Finale II

I. Explain one or two ways your writing has improved (or not) over the semester. Include a few examples from your posts over time, with analysis and links to the original posts, to illustrate how the improvement(s) happened.
First semester was an interesting start for me and in a way, I prospered. Unfortunately, this semester I have been declining. The reason why is composed of various things such as my lingering pessimism or lack of inspiration and unnecessary stress. Throughout this semester, I have been relying a lot on already written essays from other classes and adding to them or quickwrites. I realize this is okay since it's my own writing, but I feel like it lacks a sense of individualism. On the contrary, I have added additional thought to my post about the Holodomor (pt. 2). I thought it was a great addition, because while writing this essay we were required to conclude our thesis with one opinion and that opinion disagreed that the Holodomor was genocide. Knowing me, that conclusion wasn't enough. As I mentioned in previous posts (1), I contradict myself constantly. So it relieves me to say that I was able to revive a good habit of my writing even though it was only a small contribution.
Although I've been failing in creative writing, I've seen great improvements in my essays or reports. After seeing how redundant my first monthly review seemed to be, I hoped for better improvement in the upcoming one. To do that, I got a book I was not so familiar with yet have been wanting to read about. That happened to be Andrei D. Sakharov's Progress, Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom. It wasn't the easiest book to comprehend, but I was able to get the basics down. From that, I've also improved my comprehension by breaking down subjects and using a handy dictionary. I was so relieved that I was able to glide through my monthly review. Everything seemed to click since I already knew some background information of the author himself and I was highly interested in the subjects mentioned. It was a great achievement considering the fact that ever since I was a kid, I was terrible at book reports.
But before this lit circle jazz got on, we had the memoir project. I assumed it would be a challenge because at times, I can't be much in deep though about topics like these. I must say, thanks to my constant contradiction and varied perspectives, I was able to get through it.

I'm so glad through months of constant bickering, writing, thinking, and evaluating.. I was able to see improvement. Even though it seemed like this semester lacked quantity, I believe it gained more quality.

II. Do you plan on continuing to publish writing on your blog this summer, next year, or beyond? If so, what are your writing goals and how will you use your blog in the future?

1.) My memory has been terrible and I want to be able to remember days of my life, 2.) To remind myself of things such as mistakes, 3.) To see progression of my writing and living, and most importantly 4.) Not only to cherish past events, but also to feel how fast time has went by.

Like I have mentioned on my blog about personal writing, I will most likely continue writing. As quoted above, writing has benefited me this whole year. Although some things may be embarrassing to look back at, I've learned to cope with it and see how I've improved from some of my ridiculous or immature writing. This year has gone by remarkably fast and reading back at some events or prompts I have written shows me how or how I can improve. As for blogging, I think I'll save it for bigger ideas I wish to share with others rather than diary-esque entries.
I'd really like to use my blog in an informational way. I previously stated on my first final that I enjoy contributing to a small topic or cause that doesn't get enough attention and enlighten those who stumble upon my posts. But I feel like this won't take much of a flight since I'm quite lazy. I guess that's something I need to work on personally.
As for writing goals.. I want to just continue expanding the cranium and getting ideas down. This is directed particularly towards my interest of philosophy, current international events, science, and maybe some art. I like trying to think of different concepts, posing questions, or attempting to respond to certain topics. I really want to become more involved with my interests verbally (reading, writing) to help me become familiar with what I might be capable to do. This summer I might even take on self-teaching basic physics since well.. admissions hates me. Maybe if things go well, I'll record my process, going over pros and cons. It'll be quite the experiment and I've always wanted to write about independent teaching. I also wish to improve on my writing structure. Sometimes I can get a little too sloppy or silly so it's hard to take it serious. Things also tend to go a little off topic.. so I need to work on some basic stuff.

III. Conclusion
I'm not sure if I'm allowed to do this but..
This class overall has been a great modern experience since it involved today's technology (the internet!) and independence. I'd have to say that at times I felt like I was incapable to think of topics to write about which sometimes led to blaming on the wide freedom we get on our blogs. Sorry on my part, since that freedom is a privilege. But with that independence, I was able to achieve things I never thought I was able to do since I thought it would require great discipline. This year, I've learned so much about the subjects I've only dreamed of to think about often. Thanks for a great second year, Sutherland, it improved greatly! The chances of getting in your class again will be slim, but if I don't-- I'll be there by heart since I'm trying hard not to be picky with classes ever again..

Progress, Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom: Monthly Review

I. Introduction
Progress, Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom is an essay by Soviet physicist Andrei D. Sakharov. His essay includes topics that are in need of better attention such as the use or production of nuclear weaponry, "geohygiene", overpopulation, communist dictators and so on. His perspectives and possible solutions on these typical, yet difficult-to-deal-with topics seem to form a base for situations we now face today. Accompanying Sakharov's essay is an introduction, afterword, and notes by Harrison E. Salisbury which provides the reader some nice background information and clarification in order to comprehend the essay better.

II. What was the author's purpose(s) in writing this book, and how can you tell? How well was this purpose achieved?
I believe Sakharov's purpose was to formally pose current situations that took place in the late 60s and approach them with various solutions. He also wanted to prevent any future conflicts and strengthen the bond between the two superpowers of that time, the United States and the Soviet Union. Sakharov also informs us of the tragedies dogmatic leaders and groups have brought upon (such as Nazism, fascism, communism..). Sakharov begins his essay with "The Threat of Nuclear War" where he explains anti-ballistic missiles are a key factor to a possible nuclear war. He was also highly aware of nuclear proliferation and of course, disapproves it. He believed usage of nuclear energy should be used for the greater good in the least harmful way possible. One key purpose Sakharov has and repeatedly mentions is the threat to intellectual freedom. He believes that things such as war, poverty, and terror threatens "freedom of the personality and the meaning of life". Censorship, lack of education, and bureaucratic governments also restrict intellectual freedom. Without that freedom, universal cooperation cannot be achieved.

You can easily see his purposes since this is an essay and he formally approaches each topic separated by chapters. Sakharov's purpose, I cannot say was the easiest to comprehend, but was put in the simplest way to understand. I'd have to say he has achieved one of the greatest informative essays.

III. What are the strengths of this book, in your opinion?
One great strength Sakharov has in his essay is his ability to prove or support his points beautifully with quotes or situations he has witnessed. Upon exposing the ridiculous and horrifying policies of dictatorships, Sakharov brought up an excellent and humorous example that I have included in my first letter.

[...]by exposing wheat seeds to cold, he contended, a strain more resistant to cold might be developed.
His theories were taken up by Trofim D. Lysenko, who eventually won Stalin's support and appointed a "dictator of the sciences". Under his wing, classical theories and teaches have been poisoned with his senseless crap and many intellectuals were sent to gulag or the execution wall with the help of Stalin and his secret police.

This just purely shows how ignorant and stubborn totalitarian governments are and if anyone were to object, they would be condemned or severely punished. This kind of support just makes each thesis compelling and convincing.
Sakharov also alters his perspective when laying out opinions on situations which gives the reader flexibility and their ability to participate for which opinion they prefer. Another great aspect of Sakharov's essay was the division of two main theses: Dangers and The Basis for Hope. He starts off with the pessimistic yet real view of our world and what is going on, but then ends it with a series of solutions to these misfortunes. This kind of structure gives the reader hope as the title states, and determination.

IV. Find out about the author. How did they end up writing this particular book? Is the author's true life reflected in the book in any way(s)?
Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov was a Soviet nuclear physicist who was notably known as the "Father of the Soviet H-bomb". Other than being an excellent physicist at the time, he was also known to be a human rights activist and dissident. A major point in Sakharov's turn to activism was a secret letter to the Soviet leadership concerning issues of anti-ballistic missile defense with the U.S. and that the government should trust the Americans. The government simply ignored his letter and refused to publish a manuscript which he included.

The views of the author were formed in the milieu of the scientific and scientific-technological intelligentsia, which manifests much anxiety over the principles and specific aspects of foreign and domestic policy and over the future of mankind. [...] In this essay, advanced for discussion, the author has set himself the goal to present, with the greatest conviction and frankness, two theses that are supported by many people in the world. The theses related to the destruction threatened by the division of mankind and the need for intellectual freedom. - Harrison E. Salisbury

Sakharov completed Reflections on Progress, Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom in May, 1968. It was shared among the samizdat then published outside of the Soviet Union. From there, he was banned from military research. He then formed the Moscow Human Rights Committee along with two others in 1970. Sakharov was under increasing pressure of the Soviet government to the point where he was unable to leave the Soviet Union to gather his Nobel Peace Prize in 1975. On January 22, 1980, he was arrested and put into internal exile in Gorky. During his time there, he was put under surveillance. He was released back to Moscow in 1986.

V. Conclusion
Despite the fact that this book is a bit outdated, it provided me a basic knowledge of the troubles our world has faced during the time of the Soviet Union. Even today, some of those problems are what we would consider typical and constant. Sakharov's ability to summarize numerous events, issues, possible solutions, and alter his perspective to compose this essay astounds and inspires me greatly. I will admit this was a difficult read with a mix of great vocabulary and names of many brilliant minds that I just simply do not recognize, but I enjoyed the enlightenment and will definitely read this again in the near future.

Quickwrite: The Rules of Love?

1. What rules dictate the behavior of young men and women in relationships today?
There's a variety of combinations of "rules" people follow by such as treating you with respect, being honest, sociable, passionate.. It very much depends on the person's preference and tolerance. One major factor in a potential relationship is to not change for that person unless it's for the common good. There's plenty of people who want to be in a committed relationships, others just want to be swingers. Intimacy is best to be avoided in the early times of a relationship or avoided as a whole for youngins'.

2. Name a situation in which the rules have clearly been violated. In other words, what are things "nice girls" just don't do? What are things "nice guys" just don't do?
I don't really understand this question..
But uh, yeah. A lot of kids just looooove to have sex now don't they? Multiple partners? Fo sho. We live in a world where thinking before doing is simply deteriorating. Damn those raging hormones!
I don't know.

3. What are the possible consequences for breaking these rules?
Frustration, shifted opinions or impressions, lack of communication, separation? Typical stuff I suppose.. Just things that would bring more difficulties in building a relationship. Some can deal with it and compensate, others can't. I really don't know.

4. Where do these rules come from? Who "invented" them and who enforces them?
Young relationships are typically guided by mass media, culture, family, friends, and their own judgment. Adolescents are easily manipulated and influenced by these things and sometimes it's not even possible for them to use their judgment. No one should really enforce rules onto another.. People should just depend on their own opinions.

The Holodomor pt. 2

continued from pt. 1

Overall, collectivization was barely profitable. Although it did bring more power over the peasants and an increased production of grain, there were shortages in meat, fruits, and vegetables along with the deaths and suffering of millions. Stalin’s intention of the famine in Ukraine was to crush their nationalism to prevent potential independence and through Soviet propaganda, he was able to achieve the impossible-- silencing the famine world wide. Hopes of international aid was crushed and no one outside of the USSR was informed. Doubts have been raised about the USSR’s condition before in other countries, but that just brought up denial of any issues within the USSR by Stalin. Many western countries were convinced that there was nothing wrong either. This denial continued for decades until the 50th anniversary of the Holodomor in 1983 where a world-wide remembrance took place.
Although the majority of Stalin‘s actions seem genocidal, the famine as a whole shouldn’t necessarily be considered a genocide. Soviet sources claimed that natural causes such as droughts were a major reason. In contrast, Dr. Mark Tauger claims that rustic plant disease was a popular cause. Other causes included human actions such as lack of labor, systemic economic problems, and the peasant resistance during collectivization. By definition, genocide is targeted to one group depending on their religion, race, ethnicity, or nation. Yet the famine didn’t only affect Ukrainians. It affected the USSR as a whole such as Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Russia.
Today, Ukraine’s current president Viktor Yanukovych believes identifying the Holodomor as genocide would be “incorrect and unfair” since it affected other SSR countries in contrast to Ukraine’s former president, Viktor Yushchenko’s opinion. Ukrainians sees Yanukovych’s opinion as denial of the Holodomor especially since they have recently passed a law where if a citizen were to deny the Holodomor, they would be fined. Even after years of suppression, Russia shares a common pain with Ukraine’s past situation.

The Holodomor took a greater toll in Ukraine as part of the larger Soviet famine in the late 1920s to the 1930s. Although Soviet leaders took no action to help reverse this tragic event, it does not fall into the proper definition of a genocide. Therefore, the Holodomor was not a genocide, but an unfortunate event ruthlessly led by a totalitarian leader and should be widely taught to help commemorate those who have suffered and to prevent future encounters.



Although for my paper my conclusion states that the Holodomor was not a genocide, it's still widely debatable. I'm still baffled by this topic since it has genocidal and non-genocidal factors. Aside from Stalin's knowledge of Ukraine's suffering, there has been claims where Stalin primarily targeted Ukraine to "teach them a lesson" for resistance and to annihilate their nationalism (potential independence or detachment from the USSR). It really sounds like a genocide.
There's a (small) number of countries that agree it was a genocide such as the U.S. itself. European countries, in contrast, have yet to fully investigate it like the Americans. PACE or the European Parliament recently removed the recognition of the Holodomor to compliment the opinions of current Ukranian president Viktor Yanukovych and Russia itself. I understand the reason why Yanukovych doesn't want to recognize the Holodomor as genocide (as stated in paragraph 3) and following that, he wants Ukraine to have closer ties with Russia. Continuous pressure on Russia would only drift the two Slavic countries further apart.

I still have plenty of editing to do.. so this whole report thing isn't at its best, haha.

The Holodomor pt. 1

The Holodomor, meaning “murder by hunger”, was a specific part of the larger Soviet famine that took place in the Ukrainian SSR from 1932-1933. The number of deaths ranged from 2.6 to 10 million with a death rate at about 25,000 a day, more than half being children. The exact reason or cause of this terrible famine is still debatable, but Joseph Stalin has been held accountable by many. Stalin’s harsh policies such as collectivization and the liquidation of the kulaks were targeted towards the Ukrainians and played a large role in the famine. So, was the Holodomor actually a genocide?
The First Plan (1928-1933) was the beginning of Stalin’s infamous Five Year Plans to help revive the Soviet Union‘s economy. Stalin wished to rapidly industrialize the USSR to keep up with the other nations. He set up unrealistic quotas that farmers and factories were required achieve. Those who were able to achieve the impossible were rewarded-- and those who couldn’t would be ultimately punished. Families began to have difficulties feeding themselves since a great majority of their harvests went to the government to feed industrial workers. In late 1932, production quotas grew by 44% in the Ukrainian SSR and starvation began to spread and famine grew near.
During The First Plan, Stalin was unsatisfied with individual production which then led to collectivization. Collectivization is where all individual land and livestock were to be given up to the state and farmers were to be put into collective farms. About 20% of peasant households were supposed to be collectivized, yet it was set to 30% in Ukraine. The peasants highly disapproved of this policy since it seemed like a revival of serfdom. Many resisted by slaughtering all of their livestock or scorching their lands. Their continuous resistance led Stalin to launch the liquidation of the kulaks in 1929. During the dekulakization, peasants were either shot, imprisoned, exiled to Siberia, or evicted then sent to the gulag.
As collectivization continued in Ukraine, starvation began to advance. Stalin sent troops to the home of many to confiscate any hidden grain or food matter. Villagers would attempt to save their food by burying them into deep pits or trade valuables for a small sack of millet. “Large numbers of adult peasants and orphaned children moved to the cities, attracted by food rations” (Khlevniuk 54). By the Law of Spikelets, even gleaning was criminalized. Many diseases such as smallpox, relapsing fever, typhoid fever, and malaria took a toll along with the famine. Thousands of Ukrainians suffered as dead bodies were scattered all over villages. Some even desperately turned to cannibalism. Stalin also secured Ukraine’s perimeters so that no person would be able to escape in the search of food or for help.

Progress, Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom: Letter no. 1

I have finally obtained a copy of Andrei D. Sakharov's Progress, Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom. Although it's a bit outdated, some of Sakharov's fundamental ideas are still widely known today. I'm highly interested in some of the points Sakharov brings and Salisbury's contribution to this essay. Hopefully it'll be an influential read!

In the introduction, Salisbury brings up a situation that took place in the scientific world of the Soviet Union. He explained that many brilliant scientists were sent to exile or death due to their contradictions against Soviet ideologies. It revolved around a battle between those who supported the classical (and might I say, most logical) genetic theories of Mendel and Morgan vs. Michurin's belief in the environment's ability to change the heredity of plants. Here is an example:
[...]by exposing wheat seeds to cold, he contended, a strain more resistant to cold might be developed.
His theories were taken up by Trofim D. Lysenko, who eventually won Stalin's support and appointed a "dictator of the sciences". Under his wing, classical theories and teaches have been poisoned with his senseless crap and many intellectuals were sent to gulag or the execution wall with the help of Stalin and his secret police.

It is apparently futile only to insist that the more backward countries restrict their birthrates. What is needed most of all is economic and technical assistance to these countries. This assistance must be of such scale and generosity that it is absolutely impossible before the estrangement in the world and the egotistical, narrow-minded approach to relations between nations and races is eliminated...Chances in the economic situation of underdeveloped countries would solve the problem of high birthrates [...] without the barbaric method of sterilization...Therefore, government policy, legislation on the family and marriage, and propaganda should not encourage an increase in the birthrates of advanced countries while demanding that it be curtailed in underdeveloped countries that are receiving assistance.

Chapter 4: Hunger and Overpopulation (and the psychology of racism)
Our world population has more than doubled in the past 50 years and there's no doubt that this increase will continue in future generations. Here, Sakharov states that in order to control these ridiculously high birthrates (particularly in poorer countries) is to receive support from higher countries (like the States).

Into the Wild: Monthly Review

I. Introduction
Into the Wild is an adventurous travel essay by Jon Krakauer who traces the life of Christopher McCandless, a stubborn young man who decides to "live off the wild". In this book, Krakauer illustrates all of Christopher's travels around the mainland of the United States all the way up into the wilderness of Alaska. Krakauer also includes journal entries written by Christopher himself and flashbacks/interviews of those who have helped Christopher during his journey and his family.

II. What was the author's purpose(s) in writing this book, and how can you tell? How well was this purpose achieved?
Krakauer's purpose is simple, he wanted to go in depth with McCandless' journey and the effects it has left after writing an article on him. He clearly stated his purpose in the author's note: "...Unwilling to let McCandless go, I spent more than a year retracing the convoluted path that led to his death in the Alaska taiga, chasing down details of his peregrinations with an interest that bordered on obsession." Krakauer put Christopher's adventuring in chronological order with refurbished dialogue. With scenes and events supported by McCandless' journal entries and left over memories of those who met him, it truly puts you into heart and soul of Christopher McCandless.
Krakauer ventured the places Christopher has been to, which hard to describe without witnessing it yourself.
I believe Krakauer also had a personal purpose in this essay being a mountaineer himself. I believe he wanted to share the amazing things Christopher has witnessed and the hardships he has endured. He shows this towards the end of the book where he talks about the time he climbed a new route on the Devils Thumb. It was easy to see that this was his purpose although it was given, and I believe it was achieved perfectly. Krakauer took it to the fullest and made this essay so realistic and compelling. His fascination lead him to truly go into Christopher's heart and soul to achieve something no one can even imagine.

III. Pick a character that interested you and write about them in depth.
Christopher McCandless or 'Alex Supertramp', the main man, is a typical yet abstract character. He came from a upper-middle class family and went to Emory University for four years majoring in history and anthropology. He received a high cumulative grade point average and was even offered entrance to the Phi Beta Kappa Society, an honors fraternity, but declined since he thinks titles are full of crap. McCandless was a highly spiritual and idealistic person with great endurance for whatever is thrown at him. Despite his heroic personality, his character has become a cliche. As I said in my first letter, his stubbornness of living in the wild is popular among many other young men who truly believe they can do it. The story of Christopher McCandless and Jon Krakauer himself have received much criticism. I'd have to agree with some of the things people have said.. calling McCandless a foolish man who underestimated nature unprepared or being a disgraceful child towards his parents concerns. Yet-- he knew the risks such as death and was quite aware of his lack of equipment. He wanted a challenge and in a way he wanted to prove something. It's hard to explain the true purposes McCandless wanted to achieve, but you can get a sense of it and it's just amazing. What I also appreciated about Christopher is the fact that he has kept contact with each person he has met during his travels. He would either phone them or send letters maybe even swing by for a visit. Those who have given him jobs let him know that he could come back whenever he needed the cash. McCandless was obviously a loved and sociable person and it made his travels a lot more unique.

IV. For what audience(s) is this book intended, and how can you tell? (In other words, for whom would you recommend this book?)
I'd say that this essay is perfectly appropriate for young adults who would be able to understand some emotion that is put into this book. I wouldn't say this isn't for a person who reads something like Twilight though. Definitely not for the kind of people who are into elementary reading. This is also perfect for anyone who has read Jon Krakauer's other works such as Into Thin Air which is about mountain climbing (so along the lines of travel and outdoor struggles).
This book is highly recommend to anyone who is interested in the hardships of living out in the wild or just travel. Into the Wild also gives a sense of preparation for an ordinary traveler to not underestimate anything and that there is no such thing as being too prepared. Although I'm not that interested in such things, I found this book astonishing. To put it in simple words, it shows how to "live life to the fullest" in a way. Christopher was a great kid who did good in school yet knew that there was more to it. He was the kind of person who wanted to escape from our modern society and try to do something new with his life. And with that, he met amazing people and left great memories. It's a great read for people who are curious about hitchhiking especially since it usually has a bad ring to it. Chris' encounters totally contradicts what you would typically think of people who would pick up hitchhikers or hitchhikers alone.

V. Conclusion
Overall, I believe Krakauer did an excellent job reporting about Christopher McCandless. Even though this is the third time I have read this book, it still raptures me. Particular stories about an individual's life intrigue me since everyone is obviously different. I rather look into their perspectives and ideology. Krakauer's ability to relive McCandless' life was done so flawlessly making this book seem too good to be true.

Into the Wild: Letter no. 3

Dear self,

This is the last letter and the end of the book.
Although towards the end of the second paper clip is when they started talking more about McCandless' death, I didn't want to say much until now. I guess this will just be based on everyone's reaction of his death..

First, I'd really like to talk about Christopher's family and his background.
He was a good kid who respected his parents, especially his father, but never had a close relationship. When Chris left, he never kept close contact with them. Although his parents knew was that he was going to "leave", they didn't know where, when, or even why. His father offered him his credit card for any emergencies, but declined.
Then his parents got Christopher's hitchhiking ticket in the mail and they obviously freaked out and called the police to try to search for him. Their efforts of using a personal detective didn't even work. They never expected that Christopher would do this. He came from a high-middle class family and was an honors student. McCandless majored in history and anthropology and denied entrance to an honors fraternity. If you were to look at a person with that kind of profile, you wouldn't expect to get Christopher. He doesn't give a shit about titles or material stuff. He's all about good living.

His death took a huge toll on his family and those who met him throughout his adventure. His younger sister, Carine, took it the hardest though. Carine was the closest family he had. They understood each other and had a great relationship. Either way, his death scarred his family forever and it's hard to imagine how it would feel for his parents, outliving their own child. It was difficult for both his sister and mother to eat after discovering the news. While Carine was in the plane with her brother's ashes, she ate all of her food saying, "even though it was that horrible stuff they serve on airplanes, I just couldn't bear the thought of throwing away food since Chris had starved to death."

Holocaust

Just some informational stuff on the Holocaust and Anti-Semitism in honor of the Holocaust week. Also practicing some essay writing..

Anti-Semitism is unconditional hate or prejudice against Jews due to either their cultural, religious, and/or ethnic background. Anti-Semitism has been around long before the Holocaust was even an idea. Its history dates back to ancient times where the Jewish revolted against the Roman Empire for religious and righteous reasons. Persecutions also took place against Jews during the Middle Ages where they would either be forced to convert or slaughtered. Anti-Semitism grew for centuries before reaching big history—the Holocaust.

The Holocaust was the largest genocide against Jewish people during World War II under Adolf Hitler. It also included discrimination and potential slaughter to those who opposed the Nazi movement, the disabled, homosexuals, Africans, Poles, Romani, Soviet civilians, Soviet prisoners of war, and political or religious opponents. The genocide was carried out in stages starting with discrimination and abuse. That then led to separation into the ghettos then transports to concentration camps where millions would be dehumanized, tortured, and murdered. Adolf Hitler and the rest of the Nazi party believed that Jews were unworthy people and were just a burden to the world. They viewed them as parasites to the superior Aryan race, so they must be exterminated.

Concentration camps played a major role in the Holocaust. Majority of the suffering and killing took place there. Auschwitz, located in Southern Poland, was considered the largest and most feared extermination camp of all. Prisoners would go through routinely selections to determine whether they will go to the right (work) or go to the left (immediate death). The elderly, ill, and young children would typically be placed to the left. They were unaware of what these directions meant at first, so some would go to the left to be with their loved ones (usually mothers who do not want to lose their children). The ones who go left would be led to the gas chambers convinced that they would be going through disinfection (shower), but to only discover that they were trapped helplessly with cheap toxic gas flowing from the "shower heads". Their deaths were not quick and those who were still alive by the end would still be shoved into the crematory. The others would be put through hard labor and be tormented by soldiers. They were constantly starving-- the only food they got was a small bowl of soup and a bit of bread. They would be shot at or critically punished for the smallest reasons. An estimated 1.1 million prisoners were killed with only 7,000 being liberated once the Soviet forces arrived in Auschwitz.

Before extermination and concentration camps were liberated, prisoners would be forced to go on “death marches” where they would march for miles in the freezing cold with no food or water to another camp. If one were to slow down or fall, they would be shot and killed immediately.

After the camps were liberated, members of the Nazi party were hunted down and executed. Many committed suicide or simply ran off. Today, there are a handful of people who deny the Holocaust despite the mass amounts of proof.

Yeah. I know this is really.. basic and not so in-depth information, but that was the point. So... the end.

Into the Wild: Letter no. 1 + 2

Dear self,

Although I have already read this book in the past numerous times, I always become refreshed by this bone-chilling story. I'm glad that I'll be able to take this chance to actually dissect this book. Cheers to good reading!

I've noticed that the first two chapters are dedicated to the start of Christopher's-- or Alex's journey to the wilderness of Alaska and it's abrupt end. I found that to be quite interesting rather than putting everything in chronological order..
It's a bit frustrating reading about McCandless since he's so damn stubborn. In the beginning, Gallien offered him to buy him new gear and stuff and yet he still refuses. I understand that it's his personal policy to live off his own and stuff-- but he's leading himself to his death! I guess it's just not worthy or as achieving if you leech off others.
Although investigators passed off his death from starvation in the beginning, I remember that he was actually poisoned from eating bad berries/herbs or something like that. I'm not sure if that is approached by Krakauer towards the end or if the case was revisited after the publication of this book. I simply do not remember.

His journey overall was pretty long. I believe in total it was around 2 years and then 4 months into Alaska. "Alex Supertramp" met amazingly nice people and lived.. humorously. It's like he doesn't give a shit sometimes, but at the same time he has so much to say or represent.
What I enjoy about this book is that it doesn't only include McCandless' adventure, but the criticism he and the author himself has received. To be honest, I agree halfway with those who opposed McCandless' dumbass ignorance. He is part of the cliché of another idealistic and selfless young man who wants to take on mother nature as an adventure.. a realization or something.
The thing I happen to like about McCandless is how he keeps in contact with the people he has met. He doesn't reach them constantly, but a few phone calls or postcards a year. It's like they have become a significant aspect of his journey.

Anyways, after the brief introduction of his start and death, Krakauer continues with the journey in the mainland. Chris drove his ass all the way to the west, Arizona, where he eventually abandons his beloved Datsun along with other equipment due to a flash flood. Skipping his hitchhike from Arcata, California-- his parents are frantically worrying over Christopher. They received his ticket for hitchhiking towards the end of August and are totally unaware of what he's trying to do. They're utterly baffled especially since he abandoned his Datsun (which he defended when his parents offered to buy him a new car). Reporting to their local police department was obviously no good so they sought help from a known army general who turned them to Peter Kalitka, a private investigator. He caught some leads.. but of course never found McCandless.

Renewed Goals

I truly believe that I have not improved as much as I wanted to these past few months..
Why? I don't even know bro. I suppose it's because of my lack of this and that and constant tumble overs that just screw me over. I realized that once the 500 word mark was required, I had to borrow ideas. I understand that it's perfectly fine to do, but it's not what I originally wanted to do. I wanted to bring up my own ideas and curiosities, but it just haven't been.. happening. I don't know what else to say about my writing so I'll just talk about other academic goals.

So far, I'm very proud of myself. My total outcome for this year is incredible. I've made so many improvements and new accomplishments. I have also gained more confidence too (kind of.. it varies). For the first time in my life, I've achieved a 3.6 GPA and made it onto honor roll. I'm pretty sure it's a great accomplishment, right? My mother has been going crazy about it. She constantly brags to her friends or family even though my grades aren't entirely perfect. I've also grown to like math which used to be my sworn academic enemy. I'm kind of upset that I'm not able to go into pre-calculus next year since my summer physics course will clash with any other class I might try to take. I guess that's what I get for not paying attention in algebra for like three years.

Along with my achievements, I do have many disappointments.
I switched my claaaasses! Afrlgkjfklh'lk; I still haunts me everyday because it's just so shameful. It makes me feel so unprepared for unexpected things in the near future because you can't always go choosing your superiors or teachers. I'm really neutral on this situation because I have two sides to it: I should be able to take up the challenge and prove myself vs. I used to be a shitty student so I can't handle this shit right now.
God damn I'm so lame.

The biggest goal I have right now is to make it through AP Physics next year! It's the one thing I'm looking forward to-- yet at the same time afraid of. I'm really glad that I want to take AP physics because 1.) I enjoy the subject and 2.) I want to possibly major in it and have it involved in my future careers. I suppose I'm just afraid that I'll be unable to keep up and just fall behind with no hope of catching up. It's apparently a really difficult class and more than 100 students attended the informational meeting so I'm also afraid of the competition of getting in. Wow, I just sound ridiculous now. But yeah.. I don't know. Small stuff? Hopefully taking a class over the summer will help prepare me. I mean, the closest thing I got to physics was 8th grade physical science-- which I didn't even pass. I'm screwed.

Atlas Shrugged: Letter no. 3

Dear you,

Well this is the conclusion of the first section, Non-Contradiction, of Atlas Shrugged.

Scandalous shit has been going on man! Yeah this has been kind of weird.. I feel like the Transcontinental Railway only exists to somehow link all of these characters rather than representing a major part of the economy. These chapters were probably the most.. exciting out of the whole section. You learn about some interesting affairs and more about John Galt and his legends.

Conflict with Rearden Metal and the State Science Institute arises and Hank just won't give it up. The institute is filled with cocky, stuck up people who just want titles. They only want to close down Rearden Metal because they believe Rearden's new innovated metal will give them a bad name since they were not the ones who provided it. SO, they make some crap up saying it's hazardous material and should be put to question and what-not.
Actually, a lot of stuff has been happening to Rearden in general. His mother is a total douche to him and I just enjoy his comebacks. Rearden is soulless in the best way possible.
On top of that, the Legislature passed the Equalization of Opportunity Bill which pretty much screwed Hank over.

The John Galt line! I find it so strange how Dagny just chose to name it that. In the beginning of the line's introduction, Eddie Willers is taking to a worker and it just seems so schizophrenic. The worker is totally unnamed and his responses are shown as a "..." followed by more of Eddie's continuous talk. I find this almost horrific it's just so creepy. I do recall Eddie talking to a worker before, but it was more interactive and stuff. But this time.. it's just Eddie man. It's really weird.

Incinerate

Warm weather is nice. But, I'm really prone to hot weather. I can get dizzy or nauseated.. maybe even a heat stroke. Despite the cons that affect me, it just reminds me of change.

I'm an indecisive and picky person, so I don't truly have a favourite season. My situation would be once it's summer, I cannot wait until it's winter so I can throw on a bunch of blankets to be warm and eat like a fatty. Not to mention playing a bunch of video games and what not.
Then, it's winter. I start to get sick of it when it's mid January to February. I'm sick of the cold weather and rain, I can't do anything. So I seek for the long summer days and fun.

The closest thing I would have to a favourite season would be spring. Ideally, mid to late spring. I enjoy spring because the weather is neutral. The sun would be nice and warm, but there would be a cool breeze here and there. On top of that, school's almost over so, it's when I have the most fun with friends. I think I just enjoy feeling the transition from what used to be crammed, cold school days to something more relaxing. It's very nostalgic! I wish there was a better way to explain it, but that's as close as I can get.

Now that I think about it, I loved last summer. The summers before, I would just stay home and have repetitive passionate time with my computer. Last summer was different though. I made new friends to help occupy my empty days of summer and.. made interesting discoveries. I admit there were some flaws in that summer such as the weather wasn't hot enough or there were times where I really didn't want to do much.. I also have an issue with thinking up of what to do, so sometimes I would rely on friends. And when that happens, I don't always go with it. I guess last summer wasn't as perfect as I thought it would be due to some distractions.

I don't even know if I was making sense at all.
Well, okay. Referring back to my issue where I can't "think" of anything to do. I never realized how hard it would be. In order to come up something to do, it has to be "acceptable" to the people who would be accompanying such occasion. It's just some common courtesy so you wouldn't seclude someone. Then again, that isn't always the problem. Maybe I just wouldn't know what they'd want to do so I keep to myself and think again. Yeahhhhh. I for sure am suffering this as of now. I'm hoping summer will help ease it since there's more time and no school.

Oh wait, I will have school. Summer school. I don't really mind though! I get to take physics so it's all good jajaja. I don't know what this post is about to be honest. I guess it kind of revolves around summer, yes? Anywho, cheers to that.

Atlas Shrugged: Letter no. 2

Dear you,

The new chapter starts with the Taggarts' relationship with the D'Anconias, specifically Dagny and Francisco himself. Majority of these next couple of pages were flash backs of them at their youth looking forward to their prosperous future. I didn't find their relationship surprising, since situations like these are kind of common (since Dagny now "dislikes" Francisco).

I found it strange how Dagny always brings up Halley's Fifth Concerto. I was baffled when it first came up as she was introduced in the story by the worker's whistling. I know Halley will become somewhat of a significant character later in the book, but I just wonder what is the purpose of his "Fifth Concerto". What's even more confusing about it is that Halley is retired and stopped writing music. No one knows where he is or what he is doing, so it's kind of creepy how there's a concerto that mimics his style making it believable that he wrote it yet it doesn't even exist.. I don't know. I don't understand it's point; it's really mysterious.

I didn't do much annotating.. so yeah.

Rearden happens to me one of my favourite characters. He's the only one that really appeals to me. Dagny Taggart is alright.. but she just seems really typical to me. I am waiting for an impression. I don't really know why or how to explain why I like Rearden the most. Hopefully I'll be able to come up with some suave stuff to say about him later on.

I really do like this book. People would probably find it boring, but it's interesting reading about each individuals separate goals based on objectivism. Their economic and political situation are simple, yet realistic and something you can relate to. I enjoy philosophy, so absorbing this book isn't much of a work to me, but an advantage. Hopefully it'll also help me get into some activism sheeeeiiiiit.

Quickwrite: Multitasking vs. Concentration

This is a very old quickwrite, but I'm an uninspired individual who has not been actively thinking of any topics whatsoever for the past month or two :l I'm sure it's fine though.

Okay, multitasking. I have to say it's an important skill, but it does have its disadvantages. You can do as much as you want, but as Nicholas Carr says, you know less. It seems to make perfect sense to me actually. I suppose you can train yourself to multitask.. as in keep doing the same things over and over again to the point where it requires less concentration. Effortless.
Some things can be considered as what I like to call 'passive multitasking'. Something that doesn't take much brain power, but in reality it does use your senses. For example: listening to music. Tons of people listen to music no matter the situation such as doing work, walking down the street, purchasing goods, sleep, eat, read... You get where I'm going. Thing is, I believe it can also be a distraction. Strange, isn't it? You would think you wouldn't be truly concentrating on what you're listening to, but I know for a fact that I do. I get mentally sidetracked and start to listen to the music more attentively or sing along. I'm positive this happens to a lot of people fdsjkljFrance;klcjdlkj
One tricky thing to master in our book of multitasking would be deep thought. Like REAAAAL deep thought where you're just staring into space and caught into your own little world of absolute concentration. There's many examples to prove how hard to near impossible it is to successfully be in deep thought while doing some other stuff. As in more complex than walking or idly moving your hands or feet. I don't know.
BUT, I do recall a time where this has happened to me. I was attempting to apply the mobius strip into things like wheels or architecture. I don't know why I was thinking about it so hard, but I just couldn't stop. I just stared at my feet, occasionally drawing on my hand or in the air to kind of help me visualize. My friends were trying to talk to me at the same time and I just didn't want to break my concentration

Multitasking is second nature to humans (mostly for women, hahaha). So in reality, we constantly do it. You really wouldn't consider some of the things you do as multitasking since it's so easy (such as talking while walking). I suppose it's because through evolution our brain size has increased and stuff so tasks that would be considered difficult millions of years ago are now easy (duh derpderplollo). Even today I believe our ability to multitask is continuously growing even though we're nowhere near evolving. We're just that amazing.

ON THE CONTRARY,
We have been depending on technology and services for a long time and continue to do so. We're intelligent yet lazy people. So maybe our multitasking skills will decrease... You know, we have babbysitters to watch our babby.. Maids to clean houses..... Electric erasers..........

Atlas Shrugged: Letter no.1

Dear _____,

This book is HUGE. Wow. I'm jealous of your fast reading, Tim. But then again you're probably not absorbing the book as much as I am >:l

So far, the book is great. It's a bit mind boggling since we haven't been indulged to the main idea of the book yet. On top of that, it's hard to make out the current state the world is in......? I don't know. Like that calendar. What the hell is that calendar for? I don't know if it was symbolic or if it seriously does exist on top of a building.

I admire Rand's thoroughly detailed descriptions of each character that has been featured so far. It's rare to find much individualism in a character when it comes to novels. As for annotating- I didn't do much. I wrote a few notes analyzing Henry Rearden and his behavior. I believe he's one of the first characters to display Rand's philosophy, "objectivism".

Rearden seems to really care about those who are close to him even though he doesn't openly display it. The way he thinks kind of reminds me of myself like in page 34: "Fighting anger, Rearden told himself that this was Philip's form of solicitude...it would be unjust to feel resentment"
Rearden was getting pissed off that Philip was picking at him for working so much and that it's taking a toll on him, but Rearden is proud of what he's doing and just wishes his family could acknowledge his work. Even though he was getting angry, he knew that his brother was just concerned about his health and well-being.
His situation just reminds me of how my sister bitches at me all the time, but in the end I know it's just because she cares.

Sorry to jump around events, but I also noticed in the beginning that Eddie Willers reacted differently to the infamous question, "Who is John Galt?", than the others later in the book. Further into the chapters, "Who is John Galt?" is usually used after posing questions that "cannot be answered" (as said in page 16 by the fireman), but Willers reacted with slight.. disgust. I don't know if Willers had any relations with Galt, but the way John Galt is brought up makes it seem like he was an old story.

Materialism and Avarice

You know, it was pretty convenient how we had that quickwrite today (I chose the one about modern society and materialism) since I've been roughly thinking about the same subject already. I didn't get much on the paper since I was thinking all over the place and once I had one idea down, I'd totally forget the others. Anyways, I shall commence.

To start off, I believe that our society deserves to be criticized for straying away from the idea of "necessities first, wants last". Materialism has been provoking people leading them to give into greed which strongly shifts their perspective and personality. It has gotten to the point where future opportunities or your own sense of individualism heavily depends on your possessions or looks.

One thing that has kept up materialism's 'spirit' is something I call 'materialistic uniquity'. As people, the most important thing should be your mind. Each person has their own perspective and abilities, although some people may be similar. Nowadays, people don't 'look' at your mind. Instead, they look at you physically. Adolescents, in particular, has fallen into this. To be recognized, you have to look 'fresh'. Your different appearance makes you look so much more appealing to the eye and if you interact with people similar to you, you become shifted into groups-- cliques. I find wide minds more attractive than wide wardrobes kthx.
Now, I understand that your appearance may sometimes speak for your personality, but you cannot gamble with that.

Okay, another thing I have realized is that we hate necessities. Well.. that's a bit exaggerated, but we don't care about it as much. Avarice is the biggest bitch in the world and we are ALL affected by it. I have a perfect small example: My mother. Not to call her out or anything.. but seriously.

So, my mother has an obsessive habit of pulling money out of my bank via ATM or swiping money away from my room which I don't hide so well.. I know it's stupid on my fault for not hiding it well enough, but I should be able to trust my mother enough to kind of just leave it, right? Wrong.
This has been going on for years and I never get legitimate reasons of why she'd take money from me. A few reasons she has given me was.. car repair, I owe my friend, bank issues, etc. There was this one time where she withdrew about.. $1000 from me and came back home with Neiman Marcus bags and a brand new Yves Saint Laurent coat. Holy shit son. REALLY? My sister wasn't the ONLY one who needed to go to college, thank you very much.
Enough with pointing fingers, but I do this sometimes too. Not at such drastic measures though.. I don't know. But sometimes I see improvement. I just always think of what my sister would tell me, "Get what you need, not want". It's really hard to follow, but when I'd get something in my hand, I tend to look at it for a LONG time. Then I would decide to buy it or just put it back.

Memoir Project: Human Nature

Who participates in genocide, and why? What does the commonality of genocide lead you to believe about humanity?
Genocide is an organized, immoral act of potential slaughter of specific ethic, racial, religious, or national group. It is the ultimate level of pure discrimination and hate. Anyone has the true ability to participate in a genocide despite their individuality. The question is, what makes them do it in the first place? There's multiple ways to answer this in a number of different perspectives.

One would believe the participators are simply insane or possessed. It's a narrow point of view that the majority agrees upon because genocide is bad, right? So the people who participate in such activity is a mad criminal who's condemned to eternal damnation. Very shallow, but you just can't help but to agree. That's one of the first descriptions we would think of without a doubt, but we cannot judge something like genocide. It's impossible to judge something such as genocide, simply because we have not experienced it. We don't know how the victims truly suffered and why the predators participated. Either way, we still have our separate views with varied perspectives. Some may or may not be true, but everyone has the right to believe.
Another reason why people would participate is because they do not know what they're truly doing. They could think what they're doing is an act of heroism. They're being guided by a leader who is feeding them convincing lies. If one would disobey, he would be considered a criminal and sentenced to death. People are blind when it comes to the line: 'What is right and what is wrong?'. And it can be difficult for one to revolt and stay true to his beliefs. Ultimately, it's pressure.
So what if the participators knew what was going on and didn't like it? Well, they were most likely threatened. I'm sure it's a common situation. The person could be surrounded by a group or community who is pro-genocide and it's potentially dangerous to go against and psychologically threatening. They know what they are committing, but they cannot do anything about it. They're simply scared for their life and it makes them a wimp.
The last reason I could possibly think of is bad exposure. This could mean a lot of things such as the person once being in an abusive or sadistic environment or being fed biased impressions of the victimized group. I believe it mainly revolves around past experiences, influences, or personal beliefs. Instead of thinking it as another form of pure evil, it's just mislead guidance. One example of a belief would be supremacy or selection of the most fit. This has been one of the possible reasons for why Hitler exterminated the Jewish in the Holocaust.

I'm disappointed of our humanity especially for taking part of genocide. It just further proves that humanity believes in superiority of races or groups and their only solution for unification are subgoals such as genocide itself. Even though humans first saw it this way and took it to a great advantage, it shouldn't apply to us today.
The fact that participators of genocide deny the crimes they commit makes things so much more worse. I'm certain many former Nazis have gone through denial and it's such a shame. The least they can do is admit their wrong doings despite the fact they will not be forgiven. One cannot expect to be forgiven for such actions. You just can't be that stubborn, not in this situation. Adding onto denial, genocidal acts are still active today. The conflict in Darfur is elevating its status into genocide although major organizations such as the UN and African Union believe Darfur is not suffering genocide. I do not have high knowledge of the situation, but it feels like it will soon develop into true genocide. Another recent trace of genocide was in 1994, the Rwandan Genocide. With a government in favour of the Hutus, thousands of Tutsis were exterminated. It's baffling how the world has not learned from the Holocaust and other previous genocidal acts and the actions of anti-genocidal organizations isn't enough to stop these people. We obviously need to go into greater depth to stop and prevent this.

Illusion

Towards the end of January, I started to write daily entries of my day in a little notebook. The biggest reason why I wanted to do this was because: 1.) My memory has been terrible and I want to be able to remember days of my life, 2.) To remind myself of things such as mistakes, 3.) To see progression of my writing and living, and most importantly 4.) Not only to cherish past events, but also to feel how fast time has went by. The fourth one is kind of strange, but I've been journaling to my advantage. Although I should relax and let time pass by slowly.. I sometimes want it to go by fairly quick. It's an illusion I decided to try for myself and it's working quite efficiently.

Journaling so far has been going pretty good. I'd forget to do some entries, but I would make up for it the next day. Unfortunately, I've caught a similar issue as my blog: becoming less thorough and having shorter entries. It's a disappointment, but I hope it's only temporary. I usually have shorter entries due to my uneventful days. I haven't been seeing much progress so far, but hopefully it's building up slowly. I would throw in a couple of new vocabulary or even write some sentences in a different language to keep my journaling a bit more productive. I also wanted to start drawing a few doodles in there... but it hasn't happened yet.

Keeping a journal has been so beneficial to me. I wish to continue this in separate 'volumes' like one for a school year, another for the summer. It would be remarkable to look back to and it just gets me really excited. Last summer was so great for me, but I was unable to recall everyday which gets me a bit down. I'm really looking forward to next summer so I can take advantage of journaling and bump it to the next level with pictures and drawings.

Langues du Monde

Language! The dominant kind of communication everyone use constantly. I myself want to learn a handful of languages for various reasons, mostly to my future's convenience such as career. I hope to become proficient or fluent in French, Japanese, Russian, and maybe German. Reason why I'd want to learn French, Russian, and maybe German is for career purposes. As for Japanese, it's also for possible career choices and to be able to communicate with Ricky in a different language hahaha. I guess it's kind of silly for me to want to learn a handful of languages, but it's what I want to do. I'm also not even sure if I'll be able to do it P: Anyways, I for SURE know that I will not be able to become a polyglot har har harrrrrr. So anyways..

Our world is moving rapidly in terms of technology and business. Learning another language can be beneficial for you in the future (bilinguals overpopulate monolinguals). With that, there are multiple careers with "dominant" languages. It's hard for me to explain.. but certain countries or people concentrate on certain subjects more than others. For example:
In science, the top most important languages would be English, German, Russian, and Spanish. I would have to argue against Spanish, actually. I believe French would be more appropriate, but what do I know.

Besides the fact that languages are used for basic communication it can also have emotional values. By experience, I, for sure know that I'm greatly overjoyed when I'm able to talk to someone in French, Korean, or maybe a little Japanese. Aside from happy thought, language can just be terror to some. Like back then how one country would invade or conquer another and force upon their tongue and culture (sound any familiar?).

Well, I'm not a linguist so I can't really lecture about the origin of languages and what not.. But this is just kind of my brief view on them.. Yeah. LEARN A LANGUAGE!

Hello

Nothing interesting has been really getting to me this whole entire week. I was unfortunate enough to have a boring week along with great fatigue..

So last week was finals. Happy to say I beasted on each and every one of them >:D!
But last Thursday was absolutely DREADFUL. Worst headache in my life along with nausea. I felt like god was drilling the right side of my skull with his almighty finger of justice. I was crying and screaming on Ricky's couch for a good 2 hours. Before I got to his house, I took two advils since my head was hurting a bit during lunch. Totally did not work.

Friday was abnormally fine. I did not feel any signs of that terrible headache reawakening.

On Saturday, I was seeing light blotches. What the hell?! Yeah, that developed into an earlier stage of my brain-splitting headache from Thursday. I was nauseated and dizzy, laying down did NOT help. Took advil, nothing. It wasn't as bad as Thursday, but I was scared SHITLESS that it would turn into that disaster. So scared that I really thought I had to go to the hospital, but I was hesitant since it sounds ridiculous to go to the hospital for a headache.. Went anyways, sister would not give consent since it was ridiculous of me to go to the emergency room for a "little headache". No man. That shit on Thursday was TERRIBLE. I understand my sister, but she didn't really have to be such a huge bitch about it.
Anyways, Sophie and I hauled my ass home where I called up my doctor for the second time and she checked me up. Didn't get straight answers besides the fact that its either A. Indigestion, B. Migraines, or C. Early Flu Symptoms. Oh and her assistant proceeded her attempt of evangelizing Sophie (hahahahha). But I did get a fruity pink tablet to ease my nausea (it worked for once!) and a packet of mysterious Korean pills for my indigestion.
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

I didn't take those Korean pills until a few days later.. They smelled awful and of course didn't do shit to me.

I most definitely had migraines. I'm just wondering where they came from.. I don't think they're spontaneous, right?

Finale

10. Where do you get your ideas for blog post topics? What inspires you to write?
The majority of my ideas come from my stubborn curiosity. I like to read tons of different articles that I happen to stumble upon on the internet or listen to people's views. I also have a tendency to mash different things together such as old with new or architecture with topology. My ideas can also come from my rage. Emotions are great to manipulate, hahaha.

What inspires me to write is the thought of being able to contribute to the subject itself, whether it's often neglected or popular. It makes me feel awesome to bring up things people have never heard of or rarely think about. I also hope to enlighten others and start building ideas for my future. Following that, I want to improve my writing and the way I teach others. I've realized that I'm pretty bad at teaching since I don't know where to begin. Most of all, I want to build ideas that might become useful in the future. Or maybe just have something to look back at, determine whether or not I still agree with those thoughts.

7. What have you learned from your struggles with writer's block? Why do you tend to get stuck? How do you tend to get unstuck? Notice any patterns?
The ultimate causes of my writer's block is my inability to complete an idea and lack of 'time'. I'd forge some ideas once in a while, but it gets hard for me to expand them. Another problem I've discovered is the fact that I don't have enough information to support myself. I've already written about this situation in my previous blog here, talking about how I must have a significant amount of intelligence about the topic I want to write about. The reason why it's really hard for me to comprehend certain topics or ideas is because in order to understand it, I must know something else. I don't quite know how to explain this verbally, so here is a diagram:

So in order for me to completely understand A, I must know about b, and in order to understand b, I must learn about c and so on.. This is an extremely irritating and silly situation I must go through, but it just feeds my determination and curiosity.

I would have to admit that I have always been hesitant about something I wish to talk about. Yet at the same time, I completely disagree with myself. I firmly believe it is perfectly fine for me be curious about certain things and someone who is willing to speak is willing to learn. Although I haven't fully overcome this situation, but I've been making progress such as my blog about dreams. I believe in order for me to get unstuck, I'd have ask more questions. Another solution I have thought of is to carry around a small notebook to record any ideas before they disappear.

8. How do you like having a blog? How has blogging changed the way you write, the way you think, or the way you think about writing?

"Whenever a theory appears to you as the only possible one, take this as a sign that you have neither understood the theory nor the problem which it was intended to solve."
- Karl Popper

I really enjoy blogging. I've always wanted to blog or write journal entries, but never had the initiative to do so. Blogging as a school assignment is a great start for me since I have to do it, assuming the habit will break in despite some of the pressure of due dates. Blogging itself got me to start writing more productively, which enables me to get ideas down and think actively faster. I've also been contradicting myself constantly, putting more words on the page. The way I think has also changed significantly. Referring to the quote above, I believe my mind has shifted into something along Karl Popper's belief. I try to think of multiple possibilities no matter how ridiculous they are. This hasn't just helped the way I write or think, but the way I evaluate myself as a person.

I think of writing as diary of your life. I believe everyone should record in some form. It can be writing, voice memos, drawings, etc. Looking at past entries can be remarkable. For me, I sometimes use it to see how fast time has passed by or to see how I have changed. I found that writing has also helped my memory. Since last summer, I haven't been remembering a lot of things so vividly like I used to. I just wish I was able to catch my fault early and start writing about my days.

Anti-6. In what way(s) have you disappointed yourself this semester on your blog? Have you tried topics you didn't think you'd write about? Approached a familiar topic from a sluggish angle? Did less "depth" to a topic than you first expected? Explain.
I disappointed myself numerous times. It's utterly ridiculous and feels very wasteful towards my ideas. Although I have multiple posts filled with gibberish and complaints, "Avant-garde", was a major disappointment. I really wanted to display how buildings don't always have to be blocks and Bjarke Ingels was a perfect example. I even started the post beforehand, but time management really got me. On top of that, I wanted to show the benefits of a perfect blend of experimentalism and pragmatism not only in architecture, but in science. I went a little short and just summarized some of his major works and what-not. I really do hope to tackle this topic again with greater success.

Along with my failed attempt, I have a lot of lolly-gagging material on my blog. You can tell which ones they are since they're always last minute! I don't know if it either was me being forgetful and stressed or just lazy, but rereading them just carves a look of disapproval into my face. I'm tempted to delete such posts, but I should keep them just to remind me of my flaws.

Quickwrite: Writing Groups

1. What are some things you'd like to get out of writing more collaboratively with peers?
I'd really like to get some good reference sites (blogs, articles, etc..) or maybe even book recommendations relating to any previous blog posts or even new ideas or thoughts. I'd also like critique or a few tips.. I often go off subject because I don't know what else to say.

2. What are some things you'd be willing to contribute to a writing group?
The exact same I have asked for! I know a lot of interesting topics or sites myself.. And a couple of good books. I'd be willing to share with anyone who's interested. I would also be able to give critique and proofread.

3. Is it more important to you to work with friends, or with people who are writing the same types of things you are? (Of course, it's possible to have this both ways...) Explain why.
I think it's possible for me to work with both, but I wouldn't want to be put in a group with a bunch of people I don't know. It should be an even mix, you know? I don't think it's completely possible for everyone to agree on one solid subject. Maybe it could be something really general that can branch off.....? Or we can even create subgroups, but that seems a little complicating. Which ever works. It just all depends on the group of people I work with.

4. What are some "rules" (or at least guidelines) you'd like to see in a writing group?
Feedback must be constructive and especially mature. I'd hate to see people saying stupid shit to another's person's writing. It's totally unnecessary and unjust. Other than that, I'm sure people are good enough to keep privacy and what-not.. I also really want to see literacy. Doesn't have to be perfect :l

Evaluation

Bawwwwwwww stomach aches ;_; Advil PM knocked me out so badddd.

So I realized why I can't write as much as I'd want to.. or need to.
1. I never give myself the time to fully.. open a topic for myself. I'd have the idea in my head and just let it float around until last minute and never completely finish it.
2. I feel like I don't have the ability to give proper support or information to the topic I wish to write about. Which goes back to number 1, I don't give myself the time to research.
3. Lately, I've been overwhelmed by a number of things. But today, at last minute, I have been relieved of certain things (in exchange for terrible stomach aches). So sorry for such delay.

Besides lack of time management and stress, I believe number 2 is my biggest problem and it always has been. I'd always find lovely topics that are of my interest, but wouldn't know anything about it. It's very troublesome and frustrating for me. On top of that, if I were to get any information on it I'd feel like it wouldn't be enough. I assume I'm just a picky person like that and in order to write about something, you'd have to know a lot about it. But that shouldn't be the case. You should be able to learn as you progress, yes?
I guess what I'm trying to say is that in order for me to comfortably write about a certain topic, I'd have to experience something that could possibly link to it or just know a hell lot about it.

Like physicist is to string theory as neurosurgeon is to brain tumors.

I don't even know if that made sense..

I wish I didn't have to write about this, but I guess it was good for me since writer's block has been nipping me in the ass. I originally wanted to write about Andrei D. Sakharov and his amazing contributions to nuclear physics and human rights.