Tuesday, July 24, 2007

   hercules reflection.... i find it really disturbing that i still use this site for my papers >>.
Peña, Paula Pia Perez
1-AB Communications
A
July 25, 2007
Ms. Rhoda Nicadao
Kathleen Go

Go the distance

“…And a voice keeps saying, this is where I’m meant to be
I’ll be there someday, I can go the distance
I will find my way, if I can be strong
I know ev’ry mile, will be worth my while
When I go the distance, I’ll be right where I belong…
…It might take a lifetime, but somehow I’ll see it through…
…But to look beyond the glory is the hardest part
For a hero’s strength is measured by his heart…
…I will search the world, I will face its’ harms
I don’t care how far, I can go the distance…”
– Go the distance by Michael Bolton, Official movie soundtrack of “Hercules”
Disney’s movie adaptation of the legend of the Grecian god presented the truth that the values of the ancient times still prevail. Animated characters showed divine beings with human emotions, thoughts and flaws.
Going beyond his god-like characteristics, Hercules was portrayed as a misfit child. He was struggling to be accepted but what he did not know was that he was made to stand out; he was made to be a hero.
The movie followed his process to prove that it is possible to become a hero from zero. He showed resilience and courage to face his true destiny and go the distance. He endured a lot to find his true niche in this world but it was all worth it for the recognition of ones true identity is priceless and truly precious.
I could relate to Hercules in the sense that I am still searching for my path. The present will provide me clues that will lead me to my path. It may seem like a terrible and agonizing search, but there will forever be hope. The promise of realizing what I am meant to be is the fuel of my search.
Aside from the inspiration I got from the hero, the trainer also inspired me. Philoctetes’ genius, forthrightness and nonchalant approach to troubles made me see the beauty of sarcasm and skepticism. He had a cynical heart; judging not by emotions but greatly from the present reality. Being a cynic made him think clear and focused. He believed in the hope of believing. He had to find even a small spark of hope to continue and pursue something.
He was a realist, though still a dreamer. He dreamed of something greater while simultaneously being contented of what is at present.
Training a zero to be hero was a very difficult task but he saw a spark of hope in Hercules and because of this he was inspired to become an inspiration.
Like Phil, I aspire to be inspired and inspire. I yearn for an opportunity where I could be able to touch a person’s life by just being me. The joy of knowing and realizing that I made a difference in the life of another is my greatest ambition.
Similar to Phil, I am a realist. I take life as what it is and look forward to whatever comes next. I “bask in the sun” and make the most of every minute I have.
It may seem puzzling but aside from my attitude of “living life by at the moment” I am also a proud OC (a person with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder). I feel a certain joy of putting order to objects. Although it may seem contradictory, being an OC made me relish reality. It made me see that life will never work out as what I want (or more likely organized) and intended it to be.
In life there will forever be pitfalls, conflicts sacrifices and decisions to be made. This was greatly exemplified in many scenes in the movie. One instance would be when Hercules started to journey to find his true self. He made a life decision. Putting truth to its nature of being a life decision, it has altered his life. He made a decision to leave his life with his adoptive parents to search for his identity. He faced a lot of trials but he must put up with it because it was his decision to do so. His actions and resilience gave justification to what Phil said about dreaming and giving up “[…dreams are for rookies]… no, kid, giving up [that] is for rookies…”
Another illustration of this was when he plunged to the whirlpool of death to save Meg. He sacrificed his mortality for the benefit of others (specifically the person he loves). He exhausted every effort to be truly selfless. Hercules had god-like strength but he aside from that he had a selfless heart and a giving love. “… a true hero isn’t measured by the size of his strength but by the strength of his heart…” and because of such an act (also partly because he lost his mortality) he regained his omniscience.
Songs similar to “Go the Distance” have been arranged to inspire many. The song “Win” by Brian McKnight shows the similar spirit of determination of the movie and the soundtrack. The chorus of the song summarized the essence of courage amidst all fears.
“…Never say die…
…I’ll never quit
I’ll never lay down
See I promised myself I would never let me down
So I’ll never give up
Never give in
Never let a ray of doubt slip in
And if I fall
I’ll never fade
I’ll just get up and try again
Never lose hope
Never lose faith
There’s much too much at stake
Upon myself I must depend
I’m not looking for a place ashore
I’m gonna win”
Courage is not merely measured by plunging into “war”. The dedication and responsibility of owing up to the tasks demanded of a person is the true measure of courage.
Never giving up, pushing all efforts to its limits and putting to heart all experiences, inspirations and learnings are the insights I got from the film. These will help me become not just a better student but also a better person.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Sunday, July 8, 2007

   es 12
Buenaventura, Patty
Jardin, Sam
Naredo, Eugenia
Peña, Pia July 9, 2007
Robinson, Victor ES 12 Section A Ms. Favis

1. Earth’s Total Landmass : 148.94 million sq km
Estimated World Population : 6.6 billion
Amount of area alloted for each individual : .00257 sq. km / 1.73 x 10 ^ -9 %
 Patty Buenaventura :
 122.5 / 10 = 11.25
 7.6 x 10 ^ -6 % of the earth’s total land area
 Sam Jardin :
 7.6 / 3 = 5.87
 3.9 x 10 ^ -6 % of the earth’s total land area
 Eugenia Naredo :
 6.0 / 7 = .86
 5.77 x 10 ^ -7 % of the earth’s total land area
 Pia Peña :
 7.7 / 4 = 1.93
 1.29 x 10 ^ -6 % of the earth’s total land area
 Victor Robinson :
 7.7 / 3 = 2.57
 1.72 x 10^ -6 of the earth’s total land area
 Based from the data above, we therefore conclude that we occupy more than the total amount allotted for each person in this world.

2. Patty Buenaventura has the biggest footprint and Pia Peña has the smallest footprint. The group deems that the number of people in the household plays a big part in determining a person’s ecological footprint.

3. Overall, the collated spreadsheets showed that Food, Services and Waste categories account for the highest estimate of consumption. Food and Services are necessary for survival because these goods are part of the basic needs of any individual; Food because it sustains life, Services assists human activities. Waste category is inevitable but highly unnecessary because it only contributes to the rubbish.

4. Sustainable development is the fulfillment of balance between human needs and protection of the environment. Our lifestyles are not sustainable because the combined data shows that aside from the normal consumption of Food and Services, Waste is also included in those that contributes to the highest result.

5. The best possible solution to make our lifestyles more sustainable is for us to rid ourselves of unnecessary consumption. By doing so, we use less of the earth’s resources; limiting ourselves to only what we need and lessen the production of waste.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Monday, February 19, 2007

   i dont have microsoft office!!!!! otaku members would have to bear with me... Ü
ENGLISH IV
31 February 20, 2007
Paula Pia P. Peña IV-3

The Genuine Burgis:
The creation of the modern burgis from the evolution of the traditional bourgeois


"In life there is only one thing constant... change..." – Anonymous

Through modern technology and the changing times, no burgis is a true and genuine burgis. The meaning and essence of the burgis has evolved together with the evolution of everything left on earth. What is a genuine burgis anyway? Has the value of being one depreciate as the times change?
The early and traditional view of the burgis originated from the French bourgeois. This sector composed of the middle class nobility. They were the merchants and traders of the 17th-18th century France. The early bourgeois were the part of society that dwelled between the nobility; the king and his court, and the proletarians; the servants and workers.
During the early middle ages, this silent majority entered the scene as a great economic force. They cleared the feudalist system. Through this the bourgeoisie reigned gradually as the ruling class of France. The bourgeoisie did not only uplift the social order, they transformed the norms of the old France. They contributed a great change in religion, civil rights and free trade; few of the many reforms that came from their intervention.
Although critics view them as materialistic and one-track minded they promoted these concepts. The most influential and controversial critic that the bourgeoisie encountered was Karl Marx. He pronounced that the ideology of the bourgeois was a sugarcoated way for their new social class to exploit the working class. Despite all the critisms, the bourgeois stood firm and established a newly defined France.
The bourgeois was not all bad. Yes, they did profit from their establishment of a new social order but the greater part of France also benefited. The proletarians gained a greater strength as the manpower of the new society. They served as the foundation of the new society, building the basics for people. They were liberated from serfdom and the corruption of the nobility. The bourgeois brought about their liberation. The new economic sector emerged as the liberator of the oppressed workers.
The cynical case of the bourgeois was left. The views of their presence and ideology were cleared off and the bourgeois emerge victorious. Through the years the bourgeois continued to transform society. They are the silent force that drives the nation, the middle class that now comprises the 48% of our world’s population.
Through the change in all fields of human life, currently the bourgeois is seen in a completely different perspective. No more are they the merchants and traders of the country; they are now the educated sector. They are the fresh "power" that could transform and uplift a greater scope of people.
I am a modern day burgis. Like the traditional bourgeois, I am learned. Being fortunately educated, I am aware of the capacity and responsibility of being a modern day burgis. I am fortunate to have a life that provides me my basic needs and simple wants. Because of this fortunate state, I have an obligation to the others that have fewer privileges than mine.
The modern day burgis and the traditional bourgeois have a lot in common. Like the traditional bourgeois, the modern day burgis have the power to transform society. Being part of the fortunate educated class, I have to use my talents to serve as the liberator of the oppressed. This role of the modern day burgis is similar to the role that the traditional bourgeois played for the serfs of the 17th-18-th century France.
The only difference between the roles of the traditional bourgeois and modern day burgis is their reaction to their times. The French bourgeois were the silent force that emerged from the French Revolution. On the other hand the modern day burgis are the strong yet stagnant force that could transform the nation by merely speaking-up.
As part of the modern day burgis, I must speak-up and be heard for through it I could use the stagnant force that lies within me. A force that could change the world.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Sunday, February 18, 2007

english paper
Flaubert, who denounced its banality and mercenary aspirations. The earliest recorded pejorative uses of the term "bourgeois" are associated with aristocratic contempt for the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie. Successful embourgeoisement typically meant being able to retire and live on invested income.
With the expansion of commerce, trade, and the market economy, the bourgeoisie grew in size, influence, and power. In all industrialized countries, the aristocracy either faded away slowly or found itself overthrown by a bourgeois revolution. Thus, the bourgeoisie rose to the top of the social hierarchy. This, coupled with the advances of industry, resulted in the birth of an entirely new lower class, the proletariat or working class. Increasingly, criticisms of the bourgeoisie began to come from below.
The Marxist view
One of the most influential of the aforementioned criticisms came from Karl Marx, who attacked bourgeois political theory and its view of civil society and culture for believing these concepts and institutions to be universally true; in Marx's view, these concepts were only the ideology of the bourgeoisie as a new ruling class, which sought to reshape society after its own image.
Marxism defines the bourgeoisie as the social class which obtains income from ownership or trade in capital assets, or from commercial activities such as the buying and selling of commodities, wares, and services. In medieval times, the bourgeois was typically a self-employed proprietor, small employer, entrepreneur, banker, or merchant. In industrial capitalism, on the other hand, the bourgeoisie becomes the ruling class - which means it also owns the bulk of the means of production (land, factories, offices, capital, resources). This enables it to employ and exploit the work of a large mass of wage workers (the working class), also known as the industrial middle class, who have no other means of livelihood than to sell their labour to property owners.
Marx distinguished between "functioning capitalists" actually managing enterprises, and others mereley earning property rents or interest-income from financial assets or real estate ('rentiers').
Marxism sees the proletariat (wage laborers) and bourgeoisie as directly waging an ongoing class struggle, in that capitalists exploit workers and workers try to resist exploitation. This exploitation takes place as follows: the workers, who own no means of production of their own, must seek employment in order to make a living. They get hired by a capitalist and work for him, producing some sort of goods or services. These goods or services then become the property of the capitalist, who sells them and gets a certain amount of money in exchange. Part of this money is used to pay workers' wages, another part is used to pay production costs, and a third part is kept by the capitalist in the form of profit (or surplus value). Thus the capitalist can earn money (profit) from the work of his employees without actually doing any work, or in excess of his own work. Marxists argue that new wealth is created through work; therefore, if someone gains wealth that he did not work for, then someone else works and does not receive the full wealth created by his work. In other words, that "someone else" is exploited. Thus, Marxists argue that capitalists make a profit by exploiting workers.
In the rhetoric of some Communist parties, "bourgeois" is sometimes used as an insult, and those who are perceived to collaborate with the bourgeoisie are called its lackeys. Marx himself primarily used the term "bourgeois", with or without sarcasm, as an objective description of a social class and of a lifestyle based on ownership of private capital, not as a pejorative. He commended the industriousness of the bourgeoisie, but criticised it for its moral hypocrisy. This attitude is shown most clearly in the Communist Manifesto.
In the view of some 20th century Marxist currents, the nomenklatura or lower state bureaucrats in "communist states" were or are a state bourgeoisie presiding over a system of state capitalism. To anarchists, all prominent members, functionaries and leaders of any kind of state are part of this state bourgeoisie. According to these interpretations, the bourgeoisie is composed of any individuals who have exclusive control over the means of production, regardless of whether this control comes in the form of private ownership or state power.
ISA PA
In the original French, a bourgeois was originally merely a free inhabitant of a bourg, or town. Through a natural evolution it became the label for members of the property-owning class, then of the middle class. As an adjective it is used with contempt by bohemians and Marxists to label conservatives whose views are not sufficiently revolutionary. The class made up of bourgeois (which is both the singular and the plural form) is the bourgeoisie. Shaky spellers are prone to leave out the E from the middle because “eoi” is not a natural combination in English; but these words have remarkably enough retained their French pronunciation: boorzhwah and boorzhwazee. The feminine form, “bourgeoise,” is rarely encountered in English.
ETO PA

bourgeois
1564, "of the Fr. middle class," from Fr., from O.Fr. burgeis "town dweller" (as distinct from "peasant"), from borc "town, village," from Frank. *burg (see borough). Sense of "socially or aesthetically conventional" is from 1764; in communist and socialist writing, "a capitalist" (1883). Bourgeoisie (n.) "middle class" is first recorded 1707.
"It is better to be a good ordinary bourgeois than a bad ordinary bohemian." [Aldous Huxley, 1930]
bourgeois. (n.d.). Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bourgeois

bourgeois

adjective
1. (according to Marxist thought) being of the property-owning class and exploitive of the working class
2. conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality"
3. belonging to the middle class

noun
1. a capitalist who engages in industrial commercial enterprise [syn: businessperson]
2. a member of the middle class


MARAMI PA


1. a member of the middle class.

2. a person whose political, economic, and social opinions are believed to be determined mainly by concern for property values and conventional respectability.

3. a shopkeeper or merchant.
–adjective

4. belonging to, characteristic of, or consisting of the middle class.

5. conventional; middle-class.

6. dominated or characterized by materialistic pursuits or concerns.

bourgeois. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Retrieved February 18, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bourgeois

Comments (0) | Permalink

Monday, October 23, 2006

   iam back!
got spare time from my busy hectic stressful crammed jam-packed sked as a senior in my prestigously demanding school!

its been more than 2 months of not ltting out my stuffies!

my thoughts have been somehow cleared from our class' retreat in baguio (uyy, naalala ng mga taong nagpunta don! Ü)... ive now deeply felt that iam not just a spec,... iam a loved spec and that makes all the more difference...

been turdy lately... havent been doing well in my academics hoping that my psychotic dad would not disown me if i fail... Ü

aloha for now... Ü

its been so long, and ive really missed my felined site... still with great gratitude to Xiyouji... Ü
Comments (0) | Permalink

» Archives