BLOG XII (LAST BLOGGG EVVAAAA)

Due to the 2007 film, The Golden Compass, many people from all over have been claiming that Phillip Pullman, the writer, attempts to attack Chrisitanity. In Al's Book Club, a reader asks Pullman if he is "anti-catholic and promoting athiesim". Pullman states that his films in no way promote athiesm, but state that religion and the government should be as far from eachother as possible to keep from disasterous effects. He references the Afgani Talliban and claims that if religion and political power are not kept as far away as possible, then they will "send armies to war or to condemn people to death, or to rule every aspect of our lives, it rapidly goes bad."

The Golden Compass is a very ambiguious movie in which the audience can draw conclusions and parallels between the fictionional world of Pullman's imagination and the world in which we live. The movie claims that dust is a bad thing that connects the different universes. The Magisterium, which is ruled by the Authority, wishes to get rid of the dust which was created by the Authority. This could be taken as:
The Magesterium is the church.
The Authority is God.
The Dust is Original Sin.
In order to rid of the world of (dust) original sin, we must first rid the world of the Authority (God).
When the film is looked at from this perspective, it can definatly be taken as attacking Christianity. But this is not exactly what the writer was claiming and not the reason he wrote the book.

(Not to be graded portion) I personally think that people need to stop analyzing things so closely because its a good book and I want to know what happens next so they should make another movie. This also strongly backs my statement in which I claim that we should all stop analyzing media because it will just lead to another epidimic like the Manson Murders and stuff like that. If he would have just not analyzed the stupid songs, that may have not happened. So thank you Mr. Hughes, you have probably raised up a mass murderer. (Not myself or anything)

Blog XI (A directed free write)

This summer is going to, well I really have no idea. This summer will pretty much consist of me working all the time so I can afford gas which will rise to astronomical heights. I was just fired from my MOTHERS store in which jewelry was sold. We closed the smaller wtore which resided in gonzales and so we didnt have enough hours to go around between the three employees so the decided to let the only one who was blood related to the owners go. I then called my uncle and asked him if i could have a job and he said yes so i was extremely overjoyed that I had a job and I didnt have to see my crazy aunt a lot. I have about seventy five more words to bs so lets see. After working all the time so I can feed my car, I am going to hang out with my best friend katie because she just graduated last night and I am going to miss her because she is going to college and I am stayin in this lame hell hole that they like to call "school". I am actually very distressed that the seniors and not seniors anymore and it makes me want to cry a lot. So summer will be good.

Blog X (Unqualified Defense)

Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism is a documentary made by Robert Greenwald about Fox news network. The whole documentary was basically claiming that Fox News is not as "fair and balanced" as it tries to come across as. Greenwald uses first person testimonies from former employees to push his point farther across the line. He claims that Fox distorts the facts, picks guests, and spins stories all to its own advantage. This claim may seem biased and untrue to most of the people who watch fox news, but there is more to this claim than meets the eye.

A study done by FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) in 2003 has backed up claims maid by Greenwald in Outfoxed. FAIR did a study in which they studied 25 weeks of Fox's Special Report. In this crucial segment, Brit Hume has one-on-one chats with guests selected by the network. FAIR found that over 71% of guests on Special Report were conservative. They also noticed that the few liberals that were on the show were closer to the middle of the political spectrum. (Still Failing the "Fair & Balanced" Test, FAIR.com) This shows Fox's extremely tilted viewpoint. Fox doesn't accurately present the "other side" in many of its arguments. Another study was done in which the guests were divided into three groups: Conservatives, Centrists, and Progressives. These guests did not automatically fall into the category they claimed as their "political party", but were categorized by voting records and interviews. In this study, 57% of guests were conservatives, 12% were centrists, and 12% were liberals. 20% of the guests of the show were non-ideological. This means that viewers were five times more likely to see a conservative rather than a liberal on Fox's Special Report with Brit Hume.

Greenwald also claims that Fox doesn't report news, they report more of a watered down version. A study done at the Program of International Policy (PIPA) in the University of Maryland showed that people who primarily watch Fox news are more likely to have misconceptions about the war in Iraq than people who watch PBS or listen to NPR. So, what does this mean? Fox News distorts the facts to fit its own agenda. The people who watched Fox believed that the US did find nuclear weapons in Iraq, when in fact, we didn't. people who listened to NPR were more likely to know that there were no weapons of mass destruction found. (Misconceptions, The Media and the Iraq War, WPO.org) This, once again, shows how Fox twists its "facts" to fit it's tilted viewpoint.

Works Cited

"Misconceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War." World Public Opinion.Org. 2 Oct. 2003. 5 May 2008 http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php?nid=&id=&pnt=102&lb=brusc.

Rendall, Steve, and Julie Hollar. "Still Failing the "Fair and Balanced" Test." FAIR.Com. Aug. 2004. 5 May 2008 .

Blog 9...maybe. Its a FREE WRITE!!!

Im guessing a "freewrite" means I can write about whatever I want, however I want and its ok. That must be why its "free". So I could write withnospacesor i coud write spellin everthin rong or i could not give a crap about puncuation and correct grammar. I deduce I must not have to make this sound like it was written with the slightest bit of intellegence or writing ability. I guess that could be pretty cool too. I wont have to worry about the use of first or second person pronouns or contractions. It would be pretty dang cool if we could always write like this and not have to give a flip about what Mr. Hughes is going to read into our papers or not read into them. Sometimes, when writing, i get so worried that something doesnt sound just right I stress myself out about it. But as I have noticed, in this class, it really doesnt matter how your paper sounds, if Mr. Hughes doesnt like it, you get an F or maybe a D if hes in a good mood. This blog is in no way meant to degrade or say bad things about Mr. Hughes. I really wish I could just live a nomadic style life: no highschool, no college, no work, no nothing (yes, Im aware thats a double negative but read the rest of the paper, I DONT CARE!!!) I wish there were no quzizzes. How BOSS would that be? Yes, I did just bring back the slang "boss" and I do believe it is pretty boss so, spread it around. It is currently 10:30, on I think its Monday, maybe Tuesday, and Im not sure when this FREE WRITE is due, so Im doing it now. And Im not going to change it come tomorrow, or the next day. Its fine just how it is. And do you know why? Because, It's a free write and I get to express myself in whatever way I feel neseccary. And I am in a bad mood today, so I guess that bad moodiness will be taken out on this poor laptop and this stupid blog and this incredibly pointless assignment (I mean incredibly pointless unless it will bring up my grade in any way shape or form.) Well, I guess this just about covers my 200, word minimum. Actually I just broke 400 words without a sweat. Damn it feels good to write about everything, yet nothing at all.

Same Sex Marriage(VIII)

How much power is too much power? The government controls one's food, education, television programs, etc. The government is also attempting to control one's love life. Same sex marriage is a hot topic in political forums all over the nation. Should the government be able to regulate to whom one makes their vows? By laws set by the US and state governments, they have this power. Society should not have the power to tell someone who they can and can not marry because marriage is between two people who love each other.

Control by the government comes from various laws set over the citizens. Society now has the power to tell someone how to live their love life. Just because a relationship does not follow precedent does not mean the relationship and the love is not legitimate. In 2004, six months after homosexual marriages began in Massachusetts, 11 states approved constitutional amendments verifying matrimony as a heterosexual institution. The executive director for the NGLTF (National Gay and Lesbian Task Force) claimed that the voting on these amendments put "basic rights up to popular vote." (Peterson,2004) The United States Federal Government traditionally recognized any marriage that was recognized by the state. In 1996 the Defense of Marriage Act gave "marriage" a definition by saying it is the union of one man and one woman for the purpose of the federal government; yet, this act does not have the power to define marriage for separate states. Therefore, if a homosexual couple is married in Massachusetts the marriage is recognized by the state, but not the federal government. (Same Sex Marriage in the United States, Wikipedia) Laws which ban same sex marriage do in fact tell certain people how to live their love lives; which is obviously a violation of the constitutional clause saying that each citizen is entitled to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Most of the devout feelings against same sex marriage comes from religious beliefs. People brought up in a Christian family are more likely to be against gay/lesbian marriage because of the beliefs they were brought up in. Many people believe that society has the right to tell someone who they can and can not marry because it is "morally wrong" to marry someone of the same sex. Telling a group of people that they cant marry someone of the same gender is like telling someone that they are not allowed to lie or drink alcohol. One person may see no harm in having a couple drinks but another could think it is one of the worst sins possible. What gives that person who thinks drinking is a sin the authority to not allow the other to drink? It is the same with same sex marriage. It is a persons constitutional right to be allowed freedom and happiness, some people may be denied those rights because of their sexual orientation.

It all just comes back to what is "morally right" and what is "morally wrong". Just because someone is different that what society is use to, they should not be denied their happiness. Due to certain laws set into place by our government, society now has the power to tell someone whom they can and can not marry. Society has defined marriage in a way that excludes some of the population. Society has taken away a freedom from those who wish to marry someone of the same gender. Society already controls what we watch, what we listen to, and what we wear. Should they be able to control this too?

Down in a Hole (VII)

"Down in a Hole" by Alice in Chains is a song that can be interpreted in many ways. There is the more literal meaning of "the hole" that could be hell. This is shown through lines such as "Down in a Hole, Loosing my Soul...My wings have been denied." Since hell is often referred to as a "pit" in which you loose your soul to the devil, we are lead to believe that this could be what the speaker is speaking of. The metaphorical meaning of "the hole" could be a pit of despair in which the speaker has found himself. For the purpose of the argument, this is the meaning we will go with. Through the use of pathos and vivid imagery the speaker attempts to give the audience a window to his soul and the pit of despair he has found himself in.

The speaker in "Down in a Hole" could be any one person who has found themselves in a hole that they put themselves in, that they cant get out. The speaker compares this dark point in his/her life to a tomb or a womb, both of in which there is no light and no escape.___ The speaker reiterates the point of helplessness by saying that he is down in a hole and he "doesn't know if he can be saved." He is mourning the loss of himself so he decorates his heart like a grave. The speaker is talking about his life and the expectations of his family, friends and the society he lived in. It is rumored that this song was written about the lead singer of Alice in Chain's drug use. When this identity that Layne Staley was supposed to live up to didn't play out the right way he actually turned to the use of drugs such as heroine. This information puts the depression and pit off addiction into perspective. The drugs form a pit of which there is no escape.

Because the speaker is down in this pit of despair and maybe even addiction he is comparing it to hell. Loosing one's soul and being denied one's wings is an reference to hell. "...They've put all the stones in their place" could be referencing to the ancient torturous ritual of stoning one to death. He feels like the pressure placed on him by his society, family, and friends is too much and he is weighted down by the "stones." The speaker has "tasted the sun" and his tongue has been "burned of the taste," which could be a parallel drawn between Staley's heroine use which ended up killing him and tasting the sun.

This song uses stylistic devices such as metaphors and repetition throughout the song to drive the purpose home. The whole song is a metaphor comparing the speakers despair to a pit that is inescapable. While there is no actual pit, the imagery produced by this metaphor is developed to help the audience better understand the pain the speaker is trying to portray. This also helps convey the raw emotion that is missing from a lot of our music today.( Alice in Chains did an amazing job of writing and singing this song to convey a feeling a lot of people who look to music for consonance can identify with.)

Jeremy (VI)

As school violence became a very eminent issue in our society Pearl Jam and many other prominent bands began to speak up and voice their opinions. A very controversial song that did just that was "Jeremy" by Peal Jam. This song is about a young boy who is shown no affection at home and is bullied at school. this song is written as if the speaker is a primary source to the ridicule and scorn that Jeremy received. The speaker is reminiscent and remorseful about what happened with Jeremy. It seems as though throughout the song the speaker is trying to tell Jeremy's story. He seems like he wants to take what he has done to Jeremy back and let others know that people aren't just what you see on the surface. Jeremy was a troubled young man and because people didn't accept him, he killed himself.

The speaker is obviously trying to appeal to the audience's emotions by speaking of Jeremy's troubled home and problems at school. He puts his heart on the page as he sings about the experience that has shaken him to his very foundation. The very fact that the speaker has gone through this terrible event makes him have an air of authority about him. The speaker is trying to accomplish the main goal of having people see what happened in his life because of the torment he put one child through. He does this by appealing to emotions and speaking in a remorseful tone.

My Strengths and Weaknesses as a Writer. (5??)

(Please bear with the first paragraph...I'm just trying to get momentum.)
I use to think I would go into writing as a career. I figured I would start somewhere small, a local newspaper or something, and end up in Vogue or Harper's Bazaar. It all started out with the dream to be a writer who reviews books for a major magazine. I loved to read. I loved to write. It just seemed like perfect sense. Then came my love for fashion. I was constantly engrossed in Vogue, Glamour, In Style, and any other fashion magazine I could get my hands on. I then dreamed of becoming a "fashion editor" in Vogue. I would mix my two passions, English and fashion, and get the job of my dreams. I suddenly was way-laid by a reality check. Millions of girls would dream for that job, but only a few would get it. That is when I realized my dreams were very farfetched. Yes, people would tell me that I could achieve anything and that "the sky's the limit," but I didn't have much faith in myself. My eighth grade year at St. Theresa I had Mrs. Moak. She was the cheerleading sponsor so she liked me fairly enough and she was the English teacher. We wrote at least two essays every week and she did not grade lightly. Looking at where I was in my quest towards my future I was very discouraged. My papers always seemed to look as though there was a murder and my paper just happened to be an innocent bystander, covered in the remains of the murdered. After paper after paper of corrections and little notes of support I became better. My grammar had improved, as did my self-esteem. High school came and suddenly the grammatical assignments came. There was more focus on literature, rather than English. Three years later and I find myself in that position where my grammar almost back to where I was in at the beginning of eighth grade. I don’t feel as confident as I use to.

I guess I can write a decent paper. Most of the training only needs to be slightly brushed up and I could be as good as new. I believe the hardest part is writing a theisis statement. I know that it has to state what the paper is going to attempt to convey. I know that it is crucial in the development of any paper. But I do not know how to write one that doesnt sound harsh and rigid. I feel I can write opinions way better than I can write facts. It seems to me when Im writing about facts my papers seem more choppy. When just writing what I feel, I feel more free and it jsut comes more easily to me.

Who is intellegent? (4)

Intellegence is a goal in many people's lives. It is something many strive for and spend their entire lives looking for. The first thing many people think of when they hear the word "intellegenve" is being smart or having a lot of knowledge. Some think that being smart is all intellegence is. Others believe it is being able to apply knowledge. So, who is intellegent? Shouldnt one's view of the intellegent and the ignorant be based upon one's definition of intellegence?
Merriam Webster defines intellegence as "the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situation." For the sake of the argument let us just go with this definiton. By this we can accept almost anyone as "intellegent". It could be anyone who can get by, anyone who can stay alive. A 3 month old child or a 30 year old druggie could be considered intellegent. So one would guess that almost anyone could be intellegent.
Intellegence is one of those things that can not really be defined. It differs from person to person and it can be so many different things that a definition can not really be pinned down.

Truth, Knowledge, Beliefs, WHATEVER! (3)

What is truth? Who is to say what is true and what is not? I believe that every pholosophiccal subject is based in truth. Belief is based upon your perception of what is true and what is not. Knowledge is somewhat based in truth because you can know a ton of information but what does it matter if its not true? But what is the definition of truth? Merriam Webster defines tuth as "a judgement, proposition, or idea that is true or is accepted as truth." So, can facts be untrue? A fact is "a piece of information that has objective reality(the state of something being real)."

In a court room truth is supposed to be the basis for every motion, every decision. But just ask any lawyer who is defending a guilty person; theydont want the truth of what happened the night of the murder. If their client told them the truth they would be morally obligated to plead the defendant as guilty. No one would get a lot of money if that was the case.

What if the ideas and facts we have know to be "truth" and have percieved and accepted as truth are all just ideas with no truth in them at all? Take for instance the ninth and smallest planet, Pluto. We all grew up leaning that Pluto was the cold, blue planet farthest away from the sun. Well, as of last year we are all wrong. Pluto is no longer a planet. So it was a "fact" but now its not? The fact has been disproven! Can they do that?

As a Christian you can say that you believe in God and you know he is there because of your faith, but what if He's not. If thats the case; your belief, your true meaning of existance is worthless. A lot of people (myself included) push this thought to the back of their mind becase they are afraid of what is really, actually true. I think it would be scary to discover the truth. What if there is no God, would our standards of living be radically different? Or would we still strive to be the people we currently strive to be?

As I was brainstorming I came up with with this theisis:
Facts are true, beliefs can be true. One can know facts, one can know that they believe something. But one can not know all truth.

Here's the thing, I dont know everything. I dont know hardly anything and that is probably not going to change anytime soon. I really am not sure what the point of beating oneself up over things like the quest to distinguish knowledge, truth, and belief. Everyone has their own opinions and try as you may, you will not change everyone's opinion. As long as you believe what you believe for a just reason, it is your belief and it is correct in your heart. If that's not enough for you, then what, in your opinion, is the point of life?

V for Vendetta (2)

In the film V for Vendetta (2006) the writers draw parallels between the film and what is happening in the world now. The writers express their opinions concerning the government and totalitarian societies. V for Vendetta is set in the present in the United Kingdom. The government has been oppressing the people and has transformed into a totalitarian government. Outraged by this, V plots to begin a revolution to bring down the government.


The speaker in this text is V, and his audience is the general public of London who have been wronged by the government. This was not just broadcast on BBC News, it was broadcast on every channel and also on the huge screen in the middle of the city. V obviously wanted to get his message out to anyone and everyone he could. He is speaking to those who have felt suppressed by the government, those who "see what he sees, feels what he feels, and seek what he seeks." We know this because towards the end he says "So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked."


The film V for Vendetta was actually based on a graphic novel written by Alan Moore. The tone in the graphic novel's speech is more joking, and a relates the incedent with government to something the people can understand, like being let go from a job. The main point V is tyring to make the the graphic novel speech is that one is responsible for one's government's actions. He is saying that the people who voted for such terrible rulers are responsible because they voted. The tone in the speech used in the movie seems to be more stern. He is more serious about the matter at hand by not really beating around the bush.

V’s Speech to the people of London begins with V using ethos to attempt to establish that he is just like an everyday person. V does this by saying “I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of the everyday routine, the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition…” He lets the audience know that he is no better than any of them. This is where V first connects with his audience so he can later persuade them to join him and accept his point of view.

V uses logos in the sentence claiming V’s suspicion of how the government will be reacting by stating assumed facts and evidence against the government to attempt to get the people of London on his side. I say “assumed facts and evidence” because a government has routine ways of reacting to a given situation. If you take into account precedents and what is actually happening in the movie, V is correct and therefore presenting facts. V and his audience may not know they are facts but by using dramatic irony, we the audience know something the characters do not. That is how i justify that statement as being a fact. By saying “while truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power,” V is appealing to the intellect of the audience by giving them a bit of something deep and profound. He uses evaluation in the last sentence by questioning the upstanding in the country.

By listing the words like "cruelty" and "opression," V uses pathos to appeal to the audience’s emotions. By describing the life the citizens of London live, and the feelings that they deal with, V is trying to make the people see the rights the government has taken from them and how wrong it is. In the fourth and fifth lines V says, “Well certainly there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable.” He is using evaluation to put the blame on those “more responsible.” V also uses a forensic argument to identify “the guilty” and is pointing a finger at the hoi polloi.

The speaker uses pathos by talking aobut hope to appeal to the audience’s emotions, reminding the public of the reason for remembering the 5th of November. He is saying that he knows why they are afraid and he understands. He is trying to put himself on a level where the audience can trust him, where they can identify with him as a leader. In the last lines of this paragraph V uses a forensic argument to question the morals of the general public. He questions their actions as they gave the Chancellor their “silent, obedient consent.”

The main purpose of this speech is to reach out to those hurt by the government, those like V, and let them know that it is no longer acceptable to sit back and let it happen. He uses various modes of persuasion to get the audience to join him on the Fifth of November.

Myself? (1)

Describe yourself (at least 100 words): Anything about personality, goals, shortcomings, and interests. Include a photograph.

My name is Lauren Alyssa Brown. I'm pretty outgoing. I like people, I’m a people person. I have one sister, Londyn. She's five and she's pretty crazy. My parents, Dennis and Chetta, separated last April. My mom gave my sister and I a dog for Christmas. I wanted to name him Megatron but my mother said that Sugar would be better, whatever.

When I try to plan ahead I get nervous. I don’t like how things are so apt to change. It scares me how one minute you can have this huge elaborate plan that seems perfect, and the next you could be standing in the rain, completely lost, with all those plans down the drain. I don’t like to look into the past much either. I see the past as it is, it has already has happened and you cannot do anything to change it. Why would you sit there and mull over what you could have done or what you should have done.

I want to be successful. I don’t really think that I'm really great at anything in particular. I am fairly good at a bunch of different things but I don't see myself standing out in one particular field. When I graduate I plan to go to LSU and study there. I don't really know what I want major in or what I want to do after college. I believe trying to figure that out and get a set plan for it is pointless. The way I see it is I’m just going to change my mind a dozen times so why not just wait a little. One thing I could see myself doing is helping people. I would like to be a psychologist. I’ve gone through some hard stuff in my life (I’m not trying to make myself sound like a martyr) and I think that that could help me in that profession. I also like to read but not many jobs will hire you for that. I guess the future will work itself out on it's own time.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am a very studious person and school means a lot to me. I just don’t obsess about stuff like that. I have better things to waste my worries on.

As I said before, I like to read. I also like to hang out with my friends and my boyfriend. His name is Jesse and he is 4 years older than me. That freaks my parents out but my mom likes him. My dad doesn’t and I’m pretty sure he never will but that’s his problem. I just like having fun and being happy.

I guess that’s all I really want in life, to be happy.