Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Jigsaw...

1) Give a quick explanation of the topic and propose a debate resolution of the topic. (a couple of sentences)

My topic for reading is supposed to be about the Patriot Act. Unfortunately I did not get the packet. So I will be writing about the patriot act in general. I think a good resolution for this topic would be that the Patriot Act has increased censorship.

2) Explain why it is an important topic. You choose what to write about, but here are some suggestions if you are stuck: How does it impact your constitutional rights? Can it impact your daily life? Does it empower or dis empowered you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another? (short paragraph)

The Patriot Act is a really important topic because it has taken away our privacy as citizens. The patriot act was taken to effect only 15 days after the attacks of 9/11 due to the increase of terrorist attacks. This act definitely impacts daily life. And the worst part is that we may not know when we get spied on. The Patriot Act says that it gives government officials the right to wire tap a suspect and track down e-mail connections that may contain clues to a another terrorist attack. I think this dis empowers us as individuals because we are being spied on.

3) Write one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the con side and one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the pro side (2-4 sentences total).

Con:
Crime rates have plunged due to FBI and local cops.
Pro: Government Officials can track down future terrorist attacks through local communications and wiretaps.

Monday, April 23, 2007

Viewpoints due 4/24

Assume that our next debate will have the resolution, "The press should be censored in times of crisis."

1) Indicate whether your reading selection is pro or con for the above resolution and write three things that support the pro or con position on this issue.
Since my reading of the packet says that the press should practice self censorship, i would guess that it id for the PRO side. For starters, if a reporter is out in the middle of war they might report on something that the U.S military might keep hiding and thus expose our plan to the enemies.(For those watching). Secondly, recently there have been attacks made by the army to the reporters because they have been getting in the way. Finally, the press, if they have a copy of good news, should know what to air and what not to.


AND


2) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
I think that the press should not be silenced completely like in the Virginia Tech incident but they should not get in the way of soldiers when out in the battle. Soldiers have a duty and they have to achieve it. It's hard enough risking your life and keeping secret plans secret, but then having a reporter in your face?
Come on!
that's what I think.

Sunday, April 22, 2007

Viewpoints 4/23

Assume that our next debate will have the resolution, "There should be limits to free speech."

1) For chapter 1, write three things based on the reading that supports the above resolution. This is the "pro" argument.
a)
Keeping Adult content from children T.V. channels
b) Freedom of Press
c) Calling censorship something else due to the laws that prohibit it.(Responsible policy)

2) For chapter 2, write three things based on the reading that goes against the above resolution. This is the "con" argument.
a)
W/out free speech we would have no say in ideas
b) Rather than helping the minorities, censorship brings them down
c) Freedom of Speech is the foundation for a great society


3) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
a)
My view in this censorship debate is that people should be able to express their ideas but there should be limits to how much you can say. Screaming out the "N" word at African American people is past the line Somewhere n between those lines we should be able to say. Another thing; people usually want to sensor out someone just for their own benefits. Like the Don Imus controversy for example. The NAACP took it far with that one. They got Don Imus fired even after he apologized and the women accepted it. Another thing; he was a comedian. Sometimes comedians say crude mean stuff that they don't actually mean which makes people laugh. The NAACP should have known that. This is what I think.

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Don Imus Controversy 4/18

1. According to the NAACP, why should Imus be silenced?
A. According to NAACP, Imus should be silenced for his racial blur towards African American women; more specifically towards the Rutgers women's basketball team.

2. According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?
A. According to Frank Rich, Imus should not be silenced because since he has been in his show, Frank has seen that Imus makes fun of all people. The racial blur that he said was meant to be a joke, but somehow people took it the wring way.

3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?

3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?
A.

Don Imus has shared what’s in his mind a lot of times. He makes fun of all people. He is a comedian born July 23, 1940. Many comedians find anything to make fun of. The most commonly used subjects though have to do with racist offenses. Somehow, we have grown to know that some of the jokes are just for laughs. Especially those made from comedians.

Just recently, Don Imus was kicked off his own show for making a racist comment against African American women. He was known for making such comments, so why were people making a big deal out of this one? This is why I say Imus should not be censored completely.

The NAACP has taken this too far. Taking a man off his show just because he said something that many other people have said, that is not fair. We hear many of these comments in our daily lives through rap and all sorts of music. So why just go against this one man? Many comedians have said such comments. For example Carlos Mencia. In his show he has always said many racist jokes, even of his own, but people do not seem offended. So why did all of a sudden Don Imus’ comment have so many bad consequences? If it were up to me, I would not strip him of what he has; I would just have him do community service or something.

In conclusion, Don Imus should not have gotten the punishment he got for what he said. Later on he even apologized directly to the women that got offended (The Rutgers Basketball team) and they accepted the apology. Why is the NAACP so interested even after the apology? I say the NAACP has blown this out of proportion and they are the racists in this case.

I believe that Imus should not be silenced.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Plato 4/17

Q) What is your reaction to the ending of the section? What is good and/or bad about the type of society outlined by Socrates?
I think that his ideas are not right. They will have a bad impact on the society. By removing certain ideas that we know are not real and completely thinking that they are wrong will cause confusion all around. By adapting to this we will soon forget we ever had "art" and will lower our intelligence. They will start moving backwards rather than progressing. Having more knowledge is better.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

The Republic 2/27

1)Short Paragraph – Personal Reflection: Before reading the selection from Plato write at least one full paragraph on this question: Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Homer?
I think they would ban Homer because since there are many conflicts and talk about who is right and who is wrong, it would stir their minds and incite violence. They just want people to be calm and not dangerous.


a. According to Plato, what are some aspects of poetry that should be banned and why? In other words, how can poetry undermine the education of a Guardian?

Some parts of poetry that would undermine the education of a guardian would probably have to be that poetry is strong. It tells a story through its powerful words and if one would read them they would feel empowered and will try to things outside the guardians choice.

b. What should poetry “teach” and why?
I think poetry should teach people how to be themselves. If they talk about what is “right” in the world, it will cause many problems because people will start fights. It is right to have an opinion on something small but if you try to explain what justice is, that is a big topic and many people have their own views on it.

4) If you were talking to Plato what would you say to him? Do you agree with his ideas? Do you think poetry, or literature in general, should be put to the purposes that he says it should?

I am not sure about what I would say but I would start by saying that I do not tally agree with his ideas. Poetry should be to have fun and express your life etc..not judge someone or criticize them.

Monday, March 26, 2007

The Republic 2/26

Q.) Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Hesiod? Remember that Hesiod was the poet who wrote about the fight between the gods and the titans.

A.) I think they want to censor it because they have no real evidence of gods and the titans ever existing and there is no logic in that. It goes against what they believe in and they think it is wrong. The Theogony talks about the origins of the world and the gods and Plato thinks that was not true.

Q) What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?

A.) Misinterpreting the other beliefs.

Q) What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?

A.) They say that god is all the good things and will cause not trouble. God is supposed to be seen as reality which is good and just.

Q) Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?

A.) I was right in a way because they thought it was nonsense to believe in something not true.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Republic Assignment 3/21

In your opinion, does injustice pay? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

In my opinion, I think that injustice does pay. Law breakers pay for the trouble they have caused by taking away their liberty, their freedoms. We do this by sending them to jail. But I think that even when they do go to jail, those people will just not learn there lesson. Especially if someone ratted them out. Because once they are out they are out to get that person that got them busted. And once they hurt that person they will just go back to jail. But overall I think that injustice does pay, they just don't learn their lesson though.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Republic Assingment 3/20

In your opinion, how can acting “right” (i.e. justly) help or harm the achievement of happiness? In your answer you need to first establish, in true Socratic fashion, what you mean by "right" (justice) and what you mean by happiness. What do you think Socrates would say about what you wrote and/or what do you think Thrasymachus would say?

In my opinion I believe that acting “right” can sometimes harm your achievement of happiness because maybe sometimes you won’t like doing the right thing so you won’t be happy. For example doing chores. If you do them you are doing the right thing but you may not like doing them. It could also help out happiness though if you think of it through the way of honesty. For example, if you find a $20 bill on the ground and you return it to the person and they in return say “you can keep it, thanks for your honesty” that would be better than finding it and keeping it because you will feel guilty and feel bad about your actions. I do not know what Socrates Thrasymachus would say in return though.

Monday, March 19, 2007

The Republic 3/19

Q) Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?

A.) He is basically stating that the leaders are always making decisions for their own liking. Therefore making whatever they say the law and anyone opposing it is against the law. If a leader gives a bad order and damages/hurts anyone it is against the law but since the leader said it is not. It is weird how stuff can counteract with each other.

Q) In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymachus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?

A.) Thrasymarchus’ two main points are that 'justice is the interest of the stronger party' and that injustice is the interest and profit of oneself'. I cant really remember what Socrates said in return.

Q.) In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymarchus say in response to your answer?

A.) In my opinion I don’t really think it is ever right to harm anyone. There are only few times when it is right though, as in self defense for example. If you are out on the streets and you are being robbed and hit you will not just stand there and take the pain, your first instinct will be to attack back. I think Socrates would say that if it was never right to harm anyone the person robbing would not think of hurting you.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Republic Assignment

I. Answer the following questions – short answer (about a couple of sentences or more)

Q. Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?

A. They are friends of Socrates. Cephalus is the dad and his son is Polemarchus.

Q. What is the profession of Cephalus?

A. Business

Q. What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?

A. some sacrifice

Q. According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?

A. Knowledge of what is ahead and experiences the young have not yet had.


Q. What are Cephalus’ view of justice?

A. He believes it’s paying your debts and not lying.

Q. What is Socrates response?

A. Socrates gives a short story exposing some of its flaws. He says there are times where you do not pay your debts and you lie.

II. Write a one paragraph response to the following question:

Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?

A. I will have to say I go with Cephaus because he has years and years of experience to give forth an answer. All Socrates has been doing is disprove someone else’s ideas and make them think differently. I have not (yet) seen Socrates put forth an answer.

Plato(personal reflection and assignment)

Section 1

Short responses 2-5 sentences

Q. In your opinion, is Polemarchus definition of justice, derived from the poet Simonedes, an improvement from his father’s definition?

A. I think it is because at first they said justice was to do good to friends and harm your enemies and now they say hat is bad because by doing harm to your enemies you will only make them worse and I agree with that.

Q. What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?

A. Simonedes says that justice is to help your friends and hurt your enemies. This is how Polemarchus interpreted him.

Q. What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?

A. He says that people base their judgments on human likes and dislikes so it does not apply to all. A friend you say is a friend might not be good and an enemy you say is an enemy might not be bad. This is not accurate because it is based on your own personal emotions.

Q. What lesson do you think Socrates/Plato is trying to prove by having Polemarchus give in to Socrates when his father (Cephalus) would not?

A. I don’t really understand what this question is asking but I am guessing its is showing that adult minds are more concrete and are not willing to change while a child’s mind is not. It is more open.

Q. Whose argument do you find more convincing, Polemarchus or Socrates? Why? (This should be a longer response, short paragraph, about 5 sentences).

A. Socrates is not actually giving an argument as much as just proving that Polemarchus is wrong. He is not one to argue but to see people’s arguments and see its problems. Then maybe change their perspectives in it.




In one paragraph (or more) define what a friend is and how you should act towards a friend?

A friend is someone who will not harm you or go against you in any way. They will do favors for you and you will be able to do the same for them. Good friends are loyal to one another. You should act respectively to them and goof around as long as you know when to stop.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Plato. “The Simile of the Cave.” The Republic.

Section 2:

1. Compare and contrast what Socrates says in “The Simile of the Cave” with Fahrenheit 451. How are characters like Mildred similar to characters in “Simile of the Cave”?

- There are many similarities with this book and Fahrenheit 451. For one Socrates is talking to Glaucon. He told him to imagine a cave where there would be people shackled and will not be able to look anywhere but straight. By doing this you will be setting them apart. They will have projected images coming from the fire and they will only have that image to tell what it is. They will not know it is only a shadow unless they look back and see it for themselves. And until they see the real image/object they will know that they have been living lies all their lives. This is just like in F.451 because they have been living a lie. The only thing left that would tell them the truth were the books and they have been burning them. This here has been setting them apart. They have been running away from what’s real. Some contrasts though, about them, is that people in Plato, like Glaucon, are willing to listen and understand. He is being proven something else and he is accepting. When Socrates is asking him something he answers “yes” because he knows it’s true unlike F.451 where they were not willing to accept it.

Socrates has been talking to Glaucon and has been questioning him. Glaucon believes in something else and yet has been falling for what Socrates is saying. Socrates has been extracting the truth out of him.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Lies I tell you!!

Recall a time that you heard a statement of “fact” that was later found to be untrue. It can be from a parent, a teacher, a friend, a government official, a book, or a film. How did you find out it was untrue and how did it make you feel? Did it change your outlook on anything?

-I can't really remember a good time where that happened but there was this one time when i was at a fair, a policeman was handing out stickers and so i go ask for one and he says he has no more. Then later on i see a kid who had a sticker. I asked him and he said he got it from the policeman. i ask him, "when did you get it" he says, "right now" he was like third person waiting in line on back of me.

Sunday, March 4, 2007

Iliad book 16(Read pp. 434-441 lines 800 - end)

Simply summarize the main points and ask questions.

Summary:
Basically what happened was that Patroclus did not listen to Achilles and goes off to war.
there the people mistake him for Achilles and is feared by all. Hector then stabs him in the chest and kills him.

Pride and its consequences

I think a time when my pride had bad outcomes would have to be when I was at the arcade. I was playing the skill crane. I got so confident that i was going to win a prize since i had played before and won. So i decide to play one more time and i lost it. I tried again and still no. I ended up wasting 5 dollars and got nothing in return.

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

The Iliad Book 16 – “Patroclus Fights and Dies” (pp. 412-421 lines 1-333)

1. What does Patroclus propose to Achilles and what is Achilles’ response? Why does Achilles grant Patroclus’ request?
Patroclus proposes that when he goes to fight, he wears Achilles' armor and Achilles says yes because its like the war has already ended. they are losing.

2. On p. 413 line 35 (approximately), Patroclus tells Achilles that Achilles is “cursed in [his] own courage.” What does Patroclus mean by that and do you agree with him?
I think he means that his courage is why he is feeling bad. It's what caused his "downfall". I totally agree with him because Achilles needs not learn where to stop but no, he keeps on going.Arguing.

Iliad book 9 (pp. 266-275 lines 521-869 )

2. What was your opinion of Achilles before reading Book 9? Does it change after reading Book 9? Explain why or why not.
Before reading book 9 i always thought Achilles was the man to look up to. He was a courageous brave fighter. He did not let anyone bring him down. He fought for what he wanted and did not settle for less. Now that i read this section i feel like he has lost it all. Before he would not care of his actions and just did what he wanted. Now he thinks about it first. To me he seems more "human".

3.

Who is speaking? Phoenix

What does that person say and to whom does he say it? To Achilles, he starts talking about him and how hi dad helped him a lot. he says the he himself took care of him and was hoping for Achilles to return the favor, which is to fight.

What persuasive strategy is it? This would probably go in two. In Reason and Emotion.

I say this because he is reasoning with him yet he touches on a topic of emotion


Who is speaking? Phoenix

What does that person say and to whom does he say it to? To: Achilles, he says that he should fight for his country since he needs to let his anger out by fighting.

What persuasive strategy is it? This appeals to reason because he has the energy and the reason to fight.


Monday, February 26, 2007

Iliad Reading(book 9)

1. Write a question. It can be an interpretive question that you have an opinion on or something about the text that you don't understand. You do not need to write the answer.
- After reading this section I am getting the impression that Agamemnon has changed. He has thrown a banquet and has called on some warriors and has said that they cannot over throw/ take over Troy. But I did not understand it very clearly.

2. What was your opinion of Agamemnon before reading this section? Does your opinion of him change after reading it? Why or why not? A one paragraph reply is fine, minimum of 6 solid sentences, but you are encouraged to write more.
- I am going to write my opinion on what I understood. My opinion on him changed due to the fact that his attitude has gotten better. Not a lot but now he accepts is mistakes. At least from what I understood. One example that I found, and saw that some of the students did too, was on page 255 lines 137 through 139. it goes like “That’s no lie old man, a full account you give of all my acts of madness…” this is saying that Ag. Knows about his mistakes he has made.

3. At various points in the text some characters attempt to persuade other characters to take a course of action. Examples of characters using persuasion include Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax. Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters, following this format:


1.) Who is speaking? Nestor
What does that person say and to whom does he say it?
To: Diomedes
He says: “Few can match your power in battle, Diomedes, and in council you excel all men your age…”
What persuasive strategy does this appeal to?
This appeals to emotion since it is complimenting him.

2.) Who is speaking?
Agamemnon
What does the person say and to whom does he say to?
To: Achilles
He says I lost the line number but it says he will offer all these items of interest just so he could forgive him. (This is another thing that really changed my ideas about Agamemnon)
What persuasive strategy does this appeal to?
I can’t think of a specific thing this topic would go under because its more like bribing him into doing something.

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Friend Fight

In your blog write about a time when you had a big disagreement with a friend - or other person - that led you or the other person to regret things that were said or done.

I can’t really remember a time when me and a friend fought. I am sure I have but I can’t think of the details or why.

(ill keep this post they way it is and will add more to it later.)

Iliad Reflection (Book One)

A) Achilles’ rage is justified and I support his decision not to fight, even if it means the Greeks might lose lots of men, or even the war itself.

I agree with this because Agamemnon creates havoc which then causes a fight but Ag does not fight them himself. He does not deserve a war prize because he really didn’t fight his own battles. He has fought plenty for them and has done a good job; he does not have to fight one more fight.

Although it will cause plenty of deaths, this will tell Agamemnon not to create more trouble since it causes suffering.

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

My Rage - Cause

...Homework...

I am angry when I have to do homework. By the time I get home I have to do homework. No time to have fun. Since I take the bus and trolley home it takes one hour to get home.

So I get home at 5:00 p.m. Then I eat and once again. More homework. It is so stressful to get homework from all classes. Essay in one, Spanish script in the other and a math packet in another one. Man when is this going to stop? I am drowning in homework and there is no way of telling when it is going to stop. All week I am waiting for a time to relax, my savior….the weekend.

Wednesday, February 7, 2007

F.451 Descriptive Writing

The lady being burned…scene…

While I try and relax in my house the thought of any moment being caught with books at hand comes in mind. The fear of memories and ideas being lost will always haunt me. Before I can finish that thought, I hear sirens going off. Oh no, have they discovered I have hidden books in my house? Have they come and burn my house? The moment I hear a knock on the door my heart stops. My fears have come true.

…….Moments later, I see a man. I can tell he does not want to do this. But he must. It is his job. His duty. But not me. I shall not give to ignorance. I know the truth and will go by it. If my books die, then let me die with them……

Monday, February 5, 2007

Descriptive....F.451

Q. Make a list of the descriptive words in that scene – minimum of 3, but you should be able to find a lot. & Write a short paragraph of why you think that scene and the words Bradbury used were effective in representing fear. This is like the assignment from last night expect with Bradbury.

A. I chose the scene where Montag and the firemen were burning down the woman's house. After reading this passage, I was amazed. I could feel the fear of the woman and how she knew that was the day she was going to die. Some of the quotes I like that showed this fear were “Montag had hidden a book under his arm, as he watched a woman get burned alive”. I liked this quote in general but not the meaning because that’s just messed up. How could anyone just stand there watching someone just burn to death? Well, I liked the descriptive words used in this because like I said, it gives a strong mental picture. This and many other within this passage brought up mostly hatred and fear.


Hesiod Assignment

  1. What do you think this myth tells about the ancient Greeks? What values did they have? Why would a story like this develop?

>What this myth tells us about the Greeks is that they were all with power. Every child born from a god automatically had a role in the world. Like Poseidon was ruler of the seas and Hades was ruler of the underworld. I think a story like this is easily developed by the Greeks because they did not know how stuff happened so they figured there was a god for everything that would take care of that.

Words i found interesting on my partners work

Paige:

Some of the word I found interesting are pretty much the same as yours.
I also liked
>"Naive" i always use this word on my sister. but i liked how you called the "beasts" stupid by using "naive".
>"Appalling" since it means a terrible accident or horror..and
>"Thrashing". i like this word because it means chaos and destruction. which the story is all about.

Olivia:

I liked how you used the words
>Claustrophobia
>Muffled
and
>Emanating
out of all these three i liked Claustrophobia because i know I'm claustrophobic. i am afraid of being in a closed spot

Friday, February 2, 2007

9 things I hate about people( funny)

9 Things I Hate About Everyone

1. People who point at their wrist while asking for the time.... I know where my watch is pal, where the hell is yours? Do I point at my crotch when I ask where the toilet is?

2. People who are willing to get off their ass to search the entire room for the T.V. remote because they refuse to walk to the T.V. and change the channel manually.

3. When people say "Oh you just want to have your cake and eat it too". Damn right! What good is cake if you can't eat it?

4. When people say "it's always the last place you look". Of course it is. Why the hell would you keep looking after you've found it? Do people do this? Who and where are they? Gonna kick their asses!

5. When people say, while watching a film, "Did you see that?". No, Loser, I paid $12 to come to the cinema and stare at the damn floor.

6. People who ask "Can I ask you a question?".... Didn't really give me a choice there, did ya, Sunshine?

7. When something is "new and improved!"...Which is it? If it's new, then there has never been anything before it. If it's an improvement, then there must have been something before it, so it couldn't be new.

8. When people say "life is short". What the hell?? Life is the longest thing anyone ever experiences!! What can you do that's longer?

9. When you are waiting for the bus and someone asks "Has the bus come yet?". If the bus came would I be standing here?

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 154 to 165

Ask a question.

A question I have had is what is up with the war. Did Bradbury add that because ihe wrote the book during a war?

What does Montag mean when he says, “And when they ask us what we are doing, you can say, we’re remembering”? Why is this quote important? How does it fit into the novel, what is Bradbury trying to say with this?

I think what Montag means is that once you do something you can’t go back to it once you have found a mistake in it. He is probably referring to killing Beatty and thinking why he did it. I think it fits perfectly with it because all the things Guy has done and all the friendships he has had are all but a memory and all you can do is remember.

Monday, January 29, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 138 to 154

2. How has Montag changed from the beginning of the novel to this part? In writing about this you might want to notice that the environment has changed from the city to nature. Is this a coincidence or is the author trying to say something by contrasting the city to nature in relation to the ways Montag has changed.

I think that Montag has changed a lot during the course of the book so far. Like in the beginning he didn’t care what he was doing as long as he did his job; which is burn books. But ever since he saw that he burned a woman while she was holding a book he kept thinking “why would anyone sacrifice their life in order to save a book?” I think the change of scenery is very important to understand the changes that Guy has gone through because in the city he was trapped, he was following everyone else and did not realize the “real” world. Now that he realizes the truths he is free and let out in nature. That’s what I think.

Fahrenheit 451 pages 125 to 137


Explain what you find interesting or exciting in this part of the book.

I would say this section was pretty interesting since he committed a crime, everyone is after him. It sucks for him but he actually did a good job. He finally realizes the truth about the world and all the mistakes he made when burning the books. Another thing that happened was that Mildred left him…..

Fahrenheit 451 pages 110 to 125

1. Summarize what happened in one or two sentences.

This part/section was really interesting. Captain Beatty finally discovers that Guy had books and they get called to burn his house. When they finally get there, Guy notices he was called to burn his own house. So he takes the flamethrower and directs it towards Beatty and burns him. After that Guy is being chased by the mechanical hound. Montag gets bitten and then he kills the hound.

2. On your blog, copy down one sentence from this reading selection that strikes you as particularly descriptive. Which of the 5 senses does it appeal to? What verbs, adjectives, or figurative language are used and why are they effective in describing a certain action, person, or thing?

The part I liked is located near the bottom of page 117. It goes like “The house fell in red coals and black ash. It bedded itself down in sleepy pink-gray cinders and a smoke plume blew over it, rising and waving slowly back and forth in the sky” (Bradbury 117). I liked this because it shows the house being burned to nothing and how its smoke looks it is waving when it says “moving back and forth”. I think this appeals mostly to the sight but I am sure that if someone was actually there they would smell the smoke.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 91 to 110


Q.) Give a very short (1-3 sentence) summary of the two main scenes in this section. The first scene was at home in the living room and the second scene was in the fire house with Beatty.

a.) The first scene took place at the house. Basically what happened here was Guy Montag came inside the house and saw the women having a discussion. Then they all started talking. A few minutes later Montag takes out a poetry book and reads out loud.

b.) In the second scene Montag goes to the fire house and meets up with Beatty. There they talk. After a while they get called to burn down a house.

Q.) Find a sentence or two that has strong adjectives and/or verbs. Quote the book and explain why these are strong descriptive words and why they are effective. How do they appeal to the senses? What mental images do they invoke?

a.) The quote I chose from the book is when Montag is in the room and reading a passage from the book. It goes like “The room was blazing hot, he was all fire, he was all coldness; they sat in the middle of an empty desert with three chairs and him standing there…”. I chose this quote because I like the imagery used in here. It feels like I am actually there, under pressure, and having a hard time. I like when they use “blazing hot” in the beginning and near the end they also mention a desert which fits in because a desert is really hot.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 81 to 90


1.) Write a question. What are you confused about?

I am confused about the plan/ idea that Faber had. Are they really going to do it since Guy was all over doing it.


2.)
A. According to Faber, “three things are missing” from the popular media (like the “parlor games) of his society. Write what they are and explain what he means.


The three things they mention are:

  1. Quality of Information: I think what this is talking about is the information and overall quality of the book. Like if it is good everyone will want to read it. He mentions that books have certain features so I think that’s what it means.
  2. Leisure to Digest: I think this means that people have the freedom to obtain ideas. Like the freedom to read books and have opinions.
  3. The right to carry out actions based on what we learn from the interaction of the first two: I think this one means that everyone has the right to express what they think about the ideas being expressed even if the actions cause commotion. (I am not so sure about this one).

What I like


Cycling

8th grade…Ahhh, wonderful memories. Had more after school activities; kept more active. Yes, for those of you who went to King/Chavez, I am talking about Cycling. Cycling was the best. it was one of those after school activities that you were actually happy with. We used to go ride our bikes down to Seaport Village and Balboa Park. My favorite ride of all was our last ride. We rode from school to Seaport Village. There we got on a ferry and took a trip to Coronado. From there we rode our bikes through Coronado and onto the Silver Strand. (For those who don’t know, the Silver Strand is 8 miles long and if you look at it through a map you will see that it connects Coronado with Imperial Beach). I’m sure anyone who was out there would agree with me and say that that was a healthy ride. It took determination of the mind and the body to ride that far, on a bike. After it was all done we were relieved and felt great accomplishment.

Monday, January 22, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 71 to 80


1. Write a question about the reading. What are you confused about? If you don't get an answer on your blog, be sure to raise the question in class. Even if you do get an answer, and you think it's a good question with a good answer, bring it up in discussion.

A. The question I got from this reading is why Mildred is so afraid of books. Is it the ideas written inside or what? A few ideas that oppose her view won’t hurt her. That’s what makes a good debate.

2. How will books get us out of "the cave?" What is the cave and how will books get us out of it?

A. I think what they mean by “the cave” is the enclosed space no knowledge creates. What I mean by this is since they are burning books they are killing ides and the outside world. No books mean people have no knowledge of what the world consists which gives the idea of being stuck in a “cave”. This is what I think the “cave” means. Now, books can get them out of the cave by giving them more thought about the world; sort of like the saying “ I see the light at the end of the tunnel”. This means that they are finally seeing the world as it is, not just as whatever makes them happy.

Sunday, January 21, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 41 to 68


Q. Is it better to be ignorant and happy OR is it better to be aware, educated and disturbed at the world?


A. Writing from the perspective of Captain Beatty I would say that he would answer this question by saying it would be better to be ignorant and happy. I say this would be his answer because he is being blinded by his surroundings. He is trying to avoid the truth about the world and do the same with all the people. Beatty says “you must understand that our civilization is so vast that we can’t have our minorities upset and stirred. Ask yourself, what do people want in this country, above all? People want to be happy” Bradbury 59). “Happy” is the key word. A fireman’s job, in this time, is to make people happy and that’s what they do by burning ideas within the book. He also gives an example about making people happy and says “Someone’s written a book about tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn it” (Bradbury 59). This implies that firemen are hiding the cold hard facts just to make someone, who is not willing to accept them, happy. I personally think this is bad because they will be living lies all their lives. Montag used to live like this. Ever since he saw a woman burn with her books his life changed. It made him think more thoroughly and question what’s inside the books that people, like the woman, found so precious and intriguing.

Something I Dread...

The alarm programmed in my phone rings. Oh no, school; another long and tiring day of school. But I start thinking to myself; I still got 10 more minutes ‘till 7. As I do so the warmth and comfort of my blankets put me to sleep once again. 10 minutes pass…another 5 minutes pass. I am still sound asleep not knowing 15 minutes passed since I fell asleep. My mom comes in. Wake up. You need to get ready for school. As I do so I can already start feeling the shot of cold air surrounding my body. Almost as if I was being tangled by a snake. I can’t breathe. The cold air hurts my soar throat. As I struggle to get changed I remember, I need my mom to sign a permission slip. So I hurry up to get her signature. It’s 7:30 and I still got to eat breakfast. So I do. I pour the milk onto my glass, like water falling from a waterfall. I drink it. As I do so I hear someone knocking on my door. It’s Martin. Then I remember; me and him are both going to wait for our ride. Half an hour goes by. Our ride comes. Just as planned. And here we go again, a long and tiring day of school. as I come home I start thinking, I did this just so I can do this whole routine again tomorrow.

3 Examples of strong words
>"Warmth and Comfort" because as i read it i feel a warm feeling,
>"Tangled by a snake" because i gave the impression of no escape, and
>"Water falling from a waterfall" because it looks like water falling from a waterfall.

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 22 to 40


1.) What do you find confusing? What is something you don’t understand?

- My question for this part of the story is why is it illegal to read books? I mean they tell great stories. Just because they don’t agree with each other doesn’t mean they have to be burned. They all express people’s ideas and thoughts and everyone is different.

2.) Montag compares Mildred (his wife) to Clarisse and says that Clarisse seems older. In what way does Clarisse act more mature and WHY do you think she is more mature? Why does Bradbury (the author) make the contrast between the two?

- I think Clarisse is a lot more mature and older than Mildred for a couple of reasons. In the beginning of the book when Montag meets Clarisse, it seems like they had a good conversation. Clarisse is more open to ideas and is eager to learn more. She sees past what other people think and speaks her own mind. While Mildred is more to herself and it seems like we hardly know her. The whole suicide thing says it all. I think the author makes this comparison to show that they are opposites yet appeal to Montag.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Fahrenheit 451 pages 3 to 21


1.) Ask a question that you have about what's going on in the novel. What do you find confusing?

What I found confusing about this reading is that how would someone recover surgery and cleansing of blood so quickly. Like Mildred for instance, they took her in the hospital and ½ and hour later she was o.k. they also only charged 50 dollars for it.

2.) Even before Montag and his wife Mildred talk to one another we know that they are alienated (distant) from one another. How does the author convey this?

I think the author conveys this by saying that the wife, Mildred, has waited for her husband for approximately 2 years. This shows a really distant relationship, and a bad one. I think this is one of the reasons.