KK Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

KK Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

The final Socratic Seminar that we had about Kite Runner was full of insight and knowledge that is always, never expressed when someone reads alone, and doesn't have a discussion with anyone. Such as something that I hadn't thought about before, such as the way that family and culture are stressed so heavily in this book. Such as the way that even when Amir and Baba com o America , along with other Afghans at the time, the culture they had was somewhat changed with their movement while much of it also remained the same. Such as the way that women would now go to work, but something that remained the same would be that thy still used the same type of tradition in getting married.

The statement that I agree with the most from the discussion would be the statement about the way that Baba was not cowardly in laving Afghanistan but that he was smart for what he did, and he did this to protect himself and his family. The thing that I disagree with the most would be the statement someone made about Amir never telling anyone about what he did. I feel that one day he will finally come to terms about what he did and explain his reasons for doing what he did.  And Maybe, just maybe he will finally forgive himself.

I think the thing that worked really well this discussion would be that everyone came prepared and it really seemed like a discussion, by the way that people actually disagreed with what other people had said and with this it just seemed like an actual seminar. 

Something that I would say we needed to work on would be that too many of the same people were consistently talking, and a lot of times people would get cut off in my opinion and it just seemed like that could have been avoided and will most likely be something to work on for next year.

Kite Runner Socratic Seminar Reflection #1

Kite Runner Socratic Seminar Reflection #1

Within the first socratic seminar of the amazing and attention grabbing Kite Runner, there were so many things explored in both seminars that I had not really thought about before that day. Such as the way that I never gave much thought to Amir and Baba's relationship. I had never truly thought that in depth into their relationship, and with this seminar I just felt that we covered everything that anyone would ever have a question about. Such as when the other seminar talked about the way that the father and son relationship between isn't very loving at all, which I knew but I never really read into it that far. I merely perceived it as they had different interests and Baba expected so much of Amir, but Amir just could never become that person he wanted, therefore they would never be able to get close and form the bond both of them longed for.

I think the thing that I agree with the most form the seminars would be when Nick C. said that he would rather have Baba as a father rather than Ali. There are just so many reasons that I would rather have Baba as a father than Ali, but to explain my reasoning I thought about the question logically and emotionally thinking, I am nothing like Amir so how am I to know that Baba would show me no love the way that he shows Amir. Amir is a coward, weak, child, and didn't seem that he would ever grow up, and take action. With Baba I feel that with his wealth and tough love, I would become and great man strong and willful, although at the same time nothing like Assef.

I think the thing that I disagree most with form the seminar would be when people said that they would rather have Ali as a father. Sadly and unfortunately I'm very socially uncomfortable and would be extremely embarrassed to have a father like Ali, aside form his many deformities, the man is weak and lacks initiative to better his life. Overall, the main reason that I would never want Ali as a father would be because he is a servant, which would make me a servant, and I could never be anyones servant, I am not only spiteful but also just lack patience and tolerance.

I think the thing that needs improvement in the seminar would be that there needs to no longer be any moments of dead silence and I want more controversy and debates. They just aren't fun if everyone agrees with everyone, I AGREE, I AGREE, I AGREE, can someone please have a different interpretation I almost took it upon myself to say I disagree with everyone to just give the conversation a little jolt of energy. Another thing we need to do better would be to make more questions that are emotional, I feel that for a book that is this thrilling and powerful we could have such a great seminar. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SHARE MY THOUGHTS.

Socratic Seminar Preparation Sheet #4

Socratic Seminar Preparation Sheet #4

Summary

Within "Book Three" of 1984, Winston is taken by the though-police and tortured until he ultimately betrays his love, Julia. This then shows the police that he is now a full party member, and when he is released he lives his life only caring about the appreciation of Big Brother.

Level 2 Questions

1.Why does Winston start to love O’Brien even though O’Brien is the person that is torturing Winston?

Winston starts to love O’Brien because the pain that O’Brien inflicts on Winston is affecting Winston’s mind.  O’Brien has power over Winston so when O’Brien lessens the torture it makes Winston love O’Brien for not inflicting as much pain on him.  This plays to the reader’s emotions because how in the world could Winston love a person who is causing him to suffer, in answering this question I employed a PATHOS appeal, by the way I answer the question using emotion.

2. How might the Party have known of Winston's fear of rats?

I believe that it was when Julia betrays, Winston that she tells the thought police of his fear, in order to begin to control him, and torture him into becoming a full party member. In answering this question I employed both a LOGOS and PATHOS appeal, since I contrasted emotion and logic.

3. Based on what Obrien states to Winston, when he asks if Big Brother is alive, to you think Big Brother is truly alive?

I think that he is alive, because of the way that he responds, it seems that he was very peculiar and evasive in the way that he answers the question. In answering this question I used a LOGOS appeal, by the way that used logic to answer the question. 

4. What would be your biggest fear, that would be found in "Room 101".

My fear that would be found in this room, would be myself having to watch people die. I feel that this is something that is just absolutely chaotic and apocalyptic and I hope no one would ever have to watch this happen. In answering this question I used a PATHOS appeal.

5. With the book being broken into three parts, what is the significance of each part?

I feel that Book 1, would be the introduction the text and its characters and the story itself, while Book 2 further goes in depth to the story and shows the climax, while Book 3 shows the end result of the text and the resolution in a way. In answering this question I applied a LOGOS appeal, by the way I used logic to answer the question.

6.Why does the Party look to change the mindsets of its criminal rather than simply kill them?

As expressed by O’Brien himself, the party’s system ensures “…there are no martyrdoms.” The party wishes to completely suppress rebellion, and ensure that revolutionary thoughts die before the thoughtcriminals do. The danger of martyrdom is that it only encourages others to fight, and even die for their beliefs.

Level 3 Questions 

1. How powerful can a person be against the government?

I feel that one person alone, can sometimes be extremely powerful, especially if in a result of themselves rebelling or causing some type of chaos, they can cause others to join them in their fight. In answering this question I employed a LOGOS appeal, through the way that I used logic and analysis to answer the question.

2.When is it okay to betray someone you love?

I feel that it is never acceptable to betray someone, if the person has done nothing to harm you, the thing that people are always told is, "Do to others, what you would want done to you."

In answering this question I employed a PATHOS appeal, by the way I play on emotions.

3.How strongly is human emotion influenced by other people?

Without the influence of other human beings, things like love and pain cannot exist because they are impossible to apply to someone else.  Therefore, human contact is necessary for the development of emotion. In answering this question, I applied a emotional appeal by the way that I use emotion to answer the question completely.

Quotation Tracking

1. Pg : 248, "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past, repeated Winston obediently. ”

2.Pg : 241, “The beatings grew less frequent, and became mainly a threat, a horror to which he could not be sent back at any moment when his answers were unsatisfactory.” 

Socratic Seminar Reflection #3

Socratic Seminar Reflection #3

This socratic seminar influenced my thinking on the way that love and affection is portrayed in this text. Most of my classmates talked instead about the relationship between Winston and Julia and the definition and veracity of love in the book's totalitarian society. This allowed me to think about 1984 in a more emotional way, and relate it back to my own life and the relationships I have both seen and experienced, instead of simply thinking about it in terms of similarity to historical events.

I think that the thing that i disagreed with most in the socratic seminars would be when someone said that they would rather live in the world of 1984, that just seems like an unbearable living that i would never want to subject my life to. Whereas the statement that I agree with the most would be when someone said that they believed that it was more than Julia and Winston attraction to each other, was because of their mutual hate for the party. I feel that this is greatly true by the way that, it seems that whenever they are together though they are constantly in intercourse it would seem that they genuinely care for each other. I don't feel that there is anything that I would have wanted to say during this seminar that I hadn't said.

I feel that thing that worked well in the seminar would be the way that before Ms. Hunter came, the conversation just went more fluidly. It just seemed that people were less focused on the points, and just felt that there was a regular conversation going on. This was shown by the way that there were more opinions and emotional appeals shown because people were just stating what they though about the text, without feeling that they had to analyze in depth or even back their answers up with any evidence, but that they could just say what they wanted to say without being graded or ridiculed. this is truly the way that the seminars should be.

I think that one good way to change this would be to include more level three questions in the discussions, so that even students who didn't have the chance to read the selection or didn't understand it fully would be able to get some points and participate in the conversation. Such as the way that I know a certain person wasn't able to fully complete their work, because they were focused on reading there independent novel and 1984 while doing the work for both. this may and will probably be a thing that is evident all the future seminars, but it is also something that might be inevitable.

Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

The seminar influenced the way I thought about the right for people to have privacy. After having the seminar, I found myself asking many questions relating to this subject. How much privacy is one allowed? At one point does supervision become a violation of privacy. One thing said in the seminar which I hadn’t thought of in depth before was how Big Brother could possibly not be a real person, and that he might just be a figure head of power that had died many years ago, but was still used to influence the minds of others.

I agree with the statement that the proles could defeat the police. I agree with this because the book says the proles overpower the police in numbers. The proles make up 85% of the population and do not have they don't have tele screens, which would allow them to plot and plan without fear of being seen or viewed by the Thought Police. During this Socratic seminar, I did not find any statements that I disagreed with as it seemed as though everyone was in agreement with each other, and most of the discussion was spent using historical examples and evidence from the text to back up the popularly held opinion. In fact, I think that something we should work on is ensuring that there are more "controversial" topics brought up during the seminar in order to provoke meaningful discussion where we can learn from each other, instead of reiterating the same information and points of view that everyone already agrees on. I do have something I would have wanted to say, I would have wanted to give a quote to the group and see there responses to it.

I think the thing that constantly works well throughout the seminars, is the way that our discussion leaders consistently try to get everyone into the discussion. Even if a person wasn't exactly fully prepared, everyone tries to find a way to get them well involved into the discussion. Such as whenever Tyree or Li, don't try as hard as others to insert themselves into the discussion. We all try our hardest to get them involved and to make sure they get their points.

I think the thing that still and will need work on for these seminars is for there to be more question that are somewhat controversial and will spark different opinions, because I feel that at times the people who aren't talking are the people with the contrasting ideas, and I feel that it would be great to hear these ideas.

Socratic Seminar Reflection #1

Socratic Seminar Reflection #1

The Socratic Seminar as a whole was something that allowed my understanding of the text to be extremely influenced. It allowed me to see how others thoughts about the text, and also see how they analyzed certain scene, and or explain what they thought was symbolized through key events and figures. It helped me to see that there is more to offer in this book than just a story about a dystopian rule, but that with the state of society in 1949 Orwell thought that this was where the society was headed. When Lina went more in depth about the children in the book of 1984. Someone asked about whether our generation was going down the same path that the children in 1984 were on. I hadn't before then ever thought that maybe this could have been a possibility.

One statement that I agreed with was that 1984 was based off of the totalitarian regimes during World War II. I thought that the book was based off of the totalitarian regimes such as the ones in Germany, Russia, and Spain, especially since Orwell wrote the book shortly after World War II, Animal Farm. I just feel that Orwell like to use a lot of symbolism as a writer, to often get a certain reaction in people. The statement that was said that I agree with the least, was when someone started to explain that they felt that the use of too much power can't lead to an end to societies. While I think that this is very possible do to the masses feeling overpowered, and wanting to rise up in an effort of rebellion.

I think the thing that worked the best in the seminar was the fact that mostly everyone came well prepared with great discussion questions, which allowed everyone to participate and give their opinion on subjects. I feel that also the use of rhetorical appeals was very well, though we used the same ones, I feel that we did well, due to the fact that it was our first time, and I feel that like overtime we will be great at using rhetorical appeals.

The thing that I feel could have been better in our seminar would be the flow of the discussion, I just feel that it didn't feel real. It didn't seem that people were just trying to get points, its just that I don't feel it was good. Maybe it was who was the discussion leader, and the way that he did everything Ms. Hunter said not to do, but I just feel it could have been so much better, especially with the great questions and people within our discussion.

Othello Dramatic Reading Words and Actions Video

Othello Dramatic Reading Words and Actions Video 

Statement of Intent

Over the course of producing my dramatic reading I thought that it would be best to see how others have portrayed Iago in many other self productions, with countless broadcasts of the comical aspects of Iago, I choose to do a more riddled and questionable tone. This then apples to a more emotional approach which would lead the viewer to more suspense of what's to come in the following scenes. I utilized pauses in my reading, also to evoke a mysterious and dark nature, which also showed what I felt was Iago's tone was during this soliloquy.

From becoming the character that is Iago, I found that you truly do become a dark and malicious person when you have to reenact the same parts of any type of dramatic text constantly, to a point when you feel that you are no longer playing a part, but evoking something that is now a part of you and is slowly rising to the surface. I also learned that it is truly not easy to just say lines, but that you truly have to use specific tones and utilize pauses to convey what you want an audience to feel.

I feel that the soliloquy that I choose is something, truly gave the reader a key insight into the character that is Iago, with showing that he is not only conniving and malicious, but that he truly thought out the steps to take before executing his ideas in his master plans. This soliloquy showed how he would develop the plot into its climax, and how he would use many events to further complicate situations "from behind the curtains" in the same way that a puppet master does. I feel that with my effective use of pauses and shifting tones, I effectively furthered the conflict as did Iago, with increasing the mystery and suspense.