My View on Tragedies (CC)

        I've always found tragedies fairly interesting. Terrible things happening to all sorts of people and almost always resulting in death. Interesting, yes, but at the same time, very depressing. I understand that tragedies are a part of the world of literature and not every story has a happy ending, but I'm not entirely sure how exactly I feel about them as a whole. I find them interesting, as I said before, but does that mean I like them? I really don't know.
        What I do know, however, is that I tend to hate depressing endings. It all started the summer of fifth grade. I read this book about a sled dog (the protagonist of the story). I can't remember the title, but what I remember vividly is that at one point in the novel, this dog had befriended a kind man who he accepted as his master, along with that man's friends and the other sled dogs who he grew close to as his companions. One day, they were out in the woods camping (I can't remember why) and the main sled dog left the group because he heard a call from a wild dog or wolf or something. You see, he was fighting between the pull of loyalty toward his master, his master's friends, and the other dogs, and the call of the wild - leaving them all behind and becoming wild. He decided he loved his companions too much to leave them, so he ran back to the group the next day and, well, everyone had been killed by traveling huntsmen. The ending of the story was so abrupt that I just couldn't deal with it. the book had been so good up until that point. At the end of the novel, rather than the hero dying (as in most tragedies), everyone but the main character had died. Imagine that - everyone you love just suddenly disappearing off the face of the earth. In all honesty, I believe that would be worse than death.
        And so, I had been introduced to the world of tragedies. I've seen a lot of tragedies throughout the years, and some have actually been quite good. However, I just can't stand any of the endings. Death, death and more death - almost every time. I think my problem is that I just get way too attached to the characters that I can't stand watching them struggle through the terrors of their lives. Antigone, Eponine, Fantine, Hassan, many of the characters within the Hunger Games Trilogy and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. There are so many tragic deaths to characters that are so well developed and loved by the audience that it almost makes me hate tragedies.
        At the same time, tragedies are necessary to our existence. They keep us sane and out of the crazy mind-set that every little thing in the world will end in a "happily ever after", as Disney movies clearly express (No offense to Disney movies, which I love). Tragedies can be depressing and frustrating and altogether outrageous at times, but isn't that the point? Wasn't the author intending to get that specific reaction from the audience? It's like when an artist paints a portrait of a horrifying face. They specifically intend to invoke a reaction in their viewers. Sad songs can make us want to cry if performed good enough, but that doesn't mean we hate them. In fact, songs that bring us to tears can make us love them even more. And aren't tragedies the same?
          So, I may not love tragedies, but I do not hate them. I respect them for what they are and the reaction they obtain from the readers. Although some may make me cry, I acknowledge the author for developing the characters in such a way that I am disturbed by their deaths. Tragedies are tragedies, but they are not the only kind of story in the world. There's all sorts of happy endings out there, it just depends which kind of story you feel like reading. :)

Transitioning into *The Kite Runner* (IR)

       

        For my next independent reading book, I am looking into the plot of The Kite Runner, by
Khaled Hosseini. Let me just say, after suffering through a mountain of stream-of-consciousness and separated thought processing (Thank you very much, The Sound and the Fury...) I am truly grateful to be reading a book that one can actually understand. With The Sound and the Fury, I found myself double-guessing every other word and struggling to interpret just what exactly was going on. The Kite Runner, on the other hand, is written in a sensible way. The book is written in first person, the speaker doesn't shift around depending on the chapter, time changes actually make sense, and italics are used in a much simpler way. Not to mention, when flashbacks are occurring, it is clear what is going on, and the time jumps are used in a way that supports the chronological movement of the years. They are not random, nor unnecessary to the story - unlike some of those in The Sound and the Fury.
        I did not intend to rant about how much I disliked reading The Sound and the Fury. Long story short, I did not love it (Did you catch the litote there?). The point is, The Sound and the Fury and The Kite Runner are two completely different books. I have only read part of The Kite Runner, but I believe it is going to be a much more constructed piece of literature than The Sound and the Fury - at least in my opinion. What I will say is that by understanding the book and what is happening more, I will most likely get more attached to the characters in this novel than I did in The Sound and the Fury - where I honestly stopped caring about the characters and their individual trials.
        On the topic of characters, I have already decided that I hate the protagonist of The Kite Runner  (Amir) as a little boy. He may have had a few good moments, but he showed no empathy for his best friend (Hassan) in the slightest. By taking actions that made him feel better but crushed Hassan's spirit (like throwing pomegranates in his face), Amir made his way onto my list of least favorite characters. However, I believe his character shows promise as an adult. I have only read a ways into the time gap, but it seems to me that "future Amir" is more likable than "young Amir". The character Hassan has only been included as a child so far, but he was a much more likable character than Amir. I also like the character Rahim Khan, a good friend of Amir's father. He is kind, sensible, and serves as a moral center for the characters in the first part of the novel.
        I have this weird feeling that I watched The Kite Runner movie a few years ago, or at least part of it. This is because I seem to recall some of the events and characters of the book. I remember the scene at the beginning with the two boys (Hassan and Amir) chasing after a kite, as well as Amir as an adult holding a book that he wrote, standing next to his wife. There are a few scenes like these that I can remember faintly. However, I must have watched the movie quite a long time ago as most of the plot-line is still cloudy to me. This is another reason I chose to read this book. I look forward to the rest of the novel, as well. As I said before, I am much more invested in The Kite Runner than I was in The Sound and the Fury. I am ready for a new book full of new adventures and happenings.

The Amazing Existence of Poetry (CC)

       Sadly, we have come to the final days of the poetry unit in AP Lit. I didn't enjoy everything we did in the unit, nor did I enjoy every single poem we analyzed, but overall, I really liked learning more about poetry. Poetry has always been one of those things that just stuck with me. I have always loved constructing poetic writing and forming stanzas with very particular rhythms and rhyme schemes. I also see poetry in the everyday music of my life. Choral pieces that are composed merely of a poem someone, somewhere, wrote and has been set to music, song lyrics that are way too easy to memorize because they rhyme and are written exactly like a poem, etc. Poetry is kind of everywhere. Speeches that have a very musical flow to them and cause them to be portrayed effectively, certain plays and especially musicals (Anyone heard of Seussical the Musical?), songs being composed with words, and so much more. It is an art of life that would be difficult to live without. I mean, if we lost poetry, the world would - by no means - suddenly end, but it would be a darker, drearier place. 

        Poetry brings out that creative side of a lot of people, allowing them to express themselves through a complex (or simple) structure of words. If we had no poetry, a lot of people would suffer. Prose writing would vanish, tearing out the hearts of writers everywhere, as it is such a beloved form of writing to so many people. Music would lose a lot of choral pieces. A lot. Speeches with a very poetic form - like "I Have a Dream" by Martin Luther King Jr. - would lose much of their effectiveness due to their loss of flowing rhythm and structure. Like I said before, a world without poetry would not be nearly as exciting and well-off. 

        Poetry adds so much to the world. It gives us a piece of life that helps us transform into more creative thinkers and build up our character, making us more well-rounded people overall. Of course, some people hate poetry or at least certain elements of poetry, and that's fine. It isn't something everyone has to like. Personally, I like poems with a very musical or flowing feel to them. I hate poems that are intricate and so filled with complex symbolism that I can't tell one word from the other. In all honesty, a LOT of poems are like that. But every once in a while, you get a nice, simple, and down-to-earth piece of poetry that just lifts your soul. You know what what I mean? After all, poems are usually created for the audience - whether that be to prove a point, or to simply evoke an experience in the readers themselves. 

         Poems are used for enjoyment, for learning, for gaining techniques like memorization and applying those techniques to other elements in life, for writing, for music, to prove points, and to boost people's everyday moral. In my opinion, poetry has thoroughly embedded itself into the everyday life of people worldwide. Poetry is something in life that just clicks, and it will grow even larger before you know it!

The Theory of Hope (CC)

        For the poetry project in class, I'm analyzing "Hope is the Thing With Feathers" by Emily Dickinson - a poem that speaks out about the value of hope through many layers of symbolism and metaphors. Yes, I understand the collective frustration with Dickinson from our discussions in class and agree that most of her poetry is just too complicated - or in some senses way too simplistic. However, that doesn't mean I hate all of her poetry. In fact, I love some of the poems she wrote throughout her lifetime. Everyone has good works and some not-so-good works - it all depends on which the viewer is reading and their own personal opinion on the matter. So, I know I like at least one of Emily Dickinson's poems, and that's that.
        So, since I've been looking at this poem and researching it both at class and at home, I can't help thinking about hope. Just how important is hope, anyway? It seems like sometimes hope is all people have in life - it leads them through their darkest hours and guides them to better days. Everyone therefore has at least some sense of hope. Even those people who think that talking about hope is "too cheesy" or "lame" have their own personal hopes and wishes - it's something internal that we can't really shut off. Hope is pretty important then, wouldn't you say?
        Think of it like this: What if hope didn't exist? What would the world be like? All I know is that it would not be good. People would lose all of their ambition, all of their determination to find their dreams, because their hope would be replaced with despair. Everything that could have been accomplished would seem out of reach and impossible. No one would take the "leaps of faith" that they do today. Without taking chances, people never grow. It's something we just have to do. If we can't hope, we can't achieve those crazy goals we establish. Hope is what makes growth possible - it's what allows us to keep on pushing ourselves forward in life and refusing to give up. In a way, hope is what keeps us sane.
        So, this may just seem like a happy-go-lucky post about the value of faith in one's life, but hope really is an incredibly important part of the world. Hope and the will to live are tied together. They go hand in hand - if you lose one, you lose the other. Without hope we have nothing to live for - the will to live is something only reached through the power of hope. How does a young adult leave home and move towards the future? Hope. How does someone with an emotional disorder keep on going in life? Hope. How does a bird learn how to fly? Hope. It's something that just sticks with us through all of our days. Hope allows us to keep on trying, keep on racing towards new and brighter horizons. It's what makes us dreamers, and what gives us determination. Hope, faith, believing in even the most unrealistic dreams - it gives us something to ground us in this world - something to live for.

My Reflection on *The Sound and the Fury* (IR)

   

        So, I recently finished reading The Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner. I will now write about all of my thoughts on this very unique text.
        Let me just say, reading through pure stream-of-consciousness writing is a very, very, very hard thing to do. The first passage of four is written entirely in it. The second passage is still mostly stream-of-consciousness with a few sensible pieces, the third even less confusing, with the final passage leaving out stream-of-consciousness writing all together. In a way, the reader gets the hardest part out of the way first - quite a relief. I have to say, though, I honestly don't think I've read anything as confusing as this book in my life. The way the stories read in choppy sentences or fragments, and the way the scenes jump around so much - even through different times. Yes, I'm sure you have all experienced time gaps in books but for the most part, it is easy to see when your character is in a different time period - a few months have passed, years, whatever. Well, in The Sound and the Fury, the exact day or year can be impossibly hard to find at parts - especially in the first part of the novel. I was completely confused for the first fifty pages with all of these off-topic things jumping into the text and the character would suddenly be in a different place than before. I then thankfully realized that the character had been having flashbacks with the use of italics. So all I had to do was look for the main story-line in the paragraphs without italics, right? Yeah, I wish it had been that easy. In fact, that was my first thought. Unfortunately, if the flashback was long enough, it would be written without italics, switching the main story-line's view with the flashbacks altogether. Let's just say, it was extremely confusing.
        Not that I have anything against Faulkner's writing style, I just find it hard to read. In fact, I found certain parts of this book (namely part one) harder to interpret than Shakespeare - and that's saying something. It's written in a completely different tone than Shakespeare's writing, of course - much less "formal" - but that does not change the fact that it is truly confusing.
         Although I found most of this story terribly difficult to read there were a few parts I, as the reader could actually understand. Those parts were a relief. There was one section in part two like that, when one of the main characters - Quentin - was trying to help this little girl find her home. The writing for that scene was very straight-forward, unlike a lot of the book itself.
         Okay, I know it's hard to explain just how interesting the writing of this book is. Here's a short passage from part two:

 "A face reproachful an odor of camphor and of tears a voice weeping steadily and softly beyond the twilit door the twilight-colored smell of honeysuckle. Bringing empty trunks down the attic stairs they sounded like coffins French Lick. Found not death at the salt lick" (Faulkner 95).

        That quote is written word for word - I didn't leave anything out or change a thing. Notice the sting of separate thoughts mending together and the mysterious lack of normal punctuation? This is an extreme example - one of Quentin's flash backs. But you get the idea now right? It was by no means an easy read.
        Surprisingly, however, the characters were developed wonderfully - despite the hard-to-interpret writing itself. As readers, we got to know Benjy - the mentally disabled narrator of part one, Quentin,- brother to Benjy as well as Jason, who fights with himself over his feelings towards his sister Caddy as he envelops part two, Jason - the strict leader of part three and hard-headed uncle of Miss Quentin, as well as other important characters. They all have a purpose in the story - each one has a meaning.
        I find it perplexing that a book so very confusing can have such great character development. It's one of the mysterious things I discovered on my adventure reading this novel. Although it's definitely not one of my favorite books (honestly, you will have to bribe me with tickets to a really good musical if you ever want me to read that book again), but I am glad I read it. While it wasn't a particularly fun experience for me, I can now say I have read a book written mostly in stream-of-consciousness. Knowing that may never happen again, I'm glad I was able to explore an area of writing such as this. Though had to interpret, I found the way Faulkner wrote so unique and unlike anything I had ever read before. As we learned at the beginning of the year, originality is hard to find. By reading something unlike anything I have read before, I can start to feel that calm sense of originality. Seeing something so unique is really quite fascinating.
        So there you have it - my experience with The Sound and the Fury. Well, out with the old, and in with the new. Time to read another book, and have a whole new adventure.

Actors and their Amazing Capability to Act (IR)

        So, it's been a while since I've blogged about acting. It's one of my many hobbies and I can't help being interested. So, yesterday I auditioned for our school's fall play, "A Haunting We Will Go". I've always absolutely loved auditions for plays and musicals because you get to read the lines for all sorts of characters so that the directors have a good idea of your capability to act. So, in all of the plays I've been in, I've ended up being cast as the innocent and good character. Since people have only seen me act in those happy-go-lucky roles, no one has ever really seen me act in a villainous role. Of course, I'm not saying I would be a good fit for a villainous role (Ha! During the auditions for "The Wizard of Oz" in  10th grade they had me read for the witch at on point... It was quite an interesting experience), just that it is possible for even me to act villainous in certain roles.
         The point is, this got me thinking about just how amazing true actors can really be. I mean think about it - some actors can play the most pure, innocent characters as well as the most evil, lunatic and annoying characters. It all depends on perspective. I found this article online called "13 Actors Who Can Play Any Role". It has a list of some actors and actresses who do indeed have a huge range of acting experience - actors such as Natalie Portman, Johnny Depp (I don't see how he couldn't be on this list), Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, Tom Hanks, and many more. Of course, these are only a sliver of the amazing actors out there. Someone who I personally would add to this list is Anne Hathaway. From a humble daughter in Ella Enchanted, to a troubled mother (with a powerful voice) in Les Miserables, to a full-on villain in The Dark Night Rises, Anne Hathaway can play a huge variety of roles, performing each part with a certain air that is unique to her and her alone. Some actors truly have an amazing capability to act. And that is something that I admire greatly in them.
        Actors and actresses also tend to have a knack for memorizing lines. This is something that intrigues me immensely about acting. When your director hands you a 200-page packet script for a play that you decide you will learn in a week, some may think it impossible, and so may you. That is until you sit down for hours on end and come back a week later fully prepared to put down your script and start spouting lines ("Wizard of Oz" anyone?). Memorization abilities just come to people in a real variety of ways. Some people can literally look at a paragraph for fifteen minutes and then exclaim the words flawlessly a moment later.
        By the way, I've also been reading into my most recent unit of AP Psychology quite a bit, so I may start ranting about memorization from here on out. You see, there are all sorts of ways to memorize things, and people just have to find what's right for them. Personally, I am a true visual learner. I memorize lines in plays and such by looking at a phrase, covering it, and repeating the phrase aloud (or in my head if there are people around). Then, I read the next phrase, cover it along with the first phrase, and recite both phrases until it comes naturally. I then continue to repeat this process over and over again throughout whatever it is I am memorizing until I can say it all correctly and in the right order. This is why I absolutely hate it when I am talking to another actor in a play and they change the words around so that it is not exactly as it is written. Normally, a mistake like this will pass off as nothing, but sometimes it doesn't work out so well. Like in "Seussical the Musical", a musical that is made up entirely of rhymes. Once when I was performing in this play, another actor said their lines too quickly, before I could finish my own, therefore causing the rhyme scheme to fluctuate, announcing quite brightly to the audience that there had been a mistake. Yeah, I don't like it when people stray from the script.
        Not all actors are visual actors. A lot of them are audio learners. One time, one of my friends who is into acting was in a play with me outside of school. She was having trouble memorizing lines so I decided to help her. Long story short, we discovered that she was by no means a visual learner, but an audio learner. She was able to learn her lines by following my method of phrasing memorization, except with me reading each phrase aloud to her and then having her recite the lines until flawless. Once you find your ideal method of memorization, the hardest lines to memorize can become possible again.
        So, the point of the matter is, actors have an amazing capability to act. Whether they be a well-known professional or a down-to-earth newbie, acting sure takes a lot of hard work and confidence to express yourself openly to the world. And it looks like my long rant has come to an end. Until the next time! ;)

Here is the link to "13 Actors Who Can Play Any Role":

http://screen.answers.com/movies/13-actors-who-can-play-any-role

The Rising Age of Technology (FW)

        To start things off, I just got a new computer. My old computer unfortunately stopped working in the spring very suddenly and I knew it was time for me to get a new one. However, I survived the summer need for internet with an iPad mini (which I used to read one of my summer reading books online as an eBook rather than reading it from the library, as it was more convenient, although reading books online really hurts your eyes...) and the use of my mom's work computer that she has at the house during the summer. Without either of those things, I would have had issues with completing my summer homework as well as staying in the loop of all of the things going on within my email account - rehearsals, festivals, contacting coworkers, etc. Good thing I had some way to connect to the internet before I got my new computer, right?
        Well, this got me thinking - our lives are becoming so dependent on technology nowadays, aren't they? I mean, think about it. For instance, take a look at schools. Every year schools become more and more reliant on online papers and work. It's easier to keep track of and there's a much lower risk of losing an important paper of some sort. At Black River we use email, Google docs, online videos for certain lessons, and so much more. Even at this very moment, I'm using technology to do my homework blogging. And that's not half of it. Some schools actually distribute laptops or iPads to their students for all of their work throughout the year. It really does make things easier - not having to write out essay after essay, easy storage, being able to share work as well as save important documents from getting lost, and much more.
        Even things like the news are more often watched or read from TVs or computers rather than the newspaper itself. Hordes of people do their shopping and banking online, not to mention social websites like Facebook and Twitter. Computers, tablets, phones, TVs - you name it. These things are a huge part of our lives whether we acknowledge it or not.
        This leads me to the question of the future world of technology. If these things are such a huge part of our daily lives already, what will happen once even newer technology is created? This is a growing, changing world and it advances from one minute to the next. In the past, technology was not nearly as big of a concern. People hand wrote letters instead of using email accounts, gathered together in place of Skype, and got to know each other in person rather than online. I'm not saying that this means technology is a bad thing, I'm just saying that it's a big change. It has its pros and cons. While using this much technology is super efficient and helpful, does it take away from our common life experiences? It's up to you to decide. Everyone has different priorities in life, so there's no right or wrong answer.
        Technology. It's quite a big concept, isn't it? A world of unimaginable openness to new ideas and designs. People are always creating, always thinking up new ideas for the electronic world. It allows our society to keep on advancing and adapting to new ways of doing things. Though it can sometimes frustrate us (like when the internet connection to your computer just won't seem to fix itself), technology really does help us accomplish our daily goals. Without it, the world would not be as complex as it has become. I'm not entirely sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but what I do know is that technology has helped us come a long way - for better or for worse.

The Life of a Taxi Driver - CC Post

        After reading the "Interpreter of Maladies" short story, I couldn't help but wonder what it's like to drive around all day listening to other people's conversations. I mean, really. Taxi drivers, chauffeurs, bus drivers - you name it. The drivers of public and private vehicles must meet some intersting people from time to time. Like in "Interpreter of Maladies" when Mr. Kapasi observes the personalities and behaviors of the family he is escorting, taxi drivers and so on must do the same thing. Sure, they can turn on music and separate themselves from the people behind them with a panel of some sort, but at the same time, who can help but wonder about the lives of the people they drive around? If I was a taxi driver, I would be immensely curious about the people I met. With nothing to do but drive and listen to the conversations taking place behind you, it just makes sense that your mind would wander off trying to imagine the lives of these people given the information you pull from their conversations.
        It's like when you're standing in line next to someone who is talking on their cell phone. You hear little bits and pieces of their conversation and your mind automatically attempts to fit the pieces of the puzzle together and come up with an explanation that fills in the holes of their story. Sometimes, our imaginations run wild. Our brains are hard-wired into trying to resolve any hole-filled scenario. That's why we hate cliff-hangers - we just need to know what happens otherwise we don't feel complete. Therefore, when hearing bits and pieces of a person's conversation, we want to fill in those missing holes.
        Mr. Kapasi did just this within his story. He took in the faces, the words, the actions, and the moods of the family riding in his car, and he made estimated guesses of what their lives encompassed. Although his imagination may have taken things slightly too far, he was intrigued by the family beside him and with the reflection of his many unspoken thoughts, he made calculations of what the family would do in the future. I really did enjoy the story! It was fun to think about being on the sideline of the main conversation, interpreting what you hear from person after person for hours on end.
        I find it quite curious as to how taxi or bus drivers interpret the many things they hear. As passengers, we sometimes get lost in our conversations while the driver could easily be getting lost in their own world of thoughts. Intriguing, isn't it? Ha! Well, that's my random babbling of thoughts for the day! I hope you enjoyed it! :)

AP Lit Post #7: Now Where Have I Seen Her Before? Little Women Vs. March

        Well, it looks like it's time for one final blog post. Having finished reading both Little Women, by Louisa May Alcott, and March by Geraldine Brooks, I can now see two slightly different interpretations of just who the members of the March family really are. The retelling (March) definitely changed my perception of Little Women. While reading the original, I came to know the March women much more. Namely, I associated Mrs. March as a kind, willful spirit - a mother who always knows how to handle tough situations and keep a cool head. In March, however, she is described as a slightly more "expressive" character, who can sometimes be a tad stubborn and on occasion will break into sudden outbursts when annoyed by someone or something. Mr. March himself is the most changed from his original perspective. In Little Women, though he is not mentioned much, he is viewed as a humble, kind father who leads a life full of high spirits, encouragement, and love. In March however, he is construed as a conflicted man who wants desperately to further the anti-slavery cause. In fact, March appears as a rather weakened man - especially after the incident at the cotton plantation - and wants nothing much to do with his family once it gets down to it. In the last scene of the book, he returns to his home in Concord, MA. You would think he would be ecstatic about seeing his family after so long without them, but no - everything about his children's features remind him of the tragedies he has seen happen to others, and he soaks in his own regret and pain during their entire reunion rather than just rejoicing in the fact that his children are still alive.
        Therefore - as you can probably guess - I appreciated Little Women much more than its retelling. While March focuses on the tragedies of slavery and is indeed interesting, it skews the reader's original perception of March and his family. Rather than seeing the sensible father the March daughters all look up to, we see a man who has trouble controlling his own feelings and can't seem to let go of his past. That was his main problem. Yes, March faced great challenges. Yes, he deserves the ability to morn the past. But that does not give him the right to give up on the future. He had a willing, humble family standing right before him, yet all he could do was wallow in the agonies seen from his eyes. Why remain stuck in the past when you have others who rely on you for guidance? Sometimes we need to let go of our wandering emotions just long enough to help those people who still need our help. I also admire Little Women for the wonderful character development within it. The audience got to know all of the girls one on one, discovering that all of them were unique in their own way. While filled with a few tear-filled moments, the novel was a beautiful piece of writing that showed how a poor family of four daughters was able to form ties of friendship and love that would bond them together forever, even in death. It was heartfelt and very easy to get to know the characters.
        March establishes its own story line through the father of the March family. In Little Women, March is absent for about half of the novel and when he returns, he is not mentioned very much. Therefore, through March, we are able to see just what the father of the March family was doing all of that time. Because of my "curious self" and need for explanation in situations like that, I welcomed March into my hands, thrilled to finally discover the secret life of Mr. March. Now that I have actually read it, I can say that it wasn't perfect, but overall, I rather enjoyed this addition to the original story line. I do believe it has literary merit, as it was created in order to fill in the gaping holes that March left from his absence within Little Women. I appreciated the fact that Brooks took a small hole within one classic plot line and expanded her own ideas into it and allowed the new, run-off story to enrich the feel of the original. Throughout the two books, there are objects and scenes that come together on common ground while at the same time, two completely different stories were being woven together into one. Although both have contrasting flows, I accept them as almost one, unified story line. The events within them explain the gaps that one author or the other left to our imaginations. The story of the four daughters somehow intertwines with the story of the father to form a solid plot line, and that's something that is hard for two completely different authors to do with two very different books.

       I really did enjoy these two books throughout the summer. Each of them is unique in its own way, and their stories flowed along with such interesting events that I just had to keep on reading. I really do love those books - the ones that you can't seem to put down. They just prove that reading is truly a gift in this world, and without it, we would probably be bored out of our minds! Little Women and March were a perfect choice for my reading homework, and I'm so glad  that I decided to try them out. Well, that concludes my blog posts for the summer! To be continued once school starts back up! :)

                                   

AP Lit Post #6: March at the Hospital

        Chapter 24 of How to Read Literature Like a Professor is titled, "And Rarely Just Illness...". It encompasses the belief that illnesses brought onto the main character of a piece of literature are never just illnesses. Sure, they may seem like just a curve in the story to make it more interesting, but they bring with them a whole lot more than just a sickness.
        About midway through March, Mr. March ends up with something known as "Saddleback Fever" while staying at the cotton plantation. He becomes gravely ill, but soon recovers. However, the sickness weakened his heart and every once and a while March would have recurrences of the fever. This doesn't have too much of an impact on the story however, until around three quarters through the book, at which point March gets grazed in the side by a bullet and the fever takes hold of him.
        Seeing as March then becomes unconscious for quite a while and the novel is written in first person (my favorite), the author - Geraldine Brooks - switches to the viewpoint of none other than Mrs. March, providing an entirely different viewpoint of the situation. As Foster believed to be true, an illness derived from literature is rarely just an illness. It brings along with it certain attributes that add a great deal of plot development for the story. For one thing, the addition of the famous Mrs. March to the scene. Before this point, the audience only gets to know Mrs. March through the eyes of her husband, never really showing her innermost beliefs and emotions. As soon as the lights dim on Mr. March, a new character, full of spirit and carrying enormous burdens upon her own shoulders appears to enlighten the audience on the other side of the March family. By introducing Mrs. March to a certain character from Mr. March's past, conflicts and uncertainties arise within the boundaries of Blank Hospital.
        The introduction of March's illness exposed the other characters to the troubling encounters he tried so hard to keep hidden from them, opening loose ties that would not be closed up until the very end of the novel. By exposing the main character to this imminent weakness, Brooks steered the plot in a different direction, in a way depositing Mr. March's sickness as the climax of the story, and allowing Mrs. March to lead the way for the falling action.
        The illness itself brought with it a good many things - Hardship, loss, regret for past events, reunions, a change in lifestyles, heartbreak, burdens, more regret (only from a different source), as well as a faint glimmer of hope, hope that cast away the darkness of all the other factors listed. Without this event taking place, March would most likely have stayed away from his home and family for countless years. The illness that followed catastrophe truly changed March's life, as well as the lives of those around him. Although the illness was considered a burden by the March family, it sparked the beginning of a new lifestyle and better days to come, something that March would have avoided had he never been contained in a hospital on the brink of death itself. Sometimes obstacles are put in our way for a reason, which is shown vividly in the works of many pieces of literature. It all depends on what happens next - for better or for worse.

Ap Lit Post #5: Eating With the Marches

        Lately, I have been reading the novel March, by Geraldine Brooks. It is a story written about the father of the March family, who is absent for most of Little Women. I decided a good theme to write about in this post would be the effects of eating with certain people throughout the book. It may seem slightly random for a story about the Civil War, but the way I see it, it's a perfect topic for conversation. Foster named the second chapter of his literature guide book "Nice to Eat With You: Acts of Communion". As he explained, "Breaking bread together is an act of sharing and peace," (Foster 9). Normally, we eat with the people who are close to us, as well the people we are trying to be respectful or neighborly to. It's quite uncommon for two souls who hate each other with a burning passion to share a friendly dinner out of the blue. No, the meals throughout literature really do have their own purposes. Why else would the author go through the trouble of writing those difficult scenes in the first place?
        Within March, there are many scenes involving the consumption of food, but all of them are unique in their own ways. The first meal mentioned in the book takes place in a wealthy slave owner's home. Mr. Clement, the slave owner, treats young March to a fine dinner and allows him to stay there for a few weeks. March came there originally to trade books with this man and was treated with respect, and therefore invited to dine with the master of the house. Mr. Clement did not invite many people to dinner, even his son's manager - who was very familiar with the family. Therefore, it was seen as an honor for March to be treated with such respect. Of course, after a while, there was an incident with March trying to teach a young slave to read, and Mr. Clement soon discovered March's anti-slavery beliefs. Long story short, March was no longer allowed to dine with Mr. Clement. In fact, he was kicked off the premises of the Clement household.
        Later on in the novel, after a few years have passed, March meets a young women named Margaret Day, otherwise known as Marmee. He instantly feels a connection to her and gets to know her kind, humble self, through dinners with her and her brother - who March had known for a while already. Nothing much happens as he does not see her for a while. Then, while he is staying at a family called the Emersons' home, he is delighted as well as anxious to find that the two daughters of the Emerson family are good friends with Miss Day and had invited her to a very formal dinner with a few other respectful guests. At the dinner, Marmee arrives late, but is pleased to find March at the table and instantly acknowledges them. Even before the food is actually set down on the table however, Mr. Emerson and Marmee have a rather loud quarrel and Miss Day stomps away from the house, leaving March dazed and confused from seeing two very different sides of one women all in the course of a dinner party. Later that night, however, they find each other in the woods and talk about all of the problems of slavery and the terrible people who live in the world. If that dinner party had never happened, March and Marmee would most likely have never gotten to know each other - therefore preventing the existence of the four March daughters, erasing the entire story of Little Women. Quite mind boggling, isn't it?
        There are other points throughout the novel with less formal meals. At one point, March goes to a cotton plantation down south to teach the former slaves who work there how to read and write. While they are technically free men and women, their lives are anything but grand. Even on the first day March stays there, he finds a poor old man who has been banished to a hole for feeding one of the farm pigs to his family. March had been given a small ration of bread for his dinner, and he gives it to this man, seeing he is starving. There are other points in the novel as well where either March passes on his own food to others in need, or even when he is in need, and others supply precious food for him. This passing around of food truly shows the meaning of an act of communion - proving that food is shared between those who trust in each other and want to help each other for the sake of life.
        As you can see, there are many different forms of meals and acts of communion. Whether it be between two wealthy, respectful business owners, or two starving, impoverished workers, all of these meals have meaning.

AP Lit Post #4: Under the Umbrella

        As Foster says - "It's More Than Just Rain or Snow". In his 10th chapter, he talks about the impact of weather on the story at hand. As I was reading Little Women, I noticed I great deal of things implied through specific forms of precipitation. For one thing, the snow. At the beginning of the book, the four sisters are all in their teens and living at home with their mother. It is Christmas time, and the family is poor, so the daughters try to scrape together some warm family memories without the use of money. The snow outside brings with it feelings of poverty and struggle, as the girls must bear their burdens and learn how to live with little luxury. In other parts of the novel, however, the snow carries feelings of fun and laughter, as the girls (and their friend Laurie next door) experience new adventures and fun times, regardless of the frozen world outside.
        One of the most vivid representations I found of the impact of weather on the story is in a chapter near the end of the book, called "Under the Umbrella". This scene stands out in my mind as there is never much mention of rain throughout the novel until it comes to pass. There is one little scene where Amy, the youngest daughter, has to run home in the rain with her drawing sketches getting drenched after a rather unpleasant day, but other than that, there is only one scene that deliberately includes rain.
        It begins with the second oldest daughter, Jo, is walking into town to shop (although she may have ulterior motives, as her "friend" the professor has business there). Once she gets into town, it starts pouring, and she realizes with regret that she forgot an umbrella. She is tempted to stop by the building where the professor should be to ask for an umbrella, but she thinks better of it and continues walking, regardless of the water pouring down around her. As she is walking, she finds herself under a taller person's umbrella, and looking up, is shocked to see none other than the professor himself. Now, Jo is the one sister who never thought she would find true love as she had never loved anyone like that before. Her hard outer shell made it nearly impossible for any man to find their way into her heart. However, drenched in the rain and standing in the shelter of the professor's umbrella, she comes to realize that she does have a man who she cares for more than just a friend. As the two of them walk towards her house in the pouring rain, the truth spills out that they love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together. Absorbed in their new-found love, they forget to catch a carriage or bus and simply walk home in the rain, both of them soggy and dirt covered, but happier than ever before.
        As this is the only true "rain scene" within the novel, it truly is significant. Jo was the last sister to find what made her happy, and the last loose end was tied up with the rain. The rain within this scene was definitely more than just rain. It created a background that suggested something important was about to happen, as it did. The rain falling around Jo and the professor's umbrella brought about a change in their characters, unveiling the outer shell around Jo and exposing them both for who they were inside. It shed all of the two characters' doubt and denial, giving them inner strength and hope for the future.
        Imagine that scene if it had taken place on a sunny day. Would it have been nearly as effective? The answer is no. Think about it. If it hadn't been raining, the professor would not have had an umbrella which gave him clearance to walk Jo around as she shopped and headed home. They may not have even run into each other had it not been raining. It also would have created the question of whether or not the professor truly loved her for her. As he professed his love to her in her dirty, soggy clothes and messy hairdo, the audience knows for a fact that their love is true.
        To sum  things up, rain is never just rain and snow is never just snow, it all depends on how you look at it. (:

AP Lit Post #3: The Seasons of Little Women

        I just finished reading Little Women by Louisa May Alcott. I really enjoyed it! The tale of four sisters was both touching and entertaining, a perfect balance of the trial and joys one faces throughout life. The story of Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy - as well as everyone in between - is one I am pleased to say I shall never forget.

        Thomas Foster dedicates the 20th chapter in his book to the meaning and impact of specific seasons. One of the most significant connections I made between Foster's words and Alcott's was just that - the idea of seasons playing a great role in the story. The entire plot of Little Women ties in with the changes throughout time, and what is a great way to show the shifting of that time? The passing of different seasons. They also connect events that take place in the book to specific emotions. As Foster wrote, "Happiness and dissatisfaction have their seasons..., Summer is passion and love; winter, anger and hatred" (Foster 94). At one point in the story, Beth, the more feeble sister who is beloved by all, catches scarlet fever. She gets incredibly sick, and ends up coming to the brink of death. This happens in the heart of winter. By already suggesting struggle and poverty, coldness and fear in the freezing weather, Alcott creates an ominous feel to that part of the book, adding greatly to the overall effect of Beth's illness on the audience.
         It works both ways. At the end of the novel, the characters all come together for "Harvest Time" to pick fruit within an apple orchard. The families they have built up and the friendships they have deepened come together in order to rejoice for lives well-lived. There is laughter, smiles, music, and even tears of joy throughout the reunion. Foster explains, "So harvest, and not only of apples, is one element of autumn. When our writers speak of harvests, we know it can refer not only to agricultural but also to personal harvests, the results of our endeavors, whether over the course of a growing season or a life" (Foster 95). Therefore, summer and autumn are used to boost the feeling of happiness and joy for the characters, just as spring is a time of renewal. Throughout the book, many events that spark change take place during spring, directly after the cold snows of winter melt away, paving a way for growth and new opportunities. And as you can see, all four seasons have a certain impact on the story. Winter - death, worry, sadness, fear. Spring - renewal, change. Summer - happiness, joy. Autumn - the harvest, rejoicing over life.
        Once one understands the impact of seasons on a plot line, it's easier to understand the overall effect an author intends to make in a work of literature. Most events written into novels were put there for a reason, in a certain spot of time that would make the point the most effective. Writing is perplexing that way, don't you think? :)

"If It's Square, It's a Sonnet" - Do Not Stand at my Grave and Weep - AP Lit Post #2

In all honesty, I've never been a big fan of sonnets. Many of them seem to be written in roundabout ways and my brain just can't handle decoding them. So, obviously, this was a pretty difficult assignment for me. However, I did find one sonnet that caught my attention. It's called "Do Not Stand at my Grave and Weep". So, here it is!

Do Not Stand at my Grave and Weep

by Mary Elizabeth Frye

Do not stand at my grave and weep:

I am not there; I do not sleep.

I am a thousand winds that blow,

I am the diamond glints on snow,

I am the sun on ripened grain,

I am the gentle autumn rain.

When you awaken in the morning’s hush

I am the swift uplifting rush

Of quiet birds in circling flight.

I am the soft starshine at night.

Do not stand at my grave and cry:

I am not there; I did not die.

        What pulled me into this sonnet was the beautiful flow of phrase upon phrase, as well as the overall message of the poem. Personally, I haven't experienced many deaths in my life. I did lose my grandparents a while back, but two of them had already passed away before I was even born, and the other two both suffered from altzheimers disease and dementia so I never really got to know them. So I never really cried at their funerals or graves. It would be a lot different though if I had gotten to know them better. Take my pets. I've had time to get to know them my entire life, and I have experienced those deaths - of which I wept, a lot. In fact, I cry my eyes out whenever I lose a pet that is close to me. Therefore, I can't even imagine what it would be like to lose a human being who was that close to me - like a family member or a friend. I'm guessing that my reaction would include bawling my eyes out. It's something that I don't even want to think about. Therefore, when I read this sonnet, I was moved. The words in this poem cry out in vain, begging the reader to not cry when they lose someone precious, but look at all of the accomplishments they fulfilled throughout their life. Although their life has ended, their spirit has lived on in the memories of those they touched. Every person you meet leaves a mark on you, and your mark is left on them in return - it's just how life works. We change each other. Part of what makes us who we are is the people around us. If one of them suddenly disappeared, we would feel a hole in our life, like a piece of us was missing. Still, their imprint on our own lives remains with us, and they are never forgotten. I believe this sonnet was trying to convey that truth - that we should be celebrating a life, not simply mourning a loss. 

        I also liked the structure of this sonnet. It had a very distinct rhythm that kept the words moving in a cascading pattern. By having every two phrases rhyme with each other, Frye stitched together a stream of metaphors for one who has passed away. The fist half of the sonnet described in detail just who the person in question is and what they have become in a very metaphoric way. The second half continues on with that description and leads into a quiet transition that takes the reader to the final statement - showing them that the victim is dead and gone, but their spirit is still shining strong. I really loved the flow of the sonnet itself - the imagery mixed with the powerful rhythm gave off a feeling of strength, as well as joy, rather than allowing sorrow to creep into the words. The powerful descriptions within the poem shaped it into a beautiful piece of work with a reflective message to hold it all together. So there you have it - my chosen sonnet - "Do Not Stand at my Grave and Weep".

Note: I realize that I wrote this post with the belief that the poem above had 14 lines. As it turns out, it only has 12, and therefore is not a true sonnet, but has other qualities that a true sonnet would have. Namely, as I said before, the poem has two parts - both take up about six lines ("The first half of the sonnet described in detail just who the person in question is and what they have become in a very metaphoric way. The second half continues on with that description and leads into a quiet transition that takes the reader to the final statement"). Also, as  Foster explained how most sonnets are written in iambic pentameter, all of the lines in "Do Not Stand at my Grave and Weep" are fairly close to ten syllables. Not to mention, the rhyming pattern is very noticeable. Foster also explains that not all sonnets will follow the exact same structure - it all depends on the type of sonnet. :)

My Favorite Things - AP Literature Post #1

        Let me just say, deciding what my favorite books are is one of the hardest tasks anyone could ask me to perform. I love to read. In all honesty, sometimes all I want to do is forget about everything going on in the world, sit on a couch and read all day long. There are so many good books out there, that it's truly difficult picking a small group of favorites. After a LOT of thought, however, I finally came up with a pretty decent list of my very top choices. So, here are my top ten favorite books of all-time:

1. The Entire Percy Jackson & The Olympians Series (Sorry - I couldn't choose just one)
2. Heir to Sevenwaters
3. Divergent
4. The Mark of Athena
5. Flame of Sevenwaters
6. Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows
7. The Hunger Games
8. Valley of Fear
9. Ender's Game
10. Peter and the Starcatchers

        This list was so hard to create. I had to leave so many amazing books off the list to keep it a decent size. As you can see, I am a fantasy person. I love adventure stories and all of that stuff. Other genres interest me as well, but fantasy is my all-time favorite. I am very intrigued by anything considered creative writing - poetry, short stories, fantasy novels - I love to read them. Now to explain a bit about why I chose these specific books over the others. For one thing, I loved all of their plots. All of them had a good base plot line - one that fit and made sense with the context. Some of them had surprises along the way as well that I wasn't expecting at all. Whether those surprises were good or utterly tragic (the Hunger Games trilogy comes to mind...), they aided the plot lines along the way and added a whole new element to the story in question.    

         Along with the amazing plots, these books have amazing character development within them. The characters created by the authors all have distinct personalities and habits, and they truly keep the audience reading. From a girl leaving her home faction just trying to find her place in society to an extremely intelligent little boy who carries the weight of the world on his shoulders, the characters all have true bravery and a good knack for distinguishing the difference between right and wrong. In all of these books, the main characters are pushed into the worst situations imaginable, yet they always fight for what they believe in, even if it means giving up something important along the way.
        I also appreciate the way all of them are written. All of their authors' writing styles appealed to me, which I find hard in some other types of books. The writing flowed smoothly and guided the stories to their full potentials. I hate it when I am reading an amazing book but the writing style is terrible. That can make the story seem too slow or just plain confusing.
        While AP Lang taught me the value in works of nonfiction (which I had not opened up to until last year), I still can't help but return to the fiction that I have come to love so much. I guess you could call it my "comfort genre". It allows me to take a break from actual worldly problems and analyzing the text (not that that's a bad thing) and just sit down, relax, and enjoy what I am reading, getting lost in the pages of a priceless piece of fiction.
         Well, I guess that's it for my rant about fantasy books. AP Language was very interesting and I am glad that it taught me to think in a different way. I now look forward to AP Literature and the books we will read within this coming school year. I can't wait to see what we will learn next! :)

Future AP Lang Advice (TA Post)

        AP Lang is not impossible, but there are things I would have done differently if I could retake the class. I wish that I could go back in time to the fall and give myself some advice that would help me a whole lot in the future, but I can't. So this is for the future AP Lang students who will be able to benefit from my advice.
        First off: Vocabulary. Do not, under any circumstances, take AP Lang vocab lightly. Sure, previous english classes had ten words a week every week that you learned and took a small quiz on. By the end of the year, you usually forgot some, if not most of them. Well, in AP Lang, vocab is important. Without it, how would you know how to analyze the rhetorical devices in a piece of writing or apply those devices to your own writing? Therefore, if I could go back, I would have done something to record every new word or device that we learned in order to keep them all in an organized, easy-to-follow list that could take me through the year easily.
       Secondly: Stay on task. If for one moment you don't know what is going on, ask another student or teacher. If you don't learn the basics of the rhetorical thinking process, it will be hard to get back into the flow of things. Keep up with the reading homework and NEVER put it off until the last moment. For all you know, two chapters that you are assigned to read could end up taking hours upon hours to read (especially if you're a slow reader like myself).
        Thirdly: Break old habits. This is a tough one for me. Once I'm used to writing in a certain way, it's hard for me to switch to another form of writing. However, in AP Lang, you have to let go of some of the things that were pounded into your minds for years (such as 5-paragraph essay formatting) and open up a path for new, rhetorical ideas and strategies to flow into your writing. Even though it may take some time, I promise that it is, indeed possible to break some of the worst writing habits with time.
        AP Lang truly guides you to think in a different way. When I first heard this, I was pretty confused at what it meant. Now that I have taken a year of the class, I finally understand. Once you take this course, you start to analyze writing in a way that you didn't really do before. It's different, but very helpful in forming effective statements and building on them to form solid arguments that truly call on your reader's attention. Well, good luck, future AP Lang students! I hope this post is somewhat helpful to your life! (:

Exam Preparation (TA Post)

        Exams are quite a climax for the year. All of our studying and homework struggles lead up to one ending point that determines everything for the year. I have to say, I have never been good at studying for hours on end. I am someone who gets distracted the moment I take my eyes off of the paper. The most studying I have ever done in an exam was in 9th grade in World History. I was so nervous for the exam (I'll admit, history is NOT my best subject) that I read the entire contents of my history folder. It literally took me more than three hours. The good news is, I got almost a perfect score on the exam! Other than that, however, I haven't really downright studied for hours on end. In reality, I adjust my study habits to the situation. In English before AP Lang, it was hard to study because it was mainly based off of books, so I would just study some vocabulary. In choir, my exam involves singing a solo, so I just practice my solo a few times and work on memorization. Simple as that! There are a few classes that I study more for, but usually I will only study the things that I am really struggling with in order to use my studying time wisely.
       Other than studying, I try to take it easy the week of exams. This is sometimes challenging, due to extracurricular activities like Dutch Dance and memorizing songs for certain choirs, but I somehow manage to keep a level head. This may be because I sing a LOT and music really relaxes me. It's all about finding that one thing that truly eases your mind into a peaceful state. Therefore, what prepares me best for hard tests is calming my nerves through soothing music that I sing or play on piano in the comfort of my home. After that, I'm all ready for exams.
        As you can see, it's hard for me to pinpoint an exact way to prepare for exams. It really varies for different people. Some people study for days, others just take things easy for a while. There is no right or wrong way. It's all a matter of what works for you, and how you will accomplish that unique form of exam preparation. (:

Why Netflix is Amazing (CM)

        I'm sure most of you have heard about Netflix, the online site where people can watch TV after paying for a membership. I found out about Netflix around a year ago when my brother bought a membership. After a while, I realized just how amazing Netflix was. You see, I'm not much of a TV watcher. I'd rather sit down and watch a nice movie, or watch certain series' that catch my eye. In my situation, I feel like it would make life so much simpler to just stop paying for the TV network at my house and switch completely to Netflix. I only watch about three channels, so why pay for thousands that I will never care to even look at? Netflix has so many advantages. While a TV company may charge $80 per month, Netflix is currently $7.99 a month. I would rather not pay so much money for channels I may never watch. Not to mention, while TV plays shows at certain times and you have to navigate around commercials every ten minutes, Netflix allows people to watch anything straight through whenever they want. Also, rather than waiting for the right episodes to play, Netflix organizes its TV shows in chronological order, making it easy to simply go through the series in order and without rewatching things you have already seen. Some people may argue that TV is essential because of the news, which you can't really watch on Netflix, but it is easy to simply find a news channel online. Most news companies offer live streaming and frequent updates on current events.
         I love Netflix because you can use it anytime of any day. My family and I used to have Doctor Who marathons when everyone was home (which doesn't happen very often). This would have been difficult with just normal TV because we would have had to record a LOT of episodes, not to mention we don't even have the channel. Well, I also love to watch movies with my family, and Netflix gives us a variety of movies. I think the reason Netflix is better than television sets is that it is easy to use, full of variety for everyone, and simple. You find a show you want and press play. On TVs, you have to find the right channel at the right time, or record something ahead of time, still filled with commercials.
        I would not say that TV should be replaced by Netflix, but that many people (including me) benefit more from something like that rather than normal TV. Well, I'm done rambling on about Netflix now. I hope you enjoyed my thoughts!

Stories of Nature (CC Post)

        As soon as we started reading Into The Wild, I was hooked. The idea of someone abandoning everything they have in life to live out in nature alone and without many supplies is very extraordinary to me. As I read, I keep thinking about how hard it would be to just let go of everything you know in life. Imagine leaving your family and friends and not telling them what you are going to do, choosing to live secluded from the rest of the world. It would be nearly impossible to get even that far. So, when I think about what McCandless did, I am impressed at his will to survive out in the wild. I'm not sure I would go so far as saying that it was a good idea, but it is an amazing feat.
        While I read about McCandless's craving for nature, I can't help thinking about A Walk in the Woods, which I read last summer. It was a story about a man (Bill Bryson) who wanted to hike the Appalachian Trail, so he entered The Smoky Mountains National Park and tried to fulfill his goal. However, although he hiked for his love of nature, his story was very different than McCandless's. While McCandless abandoned everything - his family, his education, his life - Bryson was better prepared. He still could not connect with his family on the trail, but at least they knew where he was, what he was doing, and that he loved them. Also, he was careful to carry provisions for the hike on his back, including food, a sleeping bag, and strong hiking equipment. He also was following an actual path, rather than deciding to simply enter the wild with no solid plans.
        Although their stories have their differences, I can't help relating Bryson to McCandless. They both decided to take a break from their everyday lives and spend some hardcore time in nature. Both were gone for months on end, and neither regretted the overall experience. Acting on a love for nature, they followed a path in life that would strengthen their spirits and give them an understanding for the amazing world around us that is often forgotten. Through inner strength and the endurance needed to survive out in nature, both Bryson and McCandless followed their instincts to take an unforgettable hike through the wild of the world outside.

The Seasons (Free Write)

        I love Michigan. It's such a wonderful state and I feel like we tend to take it for granted a lot. One of my favorite things about it is that we get all four seasons. We get the freshness of spring, the traditions of summer, the beauty of fall, and my favorite, winter. Okay, so I admit it, I'm one of those few people who adores snow and absolutely loves the winter. This is funny even to me, seeing as I'm always cold, but I honestly love the winter. It just brings out the happiness in me. Anyways, I love having all four seasons. I know that a lot of people travel down south for the winter, but I just don't see the point. Yeah, they escape the cold weather, but look at what they're missing! Winter is such a beautiful season. I love watching the snow as it piles up outside and glistens in the sunlight of the day. Of course, I wouldn't want to live with winter all year round. I don't see how the people who live far up north survive. I would freeze without the comforting thoughts of warmer seasons just around the corner. The change from season to season really is something. A blossoming spring develops into a crisp summer, and then the leaves change color, and snow starts to fall. I would have to say that my favorite season change is, without a doubt, winter to spring. This is because we have already adjusted to the icy weather of the winter months, so even though 50 degrees would feel cold in the fall, in the spring it feels like a heatwave has washed over us! Therefore, I rest my case. Michigan is awesome, and we are so lucky to live here. One of my sisters lives down in Virginia, and they get hardly any snow most years. In fact, once when I was visiting her at Christmas time, her school got a snow day in the anticipation of snow. I woke up the next day expecting to see lot's of snow outside, like when we get snow days up north. Well, there was no snow. In fact, it didn't even start snowing until after lunch time. Compare that to our recent week of snowdays due to our massive amounts of snow currently occupying the town. I really do love the snow. I know a lot of people hate it, but there's something about it that just makes me smile. The same thing goes for falling leaves, shades of so many colors drifting through the air and piling up on the ground. This is also true for blossoming flowers and plant growing seasons. Every season has unique traits that make it special in its own way. Without one of the seasons, something would be missing from my life. With them, I feel so complete. I really don't know how I could live without one. It would be so different. People who live without winter and those who live without summer really are tough! I would miss the balance of the four seasons way too much. I'm so glad we live in such a beautiful state. Michigan truly has its perks! (:

The Dairy Dilemma... (Convince Me Post)

       

        I really don't like milk. I never have, and most likely never will. I remember when I was little I would drink maybe a glass or two weekly. Today, I can't even remember the last time I drank it! Okay, I do have my reasons though. First off, I'm slightly lactose intolerant, so if I don't take my lactose intolerance medication before drinking milk, I get terrible stomach aches. That may have something to do with it. I know that numerous people share this trait with me. And it's not fun. Even if I take medicine before eating dairy products, my stomach still hurts after eating something as simple as a bowl of ice cream or macaroni and cheese. But mainly, I honestly just don't like it. To me at least, milk tastes strange, makes my stomach hurt, and causes me to cringe every time I drink it.
        Now some of you milk-drinkers out there are probably mad that I'm basing this entirely off of my own personal opinion. However, it turns out that I am not alone in my quest to not drink milk. Many professionals have stated that drinking milk past childhood is in fact not as good for you as they once thought. First off, cow-milk, what we normally drink, was made especially for baby calves and not for humans. Every species has its own, unique version of milk, and they drink milk from their own kind. So it seems a bit odd that we drink the milk of other animals. Besides, baby mammals like calves only drink milk when they are young. Then they stop. Humans, on the other hand, drink milk all throughout their lives, contradicting the natural pattern that mammals follow. Also, milk ironically depletes the calcium from your bones. This goes against everything we have known about milk. I grew up hearing that I should drink a glass of milk every day (which I did not do) so that I would stay healthy and build up strong bones. Now, that entire idea is being questioned. Should we really be drinking milk throughout our entire lives?
        Whether you don't drink milk for personal reasons or for health reasons, there are always other ways to get calcium into your diet. Exhibit A: Almond Milk. This is one of my greatest discoveries. The world outside of dairy milk. If you find a good brand of soy milk or almond milk, it is a great substitute for cow-milk. Personally, I love Silk Almond Milk. After growing up with hating regular milk, I was surprised to find a drink like milk that actually tasted good. Not to mention the fact that almond milk can have more nutrients in it than regular milk. When I first started drinking Silk Milk, I realized that there was a whole 50% more calcium in it than regular milk. It also tastes wonderful in cereal and in cooking experiments like macaroni and cheese! Another way to get calcium into your diet without milk is by consuming other forms of dairy more. There's yogurt, cheese, and so much more.
        This concludes my rant about milk. I never thought I would end up writing about such a random topic, but it happened. Now I can officially say that I have written a blog post about how terrible milk is. I understand that some of you may feel differently, but now you have a look into the other side of this dairy drink. Thank you for listening! (:

Why Child Stars Go Crazy... (IR)

        Have you ever noticed the trend of child actors that grow up to be troubled people? So many actors and actresses that go into TV careers become corrupt and do incredibly foolish things. Many of the young stars we come to know and love turn out so different. Miley Cyrus, Amanda Bynes, and so many more celebrities that started acting when they were young have made some very bad decisions. The actress I always think about is Lindsay Lohan. She was one of my two favorite child actors. I loved her role in The Parent Trap and it became one of my favorite movies. When she grew up, the choices she made that messed up her life made me feel sorry for her. I really do hate how almost all children with acting careers go bad. So, I got to thinking, why is it that so many child stars go crazy in the first place? There has got to be a reason.
        I did some research and found an article written by my other favorite child actress, Mara Wilson. She is proof that not all child actors decide to make bad choices. For those of you who don't know her, Mara Wilson started as a child actress (I know her best for her starring role in Matilda) and once she started growing up, she left hollywood. The article she wrote was titled, "7 Reasons Child Stars Go Crazy (An Insider's Perspective)". She made a lot of good points and it was very interesting to read about.
        For Instance, one of the things she wrote about was the parents of the child who is acting. This is something I have wondered about as well. Sometimes it's not the actor's fault, but the parents. Mara explained that when she was little and she decided to start acting, her parents tried their best to change her mind. They were very protective of her, and this probably saved her from getting too pulled into the acting life. Many child stars go into acting because their parents want them to, and it's not the choice of the child themself. Then when they turn 18 and are declared an adult, they can make decisions for themselves rather than for their parents, and they can make bad mistakes.
        Also, being in an acting career means that throughout your entire life, people will be just waiting for you to make a mistake, observing your every flaw. That's enough to drive anyone crazy. Child actors who continue acting until they are adults never have a chance to go through a rebellious stage in their life. Almost all teenagers have a point in their life when they question things and make mistakes, but then learn from those mistakes and become a much better person. Well, would you want to rebel like that with a million eyes watching your every move? I didn't think so. Therefore, young actors miss out on that part of life, so they can't help rebelling at a later point in their lives, which causes mass consequences.
        Another point Mara brushed on was the truth that child actors get used to the attention and then they lose it all. By growing up in such an environment as acting, many children get spoiled. They get used to so many people paying attention to them and they love it, so they keep on acting and forget about the reason they were acting in the first place. They forget about their love of acting and focus in on the people who want them to act. And eventually, those people lose interest in them. And then they don't know what to do with their lives. They don't know if they should take up a different career or if acting is all they really know how to do. So, many young actors do things that they will later regret in a state of confusion. Mara gives the advice that all child actors should get out of the business as soon as possible to avoid corruption.
        The #1 reason that child stars go crazy, in Mara's opinion, is that they can't escape it. She only acted when she was a little girl and sees it as an old hobby, but people still recognize her as the girl who was in Mrs. Doubtfire or as the girl who played Matilda. She has a different life, but many people can't seem to grasp that. Once a child gets into the acting life, it is incredibly hard to leave. Imagine if Miley Cyrus had suddenly decided to quit acting in the middle of filming Hannah Montana episodes. A lot of young girls would be furious and the producers would not be happy. Young actors also have to put into account the feelings of their fans. Once you are involved in acting, it's nearly impossible to escape.
        There are many more reasons as to why so many young actors do what they do. I only elaborated on a few of the reasons. There are many factors to be taken into account with the question of why child stars go crazy. I guess what gets me is the number of them that make huge mistakes. If it were only a few actors who messed up, it wouldn't be nearly as big of a problem. But with the fact that almost every single one of the child actors I grew up with has made terrible life decisions, I can say that this is definitely a problem. Of course, some young actors are able to escape the grasp of the acting life. Some are able to heal from their mistakes and turn their lives around. Others are able to escape it all completely, just like Mara. However, the past will always be there. Even if child actors do stop acting, people remember them. That can be a good thing, but it can also be bad.

This is a picture of young Mara Wilson next to the Mara Wilson of today.

Here is the link to her article:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-reasons-child-stars-go-crazy-an-insiders-perspective/

Amazingly Awesome Alliterations! (Rhetorical Device Post)

        If I could pick my favorite rhetorical device, it would be alliterations. The idea of recurring consonant sounds have always intrigued me. I think that the reason I love them so much is because they are just so much fun! As someone who loves acting, I have always appreciated the wording of things, especially in scripts for plays or musicals. For example, in "The Wizard of Oz", I always smile when I hear "The Wicked Witch of the West". I love alliterations because they make everything so much fun to say. They open a whole world of tongue-twisters and nursery rhymes that have that special ring to them. One of my favorites is a tongue-twister I heard in choir class in middle school: "Two toads, totally tired, trying to trot to Tilbury". Now, imagine singing that while trying to get the words exactly right. It was one of the songs we used in our warm-ups and it was a vocal exercise that helped with diction - the ability to enunciate all of the words in an effective way. Alliteration is an extremely useful rhetorical device, and I feel as though we use it all the time but never really notice. Alliterations allow sentences and phrases to flow with a distinct rhythm. They make the words pop out more in a way that sticks to your mind. This is another reason that I love alliterations. They are so easy to memorize in literature because they stand out so much. Phrases with similar consonant sounding and emphasized wording tend to be much easier to remember than common, everyday speech.

        This picture is a very hard-core example of alliteration. Almost every word starts with "P" and the vowel sounds "ee", "eh", and "ah" are combined and mixed up into a variety of phrases that all have to do with one general idea. This tongue twister is tricky to say very fast. There are all sorts of alliterations. Some are extremely rhythmic and obvious, like the one above, while others are more suttle and still have similar consonant sounds, but are much harder to identify.
        Alliterations add a very bright touch to the English language and without them, literature would be much more dull. Their rhythmic sounds and strategic wording add a spark of creativity to common speech. I may have chosen to write about them because I love to speak them in plays and sing them in choir, but I am pretty sure that I am not alone when I say that alliterations are pretty awesome. They make writing and speaking incredibly enjoyable and therefore, I can say with confidence that they are my favorite rhetorical device.

                                To sum things up, all alliterations are amazing and awesome!

The Draft (Class Connection Blog Post)

        In class we recently finished reading The Things They Carried. I have to say, I have not read many books about war before, so this was a very interesting concept for me. I've never had to deal with war in my life. I know that my grandfathers both served in WWII when they were alive, but no one ever really talked much about their experiences. I honestly don't even know much about the wars that have taken place throughout my own lifetime. War just seems so far away that I tend to put it out of my mind. So, after reading this book, I started thinking about how lucky my generation is. We never had to experience drafting. When the draft was going on in the story, I began to wonder how the new generations would handle the idea of drafting - taking men from all over the place and taking them to serve in a war. I'm not saying that drafting is wrong - sometimes hard times call for drastic measures. But I have two older brothers, both between the ages of 18 and 25, and the idea of them being suddenly pulled into extremely dangerous situations honestly terrifies me. I don't know what I would do. Family is an essential part of life, and I absolutely hate seeing them pulled apart. Therefore, the idea of sons and brothers being pulled into a war and not knowing if they will ever come back gives me a hollow feeling inside. I hope that our country doesn't break into a bad enough war that drafting is required, but the world is unpredictable and we never know what may happen. Well, I hope that we don't have to experience drafting anytime soon. I've never been very interested in the idea of war, so The Things They Carried got me curious about things like the draft. Thanks for listening to my wandering thoughts! (: