Hunger Games Final Draft

      In The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, her purpose of writing this book is to show us how the future will become if our government took total control of the people. This relates to how the citizens aren't able to speak up for themselves and follow the orders that were given without backing up. This book also shows how survival of fitness determines who can win, as a connection to how humans took over and their strength and weakness. The author's purpose is integrated through her style of writing and the audience that she is appealing to.
      To give some background information of how she proposed her purpose she defines it by the game called the Hunger Games. In North America, it is divided in 12 districts, and each district has to sent out two teenagers from the age of 12-18 years old to compete in the games. From the two chosen, it has to include one boy and girl. The contestants are picked randomly and they would have to go to the hunger games located in the Capitol. In the game of 24 that were chosen, they have to fight for death and only one can survive, and the winning contestant will get food for their districts.

"The rules of the Hunger Games. In punishment for the uprising, each of the twelve districts must provide one girl and one boy, called tributes, to participate. [. . . ]To make it humiliating as well as torturous, the Capitol requires us to treat the Hunger Games as a festivity, a sporting event pitting every district against others." (Collins 18-19)

This shows what the districts have to go through when the Capitol takes control of them. The tributes will have no choice but to fight for their own lives. This is when they can no longer trust anyone at all and must only use their own strength to survive. Without the help of others, by working independently it will take up lots of effort and time. This shows how the Capitol ruled over the districts to show how Collins explains her purpose.

      She showed her purpose by putting the Capitol in total control and making the people fight each other for their lives. By this plot, it shows that we as individuals can't change what our government is doing when we are alone. The government is trying to make everyone go separate ways so that they could not be able to work together and over power them. The governments are weakening their skills. I think the purpose of this book is very important and it teaches us about the outcomes of our governments if they take total control over us.

      After finishing The Hunger Games, I thought that it was a very great book. It got very intense and exciting to read near the middle of the book. Its like you can not stop flipping the pages. It taught me alot about how government runs when it takes control of the people. This book is intended to tell people about this kind of government system; warning the possibility that out government system might turn out this way.

     I think the audience this book is intended to are people that care about our government systems and how they function. The tactics that they come up with to make the people in the game kill eat other. Indeed the government can become very cruel when they have too much power. This book can be given to anyone that is interested to knowing how governments function. Because twenty four people are participating in the games, this show that if we don't step up to make the change happen, or if they don't do anything to change the rules, they will never rise up against the government and stay forever controlled. I would recommend this book to people that are interested to knowing more about government systems. This book explains it in a different way to explain its theme. The story is also really good, so that it would not be as boring.
      I would describe the author's style of writing as using descriptive language through most of the book. She had good use of descriptive language and bad uses of descriptive language. Some of it wasn't really necessary and it was too much so it made it a but boring. The beginning of the book was boring to start with because it was too descriptive, but as it headed towards the middle, it got more interesting.        My opinions of her style was good. Her descriptions helped me have a picture in my mind about what is happening in the story. It gave me a image of what is going on and what is happening about the surroundings.
One example of a  bad description would be:

 "Stop! Stop! Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to present the victors of the Seventy-fourth Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark! I give you- the tributes of District Twelve!" (Collins 345).  

Another example of a good description would be:

 "When food is scarce, the game makers will invite players to a banquet, somewhere none to all like the cornucopia, as an inducement to gather and fight" (244).  

The first one wasn't good because they didn't put much description in it and it didn't really show lots of meaning in the line. It did not describe how they won and their victory. For the second quote it shows a meaning of the games. It shows that the government have control over the people and they can plan anything on the players since they are weaker. The stronger ones have a bigger advantage.

      In conclusion, Collins helped support her points by connecting to our society about our own government systems. By using descriptive language she was able to explain the plot of the story very well and give the audience an imagery. This book teaches a lesson about what we can do to change whats settle for us. I would recommend this book to anyone. It was a book that taught me about government systems in a way that is easy to understand.

  

Peer Review Comments

Here are the comments I left for my tablemates' rough drafts...

For Peter:
I think that you should introduce the questions that you are answering because it seems like you are only answering one sentence. I think that you could incorporate that into your intro paragraph. I think that you included a good summary about the girls relationship with her family and the struggles that she went through. Your ideas were good and the paragraphs transitioned from one another so it was good. I just think that you could go further in about the character and how relationship with others might impact them. Your conclusion was good because it introduced the overall idea that was expressed.

For Vanessa:
I think your essay was very strong at the beginning, but it got choppy in the middle; the part that says you finish your book. It might need a transition and I think that you could also mention your ideas in your second part in your introduction so that it could be more clear. As a sum up, I think that you did a great job connecting the points. It just needs some transition and I think that the conclusion could summarize all of your points so that it would be more clear. In conclusion it was a good essay, and it just needs some editing to make it flow and ideas connected. 

For Grizzell:
I thought that it was a pretty good book review and you expressed your ideas pretty well, but at some parts was kind of confusing. I think that you should move your paragraphs around so that it would flow more better and cut down one of your body paragraphs into two parts because too much ideas are in it. It makes your point unclear. I thought at you included a good summary of the book and I think you could add one more quote to support some of your points. Your conclusion was good and it summarized your book.

The Hunger Games Rough Draft

     In The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, her purpose of writing this book is to show us how the future will become if our government took total control of the people. This relates to how the citizens aren't able to speak up for themselves and follow the orders that were given without backing up. This book also shows how survival of fitness determines who can win, as a connection to how humans took over and their strength and weakness.
      To give some background information of how she proposed her purpose she defines it by the game called the Hunger Games. In North America, it is divided in 12 districts, and each district has to sent out two teenagers from the age of 12-18 years old to compete in the games. From the two chosen, it has to include one boy and girl. The contestants are picked randomly and they would have to go to the hunger games located in the Capitol. In the game of 24 that were chosen, they have to fight for death and only one can survive, and the winning contestant will get food for their districts.

"The rules of the Hunger Games. In punishment for the uprising, each of the twelve districts must provide one girl and one boy, called tributes, to participate. [. . . ]To make it humiliating as well as torturous, the Capitol requires us to treat the Hunger Games as a festivity, a sporting event pitting every district against others." (Collins 18-19)

This shows what the districts have to go through when the Capitol takes control of them. The tributes will have no choice but to fight for their own lives. This is when they can no longer trust anyone at all and must only use their own strength to survive. Without the help of others, by working independently it will take up lots of effort and time. This shows how the Capitol ruled over the districts to show how Collins explains her purpose.

     She showed her purpose by putting the Capitol in total control and making the people fight each other for their lives. By this plot, it shows that we as individuals can't change what our government is doing when we are alone. The government is trying to make everyone go separate ways so that they could not be able to work together and over power them. The governments are weakening their skills. I think the purpose of this book is very important and it teaches us about the outcomes of our governments if they take total control over us.

      After finishing The Hunger Games, I thought that it was a very great book. It got very intense and exciting to read near the middle of the book. Its like you can not stop flipping the pages. This was really a great book, it taught me alot about how government runs when it takes control of the people. This book is intended to tell people about this kind of government system; warning the possibility that out government system might turn out this way.

      I think the audience this book is intended to are people that care about out government systems and how they function. I can tell because this book's theme is about how our government can manipulate the citizens. The tactics that they come up with to make the people in the game kill eat other. Indeed the government can become very cruel when they have too much power. This book can be given to anyone that is interested to knowing how governments function. Because twenty four people are participating in the games, this show that if we don't step up to make the change happen, or if they don't do anything to change the rules, they will never rise up against the government and stay forever controlled. I would recommend this book to people that are interested to knowing more about government systems. This book explains it in a different way to explain its theme. The story is also really good, so that it would not be as boring.
      I would describe the author's style of writing as using descriptive language through most of the book. She had good use of descriptive language and bad uses of descriptive language. Some of it wasn't really necessary and it was too much so it made it a but boring. The beginning of the book was boring to start with because it was too descriptive, but as it headed towards the middle, it got more interesting. My opinions of her style was good. Her descriptions helped me have a picture in my mind about what is happening in the story. It gave me a image of what is going on and what is happening about the surroundings.
One example of a  bad description would be:

 "Stop! Stop! Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to present the victors of the Seventy-fourth Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark! I give you- the tributes of District Twelve!" (Collins 345).  

Another example of a good description would be:

 "When food is scarce, the game makers will invite players to a banquet, somewhere none to all like the cornucopia, as an inducement to gather and fight" (244).  

The first one wasn't good because they didn't put much description in it and it didn't really show lots of meaning in the line. It did not describe how they won and their victory. For the second quote it shows a meaning of the games. It shows that the government have control over the people and they can plan anything on the players since they are weaker. The stronger ones have a bigger advantage.

The Hunger Games: Book Review #2

1. For what audience(s) is this book intended, and how can you tell? (In other words, for whom would you recommend this book?)
2. How would you describe the author's style of writing? What's your opinion of the style?

     After finishing The Hunger Games, I thought that it was a very great book. It got very intense and exciting to read near the middle of the book. Its like you can not stop flipping the pages. This was really a great book, it taught me alot about how government runs when it takes control of the people. This book is intended to tell people about this kind of government system; warning the possibility that out government system might turn out this way.

     I think the audience this book is intended to are people that care about out government systems and how they function. I can tell because this book's theme is about how our government can manipulate the citizens. The tactics that they come up with to make the people in the game kill eat other. Indeed the government can become very cruel when they have too much power. This book can be given to anyone that is interested to knowing how governments function. Because twenty four people are participating in the games, this show that if we don't step up to make the change happen, or if they don't do anything to change the rules, they will never rise up against the government and stay forever controlled. I would recommend this book to people that are interested to knowing more about government systems. This book explains it in a different way to explain its theme. The story is also really good, so that it would not be as boring.


     I would describe the author's style of writing as using descriptive language through most of the book. She had good use of descriptive language and bad uses of descriptive language. Some of it wasn't really necessary and it was too much so it made it a but boring. The beginning of the book was boring to start with because it was too descriptive, but as it headed towards the middle, it got more interesting. My opinions of her style was good. Her descriptions helped me have a picture in my mind about what is happening in the story. It gave me a image of what is going on and what is happening about the surroundings. 


One example of a  bad description would be:

 "Stop! Stop! Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to present the victors of the Seventy-fourth Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark! I give you- the tributes of District Twelve!" (Collins 345).  

Another example of a good description would be:

 "When food is scarce, the game makers will invite players to a banquet, somewhere none to all like the cornucopia, as an inducement to gather and fight" (244).  

The first one wasn't good because they didn't put much description in it and it didn't really show lots of meaning in the line. It did not describe how they won and their victory. For the second quote it shows a meaning of the games. It shows that the government have control over the people and they can plan anything on the players since they are weaker. The stronger ones have a bigger advantage.

  

Book Review: The Hunger Games

     In The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, her purpose of writing this book is to show us how the future will become if our government took total control of the people. This relates to how the citizens aren't able to speak up for themselves and follow the orders that were given without backing up. This book also shows how survival of fitness determines who can win, as a connection to how humans took over and their strength and weakness.

     To give some background information of how she proposed her purpose she defines it by the game called the Hunger Games. In North America, it is divided in 12 districts, and each district has to sent out two teenagers from the age of 12-18 years old to compete in the games. From the two chosen, it has to include one boy and girl. The contestants are picked randomly and they would have to go to the hunger games located in the Capitol. In the game of 24 that were chosen, they have to fight for death and only one can survive, and the winning contestant will get food for their districts.

"The rules of the Hunger Games. In punishment for the uprising, each of the twelve districts must provide one girl and one boy, called tributes, to participate. [. . . ]To make it humiliating as well as torturous, the Capitol requires us to treat the Hunger Games as a festivity, a sporting event pitting every district against others." (Collins 18-19)

This shows what the districts have to go through when the Capitol takes control of them. The tributes will have no choice but to fight for their own lives. This is when they can no longer trust anyone at all and must only use their own strength to survive. Without the help of others, by working independently it will take up lots of effort and time. This shows how the Capitol ruled over the districts to show how Collins explains her purpose.

     She showed her purpose by putting the Capitol in total control and making the people fight each other for their lives. By this plot, it shows that we as individuals can't change what our government is doing when we are alone. The government is trying to make everyone go separate ways so that they could not be able to work together and over power them. The governments are weakening their skills. I think the purpose of this book is very important and it teaches us about the outcomes of our governments if they take total control over us.
  

Family History Connections

     After reading many family histories, I noticed a connection between most of the stories. Most of them talked about how important education was and how hard it was for them to get it. Because of money, education was put aside so that they could help earn a living for the family. Money was also a connection that I discovered because most families had a struggle through money. Money was the problem for them, and because of money some families didn't get the chance to go to school.
    
 From these three stories, they all have a connection to education and the struggles of money:


     In Grizzell's family history it talks about how important education was and that how her mom's parents would do anything just to get the right education for her mom:

"To their family, education is key to a great and complete life. They believed that by getting a full education and having good grades in school, will help their family move up from poverty to a higher status in life. My mom’s parents did everything they could to get money, just for their children to have a complete education. Money was not the issue, but it was hard to handle."

This shows that education means a lot to her family and that money wasn't an issue. Even though they didn't have much money, they still wanted their kids to get the education that they need because it can help them be successful in their future lives. No matter what their struggles through money are, they will try all their ability to get the money so that their kids will get a good future.


     In David's family history he talks about how she didn't go to school when her sister and brother went. His mom thought that earning money for the family was more important than her education:

"When she was still a child, my mother would be working on the farm to support her family while the rest of her older brothers and sisters would be attending school. She didn’t go to school yet because she thought that supporting the family would be more important than and education. At home, she would do chores around the house and cook for the family. At age 8, she had finally attended school."

For David's mom, she thought that supporting her family was more important that getting her education. If her family had enough money, her mom would have the chance to go to school and she wouldn't have to work and earn money. Money was an big issue in her family and her mom didn't want to be a burden by going to school. This explains that if they had the money, her mom wouldn't have to go to school at the age of eight.


     In Phuong's family history, it talks about how her mom's family was very poor and her mom didn't really go  to school in her age. Her mom's struggle was surviving.

" School. I don't have school. No education. My only education is to work to survive. One parent. Two kids. Survival is the main thing. I am not like you. I did not have the same luxury as you where you stay at home after school complaining about homework and how hard it is. Homework is nowhere as hard as as work. It is harder because it is hot in Vietnam."

In this story Phuong's mom didn't even go to school at all. Money was in important issue and because they didn't have much money, all they could worry about is surviving. This is another example that shows how important money was and how they had struggles through it. Worse than David's mom and Grizzell's mom. Phuong's mom didn't even go to school because she didn't have enough money.

     From reading these three stories, most of them had to struggle through money, and because of money, some of them weren't able to acquire what they want. It made me realize that I should appreciate the fact that I got to go to school. I should realize that money people didn't have the chance like I did because of the struggle through money. Some families got to go to school, some started last, and some didn't even attend school just because of moeny.

The Cycles in Marriage

     In The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan, it talks about the transition of Chinese women in America. Most of the stories were told by the mothers and daughters and their past and present life. In most of the stories, both the mother and daughter have problems with marriage. One specific cycle that keeps reoccurring is the issue with marriage. The example I have here is the mother and daughter problems from Lindo Jong and Waverly Jong. Their mother and daughter stories include a cycle that happens with both the mother and daughter.

     In Lindo Jong's story called The Red Candle, it talks about how she mis-fortunate she was to marry into a family that she didn't really like. Life was not exactly nice and she wanted to escape. Her husband didn't treat her very well, and she was treat more like a servant. She did appeal as a wife to her husband, but someone who should serve him and do whatever he commands. When she got out of the family, by telling a lie about how she would give misfortune to the the family, she escaped and married another man, she said:

"The Huangs asked only that I never tell anybody of any importance about the story of my doomed marriage" (Tan 66).  

This proves that Lindo Jong's life was not happy at all from the moment she married in . She never got the respect that she deserved and was not appreciated for what she has done. It was freedom that she felt after she left. With no more worries and a loan to carry behind her back.

"How nice it is to be that girl again, to take off my scarf, to see what is underneath and feel the lightness back into my body!" (Tan 66).

This could explain her happiness afterwards and the problems to her marriage was gone. The cycle continues on where her daughter had the same experience. She was also going to through problems with her marriage like her mother did.

     In the story of Four Directions, Waverly tells a story about her marriage that is going to be held for her and Rich. The problem is that Waverly is having a hard time persuading her mother that Rich is the person for her. Because her first marriage didn't go well because her mother criticized Marvin, her first husband. She feels that because of the criticism, her marriage was poisoned, and caused her to see only Marvin's faults. Now Waverly hopes that her realtionship with Rich will go well and not result as a disaster :

"I was afraid that some unseen speck of truth would fly into my eyes, blur what I was seeing and transform him from the divine man I thought he was into someone quite mundane, mortally wounded with tiresome habits and irritating imperfections" (Tan 173-174).

Waverly was worried that her marriage will end up like her last one and she wants to change things. She wants to persuade her mother that he is not that bad. All along Waverly thought that her mother hates Rich, but she knew about the engagement all along and was surprised about Waverly's assumption that she hated Rich.

     The stories of the mother and child includes a cycle about the problems that can occur through marriage. There includes more examples from the book, from how marriage can me a failure. Problems to these marriages are hidden and kept in the past, such as how Lindo hides that fact that she was married into a bad family and how Waverly hides that her last marriage didn't end up so well. Even though there were problems, both the mother and daughter had a happy ending and got what they want. The cycles that I discovered was marriage.

My Family History

          As a child, my mom started school at the age of seven. At school, they would have plantations and make the children help them grow crops. They would grow crops such as sugar canes, peanuts, and etc. They would even raise pigs at school. The purpose of this was to teach them to how to be farmers. There are normal classes consisting of math, Chinese, science, and history. Classes were almost the same as what we would learn. School would end at three in the afternoon and my mom would head home.

          In China, you normally have to pay for your education. All my moms siblings went to school. My mom was the fifth child out of the eight. Her older brothers were the ones paying for the fees in order for my mother and her sisters to go to school. She has two older brothers and their education was paid for by their parents. They earned money to help pay for their younger siblings. They took jobs and went to school at the same time.

          My mom would wake up at seven in the morning and head to school. When she comes back, she would be asked to do chores by her parents. Each of her siblings were assigned to do a different job. My mom had to take trips to the wells or to faucets to gather water for the family. For each bucket they got, they had to pay a cent. Back in the day, they had no access of water at homes. My mom took care of the water and took many trips back and forth from the well until she had eight buckets full of water. Water would be boiled up to take baths with, but most of the time they had to take cold water. When she comes comes back from school, she doesn’t have much time to do her homework. Most of the time, she just did whatever she was told to do.

          Other chores include cracking beans, peeling ginger, sewing blankets, and much more. These would be used to sell and earn money. In a day of work, there were a lot of chores to be done. If my mom didn’t do her part, her older sisters would pinch her and make her do it. She had no choice.

          After everything, they would eat the dinner that their mother had cooked. Her mother was only in charge of cooking and the rest of the chores was left for all of the other siblings to finish. Food was always limited and there was not much to eat. There would be more food on the table when they had more money and less when they had less money.

          At the age of seven, my mom got a high fever and almost died. Her parents took her to many doctors, but they didn't really help much, until they found this doctor that helped her get better. Medical care was not as good during her age. Most of the time going to the doctors didn’t really help much.

          In the family, my mom would be favored the most by her father. Her mom didn’t really like her and the bond between her and her father was very strong, while her mother favored her older brothers and the youngest siblings.

          In her family, many people had jobs to earn money for the family. Her mom didn’t work hard and only stayed home to take care of the children, while her father worked in a business in the city. When my mom finished school at fifteen, she started to earn money for her family. She was put in a sewing company from eight in the morning until ten at night. This job only paid a dollar a day. With the little amount of money that she would get each day, half of it went to the family to help pay for food.

After working there for eight years, she moved to the companies to work, selling books and shoes to the people in the hotels. They paid a reasonable amount of money, about a thousand or more a month. Then she started working in Hong Kong and found another job.

          When my mom was eighteen, she first met my dad. My father chased her and followed her everywhere although my mom didn’t like him. As a child, my mom’s parents were very strict, they didn’t allow them to hang out with their friends or go out. If they didn’t listen, they would get locked out of the house as a punishment. My dad loved my mom a lot, and he did everything to win her heart. As time went by, they got together and started to date. After that, she gave birth to me.

          When I was born, my mom and dad's family weren't very nice to my mother. They didn't like her very much and that she has a lot of money to spent. My dad's mom won't allow my mother to buy me milk to drink and I should only be breast feed. My mom was an very ignorant women, she didn't even bother to listen to her, and just did anything she wants. Since she was spending her own money, she could use it however way she wants. My mom told me that when I was little, I didn't always finish all my food and often wasted it. My dad's mom didn't like the fact that I wasted food and didn't feed me much. A few years after I was born, my mom immigrated to America.

           When my mom immigrates to America, she started a new life. I was left in China with my dad and his family. My mom came to America because her parents have moved here and she followed them. In this new community, she didn't understand what people spoke around there. She and her family moved in a Asian community where there were Chinese people like her. My mom had to adjust to the American culture that she as experiencing. Soon she found a job here and lived with her friends in Alameda. My mom thought that the jobs that they provided here did not pay her well, they weren't fair and lied about how much they would get for an house and gave the workers less money. She thought that payments weren't as good as before, but she still tool the job and earned money because that was the only thing she could do.

          My mom would come back to visit me a few times a year when she comes back from America. She would tell me that I looked like I was starving to death when she would see me, and that I didn't have enough food to eat. I would weigh the time she left me before she went to America. I haven't changed a lot and my mom was worried for me because I got sick often. This was because I wasn't feed much and wasn't treated well. A couple years later, mom mom immigrated my whole family here in America and start a whole new life without my dad's family. And this is how I ended up here right now.

          From this story I learned that my mom was raised in a big family and the way she raised me was similar to her own experience. My mom raised me like how her parents did, she was strict at first and would make me do chores and help her out. I am lucky that life here in America was more different because I wouldn't have want to go through the time that my mother did. Her life didn't seem so pleasant back then, and it often included lots of work. Although my mom was a strong willed person. I think that may be the reason I have to much motivation in myself and that I believed that I could do anything in which I put my whole heart in. I an guessing I got that trait from my mom, and I like it a lot.

          This story hasn't really survived in my family. My parents don't tell much stories and I don't think that they heard much stories from their parents either. Its sad to think that the family history kind of broken down and didn't get passed from generations to generations. I believe that there is a great story out there to tell, and it just never really got passed on. My only guess is that they don't want to tell the life of their sad living styles. I heard from my mom that my grandma's family was very rich. It would be very nice if I could travel back in history and know more about my background and discover the mysteries out there. I have learned about from doing this assignment and further more learning about about my mom. Next I am going to learn about my dad's family history, but I didn't really get to ask him. I really enjoyed leaning about the life of my mom from a little kid to and adult, in which turned out to be my mom.

Amy Tan v.s. Amy Chua

     In Amy Chua's "Why Chinese Mothers are Superior", she talks about the steps that the parents encounter to make their children successful. She describes how you must be able to discipline them so that they will listen to you.  In the "Twenty-Six Malignant Gates", Amy Tan describes the mother-daughter relationships that they encounter as Americans. These two readings shows lots of similarities about parenthood and the expectations that they want their daughters to follow. In The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan, in the section called, The Twenty-Six Malignant Gates, the story called Two Kinds explains how Jing Mei Woo is pushed to learn things that she doesn't want to do. These two discusses how their daughters aren't able to make their own decisions.


     In the story, Two Kinds, Jing Mei's mother wanted her to be a prodigy and made her learn many things. Her mother wanted her to learn the piano, but Jing Mei didn't want is and she knew that she would not do good. The duaghter was often made to follow the decisions that the mother choose and don't get to choose their own choice, she can only listen to her mother:

"Why don't you like me the way I am? I am not a genius! I can't play the piano. And even if I could, I wouldn't go on TV if you pay me a million dollars!" I cried. My mother slapped me. "Who asked you be genius?" she shouted. "Only asked you to be your best. For you sake. You think I want you be genius? Hnnh! What for! Who asked you!" (Tan 136)

 This shows that even though the daughter doesn't want to be like a prodigy and play the piano, her mom says that she has to even though she might not be good at it. Her mom wants her to learn the things that she could now at this point so that her future would be better. Her mother just wants her daughter to try her best and play. This will teach her a lesson that life is hard and nothing is easy. Her mother's intentions are that the skills that she learn now will come in very handy.


     In the discussions that Amy Chua makes, her observations and teaching are similar to Jing Mei's mom. Their intentions are the same, and they both want their child to be successful:

Chinese mothers said that they believe their children can be "the best" students, that "academic achievement reflects successful parenting," and that if children did not excel at school then there was "a problem" and parents "were not doing their job." What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work. (Chua)

This connects to the Jing Mei's mothers experience. They don't want their child to do bad because it would be their fault if they kids does do well. They feel that they have to take responsibility and make them learn something they don't like. By doing this, it means that they gave them am chance to do something, but they didn't, which means its not their fault. These two parents does not intend to do bad for them, but want them to be well grown fine ladies.


     I think that Amy Tan's novel does endure Chua's argument about motherhood. Even though their expectations might be strict, their intentions are the same. The only thing they want to do is do good for their children. They way they teach their kids has a meaning to it and they want their child to be successful. If you connect the pieces of Amy Chua and Amy Tan, their sense of parenting is very similar.

The Twenty-Six Malignant Gates

     In the book, Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan, she includes an introductory piece in the beginning of the piece, "The Twenty-Six Malignant Gates." From my observations, I think that the purpose to her introductory it to explain the period of time where kids will start making their own decisions. The daughter was told by her mother that she was not to bike around the corner because her mother can not see her. The daughter chooses to disobey her mother and fell before she reached the corner. The purpose might be that if you don't listen to your parents, you might regret it in the end because you might end of making wrong choices. From this short introductory I think that it means that the first step to independence is hard because you will get lost later on and need someone to carry you back up.

     In the story called Rules of the Game, the mom had high expectations for her daughter in the game of chess. She would be always next to her to see her make her next move so that she will not make a mistake. The daughter was bothered by the fact that her mother was always standing by her side. It seems as if she was not able to choose her own path and always follow the orders from her mom:

"But I found it difficult to concentrate at home. My mother had a habit of standing over me while I plotted out my games. I think she thought of herself as my protective ally. Her lips would be sealed tight, and after each move I made, a soft "Hmmmmph" would escape from her nose" (Tan 98).

 From  this reading, the daughter wanted to make her own choices and she doesn't want her mom to choose the next steps that she took. Her mom is being over protective about her, and she brags about her achievements to other people which upsets her. The daughter runs away and come back home in the end. This means that even though the daughter was able to escape her mother's expectations, she came back home because she still needs someone to support her. In the end of the story it says, "I closed my eyes and pondered my next move" (Tan 101). From the ending when she was all alone, she starts to think about her own decisions without her mother being too protective of her. When she was able to make her own step towards the game, it was like making the next step to her life and choosing to balance out her mother and herself.

     In the story called The Voice from the Wall,  when the daughter and her mother was walking around chinatown, her mother said,

"Don't look at her,"said my mother...And of course I looked...."She met a bad man," said my mother. "She had a baby she didn't want." And I knew that was not true. I knew my mother made up anything to warn me, to help me avoid some unknown danger. (Tan 105).

This means that the reason parents often tell us these lies is because they want us to be safe. They don't want you to be in danger. Although you might know that they are lying to you, you will just follow what they say to you because you know that they are just being protective.

      Parents cannot dare to let go their child, and they want to make their decisions. They don't want them to go through the wrong path and make the wrong decision. This is the reason parents or mothers tell you to follow what they tell us. I have a question through this introductory. Do we really get to grow up because we keep taking orders from others? Shouldn't we make you own decisions and fall down at times and learn from it? Isn't that the meaning of life? To fall down and stand back up by ourselves....

Should Family Take Priority Over The Rights of the Individual Family Member?

True or false? "Family and honor should take priority over the rights of the individual family member." How do you think An-mei and her mother would respond? Would they think the statement is true or false? Would they be somewhere in-between?


     According to the story "Scar"  from Joy Luck Club, I think that An-Mei's response will be in between. At certain points, she would think that family ans honor is called respecting her culture. From the time that her mother came back to her, she starts to understand what happened and believe that her mother made the right choice. An-Mei was always told stories from her Popo about her mother, but her Popo never really mentions her name. As An-Mei grew up with her Popo she was lead to the belief that she should always honor the family and not follow the path that her mother followed or else she would be an disgrace to her family. 


     When An-Mei's mother came to her life again as her Popo was very sick, her mind changes and she starts to think that her mother really needed her individual rights. An-Mei starts to understand the conditions that her mother was going through. She starts to agree that at times you honoring your family can be tough. She thinks that her mother was very brave and she got her individual rights. Although she was a disgrace to her family, she came back in the end. She gave honor to her mother before she died. She did something that was painful as a way to make her mother understand why she had to leave: 

 "Even though I was young, I could see the pain of the flesh and the worth of the pain. This is how a daughter honors her mother. It is shou so deep it is in your bones. The pain of the flesh is nothing. The pain you must forget," (Tan 48).

This quote tells that An-Mei learned that her mother left for a reason and her individual rights was very important. Even though she was raised with her Popo and her auntie, she never really disgraced her family. As she remembers about the past and what happened to her, she understands her mother more. And the point where she sacrifice her flesh, it was the thing that really surprised An-Mei.

     If An-Mei's mother were to answer this question, she would say that we should have our individual life because we are the one who should choose our own decision. We should be able to break away from that command that family members have given, and choose the right road to follow. I agree very much with her mother and how she got her freedom.

     This could be answered in different forms and because we all have different opinions about this question, what would you do if you were stopped from continuing your decision in life? 

Whats the difference between families?

Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior Response:

What do parents owe to their children? What do children owe to their parents?

     "Second, Chinese parents believe that their kids owe them everything. The reason for this is a little unclear, but it's probably a combination of Confucian filial piety and the fact that the parents have sacrificed and done so much for their children. (And it's true that Chinese mothers get in the trenches, putting in long grueling hours personally tutoring, training, interrogating and spying on their kids.) Anyway, the understanding is that Chinese children must spend their lives repaying their parents by obeying them and making them proud.

    By contrast, I don't think most Westerners have the same view of children being permanently indebted to their parents. My husband, Jed, actually has the opposite view. "Children don't choose their parents," he once said to me. "They don't even choose to be born. It's parents who foist life on their kids, so it's the parents' responsibility to provide for them. Kids don't owe their parents anything. Their duty will be to their own kids." This strikes me as a terrible deal for the Western parent." -Amy Chua

      In the Asian (Chinese) society where parents raise their children, I don't think that owe is the right word to use. Asian parents doesn't really owe their children, it would be more of a taking responsibility. The parents would rather take responsibility for giving birth to the child. For that means that they would have to take plan for the child and make them successful. It is like Asian parents would think that it would be their fault if they were not able to make their kids successful. They will feel bad themselves and that they must have done something wrong. They usually take responsibility that the child needs to do well in school and if they don't, they put let them have a tutor to improve their intelligence. Because of what the parents have done for their parents, they would ask their children to take care of them when they have become successful. This is what my parents would tell me; they tell me that I would have to take care of them and pay them back for everything they have done. I would feel like I would be paying a debt and that feeling is not so good.

As in contrast I think that Western parent think that they owe their children most of the time. In my perspective, they gets lots of love from them and get praised for everything they do. They don't really pressure their children as much, although they do want them to be more successful. Western parents in my point of view would let their children have what ever they want. Such a electronics and allowance. From my family, the parents doesn't allow their kids to choose what they want, they only can have what their parent give them. Western children are mostly spoiled from the things they get and they don't really have to owe their parents much afterwords. This is only my perspective of them, but this might be different in many families. This is just my own opinion and I am not stating that they are bad. I really admire Western families and how the parents want the kids to be more open with the society and let them choose their own decisions.

Connections Between Animal Farm and Revolutions

     From the book Animal Farm by George Orwell, he explains a revolution that takes place in a farm. The revolution was started by a pig and he got all the other animals to follow him. Then their revolution begins when they overthrew the humans and developed their own constitution. This story in many ways connect to the real revolutions happening in our world. It explains how a revolution starts and similar characteristics about what would happen.

 What connections did you see between the revolution Orwell described in Animal Farm and the events in Egypt, Tunisia, Honduras, etc.?

     One connection that I found between Animal Farm's revolution and other revolutions around is that they are all fighting for something they are going against. In Animal Farm they started a revolution because the human didn't treat them fairly and they did not feed them one day. Most protesters that are creating a revolution are fighting for similar things such as poverty and the demand to abdicate their rules. "Outside Tunisia and Egypt, Algeria and Jordan are experiencing similar trends where the economic marginalization of young people is driving unrest. Unemployment, housing shortages and food prices hit this group the hardest." Revolutions are mostly because something wrong is going on and the people don't get the right they want.

     Another connection would be that the revolutions mostly starts with one person. In Animal Farm it started off with the pig Major when he had a dream about the future of Animal Farm. When he died, Napoleon ruled over and took over his spot and continued the revolution. Then the other animals in animal farm also combined forces to help out. This is similar to how our revolutions starts. The guy that set himself on fire started a revolution in Tunisia and when other countries such as Egypt heard about it, they started their own revolutions too. From this single event, and what the person did, it caused lots of commotion around. It started to make other countries consider about their problems and so on start an revolution.

     Revolutions spread most of the time and the revolution in Tunisia has influenced other Arab counties to follow on the same road. George Orwell's revolution reflects how revolutions happen around the world. It reflects the cause and outcome of most revolutions

http://www.daily-sun.com/?view=details&type=daily_sun_news&pub_no=114&cat_id=2&menu_id=5&news_type_id=1&news_id=23773&archiev=yes&arch_date=31-01-2011

Animal Farm Chapter 11

The Rebellion
  
    Few months have past, and the pigs have gotten more familiar with the humans. They start communicating with them and playing games with them. As the days past by, the animals work more and more. They were asked to produce more and more crops. Not for them, but for the pigs and humans. The pigs would often be somewhere else in the farm, eating and chatting about their plans to make animal farm grow. The animals would be dead tired after each day, and one or two animals would die each day because of their loads of work. Even though there was the windmill which was originally build so that it could generate electricity, but turned out to mill the corns, it did not improve the lives of the animals. Because animals die each day, more work was assigned to the animals to replace the work for the animals that past away. The condition in Animal Farm was getting worse and worse, and the only ones relaxing were the pigs.

    Soon after the animals were continuously build with more and more work load. The animals start to think about equality and so when ever they passed the barn, they would look at the commandment that says, “All animals were equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” The animals thought that this commandment was not fair, and all the animals should be equal. They thought back to the times when Snowball was still in Animal farm and how he cared for the animals and tried his best to make life more easier for them. They would have more freedom when Snowball was here. Even though the animals wanted to rebel after Napoleon, they weren't strong enough to rebel over him, because he got the dogs. They knew that they must get Snowball back to the farm and hide him somewhere that Napoleon would not know.

    Clover now the leader of the animals without Napoleon knowing. They would plan secret meetings where they would plan a bug feast for the pigs, while they discuss there plan about rebellion. Napoleon and Squealer was going to far. They get far too much special treatment and the animals are working their butts off every single morning.

    In their secret meetings, they were planning to find a way to bring Snowball back and create an plan to attack the pigs. Although Snowball was a pig too, he was known more than just a pig to the animals, he was a great leader. First they have to find where Snowball was located and bring her back. They have found a very good hiding spot they could hide Snowball without the pigs knowing.

    The day has come where Snowball is going to move back to animal farm. Napoleon was out with the humans to plan something. In a good time, the store Snowball in the pen house so that he could get some rest before the meeting they are going to hold. The next night, when the pigs are asleep. The animals hold a meeting in the barn with Snowball. Clover was there to explain the circumstances they were living against. Clover and the animals ask Snowball for help, and ask for forgiveness. Snowball agreed, he said it would be hard because Napoleon had the dogs with him. For the few weeks snowball would be planning a rebellion for the animals. Although it took awhile, the animals were willing to wait for the day that their freedom would come back to them.

    After a couple weeks, Snowball thought of a plan. And while he was creating a plan, he was secretly spying on the pigs and ears-dropping about what they are planning to do next. He found out something that he knew nothing about, but the pigs are at the humans side and currently working with them. They have combined forces and when the pigs and the humans would leave the farm to for plans, they were visiting other farms and ruling over other animals in other farms. It was like they were trying to take over the world. Snowball thought that they were going too far and they had to do something soon, or else it would be too late. He thought that they would have to combine forces with the other farms too in order for the plan to succeed.

    For the few weeks after Snowball told them the truth, they start gathering animals together and working together. They plan to surround the pigs and the humans. To make this work, they will tell the pigs that they will plan a surprise celebration for them because of his leadership. When the pigs heard about this, they were overjoyed and can't wait for the day to come. A big feast was to be planned for them and animals from around the farms would be coming to this event.

    The day has come. All the animals have gathered in the field, where food was placed all around. The humans even came. When Napoleon stepped in, he saw Snowball. He didn't care much about Snowball and he wants Snowball to think that he was successful even after Snowball was gone. Soon Napoleon knew that something was wrong, and it seems like his animals were going quit well with Snowball. This was quit strange, and he thinks that they might be planning something.

    The ceremony has started and Clover was the speaker. All the animals were quiet and Clover soon started his speech. His speech was truly powerful and it was time to give an award. The award was proven the shown the most leadership in the farm. Napoleon was announced the stage and Clover placed a ribbon on his chest. Then passed a cup of wine for him and his companions. The humans also got a glass of wine. Napoleon knew that they were going to attack soon and he was ready. When the animals starts to run after him, the humans were in back of Napoleon to protect him. They were holding guns. Even though the animals knew that their plan has failed, they still charge after the pigs and the humans. Few died and before the animals reached them to knock him off the stage, the pigs and the humans fainted. What the animals didn't know was that Snowball has poured some poison in the wine. Snowball knew that Napoleon has found out their plot, so he plans ahead.

    Napoleon has finally died and so the humans too. The animals succeeded. They thought that they were in freedom, but they weren't. Snowball stood on top the the stage, he announced that he will now rule over Animal farm and all the other farms. The animals didn't know that Snowball was the most cruel of them all. He pretends to care for the animals and help them out. He uses all of them, even Napoleon. Napoleon was a scape goat for Snowball. Snowballs plan has succeeded, and animal farm finally belongs to him. The rest of the animals haven't found this out yet. The beginning has just begun. Snowball is in control and freedom was never found.

Rebuttal to John: Should Child actors be held as Role Models?

     In John's post about how child actor should not be served as role models :

 "Miley Cyrus has done it all as you can say. In the past years, we has seen her grown more and more out of control. At first, she started coming out with pictures that leaked on to Myspace of her basically half- naked. Then she showed up on T.V. dancing around on a pole and in her music video for ‘Party in the U.S.A’, she was also wearing little to no clothes on. Also, she was dating a guy who happened to be a little older than her. He was 20 while she was only 16. The most recent news on Miley Cyrus was that she was smoking out of a bong and the drug was supposedly salvia. Miley Cyrus is not a good role model and for that reason."

     There were some great points that John made, but he didn't have evidence that she did all those things. These might be all gossip that people spread around. Miley Cyrus is not the only child actor out there. Her actions does not contribute the all the other actors. She doesn't define everything. Although I must agree that child actors must beware about their actions because there are children that follow up and look up to them. Without evidence to cite this and where he got this information, it makes his argument weak. There are lots of counter arguments to this. The question is, what does her actions do? Does it make children follow up with her actions and do the same thing she does? There isn't proof that children that look up to her are taking pictures of themselves half naked. Children have the choice to make their own decisions, everything can't be blamed on the celebrities because they are the role models.


     It is not the celebrities fault that the children follow them as an example. Parents are the ones that are responsible for their own kids. Celebrities are not the ones responsible for the action of their kids. Parents have the chance to discipline them, and they have the choice to tell their kids about whether their actions are good or bad. There are lots of celebrities that are bad role models, and everyday, they have influenced many people's lives. This doesn't mean that we can stop them from doing what they are doing. They are just basically doing theist jobs and they are also human beings. We are not all perfect and we all make mistakes.


     There are steps that parents could take to teach their kids to not follow the wrong path by informing them  about what they should do. " For example, if a celebrity they like is in trouble with alcohol, ask whether their peers are using alcohol or whether they have any anxieties or questions about drinking. Take time to share your opinions -- and expectations -- about the issues." By talking to your kids, even though their favorite celebrity might be taking bad actions, taking to your kids can help them clear their minds up and not follow up with their role models because they are oftentimes confused. Parents need to point out that the misbehaviors of celebrities id mostly because they want to make money. Most importantly, parents should set themselves as role models for their kids. "Explain that poor decisions now can lead to a reputation that can hurt them later." Informing kids about these things can lesson the chance of them being influenced by these peers. Even though their role models might be not responsible for themselves, kids will at least know what is the right decision they should take.


Cites:
http://www.commonsensemedia.org/celebrity-role-models

Animal Farm: The Powers of Napoleon and Snowball

     Power goes out of control when people learn to obtain it. It is true that political power can corrupt the people who attain it. They will mostly take consideration about themselves and control others in their own goods. In Animal Farm, by George Orwell, he implies that there are good and bad leaders. The ones that earns the trust from the people and the ones that use fear as an tool to gain support. In the story, Napoleon uses fear to earn the animals attention and get them to agree with him, while Snowball understands the animals needs and try to help them. 


     From the the beginning, Napoleon never really contributes the the revolution of that farm. He was never a good speaker and uses the animals power to help himself instead. Napoleon would not think of the strengths of Animal Farm, but rather their weak points and take over them. He uses fear as a tool to get the animals to agree and move to his side, but Snowball's speeches were always very strong; in which mostly likely the animals will move to his side. Napoleon uses the fact that the mens will come back to Animal Farm if they don't do what he says. He takes advantage of the animals and use them to help him rebel. The fact that he trained the puppies might seem like he is helping the farm, but he is merely using them has defense when he is in trouble.  In one point, when Snowball came up with the idea of the windmill to help out the labor of the animals. Napoleon had not choice but to disagree with his ideas because he doesn't want the animal to go to Snowballs side, and so he brings out the dogs and chase Snowball out. The dogs didn't really help the farm itself, but helped Napoleon rebel against his opponents. The fear that the dogs chase Snowball out of the farm  grabbed the attention of the animals to follow his orders. He was never a good speaker and used different schemes to make him successful. 


     Napoleon's use of fear over the 'lower' animals was very efficient because the animals could do nothing else. If they don't go as Napoleon orders they are scared about their future and the consequences that they might need to overcome. From the scene when Napoleons sent out the dogs to chase after Snowball, the lower animals was scared that their outcome would be like if they don't follow his commands. Napoleon was quite jealous about how Snowball took over the animals with their attention, and he used tactics to get rid of him, 

"At this...nine enormous dogs wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn. They dashed straight for Snowball..." (Orwell 67).

Even though Napoleon wasn't a good speaker, he used different ways to scare the animals and get them to agree with him. Following up with Squealer with just helped Napoleon earn the trust from the animals and getting them to recognize that Napoleon is a good speaker. If Squealer wasn't there to support Napoleon, he would not be in the position as he is now. Napoleon used people around him to earn the animals trust.
     
     Snowball in the other hand was an stronger speaker, he actually contributes effort to spread equality of the animals. He helps find solutions for the animals and won over Napoleon with his brilliant speeches, "At the Meetings Snowball often won over the majority bu his brilliant speeches, but Napoleon was better at canvassing support for himself in between times," (Orwell 63). Snowballs speeches were often very strong, and he used his heart to help the animals. The creation of the windmill was to lessen the labor for the animals an shorten it so that they don't have to work as much. He was a strong leader and he was for the animals and not for himself. Everything he does inspired the animals to do better. Napoleon got in the way and when he knew that the windmill project was going better than he though, he used the dogs to chase him away.


     Snowball's use of his speeches was very effective and he won most of the votes from the animals. In would include the animals in and let them join in with him. He would never exclude anyone out of and even though the birds didn't have four legs, he said something and found agreement, 

"A bird's wing, comrades," he said, "is an organ of propulsion and not of manipulation. It should therefore be as a leg. The distinguishing mark of a man is the hand, the instrument with which he does all his mischief."

Even though the had the agreement that says that, "Four legs are good, two legs are bad" . Snowball will always find a solution to help out the animals. The act of researching and designing the windmill was also for the animals. He was an effective speaker because he found an common ground with the animals and reached out his hands to help them. He did not use the tool of fear to get their votes, but his effort.


     In conclusion, Snowball and Napoleon was two different leaders. There actions was both efficient to the animals because they used power in a different way. One side was good and one was bad.

Social Networks: Opening Statement

Are online social networks (Facebook, etc.) overall more harmful or more beneficial to society?
     
     Social networking are harmful to our society. Social networking means sitting in front of the computer for hours and hours, connecting with people. Why is this considered more beneficial? Children are so used to social networking that they have forgotten that they  could spent time interacting with people face-to-face. Social networking may allow people to create new relationships with others and reconnect with family and friends. Even improving communication skills. Is it true that it is really improving communication skills? Communication means talking to people face to face. Talking on the computer will not help you communicate with others in real life. We are not practicing when we speak behind the screens. The real way to practice your communication skills is talking to people face to face and getting the time to know more about them in perso7n. Social networking has entice people to spend more time on the computer rather than doing something more productive. "Teens spend an average of nine hours per week on social networking sites." If social networking expands even more, teens will spend even more time on the computer and spending less time interacting with others in person.
    
      Even though social networking sites allow people to message each other, posting blogs about themselves, uploading pictures, and etc. It doesn't mean that others won't get their hands on these information that you posted. Some of these information can even be used against you. Even though you might have deleted information that you have posted, people have ways to retrieve it. Information posted can lead others to stalk your personal life and steal your identity. Even though the information that people post might seem real to you, they might be hiding their real identity. Social networking have no way to verify who they claim to be. Is this really safe. Even though we get to meet people in using social networking, they might not be the person that we think they would be. You will have no idea if they are telling the truth and who they really are. Without knowing the person that you are communicating with, it leads people to be in danger. 


     Social networking has allowed cyber-bullying to happen. It is when people bully you online instead of in person. This is a real problem because at times you might not know who is sending these hate messages to you. It will let a person feel unconscious about their safety and leaving them in danger in public. Cyber-bullying makes it easier for people to bully an individual because the victim might not know who you are. "A 2009 study found that 17.3% of middle school students have been victims of cyber-bullying. Victims often experience a drop in grades, decreasing self-esteem, and other symptoms of depression." In fact, it has also caused others to suicide because they feel insecure about themselves. Does this mean that social networks are beneficial, when in fact it means that people have a chance of hurting others? It has lead others to have brain disorders and even feel bad about the,selves. 


     In conclusion, social networks are note beneficial to our society. It means less time socializing with people face-to-face and spending less time with family and friends. It also leads people to feel insecure and letting themselves out in the open being bullied by others. It has let cyber-bullying causing people to feel insecure about themselves. 


Cites:
http://socialnetworking.procon.org/

Political Power: Animal Farm

Prompt: In your opinion, does political power corrupt the people who attain it? Also, how do you think George Orwell would answer this question?


     In my opinion, I think it depends on who the individual that obtains political power. There were many leaders that obtained political power and made many good changes to the community, but there were also some leaders that were over thrown by their own people. If a person obtains political, they should share it with the people around them, or in other words, serving the people. If this person has the loyalty and is fair with their power, this would not happen. This is very likely when people obtain political power because they will want more power because of the positive things that they are obtaining and all the attention they get from others. These people will most likely corrupt. Because they are superior they have the power to command people and give them orders. In conclusion, it depends on the individual if they will let themselves take over them.


     I am not George Orwell, but I think that he might say the same things that I have said. This is probably the reason he wrote this book. He wants to warn others that gaining too much power is not good. Communism will come to a persons mind when they start receiving just a little power. He explains it by writing a story about how the animals overcome the humans. The pigs are in control and they are not being fair with the others. It will be predictable that the pig's mind will corrupt.

"And remember, comrades, your resolution must never falter. No argument must lead you astray. Never listen when they tell you that Man and the animals have a common interest, that the prosperity of the one is the prosperity of others. It is all lies." (Orwell 30)

      I think that this quote explains that when the animals get their hands on their rights and get interested into political power, they would not step back and keep moving forward. Even though as if there was something blocking their road, they will move on. It would be like they will be only concentrating on their goal and will not lead on to other ideas. If in their minds, they are thinking of power, it will lead to corruption.

"And remember also that in fighting against Man, we must not come to resemble him. Even when you have conquered him, do not adopt his vices...And, above all, no animal must ever tyrannies over his own kind. Weak of strong, cleaver or simple, we are all brothers. No animal must ever kill any other animal. All animals are equal." (Orwell )

      This quote explains that the animals will not follow in the footsteps of the humans, and create equality by themselves. Creating a better place that will not resemble the humans. The humans are known to be tyrants in this story and the animals don't want to be ruled by someone who isn't fair. The animals believe in equality and that all the rights should be shared. Because they will all work together, this is when political power is good, and their minds will not corrupt. If they will share their belief together and work as a group to move up a step, their power will be shared by everyone. Which means that all the animals are created equal.

Elite Colleges

     Whats the best choice of college? The elite ones or the average ones? Its really our own decisions to answer this question. After reading through the many responses, it was surprising that each response persuades a different idea. The one I found most persuasive is: What You Do vs. Where You Go by Martha (Marty) O'Connell. Shes states that a student's decision of what they will accomplish in their time during college contributes to their success in college and beyond: 

"The key to success in college and beyond has more to do with what students do with their time during college than where they choose to attend." (Par. 4)

     This phrase proves and interesting point. She is saying that it is not where you choose to go to college that matters, but the effort that you have contributed in your work. Even though this other person might have choose to attend a elite college, but they did not contribute their best effort. This doesn't mean that they will get hired just because they went to an elite college. Companies mostly hire the person with the most experience and someone who really tries their best. She proves a point that hard work is the answer to success. She says that when people hire you, they look beneath your cover and don't judge you by the college that you attend. This was also a persuasive piece because she supports her point with cited evidence.

     The respond that I found least persuasive is: Skip the Admissions Game by Kevin Carey. He provide some points about how rich people should attend an elite college to their advantage and that the poor should look for an alternative rather than going to an elite college:

"If you're among the small handful of students who have stellar SAT scores and parents with several hundred thousand dollars to spend, you should seriously consider going to an elite college or university." (Par. 1)

     This point is not so persuasive because he is letting the rich know that it is a best choice to attend an elite college. He is saying that if you are rich, you will be able to do anything and the poor have to stick to the less costly colleges. His points are that an elite college is the best and the non-elite ones are okay. This phrase makes his response unpersuasive because poor people can also find their way to attend an elite college by scholarship. There is no precise answer that all rich people should attend elite colleges. I think that we should separate the difference of being rich and poor, and that we should not use our status to determine the best college for us. Even though this part was not persuasive, there are some parts in his response that was persuasive.

Response Post: "Too Much Is Not So Good"

     When Phuong was responding to my blog, there was some points that I found that I can agree. She discusses about what is s good college. Like we are discussing in class. Is going to a elite school the best. There are many responses to this question, and I think that you just have to choose the road you want to take. The points that Phuong makes really made me think:

"Moreover, what is a good college? Is an elite school really rich and provides many resources. Do they have smart students there? A good college is different depending on people’s views. Furthermore, every student is smart. I don’t think that society should separate the students as either smart or dumb. Everyone holds different potentials. Some students might not be able to show it yet because they haven’t discovered it themselves."- Phuong

     What is a good college? I don't agree that the most elite colleges out there are the ones assumed as good colleges. There are colleges that are not listed as the top and are also known as good colleges. I don't like how we are judged through the college that we go to. That proofs nothing at all. We should be the ones to decide if the college we go to is good or bad. For instance, if you attended an elite college, found it very overwhelming, and the professors don't tech that good. I wouldn't describe this as a good college. A good college really depends on our own perspectives.

     Phuong makes a good point about the society not separating students as either smart or dumb because they have their own potential. Maybe they might be good with studying, but they might be really good at somethings else. Saying that someone is dumb means that they are useless; which in my opinion is not true. Everyone have their own strengths and weaknesses. Not everyone is going to be doctors or lawyers. My point is that dumb people can do lots of things that we might not know, they might be geniuses underneath. Maybe one day, those people will be the ones being as successful as others.

     We have to spent less time worrying about what college that we will get accepted in. I'm not saying that you should not put your best effort anymore. Just try your best, and you might have amazing results. Don't push yourself too hard. We should leave some time for ourselves that we could relax and spent out last childhood memories with. When college begins, you might not have as much time to spent times with our friends, and we might be regretting that. College is important, but it depends your decision to what is the best college for you.