Wow! This is my last post on this blog, and I'm kind of sad. Blogging every week become a part of my schedule, and I enjoyed reading other people's blogs. I'm glad that I have this blog, because I know that I can always come back to it online and see what I thought about books when I read them, and also how I wrote this year. It would be interesting to re-read a book I wrote about in this blog and see how my thoughts differ after I read it again. This blog has been my record of the books I read this year, and all the thoughts I had about them.
I learned a lot from having a blog. I was more interested and engaged in my book when I knew I had to write about it online. I also really liked reading other people's blogs, especially on books I read, to see if we agree or disagree on our ideas. I benefited from this experience in many ways. For instance, I thought deeper about the books I was reading when I was blogging. I also felt that I had more to say for some reason when I was writing online. I also found that blogging and reading blogs is a lot more fun than I originally thought, because it allows you to see what people really think.
Writing online is different than writing in a notebook. When you blog online, everyone can see what you're writing, so I think that encouraged me to really think about what I was reading. Also, I liked writing and knowing that other people are going to read it because I felt what I had to say was taken seriously. When I'm writing something that others are going to read, I think I put more of my thoughts and opinions in the piece.
I think that writing online can be liberating because it allows people to say what they want and state their opinions openly and freely for people to read. Writing online allows a person to get their opinions out in the open. I think writing online can also be limiting because some people may be less willing to speak their mind if other people are going to read it. They may be afraid that their opinions are bad or wrong, and therefore are discouraged to write about them online. Also, when you write something online, you have to remember that it could be pulled up at anytime once it's on the Internet.
I think that some teenagers abuse the freedom that being online gives them, for instance by typing things to people that they would never say to their faces. Some people may think that by writing it online it might not have the same meaning, but it does. Whenever you say something mean or hurtful to somebody else, whether it's online or in person, it still has the same negative meaning. Sometimes saying something mean online is worse because everybody could see it.
Overall, I really liked blogging about my reading. At the beginning of the school year, I thought that blogging would be boring and kind of hard, but after awhile I started to enjoy thinking and writing about my book in a deeper way on my blog for other people to read. I think I may continue to blog about the books I'm reading because it was fun blogging. Also, I think it's a good way to keep in touch with my classmates. I'd also really like to join a book-club blog where I could blog with people reading the same book. I like blogging, because it made me enjoy writing more. It made thinking about my book a lot more fun. I also thought a lot more about what I was reading. I have to say that I am going to miss writing on this blog.
Bye for now!
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Children Faced With Adult Situations
My book club is reading The Rules of Survival by Nancy Werlin. It is about a boy, Matt, and his two little sisters. Their mom is unstable and I think a little bit crazy. She has her own fantasies about how to be a mother, and her children are afraid of her. She's not much of a mother to Matt, Callie, and Emmy. Because of this, Matt has to take the role of being the parent to his siblings. This book has gotten me to think a lot about children. Matt has to be the responsible, caring one in his family to make up for his mother. But is that fair? Shouldn't Matt get to live his life and just be a child since he is one? Or is it really his job to take over for his mother? I think children should be children, and not have to grow up so fast.
This book has gotten me to think about The Hunger Games, which I read awhile ago. Children are a big theme in the book. Teenagers are put into a rink to kill each other, and to be watched as they do so. I think that what surprised me so much about The Hunger Games was how kids were forced to go in a lottery and the ones chosen would have to fight to their death. It comes down to children killing children, and everybody was forced to watch. For instance, Rue, the youngest tribute, was killed. Rue was just a sweet, innocent little girl, yet she got her life cut so short because of the Hunger Games.
I think that Rue should have not been killed. She was so young, and she had her whole life ahead of her. All the tributes had their whole lives ahead of them. I don't think that anyone should have been killed in the Hunger Games. I don't think it would be better if adults were in the Hunger Games, either. I think that the Hunger Games are wrong. But when it's just children fighting, I think it makes it worse. At the end of each Hunger Games, more than 20 children are dead. Their lives are ended just like that, all for the enjoyment of the government. When children see that for real, in person or on television, I think they lose some of their innocence. I can't imagine having to watch others killing others, especially people my own age, my peers. It would be too frightening and sad. I also think that it's very disturbing and unsettling.
Children can't defend themselves like adults can. They're not as wise and physically able as older people. So, in some ways, I think that one reason I was surprised when I read The Hunger Games was that children had to kill other children just to survive. Also, in The Rules of Survival, I feel myself feeling sad for Matt, because he has had to grow up so fast to be a parent-like figure to his sisters. I don't think that these two books are a lot alike, but in both books, the issue of children taking on adult responsibilities is a big theme.
This book has gotten me to think about The Hunger Games, which I read awhile ago. Children are a big theme in the book. Teenagers are put into a rink to kill each other, and to be watched as they do so. I think that what surprised me so much about The Hunger Games was how kids were forced to go in a lottery and the ones chosen would have to fight to their death. It comes down to children killing children, and everybody was forced to watch. For instance, Rue, the youngest tribute, was killed. Rue was just a sweet, innocent little girl, yet she got her life cut so short because of the Hunger Games.
I think that Rue should have not been killed. She was so young, and she had her whole life ahead of her. All the tributes had their whole lives ahead of them. I don't think that anyone should have been killed in the Hunger Games. I don't think it would be better if adults were in the Hunger Games, either. I think that the Hunger Games are wrong. But when it's just children fighting, I think it makes it worse. At the end of each Hunger Games, more than 20 children are dead. Their lives are ended just like that, all for the enjoyment of the government. When children see that for real, in person or on television, I think they lose some of their innocence. I can't imagine having to watch others killing others, especially people my own age, my peers. It would be too frightening and sad. I also think that it's very disturbing and unsettling.
Children can't defend themselves like adults can. They're not as wise and physically able as older people. So, in some ways, I think that one reason I was surprised when I read The Hunger Games was that children had to kill other children just to survive. Also, in The Rules of Survival, I feel myself feeling sad for Matt, because he has had to grow up so fast to be a parent-like figure to his sisters. I don't think that these two books are a lot alike, but in both books, the issue of children taking on adult responsibilities is a big theme.
Sunday, June 3, 2012
Change
I just began reading Awaken by Kate Kacvinksy. The book is about a girl, Madeline, who lives in 2060. Even though 2060 is only 48 years away, a lot has changed in the world. People don't go out much, and they don't need to, because everything is run on computers. Madeline goes to school online, and therefore doesn't meet with other people face-to-face a lot. Paper books don't exist anymore, and it's illegal to chop down trees. There are hardly any real trees that exist anymore, and Madeline has never seen one before. Instead, people use synthetic trees that they buy online, choose their desired size and height, and have shipped to their homes. People don't call each other to have conversations anymore. Instead, they chat on the Internet, by talking into their computer, which types up what they say. I think that in Awaken, the issue of change is important.
I think that the thing that surprised me the most was about the synthetic trees. Trees are objects that most people see everyday. They're just a part of the atmosphere, the setting of our lives. But Madeline has never seen one, because they don't grow anywhere near her. This is scary to me. When I'm 62 years old in 2060, are there going to be any more trees left? Or will humans cut down so many of them that they'll be gone? It's frightening to think that something so beautiful and vital to humans will turn to plastic. I hope this doesn't happen in the future. So many things are changing in this day in age. For instance, books are now being read on technical devices instead of on paperback. In Madeline's time period, paperback books haven't been manufactured for twenty years. I like paperback books. 2060 is so different than 2012, and this book has gotten me thinking about how I don't want a lot of things to change.
Change is a big topic. Change is good. When something is wrong or unjust, it's important that people try to change it, make it better. But I also think that change can be bad, such as if something changes for the worse. In Madeline's world, people don't go out anymore much, instead they chat with each other online. They go to school online, and get things shipped to them. In addition to the synthetic trees and new books, I don't like this change. I like going outside and glancing at the real, live trees. I like reading paperback books and seeing how many pages I've finished. I also like going outside and meeting people, face-to-face. I don't want these things to change. In Awaken, Madeline meets a boy online, and is hesitant to see him when he wants to meet her face-to-face. She knows that her father wouldn't like that, her going outside. It's as if her father is restricting her freedom, keeping her from doing something, probably because it's unusual to actually see people outside, in person.
In conclusion, Awaken is a book set in the future. Many things have changed, but I'm not sure I really want a lot of things to change. I know that not everything in the world is perfect, or even good, but some things, like trees and paperback books, are worth saving. Why are they worth saving? I think they're worth saving because they are such a vital part of life today, and it would feel funny without them.
I think that the thing that surprised me the most was about the synthetic trees. Trees are objects that most people see everyday. They're just a part of the atmosphere, the setting of our lives. But Madeline has never seen one, because they don't grow anywhere near her. This is scary to me. When I'm 62 years old in 2060, are there going to be any more trees left? Or will humans cut down so many of them that they'll be gone? It's frightening to think that something so beautiful and vital to humans will turn to plastic. I hope this doesn't happen in the future. So many things are changing in this day in age. For instance, books are now being read on technical devices instead of on paperback. In Madeline's time period, paperback books haven't been manufactured for twenty years. I like paperback books. 2060 is so different than 2012, and this book has gotten me thinking about how I don't want a lot of things to change.
Change is a big topic. Change is good. When something is wrong or unjust, it's important that people try to change it, make it better. But I also think that change can be bad, such as if something changes for the worse. In Madeline's world, people don't go out anymore much, instead they chat with each other online. They go to school online, and get things shipped to them. In addition to the synthetic trees and new books, I don't like this change. I like going outside and glancing at the real, live trees. I like reading paperback books and seeing how many pages I've finished. I also like going outside and meeting people, face-to-face. I don't want these things to change. In Awaken, Madeline meets a boy online, and is hesitant to see him when he wants to meet her face-to-face. She knows that her father wouldn't like that, her going outside. It's as if her father is restricting her freedom, keeping her from doing something, probably because it's unusual to actually see people outside, in person.
In conclusion, Awaken is a book set in the future. Many things have changed, but I'm not sure I really want a lot of things to change. I know that not everything in the world is perfect, or even good, but some things, like trees and paperback books, are worth saving. Why are they worth saving? I think they're worth saving because they are such a vital part of life today, and it would feel funny without them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)