Hi,
During the National Day Parade, cameras caught MP Penny Low looking down at her mobile phone while everyone else was singing the National Anthem. Further controversies were made when MediaCorp censored this part when they screened the replay of the parade one day later. Therefore, many people questioned the PAP's credibility and are losing faith in the party.
In my opinion, I think that it is definitely impossible that MP Penny Low is not to blame for the incident. She looked at her mobile phone during the singing of the National Anthem, which is obviously a sign of utter disrespect to the nation. The National Anthem is supposed to be sung solemnly and with full focus on the flag. However, her actions were contrary to these customs and made herself a bad role model for younger generations. Now, younger generations can use her as an excuse to look at their mobile phones while attending lectures or when someone is talking to them. As an MP, MP Penny Low should have known that all eyes were on her. Her job was to be a leader and I am sure that many people will lose their trust in her leadership abilities after this incident. Therefore, I feel quite disappointed with her actions.
However, MP Penny Low apologized to the media one day later and gave the reason that she was too excited over the parade and decided to post her feelings on Facebook. I feel that her act of apology was good because it should be the right way to go and showed that she was willing to confess her mistake in public. I also think that MediaCorp did the right thing by censoring that part because there is absolutely no reason to show it once again on television, since she has already apologized. However, her reasons make me doubt whether her apology was really sincere. I mean, of all times, posting a Facebook post during the singing of the National Anthem? Why can't she post that afterwards? I looked at her Facebook profile and discovered that she posted a picture of the fireworks at 8.00pm. I am not so sure when the National Anthem was sung so I cannot make a final conclusion.
In my opinion, I think that this incident just another porthole that distances the relationship between PAP and the citizens of Singapore. I hope that the MPs will learn from this incident and act according to how they should behave. I also hope that the citizens of Singapore will be forgiving so that we can enjoy peace in Singapore. Anyway, National Day is supposed to be a day of celebration, so why let this small matter sour the festive mood? However, if only MP Penny Low had exercised a bit of self-control and thought before she acted, this incident would not even happen in the first place.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Foreigners
Hi,
Recently, there has been a lot of unrest among Singaporeans saying that there are too many foreigners who have immigrated to Singapore, because they take away privileges that should belong to "true Singaporeans". I would like to express my views on this issue and suggest some initiatives that Singapore can take.
There are two types of foreigners in Singapore: foreign talent and foreign workers. Foreign talents are those that are highly-skilled and have the capability to work in white-collar jobs. On the other hand, foreign workers are foreigners who take up jobs that are unwanted, like construction workers and domestic helpers. Nowadays, more and more foreign workers are entering Singapore to find jobs to provide for their families back home. The same goes for foreign talent. This has resulted in the problem of a rapid population growth and puts a lot of strain on Singapore's already limited resources. For example, the public transports are now very packed during peak hours and almost every cabin has at least one foreigner getting ready to go to work. Some Singaporeans also accuse foreigners of bringing their poor hygiene standards into Singapore ad taking up jobs that Singaporeans are capable of doing, which worsens the unemployment rate. As time goes by, some foreigners also decide to stay here for good and buy housing units, which further drives up property prices. The most important problem that Singaporeans point out is that Singapore will lose its national identity and they do not feel proud to be Singaporeans with this huge influx of foreginers. As such, foreigners are targeted, but foreign talents tend to be victimised more than foreign workers.
In my opinion, I feel that this huge influx of immigrants is definitely a problem for Singapore because I agree that many of them take up our jobs, houses and identity. I just have to step out of my front door to see the huge extent of this influx. Out of four units on the floor that I am living in, half of them are owned by families who immigrated from China. However, I have to say that it is a stereotype to say that foreigners have lousier hygiene standards compared to us. We need to also look on the bright side of the matter and see how foreigners contribute to our economic sector. For example, look at Aleksander Duric, Shi Jiayi, Qiu Li, Mustafic Fahrudin and Daniel Bennett. They were all foreigners once but they toiled their hearts out to allow Singapore to enter the 3rd round of the World Cup qualifiers. Furthermore, since the foreigners are already here, it would be very cruel to send them back and Singaporeans will aggravate the situation by creating tension between "true" and "foreign" Singaporeans. Therefore, I think everyone has a role to play to minimise the negative effects of the influx of foreigners and instead use this to our advantage.
Firstly, I think that the government should enforce stricter laws on immigration to Singapore because we need to curb the number of people coming in. The government should also encourage companies to hire locals first, before considering foreigners to join the company. On a community level, I think that organisations should organise some activities for locals and foreigners to interact so that Singaporeans can understand the foreigners' situations, which will aid in promoting social cohesion. Finally, I hope that individuals can become more tolerant and understanding towards these foreigners and recognise their contributions, just like how I respect the construction workers for their silent enduring of the hard work that they do.
In conclusion, I think that the influx of foreign workers is a serious problem that needs to be resolved as soon as possible. However, things can be done to bring out the potential of these foreigners.
Recently, there has been a lot of unrest among Singaporeans saying that there are too many foreigners who have immigrated to Singapore, because they take away privileges that should belong to "true Singaporeans". I would like to express my views on this issue and suggest some initiatives that Singapore can take.
There are two types of foreigners in Singapore: foreign talent and foreign workers. Foreign talents are those that are highly-skilled and have the capability to work in white-collar jobs. On the other hand, foreign workers are foreigners who take up jobs that are unwanted, like construction workers and domestic helpers. Nowadays, more and more foreign workers are entering Singapore to find jobs to provide for their families back home. The same goes for foreign talent. This has resulted in the problem of a rapid population growth and puts a lot of strain on Singapore's already limited resources. For example, the public transports are now very packed during peak hours and almost every cabin has at least one foreigner getting ready to go to work. Some Singaporeans also accuse foreigners of bringing their poor hygiene standards into Singapore ad taking up jobs that Singaporeans are capable of doing, which worsens the unemployment rate. As time goes by, some foreigners also decide to stay here for good and buy housing units, which further drives up property prices. The most important problem that Singaporeans point out is that Singapore will lose its national identity and they do not feel proud to be Singaporeans with this huge influx of foreginers. As such, foreigners are targeted, but foreign talents tend to be victimised more than foreign workers.
In my opinion, I feel that this huge influx of immigrants is definitely a problem for Singapore because I agree that many of them take up our jobs, houses and identity. I just have to step out of my front door to see the huge extent of this influx. Out of four units on the floor that I am living in, half of them are owned by families who immigrated from China. However, I have to say that it is a stereotype to say that foreigners have lousier hygiene standards compared to us. We need to also look on the bright side of the matter and see how foreigners contribute to our economic sector. For example, look at Aleksander Duric, Shi Jiayi, Qiu Li, Mustafic Fahrudin and Daniel Bennett. They were all foreigners once but they toiled their hearts out to allow Singapore to enter the 3rd round of the World Cup qualifiers. Furthermore, since the foreigners are already here, it would be very cruel to send them back and Singaporeans will aggravate the situation by creating tension between "true" and "foreign" Singaporeans. Therefore, I think everyone has a role to play to minimise the negative effects of the influx of foreigners and instead use this to our advantage.
Firstly, I think that the government should enforce stricter laws on immigration to Singapore because we need to curb the number of people coming in. The government should also encourage companies to hire locals first, before considering foreigners to join the company. On a community level, I think that organisations should organise some activities for locals and foreigners to interact so that Singaporeans can understand the foreigners' situations, which will aid in promoting social cohesion. Finally, I hope that individuals can become more tolerant and understanding towards these foreigners and recognise their contributions, just like how I respect the construction workers for their silent enduring of the hard work that they do.
In conclusion, I think that the influx of foreign workers is a serious problem that needs to be resolved as soon as possible. However, things can be done to bring out the potential of these foreigners.
Kinship
Hi,
Recently, after watching many TV dramas, reading news articles and books, I realised that there are many families with relationship problems. Therefore, I would like to explain the importance of kinship and how relationships affect our lives directly.
There are many cases of kinship problems in the world. For example, in the book "The Merchant of Venice", there were arguments between Jessica and her father, Shylock, because they had differing principles in life and could not see eye to eye over life matters. Therefore, possibly out of frustration with her father, Jessica decided to leave her father for good and become a Christian, contrary to her father's ways, probably in a bid to spite him. I also watched a Hong Kong drama entitled "Moonlight Resonance", which centered its plot around kinship. There were many quarrels among family members, mainly because of monetary issues. Finally, in real life, there was a recent case a few years ago in 2008, where a multi-millionaire died in 2001. His three children had expected the inheritance to be split equally among the three children, however, they were taken aback when the inheritance was all given to the only son, leaving the two daughters with nothing. Therefore, the siblings decided to go to court to fight over $14 million. Thus, from all these three examples, we can see that kinship problems can be derived from differing viewpoints and more importantly, money!
It is very sad to see that many relatives fight over such trivial issues. It definitely shows that man is fallible to temptations of the world, such as money. Is money really more important than kinship? Kinship is for life, but money can be lost and won in just over a matter of days! Thus, I do not know why relatives can make up a big fuss and are willing to sacrifice their many years of kinship just to get benefits for themselves! Family members are very important to us, because they can support, help, encourage and care for us. They play a big role in determining our happiness in life and ensure that we are not lonely. In my opinion, we should always appreciate and treasure our family members and not wait until a bad thing happens that we start to regret. Therefore, we need to treat each other properly and show love to our relatives.
In conclusion, I hope that all kinship problems will be eradicated in this world and that everyone will be aware of the importance of relationships.
Recently, after watching many TV dramas, reading news articles and books, I realised that there are many families with relationship problems. Therefore, I would like to explain the importance of kinship and how relationships affect our lives directly.
There are many cases of kinship problems in the world. For example, in the book "The Merchant of Venice", there were arguments between Jessica and her father, Shylock, because they had differing principles in life and could not see eye to eye over life matters. Therefore, possibly out of frustration with her father, Jessica decided to leave her father for good and become a Christian, contrary to her father's ways, probably in a bid to spite him. I also watched a Hong Kong drama entitled "Moonlight Resonance", which centered its plot around kinship. There were many quarrels among family members, mainly because of monetary issues. Finally, in real life, there was a recent case a few years ago in 2008, where a multi-millionaire died in 2001. His three children had expected the inheritance to be split equally among the three children, however, they were taken aback when the inheritance was all given to the only son, leaving the two daughters with nothing. Therefore, the siblings decided to go to court to fight over $14 million. Thus, from all these three examples, we can see that kinship problems can be derived from differing viewpoints and more importantly, money!
It is very sad to see that many relatives fight over such trivial issues. It definitely shows that man is fallible to temptations of the world, such as money. Is money really more important than kinship? Kinship is for life, but money can be lost and won in just over a matter of days! Thus, I do not know why relatives can make up a big fuss and are willing to sacrifice their many years of kinship just to get benefits for themselves! Family members are very important to us, because they can support, help, encourage and care for us. They play a big role in determining our happiness in life and ensure that we are not lonely. In my opinion, we should always appreciate and treasure our family members and not wait until a bad thing happens that we start to regret. Therefore, we need to treat each other properly and show love to our relatives.
In conclusion, I hope that all kinship problems will be eradicated in this world and that everyone will be aware of the importance of relationships.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Wrongdoings
Hi,
I recently did something wrong that I am ashamed of and would not like to share it on such a public platform. However, through the incident, I learned many things, especially the important lesson of always thinking before I act.
Every time I do something wrong, I always feel an extreme sense of guilt and regret that I had acted that way. I always think, "If only I hadn't....". However, as the incident passes and gets removed from the "memory space" in my brain, I repeat the same actions and go through the same thought process. No doubt it is the human nature to do wrong. However, I should not take advantage of this fact as an excuse to do wrong all the time.
I see this situation in many Singaporeans in today's society as well, especially younger generations, and I know that I have no right to judge them because I fall under the same category too. For example, many students start from not handing up their homework in time, to talking back to teachers and finally to breaking school rules. Furthermore, I find that more and more people are beginning to undermine the seriousness of doing wrong. One possible cause is that many parents do not bring up their child well by not scolding them when they do wrong because they do not want to punish their children. This results in many people not having respect for others and do not realise how their wrongdoings can affect other people very severely. After repeated scoldings, many people also begin to get immune to these punishments and do not care about the consequences of their sins. This is a very bad situation in Singapore now because we, the young, are leaders of the next generation and we need to set a good example so that we can educate our descendants properly.
Therefore, I think that a solution has to be found very quickly in order to salvage this situation. I think as individuals, we need to practice self-discipline and to think before we act. When we think our actions through, we will be able to decide whether or not they will cause harm to anyone so that we can prevent the case of hurting someone unintentionally. More importantly, when we do wrong, we need to be humble and apologise to the opposite party, and not be stubborn and unwilling to be corrected. Parents also have to play a role in the proper bringing-up of their children and inculcate values such as respect in them from young. The community and the government should also organise programmes and campaigns to allow students to build their character in various ways.
In conclusion, I believe that humans are definitely not infallible, but there are many occasions where we can choose to do right or wrong. When we want to repent from our sins, we need to be sincere in our words and try our very best not to repeat the same mistake again.
I recently did something wrong that I am ashamed of and would not like to share it on such a public platform. However, through the incident, I learned many things, especially the important lesson of always thinking before I act.
Every time I do something wrong, I always feel an extreme sense of guilt and regret that I had acted that way. I always think, "If only I hadn't....". However, as the incident passes and gets removed from the "memory space" in my brain, I repeat the same actions and go through the same thought process. No doubt it is the human nature to do wrong. However, I should not take advantage of this fact as an excuse to do wrong all the time.
I see this situation in many Singaporeans in today's society as well, especially younger generations, and I know that I have no right to judge them because I fall under the same category too. For example, many students start from not handing up their homework in time, to talking back to teachers and finally to breaking school rules. Furthermore, I find that more and more people are beginning to undermine the seriousness of doing wrong. One possible cause is that many parents do not bring up their child well by not scolding them when they do wrong because they do not want to punish their children. This results in many people not having respect for others and do not realise how their wrongdoings can affect other people very severely. After repeated scoldings, many people also begin to get immune to these punishments and do not care about the consequences of their sins. This is a very bad situation in Singapore now because we, the young, are leaders of the next generation and we need to set a good example so that we can educate our descendants properly.
Therefore, I think that a solution has to be found very quickly in order to salvage this situation. I think as individuals, we need to practice self-discipline and to think before we act. When we think our actions through, we will be able to decide whether or not they will cause harm to anyone so that we can prevent the case of hurting someone unintentionally. More importantly, when we do wrong, we need to be humble and apologise to the opposite party, and not be stubborn and unwilling to be corrected. Parents also have to play a role in the proper bringing-up of their children and inculcate values such as respect in them from young. The community and the government should also organise programmes and campaigns to allow students to build their character in various ways.
In conclusion, I believe that humans are definitely not infallible, but there are many occasions where we can choose to do right or wrong. When we want to repent from our sins, we need to be sincere in our words and try our very best not to repeat the same mistake again.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Captain America
Hi,
I recently watched the movie "Captain America: The First Avenger" and I loved it very much. It was created by Marvel and is a prequel to the new movie coming out next summer, "The Avengers". It has really peaked my interest on the Marvel superheroes and I cannot wait to go to the library to borrow some of the comic books to see how the storyline of the comic and the movie differ.
In the movie, Captain America was first known as Steve Rogers, who was a very skinny but brave little man. He was often picked on by others for being weak and short, but always persevered when ever he was beaten up and never ran away, standing up tall against his assailant. He tried to enlist for the US Army to fight against the Nazis, but his applications were denied 5 times because of his long list of medical problems and his small stature. However, his perseverance paid off and he caught the eye of a scientist called Professor Erskine, who allowed Rogers to train to become a soldier. Convinced by Rogers' brave and compassionate nature, Professor Erskine decided to test his experiment on Rogers in an attempt to make his strong. The experiment worked but a Nazi operative came and assassinated Erskine, but was eventually killed by Rogers. With his new-found fame, Rogers became known as Captain America and began fighting his way to destroy the Hydra, a cult group that was led by Johann Shmidt (aka Red Skull), with the help of a few of his soldier friends.
I liked this movie because it was action-filled and hence, very intriguing. The plot was very deep, leaving no detail unexamined, but made use of the full two hours it was screened without going off track at any point of time. Every scene was important in the movie and many sensory details were also included to appeal to the audience's emotions. For example, the colours of red, blue and white were on Captain America's uniform, representing America's flag, hence showing that he had a strong sense of loyalty. On the other hand, Red Skull has a very bright red skin, symbolising hatred and anger, making the audience fear and hate him. I particularly like war movies, because they really bring a strong sense of justice and seeing good triumph over evil makes me smile.
One theme that stood out in the movie was the theme of sacrifice. Steve Rogers was willing to sacrifice his life for the country out there in the war even though he knew that very few people returned alive. Furthermore, during a training session, a fake grenade was thrown by one of the commanders and while the other soldiers fled immediately, Rogers was the only one to react and covered the "grenade" with his entire body. The most touching scene in the movie was when Captain America decided to sacrifice his life by piloting a plane down into the icy plains because it was heading towards New York with atomic bombs. Another theme that was prevalent was the theme of character vs appearance. Steve Rogers was chosen to be Captain America not because of his figure, but because of his nature and character. A motif that appeared in the show was the shield that Captain America always held when he was fighting. To me, the shield represented a form of freedom and bravery.
I would recommend this movie to everyone, especially those who like action-filled movies. I also learned a lot through this show, like not to pick on someone smaller than me, to put my talents to good use and to be willing to sacrifice for my friends. I will definitely be one of the first at the cinemas next year when "The Avenger" comes out!
Nathanael
I recently watched the movie "Captain America: The First Avenger" and I loved it very much. It was created by Marvel and is a prequel to the new movie coming out next summer, "The Avengers". It has really peaked my interest on the Marvel superheroes and I cannot wait to go to the library to borrow some of the comic books to see how the storyline of the comic and the movie differ.
In the movie, Captain America was first known as Steve Rogers, who was a very skinny but brave little man. He was often picked on by others for being weak and short, but always persevered when ever he was beaten up and never ran away, standing up tall against his assailant. He tried to enlist for the US Army to fight against the Nazis, but his applications were denied 5 times because of his long list of medical problems and his small stature. However, his perseverance paid off and he caught the eye of a scientist called Professor Erskine, who allowed Rogers to train to become a soldier. Convinced by Rogers' brave and compassionate nature, Professor Erskine decided to test his experiment on Rogers in an attempt to make his strong. The experiment worked but a Nazi operative came and assassinated Erskine, but was eventually killed by Rogers. With his new-found fame, Rogers became known as Captain America and began fighting his way to destroy the Hydra, a cult group that was led by Johann Shmidt (aka Red Skull), with the help of a few of his soldier friends.
I liked this movie because it was action-filled and hence, very intriguing. The plot was very deep, leaving no detail unexamined, but made use of the full two hours it was screened without going off track at any point of time. Every scene was important in the movie and many sensory details were also included to appeal to the audience's emotions. For example, the colours of red, blue and white were on Captain America's uniform, representing America's flag, hence showing that he had a strong sense of loyalty. On the other hand, Red Skull has a very bright red skin, symbolising hatred and anger, making the audience fear and hate him. I particularly like war movies, because they really bring a strong sense of justice and seeing good triumph over evil makes me smile.
One theme that stood out in the movie was the theme of sacrifice. Steve Rogers was willing to sacrifice his life for the country out there in the war even though he knew that very few people returned alive. Furthermore, during a training session, a fake grenade was thrown by one of the commanders and while the other soldiers fled immediately, Rogers was the only one to react and covered the "grenade" with his entire body. The most touching scene in the movie was when Captain America decided to sacrifice his life by piloting a plane down into the icy plains because it was heading towards New York with atomic bombs. Another theme that was prevalent was the theme of character vs appearance. Steve Rogers was chosen to be Captain America not because of his figure, but because of his nature and character. A motif that appeared in the show was the shield that Captain America always held when he was fighting. To me, the shield represented a form of freedom and bravery.
I would recommend this movie to everyone, especially those who like action-filled movies. I also learned a lot through this show, like not to pick on someone smaller than me, to put my talents to good use and to be willing to sacrifice for my friends. I will definitely be one of the first at the cinemas next year when "The Avenger" comes out!
Nathanael
Friday, June 24, 2011
Who is the real Shakespeare?
Hi,
I would like to share my views on the ongoing debate whether William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon holds the real authorship of Shakespearean works and if not, the most possible candidate who used William Shakespeare's name as a cover-up.
Many scholars do not believe that the William Shakespeare who lived in Stratford-upon Avon was not the real author of Shakespeare's plays. They base their claims on the fact that Stratford was not a very educated place, so someone from that town would not be able to write so beautifully. They also claimed that a playwright would never use his real name to produce his works, because he would receive a social stigma from his peers. Therefore, someone must have used William Shakespeare, a commoner from Stratford, to cover up as the author of all the plays. Some scholars have also went on to analyse "Hamlet", and took certain letters in the sentence "The funerall baked meats did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables." and formed an anagram of "FR. BACONI NATI", which was Latin for "Fr. Bacon made me". This showed that the real Shakespeare was probably from Baconian School, which was famous for its cryptography and anagrams. Therefore, many scholars suggest that Sir Francis Bacon was the actual writer of all the Shakespearean works. Others have also suggested Queen Elizabeth and Edward de Vere, because they are also educated and have written fair bits of poetry themselves.
However, in my opinion, I think that we should not dig so deep into the matter and that William Shakespeare really holds the real authorship for all his works. Anyway, some of the arguments that the scholars present are not very valid. For example, the phrase "FR. BACONI NATI" is not very correct in terms of phrasing and should be "FR. BACONUS ME FECIT". Furthermore, scholars have no evidence to prove that writers really receive a social stigma from their peers if they use their real name to write their plays. Queen Elizabeth also writes poetry under her own name. Therefore, it is still highly possible that William Shakespeare is the most likely candidate to holds the real authorship for Shakespearean works.
In conclusion, I think that this matter will never be resolved until concrete archaeological evidence can be presented. I really do not think that this issue is such a big deal because we already have the Shakespearean works, so why spend time arguing about the real author when we can just appreciate the craftsmanship of the author. No matter who the real author is, I would like to thank him, or her, for bringing such beautiful pieces of works into our world of literature right now.
Nathanael
I would like to share my views on the ongoing debate whether William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon holds the real authorship of Shakespearean works and if not, the most possible candidate who used William Shakespeare's name as a cover-up.
Many scholars do not believe that the William Shakespeare who lived in Stratford-upon Avon was not the real author of Shakespeare's plays. They base their claims on the fact that Stratford was not a very educated place, so someone from that town would not be able to write so beautifully. They also claimed that a playwright would never use his real name to produce his works, because he would receive a social stigma from his peers. Therefore, someone must have used William Shakespeare, a commoner from Stratford, to cover up as the author of all the plays. Some scholars have also went on to analyse "Hamlet", and took certain letters in the sentence "The funerall baked meats did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables." and formed an anagram of "FR. BACONI NATI", which was Latin for "Fr. Bacon made me". This showed that the real Shakespeare was probably from Baconian School, which was famous for its cryptography and anagrams. Therefore, many scholars suggest that Sir Francis Bacon was the actual writer of all the Shakespearean works. Others have also suggested Queen Elizabeth and Edward de Vere, because they are also educated and have written fair bits of poetry themselves.
However, in my opinion, I think that we should not dig so deep into the matter and that William Shakespeare really holds the real authorship for all his works. Anyway, some of the arguments that the scholars present are not very valid. For example, the phrase "FR. BACONI NATI" is not very correct in terms of phrasing and should be "FR. BACONUS ME FECIT". Furthermore, scholars have no evidence to prove that writers really receive a social stigma from their peers if they use their real name to write their plays. Queen Elizabeth also writes poetry under her own name. Therefore, it is still highly possible that William Shakespeare is the most likely candidate to holds the real authorship for Shakespearean works.
In conclusion, I think that this matter will never be resolved until concrete archaeological evidence can be presented. I really do not think that this issue is such a big deal because we already have the Shakespearean works, so why spend time arguing about the real author when we can just appreciate the craftsmanship of the author. No matter who the real author is, I would like to thank him, or her, for bringing such beautiful pieces of works into our world of literature right now.
Nathanael
Background on "The Merchant of Venice"
Hi,
I would like to share on some of the background information of "The Merchant of Venice", which will be my literature text for Term 3. It is written by William Shakespeare, a very famous playwright in the early 17th century. I will address some issues about William Shakespeare and other interesting facts about life in the 17th century.
Shakespeare lived in the Elizabethan era, which was from the mid-1500s to the early 1600s. Elizabeth I ruled England from 1558 to 1603 as Queen, but her position was very different from that of the present Queen. She had the power to disagree with the Parliament and to order the imprisonment or death of anyone, even an important minister or landowner. She was very rich and was also a great patroness of poetry, drama, music and all the crafts. Like any other rich lady, she loved bautiful clothes and had many highly decorated dresses in her enormous palace. At that time, London was tradng heavily with different cities like Venice. Queen Elizabeth was also portrayed in "The Merchant of Venice" in the form of Portia, a beautiful, elegant lady who was very smart.
There was a very big divide between classes during the Elizabethan era. The 'upper-class' people had lots of land and money, and could therefore afford to eat better food. They also wore very delicate clothings. They lived in big houses and went to watch plays for recreation. However, those of the 'lower-class' did not have enough money to live life in luxury. They had to work in jobs like farmers, and hence did not have much time for recreation. Their personal hygiene was also not as good as the rich people, and they wore less elaborate clothing.
Venice and Belmont were chosen as the settings of the story. Venice's dominant religion then was Catholic, while England were Protestant Christians until the middle of the sixteenth century, were increasingly oppressed. This was because Henry VIII quarelled with the Pope and broke away from the church of Rome, influencing Elizabeth I to enforce Protestant Christianity by law. Thus, for the first time, the Bible was widely available in English and large numbers of people could understand it. Ever since then, the Jews in Venice were discriminated by the Christians, who had anti-semitism feelings (or anti-Jewish) due to economic problems. The Christians were not allowed to work as usurers, hence leaving only the Jews to take up this money-lending businesses. As this resulted in Christians owing money to the Jews, many people viewed the Jews as loan sharks and they grew increasingly unhappy with them. There was also a conflict in religious views, where many Christians claimed that the Jews did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, hence leading to the widespread persecution of the Jews. The Christians also further laid claims on the Jews, saying that they were responsible for Christ's death, killing Christian children and even for causing the Bubonic Plague (or the Black Death) to happen. Finally, this animosity also came about because many Christians at that time suffered from xenophobia, the fear of foreigners. The Christians discriminated them by persecuting them, first starting from torture, before expelling them from the country and finally, even killing them in big numbers. Therefore, the animosity between Christians and Jews was quite a big matter.
All in all, I think that it is very important to read up on the context of a novel before reading it so that we can better understand the plot and how the characters are feeling in the story. It also helps us to imagine the setting and the context on which the whole story is based on. Therefore, I feel that reading up on "The Merchant of Venice" will help me a lot when I analyse it further in Term 3.
I would like to share on some of the background information of "The Merchant of Venice", which will be my literature text for Term 3. It is written by William Shakespeare, a very famous playwright in the early 17th century. I will address some issues about William Shakespeare and other interesting facts about life in the 17th century.
Shakespeare lived in the Elizabethan era, which was from the mid-1500s to the early 1600s. Elizabeth I ruled England from 1558 to 1603 as Queen, but her position was very different from that of the present Queen. She had the power to disagree with the Parliament and to order the imprisonment or death of anyone, even an important minister or landowner. She was very rich and was also a great patroness of poetry, drama, music and all the crafts. Like any other rich lady, she loved bautiful clothes and had many highly decorated dresses in her enormous palace. At that time, London was tradng heavily with different cities like Venice. Queen Elizabeth was also portrayed in "The Merchant of Venice" in the form of Portia, a beautiful, elegant lady who was very smart.
There was a very big divide between classes during the Elizabethan era. The 'upper-class' people had lots of land and money, and could therefore afford to eat better food. They also wore very delicate clothings. They lived in big houses and went to watch plays for recreation. However, those of the 'lower-class' did not have enough money to live life in luxury. They had to work in jobs like farmers, and hence did not have much time for recreation. Their personal hygiene was also not as good as the rich people, and they wore less elaborate clothing.
Venice and Belmont were chosen as the settings of the story. Venice's dominant religion then was Catholic, while England were Protestant Christians until the middle of the sixteenth century, were increasingly oppressed. This was because Henry VIII quarelled with the Pope and broke away from the church of Rome, influencing Elizabeth I to enforce Protestant Christianity by law. Thus, for the first time, the Bible was widely available in English and large numbers of people could understand it. Ever since then, the Jews in Venice were discriminated by the Christians, who had anti-semitism feelings (or anti-Jewish) due to economic problems. The Christians were not allowed to work as usurers, hence leaving only the Jews to take up this money-lending businesses. As this resulted in Christians owing money to the Jews, many people viewed the Jews as loan sharks and they grew increasingly unhappy with them. There was also a conflict in religious views, where many Christians claimed that the Jews did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, hence leading to the widespread persecution of the Jews. The Christians also further laid claims on the Jews, saying that they were responsible for Christ's death, killing Christian children and even for causing the Bubonic Plague (or the Black Death) to happen. Finally, this animosity also came about because many Christians at that time suffered from xenophobia, the fear of foreigners. The Christians discriminated them by persecuting them, first starting from torture, before expelling them from the country and finally, even killing them in big numbers. Therefore, the animosity between Christians and Jews was quite a big matter.
All in all, I think that it is very important to read up on the context of a novel before reading it so that we can better understand the plot and how the characters are feeling in the story. It also helps us to imagine the setting and the context on which the whole story is based on. Therefore, I feel that reading up on "The Merchant of Venice" will help me a lot when I analyse it further in Term 3.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)