Jan 25, 2016 - Communication    3 Comments

Abolishment of nuclear weapons

Nuclear weapons. The ultimate maker of peace, and stopper of wars. Who would have known that a weapon of mass destruction was not only capable of wiping out nations from the face of the world, but also the key to stopping any wars from happening in the first place. The name weapons of mass destruction in itself reassures me. Many have tried and failed in attempting to restore order in the world; some have made alliances with countries and others have tried to unite the world with peace talks. The world was in a state of chaos but with the modern introduction of nuclear weapons all seems to be well, it only took several billions of dollars. Interestingly, the current death rate in the U.S caused by violence is 36 murders a day. Not to mention they introduced the policy of guns as self protection in the first place and refute any idea that they could in return be harmful in the society. This is the same country with the highest count of nuclear weapons… Can we blame them? Surely if you could “tax” the people and had the ability to invest in a nuclear programme you would do the same thing. For the sake of peace.

On serious terms, have the number of wars stopped since the introduction of nuclear weapons? The world has witnessed the destruction of these weapons in Japan, but still we give a blind eye to the governments who invest in these programs. The same people who tell us that nuclear weapons are “agents of peace”. Guns in the U.S follows the same concept of using weapons as a form of protection and avoiding violence; in fact more people have died in the US from gun violence than from actual wars themselves. But the abuse of these policies are known to everyone. Handguns are promoted to Americans for their personal safety which is significantly attempting to reduce the current high crime rates. With this ideology it would be rational to think that the introduction of nuclear weapons is the solution to World peace; if it works in America it sure will work globally. Nuclear weapons are a form of “protection”, but having a country armed with them puts that country in risk of being caught up in nuclear war. Is it possible to put the future of the planet into the hands of the people that think their gun laws do not correspond with the rate of crime and deaths?

A majority of the world is in a state of democracy, this is great as it shows progress towards peace. Democracy has developed so much that government leaders can wipe out entire nations with the push of a single button, certainly at the request of the people. Are you sure you would want to give this power to those who use nuclear weapons as chess pieces for their own gain? The governments are not the only ones abusing this power, but the high chances of terrorists acquiring such weapons that cost multi millions to create would be fatal of course. They on the other hand would not hesitate to use them. Even when terrorists do not have explosives, there is a high risk of danger. Saddam Hussein was accused of being in possession of nuclear weapons, but allied forces invaded killing many civilians, only to find there are no weapons of mass destruction. The peace keepers sure did their jobs.

The immoral policy of nuclear deterrent is relied upon by all states with nuclear weapons. It may be able to prevent wars from occurring as there is the risk of mutually assured destruction and nobody will resort to nuclear war. The fact is countries are still having a race amongst each other to see who has the largest arsenal of nukes, it is similar to the competition children have with toys. Just holding nukes will cause a country to be in danger of attack. More nukes means less chance of using them, although this may sound like a positive factor, there is the case of miscommunication or misunderstanding. As ridiculous as it sounds, errors can be made with transmissions, even when dealing with sensitive information such as nuclear weapons. There has been a case when World War 3 was close to eruption due to lack of miscommunication. During the cold war a Russian general received the go to launch all sub missiles on targeted states because of a computer error. Luckily, he refused to input his launch codes, if that had not happened you would not be reading this article at this very moment.

The more dangerous issue is that people are led into believing that because no nuclear attacks have occurred since the disaster in Japan 1945, it wont happen at all. It is a dangerous mindset to have as there are many points to why nuclear weapons are great solutions to peace and that it is simply impossible for something to go wrong. They work – then one day they wont. It would be best for humanity and all life on earth to not discover when or if that day comes. So in the end a world without nuclear weapons is a better world, or it could possibly be the end.

Dec 17, 2015 - Communication    1 Comment

Controlled Assessment

In the three texts “Hamlet”, “Do not go gentle into that good night” and “On my first son” all the authors use language devices and features to portray messages to the audience about powers they cannot control. The author ideas are based on their life experiences which will be explored as part of the context, which influenced the authors to write those texts. Some examples of language devices are metaphors and personification where the author express their ideology on the forces they cannot control and what they feel about that. Metre is another language feature which may or may not be present throughout the texts but this may indicate certain themes they are trying to push forward. A few common themes which all the texts share in common are death, revenge, fate, supernatural and love. Each of these forces and the way characters respond to it are showed with different linguistic features. However, there are some differences between the way the themes and forces are shown to create an underlying message to the audience.

Hamlet written by Shakespeare, and is based on Hamlets views on the events around him and how he reacts to the sufferings of the world and powers he cannot control. This is interesting as Shakespeare had a son called “Hamnet” who he lost at a young age, and Shakespeare’s suffering to his loss may have influenced his writing in Hamlet, leading to those forces being present. Similarly, in Ben Johnson’s poem it revolves around the loss of his son and is based on true events as his son died at the age of seven. In his poem he also expresses his pain and suffering of the death of his son, and the fact that he could do nothing about it. The difference is he has come to accept the forces he cannot control and that is shown in the language in his poem. Finally, in Dylan Thomas’ poem “Do not go gentle into that good night” he talks about how death should be a battle and it should not come easy, which is shown in the title. The influence for this poem had to come from the death of his father, as in one of the stanzas he talks about the death of a father and suggests his emotions towards it.

Death and revenge is a common theme shown in the three texts in different ways that show how people respond to forces they have no control over. In Hamlet he poses the question to himself “To be or not to be…” Hamlet is questioning whether to live or to die by having a philosophical debate with himself. This is one of the ways he deals with his suffering, Hamlet can not deal with the deaths around him so he responds to death by wanting to take his own life. On my First son also uses rhetorical questions “Will man lament the state he should envy.” This line suggests that the author feels that he should feel happy about the state he is in as his son did not live the harsh sufferings of the world, where as Hamlet has the choice to kill himself to end it, the character is trying to see the positive side to the death and dealing with the death of his son in an optimistic way. No rhetorical questions are present in Dylan Thomas’s poem which is because the author deals with death in a different way rather than question the force. By using rhetorical questions it shows Hamlet response to the forces that he is uncertain, and after he goes on to use more questions which suggests that Hamlet is confused and he does not know how to react. Also, constantly using the interrogative shows his uncertainty and is constantly thinking about what to do, that is his reaction. But in comparison to Ben Johnson, he is using rhetorical questions for a different reason that is whether he should feel bad about the death of his son or happy that the does not suffer anymore.

In the play Hamlet experiences the death of his father which he reacts to by saying “Revenge his foul and unnatural murder”. In Do not go gentle into that good night there is a line “And you, my father there on the sad height.” The difference to Hamlet is the choice of words which creates different atmospheres as Dylan Thomas is experiencing grief over the death of his father, but Hamlet is angry and is looking for vengeance. The difference can be interpreted as due to the deaths of the fathers as Hamlets father was murdered but Dylan Thomas’s father died of natural causes. Hamlet uses the metaphor “To die, to sleep…” The way the character is dealing with the forces he has no control over, death in this case, is by comparing death to a sleep and in that sleep all of his suffering will go away. In comparison to Dylan Thomas’s poem he uses the line “rage, rage against the dying of the light.” This suggests that he feels as if death should not come easy and it should be a battle by the repetition of the word “rage”. In Ben Johnson’s poem the experience of his death is similar to that of Dylan Thomas’s where he says “scap’d world’s and flesh’s rage,” the language used is similar but the meanings are different as he is happy as his son did not face the tragedies of the world, and would not have to deal with these forces as well. The reasons for Hamlet speaking in metaphors is that he is angry about his death and feels the way to express himself is to revenge his father’s death. Dylan Thomas is speaking metaphorically to also express the grief of his father, and by repeating the word “rage” it shows his anger, and how strongly he feels about fighting against death. Ben Johnson similarly uses the language he does because he can not control his reaction and expresses the death of his son through anger.

A language feature used to describe death are semantic fields created by the authors. In Hamlet’s soliloquy the author creates a dark tone by using words such as “slings, arrows, whips, scorns and bodkin.” The choice of words has a negative connotations, showing he feels rage towards the deaths he has experienced. In Ben Johnson’s poem the word choice is the opposite “joy, soft, peace and love.” The difference is it makes a more tranquil atmosphere and shows that Ben Johnson has come to terms with death. Dylan Thomas is more similar to Hamlet in word choice as he uses “Burn, rage, dark and lightning” This is because it creates an atmosphere of anger that links with his emotions of the deaths he has experience shown through his semantic fields. The choice of words can be used to see how Dylan Thomas deals with the suffering of death by unleashing anger and fury. The different semantic fields are used to create different atmospheres which reflect the authors response to forces they can not control. Hamlet and Dylan Thomas create a very dark tone which shows that they can not deal with the deaths of their loved ones and are fighting against the idea of death. The reason that Ben Johnson uses more of a peaceful semantic field is that he can now accept death, and he has learnt that there is nothing he can do about it.

Another force that characters have to respond to is fate and supernatural which can be linked together. A similarity between all three texts is the use of iambic pentameter with some slight differences. In Hamlet there is a clear iambic pentameter structure through out the whole play. In Do not go gentle into that good night there is a deteriorating meter where the last line of each stanza has less syllables. Finally, On my first son is written in iambic pentameter. The rhythm of an iambic pentameter could symbolise the beat of the heart. This can be seen as a heart keeps on beating until death, so this can be interpreted as the underlying presence of destiny and fate, by weaving the presence of a heart beat it shows to audiences that all the pain the poets have experienced is due to fate and nothing can be done about it. However the difference with Dylan Thomas’s poem is that he deals with the force of fate with the will to break the chains of fate as he is defying the rules of the iambic pentameter which is defying fate. The other authors characters have acknowledged the idea of fate and are willing to accept it, but Dylan Thomas deals with it by fighting the force and not taking the option that fate presents in his case death. In terms of supernatural forces Hamlet is the only text where it is explored and woven in, alongside with fate. The example in Hamlet is “There is something rotten in the state of Denmark.” The quote itself does not show exactly how characters deal with forces they can not control, however the presence of supernatural elements foreshadows the later events that occur so the deaths, that lead to Hamlet questioning his fate. The metaphorical language is used for foreshadowing the future in the plot. The link to a supernatural presence can correspond with a divine entity who controls the characters fates, and therefore suggests that the characters have no choice. By the characters acknowledging the presence of the supernatural it helps understand their responses to the forces around them.

In Hamlet’s soliloquy he talks about his fate by saying “My fate cries out.” The use of personification shows Hamlet as though his fate is that bad and he is experiencing suffering that it is crying out. Also Hamlet describes his fate as “To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.” The character believes that his fortune or luck is so bad that are described to as being like slings and arrows. Hamlets response is to decide if it is more noble to suffer the pain or “to take arms against a sea of troubles”. The connotations of slings and arrows are projectile weapons showing that Hamlets fate is the cause to all his pain and suffering. In comparison to On my first Son there is a line where the poet has written “Seven years tho’ wert lent to me, and I thee pay, Exacted by fate on the just day.” The language feature here is metaphorical language as he is describing his son as being lent to him, and the years were paid, but fate had to take him away on the day he died. By using the word “lent” it shows that the author feels fate had given him a short period of time with his son and it was not enough for him. But he has still come to accept his fate. Both texts compared to Dylan Thomas’s response to fate, he uses the simile “Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay.” In this quote it shows the opposite to acceptance of fate as when people are near death it is almost though they are blind, and the heavens is only visible to that person. Another feature Dylan Thomas uses is repetition as he uses “rage, rage against the dying of the light.” The meaning is to fight against the light, so when death is near, also it is in this line that the iambic pentameter is broken. The difference is the other two texts show acceptance of fate where as in do not go gentle into that good night it is the defiance of fate, and also links in with the will of defying death. This shows that his response is to fight against fate, and make sure all his fibres in his body does not allow death to come easy.

In conclusion both Hamlet and On my good son feature similar ideas on responses to the force of fate, as they both have come to accepting it. This is shown through metaphorical language and the iambic pentameter to communicate different messages. However, Hamlet is more similar to the reaction of his father’s death creating semantic fields of anger, that is also a technique that Dylan Thomas used in his poem. Where as the difference in On my first son was that he created a more peaceful semantic field showing that he has come to accept the death of his son linking to the fact that he is also able to accept fate. Ultimately, no matter how the authors/characters react to the forces they can not control, whether they accept fate or not all three texts respond to death with the word “rage”, all creating semantic fields of anger. This suggests that no matter what all humans instinct is to respond to death with anger, and it is part of human nature.

Sep 21, 2015 - Communication    1 Comment

Now and then

There you stand in the cold silent night. You can see your wooden cabin in the distance; its hard for you to see in the night. Up in the mountains the moon hardly shines, a ghostly layer of clouds make it hard for you to see. As the night goes on it becomes colder, each breath you take hurts more than the last, like a poisonous fog. You wish to be inside, you imagine a warm soothing soup, drinking it would soften your throat. Tirelessly, you make your way through the deep snow. The fresh powdery snow crunches beneath your boots, each step sapping away at your store of precious energy. There are no lights up in the mountains, so you rely on the faint silver strands of moonlight, threads of light that weave through the clouds guiding you home. As you walk a stick lodged in the snow gets caught under your foot and you fall. The glacier of snow absorbs your fall, and it engulfs you.

Ten minutes pass resting in the snow. Now you begin to feel the cold, as it slowly creeps up your body, into your skin. There’s no sensation in your fingers other than numbness, you try to clench your fist but it almost seems frozen. Now you must get home. Though the night is silent, tranquil, predators lurk in the dark. Silent beasts of the night, this land belongs to them. The closer you are to home the acrid smell of burning wood fills your nose. Now the lights shine brighter, you know you are almost there. The thought of a kiss from the fire makes your cold, numb body work harder to move its legs through the snow. A few more steps. You are almost there.

Knock. Knock. As your mother opens the door, the heat escapes and lures you in. Quickly, you take your snow clothes of and approach the blazing fire. You hear a gentle crackle of flames, and the touch of fire pricks your skin with its warmth. At last you are home, warm and with family. You enjoy your hikes through the snow, they are pure experiences of solitude and nature, which relaxes your mind. Now it was time for you to sleep, and you go into your bed and cover yourself with the blanket, that protects you from the cold. The quiet thief that sneaks into your room at night and takes away the warmth from your body. Sleep overcomes your body, and you allow it to take over. Slowly, your mind dozes of into another realm.

You wake up to the piercing sound of a cockerel. As you get up you see the sun shining through clear blue sky. You take a deep breath of the thin crisp air of the mountains. People are already up, children are running, and the restaurants are full. Slowly, you put on some shorts and a blank t-shirt . When you leave the cabin you feel the sun’s power focusing on you, toasting your skin. A soft breeze brushes away some heat from your face. Emerald grass and bright blooming flowers cover the area. As you approach the restaurant you hear the subtle flow of water. You pick up a rock and throw it into the stream, as it falls it releases an array of hypnotizing ripples. The water is so clear and pure, you could drink from the stream. The sun rays reflect of the crystal water almost blinding. You look away. Carefully, you observe the wildlife, there are bees buzzing around you, and birds dipping in the water. You take another relaxing breath of air and move on.

You arrive at the restaurant, and you hear the traditional music, whilst the instruments overlap to create a beautiful sound. The drone of the ciftelia, and the soft deep melodies of the sharkia. People sing along to the song in delight, but the lyrics are unknown to you. As you approach your table you see that food is ready on the table. The scent slowly drifts into you nostrils, and you smell the flaky pastry of the pite, the sweet smell of hot chocolate. Now you feel more like at home. Look around. The atmosphere is so energetic; everybody around is happy. The music gradually turns to a soft sound in the background as you start eating. The pite crunches in your mouth, and you taste the delicious spinach filling, this brings your taste buds to life. You wash it down with a cool glass of water, in effort to cool your body. You drop the glass on the table, and it almost slips as your palms are so sweaty. Now you feel your whole body is becoming sweatier, and sweatier and your clothes begin to stick to your body like glue. You drop back into your seat, and in an instance your eyes close.

Dec 8, 2014 - Communication    3 Comments


He stepped onto the podium, and glared down at the piece of paper in front of him. Sweat trickled down his nose, he shook uncontrollably, but this man knew what he was going to say. He knew what he must say. “Next to of course god america i love you land of the pilgrims and so forth oh…” A gunshot broke the flow of silence. The man dropped dead with his words in his mouth.. He collapsed and dropped onto the ground, smashing the glass cup he was holding. The audience burst into cries and shouts. Several more shots were scattered across the thousands of members in the hall. Men and women dropped like flies, whilst attempting to flee from the terror. Blood seeped across the marble floor creating stripped patterns, like the white and red stripes of the great american flag.

It was going to be an important day for our country. America was a nation of actors and patriots, who talked about how great their country was. The worlds super power. But all that was going to change. Me and my three droogs geared up and loaded our guns with polyas. We had no objective, our only purpose was to wound America, and spill American blood, as they did to us. Slowly, I placed my Russian red balaclava on. It wasn’t cold.

There were a couple of hours left before we engraved our names into American history. I peered though a window, thousands of Americans entered the hall. A smile crept on my face. There was no security at an event like this. Then I remembered, security always walk through the top viewing area of the hall, and down the aisle. “Yebat! Both of you get under those tables now, security will walk through here any second now” Rapidly, I dived towards the door. I had my knife in my hand which trembled. We could not have failed, not after all the blood and sacrifice we went through to get there. Suddenly, the door creaked open. It sounded like a whole unit was out there. It was me and my knife, versus twenty armed officers. It was unfair, for them. One drunk officer walked, completely unnoticed us. Stealthily, I moved towards him and slit his throat, blood gushing out towards the wall. My droogs moved over and hid his body under a desk. Only one officer walked in, the rest had decided to take another route.

“Why are we doing this” Asked Dimitri, he was the youngest and did not fully understand the situation. He was simply forced into the duty. Without thinking I told him what I would have told my sons “America has killed our people, threatened us and most importantly they believe they are the most powerful nation on the planet and one that can not be touched. That needs to be changed. We do this for mother Russia” Dimitri nodded but I could see he was unsatisfied with my answer. “Its time” called Vladislav. The briefcase under my knees held the tool which I needed. I assembled the sniper and loaded it with only five polyas. We all had our guns prepared, but we thought we would not leave alive. My scope encircled my eye. I zoomed in on the speaker, and carefully observed him. He was the prey, and I was the predator who was going to devour him. As soon as he started speaking the man had already made a fool of himself. I let him embrace his last moment of life. Then I pulled the trigger…

Oct 7, 2014 - Communication    3 Comments

Letter to the editor (Belinda Webb’s article)

Belinda Webb’s article contained many astute points, which were logical and strongly supported her argument. The point which she made is that slang is creative and is a semi-private language, that others can use to communicate. Belinda Webb goes against modern views on slang; that it has negative connotations by embedding examples of slang such as Shakespeare’s neologisms in her writing. This creates an overall view that slang is a love of communication and it can be a unique way for people in local communities to speak their own modified version of “standard” English. One of the major points she expresses is that slang is a semi-private language, as people in communities have developed an informal way of communication, because it suits their lifestyle more therefore it becomes more personal. I agree with her point because teenagers in schools feel more secure speaking to their friends if they integrate slang into their speech as it gives them more freedom. However, to the older generation who are not used to these neologism as it is modernised English, can not simply understand their ideologies so refer to slang with negative connotations.

The article included good examples to support her view. “Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange with its Nadsat”. This is a good example, as it broadens the reader’s knowledge of colloquial language used in literary terms. Furthermore, using an author’s example of slang shows its efficiency and creativity. Authors are experts at language and if Anthony Burgess’s can get millions of readers to enjoy and understand his book, it shows that slang is interesting and can be integrated into “standard” English, making it even more unique. This suggests that slang is not overtaking the “standard” English language but it is being integrated in it as a form of modernisation.

Another example used in her writing was “…which makes them so nervy that they want to puke, which could be avoided if they stopped the slang assassination.” Belinda Webb uses Shakespeare’s neologisms to express that slang is not negative and should not be targeted upon, by using metaphorical language. Shakespeare was known as the innovator of slang and is one of the most studied authors of all time. Assassination and puke are considered to be “standard” English. They have now been integrated in modern language, so these words are not referred to as slang. By implying this she shows the audience that slang is used to build upon language. However, the word “assassination” connotes that todays English scholars disapprove of slang as they are trying to destroy it and remove it from our language completely. Some refer to slang having negative connotations, but in reality it does not destroy our language but enhances it. Language is always changing and is never constant, by using different dialects it means different groups of people can communicate with each other without a physical barrier of language.

One of the points she tries to get across to the reader is that dialects can be specific to local areas. She does this by using an example of localisation and how it links to slang. The example used is “…from the North will recognise nowt as not” It implies that specific dialects are developed in certain areas, and to them that is known as “standard” English. This builds upon the idea that slang or informal English can be very personal to certain districts, allowing people to communicate with each other freely and uniquely. Also, communities that have a strong cultural influence such as Turkish or Jamaican may include words from their own language to make it more personal for them, and again gives them that sense of freedom and personalisation. From my point of view integrating words from your own language is not a form of destruction as people in a friend group of similar culture will be able to communicate easier without a language barrier, but then change format and speak more “standard” English with others.

Reading this argument the point which stood out the most to me is that “Slang is a sophisticated attempt to communicate in a semi-private language”. The word sophisticated shows that slang is an intelligent way to communicate, and is contradicting the fact that the adult population believe slang to have negative connotations. Additionally, she uses the phrase “semi-private language”. She is implying that slang does not need to be universal, it is a language associated with a group or area of people. However, she does also state that “I am not saying slang is a substitute for “standard” English, but should be recognised and capitalised for what it is a love of communications…” I strongly agree with this as modern-day English is still the universal form of communication, but slang is personalisation and is a way for others to communicate with each other freely, sculpted from the building blocks of “standard” English.

Belinda Webb wrote a powerful article showing the benefits of slang. I strongly agree with her point, as slang is sophisticated and an attempt for the younger generation to represent their reality. Throughout her argument she uses many examples such as Shakespeare’s and Anthony Burgess’s neologisms, and uses those to create her own examples. She does not contradict her point in the argument, and provided logical explanations and reasoning which supported her point of view. The style of language she used was appropriate as “standard” English is the universal way of communicating formally. But, she changed dialect to prove her point; that slang is sophisticated and a love of communication.

May 10, 2016 - Communication    No Comments

Touching the Void quotes

53 – “As if, in some way, the nature of the game was controlling me taking me towards a logical but frightening conclusion”

The use of the game metaphor comes up when two climbers reach the Summit and it supports the idea that the risks of climbing come as a result of some kind of compulsion or addiction.

146 – “It looked like a Renaissance painting, in the Sistine Chapel, where the white bearded old man pointing his finger from the ceiling was supposed to be God.”

Comparing his hallucinations to that of a painting using similies. Talking about his hallucinations using a heavenly god like background shows that he may be having faith in God.

150 – “It was barren and lifeless; I hated the place for its cruelty, and for what it had made me do. I wondered whether I had murdered him.”

The author is speaking from the Simon’s point of view and is applying the adjective “murder” to Simon which indicates that he feels that his actions where purposeful and did cause Joe’s apparent death. Also it is personifying the mountain as an evil entity as he claims it was the reason for this all happening, so he blames the mountain for causing it all.

150 – “I spent a long time at the pool, cleaning my clothes and picking at the sunburn on my face. It was a peaceful cleansing ritual and my despair gradually faded as I mulled over the past few days.”

Simon feels guilty over the events which have occurred and the pool can symbolise washing the guilt of him as he is cleansing himself, and attempting to clean the guilt as he believes he killed Simon. Also the word “ritual” shows it is an important sequence he is doing linking with religion like he is washing his sins away.

183 – “Something huge and bloated wallowed in my chest, squeezing my throat and emptying my guts.”

181 – “When I stood up it seemed that I lifted a heavy weight with me, an almost solid feeling of dread that had crept through me, and I despaired of going on any further.”

Feb 21, 2016 - Communication    1 Comment

Journal entry “Dexter”

Dexter is a crime based series that revolves around the life of a man who may seem as normal in society but at night indulges in his addiction of murder. Dexter was traumatised at a young age seeing the bloody death of his mother, which may have left a bloody imprint on him turning him into the blood thirsty psychopath he is. Dexter lives with his wife and has two children but he is a very un-social character who appears to be acting to fit into society. Furthermore, he comes across as being very unusual to his colleagues at the Miami police department as he chose to work as a crime scene investigator, witnessing many murders a day, where he could have easily became a doctor. A long with that he has many other skills that suit the character of a criminal and hero; he lives to a moral code, is extremely disciplined and is a trained black belt in Ju Jitsu.

Dexter was excluded from society at a young age as he had a like for killing animals, which led him to killing his dog. His non biological father saw these strange occurrences and came up with a way for Dexter to channel his urges. Through more appropriate methods that would change society. Dexter’s father was the chief of police at the Miami police department, and with that came the burden of seeing many criminals escape the system, and get away with their horrible crimes. “These people deserve to die, Dexter.” So, the code was designed to release his urges of killing on other criminals, and some may see him doing a good thing in society. The director of the series portrays Dexters urges as another being known as “The dark passenger” who takes control over him and is the reason Dexter wants to kill. The addiction is similar to an addiction one may have to smoking or to drugs, they are dependent on it and experience withdrawal symptoms, as does Dexter when he has not taken a life in a while…

Now is Dexter the Protagonist or the Antagonist? It can be argued that he shares similar characteristics to the superheroes of the comic world such as Superman and Batman. Dexter gets rid of the bad guys in Miami, to which he follows a moral code on who fits that category to get rid of. But the means he does this is by killing the person instead of putting them behind bars. These characteristics suggest Dexter is more of an antihero. Even though Dexter is not killing people because he wants to do something good to some people it can be viewed that he is doing a positive thing by removing the criminals. The way Dexter kills his victims is different to that of a pure villain. It is more of a ritual and he takes care with it by rapping his victims in plastic. The actual ritual itself involves Dexter showing the victim all the crimes they have committed and then kills them by plunging a dagger in their heart or using other tools from his special collection. By him doing that it shows he has emotions and feels he has a purpose in society. At the end of a kill Dexter collects a blood sample from the victim and collects it as trophy which represents his lust for blood and each slide is a fragment of a memory in his mind of each kill, which he takes pleasure from. Furthermore, Dexter has had a tough child hood and was separated from society at a young age which is typically seen in antiheroes, whether it is a defect/deformity or unusual behaviour. Witnessing the death of his mother and being bullied in school, it is events like those, that perhaps have caused him to be the person he is.

Additionally, Dexter has a moral code as deciding to take another persons life is a choice that has severe consequences. The code states that he must never kill an innocent person, but may be able to kill people who deserve it (other criminals). It requires deep investigation before Dexter finally makes the choice to kill somebody, showing he takes the code seriously. But the fact that he has a moral code distinguishes him from the people he kills as a bad guy without a moral code is still a bad guy, but if a character can follow his own moral code it shows that he has boundaries and it means that the audience can understand him, otherwise the series would not have millions of people watching it.

Jan 18, 2016 - Communication    No Comments

Touching the void summaries

Chapter 1:
A mountaineering team have got together and are preparing an ascent to climb a mountain nobody has climbed before. In the beginning the mood is relaxed and everybody is joking around with each other. The team start to plan the routes they are going to take. However, even though the team feels very confident the narrator Joe has a suspicion of bad weather coming due to the heavy dark clouds. Joe and Simon set of for their first walk and end the night by settling in a comfortable snow hole in the mountain.

Chapter 2:
The two climbers wake up and Simon has maintained his happy mood but Joe is real starting to feel the cold. They set off and start climbing a ice cliff which presents many dangers such as hanging cornices and falling rocks. Whilst they are climbing they feel the adrenaline rush they came for but a group of rocks hurdle down towards them which they narrowly avoid. It begins to get dark and the two need to set up a Bivi but the terrain is harsh and the ice isn’t right to set up in the right spot.

Dec 7, 2015 - Communication    No Comments

Comparison of “Hamlet” and “Do not go gentle into that good night”

Do not go gentle into that good night is about the authors view on how death should be battled against and how he does not accept death willingly. The meter used is iambic pentameter which is the same as in Hamlet. However, the iambic pentameter degenerates in “Do not go gentle into that good night.” The first like contains ten syllables but from there the iambic pentameter degenerates. The iambic pentameter has a pattern of a heart beat that can’t symbolise a heart beat, representing life. In Hamlet the pentameter shows that death is inevitable and nobody has the power to stop it. However in the poem the iambic pentameter degenerating shows the idea of breaking the chains of being bounded by fate. It reinforces the idea of the first line as it means that there should be a struggle with death, do not go gentle into that good night, the good night symbolising death.

Dec 3, 2015 - Communication    No Comments

Comparison of “Hamlet” and “On my First Son”

Both the poem and the play share a common theme which is about the sufferings of life. For example in Hamlet the first line is “To be or not to be, that is the question.” Hamlet is contemplating the choice of living or to kill himself, because of all the suffering he is feeling. It is similar to “On my First Son” because the author talks about the suffering of the loss of his son as he says “My sin was too much hope of thee.” The poems share themes but are based on similar context to do with both authors sons. The background of Shakespeare is that he had a son which he lost early on in his life and he based the book on “Hamlet” who had a similar name to his son. Ben Johnson is talking about the death of his young son, who has also caused him a lot of suffering.

The poems show suffering because of the death of loved ones. However, in Hamlets soliloquy he is in agony because of the murder of his father, and the soliloquy has a very dark tone. “To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” is one of the lines Hamlet uses to describe his suffering. The metaphorical language compares his suffering to being like slings and arrows which connote projectile weapons. Hamlet describes his fate as “outrageous fortune”, so his fate is so shocking and bad. It suggests Hamlet feels helpless and he cannot do anything about it. This is similar to Ben Johnson’s language features as he personifies the world as having “Soon scap’d the worlds rage,” where he describes the world as being evil. But in “On my First Son” Ben Johnson uses a softer tone when describing his suffering such as “For why should man lament the state he should envy? To have soon scap’d world’s and flesh’s rage.” Ben Johnson is expressing his grief as being a state which he should envy as his son escaped the worlds suffering and the pain the world would have caused him. Also, the line “As what he loves may never like too much” shows that he thinks he could never love his son too much, and he promises to not love anything as much as his son. The two texts create different semantic fields with their choice of words as Hamlet uses words like “Die, whip, arrow, outrageous and bodkin” compared to “Joy, love, soft and peace”. The different selections of vocabulary shows how the authors feel towards the death they have suffered. Hamlet is angry as his father was killed by his uncle who has now married his mother, it is a very evil act. Ben Johnson lost his son at the age of seven and even though he experiences grief, he also knows that his son escaped the worlds “rage” and lived a happy life.

Iambic pentameter is used to communicate the language to the reader in both texts. The feature makes them both be read with fluency and are in an organised structure. The use of iambic pentameter can symbolise fate and that everything is bound to happen, as this is shown by the characters or author speaking with pattern and constantly saying each line with ten syllables. There is nothing they can do about their suffering as it is bound by fate and it is supposed to happen, nobody has the power to stop it.

Dec 2, 2015 - Communication    No Comments

On my First Son

Goodbye my child that has given me joy. My sin was that I loved you too much and for seven years you were with me and and now fate has taken you away on the day.
I want to abandon all thoughts of father hood. Why should I be sad for what most people envy. I would rather be in my sons position and escape this outrageous world. Rest in peace, “Here lies Ben Johnson the best thing I created.” Why did he have to die, I promise to never like anything as much as my son.

Nov 17, 2015 - Communication    No Comments

Comparison of Hamlet and Futile

In Hamlet, Shakespeare uses metaphors to express his distress towards life in his famous “to be or not to be” soliloquy. Here he debates the question of the choice whether to live or to die. Shakespeare give characters a three dimensional structure where Hamlet expresses his “Slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.” The language device suggests he is going through a lot of suffering as the connotations of slings and arrows are projectile weapons. Furthermore, the phrase “outrageous fortune” expresses Hamlets feeling towards how unlucky he feels that he is experiencing this suffering.

The poem futility shares a common theme with Hamlets soliloquy as they both discuss philosophical matters such as the choice of life or death, and why does life exist? “Are limbs so dear achieved, full nerves, still warm, too hard to stir?” In this quotation the author questions why the human body has been created, in the end just to die. In comparison the two share similar language features; metaphors in this example used to portray distress and suffering. It is questioned in futility “Was it this that the clay grew tall?” The metaphor suggest that the author thinks there is no point in life if all this suffering occurs. Human life is described to as clay, and the development of life “clay grew tall”.

Nov 10, 2015 - Communication    No Comments

Hamlet Analysis

Hamlet begins his soliloquy with the first line “to be, or not to be…” Hamlet is questioning his desire whether to live or to die. However, Hamlet doesn’t directly refer to himself or his choice as it is written in the passive tense, making the question appear more like a philosophical argument. Hamlet lists many sufferings of life through metaphors such as “slings and arrows” to express his “outrageous fortune.” The words “slings and arrows” have military connotations as they are projectile weapons, which represents Hamlets distress as he refers to his suffering as weapons being used to shoot him. Also the term “outrageous fortune” portrays how he feels he is unlucky, Hamlet feels as if nothing can be done about it. Hamlet questions his honour by asking himself if it is better to suffer the pains of life rather than killing himself. This broadens the audiences ideas on Hamlets philosophy and what is going on through his mind, that he is contemplating if he should live or die, and seems to be having a battle with himself. The soliloquy is an example where Shakespeare gives more depth to his characters by showing their ideology.

Another example where Hamlet poses a philosophical question about life is in another soliloquy where he says “What is a man if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed?” Again Hamlet does not directly refer to himself and expresses the question as a philosophical debate. The meaning of the line is what is a man if all he does with his time is to sleep and eat. The language device Shakespeare uses is a metaphor expressing the mans choice as “the market of his time”. The word “market” suggests the idea that there are a variety of choices that a man can do with his time, but Hamlet refers to sleeping and eating. This relates back to Shakespeare’s style where he develops his characters, making them more dimensional by expressing their deeper thoughts, and in Hamlets case through philosophical questions.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: