Welcome

Hey, welcome to my blog! Hope you enjoy.

Friday, March 25, 2011

Ethnocentricity and conflict

In the colonisation of Australia, the British’s ethnocentricity caused conflict and many other problems. When an ethnocentric group of people colonize another land and perceive the people of that land to be inferior to them, their ethnocentric ways will cause them to have no respect for the native culture, and they will try and convert the locals to their culture. This is what happened in the colonization of Australia. The British came to Australia and they saw these so-called ‘animals’; the Aboriginal people. The British thought that their culture, religion and ways were the best and far better than the savage, barbaric way of life the Aborigines had. So they took control of the land and called themselves Australians. The first problems arose when the Australians thought they were killing off the aborigines. One elder Australian decided to kill McIntyre, a gamekeeper. He believed that McIntyre was killing aborigines. Also, the aborigines were frustrated at how their culture and ways were being changed and almost taken over by the British lifestyle. They thought that killing McIntyre would both stop the killing of aborigines and intimidate the British. But all it did was enrage the British more. The British were angry that people had spoken out against them and wanted total control. So governor Phillip sent out a party to kill and behead the aborigines he believed were responsible. This shows the British’s completely ruthless and bloody nature. It is clear that the British want control and are willing to do whatever it takes to gain control. They are angry that someone had the nerve to challenge the dominance of their culture and lifestyle. But the aborigines are justified in their actions. Everyone fears change, and in this case the aborigines had to speak out or else their land and lifestyle would soon be completely taken over by the British. This whole dual perspective is what causes conflict. In the end, who is right?

The second instance of ethnocentricity causing conflict is when the Australians decide to uproot all the local crops and in their place plant wheat and corn. This shows the Australian’s disregard for the native lifestyle, and a desire to have complete control. When the Australians replaced all the local crops and replaced them with crops from Britain like wheat and corn, they were basically contributing to the depletion of the aborigines’ food source. If all their food and crops are gone, what can they eat? They can try to eat the Australians’ food, but like in The Rabbits, it could make them sick and cause an epidemic to break out. In this act, the Australians were not thinking about the situation from the aboriginals’ point of view at all. They were so fixed on the notion that their British culture and lifestyle were the best that they wanted to replicate every little detail of it in New South Wales, as they called it. This went all the way to planting the same crops and bringing the same animals over to Australia. The Australians, however, were completely clueless about the consequences of their actions. The Aborigines, led by Pemulwuy, burnt down all the crop fields and war broke out. They did not appreciate the Australians’ ethnocentricity one bit. The war went on for a long time, and subsequent, smaller conflicts arose as well. Generally, the effects were very negative.

Because of the Australians’ ethnocentricity and wanting to rule over Australia exactly the same way as they ruled Britain, many conflicts arose and the effects were mainly negative. Ethnocentricity does cause conflict in many ways.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

The Rabbits - Reflection Paragraph

In class we are reading the allegorical picture book "The Rabbits". The story tells how the English colonized Australia, and talks about how they interacted and treated eachother.

When colonization happens, the impact on the colonized is mostly negative in many aspects. In this case, the English colonized the aborigines from Australia. The English brought with them animals, food, and new ideas. There were some positive aspects of their colonization; the Australians liked some of the food and animals. But there were many negative events as well. Some of the food made the people sick.War broke out. These are but some examples of the negative impacts of colonization on the colonized. I think, in general, colonization has far more positive aspects for the colonizers; they get new land and space to populate, they can discover and plunder more, and they can find new materials or resources in the colonized land. But if the colonizers take a lot of the natural resources and exploit the land. it's not very good for the environment. If the colonizers mine all the ores and minerals available, the condition of the rock will decrease. There is also the whole aspect of bringing their own animals and food to the colonized land. The colonized people's bodies aren't used to consuming the kind of foods the colonizers eat. If the colonizers bring food, it might, as it did in The Rabbits, cause sickness or plague to spread in the colonized land. This would be terrible. The colonizers use up the resources and land also for industrialisation; this can be both good and bad. It can be good if the colonizers choose to let the locals learn and profit from the industry. For example, if you were to colonize a country and find lots of wheat there, you might be able to set up a bread-making or processing plant. This could benefit both the colonizers and the colonized. Also, in the story some of the animals scare the colonized; they have never seen those different animals before. Actions like this would scare or maybe even intimidate the colonized. This could lead to war. War would be terrible and completely unfair. If the colonizers can colonize, that means they probably have a significant advantage over the natives. Like in the colonization of the Australian aborigines, the British had guns and cannons, as opposed to the Australians, who simply had primitive spears and shields.
I think the deeper meaning behind The Rabbits is that colonization is both positive and negative. It is pretty positive for the colonizers; they gain knowledge, land and resources. It is negative for the colonized; their lifestyle and environment is being changed and deformed around them. The main theme that, in my opinion, is associated with colonization is change. It is a huge change for the colonized and their way of living.
Overall, "The Rabbits" is a very interesting allegorical picture book about the colonization of Australia.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Julius Caesar Performance Assessment

I am performing a section from Act 1, scene 2 of Julius Caesar. My partner is Aaron. We are performing Brutus and Cassius' lines 25 - 88. I am Brutus and Aaron is Cassius.
The passage is below:
------------------------------------
CASSIUS

Will you go see the order of the course?

BRUTUS

Not I.

CASSIUS

I pray you, do.

BRUTUS

I am not gamesome: I do lack some part
Of that quick spirit that is in Antony.
Let me not hinder, Cassius, your desires;
I'll leave you.

CASSIUS

Brutus, I do observe you now of late:
I have not from your eyes that gentleness
And show of love as I was wont to have:
You bear too stubborn and too strange a hand
Over your friend that loves you.

BRUTUS

Cassius,
Be not deceived: if I have veil'd my look,
I turn the trouble of my countenance
Merely upon myself. Vexed I am
Of late with passions of some difference,
Conceptions only proper to myself,
Which give some soil perhaps to my behaviors;
But let not therefore my good friends be grieved--
Among which number, Cassius, be you one--
Nor construe any further my neglect,
Than that poor Brutus, with himself at war,
Forgets the shows of love to other men.

CASSIUS

Then, Brutus, I have much mistook your passion;
By means whereof this breast of mine hath buried
Thoughts of great value, worthy cogitations.
Tell me, good Brutus, can you see your face?

BRUTUS

No, Cassius; for the eye sees not itself,
But by reflection, by some other things.

CASSIUS

'Tis just:
And it is very much lamented, Brutus,
That you have no such mirrors as will turn
Your hidden worthiness into your eye,
That you might see your shadow. I have heard,
Where many of the best respect in Rome,
Except immortal Caesar, speaking of Brutus
And groaning underneath this age's yoke,
Have wish'd that noble Brutus had his eyes.

BRUTUS

Into what dangers would you lead me, Cassius,
That you would have me seek into myself
For that which is not in me?

CASSIUS

Therefore, good Brutus, be prepared to hear:
And since you know you cannot see yourself
So well as by reflection, I, your glass,
Will modestly discover to yourself
That of yourself which you yet know not of.
And be not jealous on me, gentle Brutus:
Were I a common laugher, or did use
To stale with ordinary oaths my love
To every new protester; if you know
That I do fawn on men and hug them hard
And after scandal them, or if you know
That I profess myself in banqueting
To all the rout, then hold me dangerous.

-Flourish, and shout-

BRUTUS

What means this shouting? I do fear, the people
Choose Caesar for their king.

CASSIUS

Ay, do you fear it?
Then must I think you would not have it so.

BRUTUS

I would not, Cassius; yet I love him well.
But wherefore do you hold me here so long?
What is it that you would impart to me?
If it be aught toward the general good,
Set honour in one eye and death i' the other,
And I will look on both indifferently,
For let the gods so speed me as I love
The name of honour more than I fear death.
------------------------------------
The context of this passage is that Caesar has just returned from his conquest, and it is the feast of Lupercal. Therefore there is going to be an event. Brutus does not go to the event, and Cassius talks to him about Caesar's faults. Cassius is sly and sneaky as he tries to convince Brutus to join the conspirators, who are plotting against Caesar.

We chose this passage because it is quite significant. It is significant because Cassius is planting the seed for the whole conspiracy. All the conspirators want Brutus to join them so that he, like an alchemist turns rocks to gold, will make their dishonorable murder seem like an honorable act for Rome. This passage characterizes both Cassius and Brutus. Brutus seems honorable and noble, and respected throughout Rome. Cassius seems sly, sneaky and good with words. If this conversation never took place, Brutus would have probably not joined the conspirators and the whole story and its outcome would be different. This passage also gives us some insight of Caesar and his personality, however the information we get is said by Cassius who we know is trying hard to convince Brutus of Caesar's faults; the information may not all have been true. However this passage from act 1, scene 2, lines 25 - 88 is still very significant as it shows the 'seed' of the whole conspiracy being planted in Brutus' mind, and from this point on it snowballs into the epic tragedy that is Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.

Monday, January 31, 2011

Learner Profile

Today in class I found out my learner profile. I am a logic thinker with a HH learner profile.

I think I learn best when listening to quiet music without any background noise. I like to be in a quiet place so that I can think better, left in peace. I learn best when there is not that much pressure, but I feel that I perform better under pressure, because some pressure makes me hurry up what I am doing and complete it within the allocated time frame with incentive to not get distracted and speak with my classmates. I need to be given instructions and new information with not that much (or no) pressure, so that I can have time to grasp the concepts fully. But then when work gets assigned I don't mind having a time limit, so that I can tell people who talk to me to leave me in peace; I am working on the work so it can be completed within the time frame allocated (and, of course, to a high standard). Strategies that help my learning are just having a patient teacher and having a peaceful environment to learn in.

I want my teachers to know that I am a bright child who learns and grasps concepts quickly, but sometimes the reason for my bad results is communication failure (how questions are worded, trouble transferring my thinking onto the paper). Also, I have been to different schools and I have experienced many different techniques and styles of learning. So sometimes if I do badly on some activity or project, it may not be because I am incompetent in the subject; it may simply be because I am not used to the teaching and learning styles practiced at this school. I find that once I get used to a style of teaching, it is easier for me to work on those types of things. Like, for example, I had never done any annotations before coming to ISKL; I found it quite difficult to grasp the concept of "bleeding on the paper", but now I understand it and it is easier for me. Sometimes, I may have a fantastic train of thought and some great ideas about a certain subject, then when a quiz or assessment comes along, often the questions are worded differently or confusingly, or the material being asked is not what I was thinking about. It completely throws me off. This, I feel, is one of the main causes of my poor marks. I do study for tests. I appreciate it when teachers give me feedback in a serious way, especially when it comes to new material. For example, I would rather have a teacher tell me exactly why I am failing at some subjects directly, rather than have them make jokes and shrug it off.

:)

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

How Does Art Mirror Society?

Vitruvian Man
By Leonardo Da Vinci
Vitruvian Man





This painting is called Vitruvian Man by Leonardo Da Vinci. It was painted around 1487. It is pen and ink on paper.
The painting is a study and depiction of the proportions and anatomy of the human male body. It is one of Leonardo Da Vinci's most famous works. The original is stored in the Gallerie dell'Accademia in Venice, Italy.

This piece of art reflects what was happening in the Renaissance because this is a scientific drawing based on ancient Roman knowledge. In the renaissance, people began scientific inquiry and looking for new, scientific methods to solve their problems and find out new information. This drawing is one example of an artist/scientist using paper and drawing utensils as a way to communicate knowledge. Da Vinci's notes at the bottom also further explain his research and inquiry into the field of human anatomy and proportion. Also, in the renaissance people were beginning to rediscover classical (Roman and Greek) knowledge. The drawing is based on the male anatomical research by the ancient Roman architect Vitruvius in Book III of his compilation 'De Architectura'. Da Vinci rediscovered this knowledge after 1000 years and he studied it carefully, learning and making inferences from the classical Roman way of thinking. After Da Vinci created this, his knowledge was passed on to other scholars and scientists. Da Vinci had conducted the research and compiled it, now his fellow researchers would learn and futher their research from it. At the time, it was an important study of the human (male) anatomy. It's obvious that this drawing is scientifically inclined because of the way Da Vinci portrays the different range of movements from all the limbs of the man. His notes at the bottom also further one's knowledge about his opinions and the facts presented. This drawing also features Renaissance art techniques. For example, the whole drawing is completely anatomically accurrate in terms of relative size and actual visual appearance. Also, some shading and use of light and dark (sfumato) are used to enhance the visual image. Overall, the piece of art 'Vitruvian Man' by Leonardo Da Vinci is an important piece of scientific artwork that mirrored other areas of life in the renaissance.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

Driving Forces of the Renaissance


Trade and Banking
I think trade and banking is the most important driving force of the Renaissance. In 15th century Italy, trade and banking was flourishing. The city states traded with eachother, exchanging knowledge in the process, and merchants from far-off lands brought new ideas and inventions to Italy. The rich trading families had more capital -because of their succesful trading and banking- to invest in intellectual and artistic pursuits.

Thursday, August 12, 2010