Thesis Paper Outline

Thesis: Radford’s version of The Merchant of Venice is better than Sichel’s version.

Definition of a “better” film: The “better” film transports the audience into the times and the characters of the Merchant of Venice. It helps the audience to empathize with the characters, aids in understanding the history of the time, and gives the impression of authenticity.

I. Radford’s characters look more authentic. The more authentic the actors look, the more real they seem. The look also helps to bring a better vision of who the character is and the time period of the story.

A. The costumes in Radford’s version were more authentic looking. Shylock wore a red hat and gabardine, as Jews were supposed to at the time when outside of the ghetto. The gabardine that Radford’s Shylock wore had a similar appearance to the one shown in the book. Antonio, as a wealthy Venetian merchant, wore furs and gloves.
In Sichel’s version, the characters wore suits, bowler hats, and top hats. They looked more like English gentlemen than Italian merchants. Shylock was dressed as richly as Antonio was. I would imagine that Shylock would bear more of a mark to show that he lived in the Jewish ghetto.

B. The actors themselves, in the more recent version of the Merchant of Venice look like a more believable version of the characters. Radford’s Shylock looks like a European Jew as opposed to Sichel’s Shylock, who looks like an old Englishman. The actors in Sichel’s version had neatly trimmed hair and well groomed mustaches and beards. The actors in Radford’s version had untrimmed facial hair. Bassanio, like a young Venetian gentleman, had long hair in Radford’s film. The actors in Sichel’s film look like they belong to England, while the actors in Radford’s film could belong in Venice.

II. The acting in Radford’s version is better. The acting really sells the story to the audience, if nothing else does. Through acting, the audience can relate to the characters and understand what is happening in the film.

A. In Sichel’s film, the actors talk much too quickly, as if the loaning of three thousand ducats were a deal easily rushed over. When Bassanio pleads with Antonio to withdraw from the deal, Antonio appears to scold Bassanio. In Radford’s film, the actors sit down together and discuss the matter slowly. When Bassanio pleads with Antonio to withdraw this time, Antonio gently denies him. Radford’s Antonio sees that Bassanio cares about him, whereas Sichel’s Antonio doesn’t appear to see that at all. Radford’s Antonio also seems to realize the weight that three thousand ducats and a pound of flesh carries, while Sichel’s waves it away as an easy deal.

B. Gestures in acting play a big role. In Radford’s film, we saw Bassanio kissing Antonio to show his love and gratitude. This is a very Italian custom. We also saw Antonio spitting on Shylock to give us an insight on how Jews were looked down upon in Venice. I did not see many gestures in Sichel’s version, albeit we did see more of Radford’s film than his. However, the gestures that were in his film were inappropriate for the characters. Bassanio was rubbing his fingers on Antonio when asking him to withdraw. This was a rather awkward gesture; Bassanio should have been bold in his confrontation. Shylock was waving his cane around haughtily, as if he were above Antonio and Bassanio and not the abused Jew. The overall acting in Radford’s film appears to be more real than Sichel’s.

III. Radford’s version gives a distinct setting. The setting puts us in the same place as the actors. It tells us where these people are and how that might affect who they are.

A. Radford’s version of The Merchant of Venice filmed Venice, its distinctive beauty and legendary canals. It showed us the crowded Jewish community, and Shylock’s humble abode. Sichel’s film did not show anything that could make the audience think that the location was Italy. Shylock’s home looked like something out of Mary Poppins instead of early Venice.

B. Sichel’s film had no cutaways to give a better setting. In fact, there was very little camera movement at all. As the actors moved about the scene, the camera stayed locked in one place. This limited them to only the space within the camera’s view. The acting, in fact, was hampered by the camera’s restricted movement. I could not see the expressions on the actors’ faces very well.
Radford’s film had a lot of cutaways to give a clearer view of things. There were cutaways to the various canals of Venice, cutaways to Portia, and cutaways to money being paid. When Bassanio met with Shylock, there were cutaways to a goat being slaughtered, and Antonio coming on a gondola. I thought the slaughter of the goat cutaway was very symbolic, considering that Shylock was going to ask for a pound of Antonio’s flesh, should he not pay his debt. I thought the camera movements were also quite fluid. I got some very close views of the characters and their facial expressions.

Conclusion: Radford’s version of the Merchant of Venice is better than Sichel’s because the acting, costumes, and setting all seemed more realistic.

Production Log: Critique and Appraisal

Critique and Appraisal: At the time of this entry, you’ll have completed your interview. Now you need to reflect on what happened in terms of relevance, depth, and breadth, especially. Was there anything you didn’t expect? If so, how did you deal with that? Were you successful in extracting the type of commentary you were looking for? Why or why not? How do you now see this fitting into the documentary as a whole? Finally, you need to find and post footage from an interview, TV show, audio clip, or whatever (up to three minutes long) on your blog. Discuss how this footage will amplify or nuance the material you’ve collected already (and the documentary as a whole).
For the documentary, I interviewed two people: a freshman and a sophomore in order to cover the opinions of the two different grade levels of the Loft, which consists mainly of freshmen and sophomores; very few juniors and seniors spend their time there. The first interview I did was after the PSAT with a sophomore from the Loft. I tried to interview my first interviewee outside by the Science Center in order to give background on where he spent his free time at school, but this turned out to be a disaster. There was a lot of ambient noise. With the microphones on it was very difficult for me to concentrate on what he was saying and even what I was saying. Because of this, I could not expound on his thoughts and opinions about the subject. Outside, there were a lot of distractions that I had not anticipated. People would come and wave hello to the interviewee. Most of the time he would remember to ignore it, but once or twice he said hello or asked to be left alone on camera. Some people even walked in front of the camera and one person in particular was purposely trying to distract the interviewee. After the first interview catastrophe, I asked the first interviewee if I could interview him again, only this time in an empty Pauahi classroom afterschool. The interviewee's stereotype was being an Asian person - and therefore smart. I think that the classroom reflected that stereotype and contrasted with what he was talking about well. There was a bit of ambient noise due to the air conditioning in the room, but it was trivial compared to the noise in the first interview. It was much quieter, and there were no distractions caused by wandering students. During the second interview, with the mere change of location, I felt that the quality of the interview greatly improved. We were able to go more into depth about the different social groups and what it meant to be a part of that group. I learned a lot about it for example, I never knew that there was a K-town group at Punahou. He talked about people who had openly told him that they thought he was strange. I also got the opportunity to talk about his friends at his former school and learned that they hadn't changed toward him at all for coming to Punahou, but that it was a matter of just growing apart. This was very different from the stories I had heard about friends breaking apart because of the Punahou stereotype. For the third interview, I interviewed a freshman girl from the Loft. I interviewed her in the upstairs chemistry room, which is extremely close to the Loft. Fortunately I found this to be a good spot for interviewing as well because there were no wandering students and little ambient noise. Over the course of this interview, I got an opinion of stereotypes from a girl who had been attending Punahou for her entire academic career so far. She had lived with the stereotype for most of her life, and said that she tries to fight the opinions of those who think Punahou is just full of rich snobs. She even mentioned some of the more insulting stereotypes that people use subconsiously. Throughout these interviews, I felt very priveledged to get points of view from people on a somewhat controversial subject. I regret, however, that I hadn't talked about the grade-level stereotypes. What I was pleased to hear from both of these people was that they accepted who they were as people, despite the fact that some people think they are weird, and that they didn't feel that they had to change to suit others. These two people displayed a lot of inner strength that I think that others can look up to. I see these interviews as just another social group in the sea of social groups at the Academy or as an end note on self-acceptance.
Unfortunately, I could not attach an audio clip to my blog, but I do have a song in mind for the documentary. The song is We Can Work it Out by the Beatles. It is a song about cooaperating and remaining united despite contrasting opinions and beliefs. I think it would fit well with the contrasting opinions and beliefs that we encounter on the interviews about stereotypes.

Production Log: Cinematography Prep

Cinematography Prep: Go to the interview site a day or two before your scheduled shoot in order to do some scouting. Write an entry considering the following: the setting and precise framing of the shot; the establishing shots; potential cut-away and cut-in shots. Why are you doing the interview there and how are you setting up the shot? What is revealed about the interviewee by the choice of setting and framing? How will the establishing shots, CASs, and CISs provide context for the interview and tie it into the rest of the documentary? Finally, how can you link your interview visually to the rest of the documentary? Do you refer to any of our collective visual motifs? Is there another motif that we should bring into the whole documentary?

For my interview(s), the camera will be adjusted to somewhere between mid-shot and medium close up. The interviewee's head will be placed at about the upper left or upper right corner of the central box of nine so that they aren't looking directly at the camera, as that can be rather uncomfortable. Rather, they will be looking at me as I ask them questions. I would like to interview my guest outside, perhaps at the pickup point by Gates but not during a time when that spot is particularlly busy. I could make cutaways to students walking around and saying hi to the cameraperson. I could make cutins to gestures that the interviewee makes.

I am doing the interview by Gates pickup because the outside has better lighting than the inside and because it is close to where my interviewee(s) hang out so that the audience gets an idea of where this person spends their time. But it is far away enough for the interviewee to not be distracted by friends. The pickup is a pretty generic spot; I chose it because the Loft people are a mix, they aren't all studious or all laid-back.

My first establishing shot will have students walking around as a transition to show that we're moving on to a new group of people to interview. Later I hope to put in a slide of some sort that says "The Loft" on it. The next shots will view the Loft people saying hi, like at the end of the KHON2 news broadcast. Maybe I could put in a view of them looking and waving at me from upstairs while I reside on the first floor.

I hope to use the establishing shots to show what the Loft people do and who they are. How are they the same as everyone else? How are they different? The cutaways and cutins are mostly there to better explain what the interviewee is trying to say.

I hope to link my interview with the rest of the documentary with the motif of students walking around and that action-going to Punahou-links us all together, whether we are similar to each other, or different.

An Example of Good Literature

The Cold Within

Six humans trapped by happenstance, in bleak and bitter cold,
Each one possessed a stick of wood, or so the story’s told.

Their dying fire in need of logs, the first man held his back,
For of the faces ‘round the fire, he noticed one was black.

The next man looking ‘cross the way saw one not of his church,
And couldn’t bring himself to give the fire his stick of birch.

The third one sat in tattered clothes; he gave his coat a hitch,
Why should his log be put to use to warm the idle rich?

The rich man just sat back and thought of the wealth he had in store,
And how to keep what he had earned from the lazy, shiftless poor.

The black man’s face bespoke revenge as the fire passed from sight,
For all he saw in his stick of wood was a chance to spite the white.

The last man of this forlorn group did naught except for gain,
Giving only to those who gave was how he played the game.

Their logs held tight in death’s still hand was proof of human sin,
They didn’t die from the cold without – they died from the cold within.

Production Log: Interview Preparation

Interview Preparation: Redefine your essential questions, target audience and desired response based on your research and follow-up. Then draw up specific goals for the interview you’ve decided to conduct and reflect on the following questions: How do you see this interview fitting into the documentary as a whole? What angle are you going to use to get what you want out of the interview? (What’s your plan of attack, so to speak?) Next, sketch out the questions—both baseline (contextualizing / informational) and complicating—that you need to accomplish your goals. Finally (and most importantly), rethink your approach. Try to anticipate some of the ways in which your interview might turn out differently than expected. What assumptions have you made in composing your questions ? (There’ll probably be a lot of them!)

The essential questions for my interview(s) are:
1. Who are you?
2. What social groups do you see at Punahou?
3. Which do you belong to?
4. Can we follow you?

This documentary is for Punahou students, and possibly a couple teachers to view. I would like people to come away from the documentary knowing that it’s okay to be different, and that everyone has a desire to be accepted by their peers. I hope that desire will help the social groups understand each other better.

My goals for the interview(s) is to:
1. Get the interviewee to talk about as many uncomfortable issues as possible without them feeling probed so that we can have more contrast in opinions.
2. Talk about the interviewee’s personal experiences with stereotypes and social groups in and about Punahou. Stereotypes really are personal issues and it is important, if not more interesting to hear about people’s inevitably different life experiences.
3. Just get them to talk as much about the issue as possible. The more feedback, the more material to work with.

I see this interview fitting into this documentary as another insight into an individual’s perspective on the topic – as another point of view and why that p.o.v. came to be the way it is.
I am going to first approach the interview with very general questions that won’t be insulting and gradually work towards more in depth questions. Because I am friends with the people I plan on interviewing, it shouldn’t be too hard to talk to them and get them to open up. I was thinking of going over the questions with them first to check if they are okay with answering all of the questions and to better prepare them for the interview.

Questions to accomplish goals:
1. What is your definition of stereotype?
2. Do you think having stereotypes is an advantage or disadvantage?
3. Do you feel accepted here? Is Punahou an accepting community? How does that change outside the Punahou group?
4. What are your thoughts about the stereotype/social group you think you belong to?
5. Do you have any memorable experiences having to do with stereotypes/social groups that you’d like to share?
6. If you went to a different school previous to Punahou, what were the stereotypes/social groups like there? How was it different from here?
7. If you went to a different school previous to Punahou, what was the general opinion of Punahou? Did that influence you for/against coming here?

In all of these questions I am making the assumption that the person is open with their opinions and that they really do have a lot to say about the issue. I am also hoping that they have interesting experiences to share on a documentary. It could be that they may not want to say much for fear of insulting someone or have experiences too personal to impart. Or perhaps they just don’t have strong feelings about stereotypes or social groups. I hope to solve this by asking some extra pre-interview questions.

Photo Subject to Analysis >:)

This photo is a mid-shot, eye-level photo of my friend Elliott in 6th grade on the playground. The photograph is tinted in a sepia tone. In the background, you can the basketball court, and a bunch of kids having fun. Elliott is positioned at the left of the shot, so that on the right side you can see kids running around. However he is close enough to be considered in the foreground, and the subject of the photo.

In the photo, another person named Evan is trying to strangle Elliott-that is why his tongue is sticking out. The foreground strangling gives a splendid contrast to the happy scene of children playing in the background. Because the two scenes are such different themes, it would be interesting to put in a cutaway to the children playing with a voiceover of the strangling, like murder among paradise, like nothing is really what it seems. Misdeeds lurk among peace. The contrast would make the whole scene very dramatic.

Production Log: Structure

I think that we should structure the documentary by age groups because it gives a better sense of a beginning and an end. We start with freshmen, new to the Academy and its geography, then move through the years to seniors, who are more likely to have a better understanding of the social groupings at school.

It would be interesting to get opinions from all the different grade levels in a social group to see if they differ as long as we continue to interview different cliques. We should also view age as a stereotype of its own-Do most people hang out with people at the same grade level?

If we did follow people around, we could film them anonymously around the campus while they point out what kinds of groups they think hang out in a particular area. We can then contrast opinions. However, following people around should not be the main focus because I don't think we'll see anything that we won't get from the interviews if anything useful at all.

I agree that we should include an interview with the deans because they can tell us about the general trends that have occured throughout the years. However, they should not be placed grade by grade because it's difficult to talk about the social trends of a certain grade level-it's much easier to talk about the progression of group development over the years. The best way to include the deans is to put them at the beginning of the documentary so that we can compare their opinions to those of the students. The interviews with the deans should not be placed at the end because this documentary is really about the students and they should have the last say.

WMDs: Words of Mass Destruction

The idea for this cycle paper came to me in class when we were talking about how authors talk about their pens as weapons. I wanted to do the same. Believe it or not, I almost cried writing this poem. I took a few ideas and got melodramatic with them. Again, don't take anything too seriously. Ha, what is it with teenagers and dark poetry? I hope I don't get too POE-tic. Get it? Ah well, for those who know poets, you'll understand the bad pun.

I am a raging red fire
Passionate and dangerous
My words soar out like flying embers
Driven by emotion
No fear nor second thought of holding them in

When I communicate with people
I transform my words into flying daggers
Thunk. Thunk. Thunk.
The knives pierce their minds and hearts
They get my point

Word weapons are my freedom
I thrive on their power
I see blood flowing red
Radiant dark red like me

I revel in metaphors
They are hidden tools to comprehension
Others fear them
But they give me my edge
Metaphors sing of subtle beauty
But most won't seek to understand

I am protected by a lexicon arsenal
I collect each word slowly, and sharpen them to efficiency
For others value the size of vocabularies
But I value the effectiveness of them-big or small

Then,
When I'm not using my weapons
I listen to the quiet one speak

The words are different from mine: gentle and loving
Each like a kiss on the cheek
Like subtle metaphor beauty
Occasionally so quiet I miss the delicacies
Of their intended caress

I give responses
Each like a slap of romance
They are blunt, ardent, and straightforward
The words blithely burn his face red
The quiet speaker doesn't mind
He actually relishes it

But one day I sent two swords out at the quiet one
Both confessions of tragedies
One of the past
And one of the present

They sliced his heart and he cried out in pain
I realized what my words had done to him
Horrified by my lack of control

I saw his blood flow red
Red like me
Red because of my fault

I feared the wound was so great
He would never reply again
I shut my mouth; reckless cannon of destruction

Yet the quiet speaker lived
And he still comforts me
With words like serene blue waves
Rushing over my distressed fire
Like gentle forgiving embraces
I hug back, grateful for each moment

And with no mouth,
I simply gaze with my eyes
A more peaceful way to speak
While I ponder a way to use my words
As something other than weapons

Paris is Burning

What makes for a good documentary? Does Paris is Burning meet your criteria? Why or why not?

A good documentary needs to open the eyes of the viewer to a new perspective. The documentary needs to bring something fresh to the table. People should be able to learn from it. If the viewer is familiar with everything seen on the documentary, then it won't likely be too interesting to that person. I knew about homosexuals, drag queens, and the homosexual stigma, but there were still a lot new things for me to learn about from this documentary. When watching Paris is Burning, I heard a bunch of new vocabulary words and concepts, such as mopping and voguing. What surprised me the most was that these things had been around since the 80’s and I hadn’t heard of it before.

An ideal documentary interviews people who actually experienced the topic in question. In Paris is Burning, I learned about the life of a drag queen from a drag queen’s point of view. I already knew it was a hard life from listening to other people talk about it, but to hear it from someone who actually lived it is something very different. These men were thrown out of their homes by their own families, and the clothes that made them feel special were destroyed. These people weight their words with more emotions and memories than anyone else can. They have strong opinions and more often than not have extremely pertinent reasons for them.

To keep a viewer involved, a documentary must paint a very vivid image-visually or emotionally. If it’s not interesting enough for people to watch, then the documentary isn’t considered much of a success. Paris is Burning has both of those characteristics. In Paris is Burning, they showed drag queens in drag, what drag queens consider their truest forms. What stood out to me the most was not only the image of a man dressing so peculiarly, but how badly they were treated just for being who they are. Drag queens are caught between two accepted parties where you must be one or the other, and being in the middle is looked down upon by both males and females.

Every documentary must have a clear message. I thought the main idea that Jennie Livingston was trying to convey was one of acceptance. Despite the difference between "real" men, "real" women and drag queens, the underlying message is that everyone wants to be accepted for who they are. It's just harder for some people to get that acceptance.

Production Log: Brainstorming

1) Write a short paragraph outlining the essential questions you want the documentary to address, the target audience, and the desired response. Use the rest of your entry to collate a list of preliminary research questions, along with a strategy for answering them. (In other words, in order to make this documentary successful, what do you need to know about and how are you going to go about getting that information?)

Our class's documentary topic is about ethnic and grouping stereotypes around and about Punahou. The documentary should ask questions such as What defines a person as a nerd or jock or geek? Is the label based more on appearance/ethnicity, or the actions of that person? How do you think the other students label you? What is it about you that would give that impression?
What is the common stereotype about Punahou students? Is the interviewee's impression based off their own personal experience or from the rumors? When you think of Punahou students, what kinds of ethnicities come to mind?

The target audience should be Punahou students. They can learn more about their own personal biases and how prevalent prejudice is in our society. They can see their own views, the views of their fellow students and the opinions of those who do not belong to the Punahou community.

I would mostly like to see a lot of new unprecedented ideas about stereotypes come out from this documentary. I would also like to know the reasoning behind those who have a negative view of a certain group of people.

My main concern is that we will not be able to find a lot of people with negative views to speak frankly about it on the documentary. Perhaps we could keep interviews at the same level, so that one person's interview won't be singled out.

It won't be hard to find student and faculty views on the issue because we can find them at school. On the other hand, to find those outside the school may be a little more difficult. If we can't get anyone outside the school community to talk about the Punahou stereotype, we could get students and teachers who went to different schools and ask them about what their impression was before coming here. It would also be interesting to see if their views changed as they started attending Punahou.

I would also like to know if it is ok to interview a classmate working on the same documentary who has a lot to say about the topic.

The Observer

Another cycle paper! But this one took much longer than one hour; I really got into it. Most of it is based on my fourth grade experiences, but I also did a lot of reality-stretching, so don't take it too seriously. I just tried to take funny views on ordinary things. Please don't take offense to anything I say here. I didn't mean for anyone to get upset. And now, for our feature presentation, The Observer!

Introductions

The year was 2001. I was in fourth grade. This was the second time I’d moved to a different school, and the first time I’d moved to one so big. There was an ocean of people, so much to see, so different from the small puddle-like schools I’d gone to before. It was a new and potentially hostile environment. In order to survive, I trained myself to become the Observer.

There are two rules to being the Observer:
1) Never let those you observe know you are watching.
2) Avoid becoming involved at all costs.

Those being the only two rules, I didn’t necessarily have to be a super devious, all-seeing emissary. The primary goal was simply to figure out how my new environment worked without being interpreted as spying or involving myself in what I was Observing. But being ten years old, it was fun to think I was like that.

Beware, the Aliens Are Watching

There were only a handful of new students in my class. Everyone else who had their own groups had likely been together since kindergarten. The newcomers here were first new wave of aliens. I pretended I was a green alien with huge Observing eyes in a small, almost form-fitting space ship. The space ship was highly advanced, equipped with a cloaking device to render the ship and rider invisible. Unfortunately though, my ship was malfunctioning and the cloaking device only made the ship invisible. No matter though, it would not impede the primary mission.
I observed my class first, in broad, general strokes. I separated them into two tribes based on the sounds they made and they way they acted. The majority of them were raucous and energetic. They bounced around on the imaginary springs attached to their feet. Their voices were brassy and lively. I called them squawkers. The quiet ones fit the demure Asian girl type: small, nicely combed straight hair, cute girly clothes. Their voices were squeaky and rarely used. They were deemed squeakers.
I suppose if I were to try to join a tribe, it would be with the squeakers. The noise I would have to make to join the squawkers would not be good for my Observing duties. But with my alien features, I wasn’t so sure I would be readily accepted. I wasn’t short, my hair was in a frizzy ponytail that I hated brushing, and my clothes were more boyish than girly. Plus I had the superior mind capability to make my skin appear green to myself. Most people can’t appreciate that kind of talent.

The not-Hindu Maharishi say go forth with your destiny (but they’re really trying to kick you out)

Lunchtime: the first major convergence of the tribes. Everyone who takes from the lunch line gets the same food, so food isn’t the focus. It’s the territories. Each tribe has its own territory, although everyone is by the tables by the windows. Perhaps the others are considered taboo. Typically the separations of tribes are shown by the empty seats which serve as borders between two territories. Occasionally a tribe is so big that these spaces are compromised, usually in peace, but some express their annoyance in low tones-mostly squeakers when dealing with squawkers.
On the first day, I wanted to sit on the taboo tables alone in the comfort of my sleek malfunctioning space ship. I wanted to first view the tribes from a distance to look at the bigger picture and to avoid infringing the borders. Plus it would allow me to investigate the true nature of the tables and whether they were really forbidden or not. After a few days of research from a distance, I would, perhaps, join the tribes by the windows and Observe a little more closely.
So after I received my lunch, and determined it inedible to my alien digestive system, I retired to a taboo table to Observe. All was going well for a few minutes, until I was noticed by our leaders, the not-Hindu Maharishi.
They misinterpreted my solitude. They believed that I was lonely and shy, when I was really just trying to jumpstart my research from afar. But I could not object-that would be misunderstood further, and could hurt my Observing. And besides, I was planning to get closer to the tribal factions anyway. So I let them lead me to the tribal regions. Infringing the borders would no longer be a problem because any space the Maharishis granted you was sacred and permitted by all the groups.
After having settled I realized that the Maharishis’ kindness was really just a ploy to remove me from the taboo tables! Why didn’t I realize that before? Well, at least I knew the truth about the far tables now.

When people fall off trees, aren’t they supposed to hurt themselves? /Tribal Customs

Welcome to the playground, the savanna of the many tribes of squeakers and squawkers. This was the main place where groups visited and communed with relative tribes. It was an interesting place to observe because the behaviors of the tribes, especially the squeakers, changed dramatically. Squeakers became more squawk-like, only they were more methodical about it; building mini gardens with the surrounding nature: sticks, rocks, wood chips, and bougainvillea. Squawkers ran around in many random directions, or perhaps they were really making formations; my powers of Observation didn’t stretch that far.
One day, I decided to more closely examine the squeakers with their complex building habits. I sat next to the trio of large rocks, nearby the banyan tree. But someone climbing the banyan tree caught my eye.
It was a boy, squeaker or squawker, I couldn’t be sure. The banyan tree had something mystical about it that kept both tribes quiet. He was climbing across the side to get to dead man’s bridge. For some reason, the tribes name the hard places to climb to with the title “Dead Man’s” before it. No one had died there. It wasn’t owned by dead men. Curious.
The boy was making his way to Dead Man’s bridge pretty easily. He knew how to hang on and to make good footing. I would have to study how to climb the banyan tree more to figure out how he maneuvered. But then his foot slipped, and his hands grasped the air. As he was falling down, I thought a million questions: Would he die? Is that why they call it Dead Man’s Bridge? Would I need to break rule number two of Observing to save him? But he fell in a spin and landed on his two feet, in a low squat of course, but on his feet and unscathed. It was rather anti-climactic. No one else saw the miracle. I took note of it because feats like these really don’t happen that often.

There is No End for the Observer

After a few weeks of Observing in my space ship, I uncovered the ways of the new society, and could predict its trends. I learned how best to keep peace, and how to please the Maharishis. I could climb all parts of the banyan tree, and could create spectacular mini and water gardens like the squeakers. But knowing all of this did not satisfy me. I still did not have enough information. It was unfortunate, but Observing began to take a dull, ho-hum, run-of-the-mill trend.
I was sitting on the grassy hill, watching everything at a distance, when a squeaker began to approach my ship. It was my classroom buddy, though she was not a very good one so far, considering that I became an alien and she did not introduce me to the customs of the new environment. She began speaking to me in her small squeaker dialect.
“Hey, I’ve been looking for you. I wanted to ask you if you wanted to sit with me at lunch because I wasn’t really sure if I was supposed to….” She went on, apologizing here and there in an awkward manner. I don’t know why, maybe it was because of my trained Observing eyes or my alien inclination to trust, I believed her to be sincere. But what of my Observing? I would have to break all the rules in order to sit next to her. I would have to let people know I was observing them and I would have to be involved in what they were doing. It would change my way of Observing entirely. But on the other hand, it would feed my hunger for more information in a more exciting and unpredictable way.
So I consented. “Yeah, that would be great.” I tried to speak in the best squeaker accent that I could. I discreetly got out of my broken space ship, and joined my new tribe.

High School: Pivotal?

Throughout the years, humankind has brought up many difficult questions-questions that depend on each person, with no completely unified answer. Among those is this: When was/is/will be the most important moment of your life?

This question is a bomb. This is a question that is difficult to answer and maybe even impossible to answer, since we do not know everything that will happen to us in our lives. But could it be that amid all the milestones placed through the course of a person's life, high school is the most pivotal of them all?

Due to the specificity of this question as opposed to the previous inquiry, it is possible to classify the responses into three categories: 1) yes, high school is the most important moment of a person's life, 2) no; high school is not the most important moment of a person's life and lastly, 3) a mixture of yes and no.

Some would argue yes. After all it is the gap of time in which teenagers must bridge the gap between being a child versus being an adult. Parents start giviing their adolescents adult responsibilities for the first time, such as driving, taking care of children, and working a job. It is the time where we first learn how to lead the rest of our adult lives.

Education also begins to hold more weight than ever before. Colleges pay most of their attention-if not all of their attention-to a student's performance in secondary education. High school is the primary foundation for what we decide to do for the rest of our lives. Doing well in high school leads to getting into college, and doing well in college leads to getting a good job, and having that solid profession makes it easier for a person to support themselves financially in life. What one does in high school influences a lot of what happens in our future.

Another could contend that while high school may be important, it is not the most pivotal. One cannot assert that a certain point in a person's life is the most important without experiencing all of it first. According to Karen Elizaga, founder of Forward Options, many successful people did not do well in high school and still managed to achieve the jobs and the lives that they wanted. While some may have high school as their most influential point in their life's history, others have getting a job, getting married, divorcing, having a loved one pass away, raising a child, their midlife crisis. Plenty of other things could easily be a person's turning point.

The third perspective on the influence of high school is a combination of both of the answers above. The emphasis on this perspective is that the most important time of anyone's life is NOW. If high school be what is currently your present, then it indeed is the most important moment of your life. The present is the only point in time where anyone has any control over his or her life. One cannot do anything about the past, whatever has happened is unerasable. One cannot do anything in the future because likewise with the past, that person will always be stuck in the present. Therefore, every moment of life is pivotal, every moment wherein someone takes control of life is important.

This documentary topic is aiming to provoke viewers into thinking about what they're doing with their present moments and to consider how important those moments are. This theme is particurally directed toward teens in order to make the most of their high school experience.

The Disappearing Act

This is my cycle paper. It is kind of an emo poem. Hopefully I won't make too many of these...If you've seen the movie the Prestige, the titles will make more sense to you. They are the steps to every magic trick.

I. The Pledge

There once was a girl unsatisfied
She could not be happy no matter how hard she tried
Then a magician came, he wanted her for his show
He said he could help her from feeling so low
She could be his assistant in the Disappearing Act
Oh the many people it would attract!

She gave him her mind-that sold the deal
She believed the trick had much appeal

II. The Turn

The show would begin at seven o'clock
For her, it had begun long ago, tick tock, tick tock

The magician began to do marvelous tricks;
Walking through walls and chopping up bricks
The girl was in love, she thought him wise
But the audience was not, they saw through his lies

At last it was time for her part of the event
The part that would cause all who saw to repent

An invisible something ate at her sides
She was beginning to vanish-it was a wonder to the eyes

No one protested, none were suspicious
Not a one knew the end would be malicious

Her skin became sallow, her eyes sunk in
It hurt to see her now, she looked so thin
But all the while, she just stood and smiled
Thus she hid her pain and all were beguiled

At long last, the girl disappeared
But for some reason, nobody cheered

III. The Prestige

The clock turned its hand, it was eight fifteen
We waited and waited but no girl could be seen

The prestige never came, there was none
I'm afraid our dear girl is gone

7 Ways of Looking at Hair

I.
Hair in the bathroom sink
Hair in my toothbrush
Everywhere, disgusting

II.
Yours, creamy caramel
Mine, dark chocolate
Both wavy, textured
A perfect combination

III.
Hair atop the scalp
Clinging on, graying
Hair detached, disappearing
Its color eternal

IV.
A curtain obscures the windows of her face
Hiding the inside, the wet truth

V.
Hairtips, lighter than feathers
An invisible force, tickling the surface of the skin

VI.
Pulling, tangling, knotting
Twisting, breaking, falling
To have it is an extravagance of beauty

VII.
A running start into a long-awaited embrace
And the curtain that flew away
to show her smile-
Everywhere, beautiful

my first post

hahahaha my blog title is so boring...that's ok. does anyone know how to change colors and stuff? that would be nice. :)