OK Mr. Kunklek, here is where I redeem myself for all those mean things I said about AP Comp during the class.
This quarter, AP Composition was actually one of my favorite classes (a close second to Human Anatomy). I felt so relaxed in the class, there wasn't a huge Physics packet due the next day, I didn't have 80 problems of derivations and definite integrals to do. I'm really glad I had it fourth block as well, it gave me a break from all the classes I had to be insanely concentrated for...in AP Comp I didn't have to be so stressed out, I could just read and then discuss my feelings in the class.
Although somethings were more tough than others (reading Playing in the Dark) I really appreciated this class, my writing definitely has improved and I will apprectiate reading Toni Morrison's book if I am assigned it in college.
My ABSOLUTE FAVORITE thing in the whole year of AP Comp was the FIELD TRIP!!! I loved being able to sit in one of the classes, to see how things are really taught at a college level. I was interested in how little people pay attention, how students can just walk in and out, and how the teachers don't care if you're there or not. I was especially important to me because i'm going to Madison in the Fall! GO BADGERS :) The MMoCA was really interesting, too. I loved looking at the pictures and talking to KFrisch about them :) many struck my interest and I'm sure i'll go back to look at other exhibits.
So. Thanks Mr. Kunkle, it's been swell :)
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Critical Literary Analysis
So.
This paper REALLY aggravated me. I started off writing my paper and it was going well until i thought, "CRAP! I have to connect The Catcher in the Rye to Playing in the Dark!" My instinct was to write a book review and analyze the themese and how J.D. Salinger used Age as a tool to incorporate and further enhance his characters.
In the last paragraph I ended up talking about how Toni Morrison would have trouble defining age (young or old) because you have to define it by something it's not. This is one of the main arguments in Romancing the Shadow--African-American, what American is, etc. I hope that is a decent foundation for my furthering of the subject, and will allow me to write at least a couple more paragraphs to make it seem like I know how each book is connected.
Ahh!
This paper REALLY aggravated me. I started off writing my paper and it was going well until i thought, "CRAP! I have to connect The Catcher in the Rye to Playing in the Dark!" My instinct was to write a book review and analyze the themese and how J.D. Salinger used Age as a tool to incorporate and further enhance his characters.
In the last paragraph I ended up talking about how Toni Morrison would have trouble defining age (young or old) because you have to define it by something it's not. This is one of the main arguments in Romancing the Shadow--African-American, what American is, etc. I hope that is a decent foundation for my furthering of the subject, and will allow me to write at least a couple more paragraphs to make it seem like I know how each book is connected.
Ahh!
Something something West...
I can't remember the title of the play we are watching in class (sorry Mr. Kunkle!) but I do think it is verrrrry interesting :)
In the beginning I was confused as to what something in the West would have to do with a screenwriter and his drunken slob of a brother. I was intrigued by the brother's actions and his desire to steal people's TV's, toasters, and other household appliances. As the story went on, we discovered that the screenwriter was jealous of his brother and vice versa...what was really surprising was when the drunken brother went behind his brothers back and convinced Saul (I can't remember anyone's names..I think that was his name) to pick his own movie instead of his brothers.
This was a big turning point in the movie, it forwards after a while to a time where the screenwriter brother and the drunken brother have switch roles. Now the previous responsible one is rolling on the floor drunk and making toast from the toasters he stolen and the previous intoxicated brother is sitting at the typewriter telling the other one to shut up.
I could obviously see that the characters had switched places and roles in their relationship. What I didn't expect was the two brothers getting drunk together...I thought they would both take the high road. I'm excited to see the end of the movie and what happens when the mom comes home!
In the beginning I was confused as to what something in the West would have to do with a screenwriter and his drunken slob of a brother. I was intrigued by the brother's actions and his desire to steal people's TV's, toasters, and other household appliances. As the story went on, we discovered that the screenwriter was jealous of his brother and vice versa...what was really surprising was when the drunken brother went behind his brothers back and convinced Saul (I can't remember anyone's names..I think that was his name) to pick his own movie instead of his brothers.
This was a big turning point in the movie, it forwards after a while to a time where the screenwriter brother and the drunken brother have switch roles. Now the previous responsible one is rolling on the floor drunk and making toast from the toasters he stolen and the previous intoxicated brother is sitting at the typewriter telling the other one to shut up.
I could obviously see that the characters had switched places and roles in their relationship. What I didn't expect was the two brothers getting drunk together...I thought they would both take the high road. I'm excited to see the end of the movie and what happens when the mom comes home!
Monday, March 22, 2010
Roger Rabbit.
I chose to do Fred Stonehouse's Untitled (Kiss/Beso) painting of the rabbit getting shot with many arrows and crying. This painting was one of the first pieces I saw and I immediately knew I was going to choose it over the rest of the works of art. Untitled (Kiss/Beso) was created in 1992 and done as an acrylic on panel.
Earlier in class this quarter, we have read about the many massacres and wars authors have had to deal with: Rowlandson, the Iroquois Constitution, and the Great Swamp Massacre. My connection between these articles and Untitled (Kiss/Beso) lies within the arrows and tears. I took the arrows to mean to different massacres and wars that the United States has had to deal with, the tears exemplify the sadness, and the droplets of tears and blood symbolize the aftermath of each war and what it has done to the pride and emotions of our country.
What first intrigued me about this painting were the arrows lodged in the rabbit. They were sticking out in ways that were not symmetrical with the other pieces of weaponry. I'm assuming that each arrow or the arrows as a whole represents massacre, loss, or inhumane actions, since no one would impale a rabbit with so many arrows. What was also interesting about the rabbit was that it wasn't dead, even though there were three arrows shot inside the rabbit.
The tears on the rabbit were another interesting part of the painting. I was confused why Stonehouse would paint so many tears falling from the rabbit's eye; maybe it was to symbolized the sadness and cruelness of the actions of what I can assume to be a hunter. The droplets of blood and tears interested me as well. Are they supposed to show the effects of these horrible actions on the rabbit? If the blood is left behind it means this tragedy was never forgotten? I would've liked to ask the artist these and numerous other questions.
I thought that the Beso sign above the rabbit was meant to symbolize the kiss of death and that death is tragic. I thought Stonehouse was trying to incorporate the injuring of the rabbit with a common phrase--the kiss of death. The only thing Stonehouse failed to do was put in the perspective of the hunter and why he/she/it chose to hurt the rabbit. This information may have helped me understand the painting more.
One question I am still left wondering with is why a rabbit? Why did Stonehouse choose the rabbit instead of another forest creature: skunk, squirrel, bird? What did the rabbit symbolize and mean to Stonehouse? These questions are still left unanswered and were on my mind as I left the MMoCA.
This painting created questions and debate in my own mind, and I enjoyed looking underneath the surface of this piece.
Earlier in class this quarter, we have read about the many massacres and wars authors have had to deal with: Rowlandson, the Iroquois Constitution, and the Great Swamp Massacre. My connection between these articles and Untitled (Kiss/Beso) lies within the arrows and tears. I took the arrows to mean to different massacres and wars that the United States has had to deal with, the tears exemplify the sadness, and the droplets of tears and blood symbolize the aftermath of each war and what it has done to the pride and emotions of our country.
What first intrigued me about this painting were the arrows lodged in the rabbit. They were sticking out in ways that were not symmetrical with the other pieces of weaponry. I'm assuming that each arrow or the arrows as a whole represents massacre, loss, or inhumane actions, since no one would impale a rabbit with so many arrows. What was also interesting about the rabbit was that it wasn't dead, even though there were three arrows shot inside the rabbit.
The tears on the rabbit were another interesting part of the painting. I was confused why Stonehouse would paint so many tears falling from the rabbit's eye; maybe it was to symbolized the sadness and cruelness of the actions of what I can assume to be a hunter. The droplets of blood and tears interested me as well. Are they supposed to show the effects of these horrible actions on the rabbit? If the blood is left behind it means this tragedy was never forgotten? I would've liked to ask the artist these and numerous other questions.
I thought that the Beso sign above the rabbit was meant to symbolize the kiss of death and that death is tragic. I thought Stonehouse was trying to incorporate the injuring of the rabbit with a common phrase--the kiss of death. The only thing Stonehouse failed to do was put in the perspective of the hunter and why he/she/it chose to hurt the rabbit. This information may have helped me understand the painting more.
One question I am still left wondering with is why a rabbit? Why did Stonehouse choose the rabbit instead of another forest creature: skunk, squirrel, bird? What did the rabbit symbolize and mean to Stonehouse? These questions are still left unanswered and were on my mind as I left the MMoCA.
This painting created questions and debate in my own mind, and I enjoyed looking underneath the surface of this piece.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Space Exploration Synthesis Essay
Today we had to write a synthesis essay on space exploration and explain what we thought should be the most important aspects of the decision.
I thought it would go pretty smooth, the topic seemed easy to write so I turned the page to start writing.
WHAT THE HECK!?! basically none of the sources were about space travel and/or exploration. What does the National Institute of Health have to do about space exploration? Or how taxpayers money is spent?
This was one of the toughest connections that I've ever had to write. I really hope that the synthesis essay I have to write for the AP exam will not even come close to the material in this question.
I thought it would go pretty smooth, the topic seemed easy to write so I turned the page to start writing.
WHAT THE HECK!?! basically none of the sources were about space travel and/or exploration. What does the National Institute of Health have to do about space exploration? Or how taxpayers money is spent?
This was one of the toughest connections that I've ever had to write. I really hope that the synthesis essay I have to write for the AP exam will not even come close to the material in this question.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Karen.
Dear Karen.
PLEASE STOP MAKING FUN OF ME.
I dislike it very much and we ARE not and ARE NEVER going to have a relationship.
Thank you very much,
Melissa
PLEASE STOP MAKING FUN OF ME.
I dislike it very much and we ARE not and ARE NEVER going to have a relationship.
Thank you very much,
Melissa
Monday, March 1, 2010
The Self-Reliance
"These are the voices which we hear in solitude, but they grow faint and inaudible as we enter into the world. Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of everyone of its members. Society is a joint-stock company, in which the members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs."
I chose this quote because it seemed to be the most prominent theme in the beginning paragraphs. Emerson described being yourself and not conforming to the virtues and ideals of society with utmost importance. There is another quote, "...that imitation is suicide;..." that also strengthens Emerson's argument in that you should be your own person instead of shaping yourself around society. I agree with Emerson in that you should be unique and your own individual--we are all different people and should accept it instead of trying to change it.
Changing our actions and lives to fit society's ideals creates unhappiness. If we are all alike there is nothing to appreciate in others since we ourselves have it. Emerson had it right when he said to just be yourself.
I chose this quote because it seemed to be the most prominent theme in the beginning paragraphs. Emerson described being yourself and not conforming to the virtues and ideals of society with utmost importance. There is another quote, "...that imitation is suicide;..." that also strengthens Emerson's argument in that you should be your own person instead of shaping yourself around society. I agree with Emerson in that you should be unique and your own individual--we are all different people and should accept it instead of trying to change it.
Changing our actions and lives to fit society's ideals creates unhappiness. If we are all alike there is nothing to appreciate in others since we ourselves have it. Emerson had it right when he said to just be yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)