Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Jem's Journal Entry
Maycomb County sure is a small place to live, so small you should be careful with what you do because soon every one will know. Down here in the South, most of Maycomb's citizens are just some unhappy racist folks. But no one really sees the life from a black man's shoe.
Now all this drama started to heat up when Mr. Ewell said that his daughter, Mayella Ewell, got raped by a black man named Tom Robinson. Another guy usually gets appointed to try these cases, but somehow the jury chose Atticus Finch, my father, to back him up. I think they saw this coming and probably knew he was fighting a losing battle. Anyways, my father is an excellent lawyer, he taught me every thing I should know, though up to my mind's capacity.
The two witnesses' stories were pretty convincing, 'cuz it was from Mayella and Mr. Bob Ewell of course. They both said Mayella was sitting on her porch not doing anything, Mayella asks Tom if he can do some chores for her (he always does favors for her), so Tom goes in and they say he just raped her right there and she started screamin'.
Funny how every one got so convinced, but when my father hit em' back with that cross-examination, it became clear that they just hiding their discrimination towards Tom but still the jury had to go with what the crowd wants to hear. I say the verdict ain't fair to ya'll black men. It's like if every day they lose more and more respect.
Naw I really don't see why they have to be treated so inhumane. So, Tom ended up going to jail. I remember Atticus taught me that all the jury men are suposed to look at the guilty person but no one seemed to look at Tom. Even so, he ended up going to jail.
I don't understand why people don't see it my way, the way Atticus taught us, what have black people ever done to us? I say this is another mockingbird dead coming from us white folks, another sin committed.
Now all this drama started to heat up when Mr. Ewell said that his daughter, Mayella Ewell, got raped by a black man named Tom Robinson. Another guy usually gets appointed to try these cases, but somehow the jury chose Atticus Finch, my father, to back him up. I think they saw this coming and probably knew he was fighting a losing battle. Anyways, my father is an excellent lawyer, he taught me every thing I should know, though up to my mind's capacity.
The two witnesses' stories were pretty convincing, 'cuz it was from Mayella and Mr. Bob Ewell of course. They both said Mayella was sitting on her porch not doing anything, Mayella asks Tom if he can do some chores for her (he always does favors for her), so Tom goes in and they say he just raped her right there and she started screamin'.
Funny how every one got so convinced, but when my father hit em' back with that cross-examination, it became clear that they just hiding their discrimination towards Tom but still the jury had to go with what the crowd wants to hear. I say the verdict ain't fair to ya'll black men. It's like if every day they lose more and more respect.
Naw I really don't see why they have to be treated so inhumane. So, Tom ended up going to jail. I remember Atticus taught me that all the jury men are suposed to look at the guilty person but no one seemed to look at Tom. Even so, he ended up going to jail.
I don't understand why people don't see it my way, the way Atticus taught us, what have black people ever done to us? I say this is another mockingbird dead coming from us white folks, another sin committed.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Movie isn't Always Better than the Book
There are important differences in Harry Hooke's 1990 film of the Lord of the Flies and William Golding's Lord of the Flies novel that changed the entire outcome of the story. Three differences are: The kids were all from military school, they already knew each other, and the Lord of the Flies didn't really have anything symbolic in the film.
To start off, all these kids were all from military school in the film, which means that they're all well trained and know how to use their surroundings as an advantage. This makes you think, a bunch of 12 year old school kids would react different to being stuck on an island with no adults, as portrayed in the book. This makes the military training a higher chance of survival in the island.
Furthermore, this leads to the fact that they all knew each other when they landed in the sea. This factor is really important because since they know each other, they aren't afraid to speak freely, it doesn't show how the kids got to know each other and that Ralph became immediate tribe leader because everyone knew him. The film doesn't capture the essence of the coming-of-age theme because it doesn't show how the kids interact with each other or some intimite feelings.
Another reason why the film is so different from the book is that the lord of the flies didn't really have a significance. It doesn't even show why it's called the "Lord of the Flies". In the book, the lord of the flies is described as a satanic figure that Simon would talk to, but the closest thing to satanic in the film was the sow head they cut off. It didn't show how such evil can influence a good person to make harmful actions like William Golding's novel did.
All these factors, the fact that they're all from military school, they all knew each other, and the Lord of the Flies doesn'y symbolize anything. Though, they both have the same idea, but if u start to look in depth, you'll notice a huge difference in Harry Hooke's 1990 film to William Golding's novel.
To start off, all these kids were all from military school in the film, which means that they're all well trained and know how to use their surroundings as an advantage. This makes you think, a bunch of 12 year old school kids would react different to being stuck on an island with no adults, as portrayed in the book. This makes the military training a higher chance of survival in the island.
Furthermore, this leads to the fact that they all knew each other when they landed in the sea. This factor is really important because since they know each other, they aren't afraid to speak freely, it doesn't show how the kids got to know each other and that Ralph became immediate tribe leader because everyone knew him. The film doesn't capture the essence of the coming-of-age theme because it doesn't show how the kids interact with each other or some intimite feelings.
Another reason why the film is so different from the book is that the lord of the flies didn't really have a significance. It doesn't even show why it's called the "Lord of the Flies". In the book, the lord of the flies is described as a satanic figure that Simon would talk to, but the closest thing to satanic in the film was the sow head they cut off. It didn't show how such evil can influence a good person to make harmful actions like William Golding's novel did.
All these factors, the fact that they're all from military school, they all knew each other, and the Lord of the Flies doesn'y symbolize anything. Though, they both have the same idea, but if u start to look in depth, you'll notice a huge difference in Harry Hooke's 1990 film to William Golding's novel.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Taking Part in a Trial
Taking Part in a Trial
Lord of the Flies
Juan Diego Jimenez
Roger, is he fully guilty for the murder of Piggy or is he Jack’s pawn? Should the death of two boys be forgotten? This is what I will prove today. I will provide you with evidence, facts, actions and even quotes from the accused, a.k.a. the Executioner, which will prove to you, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Roger is guilty of this crime. That he is fully aware and responsible for his actions.
When the boys’ first crash landed on the island, Roger was seen as an antisocial recluse, hiding his true intent to wreak havoc amongst the boys. Quote from Golding pg. 22. “A slight furtive boy whom no one knew who kept himself with an inner intensity of avoidance and secrecy.” Unquote. At that time, he gave the impression that he was lost and confused like all the others. Later it seemed he gained more confidence to speak about.
Ladies and gentleman, I would like to remind you that he is the one that had the idea to vote for a chief, and not make Jack immediately the leader. This shows that Roger already had something against Jack, which later I will explain about their rivalry.
Now I would like to demonstrate that Roger is a loner and uncommunicative by nature which explains why he is so cruel. To start off, he smashes a sand castle of three littluns: Henry, Percival and Johnny. What was Roger’s true intention? In what way is this beneficial to Roger and the others? Well it seems that to Roger, this is what satisfies him. And the others, they can’t do anything about him.
There was another time where Roger and the others were hunting pigs; suddenly Roger sees steaming pig poo and excitedly points it out. This shows how his savagery kicks in and he isn’t bothered by disgusting things.
After the sand castle incident, Roger follows Henry from a distance, and starts throwing rocks at him, but purposely missed. Again, what is the point of this? Now he really did leave a message to the boys. He could have hit Henry if he wanted to. By throwing rocks he was able to calculate with precision which shows ample control of his actions and his impulsivity as well.
Furthermore, Jack announced that he was having a feast, and everyone was invited; Roger didn’t appear at the feast. Roger was never one to get along well with the others, even though it seems that it could be difficult for him, he just doesn’t put any effort on getting along with others. Even though these are small pieces of evidence, this all adds up to why Roger is so cruel with everyone, and shows he is an independent person who has a mind of his own.
As the story progresses, Roger is now recognized and feared when he kills Simon. It’s quite odd how Simon was mistaken for the “beast” when really he’s completely the opposite; the only “good” character when all of society collapsed. Also how he helped steal the glasses from Piggy, his tribe members started fearing him.
Before I start talking about Piggy’s murder, I would like to state more factual material after Piggy’s death. Now after the pig kill, Roger sharpens both ends of his spear. This is very important because this shows that this is premeditated malicious intent. Roger wanted to do the same thing they did with the sow; cut his head off and stick it on the spear. Instead, his target was Ralph.
After the Piggy incident, Roger tortures Sam and Eric to join the tribe. This shows that at this point, Roger’s cruelty is out of control; which causes him to cause pain and kill. And actually Roger did convince Sam and Eric to join the tribe. When Roger committed the act of killing Piggy and torturing Sam and Eric, Jack was up to a point where he feared Roger. So Jack announces that the tribe goes back to the fort, but immediately sends Roger back to be on guard duty.
Obviously Jack doesn’t want to be anywhere near Roger; no one would want to be stuck on an island with Roger. Also how Roger walked past Jack and slightly pushed him with his shoulder, Jack didn’t do anything to him because he was afraid. If anyone else had disrespected Jack like this, he probably would have hit him or some kind of punishment.
At the scene of Piggy’s murder, it was clear that Roger was indeed the one that pushed the boulder that killed Piggy, also that Jack wasn’t expecting Roger to do this, and he didn’t even order Roger to do this. Jack was all small talk, but Roger actually did commit this crime. All the way, Roger’s full intentions were to kill someone and leave a message to all the kids stuck in the island with him.
Now, listen to how Jack reacted to this: “See? See? That’s what you’ll get! I mean that! There isn’t a tribe for you anymore! The conch is gone…” In other words, he wasn’t ready for this and was completely shocked, basically babbling about it. “The conch is gone…”meant that society has been distorted which marked the end for any hope for civilization to be restored.
This evidence is proof to you, beyond reasonable doubt, that Roger is capable and fully responsible of killing Piggy.
Lord of the Flies
Juan Diego Jimenez
Roger, is he fully guilty for the murder of Piggy or is he Jack’s pawn? Should the death of two boys be forgotten? This is what I will prove today. I will provide you with evidence, facts, actions and even quotes from the accused, a.k.a. the Executioner, which will prove to you, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Roger is guilty of this crime. That he is fully aware and responsible for his actions.
When the boys’ first crash landed on the island, Roger was seen as an antisocial recluse, hiding his true intent to wreak havoc amongst the boys. Quote from Golding pg. 22. “A slight furtive boy whom no one knew who kept himself with an inner intensity of avoidance and secrecy.” Unquote. At that time, he gave the impression that he was lost and confused like all the others. Later it seemed he gained more confidence to speak about.
Ladies and gentleman, I would like to remind you that he is the one that had the idea to vote for a chief, and not make Jack immediately the leader. This shows that Roger already had something against Jack, which later I will explain about their rivalry.
Now I would like to demonstrate that Roger is a loner and uncommunicative by nature which explains why he is so cruel. To start off, he smashes a sand castle of three littluns: Henry, Percival and Johnny. What was Roger’s true intention? In what way is this beneficial to Roger and the others? Well it seems that to Roger, this is what satisfies him. And the others, they can’t do anything about him.
There was another time where Roger and the others were hunting pigs; suddenly Roger sees steaming pig poo and excitedly points it out. This shows how his savagery kicks in and he isn’t bothered by disgusting things.
After the sand castle incident, Roger follows Henry from a distance, and starts throwing rocks at him, but purposely missed. Again, what is the point of this? Now he really did leave a message to the boys. He could have hit Henry if he wanted to. By throwing rocks he was able to calculate with precision which shows ample control of his actions and his impulsivity as well.
Furthermore, Jack announced that he was having a feast, and everyone was invited; Roger didn’t appear at the feast. Roger was never one to get along well with the others, even though it seems that it could be difficult for him, he just doesn’t put any effort on getting along with others. Even though these are small pieces of evidence, this all adds up to why Roger is so cruel with everyone, and shows he is an independent person who has a mind of his own.
As the story progresses, Roger is now recognized and feared when he kills Simon. It’s quite odd how Simon was mistaken for the “beast” when really he’s completely the opposite; the only “good” character when all of society collapsed. Also how he helped steal the glasses from Piggy, his tribe members started fearing him.
Before I start talking about Piggy’s murder, I would like to state more factual material after Piggy’s death. Now after the pig kill, Roger sharpens both ends of his spear. This is very important because this shows that this is premeditated malicious intent. Roger wanted to do the same thing they did with the sow; cut his head off and stick it on the spear. Instead, his target was Ralph.
After the Piggy incident, Roger tortures Sam and Eric to join the tribe. This shows that at this point, Roger’s cruelty is out of control; which causes him to cause pain and kill. And actually Roger did convince Sam and Eric to join the tribe. When Roger committed the act of killing Piggy and torturing Sam and Eric, Jack was up to a point where he feared Roger. So Jack announces that the tribe goes back to the fort, but immediately sends Roger back to be on guard duty.
Obviously Jack doesn’t want to be anywhere near Roger; no one would want to be stuck on an island with Roger. Also how Roger walked past Jack and slightly pushed him with his shoulder, Jack didn’t do anything to him because he was afraid. If anyone else had disrespected Jack like this, he probably would have hit him or some kind of punishment.
At the scene of Piggy’s murder, it was clear that Roger was indeed the one that pushed the boulder that killed Piggy, also that Jack wasn’t expecting Roger to do this, and he didn’t even order Roger to do this. Jack was all small talk, but Roger actually did commit this crime. All the way, Roger’s full intentions were to kill someone and leave a message to all the kids stuck in the island with him.
Now, listen to how Jack reacted to this: “See? See? That’s what you’ll get! I mean that! There isn’t a tribe for you anymore! The conch is gone…” In other words, he wasn’t ready for this and was completely shocked, basically babbling about it. “The conch is gone…”meant that society has been distorted which marked the end for any hope for civilization to be restored.
This evidence is proof to you, beyond reasonable doubt, that Roger is capable and fully responsible of killing Piggy.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Poetry Notebook
Yes Sir, Yes Ma'am.
selected by Juan Diego Jimenez
Description:
These poems will be about my struggle with my parents and how my poor relationship with them varies from poorly to even worse, also how she doesn't show that really she does care. I have a lot of things to relate to these poems though I even though I lack my parent's expectations, I must still behave.
These poems will be about my struggle with my parents and how my poor relationship with them varies from poorly to even worse, also how she doesn't show that really she does care. I have a lot of things to relate to these poems though I even though I lack my parent's expectations, I must still behave.
Synopsis: The poems in this notebook are about parents.
My Mother Would be a Falconress by Robert Duncan
Description of Heaven and Hell by Mark Jarman
Man of the Year by Robin Becker
My Mother was no White Dove by Reginald Shepherd
Mother o' Mine by Rudyard Kipling
To My Mother by Edgar Allen Poe
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Rosy Peach Benjamin Moore 2089-20
Rosy peach
now she's in a good moodrosy peach
pacificatory princess
palatable peacemaker
precatious of her polished fingernails
like ice sculptures.
Her rose aroma
speaking to us
saying it's safe; for now.
Her red dress
accompanies her smile
as she goes out for dinner
looking at her wedding picture.
She takes off her rose mask
sits
with both her feet
up at her desk
looking at her minions.
Her red lipstick
slimed
across her daughter's cheek
brings back
the joy.
Her rose
inside her
is weak
soon
it begins to diminish
back to her
other side.
Its like
a never ending cylce
that just
seems
to come full cirlce.
Its funny
she rarely shows her rose
inside of her.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
A Child Called "It"
A Child Called "It" by Dave Pelzer
Publisher: Omaha Press
Genre: Memoir
Where I got it: I bought in Barnes and Nobles during christmas vacation.
One sentence summary: Dave tells the story of not only his daily struggle against his abusive parents, but his bravery of surviving near death situations in one of the most severe child abuse cases in California.
First sentence of the book: March 5, 1973, Daly City, California- I'm late.
First chapter review: The chapter begins when Dave is in his final days of child abuse where it finally comes to an end because a teacher reported his bruises on his face and he was sent to live with his aunt. Later on, the story goes back to where it all started.
Verdict: This story is truly heartbreaking and the author makes it easy to understand the immense pain he was going through, best book I've ever read.
Cover comments: The cover is a picture of Dave as a child while God's hand reaches out for him assuming he now has some one that looks over him and protects him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)