Dolphins Should Be Free

In the film The Cove, directed by Louie Psihoyos in 2009, a group of activists sneak into a cove near Taijii, Japan to reveal the shocking case of animal abuse towards dolphins. Throughout the movie dolphins are presented in both their natural habitats and in captivity, which unfortunately affects their health. In the wild they are shown as carefree, energetic, and most of all happy. Once in captivity however, the dolphins lose their personalities and begin to show signs of depression. Psihoyos puts a contrast on these scenes throughout the film to force the audience to finally acknowledge the abuse dolphins face and to treat them not as entertainment, but as live animals.

Wild dolphins in this film are presented as beautiful, loving, and carefree animals. They do not cause harm to humans or other animals. In fact, in The Cove a surfer tells a story about how he watched his friend be saved by a dolphin from a shark. This proves the connection that dolphins naturally share with humans. The dolphins went out of their way and risked their own lives to save that of a humans. Some might even make an argument in saying that this is the way they show their love. In the film there are many scenes where wild dolphins come up to divers and allow the divers to rub them. These scenes show the mammals as carefree creatures. Just by them coming up to the divers willingly shows how comfortable and secure they are with themselves as well as with humans.

Dolphins in this film that are held in captivity do not have the same sense of energy as those who are wild. It is as if they have been drained from the life which they once knew. They are represented as only entertainment. In the film they mention that the reasons why humans like to watch dolphins so much is because naturally, it looks as if they are always smiling. Their look of happiness gives the humans a feeling of happiness also. However, just because it looks like they are smiling does not mean they are happy inside.

Dolphins are meant to wild and free not held in a wall to wall tank. They are deprived of their natural scenery and therefore change drastically into a negative and downward direction. No living creature should suffice to this kind of torture. The contrast in the sceneries leaves the audience with the idea that dolphins are meant to be free, just as Psihoyos wanted to portray.

Blog 5

In the film Koyaanisqatsi, directed by Godfrey Reggio in 1983, different scenes show structural similarities that are reinforced by the change in perspectives. Using different perspectives throughout the film allows for us, the audience, to look at the things we typically take for granted in a new and unfamiliar way. The use of juxtaposition in the film also allows us to view things in our daily lives that we do not normally notice. The accretion and juxtaposition of images in Koyaanisqatsi help to confirm Reggio’s argument that we have come to accept technology as part of our environment.

There are many scenes throughout the film that demonstrate the use of juxtapositions as well as the use of different perspectives in certain images.  One example is when there was a close up of a family relaxing on a beach, and when the camera zoomed out of the frame it showed a nuclear power plant right behind them. By only showing us the family first, it made us, as the audience, believe that everything was normal. Zooming out however, revealed the truth to us. The scene demonstrated just how much people have become accustomed to technology. The family acted as if it was normal or even safe to be swimming in a beach that is right next to a nuclear power plant.

Another choice of scenes that the director put together for a purpose was the bird and army plane scenes. At first, there was a focus on a group of birds flying throughout the desert and then it changed to an army plane painted in camouflage, also flying through the desert. I believe that the objective of putting these two scenes side by side was to show just how much our technology tries to blend in with the environment. The plane was metaphorically acting like a bird and painted to match the environment of the desert, therefore, it was in a way blending in with nature.

After watching Koyaanisqatsi, I have come to agree with Reggio in his argument that we, as people, are accepting technology as part of our environment. We rely on it so much that sometimes we no longer do things for ourselves. Like reading a book for example. Now the internet can provide summaries of an entire novel. Even though we have proven to create advancements in technology as the years pass by, it is a bad idea to ignore the other things in our lives. Our actual environment being one of the main things.

Works Cited

“Abstinence-Only vs. Comprehensive Sex Education.” Teens and Sex. Detroit:

Greenhaven Press, 2008. Contemporary Issues Companion. Gale Opposing 

Viewpoints In Context. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

“Abstinence Sex Education Does Not Reduce Teen Sexual Activity.” Teens at Risk. Ed. Auriana Ojeda. San Diego: Greenhaven Press,   2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

“Abstinence Sex Education Reduces Teen Sexual Activity.” Teens at Risk. Ed. 

Auriana Ojeda. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

“Abstinence-Only Education Does Not Prevent Teen Pregnancies.” Do Abstinence Programs Work? Ed. Christina Fisanick. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

“Adult and teen preferences for type of sex education information needed, 2006.” Abortion: An Eternal Social and Moral Issue. Sandra M. Alters. 2008 ed. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Information Plus Reference Series. Gale Opposing Viewpoint In Context. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

“Teens report high exposure to sex education; Birth-control talks not as widespread.” Washington Times [Washington, DC] 16 Sept. 2010: A06. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

What Type of Sex Education Should be Taught?

In todays society more and more teens are becoming sexually active, whether we want them to or not. In fact, according to Emma Elliott’s article “Abstinence Sex Education Reduces Teen Sexual Activity”, 40 percent of sexually active teens become pregnant and more than 8,000 teens become infected with a sexually transmitted disease every day. We can not prevent teens from having sexual intercourse, but we can help provide them with more options and choices to help protect their futures. Current sex education programs focus on teaching abstinence only, which leaves students without the knowledge on how to protect themselves if the situation to have sexual intercourse ever appeared. Changing the program is the first step in helping teens and their futures. We can improve sex education by teaching students the different forms of contraceptives available, how sexually transmitted disease are spread, and the consequences that come along with choosing to become sexually active. Although abstinence is the most effective prevention of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, I believe that by changing sex education programs to teach teens all of the precautions before making that big decision, will dramatically improve statistics.

Arthur Caplan, the director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, said that he is “completely against abstinence-only sex ed programs for three reasons: there is no evidence at all that they work; common sense says they have no chance of working; and it is not clear that ethically they send the right message to young people.” I agree with him because of all of the evidence researchers show for teens who are sexually active, there is no evidence to show that abstinence-only classes work. In fact, Texas and Kansas evaluated their sex education classes and found that there was no change in the number of students pledging to remain abstinent until marriage, therefore, abstinent-only classes are not working. Next, teens will do what they believe is right for them so it is only common sense to teach them how to protect themselves against sexually transmitted diseases as well as an unwanted pregnancy. Educators who are teaching abstinence-only probably never followed that motto in their own lives, so it is hypocritical for them to try and enforce that life style upon another individual.

For years sex education programs have instilled abstinence upon teenagers, making them unaware of the different ways to protect themselves if and when they do decide to have sexual intercourse. This is what causes abstinence-only programs to be more harmful for teens than beneficial. Arthur Caplan says that “nearly half of the nation’s new cases of STDs each year occur among adolescents and young adults”. I believe that if we change the way sex educated programs are designed, then sexually transmitted diseases amongst teens will no longer post as a huge problem, like it currently does. In a more modernized sex education class, the instructor will teach the students about the many different forms of sexually transmitted diseases, how they are transmitted, and how the students can protect themselves against them. This will not only give the students the knowledge on how to keep sexually transmitted disease free, but they will also know what signs to look for when they do decide to become intimate with someone.

Most teens are also unaware about the different forms of contraceptives. Teenagers most likely only know of one form, which are condoms. Ninety-five percent of U.S. teenagers have taken a sex education class according to The Washington Times (Washington DC), however, only two-thirds were informed about birth-control methods. If sex education programs are not teaching our children how to protect themselves properly, not only against unwanted pregnancies but also against sexually transmitted diseases, then where are they supposed to learn it from? Only about 80 percent of girls and 70 percent of boys actually talk to their parents about at least one sex related topic says Washington Times (Washington DC). Where are the other 20 percent of girls and 30 percent of boys receiving their information from? In a newer program, I believe that students should be taught all of the different types of contraceptives. This will insure the safety of their health and future by giving them the knowledge on how to protect their bodies, if they do decide to have sexual intercourse. Improving sex education programs will also guarantee that all students are learning how to keep safe from a reliable resource.

Many teenagers today believe that “it won’t happen to them”, but it can. Forty percent of sexually active teens will, in due course, become pregnant before marriage says Emma Elliott. This is why it is imperative to teach our children about the consequences that come along with having sexual intercourse before they actually become active. Educators of the sex education programs need to start being realistic in the fact that teens will have sex. Today, “more than 70 percent of young women and 80 percent of young men approve of premarital sex” says Arthur Caplan. If teens believe that it is okay, then they will be more likely to have premarital sex. Showing students the consequences of sexual intercourse however, might help to change their minds when making that decision to become intimate with someone else. Some of these consequences include emotional attachment, judgement by their peers, and the most obvious ones; pregnancy, and sexually transmitted diseases.

Abstinence is the best option to teach our children when speaking to them about sex for the first time. It is the only one hundred percent effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. However, when it comes to teens, they will do what they ultimately believe is right for them. So it is also prominent to teach them about the steps to take in order to protect themselves in a different way just in case they do decide to have sex. This is why I believe that a change in the sex education program is needed.

Emma Elliot, when speaking in her article “Abstinence Sex Education Reduces Teen Sexual Activity”, makes a very strong point by saying: “while sexually active characters on television programs virtually never contract STDs, millions of real teenagers will this year”. Although she trying to strengthen her belief in teaching abstinent-only courses to teenagers, her point also went against her belief. If Emma Elliot is so concerned in the spread of sexually transmitted diseases amongst teens, then why would she not want to improve sex education classes to teach students how to protect themselves?

Emma Elliot also goes on in her article to say that “the vast majority of teenage pregnancies occur unintentionally and outside of marriage. Of those who carry their babies to term, only one-third will complete high school.” I feel like this statement also contradicts her argument. Elliot is completely aware of the statistics about teen pregnancy, however, she still does not believe that sex education programs should be expanded to cover contraceptives.

Obviously abstinent-only classes are no longer reaching through to teenagers, who are becoming sexually active more and more each day. Unfortunately, nothing has been done to change these programs to accommodate teens and their behaviors. Using abstinence-only as a form of a contraceptive is not one hundred percent bulletproof, for there are those mass majority of students who will “slip up” and have sex. This is why I firmly believe that sex education classes need to be improved to help secure and protect the futures of teenagers. Abstinence will still be the main component in these new programs, however, contraceptive use, sexually transmitted diseases, and the consequences that come along with becoming sexually active will also be a big portion of the class. When students do decide to become sexually active they will be fully acquainted on how to protect not only their bodies but their futures as well.

Marlon Brando as Mr. Kurtz

The movie Apocalypse Now Redux (2001), directed by Francis Ford Coppola, captures and illustrates the characters from the novella Heart of Darkness, by Joseph Conrad, perfectly. Mr. Kurtz, one of the main characters in the novella, is played by Marlon Brando. His physical appearance as well as the character that he instilled in Mr. Kurtz, portrayed Mr. Kurtz just as anyone who has read the novella would imagine him to be. Brando’s combination of his weight, height, and voice along with his mysterious and frightening character captivates the audience and brings Mr. Kurtz to life.

Marlon Brando’s physical appearance was the main component in making Mr. Kurtz look terrifying. His height, which was probably around six foot, gave him the appearance of being superior to all of those around him. Metaphorically being because he stood above everyone else since the natives treated him like a god, but more literally because all of the natives were shorter than him. Brando’s weight also contributed to giving him that superior look. With everyone else in Vietnam, where the movie takes place, being skinny, it demonstrates that the natives were willing to give him their food instead of eating it themselves. Brando’s tone of voice also helped to enhance the terrifying view of Mr. Kurtz. It was a very deep and monotoned throughout the whole movie. Which kind of makes the audience wonder what is going on inside of his head and if he cares for anything out in the jungle.

Brando instills the mysterious, intimidating, and frightening character in Mr. Kurtz just like he is portrayed throughout the novella. Mr. Kurtz’s bluntness came off as intimidating in the movie, because he was not afraid to tell anyone the truth, which made people face the reality of things. In the movie Mr. Kurtz and Willard have a conversation where Willard tells him that he is a solider and an assassin. Mr. Kurtz, however, replies by telling him “your neither, your an errand boy sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill”. This specific quote in the movie was important because it demonstrated Mr. Kurtz’s bluntness in situations. He did not care whether or not his words would hurt Willard, he just told him how it was. Mr. Kurtz was also very frightening to both the natives and americans. Mainly because of the way he killed anyone, no matter if you were his friend or not. In fact, on the pathway towards where he lived in the movie there were bodies and heads decaying everywhere, to scare people by showing them what happens if you were to go against him. Another way Brando’s Kurtz captivates the audience is by his mysterious character. No one knows why Mr. Kurtz does the things that he does and this keeps the audience intrigued in finding out who he is. Whenever Mr. Kurtz was showed on camera he was always covered by a shadow, this also was very mysterious. It made it seem as if he was literally being taken over by the darkness.

Marlon Brando, Mr. Kurtz in Apocalypse Now (2001), portrayed Mr. Kurtz in a way that someone else could not have. His physical appearance helped to enhance Mr. Kurtz’s frightening character. His height and weight intensified his intimidating view and his monotone voice strengthened his mysterious look. Brando did an excellent job in bringing Mr. Kurtz to life from the novella.

Works Cited

Achebe, Chinua. “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.”

        Armstrong 336-49

Armstrong, Paul B, ed. Heart of Darkness.

  New York: W.W. Norton, 2005

“Joseph Conrad was a thoroughgoing racist”: “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness” by Chinua Achebe

In the last fifty years Conrad’s novella, Heart of Darkness, has been dissected and evaluated multiple times, yet “his obvious racism however, has not been addressed. And it is high time it was!”(344). In the article “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness,” by Chinua Achebe, Conrad is characterized by Achebe as being a “thoroughgoing racist” (343). Although Achebe’s anachronistic view, as well as his unfair overlook of Conrad’s literary talents to only focus on the political qualities of Conrad’s novella hinders the judgment of future readers, Achebe opens a new door to the audience through his strong emotions about the subject of his article, that Conrad is a racist, and helps them to acknowledge the fact that racism is a problem.

In the beginning of “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness,” Achebe starts off by telling the audience a story about how he had a conversation with a man on his way home and how he had received letters from two high school students who had read his own book, Things Fall Apart, which, like Conrad’s novella, depicts the life of Africans. In one of the letters, the student talked about how much he enjoyed reading his novel and learning all of the superstitions of an African tribe. In response, Achebe says the following in his article:

The young fellow from Yonkers, perhaps partly on account of his age but I believe also much deeper and more serious reasons, is obviously unaware that the life of his own tribesmen in Yonkers, New York, is full of odd customs and superstitions and, like everybody else in his culture, imagines that he needs a trip to Africa to encounter those things.(337) 

Achebe believes that in the student’s case, and other citizens’ as well, he was just oblivious to his surroundings and culture, probably because he was accustomed to it. So when the student read Things Fall Apart, he became intrigued because the African culture is different from his. This is why Achebe was so upset, because so many Americans read about African culture and view them as weird, different, or cool and fail to realize that that is their culture, it is what they are accustomed to. The man whom Achebe had run into on the way home made a comment to him about how he never thought that Africa could have a history or a background. This made Achebe wonder if both the student, subconsciously, and the man, willingly, were being ignorant rather than having a lack of knowledge. Achebe, when talking about the man, states that “the other person being fully my own age could not be excused on the grounds of his years. Ignorance might be a more likely reason; but here again I believe that something more willful than a mere lack of information was at work.” (337). Achebe believes that the man, unlike the student, had no reason to act the way he did because he had more life experience. In other words, he believes that the man should not have been so ignorant, especially given his years.

Since Achebe is of African descent, he interprets Conrad’s novella differently from the way someone of another culture would. This is how Achebe generates another strong point when he begins to analyze Heart of Darkness. When discussing the book, he says that “it took different forms in the minds of different people but almost always managed to sidestep the ultimate question of equality between white people and black people” (342-43). In other words, the book, or any book, is open to a person’s own interpretation because his or her view on the book ultimately depends upon the culture in which he or she were raised. A Caucasian person reading Heart of Darkness will most likely not be insulted by its contents versus an African American who reads it. This being because a Caucasian person cannot relate to the discrimination and racism towards Africans used by Conrad in Heart of Darkness because they have never experienced it. This proves that although two people may be reading the same passage, they could still get different interpretations depending on where they come from and their life experiences. The other half of the quote where Achebe states that people “almost always manage to sidestep the ultimate question of equality between white people and black people” is another good observation he had on Conrad’s novella. Despite all of the cultural differences between the many audiences of Heart of Darkness in the last fifty years, not one person had questioned the way white people as well as black people are perceived in not only the book but also in the world.

Achebe, although he comments on it fifty years later, is the only person who has discussed the ongoing racism throughout Conrad’s novella, Heart of Darkness. In fact, Bernard C. Meyer, M.D. even wrote a book analyzing Conrad, in which he never mentions Conrad’s racism towards the Africans:

In his lengthy book Dr. Meyer follows every conceivable lead (and sometimes unconceivable ones) to explain Conrad. As an example he gives us long disquisitions on the significance of hair and hair-cutting in Conrad. And yet not even one word is spared for his attitude to black people. (345)

Dr. Meyer seemed to care more about analyzing the little things in Conrad, like his hair for example, versus the bigger and more controversial items, like why Conrad uses words that are insulting and dehumanizing towards African Americans. Achebe, however, acknowledges the fact that Conrad is a “thoroughgoing racist” (343) and comments on this accusation a lot throughout his article, “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.” Achebe supports his accusation with textual evidence from Conrad’s novella. One of the quotes he uses deals with Conrad’s obsession towards the color of an African:

 Sometimes his fixation on blackness is equally interesting as when he gives us this brief description:

‘A black figure stood up, strode on long black legs, waving long black arms...’

as though we might expect a black figure striding along on black legs to wave white arms! (345)

Achebe’s emotion and tone when describing Conrad’s words is all a reader needs to read to know just how offended Achebe is by Conrad and how passionate he is when he states that Conrad is a bloody racist.

Achebe’s anachronistic views on Heart of Darkness are unfair and affects the interpretations of future readers. Although Achebe begins with defending Conrad by saying that “it was certainly not his fault that he lived his life at a time when the reputation of the black man was at a particular low level” (344), he still goes on to criticize Conrad for his choice of words. Achebe realizes that in the past it was almost “normal” to act this way towards Africans because it was all the Europeans knew, yet it does not stop him to question “whether a novel which celebrates this dehumanization, which depersonalizes a portion of the human race, can be called a great work of art.”(344). Achebe feels that Conrad crosses boundaries in his book when describing the Africans and does not believe that his book should still be taught in school or even read despite the fact that Heart of Darkness was published in 1899, fifty years ago, and times have changed now.

In “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness,” Achebe overlooks Conrad’s literary talents and only focuses on the political qualities of his novella. Achebe forgets that Conrad is just an author writing a fiction book, whose to say that whats written in his novella are his inner thoughts and beliefs. In all actuality, this is proof that Conrad was a phenomenal writer. Achebe was so intrigued and offended by Conrad’s words that he ultimately forgot that it was not Conrad living in the story, but Marlow.

Despite the fact that this novel was written in the past and it was in a sense “normal” to be racist, Achebe continues to believe that it is a book of ignorance and insulting towards the African race. Although he overlooks Conrad’s talents as an author and believes that Heart of Darkness should be removed from the shelves, Achebe still makes very strong points when evaluating Conrad’s novella. He notices that race affects everyone everyday, whether when it comes to reading or just walking down the street, and he also notices that people have ignored the main topic of Heart of Darkness for fifty years, which is racism.