This might seem a bit contradictory to what I said in my last post, but I'll try to explain it well enough that it won't be.
I am very opinionated when it comes to books and movies that I love. My friends know firsthand that I will ferociously berate anyone who dares say a word against Harry Potter, To Kill a Mockingbird, or The Catcher in the Rye. "Why don't you like it? Huh? Answer the question. WHAT ABOUT THE CATCHER IN THE RYE DID YOU NOT FIND RIVETING AND PERFECT?" is my typical response to someone saying, "Meh, I didn't really like it that much." And then I get all passive-aggressive.
I guess I just have problems accepting the fact that the things I love are not as near and dear to others' hearts.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Go With the Flow
I was told recently that I need to grow a backbone. I'm really not a non-confrontational person (as evidenced by the fact that I started arguing with the person who said I needed to get a spine), but I admit that it's usually easier and more beneficial to just sit back and things take their course. I'm not going to argue with a teacher over one point on a test or scream at someone for cutting me off in traffic. Those types of things are so inconsequential that it isn't even worth my time bothering with them.
After all, what use is arguing over things that don't matter? All you're going to do is piss people off. If you know you're right, congratulations. You can now consider yourself morally superior to the other person. After that, just move on.
I am turning to Quiz Bowl to provide an example of my philosophy in action. I was at a tournament recently. During the fifth round, there was a mistake in the answer key to one of the questions. The other team answered correctly, but their answer was counted as wrong because of the typo. One of my teammates did the math and discovered that the other team had been right. We talked to the moderator and they were given their points. Later in the round, our team got an answer wrong because of a typo and the team returned the favor.
Fast forward to the seventh round. The same thing happened to us again, but the moderator initially refused to give us the point, as the other team had answered correctly. One of my teammates began berating the moderator and the other team, much to my chagrin. He ended up getting us the point back, but from then on the attitude towards us of the moderator and the other team was decidedly negative. The other team ended up winning because of it. Obviously, I was pretty mad.
There are some things in life that you need to fight for. So why not concentrate on those things?
After all, what use is arguing over things that don't matter? All you're going to do is piss people off. If you know you're right, congratulations. You can now consider yourself morally superior to the other person. After that, just move on.
I am turning to Quiz Bowl to provide an example of my philosophy in action. I was at a tournament recently. During the fifth round, there was a mistake in the answer key to one of the questions. The other team answered correctly, but their answer was counted as wrong because of the typo. One of my teammates did the math and discovered that the other team had been right. We talked to the moderator and they were given their points. Later in the round, our team got an answer wrong because of a typo and the team returned the favor.
Fast forward to the seventh round. The same thing happened to us again, but the moderator initially refused to give us the point, as the other team had answered correctly. One of my teammates began berating the moderator and the other team, much to my chagrin. He ended up getting us the point back, but from then on the attitude towards us of the moderator and the other team was decidedly negative. The other team ended up winning because of it. Obviously, I was pretty mad.
There are some things in life that you need to fight for. So why not concentrate on those things?
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Dexter
Despite the fact that the title character spends much his time analyzing blood, I really enjoy the show Dexter. It's about a psychopathic man named Dexter who, knowing he will never be able to curb his need to kill, decides to channel his abilities into finding and killing rapists, murderers, and serial killers.
What gets me the most about this show is the fact that even though Dexter is emotionless and addicted to killing people, you can't help but feel sorry for him. He lives in a world where he will never fit in, and he has to constantly wear a mask in order to fit in. He has a hard time understanding people, but he tries to. Dexter also tries to make the best of his need to kill by only killing those who, in his opinion, need to be brought to justice. He lives by a strict code of ethics: no killing children, animals, bystanders, or the innocent. He does his reasearch incredibly meticulously, sometimes holding off killing someone for months just so he can be sure that it's the right person.
I would say that Dexter is, overall, a good person. J.K. Rowling wrote that it is our choices, far more than our abilities, that define us. Dexter could easily hide out somewhere, killing whomever he pleased and disposing of them neatly and surreptitiously. No one would ever notice. But he doesn't. He works for the police, he brings people to justice, he would do anything for his girlfriend, Rita. He wants to be a good person, and tries to make the best of his situation. It feels really weird saying that about a fictional vigilante serial killer, but there you have it.
What gets me the most about this show is the fact that even though Dexter is emotionless and addicted to killing people, you can't help but feel sorry for him. He lives in a world where he will never fit in, and he has to constantly wear a mask in order to fit in. He has a hard time understanding people, but he tries to. Dexter also tries to make the best of his need to kill by only killing those who, in his opinion, need to be brought to justice. He lives by a strict code of ethics: no killing children, animals, bystanders, or the innocent. He does his reasearch incredibly meticulously, sometimes holding off killing someone for months just so he can be sure that it's the right person.
I would say that Dexter is, overall, a good person. J.K. Rowling wrote that it is our choices, far more than our abilities, that define us. Dexter could easily hide out somewhere, killing whomever he pleased and disposing of them neatly and surreptitiously. No one would ever notice. But he doesn't. He works for the police, he brings people to justice, he would do anything for his girlfriend, Rita. He wants to be a good person, and tries to make the best of his situation. It feels really weird saying that about a fictional vigilante serial killer, but there you have it.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
"Oh my gawd IB teaches you nothing. AP is so much better." (Shoutout to Ian Kropp)
So there's this one person I know who is so militantly anti-IB that it makes me want to scream. Every single time someone even mentions IB, he goes nuts trying to prove how inferior it is compared to AP. I have nothing against AP; it's just so irritating howthis person feels compelled to butt in to something that has no bearing on his own life. He's never taken a single IB class. It doesn't affect him in any way, yet he constantly goes out of his way to make it sound like it's Satan's own personal way of torturing him or something.
I mean, if he had taken an IB class that left him woefully unprepared for college, or had an IB student beat him up for taking AP courses, that would be one thing. But no, he just inexplicably hates it. I think it's because he thinks it's unfair that we get weighted grades when "IB classes are basically just honors classes regurgitated into two years and they teach you a bunch of liberal bullcrap." For the record, I know people of a myriad of different political affiliations who have taken IB.
I took IB because I thought it seemed like it would be a better match for my persoonal learning style and iinterests. Not because I loathe AP with the intensity of a thousand suns. Not because I detest the people in it. I wouldn't say IB is better than AP. Not in the least. In fact, I liked AP History and did very well in the class. Some of my best friends are going the AP route and I respect that. It's a personal choice, and I think both programs have their strengths and weaknesses. I just hate when people don't understand that and get so uptight and angry.
I always want to say, "Dude. It's not your life. Who cares? Let it go!"
Quote hall of fame:
"Pssh. IB is a waste of time."
"Don't even get me started."
"How did I know that answer? AP BIO!!!!"
"If you learned it in 'IB', why didn't you say it? Too afraid you'll be WRONG?"
"Languages and arts are useless for those of us who actually want to accomplish something with our lives."
I mean, if he had taken an IB class that left him woefully unprepared for college, or had an IB student beat him up for taking AP courses, that would be one thing. But no, he just inexplicably hates it. I think it's because he thinks it's unfair that we get weighted grades when "IB classes are basically just honors classes regurgitated into two years and they teach you a bunch of liberal bullcrap." For the record, I know people of a myriad of different political affiliations who have taken IB.
I took IB because I thought it seemed like it would be a better match for my persoonal learning style and iinterests. Not because I loathe AP with the intensity of a thousand suns. Not because I detest the people in it. I wouldn't say IB is better than AP. Not in the least. In fact, I liked AP History and did very well in the class. Some of my best friends are going the AP route and I respect that. It's a personal choice, and I think both programs have their strengths and weaknesses. I just hate when people don't understand that and get so uptight and angry.
I always want to say, "Dude. It's not your life. Who cares? Let it go!"
Quote hall of fame:
"Pssh. IB is a waste of time."
"Don't even get me started."
"How did I know that answer? AP BIO!!!!"
"If you learned it in 'IB', why didn't you say it? Too afraid you'll be WRONG?"
"Languages and arts are useless for those of us who actually want to accomplish something with our lives."
Monday, January 10, 2011
Hey you. Yes, you. Read this.
Please don't think I'm a creep...
From time to time, I like to scroll down the list of blogs and read them. I'm sure all of us do sometimes. I feel like our blogs are very secret, though- not necessarily in a bad way, but we never really talk about them. Sometimes I think people feel as if the effort they pit into these blogs is for nothing, and that's not true at all. The whole point of these blogs is to communicate, so I think I'll do just that.
It's interesting for me to be able to see what people have written about and how they approach their subject. Some of you sneak the message in an anecdote, others pick a theme and roll with it. I know all of you to some extent, but with these blogs I'm seeing a whole new side of you. Most of your personal stories have given me a deeper respect for you and made me realize that all people are multifaceted and complex.
It's also made me understand that we are all similar in many ways, yet unique. Everyone is eloquent, whether in their simplicity or complexity. We share many of the same struggles but we all have different ways of going about solving them. These blogs aren't open to the vast majority of our peers, and I think we have that in common, too. The things we write about in our blogs might be things we've never told anyone before; we need to embrace this.
In a word (for each), your blogs are elegant, simple, aware, enthusiastic, observant, analytical, introspective, succinct, descriptive, informative, and wise.
From time to time, I like to scroll down the list of blogs and read them. I'm sure all of us do sometimes. I feel like our blogs are very secret, though- not necessarily in a bad way, but we never really talk about them. Sometimes I think people feel as if the effort they pit into these blogs is for nothing, and that's not true at all. The whole point of these blogs is to communicate, so I think I'll do just that.
It's interesting for me to be able to see what people have written about and how they approach their subject. Some of you sneak the message in an anecdote, others pick a theme and roll with it. I know all of you to some extent, but with these blogs I'm seeing a whole new side of you. Most of your personal stories have given me a deeper respect for you and made me realize that all people are multifaceted and complex.
It's also made me understand that we are all similar in many ways, yet unique. Everyone is eloquent, whether in their simplicity or complexity. We share many of the same struggles but we all have different ways of going about solving them. These blogs aren't open to the vast majority of our peers, and I think we have that in common, too. The things we write about in our blogs might be things we've never told anyone before; we need to embrace this.
In a word (for each), your blogs are elegant, simple, aware, enthusiastic, observant, analytical, introspective, succinct, descriptive, informative, and wise.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Humans are Weird
"It's so sad to see the world agree/ that they'd rather see their faces filled with flies/ all when I'd want to keep white roses in their eyes."
This is a quote by my favorite band, Neutral Milk Hotel, and I think it's really true. Humans, by nature, will never choose peace. We are confrontational by nature, and peace may never work, no matter how hard we try.
It's often said that we are unique in that we have always fought our environment rather than reached stasis with it. It shows that while we are good at changing our environment and figuring out ways around things, we really aren't that good at accepting things for how they are.
After all, you don't see birds ordering pizza, or penguins getting their coats because the water is a little chilly. Wolves don't quarrel over the fact that their neighbor took two chunks of meat while they only got one, and you don't see mice tearing down pieces of grass to clear space for a condo.
This is a quote by my favorite band, Neutral Milk Hotel, and I think it's really true. Humans, by nature, will never choose peace. We are confrontational by nature, and peace may never work, no matter how hard we try.
It's often said that we are unique in that we have always fought our environment rather than reached stasis with it. It shows that while we are good at changing our environment and figuring out ways around things, we really aren't that good at accepting things for how they are.
After all, you don't see birds ordering pizza, or penguins getting their coats because the water is a little chilly. Wolves don't quarrel over the fact that their neighbor took two chunks of meat while they only got one, and you don't see mice tearing down pieces of grass to clear space for a condo.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
To BLEEP a BLEEP
Oh. My. God. This is going to be another rant.
I heard on the radioo the other day that there is a new edition of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn that replaces all "n-words" with "slave". Next up for the printing company (which is headed by an English professor) is Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, and possibly several others. The new editions are considered to be more accessible to children and teachers. The man in charge of this said that books that are considered classics need to be rethought if they are going to be read by people during and after Barack Obama's presidency. He also insinuated that books with the n-word-or other profanities- in them were lucky to be considered classics and didn't really deserve that distinction.
I was so mad when I heard this.
In my opinion, censorship is the worst thing that can happen to books. I would rather see Huckleberry Finn banned than see it transformed into a watered-down, "politically correct" version of its former self. Censorship totally invalidates the integrity of books. The message in To Kill a Mockingbird would not be nearly as strong if Harper Lee had not described so vividly the effects of racism in the south. The impact these two books had, respectively, was due to their honest portrayal of life in the time periods they were set in. It sounds shocking to us, maybe, but the fact is that they were extremely realistic situations.
Denying that these words were written is trying to deny our history. We can't just shrug it off and say that Twain and Lee exaggerated for shock value. If they were simply slinging around racial epithets just for the fun of it, and not to illustrate a genuine problem, that might be cause for concern. But we can't erase these problems from our past; doing so would be ignorant and an insult to those who suffered to solve them. These books were not written to demean, they were written to enlighten. It's unfortunate that people are missing that point. It's also sad that they don't realize the fact that censoring them obliviates their significance.
I don't support banning books, either, but at least banned books are left in their original state and are not attempted to be passed off as the real thing. Most classic books-even the Bible-have been banned somewhere, for some reason, and the true mark of being a classic is that they are able to transcend this. They are classics because the message they convey is more important than the words on their pages. It's not just about Tom Robinson-it's about all African-Americans who were enslaved by society's lingering prejudice.
I understand that our nation's history has not always been pretty, and we would often like to forget that certain things ever happened. But to truly be able to be, as a nation, guilt-free, we must first admit that these things happened. Destoying the traces is turning a blind eye to the atrocities of our past, and thereby clearing the way for more in our future.
I heard on the radioo the other day that there is a new edition of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn that replaces all "n-words" with "slave". Next up for the printing company (which is headed by an English professor) is Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, and possibly several others. The new editions are considered to be more accessible to children and teachers. The man in charge of this said that books that are considered classics need to be rethought if they are going to be read by people during and after Barack Obama's presidency. He also insinuated that books with the n-word-or other profanities- in them were lucky to be considered classics and didn't really deserve that distinction.
I was so mad when I heard this.
In my opinion, censorship is the worst thing that can happen to books. I would rather see Huckleberry Finn banned than see it transformed into a watered-down, "politically correct" version of its former self. Censorship totally invalidates the integrity of books. The message in To Kill a Mockingbird would not be nearly as strong if Harper Lee had not described so vividly the effects of racism in the south. The impact these two books had, respectively, was due to their honest portrayal of life in the time periods they were set in. It sounds shocking to us, maybe, but the fact is that they were extremely realistic situations.
Denying that these words were written is trying to deny our history. We can't just shrug it off and say that Twain and Lee exaggerated for shock value. If they were simply slinging around racial epithets just for the fun of it, and not to illustrate a genuine problem, that might be cause for concern. But we can't erase these problems from our past; doing so would be ignorant and an insult to those who suffered to solve them. These books were not written to demean, they were written to enlighten. It's unfortunate that people are missing that point. It's also sad that they don't realize the fact that censoring them obliviates their significance.
I don't support banning books, either, but at least banned books are left in their original state and are not attempted to be passed off as the real thing. Most classic books-even the Bible-have been banned somewhere, for some reason, and the true mark of being a classic is that they are able to transcend this. They are classics because the message they convey is more important than the words on their pages. It's not just about Tom Robinson-it's about all African-Americans who were enslaved by society's lingering prejudice.
I understand that our nation's history has not always been pretty, and we would often like to forget that certain things ever happened. But to truly be able to be, as a nation, guilt-free, we must first admit that these things happened. Destoying the traces is turning a blind eye to the atrocities of our past, and thereby clearing the way for more in our future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)