Netflix Suggestions by MacDuff...
Sunday, December 7, 2014
Life is but a Netflix Queue created by an idiot...
Netflix Suggestions by MacDuff...
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Witch-slapped: Macbeth's fall from grace
For this blog post, I am responding to prompt number 4. "How do the values of manhood differ in modern times? What do you think it takes to be a good man? Explain how your views are like or unlike those in the play, using examples from the text."
I think that the modern day values for being a man are not that different than the ones from Shakespeare's era. Men are expected to be strong, successful, wealthy, handsome, polite, intelligent, charismatic, and kind. In Shakespeare's day, men were expected to take care of everything and to protect their woman and provide for her. These ideals are not so different from nowadays, but now women want to be able to choose if they want it. There are obviously differences in circumstances between men of today and the men of Macbeth, but there is a similar expected code to guide men's actions.
I think to be a good man, you just have to treat people well. I am a Meninist, I don't believe that there should be a difference in the world as to what makes a good man different from a good woman. Women are given many privileges that men are denied, and I think that if you want to set a good example in life, no one should be given unfair special treatment. There may be select cases where someone deserves special treatment but in the majority of situations everyone should be regarded the same.
My views are dissimilar to those from Macbeth, mainly because my life experiences and opportunities are wildly different from any of those in Macbeth. Lady Macbeth needing her husband to kill the king because she was a woman is less of an issue nowadays than in Shakespeare's period. In current times, Lady Macbeth would also not be denied opportunities due to her gender as she was in Macbeth. Equality was almost non existent in the time when the play was set, and this is shown by the main female character simply being a passive force for the most part, having her husband do actions while she enjoys the benefits. Lady Macbeth is rarely required to take part in the actual action, instead she must keep Macbeth from breaking under the pressure. I think that if someone wants something in life, then they should be the one to go out and get what they want, not convince someone else to do it for them because "that is the way it is supposed to work".
I think that the modern day values for being a man are not that different than the ones from Shakespeare's era. Men are expected to be strong, successful, wealthy, handsome, polite, intelligent, charismatic, and kind. In Shakespeare's day, men were expected to take care of everything and to protect their woman and provide for her. These ideals are not so different from nowadays, but now women want to be able to choose if they want it. There are obviously differences in circumstances between men of today and the men of Macbeth, but there is a similar expected code to guide men's actions.
I think to be a good man, you just have to treat people well. I am a Meninist, I don't believe that there should be a difference in the world as to what makes a good man different from a good woman. Women are given many privileges that men are denied, and I think that if you want to set a good example in life, no one should be given unfair special treatment. There may be select cases where someone deserves special treatment but in the majority of situations everyone should be regarded the same.
My views are dissimilar to those from Macbeth, mainly because my life experiences and opportunities are wildly different from any of those in Macbeth. Lady Macbeth needing her husband to kill the king because she was a woman is less of an issue nowadays than in Shakespeare's period. In current times, Lady Macbeth would also not be denied opportunities due to her gender as she was in Macbeth. Equality was almost non existent in the time when the play was set, and this is shown by the main female character simply being a passive force for the most part, having her husband do actions while she enjoys the benefits. Lady Macbeth is rarely required to take part in the actual action, instead she must keep Macbeth from breaking under the pressure. I think that if someone wants something in life, then they should be the one to go out and get what they want, not convince someone else to do it for them because "that is the way it is supposed to work".
Sunday, November 2, 2014
#IBMakingart
Art Museum Reflection
This piece is called the "Temple of One Thousand Bells" by Laura Belém. The bells themselves are made from hand-blown glass by local artisans and hung on nylon strings. They were hung from the ceiling above a bench and had a surround sound system with an audio piece accompany the bells. The surround sound system played a story told about a temple filled with 1,000 bells. The story was inter cut with sounds of the ocean and calming music. This is the second time the artist created a piece like this, the first being at the Liverpool Biennial in 2010. The piece was made in Raleigh by many local artists who hand blew each individual bell. Laura Belém created the audio piece and arranged the bells in the museum.
The initial focus of this piece is the bells that are hanging from the ceiling, which is what attracts the attention of people from a distance, but the main focus of the piece is the audio story that accompanied the bells. The story was about an island that sank into the sea, and on the island was a temple with one thousand bells. Then a sailor went in search of the island to try and hear the bells from deep in the ocean. The story is about loss, and focusing oneself to gain clarity. The whole focus of the art piece is on serenity and peace, and that is something that really resonates with me.
The art is organized to be centered above a bench that visitors can sit on. The whole piece is very bright and has lots of light shining through it which creates a happier feeling in the viewer. The accompanying audio piece is played through surround sound speakers on each side of the bells. Since the story told through the speakers is interspersed with peaceful music and the sound of waves, the entire work has a calming vibe on the audience.
The purpose of this piece of artwork is to show people inevitability. The island was doomed to sink into the sea, and there was nothing that anyone could do to save it. This is applicable to a lot of things in life that no one has control over, and people need to recognize that there are some things out of their control. At the same time, the piece has a reassuring effect on the audience due to the light, soft music and general white coloring of the art. The piece also has an encouraging effect on the viewer because of the sailor's persistence in attempting to hear the music of the one thousand bells from below the ocean. This makes the audience believe that they are able to overcome their problems if they work hard, and this gives the audience hope that their life will be successful.
Overall, I quite enjoyed the entire CAM exhibit. I did not understand a lot of the art that I observed, but I liked most of the pieces. I particularly enjoyed the Temple of One Thousand Bells, the Atlas that had been rubbed with sandpaper, the wall that had been ripped apart, and the video screen that reacted when someone moved in front of it. The feeling of the entire exhibit seemed to be that of melancholy, and regret for lost times. Several of the pieces dealt with American prejudices, such as homosexuality or immigration. I would like to go on more field trips like this one.
Sunday, October 19, 2014
Sunday, October 5, 2014
Can't Bury These Tales
Jane Eyre Question 4
What does Mr. Brocklehurst’s analogy between the ill-prepared breakfast and the “sufferings of the primitive Christians…the torments of martyrs…the exhortations of our blessed Lord Himself” reveal about his character? How does this attitude contrast with that of Miss Temple to reveal the author’s social message?
Based on the limited views or interactions that I have had with Mr. Brocklehurst in this reading, he already seems like a hypocritical, self centered jerk, who is simply using the school as a way to seem like a better person and make money. His analogy concerning the breakfast versus the trials and tribulations of early Christians shows Mr. Brocklehurst as a smooth talking sleaze bag, since he is using religion as a way to justify his own ends. He tries to claim that forcing children to skip breakfast because the cook messed it up is comparable to being crucified for refusing to stop preaching what you believe in. This is absolutely wrong and immediately makes me dislike Mr. Brocklehurst as a person. It does not help my opinion of him when his lady friends arrive, all extravagantly dressed and very fashionable for the time period. I inferred that Mr. Brocklehurst was providing the clothes for these women, which makes him the ultimate hypocrite for preaching to Miss Temple about humility and sobriety. It also shows that he has plenty of money, more than enough to provide decent clothes or food to the children at the school so that they don't die, as opposed to fake hair curls for his wife so she can look fancy.
Mr. Brocklehurst puts on a false front of piety and charity, but in the end all he really cares about is himself. Miss Temple on the other hand, is strict but fair in the passage. She does not baby or pamper the students at the school, but at the same time she is not unfairly cruel to them either. This creates an interesting contrast in the passage. At first glance, Mr. Brocklehurst seems to be the kinder of the two, the one that you would rather be in charge of the school, but when you actually look deeper, Miss Temple is far preferable to Mr. Brocklehurst. This shows the author's message that it is better to be honest and strict, than to pretend to be kind, or to only be kind to certain people. If money is your goal, and it is valued more than your morals, you will end up as a very evil and unliked person.
What does Mr. Brocklehurst’s analogy between the ill-prepared breakfast and the “sufferings of the primitive Christians…the torments of martyrs…the exhortations of our blessed Lord Himself” reveal about his character? How does this attitude contrast with that of Miss Temple to reveal the author’s social message?
Based on the limited views or interactions that I have had with Mr. Brocklehurst in this reading, he already seems like a hypocritical, self centered jerk, who is simply using the school as a way to seem like a better person and make money. His analogy concerning the breakfast versus the trials and tribulations of early Christians shows Mr. Brocklehurst as a smooth talking sleaze bag, since he is using religion as a way to justify his own ends. He tries to claim that forcing children to skip breakfast because the cook messed it up is comparable to being crucified for refusing to stop preaching what you believe in. This is absolutely wrong and immediately makes me dislike Mr. Brocklehurst as a person. It does not help my opinion of him when his lady friends arrive, all extravagantly dressed and very fashionable for the time period. I inferred that Mr. Brocklehurst was providing the clothes for these women, which makes him the ultimate hypocrite for preaching to Miss Temple about humility and sobriety. It also shows that he has plenty of money, more than enough to provide decent clothes or food to the children at the school so that they don't die, as opposed to fake hair curls for his wife so she can look fancy.
Mr. Brocklehurst puts on a false front of piety and charity, but in the end all he really cares about is himself. Miss Temple on the other hand, is strict but fair in the passage. She does not baby or pamper the students at the school, but at the same time she is not unfairly cruel to them either. This creates an interesting contrast in the passage. At first glance, Mr. Brocklehurst seems to be the kinder of the two, the one that you would rather be in charge of the school, but when you actually look deeper, Miss Temple is far preferable to Mr. Brocklehurst. This shows the author's message that it is better to be honest and strict, than to pretend to be kind, or to only be kind to certain people. If money is your goal, and it is valued more than your morals, you will end up as a very evil and unliked person.
Sunday, September 21, 2014
What's in a Name?
Blog Post 2
I like my name. Steven is a Greek name, that derives from the word for crown. It is a versatile name, I can be called Steve for a change if I wish. One of the things that I do not like about my name is that there are various spellings for it. I do not like that Stephen is another way to spell my name, because it messes people up and I always have to clarify. I have a similar problem with my last name as well. Most people want to spell my last name as Costello, instead of Kostello, which makes identification difficult. Whenever I am verifying my registration for something with a person I have to end up spelling out my first and last name, even though neither of them are very complicated. Even Blogger doesn't recognize Kostello as a word, but suggests Costello as a spelling change. Steven can also be a bit of a common name, which annoys me, especially if I don't like another person who is named Steven, because it feels like they are damaging my name and there is nothing I can do about it. Despite these difficulties, I would not change my first or last name if I was given the opportunity. My name feels like it fits me, and after everything I have gone through while named Steven Kostello, I feel that I would lose some of those experiences if I lost my name.
There have been numerous instances when I have been both an individual, as well as part of a greater whole. In any sort of sports team, you have to be part of a whole, and put the best interests of the group in front of your own. If you can either give several people on your team opportunities to score multiple points, or you can score one point, a good teammate will allow others to score the points for the better of the team. Some people have trouble swallowing their pride and allowing other people to score points. This is part of the dilemma of being both an individual as well as part of a greater whole.
I like my name. Steven is a Greek name, that derives from the word for crown. It is a versatile name, I can be called Steve for a change if I wish. One of the things that I do not like about my name is that there are various spellings for it. I do not like that Stephen is another way to spell my name, because it messes people up and I always have to clarify. I have a similar problem with my last name as well. Most people want to spell my last name as Costello, instead of Kostello, which makes identification difficult. Whenever I am verifying my registration for something with a person I have to end up spelling out my first and last name, even though neither of them are very complicated. Even Blogger doesn't recognize Kostello as a word, but suggests Costello as a spelling change. Steven can also be a bit of a common name, which annoys me, especially if I don't like another person who is named Steven, because it feels like they are damaging my name and there is nothing I can do about it. Despite these difficulties, I would not change my first or last name if I was given the opportunity. My name feels like it fits me, and after everything I have gone through while named Steven Kostello, I feel that I would lose some of those experiences if I lost my name.
There have been numerous instances when I have been both an individual, as well as part of a greater whole. In any sort of sports team, you have to be part of a whole, and put the best interests of the group in front of your own. If you can either give several people on your team opportunities to score multiple points, or you can score one point, a good teammate will allow others to score the points for the better of the team. Some people have trouble swallowing their pride and allowing other people to score points. This is part of the dilemma of being both an individual as well as part of a greater whole.
Sunday, September 7, 2014
Blog Post 1
Image @ http://photos.wingyounghuie.com/p709406511/h7960348f#h7960348f
People are generally thought of differently if they are an immigrant, as opposed to a natural born citizen, even if there is no reason for the difference in status. This is definitely an example of othering in real life, like in The Handmaid's Tale, how Handmaids are thought of differently because of the nature of their situation, rather than their personalities or actions. I think it is interesting that othering occurs at all, that people feel a need to exclude people no matter what situation or circumstances they are in. Exclusion occurs all throughout life, and can be found in many situations like bullying, job applications, group memberships, or even simply purchasing items at a store. The Handmaid's Tale illustrates people's need to exclude others well, from wives excluding handmaids from drinking at birth ceremonies, or Marthas not being allowed to go out shopping for the ingredients that they are going to cook with.
Overall, othering seems unavoidable. It occurs through all aspects and ages of our societies, and does very little good for anyone, if at all. If people just relaxed and let go of what they believed was absolutely right, the world could easily end up being a much happier and more peaceful place.
Steven Kostello
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)