Friar Lawrences Decision: Ethical vs Unethical :)

On average, one person usually makes about 35,000 decisions per day. Whether its on what to eat for lunch or what movie to watch, every decision affects you as a person. Sometimes we make bad decisions, whether they're unethical or just ignorant. Nonetheless, sometimes we make good decisions that help us achieve our goals and help others around us as well. In addition, we sometimes make decisions that are ethical and helpful in one way, but unethical and harmful in another. A perfect example of this is Friar Lawrence in Romeo and Juliet. Friar Lawrence decides to agree to marry Romeo and Juliet after Romeo asks him, however he did not marry them for their claimed "love" for each other, but rather to make peace between the two rival families; the Montagues and the Capulets. As you can see, his intentions were to make peace, but he used Romeo and Juliet to achieve that goal. Therefore, Friar Lawrence's decision to marry Romeo and Juliet was ethical in someways, but unethical in others.

At first, when Romeo asks Friar Lawrence to marry him and Juliet, the Friar is doubtful of Romeo's intention and his love for Juliet. When Romeo asks, Friar Lawrence replies, "Holy Saint Francis, what a change is here! Is Rosaline, that thou didst love so dear so soon forgotten?" As you can see, the Friar is questioning whether or not Romeo is actually in love with Juliet, or if he just longs to be in love with someone after loosing Rosaline. Because Romeo is young, loving someone to him may just mean having someone to be with, not fully loving them. In addition, Friar Lawrence says, "Young mens love then not truly in their hearts but in their eyes." He is saying that most times, young men "fall in love" with a persons image, even without getting to know the person first. He says this line to Romeo, intending to question whether Romeos love for Juliet is actually true love, or just based on what she looks like. Overall, Friar Lawrence doesn't truly believe that Romeo is in love with Juliet. He questions Romeos definition of love and seems doubtful that Romeo could move from one true love to another so quickly! 

However, despite the Friars nonbelief in Romeo and Juliets "true love", he decides to marry them anyway! He says, "In one respect I'll your assistant be, for this alliance may no happy prove to turn your household's rancor to pure love." Rancor means bitterness and resentfulness, so therefore he hopes to end the families resentfulness towards each other by marrying Romeo and Juliet. Marriage is something that is supposed to be done by people who love each other, and in this case, the Friar's decision to marry two people he doesn't truly believe love each other was unethical. However, he did say that it could possibly "turn your household's rancor into pure love." This shows that he had good, ethical intentions. Overall, Friar Lawrences decision to marry Romeo and Juliet can be looked at as ethical and unethical. His goal was peace, however the way he tried to achieve his goal took advantage of Romeo and Juliet.

To conclude, decision making cannot be put into the two categories of 'the right decision and the wrong decision' because sometimes one decision is both! In Romeo and Juliet, Friar Lawrence did not decide to marry Romeo and Juliet because of their love, but  he married them to try and make peace and stop the fighting between their families! As you can see, he had good intentions, but he acted in an unethical way. He had to decide between the decision he made to marry them and just saying no and letting the family feud continue! Clearly though, he didn't fully think through all of the possible out comes of his decisions, and he ended up basically killing the both of them. This goes to show that when making decisions, it is most important to keep your mind open to all possible outcomes, and to search for the most ethical decision before you cause harm to yourself and others.

Themes in "The One" by Kiera Cass That Relate to Issues in Real life: The cycle of events :)

Have you ever noticed that in life, there is a usually cycle of events? Where one things happens which leads to another and a another and on and on. In the book "The One," by Kiera Cass, there is a cycle of events too. These events or themes in the book, like tyranny, rebellion and revolution, occur in real life, as does the cycle. For example, back when there was slavery, whites have complete power over blacks, like tyranny. They controlled everything they did, even when slavery was abolished. However many people, like Martin Luther King Jr., knew what was happening was wrong and rebelled, eventually gaining equal rights for both races. This is a clear example of how tyranny led to rebellion and revolution. In "The One," the king of Illea is a tyrant who does whatever he wants to whoever he wants. Many people saw that this was unfair and fought back, including the main character America and the Northern and Southern rebels. Overall, many themes in this book and the way they are presented, relate to issues in the real world and how they affect one another.

The three main themes that were presented in the book "The One" are all issues in the real world today! For example, in one part of the book America says, "Then it all made perfect sense. His absence made the palace warmer, and now that he was home, we were all subject to his whims again. No wonder the Northern rebels were so excited about Maxon." The king, King Clarkson, is a tyrant. He forces everyone in Ilea to stay in their cast, even if they're starving or without shelter. (The castes are like classes where the ones are royalty all the way down to the eights, who are homeless). He even beats his own son Maxon when Maxon does something that he doesn't like! His tyrannic actions and unfairness leads to the rebellion of many people, especially ones who are in the lower castes. They rebelled by forming groups, the 'Northern rebels' and the 'Southern rebels'. The Southern rebels are violent and willing to kill to get what they want. However, the Northern rebels are the peaceful ones who only want a change in the caste system. As they explained to Maxon and America, "We'll do everything we can to help you change things, peacefully and fairly. Your people deserve a chance." As you can see, all the Northern rebels want is equality and freedom, something that the king will not give them. Many tyrants in the real world abuse their power as well and take away the rights and freedoms of the people that they rule over. But even after people rebel and revolutionize, the cycle of events can start all over again. Like in the book, the people who once rebelled may take all of the power for themselves! Once the rebels in the book take all of the power for themselves, America says to the people, "Fight. The rebels are bullies. They're trying to scare you into doing what they want. And what if you do? What king of future do you think they'll offer you? These people, these tyrants aren't going to suddenly stop being violent. If you give them power, they're going to be a thousand times worse. So fight. However you can, fight." If you let others control you, you'll never be able to escape. Tyrants are tyrants, even if the way they became one was through fighting another. This cycle occurs in the book over and over again, as does it in the real world

Overall, the main themes in the book "The One" by Kiera Cass occur in a cycle such as many issues in the real world do. Scarcity of jobs leads to poverty, which leads to hunger and so on. I think that it is important to recognize these events and do something bout them before the escalate into bigger issues. If a war can be stopped before it even started, then why not? We as a society can help to stop that cycle of events, like America did in the book, by taking action against things like tyranny, that we know are wrong.

The Debate on Solving Illegal Immigration Issues: Ethical VS Constitutional :)

America was once, and still is a country of immigrants. The article "Immigration: Obama vs Congress," by Patricia Smith explains the debate between Obama and Congress on how to deal with the issue of illegal immigration in America. The article begins by explaining that, "There are 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, living in the shadows, in constant fear of deportation." As you can see, this isn't just an issue for American citizens, but an issue for the immigrants who are coming here illegally, as well. Although Obama has issued the controversial consecutive order that will, for the time being, protect about 5 million people from deportation, many people, including Congress, do not approve of many of his decisions. However, the claim that the author is making in the article is that although Congress does not agree with Obama's order, it has helped and will help many families to reunite and live a life that is free of fear.

Throughout the article, the author presents her opinion through quotes and evidence that portray the main idea: The issue of illegal immigration and the debate on how it should be fixed. She quotes Jorge Jimenez, a man who moved to America from Mexico illegally in 1988. He explained the constant fear that he and his family live in. "Even a small traffic stop could send us to deportation," he explained. Jorge now has four children who are U.S. citizens, therefore the order that was passed by President Obama means a lot to him ad his family. But they're not the only ones. Paola Fernandez was illegally brought to America by her parents at age four, and she has two younger siblings who are U.S citizens. She now has permission to stay in the U.S. because of Obama's other order which allowed people who were brought to America illegally as children, to stay. Her undocumented parents are included in Obama's most recent order. The author of this article quoted Paola saying, "We've been here close to 25 years. On a very personal level, this is a very amazing moment." As you can see, Obama's new order for illegal immigrant has a huge and important impact on immigrant families. It not only reunites and rejoices families, but it enables them to stop living in constant fear of being deported and separated from their loved ones. 

All in all, the claim that the author makes in this article is that although Obama's new order is highly disliked by congress, it is the ethical and right decision because it reunites families and eliminates fear from their lives. Illegal immigration has been an issue in this country for a very long time. However, when it comes to separating parents from their children, it shouldn't matter whether or not these people got their paperwork. Obama's new order grants permission to illegal immigrants who have U.S. citizen children to stay in America because it's the right thing to do. Would you want to see your parents sent back to a country hundreds of miles away?

Symbolism -The Most Effective Way to Portray Mood in a Story :)

Symbolism is "the use of symbols to represent ideas or qualities". Often, symbolism is used to reflect mood in character and settings. These feelings can be portrayed through objects, thoughts, or actual events. For example, Laurie Halse Anderson, the author of the book "Twisted" shows emotion and mood through different symbols throughout the story. Throughout the book, the main character Tyler faces many hardships such as being accused of posting nude images of people online, wanting to kill himself and having a very unsupportive father who is verbally abusive. When Tyler feels sad or upset, that feeling is represented through imagery and comparison. Laurie Halse Anderson uses symbolism and artistic writing to illustrate the story line by incorporating mood through different craft moves.

In many cases, unpleasant thoughts and feelings are represented by unpleasant objects or occurrences. For example, its is obvious that Tyler is feeling angry and upset when he says "I decapitated dandelions all morning, leaving carnage and death strewn in my path." As you can see, the author doesn't straight out say 'Tyler was feeling upset," she uses symbolism to creatively illustrate the mood. And this line is not only to show how Tyler is feeling, but it also makes the reader feel that way too. When people hear the words death and decapitated, more often than not, they will know that something upsetting is going on in the characters life at that time. Another example of mood through representation is when Tyler says "Me at the end of a rope in a dog collar skating on a frozen pond, world watching on a shaky limb, waiting for me to fall through to the black water below." The part about the rope and the dog collar shows the reader that Tyler feels like he is being held back  and restrained by people, even the ones he loves. As you can see, Laurie Halse Anderson uses a metaphor to represent how Tyler feels about his complicated life.

Unpleasant thoughts and feelings can also be portrayed through inner thinking. A lot of inner thought in books has deeper meanings that what you're reading on the page. For example, after teachers see Tyler getting bullied in school, he says "A couple of teachers saw it. They saw it and they saw nothing." They treated him like like he didn't exist. Obviously, Tyler is feeling victimized by the people around him. No one pays attention to the people who wronged him, they only notices his mess ups. Another example of symbolism through inner thought is when Tyler says "Like it never happened. Like my mother was lying down because of a migraine." The line really connects back to all of the times when his family thought that they were okay, but Tyler knows that they're not. His dad doesn't care, his mom won't come to believe it, but their family falls apart more and more throughout the story. This line shows how much they're really lying to themselves!

All in all, the use of symbolism in stories can artfully reflect the mood a give it a deeper meaning. Different objects, events, and thoughts can make the character feel a certain way, thus also making the reader feel the same. From reading this book, I learned how much more effective symbolism is in setting the mood than just down right saying 'They were sad'. It gives the reader a chance to use their imagination and infer what the mood really is.

Fiction Reading Response :)

Do you ever wonder what makes a good relationship? We have relationships with everyone we are close to, even the ones we don't like. Some relationships are great and everyone gets along, however in other relationships, you may be totally butting heads with someone else. In books, the relationship that the main character has with one person can be completely different from their relationship with another.  Like in the book "It's Kind of A Funny Story" by Ned Vizzini, the main character Craig has many different relationships with many different people. Relationships can go from horrible to amazing, but the real reason why is because of the balance of power.

When you meet someone, sometimes you end up as friends. A friend is someone you can talk and listen to and trust. For example, in the book "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" by John Boyne, the main character Bruno moves from Berlin to Poland at the beginning of the story. There he meets Shmuel, a boy who lives on the other side of the fence that is in his backyard. Bruno, who lives in a mansion with his family and their servants, and Shmuel, who lives in a concentration camp, are completely different. However, they become best friends throughout the story because there is a balance of power in their relationship. They both talk and listen to each other and neither one overpowers the other. In the book "It's Kind of A Funny Story" by Ned Vizzini, Craig, the main character is clinically depressed. As a result he spends about a month in the mental hospital unit, Six North. There he meets Bobby, Humble, Ebony, Noelle, and many more. His relationships with each of them are all very different. I could tell from the description and action that each person shared equal power in their relationships with him, therefore, they all became his friends. All in all, an equal amount of power shared between people usually makes for a equal and happy relationship because no one is controlling another person.

On the other hand, sometimes you encounter people who you are not friends with. These are the people who you constantly disagree with or find unfriendly. For example in "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas," Bruno and his father have a pretty unbalanced relationship. His father, a major commander in the Nazi army, has tons power over many people. The story states, "Father held a hand in the air which immediately caused the other men to fall silent. It was as if he was the conductor of a barbershop quartet." Bruno sees this power and is afraid. Obviously, this makes for a uneasy relationship. There is no balance and Bruno is even occasionally too afraid to try to talk to his father! Another example of a bad relationship between characters is in "It's Kind of A Funny Story." At the beginning of the story, Aaron was his best friend. Aaron, the super smart guy with the beautiful girlfriend, and everything he wanted, had all of the power in the relationship. He was the cool guy and Craig just kind of did what he said. But once Craig was admitted to Six North, he built up confidence. When he and Aaron got into a fight over the phone, it made Craig realize that their friendship wasn't really working out. After all when Aaron came to see him at the hospital, Craig said, "I don't really need to explain this to Aaron. He's been demoted from most important friend to friend, and he's going to have to earn that, even." As soon as Craig found himself, both of them looked for power, causing them to argue about almost everything. All in all, an unequal or unclear amount of power between people usually makes for a uneven and unfriendly relationship because they are unable to trust and talk to one another.

To conclude, a relationship in which there is an equal separation of power makes for a friendship, whereas a relationship where one person has all of the power or each person wants all of the power doesn't. These books demonstrate different types of relationships between different types of power. I learned that people who have a constant thirst for power over everyone will most likely not make the best friend. When there is a balance of power, everyone is able to trust one another, talk and listen to each other, and no one feels dominated by someone else. Isn't that what you would want in a friendship?

Non-fiction Article Reading Response :)

The article "Role Reversal" by Patricia Smith states that, "A black woman judging a white man would  have been unthinkable under apartheid." However, that's exactly what happened during the trial of paralympian Oscar Pistorius, who was found guilty of "culpable homicide" last month. The main judge, a sixty-seven year old black woman named Thokozile Matilda Masipa, became the second black woman in South Africa to become an official judge in 1998. Now she is doing something unimaginable in South Africa during apartheid; a black woman is judging a rich, white man. Although during apartheid this setup would have been unthinkable, it can inspire the people of South Africa to see that things are different now. The claim that the author makes is that things have changed since the time of apartheid for the better. 

Throughout the entire article the author, Patricia Smith, uses many different crafting methods to support her claim. Repeatedly, she refers back to apartheid, a time in South African history when people were racially segregated. She explains that, "It's a situation that would have been unthinkable a generation ago, before the end of apartheid." Apartheid prevented black people living in South Africa from voting, and even socializing with white people. No one even considered the thought of a black person becoming a judge! The article quotes a black woman named Nomavenda Mathiane, a former newspaper colleague, who said, "'Whoever thought that one day a black woman would be standing judge over a white boy?'" She also quotes Margie Orford, a South African novelist who wrote about the trial. She explained that "It was a beautiful little apartheid reversal going on there."  They are two of the many people surprised by this association. How could you not be startled by this sudden change in racial views? Although the author does include the opinion of an many journalists and other people in South Africa, she does not incorporate the opinion of Oscar Pistorius, the man who is being tried. I think the reason she does not include his opinion is because he is the one being judged, so he probably won't have anything good to say about Judge Masipa at all. 

Another technique the author used to promote her claim throughout the article was imagery. She explains that before becoming a judge, Thokozile Matilda Masipa "was once arrested during an anti-apartheid protest and ordered by her white jailers to clean her cells filthy toilet." By adding this in, she conveys to the reader how terribly back South Africans were treated during apartheid, and then uses that to show how amazing it is that a black woman can now judge a white man. The author also explains that during apartheid, blacks were "essentially treated like outsiders on their own land". Outsiders means 'a person who does not belong to a particular group'. The author uses quotes and words like these to emphasize that that this new dynamic within the judiciary in South Africa creates justice for the black South Africans treated unfairly during apartheid. All of the methods Patricia Smith uses to support her claim give the reader an idea of how much things have changed.

To conclude, this article is fairly argumentative. Although the author does not straight out tell the reader her opinion, she uses different crafting methods throughout the article to indicate her claim. While reading this article, I learned a lot about how blacks were viewed during apartheid, and I agree with Patricia Smith that things have definitely changed for the better. The part when she explained how hard Judge Masipa's life was growing up made me realize that even when you're going through tough times, if you push through and keep on trying, you can change the world.

Reading Response - "Darkness Too Visible" by Megan Cox Gurdon :)

"If books show us the world, teen fiction can be like a hall of fun-house mirrors, constantly reflecting back hideously distorted portrayals of what life is," states Megan Cox Gurdon in her article, "Darkness Too Visible." In other words, is YA an accurate and good example for teens of what is to come in life? Her article explains that the themes and concepts and how dark they really are. For example, the theme of the YA book "Inexcusable" by Chris Lynch revolves around rape and sexual abuse, material that may be considered inappropriate for most, if not all teenagers. The claim that Megan Cox Gurdon is making in this article is that YA adult books nowadays are way too dark and inappropriate for teenagers.

The author, Megan Cox Gurdon begins the article by quoting Amy Freeman, a mother of three. Amy, who was at Barnes & Noble in search of a book for her thirteen year old daughter, explains that there was "nothing, not a thing, that I could imagine giving my daughter. It was all vampires and suicide and self-mutilation, this dark, dark stuff." The author then elaborates on that by explaining that these "dark" themes presented in YA books like pederasty, incest, and brutal beatings "are now just part of the run of things in novels directed, broadly speaking, at children from the ages of 12 to 18." To add, she uses loaded words like "stomach-clenching" and "grotesque" to express the detail that these themes are described in. The way that she describes these books using heavy words, imagery, and different perspectives shows that she is trying to make the reader think that YA is too inappropriate for teens as well. She gives the perspective of a parent, of her, but there's one thing she's missing. The perspective of the actual readers of YA books, us teens! I think she strategically left out these perspectives because I know I, and probably many other teens think that it is good to read YA to learn about real life, and it is really hard to counteract that kind of opinion.

Overall this article is very argumentative.Obviously the author is clearly claiming that YA literature deals with issues that are not only inappropriate, but described in a very graphic way that really distorts the truth. in my opinion, Megan Cox Gurdon is neither right nor wrong. Although for some teens, the themes in these books may be not okay, but for others it might. I think it really depends on the maturity level of the reader and the amount of material they can handle, not so much their age. I also think that it is important for teens to learn about the issues in YA books like drugs and alcohol because they do come up in real life! At the same time, the part on page three of the article about the girl who "sliced her arms to ribbons" and "gouged her belly until it was a mess of meat and blood" made me feel sick. All in all, I think that the issue of inappropriate material in YA and whether or not they are right for teens is really up to the person who is reading the book and how they feel about the issues discussed. I know that I like to read YA books to learn about things in real-life. What about you?