Quarter 3- Journal 16: So Long a Letter

So long for such a short book. Furthermore, really? This book was equally as boring as From Sleep Unbound. At least it was really short. In this book, the character really just complains to her friend, and forces her to empathize with her because her husband died. Some friend. Her friend, Aissatou, can commemorate because she divorced her husband after he took a co-wife. Ramatoualye, the person scribing this wonderful letter, then recalls how strong Aissatou is, because she herself couldn't divorce her husband when he took a co-wife of his daughter's friend. Awkward. In any case, I find that these books both show how much life sucked for women living in either Egypt or Senegal during these time periods for the adversity they faced, and the lack of love in their lives. However, I think these books could be better if a bit more went on, rather than the female protagonist complaining about how sad/lifeless they are. In conclusion, this book was pretty slow and boring, but I guess in the end Mrs. Hilston was right. These are not books to be favorites, but they do have a lot to be written about.

Quarter 3- Journal 15: Conflict

So this week in IB Theory of Knowledge, we learned that there are three different types of conflict. No, Mrs. Hilston/Lindley, they are not man vs. man, man vs. society and man vs self. These three different kinds of conflicts are the functionalist theory, the conflict theory and the symbolic interaction theory. The functionalist theory states that groups will adjust to each other in a stable manner, and not have conflict. The conflict theory states that groups are inevitably organized to compete with each other. The symbolic interaction theory emphasizes the importance of culture and language for the development of society, groups and individuals. I think it's interesting that nearly anything debated can be fitted into at least one of these three categories. For instance, the Ku Klux Klan fits under both the conflict theory and the symbolic interaction theory, for they are based off of culture, but also inevitably compete with one group. I watched the movie Inglorious Bastards last night, and while I didn't think it was that great, I realize that it totally fits in with the conflict theory. Brad Pitt assembles a group of jewish people to disguise themselves and go into Nazi Germany and try and take down some Nazis. He purposefully creates a group of people in order to have conflict. I think it's definitely interesting to see a concept like that applied, considering the human race in general tends to avoid conflict when faced with adversity.

Quarter 3- Journal 14: Hard sciences vs. Soft sciences

First off, I think it's an improper statement to claim that either of these sciences is harder than any of the others. For instance, people who are generally bad at social studies are good with subjects like math and science, and vice-versa. I think if we evaluated one person from each party, they would probably argue on separate sides of the case. Besides, hard is a very subjective word, and what people consider is hard is not the same for anyone. Someone who spends all their life working out, may think that math is hard, whereas someone who spends all of their time studying may think that running a three mile race is hard. Therefore, no one should be able to claim that either social science is harder than another. That's one reason that I didn't like the beginning of the chapter packet. When they start questioning which science is harder, it was just bothersome. Maybe because when I was younger, I hated social studies, but now, I have a high grade in social studies, much higher than my math, biology or chemistry grades. So in conclusion, I don't think it's fair to say that anything is harder than anything else.

Quarter 3: Journal 13: Crazy for You

I saw the musical last night, and first and foremost, great job to everyone who was in the cast and crew! It was really good! The story itself is actually a really nice story. It starts off with the protagonist Bobby Child, who wants to dance for the rest of his life, being controlled by his mother (go Margo) and his "fiance." (I don't think he's actually engaged to her.) Anyway, his choice is to stay with his wife and mother, or go out and try and foreclose some town as a banker in Dead Rock, Nevada. For his sanity, he gets to Dead Rock as soon as he can. There, he meets a girl who is trying to keep the town alive, Polly Baker. She hates Bobby Child for trying to take her town away from her, but he falls in love with her at first encounter. After Bobby and Polly plan to put on a show, to raise the money so the town won't have to be foreclosed. Then, Polly finds out that Bobby is actually Bobby, and doesn't trust him anymore. Then, Bobby calls in his showgirl friends from New York, and he dresses up as Bella Zangler, the owner of the showgirls, who Polly falls in love with. Then, he tries to convince her that he's actually Bobby Child, but she doesn't believe him. After their first show fails, the real Bella Zangler shows up and pays off the debt of the foreclosure. Then, Polly and Bobby get together, and live happily ever after. I thought that this was a good musical because of the story, and how well thought out it is. Maybe I'm a bit of a sap for love stories, but you should go see the AHS players present this show.

Quarter 3- Journal 12: God and Genetics

Can they coexist? Personally, I think so. There are definitely some conflicts in order for it to work, but they can coexist. To start, the Bible states that God created every individual based on his own image of them, whereas, genetics state that you are half of your mother and half of your father in all things genetic. I think these two facts can coexist because there are also environmental factors that can affect one's being as well. If God can control those, than he can control a lot of who anyone is as a person, and therefore shift them into his own image. Also, there is the other belief, which states that God is not omnipotent. If God is not all powerful, than he couldn't make everyone in his own image anyway, so it doesn't really conflict with genetics in that manner. However, if we claim that God controls the environmental factors around you, to shift who you are into his own image, than that brings up the argument about predestination. Are we placed on this earth to fulfill our own will, or live the life of someone already completely mapped out? I, personally, don't like the feeling of not having control over what I do, because I hate being controlled by anyone. But just because I dislike being controlled doesn't necessarily mean that I believe that everyone has free will. I'm not entirely sure, but I think that we have free will, but at the same time, a lot of things happen for a reason. I'm not entirely sure how to explain that, but it's what I believe. Then again, I've always considered my beliefs to be rather unique.

Quarter 3- Journal 11: Charades

So last night I was hanging out with some friends, and we played charades for quite a few hours. Despite me being totally bored by the end of it, it was still pretty interesting to see how people react to what other people think is portraying an idea. It shows how the human mind can be so similar, and so different at the same time. Also, there was a two minute time constraint in which you had to get the movie title or song out to the other team. This also shows how crazy fast the human brain works. Someone has to process an idea, figure out how to show it through motions, without props, and then make it guessable for someone else. It's also interesting to see that if someone gets the first three words of a song "It's all coming...", then the know that the song is "It's All Coming Back to Me Now." This is another portrayal of how fast the human brain works. Ultimately, I thought charades was super interesting game to analyze, just because of the human interaction that is involved.

Quarter 3- Journal 10: From Sleep Unbound

This is a book that we had to read as part of our world literature curriculum for IB English 11. In this book, it starts off with a murder scene, where Samya kills her husband, Boutros. Rachida basically flips out, and screams to the village, who eventually comes to her rescue. Before anything else about that day is disclosed, the story flashes back to Samya's childhood. Her father and brothers have sent her to a monastery-boarding-home of sorts, where she lives with other girls and practices religion. This, however, is not where she wants to be. She feels imprisoned by religion and her family, and is extremely unhappy. Furthermore, she feels deprived because of her lack of relationship with her late mother, who passed when she was very little. She has had little closure from her mother, due to the cold personality of her father and brothers. When she is 15, her father sends her off to be married to a 45 year old man, Boutros. Her father has lost his job, and therefore, he gives her away because she's a burden to him. This hurts Samya, but she goes because she's obviously not wanted at home. After a few years, in which she just lets time pass, she has a child, Mia. Mia gives her life, or so she says. With Mia she is happy, and lives her life. She doesn't feel oppressed by Boutros, who is abusive physically and verbally. When Mia is six, she dies, and Boutros blames it on Samya. This causes Samya to internally die, because her sole purpose in life is gone. After a few weeks of living in a wheelchair, she kil becuase she's emotionally paralyzed, she kills Boutros. Then she gets arrested, and it ends. Analysis: What? This was a waste. All the main character did was complain about how much her life sucked... Well that's how life went back then, and everyone else got along just fine. She pays way too much attention to detail about everything, and is constantly whining. And then she kills her husband and the book ends? Isn't there supposed to be some sort of closure? My advice: If you want someone to like a book, don't have an annoying protagonist, and actually write a conclusion to a book.