IOC - EEK

The Worst IOC Ever- I apologize in advance 

Okay, so the first thing I will address is that I went over time... by a lot. So, with that, I'm docking some points because I apparently can't stop rambling!

Criterion A - 6: As I was listening, I noticed I didn't make nearly as many references to the text as I had wanted to, and the references I did make were lacking. I think I showed my knowledge and understanding of the text and the context around it, and I made enough references to the text to get myself a 6 in this category.

Criterion B - 2: I know for a fact that I mentioned nearly nothing on the effect of the reader, and I also know that I barely mentioned any of the stylistic elements that I had written down and while I harped on diction and connotation, I never mentioned anything else. Not my best at all.

Criterion C - 3: I think I was pretty coherent, however, I went over the time by over a minute. My entire conclusion would probably be cut off, so that really means that the IB wouldn't hear any of my wrap up. Also, I went a little off the rails and lost some of my organization. 

Criterion D - 4: My language was pretty good, I said WAY TO MANY um's, but other than that and some corrections, I think that my language was actually pretty good! Probably overestimating myself on this one, but I needed to say I was good at something! :)

Total: 15/30 - I have no idea what this correlates to, but I definitely think I could do better.   

Wow, These Puns are Really BUGging Me!

#1:Gregory Samsa woke from uneasy dreams one morning to find himself changed into a giant bug.

- diction (connotation/denotation): 
Uneasy demonstrates a slightly negative and foreboding connotation because it is word promoting an anxious feeling or emotion. 
Giant gives a denotation of huge, so it would lead the reader to assume that the bug he has turned into is whatever giant means to them. The word leaves a lot of room for interpretation, such as for example, my version of giant is a bug bigger than a cockroach (the world's most abominable creation), but that may be different than say, Bob's version of giant, which could potentially be the size of a human. 
Bug gives a more colloquial connotation as it is the common name for insect. This could potentially make the sentence easier to read, as there is less interpretation of what a bug is. 

- syntax: The overall syntax is short, and it gets to the point rather quickly without much pausing.

- imagery/details: "Uneasy dreams" gives the imagery of a bad feeling, not exactly nightmares, but waking up nervous and apprehending something. "Changed into a giant bug" is imagery because it is showing that Samsa quite literally woke up as a bug. There isn't much more description about the bug except for the giant part which helps to give a small description of what the bug looked like.

- structure: The sentence takes on an active voice and structure, as there is no "he had been changed" in the sentence. 

- any other stylist/figurative elements: The tone of the sentence is surprising and startling, as it's something that isn't expected when reading the sentence. 

#2:When Gregor Samsa awoke from troubled dreams one morning he found he had been transformed in his bed into an enormous bug.

- diction (connotation/denotation): 
Troubled gives a negative connotation because it is revealing that the dreams were really nightmares.
Enormous gives a denotation of incredibly large, and its more scientific than most versions of giant, giving the word a more scientific and intelectual connotation than other words such as big or huge. 
Transformed has a denotation of change, but it could also mean a temporary change, as changed is seen as more of a permanent action than transformed. 

- syntax: The syntax is longer in this translation, and there are more flowery words such as awoke, and there are also more phrases that make the syntax longer such as "When Gregor Samsa awoke", "one morning" and "in his bed".

- imagery/details: There is some imagery in this translation, but it mostly focuses on location, specifically where Samsa is when he wakes up, and there is again not much describing the bug, other than it's enormous. 

- structure: This sentence is done more in the passive structure and voice because it states the phrase "he had been transformed", which hints that it was someone or something else that turned Samsa into a bug. 
- any other stylist/figurative elements: The tone of this sentence is much more scientific and descriptive, because it gives a set location and a more scientific description of what the bug looked like. While this still would make the tone negative and startling, there is much less of a startling tone as most of the sentence is utilizing location and descriptive (ish) settings. 

#3:As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.

- diction (connotation/denotation): 
Uneasy gives the same connotation as before, with an uneasy and anxious connotation, which in turn promotes that startling and anxious feeling as the sentence goes on. 
Transformed also gives the same denotation as before, which possibly means a temporary change into the bug.
Gigantic gives a denotation of huge and large, similar to Godzilla. This also gives a more generalized connotation of what how big the bug is, as it's not nearly as scientific as enormous, but is a little more specific than giant.
Insect gives a scientific negative connotation to the sentence, and is very factual. Since insect is the more scientific word for bug, this makes the sentence as a whole more factual. 

- syntax: The syntax for this sentence is shorter, with less flowery words, and gets to the point faster than the second sentence. 

- imagery/details: There is a bit of imagery around the description of the size of the bug, but it is very generalized, which is similar to the previous descriptions.

- structure: The sentence is in more of an active voice because it shows that he transformed, not that he was transformed by something or someone. 

- any other stylist/figurative elements: The tone of this sentence is still mainly startling, but is a little more expectant as the sentence is really setting up that something happened to Samsa.  

#4:One morning, upon awakening from agitated dreams, Gregor Samsa found himself, in his bed, transformed into a monstrous vermin.

- diction (connotation/denotation): 
Agitated has a negative connotation that makes the character or reader feel uncomfortable, and in this context, it can show that the presumable nightmare Samsa had left him uncomfortable, and possibly nervous. 
Monstrous has an extreme negative connotation that makes the sentence much more horrifying. In the context, the thing that Samsa had turned into was so horrifying that it was monstrous. 
Vermin also has an extreme negative connotation, and also explains how Samsa feels about the whole situation. 

- syntax: This sentence has a longer syntax, and is filled with phrases leading up to the huge reveal of the sentence. 


- imagery/details: The bug that Samsa has turned into is much more descriptive, as it is no longer a bug, but a monstrous vermin, and this detail helps to explain Samsa's emotions on the fact. 


- structure: The structure is more of an active voice than a passive voice, and this is showing that Samsa himself transformed into the vermin, not someone else turning him into the vermin.


- any other stylist/figurative elements: The tone of this sentence is so different compared to the other sentences, despite it being startling. It is also horrifying and gives a sense of internal hatred due to the description of the bug. 

Each of these translations were pretty similar, but they had their differences, especially in their meaning. The basic meaning was along the lines of: This guy woke up to find he was a giant bug. While the four translations stuck to this meaning, the tone and negativity of the meaning varied. The fourth translation stood out for it's negativity, and it's horror inside the meaning. The other three had variations, with the second and third being a bit more scientific, while the first one was very basic (vanilla ice). The words within each translation give it the tonal meaning, such as the fourth translation's "monstrous vermin" that gave the negative meaning to the text. The stronger the words are, the more effective the meaning is, even if the basic words make the most sense. Syntax also affects the intensity of what is happening, as most of the translations are utilizing flowery words and longer phrases that make the bug appearance more awaited and drawn out. The lack of imagery that was presented made the story feel more abstract and disconnected as there wasn't much description, even for the bug.
The difficulty of reading translated texts is that there are so many words that have so many different meanings that they infer totally different things that give a whole new meaning to the text. Also, as someone who has spent several hours reading translated texts (#HistoryIA), I know that meanings of words don't necessarily cross over from one language to another, so the true meaning of the text could potentially be hidden. While I'm 99% positive that the word from German (or whatever language that is, I'm sorry I'm not cultured) means bug, there are texts that have words that only exist in German or French or Spanish and the translations for those are usually different than what the original language meant.

Don't Judge a Book by its Cover

Never Let Me Go - picture not mine!

The first cover is very similar to the original (I guess) cover on Never Let Me Go. Containing a girl with blond hair and a neutral face, it is similar to the original cover. However, this cover has the purpose of showing something is off, as seen in the foreground and background of the cover. Around the girl, there is all of this natural scenery. In the background of the picture, there is a dark green/black color that could represent foreboding. The girl is wearing simple, but non natural colors - orange/red and black. This helps her stand out from the natural scene and creates an almost disturbing aura about the cover. With this, the purpose is to tell the reader that the girl is different and out of place by sitting in a natural scene. This cover is one of two with an actual person in it, but the implementation of this girl is just off enough to tip the audience that she is different.

Never Let Me Go - picture not mine!

This cover depicts a boat, which is a very important scene in the novel. The boat is an old row boat that is leaning up against a pole, with faded dark colors around it. The faded colors are a mix of black, gray and yellow, which can always symbol ominous or depressing subject matter. The darkness of this cover shows that this book will be sad, and in this case, the purpose is to let the audience know that, along with providing more significance to the boat scene (which actually brings a whole new light to the scene, as I thought it was a meh scene). Along with this negative outlook, the black coloring represents death, and it could show that the purpose of the cover is to let the audience know that death will be a prominent theme of the book.

Never Let Me Go - picture not mine!

This cover is more different than the others, with cooler colors, and nothing natural about it. The cover has important organs such as lungs, stomach, and liver (I actually have no idea what some of this is... I guess I blocked bio from my mind). However, the rest of the body parts, such as all of those other arteries are not present in the cover, it's just those 4 things. Along with this, there are no colors, only shades of black and gray. These colors represent death, such as what the colors mean above. This cover takes a much more scientific approach to the plot of the book. The purpose of this cover could be to go along with the scientific elements of the stories along with identifying all of the essential/nonessential organs that the donors are giving away.

Never Let Me Go - picture not mine!

This final cover is much more upbeat and mysterious than the other ones. This cover has a girl, who is faded and blurred in a blue dress in a yellow background. The overall mood of this cover is nostalgic, and it appears to be representing flashbacks and memory. The yellow can represent the faded parts of a photograph, or a faded memory. The blurred girl adds to the memory aspect of the cover, as she is blurry and as someone gets older, the more blurry and faded their memories become. This cover's purpose could be to hint at the memory aspect of the novel, and to hint at the fact that Kathy as a narrator is unreliable, which is something seen throughout the novella. This hinting is demonstrated through this memory concept as nobody remembers anything perfectly except if they are photographic (lucky).


The four covers are very different from each other, but also are mostly similar in their negative, off putting and freaky moods. The first three covers all hint at something bad, whether it be death or the oddity of what is assumed to be Kathy. Both the boat cover and the body cover utilize black, which symbolizes death. This differs from the woods cover, which just shows the creepiness and uncanny sense of fear that the reader would feel. All three of these covers differ from the fourth, which has a much more positive light with it, along with having a different color scheme than the other three book covers. While the other covers have black, and a sickly yellow and green, the fourth cover has a bright blue and a parchment yellow. Another aspect that all four covers differ in is their themes, because each one is about a different thing in the book: clones, death, science, and memory.

The third cover would make anyone get the scientific vibes from it, as it has to do with a body and important organs, and had I not read the book, I would think that it was about some old person dying due to organ failure and their family being really upset about it. When I first saw this cover, it made sense to me, but I thought of science and death, as I explained with the color scheme earlier. Now that I've read the entire book, not only was I right, but also I think that the relationship lies in the death aspect of the book, as everyone dies (spoiler!!), and they are all dying due to the organs they have to donate. This is obviously from the scientific perspective, and it is focusing on the aspect of being a donor, which is a real thing today because when you get your license you can be a donor. While this may not spark any form of controversy, it is still relevant because in this world people choose to be donors. Overall, someone who is not overly sensitive would probably take a look at this cover because the oversensitive teenager writing this wanted to curl up in a ball and sob after studying it for so long.

The fourth cover is very nostalgic and gives the memory vibe to it, and its also the first word I think of when I see this cover. If I hadn't read the book I would think this book was about a relationship that was on and off, probably taking place in a high school. The relationship between the cover and the novel is about the memories that Kathy shares throughout the novel, and how memories fade making her an unreliable narrator. Memories don't really have much controversy, unless someone is obsessed with the Mandela effect, and in that case, they could argue for hours over the Berenstain Bears. Overall, this cover makes this book appear to be all about relationships, and that would usually appeal to girls as there are a lot of relationship books meant for girls.

Wow, this was a lot... maybe next time I shouldn't develop color scheme theories until after I decide to compare all of the book covers.

A Look at Happiness - From the Happiest Person on Earth

This Ted Talk was all about happiness, and why it possibly isn't the best thing for society. If you're ready to accept the fact that happiness may not help people (which is hard... because I was not), then feel free to watch this Ted Talk here:
https://www.ted.com/talks/emily_esfahani_smith_there_s_more_to_life_than_being_happy#t-726454   

Emily Esfahani Smith makes the argument that happiness is something that comes and goes, but meaning and meaningfulness are things that help you through life and give you something to hold on to. She proves this point by saying that overall people who chase happiness are more depressed, and that those who are happy have a sense of meaning in their life. Adding on to this point of meaning, she introduces the four pillars of meaning: belonging, purpose, transcendence, and storytelling. Each one of these pillars helps someone to recognize their meaning in life, therefore making them a happier person. Smith saves storytelling for last, and she argues that this pillar is the most surprising. Storytelling, in Smith's view, is the story someone tells about themselves and their life, and she argues that people can change the meaning of their story, instead of having it listed out as a set of events that may be important to them. Smith also discusses the sense of belonging, which usually comes out of forming bonds with people that are close friends or family.  Smith discusses purpose as an outlet for talents and strengths in someone, and as a way to help people. Finally, Smith also describes transcendence as something that makes someone feel connected to a higher reality, be it God or even art. Throughout all of this, Smith includes personal examples and how they impact not only that person's life, but other lives as well.

Smith proves her point immediately through ethos, and states that she studied positive psychology, along with dedicating 5 years of her life to study the meaning of someone's life. She also name drops several important psychologists such as Dan McAdams, and gives their input into her development of her research, which is a great example of ethos.

Using logos, Smith is able to effectively demonstrate what she means when she is talking about these four pillars of meaning, a term that she came up with. She structures her argument so that it disproves the main topic, and then provides an answer for it.

There is a lot of pathos in this Ted Talk, and this is because Smith adds personal stories into each pillar of meaning. She includes stories about a soccer player who changed his view on his life based on an accident, along with a story about the rejection of a nicety and its impact. Smith was able to make it personal to listeners and get them thinking about how they are meaningful and how they are also victims to some of the stories she shared.

As someone who is known for being almost robotically happy, I was a bit confused when I stumbled upon this Ted Talk. A very big reason for my confusion was because I have always had the goal of making someone's day better, and I strive to do that through being happy and using my happiness to help others. When I saw this Ted Talk, I had a mini panic attack that I had subconsciously been screwing people over for over 13 years of my life. However, I then felt the need to listen to this talk because I thought I could possibly learn something about why I'm so happy. While that didn't happen, I was able to see right away that everyone I know fits into the four pillars, and I thought that that was really cool. This talk also helped me to understand the reason I cry whenever I see fireworks (transcendence, it's the little things), and that me attempting to make others happy is my purpose (I guess). I think that everyone belongs in the four pillars, and while I may not always get why people are not happy, I know that they have a meaning in this world, and one day they will put it to use and be happy from that. I think that my meaning is just to help people by being happy and not letting life get me down, and anyone who goes to Disney in the next few years may see me put that meaning to use!

Everybody's Got a Dark Side

The first description of Mr. Hyde is told by Mr. Enfield, and mainly describes his physical appearance. He uses words such as deformed and detestable, and even makes a subtle reference to the Ape vs God theory that was apparent in the Victorian era. This description of Mr. Hyde is in a very negative light, and this is because of the maniacal situation he was involved in, and also the judgment of first appearances by Mr. Enfield. Along with the negative light Mr. Hyde is placed in, it is also very vague and ambiguous, with only generalizations and a few words to describe him. This perspective of Mr. Hyde demonstrates the thought process of Mr. Enfield. Mr. Enfield has just witnessed Mr. Hyde run over a little girl, so naturally his thoughts and feelings about the matter are going to be negative, and this affects what other characters such as Mr. Utterson think of Mr. Hyde initially. Mr. Enfield's overall theme of his description is that Mr. Hyde looks like someone people do not like, and radiates and aura of disgust. 

Dr. Jekyll is viewed as almost the complete opposite of Mr. Hyde in his secondary description. Dr. Jekyll is described by the narrator of the novella, but is viewed through Mr. Utterson and Dr. Lanyon. During the beginning of the description, Dr. Jekyll is seen as someone who is kind, caring and overall at peace with himself. However, as the description goes on, there is a point where he undergoes a massive change. He hydes (Get it?... I'm so sorry) himself in his room, and is seen to live vicariously through the dying Dr. Lanyon, who looks like he is about to die, with pale skin, a gaunt face, and an older, terrified aura about him.  Dr. Jekyll's description is in a conflicting light with a sudden switch between positive and negative lights. This description of Dr. Jekyll shows the mysterious circumstances surrounding Dr. Jekyll, especially in the latter part of the description, and it shows the actions going on around him, such as Dr. Lanyon's demise. This description is reflects the confusion in Mr. Utterson, and it affects the terror seen in Dr. Lanyon. 

This particular two voice poem is reflecting on Mr. Hyde's first appearance, which is overall vague and detestable. It is also reflecting on Dr. Jekyll's at once calm, but now terrified and confined nature.

Dr. Jekyll I am Dr. Jekyll There is this darkness inside This darkness is unsettling No matter, there will be only one. I fear he is controlling my mind He is strong, but he won’t survive He will not win! I will fight! I will not lose It has already begun I will make this end He will not kill me! London will not know of Mr. Hyde No! He will lose Hyde will not win Goodbye Mr, Hyde! No!

Mr. Hyde I am Mr. Hyde There is this brightness inside This light will be crushed No matter, there will be only one. I am gaining control in the mind He is weak, and he will die He will not win! He will lose I will win It has already begun I will forever live on He will not kill me! London will fear the name Mr. Hyde I am already winning It’s the end for Jekyll Goodbye Dr. Jekyll! Yes!

Macbeth? You mean Macdeath

Surprise! Or not - it's time to be that person who waited until the very last post to do a freebie. 

And now - some articulate Macbeth rhymey thing to make this a little more exciting. 

There was a Rachel Gerney,

Who has made an elaborate journey.

Every Sunday she would post,

A random blog in which she was the host.

But now is the end of that path,

And this writing is just for laughs.

Sorry to end it this way,

But she will be back after the Holidays.

"If Ye had a Chance to Change Yer Fate...Would You?"

3. Do you believe events in your life have been guided by fate or chance? Why or why not? Based on the text, what do you think Shakespeare's attitude was towards fate? Does Macbeth have any choice in his actions or was everything predetermined? Use examples from the text as your support.

 The concept of fate vs free will is an incredibly popular topic among archaic (or ancient, whatever works) literature. Examples of this are Oedipus Rex (sophomore year anyone?) and probably some other books that are super popular that I can't remember right now. Shakespeare's Macbeth is filled with the idea of fate vs free will, with the witches, supernatural elements, Macbeth's slow decent into complete madness, and even his murder of characters such as King Duncan and (SPOILER ALERT!) Banquo.

Fate vs free will has always been a tough subject for me to answer, partly because I constantly doubt myself after I make a definitive answer. Macbeth's case is no different. There are completely valid arguments on both sides, so forgive me if I sound like either a devil's advocate or an incredibly indecisive individual (Assonance and articulation! See what I did there?) .

Macbeth has encountered the supernatural and fate through the Weird Sisters in Act 1, and that has started the spiral into his madness for lack of a better word. Shakespeare was probably going for more of the fate side, and this is proven right away by how much he includes the supernatural in the play. There is so much rhyme that indicates the supernatural, which in this case is fate.

Another piece of evidence for this is in a recent scene (SPOILER ALERT!!) where three murders have a light so that they are able to kill Banquo and Fleeance, and then the light goes out. Neither of the three murders touched the light, and it went out as if by magic (or fate). Even more evidence for this is the event right after the Weird Sister's prophecy - Macbeth becoming Thane of Cawdor. This coincidence is fate coming into play.

Shakespeare, while having fate be the majority of the reason why the events in Macbeth happen the way they do, doesn't completely control all of his actions. There are definitely moments where he controlled himself and he wasn't dictated by fate. One piece of evidence for this is when he is making the decision to murder Banquo to stop his prophecy from happening.

Another piece of evidence for this is when Macbeth actually kills King Duncan. While it was mentioned in the prophecy that Macbeth would become king, it never said how. His decision to murder King Duncan was his to make, despite a dagger possibly appearing out of nowhere.

Now, why on earth would Shakespeare decide to have fate control events, but not completely control Macbeth's actions? Well, to a super paranoid man such as King James, fate dictating life is not only terrifying, but allowing people to have a bit of freedom of how they execute things makes it so much worse. Poor King James! He probably had nightmares for weeks after seeing Macbeth.

So now that I have talked all about Macbeth, I guess I'm supposed to evaluate whether my life is controlled by fate, and also question how fast I'll be able to sleep for the next week, or month.

There have definitely been events in my life where I've said "Okay, what are the chances of THAT ever happening?!", and these events I think may have been driven by  fate. Actually, all of this is ironic for me because I'm a huge believer in karma, yet I don't consider myself to be incredibly spiritual or religious.

Some of the craziest events that I have to believe are driven by fate are the rather unfortunate several deaths that I've had in my family, starting from when I was about 6 years old. This is not to turn this post into a sob story; I've just had a lot of people die over the 17 years I've been alive. The range of evaluations have been used: a heart attack & old age being some of them, but I think they just happened for a reason. However, my aunt's death was so mysterious that I have to believe that it was a result of fate. I actually remember asking if anything would happen to her and her baby, and no one really believed me, so I think that was a bit of fate too in a twisted, horrifying way.

Obviously, having several people & a dog that you know and love die in under a decade is something I don't find to just be a coincidence, and I think that fate has really played a part in most of those deaths. Why? I think it might be to balance out the life I have always had, as it has never been straining, I've never had other family issues, and I'm now incredibly thankful for what I have because of what has happened over the years. I can't say that I would be as thankful (which sounds horrible) if I hadn't experienced these traumas.


Onto a happier part of the blog (I promise I'm done with the sad stuff!), my entire existence is based off of fate. My parents met by complete coincidence on a literal street corner. Long story short, my dad had two options, go out to a bar with his friends or leave and go home. My mom also had two options, take the long, lighted way home, or the shady dark alleyway home. My mom would typically take the dark and shady path, but that particular day she decided to take the lighted way home, and that's when she met my dad. Had she taken a different path, or had my dad decided to go home at any point, they never would have met and I would never have been born. Crazy right?

I think that incredibly important events in my life have been controlled by fate, and I think this is because to either balance out all of the good in my life, or just to say it can. However, the little events, I think I control, because they are my decision to make. So, the answer is... both?