My Very Rough First Draft (1/3) December 12, 2007

Katie Kooiman

Advance Composition

Mrs. Meeuwenberg

20 December 2007

Jane Austen: Timeless Love Stories

            (Fix Intro) When one asks for a good book to read, one should look no further than Jane Austen. Jane Austen is known for her timeless books, such as Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, and Emma. The characterizations, plots and themes of these three novels convey a sense of timelessness.

            (Need to add ALL parenthetical citing) Jane Austen was born on December 16, 1776 to Reverend George and Cassandra Austen. Her father was a clergyman in Steventon, the small town they lived in, in Hampshire, England. Jane Austen was the seventh of eight kids, with her and her sister being really close. Some of the characters she brings into her novels represent people that she knew.

            Jane Austen’s novels are timeless because of the characterization she uses in them. Austen focuses on the lives of individuals within a couple of families. These families often live in a small, confined and conservative town. Pride and Prejudice focuses on the Bennets, Bingleys, Darcys, and Lucases. The Bennet’s and Lucas’s live in Hertfordshire, and the Bingley’s and Mr. Darcy stay in the Charles Bingley’s home in Netherfield. Jane Austen was very close to her sister, and wrote Sense and Sensibility about Cassandra and herself. Cassandra and Elinor, the older sister in Sense and Sensibility share sense, but Jane didn’t share sensibility with Marianne. Sir Walter Scott, in a review of Jane Austen’s novels, said, “That young lady has a talent for describing the involvements and feelings and characters of ordinary life which is to me the most wonderful I ever met with.” This is shown by the differences in each character.

In Pride and Prejudice, Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy are alike. They are both rich, upper class men with their own homes and responsibilities. They both fall in love, but yet, they are totally different. Mr. Bingley is more naïve, unworldly, and enjoys the things of the upper class, but would still be perfectly happy if he were not upper class. On the other hand, Mr. Darcy is prideful, worldly and he has a failing, as well as everything good. Darcy explains it like this: “I cannot forget the follies and vices of others so soon as I ought, nor their offenses against myself. My feelings are not puffed about with every attempted to move them. My temper would perhaps be called resentful. My good opinion once lost is lost for ever.” The quote explains that after you have done something to wrong him, he finds it impossible to forgive. A quote from Elizabeth Bennet also explains about Darcy’s character:

“From the very beginning, from the first moment, I may almost say, of my acquaintance with you, your manner impressing me with the fullest belief of your arrogance, your conceit, and your selfish disdain of the feelings of others, were such as to form that groundwork of disapprobation, on which succeeding events have built so immovable a dislike; and I had not known you a month before I felt you were the last man in the world whom I could ever be prevailed on to marry.”

Arrogant, conceited, selfish disdain of feelings are that Elizabeth Bennet expresses in this quote. Altogether, this shows that Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy, although friends and from the same class, are two totally different people.

            Jane Austen’s novels have good characterization because of the way she uses ordinary people to make interesting, extraordinary and believable stories. “Miss Austen’s personages are always in plain clothes, but no two suits are alike: all are worn with their appropriate differences, and under all human thoughts and feelings are at work.” The people are all ordinary people living in ordinary towns, but Austen knows how she can make it more interesting. Through the words she uses and the situations that happen. Elinor and Marianne, from Sense and Sensibility, are two ordinary girls, who through a series of events fall in love, and marry the men of their dreams. Emma, from Emma, is able to realize she is in love with Mr. Knightly through a series of events, when she was trying to set her friend, Ms. Smith up.

            Her novels are timeless because the way she uses her characters. If one wanted to read a book, from a different time period, wouldn’t it be better to have interesting, complex characters that tell a believable story through the eyes of an ordinary family? Because she uses characters that are similar to people she knew in her lifetime, her characters come alive and continue to represent and relate to the readers through all of the generations.

Harry Potter’s Secret October 28, 2007

By: Michael Gerson

J. K. Rwoling announced that Albus Dumbledore, the headmaster of “Hogwarts” is gay. The Harry Potter books are really popular, with the last book selling 11 million copies in 23 hours. Many Christian conservatives believe Rowlingis a corrupter of youth, adding witchcraft and homosexual rights into her books. The author believes the reaction is mistaken. Ruling out magic in children’s books would be bad. The use of magic happens for a reason; it reveals another reality beneath the surface of our days. Magic is the way children are introduced to the idea of transcendence. The only way that it would have been using her book for arguing some political agenda would be if Dumbledore and Spape got married. That would have caused some problems, but Dumbledore being gay was more of an assumption brought to the writting ,not actually in the writting itself. Tolerance is one of the main themes. Werewolves are discriminated against like people with AIDS, Voldemort is Nazi-like and Pure-bloods with untainted magical lineage, mixed parentage is half-bloods and people are brought to trial before going to Azkaban. The author goes on to tell more good things about the books and pretty much say that Dumbledore being gay isn’t something we should dwell on.

The article was well written, and proved his point well, showing all of the good things Harry Potter can teach kids, along with some of the bad things.

Abortion’s ‘So-What’ Factor October 28, 2007

By:  George F. Will

35 Years ago, the supreme court decided to ban abortion. Some states have changed and relaxed their regulations. One is California. If the republican party wants to be competitive in California, they need to nominate a pro-choice candidate. This candidate is Rudy Giuliani. Whether there is a pro-choice  or pro-life candidate, someone loses. It wouldn’t really matter whether the president is pro-choice or pro-life because the policy is in the hands of the Supreme Court and 3 of the five are pro-life. The president will have the opportunity to shape our court. The ruling of Roe VS. Wade could be changed because one of the justices thinks it was improperly deced on.  The overturning of Roe most likely wouldn’t result from a Republican president’s alteration of the courts balance. If Roe was overturned, it would only restore abortion as a practice subject to state regulation, not make it illegal. The author believes that it is okay to care about the candidate’s stance on stuff, but when it comes to abortion, it might not be as important because it doesn’t necessarily matter.

This was a well written piece, but was a lttle confusing if you didn’t know a ton about the topic. The author could have made it a little clearer on what Roe VS. Wade was and everything like that. The author shows his opinion that is a little more of it doesn’t matter what the candidate thinks as long as the court stays unevenly divided in the right way.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/26/AR2007102601864.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

Moment that Shaped You’re Life October 17, 2007

Moment that changed me.

 

Spring Break. Separate, spring is a season and break is a time off of something. Together, spring break is one of the most anticipated times of the year. It is a time to goof off, sunbathe, relax, and distress after about seven months of school five days a week, sports after school, and that after school job you hate, but need the money. Spring Break 2007 was no different for me.

            The week before spring break was hectic as usual. Between packing and all the last minute tests teachers love to cram in on the last few days of school, I had no time to really realize what was going to happen. I was going to Cancun, Mexico, on a mission trip, with my youth group. Thursday came with a bang. I awoke and went to school. Looking back, I’m pretty sure that was the longest half day of school in my life. From school, I went home to do my last minute packing. 7 pm finally arrived and I was finally standing in my church parking lot, praying for safe travels. We drove to Chicago, IL to catch our plane, and flew off to Mexico at 2:30 am. We arrived in Cancun, Mexico at 11 am the same morning. From there, the ten days passed in a blur. We stayed at a hotel for two nights and then went to Betania church to work. At Betania, I found something new and surprising. I found a church community who welcomed us with open arms, lived us without holding back and were willing to give us any and everything, even though they had nothing. To measure up to all they did and gave us, we would have had to stay a month, not four days. In the four days, we dug a gigantic hole for the septic tank, moved sand many times, moved rocks even more times and poured cement. Even after all that work was done, it still felt as if we did nothing at all. Betania church is a work in progress; a progress that so far had taken 7 years, and has about 6 years to go. They don’t care. They live in the now, and worship and a partly done building. They love when groups come, but not because they are excited about the work that will get done, but because they get to share their love with the groups. They open their homes, give up their rooms, and cook every meal for us without complaining or thinking anything else could be right.

            The time I spent in Mexico changed me. It was what you might call a “mountain high” experience. I remember how it felt to be in Mexico, close to God and loving every minute of it. The thing I remember the most is how I felt afterwards. I went from the top of the mountain to the lowest gorge you can find. That is when I really learned about myself.

            What I learned, I didn’t like. It was like the blindfold finally came off. Before and after Mexico, I wasn’t the best person I could be. Not just disobeying my parents, but I just wasn’t who I wanted to be. Away from Mexico, I didn’t feel close to God anymore. After a few days, I stopped doing devotions again and I slumped back into the habits I started before Mexico.

            This shouldn’t have happened. I no longer liked my self. I liked the person I was in Mexico. Since I couldn’t go back to Mexico, I had to learn how to get closer to God and the person I want to be in different ways. It has slowly been happening. I’m trying to be more like the people I met in Mexico. I used them as an example as how to live. I am trying to love with all I am, welcoming people into my life, and give all I have. This is not an easy process, but I think I’m doing well. Climbing out of the gorge is hard, but with God’s help, I am learning to live my life more like the Mexicans.

Teaching a Bad Dog New Tricks October 14, 2007

BY: David Buetow

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14415923&ft=1&f=4538138

David Buetow believes in his dog. There are aspects of his dog’s life that he wishes he could be more like. One thing is that his dog is happy at the smallest things. He is so happy to get the same food every meal when we complain about not liking what we eat. His dog always thinks about the present. When Buetow comes home, he is ready to play, not think about his boring day. His dog doesn’t pre-judge and will “talk” to anyone and greet anyone.

Buetow used to be concentrated on work. He never depended on anyone, and no one depended on him. He got lonely that way, and decided to get a dog… Duncan. He realized that he liked being depended upon and realized Duncan helped him too. He belives in the nobility of loyalty and enthusiasm (of Duncan).

I think that this was a really well written paper. It showed things that he likes, and then shows you how his life was before that. He gives really good examples and stories about how dogs act and about his life before and after he got Duncan. In his paper, he uses a lot of different techniques to get across his point. He gives examples, stories and gives them often. I think this is a really cool paper and connection about how we could/should live our lives.

A Revelation October 14, 2007

By: Naomi Schaefer Riley

http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110010724&mod=RSS_Opinion_Journal&ojrss=frontpage

In Birmingham, Alabama, there was an event that everyone wanted to go to. It was a debate between biologist Richard Dawkins and mathematician John Lennox. The subject they debated was: Does God exist?

Over the course of 90 minutes, the two, who have different views, debated this. They clashed over whether it was Christianity that started the scientific revolution, whether the complexity of the world was evidence to a Creator, and whether atheism is a religion. Mr. Lennox suggested that the Bible was right that the earth was formed out of nothing, and didn’t just come to be. Mr. Dawkin’s thought that that was wrong. Mr. Dawkin’s said that Mr. Lennox could say that the world was created later, but he still couldn’t prove that Jesus is the son of God or that he was resurrected from the dead.

Mr. Dawkin was surprised at how he was regarded here. He had made a comment about the southern and central states being really full of Christians and the northern and coastline states not being as religious. This was the first time he had ever given a debate in the south, and it was only because his book, “The God Delusion”, was selling really well down there. Dawkin is disappointed because the Christians reading the books aren’t ready to give up their faith yet. Some of the Christians are showing up more for bible study to learn how to respond to some of the stuff in Dawkin’s book.

Christians are starting to change their ways. When they used to hear stuff like the stuff in Dawkin’s book, they used to run and hide because they didn’t know what to say. Now, they are starting to think that if our God is the God of truth, what do we need to be afraid of. That was the attitude Lennox grew up with. He grew up with his parents encouraging him to read everything and develop an interest in the great questions in life. Dawkins grew up in a Christian family, but he “realized that his religion was merely an accident of his birth and soon thereafter gave up his faith.” The author of this article believes that he wasn’t rebelling against religion, but against the harmless worldview that glosses over the great questions in life. She also says that the people of Birmingham didn’t come out of that tradition after this debate.

This was a really well written article. The author divided it in half. She started with the information about the debate. It first said who the two men were, and then some of the arguments that they gave. The second half was about the men themselves and their upbringings, and beliefs, or lack there of. I like that she put the personal information at the end, not at the beginning. This way you know the story, and then from the information she gives after that, you learn how they came to the conclusions they have. The author does a really good job in not showing their personal stance on the issues. It shows good comebacks from both men, not concentrating on the one they agree with.

This I Believe October 7, 2007

Katie Kooiman

Mrs. Meeuwenburg

Advance Composition

 

This I Believe

 

            Young, innocent, naïve. These three words are often used to describe children. As teenagers and adults, we are taught to teach children, not learn from them. That idea is wrong. Children have it good. They get to color; have naptime, snack time and recess. Beyond that, their lives are simple and fun. Not only do they have it good, they have it right when it comes to faith.

            A child’s faith is often simple, but what else does it need to be? They learn songs with the meanings spelled out. Songs like “Jesus Loves Me” and “He’s got the Whole World in His Hands”. In Sunday school, or 2-5 Alive (for 2-5 year olds), they know the right answer. Who loves you? Jesus. Who died on the cross? Jesus. Who rose on Easter? Jesus. Who is in heaven with God? Jesus.

            I was babysitting the other night when I encountered something I’ve never witnessed with any other family. Picture this scene: A dining room right off of the kitchen. I’m sitting on a bar stool near the table, being very thankful that Ian, the youngest of three boys, didn’t throw a fit when his parents left. Hot chicken nuggets just out of the oven, along with applesauce and mini goldfish for supper. A second after the first bite of chicken, I asked the oldest boy, Jack, how his chicken nuggets were. He gives me this look; his face mixed with shock and worry, and tells me in a very worried voice that he forgot to pray. The other two look up, and gave me the same look when they realized that they also forgot to pray. They all closed their eyes and said their prayers. When their prayers were over, they went back to their meals.

            What happened in the kitchen that night will stay with me forever. I realized that night that children have a strong faith. They know that when to pray and who they believe in. Whereas many adults have a hard time voicing their faith, children come right out and say it. Children also follow the 10 Commandments better. Children don’t take the Lord’s name in vain, don’t covet their neighbor’s possessions, and they love everyone as themselves, even those they only just met.

            The reasons above are proof of how well children know God and His plans for them. The reasons above are just a few of the reasons that I believe in faith like a child’s.

Living in the Here and Now September 30, 2007

This I Believe by: Jeffrey Hollender

Six years ago, Jeffrey’s brother ended his life. This had the biggest impact on Jeffrey’s life than anything before it. Life was just sliding by, and he was never in the present, only in the past or future. This life is short, and he realized that when his brother died. He decided to honor his brother’s death by living his own strictly in the present. The autopilot he was living on shut of, and he says, “I began to see new possibilities for thought, vision, caring and action: to say what too often remains unsaid, to admit that often I have no idea what to do.” He said that living in the now is hard. He spends most of his time reacting to things. He is now trying to ask questions, not answer them. This way, he isn’t reacting, but acting. This is making him feel more like the person he aspires to be. Jeffrey says he sees that his mind is his greatest limitation and the gateway to what matters most. It also is the gateway to the big stuff, like world peace, end to world hunger. He didn’t always believe in them because he thought they were to far out of our reach. He is sad for the missed opportunities his brother will never have. He doesn’t want to miss anymore moments. In this small way, he is honoring his brother every day.

I think this is really good. I don’t think we live very much in the present anymore. We think about the future, and how much homework we have tonight, or the test we have tomorrow. I think we should all work harder to live in the present, if only for a few hours a day.

http://www.npr.org./templates/story/story.php?storyId=11888509

The Light of a Brighter Day September 30, 2007

By: Helen Keller

“This I Believe” article.  Aired circa 1951.

Helen Keller was struck with a fever as an infant that left her deaf and blind. With the help of her teacher Anne Sullivan, she learned to communicate through the ears and eyes of others. She became a renowned author, activist and lecturer.

“I choose for my subject faith wrought into life apart from creed or dogma. By faith, I mean a vision of good one cherishes and the enthusiasm that pushes one to seek its fulfillment, regardless of obstacles.”

This is the opening quote from “The Light of a Brighter Day”. Helen Keller goes on to say that faith is a dynamic power that breaks the routine, and gives a new turn on old things. it reinvigorates the will, awakens a sense of creativeness and enriches the affections. Active faith should be a safeguard and should know no fear. Faith is an indivisible totality of beliefs that inspire her. There is a belief in God as an infinite goodwill and all-seeing wisdom, a belief that God will be sustain you in all of life. It is a trust in fellow men that even after a night of oppression and sorrow, they will rise in the glory of the morning. There is a reverence for the beauty and preciousness of the earth and a sense of responsibility to make it a habitation of health and plenty for everyone. Faith should also help when you lose the ones you love. Helen says that it is a blow to her faith that people have to labor everyday to survive and die without knowing the joy of living life. Faith is a state of mind. The believer shouldn’t be disheartened. If he loses his home, he should rebuild one that the winds of earth  cannot destroy. It still hurts her when she hears of suffering and famine, and the slaughtering of men, but “the thought comes to me that, like the little deaf, dumb and blind child I once was, mankind is growing out of the darkness of ignorance and hate into the light of a brighter day.”

I think that this is well written, and hits on a lot of key points. Faith is not merely a way of life, or one action. Faith is a series of beliefs that gives us an outline of how to live our lives. I believe that faith is a belief in God and all his powers, but also in everything and everyone he created. I hope, like Helen Keller believes, that one day, we will grow out of the darkness of ignorance, and realize what is really important in life. The important things aren’t money, and clothes, but having a family you love, and being happy.

http://www.npr.org./templates/story/story.php?storyId=4536329

Division Problem September 23, 2007

Written By Michael Gerson on Septemeber 19, 2007.

Michael Gerson starts by saying that immigration has become more than just a topic of debate. Governer Mitt Romney from Massachucetts says that illegal immigrants need to be forced out, while Mayor Rudy Giuliani from New York was told by Romney that he didn’t “round up” enough illegal immigrants during his time as Mayor. Conservatives are trying to build a more appealing, post-Bush republican party. The most obvious change so far is to, “reverse remarkably Republican gains among one of the fastest-growing groups of American voters.” Bush refused amnesty for illegal immigrants. He gave a proposal that would give legal status to immigrants that were planning on working in America, and then returning home. He also provided a realistic pathway to those who wanted to become citizens. This helped him. In 1996, Bob Dole got 21% of latino’s votes, and Bush in 2000, got 35%. But in 2006, the % dropped to 30%. This number keeps dropping, and in the swing states, it could end up making it unwinnable for the republicans.

I think that Michael Gerson is saying that if Republicans want to keep winning elections, they need to figure out how to deal with the illegal immigration situation, and how to make the latino’s happy, so that the latino’s will start voting republican again.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/18/AR2007091801626.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns