Text 1:
Wild Pork and Watercress
Text 2:
Jack Reacher: Past Tense
Text 3:
Jack Ryan season 1
Text 4:
John Wick 1
Text 5:
Kate Hawkesby: Why 16-year-olds should not be voting
Text 6:
Mike Hosking: NZ asleep at the wheel on vaping health crisis
Wild Pork and Watercress
Following the completion of this novel, written by Barry Crump, I felt a sense of admiration and respect towards one of the main protagonists, Uncle Hector. When Ricky is brought from the city to stay with Hector and his wife, initially, the old man is unwelcoming and is slow to warm towards the boy, who is a polar opposite to him. He is reserved and introverted, possibly why he chose the secluded lifestyle he lives, so when a boisterous young boy who has lived a life of very little discipline on the streets and in the foster system, it will have been a shock to him. Despite their differences though, Hector, (after his wife, who took primary care of Ricky, dies) allows Ricky to come with him to avoid going back into the foster care system, and teaches him important life skills, such as teamwork, for one, because as someone who has been alone for much of his life, Ricky doesn’t know how to work as a team, and for one of the first times in Ricky’s life, shows him that he has someone that actually cares about him. For me, this was a very important part of the story, as it showed me just how lucky I am to have a caring family that has provided for me in not only a financial sense, but also in a caring sense, and just how important that love has been to allow me to be happy. Hector goes out of his comfort zone to help Ricky become a better person, even though he could have easily taken the easy way out, and just handed him back to the broken system he hates so much. When Ricky told Hector, “I know how to run away, I’ve done it before you know”, this showed me just how ineffective the system is for children is, how this boy would rather live on the streets than in the social welfare program, once again made me feel incredibly lucky to have had such a good upbringing, because Ricky had become so used to living in a place that doesn’t care about his wellbeing . Later in the text, when the government starts the search for the two fugitives, I realized just how flawed the legal system is. When the two visit the farm manager’s homestead below their camp and the manager explains their situation, he tells Hector, “There’s a price on your head”, “For abducting a minor…”. This made me realize just how flawed the system is. Despite the fact that Ricky went with Hector by choice, by choosing to do so over going back into the custardy of social welfare and that his time living in the bush with his uncle and been some of the best times of his life- Ricky as a character had by this point developed vastly from the child delinquent, now was independent caring person who had learned a sense of responsibility in the form of zag, the dog given to him by his aunt and uncle, and he was finally feeling like someone cared about him, only for the authorities to label the man that had given all that to him a criminal who would be prosecuted once apprehended. After reading this particular chapter, I was brought to think about all the people that have had their lives damaged by the law and the technicalities that come with it, even if they haven’t done anything wrong and even sometimes, like in Hector’s case, they haven’t actually done anything wrong. This made me think about how the world is such an unfair place, where unless you reach out to others for help, to trust, for advice, you can’t get far. Until the start of the story, Ricky had not found this person to help him, for him to trust, for him get advice from until he and Hector are forced into a position where they can do this for each other. I thought that this was a nice aspect to put into the text, showing how the two were good for each other, how their bond was forged through the tough times, for them to emerge on the other side, with a relationship close to that of a father and son.
Jack Reacher: Past Tense:
Following the completion of the novel “Jack Reacher Past Tense”, I felt a mixed feeling towards the protagonist, Jack Reacher. The author describes the character essentially as an old fashioned military man who has an unwavering sense of morals. Reacher as a character is somewhat interesting, as he values vastly different aspects of life in comparison with myself or the majority of people I know. He travels around, going from place to place, drifting, not having any friends or family to be around, always moving. When he sees a problem, he fixes it-which is where my mixed feelings surrounding the character arise. As an ex-military man, and being a very competent brawler, the character does not hesitate to resort to violence, brutally taking down various adversaries throughout the story, he “doesn’t take shit from bullies”. Despite the fact that it provided for an entertaining reading experience, and it was satisfying to see the bad guys get what they deserve, it is likely that in a more realistic situation, beating up members of a local crime family is not a good way to resolve an issue, or a good way to bring justice to them. That being said, the book did make me think about what exactly the right option would be in the situations Reacher was put in. At one point in the story, Reacher prevented a young woman from being in danger, and then the same man he had prevented from wronging the woman then tried to ambush him. Expecting the attack, Reacher ended up “teach those bastards a lesson”- I was brought to question whether or not it was right for Reacher to engage in violence if he could have avoided it. I was consequently wondering if I agreed with the way the author essentially rewarded such violent acts was the right thing to do, especially in today’s world, where violence is often used in an attempt to solve issues, generally by people in positions of power and status, and the situation often ending in large amounts of collateral damage or the issue could even escalate and be taken out of proportion. I found the fact that Reacher’s actions were often described as heroic somewhat unjust, and despite the fact that he ultimately rescued the people from their captors, he killed people in doing so, which is questionable at least, and in my opinion definitely not worthy of the praise the author insists upon the audience throughout the text. All things considered, the novel made me question what lengths it is acceptable to go to solve a problem, and helped me further realise that whilst using the violent way to fix the issue can work in the end, but at a large cost of injury, pain and even in extreme situations, death, and that to better resolve an issue, time should be taken in an attempt to avoid pain and suffering. Reading this text made me feel lucky to never have needed to resort to physical violence to solve an issue, or that major physical violence has ever been inflicted upon me either.
Jack Ryan: Season 1
Whist viewing this mini-series, “Jack Ryan”, I resonated with the conflicting nature of the main character’s values with his job, which at the time was to use a contact to locate an asset to help them stop a terrorist. In order to find what they needed, Jack Ryan, the main character and his boss use a contact who runs a sex trafficking ring to help find a human trafficking operation. Whilst meeting the contact at the brothel, Ryan is very conflicted, because they are relying on and giving money to what he knows is a “monster, only concerned about making money, he doesn’t give a damn who he steps on to get it”, but without him, they weren’t going to be able to find what they are looking for without him. This particular story-line made me think about what it is okay to do for the greater good, and what can be overlooked in the process of trying to accomplish something bigger. For example, if something like this happened in normal society, and it was overlooked, the overlooker would be punished, despite the fact it was done to help something bigger. The show clearly illustrated to the audience that Jack Ryan wanted both- to use this contact and to take him down and bring him to justice, which I thought well illustrated what kind of person he is- someone who has a very strong sense of morals and emotions, which he sometimes lets get in the way of his job. Luckily for the sake of the operation, his boss was there too, who had clearly done this kind of thing before, and knew he couldn’t have it both ways. The use of this character showed me that you can’t always have it both ways and that things won’t always work out perfectly, and you need to learn to pick your battles with restraint in order to achieve your final goal. Another aspect of the show that really gave me cause to think is, later in the episode, a character from a subplot, a drone pilot, who was given incorrect information and as a result, killed an innocent man. He feels very guilty for what he did, despite the fact, as pointed out by his colleague, that it was not his fault, he cannot get past what he has done. This interesting subplot made me think about who really the good guys are. The show clearly wanted the audience to see that whilst the American Army is consistently depicted to be out in the world using its’ might for good and freedom for the people, and they certainly are doing good in the show, attempting to stop a man that is committing mass murder worldwide, they also take innocent lives, writing them off as simply collateral damage, and the show showed the viewers that the pilot’s superiors did not bat an eye when they realized that they had ordered the wrong man to be killed, as the human trafficker tells Jack Ryan” maybe if I was born in a nice city in America, like Cincinnati, I could be the good guy too.”This made me think about how far it was okay to go, what it is okay to do, for the “greater good”. After seeing this, I realized how important upbringing is, and how lucky I have been to have come from a “nice city from Cincinnati”, and not the poverty-stricken streets of Turkey, in which they found their source in the series, because if I had, then my life would have been very different. I probably wouldn’t think of the US as the good guys, as they are so commonly portrayed to be in western culture, and instead, I may, like many of the people there do, believe in a different belief. I found the view the show brought the viewers was somewhat refreshing, as the US military was shown both as the good guy, but also as an entity that brought hurt to many innocent people who had nothing to do with the conflict. I believe that the show brought both sides of the story the audience effectively, which helped me realize that there are always two sides to every story, no matter how one-sided it may appear at face value.
Text 4:John Wick
While viewing this film, I felt that, while entertaining, the overly violent nature of the film was unrealistic and over the top, which made me realise that the protagonist isn’t as good a person as the film would try and have the viewer believe. I felt that whilst John, the main protagonist, “did not start this, and I sure as hell don’t want it”, and what the antagonist did to him was cruel and ruthless, his response, which admittedly, the entire film’s plot hinges upon, is much too exaggerated to be believable. I did not enjoy how the film presented John’s violent actions as heroic, as it sends a message that in essence, says mass murder is acceptable as long as you have a reason, that in the case of the film, whilst tragic, would never be considered acceptable reasons. As a result of this, throughout the film, I found myself questioning the protagonist’s motivations, and as a result, found it difficult to be able to decide which party was in the right. An aspect of the film, however, that helped me see the main character in a more positive light is at the end of the film, when he confronts the man that started the feud, lays down his gun to make an even fight, to give him a chance. This showed me that John, the main character, had honor, and helped me understand that the director, Chad Stahelski, is trying to ensure that the audience knows that in essence, John is a good man, who is above the low life gangsters that he has been facing for the majority of the film. Because of this, I felt a sense of admiration for John, a sense of respect, despite the fact that I disagreed so strongly with his actions throughout a lot of the film. Throughout the film, all things aside, I did feel admiration towards the protagonist, John Wick, because, against all odds, he battled and fought to the end, to achieve the goal, never giving up throughout, even when all looks hopeless, as Viggo Tarasov said in the film, ” John is a man of focus, commitment, sheer willl”. Through observing this, it helped me understand that even when all seems hopeless, even when someone has a gun to your head, there is a way to through it, a way achieve what you have set out to achieve, if you give something your all, the amount one can achieve is staggering.
Text 5: Kate Hawkesby: Why 16 year olds should not be voting
I found this article particularly interesting. Nowadays, “youth empowerment” and the growing belief that the young people of today should be able to seek social justice is a major topic discussed by many members of society, and to read an article outlining the very opposite opinion of such a topic sparked my interest as bold and controversial, and admittedly, I agreed with what the author had to say on the most part. Despite my agreeance with the author on an overall level, I didn’t get the impression that the author, Kate Hawkesby, fully understood teenagers, and as a result, I found it hard to take what she was saying with the full impact that she intended to have on her audience. I did not agree with the way that she described teenagers as “ten feet tall and bulletproof”, as I know for a fact that many young people do not think this of themselves and they make no attempt to do so. This statement showed me that the author considered all teens as quite similar, despite the truth being anything but, with many being somewhat reserved and even timid, a stark contrast to the ten-foot-tall “hormonal maniacs” that she has described them to be. Aside from the things that the author made out to be the fact that was actually opinion, I found the actual statistics and experts’ thoughts to be appealing to the Logos enthusiast inside me. I found the way she linked in statistics about teenagers’ tendencies to be very relevant to the argument she made, which made me realize that despite my own beliefs, there is no better argument than facts. Despite my disbelief in the way she made out the average teenager, there is no arguing with facts, with which she heavily backed up her arguments, using statistical investigations and expert advice to do so. All things aside, whilst reading this article, I learned an important lesson- while empowerment of youth is a very important idea in today’s society, they should definitely not be given the ability to make major decisions that affect the rest of society just yet, as they are simply not ready for it yet.
Text 6-Mike Hosking
Whilst reading this column, I was brought to think about the repetitive nature of humans in society today. The author brought up the fact that “we did 50 years ago, delude ourselves into believing that e-cigarettes are somehow good”, and how the two situations are so similar. I realised, as he brought up more and facts and ideas relating to the situation, making me realise just how bad the issue facing society is. I was very convinced by the author’s argument and liked how he didn’t just base his argument solely on opinion, as he backed everything he said up reasonably. I found this refreshing, as many people base a lot of what they say on not much at all, and then expect others to agree with them just because they have said it. The author goes into a lot of details about how society is being blind to the threats on their wellbeing, and how influential people of today need to give the general population justice by making sure they know what it actually can do to them. Another aspect of the article I found positive was the fact that the author is being impartial, setting their personal beliefs aside to make sure the reader gets the full story, an aspect that is particularly rare in an age when misinformation is increasingly common, such as agreeing with the stance on the issue by controversial US president, Donald Trump, saying he “…will be grateful for a .steady hand, strong leadership and common sense”. Despite the positives I took away from the article, I thought that it did have its downfalls. I felt that in the conclusion of the piece, the author calling the rising popularity of vaping a “tragedy” too much exaggerated the issue. It is a problem, definitely, but not a tragedy. I felt that using such a word trivialized true tragedies that have happened in recent times, and comparing them to vaping is not a good thing, and I am happy that I have not been put in a position where I have taken it up and even become addicted, as the health deficits it can cause are major. Overall, this article helped me understand that this world will always have problems, and unfortunately, we are destined to repeat ourselves time and time again, and the best we can do to try and stop this is to be educated, and try to act responsibly.