Photo

Polo Black.

Polo Black, the newest fragrance by Ralph Lauren. At first glance all we see is a handsome, young Italian model. What is he up to? What image of masculinity does he iconize? Is he trying to sell us something more than just the cologne, something that cost us more than many would be willing to pay? Advertisers spend hour upon hours coming up with the best and most effective way to sell us a product. When we buy these products I believe that we buy more than just a product, but an image of life which is glamorized and overly exaggerated.

The guy before us is young and handsome. He has a light tan from his days on the polo field with the most of his long brown hair fading out of the shadowy background. He wears a pinstripe black suit and blue shirt with a white collar. Figueras also reminds us of Christian Bale. He shares the ad with a small black bottle; above which are the words Polo Black Ralph Lauren.  Why, because it wants to make a statement.  

Figueras is in a position of lounging as he poses for the shot. He is watchful, sharp, debonair, and mysterious. He doesn’t where a tie. Yet the first few buttons are open, suggesting a sense of ease and control. He wears a suit. Nice enough for a formal dinner but is not confined by the suit. He is skin is bronzed, making him more appealing and more broadly attractive. He is stylish, strong and silent. The dark brown eyes holds your gaze long enough to take ones breathe. The suggestion to Bale is a hint at heroism. He plays a billionaire, secretly a hero, Batman. The fact that he doesn’t smile is important.  The lack of a smile makes him mysterious, but that open collar suggests that he is a hero still rough around the edges.

This is what women want. Women are attracted to the guy who is dangerous, seductive and mysterious. The original dream guy was the cowboy but now it has changed.  A man must be strong, young, charming and mysterious. When we describe a guy we look at him as a whole. We don’t dissect him, because of his apparent confidence. It’s apparent in the way he carries himself to how he dresses.  If this is what Polo is selling, why are we buying?

We are weak. We want that confidence. We want that feeling of debonair. Women are attracted to this and if women want it they only need to provide it. They aren’t promising that this will change who we are. But it will, temporarily,  

Christmas in CGS

Christmas time is here
Happiness and cheer
Fun for all that students call
their favorite time of the year

Teacher s gives them gifts

In the form of tests

With the passing bell

As excuses grow like shopping list

Teachers are on break

Students have headaches

When they see their homework load

Over their Christmas break

Presents are exchanged

Some things never change

When it’s Christmas time in CGS

 We are all like children on Christmas Day

 In the week leading up to Christmas an aura of trepidation fills the singular hallway that is CGS. Teacher plan last minute activities as students are pulled out from class to practice for the upcoming concert. We here the administrations angst from all the holiday cheer as if they can control the joy of Christmas. We become lax and anxious as we wait to hear that 12:45 bell meaning that we can leave for the retreat of our families. Our holiday to do list seems to grow but in the end we are ok. Since it Christmas what can go wrong?

Just about everything and anything.   

Merry Christmas.

David A. Kai (inspired by a Charlie Brown Christmas and Ms. Parham's prompt.)

Comic

我不知道，如果丽莎想今晚去吃饭。我应该叫她找出来。

您好丽莎。

您好迈克尔。

你怎么样？

我很好。你是如何。

我很好的感谢。

你今晚忙吗？

号为什么要问？

我想知道，如果你想和我一起去吃饭？

当然可以。我很想去。你什么时候接我吗？

5:30

好吧，我会看到你。

在餐厅。

请问您喜欢吃什么？他们包饺子，曹将军的鸡肉，海鲜和素食。

我想订购一些蔬菜饺子糖醋鱼。

这听起来非常健康，我们应该记住，要求他们不添加任何味精。

晚饭后。

你认为什么晚宴？

我觉得食物很美味，我们应该再次来到这里。

好吧，我会今晚晚餐支付。

谢谢您。

没有问题，我很高兴你能和我一起。

哦，不。

什么错了？

我的钱，我必须花了。

不用担心，我会支付。

谢谢

没有问题的

中国 晚餐

一-烤香蒜鸡与天使头发面食和法国面包

二－鸡Stroganoff抛沙拉和意大利面包

三－勃艮第牛肉与鸡蛋面

四－在伏特加酒汁长通粉抛沙拉和意大利面包

五－面包馅和奶油玉米焗猪扒

六－香辣虾和西兰花与赖斯

七－罗尔斯与红新月鸡饭砂锅

Churchill vs. Hirohito

World War Two, Churchill, and Hirohito: What could possibly go wrong?

            With the Germans on the rise to ultimate European power. Having taken down country after country for Nazi Germany Hitler seemed nearly unstoppable. What he did not expect was the energy and caliber of the new British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Despite a lukewarm reception he stands to deliver one of the greatest calls-to-arms in history.  In the same way at the end of World War Two after Japan had been devastated by the first nuclear bombing in history Emperor Hirohito makes a magnificent surrender speech both honorable and empowering. These two dynamic speeches are separated by time, situation, speaker and perspectives, yet are united in their purpose; to send a message that would inspire a nation and show the world the strength of their words.

            Churchill's call to arms speech has been called one of the greatest speeches ever given in history, but why is it? The language is powerful, accepting the gravity of the situation and his actions, and direct in his tone.  Phrases like, “for without victory, there is no survival”, “victory in spite of all terror”, and “It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us” Churchill uses pathos to show the importance of answering his call. He also gives his audience the benefit that they are fully capable to understand the gravity of their situation that he does not need to sugar coat. In other words he gives them their vegetables plain and simple. No faulty logic or far-fetched propaganda. Churchill, does this beautifully when he says, “We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering.” His strength, “buoyancy”, and caliber portrayed in his first speech dissolve his early perceptions.

            Emperor Hirohito was faced with a daring challenge; the honorable surrender of the Japanese people after the devastating bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.  He also gives great credit to the mental capacity of his “loyal subjects.” He amazingly says that the people of Japan are surrendering without saying the phrase, We Surrender. He addresses his military in a tone of thanks and honor when he says, “Despite the best that has been done by everyone,” The war has not ended in Japan’s favor.  He explains the gravity of their situation when he writes; “Should we continue to fight” it would result in the obliteration of the Japan and human civilization.by taking this approach he makes the Japanese people martyrs of the world who will have to suffer for the wellbeing of human existence. This is why this speech is known as one of the best surrender speech in History. He does this with grace and humility whilst portraying America as the homicidal villain and Japan the martyr of the world.

Who has the better argument: The Prince or Civil Disobedience?

Machiavelli, the 1513 author of The Prince, and Thoreau, The 1849 author of Civil Disobedience, share and differ on ideas concerning government and how it should govern people as well as the best form of response. Due to their different time periods the ideas articulated would have huge consequences if read out of context. Machiavelli’s essay was written for the wealthy of society on how to govern a people whilst remaining in power.  But he lived in a society where the majority couldn’t read so he was safe from retribution from angry commoners. Thoreau voices the opinion of the majority under such a rule described by Machiavelli. What it all comes down to is how should we let ourselves be governed?

            Thoreau believes that the American government is a necessary evil for "the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have." Yet in his opinion it has been most effective when it was idle. To Thoreau the government doesn’t deserve the credit we give it for it was by the drive and pride of the American people that those achievements were made.  Machiavelli talks about how to portray yourself publicly one way and act the exact opposite, “for there’s such a difference between the way we really live and the way we ought to live that the man who neglects the real to study the ideal will learn how to accomplish his ruin not his salvation.”   Here Machiavelli sums up his entire piece because a man who completely understands how to navigate the real whilst entertaining his subjects ideal reality he can retain his power.   

            Machiavelli also explains the difference between being loved or feared by your subjects. To Machiavelli, “to be feared is much safer than to be loved.” He believes this because as humans beings we are ungrateful, “fickle, liars and deceivers, fearful of danger and greedy for gain.” Thoreau supports this claim when he talks about how easily we are pleased for, “He who gives himself entirely to his fellow-men appears to them useless and selfish; but he who gives himself partially to them is pronounced a benefactor and philanthropist.”  And still he calls up to stand against this unjust system that keeps us trapped in cages of fear and reverie. We are “happy robots” not thinking, living, or questioning, but simply existing. We should not and will not stand for this tyranny that the Machiavellian political system has made.

             It all depends on where you sit on the social ladder. If you are on the lower half Thoreau is your champion of equality and fairness. But if you’re on the upper half Machiavelli is your guidebook to success but you must always be aware when the vultures are circling for when you fall they will feed.