how many times do I have to tell you..

how many times do I have to tell you..
I listened to song by John Legend recently which is called All of me, a very popular song today. he sings there: how many times do I have to tell you that you are beautiful, that I love you etc. I paraphrase it in order to show that there are essential differences between men and women, between mens perception of love and womens. From this short excerpt which does not say generally all differences we see one which is vital in men-women relationships. man thinks that it is necessary to say the woman usually just once that he loves her and that from now on, she just knows it. woman on the other hand needs to heard it basically everyday. she one one hand needs to be caressed and needs to be shown actions of affection by the men, but women pay a great attention on words. words are actions as well. for men, words are not of so great importance. man thinks that when he buys a car, it is a great show of love and affection. woman appreaciates it of course, but it does not last long. this is natural, we are different. it is good to know that women need to be shown small signs of affection but very often and men think that by buying a car, one fulfills ones duty and that now he may slow down for some time and then after time do another big think-for example buying holiday. this difference in thinking is vital for our well being in a couple. if men understand that women need to heard it every day, they would stop asking as John above because they would see that it is irrelevant. women on the other hand need to tell men that they have this need and must understand that it is not mens fault that they do not know it.


Používam Rychlý zápisník

Advertisements
Standard

Global english

This essay brings different insights on the present English and the world which English develops in. English today is the most widespread world language. Different sources and observation about global English will also be provided.

Current issues of English as the global language concern Rita Raley, scholar at Department of English at University of California. The author follows different opinions and finally concludes that it is a potential for a unification that makes English the global language (Raley). This opinion is not only a speculation. Nations unified under English became in history the leading powers of the world. Firstly, take for instance the naval supremacy of United Kingdom. Country which subdued a great part of the world and set colonies all around the it. Secondly, USA was the leading country in technology economy and art throughout twentieth century.

David Crystal is concerned about historical development of insights on the role of English as a superior language. Crystal remarks, “English was no real match for Latin at the international level […] but within two years, Walter Raleigh´s first expedition to America had set sail, and the situation was about to alter fundamentally” (65). Here we see a link to the second paragraph which supports the significance of Great Britain as supremal country which influenced whole of the world. There were of course other factors but the unification played the most important role, where there is a unity, is power and progress.

Alstair Pennycook deals with the wordliness of English. The author claims that there was a large fail concerning the predominant paradigm of analyzing of the spread of English. Teachers of English have failed to adress the cultural implications of this spread, it was taken as natural and beneficial. English is some kind of threat to other languages (Pennycook 86). Each nation wants to expand and bring about its influence upon other nations and countries. If a nation did not endeavour to expand, it would fall apart, it would be destroyed by more ambitious one. English speaking countries are to strenghten their economic and political interests via the widespread English which is perceived as a gate to wealth and prestige. Country which is not going to accept this, is going to be in a disadvantage (Pennycook 86). This, as Pennycook claims, concludes in the global inequalities. To get along with consequences of such inequalities means to support language-planing policies, when identifying English, we ought not to forget to examine and maintain other languages (Pennycook 86). When we distinguish English from another language, we see differences. These tell us a lot about the particular language and also about English.

Today, people in the world struggle the same way they struggled years ago. The only difference is that the tool for fighting is not a sword or a gun, it is word. Words of English won major part of the world. It would be unwise to deny it and even more unwise to fight English back. Wisdom dwells in cooperation and agreement. Let us not use words for fighting, let us use it for cooperation and unification. Let us find mutual answer to divergent problems.

Bibliography

Crystal, David. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997. Print

Pennycook, Alstair. “English in the World/World in the English”. Print

Raley, Rita. “What is global English?”

http://www.english.ucsb.edu/faculty/rraley/research/global-english.html. Web.

Standard

There Cannot Be Romeo and Juliet with Happy Ending

When hearing about Romeo and Juliet, one usually asociates it only with love and bad ending. The purpose of this essay is to show another “darker” aspects besides love. It will be shown that the play is not only a simple love story about two lovers who are out of luck. This examination should support the statement that everything that happens in the plot is not a chance of bad luck but is governed by human. The method to support that statement is the depiction of particular characters as well as a more complex description of the plot. Finding of this essay is that everything within the story heads for the particular ending which there in Romeo and Juliet is. Every act of human concludes in death, which might be percieved as bad ending; however, it will be shown that the ending is undoubtedly sad but not bad at all.

Question of Joy and Despair in Shakespeare´s Romeo and Juliet is rather complicated and complex issue. Examining the characters according to their nature, whether it is good or bad, reveals interesting features which Shakespear included into his work.

Romeo and Juliet is a story of ambivalence. A story of Juliet, faith, hope and tranquillity on one side and Romeo, rush, action and movement on the other. Juliet´s main attribute is that she is static and unchangeable. “From beginig to end Juliet is mode of one piece. […] She is never politely weary of the world or genteely astonished at anything, not even her husband´s banishment.”(P.S. 88-89). She might be described as the “head” and Romeo as the “legs.” Juliet´s oppression is the burden of her family, which will not allow her to love a man from another descent . She would not fleet away, she can only be taken away, in the latter context, by Paris. Therefore, she makes up a plan with the Nurse but this plan is not fulfilled because of Romeo´s fervour.

Romeo, on the other hand, is a total contrast to Juliet. He is a pilgrim. In Renaissance, historical meaning of Romeo [ru:mio] was a pilgrim to Rome. No matter what happens, everywhere in the story Romeo always approaches Juliet. He represents the movement and consequently the fervour. Following the plot, it is exactly Romeo´s rush and haste which complicates the sequence of events which might have end up differently.

Professor Kilroy claims that the juxtaposition of tragedy and comedy is an important aspect of the play which emphasises the sad ending of the story. The very half of the plot is literary a comedy. There is not a single inkling which might indicate such a sad ending of the play. Some of the characters even act as comedians and try to relax the atmosphere between the two houses. Suddenly, Romeo´s nature and temperament reveals, his rashness and fervour turn up and result in a slaughter. Only when Romeo kills Mercucio, the whole plot transfers to a tragedy and heads straight to its inevitable end.

From this moment on, the story goes gradually down to the darkness. Every action which was to result in lovers´ luck is an opposite effect. The play became a stage and the characters spectators of their own desparate actions which were to take them to the suicidal end.

The last scene shows lovers´s physical perishing and the contemplation of two solitary souls. Despair is away. The act of suicide, their dying for each other should be a proof that they were created one for the other. They were not a couple to be fortunate in this world. If they got married, it would not be a happy ending, it would not be the ending which this exquisite and exceptional romance deserves. A happy ending would be a fake, a stereotype, a fairy tale. This sad ending belongs to the plot as Juliet belongs to Romeo. Only now are the lovers together in the timeless orchard for all eternity.

Bibliography

Written:

Arden Edition of Romeo and Juliet.

Electronic:

Nevo, Ruth. “Tragic Form in Romeo and Juliet”. Studies in English Literature.

Tanselle, G. Thomas. “Time in Romeo and Juliet” Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 4

P. S. “What a Wife Was Juliet” Living, Vol. 1, No. 4, Autumn (Nov., 1939), pp. 87-95 Web.

Standard

the separation of body and mind

I saw a documentary about students who earn their living by having sex. These are girl students who instead of earning ten thousand for a month of work in a supermarket have the same pay for a few hours work as an amateur porn actress. most of the girls argued that they save much time and then they can study or do other things. by working in the mall they waste time and earn almost nothing. can this be taken so pragmatically? can the girls consider their body as s omething used for money? can they separate soul and body? i do not think so. all the girls also said that they do not want other people to know that they make porn. why not, if they consider it normal. subconsciously they know how detrimental such behaviour is to them, they feel shame and yet theydo it. the survey also showed that if a woman is asked by a stranger to go on a date with the view of having sex (from mans iniciative) they in almost all cases declined such an offer. on the other hand, were they offered money as exchange for having sex with them, around 60 percent accepted this offer. can we saythat almost half of women population are occasional prostitues? i hope that this view is not true. unfortunately it also correlates with todays approach to earthly things and our bodies as well. the relationship with our bodies is very complicated one. i dare say that our bodies our not our property. we cannot do with the body what we like to do. let us see as only puppets in some higher theater. we make control the body but only lead it to what is beneficial for it. we can usethe body for our purposes if these purposes are for bonum comune, for good, not for evil. if we use the body entrusted to us then either hurt it, or hurt our mind, or both as we see in the case of porn actresses.


Používam Rychlý zápisník

Standard

relativity of age

relativity of age
I saw an argument yesterday about a mother and her daughter. It was in a fantasy play where the souls of mother and daughter are switched. the body is the same but the soul of the mother is in her daughters body and vica versa. the plot is basically obviously about how to get into their real bodies and when the attempts fail, the daughter and her mother are slowly realizing what it means to be in this body. the daughter says when she considers her lot horrible that she would miss the dating, partying and everything so pleasant and the mother ponders about her plight in similar way-she after a years of experience sees that this age is very difficult and dangerous and is frightened with the perspective of going through it once again. here we see that one situation(returing to ones adolescence) can be seen by two opposing optics. either through lenses of something pleasant-girls view without the bad expericence and throught the prism of mother which is considering all these (in girls eyes positive)aspects of adolescence as unpleasant. I think that it is very important for the parents to accept the fact that one learns only throught experience. words are good for showing that something may be dangerous but it is never possible to convey all the message because words are relative and never carry the absolute message. even if they did, one situation as we see can be perceived by different people differently which means that the more one is identical to someone else, the more one understands experiecne and experiences of someone else. it also depends on the state of mind, empthy, education, upbringing and these factors. for children it is virtually impossible to understand ones parents because it has no such experience. if the child should understand ones parents and see that some things are better avoided, then it would not have these experience which are vital for life. naturally, parents want to guard their children nevertheless yet such an approach is detrimental to both sides. parents should not absolutely refrain from reproaching their children but they should acknowledge that free will is more important than anything else. child is not property. nevertheless it is very difficul for parents to understand and I myself have great worries having children for this exact reason. children should try to understand their parents, see that what they are doing is benefitial for them but should not listen to the parents in all their advice. in the end, it is about subjective experience and after all, these experiences makes us what we are. as parents, we should not want the children to be us, but be new persons, according to what they choose, not us.


Používam Rychlý zápisník

Standard

the whiter the better

the whiter the better
I read in the autobiography of Malcolm X a thesis that was tought to black people and that is that the whiter a human, the better a person.
Malcolm conjectures that black people consider mulatoes better subconsciously because of that. this kind of stereotyping rule has ramifications even today. it may not be manifested in everyday life but take for example positive discrimination. I think that in order to show that certain companis do not discriminate, they hire a prototype of a minority which they are accused of discriminating. similar event happened to me while I was driving and was not obeyed by a driver next to me. I saw that there was a group of gypsies and I reasoned that that was the reason why they did not let me go in front of them because a white (the whiter the better) driver would yield. here I realized that subconsciously I also live according to stereotypes. similarly with women. There are many survey that women in fact are not worse drivers than men but they are told that they are and that is paradoxically the reason the drive probably with no such certainty as men. women do take these reproaches that are not based on any racional argument seriously. when I see a woman driving who makes a mistake I subconsciously vindicate her behavior on the basis of her sex. when a man does a mistake I subconsciously say to myself that he has a bad day or something irrelevant like. I think that these patters that we live by are very deeply rooted and must be actively and seriously analyzed and decomposed so that we are capable of seeing not so blurilly but clearly based not on stereotypes but on personal traits and qualities.


Používam Rychlý zápisník

Standard

bread and circuses-new age gladiators

bread and circuses
in ancient Rome, the rulers knew that if they keep people content and happy then they can be sure that there would be no uprising and revolt. until they have bread and games, people usually were content. we see it today as well. for capitalists the people are basically a by product for their goods. capitalists need the people to create values for them but they also need the people to be docile and controlled. capitalists are only interested in what the proletariat can create and can buy but not in their welfare. they do not consider people people but only as tools to reach their capitalistic ventures. take for example hockey or football players. in ancient Rome, people got bread and games. today it is impossible to have bloody games, unless they are in TV. almost bloody games we get in hockey. hockey players are so called new age gladiators. people come and watch them from the safety of their seats. they either win or lose but without their contribution. similar with watcher of computer games. today the trend is not to be active, but to passively watche some other people play-anything. hockey players undergo the risk of being hurt and we exchange the victory for a ticket, for money. until I have money, I can be a contributing member of the society. until I do not have too high needs and expectations and I keep myself occupid with bread and games, then the capitalists do not need to worry about their goods and wealth. watching others to win is an illusion. it is not my victory, money cannot be exchanged for victory of someone else. If I do not win myself, then I cannot substitute the victory of others for my own. This is what money do with us. they make us think that we can buy anything. this is lie. basically nothing that is capable of making us happy cannot be bought. naturally, if I work hard and then buy a holiday where I like it, then this can make me happy. Here the exchange is equal, but I should not hope that I can buy happiness for money. If I think that a work on the side of someone else can be bought as my own, then I shall never be content with such exchange. unless I exchange fairly I am like the capitalistis who think that money is the only value that matters.


Používam Rychlý zápisník

Standard