In Response to Our Blog

Previous to blogging in English 110, I had zero blogging experience.  So, the concept was completely new to me.  Now, I'm happy to say, the experience has been a pleasant one.  Using the blog as a tool for thought was very rewarding.  Having written blogs about our readings, that helped to refresh what I'd read, and further what I got from it.  That was in reference to the "Evidence Vs. Claims" reading/blog.  In regards to the posts about the PSI, SSI, and Final ARP project, those were rewarding as well.  By writing those short pieces about where I was in the process, and how I would expand, I brainstormed ideas, and came up with successful ways of doing such expansion, furthering my project as a whole.  The writing style I took during my blog writing was also enjoyable.  I tried to spicen up my writing, as I knew others would be reading it (due to the writing being on a blog and out on the internet), and this forced me to try different things.  Again, this aspect of blogging helped me progress as a writer, not just a blogger.

I don't really see myself blogging much in the future, as I've really just looked at it from an educational standpoint.  Not many of my friends blog, or relatives for that matter, so it doesn't seem like something worth putting time into.  Possibly I'll blog later in life, when I have more to rant about, but currently my mind is blank enough in it's content state.

We were told to post a picture, or possibly a comic about blogs, but it seems most (the best) are restricted by copyright acts.  So, I decided to post this 'anti-copyright' photo, in silent protest of these such laws, which prevent me from being funny (sarcasm intended).

  <-- anti-copyright sign

One photo worth noting, however, that isn't covered by copyright laws, happens to be a photo of my best friend....50 Cent (sporting the blog Swag).  As you can see, he wants you to 'blog this'...or something.

The Death Penalty

To many individuals, the death penalty is a very touchy subject.  It's one of the few that's not too politically based (Republican vs. Democrat), however, it's one of the front-runners in debate.  I used to be for the death penalty, based on people such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Osama Bin Laden.  People like that were responsible for countless murders, evil plots, and terrible practices.  Hitler massacred millions of jews.  Mussolini bullied his way to the top of Italy and joined Hitlers side.  Osama was the leader of Al-Qaeda.  Those three, along with other terrible people in history fueled my siding with the death penalty. For those of you unaware, the death penalty is punishment of death for a crime (as one might assume).

Today, I stand on the opposite side of the spectrum.  I have chosen to side against the death penalty.  Arriving at this conclusion took a very long time, and caused much struggle within my own head.  Arguing with myself over and over (of course this happened over a span of years, I didn't think about the death penalty on a daily basis), weighing the positives and negatives, and finally choosing to switch sides took time.  Having one parent that supports the death penalty, and one that is strongly against it, was good for me.  I was able to choose whether I supported the idea, or not, for myself.  Now you might ask, why did you switch positions?  Well, I'll give you some ideas.

A lot of people believe religion affects views on things such as the death penalty.  In my case, this is somewhat true.  I am a life-long Christian, devoted to God.  I hope I didn't lose anyone by making that statement, but it's something I feel the reader must know in order to analyze and understand my opinions.  Due to my Christian faith, I believe murder is a sin, and that killing someone, regardless of their faults, is murder.  Jesus preached against violence, and I interpret that to include the death penalty (however, this does cause strife between Christians in how they perceive what Jesus said in regards to the 'death penalty').  The old testament has some support of the death penalty, but, again, interpretations of the text, and analyzations, cause the meaning to be somewhat blurred.  With the scriptures I've read, and the things I've been taught, I have formulated the idea that the death penalty should be banned, if only using religion as a reference.

On another hand, we have atheists, or people who don't believe in God.  Or we have the individuals that  think the church and state should be separate (as the death penalty is a state issue).  In this case, we ignore the presence of a greater being, and choose a side solely based on opinion.  My argument here is; how can someone who is killed with an injection (painless), receive the punishment you think fits the crime, if they don't move on to 'Hell', and feel no pain through death (injection).  If someone kills a loved one of yours, the standard reaction is a feeling of hate.  Normally, one might wish to kill that individual immediately.  However, if you're an atheist, wouldn't it make more sense if that person was sentenced for life, and required to stay in prison?  There, that person has the time to evaluate what they've done, be forced to confinement, and possibly apologize to you (regardless of whether you care or not if they're sorry).  Many murderers would probably feel regret, and have to live with it.  I believe that's the punishment that fits the crime.  It attacks their psychology, and for those who don't feel regret, they're stuck in prison, unable to hurt anyone else.

Those two issues were the main one's that were responsible for arriving at my position.  The death penalty is easily one of the most controversial subjects in our day and age.  It always has been, and probably always will be.  Is there a right answer?  I think so.  I changed my stance, and plan on staying where I am.

Primary Source Expansion

My Primary Source is of the official trailer for the movie Gladiator.  It runs around a minute and a half long. 

The secondary sources I plan on using thus far are a movie review about the movie, the book "The Colosseum" by Keith Hopkins and Mary Beard, and some journal article I still am yet to find. 

Using these sources to expand my Primary Source Analysis should be fairly simple.  I believe my PSA had too many different views of how the trailer portrayed/delivered different things, and with these SSA pieces I believe I can narrow down on what I think the trailer is really saying/how it's saying it.  The novel I chose should help me understand what the colloseums of that day mean in todays age.  Also, the review should give me ideas of how some other individual saw the trailer, and further my understanding of what was shown.  In the end, I should have a more concrete idea of what I think the reader should see in the trailer.

Claims, Evidence, and So Much More...

Claims and evidence are essentially two different things; however, they are very inter-related.  In order to have convincing claims, you must have convincing evidence.  Without sufficient evidence, how can you prove to someone that the way you view something is the right way?  Honestly, you can't.  Not without sufficient, reliable, and accurate evidence that the reader can understand.  On the other end, stating a bunch of evidence, but not using it to come to some abstract claim, is irrelivant.  You don't want to go in depth about some obvious answer to the question at hand.  Thus we have the relationship between claims and evidence, where you can't really have one without the other. 

This relationship is important because often times in writing we are trying to convince someone that our view is best.  We can't convince someone of this without supporting evidence that is bold enough to swipe a readers attention, and pull them in.  Also, if we just make some open ended claim, we might be walking the line between 'claims' and 'unsubstantiated claims', two very different things.  Unsubstantiated claims lack that convincing/bold evidence that sets the two apart. 

Applying these concepts to academic writing will be a crucial step in my writing this year. In regards to our secondary source analysis, painting the picture between evidence and claims will play a huge role.  Thus far, I've come to conclude that we are supposed to "pick a side"(although there are countless sides) during this analysis, and make some claim.  If I just stated a claim based on just my primary source analysis, things might not look so convincing.  Evidence is the key, but not just any evidence.  I need to write more about less, and convince these readers that my claim is the best possible claim.  Sufficient evidence will drive this force, and put my plan into action.

Primary Source Summary

The primary source I have chosen is the official Gladiator movie trailer.  The trailer gives the main parts of the story, as a General in the Roman empire is made a slave.  Then he is made a Gladiator, or someone who fights in the Colosseum.  And finally, he defies an empire, as one would assume, he fights the power that was stripped from him (one would guess based on just the trailer). We are told that Russel Crow's character 'Maximus' has his wife and son murdered.  We assume this happened because of the Emperor, as Maximus is walking towards him with a terrifying glare, and tells us/him he is the husband of a murdered wife, and the father of a murdered son.

The music in the trailer sounds very adventurous, but also angry and complex.  It sounds like the way Maximus looks to be feeling.  When the people cheer and the music goes silence, that seems to be an important part of the trailer.  Obviously the people turn to Maximus's side sometime during all these events.  The feeling I got from the trailer was one of defiance, anger, and hope.  All very different feelings, so the director of this trailer clearly knew what they were doing.  Another sense I got from watching this was the whole...rooting for the under-dog thing.  This small, insignificant gladiator, seems to capture the gaze of an entire population, and get them to cheer his name.  This is not something that would ever go on ignored.  The trailer has a very dense foundation.  One that I look forward to picking apart and analyzing.

First Blog

Hello, this is James Hull in English 110.01 class.