Mitch

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Trowa_fan [/i] [B]I like Mac Beth it was a good play. [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] Please put more thoughts into your posts. Tell [i]why[/i] you liked Mac Beth....and tell if you like Shakespeare. I hope to see an improvement.[/size]

[size=1] First Name: Mitchell Smith Age: Soon to be 17. Hair Color: Brown. Eye Color: Green. Height: 5 feet 8 inches or so. Wardrobe: Pink Floyd T-shirts, Led Zeppelin T-shirts, jeans. Just basically Shirts and jeans. Personality: Quiet when I feel like it, loud and humorous when I feel like it. Hair Style: A little gel for leverage. Favorite Music Type: All genres except Country and Rap. Favorite musical Band/Artist: Pink Floyd, Tool, Rush, Radiohead, Led Zeppelin. The list goes on and there's too many to name. Hobbies: Writing.[/size]

[size=1] He's old enough to drive, as am I. How is this being "protective"? I think I have enough sense, I mean this October 12th (Sunday) I am 17. Whatever.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Queen Asuka [/i] [B][color=hotpink][size=1]I don't think you can say that someone isn't a true writer just because they only published one novel. She maybe writes in her spare time or as a hobby and doesn't want to publish anything else. I would consider myself a writer in some senses. I like to write and I love what I turn out most of the time. That's like saying someone isn't an artist unless they do art that gets big and famous. I don't like that opinion very much. -_- [/color][/size] [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] Asuka, I mentioned that she might write in her free time right in my post. I'm not saying she isn't a true writer...but real writers keep writing and don't stop. I meant it rather lightly. Just consider it. I as a writer see that it's most important to me that people read my stuff. If I were in Harper's shoes, I'd want more of my stuff published, even if it wasn't as good. That doesn't matter. What matters is it's something people will read and like.[/size]

[size=1] I liked Asphy's better. I sort of came in there thinking hers would be better, because I just consider her a good writer. Not that Deedlit's was horrible...but as I was reading, it was...too explanatory. That made it boring, since really, I have seen a snowstorm I suppose, and I already know what snow is and such...so that approach that Deedlit did just didn't work for me. But mechanically it was pretty good...Deedlit seems to have a nice grasp on that, and she also has some decent grasp of word choice. It's the way it was written that's just bleh. As for Asphy's...I enjoyed it a lot more, since it told a story, and had characters, and all this gravitated me more into this story than Deedlit's. I found the use of apostrophes as quotation marks a bit odd, but it works for me. I also would like to show you, Asphy, how you can make large chunks of conversation into paragraphs. Not that you really did this wrong...or anything, but some of it could be used like so: The man had dark black hair, dark as a black pony. It stood on his hair so nicely, I just had to ask him about it, I couldn't help it. I tugged his collar with my hands, and he knelt down to me, looking me straight in the eye. "What is it dearie?" he asked, letting out a smile. "I like your hair," I said. "Ah yes, I really like my hair too. You see, my grandpa, he had grey hair all the time when I was growing up. And my Dad, he had dark brown hair, you know, that almost looked black but wasn't. Then my Mom, ah, she was a beauty, really was. She had really long, really black hair, like mine. [Notice I don't end the quotations] [Notice I use the quotations here]"She always had this nice smile, too. And you know who she got her black hair from? She got it from my grandpa, the one I'd thought had always had grey hair, and nothing less. Ah yes. She was a beautiful woman, god rest her soul." The man continued to look at me, but now, he was looking past me...looking across the room, at the wall. It looked like he was remembering something. That's that. Hm...also, don't overuse commas. They really cause sentences to be choppy, and just because it's said "as a rule" you have to use a comma in a certain place, don't. This is your own writing, do whatever you want with it. Here, let me give you one sentence, and show you how it changes without the commas. This is right from your story. "I remember several things she, in her wisdom, told me; the day ended at five o?clock in the afternoon, babies were made by fathers touching mummies? stomachs and wishing for a baby, Barbie Barbies was a game we played where we pretended to be Barbies. " Notice how it's chopped, especially the part, "...She, in her wisdom, told me." Now watch what I do to it. "I remember several things she had told me in her wisdom; the day ended at five o?clock in the afternoon, babies were made by fathers touching mummies? stomachs and wishing for a baby and Barbie Barbies was a game we played where we pretended to be Barbies. " Mm. It wasn't an extremely good example, but do you at least see the difference in the start? When I was reading it, it was really clipped, and I had to pause and figure out what you were saying since you had the comma splayed there in interruption like that. By just getting rid of that, and placing it differently in the sentence, I was able to get it to flow seamlessly and better. Not that it's wrong to use commas zealously, but it just did not flow well with what you'd written to that point. It slowed it down more than helped. I also didn't like the end of it. Either put some emphasis on it that it was sarcastic, or just get rid of it altogether. It doesn't rest well as an ending...it feels sudden more than anything, and doesn't have a final feel to it. Otherwise it was above average, and I enjoyed it a lot more than Deedlit's. I'm sorry if I'm being too critical...but you know the drill. I'm just being honest.[/size]

[size=1] I totally hate these things. My parents don't seem to trust me at all; nor do they think I'm responsible at all...and with my crash recently, now I [i]have[/i] to get another job as lazy as I am and as much as I don't want to with school and all. This is beside the point heh. I have AOL. They have me rated under the "13-year-old" category on it, which isn't "Mature Teen," but the level below that. So because of this, it blocks some people's blogs, my own livejournal at times, and other random crap that shouldn't be blocked at all period. This isn't the worst part at all to me, really. The thing that really annoys me is they put the newer AOL timer feature on it. I get two hours a day...which is fine with me. It's just really annoying, you know. I like to do things when I feel I want to do them...not be restricted to having to go on at some certain time span elapsing two hours a day. I don't know...they don't seem to trust me at all. But I guess I live with it. It isn't too big of a deal, I suppose. I live with it. But man...when they were using this program that let them see [i]EVERYTHING[/i] I did online, that was scary. And I do mean everything. It let them see each and every website I went to...each and every AIM conversation I had (in full), each and every thing I typed up, each and every e-mail I checked, each and every little thing I did online. That's just going too far into my personal life in my opinion. I mean, seriously. My Mom was coming up to me, asking me why I'd told this person online that I loved them (it was Ginny, heh, I haven't talked to her for quite some time, though), asking me, after reading this conversation I had with Tony, why I had been arguing about "OOtok Boards," as they say, and my Mod position there. It's just a really paranoid feeling, thinking that each and every thing you say online, your parents will hear. To me, that's just taking this too far. They don't seem to check that progam any longer, thank God. But now they have AOL Guardian on it...just so they can see every website you go to and how many IMs I send. At least it doesn't show everything I do, though. So now I feel more safe and like I can actually use the internet for what I use it for. My Dad seems to think I do nothing on the internet and considers it mostly a waste of time on my part, and often says I'm "like a drug addict with it." It doesn't even compare in my opinion. And yes, the internet is often a waste of time, but I've met some really good people on it, and I've also learned a lot of things and been able to discuss a lot of things that otherwise I wouldn't really have the gall to do. I'm just really timid towards things... That is about all I have to say. The main thing that annoys me is that I cannot download music when Tony recommends some bands. He usually links them to his own site, and you can download them there. But my computer will only save them as HTML files due to the fact of the parental controls. It's just annoying. I also can't download anything off of Kazaa or anything. I miss that somewhat too, since it allowed me to listen to some bands I hadn't listened to before. Such as Nine Inch Nails.[/size]

[size=1] Sara, I don't exactly see what warrants this to be closed, you know. But whatever, it's your call. Yes, their posting quality could be better...but then again, it could be worse, you know? At least it's not some completely irrelevant post about nothing, or a spamified post that's full of nothing. There have been [i]far[/i] worse threads around here than this...such as those ones dayday and co. made. Ah well. It's your call, I guess. Personally, I would have just told them to increase their posting quality...and to critique better. Not close the thread entirely. It isn't so bad that it needs to be closed. There has been a lot worse threads around here than this.[/size]

[size=1] The thing that still urks me is that Harper Lee hasn't written any other books. Seriously, she isn't a true writer... I'm sure she has to have written more stuff...but to not publish it since she's become so famous? I recollect she spents years and years perfecting TKM...and I suppose that's one of the main reasons it's as good as it is. But really, a real writer just doesn't stop writing...amd publishing, if that's in the question. This book is quite enjoyable, of course. I really think a lot of the incidents in the book actually happened during Harper's childhood and such...I mean, Atticus is said to be based on her father...and I'm supposing a lot of the other characters are probably based on things close in tie with this. Also, she supposedly just wrote all the different chapters of the book in no certain order...and then tied them all together. Anyway, that's about all I have to say. It's sad she doesn't write anymore books, really. Ah well.[/size]

[size=1]in the rusty swings where children laugh like nothing is under their beds it all rests dead when the leaves fall. when the leaves leave. when a child, fallen, falls to his knees. there stands me helping him to his knees. and just to think of what was. and what is. realize the way my hands feel too big on me. or that this will never be me again. each year pumpkins come and children haggle into suits of what they might become wearing it proudly and with care. and i no longer will be there. i will wear a pigskin that is full of hair that will slowly grey in the seasons' rain and snow. and hail. and the endless fails. until one day i will stand by another child that will smile to me like wind in the trees saying please. the leaves are falling one by one and growing dead in the sun and moon. everytime i touch one with my hands it feels like nothing. it scrunches in my hands. scrunches on my cleats like a lost dream. the children laugh and play in leaves that scatter them until they are covered in make believe. and they throw them in the air in a scatter of hands and i am left to just stand by their sides as they play. every year this time comes around when scarecrows are in my head and spiders are able to crawl on what the scarecrow's made dead. i am left to the machine's deed. left to suffering as the children swing on their rusty swings.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by maladjusted [/i] [B][size=1] *coughs* I really think JK Rowling has no definate writing style, and bluntly, I think she's just an average writer. I just think she has an extremely good plot.[/size] [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] All writers have some kind of writing style...and as for Rowling, she certainly does. She is pretty much an average writer due to the fact a lot of writers have written like she does...the way she writes often reminds me of Stephen King's writing in some aspects...not all, of course; but yes, of course she has a writing style, even as much as it's been used before. You are right about plot-wise. This is how many writers make up for their dull, uninteresting writing--they are able to weave very nice stories.[/size]

[size=1] I really don't have much to say in response lol. I see something defined such as abstract shouldn't have a venued and certain definition as you seem to claim it has; as in, having complete control of your emotions, doing everything and doing it right, and so on. How is this abstract? How is being in complete control of your emotions abstract, or how is something even labeled as "abstractism." At dictionary.com there [i]is no definition for abstractism[/i]. It doesn't state these things you seem to say are "abstractism." Abstractism, to me, isn't some state of mind, or some certain way you have to be. I haven't learned it like this...I'm guessing you took some classes or such about it, and from it have coined this term; but to me, abstractism isn't what you say. And really, all it is is a word. A word put together by letters. That's all abstractism is. Just think about it...by defining "abstractism" you in turn aren't being abstract. You're conforming to this belief that, by the so-called principles you have learned of "abstractism," that this is how and what it is. When in reality...it isn't anything but a definition. You're living [i]by[/i] this definition. My thoughts on what you have said or unfocused. I don't quite see what you're saying exactly. To me, being abstract is being original. There's nothing more or less to add to that.[/size]

[size=1][b]Name:[/b] Mitch. [b]Age:[/b] 19. [b]Hometown:[/b] Bismarck, North Dakota. [b]Any Pets?:[/b] Nah. [b]Attached or Single?:[/b] What? Cows? Oh. [b]***Roommate [To be decided after all signups are final]:[/b] --- Don't ask me lol. *hopes Tony will be in this thing* [b]Brief Life History:[/b] I was born. Then I met the muffin man. [b]Personality Traits:[/b] [i]Like:[/i] Writing, reading, movies, fries, [b]ketchup[/b], hamburger, girls, women. [i]Hate:[/i] Sports, ditziness, haters, pumpkins that have wide staring eyes that seem to be looking at me and sporadically cleaving me with their seeds. Mm. Yes. [b]Appearance:[/b] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=494080[/img] [/size]

[size=1] People that are more abstract than anything [i]do[/i] live in lonliness on one hand, heh. They go against the usual, in a fashion, it could be said. They are often segragated. It's just like anything else--being black or white--being religionist or anti christian or against religion--it's just like this. People, in one form or another, will hate you for what you are, and in another fell swoop, love you for what you are. It's like this for anything, basically. Not to say that there [i]isn't[/i] other people out there to form a group with, but still, there's an external conflict with those that don't agree with you. In this way you are given a certain label and given a certain ideal way you act and a certain way you'll probably be treated. People often don't like things they don't understand. Just look at Communisim during the time when the US and Russia were at its cold war; just look at how, after Sept. 11, people condemned people of the cause of it as a whole. People are stupid like this, and are going to always point fingers at whatever they can and fight whatever change they had. Charles called me a post modernist for a story I wrote...and the overall style I had been starting to write then. It's called "567," and it was critically acclaimed as good here at the boards by those who read it...I'll find the link and edit this post, but for nowm on with our discussion, heh. I say "trying" because not all combinations and thoughts are going to"be" the actuality of something...or a choice at something; they will merely be tried side thoughts which are fragmented aside. I guess really "self-awarness" is most definitely a good thing to have...but really, I don't have this, I'm sorry to say. I doubt myself each and every day, I analyze things I do and take in; I'm critical of everything that I feel, touch, take in, come to conclusion to, understand. I'm also very timid...often more internal than anything else, often horrid at taking some skill which I could care less to learn and beign forced to do it. Yet, if you look at this, this is being "self aware" in some ways..instead of just jumping into someting, I take the time to master it within my own self. I am paranoid of it rather than just absorbent of it. I take from it what I want and discard what I don't. I don't know. Even if I am more of an abstract person than anything...you still can't label what "abstractism" is. To do this is to be contradicting of the very purpose which you tell and slather. It is to not be abstract about abstract. Anyone can be abstract to a sense that they want to be...and labeling it as being "completely self aware" is not going to work in everyone's case, and really, narrowing something down like this only makes it tougher...to actually know what you're even labeling. So thus, I don't really consider anything certain to be "abstract," nor do I consider any certain type of habitual behavior or action as being it. Rather, I let it be loose in my mind as possible. From what I said, I also hit with your saying that I'm not abstract because I feel "loneliness." All humans feel emotions...and to discredit these is to not use the heart as the head. We all make some decisions based upon our emotions...and even as far as you can say, you cannot control your emotions all of the time, nor can you manipulate them like a puppeteer dancing his hands merrily on a string marionette. You can't just hide them away all the time... And by hiding them away, you begin to feel empty, apathetical, drained, held in, [i]lonely[/i]. Eh. That's about enough for me.[/size] [b]Edit:[/b] Here is the link to "567," please read it and comment on it if you're interested enough. I still have yet to finalize it...and any further thoughts on it I'd love to hear. [url=http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23889]"567."[/url]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i] [B]It sounds like you guys are expecting way too much from a film that has to compress an epic novel into two hours. It was as faithful as I think can be expected, although it obviously omitted some things and moved others so they'd actually work as movies. Some things in books just cannot be translated well, and you don't exactly want to end a film with a death either. Good film writing and good novel writing are very different things, I'd say. I think they did well with what they could do. They have to somehow please fans of the books as well as the general movie going public... and that's not exactly an easy task. [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] Tony, of course I am going to expect way too much from a book-to-film makeover. In most cases a movie is [i]never[/i] better than a book, but there's always exceptions, of course. This is the way I am with almost anything; I am overly analytical and overly harsher on things than I should be. This is the way I've always been...and I myself try not to fall short of my shortcomings and exceed everything. [/size]

[size=1] Indeed, it [i]is[/i] double posting. It isn't quite my place to call this...since I no longer moderate this forum (I used to), but yes, it's still double posting. If I had the power, lea, I would combine your two posts into one. And here's another tip. If you want to push a topic that last you posted in up, but can't double post, then you simply copy your old post, then delete it. After doing so, make a new post, and copy your old post and make your new one in it together. By this you will be able to post your next post, as well as push whatever topic back up. And Raven, I loved that joke. It's right up my alley. You don't know how long I laughed at that, and if you could only have seen the little devious smirk I got just while reading through it only half way.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PoisonTongue [/i] [B]Mitch is correct. Abstract thought is the most important aspect of the human existence. For those of you that don?t live in abstract thought, you will never fully understand what abstract thought is. Abstract thought is?for lack of a better phrase, ?thinking outside the box.? Abstractists live in a world totally unlike your own. We look at things from a totally different perspective; our minds work in a totally fractured way. Er, our minds work in a way that looks totally fractured to you. We understand it completely. The way I see it, is that until you fully realize WHERE and HOW those confused looks are coming from?what their origin is?you will always be rooted in basic thought. When someone you know talks for hours upon hours about things you never thought of before, when that person speaks in a way you can?t quite comprehend, presenting ideas and ideals that you have never heard before, you are talking to an Abstractist. That is Abstractism. But do not confuse Abstractism with self-imposed social removal, and do not accuse Abstractists of being aligned with poseur social rejects; we?re not. Abstractists and Marxist Pythonians fully understand who they are, how they think, where they are going, who we are talking to, what we are talking about, how our minds work, how to control our minds. Not to sound pompous or disrespectful (as that is not encouraged among Abstractists and Marxist Pythonians), but Abstractists and Marxist Pythonians are hyper-advanced thinkers. I go as far as to say, Abstractists and Marxist Pythonians are the evolution of the human mind. [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] Well said, well said. Abstract thought, to me, is the way things shall progress further in their manners. Just look at governments today--communism, democracy, others of the sort--they were all embelished by people, who, during their times, were seen as radical, and who, during their times, thought radically and abstractly. This may be a horrid example...but it serves its purpose. Many people don't seem to like abstract thought, yet it's the main thing in a writer's principle in my opinion. It's something that tells a good story. Poetry itself is almost completly abstract thoughts strung together, yarned into strings and fragments which form a whole. Charles has said I am a post modernist. It's a nice name. It basically shows what I am--I think ahead, outside of the box. I dig into things as deep as I can, I become a reaper and shredder of everything I own in my head. Rather than just accepting things and ploying my faith to them, I let them fester in my mind, fragment into other thoughts which lead to other thoughts which lead to even more thoughts. I'm a parabola. I try to see the deepest, most hitting roots of something and apply it to everything I know. Most people don't quite understand this...but I know exactly what I'm doing when I think things out so fine and finite and give them their own identities. I sound so much like a hopeless romantic lol. I suppose that's what most poets/abstractees are. They live in the lonliness of deceptively understanding something to its full.[/size]

[size=1] I hope this thread is closed lol. It has strayed far, far off the topic....[/size]

[size=1] I still haven't posted in this thread because I just don't know what to say. Do you know how much Final Fantasy Seven is to live up to? It's...too much for me to even put my finger on. This game just is one of my favorite games of all time...and almost my favorite Final Fantasy (my favorite is FF 3 (american)). This is so much to live up to...you know. And I have extreme [i]extreme[/i] [b]extreme[/b] doubts. Very high doubts. Very many doubts. Plus you have to look at the long-term effects of this stuff Square is now pulling. It just doesn't feel like Final Fantasy to me anymore...it's like they're getting so run-down and out of ideas they are finally doing what they never did--making sequels to these amazing games. And starting off with FF X-2 was fine in my opinion...X as a game and all was decent...but I didn't love it so much that I wouldn't hate to see it disgraced. But FF 7? I never ever ever ever thought I'd hear Square touching its hands on this. This, this game is a masterpiece in ever facet. The characters...the magic system...the way the graphics look on FF 7 to this very day I still love...the settings...the story...I loved everything about 7. It's just so great. It is sooooooooo much to live up to. I can't even comprehend how much it is to live up to. And I doubt Square is going to make anything worthy of a sequel. This game was magic. And magic doesn't happen often. If I had a choice...I'd rather there not be a sequel. And if there had to be a sequel...[b]I want a game[/b]. Not a movie. Movies are good...but from what I've seen...I am going to come into this thing totally comparing it to FF 7 the game...and it's going to fail in my expectations. I know it will. It just has to, you know. 7 is just like that to me personally. Sephiroth died at the end of 7. I'm going to love seeing how this is pieced together by Square. Yes, Sephiroth is awesome. Yes, he was one of the best characters in the game But no, I don't want him in the movie just because he's so cool. I want an actual sequel to FF 7...which I doubt I shall have. I would so much rather have this be a game. So much rather. So very much rather. I would like it to be a game...a game that has the same look and feel as 7. The same outdated, beautiful graphics, the same outdated, beautiful FMVs. The same game...only a sequel and more of the epic story I feel 7 deserves. But not a movie. Yes...this is somewhat like a wet dream. But I am not going to say right off that I'm going to love it right off for what it will be. I am dead serious about FF 7 as a masterpiece...and I doubt that Square can deliver what 7 had. But we'll see. Indeed we will.[/size]

[size=1] Just like Raven...I didn't really enjoy the second movie as much as the first...I mean, the first was what it should have been--a base for the next two movies. But the second was too loaded with...useless things when the movie could've been spiraling better in its directions. Ah well. I saw the second movie once...it was okay, I thought, but I still loved it because...hell, it's LoTR. This is the shiznit lol...as some might say. A masterpiece of a book. The one fantasy novel which shall be known for long. Second time...I was mostly bored with it. I felt that it moved so slow...and that the humor, and just the way it was presented could've been way better managed. Plus I'm sick of all those feminities loving so gracious Legolas. Eggo my Leggo, pff. What am I expecting? I am expecting this movie to be the best of them all. [spoiler]I want to see the death of the witch king...and that (erg, can't remember names) girl that is...I believe...related to Theoden die. I also want to see Shelob in all her bitchin glory. This is where they didn't remain nice to the books...in the second book, Frodo and Sam meet up with Shelob at the end, and The Witch King and that one gal do battle to the death of them. This was what I was really looking forward to in the second movie...but didn't get it.[/spoiler] I guess they just saved the best for last. They better deliver on it, too, or else I will...read the books over and over again and complain in letters of Joe Doeity of how much the second and third movies were crap on a boiling, dung-heaped stick. That is all, ladies and gentlemen.[/size]

[size=1] Yes, that weird dude [i]has[/i] been implanted with Agent Smith. That was one of the harder things people seemed to not gain from [i]Reloaded[/i]. I have not seen the trailers...other than the one that was shown at the end of [i]Reloaded[/i]...and from what I remember, there is definitely going to be a "big showdown" between Smith and Neo as it appears...and I feel that both Smith and Neo are going to be the most important implications in the new movie. James, I'd also like to bring up even more theories of how Neo was able to destroy the machines with his "one" powers when he was, from all we know, [i]outside[/i] The Matrix. Do the new trailers hint at this? Who knows. I don't really plan on seeing the trailers...they won't ruin much, but I'd rather just wait it out and let [i]Revolutions[/i] be what I hope it will lol. So saying this, I suppose at this time I am mostly useless in this thread...other than creative things I could come up with as to how things could do this or that or what and when or...anything. I did see [i]The Animatrix[/i]...rented it. Certainly interesting. Of course I see Smith as a threat to the machines...just as the French dude was and his cronies. They were meant to be deleted...to die, in a sense, and averted this. Thus they are a threat to The Matrix as a whole....they allow things not to run their regular courses as The Matrix program does. God, I can't wait to see this movie. I just hope it lives up to..everything. Which is going to be hard.[/size]

[size=1] He's a God. That is all I have to say... Nah, lol. Damnit, and here I wanted to be all cryptic lol. I actually haven't read too much of his stuff yet...but the way he uses the language is [i][b]amazing[/i][/b]..I do not understand why most people totally loathe him. He's amazing. People hate the archaics of his writing the more of anything I'd say. This is one of the reasons I love it...otherwise I wouldn't at least have some archaic in my vocabulary. And he just uses the language amazingly. AMAZINGLY. All I have read is [i]Julius Caesar[/i], [i]Romeo and Juliet[/i], and [i]The Tempest[/i]. Since for last Christmas I got [i]an entire set of all his sonnets and plays[/i], I read [i]The Tempest[/i] alone. Reading his plays alone is a lot harder than in class...since in these books, there isn't notes that tell what things mean, so I have to look them all up in the dictionary. But this isn't to say I didn't enjoy [i]The Tempest[/i] so much. I just found it harder to read at this time lol. But I'm sure once I finally get my butt in gear and really crack down on this crap...something should happen, like me knowing as much archaic vernacular as I want lol. Right now I am rereading [i]Julius Caesar[/i] for the second time, since I enjoyed this play most of them all. So far I am really enjoying it...I mean...I can't even begin to explain how he uses the language. I don't even compare to him, in my opinion, as a writer. The only one I'd put in his league as this much of a genius is my other God, Poe. God Poe is great....oh my God. [i]I LOVE POE[/i]. Okay. That is enough...[/size]

[size=1] This one I enjoyed a lot more than the first. The way you write poems...with one-line stanzas is certainly interesting. I guess it kind of works, but really, I'm so used to stanzas lol. I liked it. It appeals to the mood I seem to be in at the moment, lol. Some of the stanzas in it were especially effective, such as: "We shall never meet in another December," "and now I realise that in the end that love never dies." And so on. I think the thing I like the most is how simple it is; using the language in the easiest and most "how it is" way you can. It isn't labored down with metaphors, similies, and other stylistic devices, but rather, you just tell it like it is, like you're talking to a dear friend. It works. Write more.[/size]

[size=1] I think that the most beautiful thing of the human mind is its abstract thinking. Watch as I use abstract thinking to justify why human minds can somewhat grasp the concept of infinity. We are surrounded by finite things all our lives. Food is finite. Clothes are finite. Money is finite; our lives are finite; the president is finite; the sun is finite; the earth is finite; the brain is finite, and so on and so forth. The way our society itself is molded is by these finite chains. Due to the fact we don't live infinitely, we live life as a momentary thing, rather than a long-term thing. Due to this, it is very hard to even grasp the thought of infinity. Seeing that so many things die, it's hard to believe that something could go on forever and ever and never end. Now we can think that something goes on forever, and tell ourselves, but we can't understand why, because to us, everything dies and ends at some point, even infinity has to have an end. Try and imagine what infinity looks like. Even try to take apart some of these varying statistics--such as there are about 6 [i]billion[/i] people on this Earth. You just can't do that, you can only take in the number, 6,000,000,000, and say, "Woah, that's a lot," and that is all. You can't really see an image of it in your head. You just know that it's a lot, for sure. Yet if we think of one, you can see one of something easily enough. And if you think of two, that's easy enough too. Ten isn't too hard for me to imagine...but it's when you get to over that that I just can't see that much. Now think even deeper. All numbers are is a way to know how much of something there is. All they are is slashes and dashes and circles and scribbles. That's all they are: you are the one that gives them meaning. Infinity could be the same thing if you want to look at it that way. Since it's so hard to grasp, I don't try to understand how long infinity is, rather I see it as one thing: infinity; it means something that goes on forever, something that never ends, something that has a beginning but no end. What's so hard to fathom about that? It's when you try to look past the definition, and give it an image in your mind that it just doesn't work well. So I do think, in an abstract manner, that humans [i]can[/i] grasp the concept of infinity. Really, we don't even know of anything that [i]is[/i] infinite for certain; we know that one day the sun will become a white dwarf, and dissipate (I believe it goes through different stages, according to the way it goes, such as a red giant, then a white dwarf, or maybe it's the other way around, who knows); we know that stars are born and die, just as our sun I mentioned; we know that the earth is not going to last forever, that one day, perchance, it will be hit by a meteor, or maybe mankind itself will destroy it, or other venues; we know that every animal or insect dies on this planet; we know that chemicals are consumed and made, enzymes used and made, energy used and made and drained. Everything we know as humans and learn about dies or leaves or uses or abuses in some way. People sit here and ask, "What's the point of life?" and I say there isn't one. If there is, then it's to die. To be finite. To have an ending. To cease to exist as the beginning had ushered you to exist. Hm. I'm blabbering. Let's talk about babies, shall we? Our society eats babies. We should really just place "We Eat Babies" all over lol. It'd be so cool, really. We do, though. When babies are born it's something like a blank canvas to draw on that's only a thin, bony frame of what's to come. Our minds work mainly from memories and from learning things and keeping them. By doing this, we are able to take other things, using our memories, and use what we know to figure out what we don't know. Just take language as a great example. A definition of a word is the use of other words you already know to give a new word meaning. This is pretty well how our brains work. Of course, we forget things over time, but that's for useless things we don't need. Otherwise, we take in things from our surroundings, learn the proclivities of our parents, and take everything in as we are babies and use that to become. Mm. Ah well. That is enough blabbering from me for now lol. My friend says I don't need to write an essay...[/size]

[size=1] I also had a C in my History class a la midterms. But I checked my grade again today (since we have this thing where we can check grades) and it went up to a B. Listen to what Sara has said mainly; I'd end up saying the exact same thing to you...but I don't feel it needs to be repeated. Basically, to do good in a class, you have to adapt to the teacher's teaching style and just overall the way the class is. For my history class I absolutely love my history teacher. His name is Mr. Schimdt, he's in his 20s, and it's just great to have a younger teacher over a more older one because he isn't all strict and fogey really. He tells you the class like it is. At the beginning of the year he said the only thing that needs to be done to pass the class was to read the book, take notes, and that was about all; and he told the truth. Not all teachers are like this, though. You just have to play it by either hard-learned lessons, or by talking to the teacher--and if that's needed, I'd talk to the teacher as Sara said: politely, after class if possible. Adapting to a class means either listening right to the teacher the first day and doing what he says, or learning the hard way, getting a low grade on a test or quiz or whatever, and then seeing what you did wrong and fixing it. I hadn't been taking good enough notes--one quizzes, it's open note, and they're good for studying--so then for this next chapter I sat down last weekend and just got all the notes down and this worksheet done. I was really satisfied with the results, too. This is the main reason my grade went up to a B. We had a quiz this Thursday, and most people still hadn't gotten good enough notes to do well on it. But I got 21/20 on my quiz since I'd taken notes. I only got one wrong, and that's because the question was about how people realized the spoil system wasn't working; I put down a tornado instead of a hurricane. But I got two bonus right so thus I got 21/20. The test itself for this chapter is Monday... I've learned that the tests are the hardest part of this class. So due to this, I have found that I need to study my notes, maybe skim through the chapter. On my first test I got like 30/50. Then on the second one we had a while ago I only got 3 wrong. Hopefully this next one I will improve even more. So as I said it's all about adapting to the teacher's teaching methods. It's also a lot of finding out--with the way the class is run and all--and using your own methods that work personally for you.[/size]

[size=1] Well, by answering if, I showed where lol, as I logically showed in my responce to Sara's post.[/size]