To Huit concerns...

The Lecture of Week 8 was by far the most interesting to date - aside from the fact I mucked up my paper almost straight away. I was just TOO KEEN to fill out those neat little boxes! Who can resist a clean, crisp piece of paper, especially when it is so ready to be ticked or crossed or filled out or sniffed? It's like putting on a shirt from the dryer or that you've just ironed when the temperature is not hot, but not heaps cold either. The temperature of one of those days where a pack of TimTams, 4 Instant Coffees and 100GB of musicals and rock operas would not go ashtray... I mean: astray.

I think that grammar and punctuation is marked far too harshly these days. At uni, at school, resumés, the list doesn't really go on that far but it sounds better if  I say 'the list goes on'. I think that we should be teaching children the basics of grammar and punctuation, all the rules and stipulations and hyphens and dashes and colons and such and then let them figure it out for themselves. Writing scripts, I tend to find myself speaking what I write before I write it. This then leads to me putting a large amount of commas in my texts and makes it hard for anyone else to read. But that is how I say therefore my brain thinks that is how it should read. A sentence, using a forced application of this trait, will end up, almost invariably, like this. Of course, that may be overexaggerated, but the point still, remains. (Just kidding). But I've had to tone down my comma usage, against my better judgement, and let the reader figure out where the natural breaks are themselves. It seems an alien idea, but therein lies the betterment of multiple interpretations of the same texts. I respect how grammar and punctuation change how a script reads, and sometimes what a sentence means. I think it's a real shame the internet is allowing all these people without the proper care or instruction to write willy-nilly, and forego the rules that their Grade 4 teachers spent so long attempting to instil. 

There has to be some happy medium between the two. A mix between the overzealousness of 'seasoned' teachers smacking knuckles of those students who risk a interrobang, or jot an extra comma or two and the lawlessness that Facebook, Twitter and this shitty site compliment and encourage.

And that shall be called justice, and like Judge Judy it will be served hot and ruthlessly. In a manner without ruth. Ruth always seems to get left out of a lot of cool things.

Apart from "ethics is subjectice" which we all of course knew already, not a lot of stuff was said or learnt in this lecture. A lot of talking happened but not much was actually said. 

I don't like Deontology or Teleology but rather, I think Virtue is a good means of determining ethics. I think that virtue is something that can't actually be taught, which this lecture so amply proved. I like virtue however, it has a sort of compromise system that appeals to me. Like I elucidated with my round about grammar tangent. And although I DID say this was the most interesting lecture yet, it was also the most infuriating. I can't stand the fact Australia is such a bureaucratic nanny state.

The only one I had a problem with is Outdoor 5. I mean I don't even know what is being advertised. Being overtly sexual for no overt reason is fairly stupid, and surely should be called into question. The rest, seem fine to me.

Like a bullet lodged in the upper spine but too close to the brain to operate, I'll have to leave it there.