Sterling's Online Journal

Harper Lee’s TKAM: how does Lee presents attitude to the Radley family

 Question 1: At the end of the summer, Jem, Scout, and Dill are bored and turn their thoughts to the mysterious Radley place, down the block from the Finch house. The Radley house is said to contain a “malevolent phantom” by the name of Boo Radley. Though the children have never seen him, rumors abound that he is over six feet tall, has rotten yellow teeth, popping eyes and a drool, and eats raw animals. Whenever strange things happen in the neighborhood, Boo is often blamed. Boo’s story is an extension of the strange Radley family, who have always disregarded local custom by “keeping to themselves.” Prior to his death, Mr. Radley, Boo’s father, had only been seen on his daily trip to collect groceries from 11:30am-12pm, and the family worshipped together in their own home on Sundays. Their youngest son, Arthur, who the children call Boo, apparently mixed with “the wrong crowd,” a gang of boys who were finally arrested and brought to court after driving an old car through the town square and locking Macomb’s beadle in an outhouse. Though the other boys were sent to industrial school for punishment, and ironically received excellent educations, Arthur Radley’s family preferred to keep him hidden inside the home. After fifteen years living at home, the thirty-three-year-old Boo is rumored to have stabbed his father in the leg with a pair of scissors and then quietly continued about his business of cutting out newspaper articles. Refusing to permit his son to be deemed insane or charged with criminal behavior, Mr. Radley allowed Boo to be locked up in the courthouse basement: “the sheriff hadn’t the heart to put him in jail alongside Negroes”. Boo was eventually brought back to the Radley home. After Mr. Radley’s death, his older brother Nathan arrived to continue to watch over Boo and keep him inside and out of sight.

The poem: The British, What does it mean to be british?

I beleive that what Benjamin is trying to say is that this country was never one race, he talking about how much of London is some sort of multicultural smoothie. He is then near the end, talkin about how important it is to keep in balance

1. How does yellow palms show how conflict is affected in Palestine street?

•As the narrator is walking down this road he is looking at the things thats going on as he moves down first he sees a funeral happening, he has described the funeral to have quite a descent budget with a coffin made of glass. But then he says that he has died by inhaling poisonous gas, this is to show that some sort of warfare is happening around Palestine street.

How are love and Hate portrayed in Julius Caesar & Porphyria’s Lover?

Shakespeare shows us that love and hate are used together. Brutus’s decision to stab Caesar in the back isn’t Was what I believe, a difficult choice for Brutus. He has to choose between his loyalty to Rome and his loyalty to his friend, who seems like he could become a tyrant if he becomes king. When Brutus hears how the commoners are treating Caesar like a king already. he’s worried for Rome.

Brutus’s Speach                                                                                                                                                           ‘Friends Roman countrymen lend me your ears I come to bury Caesar not to praise him’. this is signifying that he has made a huge sacrifice by not only killing Caesar himself but telling the people of Rome that he did it for Rome.

‘there was a Brutus once that would have brook’d Th-eternal devil to keep his state in Rome As easy as a King’. this is showing that Brutus was once treated like a king or was around that status this could also be a way of Cassius trying to make Brutus feel as great as Caesar and make him want to go through his actions of killing Caesar. Cassius also asks Brutus to love him like a friend ‘you bare to stubborn and to strange a hand over your friend that loves you

“And this man is now become a god, and Cassius is A wretched creature and must bend his body If Caesar carelessly but nod on him”. The way Cassius is talking about himself is as if he is distancing himself from himself,it seems that he’s trying to get someone to take pity on him by saying that he’s some sort of odd creature. this implies that he is envious of Caesar and that he wishes that he had such power that Caesar has. Cassius is ambitious for power,’men at sometimes are masters of their fate the fault is not in our stars but in our selves.’He also manipulates the friendship of most of the people around him to obtain power. ‘I see thy honourable metal may be wrought’ this metaphor is showing that Cassius believe that he can do what ever he wants. ‘who so firm that cannot be seduced’,

Within  Porphyria’s Lover, Robert Browning shows love as something to be feared in this dramatic monologue. In the start of the poem, the speaker goes out of his way to describe the setting.  We are told: ‘the sullen wind was soon awake it tore the elm tops down for spite and did its worst to vex the lake.’ in this Browning personifies hate by describing the weather with word such as tore, spite and vex which could be used to describe how he is feeling in the story. The words used for hate are very viscous  and aggressive, this is showing the point of view of someone who can watch from a distance and actually see what it’s doing .  Love is seen as very warm and romantic. In this monologue love is said to describe a woman by the name of Porphyria who has blonde hair and blue eyes.

Seduction is shown in Porphyria’s lover by; ‘made her smooth white shoulder bare…. murmuring how she loved me’ the narrator describes Porphyria to be seductive towards him,That moment she was mine, mine, fair, perfectly pure and good: I found A thing to do, and all her hair In one long yellow string I wound Three times her little throat around, And strangled her. No pain felt she; then he kills her using her own hair as a weapon to strangle her he thinks of her as a possession rather than a human being   gains possession of her by killing her ‘that moment she was mine, mine, fair, perfectly pure and good:’ no guilt is shown by killing her as the narrator insists that she didn’t feel any at all even though he’s just tackled her to the floor and strangles her with her own hair. I believe that this action shows that he is a little unhinged, then after she’s dead he looks to god to see whether its right or wrong  “And all night long we have not stirred,  And yet God has not said a word!” this shows us that he has true faith in god and will only perform an action if god approves

there was a Brutus once that would have brook’d Th-eternal devil to keep his state in Rome As easy as a King

“Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him”.
Quote (Act III, Scene  II).

“But, for my own part, it was Greek to me”. Julius  Caesar Quote (Act I, Scene II).

Shakespeare shows us that love and hate are used together. Brutus’s decision to stab Caesar in the back isn’t Was what I believe, a difficult choice for Brutus. He has to choose between his loyalty to Rome and his loyalty to his friend, who seems like he could become a tyrant if he becomes king. When Brutus hears how the commoners are treating Caesar like a king already. he’s worried for Rome.

Even though Brutus loves Caesar well, he also fears that his friend will be crowned king, which goes against the ideals of Rome

After killing Caesar and washing his hands in his blood, Brutus defends his actions:

If there be any in this assembly, any dear
friend of Caesar’s, to him I say that Brutus’ love
to Caesar was no less than his. If then that friend
demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my
answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved
Rome more.

Within  Porphyria’s Lover, Robert Browning shows love as something to be feared in this dramatic monologue. In the start of the poem, the speaker goes out of his way to describe the setting.  We are told ‘the sullen wind was soon awake it tore the elm tops down for spite and did its worst to vex the lake.’ in this Browning personifies hate by describing the weather with word such as tore, spite and vex which could be used to describe how he is feeling in the story.  but has used love in a way that he can’t handle. The words used for hate are very viscous  and aggressive, this is showing the point of view of someone who can watch from a distance and actually see what it’s doing . Love is seen as very warm and romantic. In this monologue love is said to describe a woman by the name of Porphyria who has blonde hair and blue eyes. This love doesn’t last long because it slowly develops into a more strange form of love this is because he uses her hair to strangle her to death.

Julius Caesar                                                                                                                                                                                                            BRUTUS :It must be by his death, and for my part I know no personal cause to spurn at him But for the general. He would be crowned. How that might change his nature, there’s the question. It is the bright day that brings forth the adder And that craves wary walking. Crown him that,And then I grant we put a sting in him That at his will he may do danger with.                             Act 2 Scene 1

Dear John Humphrys,

I have read your article in the Daily Mail and I am completely against your point of view. I believe that your idea of text messages ruining the English language is false. The English language isn’t being ruined by technology; how can you argue that a powerful new form of communication can ruin a language? What you should really be saying is that language is being ruined by the people in possession of these devices. This opinion is also false. Technology crosses all sorts of geographical and physical barriers: it gives you the opportunity to never miss-spell anything again with auto-correct: there is now predictive text which speeds communication massively you can communicate in real-time, whereas in the past you would have to wait for a couple of days to receive a letter (or a week to receive one by pigeon).

You say you don’t like the way  technology is moving: ‘my own outgoing messages asks callers to be very brief, ideally just name and number, but that doesn’t stop some callers burbling on for ten minutes and always, always ending by saying: “Ooh sorry I went on for so long!”‘. As far as voice mail is concerned, I don’t really know anyone apart from my grandmother who uses it – it’s certainly not a common thing for me to receive, in fact I can’t remember the last time I have received one. The reason why people don’t use it is probably because it’s a lot easier to just send a text message rather than send a voicemail that you can barely understand. As for emojis, I can’t really remember the last person who has used one for a serious reason; they’re a way of having fun texting someone a message instead of typing plain black text.

‘It is the relentless onward march of the ‘texters’, the SMS (short message service) vandals who are doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his to his neighbours eight hundred years ago’. I think that your views here are very old-fashioned. It seems that you could have more in common with Genghis Khan: “It began with some fairly obvious and relatively inoffensive abbreviations: ‘tks’ for ‘thanks’; ‘u’ for ‘you’; 4 for ‘for'”. You are so out of touch, and when it comes to abbreviated words you are extremely out of date. No one uses ‘tks’ for thanks or ‘4’ for four. You cannot exactly criticise the ‘SMS vandals’ for using abbreviations, when you yourself are an employee of the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). No one really wants to say that when it’s such a mouthful, so what’s the problem with SMS? Abbreviations like these are easier to say and less longwinded   (sorry long-winded) – unlike your article. You describe searching through a paperback OED (Oxford English Dictionary) as a “voyage of discovery”. But online dictionaries are so much quicker. Looking up a word online gives a really fast response, plus you can discover more about a word e.g multiple definitions and the history of that word; not only can you find out more about it, you can learn that word in multiple languages and their origins.

‘It is interesting in a masochistic sort of way, to look at how text language has changed over the years’. I don’t understand that you have the need to point this out. The English language owes a great debt to Shakespeare. The words that you are using are extremely over exaggerated; with words like ‘masochistic’ and ‘grotesque’ you are putting (who I guess is your hero) William Shakespeare’s innovative use of language to shame. In his time he invented over 1700 new words ranging from ‘amazement’ to ‘worthless’. He played around with language and broke all grammar rules by changing nouns into verbs, joining words together and making up completely new ones. Surely what everyone enjoys about language is that it is constantly changing? What you are doing, John, is trying to preserve it forever and in the end that would kill it.

Urs Sterling Oldroyd

On 6 July 2005, the International Olympic Committee named London as the host for the Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games in 2012. The regeneration of the Lower Lea Valley, a deprived part of East London, was an important part of the London bid for the games. Urban regeneration has been a significant element in previously successful Olympic bids and in the planning for other major sporting events, such as the Commonwealth Games in Manchester in 2002. It is hoped that the very high level of investment for the games will set off a positive chain of cumulative causation, bringing permanently higher living standards to the area.

‘The London Games in 2012 will be far more than just a four week festival of sport. They will be quite simply the most sustainable ever – leaving a lasting legacy of jobs, homes and environmental improvements for East London, London and Britain’.
Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London.

‘The Games will lift our international profile, attract inward investment and boost profits and jobs for everyone’.
Sir Digby Jones, Director General of the Confederation of British Industry.

The use of torture is necessary to protect lives. Argue for or against this statement.

I am opposed to the idea of torture. I believe that imprisonment of terrorists is reasonable, for they have posed a threat to society, but the idea of hurting them shouldn’t be allowed. In fact there has already been a law created that prevents this from happening. In 1949 the Geneva Convention banned the use of “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture”. I think that torturing terrorists is the wrong thing to do, but in extreme scenarios it may justifiably be used in order to ensure safety to the public.

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not approve torture.”No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The United Nations Convention Against Torture bans torture of all civilians, combatants, prisoners of war and terrorists alike. This is an unambiguous piece of international law, which forbids the use of torture in all circumstances; this includes the ‘exceptional ticking time-bomb’ scenario. Although the Geneva Conventions don’t explicitly ban the torture of terrorists because they are not parties to a state, the Convention Against Torture does protect terrorists.

In a ‘ticking time-bomb scenario’ there is a bomb that will detonate in a public area somewhere very soon. The person who planted the bomb is the only one who knows its whereabouts. That person should be held by the police/intelligence services. The interrogators have overwhelming evidence to believe that they have the right man. They can check anything he says to see if he is lying, because of the other intelligence they have gathered. However, he is refusing to disclose the location of the bomb under interrogation.The three reasons torture is justified in this scenario are firstly that there is a specific time pressure and the knowledge that there is no other possible to way to retrieve the information. Secondly, on a utilitarian calculus, the benefits to many outweigh the cost to one man. Thirdly, because the man is strongly assumed to be guilty, he/she deserves punishment anyway for his/her actions.

This sort of scenario can be replicated in books, films and video games.  In the game, Metal Gear Solid V: Phantom Pain, the main character Snake is witness to the use of torture to get information to eventually save the world. This ends up showing the true colours of the characters torturing members of private militias. When you play, you can see whether these men who are torturing these people have a valid reason why they should do it or not. Whilst you play through this game you may end up picking a side between the two men who are put in charge of this form of torture. They both feel differently about the same problems they’re up against. In the end you have to make the call. The gamer must decide whether this is the correct thing to do in this development of events. I believe the decision that the player makes should be reasonable because of the upper hand the opposing group have; this game mirrors in an interesting and challenging way what making the decision of torture would be in real life to a civilian.

However, seeing as this has to be in my opinion I think that the laws that have been made are the correct ones. In one hand, terrorists shouldn’t be tortured because of the fact that they could be pressured into committing terrorist acts. In the other hand, I do believe that this could be the only way to prevent acts of terrorism. I don’t know what to choose and I don’t want to play god in choosing whether to kill/torture terrorists.

I think that shakespeare has made Brutus out to not live up to his name. Brutus wants to kill Ceaser

One-shot finch

This is implying that he was a ledgend with a god given ability that his children have never seen or heard of. He i think that he hid his marksmanship skill because of maybe a choice he had to make in the past and has been trying to forget it and that’s why I think he has kept it a secret