IOC

  

https://youtu.be/VbCuTx_l3LM

Act 3 Scene 3 Coriolanus’s Banishment

SIC.

For that he has                                                                                                     1

(As much as in him lies) from time to time

Envied against the people, seeking means

To pluck away their power, as now at last

Given hostile strokes, and that not in the presence

Of dreaded justice, but on the ministers         5

That doth distribute it—in the name a’ th’ people,

And in the power of us the tribunes, we,

Even from this instant, banish him our city,

In peril of precipitation

From off the rock Tarpeian, never more       10

To enter our Rome gates. I’ th’ people’s name,

I say it shall be so.

ALL PLEBEIANS.

It shall be so, it shall be so. Let him away!

He’s banish’d, and it shall be so.

COM.

Hear me, my masters, and my common friends—        15

SIC.

He’s sentenc’d; no more hearing.

COM.

Let me speak.

I have been consul, and can show for Rome

Her enemies’ marks upon me. I do love

My country’s good with a respect more tender,                 20

More holy and profound, than mine own life,

My dear wive’s estimate, her womb’s increase

And treasure of my loins; then if I would

Speak that—

SIC.

We know your drift. Speak what?                               25

BRU.

There’s no more to be said, but he is banish’d

As enemy to the people and his country.

It shall be so.

ALL PLEBEIANS.

It shall be so, it shall be so.

COR.

You common cry of curs, whose breath I hate                   30

As reek a’ th’ rotten fens, whose loves I prize

As the dead carcasses of unburied men

That do corrupt my air—I banish you!

And here remain with your uncertainty!

Let every feeble rumor shake your hearts!               35

Your enemies, with nodding of their plumes,

Fan you into despair! Have the power still

To banish your defenders, till at length

Your ignorance (which finds not till it feels,

Making but reservation of yourselves,              40

Still your own foes) deliver you as most

Abated captives to some nation

That won you without blows! Despising,

For you, the city, thus I turn my back;

There is a world elsewhere.                          45

CORIOLANUS: ACT 1

To start off, Coriolanus was a play written by Shakespeare during the Elizabethan Era. Because Latin and Greek formed the basis of education at that time, many people, including Shakespeare himself, learned about Roman times in depth. Moreover, Shakespeare's audiences were familiar with classical literature of Latin and Greek. Typically, classical literature had a heroic, and almost divine figure, the protagonist, and an antagonist on the opposite side, who was often the rival, Likewise, Shakespeare set Coriolanus as the protagonist, and characterizes him as a typical heroic figure throughout Chapter 1.

 Also, Shakespeare doesn't forget to reveal Coriolanus's Achilles' heel, and that is his hatred of the plebeians. This is evident in Act 1 Scene 1 where Coriolanus (Martius) scowls at the plebeians describing them as useless beings. This scene, in particular, is where Coriolanus's political views are presented. From looking at his disgust of the "lower-class people', it shows that Coriolanus highly believes in hierarchy and meritocracy. However, it is evident that almost everyone in Rome has changed and started to value more of democracy and equality. Hence, Shakespeare is conveying and foreshadowing a friction later in the play between Coriolanus and the others, specifically the plebeians, due to their contradicting political ideologies.

Secondly, Shakespeare hints another weakness of Coriolanus, but in an indirect way. In Act 3 where 3 ladies, Volumnia, Virgilia, Valeria converse, Coriolanus's excessive love for his mom and wife is represented. It is almost expressed as if Coriolanus has attended at wars for the pride of his mom. This high dependency on others reveals his unsuitable nature as a consul; this foreshadows his failure as being a consul later in the play.

Next, in Act 1, there are 2 big settings: One in the city (Capitol) and the other in the battlefield. It is notable that Coriolanus's nature is deliberately characterized differently in these 2 settings. In the city, his nature is depicted as being nasty, condemnatory, vile whereas in the battlefield, he is depicted as bold, praiseworthy and most importantly, a good leader. This clear contradiction of Coriolanus's nature in 2 different places implies and foreshadows Coriolanus's downfall as being a consul, a high position in the capitol, but his more adequacy as a soldier in battlefields.

Another possible purpose of Shakespeare's characterization of Coriolanus in Act 1 might be his attempt to catch his audiences attention, considering that it is a play, through its fast escalation. Unlike other classical literature, this play has an uncommon structure, where the climax happens relatively earlier in the play: The battle between Rome and Volsces from Act 1 scene 4 - 9. 

Blog post- Bell Hooks

Today, I am going to relate one of the quotes from Bell Hooks and relate to a specific text.

The quote I have chosen is:
 For in the incorrect usage of words, in the incorrect placement of words, was a spirit of rebellion that claimed language as a site of resistance. Using English in a way that ruptured standard usage and meaning, so that white folks could often not understand black speech, made English into more than the oppressor’s language

Among many kinds of texts that are written in AAVE by African-Americans, poems, in particular, employ the AAVE language very effectively. Likewise, I have chosen a poem by Langston Hughes, an African-American poet who was born in the Jazz era of America. 

     Mother to Son

Well, son, I’ll tell you:

Life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.

It’s had tacks in it,

And splinters,

And boards torn up,

And places with no carpet on the floor—

Bare.

But all the time

I’se been a-climbin’ on,

And reachin’ landin’s,

And turnin’ corners,

And sometimes goin’ in the dark

Where there ain’t been no light.

So boy, don’t you turn back.

Don’t you set down on the steps

’Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.

Don’t you fall now—

For I’se still goin’, honey,

I’se still climbin’,

And life for me ain’t been no crystal stair

In the poem above, there is a sense of rebellion here and there. Although the sense of rebellion is not overtly apparent in the what the text conveys, it is visible in how the language is used and how the poem is deliberately structured. 

First, there are some grammatical variations throughout the poem. On the second line of the poem, "Life for me ain't been no crystal stair.", the use of 'ain't' instead of 'hasn't' is a typical style of the AAVE. Furthermore, the use of 'I'se' is extraordinary and is something that isn't used in the common English. With its meaning of 'I shall', it makes the common English speakers not from the AAVE context question the meaning of it, successfully acting as a resistance. Also, in every past participle verbs, the letter 'g' at the end is omitted, once again breaking the rules of the common English grammar. 

Second, the overall structure of this poem is not similar to those poems by non-AAVE-speaking poets that existed in the same era. To begin, it violates the basic characteristic of a poem by omitting stanzas. Unlike poems that have rhythmical patterns such as having the same number of syllables in every lines, there seems to be no rhythmical pattern in this poem, which reflects its function as a resistance effectively. However, this structure is deliberately established. The whole theme of this poem is a message from Langston's mom to her son, Langston, about how life has been hard for her and how he should live to overcome those hardships. When seen from a lens of that era, the hardship Langston mom refers to her difficulty of adapting to the American society. 

Mascalero Apache

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwkASudzhU8

Speaking in Tongue Blog Post

  


On a TIME magazine, that was published in 1997, an article was published to raise awareness about the gradual loss of languages throughout the world. Surprisingly, according to the magazine, there are approximately 6,500 different languages, and one language is being disappeared every 2 weeks. 

   Along with this, he quotes that any language is as divine and endless a mystery as a living organism. It is very apparent that language is being compared to a living organism with its characteristics of being divine and endless. However, I want to ask you. Are living organisms divine, meaning that they don't die? Clearly not. But, when they die, they are decomposed and are broken into simpler matters, being absorbed into the soil. Likewise, I believe that the author is trying to convey a message that despite the death of many languages, they are assimilated into something that lasts forever, and that is culture and tradition.

    Moreover, the author further compares language as a mystery. I believe that the author is trying to deliver that language, like its characteristics of living organisms, doesn’t know what external forces are awaiting it. The author also implies that languages can be easily damaged by external forces like living organisms are by poachers. An example he gives is the Russians, who were the poachers in this case, and the people of Nentsi, being the living organisms. The people of Nentsi were forced to give up their language and were brutally treated to imbibe the Russian language; not a long after, the language of Nentsi evaporated on Earth, but luckily, the culture and tradition of it are still at present. 

Do you believe that today’s YouTube stars are being exploited or empowered?

3-Do you believe that today’s YouTube stars are being exploited or empowered? Write a short persuasive piece that shares your opinion. 


      With the emergence of Globalization and advancement in technology, the importance of the internet has grown, becoming a necessity in today's generation. Along with this, the importance of Youtube, a website where anyone can upload videos and make profit out of their number of views and likes for their videos, has grown bigger. Up to today, there are almost 1.3 billion creators, whose job is to make Youtube videos on their channels, all around the world, 5 billion videos being watched on a single day, and the monetary value of Youtube is has grown exponentially. Now, do you think that Youtube stars are just being exploited to increase Youtube's revenue and to negatively influence the social norm, or being empowered to give them opportunities to fight against this evilness? In my opinion, I believe that Youtube creators, especially those with more fame, are being empowered with the help of Youtube due to several reasons, and I will go over them in my essay. 

      First, it is true that the competition in order to actually generate some profit from making video is highly intense; it is true that many people decide to choose ways that ensure a number of views. These ways, in common, follow a trend which our society has shaped into:A trend that involves high levels of  vulgarity, indecency, materialism, and even sexuality. I can't disagree that the number of these videos are overflowing and will still overflow in the future; however,I want to put a spotlight on Youtube stars who decided to avoided using these "ensuring" methods but still managed to acquire fame equivalent to or even more than stars who used these methods. For example, Nigahiga, a channel created by a single person but controlled by a few, is a great example of how Youtube stars can be empowered. By making satirical, yet highly appropriate videos that criticize the inappropriate norms our society has created, Nigahiga is empowered as a figure of justice. Like this, with the empowerment of few Youtube creators, such as Nigahiga, our society hasn't been prone to abrupt changes. 

    Secondly, I also think that Youtubers can create an abrupt social change and that is because I believe that Youtube stars have the authority that is equivalent to that of celebrities. The power to change the entire society. For instance, Tyler, a Youtube star with almost 8 million views, was able to gradually change the views against homosexuality of his viewers and was able to convince many people to agree with homosexuality. Later on, his single voice aroused different voices from different people who had the same opinion. Tyler's voiced led to a chain: Starting from him to his subscribers, to different celebrities, and even to some government officials. Now look at America and other countries: They all officially allowed gay marriage. I personally think that Tyler was at the heart of this revolutionary movement. Like this, Youtubers are empowered and given a huge authority that could change a whole society. 

    In conclusion, Youtube stars are empowered to have a massive effect on the society. Like the Nigahiga, some youtubers have the authority to prevent the society from changing, whereas some stars like Tyler Oakley have the authority to generate change in the society. However, empowerment comes with authority, which also comes with high responsibility. 

Stereotypes

Do you think that advertisers have a moral duty to avoid stereotyping people?

I believe that they DO have a moral duty. First of all,  with the development of the technology and communication, the world has become a place where everyone connects neglecting time and space. This is called a ubiquitous society. In the center, there has always been the mass media, manipulating how people think and feel about certain groups in society. Advertisements, which are typically common in the mass media, also contribute to this as they in many cases undermine a certain group in return to support the other;this is often displayed in a form of stereotyping. Stereotyping, unlike many other forms, isn't considered to be very offensive towards the undermined group.  This is because advertisers adroitly use 'appeal to humor' when employing stereotypes. However, people should not fail to recognize the consequences that these advertisements can lead up to, as the consequences might not be manageable in the future. These stereotypes displayed in the mass media can turn into reality.

A single advertisement can incorporate so many stereotypes that it almost may be able to attack every single different group.  Though not the best example, the Mountain Dew advertisement made by Tyler show how an advertisement can include different stereotypes of different groups and people's reactions in response reveal why advertisements should take moral duties into account. Explicitly, the advertisement features both racial and sexual stereotypes.  Racial stereotype is displayed through ways in which black people were portrayed: gangsters and criminals. Moreover, these black people are displayed on par with an animal whereas the whites are presented as rather wealthy and money-oriented. In return, customers and critics condemned the advertisement for its biased and inappropriate portrayal of stereotypes of certain groups. A scholar even described this advertisement as 'disgusting'. Later on, as the number of critics increased to a point where Mountain Dew's revenue decreased, Mountain Dew officially announced its apology and the advertisement was permanently deleted.

 If a company cannot appeal to its customers, how is it going to persuade them to buy its products?  If the advertiser wants to aim towards a particular group, like how the Mountain Dew advertisement targeted towards the whites, he/she should be well aware of the moral line-which includes avoiding stereotyping- he/she should not cross over, as  encroaching upon this only brings about disadvantages to not only the advertiser and its company but also the group displayed in the advertisement.