Swift is clearly upset or astound by the minimal differences that can lead to war, and separation. In the story, this is clearly represented with the heels. As I don't know much about English history I wouldnt be able to know the exact meaning of the "High-Heels" and the "Low-Heels", but I understand though, that he intends to say that their differences are ridiculous. Same thing happens with the eggs, and even with the conflict between Lilliput and Blefuscu which seems even more stupid.
Now, another small thing I want to talk about is the fact that Gulliver peed onto the pallace to save the emperor's wife. What does this mean? Also, the fact that he was granted pardon. What does this imply to society, or implied back then?
I'd say that first of all, Swift doesnt agree much with the royal desicions. Otherwise, why would he pee on their palace? He could believe that you ought to dishonor the existing rules, and crown, in order to save lifes. We have seen that Swift critizes the whole european culture, and that might've been another of his jokes. Aside from that, as Gullviver was pardoned, then he believes that there is entirely nothing wrong with doing so. That explains why he was so controversial with his book. (Anyways, I'm not sure if many people noticed back then.) Signifying nothing?
domingo, 31 de mayo de 2009
lunes, 25 de mayo de 2009
The Power of the Unknown
Gulliver reminds me of Hernan Cortez. The conquistador that "discovered" Mexico. He was praised, and seen as a God for his power. With his weapons, clothing, ships, and his animals, he was viewed as a leader, and highly respected at first. Gulliver is receiving a spectacular treatment by the Lilliputians. His size, compared to these creatures, represents the difference in power, and greatness.
Gulliver has the power to tyrannize the Lilliputians but he hasn't done it so far. It maybe that he isn't as cruel as Hernan Cortez, or simply that he hasn't found the opportunity. Yet, as he has the power to choose, we'll just have to wait on his decision.
I believe that the Lilliputians must be experiencing fear, and amusement. He is pretty much as an alien to them, and they will find some use of that. The majority feel intimidated by him, and we would too, if something like that were to happen to us. It is known that people tend to fear the unknown, because you never know how capable are they. I wonder, what does Gulliver and the Lilliputians represent in reality?
Right in front of our noses
As I was reading "The Coming Superbrain", by John Markoff I laughed out loud. I laughed because it remembered me to a story I heard during the weekend that perfectly relates to the Op-Ed. Basically, what Markoff tries to do in the Op-Ed is to evaluate the different possibilities and consequences of a future in which we create machines, or computers that become smarter than us
I believe that this will happen in a not so distant future. Although Markoff said that we wouldn't live to see any examples of this anomaly. There are many machines that have certain control over us, and we don't even know it.
As "La Inolvidable Penny", one of my grandmother's friends said, "Yo nunca escribo en esas maquinas porque no me gusta que nadie me este diciendo que hacer" when we were talking about computers. She hated computers because if you didn't press the button that "they" wanted, then they would simply not do what you wanted them to do and in many cases, just freeze for a while, until "THEY FELT" that you were ready for them.
Why would you have to press those exact buttons to open the explorer? After all, you own the computer and it is meant to serve you, not the other way around.
She also hated Microsoft Word. The exact translation of her words would be, "What the fuck do I care if my fragment needs revising?, I don't want any fucking advice on my grammar."
Penny also despised cellphones, ipods, and even A.I. chess machines. One would say that it is a very childish attitude towards techonolohy, and it is indeed, but we must consider the fact that she is reaching her last days on this planet, and she is much more amused by the amount of progress that has occurred during the past century. Anyways, she is right in the fact that we don't realize that we are enslaved by our machines.
That day shall come. The day in which the computer will tell us what to eat, what to think, and what to do. The day in which robots will have us as pets and We'll never notice. We'll never know because they will control us, and we'll have no way of knowing as they will be hiding right in front of our noses. As it is happening right now.
And by the way, if that day shall come, then the insatiable ego of the computer geeks shall be blamed. Because they are innovating in the daily bases, without knowing the chaos that we'll face in the future. And I bet that they will not feel as proud as they do in these days, when they show their discoveries in front of thousands, just for the sake of the money. How selfish are these geeks. I bet that they are too, ignorant of what hides in front of their noses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/weekinreview/24markoff.html?em
I believe that this will happen in a not so distant future. Although Markoff said that we wouldn't live to see any examples of this anomaly. There are many machines that have certain control over us, and we don't even know it.
As "La Inolvidable Penny", one of my grandmother's friends said, "Yo nunca escribo en esas maquinas porque no me gusta que nadie me este diciendo que hacer" when we were talking about computers. She hated computers because if you didn't press the button that "they" wanted, then they would simply not do what you wanted them to do and in many cases, just freeze for a while, until "THEY FELT" that you were ready for them.
Why would you have to press those exact buttons to open the explorer? After all, you own the computer and it is meant to serve you, not the other way around.
She also hated Microsoft Word. The exact translation of her words would be, "What the fuck do I care if my fragment needs revising?, I don't want any fucking advice on my grammar."
Penny also despised cellphones, ipods, and even A.I. chess machines. One would say that it is a very childish attitude towards techonolohy, and it is indeed, but we must consider the fact that she is reaching her last days on this planet, and she is much more amused by the amount of progress that has occurred during the past century. Anyways, she is right in the fact that we don't realize that we are enslaved by our machines.
That day shall come. The day in which the computer will tell us what to eat, what to think, and what to do. The day in which robots will have us as pets and We'll never notice. We'll never know because they will control us, and we'll have no way of knowing as they will be hiding right in front of our noses. As it is happening right now.
And by the way, if that day shall come, then the insatiable ego of the computer geeks shall be blamed. Because they are innovating in the daily bases, without knowing the chaos that we'll face in the future. And I bet that they will not feel as proud as they do in these days, when they show their discoveries in front of thousands, just for the sake of the money. How selfish are these geeks. I bet that they are too, ignorant of what hides in front of their noses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/weekinreview/24markoff.html?em
DNA serves well
There is not much to say. I agree with the author. Prosecutors shouldn't block the opportunities to do a DNA test. What is more reliable than this? In fact, it shouldn't even be the prisoner's choice. DNA testing would reduce significantly the margin of error, and ensure that the right people are getting convicted.
Besides, another benefit of the DNA testing is that they could find other potential suspects or criminals. Why wouldn't they want to do this? Why would you eat bad food, instead of your favorite food? (assuming that both of them are equally healthy and cost the same?) Why would you want to be counterproductive?
Maybe the tests are expensive but if you ask the average American, as to whether they would like more natural parks, or a safer country, they'd probably choose the second one. Well, maybe they would even choose the first one. But if it were up to me, I'd choose to spend more of my tax money onto safety. After all, who wants a bunch of criminals around their kids? Free! And, who wants to see innocents convicted for lifetime? Talking about justice there. It is all a matter of reasoning, and progress.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/opinion/19tue2.html?_r=1
Besides, another benefit of the DNA testing is that they could find other potential suspects or criminals. Why wouldn't they want to do this? Why would you eat bad food, instead of your favorite food? (assuming that both of them are equally healthy and cost the same?) Why would you want to be counterproductive?
Maybe the tests are expensive but if you ask the average American, as to whether they would like more natural parks, or a safer country, they'd probably choose the second one. Well, maybe they would even choose the first one. But if it were up to me, I'd choose to spend more of my tax money onto safety. After all, who wants a bunch of criminals around their kids? Free! And, who wants to see innocents convicted for lifetime? Talking about justice there. It is all a matter of reasoning, and progress.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/opinion/19tue2.html?_r=1
domingo, 17 de mayo de 2009
No Music, No Life?
Miro's painting is straight up funky. The colors, the shapes, the lines, and the overall energy that it creates makes me either smile, or just want to go out and live. Enjoy, and even sing.
I wonder what is he implying with this painting? You can see plenty of figures that resemble reality, but they are all distorted in ways that cannot be described. There is this man playing his guitar, or banjo, or whatever that may be and he is inside a house. There is a dog that is enjoying music and looks like it were drugged. There is also a cat, and at the time, the rest of the shapes inside his house seem abstract and undecipherable. Yet, I see a house with a lake, at the left side, in which there are animals and trees.
My immediate understanding of this painting was that music, or art, are the foundations of life, or at least happiness. You can interpret this from the attention that the musician is getting. Most of the objects are revolving around him, or looking up to him as the cat, and the squirrel that I've just found on the wall.
Aside from this, his body is on rule of thirds, and even more so, his face the most notorious thing for me. (By the way, his face is another red balloon.) There are many lines and shapes that direct your eye onto the character and the contrast of his red face, with the whiteness that surrounds him, make him stand out.
The colors are very unreal. Most of them are tones that you wouldn't find normally find. For instance, there is the vibrant green on the walls, and the blue that we find on many details, such as as the trees, and the lake. This is the kind of blue you would find on top of a Disney cupcake. (By the way, to clear things out, I don't mean that the colors are unreal because you wouldn't find them in reality. I say that they are unreal because they are not common. You'd most likely see them as artificial.)
I wonder what is he implying with this painting? You can see plenty of figures that resemble reality, but they are all distorted in ways that cannot be described. There is this man playing his guitar, or banjo, or whatever that may be and he is inside a house. There is a dog that is enjoying music and looks like it were drugged. There is also a cat, and at the time, the rest of the shapes inside his house seem abstract and undecipherable. Yet, I see a house with a lake, at the left side, in which there are animals and trees.
My immediate understanding of this painting was that music, or art, are the foundations of life, or at least happiness. You can interpret this from the attention that the musician is getting. Most of the objects are revolving around him, or looking up to him as the cat, and the squirrel that I've just found on the wall.
Aside from this, his body is on rule of thirds, and even more so, his face the most notorious thing for me. (By the way, his face is another red balloon.) There are many lines and shapes that direct your eye onto the character and the contrast of his red face, with the whiteness that surrounds him, make him stand out.
The colors are very unreal. Most of them are tones that you wouldn't find normally find. For instance, there is the vibrant green on the walls, and the blue that we find on many details, such as as the trees, and the lake. This is the kind of blue you would find on top of a Disney cupcake. (By the way, to clear things out, I don't mean that the colors are unreal because you wouldn't find them in reality. I say that they are unreal because they are not common. You'd most likely see them as artificial.)
The power of the Balloon
First of all, I'd like to say that looking for a resemblance with reality, this would be a park, or a yard. At the left side, we can see a tree, standing above a kind building or structure. The floor likes like grass and as the see a bit blue color in the background, I'd say it is in the open. (Not to mention the fact that the balloon is rising above.)Aside from this, there is another structure that form a spiral, or stair that fades into the top of a wall, or a building.
I am having a hard time understanding the meaning of this piece. I'd say that it symbolizes freedom, or escaping from something. This would also be reinforced with the fact that things don't like as they would in real life. Now, as there is really not way of knowing, I will focus on the style.
Clearly, the focus point lies on the balloon. This happens for various reasons. First of all, the balloon is the only circle. (As the rest are rectangles, triangles, some squares, and although the 'tree' has smooth curves too, it doesn't get much attention because of its colors and placement.
The balloon is also emphasized with color. It is the most notorious element of the picture and I'd dare to say that it enlightens the rest of them, as a a sun. I know this because the objects that lie at its level have a slight reflection of that reddish color.
Finally, you also focus at the balloon because of the emptiness that surrounds it. That creates importance, and notoriety. Aside from this, the corners of the structures point out to it.
As for colors, the painting is made out of pastels that don't create much energy while you observe them. Since the majority of the background has the color of a cloud, you are not very much attracted, or at least I am not overall attracted to the painting. Yet, the balloon indicates hope, with its color, difference and height and looks as if the author wants to tell us that there is a way out from the depressive mist of... life?
(By the way, I am now thinking that this picture looks like a rooftop.)
I am having a hard time understanding the meaning of this piece. I'd say that it symbolizes freedom, or escaping from something. This would also be reinforced with the fact that things don't like as they would in real life. Now, as there is really not way of knowing, I will focus on the style.
Clearly, the focus point lies on the balloon. This happens for various reasons. First of all, the balloon is the only circle. (As the rest are rectangles, triangles, some squares, and although the 'tree' has smooth curves too, it doesn't get much attention because of its colors and placement.
The balloon is also emphasized with color. It is the most notorious element of the picture and I'd dare to say that it enlightens the rest of them, as a a sun. I know this because the objects that lie at its level have a slight reflection of that reddish color.
Finally, you also focus at the balloon because of the emptiness that surrounds it. That creates importance, and notoriety. Aside from this, the corners of the structures point out to it.
As for colors, the painting is made out of pastels that don't create much energy while you observe them. Since the majority of the background has the color of a cloud, you are not very much attracted, or at least I am not overall attracted to the painting. Yet, the balloon indicates hope, with its color, difference and height and looks as if the author wants to tell us that there is a way out from the depressive mist of... life?
(By the way, I am now thinking that this picture looks like a rooftop.)
domingo, 10 de mayo de 2009
Is Happiness is unreachable?
While I was reading the fifth chapter of Seize the Day, I Felt a connection with Tommy. I would dare to say that many of his problems lie on the fact that he feels lonely. Lonely because his father doesn't support him. Loneliness because he cant be with the one he loves. And loneliness because he feels that he doesn't form a part of humanity. Yet, we come to understand that he begins to feel 'connected' with people when he is on the subway station and feels part of some sort of "larger body".
The reason why he trusts in Tamkin is because he encourages him to become a part of the here and the now, and thus the people that live on it. He is his guide and supporter and that is why he relies on him. To be saved. Yet, I realize that there is a point in which Tommy will have to separate from him to begin doing things on his own. This will probably be a turning point in the story, or even so, the climax.
Anyways, I say that I felt a connection with him because although I have plenty, of friends, love, and 'control' over my life, I feel as if there was something missing. I am yet to find what it is and certainly hoping to find it because it seems as if you can never reach that utter point of happiness, or peace.
Freud said that happiness is an illusion and is unreachable and thus I question myself, will Tommy find that thing that he has been searching for? Will I find it too? Well, we just have to wait. Probably seize the day and who knows... We'll eventually get there.
The reason why he trusts in Tamkin is because he encourages him to become a part of the here and the now, and thus the people that live on it. He is his guide and supporter and that is why he relies on him. To be saved. Yet, I realize that there is a point in which Tommy will have to separate from him to begin doing things on his own. This will probably be a turning point in the story, or even so, the climax.
Anyways, I say that I felt a connection with him because although I have plenty, of friends, love, and 'control' over my life, I feel as if there was something missing. I am yet to find what it is and certainly hoping to find it because it seems as if you can never reach that utter point of happiness, or peace.
Freud said that happiness is an illusion and is unreachable and thus I question myself, will Tommy find that thing that he has been searching for? Will I find it too? Well, we just have to wait. Probably seize the day and who knows... We'll eventually get there.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
