In what context can we use the word ‘barbaric’

One article I found on LexisNexis is “Robbers jailed after they hurled corrosive fluid in women’s face in ‘Barbaric’ attack” by Chloe Chaplain, and this incident took place in the UK London. This article was about how robbers sprayed ammonia in women faces so they can  not fight back while thy are trying to rob them. In this specific article two women got attacked, one by the age of 51, and the other 49. These robbers were the age of 24, and 20. With the first woman they had trouble robbing her because, even though they sprayed her face with ammonia three times she still fought back. While she fought back they decided to punch and kick her on the floor, luckily she was able to press the panic alarm button to get some help. So the robbers fled the scene without getting anything. But on the other hand the second woman was attacked 10 minutes later and she was held to the ground while they continuously sprayed her. Her vision blurred as soon as the first spray got into her eyes so she did not fight back, the robbers managed to get away with her bag. After this successful robbery the men ran off laughing and rejoice that they were successful. The two victims were rushed immediately to the hospitals and rinsed out with water rapidly, even though they suffered minor burns on their faces, nothing was permanent. This ‘barbaric’ attack scarred the women so bad that they both decided not to work anymore.

In the second article “What is barbaric Mr. Obama?” by Paul Gadalla he was questioning whether President Obama understands what is barbaric and what is not. Only because President Obama he considered that the abduction of one of his soldiers in another country. The author totally misunderstood President Obama because he then counters Obama’s statement with saying so the genocide in Gaza is not barbaric. Just because President Obama did not mention the other genocides that goes on in another country does not mean that it is not barbaric. I feel that the author is too caught up in his feelings about other problems that he jumped to conclusions by saying that Obama does not know what ‘barbaric’ really is. This article took place in Texas.

But the ‘other’ in the first article was represented as the robbers. They were the other because they have done something so outrageous that their action is considered ‘barbaric’. The targeted audience for this article is everyone, not only to be informed of this tragedy but to be aware of your surroundings, because people do not care what your age is anymore, they will still beat you or rob you. In the second article I consider the author to be the ‘other’ because he totally took President Obama out of context and decided to write a whole article about other problems hat President Obama never said that their actions are not ‘barbaric’. President Obama was just speaking on a current situation that was brought forth, not just bringing up problems from across the globe at any given time. There is a time for him to talk about everything. Not just because he used the word ‘barbaric’ for the abduction of soldiers makes him think indifferent towards genocides that are happening in parts of Africa. Therefore barbaric is more towards the action and not because someone said something and you think it is wrong based off of your opinion you think it is barbaric.

Similarly to the Persians, they cannot be barbaric just because they appear different and they do not look similar to the Greeks, nor speak the same language. Barbaric ad to be an action or something said that totally goes against what is normal and goes against proper moral attitudes. Devils advocate: Some things can be barbaric because what can be normal to you may not be normal to me. There are different cultures all over the place and some things may come off barbaric because that is not what they are used to. Therefore that word has to be used in context to fully understand who is being ‘barbaric’ at the moment.


Citation

Chaplain, Chloe. “LexisNexis® Academic.” LexisNexis® Academic & Library Solutions, 8                                 Dec. 2017, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/

Gadalla, Paul. “What Is ‘Barbaric’ Mr. Obama?” LexisNexis® Academic: Sign In, 7 Aug.         2014, http://www.lexisnexis.com/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?                          docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T26932203580&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo =1&resultsUrlKey=29_T26932203584&cisb=22_T26932203583&tree.

Advertisements

Chartres right in front of my eyes!

IMG_20171112_110002804_BURST000_COVER_TOP

This is a picture I took on Bushwick avenue on my way to church. This is a church that has a structure just like the Cathedral of Notre Dame de Chartres ( c.1145-c.1220 ). If I was able to capture the whole building you would see that in front of it had the same Gothic style as the Notre Dame. There was a huge circular window in the middle and it had small windows on either side of the door. Especially with the pointed top. This church does not have a dome like other churches or like the Hagia Sophia, it had the six sided pyramid closing the top of the building. Furthermore another difference between the dome like churches and this Chartres is that most of the building is being supported by the outside instead of the inside where the interior structure is what is holding the building up. There is also a sense of symmetry within the building and everything is like a mirror. Whatever is on one side of the circular window, the same thing is on the other side. It is like the window was the line of symmetry.

Slavery was not only in Central America!

“Slavery.” Britannica Online Academic Edition, 2017, pp. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc

In this publication the primary audience would be people who are interested in history, or people that are interested in extra details that happened during slavery. This article sweetened up the history of slaves and gave a historical background on how slaves came about in Greece and Italy. This article also explained how so many other countries owned slaves. For me this article was a bit troubling because its not giving the truth raw. It sugar coated how slaves were treated in Central America. For example ” Slavery was usually, but not always, involuntary.” Maybe in other countries where slaves weren’t as mistreated as central america, slaves would not mind working off their debt. However being a slave in Central America people would get lynched for no reason, and beaten, African Americans would not voluntarily want to be slaves. This is one of the sentences that stood out to me because it just shows how much certain things are glazed over. But furthermore it explains how other countries had slaves such as, China, India, Malabar, Thailand, Japan, Philippines, and so forth. Lastly the article gets into the different protests that occurred in some of the countries that had slavery. One of the famous rebellions we know today is when Haiti gained their independence from the French in 1804, and the famous man who led them who was Toussaint-Louverture. In this article the author does not really connect the key terms, instead it is a lot if historical background on slavery on where it started and how it ended. While sugar coating things but overall capturing the main part of slavery. One connection I can say between these terms was just how slavery was in Rome, and in Sicily.

#JulieTeamVenus

Screenshot_20171110-100703 (1)

This picture was taken on the day of the trip to the city. This building is the New York Stock exchange, this building relates to Unit 2 because of it columns. In the Early Christian art and architecture after Constantine Their churches had columns, they weren’t Corinthian but ionic.  Even though the New York Stock Exchange was not built to have people worship inside, it still contained structures from the early Christianity period. This building also can connect to the Basilica because their columns were more similar. The basilica had Corinthian columns and it surrounded the building in two stories. And that is one way how this building differs, the NYSE does not have two stories of columns supporting the building, but the basilica did.

Pediments!!

Snapchat-1202432437 (1)

On Sunday afternoon my family and I went to visit a close family friend at Mount Sinai Hospital, which is located in the city. Every time I go to the city I am amazed by the buildings, stores, big businesses etc. I have always seen statues and other Greek art around but I never paid much attention to it. I have always admired it’s beauty without knowing what it really is, until I learned about sculptures in Art class. So as my mom drove off the Manhattan Bridge I noticed this arch that had multiple sculptures and and I tried to see if I could identify any of the statues. But unfortunately I couldn’t identify each one, but I was able to see that there were pediments at the top of the arch. The only difference is that the mini sculptures were in a rectangle box rather than a triangle. I know that this picture is kind of blurry to see but I had to beg my mom to slow down a bit so I can take the picture. After doing some research on this arch I found out that it was built between 1910, one year after the bridge was built and 1915. It was designed by Carrere and Hastings as a triumphal arch with curved colonnades. It was an awesome experience because I was able to look at a Greek style and actually be able to know what some styles are called.

 

Alexander the Great?

Before interviewing three people about Alexander the Great, I assumed many people would be very informed about him because he was so Great. This made me rethink if he was really Great. My first interviewer was my best friend Janine who is 18. I interviewed her on the phone. Her response was very vague, she said she learned about him in the 9th grade and all she remembers was that he was the king of Greece. I also interviewed my younger sister. Her name is Christa and she is 16 years old and she said that he was the King of Russia before the Enlightenment and he was a totalitarian. I interviewed her in my house. I was completely shocked at her answer because she is in high school currently and she didn’t even remember where he was the king of. Lastly I interviewed my friend Billy and he is 20 years old. I also interviewed him over the telephone. He said that Alexander was the guy who became king at 12 and as he grew older he killed lots and lots of people. He learned all of that in high school. With these answers I collected from my friends and family I was very shocked and amazed that they didn’t really know who he was. Not one of the people I interviewed knew his background of where he came from. This was different to what I learned in class because we learned about him in great detail and learned about his whereabouts. We learned the romance part of his story and that his father was conniving and tricked his mother into sleeping with him. I think its also different because they were recalling what they learned from high school, and I am relearning this on a college level so there are many factors that are left out in younger years. So based off of their answers I questioned was he really great or was he really important. But then I came to realize that I am learning this subject in great detail because of the different levels.

 

 

 

 

An ideal society is different for everyone because of their surroundings.

In the article “Three Young Democracy Advocates in Hong Kong Are Sentenced to Prison” there is no such thing as an ideal society with freedom. Knowing that China is a Communist country they believe that everyone is equal and no one should be higher than the other. The government believes they should be in control of everything. That is their idea of an ideal society, with everything controlled by government. Now that things are very much evolved and a spread of cultures are more rampant people are starting to stand up for what they believe in. Due to the activist standing up for more freedom they were sentenced six to eight months in prison, and to complete community service. Because such acts never happen, people requested a harder punishment for the activist for their actions. Even though three activist stood against the government and this was not the first time, the government cannot say that the society as a whole is lacking values from their ideal society. Only a few people decided to stand up against so as a whole the Chinese society have not lost any values of their ideal society.  I would not be able to live in this society because I live in a country where I have a say in what goes on around me. For example I have the right to vote, protest, bear arms, free religion, and with these freedoms I would never trade them in. That is why living in China would not be the best fit for me.

An ideal society would be different for everyone because of their cultures. Since the communist people were never exposed to freedom or having a say in government, they wouldn’t have any other idea or vision for an ideal society. The communist society is what their ideal society would be. In comparison to Xenophon, their ideal society does not include women partaking in government or having a say in anything. Their role is staying home and cleaning and cooking being behind the scenes. It is the men that have all the roles. But because that is all they were exposed to the way of their living would be their ideal society. Therefore an ideal society is limited to what you are exposed to.

 

Wong, Alan. “Three Young Democracy Advocates in Hong Kong Are Sentenced to Prison.” New York Times, 18 Aug. 2017, p. A7(L). New York State Newspapers, login.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/ps/i.do?p=SPN.SP01&sw=w&u=nysl_me_brookcol&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA500925562&asid=ee57bb4fe60242a101cca4763e94bf09. Accessed 17 Sept. 2017.

How far can we really go to say something is ‘barbaric’

The word ‘barbaric’ is defined as ” savagely cruel; exceedingly brutal”. It is usually obvious when an action is barbaric, because it is usually above and beyond. Someone can not be called barbaric if it is based on opinion. For example if someone likes eating ice-cream and burgers together, I can not call that barbaric because it would be based on my opinion. In this first article ” School Lunch Without Shame” it was easy to notice the barbaric behavior. “far too many school districts still employ barbaric policies under which children are openly humiliated when their parents cannot pay lunch bills.” The barbaric behavior occurred when children were being openly humiliated because of not having enough money to afford to pay school lunch bills. Specific forms of barbaric behavior that were mentioned in the article was, students verbally berating ‘others’, also consciously throwing food in the garbage knowing that there are children starving. The ‘other’ people in this article was the less fortunate children. In this article you can also say that the targeted audience would be parents that had difficulty paying lunch bills, and other teens and kids who could fall in the ‘other’ category. Overall in this article you can clearly tell the barbaric behavior, and it was not based on an opinion. There was clear action to distinguish the barbaric behavior.

Unlike this second article. In this article “Texas Abortion Restriction Is Temporarily Blocked” an attorney said dilation-and-evacuation abortions were ”gruesome and inhumane, which makes it troubling that a District Court would block Texas’ lawful authority to protect the life of unborn children from such a barbaric practice.” The ‘other’ in this article would be the women who decides to get this procedure done. However this can not be called barbaric because that was his own opinion about abortions. Abortions are done for multiple reasons and a woman’s own personal reason, therefore this attorney was completely out of line for saying that this  practice is barbaric. And this is where the question would come in. How far can we go to say that something is barbaric? Is something barbaric based on our opinion or when it is coherent to identify a behavior that was cruel?

These articles differ because of what circumstance the word barbaric was used. When it comes to berating others and purposely throwing out lunches knowing that others are hungry, that is barbaric. It’s barbaric because that is something cruel, to humiliate others while thy are already down. While in the second article the attorney said that abortions are barbaric but there is no clear evidence to show that there was cruelty happening. Even though the topic of abortions are controversial and people are strongly opinionated about it, does not make the action barbaric. Especially because it was based on his own opinion.

Astor, Maggie. “Texas Abortion Restriction Is Temporarily Blocked.” New York Times, 1     Sept. 2017, p. NA(L). New York State Newspapers, login.ez-           proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/ps/i.do?p=SPN.SP01&sw=w&u=nysl_me_brookcol&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA502626734&asid=99f3a59c2cdc1bf2d8c53660ad4c611c. Accessed 10 Sept. 2017.

 

Board, The Editorial. “School Lunch Without Shame.” New York Times, 8 Sept. 2017, p. A26(L). New York State Newspapers, login.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/ps/i.do?p=SPN.SP01&sw=w&u=nysl_me_brookcol&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA503736222&asid=3f179db234cee34f6832cf7f25307cc3. Accessed 10 Sept. 2017.