DUE FRIDAY 5/18 Apology Reading pp. 61-70

Highlighted section: P.69 section 40e-(end of)41a Summarized: "Death would be a nice punishment because I will get to see my friends again. Please kill me, i would like to see them."

I almost understand why Socrates would say this. I do not get this because he is trying a bit to hard to give the judges guilt trip. It seams unnecessary to go to that length of making someone feel bad about themselves. Yet at the same time it seems effective... but only if he told the judges before he was sentenced to death!

DUE THR 5/17 The Apology pp. 51-61

Sentence highlighted: p.52 section 27a: 'Socrates is guilty of not believing in the gods, but believing in the gods.' And this is pure flippancy.

I chose this sentence for a hopefully obvious reason. That reason is that this sentence makes no sense at all. Meletus says that Socrates is guilty and not guilty of believing in the gods. Either this sentence was written wrong or I am confused on what Meletus is trying to say. I will ask for clarification on Thursday.

DUE WED 5/16 The Apology

Sentence I highlighted: p46-47 section b I highlighted the first full paragraph. Summarized it says that he is so actively religious that it has reduced him to poverty.

This is important because he was charged of not being religious. So if this paragraph states that he is very active in the practice he couldn't have been non-religious. that said, there is one less offense toward Socrates. Also, it shows how dumb the prosecutors were in convicting him of that.

DUE TUE 5/15 Pericles Funeral Oration

Make a list of some of the Athenian values that you encountered in the text. Choose one a write a couple of sentences (or more) about why it might be good for the trial of Socrates.

I came across several values. One of those values stated that everyone had power and not just a minority. Another value was that they gave their obedience to the people they put in an authoritative position. I am kinda confused on those two values because the contradict each other a bit.

Due Wed 4/25 "Jigsaw Activity"

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

The topic was weather or not we should censor things deemed inappropriate for minors. I think a debate resolution could be: "We should restrict minors from certain content because it could corrupt them." This resolution could generate lots of ideas and opinions such as: If we censor them, what would we censor, why? We shouldn't censor them because... It depends on...

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 restrict you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another? (short paragraph)

This is an incredibly important topic because it has to do with tomorrows generation, a.k.a our future. It defines what our generation has access to in the (* cough *) information age. A good point that was brought up in the article was that access to seemingly 'bad' info helps us deal with the real world when we turn 18 because we don't just instantly become adult-like when we turn 18.

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).

There is only one good point made on the con side (restrict access to minors). That good point was that vulgar, violent, etc... things make us more likely to imitate those actions.
There were two good points made on the pro side (infinite access to minors). The first point was the censoring things blinds us from what is really happening and makes us ill prepared for the real world. The other good point made was that making items bad or for 'mommy and daddy' only makes kids more likely to get into them. There were a few other good points but I will stick to writing about those two points.

You do NOT have to write this down, but think about how you are going to "pitch" this topic. In other words, if you want to debate this, how are you going to convince others that it would be a good topic. If you don't want to debate it, how are you going to convince the others that you think it would be a bad topic?

I think that this would be an excellent topic for several reasons. The first reason is that it pertains directly to us, thus making a better topic then burning flags because chances are that none of us burn flags. The second reason is that this topic will affect are immediate future and distant future. The third reason is that it is tied into several opinions making it a good idea generating topic.

Due Tuesday 4/24 - The press in times of crisis

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

Q: 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.

A:
The section that I read was against that resolution. There are three things that support the con side argument on this topic. The first argument is that it is unconstitutional to censor what the media has to say. The other arguments did not relate to the press in a manner describing how it is unnecessary to censor the media. For instance they talk about a guy who was thrown in jail without questioning or a lawyer. The article also talks about how high government officials asked news stations to restrict the bin laden tapes; it never really said how that was bad, just why the stations agreed. So I hope we get to talk about this in class because we didn't last time and it would have helped me a lot.

Q: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 opinion on this matter is that news stations should be able to present any news topic they want. The only exception would be if there is already legal interferences such as using hate speech. If stations like adult swim can get away with brief nudity, language, intense violence, etc... i think that a news stations should at least be able to do what they want.

DUE MONDAY 4/23 Viewpoints

Supportive argument on why speech must be protected:

Free speech must be protected (allowed) for several reasons. A few of these reasons are: Free speech is in the constitution; it allows us to express our opinions; lastly, it keeps America free.
The right to express yourself is written in the constitution. That means that you would be breaking the law if you did not allow someone to express themselves. You could say that free speech is entitled to every US citizen and is a law.
One of the most popular arguments for allowing free speech is that it allows us to express are selves. We wouldn't be able to talk about this right now if it was not for free speech.
The last of my opinions that I will talk about is how free speech keeps America free. America is a free country was sorry does not mean you can kill someone and get away with it (sorry OJ, u know its true), rather it means that you can express your self in any way weather that be talking, buying certain stocks, refusing to do something (go on strike), or simply practicing the religion you want to believe in. Without the ability to express yourself you would not be free along with the rest of America.

Supportive argument on why we should put a limit on speech:

This section of the article focused on two similar things. One of them was talking about how things like "triple-x porn on Saturday mornings" should be banned, and how we are not strict enough on enforcing copyright laws. The other argument was focusing on 'stealth advertising'.
The first topic just said how there are some things that just are not right and should be banned. For instance showing "kiddie porn" or not enforcing copyright laws. It gave a physically imposable graph showing who thought copyright laws were not being enforced well enough.
I am just going to tell the truth here so bare with me: I have no idea what the rest of this article was talking about. It had something to do with stealth advertising, poop smeared on canvas, and fringe and core freedoms. I wil bring this up in class because someone has to understand it.

My opinion:

I think that free speech should be completely allowed and that there should be no such thing as censorship... sort of. I can understand why people do not want to have "triple-x porn on Saturday mornings". Although, no one really talks about the people that do want it. Since everything (yes even something like sesame street) can be found offensive i think that broadcasters should have a warning be everything that simply sums up what is about to be shown and that it may be offensive. This also ties into copyright laws somewhat. I think that copyright things like the name 'google' should be restricted for anyone to use without the owners consent. If any one is to be found using 'google' that the authorities should report that to the entitled owners (google) and they should decide if they should be punished or not.

DUE THUR 4/19 Don Imus Controversy

Q:
According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?

A:
Frank Rich's argument stated a few reasons why Don should not be silenced. One of those statements stated that Don's previous 'jokes' or statements were very broad and was equally offensive to everyone. Frank added on to that stating that Don should be able to say what ever he wants as long as other people can give their opinion on the racial statement, or any statement that could be offensive. He also says that other people have gotten away with worse racial slurs.

DUE WED 4/18 Plato Reading and Blog

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?

A:
I think the society proposed is absurd. Their society proposes that you can only be one 'character', for instance a action actor has to be a action actor and can not also be a horror actor. Socrates think s that you can only be one thing because you would not be able to work both jobs as well as if you only had one. I think that you should be able to do both as long as you do them well so that they can contribute to the community, not everyone can do two completely separate things which i can understand (like being able to use a mac and a PC, lol).

DUE WED 3/28 Plato Assignment

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 some people would want to censor homer because he talks about how the gods picked sides. If they pick sides they are then they are technically fighting with each other and that makes them 'bad'.

[READ PAGES 76-85]

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?
Plato said that poetry that states that bad thing s about the afterlife or 'questionable' statements about the gods should be banned from poetry.

What should poetry “teach” and why?
I didn't catch what Plato said poetry should 'teach', i will ask what he said tomorrow in class.

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?
1. If I were talking to Plato i would argue with him about why he thinks that people should write about what they want, weather it be moral or immoral. I mean you should have the write to talk about what you think is write, and if you know what u are saying it is false simply label as a 'fictional' piece of writing'.
2. I do not agree with Plato's ideas at all, i think i like free speech too much to think about anyone else's argument.
3. I do not think that writing should be put to the purposes that Plato says it should be because it kills the idea of free speech that i treasure so much.

DUE TUE 3/27 Republic Assignment

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 Hesiod? Remember that Hesiod was the poet who wrote about the fight between the gods and the titans.

I am not 100% sure why he would want to censor Hesiod. But I do have a general guess of why he would. I think that the Hesiod witting is either supports ideas of the gods that not everyone agrees on and/or it supports immoral ideas like the book: "how to be a hitman" That is the best I can come up with on why someone would want to ban or censor that book.

What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?

They wrote false stories about how the gods fought with each other.

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

I am not quite sure what the two main characteristics of 'god' are but i think these quotes are what I'm supposed to be looking for:
1. "Zeus has two jars standing on the floor of his palace, full of fates, good in one and evil one and evil in the other"
2. "God implants a fault in man, when he wishes to destroy a house utterly."
3. I think the laws of story telling is to have a false and true story, and that you always start with something false. I'm positive either one or both of these answers are wrong because the question ask why these are related.

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

I was pretty close. I wrote that Hesiod's work would want to be censored because it sopported ideas that not every one agreed on about the gods and that is exactly what Plato wrote in his writing.

Q:
Who is right, Socrates or Thrasymaschus? Why?

A:
I think Socrates is right and Thrasymaschus is wrong. Thrasymaschus is wrong because he never takes into account simple things like mistakes people make. He also never specifically defines anything like who the 'strong' are. Socrates on the other hand specifically details what certain definitions are like who the strong are and he explains why the strong can change. Something else he mentions is that people can make mistakes and that the strong are so not always do what is right for other people.

DUE WED 3/21 Republic Assignment

Q:
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?

A:

I think acting 'right' is doing what you personally think is appropriate and ethical. Not everyone thinks that 'right' is a certain thing, for instance you have Republicans and Democrats; they think that each others ideas are 'wrong' and that their ideas are 'right'. I think happiness is similar to my previous idea. Happiness is what you as an individual know brings you pleasure/excitement/contentment. i.e: Somebody could think that sports are really fun and somebody else thinks that computers are fun. If you told the computer guy to play sports and vise versa they would think their new activity is boring and would therefore be unhappy.

Socrates would agree with me for the most part. I think he wouldn't agree with my definitions for 'happiness', yet he would agree with my examples and everything else. I think 'homie T' wouldn't agree with everything. (once again i do not know enough about these 2 characters to properly guage what they would say.)

Due Tuesday, 3/20 Republic Assignment

Q1: 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?

A1: Socrates main points are the fact that the strong is not specific enough (who are the strong), the strong make mistakes, and that their are different governmental societies.

Q2: In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ main points in response?

A2: I'm not that sure on what the last few pages are about. I couldn't figure out why Thrasymahcus was referring to nurses, sheep and shepherds.

Q3: In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

A3: I do not think it is right to harm somebody. In todays world that will never be reality, but it would be nice. I think it is not right to harm something simply because it causes complications like: "Hey, he hurt me... can I hurt him back?" I think Thrasymachus would agree with me. Socrates ooin the other hand would try to argue over the little points that are just annoying to listen to and only Socrates would care about. He would never even make up his own point, just disargee with me. (I havn't read enough of plato to really know what he would do but thats what I am assuming now.)

DUE FRI 3/16 Personal Reflection and Plato Assignment

Personal Reflection:

good friend:
A good friend is someone who you hang out with and have fun. At least that it what I think of. Some people say it is someone you can trust, others say it someone you have known for a long time. You define what a friend is and what makes them 'good'. I have a good friend and I can't trust him. Some people say that doesn't make him my friend, but I hang out with him and have a fun time so thats all that matters for me. (can any of you guess who he is?)
bad friend:
A bad friend is someone you don't have fun with because their annoying and/or a jerk. You may be able to trust them but that doesn't make them a good friend. I mean what kind of friend is hard to be around and have fun with?
======================

Q:
Amongst other things, Socrates strategy includes an attempt to define a friend (Section 334c-335b) and a critique of the idea that a just man can do harm (Section 335b-336a). Why did he start this line of questioning? What questions does he ask and what responses does he get that leads him to win the argument?Are his points valid and convincing?

A:
Socrates started that line of questioning so he could prove Polemarchus wrong. He asks specific questions like can you punish someone who seems bad, or only if they are bad. Polemarchus keeps agreeing with Socrates untill he gets his point. I think that Socrates points are valid except when he cherry picks around stuff just to make his point.

Q:
List 3-5 of the questions that Socrates asks that you think are the most useful in arguing against Polemarchus. Why are these questions useful for Socrates purposes?

A:
1. "But which do you reckon are a mans friends or enemies? Those he thinks good, honest men and the reverse, or those who really are even though he may not think so?"
2. "If we harm a horse do we make it better or worse?"
3. "Worse, that is, by the standard of excellence by which we judge horses, not dogs?"

Socrates gives these questions to find loopholes or week undefined points in Polemarchus's definition of justice. I think this helped Socrates change the definiton of justice a lot.

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? Short answer response.

A:
I thin khe might be trying to prove that all though they are father and son that they do not agree with eachother. Im not so sure if this is right but its all I could think of.

DUE FRI, 3/16 Republic Assignment

What are Cephalus’ view of justice?
He thinks that justice is doing what is right and owning up to your debts.
What is Socrates response?
His response was that you coudn't define what was right and that if your friend lent you a gun and then he went insane and asked for it back, common sense would tell you not too but then you would breaking the laws of 'Justice'
According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
Im not sure but I think he was saying that as physical activity goes down your mental staus goes up because you have more time to sit and think.
What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
Cephalus was sitting in an easy chair because he had just sacrificed in the courtyard.
What is the profession of Cephalus?
I guess i got this wrong because I thought that he inherited money and then invested it. (and hes father stole it, or abused it?)
Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
Cephalus is an old rich guy. Polemarchus... I must admit i dont know who he is (I am absalutly the worst possible person to remmeber peoples names in a story). I think these eople were talking to eaxch other most of the pelude.
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?
I am confused. Because someones reason not to accept the other persons understanding of 'justice' doesn't make sense to me. I don't see how simply saying that you wouldn't give a crazy guy his gun back is a loop whole in 'paying back your debt'. I will bring this up in class because I am having a hard time explaining this here.

Q: 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”?

A: Mildred, Clarisse, and Guy (the main characters of F451) are all characters in Fahrenheit 451 that are similar to characters in Simile of the cave. Mildred is Blinded from the world and the media forces to know what she thinks she knows. This is exactly how the people in the caves are like. They think they know what everything is because they only know about the shadows, they don't even accept the idea of their being anything else that easily. Clarisse is like the philosophers in the simile of the cave. Clarisse always asks 'why' and does not sit there to be told 'how'. The philosophers in the simile of the cave's whole life is based on 'why'. In Fahrenheit 451 it seems like Clarisse asks a lot of good questions and realizes things that everyone fails to recognize. Guy always thought burning book was normal and that information forced into him was just a part of his life. Once he was introduced into a new way of thinking he thought that he was previously doing everything wrong and saw how he was corrupted. The 'prisoners' in the cave are like this because they thought the shadows were normal and that they saw shadows. yet once they were free the realized from reverse engineering that they saw light and not shadows; that light casted shadows and they could see the shadows but thats not what made them.

DUE WED 3/14 - Personal Reflection (Plato)

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?

A: When I learned that the tooth fairy was not real I wasn't mad or anything. I already assumed she wasn't real because I din't think it was possible with the te fact that she was soposedly. So when I learned she wasn't real it made me think of the people of who got a lot more money then me, or who didn't get that much. I have had a more 'dramatic' experience but I have failed to thin kof one.

3/2 Personal Reflection

I know this is supposed to be about pride, but I couldn’t think of an example that fit that description. So I am going to write about the time I was having fun but I regretted having fun. I was in the hallway with my laptop with Justin and Cameron like usual. And we were going to go onto Digg, but I decided to play NFS most wanted instead because I thought that the middle school rule were you could play video games before school applied at HTH, but that wasn’t the case; obviously somebody thought it would be too good of an idea to do that. So I was having fun playing NFS and then Mr. Jana and Ben daily come around the corner. Justin, Cameron, and I look up at them and then continue playing. Then Ben daily calmly says to me as if he was simply saying hi to me: “I’m going to have to confiscate that. You can get it from Marcus at the end of the day.” So I gave it too him and Cameron and Justin started talking about why you couldn’t play video games before school if you can play cell phones, iPods, and PSP’s without someone taking it away.

3/2 Iliad Assignment

Summary:

In the beginning Patroclus drives Hector in to back all the way to troy. Then later were we pick up on line 800 a lot more stuff happens. A reference to Hubris and cosmos is made. Patroclus gets knocked of his chariot. Hector and Patroclus fight for a while and neither of them can win. Apollo rips off Achilles armor and then Hector lays the final blow to kill him.

Questions:

At the end of the book Hector tells Patroclus not to come back to the ships, I was wondering what he meant by that because Patroclus is on the verge of death.

I was also wondering if Hector took Achilles sword or something like that.

3/1 Iliad Reading

1. What does Patroclus propose to Achilles and what is Achilles’ response? Why does Achilles grant Patroclus’ request?

Patroclus proposes that he go to battle with Achilles armor on so as to trick the Trojans into thinking it’s him.

He accepts it because he thinks it will make the Trojans go away. (page 414. line 81)

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 Achilles impending doom is tied in with his courage to take the lead and take on several men at once.

3. Either ask questions about the text or write down vocab words from the text with definitions.

QUESTION:

How come Zeus doesn’t answer both of Achilles prayers? More importantly, does no one seriously notice Achilles walking out into battle pouring wine on the floor and going back to his ship? Wouldn’t they then realize that he is not fighting.

DUE WED 2/28 Iliad Assignment

Write a question you have about the text, either an interpretive question that you have an opinion on, or something that you don't understand. You don't need to write the answer.

I can’t understand for the life of me why Achilles won't accept the offer given by Agamemnon. It clearly says that he will not be remembered if he doesn’t accept the offer.

What was your opinion of Achilles before reading Book 9? Does it change after reading Book 9? Explain why or why not.

I thought Achilles was a loner stand alone fighter before I read book 9. My opinion did not change after reading it; he just seems more frustrated with Agamemnon afterwards.

Who is speaking?
Phoenix

What does that person say and to whom does he say it?
He says to Achilles: Why aren’t you accepting the gift and joining the battle? You should be ashamed of yourself; in fact I remember when you were just a baby, I can’t believe you turned out this way.

What persuasive strategy is it?
Emotional and Ethics

Why is it an example of that strategy?
Phoenix says that he remembers Achilles was young and how he shouldn’t be acting this way.

Who is speaking?
Achilles

What does that person say and to whom does he say it?
He says that Agamemnon still won't give him what he wants.

What persuasive strategy is it?
Reason

Why is it an example of that strategy?
He says that Agamemnon won't do the simplest thing in order for him to fight. He offers huge gifts and won't listen to what Achilles wants.

DUE TUE 2/27 – Iliad Assignment

Q:

I am confused why who a lot of the characters are. Such as Atrides, Diomedes, Orestes, Chrysothemis, Laodice, Iphianassa, Ajax, Odysseus, Heralds, Odius, and Eurybates. I also don’t know what a tripod is; I'm assuming they don’t mean the thing that holds cameras.

Opinion of Agamemnon before and after:

I thought that Agamemnon was a power hungry jerk who got what he wanted while not doing much work himself. It seemed like he gave his men (this is especially true with Achilles) just barley what they need to want to work for him. After reading the text I think the same from him, because he acts the same. He offers Achilles an immense reward to try to bring him back to fight for him. But if you think about it you realize that he is just trying to give Achilles the bare minimum that he can offer (Agamemnon has much more fortune that what he is offering) to get him to fight. Yet Achilles doesn’t accept it still and he thinks that Agamemnon is so much of a jerk that he still won’t fight for him.

Persuasive conversation notes:

Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax try and convince Achilles that he should continue to fight for Agamemnon. The say that Agamemnon will give him a lot of riches and luxuries if he comes backs to fight. That is what Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax use to appeal to reason. They use a really good ethics reason too. They say that Achilles should join to help save the Greeks. They try to get him to feel sorry for them because they are going to die if he won't fight. As to what they used to appeal to him emotionally I still can not figure it out after reading the text over and over again.

2/22 - Disagreements and Fights

The following are just the details of my argument (the names have bean changed… sort of):

My friend Illy and I were talking about the new video game that came out: Ratchet and Clank: Size Matters (yes that really is the name). Anyways, I was talking about how the game was really cool especially because it was made for the PSP™ and all the games for the PSP™ (besides Loco Roco) are really bad. Illy then revolted saying that the game is not good and then told me that I should go eat some fish. After that we hated each other for that very reason but eventually (about 5 sec. after the personal attack) he said he was sorry because he knew I didn’t like seafood.

2/22 Iliad Reflection - Book One

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.

-OR-

Agamemnon is the commander, as such he is in the right, and I support his decision to ask for Achilles’ war prize Briseis – even if it means that Achilles will sit out the war.

RESPONSE:

I don’t really know what an ancient Greek would think of Achilles, but I do not agree with both of these statements. I can understand why Achilles would want to not fight and I can understand why Agamemnon should take Briseis. Although I personally think that neither Achilles nor Agamemnon should really care that much of their ‘war prize’ should be taken away. They should realize that they forcefully took then away and that other people could do the same thing. If they were really that upset they should just go steal another one, that’s what Agamemnon did.

2/13 My Rage - Cause

The one thing that really makes me mad more then anything else is my brother. It’s not completely because he annoys me, but it mostly why he annoys me. He annoys me because he is bored. It makes me so mad that he when he can’t find something to do he resorts to annoying me. The worst thing about it though is I can’t do anything about it. If I just ignore him, he will go mess with my stuff and of course break them. If I hurt him he does stop but its only temporary and then I get in trouble. If I simply tell me parents to get him to stop all they do is kindly tell him to stop, they never actually do anything to control him.

page 44: The Lost world

I am currently on page 44 in my book report book. So far a scientist named Levine who everyone finds quite annoying goes on an expedition to Costa Rica to find dinosaurs. Soon after Richard Levine arrives at Costa Rica a local touring group flew Levine and his guide Diego to an unidentified lizard that was found dead on a beach. Levine took a sample of the creature right before a hazmat crew incinerated the animal. Levine sent the sample to a research company in San Jose so his friend could look at it. Richard hears that some animals were thought to be located on a nearby island that was recently owned by BioGen so he plans a trip to that island. Once he arrived, his guide Diego gets mauled by a dinosaur and dies. Then Levine gets trampled by a dinosaur yet the book never officially says that he dies, Levine just thinks to himself that he is going to die.

Book Report Posting

Recently everyone was assigned to read a book. You could choose any book of your preference. I chose the lost world, by Michael Crichton. I’m not sure if that’s how you spell his name though. From now on I am going to write posts about him, I would keep writing but I have to go.

descriptive paragraph

I was reading my book all alone in the dark crevasses of my house with only the dim light showing from my antique lamp I bought when I was little. As I was reading the rich text illuminated by the yellow light I heard blaring sirens in the background. It seems as if they just suddenly appeared like a light switch being tuned on, its either there or not, it doesn't fade in. My heart pounded as the firemen burst through my door instantly covering all my books with there black ooze, the color of their unforgiving hearts. I quickly threw my book in my safe chest in the corner, out of the way of the firemen. I prayed they wouldn't see it as they quickly yet efficiently burned my books to the ground. Suddenly they were done and they asked me to leave. I didn’t want to go; I knew there must be a way to avoid this. “No.” I said, they agreed and left. A smile went across my face as I grabbed my book and fled through the back door.

2/6 Descriptive Writing Assignment

This is the scene were all the “books” watch the city get bombed as they hold on for their life.

Descriptive words:

Gasping, clawed, bursting, shouting, sanity, ripped, tore, gritting, concussion, crushed, squeezing, and oblivion.

I think these words emphasize everything that ray was saying. Also they were dreadful words too, nothing like scratched, he used clawed. That is a much stronger and more frightening word to add to the mood. There were a lot of these strong words too, these are just scratching the surface compared to how many there were on the scene.

1/30 Fahrenheit 451 pp. 154-165

My question is why Montag said that he liked Mildred; he was worried for her right after and during the bombings. Yet, right before the bombings he said that he could care less if Mildred was killed. Did he change his mind that quickly? Or did he always care for her?

Q: I am responding to the quote “And when they ask us what we are doing, you can say, we’re remembering”.

A: Montag says that because he thinks it is important for people to remember things, to realize what is going on around them, and have ideas. Yet at the same time it does not imply that they should worry or fret about what they know, or are trying to remember. It’s not like he is forcing people to think, he just wants them not to be ignorant and oblivious.

1/29 Fahrenheit 451 pp. 138-154

I don’t get why Guy said that the police haven’t told people to look outside their front doors before for the only person running. You would think that no one has ever managed to outrun the cops, a police ‘hound’, and helicopters. Seems to me this is a one time only thing.

Q: Has guy changed since the begging of the book until now?

A: Montag has changes since the begging of the book since about the time he met Clarisse. Clarisse told him he was not like the other firefighters and I think that’s when he realized he really wasn’t like the others. After that he slowly became more aware of things around him like ideas, nature, and creativity.

1/29 Fahrenheit 451 pp. 126-137

“He looked down the boulevard. It was clear now. A car full of children, all ages. God knew, from twelve to sixteen whistling, yelling, hurrahing, had seen a man, a very extraordinary sight, a man strolling, a rarity, and simply said, “Let’s get him,” not knowing he was the fugitive Mr. Montag, simply a number of children out for a long night of roaring five or six hundred miles in a few moonlit hours, there faces icy with wind, and coming home or not coming at dawn, alive or not alive, that made the adventure.”

I found this paragraph very interesting because it struck me how the kids acted. It was unusual how the kids didn’t care what happened. I also noticed the many spelling and grammatical errors such as no and after a list with commas. Also he says that the kids traveled 500 or 600 miles in a few moonlit hours the would have to be going 150-300 miles an hour to make that trip, no were does he ever say they are going that fast, the fasted he said was 130 mph.

1/26 Fahrenheit 451 pp. 110-125

Summarize: Captain Beatty tells Guy to set fire to his own house with a flame thrower. Guy then kills Beatty with it, gets hit by a car, and runs away from the cops.

Sentence: “And then he was a shrieking blaze, a jumping, sprawling gibbering manikin, no longer human or known, all writhing flame on the lawn as Montag shot one continues pulse of liquid fire on him.” I thought this was an incredibly descriptive because it used so many ways to describe Beatty as he died. Some strong words were: sprawling, writhing and pulse.

1/25 Fahrenheit 451pp. 91 - 110

Summary: Montag reads a poem from a book and makes all of the women in the parlor leave. He also brought a book to Beatty to be destroyed. They then all rush over to a house that had books that turned out to be Guy’s.

Figurative Language: On page 102, in the first paragraph it has a good simile. It was: “He searched his house and found the books where Mildred stacked them behind the refrigerator. Some were missing and he knew that she had started on her own slow process of dispersing the dynamite in her house stick by stick.”

1/24 Descriptive Paragraph

Lying back, I release a deep breath like the wind gushing ashore from a huge wave. As I start to relax all my muscled in a sort of trance, I realize how close I am to falling asleep that very instance. As I reach over to the side of my bed and click the only button on the white blob that resembles an alien looking shell complete with funny grooves and a flat green section with squares. I spin the top of it watching the numbers flash a million times as the broken display board acts as if it has epilepsy until I stop interfering with it, its almost like an old computer. I then feel the surge of heat rushing through that one blanket filled with wires amongst all the other plain and normal blankets. I let my eyes wonder around the room as they come across $250 dollars of electrical entertainment. As I grab it I put the two funny buds in my ears awaiting the sound that will soon rush out of it. I hit the switch on the side that makes all of the 130,560 pixels in exclusion to that one lonely dead pixel come to life immersing me in all of the colors it can display. I play all the music I have personally put into it while watching the array of lights that the visualizer engenders. The overwhelming almost coma-inducing heat from that one unique blanket and the rhythmic tune form the funny buds puts me to sleep almost instantly; the tune from the buds still ragging on through the night.

1/24 Fahrenheit 481 pp. 81-91

I'm confused as to what Guy was going to say on page 86. He says: “I’ve got a list of fireman’s residences everywhere. With some sort of underground— “ He just trails off, I don’t really know what he is going to say.

Q:

Faber jokingly proposes a plan of action and then starts to discuss it seriously with Montag. What is the plan of action? More importantly, why does he say it won’t work? Analyze his answer. Why won't it work?

A:

Faber says it won’t work for two reasons. 1: No one can set the fires. 2: You can’t trust anybody. I think this is half right, half wrong because I think that if a fireman is caught with a book there house can be burnt down. However I do agree with the second thing that Faber said: you can’t trust anybody. I think that they went around asking people to join them they would both be put in jail, there's no way to find anyone who can join them.

1/23 - Fahrenheit 451 pp. 71-80

I’m confused on why Montag shut the door-voice off. You would think he would wan t to know when someone was at the door, possibly listening to them read the books out loud. The only logical reason I could think of would be the fact that Mildred might rush to the door to open it no matter who was there (knowing her spastic personality). If the door opened someone would know they were reading books.

Question A:

What does Montag mean when he says that books "point, one way or another, to Clarisse?"

Answer:

Guy means that books never agree with everyone. They have only one side and therefore can offend certain people. For instance a book could say that all circles should be orange, which would upset people who think that all circles should be blue.

1/22 Fahrenheit 451 pp. 40-68

Q:

Captain Beatty tells Montag that firemen are the “happiness boys” and that they are custodians of “our piece of mind.” Why does he say this?

A:
He says that because the fireman burn controversial books. If the books are not there then no one gets offended and everyone is happy. That’s why they are called the “happiness boys”. The books also give people bad ideas and supposedly corrupt their minds. But because there are no books no one has a corrupt mind, which is why Beatty tells Guy they are custodians of “our piece of mind”.

What I am sort of confused on is how captain Beatty knows a lot of book titles and quotes form them. Not so much of quotes, but rather certain ideas. It doesn’t seem to me that Beatty would read the books.

What I dread

I shiver ran through my body as I looked over my shoulder. I turn around to see an endless wave stretching across the beach. As it towers over me I notice it start to curl and I know it’s going to break, it reminds me of a skyscraper crashing over me and I have no where to run. Frozen in fear, fumbling with that strap on my wrist hearing the crinkling of wet Velcro, I try to decide what to do. Thinking fast I gasp for air feeling the coldness of it rush against the inside of my throat burning it. I then dive under the cold liquid that makes me float thinking that the further I dive under it the less the ferocious beast will unleash it mighty power sending me tumbling underwater. Yet as I dive down further and further while it’s getting darker and darker while knowing I need to go a lot further… I stop; it was as if I ran into a glass wall. I panic realizing why I had stopped; my boogie board was still attached to my wrist, like a dog on a leash trying to chase a cat. I look up with my pupils enlarged in pure terror watching the bulge in the water crashing down onto the water. The bitter current throws me to the bottom of the ocean snapping the cable attached to my wrist. Clenching my wrist in pain I strike the hard bed of the ocean listening to the rushing water above me accompanied to the scrapping noise of my back against the coarse sand. Tumbling across the ocean floor I folded my legs in to jump with all my strength to the surface of the unforgiving water. Gasping for air I swallow the white wash that the vast wave had left, like the black ashes from a once raging fire. The intense blinding whiteness washes me ashore along with my board like I'm driftwood floating ashore from a horrible ship wreck. I grab my board and sprint along shore burning up my remaining energy as I head towards my spot on the beach. I collapse against the near molten sand from the intense heat of the sun, too drained to move, I lay there in pain… stomach burning to a crisp, my back bleeding profoundly as the ground surrounding me turned red from blood.

1/19 Fahrenheit 451 Assignment pp. 21-40

1) Guy compares his wife and Clarisse and thought that Clarisse seemed older in some ways compared to Mildred. Montag thinks Clarisse seems more mature because she notices things such as how the kids in her class are killing each other and how it is wrong. She also does all the shopping and cleans her house by hand. Guy also thinks that Clarisse is more social then most people in the traditional way, by actually talking, everyone else just sits in groups and watches movies and listens to the radio. Mildred on the other hand is older then Clarisse but does not show that much signs of maturity. She doesn’t seem to take a break at anytime from entertaining herself and she never has thinks or worries about things. For instance she is always listing to the family and has the seashells in her ears; she’s just always doing something. Also, Mildred accidentally killed herself and she doesn’t even really care that she did.

Fahrenheit 451 pp. 3-21

My question is why Mildred wants to add a 4th wall when she the already have three and she knows they cant afford it?


I think that the other is able to convey the fact that Guy and Mildred are remote from each other because they have very different behaviors and the do not communicate well. For instance, Mildred is always happy and Clarisse made mad Guy realize that he wasn't happy. Also, Mildred barley makes an effort to listen to Guy, in fact, she doesn't listen at all she lip reads because she is constantly listening to music.