Thinking about Inquiry 1, I would probably say that my greatest takeaway from it was how to analyze films. It became much easier for me afterwards to watch films (such as Braveheart) and then analyze the elements in them. This in turn helped me with my Inquiry 2 writing, as I pulled a couple themes out of the film to help me with my writing. In Inquiry 2, I finally learned that the five paragraph essay does not work for everything, and that I should start to move away from it. I think that in turn my writer’s reflection for Inquiry 3 was much better because I learned this lesson, as it flows seamlessly and makes complete sense. Inquiry 3 was a bit different. It made me feel as though writing in a certain way, particularly from my point of view, gives me a completely different writing style, one that flows and is much more interesting. I’m not quite sure what I want to highlight for Inquiry 4 yet, as I’m still looking over all my work to see what points I want to hit on and where I want to say something.
Final reactions
Well first off, I looked at my blog today and realized that wordpress posted the other reaction blog to the wrong wordpress site. Awkward. Anyway, here’s the link to that : http://bucklet2.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/initial-reactionsthoughts/. Now back to what this is about. Reactions. Like last time, I was really interested by what a lot of people had to say and present. It was really awesome to see what interests everyone and what really speaks to them. Even though I’ve never studied it, learning about other people and what makes them tick has always been interesting to me, so getting to see all these presentations has really been pretty cool for me and a fun way to spend class. Nothing in particular stuck out to me, as most of what was introduced I was familiar with, although it did really make me want to see some of the movies that people talked about, like Remember the Titans.
Video Game Canon (So Far)
Halo series
Legend of Zelda series
Mass Effect series
A Necessary Change
Reading the first two articles, both on the racism/sexism of the literary canon, and I can honestly say I’m not surprised. When you take into consideration how long white males have been in control of society, it should come as no surprise that the literary canon is dominated by males. However, that doesn’t mean I agree. While I have mostly been exposed to male writers, I believe that both males and females are of equal merit, and that anyone who believes otherwise doesn’t deserve to call themselves a scholar, because obtuseness is not a scholarly attitude. Reading these articles has really helped me understand why the canon is the way it is, as well as why it needs to change. I’m not saying popular novels should be declared as the works of genius; far from it. I’m saying that the people who decide what we value as readers are out of date. These articles have caused me to review what I read in high school, and I would say most of them apply to the traditional canon, and I didn’t particularly have a problem with it, mostly because I chose the works that I read based on interest and college expectations. However, I was given options that strayed from the traditional canon, but I didn’t have the time to read those works. All things considered though, I can say that there are some works that I believe don’t belong in the canon that I have read, works that I will aspire never to read again. I see value in seeking to preserve our history, the great writers, such as Shakespeare, but some of the canon is preserving ancient, boring, irrelevant history without a thought towards recent history.This results in not giving us a look at how our culture has changed and developed over time, which in and of itself is valuable.
The Story So Far..
Hey guys. I basically cranked this one out with no idea what I was writing at first, but out of it all I managed to get what I think is a pretty solid thesis statement: The principal contemporary themes of the film, parallelism between William Wallace, a Scottish man from the fourteenth century, and the Scottish of 1995, and emphasis on Scottish pride are the main reasons for such an emphatic reaction by the Scottish. To clarify, I am writing on Braveheart and its impact on the Scottish people, examining the specifics of why they were more affected by the film than other cultures were. My research was mostly background information about the era and about some groups involved, but I did get some specific articles on the impact that Braveheart had, and I use those throughout my paper. To be honest, I’m not entirely sure where else I want to take this paper; I know I need to make it longer, and I know I might not be detailed enough in my writing, I just don’t know what to add so that I can add more value. So my questions for this are:
What can I do to add more to this paper? Or is the paper sufficient as-is?
Does my paper flow well? Do I use proper grammar, etc?
Research 10: The English Don’t Get It
Crumley, Jim. “The English Don’t Get It.” New Statesman 125.4311 (1996): 19. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Mar. 2014.
This article discusses a similar topic to one of my other sources, however, it provides some different information, and doesn’t focus on the political details as much. It does focus on one thing in particular, however: The English Don’t Get It. This theme is repeatedly seen and stated in the article, and the writer elaborate on how the English don’t get it.
This article is another good source for me, particularly with regards to the circumstances in Scotland, such as the rise of Nationalism, the influence of Braveheart as a catalyst for these movements, and also some examples of how popular Braveheart was with the people. I’m not quite sure how I’m going to use all of this information yet, but I know a lot of the info in this article is going to come in handy.
Research 9: An interview with the Director
Gallagher, John Andrew, and Sylvia Caminer. “Interview With Mel Gibson.” Films In Review 47.5/6 (1996): 31. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Mar. 2014.
This source is, rather obviously, an interview with Mel Gibson on Braveheart, as well as some other subjects. He talks about how he became to be involved with the film, then how he came to be director and actor.
This interview was really great for me to find. It’s great to get all this information from Mel Gibson’s perspective, to try and get a better impression of the movie, how it was made, and possibly some other tidbits of information. It also helps me with what kind of audiences he was considering when he directed this film, as well as some of the processes behind the scenes of making the movie.
Research 8: Historical Knowledge as of 1996
“William Wallace’s Adventure Through Time.” British Heritage 18.6 (1996): 42. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Mar. 2014.
This source basically cross-references all of the events in Braveheart with the known facts about William Wallace. It goes into a lot of depth, providing great detail, and tries to put the pieces together. Unfortunately, the only thing that seems to have been historically accurate is the fact that Wallace was a brilliant military leader. It actually includes some information about why Mel Gibson wanted to make this movie, which could be useful.
This article is basically to address the counter-arguments that may be posed, particularly regarding the lack of historical accuracy. Even with all the information presented in the article, there is still a lot of information that is not known, however, some of the things that are known are not present in the movie, or are else distorted for the sake of making a good movie.
Research 7: Academy Awards Results 1996
Sterritt, David. “Oscar wore plaid: `Braveheart’ wins 5.” Christian Science Monitor 27 Mar. 1996: 12. Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Mar. 2014.
This entire article is in essence, all about the Academy Awards. Who was in contention for each award, who won which award, and some comments regarding most of the winners. There also were some comments at the beginning, regarding the opinions of movie-goers and critics, on the award winners as well.
Really, this article is solely for the purpose of showing how good of a movie is, or at least to the general population. Braveheart was nominated for ten awards and won five awards. The fact that it took home five Academy Awards is significant, especially considering that two of the awards were major awards; best picture and best director.
Research 6: More on the Scottish National Party
Mad Macs At The Movies.” Newsweek 126.17 (1995): 44. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Mar. 2014.
This article discusses the impact of Braveheart on the Scottish people. It also discusses the rise in popularity of the Scottish National Party, as a result of the film, and how they are taking advantage of it.
Despite its lack of length, this is still a valuable source for me for a few reasons. First off, it provides me with the Scottish reception of Braveheart, which was extremely positive, and also why they might have liked it. It also give me the impact of Braveheart on the Scottish people, particularly the fact that it was so well-received that it caused a rise in support for the Scottish nationalist party to about 30% support from the population. It also hints at some possible reasons why the Scots are so discontent with their lot right now, the North Sea oil conflict in particular, and also how the Scottish national Party is taking advantage of Braveheart.
Tyler Buckley's Composition Blog 