Tim O’Brien stated in a Presidents’ Day speech that he is not, “...caught up in the cold hard facts but more on the heart truth of the matter.” This goes to say that even if the novel isn’t displaying ‘the’ truth it will present a truth. This is the key idea of the novel, “The Things They Carried” by Tim O’Brien, which is dealing with death by telling the heart truth. This idea is presented by the deaths of Norman Bowker, Kiowa and Linda. Throughout the entire text though, we only fully grasp this idea at the end of the text leaving the reader fully satisfied and understanding the main idea. Therefore, I agree that leaving readers uncertain about outcomes is unwise and that all conflicts should be satisfactorily resolved by the time the novel is ended.
First we are presented with the death of Norman Bowker. Bowker returns back to his hometown a veteran soldier from Vietnam, where he is shunned by his medal obsessed father and I treated like an outsider. He circles the lake, quietly chatting to himself as if he was circling the issues of the Vietnam War. We hear that he is feeling very guilty for the death of his friend; Kiowa whom he let die in the ‘shit field’ in Vietnam and is imagining telling the story to his father, who in his mind accepted him. “Six medals, count ‘em...” He then stops at a fast food restaurant and attempts to confide in a fast food lady through the drive thru speaker. He is in turn declined and a few months later commits suicide. Bowker did this as a result of having no one to talk to. No one was there for him to tell his story to, so he couldn’t express the guilt inside of him about Kiowa’s death. So he bottled it up and then it ultimately lead to his demise. He ended up hanging himself in the locker room of the YMCA. This story was key to the understanding of the main idea, as it was about expressing the heart truth to deal with death, which was a major issue at the time because statistics show that almost half of the veterans that returned from Nam had committed suicide.
We are told of Kiowa’s death three times, first, through Norman Bowker, then through an ‘unnamed soldier’ and finally Tim O’Brien himself. Kiowa was killed by mortars and the depth of the muck in the ‘sh*t field’. In the Norman Bowker story, we are told that it was him that let Kiowa die that night, due to the horrific smell of the muck, which were in fact the villager’s excrements throughout the years. We then find out that it was an ‘unnamed soldier’ who was, “...showing Kiowa a picture of his girlfriend,” and had turned his torch on, giving away his company’s position. Then we are finally told that it was O’Brien that didn’t save Kiowa. Through each of these stories, we see each one getting closer to the place of the event, first with Bowker in America after the war is ended, then the unnamed soldier , the morning after the event and then O’Brien telling the story at the exact time and place of the incident. Through this we can see that O’Brien is ‘circling’ the event telling one story at a time and weathering away at the truth until it is finally presented to us. This is O’Brien’s way of dealing with death, by telling stories. He does this though by using three different stories, which allows him to deal with the truth one revelation after another and to make us feel different things with each story, each one expressing the heart truth.
We are then finally presented with the death of Linda. Linda is O’Brien’s childhood sweetheart who he undoubtedly, “...just loved her.” Linda is diagnosed with leukaemia and is teased by all the kids at school. Linda eventually dies from the cancer but taught O’Brien lessons helped him deal with death. Linda taught O’Brien that sometimes, “...the dead can sit up and smile,” through stories like this we can see the main idea of the novel finally told to the reader. The death of Linda was the easiest story to tell because throughout his life, he would have told the story of Linda many times, and each time it would’ve gotten easier and easier to tell it. The lesson was the one that stayed with O’Brien his whole life and transcended into other times that he had to deal with death, in the three stories of Kiowa and Linda. This event was key to our understanding the main idea of dealing with death by expressing the heart truth.
We finally understand this idea at the end of the text though, because it tends to be what we do in real life. When we tell a story, we exaggerate the parts in which we want the listener to relate to, or make them feel how we want to feel. O’Brien did this in the three times he told us of Kiowa’s death. He exaggerated on the horrific “smell of the muck” and made that a key factor for the audience to understand why he couldn’t save him. In stories we also tend to bend ‘the’ truth to get to ‘a’ truth. This is shown in the Norman Bowker story showing that he had no one to talk to and to present his heart truth, so he wrote about Bowker, saying that it was him that let Kiowa drown in the field. Throughout the entire book though we are not enlightened with the main idea until the last story of the book, which is about Linda. We only understand at the end that the entire book is fiction and that even though these characters in the story might not be true, they can, “...sit up and smile at you... when you can keep them alive,” in stories
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Friday, August 13, 2010
Merit L3 Writing Essay Paea Ahokava
Yesterday afternoon, I was sitting at the back of my English class. Our teacher was blabbering on about his life story and how he sees the world in different spectacles from teenager’s today. Not having a clue what this old fragile man was talking about, I slammed my head on the desk, yelling for the bell to hurry up and ring. I slammed the solid skull of mine so hard it caused a small concussion. While in this world of non-existence, I questioned what this teacher was talking about. It made me wonder, how were outsiders treated through generations? Many thoughts rushed through my concussed brain, like how Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, has anything changed in relation to outsiders or has society been the same from then till now?
In the western world, Jesus is known as the centre of Christianity. He is worshipped by millions, throughout the world, and respected by more. Accounts were written about the torture and mockery that he endured, which led to His crucifixion at Calvary. But how was it, that His own people did not accept him? How was it that His society deemed him to be a somewhat visionary man? Society influences people’s behavior and their values, either consciously or unconsciously. The Jews didn’t accept him to be the Messiah because they were waiting for someone to come in full glory, not a carpenter’s son. During his time, society was narrow-minded and could not accept change or a different way of viewing life. Society believed that had everything that they needed, but he had come to disrupt the peace.
Evident through Shakespearean literature, the same theme of outsiders still occurs during this period. One of Shakespeare most well known plays, Othello, features a main character called Othello. He marries a rich, beautiful young lady against her father’s wishes, due to him being of a lower stature. Othello, who had come from a completely different society, did not understand the ways of the Venetians. Therefore he searched to find friends that could help him adjust and guide him through his journey. But instead this society had deceived and manipulated him. They too were narrow-minded and could not accept this new person into their society. Instead they took advantage of this “Moor” for their own personal gain. Othello was blind to see that a society full of good could turn on him. This made him confused and led him into the wrong path and at the end he sadly killed himself because of a selfish act of society.
“One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest” directed by Milos Forman, was released during the 1960’s. It reveals how outsiders were neglected and cast away by society. We see this when R.P McMurphy is taken into the mental institute, since they think he is crazy, after doing time in prison for statuary rape. Therefore, McMurphy acts crazy because what society implies of those taken to mental institutions. McMurphy influences the other patients by treating them like normal human beings. This arouses emotions and conflicts that lead into danger and serious consequences. We come to this conclusion when McMurphy and the boys break out of the institute and set off on a fishing trip. This was a warning for more danger to come. McMurphy sees these men as normal, everyday people while, on the other hand, Nurse Ratchet treats these men like how society desires them to be treated. By speaking politely, treating them with respect and lowering their vocabulary and brain power to meet society’s convention of treating mental patients. These boys disapproved of this orthodox method, so they take a stand on what they believe. It shows how society thinks negatively about special people and downgrading their belonging on the human scale. Everyone wants to be treated equally and not to have his or her status lowered by society
Ten years prior to the release of Milos Forman’s movie, 1000 kilometers across the world, James Baxter expressed his emotions about how Society treats outsiders, during the 1960s, in New Zealand. Baxter expressed his emotions through the use of poems. The Maori Jesus emphasizes how Society treats outsiders. He used metaphors, alluding to the original Jesus, to make you and I think of how we would react to this Maori Jesus. Eventually the Maori Jesus was lobotomized due to an arrogant society. This reenacts the crucifixion of Jesus on Calvary. We see how Society has not changed, we would think after so many years we would learn from the past. Today nothing has gone into the thick skulls of society. We as a society are stubborn to accept change. We have to learn to accept different cultures, religions and sex to build a strong and unified society. We have to accept cultures that eat dogs, we have to accept Asians, even though they can’t drive, they will do your homework. If we love one another Baxter leaves us with a promise “…our sins as old as mountains will melt into the air”. When we accept everyone for who they are, instead of making everyone the same, we will make this society will be more prosper.
A fountain of water splashed across my face. I slowly open my eyes trying hard to gather my thoughts together. Once I recollected myself, I looked around; my peers were all laughing with amusement. I was right; nothing has changed through generation. So how could this man think he sees the world in different spectacles from us today? He saw how Jesus was treated and denied by society, how Othello faced his doom because of society and how Society were ashamed of outsiders so they cast them out of their communities. As they were all laughing I finally knew how it felt to be an outsider. I wanted to do anything to be accepted again. But I knew its better to be loved for who you are, than to be loved for who your not. They all love me. I think?
In the western world, Jesus is known as the centre of Christianity. He is worshipped by millions, throughout the world, and respected by more. Accounts were written about the torture and mockery that he endured, which led to His crucifixion at Calvary. But how was it, that His own people did not accept him? How was it that His society deemed him to be a somewhat visionary man? Society influences people’s behavior and their values, either consciously or unconsciously. The Jews didn’t accept him to be the Messiah because they were waiting for someone to come in full glory, not a carpenter’s son. During his time, society was narrow-minded and could not accept change or a different way of viewing life. Society believed that had everything that they needed, but he had come to disrupt the peace.
Evident through Shakespearean literature, the same theme of outsiders still occurs during this period. One of Shakespeare most well known plays, Othello, features a main character called Othello. He marries a rich, beautiful young lady against her father’s wishes, due to him being of a lower stature. Othello, who had come from a completely different society, did not understand the ways of the Venetians. Therefore he searched to find friends that could help him adjust and guide him through his journey. But instead this society had deceived and manipulated him. They too were narrow-minded and could not accept this new person into their society. Instead they took advantage of this “Moor” for their own personal gain. Othello was blind to see that a society full of good could turn on him. This made him confused and led him into the wrong path and at the end he sadly killed himself because of a selfish act of society.
“One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest” directed by Milos Forman, was released during the 1960’s. It reveals how outsiders were neglected and cast away by society. We see this when R.P McMurphy is taken into the mental institute, since they think he is crazy, after doing time in prison for statuary rape. Therefore, McMurphy acts crazy because what society implies of those taken to mental institutions. McMurphy influences the other patients by treating them like normal human beings. This arouses emotions and conflicts that lead into danger and serious consequences. We come to this conclusion when McMurphy and the boys break out of the institute and set off on a fishing trip. This was a warning for more danger to come. McMurphy sees these men as normal, everyday people while, on the other hand, Nurse Ratchet treats these men like how society desires them to be treated. By speaking politely, treating them with respect and lowering their vocabulary and brain power to meet society’s convention of treating mental patients. These boys disapproved of this orthodox method, so they take a stand on what they believe. It shows how society thinks negatively about special people and downgrading their belonging on the human scale. Everyone wants to be treated equally and not to have his or her status lowered by society
Ten years prior to the release of Milos Forman’s movie, 1000 kilometers across the world, James Baxter expressed his emotions about how Society treats outsiders, during the 1960s, in New Zealand. Baxter expressed his emotions through the use of poems. The Maori Jesus emphasizes how Society treats outsiders. He used metaphors, alluding to the original Jesus, to make you and I think of how we would react to this Maori Jesus. Eventually the Maori Jesus was lobotomized due to an arrogant society. This reenacts the crucifixion of Jesus on Calvary. We see how Society has not changed, we would think after so many years we would learn from the past. Today nothing has gone into the thick skulls of society. We as a society are stubborn to accept change. We have to learn to accept different cultures, religions and sex to build a strong and unified society. We have to accept cultures that eat dogs, we have to accept Asians, even though they can’t drive, they will do your homework. If we love one another Baxter leaves us with a promise “…our sins as old as mountains will melt into the air”. When we accept everyone for who they are, instead of making everyone the same, we will make this society will be more prosper.
A fountain of water splashed across my face. I slowly open my eyes trying hard to gather my thoughts together. Once I recollected myself, I looked around; my peers were all laughing with amusement. I was right; nothing has changed through generation. So how could this man think he sees the world in different spectacles from us today? He saw how Jesus was treated and denied by society, how Othello faced his doom because of society and how Society were ashamed of outsiders so they cast them out of their communities. As they were all laughing I finally knew how it felt to be an outsider. I wanted to do anything to be accepted again. But I knew its better to be loved for who you are, than to be loved for who your not. They all love me. I think?
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Achieved with Excellence
Shakespeare’s tragedies generally conclude with the downfall and death of the noble protagonist. Discuss with detailed supporting evidence, whether or not Othello can be considered a‘noble protagonist’, given his murderous actions at the end of the play.
Othello
William Shakespeare’s Othello will forever be a character surrounded by
controversy. There will always be critics and not a few readers who cannot
forgive Othello for his violence and misplaced anger toward his wife Desdemona.
However, others argue he remains, despite this lapse a character of great dignityand one worthy of respect. Indeed, though certainly the unhappy victim of manipulation, Othello is I believe arguably one of the most noble and romantic of Shakespeare’s protagonists.
Othello is a man shrouded in mystery. Though lacking in the airs and etiquette of fine Venetian society, he is widely respected and awed by all those who know him for his military prowess and temperate nature. He appears, as A C Bradley writes “almost from wonderland”, from a far off place, bearing stories of mythical creatures and magic handerchieves. It is this mysterious dignity that attracts Desdemona to him, as well as his controlled and noble manner. He exhibits this several times early on in the play, refusing to become angry or act rashly: “keep up your bright swords or the dew will rust them”. He is also perhaps the most poetic of Shakespeare’s heroes, a characteristic evident in many of his speeches, “these nine moons wasted”. He has an eloquence beyond the airs
and graces of Venetian court, as well as a thoughtful and mild disposition.
Certainly, then, at the outset of the play Othello is every inch the “noble
protagonist” necessary in a Shakespearian tragedy.
It would be foolish to say, however, that later events leave Othello’s character untarnished. It is undeniable that eventually Othello is consumed with jealously and acts in a way far removed from his calm and reasoned normal self. However I would argue that this is not so much indicative of a flaw in Othello’s character as representative of the weakness of all men, the susceptability of everyone to suspicion and jealously and the influence of unfortunate circumstance. Othello is, in fact, the victim in the play, the unlucky plaything of a villain who admits “I hate the Moor”, a calculating and conniving man who will do anything to bring about Othello’s demise. The blame lies not with Othello, but with Iago.
As J I M Stewart writes, “Othello is everything that the human soul strives to be, Iago is that which corrupts and perverts it from within. Othello is guilty of nothing except perhaps being too passionate, too emotional. After all, Othello is a man who “loved not wisely but too well”. He is a man, according to Bradley, of “one nature” when he trusts he trusts fully. When he fights, he fights with all the strength he can muster, when he loves he loves wholeheartedly. And when Iago plants the “seeds of distrust” in his mind, suspicion consumes him.”
This is not a criticism, merely perhaps an explanation. It is Othello’s emotional nature that eventually clouds his normally flawless judgement. However, despite this, it is impossible to say that Othello was any more jealous or more suspicious than any other man would have been under the same circumstances. Despite Iago’s constant insinuation, Othello does not immediately nor unquestioningly take Iago’s word for Desdemona’s infidelity. He demands proof when a less level-minded man would have blindly assumed the worst. Indeed, that Othello does even this much is a tribute to his noble and controlled nature, for what man would not believe the word of another whom he considered an honest and trustworthy friend?
Also, it cannot be forgotten that Iago had not chosen as his victim a long-married man who as Bradley put it “knew his wife like his sister”. Othello and Desdemona were newly weds and there was much Othello would not have known about his bride. Perhaps it is understandable then, that as a foreigner and an older man without as firmer grasp of Venetian customs as the company his wife usually kept, that Othello might be particularly peceptive to Iago’s cunning and lies. It is natural, under the circumstances, that Othello may have been lacking some of the confidence he would otherwise possess. If Othello and Desdemona had been long-married, it is very unlikely that Iago’s conniving could have had such great and dire effect. Bradley writes “the Othello of Act Four is not Othello” and it is easy to see what he means. This is Othello in his fall (a fall which is never quite completed) and it is here that his noble nature is most in question. It is here we see a strong, proud man reduced to a quivering, confused shadow of his former self. He is violent and angry, but then this is no more than could be seen in any other man and reveals only Othello’s humanity. He loses his eloquence and his calm nature, but the loss is temporary. When he kills Desdemona, it is not so much a murder as a sacrifice, and the remorse he feels is painfully genuine.
In the final act of the play, we see Othello return to the man we met at the
production’s outset. He is a man of dignity, a man fond of beauty and poetry, a man quiet and controlled. Here, again, is Othello the hero. In his death is the same pride with which he lived his life. Despite the fateful turn of events and Othello’s unsavoury actions, he is not a bad person. He suffered the inherant weaknesses that all humanity suffers, and was tricked into becoming something he was not, because of it. But he is not to blame for Iago’s dangerous understanding of human nature, Iago who played our hero cruely, decieving him at every turn. Iago who said “though I hate him as a do hell’s pains yet for neccessity of present life I must show out a flag and sign of love which is indeed but sign.” Ironically it is because of his human imperfection that Othello died much as he began, the perfect tragic hero, the perfect “noble protagonisist.”
Shakespeare’s tragedies generally conclude with the downfall and death of the noble protagonist. Discuss with detailed supporting evidence, whether or not Othello can be considered a‘noble protagonist’, given his murderous actions at the end of the play.
Othello
William Shakespeare’s Othello will forever be a character surrounded by
controversy. There will always be critics and not a few readers who cannot
forgive Othello for his violence and misplaced anger toward his wife Desdemona.
However, others argue he remains, despite this lapse a character of great dignityand one worthy of respect. Indeed, though certainly the unhappy victim of manipulation, Othello is I believe arguably one of the most noble and romantic of Shakespeare’s protagonists.
Othello is a man shrouded in mystery. Though lacking in the airs and etiquette of fine Venetian society, he is widely respected and awed by all those who know him for his military prowess and temperate nature. He appears, as A C Bradley writes “almost from wonderland”, from a far off place, bearing stories of mythical creatures and magic handerchieves. It is this mysterious dignity that attracts Desdemona to him, as well as his controlled and noble manner. He exhibits this several times early on in the play, refusing to become angry or act rashly: “keep up your bright swords or the dew will rust them”. He is also perhaps the most poetic of Shakespeare’s heroes, a characteristic evident in many of his speeches, “these nine moons wasted”. He has an eloquence beyond the airs
and graces of Venetian court, as well as a thoughtful and mild disposition.
Certainly, then, at the outset of the play Othello is every inch the “noble
protagonist” necessary in a Shakespearian tragedy.
It would be foolish to say, however, that later events leave Othello’s character untarnished. It is undeniable that eventually Othello is consumed with jealously and acts in a way far removed from his calm and reasoned normal self. However I would argue that this is not so much indicative of a flaw in Othello’s character as representative of the weakness of all men, the susceptability of everyone to suspicion and jealously and the influence of unfortunate circumstance. Othello is, in fact, the victim in the play, the unlucky plaything of a villain who admits “I hate the Moor”, a calculating and conniving man who will do anything to bring about Othello’s demise. The blame lies not with Othello, but with Iago.
As J I M Stewart writes, “Othello is everything that the human soul strives to be, Iago is that which corrupts and perverts it from within. Othello is guilty of nothing except perhaps being too passionate, too emotional. After all, Othello is a man who “loved not wisely but too well”. He is a man, according to Bradley, of “one nature” when he trusts he trusts fully. When he fights, he fights with all the strength he can muster, when he loves he loves wholeheartedly. And when Iago plants the “seeds of distrust” in his mind, suspicion consumes him.”
This is not a criticism, merely perhaps an explanation. It is Othello’s emotional nature that eventually clouds his normally flawless judgement. However, despite this, it is impossible to say that Othello was any more jealous or more suspicious than any other man would have been under the same circumstances. Despite Iago’s constant insinuation, Othello does not immediately nor unquestioningly take Iago’s word for Desdemona’s infidelity. He demands proof when a less level-minded man would have blindly assumed the worst. Indeed, that Othello does even this much is a tribute to his noble and controlled nature, for what man would not believe the word of another whom he considered an honest and trustworthy friend?
Also, it cannot be forgotten that Iago had not chosen as his victim a long-married man who as Bradley put it “knew his wife like his sister”. Othello and Desdemona were newly weds and there was much Othello would not have known about his bride. Perhaps it is understandable then, that as a foreigner and an older man without as firmer grasp of Venetian customs as the company his wife usually kept, that Othello might be particularly peceptive to Iago’s cunning and lies. It is natural, under the circumstances, that Othello may have been lacking some of the confidence he would otherwise possess. If Othello and Desdemona had been long-married, it is very unlikely that Iago’s conniving could have had such great and dire effect. Bradley writes “the Othello of Act Four is not Othello” and it is easy to see what he means. This is Othello in his fall (a fall which is never quite completed) and it is here that his noble nature is most in question. It is here we see a strong, proud man reduced to a quivering, confused shadow of his former self. He is violent and angry, but then this is no more than could be seen in any other man and reveals only Othello’s humanity. He loses his eloquence and his calm nature, but the loss is temporary. When he kills Desdemona, it is not so much a murder as a sacrifice, and the remorse he feels is painfully genuine.
In the final act of the play, we see Othello return to the man we met at the
production’s outset. He is a man of dignity, a man fond of beauty and poetry, a man quiet and controlled. Here, again, is Othello the hero. In his death is the same pride with which he lived his life. Despite the fateful turn of events and Othello’s unsavoury actions, he is not a bad person. He suffered the inherant weaknesses that all humanity suffers, and was tricked into becoming something he was not, because of it. But he is not to blame for Iago’s dangerous understanding of human nature, Iago who played our hero cruely, decieving him at every turn. Iago who said “though I hate him as a do hell’s pains yet for neccessity of present life I must show out a flag and sign of love which is indeed but sign.” Ironically it is because of his human imperfection that Othello died much as he began, the perfect tragic hero, the perfect “noble protagonisist.”
A Copy of the L3 English Exam
Do You Really Think
We Would Do That!
We have some integrity!
Honestly we do somewhere?
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Group Three: Obama Charisma Questions
1. What would make a good person without charisma?
2. When should charisma be used?
3. Why does charisma start with a “CH” but is pronounced “C”?
4. Where could charisma be found?
5. How could people be a leader without charisma?
By; Katie Nqatokoa ,Lilly Ahome’e,Abigail Strickland, Nive Isaako and Chantal Stephens.
2. When should charisma be used?
3. Why does charisma start with a “CH” but is pronounced “C”?
4. Where could charisma be found?
5. How could people be a leader without charisma?
By; Katie Nqatokoa ,Lilly Ahome’e,Abigail Strickland, Nive Isaako and Chantal Stephens.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Group Two: Obama Charisma Questions
1. Why did Nelson Mandela have so much charisma?
2. Will there be more people in the future that will have lots of charisma ?
3. What do people have to do to be able to get charisma?
4. Could people become a president without having charisma?
By Victor Pupuo, Takawai Herbert, Danyon Morrissey, Peter Oto
2. Will there be more people in the future that will have lots of charisma ?
3. What do people have to do to be able to get charisma?
4. Could people become a president without having charisma?
By Victor Pupuo, Takawai Herbert, Danyon Morrissey, Peter Oto
Group Ones: Questions on Obama Power of Charisma
1. Why should leaders have good charisma?
2. Where is this story “the power of charisma” based?
3. How could school students develop good leadership?
4. What will happen if Barack Obama didn’t have charisma?
5. When should young leaders start to develop Charisma?
By: Owen Talatau, Brock Allen, Douglas Tumanuvao, and Thomas Napier
2. Where is this story “the power of charisma” based?
3. How could school students develop good leadership?
4. What will happen if Barack Obama didn’t have charisma?
5. When should young leaders start to develop Charisma?
By: Owen Talatau, Brock Allen, Douglas Tumanuvao, and Thomas Napier
Barack Obama The Power of Charisma
As a class 10PCk read a blog entry talking about Barack Obama and has charismatic traits. The article went on to talk about the power of charisma generally and how it can be a powerful tool for those that possess it.
Students then had to create their own questions about the blog entry after reading it.
Read the entry below and click on the different groups questions leaving your own answers by commeting on their group questions.
The Power Of Charisma
As I stopped to listen to the inauguration speech of newly appointed president, Barack Obama, the thing that stood out most about him was not the content of his speech but rather how he was able to draw the attention of millions by just the words he spoke. His words not only captivated millions but it also instilled hope and inspiration to those who listened. Obama shares a rare trait that great leaders have. That trait is charisma.
While many may be described as charismatic, true and genuine charisma is often hard to find. Charisma is often defined as a rare trait in human personality that includes charm and a ‘magnetic’ quality. Not only is charisma a rare trait, it is also by far one of the most valued. Taking a look at the famous leaders such as Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., Caesar, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and Nelson Mandela, the key characteristic that all of them shared was their ability to captivate an audience. From Napoleon’s ability to rally his troops through is powerful words to Martin Luther King Jr.’s ability to charm thousands and lead millions, charisma is a powerful tool. Anyone can become a leader, but it takes true charisma to get people to follow you. You maybe extremely bright, but without charisma, you can only go so far.
In the business world, charisma plays a huge role in the workplace. While work ethic and efficiency are both key factors in promotions, a persons charisma is also key. Someone who is charismatic not only gets along with most people, but they can also make up for areas they lack in with their charm. The goal of any company is to hire a well rounded individuals that can come in and bring value to the company. The key word out of that sentence is value. Speaking to the HR of a few companies, many agree that charisma has huge value.
Aside from the charisma playing a huge part in the business world, charisma is also a dominant trait in entertainment and sports. When you look at players like Kobe Bryant and actors like Will Smith, aside from work on the court and on film, people naturally gravitate toward them. This ‘magnetic’ trait that they have has helped them become as popular as they are today. Even looking at our past president, George Bush, we can see the power of charisma. While he wasn’t loved by all, people would agree that part of the reason he got to White House was because of his personal charisma.
While not all of us can be as smooth as Will Smith or are able to captivate a nation like President Barack Obama, it is important to recognize those that are charismatic. Being able to identify individuals with genuine charisma can be difficult because who is to say what “true” and “genuine” charisma is, but here is a suggestion to figuring it out: Look around you and see who are the followers, and who are the leaders. More than often, the leaders have true charisma.
As I stopped to listen to the inauguration speech of newly appointed president, Barack Obama, the thing that stood out most about him was not the content of his speech but rather how he was able to draw the attention of millions by just the words he spoke. His words not only captivated millions but it also instilled hope and inspiration to those who listened. Obama shares a rare trait that great leaders have. That trait is charisma.
While many may be described as charismatic, true and genuine charisma is often hard to find. Charisma is often defined as a rare trait in human personality that includes charm and a ‘magnetic’ quality. Not only is charisma a rare trait, it is also by far one of the most valued. Taking a look at the famous leaders such as Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., Caesar, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and Nelson Mandela, the key characteristic that all of them shared was their ability to captivate an audience. From Napoleon’s ability to rally his troops through is powerful words to Martin Luther King Jr.’s ability to charm thousands and lead millions, charisma is a powerful tool. Anyone can become a leader, but it takes true charisma to get people to follow you. You maybe extremely bright, but without charisma, you can only go so far.
In the business world, charisma plays a huge role in the workplace. While work ethic and efficiency are both key factors in promotions, a persons charisma is also key. Someone who is charismatic not only gets along with most people, but they can also make up for areas they lack in with their charm. The goal of any company is to hire a well rounded individuals that can come in and bring value to the company. The key word out of that sentence is value. Speaking to the HR of a few companies, many agree that charisma has huge value.
Aside from the charisma playing a huge part in the business world, charisma is also a dominant trait in entertainment and sports. When you look at players like Kobe Bryant and actors like Will Smith, aside from work on the court and on film, people naturally gravitate toward them. This ‘magnetic’ trait that they have has helped them become as popular as they are today. Even looking at our past president, George Bush, we can see the power of charisma. While he wasn’t loved by all, people would agree that part of the reason he got to White House was because of his personal charisma.
While not all of us can be as smooth as Will Smith or are able to captivate a nation like President Barack Obama, it is important to recognize those that are charismatic. Being able to identify individuals with genuine charisma can be difficult because who is to say what “true” and “genuine” charisma is, but here is a suggestion to figuring it out: Look around you and see who are the followers, and who are the leaders. More than often, the leaders have true charisma.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Samoan Cinderellas 2
Angela Gregory
Pacific Studies Reporter
New Zealand Herald
Dear Angela,
We agree with you that people should receive what they earn and not have the people they look up to taking any of it without getting agreement from the worker. For example when the money is handed over to the aunties and uncles at the factory using standover tactics. Our opinion is that school aged children should keep their money and the family members that the money is handed to should get charged if the child wants them to be.
We also agree with the fact that pacific youth can seek help
From social workers, lawyers, doctors, church ministers, and a range of social organisations that can help young Pacific Islanders. But they do not choose to accept the help that is given to them. For example when their relatives force them to go church. They should go to their minister to ask for help. Our opinion is that young youth should ask for help when they have problems.
We also agree elders should look after themselves except if they really need the money. For example when grandparents take the money and use it not for the young workers needs but for their needs. Young youth should keep their money except when the elders are in real need.
Yours Sincerely
Owen Talatau, Takawai Herbert, Brock Allen, Victor Pupuo
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Samoan Cinderellas
As a class 10PcK read two articles titled "Samoan Cinderellas" by the NZ Herald's Pacific Issues Reporter Angela Gregory about young samoans giving almost all of their wages to their families. In response the students wrote a letter to Angela either agreeing or disagreeing with her stance that this was not a good thing. Their responses are posted below do you agree??? Leave comments with your point of view.
Dear Angela Gregory
We are writing this letter to let you know that in a
way we agree with you because the elders are taking advantage
of the young people’s earnings, by not letting them get a share of their pay. We say that it’s not fair that the young people have to work and do not get any of their earnings.
But at the same time we disagree because they are helping out there families by working and providing money for them. But these young people shouldn’t be the only ones working because other family members should help out by getting a job.
Lastly we agree again because the way they are earning their money is like slavery . For example they work from 6:00am -2:30pm and gets $12 an hour and don’t get any of their pay. We say they should be working more suitable hours and get some of the money.
Your Sincerely
Chantal Stephens,Lily Ahome’e,Abigail Strickland
We are writing this letter to let you know that in a
way we agree with you because the elders are taking advantage
of the young people’s earnings, by not letting them get a share of their pay. We say that it’s not fair that the young people have to work and do not get any of their earnings.
But at the same time we disagree because they are helping out there families by working and providing money for them. But these young people shouldn’t be the only ones working because other family members should help out by getting a job.
Lastly we agree again because the way they are earning their money is like slavery . For example they work from 6:00am -2:30pm and gets $12 an hour and don’t get any of their pay. We say they should be working more suitable hours and get some of the money.
Your Sincerely
Chantal Stephens,Lily Ahome’e,Abigail Strickland
Dear Angela,
I agree with you in a way because no one should have to work in a factory for hours to work for money not knowing what it’s going towards.
An example of this is she comes home real tired then has to look after the kids.
Our opinion is that this sucks, it is taking advantage of the the young people and who are not getting a share of any money.
I disagree with you in a way because the two young teens could be working to support the family needs or for financial problems.
An example of this is the family might keep taking her money to pay the bills.
Our opinion in this case is family needs may be warranted and also household stuff may need paying for.
Another reason why we agree is because the young ladies seem to feel trapped and desperate about their future. They are not allowed out during the day and get forced to clean up the house and look after little kids before they go out and work at night.
Our opinion is it should stop immediately before anyone gets hurt.
Your sincerely,
Katie Ngatokoa, Peter Oto, Nive Isaako, Danyon Morrisey
I agree with you in a way because no one should have to work in a factory for hours to work for money not knowing what it’s going towards.
An example of this is she comes home real tired then has to look after the kids.
Our opinion is that this sucks, it is taking advantage of the the young people and who are not getting a share of any money.
I disagree with you in a way because the two young teens could be working to support the family needs or for financial problems.
An example of this is the family might keep taking her money to pay the bills.
Our opinion in this case is family needs may be warranted and also household stuff may need paying for.
Another reason why we agree is because the young ladies seem to feel trapped and desperate about their future. They are not allowed out during the day and get forced to clean up the house and look after little kids before they go out and work at night.
Our opinion is it should stop immediately before anyone gets hurt.
Your sincerely,
Katie Ngatokoa, Peter Oto, Nive Isaako, Danyon Morrisey
A Beautiful Scene
As a class we watched the film A Beautiful Mind for Level 3 English. The class split into two groups and in 45minutes they had to recreate the opening scene of the film. Watch the opening scene by clicking on the you tube link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4IsJMGI3Ng, and then vote for which scene you think is the best and leave a comment saying why.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
