The planet is trying to shake us off like a bad case of fleas.

I had no clue that my sole purpose in life was make plastic for our planet. Thankyou George Carlin, now I know that. All sarcasm aside Carlin did raise some pretty good points. Especially when he compared how long humans have been on the planet to how long the planet has actually been in existence. and meteors and ice ages and shit. Our planet has gone through some way more traumatic stuff than an overdose on carbon dioxide. He's also right. We are so worried about taking care of the "bees and trees and whales and snales" they we havent even realized that we can barely take care of ourselves. Im too lazy at the moment to look up the daily world death rate but Im pretty sure that its high. And I am also pretty sure that about half of those deaths are semi-preventable. The rest are either accidents our the negative effect of nature (whther it be viral, chemical, atmospheric etc) on the human body. In a nutshell, Nature is kicking or fat assess and we still have the nerve to call ourselves boss. I dont thiink we need to focus on eevery tree and bird and snail when our own extinction is approaching much more rapidly. However, we should fight to save pandas because theyre really cute and i like them.

Another Focused Freewrite (btw, if its focused is it really free?...just throwing that out there)

When I think of just add water I think of Ray's pet turtle. (actually is that even a PET turtle or is just a turtle that likes to camp out in Ray's front yard because he's the only non-crazy person on the street?) The turtle is thrivingin that arid, lifeless environment. In fact, it seems to be pretty much the only thing that is doing okay. Why is that? Did the turtle just adapt to its environment? Did it like 5,000,000 years ago? Nvm I need to get back to my point before I end up doing what I usually do and ranting about something totally unrelated.
So here's my point. Trona sucks, the weather the heat the environment suck. However, Ray and his turtle both stand out as signs of life.

iI'll trade you my Euplotes for your chocolate chip cookie

This is the first article in the entire collection of The Best American Science and Nature Writing where I could actually feel the author's passion for his subject, understand his message, and be able to explain it someone else. In other words, I actually really enjoyed this piece. Sure I didn't understand the names and descriptions of all of the microorganisms that ___ writes about, but I was able to really grasp his main message. Nature is beautiful. Its simplicity, its variety, the understated complexity of its internal structures, its constant yet low-mainentance availability are what make it so beautiful. Just when you think you've hit the bottom of the pond, you have seen and studied all that is out there, you dig a little bit through the sand and discover a new animalcule.
To some individuals, the fact that Smith feels that he has "trouble explaining my [his] satisfaction with the animalcules" might seem strange. After all, at the end of the day theyre all animals, theyre just really really small animals. What satisfaction is there to have? How could there possibly be any trouble in finding the apropriate explanation? I might be wrong in the attempt I am about to make in answering this question, but I think that this is how it works. I'll use an example. My mom buys a big tub of tollhouse chocolate chip cookie dough. She bakes a few cookies. I eat one or two and am satisfied because I have seen the big tub I know that there are plenty more and even when that tub runs out there is some supermarket somewhere that will have another one. I know what to expect because it is a delicious chocolate chip cookie, but each batch is never the same so I also am able to contendtedly anticipate what this exact batch will be like.
Smith says that, " for some reason i often feel calm and reassured afterward perhaps because I realize how much room there remains for more." He then goes on to talk about his paparazzi-like fascination with the lives and purposes of the animalcules. "Just one cell, this Euplotes, and barely one-tenth of a millimeter in length, but it scurries with purpose and aplomb in this world."

Smith loves Animalcules and I love chocolate chip cookies (and David Beckham although i love him for very differnt reasons) and I think that the reasons why we are fascinated with both subjects are relatively similar.

this......sucked

In an effort to be a better student I have been actually doing my homework lately. That means that I did indeed read Benjamin Phelan's How We Evolve. This is one assignment I probably would have been better off skipping. I realize that I may not get points for this blog post but at the same time I'll never get back the 45 min of life I wasted reading this article so if I want to pointlessly rant then I am going to pointlessly rant.
First of all, what the heck is going in the first eightpages? I seriously did NOT get that. And angst? What angst? I didn't sense the tiniest bit of angst when he said "The fate of our civlization and maybe our species may be determined by the next five generations. So I don't really give a shit what's happening to our genetic evolution". I did however get a pretty good sense of anger from the guy at the top of the page. I can actually see how this guy's "angst" is justified. Basically his point is that humans might be gone pretty soon so he doesnt give a duck if 2,000 years from now humans have evolved to have like idk 13 toes instead of 10.
As far as angst in the line about self-inflicted extinction goes...im just not seeing it.


actually you know what i take back what i said previously about getting no points for this. I am legit asking for comments if someone will explain this p.o.s. to me then I willl happily rewrite my blog, until them im going to dutch treats i am badly in need of some zero calorie vitamin water.

Now I know why my dad chose not to invest apple...

Forgive me if I sound like an airhead,
but what the heck is Broome talking about. I mean I get what he's talking about but what the heck is he actually talking about. Personally I think that this piece totally could have been kept out of the book I dont think the guy ever really reached an actual conclusion.(then again i might be wrong, my steady intake of benadryl over the past few days maybe affecting my ability to comprehend things...but i dont think thats the case)

The question proposed to us was what does Broome claim the money market reveals about people's ethical judgements about the value of future well-being. Okay so. Basically I found this one sentence that I think pretty much sums up the answer to that question. Broome asserts that," the evidence shows that, when people borrow and lend, they often give less weight to their own future well-being than to their present well-being." Bingo. There it is.
I guess that statement can be tied to that whole concept of discount rate in the article. People judge their current lifestyle and the goods they have the most access to NOW as being worth more than ones that they will receive down the road. Furthermore, if they are not even going to be the recipients of these future goods or benefits. The less value you place on future stuff the higher your discount rate will be and the less motivated you will be to make sacrifices now. Like investing in stocks in the money market. My dad could have invested in Apple like idk twenty years ago (I really wish he did) but he didn't really see that much future gain, instead it was just like ummm I don't want to buy a shit ton of stocks in that company now because I wont be getting an income from it any time soon.
does that make sense?
if it doesn't...well sorry i dont know what to tell you and i probably wont feel like explaining.

Blogging is......

Okay so i will be honest. I am NOT a blogger. Well techincallly I am because this whole blogging thing is a huge part of this class, but this is somethign that I would probably never do in my free time. The funny thing though, is that i definitely like to read other people'es blogs. Not just for this class (well acctually i dont really enjoy reading the ones for this class at all just because there are about Twelfth Night and Big foot and stuff). But i follow this blog linked to the mayo clinic on healthcare and another one about veganism and a couple other ones like dailycandy and style.com's blogs. Like I have said before I am a reader not a writer and when Im really pasionate about what I am reading then I will read it nonstop.
Writing..mmm. not so much a huge writing fan, blogging especially.

Write-a-phobia

When I first watched Derrida’s video I honestly thought he was being a little umm…over dramatic. Then I took down my to cool for this dumb youtube video mindset and realized a lot of what he was saying is write. He says that he feels that what he has written is important to share with the world. It is easy for us to say “well of course YOU think what YOU say is important” to someone. But them how often do we have something to say that we feel is important. I think that writing something down further emphasizes the importance of a message because now you are making it available to more people and making it available to be reproduced and redistributed, essentially you are making it so that you can reach more people. And Derrida is right. When I have to share something I have written I really can relate to the Freudian analogy of being seen in your underwear. I had one of my blogs read out loud in class and was cringing the whole time. On the surface, in phase 1, writing gives you freedom. Like Derrida, you can be as controversial as you want because its just you, your pen and your paper. Once it is spread and read aloud though all your walls and protection are gone and you are left up to the judgement of others. To top it off not only are you exposed but you often times are not present to defend yourself when others read your work. Maybe I am being over dramatic like Derrida, but I think the fear of writing really could be a legit phobia.

Your'e a writer right?

I will be honest. I am not actually sure what/who a writer is. I know that a writer is not my 4 year old goddaughter who randomly scribbles and writes short sentences on her kindergarten writing tablet. I also know that this blog post probably would not be considered writing. On the surface a writer probably is seen as someone who puts thoughts to paper. If that is the case then does my existence of my 6th grade diary entitle me to call myself a writer? My guess is no.
So then what is a writer?
I think a writer is someone who turns thoughts and information into text to inform, entertain, enlighten or evoke some sort of action or emotion in his or her reader. That is why my diary doesn't make me a writer. I am not trying to get any sort of reaction out of anyone or tell anyone anything.
I am not a writer and do not particularly enjoy writing. However, I am a reader and because of that I share a very close bond with writers. If it was not for writers being who they are I would not be what I am. A reader cannot read unless a writer writes.

Why water?

1. Why is the title called just add water?
Actually im going to attempt to semi-answer my own question. Maybe it has something to do with the town of Trona itself. Everything is so dry and barren and lifeless, adding water at least to the natural surroundings of the town would defiitely perk things up, make them greener and more lively.

2. Why does Nora smile to herself after Troy tells her about his problems with Charlene? The camera does a close up of her walking away and sort of creepishly smiling.

3. What is the signifgance of the can Ray pulls out when he drops his son off, and what is inside the can?

4. How did Dirk end up becoming the "boss" of the neighborhood, especially since he is so young? (yes i know that he is a drug dealer but im guessing that that community wasnt always full of drug using people so how did that happen?)

5. What else is Nora hiding?

6. When Ray asks Charlene if their son knows about her affair she yes. How come he didnt say anythign to his dad if he knew?

Hello Bigfoot

Labeling products with their carbon footprint seems like a pretty solid idea. If you can give people the option to choose one semi-destructive product over a not-as-bad or completely neutral one, then result could be really beneficial to our environment. But the author is right. So what? So you slapped some labels on some pears. What is that really going to do? What do those labels even mean? What is considered to be a “good” amount of carbon footprint anyhow!?!?
According to Michael Specter “ This is not an equation like the number of calories or even the cost of the product. There is no one number that works.” So what do we do? Do we overhaul our entire way of life? Do we grow our own wheat and sew our own clothes and kill our own beef? In a perfect 100% environmentally friendly world we do. However, in our fast-paces society no one actually has time to do any of that.
So really, how do we create change, is it even worth it to be eco-friendly potato chips? Specter is absolutely correct he writes, “Personal choices, no matter how virtuous, cannot do enough. It will also take the law and money.” We cannot consume eco-friendly products unless someone produces them for our consumption. We cannot make companies change their practices and products unless a) laws are passed requiring them to do so or b) there is some sort of monetary incentive for change. At the same time we definitely cannot have our economy and our current structure of living fall apart just to save the atmosphere 200 years from now. Until someone can come up with an answer I guess we are stuck with well-intentioned carbon-conscious potato chips from England. Who knows though, maybe carbon-consciousness will become the new Kaballa and be so damn trendy that celebrities and in turn regular folks jump on the bandwagon.

Really real

First of all, what the heck was going in this piece? Second of all, seriously what the heck was going on! Okay, okay, all joking aside I did sort of understand it and with the aid of some googling and rereading it like three times I can FINALLY make a blogpost. I guess in answer to the question, you decide what’s real. I mean there are certain elements, certain concrete facets of everyday life whose existence cannot be ignored, but other than the like the realities of the existence of air and water and dirt and bugs and stuff, almost everything is subjective. Especially ideas, emotions, symbols… all of that kind of stuff is left up to the individual. How can you prove that something like love exists for example? We have “created love” by observing that particular emotional force in people and assigning the name love to it. That still doesn’t answer what is love though, and you can ask different people the same question and get a bazillion different answers.



btw dont comment on this im not sure that i know what im talking about...

ignore that first writing center post

When i went to the writing center i had honestly planned on it being a one time ,in and out, no longer than 10 minutes, meeting. To my surprise i stayed for close to a half hour. Because I hadn't actually written my essay the guy (sorry i dont remember his name but he had a cool blue mohawk) helped develop an outline. I really ended up benefitting from choosing to go as I realized that I was going about the essay completely the wrong way. Also, I liked that this nice, blue haired young man didnt try to write my essay for me or try to get me to do things his way. He worked with my writing style and topic of choice and basically just served as an extremely knowledgeable guide along the way.

Writing center

Kenneth Bruffeeeee

According to Kenneth Bruffee, “not to have mastered the normal discourse of a discipline no matter how many ‘facts’ or data one may know, is not to be knowledgeable in that discipline.” I can honestly say that up until this sentence I didn’t really comprehend what I had read so far. I mean I understand what Bruffee is saying about how conversation is the necessary foundation for the accumulation of knowledge and subsequently the ability to form, categorize and process thoughts. I agree. You really don’t know anything until you’ve had a conversation with someone else. I guess you could say that all you really have is a muddled and jumbled collection of observations without any idea of how or even why to analyze, process and make meaning of them.
Bruffee then goes on to explain that, “we can think because we can talk, and we think in ways we have learned to talk”. I know that what I am about to say probably is going to seem kind of strange, but I took a second to think about what I think. I then wrote down my thoughts on a piece of paper word for word as I thought them. For the most part, I found that they were structured the same way they would be if it was my turn to speak in a conversation with someone. In order of development Bruffee lists speaking/conversing, thinking and writing in order from first to last. Basically you need to have conversation with another human being to write. It would make sense that more conversation/more intellectual discourse would result in better knowledge and understanding and subsequently better writing.
This concept, the concept of conversation and instruction fostering thought and understanding actually makes a lot of sense. In the article, Bruffee talks about how medical students learned more when they worked in groups and were able to bounce ideas off each other than they did when they were alone. As a student I can totally relate to this situation. When writing a paper for example, I find it easier to write if we have frequently discussed it in class.
The quote that I started this little rant with is something that I would like to go back to again. You don’t know anything about anything by just knowing the facts, the stats, or the definition of the subject. If you haven’t learned the ideas circulating on a topic and gotten a second and third and so on opinion on it then you don’t know anything and you cannot make any real meaning of whatever it is you think you know.

Two poems, countless meanings

How do both of these poems address the nature of making meaning?
Both Hass and Jones wrote poems that address the nature of meaning. Hass, grapples with the issue of reader interpretation and ultimately decides to leave that interpretation, that overall meaning, up to the reader. As difficult as this might be for a writer to do sometimes, he or she must realize that the reader is going to make their own sense, their own meaning out of what they are reading. Jones's poem addresses the topic of releasign and writing down ideas. What happens when an author writes somethign and then realizes that she or he needs to make changes. That they never should have released that work to the public and that the truly intended meaning will be absent from the piece? The answer to this is a guaranteed change in meaning. However, in the end it doesn't really matter almost-finished meaning or finished meaning will still be changed and twisted by each reader who will form and define their own personal meaning for the piece.
How is language a slippery vehicle?
In The Problem of Describing Trees the author struggles to find the write word to articulate to the reader about the movements of the cottonwood tree. He then goes on to claim that "there are limits to saying, in language what the tree did". The author then goes on in the last line to say that the aspen trees are doing something in the wind, after he had in the first line claimed that they were glittering in the wind. He is essentially handing the meaning and interpretation over to the reader to do with what he or she will. This is what is meant by language being a slippery slope. Everyone will have their own personal interpretation of something and the actual intent of the author may never even be addressed. Instead of trying to find that perfect word that will enable as many readers as possible to understand his meaning, Hass decides to leave it up to the reader letting them decide for themselves what that "something" is that the aspen is doing in the wind.

Two years ago my really annoying cousin Enzo who would always flick me in the side of the head like he was some creepy five year old got lime disease. Basically what happened is that a blood sucking tick decided to attach itself to his body and have a field day (WHAT NOW ENZO!)
Where was I going with this?
oh yes.
Ticks. I was thinking about it and ticks are pretty greedy little bastards. They attach themselves onto someone totally without their permission and in complete violation of that person's personal space rights. To add insult to injury that take drop after drop of life-nuturing blood without any thought of the possibilities or realities of that dreaded disease that they carry. They bury their little heads under their unwilling hosts skin so that they are surrounded by the feast of blood that they have been looking for. Instead of stopping when they are full, ticks keep going and going and going until they are completely gorged and even then, will go and find someone else to attach themselves onto later.
Ticks are greedy. Ticks are greed. If i were to make a thesauras that used only pictures instead of words I would place a picture of a tick next to the word greed. Only greed can motivate a person to burden someone else with their desires, cause them to be able to focus only on their wants like the way the tick does when it buries its head under someone's skin. Only greed makes you keep going when you've had enough and even then keeps you on the hunt for more.

Wendell Berry's name makes him sound like an asthmatic 75 year old nerd....but im still going to read his writing.

When I was first told that I would have to read an article whose title was “Faustian Economics: Hell hath no limits”, I pretty much became dead set on skipping the assignment. However, due to the fact that my grade partially depended on it, I decided to go ahead and read it.
Honestly, I am glad I did.
I found what Wendell Berry wrote to be not only interesting, but also hauntingly accurate. Americans have lived in a seemingly limitless existence for far too long. However, because not everyone can be without borders or constraints some people’s limitlessness is going to come at the expense of other people’s (or things’) basic freedoms. By basic freedoms I mean those freedoms that are constitutional/human/ necessary freedoms, not the constant add-ons that we Americans constantly reward ourselves. This concept of limitlessness, of moveable, changeable and extinguishable borders is best illustrated by viewing the complex entity that is American economics. According to Berry, “the commonly accepted basis of our economy is the supposed possibility of limitless growth, limitless wants, limitless wealth, limitless natural resources, limitless energy and limitless debt”.
Even attending college (the reason for why I am reading this piece in the first place) hold true to this idea. For many people post-secondary education can mean upwards of $40,000 in debt. But let’s face it, is debt really that big of a deal? I mean in American we really can live with no money at all, as long as that’s not how we started out our lives. In our world debt is okay becayse some place somewhere there is someone who can loan us something so that we can get something else that we might (or might not) not.
Our desire to live without limits has been resulted in widespread and unfortunately widely accepted greed and wastefulness. We want more and more and more….and more and then underuse, or exploit to the point of ruin the things that we get. As Berry puts it, “ it is now and forevermore too late to use thriftily the first half of the world’s supply of petroleum.” First half. That means that there is a second half. Which must mean that there is a limit……No. Impossible. Maybe over there, maybe in some underdeveloped nation. But not here. Never here. But think about it for a second. Maybe we should be preparing, just in case. I’m probably wrong about that seeing has petroleum consumption really hasn’t slowed down at any significant rate in the past decade. I am sure that most of us are guilty of getting in our cars and riding somewhere we could have easily walked or to some place to get something that we don’t even really need. Whether we like it or not Berry is right. “We will keep consuming, spending, wasting and driving as before, at any cost to anything and everybody but ourselves.” So let’s have some fun for now, and let our great-grandkids foot the bill.

That essay from way back when

Small Object Large Concept

For two summers I worked at a small ice cream store in my hometown. From March until December I dished out cup after cup of chocolaty, minty, sticky cool goodness. Sometimes I served the ice cream in a cone, other times in a cup drenched in hot fudge or whip cream. Of course there were always those health nuts who came in, ordering nonfat vanilla frozen yogurt while their friends indulged in three- scoop brownie sundaes. Usually, a frozen yogurt consumer, I can honestly say when placed next to a dish of smooth, delicious, full-fat ice cream, the ice-cube-like texture of fat- free frozen yogurt loses its appeal. My favorite aspect of working in that restaurant was observing the customers place their orders. Every so often I would encounter one of these orders, “can I have a cup of non-fat vanilla frozen yogurt with peanut butter sauce, hot fudge, nuts and whipped cream?” As ridiculous as such an order sounds to many Americans this type of eating makes sense. Americans tend to turn to diet, sugar- free, fat- free products as a quick fix for all of our nutritional problems. For a majority of the population, reliance on sugar-free products over appropriate dietary practices is an acceptable and desirable option.
In particular, Americans crave sugar substitutes. Splenda, Olestra, and Equal are products which offer sweet satisfaction without calories. The benefit to these products is obvious: trade out the sugar and fat that pollute the typical American diet and in return reduce your risk of obesity, cardiovascular disease and love handles. As the obesity rates are rising, and starting at younger and younger ages, adults and children alike are looking for a variety of ways to keep their weight in check. While most nutritionists would recommend the constant and consistent implementation of a healthful diet and regular exercise, many Americans ignore these suggestions and opt to create their own dietary guidelines. Diet products have become staples in American diets. Sugar free jello, diet soda, and fat free potato chips are often times very useful in weight management. With a pound being the equivalent of 3,500 calories, the best bet for losing weight is to cut as many calories as possible. If this goal can be accomplished without having to give up one’s favorite treats, then why not do so? Brown rice has more calories than Lays fat- free potato chips made with Olestra fat substitute, so why not just go ahead and pick the tastier option?
What most consumers do not realize is that they are actually setting themselves up for failure by depending on these products. The fat substitute Olestra for example is known to cause “oily secretions”, gas, bloating and other uncomfortable side effects. Saccharine and Aspartame, the sugar substitutes in Splenda, sugar- free jello and diet coke have been proven to cause bloating. Essentially, a product that is suppose to help you lose or maintain your weight gives you the appearance of looking larger and puffier than you really are. Furthermore, Saccharine has been clinically linked to the development of certain cancers. Furthermore, this product was not even originally intended to be used as a substitute for healthful living. Its original target audience was diabetics, who truly could not risk having too much, if any, sugar or excess fat in their diets. A reliance on these products also has been linked to physical inactivity. Americans have a tendency to believe that no fat or no sugar equals no need for exercise. In reality, even if a body consumes only a miniscule amount of calories, when one’s diet revolves around these products, its muscles (including the heart) as well as respiratory and immune systems rely on exercise to function at optimal levels.
So, why do Americans choose time and time again to pick these subpar products instead of fresh, quality foods to fulfill nutritional needs and control weight? The answer is fairly simple: our lifestyle wills us to do so. A large part of American society is based around the ideals of convenience, speed, and pleasure. It is much more convenient to pop open a bag of Lays fat-free (not talking about the baked chips) potato chips than to purchase, boil and prepare 2 cups of long grain brown rice. Most of the foods are portable and easily accessible whereas fresher and all-around healthier foods most often are not. Speed is also another motive, perhaps the greatest motive, for reliance on these products. Americans are known at home and overseas for dwelling in a society of laziness. Going to the gym and sticking to a well-planned exercise regimen takes time, work, and a lot of sweat. Many Americans find it to be much easier to pop open a can of diet coke, over the full calorie option, than to get in their car and drive to the local gym where they will have to spend the required 45 minutes engaging in moderately paced exercise. An even scarier thought is that not only do many Americans consider this to even be an option, but some believe it is actually a better option. My mother, for example, has convinced herself that consuming a diet full of fat-free, sugar-free products is a preventative measure. By taking in so few calories and fat grams from her food, she has completely eliminated the need for exercise. In her mind the sole purpose of exercise is to burn calories. In reality however, exercise fulfills a much wider range of purposes. From quality sleep, to cardiovascular to proper functioning of sexual organs and maintenance of clear, glowing skin, exercise is literally essential to our health. Without exercise, we would just be skinny, fat-free, sugar-free people who most likely would not stay very skinny for very long.
Our need for instant results also plays a big role in how we feed and care for our bodies. Our culture revolves around an “I want it all and I want it all NOW” mentality. There is no time for going to the gym or taking a trip to Whole Foods or preparing home-made meals. We need to be skinny, not necessarily healthy, but skinny, and we need to be skinny as soon as is humanly possible. Therefore, me must, without any hesitation, turn to diets and eating patterns that will help us accomplish this goal as quickly as possible.
Lastly, our culture promotes pleasure. We want to eat foods that make our taste buds happy. In general, most people are not as excited about scarffing down a bowl of wheat bran, as they are about eating a Nabisco 100 calorie snack pack. The Snack Pack has fewer calories and has the added perk of tasting better. However, the brown rice and broccoli have the fiber, protein, vitamins and minerals that the Nabisco Product lacks. According to ABC News, “59 Percent of Americans consume diet soft drinks” while only “34 percent claim they drink eight or more servings per day (IBWA)”. Both diet soda and water have the same caloric value, but water is much better for one’s health than diet soda. Diet Soda tastes good in our mouths but really does pretty much nothing for our bodies.
By relying on convenient, fast and more palate-appealing ways of maintaining our weight, we more often than not sacrifice our overall health. The focus should be the health and condition of all of our major organs, not just the number on the scale. When we consume these types of foods, we are really just filling our body up with empty calories. Sure these products are fat and sugar- free and seem to pose little risk to our standing on the scales, but they usually possess almost no nutritional value and more often than not leave us feeling hungry shortly after consumption. What this really says about our culture is that we care more about instant gratification than long-lasting results. Our values lie in the size of our jean, not in the healthiness of our bodies. Thousands of Americans are willing to sacrifice long term health and quality nutrition for the instant gratification of fat- free, sugar-free jello. By doing so we are slowly killing ourselves, making that size four bodies that we attempt to put in as little effort as possible for, only last us a few years instead of a lifetime. So go ahead America, and put that Splenda in your coffee, but first, answer my one question. Have you noticed that as the number of diet food products on the market grows, the average American waistline seems to have grown in sync?

I really need to stop procrastinating.....

Viola: Then think you right. I am not what I am.
Olivia: I would you were as I would have you be. (III.i. 148-9)

Viola is agreeing with Olivia, but not in the same way. Viola means that she is not the man (literally) that Olivia thinks she is. Olivia means that he/she is hiding something from her.

Olivia then saids that since she loves him she would have him be whatever she wanted him to be so that they could be together. She wishes that he would feel the same way about her as she does about him but no luck for her!

People in general tend to hope that they can change a person who they love into what they want them to be. Shakespeare recognized this common human characteristic and chose to incorporate it into this scene, which in my opinion, makes these lines very relatble.

Shakespeare at 3am...

Malvolio: ...and yet to crush it a little, it would bow to me... (II.v.143-145)
Malvolio muct change the MOAI to MAOI in the "letter" that "olivia leaves for him". He basically needs to bend the letter to his will to make it actually fit him therefore making him Olivia's love. Because he wants Olivia so badly he overlooks and ignore reality and tries to bend situations and read into things more than he needs to

I also think that this statement could be applied to Toby Belch and Sir Andrew. Malvolio cannot stand either of them and if he were to marry Olivia, he would be of a higher status and therefore be in charge of them instead of vice versa. He would be able to crush them a little so that they would bow to him.

alot of shakespear

Viola: I am the man (II.ii.25)

Viola is "the man" that Olivia is looking for. However, she is not a man. THrought the scene she constantly referes to and asserts herself as a man, yet being a man prevents her from getting what she wants most in life....a man!

I think this sort of can be scene as Shakespeare using the phrase "I am the man" to symbolize all of the "doubleness" going on Viola's life. She is the man but she is also the woman. She desires love (Duke Orsino's) but denies love (to Olivia). She is a confidant and yet betrays. She basically has wayyy tooo much stuff going on at once in her life.

What thematic strands have you located?
Heart-Love-Longing-Desire-Survival-Hart-stag-hunt-chase-capture-keep-

Where is the data you retrieved found? What is happening in context when Shakespeare employs this particular theme or image?
Act I, Scene 1- Duke Orsino
Act I, Scene 3- Sir Andrew (2x)
Act I, Scene 5- Viola (4x)
Act II, Scene 5- Malvolio
Act III, Scene 1- Olivia (2x) Viola (1x)
Act III, Scene 2- Fabian
Act III, Scene 4- Maria, Olivia
Act IV, Scene 1- Olivia
Act V, Scene 1- Duke Orsino

The use of Hart

Act 1, Scene 1- Curio and Duke Orsino

- Most of the time when the word heart is used it is a sad situation. Usually one person is longing for the love/affection (heart) of someone from whom they cannot have it. All of the characters of Twelfth Night are in love with, or have given their heart away, to someone who does not feel the same way about them. The word heart is also used in the context of a chase or a thing that must be tamed also.
- When the word Hart is used it is used as a play on words. Duke Orsino says that he has been turned into a hart. What he means by that is that he has been turned into a heart, or love sick person. He then goes on to say that his desires pursue him. Comparing his love sick state to that of Hart trying to escape hounds his how Shakespeare chooses to metaphorically describe Orsino’s state.

How does the data you retrieved support your first thoughts on Shakespeare’s obsessive use of a particular image? What can you argue about Shakespeare’s figuration?
In most of Shakespeare’s plays affairs of the heart are never easily managed/resolved. He is fairly consistent in making the heart (or love) something that is often sought after but rarely returned by the person who is originally being sought. Instead by the end of the play each character (almost all of whom have displaced hearts) find someone else to be the recipient of his or her love.

New post

First off i would like to say that strep throat sucks and the wellness center at hofstra has new clue as to what is giong on in the world.
With that said, onto the real assignment.
we were asked to use this concordance thing to look up words and see how they were used in twelfth night. I chose three words (light, love and youth) but youth came up as the most interesting to me. Actually there was one line in which Orsino tells Cesario (viola) that a woman should marry someone older than herself so that they will be matched emotionally.
I am not sure if there is a direct correlation between that concept and youth but whatever it made me think of the word youth so i looked up.
Unless someone was being addressed as a youth in the play, youth was usually linked with positive connotations.
"OLIVIA Your lord does know my mind; I cannot love him:
Yet I suppose him virtuous, know him noble,
Of great estate, of fresh and stainless youth;"

I am pretty sure that one of the reasons that Olivia loves Cesario so much is because of his youth and the fact that he is 'fresh and pure and virtuous'.

Twelfth Night questions

1. Why is Orsino so chummy with Cesario? This guy a) use to be a girl and b) just popped out of nowhere only 3 days prior.
2. Just for clarification? Did both Olivia and Viola's brothers die?
3. Is her brother really even dead.. it seems like she is assuming that he is dead even thoug it has yet to be confirmed.
4. Why does Orsino think that Cesario will prove to be so useful in helping him get Olivia?
5. Is there any reason besides his age and social standing that Olivia is refusing to marry Orsino?
6. I don't know if i am just thinking into this too much but is malvolio a bad person (usually mal as a prefix of a word means bad) i know thta sometimes shakespeare did symbolic naming such as this?

Virtual Iraq

Soldiers kill people. That is essentially what they are enlisted to do. To spend any amount of time in an occupation that possesses such a purposefully violent objective would eventually cause a person to become completely out of touch with reality. In Virtual Iraq, editor Sue Halpern, presents to readers a small recap of the harsh realities of war through her subject Travis Boyd. Boyd, who had been involved in two tours of duty in Iraq found himself unable to assimilate back into normal American society when he returned home. Halpner explains that, “he was haunted by memories of Iraq. He couldn’t sleep. His mind raced. He was edgy, guilt-racked, depressed. He could barely do his job”. What Boyd was suffering from was a typical case of P.T.S.D. (post-traumatic stress disorder) that was taking over (and taking away from him) his post-Iraq life.
One of my sister’s girlfriends was an ex-Iraq veteran and I recall one time when she came to our house for thanksgiving shortly after arriving back at home, she clearly was not the same person she was when she left. She was silent, yet clearly irritated by all the commotion going on in the house and seemed to always be scanning the room as if in search of something or someone.
The Virtual Iraq program discusses in this piece might indeed prove to be an excellent way to get armed service veterans to confront and cope with their Iraq experiences and eventually help them to move on and lead normal lives. By engaging in a game, “in which patients work through their trauma in a computer-simulated environment”, many veterans, such as my sisters girlfriend, might be able to open deal with issues that they feel normal US civilians cannot understand or relate to.
Halpern portrays the feelings of many veterans when quoting Paul Rieckhoff , “I’m not someone who responds to sitting with some guy, talking about my whole life”. Maybe this game will give veterans, or soldiers in between duties, a chance to deal with their Iraq experience on their own terms. Besides, as Rieckhoff puts it, “we’re a video game generation, It’s what we grew up on.”

High-tech trash

I have probably gone through about 7 cell phones since 8th grade when I received my first one. Most, if not all of the phones are sitting in random drawers or baskets scattered around my house. In my house we keep almost everything, thinking that we “might need it one day!’. To think of the millions of pounds of used electronics that wind up in the backyards of people in developing countries is strange. Well maybe not strange, strange may not be the right word, unbelievable I simply cannot believe it. How and where the heck does one throw out a computer anyhow!?! I almost must admit that it was the picture that accompanied the article, not so much the article itself that really caught my attention. That pile of “e-trash” that that boy was holding looked completely unsafe. I do not know much about chemistry or metals or anything but I am guessing that spending large quantities of time around fire, lead, plastic and other potentially hazardous substances cannot be good for a person’s health. At the same time no one really wants piles and piles of old electronic junk sitting in their house either. So here are the options. Create stricter laws concerning the disposal of e-trash, or stop upgrading so often that the demand for the newest and latest technology is decreased and the amount of e-trash produced decreases. Or maybe we should just all do like my family and keep our outdated electronics. Who knows that Nintendo 64 might actually come in handy some day.

Yes. you are lazy, and No. diet soda will not make you skinny

I don’t drink diet soda. If I am going to drink a soda than I am going to drink a goddamn soda and bask in the deliciousness of every calorie-laden drop. The sugar substitutes found in diet sodas, baked goods and many alleged “health” drinks are what we Americans have now turned to in order to cheat without getting caught. Image is everything in this country and love handles and thunder thighs simply do make the cut. By consuming foods with calorie free-sugar substitutes many Americans believe that they can they can attain (or maintain) the body that they desire without having to make any real effort and get their asses up on a Stairmaster.
Maybe I am just being a little hard on sugar-substitutes like splenda and its users (who are in my opinion more often than not abusers). The product itself was actually designed for diabetics whose health would benefit from a product that allowed them to occasionally indulge in their favorite treats without experiencing the effects that the missing sugar would produce. However, how many people have gulped down a diet coke, put splenda in their coffee or bought a reduced-calorie/sugar food item thinking that we were making some huge triumph in the battle against the bulge.
What many Americans do not know is that the products often can have an adverse effect on their desire to look lean. Most sugar substitute products can cause bloating making the person who has just consumed a zero-calorie beverage appear to be a little “puffier” than they really are. In addition, many of these products are made with the chemical saccharine which is a scientifically proven carcinogen. Personally I would rather have a few extra pounds (or just skip the soda altogether) than have cancer. Laziness is a problem in this country and the willingness of its citizens to choose an increased possibility of cancer over a little less food and a little more time at the gym is proof of that fact.
The reason why splenda, equal and other sugar substitutes have been so successful is because people will buy it. As I said before American is obsessed with image. Our people consume the most diet pills, have the most eating disorders and are ironically the fattest when compared to any other country in the world. Drinking a diet soda instead of fruit juice or water will NOT make a person any leaner and definitely will not produce any long-term positive health effects. I will repeat myself to make this clear. DIET SODA AND USING SPLENDA IN YOUR COFFEE DOES NOT AND WILL NOT MAKE YOU THIN! Eating a healthful diet and exercising regularly, aka working for your health, is the only path that will lead to desired and lasting results. So get up off your butts America, put down that diet Dr. Pepper and do some squats!