youshouldbejealous:

indigo-inside:

can I tread on a topic that might not be popular

but first of all Edgar Allen Poe was pretty damn intelligent, along with most authors you do these critical analysis studies for.

I specifically remember an interview from the author of “The Secret Life of Bees,” who talked about how the symbolism that came up in her novel just kinda “flowed;” it was written through intuition. As in it WAS intentional but they didn’t blatantly think “Oh, this represents this and this is a metaphor for that” or write a critical analysis of their own book.

It’s this “unintentional intentional” symbolism that’s the most subtle and most open to interpretation, I think. And it’s really good for letting us (students) think critically about it.

Kind of like math — 90% of you probably aren’t going to use algebra everyday of your life, but learning it taught you how to THINK on the left side of the brain. This stuff teaches you how to problem solve. This analysis of literature is teaching you to question things and how to analyze things at a deeper level. Sometimes it feels ridiculous, but exaggeration is a really good way to learn. 

**Did this comic really just summarise Edgar Allen Poe’s [The Raven](http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/178713) into “I fucking love Ravens”?

FUUUUUCCCCCCCCK

(Source: accordingtodevin)

On Unchanging Biblical and Quranic Morality.

I don’t understand people who choose (or claim) to adhere strictly to the morality of their religious books (the Bible and Qur’an in particular). They repress their sexuality and that of their families and friends, argue for the death sentence to be imposed on homosexuals and maintain extremely strict dietary restrictions in spite of the progression of modern cooking techniques. In other words, they treat their holy books as unchanging moral guidelines.

Yet if you ask a modern Muslim or Christian whether or not they support slavery, they would probably say no despite their holy books allowing it, and in some cases even encouraging it. The typical response to it would be “but it was a different culture at the time, it was allowed”; it’s the same response a lot of Muslims give when you ask them what they think about Muhammad’s marrying of a 6 year-old child. These people already consider something allowed in their holy books to be morally wrong.

Read more

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (Spoiler-Free) Review : A Movie Named Sparkles

While full of gloss, sparkles and big-budget special effects, Marc Webb’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2 lacks the heart that made his previous effort a successful Spider-Man film.

The world of The Amazing Spider-Man is a funny one; you have an extremely good-looking 30 year-old British man playing the teenaged nerdy Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), you have his real-life girlfriend playing his on-screen love interest Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), and you have a director who is mainly known for his 2009 romantic comedy, 500 Days of Summer (Marc Webb). It seemed like a combination that was destined to fail. Andrew Garfield was definitely not going to pass off as a high school nerd, Marc Webb was completely foreign to the superhero genre and Emma Stone… actually, you can’t go wrong with Emma Stone, so the film still had 1/3 things going for it. Still not very good odds.

Read More…

Religion, Evolution and the Big Bang

Vatican City

I don’t think religion is inherently incompatible with science. Sure, one of its fundamental tenets is faith—unwavering belief in God with or without evidence— but so long as faith is compartmentalised and everything else is treated with a dose of healthy skepticism, there shouldn’t be a problem. There is, however, something that is slowing down our advancement as a species: the scary amount of people who deny things like evolution and the Big Bang.

Read more