A news source should at least do what it sounds like: give out news. It should inform the public of what is happening when, where and how. Depending on what kind of news source it is, it should be local or national. This way, people will be able to figure out what is happening with the country as well as where their own home is.
I feel the media is doing a good job of this. Newspapers cover a good portion of everything that is happening locally and nationally. If a person wants to only look into certain topics, a magazine will go more in depth of the topic and give more examples. Print media is important no matter what.
I will not say, however, that print media is the only way to receive news. There is always the internet, gatherings, and by word of mouth. It would not b the end of the world if print media was lost over time. People will have found new ways to gather information, and the new ways will probably be just as informative as they are now.
Even though non-print information is useful, I guess I'm just old fashioned when I prefer to read a hard copy of something. Even though I am a computer nerd, I would prefer to get away from the screen when I am going to read something like news. Nothing like a Sunday morning when I'm scanning the paper over a bowl of Cherrios.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Recieving News
Receiving news is an important part of many people's lives. However, I don't really pay attention to it at all. I'm that one person who has their head in the sand most of the time. It's been especially like that for college because I don't receive a daily newspaper and I don't have a T.V. There is always online sources, but I don't go to any news websites. When I do see some news, whether passing a T.V., picking up a stray paper, or seeing a caption on the internet, it could be about anything. If it sounds interesting and worthwhile, I will read it. For instance, if a major flu epidemic is anywhere in the title, I will look into it. However, if it says who is the new Miss America, I don't even bother.
Since I'm in college now, I'm more interested in the newspaper written by USC because it is explaining what is happening on campus. Overall, I guess I'm more interested in the local news of where I am situated because I like to know what is happening around me.
Since I'm in college now, I'm more interested in the newspaper written by USC because it is explaining what is happening on campus. Overall, I guess I'm more interested in the local news of where I am situated because I like to know what is happening around me.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Medical Menagerie
There should be a museum dedicated to all medical history because medical treatments have played big roles in everyone's lives. From Shaman, to priests, to doctors, there have been many people who were praised and worshiped for their medical advice all over the world. Everyone in the world has wished at some point to remove some form of pain or to cleanse their body, from using plants to snake oil to chants and to amputating arms. Since everyone has a connection with medicine, shouldn't it be given its own museum? It would delve into many different cultures and show how medical treatments have changed over the course of history in all continents and many different countries.
Page Museum: La Brea Tar Pits
About a couple of months ago, I went with my parents to the Page Museum: La Brea Tar Pits. It was just a last minute family field trip before they left for Arizona. The trip was surprisingly informative and fun. There was a black gate around the entire grounds and a pathway led to the entrance of the main building. To the left of the pathway, visitors got to see an actual bubbling tar pit fenced off. There were statues of animals in it to act as if they were caught by the tar and doomed to die. It was pretty cool to see an actual tar pit when one only hears of them with dinosaurs and other extinct creatures.
With my curiousity peaked, my family set off for the main building where black animal prints lead the way. The building was circular with an atrium in the middle. This way, the visitor would be able to see the entire museum by just walking in one direction. Pretty simple and easy to navigate.
Along the way, there were models and skeletons of the animals that were found in these specific tar pits. One amazing part was the collection of over 100 skulls of Dire Wolves that had fallen in the sticky tar and never surfaced again. By showing actual skeletons, the museum made it more interesting to learn about the animals that died in the tar pits.
In order for people to see what it was like to be in tar, there was a case with tar in it and the visitors could pull up on handles that descended into the black goo. Judging by the height, it was direct more at little kids, but it was interesting none the less!
Near the end of the circle, there were scietists who were behind glass and they were cleaning up actual bones of a mammoth. They were in a labratory that was set up so that visitors could stop and watch and they had signs posted next to bones on the window sill that explained what was going on.
The museam did a very good job of getting information across in facinating ways. They showed skeletons, tools to dig them up, and other models that got information effectively across.
They even allowed the visitors to walk to the actual excavation sites to see how the bones were removed. It was all interesting, and very entertaining, expecially for those interesten in archaeology and other fields related to that.
With my curiousity peaked, my family set off for the main building where black animal prints lead the way. The building was circular with an atrium in the middle. This way, the visitor would be able to see the entire museum by just walking in one direction. Pretty simple and easy to navigate.
Along the way, there were models and skeletons of the animals that were found in these specific tar pits. One amazing part was the collection of over 100 skulls of Dire Wolves that had fallen in the sticky tar and never surfaced again. By showing actual skeletons, the museum made it more interesting to learn about the animals that died in the tar pits.
In order for people to see what it was like to be in tar, there was a case with tar in it and the visitors could pull up on handles that descended into the black goo. Judging by the height, it was direct more at little kids, but it was interesting none the less!
Near the end of the circle, there were scietists who were behind glass and they were cleaning up actual bones of a mammoth. They were in a labratory that was set up so that visitors could stop and watch and they had signs posted next to bones on the window sill that explained what was going on.
The museam did a very good job of getting information across in facinating ways. They showed skeletons, tools to dig them up, and other models that got information effectively across.
They even allowed the visitors to walk to the actual excavation sites to see how the bones were removed. It was all interesting, and very entertaining, expecially for those interesten in archaeology and other fields related to that.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Is it good or bad to apologize to comfort women?
I think it would be good overall if the government made the apology to the comfort women.
The women should definitely be apologized to in my opinion. They were raped and abused by the soldiers. They were forced to do many sexual and perverted things. No one should have to do that. The question is, why should the government apologize if it didn't order for the women to be kidnapped? One simple solution is it should have had a better control over the soldiers. What kind of government lets their fighters run wild and commit acts of rape and other stuff like that?
If the government, however, admits they ordered it, then they should obviously apologize for letting their own citizens be sexually amused at the extent of others. Either way, "Sorry" is a necessity.
The effects would be great. First of all, the comfort women would stop pestering the government. That way, people will stop whispering about how the government keeps secrets and stuff. Secondly, the government would be shamed for a while, BUT ONLY FOR A WHILE!! It's called humility, and everyone should have some now and then for a healthy life. Sure, they will be hated and bashed for a while, but then they just need to gain the trust of the people again. To put it simply, a few scrapes and bruises for the government will make it grow up and accept responsibility. What's even more ridiculous is that even the U.S. House of Reps made a bill that demanded Japan to apologize. Why does any country need another to say blankly "Dude, you messed up. Stop complaining and apologize to your people"!? I mean, that in itself is enough for any country to feel a little embarrassed. Now they have to deal with the rest of the world telling them to grow up. Japan is just being stubborn at this point. Once they say sorry, it could all be over a lot quicker than just refusing to directly and clearly say, "I'm sorry, it will never happen again."
The women should definitely be apologized to in my opinion. They were raped and abused by the soldiers. They were forced to do many sexual and perverted things. No one should have to do that. The question is, why should the government apologize if it didn't order for the women to be kidnapped? One simple solution is it should have had a better control over the soldiers. What kind of government lets their fighters run wild and commit acts of rape and other stuff like that?
If the government, however, admits they ordered it, then they should obviously apologize for letting their own citizens be sexually amused at the extent of others. Either way, "Sorry" is a necessity.
The effects would be great. First of all, the comfort women would stop pestering the government. That way, people will stop whispering about how the government keeps secrets and stuff. Secondly, the government would be shamed for a while, BUT ONLY FOR A WHILE!! It's called humility, and everyone should have some now and then for a healthy life. Sure, they will be hated and bashed for a while, but then they just need to gain the trust of the people again. To put it simply, a few scrapes and bruises for the government will make it grow up and accept responsibility. What's even more ridiculous is that even the U.S. House of Reps made a bill that demanded Japan to apologize. Why does any country need another to say blankly "Dude, you messed up. Stop complaining and apologize to your people"!? I mean, that in itself is enough for any country to feel a little embarrassed. Now they have to deal with the rest of the world telling them to grow up. Japan is just being stubborn at this point. Once they say sorry, it could all be over a lot quicker than just refusing to directly and clearly say, "I'm sorry, it will never happen again."
Apologizing to Women...er, Comfort Women I should add
I am really sorry, but I had no idea what I wanted to write about for the longest time. At first I was going to write how state governments should apologize to people who were on death row for many years when they were actually innocent. However, this was a bit earlier than DNA test and such, so I can understand the controversy there about going with the evidence given, so there was not much of a point to make here.
The second thing that interested me to write about was when a U.S. stealth plane was flying around the Soviet Union, but was "not spying" on them in anyway, shape or form. However, the Russians took the plane and pilot captive after firing it out of the air and found the pilot with a hidden suicide pin, which was a device that allowed people who held critical information to commit suicide in order to prevent the information being forced out of them. I thought the U.S. should apologize for their actions, but I couldn't remember many names to get enough detail about this incident.
Finally, I turned to the comfort women scenario. This is how the incident occurred:
During WWII, the Japanese soldiers tricked and kidnapped many women to act as sex slaves for them. These women were brutally raped and used. Many years later, the women are asking for an apology, but the Japanese government isn't giving one. They have offered a little money, but they have avoided apologizing directly and outright. The women are angry at the government for thinking if it pays them, they will just go away like common whores.
Here are some pictures of the comfort women, both during captivity and after it.
One of the biggest reason this is controversial is because Japan denies it ever happening. There "isn't enough" proof that hundreds of thousands of women were trafficked around the country, even though many have spoken out about this travesty. If Japan finally gives an apology, it owuld mean they had been trying to lie to it's people in order to save face. However, by not apologizing, it is betraying those who live in Japan. Quite the dilemma for the Japanese government.
The second thing that interested me to write about was when a U.S. stealth plane was flying around the Soviet Union, but was "not spying" on them in anyway, shape or form. However, the Russians took the plane and pilot captive after firing it out of the air and found the pilot with a hidden suicide pin, which was a device that allowed people who held critical information to commit suicide in order to prevent the information being forced out of them. I thought the U.S. should apologize for their actions, but I couldn't remember many names to get enough detail about this incident.
Finally, I turned to the comfort women scenario. This is how the incident occurred:
During WWII, the Japanese soldiers tricked and kidnapped many women to act as sex slaves for them. These women were brutally raped and used. Many years later, the women are asking for an apology, but the Japanese government isn't giving one. They have offered a little money, but they have avoided apologizing directly and outright. The women are angry at the government for thinking if it pays them, they will just go away like common whores.
Here are some pictures of the comfort women, both during captivity and after it.
One of the biggest reason this is controversial is because Japan denies it ever happening. There "isn't enough" proof that hundreds of thousands of women were trafficked around the country, even though many have spoken out about this travesty. If Japan finally gives an apology, it owuld mean they had been trying to lie to it's people in order to save face. However, by not apologizing, it is betraying those who live in Japan. Quite the dilemma for the Japanese government.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Music and Critical Thinking
I have just realized that I totally forgot to do this blog, so I am doing it now. The topic? Well, hopefully the title explains it all. If not, then let me put it simply: I plan to say how my major (music) incorporates the idea of critical thinking into its curriculum.
To answer any question marks appearing above your head, yes there IS critical thinking in music, whether it be analyzing, composing or performing it. And even though I am a percussionist, there is STILL critical thinking. Heck, there is still thinking in general going on back in the section. Believe it or not, we just don't drool like cave bats with rabies and hit random objects with sticks whenever we fancy. In fact, it has been proven that people who can keep closer to tempo and play beats more accurately are smarter than others. TAKE THAT!!
Anyway, back to the original topic. Music does indeed have critical thinking. When composers create music, they have to take certain chord progressions and make melodies with them. They have all these tools to use in order to make the music sound pretty, angry, or the saddest thing on earth. The are endless combinations about which chord progresses the best into this one other chord and what notes should follow an augmented 6th. Think carefully about how many songs there are. Really carefully. Although many of them use all the same notes, they are placed so differently that they can get a tottaly different song out.
Another way for critical thinking to be used in music is when you are playing it. The performer has to think about the atmoshpere of the piece being played, and adjust his playing to fit the appropriate mood. Other wise you could end up with a heavanly chorus from the orchestra while the triangle player is playing like he sees bats out of hell.
Which all comes down to another point: The performer should probably figure out when the piece being played was created. This would help get the best effect that was meant for the piece. For example, baroque music was meant for certain instruments during the baroque period. If the same music was used with instruments today, like a heavy metal guitar, it probably would not have the same affect as a flute.
This is only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to critical thinking and music, but, alas, this is where we must stop. I hope you have all enjoyed this post, as I tried to add some color to what would have been an otherwise mind numbing assignment. Hopefully your mind is inspired now to critically think about anything in a "more fun" way.
To answer any question marks appearing above your head, yes there IS critical thinking in music, whether it be analyzing, composing or performing it. And even though I am a percussionist, there is STILL critical thinking. Heck, there is still thinking in general going on back in the section. Believe it or not, we just don't drool like cave bats with rabies and hit random objects with sticks whenever we fancy. In fact, it has been proven that people who can keep closer to tempo and play beats more accurately are smarter than others. TAKE THAT!!
Anyway, back to the original topic. Music does indeed have critical thinking. When composers create music, they have to take certain chord progressions and make melodies with them. They have all these tools to use in order to make the music sound pretty, angry, or the saddest thing on earth. The are endless combinations about which chord progresses the best into this one other chord and what notes should follow an augmented 6th. Think carefully about how many songs there are. Really carefully. Although many of them use all the same notes, they are placed so differently that they can get a tottaly different song out.
Another way for critical thinking to be used in music is when you are playing it. The performer has to think about the atmoshpere of the piece being played, and adjust his playing to fit the appropriate mood. Other wise you could end up with a heavanly chorus from the orchestra while the triangle player is playing like he sees bats out of hell.
Which all comes down to another point: The performer should probably figure out when the piece being played was created. This would help get the best effect that was meant for the piece. For example, baroque music was meant for certain instruments during the baroque period. If the same music was used with instruments today, like a heavy metal guitar, it probably would not have the same affect as a flute.
This is only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to critical thinking and music, but, alas, this is where we must stop. I hope you have all enjoyed this post, as I tried to add some color to what would have been an otherwise mind numbing assignment. Hopefully your mind is inspired now to critically think about anything in a "more fun" way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
