Category: Communication

Dear Ms Samantha Taylor,

I have recently read your article ‘Clive Thompson says the digital age is making teenagers uniquely shallow’, and I support and agree with your idea to an extent. Your idea of these men’s claims might be true to an extent of some teens but not representative for the entire of us youth. I am writing this letter because I most importantly feel that the argument is irrelevant, as adults can not really know how it feels to be in the position of a teen in this age, as this current youth generation has changed immensely compared to some other our mothers and fathers generation. I also think that I should express my view points, and as a 16 year old teenager can relate more to the reality of if this is true between me and my fellow peers. I feel that it is essential and necessary that I oppose such wicked claims against us teenagers.

Firstly, I do not agree that too much socialising online between teenagers has created a generation who can’t relate face to face. We now live in a society in which we teenagers are highly exposed to social networks which lead to meeting new people, but this does not mean the destruction of real life association between teens. I believe that socialising online is a positive way to encourage us youth in engaging with others, especially for those who suffer from being shy. These are difficulties that socialising online has the potential to conquer therefore should be encouraged. As a 16 year old teenager myself living in south London, I believe that I have adopted social networking as a way in which to build confidence in communicating with people face to face. I can vouch that this technique works and am sure others would agree with this statement. Some people are socially awkward and freeze when encountering face to face conversations, so social networking is the key towards building confidence for some. Furthermore, some suffer social communication difficulties such as autism which brings the challenge of speaking publicly. Do you want to live in a world in which your child suffers from social awkwardness ? Do you want us youth who shall be leaders and politicians of this world one day to be restricted of being able to socialise properly? Limited of confidence ? That’s something I believe Clive Thompson and any other agreeing adults should think about.

In addition, it was stated by Clive Thompson that ‘All those countless hours glued to Facebook has turned teenagers into screen – enslaved social inadequates’. I counter this statement and fully disagree with it. I can say in confidence that as a user of Facebook myself I have not been subdued from engaging in any social activity. I use Facebook everyday yet I have undertaken things such as leadership courses and even run my own youtube channel, in which I perform my own music on the streets of London and interview random people for their opinions afterwards.  Despite this, it is not to say that everyone is like me and can control their addiction towards social networking, but this is a prime example of how social networking has encouraged me and many other teenagers in being bold when communicating with others.

In conclusion, I strongly recommend that we go about this by allowing us teenagers to continue to use these social networks as it brings out a more bold and enthusiastic side towards us. Of course too much social networking can lead to being enslaved social inadequates and I agree with that, but this is where the jobs of parents come in. Parents are responsible for the hours spent by their kids on social networking and what they are doing on it, however social networking is a seed of communication planted in humans as a whole’ life, used for productive things such as sharing information, keeping up to date with world interest, keeping in contact with family in any part of the world. I hope you take on board my opinions shared in this letter and act accordingly.

Your Sincerely, David Tayo

In this essay, I will be analysing the language and structure presented within Frankenstein and The Tempest, and I will compare the ways in which monstrosity is presented in both books. Monstrosity is explored in various ways in different contexts on both books and many quotes are given to support these ideas. The definition of monstrosity is a thing which is outrageously evil or wrong.

The definition of social context is ‘the immediate physical and social setting in which people live or in which something happens or develops.’ It also includes ‘the culture that the individual was educated or lives in, and the people and institutions with whom they interact.’ In Frankenstein, the social context of this book involves the ‘aldini experiment’ which was a real experiment which took place in January 1803 in London. This event consisted the dead body of the murderer George Forster being taken to the Royal College of Surgeons, and being attempted to return the corpse to life. In the end, ‘as Aldini probed Forster’s rectrum, causing his clenched fist to punch the air, as if in fury, his legs to kick and his back to arch violently. It is clear that Mary Shelley grabbed a direct influence from this experiment in order to come up which the idea of writing this book. The Tempest on the other hand, examples of the book and play’s social context are in ‘The King’s Men” play where it was performed both at the outdoor Globe Theatre and the indoor Blackfriars Theatre and their plays would have had to work in either venue. Therefore, much dramatic effect was left up to the minds of the audience. A similar situation is given in The Tempest play when in Act II, scene i Gonzalo, Sebastian, and Antonio argue about whether the island is beautiful or barren. The bareness of the stage would have allowed either option to be possible in the audience’s mind at any given moment.

The first piece I am going to analyse is extract A : volume 2, chapter 8 from Frankenstein. In this extract, the death of Victor’s dear friend William happens and when exploring this extract we can identify strong and powerful language that adds to the equation of monstrosity. When the unnamed monster and William encounter each other, the monster thinks that William has yet to mature into the world’s aspects and is still of a baby mentality. In this case, the monster decides to ‘seize’ William, and ‘educate’ him as a ‘friend and companion’ so that the monster should ‘not be so desolate in this peopled earth’. When looking at the language associated in these sentences, we can see that the monster has used the word ‘companion’. The definition of this word is ‘a person with whom one spends a lot of time or travels with’. This is much different than that of a prisoner, and I believe the reason Mary Shelley has used this word is to indicate that the monster did not have any bad intentions of seizing young William. If anything, attempted to develop a friendship between the two in hope of survival in this cruel retched world, which had rejected his presence. In my opinion, I don’t believe the idea of monstrosity lies only upon the obvious idea of the ‘monster’s physical appearance’. William’s disgust towards the presence of the monster is also a example of monstrosity, and an example of this is in his reaction in the extract where it says “I seized on the boy as he passed, and drew him towards me. As soon as he beheld my form, he placed his hands before his eyes, and uttered a shrill scream”. The language in this sentence is significant because it proves that monstrosity is not only dedicated towards physical appearance but

Dear Ms Samantha Taylor,

I have recently read your article in the Edutronic newspaper named ‘Clive Thompson says the digital age is making teenagers uniquely shallow’, and I support and agree with your idea to an extent. I am writing this letter because I feel that I also should express my view points, and as a 16 year old teenager can correlate more to the reality of if this is true to me and my fellow peers. I feel that it is essential and necessary that I oppose such wicked claims against us teenagers.

In this essay, I will be analysing the language and structure presented within Frankenstein and The Tempest, and I will compare the ways in which monstrosity is presented in both books. Monstrosity is explored in various ways in different contexts on both books and many quotes are given to support these ideas. The definition of monstrosity is a thing which is outrageously evil or wrong.

The definition of social context is ‘the immediate physical and social setting in which people live or in which something happens or develops.’ It also includes ‘the culture that the individual was educated or lives in, and the people and institutions with whom they interact.’ In Frankenstein, the social context of this book involves the ‘aldini experiment’ which was a real experiment which took place in January 1803 in London. This event consisted the dead body of the murderer George Forster being taken to the Royal College of Surgeons, and being attempted to return the corpse to life. In the end, ‘as Aldini probed Forster’s rectrum, causing his clenched fist to punch the air, as if in fury, his legs to kick and his back to arch violently. It is clear that Mary Shelley grabbed a direct influence from this experiment in order to come up which the idea of writing this book. The Tempest on the other hand, examples of the book and play’s social context are in ‘The King’s Men” play where it was performed both at the outdoor Globe Theatre and the indoor Blackfriars Theatre and their plays would have had to work in either venue. Therefore, much dramatic effect was left up to the minds of the audience. A similar situation is given in The Tempest play when in Act II, scene i Gonzalo, Sebastian, and Antonio argue about whether the island is beautiful or barren. The bareness of the stage would have allowed either option to be possible in the audience’s mind at any given moment.

The first piece I am going to analyse is a extract from Frankenstein, chapter 5. When looking at the monster’s physical appearance, Victor Frankenstein describes his first encounter with the monster. In this he says “I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open. His yellow skin. A more horrid contrast with his watery eyes.” When looking at this piece we can see that

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen,

It has come to the attention of the modern world, that early teenagers feel should be obliged and embraced with the power to be allowed to work, in other words receive their National Insurance number from the age of fifteen. This issue has been raised, but the question is, should teenagers be allowed to get their National Insurance number from the age of fifteen? And if this does happen, what effect will this have? My piece will be evaluating and concluding why teenagers feel like this and what should be done about it.

According to fifteen year old DAVID TAYO from London who just turned fifteen this September gone by, he wants teenagers to work at 15 years old. On Twitter, he tweeted “I feel I have reached the appropriate age in which I feel I should acquire the key to working. By this age we are all mature and responsible enough” ‘hashtag’ freedom. My point of view is that we adults who are more experienced in knowing how the world out here works, and with this we should set our younger ones on the right path avoiding all conflict. We can see that this is one teenager who is just not satisfied and wants change as soon as possible. The benefits of allowing children to work as such a young age are that it prepares them for the real world, and helps not generate the idea that the world is not easy to survive in. During the past the country have been quick to call children of very young ages to work in dangerous occupations such as ‘chimney cleaners’ or ‘factory workers’, so why not give them the chance to work in safe jobs now where they will be monitored and watched and guided. Fifteen year old DAVID TAYO has mentioned the word “freedom”. The definition of freedom means “the state of not being imprisoned or enslaved” so surely it is bad that a fifteenth year old feels enslaved. Our great country stands and fights against free right that we tackled in all past years, and restricting a child of this stands against this. Now for a fifteen year old to be using this word in something he wants, he is clearly passionate and expressing his feelings.

Soon we will see teenagers rebelling against the government if we do not act against teen requirements. I am fully supporting that teens should be able to get their National Insurance number at the age of 15. At that age, youths are highly responsible and have to do work experience anyway, so why not grant them this great privilege. The earlier a baby starts potty training, the earlier they know how to use a toilet, therefore the earlier a teenager learns the traits of being an adult/young adult, the more responsible they are by the time they hit a certain age.

I am confident you will agree when I say that the youths are the next line up of generation. We do not want our world damaged after all the years of hard work we have put in? We do not want our teenagers to develop hatred? We do not want our own to go against us. We do not want war of some sort? The world we live in currently is complex and complicated, in spite of this we should allow youths to work at 15. This is the prime age in which going violence, life problems, school encounters, so surely working is the way to keep them on the safe path. I can personally tell you that when I was younger there was things I wanted to say that I felt could make a good impact… but I was too scared to say. Is this what we want? Our children living in fear? Our younger ones who WILL be in our position one day to be living in fear?

Comparing all these things, I think that it is correct and safe to say that teenagers should be allowed to get their National Insurance number at the age of fifteen. Modern society has changed and youth has adapted to being part of the adult world from early. So why not reward them with just a bit of freedom, that’s the least they deserve.

Writing to Describe –

The screams of joy from the birds in the distance. The sheer flow of the river in the hub of this paradise land, filling the animals with a sense of happiness. There is no area of perfect tranquillity other than the grass filled path of ‘the apple tree’. Grass crawls up the lead to the Rocky Mountains. Surrounding the Garden of Eden is nothing but beautiful colourful miraculous flowers. Pink, yellow, orange, roses, daffodils, Lilly’s. Enticed by the queer buzzing of insects, a man standing in the middle of the garden takes a deep breath…nothing special but the smell of fresh air is acquired. This man goes by the name of Adam.

Adam is not alone. Walking towards in a quick pace but careful manner, his partner Eve arrives. Dressed nakedly, bright blond gold-like flourishing hair placed gently flowing along as low as the floor, following after like a flock to its master. Hazel eyes with a little spark in the middle like a diamond or star in the sky. On the other hand, Adam more like a boy than adult, hairless with straight black hair, black eyes, as pale as the base of penguins. There couldn’t be any creation more perfect than these of God.

The garden is filled with the sounds of nature’s beauty. All different animals gather to be fed. Elephants, Camels, Turtles, Tigers, Penguins, Zebras, Flamingos, Hyenas, Fish, Parrots, Doves, Swans. As the rainbow shadows brightly over the garden, it gently begins to fade. The time has come for the pair to pray. As they embark on this mystical journey to communicate with God, the entire garden is blessed with a holy presence as everyone, everything, every animal accepts and embraces the Holy Spirit. The feeling that nothing could be more peaceful and spiritual than this is spread around to all the opened hearts.

The next morning, sun blazing, trees blowing and celebrating a new day, the excitement of life itself, Eve has arisen and woken up before Adam. Adam not being able to find Eve in the sheer edges of the garden walks firmly, reluctant to go to the mist of the forbidden tree, where God told them they can’t eat from or certain doom and disaster. Entering the green pasture of where the apple tree stood in complete masculinity, leaves hanging onto the stick branches, connected to the perfect streamline trunk, Adam caught sight of Eve as she was piercing at the Sharpe red curved shape of the apples. “What are you doing here? Father banned us from being here ever!” asked Adam curiously. A fast bullet speed reply came back in an argumentive manner saying “That was a long time ago, Father won’t mind now.” “But…” Eve quickly interrupted. “It’s only an apple; look let me eat it first”.

When Adam saw that there were no instant reactions, he acted thoughtlessly and copied after taking a colossal bite, chewing violently, pieces of apple rapidly shooting out the side of his mouth. Immediately after the bad deed had been done, footsteps of thunder began. Closer it got, closer, closer… It was God. Adam and Eve quietly hid in shame, at the same time noticing that they were both naked. God said “Adam come out! Eve why do you hide?” The two came out in despair and astonishment at how their eyes had been opened. Eve said taking all responsibility “We disobeyed your will Father, we ate from the apple tree you told us not to feast from. The snake told me it was ok and I convinced Adam to take part in my actions”.

God looked at his creation, his children who he had given everything of the earth to, whom he so much loved, in disappointment and said “As a result of this, I have opened your blind naked eyes, and you will be cast out into the open of the world. Also, the whole generation of mankind will be doomed for all eternity.” Not knowing what to do, Adam and Eve walked out into the open of the Earth for the first time, on their own, taking on the responsibility of what was yet to come.