Howdy. I'm Kaylee; I've lived in Albuquerque for 3 years, before that I lived in Helena, Montana. I have three vices: sarcasm, tea, and Mountain Dew. The plan is to major in International Studies. That's me in a nutshell. Oh wait, I love outdated, cliched sayings. Swell.

The most obvious reason to watch a children's movie in a college class is simply because the villains in a children's movie can be just as awful as one in a more mature film. For example, though Joker in The Superman/Batman Movie may not be as graphically violent and sociopathic as Joker in The Dark Knight, he is still evil and insane. When you analyze what the Joker is truly doing, though represented in a manner consist ant with children's movies,you recognize that his villainy is truly deplorable. Watching a children's movie when you are no longer a child also gives you the opportunity to look at and interpret some of the deeper levels that are e
mbedded in the film.

Week of August 30, 2011
Mr. Hyde: Villain-ness 4.3

Mr. Utterson: Villain-ness 1.6

Dr. Jekyll had been plagued his whole life by his divided desires: to do good or evil. Did this partition make him evil? No, of course not. Everyone must deal with his or her own separate sides. Abraham Lincoln’s quote explained this. He said there is hardly ever true evil or good, simply mixes of both. Dr. Jekyll had, before his yearning to split himself, more good in his own mix. This fact, according to Lincoln made him someone to embrace. However, after he succumbed to his wild wish to be purely evil and purely good, but as two different personas, Dr. Jekyll’s mix moved a little bit closer to the evil. Clearly, Mr. Hyde was one of those rare things that was indeed wholly evil. Abe would have been appalled by Hyde’s villainy, which was, of course, quite similar to Jefferson Davis' wickedness.

- sdimpfel sdimpfel Sep 5, 2011 First I must say that I love picture! Second, I agree that Lincoln would have considered Jekyll embracable, because I feel this is a 'road to hell' sort of situation think Jekyll had good intentions and got carried away and I don't nesecarily think that that makes him more evil. Just human.

Week of September 6, 2011

Grendel: Villain-ness 6
Grendel's Mother (haha Angelina Jolie): Villain-ness 2.7
Dragon: Villain-ness 3.9

  1. According to Beowulf, a good king is generous, brave, and continues the bloodline. This is, of course, different than a good hero which is whom we would contrast a successful villain with. I think, however, that many of the opposite traits would be necessary for a successful villain, such as greed (like the dragon) and cowardliness (like Grendel when he tried to flee after Beowulf fought back). Interestingly, Grendel’s mother had one of the traits of the good king: continuing the blood line. Hrothgar himself acknowledged her right to avenge her son’s death. One can also recognize the importance of being a fierce fighter, which is also important for a hero.
  2. Villain-O-Meter :)
  3. A good class discussion involves everyone communicating in such a manner that everyone gets a chance to speak their opinion; it also requires everyone to have read the text (which has not been a problem for our class). One thing that should be missing from a discussion is interruption, but this is difficult to avoid. One way to reach a point where our class is qualified to be called a good discussion would be to make sure those folks who do not have a chance to speak get that opportunity. Sadly, I don’t quite know how to make sure that happens, except to personally make to decision to let others speak if we begin at the same time.

I really like the Grendel picture, and I agree with the low villain rating of Grendel's mother.-Tyler Jimenez

I really like the picture you posted of Grendel, that is almost exactly the way I pictured him, big and blue and not very human like at all.- Jamie

I absolutely love how you used pictures to do your Villain-O-Meter. And your platform 9 3/4 pic? Absolutely amazing. I'm incredibly jealous!- Kharli

I agree with what you had to say about the guidlines of being a sucessfull villain. I agree that Grendel was a coward because of always fleeing and killing Harothgars men when they least expected it.
- HeyThereAri HeyThereAri Sep 13, 2011Ari

Week of September 13, 2011
Dexter: 7.3

Dracula: 8.2

Jack the Ripper: 9.2

  1. Dexter is popular now just as it would have been at any other time. People have always been fascinated by villains, especially psychopaths. With Dexter, however, it is socially acceptable to be intrigued by him because we are able to see him as a “good guy.” Plus, the show feels a little edgy, with its violence, internal dialogue, and gross intro. If Dexterwas made appropriate for another time, then yes, it would probably be popular at that point as well.
  2. Superman is almost too perfect to compare with the other flawed characters and villains. I could see him as Dr. Jekyll had Jekyll succeeded in making a good version of himself, but he has nothing in common with Dexter.
    Superman, though, is rather similar to Beowulf; they are both all-around good guys with a weakness, be it kryptonite or lacking an heir. In addition, Beowulf and Superman swim or fly to protect and defend innocent folks, which results in a general degradation of the public safety when they ar e defeated.
    Dexter is a Batman who kills. Or is he? Is it fair to compare Dexter to Batman? I think not. Batman is, yes, a vigilante just as Dexter is, but Batman has a completely different motivation. Batman defeats evil because the villains are bad or are doing bad things. Dexter, however, likes killing folks and simply chose villains as his victims.
    Beowulf and Batman I do not find similar in any way. Beowulf tells everyone every heroic deed he’s ever done. Batman, on the other hand, is required to hide his identity, and even if he wasn’t, I doubt he would tell folks.
    Dexter is a psychopath, and for all intents and purposes we can consider Hyde a sociopath. Both lack basic human emotions, such as empathy and guilt. The biggest difference between them lies in their ability to blend in with the rest of society. Hyde stands out as just plain wrong, while folks think Dexter is just swell.
  3. Dracula and vampires in general are sexy for three simple, but unsatisfactory, reasons. They have power, charisma, and personal magnetism (literally or figuratively). These three things are basically the three most attractive traits out there. If vampires actually existed though, I’m not sure people would be quite so enamored by their power and mystique.
  4. I say this with trepidation, but I feel like the reason Jack the Ripper wasn’t caught was because of the media attention. People were terrified, enthralled, or believed someone else would do something. It’s the high, but tolerable, price we pay for uncensored media.

- mlerussell mlerussell Sep 19, 2011 Calling Dexter a psychopath might be a little extreme! He has the potential to be something close, but he controls himself! He acts for the common good, and if he enjoys doing it.. Weeell then maybe he's a little violent. But still, acting with good intentions!

  1. The Chorus did, of course, know of Medea’s plans. I never really thought about why they did not try and stop her because I never saw them as literal representations of people. I just assumed the chorus was a plot device to get the audience involved and to help the audience understand everything that was happening.
    In the case of the gods, I think they felt perhaps Medea was all right in murdering her children. The Greek gods were never particularly compassionate toward people who broke oaths, especially not oaths sworn against the gods themselves. I obviously completely disagree with the gods being A-okay with her, but hey, I never thought Greek gods were the best judges of character.
  2. I think that revolution is still the mainstream. It’s still cool to be a rebel, both in your little circle, and in a whole country. Think about Egypt (and in no way am I belittling their quest for democracy), they mobilized in a way that spurred many other previously non-democratic countries to fight for their rights. The ideal of revolution for democracy became ‘mainstream’ just as many other revolutions have become mainstream. Some examples could be the civil rights movement, suffrage, and the initial wave of democracy in the mid-19th century.
  3. My inner animal is definitely a panda bear. They are an endangered species, probably because t hey think highly of themselves and don’t like kids, just like me. Plus they’re quite content just chilling, also like me. We’re a perfect fit really.
    My Inner Beast!
Medea: 9.4

Chairman Mao: 8.8

Werewolves: 3.2

First all, I'm lovin all the pictures you have. Second, I completely agree with your take on revolution still being mainstream. Todays culture is full of revolt and rebellion, kids rebel from parents and school to tattoos and the way they dress. and good point about Egypt. Third, you have the cutest inner beast ever. -Jamie

Your Pal, HUNTER

Week of September 27
  1. In general, female villains tend to have more exact reasons for their villainy. Grendel’s mother was simply getting revenge for her son’s death, while Medea, evil, heinous woman that she was, was revenging Jason’s slight. Maleficent’s motivation was, however, less obvious. Was she lonely, or did she simply like to cause pain?
    In addition to cause, female villains seem to think their plans out a bit more (though this difference is less solid). For example, both Medea and Maleficent had carefully executed plots of evil. Again, this is not universal, as Grendel’s mother and many others, such as Bellatrix and Harvey Quinn, plan very little and just go.
    Another factor that makes female villains different from male villains is their use of their attractiveness. Very few women (barring many children’s movies) who we are to seriously consider as villains are unattractive. Think of Catwoman, Bellatrix, Kitty Kowalski (Lex Luther’s sidekick), and countless others. Actually, I’d like you to name female villains who are or aren’t attractive in the comments! I’m so excited :)
  2. Dark and/or unnatural colors were evil. Maleficent’s minions were dark brown and black with undeveloped features and Maleficent’s magic was bright green. The colors she used weren’t nice to look at. On the contrary, the fairies were sweet colors and everything good looked natural or pretty.
Maleficent: 2.6

I totally agree that female baddies use their sexual appeal to befit their evil purposes. They use it by making themselves seem more intimidating, undeniable, and powerful.
Sexy Female Villains: Elektra, Mystique from X-Men, Poison Ivy from Batman, Narcissa Black from Harry Potter, Faith from Buffy, and Sedusa from Power Puff Girls. - samanthaprina samanthaprina Oct 2, 2011samanthaprina

Ha! I never thought of female villains having a specific motive but I totally see it.
- jserru jserru Oct 3, 2011jaclynserru

I agree that female villains think out their plans more than male villains. It seems that this is due in part to their sensuality and their ability to use that sensuality to accomplish their plans.

I agree with your point that female villains tend to have more motives for their villainy as well as the fact that they are generally quite attractive. There are tons of examples of that in Buffy such as, Glory, Darla and even Willow. Hell, in Star-trek even the borg are somewhat attractive (see 7 of 9). Aside from the queen in Snow White when she turns herself into an old woman, however, I am struggling to think of an unattractive female villain.- Lenarama Lenarama Oct 4, 2011

Week of October 4

  1. The first and most obvious reason that Iago is a villain is easy to see. His actions and machinations resulted in multiple murders, including the death of Desdemona. Secondly, Iago had the mindset of a great general, the type of man who would do anything to get what he wants.
    Then again, Othello was the man who actually murdered Desdemona. Iago never actually killed her or forced Othello to kill her. It was Othello’s hand that murdered his own wife, his love. Also, it was Othello’s ability to lead troops, such as his quick decision skills and fierce loyalty (which was offended by Desdemona’s perceived betrayal) that led him to murdering Desdemona, and then himself when it was proven that she had not been unfaithful.
  2. The easiest villain to identify with a mental disorder is Dexter. He has all the symptoms of a psychopath: complete lack of a conscience and empathy, an astute understanding of other people’s “human” emotions, and a well-developed ability to hide these two previous facts from others.
    Psychopathic behavior general manifests itself before the age of 15, often with cruelty or murder of animals (and other symptoms that I don’t know if Dexter had). Dexter killed at least one dog and continued to show a lack of emotion for the two episodes we watched. Interstingly enough, approximately four percent of the population may be psychopaths, at least according to http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm
    Some other psychopaths in literature: Tom Riddle, Hannibal Lector, the Pardoner from The Canterbury Tales, perhaps Iago, and Alex DeLarge from A Clockwork Orange.
  3. Dracula and Edward Cullen. Both were vampires and both had scores of middle aged women in love with them. Dracula sucked people’s blood, and Edward sucked the life out of today’s preteens and chic-lit.
    Commander Fred (Handmaid’s Tale) and O’Brian (1984). These are dystopian novels involving society’s complete control by those two characters. They were both dictators who took total control of a nation after that country’s own revolution. They were bad fellows.

Iago: 7

Cassio: 2

Your comparison of Dracula and Edward Cullen is great. Haha. I also found the link you posted extremely interesting. - Lenarama Lenarama

I must agree your comparison between Edward and Dracula made my day. I also must say I really like how you have pictures for all of the villains you rank. It makes your page very interesting to look at. -sdimpfel

I enjoyed your comparisons of different villains and how you used something we had seen in one of the in class presentations. Your answers are always very well written and interesting. -angelica

Week of October 11

  1. It is not the mere fact that something is unnatural that makes it scary, but it is when we think something should be natural but it is not. We feel that Joker, as a human like you and me, should display the same kinds of emotions we do, such as empathy, love, fear, anger*, at least a little sanity, and hope. However, he does not. We can’t understand something so opposite from our very nature. “And you always fear what you don’t understand.” Carmone Falcone
    However, it is important to note that sometimes, though something is unnatural, we are not afraid. For example, it is basic human nature to survive. The people on the ferries did not kill each other. This is contrary to what many view as human nature. Yet it was positive, so we are not afraid of it. Therefore, I must amend my statement to we fear things that should be natural but aren’t and are negative things.
    *I know the Joker shows symptoms of anger, but I legitimately believe he fakes most of it in order to further his plan for chaos.
  2. The final scene, when Batman takes blame for the murders Dent committed, that was heroic. Batman took all the hate that would have been focused on Dent and carries it himself. As Gordon stated, “Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt him because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark knight.”
    However, Batman’s use of the sonar technology, that was villainous. Batman was redeemed by giving the responsibility to someone who didn’t want it and by destroying it afterward, but still. No one should have the power to watch that many people. That is what authoritarianism is all about, and no one (no groups of people either) is able to fight the desire for power that that would bring.
The Joker: 9.9
Two-Face: 6

I think the intent with which Batman used his technology counts for something. Literally, his only intent was to find the Joker. He didn't use it to spy on anyone or to benefit himself in any way, shape, or form. While it is most certainly unethical, I disagree that it is villainous, as villainy generally implies intent to do harm in some way. - Lenarama Lenarama Oct 17, 2011

Your explanation of something that is unnatural is cool because it is totally different than something that i would not have thought of. I also like your explanation of batman because i have a similar view.- Droybal Droybal Oct 18, 2011

I absolutely love the quote from Falcone. It's completely true, we do in fact fear the things we do not understand. As for Batman's villanousness, don't forget that he tried to save Rachael selfishly instead of Dent. Batman was incredibly bad in this movie, oddly enough. The phone hacking is a great point. - Roxypotter13 Roxypotter13 Oct 20, 2011

Week of October 18
  1. So far, all of our villains have had a clear hero to fight against. In this way, these heroes were the watchmen, and few, if any, had anyone to watch them which, in general, was okay because these heroes were literary figures and therefore able to handle it. However, in the real world all of us are watchmen. It is your responsibility, my responsibility, to monitor those who are in charge of protecting us. There should never be corruption in the armed forces or police brutality. Our justice system should be as close to flawless as we can make it. It is our job to make sure these are the case.
  2. Privateers are the bomb! Talk about using the system to your advantage. They did what they loved, something that was generally illegal, and got government support for it so they wouldn’t get hung. Go privateers!
    Congress has a right to give out Letters of Marque according to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Some were given out in the War of 1812.
  3. I can’t decide! I’ll try no.
    Intentions matter. Eddie Brock joined with the weird thing in a moment of anger and weakness. After this initial contact, he had virtually no chance to get rid of it. However, Cletus Cassidy knew the consequences of his decision. He simply used the symbios (sp?) to further his own villainous powers and desires.

Pirates: 5

Venom: 6.9

Carnage: 7.5

I coudnt decide either on who was more at fault or more to blame, I dont really know either of the two, but I said they were equally at fault. - Jamiea.book Jamiea.book Oct 24, 2011

I love your look on privateers! I also am really conflicted about which has more fault or blame. - Lenarama Lenarama Oct 25, 2011

Week of October 25

  1. Ho. Oh my. This is really, really difficult question. I’m going to say yes, some things are inherently evil. Anything destructive done to another person without their consent is wrong. For example, tripping an old lady just because you want to is wrong. Don’t do that. It’s mean.
    Except, it’s not that simple, is it? Technically, putting someone in jail, even criminals of the worst sort, would be destructive to them, though I’m sure we’d all agree that some people need to be locked up. So this is an exception, but who decides when we get to break this rule?
    Most people accept one should not lie. However, sometimes telling the truth causes so much pain. Do we lie then? What about when we forget to do our homework?
    Murder is wrong, yes? But what about killing for self-defense? Or killing to save more lives? Do we still consider this murder? What person is capable, nay willing, to make this choice? Could you? Imagine you had to kill someone in order to save your family. Would doing so make you evil?
    No one advocates torture. All of us (probably) are against it. Does this mean we shouldn’t use the information garnered by others through torture? But think about the lives we could save! Would you be willing to hurt another person to prevent the deaths of others? What about if it was only a little torture? You know, just a tich of sleep deprivation or small injuries that will heal?
    I don’t know if I answered to question. It’s too difficult.
  2. Both. I think he was born a wee bit off which then, due to his childhood, blossomed into full-blown psycopathy, but brilliant, powerful psycopathy. (Is that seriously not a word? Shut up Firefox.)
  3. Vampires of today are nice and sweet. We want bad boys who are socially acceptable to want. Great.
    Future vampires will have hovercrafts that much is easy to know. In addition, they will probably not eat animals, but instead will suck the blood of the wealthy. Yeah. On hovercrafts.

The Comedian: 7.6
Dr. Manhattan: 3
Rorschach: 6.7
Ozymandias: 7.3
Voldemort: 8.6

I just love all of your responses :). I loved your idea of what vampires will be like in the future (space vampires?). I also really liked your answer to the first question. - Lenarama Lenarama Oct 31, 2011

I very much enjoyed your answer to the first question. That one was also a bit difficult for me. I started writing from one perspective, then half way through completely changed my mind to another perspective. It is a really hard question, I'll give you that. But when I actually tried to think of something that was inherently evil, I couldn't think of anyone but Voldemort. - mlerussell mlerussell Nov 1, 2011

Hovercraft vampire! Back to the first question, do you think there are actions that are inherently "good"?
- tylerjames1992 tylerjames1992 Nov 1, 2011

To Tyler: I have literally been trying to think of inherently good actions, and as cliche as this is, all I can think of is love, which is sort of an action and sort of an emotion. I'm not only thinking of romantic love, but also the love in a family or between friends. This is something inherently good.

Week of November 1
  1. Personally, I have learned to focus on the villains in a story. I also think that in the beginning of this class, we saw children’s villain as simple, but I think through our discussions we have learned that villains are seldom black and white. It is important to discuss the villains in children’s stories because often the point of these stories is to introduce a child to what society values. This is a significant thing for us to realize. Along that same vein, the villains are what people fear most in its most basic form
  2. Good question. I think we’re fascinated by things we aren’t and can’t really be. Just as a society we are interested by famous people, because they live such glamorous lives that we can only imagine, we are also engrossed by gruesome things because we don’t experience them firsthand.
  3. There’s a simple reason to blame things on demons: no one can prove it! Someone may ask a criminal (or victim), “Why did you rob that bank?” If the perpertrator answers with “I was possessed!” well, there’s not a lot to be done about that is there? This was more true in times past, but it’s still worth a shot.

The Stepsisters: 1.7

Wolf: 6.6

Frau Gothel: 5

Do you mean that a "demon" is more like an insanity plea? A free card to get out of your punishment? I think this is very possible, people often times don't want to accept the consequences of their actions.
- tylerjames1992 tylerjames1992 Nov 8, 2011

I really liked your answer to the first question. I agree with your point that children's stories show us the values of society. - Lenarama Lenarama Nov 8, 2011

Week of November 8, 2011
  1. Peter had many characteristics of what we consider villainous: heartless, impulsive, cruel (though he is cruel without comprehension), arrogant, and murderous. His heartlessness is evident in how quickly he forgets anyone and anything. Peter is never able to form a connection lasting enough to survive his forgetfulness. He is easily bored by thing, and as such he requires constant adventure. Peter is cruel in how he treats the other boys. When he senses a boy is growing up he does all he can to stop it. Peter’s arrogance is evident in everything he does, and he thoroughly enjoys killing pirates and “redskins.”
  2. No. Snape was not a villain. He was the reason Harry lived and Voldemort was defeated. What villainous things did he do? He was cruel to Harry, told Voldemort the prophecy and joined the Death Eaters of his own free will. However, his cruelty to Harry was based purely on the fact Snape was a double agent; it was imperative that he remain as far above reproach from another Death Eater’s perspective as possible. This also explains why he treated Draco so well, though there is plenty of speculation that Snape and Lucius Malfoy were good friends and even that Snape was Draco’s godfather. As for the final two evil things Snape did, let us first address Snape joining the Death Eaters, a very bad group of folks. Remember, Snape had had an awful childhood. He was abused, probably mentally and physically, in addition to being neglected by his cruel muggle father. When he finally reached Hogwarts he was picked on from the onset by James and the Mauraders (who were considered by many to be the epitomes of Gryffindor house and all it stands for). His first ever acceptance by anyone other than Lily (who later rejected him) was by those we would consider baby Death Eaters. Also, he seems to have always had a need to prove himself, something Voldemort obviously would have taken advantage of. What other options did he have but to join with those who had first, and the only people who had ever, reached out to him and accepted him? As to Snape telling Voldemort the prophecy, he was simply being a good little soldier. It was war. Yes Voldemort was evil and all that jazz, but Snape wasn’t doing anything out of the ordinary, it’s just that the consequences were far worse than he imagined.
    The strongest power in Jo’s world is love. Snape loved Lily. He really, truly loved her. This fact alone helps redeem him greatly. But even beyond that, Snape worked for 17 years trying to protect Harry and defeat Voldemort and in doing so atone himself. For four of those years he was working as a double agent, which is probably one of the most difficult things a person could ever do. Snape did everything Dumbledore asked of him, even when Dumbledore told Snape to kill him (which was awful, poor Snape, Dumbledore was the closest thing he ever had to a father figure!). Snape did all of this with no thanks. None. Everyone hated him and no one trusted him, not even those on Voldemort’s side.
    Okay. I have to stop now. I wrote a crazy amount as it is.
  3. Uh… no. Maybe. I guess. It’s nice that he got nice in the end, but he did try to rape Buffy, which I personally think is unforgivable. So no.

Peter Pan: 2
Captain Hook: 4
Professor Snape: 0.4
Spike: 6?

I like your point on love being very important throughout HP. It makes me think that the mere fact that Snape COULD love proves that he isn't evil. You don't see a whole lot of lovin' coming from the villains of the series! - mlerussell mlerussell Nov 10, 2011

I agree with you that Snape was not a villain. But you did state that cruelty was a villianous characteristic for Peter??? But I still agree with you that he's not a villain and Peter was cruel.
- jserru jserru Nov 12, 2011JaclynSerru

I love that you wrote a crazy amount for the second question. I know you were itching to defend snape in class. Completely agree with everything you said, couldn't have said it better myself.- lduran02 lduran02 Nov 14, 2011

I love the passion you put behind your response to if snape is a villain or not, you show that you know a lot about snape and the story and give lots of good examples. You have me convinced he is not a villain. - Jamiea.book Jamiea.book Nov 15, 2011

Your description of Peter as a villain is very comprehensive. It seems that he has an unnatural badness about him because of his inability to grow up. He can accept the responsibilities that the lost boys need in a leader. I also agree with both of your opinions of Snape and Spike..- Droybal Droybal Nov 15, 2011

I just love your answer about Snape :) - Lenarama Lenarama Nov 15, 2011

Week of November 22
  1. There is no way to prove this conclusively. It is virtually impossible to prove a lack of manipulation. Any steps Ender could possibly attempt in order to prove the validity of what the Buggers had communicated to him could easily be twisted by humans who want to disagree. I believe that while Ender may someday try and prove the innocence of the Buggers, it will not be accepted, at least not until long after Ender is gone. Such is the nature of humanity, to fully vilify our enemies and to cling to that perception long after evidence has been presented to the contrary. Unfortunately, I don’t think that Ender will ever tell the truth because he will always be waiting for the proper moment which will never arise.
  2. A holy man? Definitely not. An intelligent, psycho-nut job with an uncanny knack for survival? Most assuredly. I have no idea how he was able to help Alexi with his hemophilia or how he was able to ‘heal’ others, but it was not through supernatural means.
  3. Because it’s Disney and they don’t care about being accurate as long as it sells movies and perpetrates their worldview.
    Wow. That was cynical, and on Thanksgiving no less! I’ll try again.
    Most people view Hades as the mean Greek god, so it was simpler to portray him as people expected instead of trying to educate the populous on Greek myths.
Human Nature: 6.3

Peter Wiggin: 5

Rasputin: 7.3

Hades: 3

I agree with you that there really would not be a good time for Ender to tell the truth, and people would do anything to not believe the truth. How do you tell people that they have been believing in such a huge lie for so long? It wouldn't go over well, so who knows if he ever would tell the truth. Oh, and I had a feeling you would use a picture of Alan Rickman for Rasputin, seeing how disgusting the real Rasputin was. - reinada reinada Nov 27, 2011Reina

I agree with your point that Ender will probably never tell the truth. I also agree with your stance on Rasputin. There's no way he was a holy man of any kind. Finally, I agree with your cynical yet true take on Disney. - Lenarama Lenarama Nov 29, 2011
Yay for cynics! Boo to lazy Disney writers!- lduran02 lduran02 Dec 6, 2011
Week of November 29
  1. The first villain is Prince Humperdink. He had planned to murder Buttercup and frame his country’s enemies in order to start a war. Both parts of that plan are villainous, but we are mostly concerned with his relationship with/ desire to murder Buttercup. He pretended to car about her, which is odd because she openly admitted she didn’t love him. Anyway, the most important part is how Humperdink reflects Wesley’s character and actions. Wesley had a short period of duplicity and other than that he was a man of his word. On the other hand, Humperdink was conniving and deceitful. In addition, Wesley’s bravery was a much lauded trait while, as was shown by his response to Wesley’s bluff about “to the pain,” Humperdink’s cowardice was one of his most visible attributes.
    Secondly, there was Tyrone. He is, in some ways, a scarier villain due to the fact that he enjoys the pain of others. His greed, another of his awful traits, resulted in him murdering Inigo’s father, but Tyrone’s sadism made him shame Inigo and leave him alive. Luckily, this comes back and results in Tyrone’s defeat. Yippee! Tyrone, like Humperdink, was a coward. That is one trait that is completely unacceptable in the Princess Bride. Inigo was brave and determined.
    Lastly, Buttercup was a villain due to her complete uselessness. Okay, not a villain, but really? What did she actually ever do?
  2. Wesley does pick up some villainy, too much, I think. When he was fighting with Buttercup before he had revealed himself, he almost hit her and threatened that he would if she misspoke again. I don’t care who you are, that’s wrong.
    Anyway, I’m not sure his villainy ever helped him, exept when he killed the short guy (what’s his name?) in the beginning. However, that was just conniving and that’s not necessarily a bad trait. It was his good guy-ness that actually helped him out: bravery, true love, fairness, and wit.
Humperdink: 5

Tyrone: 6.8

Buttercup: 0.2

I like your case for Buttercup as a villain. Also, the quote was from She's the Man :) - Lenarama Lenarama Dec 1, 2011
So, I like your idea about Tyrone's villainy coming back to bite him in the butt. If he hadn't underestimated Inigo, and hadn't liked pain so much, he would've just killed him. But instead, he wanted to let Inigo die slowly, and that screwed him over. The Cicilian's name is Vizzini, btw. :) - mlerussell mlerussell Dec 3, 2011

Lecture Time!!!

1. August 28 (Sun), 3:00 pm Corruption: a Global Overview
I had really high hope for this. The speaker, Laura Sherman, was from Transparency International, which is a global organization devoted to reducing corruption in governments. She was also a lawyer, so inexplicably I though she would be a great orator. Sadly, I learned very little and was uninterested in her presentation due to the fact that she simply read a slideshow :(
2. October 27 (Thur), 7:30 pm Zombie Speaker!
What did I learn from Matt Mogk? I want to die in the initial part of an apocalypse. Other than that, I learned what weapons are best against zombies (bludgeoning), how likely a zombie problem is (sort of, if there's ever a psycho-billionaire who wants to develop a drug), and what types of zombies there are (fast and slow).
3. December 1, UNM Art Museum
There was a Warhol print!! Yeah!! I love Warhol. The art museum had Electric Chair (I forgot which number). It was great. Andy Warhol is my favorite artist. In addition to this, we saw a giant sculpture that I have no idea what it was, lots of really great photography (and one really weird photo) of American portraits, and religious artwork. Oh, and an odd video that showed nothing but four metronomes.