then the readers (or at least I do this) really almost need to keep reading until you write something next that’s in that interesting part of the other plot. Thank you for writing this book! It’s great, I can’t wait to finish reading it! I’ll probably finish it pretty soon at the rate I’m going!
Emma
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Water for Elephants: Week 1, Post A
VOCAB:
undulating (46)-to move in a smooth wavelike motion.
Proctor (21)-a person appointed to keep watch over students during an exam.
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
“They pat and they fuss, and above all, they cluck” (19). Jacob’s parents died, so a few old ladies from his church come to visit him. This is the author’s description of these women. The ladies clucking like hens. It’s a kind of metaphor.
“But it’s difficult because he’s zooming away from me, receding to the end of a long black tunnel” (17). This is also when Jacob’s parents have died. This phrase is kind of imagery. It’s telling us what Jacob was feeling and seeing at the time.
“Snatches of sky peek through leaves, a mosaic blue and green that shifts gently with the wind” (22). This sentence is definitely imagery. It’s describing exactly what the sky looked like at the moment Jacob was looking out the window during his test.
QUOTE:
“Age is a terrible thief” (12). This quote is significant in the story because it’s about a man who is in the nursing home but is having flashbacks of his life in the circus. In this quote, Jacob is talking about how aging took his wife from him by cancer, and aging is the reason that he’s in the nursing home right now. Age took the things one usually enjoys in life away from him.
THEME:
The major emerging theme of the book so far is probably that you should go to college and start a successful life and not ruin your chances of being successful.
undulating (46)-to move in a smooth wavelike motion.
Proctor (21)-a person appointed to keep watch over students during an exam.
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
“They pat and they fuss, and above all, they cluck” (19). Jacob’s parents died, so a few old ladies from his church come to visit him. This is the author’s description of these women. The ladies clucking like hens. It’s a kind of metaphor.
“But it’s difficult because he’s zooming away from me, receding to the end of a long black tunnel” (17). This is also when Jacob’s parents have died. This phrase is kind of imagery. It’s telling us what Jacob was feeling and seeing at the time.
“Snatches of sky peek through leaves, a mosaic blue and green that shifts gently with the wind” (22). This sentence is definitely imagery. It’s describing exactly what the sky looked like at the moment Jacob was looking out the window during his test.
QUOTE:
“Age is a terrible thief” (12). This quote is significant in the story because it’s about a man who is in the nursing home but is having flashbacks of his life in the circus. In this quote, Jacob is talking about how aging took his wife from him by cancer, and aging is the reason that he’s in the nursing home right now. Age took the things one usually enjoys in life away from him.
THEME:
The major emerging theme of the book so far is probably that you should go to college and start a successful life and not ruin your chances of being successful.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
MORE BLOGGING! book is chosen.
I have chosen to read "Water for Elephants." I just realized that I could have never read a Jane Austen book, because the book we choose had to be from 2006-2007. Yeah, Jane Austen is just a bit too old to fit into that category.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
"Our Endangered Values": Reflection
First of all, I would just like to point this out. We, America, should have listened to Jimmy Carter when he proposed all of his ideas for protecting the environment. We should have listened to him when he came up with the crazy thought that we just might be wasting our resources. I know that this is in the past, but maybe it will teach us a lesson for the future, so that if someone has a crazy idea that just might be true, we don’t just ignore what he or she has to say. So, I would like to talk about the first major threat that he mentions in this section of his book. It’s about how we must protect the major National Parks in Alaska, Wyoming, and Montana. I feel very strongly about this topic, because this summer, I went on a week-long trip to Glacier National Park, in Montana. The reason it was named Glacier is for all the glaciers that were covering that particular mountain range. Well, when my parents and I got there, we were a little confused. We still expected to see glaciers everywhere, covering the ground, and having snow and ice everywhere. Apparently, there are only a few glaciers left. In the forties there were hundreds of glaciers. Most of them have melted because of global warming. What was really interesting on this trip was that they had pictures everywhere of what the park looked like seventy years ago, and then looking at it now. The difference is huge. What used to be solely ice is now fields with grass and flowers. It’s lovely, but of course, they are not glaciers. This is when I realized that global warming is not just something that some politicians made up to help their campaign, but it is real. One can’t blame all of this on global warming, however. What President Carter mentions in his book is industrialization. This can also be blamed for the National Parks being so different. More people are moving to areas around the parks, more businesses are cropping up around them, and the worst thing of all is the people drive their cars through the park. This is releasing harmful gas fumes into the mountain air. This is so sad, because at the rate we’re ruining the environment, our grandchildren may not live to see a glacier or a polar bear. This is what President Carter was talking about in his book. I believe that we have the same opinions on the environment, and I really wish this country would have listened to him in the first place. We might be in a completely different situation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
