I fully believe that the words of Thomas Jefferson, and all of the convention, speak of injustices that could be applied to our own society. They were important then, and draw ample parallels to our own kindred troubles. The first, the King does not allow the governors of the colonies to pass laws to requite immediately the troubles of the colonies. Ignoring a problem, only allows it to become entrenched deeper into our society. That's how something evolves from a problem to a way of life.
Second, the King squashed all attempts for the colonists to gain representation in British Parliament. This can be seen in our lives today, where more conservative states attempt to censor people on the basis of race or sexual orientation, (looking at you North Carolina).
Third, the King manipulated envoys/constituents into compliance through weary travel. He would force people attempting to change something into sailing all the way to England to present the case. They would be more likely to comply and miss fine details due to exhaustion. Today, we see corporate strong-arming, and politicking daily. Whether from biased new outlets, lobbying, etc.
Fourth, the King prevented immigration into the United States. Immigration is still a topic of discussion for all states but especially Western ones like the United States. We've formed bands of witch-hunters oppressing, censoring, or otherwise stopping the flow of immigrants because they're different. These days, we do it to ourselves, and a country has a right to control its borders; but to obdurately refuse families with foreign ancestry because of a bad representation of their culture, is not only fascist, but also unworthy of a civilized country.
Fifth, laws made by British Parliament, backslide, neglect, roadblock, or otherwise inhibit the judiciaries of the United Colonies. This is important because, as a society we have become more informed and clever. So has the government, therefore, we have to make certain that the United States is ruled not by the interests of leaders but lead by those interested in their followers. The U.S should not allow the federal government levy what is and is not important to our smaller communities.
Sixth, the King excited domestic violence between Colonists and the Native Americans. I see the same measure in our leaders today, constructing divides between us, fizzing the view of what we all are (human) by tethering us to racial stereotypes. Trump is notorious for exciting violence among us all through racial rhetoric and an uncouth penchant for violence towards whatever attempts to contradict him.
Seven, the King would require the Colonists to quarter British troops, tending to them, no matter the tab burdened on the Colonists. We don't deal with this today, but it's good to have a law prohibiting it just in case. Also, parallels can be drawn to unconstitutional surveillance of the people. We shouldn't allow the government to track our every move, and quarter surveillance equipment in our homes.
Eight, the British military answers directly to the King and not his people. Martial law parallels this, and while it's never reached the zenith as seen in fiction, it's important to remember we never send our soldiers on errands for power and subjugation. They serve to protect not conquer on behalf of the government.
Nine, the King raised yes-men in the courts. Those who would bend every decision they made to his will. Money talks and power too. Justice should be blind, though that's rarely the case. We need to be aware of corruption and answer it as a people. This sort of thing isn't beholden to just early American politics.
Finally, ten, unrepresented taxation. One of the main reasons the Colonists waged war on the British Empire, was unlawful taxation on things like paper and tea. Today, it is still relevant because our tax dollars fund many things in this country. Like infrastructure, our teachers and public service men and women. Taxes should never be rolled on to fund corruption or stolen to fill the pockets of corrupt officials.
The Declaration of Independence, aside from being the most eloquent break up letter ever conceived, is an important piece of identity. The identification of this country as an independent vessel to the west. America experienced an awakening herself. They discovered that they could sustain themselves and had the ingredients to churn out a country from Thirteen coastal states. Up until this point, the Colonists had nothing to hang their hat on, but now they had a group of individuals that were willing to commit treason to ensnare their rights. I guarantee some random Joe already knew all of these things but weren't able to establish a platform to be heard. The whole concept of a "sense of self" is realizing your own worth. Often we uncover what we're made of when misery fastens us to a sinking ship. Rather than suffering, the Founding Fathers chose union and dignity.
Thursday, September 22, 2016
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Standards Addressed:
* RI.11-12.3 Analyze a complex set of ideas or sequence of events and explain how specific individuals, ideas, or events interact and develop over the course of the text
* RI.11-12.6 Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text in which the rhetoric is particularly effective, analyzing how style and content contribute to the power, persuasiveness or beauty of the text.
* RI.11-12.2 Determine two or more central ideas of a text and analyze their development over the course of the text, including how they interact and build on one another to provide a complex analysis; provide an objective summary of the text.
* RI.11-12.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.
Blog Post on main page: (Remember - you must copy and paste the prompt and standards into your blog prior to your response. The standards listed are what I will use to grade your entry. This will ALWAYS be the process.)
1. RI.11-12.3, 1 – Explain how the opening scene is a catalyst for at least three major events in the play. Be sure to evidence from the text to support the events (remember – you have a copy of the screen play on Edmodo!)
2. RI.11-12.6, 1 – Explain how the author has use rhetoric in the play to develop his clear argument (appeals - logos, pathos, ethos; rhetorical devices: visit http://www.flashcardmachine.com/machine/?topic_id=2282658&source=pub.pub_details for a solid review of topics you could elaborate on in your post. Please note the text evidence and HOW the author used this evidence to develop rhetoric for his argument in the play.
3. RI.11-12.2, 1 – What truth is the author attempting to reveal with his play? Cite evidence from the text to support your analysis.
4. RI/RL.11-12.2 Thematic Unit Connection, consider these lines from the text:
PROCTOR, with a cry of his whole soul: Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!
How does Proctor’s sense of self impact him personally, and in turn, his family and the community of Salem?
The Crucible Blog Post
The beginning scene is symbolic of the entirety of the trials. Things started innocent but quickly got out of hand. One moment it's fun and games, the next, spectral finger pointing and dissent. It catalyzes "courts" taking the word of something intangible. Abigail's passionate drinking of the chicken blood prompted her to threaten Mary Warren and the other girls. It also led to over a hundred accused "witches." It led to the conviction of Elizabeth Proctor spurring protest from John Proctor through the testimony of Mary Warren, clearly scared of the psychotic Abigail Williams. This led to a last ditch effort by John to admit adultery to discredit Abigail and his eventual hanging by accusations from Mary and Abigail.
Arthur Miller uses several examples of paradoxes to exfoliate McCarthyism, such as "why do you never wonder if Parris be innocent, or Putnam, or Abigail? Are the accusers always holy now, were they born this morning as pure as God's fingers?" We as the audience know that they aren't pure and holy yet their word is treated as gospel. To that point, it's an example of dramatic irony in a way, because the audience suspects they are lying yet Danforth believes them wholesale. Arthur Miller points out the hypocrisy of not only the witch trials, but the witch hunt for communists. Another example of dramatic irony can be seen on page five of the screenplay, "There are wheels within wheels here, Mr. Hale. I hope you'll not forget that." We as the audience know that things will not end well for a majority of the characters because we have context of what happened to most victims during the trial. Arthur Miller also uses Pathos, specifying on page 23 of the screenplay, where John Proctor breaks down from the battling forces within himself. You can feel, not only through the poetic writing, but through Daniel Day-Lewis' acting, we feel the rock and the hard place grind John's life to a halt. But I also think it's telling that John doesn't beg for his life but for his name. He doesn't necessarily care about living, in fact, he probably thinks he deserves death and clearly he thinks he deserves Hell when he tells Abigail that they'll see each other in Hell, he argues for his name which lives forever. The memory of John Proctor is more important to him then life. This sort of selflessness emotionally resonates with the audience and we're totally on John's side, even if he "deflowered" a teenager.
He is attempting to fictionalize mob mentality and showing it has real consequences. That lies have a stern clout and can create a sequence of irreversible events, and that hysteria and pettiness can hurt innocent people. This is seen in, "Get your hands off me! Don't touch me! You're the Devil's man! I go your way no more, I love God." Mary has basically condemned John Proctor for a petty lie to save her own skin. It's an allegory for McCarthyism that condemned many people on something that cannot be proved. The loss of innocence is shown in the last page as John, Martha, and Rebecca hare hanged. It is also an allusion to the Salem belief that a witch could not recite the Lord's prayer. Another example of pettiness vengeance as a reason to accuse someone is seen with Thomas Putnam wanting John's land. It also speaks to what fuels a mob mentality, evinced by Ann Putnam's protectiveness because she lost seven babies. There's also irony in hanging Rebecca Nurse, arguably the most godly individual in The Crucible.
What's interesting about John Proctor is he does have a little metaphorical "devil" in him. But the only "devil" in John Proctor are the two governing right and wrong. Does a man deserve immortal salaciousness tied to his name when all has been laid out for his neighbors and the law? Is a guilty man any less of a human? Why does John deserve the mercy of lies more than any other? Reverend Hale says in the film, paraphrasing here, that it's more forgivable to lie and live then to die for pride. I think John represents the capacity we humans have for good and evil. We're just as likely to ruin someone else as we are to be a martyr. Danforth goes to John for a confession because of the weight his name carries in the Salem community. But paradoxically, seeks to ruin the validity of Proctor by having him sell his friends. So I question whether it would have done any good, or if the Salem residents would have been clever enough to see the strong arming happening in court. You can hear the spectators calling John a good man as he rides to the scaffold, yet none try to prevent the injustice. That's one of the biggest things I didn't understand about the ending. Maybe they were scared, and that's likely the reason, but it's like counting your chickens as they run off the side of a cliff. They saw the capacity of a person that John was, but they let him go anyway. That offers some theories on why they did nothing. One, they were secretly disgusted by John's other mistakes. Or, Arthur Miller wanted to show that John was at peace with his life and the only thing left for him was death. He wanted to be a martyr, and he'd redeemed himself, and he made it clear that he was more interested in what he'd be remembered by not his life. John Proctor's sense of self, allowed him to make the less grey choice of dying with all the others rather than bending to injustice. This, quite poetically, evangelized his name in the eyes of Salem.
* RI.11-12.3 Analyze a complex set of ideas or sequence of events and explain how specific individuals, ideas, or events interact and develop over the course of the text
* RI.11-12.6 Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text in which the rhetoric is particularly effective, analyzing how style and content contribute to the power, persuasiveness or beauty of the text.
* RI.11-12.2 Determine two or more central ideas of a text and analyze their development over the course of the text, including how they interact and build on one another to provide a complex analysis; provide an objective summary of the text.
* RI.11-12.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.
Blog Post on main page: (Remember - you must copy and paste the prompt and standards into your blog prior to your response. The standards listed are what I will use to grade your entry. This will ALWAYS be the process.)
1. RI.11-12.3, 1 – Explain how the opening scene is a catalyst for at least three major events in the play. Be sure to evidence from the text to support the events (remember – you have a copy of the screen play on Edmodo!)
2. RI.11-12.6, 1 – Explain how the author has use rhetoric in the play to develop his clear argument (appeals - logos, pathos, ethos; rhetorical devices: visit http://www.flashcardmachine.com/machine/?topic_id=2282658&source=pub.pub_details for a solid review of topics you could elaborate on in your post. Please note the text evidence and HOW the author used this evidence to develop rhetoric for his argument in the play.
3. RI.11-12.2, 1 – What truth is the author attempting to reveal with his play? Cite evidence from the text to support your analysis.
4. RI/RL.11-12.2 Thematic Unit Connection, consider these lines from the text:
PROCTOR, with a cry of his whole soul: Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!
How does Proctor’s sense of self impact him personally, and in turn, his family and the community of Salem?
The Crucible Blog Post
The beginning scene is symbolic of the entirety of the trials. Things started innocent but quickly got out of hand. One moment it's fun and games, the next, spectral finger pointing and dissent. It catalyzes "courts" taking the word of something intangible. Abigail's passionate drinking of the chicken blood prompted her to threaten Mary Warren and the other girls. It also led to over a hundred accused "witches." It led to the conviction of Elizabeth Proctor spurring protest from John Proctor through the testimony of Mary Warren, clearly scared of the psychotic Abigail Williams. This led to a last ditch effort by John to admit adultery to discredit Abigail and his eventual hanging by accusations from Mary and Abigail.
Arthur Miller uses several examples of paradoxes to exfoliate McCarthyism, such as "why do you never wonder if Parris be innocent, or Putnam, or Abigail? Are the accusers always holy now, were they born this morning as pure as God's fingers?" We as the audience know that they aren't pure and holy yet their word is treated as gospel. To that point, it's an example of dramatic irony in a way, because the audience suspects they are lying yet Danforth believes them wholesale. Arthur Miller points out the hypocrisy of not only the witch trials, but the witch hunt for communists. Another example of dramatic irony can be seen on page five of the screenplay, "There are wheels within wheels here, Mr. Hale. I hope you'll not forget that." We as the audience know that things will not end well for a majority of the characters because we have context of what happened to most victims during the trial. Arthur Miller also uses Pathos, specifying on page 23 of the screenplay, where John Proctor breaks down from the battling forces within himself. You can feel, not only through the poetic writing, but through Daniel Day-Lewis' acting, we feel the rock and the hard place grind John's life to a halt. But I also think it's telling that John doesn't beg for his life but for his name. He doesn't necessarily care about living, in fact, he probably thinks he deserves death and clearly he thinks he deserves Hell when he tells Abigail that they'll see each other in Hell, he argues for his name which lives forever. The memory of John Proctor is more important to him then life. This sort of selflessness emotionally resonates with the audience and we're totally on John's side, even if he "deflowered" a teenager.
He is attempting to fictionalize mob mentality and showing it has real consequences. That lies have a stern clout and can create a sequence of irreversible events, and that hysteria and pettiness can hurt innocent people. This is seen in, "Get your hands off me! Don't touch me! You're the Devil's man! I go your way no more, I love God." Mary has basically condemned John Proctor for a petty lie to save her own skin. It's an allegory for McCarthyism that condemned many people on something that cannot be proved. The loss of innocence is shown in the last page as John, Martha, and Rebecca hare hanged. It is also an allusion to the Salem belief that a witch could not recite the Lord's prayer. Another example of pettiness vengeance as a reason to accuse someone is seen with Thomas Putnam wanting John's land. It also speaks to what fuels a mob mentality, evinced by Ann Putnam's protectiveness because she lost seven babies. There's also irony in hanging Rebecca Nurse, arguably the most godly individual in The Crucible.
What's interesting about John Proctor is he does have a little metaphorical "devil" in him. But the only "devil" in John Proctor are the two governing right and wrong. Does a man deserve immortal salaciousness tied to his name when all has been laid out for his neighbors and the law? Is a guilty man any less of a human? Why does John deserve the mercy of lies more than any other? Reverend Hale says in the film, paraphrasing here, that it's more forgivable to lie and live then to die for pride. I think John represents the capacity we humans have for good and evil. We're just as likely to ruin someone else as we are to be a martyr. Danforth goes to John for a confession because of the weight his name carries in the Salem community. But paradoxically, seeks to ruin the validity of Proctor by having him sell his friends. So I question whether it would have done any good, or if the Salem residents would have been clever enough to see the strong arming happening in court. You can hear the spectators calling John a good man as he rides to the scaffold, yet none try to prevent the injustice. That's one of the biggest things I didn't understand about the ending. Maybe they were scared, and that's likely the reason, but it's like counting your chickens as they run off the side of a cliff. They saw the capacity of a person that John was, but they let him go anyway. That offers some theories on why they did nothing. One, they were secretly disgusted by John's other mistakes. Or, Arthur Miller wanted to show that John was at peace with his life and the only thing left for him was death. He wanted to be a martyr, and he'd redeemed himself, and he made it clear that he was more interested in what he'd be remembered by not his life. John Proctor's sense of self, allowed him to make the less grey choice of dying with all the others rather than bending to injustice. This, quite poetically, evangelized his name in the eyes of Salem.
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
The Devil and Adam Twardowski
Dr. Adam Twardowski is an astrobiologist and a massive Ray Bradbury fan. You could say his fandom has an invisible hand in his work. So on the afternoon of his lecture where he is to convince the world of life on Mars, not unlike the tan, leathery creatures chronicled in the Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury. However, to his horror, one misplaced semi-colon in his data collecting program has voided the data. The Devil comes to him while he is having a fit in the bathroom, while the smarmy scholars wait in the ballroom. He looks like Ray Bradbury and offers him a trade for his soul. He wants life on Mars to be true, look just like Ray Bradbury's rendition, a trip to Mars, and 50 lbs as he is a scant and scrawny man. The stipulations are, he will never see home again and must spend eternity with a bunch of Martians who are huge fans of Bradbury. Only they slightly mispronounce everything. Eternal torment for the poor scientist. But, a feeling of renewed hope.
As for the 50 lbs, he arrives on Mars with a £50 bill.
As for the 50 lbs, he arrives on Mars with a £50 bill.
Thursday, August 18, 2016
A Sense of Self
Essential Question - "How do moral and ethical convictions impact an individual, a group, a society, and/or a community?
Standards Addressed: W.11 - 12.3 - Write narratives to develop experiences using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured sequences. The entry should include an introductory idea that identifies the focus (W.11-12.3a), coherent progression of ideas and distinctive tone (W.11 - 12.3c), and a final concluding statement (W.11 - 12.3e).
Conviction is that thing everyone's secretly trying to get a beat on whenever they meet you. We don't really think about it, but whenever we meet someone, we're trying to, metaphorically, stick a pin in them. Figure them out, test the waters, see what lines you can and can't cross with someone. If you've ever had a crush on anyone, and actually brave those rapids (not talk about it), you're looking for that compatibility. And what sort of worthwhile compatibility ever comes from looks? The way I've noticed people get the attention they need, is two fold: the ones who've got it to an automaton; their gestures and heel-kicks are polished enough to make anyone blush. Maybe they wish they were different. Then the palette faced introverts who mark their targets carefully so they can get that same attention at a different pace. Maybe they wish they were different. I've always been a long distance runner (and by distance I mean a slow foot shuffle forward, dangling my hands like wet rags wondering why I was never a track star) so I fall on the latter end of that yard stick. Of course I can't dehumanize an individual in these myopic platitudes and pass myself off as an artist. No, you see, it's my conviction which batters down that I am a part of a greater whole, and all those faces I see every day live lives as complex as the one I lead.
I look at conviction as an outline for what is compromise and what is selling your integrity to the first bid paddle. Why not keep everyone wondering? They'll ask, "what can I get away with here?" When you feel the turn in your stomach seeing a face you'd rather not or something that doesn't sit well. Those are the convictions, and it's easy for them to be taken advantage of by others, but also by you.
There is integrity in compromise. It shows you'll row with the group. You'll muscle the walk with them to the Dunn Center IF we make a pit stop to Subway. Great battles aren't always won by the sword; peace is typically preferable, and it isn't cowardly. To quote a show I like, "we only make peace with our enemies." But there are some things you'll die on a hill for; things that paint you as the funny looking sheep. You'll be a drag, fake, a real stubborn tree you can't move out of the mud. But it's hard to test how far a tree can bend in a forest.
Luckily, it isn't all doom. That doleful paragraph is whom you want to avoid, if you can help it. Sometimes, something you believe in can bring you closer to people. Sometimes it's that huzzah! moment you need when it's hard to tell if there's anything more to know about your character. It draws people to you, and you to them, not necessarily to fight for the cause, but as something you have in common. I've made friends off of being "more than meets the eye," and it's connected me with people in layers I didn't think they had.
As for a community, I treat it like a larger group in theory. You have to ask yourself the same questions, like, what are you willing to be stalwart for in a world that's so easy to fall in line with? Not everyone's gonna see it your way, especially if you live in a community riding a more traditional (or dare I say, Old Testament) line. But I also think it's important to distinguish when you're projecting your opinions too much (kinda like I'm doing now). Are you a regressive leftist? Are you pushing the envelope or my buttons? The world doesn't always need to hear you. In fact, it's more powerful in doses, as a constant stream of shouting and condemning is bound to harbor diminishing returns.
But, like the world, I am painted in shades of grey. Full of contradictions and hypocrisy. So that get-out-of-jail-free card allows me to muse on obtrusion and explain what I find so beautiful about it. So here it is: it's easy to mind your own business. What's perhaps so unique and powerful of people is how little we do that. We'll surf against the gradient just to rub your nose in it. The fear of what we don't understand can make us a pinata and history the stick. We ask ourselves, through our convictions, what side of history will we be on? Right and wrong, that's your construct. Unfortunately, our world is base and grey and we can never be to sure of anything. Which is gorgeous to me. Before the big wallop from the pole arm of time, while our candy is still ours, we ponder what is worth sacrificing for what you believe in? Community? Family and friends?
It's tough thinking for ourselves, but I'd not want it any other way.
Standards Addressed: W.11 - 12.3 - Write narratives to develop experiences using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured sequences. The entry should include an introductory idea that identifies the focus (W.11-12.3a), coherent progression of ideas and distinctive tone (W.11 - 12.3c), and a final concluding statement (W.11 - 12.3e).
Conviction is that thing everyone's secretly trying to get a beat on whenever they meet you. We don't really think about it, but whenever we meet someone, we're trying to, metaphorically, stick a pin in them. Figure them out, test the waters, see what lines you can and can't cross with someone. If you've ever had a crush on anyone, and actually brave those rapids (not talk about it), you're looking for that compatibility. And what sort of worthwhile compatibility ever comes from looks? The way I've noticed people get the attention they need, is two fold: the ones who've got it to an automaton; their gestures and heel-kicks are polished enough to make anyone blush. Maybe they wish they were different. Then the palette faced introverts who mark their targets carefully so they can get that same attention at a different pace. Maybe they wish they were different. I've always been a long distance runner (and by distance I mean a slow foot shuffle forward, dangling my hands like wet rags wondering why I was never a track star) so I fall on the latter end of that yard stick. Of course I can't dehumanize an individual in these myopic platitudes and pass myself off as an artist. No, you see, it's my conviction which batters down that I am a part of a greater whole, and all those faces I see every day live lives as complex as the one I lead.
I look at conviction as an outline for what is compromise and what is selling your integrity to the first bid paddle. Why not keep everyone wondering? They'll ask, "what can I get away with here?" When you feel the turn in your stomach seeing a face you'd rather not or something that doesn't sit well. Those are the convictions, and it's easy for them to be taken advantage of by others, but also by you.
There is integrity in compromise. It shows you'll row with the group. You'll muscle the walk with them to the Dunn Center IF we make a pit stop to Subway. Great battles aren't always won by the sword; peace is typically preferable, and it isn't cowardly. To quote a show I like, "we only make peace with our enemies." But there are some things you'll die on a hill for; things that paint you as the funny looking sheep. You'll be a drag, fake, a real stubborn tree you can't move out of the mud. But it's hard to test how far a tree can bend in a forest.
Luckily, it isn't all doom. That doleful paragraph is whom you want to avoid, if you can help it. Sometimes, something you believe in can bring you closer to people. Sometimes it's that huzzah! moment you need when it's hard to tell if there's anything more to know about your character. It draws people to you, and you to them, not necessarily to fight for the cause, but as something you have in common. I've made friends off of being "more than meets the eye," and it's connected me with people in layers I didn't think they had.
As for a community, I treat it like a larger group in theory. You have to ask yourself the same questions, like, what are you willing to be stalwart for in a world that's so easy to fall in line with? Not everyone's gonna see it your way, especially if you live in a community riding a more traditional (or dare I say, Old Testament) line. But I also think it's important to distinguish when you're projecting your opinions too much (kinda like I'm doing now). Are you a regressive leftist? Are you pushing the envelope or my buttons? The world doesn't always need to hear you. In fact, it's more powerful in doses, as a constant stream of shouting and condemning is bound to harbor diminishing returns.
But, like the world, I am painted in shades of grey. Full of contradictions and hypocrisy. So that get-out-of-jail-free card allows me to muse on obtrusion and explain what I find so beautiful about it. So here it is: it's easy to mind your own business. What's perhaps so unique and powerful of people is how little we do that. We'll surf against the gradient just to rub your nose in it. The fear of what we don't understand can make us a pinata and history the stick. We ask ourselves, through our convictions, what side of history will we be on? Right and wrong, that's your construct. Unfortunately, our world is base and grey and we can never be to sure of anything. Which is gorgeous to me. Before the big wallop from the pole arm of time, while our candy is still ours, we ponder what is worth sacrificing for what you believe in? Community? Family and friends?
It's tough thinking for ourselves, but I'd not want it any other way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)