Marwan’s 10th grade English blog

I believe that Law 9 is a fairly valid rule. In my experience, demonstrating my point of view and coming out successful has almost always yielded the most profitable results, especially people agreeing with me. Based on my experiences, I believe that the majority of the time this law will be deemed viable. Also, I believe that this law is morally just compared to most other laws of power, because it is in no way immorally giving you an advantage, it is merely displaying your skills in action compared to that of your rival.

a) a reflection on whether you think the laws work, should work, or are moral to follow.

What advice do you have for Macbeth? Should he kill the king? How? Can he/can anyone be successful without hurting other people?

Macbeth, in my professional opinion, I think the only way to truly manifest your full potential is to kill the king. Do it in a way that will insure your safety from hooligans who are suspicious about the legitimacy of your new title as king. This way, no one will question your authority, and you will be able to be the greatest king ever. This is the only way you will be able to be successful and you must hurt people in order to achieve this.

1. His dreams about the witches and their prophesies.
2. That he hasn’t been thinking about the witches.
3. It will be worth it to kill the king.
4. His feverish excitement about killing the king.
5. Because the king died.

Scene 2

1. Because Lady Macbeth thought the king looked like her father when he was asleep.
2. He hears someone cry “Macbeth murders sleep!”
3. He brought the daggers back to their own bedroom.
4. Macbeth believes that even Neptune’s sea couldn’t wash the blood away, while Lady Macbeth thinks it will merely wash off.

Scene 3

1. He went to the castle to see the king.
2. They don’t get let in by the porter guy, he denies entrance. And they see Macbeth kill the guards.
3. Because they were smeared with blood and they killed the king so it was justified with witnesses.
4. To distract them from questioning Macbeth about killing the guards.
5. They run away to Ireland and England because they both fear they are going to be murdered next.

Scene 4

1. It has been dark even if “the clock says it’s day”
2. The guards.
3. Macbeth has been named king.
4. Because he suspects Macbeth as being the killer.

1. Why do you think the State, the Fed, your teacher wants you to take the WASL?

So they can equally assess all the students in the state, and see how you’re doing indiviually, and as well as compared to the other students taught by the same teacher.

1. What are the good aspects and not so good aspects of the WASL?

Good Aspects - It’s really not that often.
Bad Aspects - Everyone else gets to sleep in.

1. What do you think the WASL is supposed to accomplish and if we didn’t have the WASL, what would be the best way to accomplish these things?

The WASL is supposed to assess us, and I think it is one of the most efficient ways of assessing everyone.

1. What logos does Quindlen use? What facts, stats, quotes from authorities, and logical cause/effect statements does she use? : “…car crashes are the No. 1 cause of death among 15- to 20-year-olds in this country.” “Between July 2004 and November 2006, only 12 provisional drivers were ticketed for carrying too many passengers. Good law, bad enforcement.”
2. What pathos does Quindlen use? “What appeals to emotion, metaphors, rhetorical figures, and parallel sentence structures does she use? . Perhaps the only ones who wouldn’t make a fuss are those parents who have accepted diplomas at graduation because their children were no longer alive to do so themselves.” “If someone told you that there was one behavior most likely to lead to the premature death of your kid, wouldn’t you do something about that?
3. What ethos does Quindlen use? How does she establish her credibility as an author? How does she deal with threats to her credibility? She writes for Newsweek, that means she has some credibility…sort of…
4. How persuasive was Qunidlen overall? She might convince the parents of children that the age should be raised, but overall I didn’t believe that this was a very persuasive article at all.

1. Lennie ain’t evil and he didn’ mean to kill no one, he jus’ scared that she would tell George about what he done an’ he scared George gonna beat hella outta him.
2. Curley done round up a groupa farmers an’ they gone huntin’ Lennie. It done surprise me o bit that Curley done go after Lennie cuz he’s them jealous type.
3. George telled that story of him an’ Lennie and they was gonna have their own farm and Lennie gonna tend to the rabbits.
4. George done killed Lennie cuz if he ain’t gonna do it, Curley an’ his people gonna kill Lennie.
5. George had all the damn right in the worl’ cuz he the only one who done truly know Lennie an’ it had better been George then Curley and his hoodlums
6. Steinbeck done go tryin’ to say that it done be more humane to do something like George done than have hell beat outta him by a group of belligerent dicks who done about to do somethin’ egregious.

5. A muscle in my lower lip twitched as drool slowly dripped down the side of my chin. The lack of feeling in my sprawled legs over the side of the Lazy-Boy seemed to grasp the majority of my conscious attention. Although my vision was limited to the blood red Persian rug that belonged to my mother in-law, the repetitious ticking of the 9 foot tall cherry mahogany’s pendulum only enhanced my alliterative state.

1. How did the pitching coach get the author to stop “over thinking” on the mound?
By keeping his head quiet.

2. Why did Bryan believe it was better to learn a change-up first?
Because now he was thinking of the change-up as an antidote to his wayward fastball.

3. How does one throw a change-up?
By throwing it with the power of a fastball, but with the grip of making an “OK” sign and wrapping it around a ball.

4. Why does a change-up work?
It works because it fakes the batter out.

5. What makes a good pitching coach?
A good pitching coach is someone who can “self-coach”, and who can find mistakes in miniscule flaws.

1. What can we learn from the pitching coach that could translate to how we learn in school or with writing?
That when we try and learn something, we shouldn’t be thinking about a million different things, but we should keep our heads quiet and focus on what we need to accomplish.

2. What would the equivalent of a “change-up” be in writing?
Suspense techniques in Sci-Fi writing, when you think something is going to happen, but you change it and have something else happen.

3. Explain what you think the author means by the following selection:
You may not win all the time, but if you think about what you did wrong and how you can improve that to make yourself better, that is when you win.

Both dystopian societies in ‘Anthem’ and ‘Fahrenheit 451’ share similarities and differences that accentuate their own original worlds. While ‘Anthem’ radiates a more rigid, structured society, both worlds begin with a person(s) blind to what we know today as common knowledge, then ultimately have an epiphany about their domineering, controlling governments. The difference in realization of their governments’ outlandish tactics for managing their society is that in ‘Fahrenheit 451’, Montag become conscious over a longer period of time, while in ‘Anthem’ Equality recognizes this in a much shorter phase. The general public in both worlds are deprived of facts and knowledge about everyday things, which seems to be what both authors are trying to convey to the reader, that the government will try to censor more and more basic information to the public.
The qualities of the protagonists have many similarities in the sense of original thinking, and yearning to learn about the things they knew not of. I think the qualities of the protagonists augment the endings of the books, which I also find to be similar. Both endings give the impression of putting a stop to what was wrong in their community, and starting off fresh, a new beginning. I really appreciate the way both authors used this technique and find it to enhance the novel, and tell us as readers to do the same with our own lives, even if it may be something as small as cleaning your room, or beginning a new exercise routine.

“Brush your teeth”, “Take the trash out”, “Pick up after yourself”. Every day we are constantly bombarded with orders, be they grossly superfluous, or blatantly cardinal; how we choose to deal with these devoirs shape our personality and greatly influence the crucial development of our own internal authority. I believe that as children we have to listen to elder figures, but if we don’t mature our own internal authority, we fall into blind obedience to foreign command, which I believe to be a risk every man runs. The only way that we would be able to have an authentic relationship with someone else depends on if we have an authentic relationship with our self, and what we know to be true for us. As Shakespeare so elegantly put it, “To thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man.”
In 1961, psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment, testing the willingness of participants to obey an authority figure. 65% of the participants followed the orders given by the experimenter, administering a supposed 450 volts of electric shock to the “learner”.