Instead of trying to think of some witty introduction to start this post, I'm going to go ahead and say that yes, it's important to love your job. Or enjoy it, at least, if you find it hard to commit. To love, I mean.
Anyway, I would have to say that I pity the people that don't like their jobs. I hope that they were forced into that job, rather than making the decision to go with it. Being flexible isn't bad, but at least have the courage to back out of something you hate. You won't be judged. I had a 60% average in Math Principals 11, but you don't see me saying, "I'M GOING TO BE A MATHEMATICIAN! I'M GOING TO CHANGE THE WORLD USING MATH! YEAH!"
If I said that, I know I would be dooming myself to a dreadful life full of tearful nights.
Alright, went a bit off topic there.
For the sake of people's sanity and tempers, I'd have to say enjoying your job is something that is vital in life.
As of now, I am confused out of my MIND trying to think of what I want to do with my life. I don't want to end up miserable. What if I choose a path where you can't back out? Yeah, that would suck.
I don't even want to list the jobs I have in mind because I know whoever will read this will go, "Pffft. Her? Being THAT? Yeah right. She'll end up on the streets if she goes with that." So I'm just going to say that I'm being very flexible with my options, and when I go to my high school reunion I will proudly say, "Hey, sup, sup sippie cup. Whuddup. I love my job, yo." (Just kidding; I'll say it like a normal person.)
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Pieces of the Puzzle - The Glass Castle
"I began to feel like I was getting the whole story for the first time, that I was being handed the missing pieces tothe puzzle, and the world was making a little more sense." (Walls, page 205)
It is almost laughable how analogous this statement is to past event in my life. When my father was diagnosed with cancer, it was, of course, kept a secret from me. I was ten years old, so it was understandably assumed that I would not be able to handle the unimaginable: death of a family member.
For my parents' sake, I think their plans of telling me at a later date were in vain; my older sister didn't have a normal twelve-year-old IQ, and she had the whole situation figured out in seconds. Naturally, Holly understood where my parents were coming from and only hinted to me the truth - me, with my horribly underdeveloped brain.
But when I was "handed the missing pieces of the puzzle," the "world [definitely started] making a little more sense." I was devastated that my father was ill, but I had mixed feelings. I felt naive, lied to and fragile - as if I could easily be broken and therefore had no right to be told the truth. And if anything, this thought changed me. I became suspicious and I found it hard to believe anything that my parents told me. I was always thinking, "is there more to this than what they're telling me?"
I can confidently say that I completely undertsood what Jeannette was feeling. Though I did feel lied to, fragile, and all of those other mixed emotions, I began to understand the world a bit better. I became more mature, and I understood that from this point on in my life, I would have to grow up. I would have to look after myself and my sister, and in the end, it would only be the two of us that had one another. In The Glass Castle, this scene allows Jeannette to go under a considerable change; from that point on, she too grew up.
I am not saying that my parents are like Jeannette's, and for that, I'm grateful. What I am saying, however, is that this scene in the book made me realize - everyone can relate to Jeannette. Everyone has been lied to; though it may have been something simple, when you finally grasp the truth it changes you. It may be a positive change, or it may be a negative change. We may not have a disfunctional family like Jeannette, but we all have lied, kept secrets, and have been lied to. In the end, it's really just a vicious cycle.
It is almost laughable how analogous this statement is to past event in my life. When my father was diagnosed with cancer, it was, of course, kept a secret from me. I was ten years old, so it was understandably assumed that I would not be able to handle the unimaginable: death of a family member.
For my parents' sake, I think their plans of telling me at a later date were in vain; my older sister didn't have a normal twelve-year-old IQ, and she had the whole situation figured out in seconds. Naturally, Holly understood where my parents were coming from and only hinted to me the truth - me, with my horribly underdeveloped brain.
But when I was "handed the missing pieces of the puzzle," the "world [definitely started] making a little more sense." I was devastated that my father was ill, but I had mixed feelings. I felt naive, lied to and fragile - as if I could easily be broken and therefore had no right to be told the truth. And if anything, this thought changed me. I became suspicious and I found it hard to believe anything that my parents told me. I was always thinking, "is there more to this than what they're telling me?"
I can confidently say that I completely undertsood what Jeannette was feeling. Though I did feel lied to, fragile, and all of those other mixed emotions, I began to understand the world a bit better. I became more mature, and I understood that from this point on in my life, I would have to grow up. I would have to look after myself and my sister, and in the end, it would only be the two of us that had one another. In The Glass Castle, this scene allows Jeannette to go under a considerable change; from that point on, she too grew up.
I am not saying that my parents are like Jeannette's, and for that, I'm grateful. What I am saying, however, is that this scene in the book made me realize - everyone can relate to Jeannette. Everyone has been lied to; though it may have been something simple, when you finally grasp the truth it changes you. It may be a positive change, or it may be a negative change. We may not have a disfunctional family like Jeannette, but we all have lied, kept secrets, and have been lied to. In the end, it's really just a vicious cycle.
Friday, October 9, 2009
What Am I Thankful For...?
Have you ever read a book that made you considerably thankful for what you have? I think many of us have, so now that we're on the same page, let me introduce a book to you. I'm going to tie the book into a few of my own personal experiences, as well. That way, I can feel that this blog will be understood in more depth.
What I first noticed about The Glass Castle (written by Jeanette Halls) is that the children seemed to be brainwashed into thinking that the life they have - constant moving, irresponsible actions from their parents, sleeping in boxes and starving for days upon end - is acceptable. It's as if the parents have told their children from time to time that everything they're doing is okay - just to cover up for their recklessness. This was hard to understand at first, because growing up, my parents were responsible. They both held very respectable jobs for the government and they were always careful for money. I always felt that their number one priority was my sister and I: they were always so good to us in the form of feeding us, clothing us and giving us a beautiful home to live in. They took us on trips and they always drove us places that we needed to go. We were able to see our friends and have them over, or stay with him. When our friends stayed at our home, my parents were always very thoughtful and treated them as if they were one of their own.
I couldn't believe what I was reading when I came to the part in the novel where the mother and father had put their own children in the back of the U-haul. My family and I rented a U-haul once. Where did I sit? In the comfortable seat in our van beside my sister. There was no huddling in the back of the U-haul, fearing for my life if the doors flew open. Sure, I worried over the fact that the doors would open of the trailer, but only because I didn't want our stuff to fall out.
The next appalling thing I came across in the book was how the parents swear - and, in an almost encouraging way - is how the mother and father allow the children to swear. My mother always, always gets mad at me if I say an inappropriate word. Seriously.
Though things went downhill with my family and I no longer speak to my father, what I am most thankful for in my life is my mother and sister. They are both rolemodels to me. They also both supported me (and continue to do so) in the darkest of times. My mother is a strong woman who doesn't let things bother her. Whenever someone would send a negative comment or insult her way, it's as if I can actually see the negativity ricochet off of her. My mom is also good to me in so many other ways - driving me places I need to go (she drove me to Westbank to get an Xbox 360 after Christmas because they didn't have any in stock in Penticton), as well as supporting me financially.
My sister is intelligent. Growing up, I can always remember my dad praising her for her outstanding work in school. (I was always making lousy marks.) I can remember them having in-depth conversations about something I didn't have the slightest clue about. I watched her apply for student loans, which required filling out a long and complicated form. Half of the words I didn't even understand, and I admired how grown up my sister has become.
In the novel, though the siblings play together, I can't really sense any close affection towards them. Jeanette admires her father, while Brian and Lori do not. Brian, under his breath, speaks of how his father has let him down on countless occasions. Lori took lashings from her mother so other children wouldn't be upset with her.
It seems that the love that is shown in this novel is fake; though there is appreciation towards others at times, no one really feels affection for the other. The children appear to be embarrassed of their parents, but they dutifully act "fake" or like "real children" in order to shield their parents from the public's eye. Is this right? Is this really an acceptable family?
I am so grateful to have a loving mother and sister, that I would seriously go to the ends of the Earth for them. I feel like that I haven't given to them in the ways they have to me. I feel as if they are too good to me. It may sound selfish, but I am entirely grateful that I do not live the life that Jeanette did. There have been hard parts in my life, but they were short, and they weren't my whole childhood.
What I first noticed about The Glass Castle (written by Jeanette Halls) is that the children seemed to be brainwashed into thinking that the life they have - constant moving, irresponsible actions from their parents, sleeping in boxes and starving for days upon end - is acceptable. It's as if the parents have told their children from time to time that everything they're doing is okay - just to cover up for their recklessness. This was hard to understand at first, because growing up, my parents were responsible. They both held very respectable jobs for the government and they were always careful for money. I always felt that their number one priority was my sister and I: they were always so good to us in the form of feeding us, clothing us and giving us a beautiful home to live in. They took us on trips and they always drove us places that we needed to go. We were able to see our friends and have them over, or stay with him. When our friends stayed at our home, my parents were always very thoughtful and treated them as if they were one of their own.
I couldn't believe what I was reading when I came to the part in the novel where the mother and father had put their own children in the back of the U-haul. My family and I rented a U-haul once. Where did I sit? In the comfortable seat in our van beside my sister. There was no huddling in the back of the U-haul, fearing for my life if the doors flew open. Sure, I worried over the fact that the doors would open of the trailer, but only because I didn't want our stuff to fall out.
The next appalling thing I came across in the book was how the parents swear - and, in an almost encouraging way - is how the mother and father allow the children to swear. My mother always, always gets mad at me if I say an inappropriate word. Seriously.
Though things went downhill with my family and I no longer speak to my father, what I am most thankful for in my life is my mother and sister. They are both rolemodels to me. They also both supported me (and continue to do so) in the darkest of times. My mother is a strong woman who doesn't let things bother her. Whenever someone would send a negative comment or insult her way, it's as if I can actually see the negativity ricochet off of her. My mom is also good to me in so many other ways - driving me places I need to go (she drove me to Westbank to get an Xbox 360 after Christmas because they didn't have any in stock in Penticton), as well as supporting me financially.
My sister is intelligent. Growing up, I can always remember my dad praising her for her outstanding work in school. (I was always making lousy marks.) I can remember them having in-depth conversations about something I didn't have the slightest clue about. I watched her apply for student loans, which required filling out a long and complicated form. Half of the words I didn't even understand, and I admired how grown up my sister has become.
In the novel, though the siblings play together, I can't really sense any close affection towards them. Jeanette admires her father, while Brian and Lori do not. Brian, under his breath, speaks of how his father has let him down on countless occasions. Lori took lashings from her mother so other children wouldn't be upset with her.
It seems that the love that is shown in this novel is fake; though there is appreciation towards others at times, no one really feels affection for the other. The children appear to be embarrassed of their parents, but they dutifully act "fake" or like "real children" in order to shield their parents from the public's eye. Is this right? Is this really an acceptable family?
I am so grateful to have a loving mother and sister, that I would seriously go to the ends of the Earth for them. I feel like that I haven't given to them in the ways they have to me. I feel as if they are too good to me. It may sound selfish, but I am entirely grateful that I do not live the life that Jeanette did. There have been hard parts in my life, but they were short, and they weren't my whole childhood.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Unraveling an Appalling Secret
It was definitely a deplorable ending to "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson. Who knew that the small town of three hundred, all approaching each other with 'good mornings', talking of gossip and "speaking of planting and rain, tractors and taxes" (Jackson, page 227)could abruptly turn on each other and stone to death the one that pulls the black dot from the box?
I have to admit: I have seen this before, in the movie "The Wicker Man" and the book "The Kite Runner" by Khaled Hosseini.
I have to admit: I have seen this before, in the movie "The Wicker Man" and the book "The Kite Runner" by Khaled Hosseini.
The film "The Wicker Man" conveys the same sort of idea that "The Lottery" does: a small, friendly town and a harsh, ghastly secret that isn't revealed until the end. It's all done like this in order to allow the audience to feel appalled, and no doubt exclaim, "what a twist!"
With this movie, the town has a celebration, or ritual that they follow every year. And it includes the one, same thing that the short story does: murder. It is horrible that such a festivity can occur with the death of an innocent life. As well, the only time that someone considers what the town is doing is wrong, it is when its their own life on the line. Such as Mrs. Hutchinson, who had screamed, "It isn't fair, it isn't right" (Jackson, page 234).
Conversely, the novel "The Kite Runner" has the same approach to murder, but it's not a yearly celebration. Citizens in small towns are forced to watch as sometimes wrongfully accused people are buried, then stoned to death. This is under the rule of the Taliban that such grotesque actions ensue. As well, the citizens must act as if they enjoy what they see. Connections from this novel to the short story can be made by the way of the murder (with stones), as well as the persuasion from a figurehead with authority (The Taliban, and Mr. Summers [The Lottery]).
Indifference is a word that applies to all three of these works. Under figureheads, a crowd of people will either act out of fear or apathy, loyalty or uncertainty, and commit horrendous acts. Indifference is something that is still seen today. The question is: when will someone finally stand up to what is wrong, and disown the word "indifference" from their vocabulary?
Thursday, September 24, 2009
2012: An Inconvenient Truth.
Let me assure you now that this isn't going to be a post about how the world is going to end in the year 2012. In fact, it's the complete opposite. And that's why the title is "2012: An Inconvenient Truth" - because it's inconvenient to the people that believe the world is going to end.
With the aid of Google, I found myself a list of "220 Dates for the End of the World."
I'm not impressed.
Frankly, the world was supposed to end in 44 B.C. Prophecies of fires, earthquakes that will rattle the world and the return of Jesus Christ have been told to occur sometimes more than three times a year.
Who the hell started this nonsense, anyways? He or she is probably laughing in their grave as I speak.
As most people are aware of the controversy ("Is the world really going to end in 2012?) that is now sweeping the nation - let alone the Earth - what should really be acknowledged is that the world is allegedly going to "end" in 2036.
Seriously people, let's make up our minds: 1988, 1992, 2000, 2012, 2036? Or how about "The world really isn't going to end on a predicted date."?
What else should be considered is that the world could abruptly implode or spontaneously combust before you even finishing reading this "rant blog".
The Mayan calendar came to an abrupt halt on December 22, 2012. Most people want to know: Why? And this is where the conspiracies have started. But has anyone really thought that, "hey, you know what? Maybe the Mayans became lazy. Maybe they were sick and tired of writing up a calendar, doing all the math and considering those leap years that in reality, nobody can really comprehend." Or perhaps, "It has been said that the Mayan's marked the end of each era - every 26,000 years. Maybe this is the end of an era? The era of technology?" Or, "The era of the beginning of Global Warming!" But that's a rant for another day.
You're probably wondering where this rant is going, and I can assure you that if I continue, it'll probably go off the deep end. You might hear of how I blame the Bible, because a decent size of the predictions I have stumbled across mention the Bible. "Hell hath no fury," but Heaven appears to have a bit of a "fury". I won't go any farther from there, because - like the global warming (which, in all truth, I do believe is something that is threatening the Earth) it is a rant for another day.
All in all, let me sum up this rant politely and liberally:
My thoughts on the "The world is ending in 2012" is that it's not going to happen. The world was going to end in 2000, but seeing as how the Earth has held it's weight for a good nine years, I'm not entirely concerned. If our planet ceases to exist after a series of fires, tsunamis, and other disasters, I will embrace my demise with open and accepting arms, admitting that I, and this tirade, was wrong.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Top 3 TV Shows
The subject I chose for my "Top 3" is Television Shows.
Original, right?
I'm judging three TV shows that I have watched regularily based on: level of entertainment (storyline, drama, suspense, holds interest, etc.), characters (are they well-rounded characters that the audience can relate to? Appealing? Are creative in the sense of their biographies?) and overall what you learn or can take from the show.
First, the ratings:
1. House MD
2. Surviving Disasters
3. Heroes
1. House MD:
Is House a form of entertainment? Certainly; it isn't a show just for doctors. An 'Average Joe' such as a high school student could follow the series, then talk about it with their friends with confidence.
The storyline is captivating: while it is always changing with each episode (when a new patient is taken into the hospital) the plot with the main character, Gregory House, is easy to follow and interesting. Looking past the list of diseases, medicines and crazy hospital tools that are listed off, the show provides suspense, drama, and even romance. The show does an amazing job of building up the suspense during the few minutes of show time you get, then leading to a peak just as commercials hit. This leaves the audience on the 'edge of their seat', waiting for the two minutes of screeching commercials to end and for the show to come back on.
Character-wise, there are many people in the series that the audience can take a liking to. Each character has their own unique personality, allowing a bit of head-on-head clash every now and then. Not only does this add drama, but it also adds into the romance category. On the topic of characters, each has their own interesting past that can connect with not only the audience, but others in the show. Gregory House's plotline that was mentioned before is about him, a genius doctor, struggling with an addiction that he is having difficulties overcoming while treating patients to the best of his ability.
So what can an 'Average Joe' walk away with, in the sense of knowledge, after watching an episode of House MD?
A lot.
The show is educational, describing many forms of diseases and what they do, as well as listing off (as mentioned before) hospital tools. House allows the audience's mind to get active, and guess what disease or illness the patient may have.
House MD is rated my number one in the top three for its suspense, drama, characters, and amazing plotline.
2. Surviving Disasters:
Suspensful, full of action, and a plotline that always changing, Surviving Disasters takes the audience through many different scenarios that are - sadly - very much possible. This show is second in my top three for the amount of suspense and knowledge that is given to the audience. There is only one character that you see in every episode, and that is the Host, who was once in the military. The fact that the Host was in the military is reassuring, and it's obvious that he knows what he's talking about.
Moving into more details on characters, there is always a small group of 'survivors' or 'victims' that are taken with the Host through the show. However, the Host will always turn to the camera and address you, speaking as if you were in the situation as well. This makes the show fun to watch.
What can be taken from this show are many tips of how to survive a plane hijaking, or an office building that is in flames. You learn how to treat a victim of burn wounds, how to break through walls to avoid a fire in the hall, and how to land a 747 aircrafts.
Because of the fact that I may be in a dangerous situation one day in my life, and I have learnt extensive knowledge from the show, Surviving Disasters is rated number two.
3. Heroes:
My third favourite TV show is Heroes. Though the show has an interesting plotline and characters, it isn't very educational. However, there is romance, action, comedy and suspense, and each character has their own 'past' that, a bit further into the show, connects up with one or more characters in either a good or bad way.
Back on the subject of education, the only real form that the audience gets is about the character. There isn't much information that someone could take and apply to the outside world, where people can't fly, control elements, or absorb other's powers and chop half their head's off during the process.
For the lack of education in the show, Heroes is my number three.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Superpower
One superpower in the world that I would like to have would be the ability to heal.
Why?
Well, for starters, Sam already wrote about the ability to fly. That was the one I wanted to write about, but I thought, "Hey, it would be stupid if I wrote about that, too." So I decided to go with the ability to heal, because it is another power that I would want to have.
Just think about it this way for a minute: You get shot in the chest, the guy is walking away like, "Ohoho, she's dead, all power to me!" and then you stand up and you're like, "Think again, buddy!" and shoot him while he has his back turned. You could also fake your death and start a new life. Not that, you know, I was planning on wanting to rob a bank or murder anyone and have to start a new life, but it's something that could be considered.
I wouldn't want to be able to heal just myself, though. I'd want to be able to heal my friends, too. Then I wouldn't be completely useless, would I? It would be unfair if my friends and I were in a battle, we all get injured, and the only person who is able to get away safely is me.
To conclude this blog, the reason why I chose the ability to heal is so I could help my friends, my family, others and myself. To be the "Healer" in a super hero team would mean being an important member, and I have to admit: I'd like the challenge of being constantly relied on.
---
P.S. Even though I wasn't able to write about being able to fly before Sam did, I would just mooch a ride off her to Europe, or teleport somewhere with Allison.
Remember: It is always O.K. to mooch a ride.
Why?
Well, for starters, Sam already wrote about the ability to fly. That was the one I wanted to write about, but I thought, "Hey, it would be stupid if I wrote about that, too." So I decided to go with the ability to heal, because it is another power that I would want to have.
Just think about it this way for a minute: You get shot in the chest, the guy is walking away like, "Ohoho, she's dead, all power to me!" and then you stand up and you're like, "Think again, buddy!" and shoot him while he has his back turned. You could also fake your death and start a new life. Not that, you know, I was planning on wanting to rob a bank or murder anyone and have to start a new life, but it's something that could be considered.
I wouldn't want to be able to heal just myself, though. I'd want to be able to heal my friends, too. Then I wouldn't be completely useless, would I? It would be unfair if my friends and I were in a battle, we all get injured, and the only person who is able to get away safely is me.
To conclude this blog, the reason why I chose the ability to heal is so I could help my friends, my family, others and myself. To be the "Healer" in a super hero team would mean being an important member, and I have to admit: I'd like the challenge of being constantly relied on.
---
P.S. Even though I wasn't able to write about being able to fly before Sam did, I would just mooch a ride off her to Europe, or teleport somewhere with Allison.
Remember: It is always O.K. to mooch a ride.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)