And So It Goes...

It was... bittersweet

There are so many "firsts" in your life that you will always remember, whether that be first best friend, first date, first failure, etc. I will always remember the first day of class at Millbrook, and that stab of nervousness I felt as I walked into the cafeteria for the first time and realized I knew absolutely no one. But four years later, despite all the stress we have endured and the time spent complaining about various teachers or assignments, I can say the experience consisted overall of good moments. So rather than dwell on the few negatives, I decided to mention a few small moments and people from each year that hold special places in my heart that transcend any of the bad.

Who knew that my first friend I made at Millbrook Freshman year would end up being my best? I do not remember the exact moment I met Rebecca Irene, but I am confident it started with a timid "Hey I'm Kaitlyn, do you wanna warm up with me?" at the first day of JV tennis practice. We often ended up playing together, and she stuck around warming up with me even though she has always been 10x better. Even though we did not have any classes together Freshman year, we still managed to remain friends until we got to know each other even more over the course of the past three years. Now we have countless memories together, but those are stories for another time! Secondly, another key moment I had Freshman year was with the aforementioned cafeteria debacle. I had second lunch on the first A-day, and decided to sit with the equally-as-sky Maria Alejandra (back when she was shy, that is). I recall pretending to know a lot about One Direction and 5 Seconds of Summer to have a decent conversation with her, because all other small talk led back to them in the end. But nevertheless, I am still eternally grateful that she was nice enough to let me sit with her and made my first day of high school so much easier and fun.

Sophomore year is where I had some of my favorite moments, but I think some of the best that involved IB people had to be with my English group. By happenstance, Mrs. Cortwright placed Anna Thompson, Lindsey Mallard, Graham Watkins, and I in the same group and we all got along very well. In fact, we got along so well that during the last three quarters we never moved tables and only sat with each other. One of the memories that stands out the most is after Noah Showalter got a purple Bojangles t-shirt from his friend's grandmother's attic, and asked around the cafeteria if anyone wanted it. Naturally, I was not one to turn down a perfectly good shirt to use as a pajama top, so I took it and brought it back to my English group with pride. Rather than just making a comment on it, Graham decided to take it from me and put it on. As this was a size small shirt and Graham was wearing football pads, it was basically a tight crop top on him. He looked absolutely ridiculous. Anna, Lindsey, and I just laughed at him the entire period much to the teacher's annoyance, but I could see the smile she was trying to hide everytime she looked at us.

To be honest, Junior year was kind of a blur with all the assignments we had to do, but I managed to make a few more friends somewhere along the way. I first met Alexandra Butler Freshman year, but our friendship really started to pick up last year. I remember being quite intimidated by her, since she was Vice President of Junior Class Council and always seemed to have multiple people talking to her at once. But after talking with her in class, while she taught me to knit, or even while picking collards and okra at Goodwill farms, I learned she was not intimidating at all; she's just a really cool person to have the most random conversations with. As for a weird memory involving another friend, Danny Andrussier, there was this one lunch in Ms. Clemmer's room that stands out. I am not quite sure if he was trying to make Rebecca and I laugh, but he started drawing on the white board with string cheese as a marker. I guess he was unsatisfied when we paid little attention, so he went over to his friend Michael Pasca, who was eating a banana, and lightly shoved it upwards to smash the banana on the tip of his nose. It did not make a mess or anything, and only resulted in a slightly baffled Michael, but I feel like this memory encapsulates my friendship with Danny. He is always unpredictable and doing whatever it takes to make someone laugh, and even of his methods are odd sometimes, it just adds to his fun personality.

There are a lot of stand out memories from Senior Year, and I got to know quite a few people even more through shared lunches and classes. Some of these people include Iman Breland, Quentin Meritt, Chris Vogel, and Keerti Kalluru, who all ended up being in my Canterbury Tales Group. Even though our movie was extremely cringy to everyone but us, we all had so much fun running around in super hero costumes in public. Shout out to the time where Keerti stood on top of a rock as Wonder Woman while spinning an iPhone Charger as her golden lasso of truth, or when I threw a plastic table at Chris since he was dressed as a creepy old man poking Iman with a stick. As you can see, a lot of my favorite moments revolve around school, and while some people may think that is sad, I find absolutely nothing wrong with it. I will be the first to say I did enjoy high school, and though I cannot wait for Summer and college, I will miss everyone I have ever met here (whether they are listed here publicly or listed in my heart). My departure from Millbrook is thus bittersweet, because I am more than ready to leave but do not want to say my goodbyes. But I know with confidence that even though moving forward is terrifying, it is also exciting because of how many new friends I will make while still cherishing the old.

Witty Whitman

Roses are red, green is a pea
I don't like doing work
So I'm using my Freebie

"Breathing Dreams Like Air..."

"The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"-Someone

   I suppose my first exposure to the American Dream came with watching Shark Tank when I was in middle school; the five 'sharks' were always commending the aspiring entrepreneurs if they achieved this concept. As a result, it shaped my perception of this dream to be quite monetary, since I associated it with the success that comes with a business or enterprise. Now that I have a better understanding of what the American Dream is actually meant to be, I understand the typical belief is that it is self-made. This does not mean it relies on strictly business ventures, but rather taking advantage of the "unalienable" rights guaranteed in the Constitution to achieve even the wildest parts of your imagination. This could be finding a hobby you are passionate about and perfecting it, creating a family, or even taking lifelong risks that could either promote or desiccate your happiness. As a result, the American Dream is not simply intangible success, but a physical manifestation of your deepest desires.
      As I mentioned previously, wealth is a topic people commonly associate with the American Dream since those in hard financial situations want to achieve a debt-free lifestyle. Yet, the definition of wealth is not as simple as how much a person makes in dollars, but also several other monetary and social factors. I will be honest, my first thought when I hear wealth typically revolves around money since this is the most common meaning of the word. However, as cheesy as it sounds, strong relationships with friends, family, and God are the most priceless. Even though the American Dream is unobtainable for many when it comes to financial security, a person can still aspire to be wealthy in the people they always rely on and the joyful emotions they evoke.
     Although I wish life was as simple as everyone achieving their dreams, I understand financial wealth and poverty will always be a dividing line between the national population and the world. American society, like in The Great Gatsby, has always bred citizens with the mindset that money is power. Perhaps this is true in many ways, such as how we see wealthy individuals with key positions in government and their access to innumerable resources. Society also tends to view its impoverished citizens as lazy with the belief they are choosing to not work harder to better themselves. Yet, my mindset is not as clear-cut as this one, because I understand there are sides to every story. The American Dream, and the happiness associated with it, is not reflective of income only. For example, I learned this year that white, middle to upper class males are the most likely to commit suicide, and those who have a household income of over $75,000 are more likely to have domestic problems. This shows how having money may look optimal to those on the outside, but in reality it may be causing even more problems. As for those in poverty, it certainly is not an ideal situation and of course they wish to escape it, but the values of hard work will hopefully pay off in the future for these individuals. Whatever a person's situation or version of the American Dream is, it is up to the rest of us to treat everyone with equal respect and hope others give the same to us.

You down with the IOC? No, not really!

Excerpt and Prep From Macbeth:

My Practice IOC:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1flUW9X6-8loF2KQc9dTE8QqvpRE8X_gM

Criterion A: Knowledge and Understanding of the Text - 7

I gave myself a seven in this category because I felt I could have included more about the text and historical context. While I did include some context about religion, witches, and the fear of the supernatural, I lacked information about King James I and the Catholicism dilemma. For the points I did include, I did feel like my quotes supported my points. In the future, I might want to look over my Macbeth notes a little more and memorize some facts.

Criterion B: Understanding the Use and Effects of Literary Devices - 7

I was not too sure whether to give myself a six or seven on this, so I decided to go with the more confident number since it is just practice. I wish I would have identified more stylistic devices, but many of the obvious ones (similes, metaphors) were not in my passage. As a result, the main ones I found involved syntax, connotation, and objectification. I do feel like I supported the ones included pretty well using quotes and historical context, so that is why I placed myself as a seven.

Criterion C: Organization - 4

Since I pretty much went in the order provided on the IOC planning sheet, my argument was relatively organized. I started with a background of the play, then a thesis, three themes with quotes, and a conclusion. The only reason I did not give myself a five was because I wish I would have rearranged some of my quotes, like those in my third theme because I felt like I kind of jumped around. I think this was mainly due to how little time I had left to plan this section, so next time I have to dedicate at least three minutes to each theme.

Criterion D: Language - 4
The main reason I gave myself a four was because my thesis' wording was all over the place. I had a simple version of it written down on my paper, and when I went to read it, my rephrasing of it was jumbled. In addition, my use of "ums" and contractions made my commentary a tad informal. As much as I will try to fix how I say my thesis in the future, I really cannot focus on whether I use colloquial language. I would much rather be focused on my actual analysis than if I speak perfectly formal language, so the only thing I can try to be more aware.

Total: 22/30

Nothing Really Mattress: Kafka, Camus, and the Importance of Translation

Quote 1:Gregory Samsa woke from uneasy dreams one morning to find himself changed into a giant bug.

• Simplistic structure which provides only essential details. There is not an excessive use of adjectives, and only uses them to provide positive or negative connotations to words such as "dreams" or "bug". The details included are meant to set the scene and describe what happened, but it is said like a statement and not meant to provoke imagery.

Quote 2:When Gregor Samsa awoke from troubled dreams one morning he found he had been transformed in his bed into an enormous bug.

• Specific avoidance of using commas to ensure it sounds like a statement. Since the sentence begins with "when", there could be a comma after "morning" which would change the diction to be analytical. "Bug" is described as enormous, suggesting he was not just a bug, but significantly larger than how a real bug would be. This acts as a hyperbole, where a reader may imagine a bug comically large and add a humorous tone to the quote. 
  

Quote 3:As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.

• The use of "as" at the beginning shows he realized his transformation while he was waking up, not after. "One morning" is also mentioned before "uneasy dreams", making the structure focused on introducing a setting before providing details.  Lastly, imagery is seen in how his transformation is described. "Insect" is a more formal word for "bug", as well as how "gigantic" is a more exaggerated version of "giant". As a result, the use of synonyms makes the text seem more sophisticated and precise.

Quote 4: One morning, upon awakening from agitated dreams, Gregor Samsa found himself, in his bed, transformed into a monstrous vermin.

• The use of commas four times makes the structure(broken up=broken man) interruptive, so there is more focus on each individual part. "One morning" is said first, so that the setting is immediately established. The diction/connotation associated with agitated dreams suggests there was something specific on his mind that was based in experiences/fears. Lastly, imagery is played with in saying "monstrous vermin" because vermin is often associated with mice. This may make a person imagine a large creature that is not the bug/insect mentioned in the other translations.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Though each translation has essentially the same plot elements and equally serve to develop the plot, meaning is expressed through the style and structure of the sentences. Syntax is possibly the most noticeable difference amongst the four, such as the placement of "One morning" in the translation. The first two place the phrase after mentioning Samsa's dreams, which places more emphasis on how he was unable to sleep. In the second two, "one morning" is placed before the dreams were mentioned (the fourth translation even had it as the first words) to give more attention to the setting. While the point being made is the same, the difference was the reader's attention to one specific part to tell them where they should be focused: the setting or Samsa's mental state. Punctuation plays into this as well, because the author's use of commas splits sentences into multiple parts. For example, quote 1 has no commas and is a statement that introduces a major plot element. On the other hand, quote 4 uses four commas (some grammatically unnecessary) to have fragmented sentences represent how Samsa's life is now broken and unpredictable.

Now that's an "enormous" man-bug.

     In all of the translations, imagery is a mechanism to express tone. The first two quotes are similar in how they describe the transformation as being a bug, but differ in their descriptions. Quote 1 says "giant" and quote 2 says "enormous", with the first acting as a key descriptor and the other being a dramatization. The simplicity of the imagery in quote 1 makes it more serious, because the details appear to be more accurate and less concerned with frivolous adjectives. The overemphasis of the bug as enormous thus makes quote 2 a tad more comical, since the word "enormous" may make a reader imagine a bug as big as a human. As for quotes 3 and 4, Samsa's new form is described as either a gigantic insect or monstrous vermin (respectively). The use of the word "insect" instead of "bug" does not have a drastic effect on the imagery or tone, since they are synonyms of each other. "Gigantic" is also a medium between "giant" and "enormous", so a reader will likely imagine Samsa in a similar way. However, the translation in quote 4 is drastically different due to how he is referred to as vermin. "Vermin" is typically equated with a mouse or rat, so this would cause a reader to think Samsa did not turn into a bug. The concept of what can be considered vermin is also argumentative, since it can be any organism that is a pest. The addition of the word "monstrous" also gives it a terrifying tone, making it appear like the author meant for the book to be part of the horror genre.

     This exercise brings up the importance of translations to show how unless the target language has been mastered, it may be impossible to understand a text's implicit meanings. As a result, it becomes difficult to read a translated texts because all analytical assumptions could be based in falsities. This revelation is not a new one in society; take Judaism and Islam, for example. Both religions have many translations of their sacred texts, but each religion wants their followers to learn the text's language so they can fully grasp what has been written long ago. Many words and phrases in Hebrew and Arabic do not exist in English, because they may have associated connotations that cannot be expressed. This means some followers of these religions cannot say an English follower has read the Torah or Quran if they have not read it in its original language. There is not much that can be fixed about this predicament, since language is just as much embedded in culture as it is in words. Perhaps with the analysis and interpretations of numerous fluent scholars can we finally understand what these authors are trying to get across. 

http://kryptonsyt.darkbb.com/t9-wizards-of-waverly-place-dad-s-buggin-out-s03e18-hdtv-xvid-dvdrip-itunes

I've Got You Covered

Examine the four covers of Never Let Me Go below. Choose two to compare, using the guidelines provided to complete a thorough analysis.

   

       Cover 1                     Cover 2                          Cover 3                  Cover 4

Surface Level Analysis:

Cover 1: The first object on this cover which draws attention is the sitting figure of a young female, possibly a teenager. She is looking away from the camera, and is wearing a conservative outfit that covers her arms, chest, and most of her legs. Her clothing may suggest that she lives in a formal setting, such as an elite school that requires herself to be covered. In addition, she is sitting next to a bush by herself, which is not a traditional place for a teenage girl to be situated. The purpose could be to show how her solidarity is intentional, and how she is possibly avoiding someone or something. Lastly, the font used is commonly found in science fiction movies or books, its technological influences hinting at the involvement of a futuristic advancement.

Cover 2: The color scheme of this cover is mostly browns and yellows, signifying the novel may have a bleak story. Since the book also takes place in London, the fog shrouding the background and objects is a nod to England's imperfect weather. An empty rowboat is floating in shallow water by a pole, with a long wooden dock in the background. The author's name is large and above the title, with the intended purpose of advertising a famous, award-winning name to act as an incentive to read the book.

Cover 3: This cover features the shape of the human body, in the form of a crudely-drawn outline. Many of the major organs have been drawn in, including the lungs, liver, pancreas, and intestinal tract. These organs are all common sites of life-threatening cancer, suggesting these are the primary organs taken from donors. Though the entire cover is blue, a darker shade shows a shadow of trees or a building in the background, possibly a place of some significance to the protagonists. The font is rather scraggly, using multiple colors for the author's name and uneven letters to give a feeling of unease. This type of font is often used in association with horror or mystery novels, suggesting these could be themes within the novel. 

Cover 4: The most simplistic of the designs, this cover features a yellow-orange background and a watercolor image of a girl. Her back is facing the audience, but a pillow can still be seen in her arms. She is swaddling it like a baby, and is meant to represent the scene where Madame watches Kathy dancing around to "Never Let Me Go". Since Kathy's back is to the audience, the purpose was to  show Madame's perspective of when she walked in on this intimate moment and how she chose not to interrupt it. 

Basic Similarities and Differences: Three of the covers, numbers 1,2, and 4, all acknowledge Ishiguro as an acclaimed writer. Whether they mention his awards, such as "Nominated for the Man Booker Prize" or give a quote from a critic, it gives a buyer insight into the credibility of the author. The third cover only includes the book title and author's name, since the main focus was to be on the image. Cover 1 and Cover 3 are also the only ones that display the author's name smaller than the title, and also use a different font color that blends into the background more so it is less noticeable. This is different than Covers 1 and 4, which place the author's name on top of and larger than the title if the publisher felt that was the main selling point. Finally, covers 1 and 2 feature images of actual people and places, to give a sense of realism to the story. It allows a reader to place the plot's context in the real world, where the other two covers allows the reader's imagination to create their own locations based on Ishiguro's descriptions.

Analyzing Cover 2 and Cover 3:

1) What are the first words that come into your mind when you see this image?  What does it make you think of?

When looking at the boat on Cover 2, the first word that comes to mind is "stranded". Though the boat is sitting in open water, the melancholy atmosphere evokes feelings of sadness and inability to escape. The boat appears to be tied to a single pole, showing how unless these ties are cut, it can never move. It appears to be a metaphor for the lives of clones, and how their fates are bound. For example, Kathy and her friends are able to travel the country with ease, leaving for Norfolk unopposed. No one could stop them from leaving the Cottages permanently, because there were few supervisors watching them. Yet, despite this freedom and the desire to live full lives, the clones always return to the places they have always known. This is likely because even if they escaped they would be trapped in a discriminatory world, where they would be persecuted as clones and how they left their "duty" behind. So, the boat on the water represents the ability to escape to the great beyond, but how they will always be tied down and unable to escape. On the other hand, the first word that comes to mind for Cover 3 is "inescapable".  If the outline of the torso is looked at closely, one can see irregular black marks alone the outside. While these could be stitches, they immediately reminded me of barbed wire. Barbed wire is mainly used to keep people out, and thus, how the clones were purposely kept out of human society. As I mentioned in my surface-level analysis, the organs featured in the torso are commonly associated with deadly forms of cancer and disease. Yet one important organ is missing: the heart. The reason for not including the heart was likely intentional in showing the dilemma of whether a clone is truly human. As explained by Miss Emily, the Gallery's purpose was to "Prove you had any souls at all" (Ishiguro 260). By not including a heart, or other organs associated with being humane (like the brain), it showed how it was easier to take a clone's organs if they were considered "other than". As a result, the word "inescapable" can be applied because with a flawed mindset of the value of human life, the clone would be forced to donate even when it cost their life. 

2) If you hadn't read any of the novel, what would this image make you think the book was about? 

 Now that you've read the novel, what kind of relationship(s) does this image have to the text?

Since the most prominent image on Cover 2 is a boat, I would think the story would have to do with sailing, or at least take place in a city by the water. Since the boat is small and can only fit a few people, it would hint that the protagonist(s) prefer to interact with small groups or by themselves. It is also not a sophisticated boat, so it could be representative of a sailing dream or leaving for better places to increase a person's livelihood. Now that I have read the novel, I know that the boat is only present in a single scene at the end of the book. It is the last adventure Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy have together after being separated for so long, and is when Ruth finally apologizes for her behavior and asks that Tommy and Kathy try to have a relationship. This tied up boat can be representative of how it is too late for this relationship, because Tommy is preparing for a donation and Kathy is his Carer. The open water shows how much time and opportunity they once had to be together, but now they are limited to a short, frivolous relationship since their fate had already been decided. When looking at Cover 3, I would immediately think of Frankenstein and other supernatural Gothic texts due to several features. For one, the text is haphazard and not a formal font, which I associate with the credits from old horror films. Secondly, the previously mentioned "barbed wire" also looks like stitches from a Frankenstein-esque monster. Knowing the context of the book, I can now see how this represents the ultimate outcome of the clones' lives. They will be dismembered into faceless body parts, being identified more by their anatomy than personality. The purpose of this cover was to therefore show how every clone is equal at the end of their life, and how not even love or distinguishing features can differentiate one from the other. 
3) Who seems to be portrayed?  From whose viewpoint are we looking?

The image of the boat could be from various perspectives-Kathy, Ruth, or Tommy. They all went to see the boat, because it was considered a final adventure to experience together. The distance of the boat from them is also important, because it is not directly in front or below them. Despite having made the journey to see the boat, the most important aspect is the apologetic conversation Ruth has with the others. This means that they never get to see the boat up close, and how they are unable to complete their mission. This shows the unfulfilled tension between the trio of friends, and how even with this event, they are unable to make amends and make up for lost time. The perspective from Cover 3 is more ambiguous, since it is a simple illustration. However, if we imagine the torso to be real, it could belong to any clone during their final donation. Since a clone can only have certain body parts taken and be able to survive, their "completion" means their entire torso can be opened and used. As a result, the person looking at their open chest would be a doctor sent to extract the most important organs. The exact doctor will always remain unnamed, because clones do not have the luxury of having a personal doctor to oversee their completion. They are simply considered a job to these surgeons, and thus the torso is displayed as faceless and impersonal.
4) Does this image spark any ideas about the cultural construction of the book?

Since cover 2 is meant to be in London, the foggy location near the water alludes to this location. The foggy weather is not uncharacteristic of English weather, yet the yellow hue would not be common in the 1990s. The unusual color is meant to signify something unnatural is afoot, and that this London is not the same as the one that once existed. If one looks carefully at the dock in the background, it can be seen that it is slightly askew. This effect was achieved by taking the picture at an angle, to show society was bent out of the normal and there were new implications in the world. The cultural construction of the book can also be seen in the images of Cover 3, because of how it includes illustrations and actual images. The illustrations, in dark ink as if freshly drawn, give the impression of something new and inventive that has redefined society. It is overlapping a shadow of real trees, symbolizing how the new has overtaken the natural. This sparks ideas about the cultural construction of the book and how the setting may take place in a familiar environment. If a reader can find parallels to a similar world, the plot will seem more realistic and as if it could actually happen. This would draw focus to the "new" element, so that an audience could see how a controversial issue would take place if it was implemented into modern culture.
5) What kinds of people would make this book, and what kinds of people would read it?

As the image of the boat does not spark immediate interest in the topic of clones, the creator of Cover 2 would likely focus on the metaphorical aspects of the book. The author(s) could pay more attention to the "what makes you human" aspects of the plot, as well as the relationships between the three main characters. Since the setting of the coastline and boat is the main focus of the cover, an author may go into further detail into the weather, location, and the objects that affect the characters. The type of people attracted to this would be those who enjoy realistic fiction or romance novels, because there would be less focus on the supernatural and more on complex relationships. The classic love triangle could also be appealing, especially with the concept of a "lost love" being a popular theme in literature. The type of people who made Cover 3 would be those who wish to highlight the society Kathy lived in. This is because the main focus was on the clones' role of donating organs, and not so much the personalities involved. A rendition of Never Let Me Go by this publisher may reveal more information about 1990s London and how the society developed, and also may explore the lives and opinions of humans in this scientific world. Readers of this version would also share interest in modern dystopian fiction, since popular novels like The Hunger Games feature oppressive governments. These readers would enjoy learning about this society and may draw parallels to their own, and how discovering the truth in a fictional world may lead to truths about their own.

Once upon a time...

Many are familiar with the story of David and Goliath, where a small Shepard boy defies the odds by defeating a giant. However, Malcolm Gladwell makes the point that the seemingly optimistic theme of overcoming the odds is actually wrong. He explains how it was actually Goliath who was the weaker warrior, because his incredible height of 6' 9" is a symptom of acromegaly. This is a disease which results in abnormal growth, but also causes vision loss and less-acute senses. On the other hand, David was skilled with using a sling to hurtle rocks with the same force as a .45 caliber handgun. This meant he could easily kill Goliath from a distance since the giant could only fight in close combat. By describing these events, the speaker's point was to prove how a person's greatest strength (i.e Goliath's condition) can also be their greatest weakness, and how the powerful giants in our life may be the most unassuming.

Approximately the first five minutes of the Ted Talk is an narration of the original David and Goliath story, namely the Biblical version of the story. Gladwell makes sure to include direct quotes from the Bible, those of which have been considered the most accurate translation. The purpose was to reference them in the future, to show what these quotes prove when combined with historical analysis. In addition, his inclusion of the original story reminds the audience of the generic story, so they are familiarized with the exact details. Once he develops this tale, he begins to describe the events as an underdog story, using pathos as a means to describe David as the victim. Since this is the most common interpretation of the story, it also draws an emotional response from the crowd as they recount on childhood memories and overall familiarity with the story. Yet, despite building up this response, Gladwell quickly develops a more cynical approach and begins to dispute each detail. He says, "Well, let's start there with the phrase, 'all David has is a sling,' because that's the first mistake we make" (6:31). By utilizing this change of tone, he captures the audience's attention by changing focus. He continues to command their attention by using rhetorical questions, such as asking whether the slingshot David wielded was a toy or an actual weapon of war. As an answer, he uses ethos in the form of historical record s found from accredited sources, including details of how "experienced slingers could hit, maim, or even kill at distances of up to 200 yards" (Gladwell 6:40). By including these details, it makes him more credible as an expert since he has provided evidence from factual sources. It makes any ambiguous details with less evidence more believable, since the facts and knowledge presented earlier make his logic seem sound. Lastly, he uses a combination of ethos and pathos to present his final argument. He says, "Well, it turns out there's been a great deal of speculation within the medical community over the years about whether there is something fundamentally wrong with Goliath" (Gladwell 12:15). With his claims that Goliath was suffering from a medical condition, the audience begins to realize the giant was not as much of a threat as they previously assumed; Goliath was fighting a constant battle within himself. The audience thus begins to empathize with the supposed villain of the story, because evidence by the "medical community" deemed it as being highly probable. As a result, the speaker's claim of Goliath being the weaker man becomes more effective, because historical/medical details and the audience's emotions drive the story to reach a new meaning.

While some of the main reasons I chose this TedTalk revolved around the familiar Biblical story and a recommendation from a friend, I continued to watch since its theme of victimization related to several of our past readings. Throughout my time in IB, we have read story after story about people living in oppressive societies. Typically the protagonist is considered the victim, not only because of the narrating perspective but also because of the author's personal views. Yet, sometimes this perspective is never the full story, because no matter if the society is real or fictional, it is still one-sided. I immediately thought of A Handmaid's Tale while watching this video, and how Offred was seemingly oppressed in Gilead as a woman. Though her oppression was extreme and undoubtedly wrong, Offred still may have not been a complete victim as she claimed to be. Margaret Atwood set the society in a time where women were failing to have healthy offspring, and how Gilead was established to remedy this problem. With Offred unwilling to perform this simple task for the sake of humanity, she can come across as somewhat selfish. While this analysis is much more extreme (and not based in fact) than David and Goliath, the same principles of false victimization can still be applied. So, I was drawn to watching this video fully because of the connections I began to see, and the connections I hoped to find to other common stories I have heard throughout my life.

Don't Hyde From Fate

 Analyze, compare and contrast the idea development and voice in the two excerpts in 1-2 paragraphs.

(In my case, Chapter 2 for Hyde and Chapter 3 for Jekyll)

               Due to the author’s intentional design of his characters, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are meant to be stark opposites. Not only is Hyde described as grotesque and inhuman compared to Jekyll, but the author chose to use his actions to allude to animalistic behavior. Aside from the obvious descriptions of Hyde “hissing” and withdrawing from conversations, his body language is also telling of his animal qualities. For example, Stevenson mentions twice that Hyde refuses to look Jekyll in the eye. A study of several animals, namely dogs and wolves, found that unfamiliar animals refuse to look in human’s eyes if they are willing to submit to them. Yet, the study also found “Direct eye contact in these canids is often a behavior in establishing or challenging dominance, so staring at a dog or wolf makes them uncomfortable, if not irritated” (Forbes). This challenge for dominance can be seen within the same excerpt of the novella, which stated how Hyde was, “...fronted about with an air of defiance; and the pair stared at each other pretty fixedly for a few seconds” (Stevenson 9). Hyde only partook in this confrontation because he felt threatened by Utterson’s incessant questions. Not only did he answer each inquiry with brevity, but also made sure his answers did not provoke further questioning. Since Utterson did not cease his investigation despite Hyde’s impersonal responses and passive body language, Hyde was forced to challenge Utterson for control of the conversation via eye contact. On the other hand, Jekyll’s primary method of conversing with Utterson was rather humane and individual. Not only did he describe Hyde as possessing “a sincere and warm affection” (with affection being a human trait), but also as being curious about Jekyll’s relationships with others (Stevenson 12). While Hyde wished for his conversation to be brief, Jekyll was genuinely curious in Lanyon and Utterson’s relationship. These are also hints of past memories and topics embedded in Jekyll and Utterson’s conversation, suggesting they are familiar with each other and old friends. As a result, their conversation included a range of emotions from both sides, evident by words such as “kindness”, “distasteful”, and “distressed” (Stevenson 12). Having such complex emotions makes Jekyll more approachable than Hyde, and allows the development of ideas to progress naturally.

               Though the characters of Jekyll and Hyde have more differences than similarities, they do share some of the same tendencies. A clear example is how both characters respond to the will in a similar fashion. After Hyde accuses Utterson of being a liar, the text states, “The other snarled aloud into a savage laugh; and the next moment, with extraordinary quickness, he had unlocked the door and disappeared into the house” (Stevenson 10). Once again, Hyde exhibits primal behavior in the form of snarling and quickness. Yet, the development of his façade is confident to frightful. This phrase begins with dominant behavior, that of a lion defending its territory, but evolves into the behavior of a skittish mouse. It shows how Hyde’s composure is rather fluid since his emotions change so rapidly. In the same measure, Jekyll also fails to remain calm when prompted by the topic of the will. Due to their strong friendship, Jekyll felt betrayed with Utterson “ruthlessly disregarding the fresh topic” of Lanyon in order to discuss the will (Stevenson 12). Jekyll’s sharp response is similar to that of Hyde’s, where he refuses to address the topic further and no longer trusts Utterson. He loses all friendly emotion towards the other in this moment, showing how Jekyll and Hyde share the same inexpressive tendencies when provoked. Thus, in both excerpts the development of ideas is stopped, because concise speech and emotional distance terminates the conversation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/09/20/how-do-animals-perceive-eye-contact-from-other-species/#1eeb957d6847

A Poem with Two Voices: A Collaboration with Rebecca Irene 😁

My inspiration for writing this poem, both collaboratively and with my role as Hyde, was to capture the conflict within the two identities. Although both sides were competing to be the sole identity, they both only embody half of a person. As a result, the conclusion of our poem has both sides acknowledge the importance of the other with the intended effect of showing a balance.

Jekyll I can’t control him He fights to be free, to have his evil power over my whole being I try to resist, but his wild and ruthless nature is too strong Let me out This cruelty is too much, that child deserved better! How can I escape his grasp? These evil deeds torture my kinder nature but appeal to my desire for youthful lawlessness I need him. But at what cost? He gives me respite from the dullness of normalcy, but in the worst ways possible. I can feel the darkness gnawing at my soul, and my worse half conquers my delicate being once more. And I let him in

Hyde I can’t control him I crave power, I cannot contain my vices much longer Let it consume you, feel the fury mounting in your soul. Suppress your thoughts, accept your instincts Let me out How can I make him understand? Necessary evils ensure our survival. My thirst is unquenchable; should I be feeling remorse? Should there be a counterbalance of my deeds, to preserve my anonymity? I need him. But at what cost? He is my provider of resources, the caretaker of my prison. But if this continues, I must become the warden and he the prisoner. A dark oblivion beckons me, and yet the light is ever-present. Morality is alluring, tempting me to be awash with virtue. And I let him in