Character analysis-Arthur, Bob, and Charles

Arthur “Boo” Radley - A recluse who never sets foot outside his house, Boo dominates the imaginations of Jem, Scout, and Dill. He is a powerful symbol of goodness swathed in an initial shroud of creepiness, leaving little presents for Scout and Jem and emerging at an opportune moment to save the children. An intelligent child emotionally damaged by his cruel father. Boo provides an example of the threat that evil poses to innocence and goodness. He is one of the novel’s “mockingbirds,” a good person injured by the evil of mankind. Bob Ewell - A drunken, mostly unemployed member of Maycomb’s poorest family. In his knowingly wrongful accusation that Tom Robinson raped his daughter, Ewell represents the dark side of the South: ignorance, poverty, squalor, and hate-filled racial prejudice. Charles Baker “Dill” Harris - Jem and Scout’s summer neighbor and friend. Dill is a diminutive, confident boy with an active imagination. He becomes fascinated with Boo Radley and represents the perspective of childhood innocence throughout the novel.

Character analysis-Scout

Scout is a very unusual little girl both in her own qualities and in her social position. She is unusually smart, unusually confident (she fights boys without being scared!), thoughtful , and unusually good. In terms of her social identity, she is unusual for being a tomboy in the prim and proper Southern world of Maycomb. You will quickly find out when reading "To Kill a Mockingbird" that Scout is who she is because of the way Atticus has raised her. He has nurtured her mind, conscience, and individuality without bogging her down in fussy social hypocrisies and notions of propriety. While most girls in Scout’s position would be wearing dresses and learning manners, Scout thanks to Atticus’s hands-off parenting style, wears overalls and learns to climb trees with Jem and Dill. She does not always grasp social niceties, and human behavior often baffles her (as when one of her teachers criticizes Hitler’s prejudice against Jews while indulging in her own prejudice against blacks that doesn't make sense to her).

How to kill a mockingbird book analysis

The book To Kill A Mockingbird is a story about innocence, courage and knowledge . In the beginning the main character Scout starts out to be a very immature child not knowing the racist times around her. As the story goes on she gains knowledge of these times by fellow kids around her accusing her dad of being something he's not it was an insult. Her dad was being courageous of a black man being faulsey accused of raping a white girl. Her dad Atticus is a crimnal defense attorney only doing his job and not discriminating against this man. The line in the book "Shoot, all the bluejays you want, but remember its a sin to kill mockingbird" is referring to the black man in the story named Tom. He symbolises a mockingbird because all mockingbirds do is sing for our enjoyment and stay out of harms way so if you kill them its a sin. He is the mockingbird in the book and all he does is stay out of harms way and is accused of a crime and in the end is eventually guilty and dies.

MId-Summer Night's Dream Question #6

          In the play "A Mid-Summers Night's Dream" there are four young lovers Lysander,Demetrius,Helena, and Hermia. Some critics have suggested that the are indistinguishable meaning they are the same(or very similar). I do not think that they are all the same though.They may be similar but i think the differences out weigh the similarities. In the beginnings of the play Egeus is talking to Theseus about Hermia not loving Demetrius like her father wanted her to do. Hermia wanted to get married to Lysander her one true love and he loved her back. Demetrius was in love with Hermia as well but she did not like him at all! Helena was jealous of Hermia because Demetrius loved Hermia not her. She loves Demetrius but he hates her with a passion.
          So now that you have read who loves who and who hates who you probably think that they are all similar? Well there not they have so many differences. First of all Lysander and Demetrius may both love Hermia that's true but Hermia only loves one of them back, Lysander. Helena loves Demetrius but he doesn't love her she doesn't share qualities with any of the other characters. She is bigger than Hermia cause in the play she calls Hermia a dwarf. Nobody is in love with her (until later in the play). The characters are not the same the only time they are at most similar is when a magical spell is put on them. They are both couples and both in love with someone. But the true similarities should be judged based on their true selves not on them after a spell. If you tried to put Helena as Hermia's role it wouldn't work our because Helena is described as having long legs and tall where as Hermia is short like a dwarf. 
          In the group of lovers i personally liked Hermia the best because they made her out to be the prettiest and the most fairest in Athens. Helena is not compared to Hermia says Lysander and Demetrius before they are put on a spell. But that is just my opinion. So in conclusion they are similar in some ways but are different in more meaningful ways. The only thing similar about Hermia and Helena is that their names start with the same letter. If you think they are the same based on that then I don't know what to tell you...

Which World Is worse?

In my opinion i think 1984 is more ominous then Brave New World. For instance in 1984 you are always being watched so whatever you do they see...They will then come in the night take you away to the ministry to be investigated. They torture you until you confess then...you die. I'm pretty sure in Brave New World you don't get tortured to confess to something. Also in 1984 when you have kids they will join the spies most likely. The only thing wrong with this is that if they overhear you talking rebellious then they will turn you in to the thought police. Then just like i said before they torture you until you confess, then you die.In Brave New World bad things may happen but then the people will just take some soma to forget about it. This may be scary to some of you but if your looking in the view point of the people it isn't scary cause you can just forget everything that is scary. In Brave New World did you ever read about when the kids would turn their parents in to the police? If you did then reread the book cause they don't have parents! So they cant turn them in. In my opinion i think my kids turning me into the police would be scary cause you think you know them well and yall love each other then....BAM!The police are at your door and the kid gets a medal for turning in a traitor. Another reason may be that in 1984 the government is telling you that everything is okay. But in reality there are wars going on, people disappearing, even kids turning in their own parents. Now does that seem okay to you?

A World Without Media

World Without Media

By:Hawkin Nedoff

A world without media would not be safer and improved.  We would live with danger,questions, and the rest of the world would be a mystery to us.  Media can include TV, Newspaper articles, the radio, or even a poster with some information.  These things all give us information about what's new and happening in our society today.

My first reason is that if anything bad is about to happen we wouldn’t know unless someone calls calls us or comes and talks to  us in person before it happened. Like if another terrorist attack happens like on 9-11, we wouldn't know about it  until about a hour or so after it already happened. The dangers of us finding out late could be like if a terrorist attack was happening how would we know to get to safety if they were planning another one. We would have to rely on someone else to tell  us what happened and we all know that people can be forgetful or might not remember it correctly so we either couldn't get the information. Or we would get false information leading us to believe something not true. Or if the world is “going to end” how would we know if a meteor is about to hit the earth and we need to take cover? Certainly not by the radio or TV because there would be no media to tell us about it.

As you probably know there was a shooting in Connecticut at Sandy Cook Elementary, twenty children and six adults were killed. Now when you heard about this how did you find out? TV? Newspaper? Radio? From a friend?Even if you heard it from a friend where do you think they heard it from? Most likely the news or something. Point is that in a world with media influence we wouldn’t have heard about this tragic event. We may have just found out about like a week later because media influence would not have been involved to spread the news. It could be dangerous because how would the other school around that area know to get to safety? There might have been another shooter that is going to a different school while his buddy was at sandy cook . The media could inform other schools to go in lock down until it has been taken care of. If you think about it almost everyone watches TV and they will flip to a channel with some crazy  news that just happened. But in the world without media we wouldn’t have commercials to tell us the latest news or newspapers.

Another example maybe not as important as the others but when you wanna go see a movie you wouldn't know what movie is in theatres. Normally you would see the commercials for the movies and when they will be coming out or you could drive past the theatre and see the posters for movies. But in a world without media those things wouldn’t exist. Say you were going to see the Hobbit and when you got in the theatre there were no commercials in the beginning of the show. You won’t know what movies will be coming out so not any of that other stuff they  tell you.

Also not mentioned in my essay is that without media the advertisement would be horrible. It would be nearly impossible for someone to start a new business because they wouldn't be able to put up a sign to tell what the business is. So people wont come to the store turning the whole thing into a loss of money.So hopefully now you see a world without media influence would not be a  safer and improved world to live in. Like it says in my previous  paragraphs we will not know when danger comes, or we won't know the major events happening or we might miss a good movie that comes out. No Advertisement would not be a boon to mankind we would  have a bunch of people being confused and not knowing what’s going on.

Finnik Odair summary

Finnik in the Catching Fire book was a very important character. He was from district 4 (fishing) and was a victor at age 14. He is a very attractive man and that's how he won the hunger games. He didn't ask for weapons,food, medicine, or anything but during the game he got a trident which basically meant the games were over because he dominated after that! Katniss says that was the most expensive gift she has ever seen in the Hunger Games. He teams with Katniss and Peeta in the 75th Hunger Games. The cornucopia he finds 2 tridents and covers for Katniss to get the bow and arrows. Now they both have their weapons so they will be pretty amazing out there. But Katniss still doesn't trust him so to try and prove it he swam to get Peeta and bring him to land. Even though Katniss doesn't trust him throughout the book he still is a important character that helped save Katniss's life during the games.