Dear Readers of My Blog,
When you strike the lottery, you would be jumping for joy, ecstatic on having won some prize or money. This is, however, not so in the case of Shirley Jackson’s "The Lottery".
In this novella, the Hutchinson family was at stake of losing one of their family members as Bill got the unlucky lot. When the family had to re-draw to see who would be stoned, the on-lookers were wishing for it not to be the children. Since this is so, why doesn’t anyone try to break this ritual? In the end, it was Tessie Hutchinson, the mother, who got it.
In this town, superstition constitutes a great force within the people, as they believed that by performing this nonsensical rite, they could get a year of good harvest.
Superstition is an extremely powerful tool as it can destroy the lives of many humans. In this story, the people simply performed the rituals that have been handed down from generations, without really analysing it and finding out whether it really helps them. They are just being led by the nose. It is really depressing to see the townspeople, especially the children, happily gather the stones before the event. When the time comes, they just fire the stones at the victim, especially Mrs. Delacroix, who “selected a stone so large she had to pick it up with both hands”.
I sincerely hope that this story remains just what it is – a fictional story.
Best Regards,
Nathan
Sunday, 28 February 2010
eLearning Assignment
Dear Readers of My Blog,
Today is eLearning Day.
Visual/Spatial Assignment A:
Today is eLearning Day.
Visual/Spatial Assignment A:
Create a character web for Flowers for Algernon
Best Regards,
Nathan
Saturday, 27 February 2010
Learner's Profile
Dear Readers of My Blog,
In order to identify our personal learning styles, our class was asked to take a Multiple Intelligence test on this website: http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks1/ict/multiple_int/questions/choose_lang.cfm
According to my results, I was identified as a visual and intrapersonal learner. The results are represented in a pie chart which is found below:
In my opinion, the results seem to be quite true, as they complement with the results from similar tests I participated in during my upper primary years. In addition, I do learn better with visual as compared to audio aids.
However, in my opinion, this kind of Multiple Intelligence tests are not totally accurate. If they can really analyse one’s learning style through just asking some simple questions, then why do we need psychiatrists and psychologists? Then again, we can just take these tests for the fun of it, but do not take it too seriously.
Best Regards,
Nathan
In order to identify our personal learning styles, our class was asked to take a Multiple Intelligence test on this website: http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks1/ict/multiple_int/questions/choose_lang.cfm
According to my results, I was identified as a visual and intrapersonal learner. The results are represented in a pie chart which is found below:
In my opinion, the results seem to be quite true, as they complement with the results from similar tests I participated in during my upper primary years. In addition, I do learn better with visual as compared to audio aids.
However, in my opinion, this kind of Multiple Intelligence tests are not totally accurate. If they can really analyse one’s learning style through just asking some simple questions, then why do we need psychiatrists and psychologists? Then again, we can just take these tests for the fun of it, but do not take it too seriously.
Best Regards,
Nathan
Saturday, 20 February 2010
Does Singapore Need A National Identity? (Socratic Seminar 1- Current Affairs)
Dear Readers of My Blog,
The Socratic Seminar on Friday (19 February 2010) discussed the topic regarding what our national identity should be. I would like to add my views on this matter.
In Singapore, it is extremely difficult to create a national identity. There are many reasons why this is so. Firstly, our forefathers came from different parts of the world and are different in race, language, religion, culture and even the food they consume.
Singapore is also a young nation of only 45 years, having only gained her independence in 1965. 45 years is considered a very short period to have had a national identity.
In recent years, there is yet another difficulty. The government has been hiring plenty of foreigners to work in Singapore. Not only do the people of Singapore have to content with the above-mentioned difficulties, with the influx of foreigners, this task is made even harder. Besides, humans are the most unpredictable creatures in the world…
I feel that for Singapore to have only one national identity is an impossible task. This is because she has too diverse a community and too great a variation in her citizens.
In my opinion, I strongly believe that instilling the virtue of 饮水思源 (one quality that our school emphasises greatly on) in each and every one of her young citizens is more vital than seeking a physical symbol to represent her. A child, brought up with right values, will then give back generously to the society, after having received many privileges from it. This way, a sense of belonging towards Singapore will be manifested clearly in that individual, regardless of race, language and religion.
Does one need a physical symbol to represent one’s national identity? To me, the emotional attachment to one’s nation is more important.
Best Regards,
Nathan
The Socratic Seminar on Friday (19 February 2010) discussed the topic regarding what our national identity should be. I would like to add my views on this matter.
In Singapore, it is extremely difficult to create a national identity. There are many reasons why this is so. Firstly, our forefathers came from different parts of the world and are different in race, language, religion, culture and even the food they consume.
Singapore is also a young nation of only 45 years, having only gained her independence in 1965. 45 years is considered a very short period to have had a national identity.
In recent years, there is yet another difficulty. The government has been hiring plenty of foreigners to work in Singapore. Not only do the people of Singapore have to content with the above-mentioned difficulties, with the influx of foreigners, this task is made even harder. Besides, humans are the most unpredictable creatures in the world…
I feel that for Singapore to have only one national identity is an impossible task. This is because she has too diverse a community and too great a variation in her citizens.
In my opinion, I strongly believe that instilling the virtue of 饮水思源 (one quality that our school emphasises greatly on) in each and every one of her young citizens is more vital than seeking a physical symbol to represent her. A child, brought up with right values, will then give back generously to the society, after having received many privileges from it. This way, a sense of belonging towards Singapore will be manifested clearly in that individual, regardless of race, language and religion.
Does one need a physical symbol to represent one’s national identity? To me, the emotional attachment to one’s nation is more important.
Best Regards,
Nathan
Sunday, 14 February 2010
Was The Narrator Wrong In His Act To Push Doodle To The Limit?
Dear Readers of My Blog,
Firstly, if he had not done so, the sickly and physically disabled boy would never be able to perform the activities that we all take for granted, namely to walk, run or swim. Should he remain under his parents’ care, I think he would still remain as a wheelchair-bound handicapped individual. He could also be ostracised in school which would made his life miserable and lonely.
To help Doodle walk, the narrator had to keep picking his brother up each time he fell. This is only possible because of his patience and perseverance, even though his intention was questionable. The narrator even came up with plans and schedules to teach Doodle how to run and even swim before school so that Doodle could live the life of an ordinary schoolboy. However, the price in which Doodle had to pay was his life.
You may disagree with me but I feel that despite ill intentions, he was the one who gave Doodle a life. One that is more meaningful where he did not have to rely on others for everything, even though it is short. If I were Doodle, I would rather live a short but non-reliant life.
The narrator’s biggest mistake was his unawareness of the limit to which he should push Doodle because he is only eleven then. This is not wholly his fault as how many of us are truly aware of when or where is the limit?
Best Regards,
Nathan
Firstly, if he had not done so, the sickly and physically disabled boy would never be able to perform the activities that we all take for granted, namely to walk, run or swim. Should he remain under his parents’ care, I think he would still remain as a wheelchair-bound handicapped individual. He could also be ostracised in school which would made his life miserable and lonely.
To help Doodle walk, the narrator had to keep picking his brother up each time he fell. This is only possible because of his patience and perseverance, even though his intention was questionable. The narrator even came up with plans and schedules to teach Doodle how to run and even swim before school so that Doodle could live the life of an ordinary schoolboy. However, the price in which Doodle had to pay was his life.
You may disagree with me but I feel that despite ill intentions, he was the one who gave Doodle a life. One that is more meaningful where he did not have to rely on others for everything, even though it is short. If I were Doodle, I would rather live a short but non-reliant life.
The narrator’s biggest mistake was his unawareness of the limit to which he should push Doodle because he is only eleven then. This is not wholly his fault as how many of us are truly aware of when or where is the limit?
Best Regards,
Nathan
How Different People View and Approach the Same Incident
Dear Readers of My Blog,
The style of James Hurst was that of a descriptive or narrative approach to attract his readers’ attention. A good example was the opening paragraph where he depicted the scene of the garden, which strongly smelt of death.
He cleverly compared the dead scarlet ibis which was swept away from its habitat to Doodle, who was born physically handicapped and wanted desperately to live up to his brother’s expectations.
Let us move on to character analysis.
Thinking that their son was dying, Doodle’s parents easily succumbed to his fate and feeling sorry for themselves, started preparing for his death. They never even tried to seek help for their child. This shows that they are very simple-minded and accept whatever is put forward to them.
On the contrary, the narrator was extremely determined to make Doodle live like everyone else. However, this is not because of brotherly love but for the selfish reason of not wanting to be laughed at. The narrator pushed Doodle to extremity due to his obstinate character.
Of all, Doodle is the most compassionate member of the family, as can be seen from him being the only one in the family who wanted to bury the scarlet ibis. His love for his brother, as well as his belief in him, resulted in his wanting to live up to the narrator’s expectation, which eventually cost him his life.
With the above analysis, it can be seen that though the family faced the same situation but the approach taken by each member is so very different.
Best Regards,
Nathan
The style of James Hurst was that of a descriptive or narrative approach to attract his readers’ attention. A good example was the opening paragraph where he depicted the scene of the garden, which strongly smelt of death.
He cleverly compared the dead scarlet ibis which was swept away from its habitat to Doodle, who was born physically handicapped and wanted desperately to live up to his brother’s expectations.
Let us move on to character analysis.
Thinking that their son was dying, Doodle’s parents easily succumbed to his fate and feeling sorry for themselves, started preparing for his death. They never even tried to seek help for their child. This shows that they are very simple-minded and accept whatever is put forward to them.
On the contrary, the narrator was extremely determined to make Doodle live like everyone else. However, this is not because of brotherly love but for the selfish reason of not wanting to be laughed at. The narrator pushed Doodle to extremity due to his obstinate character.
Of all, Doodle is the most compassionate member of the family, as can be seen from him being the only one in the family who wanted to bury the scarlet ibis. His love for his brother, as well as his belief in him, resulted in his wanting to live up to the narrator’s expectation, which eventually cost him his life.
With the above analysis, it can be seen that though the family faced the same situation but the approach taken by each member is so very different.
Best Regards,
Nathan
Wednesday, 10 February 2010
"Flowers for Algernon": To Operate or Not?
Dear Readers of My Blog,
I am fully supportive of Charlie Gordon’s decision to go for the operation. Why do I say so?
Firstly, it was his wish to want to become smart and not stay dumb. He was willing to bear any pain to achieve this. I believe that everyone should do what he/she wants as long as it is not against the law. There is nothing wrong for Charlie to want to become intelligent and acquire knowledge, even if the result is temporary.
Before the operation, his factory-mates made fun of him but Charlie did not know and still thought that they were his friends. It was only after the operation that Charlie realised they were laughing at him and were not his friends. In life, we have many friends but how many can we truly call “friends”? Charlie was fortunate to be able to finally know who his true friends were: Fanny and Miss Kinnian.
Some people may argue that after the operation, he lost all his friends but are they really his friends? It seems to me that they befriended him with a condition tagged: when he is dumb and they can make fun of him and make use of his kindness to their advantage.
After the operation, he did not slack but used his newly-found intelligence to help increase humans’ intelligence. Knowing that his intelligence was deteriorating rapidly, he worked extremely hard to complete his study for the benefit of the community. Without this operation, he would not be able to complete this study.
After he became his old self, he remained very much motivated to work very hard to relive the feeling of being intelligent.
Thus, I strongly feel that he made the right choice.
What do you think?
See you soon :)
Nathan
I am fully supportive of Charlie Gordon’s decision to go for the operation. Why do I say so?
Firstly, it was his wish to want to become smart and not stay dumb. He was willing to bear any pain to achieve this. I believe that everyone should do what he/she wants as long as it is not against the law. There is nothing wrong for Charlie to want to become intelligent and acquire knowledge, even if the result is temporary.
Before the operation, his factory-mates made fun of him but Charlie did not know and still thought that they were his friends. It was only after the operation that Charlie realised they were laughing at him and were not his friends. In life, we have many friends but how many can we truly call “friends”? Charlie was fortunate to be able to finally know who his true friends were: Fanny and Miss Kinnian.
Some people may argue that after the operation, he lost all his friends but are they really his friends? It seems to me that they befriended him with a condition tagged: when he is dumb and they can make fun of him and make use of his kindness to their advantage.
After the operation, he did not slack but used his newly-found intelligence to help increase humans’ intelligence. Knowing that his intelligence was deteriorating rapidly, he worked extremely hard to complete his study for the benefit of the community. Without this operation, he would not be able to complete this study.
After he became his old self, he remained very much motivated to work very hard to relive the feeling of being intelligent.
Thus, I strongly feel that he made the right choice.
What do you think?
See you soon :)
Nathan
"Flowers for Algernon": Character Analysis of Charlie Gordon
Dear readers of my blog,
The literature text I am referring to is "Flowers for Algernon".
After reading this novella, I realised that Charlie Gordon, though not bright, has many qualities that are worth emulating. How many of us are willing to endure pain and hardship in order to achieve our goals in our lives? How many of us, after attaining our goals, are willing to share the fruits of our labour with others? Well, Charlie Gordon did all of this!
An honest and diligent man who would not make up lies about others, he worked very hard to read and write better than the rest of his classmates. Charlie was also an independent person as he found the night school by making enquiries on his own.
Not an aimless soul, he had a goal in life to be intelligent like everyone else and worked hard to achieve this goal.
The superstitious Charlie brought his rabbit’s foot and his lucky penny everywhere he goes.
He was very kind to his friends, often helping them run errands. His love for animals is evident in his care for Algernon.
Charlie is willing to share his new-found knowledge with others. As his intelligence level deteriorated rapidly, he did not become despondent but instead, he worked even harder to complete his research, enabling the society to benefit from it.
I strongly recommend everyone to read this superbly-written story by Daniel Keyes.
Bye :)
Nathan
The literature text I am referring to is "Flowers for Algernon".
After reading this novella, I realised that Charlie Gordon, though not bright, has many qualities that are worth emulating. How many of us are willing to endure pain and hardship in order to achieve our goals in our lives? How many of us, after attaining our goals, are willing to share the fruits of our labour with others? Well, Charlie Gordon did all of this!
An honest and diligent man who would not make up lies about others, he worked very hard to read and write better than the rest of his classmates. Charlie was also an independent person as he found the night school by making enquiries on his own.
Not an aimless soul, he had a goal in life to be intelligent like everyone else and worked hard to achieve this goal.
The superstitious Charlie brought his rabbit’s foot and his lucky penny everywhere he goes.
He was very kind to his friends, often helping them run errands. His love for animals is evident in his care for Algernon.
Charlie is willing to share his new-found knowledge with others. As his intelligence level deteriorated rapidly, he did not become despondent but instead, he worked even harder to complete his research, enabling the society to benefit from it.
I strongly recommend everyone to read this superbly-written story by Daniel Keyes.
Bye :)
Nathan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
