Betryal. A negative verb that can hurt many feelings, and can sketch bad memories. Betryal can be considered to be different actions, in different situations. A friend talking behind your back, being a trator could be betrayal. Your husband cheating on you, leaving you for someone else could be betrayal. A child being abandaned by his parents could be betrayal, your boss chosing your best friend to be his secretary for her looks, after promising you the promotion could be considered to be betrayal. The range to betrayal could be limited, it could be broad. Who knows. But, according to moi, betrayal is purposly hurting someone 'close's' feelings, or going behind their backs, with them counting on you.
Betrayal had taken place in my life, and so i do know how i did and would react towards such situation. Then, i really got mad and made things worse by doing things and saying things you wouldn't want to know about. But now, i know im far better with handeling situations, and would most likely get exhasperated, and may explode on the who-so-ever, regarding my mood. If i think i can take it, and knew not expect much out of that person, i would most likely egnore the happening. But I'm always counting on people, if i trust, i trust fully, if i dont, i dont. So if a close one does betray, its going to be an unforgetable act. Maybe it could be forgiven, but it depends. As i believe, i can forgive, but never forget.
Also with forgiveness, it might take a while for me to get over it, because i tend to stick to things strongly, and have a hard time letting go. So yea. Bottom line, and long story short, dont betray me, becuase i can be mean, and yea end of story. Medea Rocks! :D
Thursday, 2 April 2009
Thursday, 26 March 2009
Hard Love
Hard Love, a book written by Ellen Wittlinger. Where to start, this is deffinitly one of my fave. books now. Valeria had recommended this book, and at first i thought it was going to be ok-sih, but it turned out the be great! It is about two people mainly, this guy, and this girl who is a lesbian. The boy likes a particular author for her zines, which happens to be the girl. They meat up, and he starts to like her. They spend time together, and become close friends, and they run away together. The Boy is into the girl, knowying she's a lesbian, and thats where the conflict begins. It is also another very difernt book, from wat i;ve read beore. It wouldnt be surprising, if this was actually a non fiction, though it is fiction. Great book, read it, you wont regret it.
Character:5/5
Setting:4/5
Plot:5/5
Conflict:5/5
Teach Me.
Teach Me is an amazing book written by R.A.Nelson. It is about a girl who falls in love with her Literature teacher, named Mr. Mann. The book circles about the themes, love, betrayal, and true friendship. A story about a girl falling deeply in love with an possibly ten year old, older person, and having a out-side-school-seductive relationship with him. The girl is blindly in love with the teacher, not knowing off what lies next. She pictures her life in the arms of the gorgeous guy, unaware of the fact that he will be marrying another women, leaving her desperate with rage and love. It is a differnt story, that could be read as a "mind candy". At least no one dies in the end. Or at lest close to not die :)
Character: 5/5
Setting: 3/5
Plot: 4/5
Conflict:5/5
Sure, go ahead read it.
Sunday, 22 February 2009
Multiple Choice
Multiple Choice was a very different book from those i've read before. Its about a girl called Monica who is obsessed about everything to anything in her life. She would weigh two bean bags to see if they are the same, she couldnt stand an extra hair strand popping out from a stranger's head. Everytime she would do something, she would jump into thinking of conclusions, and if she messed up somewhere. She wanted everything perfect. But at the same time, she didnt want everything to be perfect, because as again she would skip to conclusions, asking what will things be like if they WERE too PERFECT. Monica's life was fine with obsession until she came up with the game called "Multiple Choice." This game decided what she would do, in order to be 'not perfect'. Through this game she could be a complete different person, yet being herslef. Its a fun book to read, that would crack you up at least once everytime you read a chapter. Also, Monica, gives a whole new meaning to 'anagrams' as it plays a crusial part in her life, for figuring out who she really is. Its a great book that anyone can read, and should read! It is fun, with a good vocabulary, and would make a great movie.
Character: 10/10
Setting: 9/10
Problem: 10/10
Plot: 10/10
oh and it had a fine ending...thankfully!
Saturday, 21 February 2009
Brutus and the Chivalric Codes
Chivalric codes: Honor, Chastity, Loyalty, Courageous
Honor: Brutus is one of the key characters that we've studied, who shows the greatest bond with honor. Brutus was obsessed with honor. Everything to him was for honor. His actions, his words, his speeches, even his death was to gain honor.
Chastity: Brutus had a wife--Portia, so he was definitely not chastit-ious. Not much was discribed, over if he liked women or not, but we certainly saw that although he loved his wife, he didnt honor her enough to trust her and tell her one of his secrets.
Loyalty: Brutus didnt tell Portia his secret, in order to keep his loyalty towards Cassius and the others. But was Brutus loyal to his wife by doing so? Was Brutus loyal to go Behind Caesar's back and make plans to murder him? It may have seemed to Brutus that he was being loyal to Rome, but in my opinion, he definitely was not loyal.
Courageous: Though not loyal, I think, Brutus was surely courageous. Brutus was a friend of Caesar and respected him. I think, it takes some courage to go behind a friend's back and to kill him. It takes courage to admit that you killed someone, and then to give an outstanding-persuasive speech in front of the commoners, not knowing how the'd react. And it also takes courage to tell someone to take your life. It takes courage to die with honor.
Honor: Brutus is one of the key characters that we've studied, who shows the greatest bond with honor. Brutus was obsessed with honor. Everything to him was for honor. His actions, his words, his speeches, even his death was to gain honor.
Chastity: Brutus had a wife--Portia, so he was definitely not chastit-ious. Not much was discribed, over if he liked women or not, but we certainly saw that although he loved his wife, he didnt honor her enough to trust her and tell her one of his secrets.
Loyalty: Brutus didnt tell Portia his secret, in order to keep his loyalty towards Cassius and the others. But was Brutus loyal to his wife by doing so? Was Brutus loyal to go Behind Caesar's back and make plans to murder him? It may have seemed to Brutus that he was being loyal to Rome, but in my opinion, he definitely was not loyal.
Courageous: Though not loyal, I think, Brutus was surely courageous. Brutus was a friend of Caesar and respected him. I think, it takes some courage to go behind a friend's back and to kill him. It takes courage to admit that you killed someone, and then to give an outstanding-persuasive speech in front of the commoners, not knowing how the'd react. And it also takes courage to tell someone to take your life. It takes courage to die with honor.
Thursday, 19 February 2009
The Good Guy
This is a book by Dean Koontz, who is one of my favorite writers. One of my favorite books by him is Velocity. Dean has a very intriguing way of writing. He mainly writes mistery/thrillers, and is a pro at it. This book, is another mistery/thriller book of his, which starts of with a guy--Tim-- sitting at a bar, who is mistaken by a stranger to be someone else. The stranger dilivers him a photo and a certain amount of money, to kill the person in the picture. Tim knowing that he'd been mistaken for someone else, doesnt say anything and takes the package. What happens next, could only revieled after reading the book.
I say read this book! Yes, it is a mind candy, and a really tasty one! If you for a rollercoaster-istic novel, that paces itself in a great way, then this is the book for you. But, if you are one of those bio-auto bio-fantasy sorta person, then i'd recon to skip this one.
Setting: 10/10
Character:10/10
Plot:10/10
Conflict: Man vs. himself and Man vs. Man.
Monday, 16 February 2009
Camparin' & Contrastin'
Sir Launcelot du Lake. What a name..It is a really strong name, that was given to a courageous night, who was made the head night of the Round Table by King Arthur. There are various legends, and different authors have laid them for us to read in their own different ways. Sir Launcelot's character is shown differently in the two different prospectuses of the legends; Sir Launcelot du Lake and from the Acts of King Arthur and his Noble Knights, written by Sir Thomas Malory and John Steinbeck respectively. The two images that these writers worked on to portray are extremely different from each other. In Sir Thomas's version, Launcelot's character is explained dramatically, in a very exagerated manner. For example: "Sir Launcelot took another spear and unhorsed sixteen more of the King or North Galys's knights and, with his next, unhorsed another twelve; and in each case with such violence that none of the knights ever fully recovered"(Sir Launcelot.Pg:1078). Many events, just like this one, were described with much fantasy, hence, seemed unrealistic. Istead of being wowed by his brave battles, I was more like "yeah right kido."
On the other hand, Steinbeck's version ilustrates a totally different picture. His version consisted of detailed discriptions and figurative language, which made his writing seem like a emotional story. For Example: "Lancelot exhausted the theme of his hands and squinted down the long hall and watched the movement with eyes so nearly closed that he could not see faces...The knights in long full floor-brushing robes walked lightly or thought their feet barely touched the ground because their bodies were released rom their crushing boxes of iron" (The Acts King. Pg:1094). Through this example, we can see how Steinbeck manages to create a delicate sympathy towards Launcelot. The discriptions for what he thinks, and what he observes are a great way to gain the reader's sympathy. Both the authors did a great job, developing the different images of Sir Launcelot. Where, one was an honorable, courageous, undefeatable knight, the ohter was an emotional, delicate, yet honorable knight with deep feelings. The interesting thing about both the pieces were, that both the writings had a power, that dug out two completely different responses from its audience. Good job writers!
On the other hand, Steinbeck's version ilustrates a totally different picture. His version consisted of detailed discriptions and figurative language, which made his writing seem like a emotional story. For Example: "Lancelot exhausted the theme of his hands and squinted down the long hall and watched the movement with eyes so nearly closed that he could not see faces...The knights in long full floor-brushing robes walked lightly or thought their feet barely touched the ground because their bodies were released rom their crushing boxes of iron" (The Acts King. Pg:1094). Through this example, we can see how Steinbeck manages to create a delicate sympathy towards Launcelot. The discriptions for what he thinks, and what he observes are a great way to gain the reader's sympathy. Both the authors did a great job, developing the different images of Sir Launcelot. Where, one was an honorable, courageous, undefeatable knight, the ohter was an emotional, delicate, yet honorable knight with deep feelings. The interesting thing about both the pieces were, that both the writings had a power, that dug out two completely different responses from its audience. Good job writers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
