Blog 6 ~ What Makes Relationships Fail?

So I asked five juniors at school today this simple question: What makes a relationship fail?

Obviously, this “relationship” I speak of falls under the specific category called high-school relationships (typically romantic between a male and female BUT not always… whatever floats your boat). In the description of this topic, it included “friend, spouse, parent-child” in parenthesis without an “etc.” so I’m just going to hope the whole high school relationship thing is fine, too. I mean, I’m a junior girl in high school—I’m obligated to know a lot about that stuff.

Within five total answers to my question, I received approximately three cohesive responses (Others being slight variations of the original).

Miscommunication. First, a junior male who is currently in a “happy relationship” gave his input. He replied simply and with much ease, “Miscommunication… like when one person is on a totally different page than the other, you know?” So, there you have it: miscommunication. Heidi Grant Halvorson, Ph.D from Psychology Today states the problem that miscommunication brings about, “The most common source of miscommunication in any relationship is a very simple one:  people routinely fail to realize how little they are actually communicating.  In other words, we think we've said a lot more than we actually have.” (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-science-success/201102/too-much-miscommunication-in-your-relationship-simple-fix) It is almost self-explanatory in the sense that in order to have a healthy relationship, you must communicate—CORRECTLY!!! We are much more likely to assume “it was obvious" with people we know very well. So, ironically, the risk of miscommunication is greater with your significant other than it is with an absolute stranger. Studies show this trend of miscommunication is much higher in girls, since girls tend to insinuate more than 50% of what they truly mean, thus causing frustration on their side, which eventually causes a greater frustration and misunderstanding from the male perspective.

How to fix the problem? Say what you need to say and always make it clear.

Trust Issues. Now this one came from a boy and girl today.  Unsurprisingly, this issue was vigorously defined similarly from both sexes. The male complained about “…the fear of getting hurt emotionally,” while the female ranted about “…him getting jealous about everyone I talk to.” As you can see, these BOTH may be the cause AND effect of one another. Trust is perhaps the most important quality a relationship must possess, and without it, the relationship is as good as doomed. Take these words of wisdom from Tejvan Pettinger’s “7 Common Reasons Relationships Fail”: “Others will be rightly discomforted if we mistrust them. If our partner lets us down, it is not our fault. But, if we suspect, because of our own insecurity, we are bound to create serious problems in our own relationships.” (http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/7-common-reasons-relationships-fail/) Now, how do we fix this problem? You need to learn how to trust. If you end up getting screwed over after you followed this advice, it’s unfortunate for that person. I don’t know if you believe in Karma, but I do, and it’s about to bite them in the butt. Keep trusting, because someone out there will not let you down.

Sexual Boundaries. Lastly, but nonetheless a very important issue, is something almost only seen or ever heard about in high school.  Not only does it set a rift in the relationship, this is the only category that can cause serious lifelong ramifications. Sexual pressure in high school is a very prominent concern. According to my two remaining contributors (one male, one female), these sexual boundaries were the fatal blow to a past relationship. I was not in the least surprised as to what standpoint each was on. The male claimed that his ex-girlfriend was “...an absolute prude. She didn’t ever wanna do anything, so what’s the point?” heavily insinuating that the word “anything” meant various sexual activities.  Now as you can imagine, the girl surveyed had a much different take. “A guy has to know that there are boundaries. You definitely need to iron those details out from the start, or there’s going to be trouble.” Statistics illustrate an almost precise legitimacy to these inputs. While there are plenty of exceptions and definite cases of “the other way around,” 72% of girls compared to a 12% of boys said they wish they had waited longer to have sex. (http://www.realalternatives.org/worried/sayingno.htm). The answer to all your troubles is here: Be clear of each other’s boundaries (this also ties in the issue of miscommunication) from the very beginning. Only partake in sexual activities if you are ready and feel totally comfortable in doing so. And on a last note, be safe ;)

Blog 5 ~ Decisions, Decisions, Decisions...

Relating back to the idea of the “Chem 20 Factor” in Ellen Goodman’s article about an infamous course in college, I’d have to say the high school version of this course would be the plain fact that the decisions a student makes directly interprets their success in applying for college.

Whether it’s deciding what class to enroll in (an AP class or regular class), the decision to study extra hard and do well in that class, or the decision to be respectful to teachers that can possibly write a fantastic letter of recommendation, the task of student decision-making can make or break their chances of admission into the college of their choice.

On the issue of a “screening process” for students, we can claim that these decisions are this aforementioned filter, and you’d be correct in claiming that this argument is quite, well, meta. I am basically chasing my tail on this one, but the truth is, this paradoxicality (that is sort of a made up word) is quite legitimate. While everyone in the AP blogging network is undoubtedly stating the obvious, I’d like to attempt to state a more, shall we say, off the wall perspective, because Mrs. Moe, I selflessly want to save you from that monotony.

The “Just Good Enough” Factor

Pretend you don’t know anything about college admission.

Let’s just say this little “mad-libs” is how you get into college. 

You get _______ grades,

do _______ on your SATs,

volunteer for a _______ cause,

show _______ behavior in class,

exercise ________ character,

write a ________ personal statement,

& do ________ in all your extracurricular activities.

Word Bank:   Great     Good     Mediocre

Now let’s just say you can directly relate the outcome with a school on these “levels.”

Mostly or all “Great”s: Stanford, Harvard, Yale etc.

Mostly or all “Good”s: UC Davis, UCLA, UC Berkeley etc.

Mostly or all “Mediocre”s: Humboldt State, Solano Community College etc.

(Less than “Mediocre”? Oh please, you’re not going to college! But that was a good try!)

So basically what I’m trying to illustrate is the typical understanding of the HUMAN POPUATION that has not personally endeavored the college application process.

In reality, the deciding factor is the people on the admissions board. Yes, you must achieve what is necessary to go to that specified college! That in itself acts as a filter, but typically the applicants are already aware of that.  In addition to high grades, a moving personal statement, and some proof that you care about the well-being of others of the same species, there is an unspoken factor of money and status (these go hand in hand like death and taxes). No one likes to admit it because it is not fair in the least, but that’s just the way it is. Nevertheless, the only thing a student can really do is try.

Extremely hard.

The Separation Factor

But then we move into what I call “The Separation Factor”. We separate the driven students from the naturally intelligent students (I’m not claiming these are mutually exclusive), and if you’ve got both, props for you! You are one exceptional human being! Personally, I would say I have possibly the most miniscule amounts of both attributes in students at the AP level, but in admitting this, I DO have something that many others do not have, a little thing I’d like to call “modesty.” The idea that you must have a little bit of BOTH attributes to succeed has everything to do with your upbringing/genetics, which in many cases, is extremely unfortunate. And the deciding factor for who gets in and who doesn’t all comes down to the decisions you, as a student, make in high school.

The High School Factor

Now, as I am at a loss for further explanation, I will begin forcing a less pressing sub-topic out into the open. The prompt is asking what aspect in high school acts as the Chem 20 course, and to be honest, that “course” is high school.

In popular media, we understand how high school can bring out the absolute worst in everyone; we’ve got catty cliques, bullies, etc. But this is completely the social aspect. The educational aspect of high school is, well difficult to say the least. I don’t think any student is not challenged in at least a few of his/her classes. Not everyone fully understands why the curriculum must be this way, or why there is homework. In a vague sense, high school truly tests our will-power and stamina and mediates the awkward transition from child to adult.  So when you ask about what makes students succeed or fail in their educational endeavors, it is the student succeeding or failing. School is tough, let me get that straight, but no blame should ever be placed on school for a student failing. Responsibility should always remain with the student, considering there is no alternative to school (besides dropping out, I guess).

The Conclusion Factor

So in this thousand-word-essay, I explained my viewpoints on one of the most obvious topics. I did, hopefully, explain it in a weirder way than most of your students, because blogs are almost always 1 point. ONE POINT!!! But I assure you that I put in just as much effort (if not more) in composing this blog, post, entry….thing.

Well, toodles for now.

Blog 4 ~ Ryan Gosling vs. Jake Gyllenhaal: Who is the Most Valuable Player?

Ode to the compare and contrast blog. I might have known this one was inevitable, and fortunately, this topic was immensely exciting to research.

“Compare and contrast two figures from popular cinema.”

And so I began drumming up ideas and scribbling down some names. Eventually, this led me to two actors with somewhat opposite personalities but some pretty wicked similarities. Both hold very honorable accomplishments to their name, and both have plenty of room—and time—to grow. So without further adieu, let’s introduce the contenders: Ryan Gosling vs. Jake Gyllenhaal. Who is the most valuable player?

Let’s begin with pointing out the obvious similarities. Both were born within a month of each other in the year of 1980. They both have brown hair and blue eyes, one older sister, and a recent knack for playing the edgier roles. Gyllenhaal and Gosling have been referred to as “heartthrobs” and the two have devoted their time and money in promoting social causes as well as raising awareness about many crucial topics of interest. Ryan and Jake are indeed friends, and were both nominated for an Academy Award (Jake for Best Supporting Actor and Ryan for Best Actor) within a year of each other. Both lost, but moved on in their careers and recently came out with a string of movies that have relatively positive critical review.

The photographs above show Gosling on the left and Gyllenhaal on the right. While looks are valuable to the actors’ overall popularity, it may be hard to believe that looks are not, in fact, the deciding factor.

So, how are we to judge?

In finding the most valuable player, we must (you guessed it) compare and contrast on many different levels and categories.

Ryan Thomas Gosling grew up in the city of Cornwall in the easternmost parts of Ontario, Canada. His mother was a secretary and his father was a paper mill worker and both raised him and his sister in the Mormon religion. After his parents’ divorce early in his childhood, Ryan was bullied relentlessly in school. In 1^st grade, he brought steak knives to school and threw them at his tormentors leading to his suspension. While in elementary school, Ryan was diagnosed with ADHD, which eventually led to his mother homeschooling him. When he was 12, Ryan and his mother moved to Florida after landing his first role as a performer in The Mickey Mouse Club. At the age of 17, Ryan dropped out of high school and moved to Los Angeles to pursue an acting career.

Meanwhile, Jacob Benjamin Gyllenhaal grew up in Los Angeles. His father is a film producer while his mother is a screenwriter. He is a descendent of the Swedish noble Gyllenhaal family, and considers himself Jewish more than anything else. Despite his privileged lifestyle, his parents required him to volunteer at homeless shelters from an early age to instill gratitude for everything life has given him. Before he was even ten years old, Jake was receiving plenty of exposure to the filmmaking industry due to his family’s close ties in the business. He graduated high school and went on to study at Columbia University only to drop out after two years to focus on his acting career.

Six years and five films later, Ryan Gosling finally reached his breakthrough role. He was cast as the male lead in The Notebook, his co-star the now very successful Rachel McAdams. The Notebook was considered a sleeper hit, claiming instant unexpected popularity and is said to be “one of the best romantic movies of all time.” After its release in 2004, Gosling was a star. His exceptional performance in the film led to critical recognition, promoting him as an actor and two years later, he won the lead role in the independent film Half Nelson. His performance landed him an Academy Award nomination, along with four other very prestigious awards, finally winning the Best Actor Award at the Spirit Awards. After a long break from the filmmaking industry, Gosling reclaimed his success in the 2010 drama, Blue Valentine. The film was an “emotionally gripping examination of a marriage on the rocks” and introduced Ryan as a much edgier actor than his previous works. The same year, he starred opposite Kirsten Dunst in an even darker drama, All Good Things, inspired by the true story of Robert Durst and his suspected murder of his own wife. This year, Ryan has starred in three movies (post-production of his 4^th) that have been box office hits. He played a cocky womanizer in his first comedy, Crazy, Stupid, Love, the unnamed lead in his first action film, Drive, and the lead role opposite George Clooney in the political thriller, The Ides of March.

Similar to Gosling, Gyllenhaal starred in his first role in the 2004 blockbuster, The Day After Tomorrow. While the “idea” of the film was popular, the movie itself fell flat. Jake then turned to a different kind of acting in his theatrical debut on the London stage. He received exceptional reviews and was even named the “Outstanding Newcomer” of the year with an Evening Standard Theatre Award. 2005 started a prolific year for Gyllenhaal, where he received critical recognition for his three films; Proof, Jarhead, and arguably his most popular work, Brokeback Mountain. Like Gosling’s The Notebook, Brokeback Mountain, was a huge milestone for Gyllenhaal’s career. While not a conventional love story, the film’s significance has been attributed to the fact that it is a portrayal of a same-sex love story. The film ended up winning four Golden Globe Awards, four British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) Awards, and three Academy Awards. It also scored Ryan a nomination for an Academy Award as well as Screen Actors Guild and a victory for the Best Supporting Actor BAFTA. In 2007, Gyllenhaal starred in Zodiac, followed by the dark 2009 drama, Brothers, and in 2010, Prince of Persia as well as Love and Other Drugs. His last film was Source Code, which premiered in 2011. The aforementioned feature films, however, received relatively indifferent critic reviews.

As you can see, Gosling and Gyllenhaal both have an outstanding collection of achievements to put under their belt. With their careers far from expiration, they really have nothing but time to improve and grow in their craft. While Gosling is presently in the center of a whirlwind of remarkable films, Gyllenhaal has definitely trumped the previous in the award category. While Gyllenhaal slowly built his career with a slow and steady claim to fame, it only took one movie to make Gosling one of the most sought-after actors in America. This has its consequences, though, with the foreboding implications of a “tortoise & the hare” race. It is feared that after Gosling’s streak of successes this year, he will quietly fade into oblivion, doing a few mediocre films here and there. Meanwhile, Gyllenhaal seems to have completed these phases just a few years earlier, with his streak in 2005. However, his mediocre-stage is now.

While Jake Gyllenhaal is a more established actor, Gosling definitely has the potential to push much further beyond Gyllenhaal’s capabilities. Gosling did not have the means to start his career in acting at such an early age. He pioneered his own way to fame as a self-made strategist while Jake’s upbringing and connections gave him a tremendous advantage in the filmmaking industry. When it comes to the art of acting itself, with all accomplishments aside, the better actor is hard to decipher, considering the fact that opinion plays a huge role in the different styles of acting. Ryan Gosling tends to be absolutely astounding in his portrayal of very dark and serious roles while Jake Gyllenhaal is commendable at just about any genre. While Gosling adds a convincing aspect of edginess, Gyllenhaal adds a unique incorporation of his own special personality. Ryan’s natural ability, however, is known to surpass every competitor, while Jake’s acting talent is always spot-on. However, a decision is to be made.  While both are extremely successful actors blessed with a tremendous career all before the age of 30, one must be named the more valuable player.

While each wins their own little battles, only one can win the war and the scale is surely tipped in Gosling’s favor. Even though Gyllenhaal’s foundation is sturdier, Gosling’s spontaneity in blowing his critics out of the water is undeniable. His accomplishments in acclaim do not add up to Gyllenhaal’s, but we have to remember, he had a late start. His shaky childhood shaped his remarkable capacity in being so edgy and interesting to watch, and his “dark and twisty” persona makes him simply an interesting figure as a celebrity. Furthermore, we should not doubt Gyllenhaal’s potential of reclaiming his popularity, as he is an outstanding actor who still has a bright future. But there is just something about Ryan and his irrevocable charisma that makes him the most valuable player.

Blog 2 ~ American Politics & Popular Music

When I first read the topic as to which I would be interpreting, I was quite perplexed.

“Politics and popular music”

What does that even mean?

Finding the relationship between the two seemed a daunting task to me at first glance. What kind of relationship assessment was desired? Or better yet, what relationship did anyone see in the two? Is it an analogy, like:

Lily Allen is to Liberal as Toby Keith is to Republican?

I honestly had no clue—until I just Googled “relationship between politics and popular music”.

I’m partially ashamed to admit that I did, in fact, read the Wikipedia page “Music and politics” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_and_politics) but I’m delighted to report that it revealed an earth-shattering discovery; the relationship between music and politics. While it is well known that Wikipedia is, perhaps, not the most reliable way of forming a basis for a credible stance on an argument, it did help me wrap my mind around the fact that there was indeed, a definite relationship between the two. American politics and popular music have a relationship that is so close, the latter can influence the former in a way that transforms the entire system.

Considering the not-so-reliable-source notoriety Wikipedia has obtained, especially throughout schools, it did possess 23 very reliable sources; some including The New York Times as well as numerous excerpts from Worldpress. The Wiki article outlined the suspected political stance for several genres, and what their influence was on American politics. While there are always exceptions to a rule, I still found many truths in the idea. So I did some research for myself and came across a much more cohesive understanding of the topic.

It is well known that most hip-hop/rap music these days lean far towards the left. Racism and equality are major themes, and recently, a sub-genre of hip hop has come into play; “political hip-hop.” Predictably, this portion of the genre focuses mainly on political outspokenness. The website “Hip Hop Democrat” (http://thehiphopdemocrat.com/) states that they are a “…media company committed to educating, informing, and entertaining fans of Hip Hop and its culture and exposing its influence socially, economically, and politically.” The website also has links to blogs about the 2012 democratic candidates, breaking news on almost all of President Obama’s political decision-making, and featured artists (almost all with songs about political change). This method of influence is just another example of how liberal the genre is.

On the other extreme, country music is said to be the epitome of conservatism in music. After searching through countless websites, blogs and articles, I couldn’t find any evidence to the contrary.  In the article, “Is Country Music Inherently Conservative?” (http://hnn.us/articles/42602.html) by Peter La Chapelle, there is a statement that perhaps sums up every other article I read; “The notion that country music is, and has always been, politically conservative seems so ingrained in our culture that it passes not just for cliché, but as a truism beyond reproach.” The ultimate evidence to just how far right country music is, was the voluminous references to the Dixie Chicks lead singer, Natalie Maines, after she criticized the former President Bush of his decisions in entering Iraq. During the 2003 controversy, CNN reported that, "Country stations across the United States have pulled the Chicks from playlists following reports that lead singer Natalie Maines said in a concert in London earlier this week that she was 'ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.'" (http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/03/14/dixie.chicks.reut/) Thus led to a massive boycott of the Dixie Chicks from what-seemed-to-be-faithful fans.

However, this evidence must not have an undesired effect on individual musical preference. Just because these very opposite genres of music have a very predominant voice on where they reside on the political spectrum, one should not choose according to their political beliefs.

i.e. If you listen to country music, it doesn’t mean you are a tea party-loving right-winger. If you listen to rap or hip hop, that does not make you a morally-ambiguous socialist.

Another way of looking at this relationship between music and politics, is the influence music has on actual political elections. Rap artist “P Diddy” led the “Vote or Die” non-profit organization to pull more youth voters out to the polls. I found that this was extremely similar to rock music’s “Rock the Vote” non-profit organization led by Jeff Ayeroff in Los Angeles to "…build the political clout and engagement of young people in order to achieve progressive change in our country." (http://www.rockthevote.org/) These are two very notable methods of altering the course of government and proving that the entertainment business has one of the most powerful influential auras over politics known today.

In retrospect, it is the listener’s decision as to what genre of music they will listen to, what political candidate they will vote for, and how much influence they will let both have on them. The entertainment industry holds a huge amount of power over politics, and politics has a dependency on music I will deeply understand from this day on. Nevertheless, it’s still your responsibility to make whatever assumptions you may deem necessary to make. Happy listening—happy voting.

Blog 1 ~ The Art of Reading

When I think of the word “reader,” I somehow picture my seventh grade teacher waving a thick novel in front of the class, badgering us for the umpteenth time about the importance of reading. I didn’t pay much attention to her; I liked to read so figured she was only talking to the lazy kids. As a young girl, I read books all the time. I read a book in a day—sometimes two, and I wouldn’t eat dinner or go to sleep on time. I was hooked on series’ like Peter and the Starcatchers, Series of Unfortunate Events, Haddix’s “Shadow Children” collection and of course Harry Potter. Reading was one of the most fun activities, and the “young adult” section rarely had a book that wasn’t an exciting read.

           

Unfortunately, reading now isn’t as much of a pleasure as it used to be. I think this is due to the lack of time, however, as I am a busy student with a number of extracurricular activities. The only time I find the chance to read is if it’s assigned, and to be honest, most of the past-assigned literature put me to sleep. Reading by force is bad enough, but then students are forced to write about it mechanically pointing out themes and symbols and literary devices when I’m just dying to scribble on my paper; “This book wasn't even remotely interesting.”

Fortunately, I’ve noticed a great change on this issue. The biography, Tuesdays with Morrie, by Mitch Albom is perhaps the most interesting class-assigned novel I have found myself reading. It is a true page-turner and I might add that the other titles listed on the AP reading syllabus are also relatively hopeful.  Some of the recent books on my shelf include varying topics from a nonfiction, informative read called The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Backpacking and Hiking, to the very popular novel by the late Stieg Larson, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, all the way to Al Gore’s political analysis addressing the consequences of the current administration's fear, secrecy, and faith-based initiatives called The Assault on Reason. Even though they are visibly different genres, their overall significance is similarly enjoyed.

           

In the mystery of exactly what kind of material I’m reading, you can leave the tabloids out. Nothing against magazine readers; I just prefer to focus my brain energy on materials with a bit more substance. I take pleasure in keeping up on current affairs, especially through the writing of a skilled and respected journalist. I don’t purchase The New York Times every morning, but I do read it on my iPhone quite often, along with the The San Francisco Chronicle and The Washington Post. Sadly, in this day and age I’d say about 65% of my daily reading is looking at that 3½ inch retina display. On a personal note, non-fiction-internet material is where most of my reading lies. It is my belief that so many topics as well as opinions dwelling a few clicks away should not be taken for granted.

           
If I could improve one thing about myself as a reader, it would definitely be the speed. I'm the slowest reader on Earth and my rate of obtaining information when reading is somewhat delayed. I feel the only solution to this problem is reading more, so with time I'll improve. Reading more is actually on my To-Do list, so all reading problems should be zapped in no time. 

Furthermore, the meaning of a “reader” is much too broad a subject to identify.  It all depends on the individual and their reading preferences. To enjoy the benefits of reading, one does not have to choose a novel, but I absolutely cringe when someone declares that they “hate” reading. It’s almost like claiming they hate knowledge itself, and the first word that comes to my mind is “ignorance”. There are countless books I truly love and if I had the time, I’d surround myself with all kinds of literature. It’s extremely unfortunate that many people these days can’t find the time to read, as the importance of reading is crucial to being literate and well-spoken. The knowledge and wisdom obtained in reading itself is indispensible.