When to the sessions of sweet silent thought I tend to ponder the ever-changing stages of life.  As I embark upon an adventure of acceptance and rejection, scholarship applications and weighty decisions which shall undoubtedly advise my future I reflect on the passing of my high school age.  I unpack my library of memories (those that have not been lost in thick hazes, drowned by oceans of fun, and survived winter’s many flavored blizzards) I can only realize that it has been my sophomore and senior years that have served to most drastically shape my character.  Why?  Perhaps it is the sad fact that both of these years saw a rather serious rumble with the law, but I would rather cater to my optomistic side and say that these threshold years were more heavily influenced by the man who needs no introduction, or mention for that matter.  From honors englishII to AP lit I have been in this man’s presence long enough to know that his words and lessons shall ring in my brain forever (good or bad I do not know).  Beyond his nurturing encouragement and humbling lessons, witty humor and inate ability to relate (regardless of difference of age or title) it has also been the room full of classmates that have shared these experiences with me.  Without such curiosity and diversity that has surrounded me I am doubtful that he would’ve been able to make such a profound impact.  For this I thank you all for giving that which you all have given, for each of your individual contributions have been absolutely essential in creating such a life changing experience.  The experience that one can only have with their family.       In the honor of this family I will list the initials (as to not comprimise any identities) of all of my brothers and sisters who have made this all possible.  In no specific order except the order of which they come to mind (which is a bit rusted mind you) : JR, CF, SC, KD, KB, CP, MR, MM, JC, ABV, LN, RM, RP, KM, CF, WB, LS, KJ, MS, AA, DSP, NS, CE, MT, SK, EM, KP, KL.  I love you all.                                       

Hold on now, wipe your tears and calm your giggles because this post is not meant to be some emotional rant, or midyear stretch suicide note.  Not at all, I am writing this in search for suggestions and opinions from all of you.  Permanence is not to be taken lightly, and I have fully decided that the impact of these two classes has been something that will forever affect my future.  For this reason I have decided that I shall tattoo my body in honor and rememberence of these classes.  Please comment with any thoughtful suggestion you have and I will take them all into careful consideration.

                                                                  – Thank you all on so many levels

                                                                                            TC

Apple Introduces Revolutionary New Laptop With No Keyboard

Click and Watch!!!! Trust me its worth it

Disco:

http://elfyourself.jibjab.com/view/NvbJkodAgVwq2Cqf62RZ

Country:

http://elfyourself.jibjab.com/view/WEPMBZyA5WvAqOfdUjhT

Ugly, beautiful, ethical, unjust, what do these words really mean?  Are they to be used in a universal manner and interchangeable in all aspects of a human character.  Is it wrong to label someone physically beautiful but morally corrupt, or should all factors that construct the entire being be weighed before strapping a bold, uniformly interpreted title or label.  Personally I feel that no one can ever be perfect because the interpretation of perfect is rarely agreed upon by any two individuals never mind the global human population.  Certainly individuals can come very close to perfection, bur somewhere there will be someone who with one roll of the eyes or a single sneer can cast their unfavorable vote for the Perfection Candidate leaving the person with an imperfect approval rating and therefor dumping him/her in the bottomless landfill with the rest of those sub-par humans like Gandhi, Jesus, or Malcom X.

Crime and Punishment isn’t any different than the real, tangible everyday in that the characters in the story may and should also be labeled differently according to their various traits.  Sonya Marmeladov for example is a prime example of the ability to harbor more than one trait.  Her profession is one that is frowned upon by society and the law, but her spirit is what makes her a beautiful person.  She has essentially sacrificed her physical being for the financial future of her family, and later in the novel expresses her deep religious convictions by trying to introduce the murderer, Raskolnikov, to the lord for forgiveness and redemption.  Rasklonikov on the other hand, though also a suitable example for the varying views that are to be acknowledge regarding a man’s character, is very much opposite of Sonya.  Raskolnikov is described as a rather attractive man who was, although poverty stricken, a well respected member of the St. Petersburg society.  He was an established student at the university who more than proved his intellectual capabilities, and even authored a well-circulated essay on the right of the superior beings to eliminate the inferior pawns of the world.  Unfortunately Raskolnikov’s aesthetically pleasing record was no match for his deranged and corrupt mental state.  He actually follows through with his essay in an effort to prove himself to himself.  He murders Alyona Ivanovna, a local pawn broker, and her sister in order to establish his own superiority.  For this reason, Raskolnikov, like Sonya, can potentially be judged in clashing fashions when picked apart into the smaller aspects that make a functional person and member of the the human world.

First of all I wanted to see if I could post videos and I found out I can. Secondly this guy is awsome.

First of all I thought this posted on tuesday, but apparently i didnt his publish or something. You might think that since i post almost everyday i would know how to use wordpress by now but apparently I dont. Alright, I planed to blog last week, but intrenet on the cruise ship was 75 cents a minute. Well thats my excuse. Anyway…the narration in Crime and Punishment is great in the sense that as readers we are able to experience each chacter through a nonbias lense. We can see the intricacies of each character. Although the story revolves around Raskolnikov, characters such as Svidrigailov or Marmeladov have their own story. In this way Crime and Punishment is more “captivating” or interesting because of the numerous stories taking place alongside the turmiol of Raskolnikov.

Crime and Punishment, one’s first impredession of the title is one of justice, and a plot that succumbs to the “what goes around comes around” philosophy.  However, as far as I have read one would be wrong, or would they?  Raskolnikov may not have received any sort of incarceration or act of punishment from any third party for the haneous murders of the pawn broker and her sister which he committed, but he has undergone a subconcious type of self-inflicted torture.  It is this self-destructive penance that has kept his heart racing with anxiety, and brought some sort of mysterious, physically handicapping illness.  Is this enough?  Does this suffering of the conscience constitute a just recompence for murder?  Should the degree of punishment be based on the value of the victim?  These are all questions that one must ask themself, and I hope that soon the text will provide me with a subsequent amount of insight that will allow me to draw an informed conclusion as to the true meaning of crime vs. punishment.

Shakespeare is getting old…literally. I’m just saying that im getting sick of talking about him like we have been for the last month and a half. I’m likely to complain about anything old like Shakespeare or Sheridan, but id rather be reading contemporary literature every now and then…then id be more interested.

Being one who would usually just watch a movie rather than read, i found the movie version of King Lear to be a bit disappointing. I’m not saying i would want to spend four or five hours watching Shakespeare, but I feel that certain scenes could have had more dialect than they did. Another thing I noticed was that by watching this happen it gives the viewer a set perception of what is going on. In some cases this is good and in some cases this is bad. I feel some scenes didn’t have the same emotion as they did when read, yet some other scenes that were vague before seem to be a bit more clear. All in all, having seen King Lear and Julius Caesar, I think I would rather read Shakespeare than watch the movie.

I think Kavanagh studied Shakespeare and his obnoxious way of writing. His long, complex and run-on sentences confuse the reader. He seems to be saying the same thing over and over again after each of his examples. Basically he says, well this is an example of a sociological and ideological system which focuses on the ideology of sociology ideological social system that express Ideology Ideologically. WHAT??? I hate this guy.