Water Bottles: Safe or Unsafe?

Imagine that you are standing in your kitchen after going for a jog. It was a great run—you went for five miles nonstop, and feel great. After taking a moment to cool down, you open your refrigerator, pull out an Acadia water bottle, unscrew the cap, and take a long, refreshing drink. Well, you feel healthy right now, but what you do not know is that that water bottle may actually be causing you more harm than good. Bottled water companies have perfected the art of making you feel like you are doing the best for yourself by buying their product. They state in their advertisements how bottled water is very safe, and is strictly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. However, because harmful chemicals and pollutants have been found in bottled water, and companies are not required to share information on the contaminant testing that they do, and the actual plastic from the water bottle itself may be dangerous, bottled water is not safe.

The University of Iowa Hygienic Laboratory conducted some tests on different brands of bottled water for the Environmental Working Group, and found some interesting things. “10 popular brands of bottled water, purchased from grocery stores and other retailers in 9 states and the District of Columbia, contained 38 chemical pollutants altogether, with an average of 8 contaminants in each brand. More than one-third of the chemicals found are not regulated in bottled water.” For example, in Sam’s Choice bottled water from Wal-Mart, several disinfection byproducts were found. These byproducts, called trihalomethanes, existed in amounts greater than what is regulated for bottled water in the state, and were associated with cancer and reproductive problems. In the same brand, the tests found a cancer-causing chemical called bromodichloromethane. This chemical also exceeded legal limitations, which shows that Sam’s Choice bottled water is not safe to drink. It is alarming to find two pollutants in one brand of bottled water, but it also opens up the possibility of finding more contaminants in the brand, as well as other brands. This possibility proved to be true when the tests found amounts of those two chemicals in Giant Supermarket’s Acadia brand that were also greater than legal regulations (Olga Naidenko, Nneka Leiba, Renee Sharp, and Jane Houlihan).

It is scary enough to hear these findings, but is even scarier to know that water bottle companies that do contaminant testing are not required to disclose any information that they find. This makes it possible that companies like Sam’s Choice and Giant’s Acadia might have known about the pollutants in their water, and still put it out there to sell. People have no reason to believe that their bottled water is safe, which the lab tests discussed previously have proved—bottled water is indeed not safe. Most water bottle companies claim that they follow the same safety standards as tap water. However, this statement means nothing because there is no proof. The reason that people trust these bottled water companies is their cleverly developed propaganda. It is really quite amazing how—in an age when people are obsessed with looking at nutritional facts and the ingredients of food—they have tricked people into buying their water with no solid evidence to support their claims of cleanliness. Bottled water is “1,900 times the price of tap water” (Olga Naidenko, Nneka Leiba, Renee Sharp, and Jane Houlihan). It is ridiculous that people should spend this much money on water, when there is simply no evidence that bottled water is worth its price, let alone that it is actually safe to drink.

Recent research even suggests that not just the water in bottled water should be cause for concern, but also the plastic bottles themselves. It has been shown that some chemicals in the plastic bottles can leach into the water over time. Some harmful chemicals, like ‘phthalates’, have been found, having leached into the water. These chemicals are harmful because they can “disrupt testosterone and other hormones” (Bottled Water). There ought to be safety regulations on the amount of these chemicals allowed for bottled water companies to put into their bottles. It is very popular for people to reuse water bottles, and that is when the harmful chemicals leach into the water. However, such limits do not exist.

The FDA actually proposed to set these regulations, but bottled water companies were successful in their campaign against them. Of course they would object so strongly; it costs them money to regulate their production that strictly, and, if people found out that the levels of phthalates were so great that there was a need for limitations, then their confidence in bottled water safety would go down, which could decrease sales. One of the greatest myths about water is that bottled water is safer than tap water. As discussed earlier, companies claim that they follow the same strict regulations as tap water. “By law, FDA standards for bottled water must be at least as stringent and protective of public health as standards set by EPA for public water systems.” They also have to meet strict industry standards, which sometimes are stricter than other regulations (International Bottled Water Association). However, because unsafe amounts of contaminants were found in some brands of bottled water, or had leached in from the plastic of the bottle, apparently these regulations aren’t as strict or enforced as was thought. Bottled water can’t be deemed “safe” if pollutants that negatively affect your health, especially the health of people with weak immune systems, have been found in more than one instance. It is ridiculous to claim that bottled water is safe and healthy, when obviously, it is not.

Meanwhile, chemicals are leaching into people’s bottled drinking water and people are drinking up, exposing themselves to the possibility of being harmed from phthalates from the plastic, or any other pollutants like bromodichloromethane or trihalomethanes that bottled water companies put into their water. While this is happening, companies don’t have to share any of the lab test results that they might find, for example, the fact that pollutants found in their water are linked to cancer and reproductive problems. So, what do you do now that you know the facts? Well, you can start by writing to the FDA and the government, asking them to adopt strict regulations for water bottle safety, for example, limits on the amount of contaminants allowed in bottled water that are cause for concern, like bromodichloromethane, trihalomethanes, and phthalates from plastic. And until those requirements do come in to place, you can drink tap water in order to save a lot of money, and to ensure your safety from unsafe bottled water.


Works Cited

International Bottled Water Association. “Bottled Water is Safe.” Opposing Viewpoints: Water.
Ed. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. PLYMOUTH CANTON COMMUNITY SCHOOL. 25 Mar. 2010 .
Olga Naidenko, Nneka Leiba, Renee Sharp, and Jane Houlihan. “Bottled Water May Be Harmful.” Opposing Viewpoints: Water. Ed. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greehaven Press, 2010. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. PLYMOUTH CANTON COMMUNITY SCHOOL. 25 Mar. 2010 .
"Bottled Water." NRDC. 25 Mar. 2008. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. .

Things Fall Apart Essay & Notes

1.) There are several topics in the additional notes that I did not discuss in my notes. One idea is that the whole novel “deals with how the prospect and reality of change affect various characters.” Some people, for example Okonkwo, didn’t react well to the idea of change. All throughout the novel, Okonkwo struggled to keep traditional Igbo culture alive, and only at the very end, when he realized that his people had lost those traditions, did he give up on them, and commit suicide. Nwoye, however, reacted well to the reality of change. In the additional notes, it discusses how, when Nwoye first heard a Christian hymn, it relieved Nwoye’s “parched soul”. In my notes I did not include this specific quote from the book, but I did discuss how hearing the new missionaries talk caused a change in Nwoye, and eventually led him to convert to Christianity. One topic that I discussed in my notes that I did not see in the additional notes was how the theme of change fits so perfectly into the title of this book. “Things Fall Apart.” When something this dramatic is said, it is due to the fact that major changes have taken place, changes that the person who said “things have fallen apart” obviously didn’t think were good. It was Obierika who was the first one to say that “things have fallen apart”, and he said this because the arrival of the white missionaries and the changes in the clan had separated the clansmen and their “brothers” who had begun converting to Christianity, not allowing Umuofia to function as a whole anymore.

2.) The additional notes did help me to understand some things. For example, one section discusses how the arrival of the white colonists and the introduction of their religion weakened the kinship bonds so central to Igbo culture. It helped me realize that another big deal of converting to Christianity was the partial rejection of these kinship bonds, because Christianity was about realizing that all people were brothers and sons of God. This was a big change from the Igbo religion in which ancestral worship played an important role. This was helpful in making me understand, because I was aware that some kind of difference like that existed between the two very different cultures, but I never fully grasped that concept, and never fully understood it until it was explained in the additional notes.

3.) There were some ways in which my notes were different from the additional ones. I think that the additional ones were much more detailed than mine, although I did try to make mine as detailed as possible as well, and I did put a lot of thought into my notes. My notes had more specific examples from the book (specific quotes) of how the theme of change ties into Things Fall Apart, while the additional notes summarized the big ideas of change in the novel, as well as giving specific details. However, I think that both the additional notes and my notes covered each major turning point in the story, or any change in the plot that drove the story forward.

4.) I think that I probably could have improved my note taking. If I had had more time on my hands, I should have read the book twice. It’s hard to pick up on certain aspects of a book while at the same time trying to make sense of the plot when you’re reading it for the first time. I feel like I was only able to skim the surface of the huge theme of change because I only read Things Fall Apart once, and not really go into much depth. If I had read it a second time, I might have been able to discover more details than the ones I picked up by just reading it once.

5.) 1. After a daughter of Umuofia was killed in Mbaino, Umuofia was given a young man and a virgin. The virgin was given to Ogbuefi Udo, and the boy was given to Okonkwo. “And that was how he came to look after the doomed lad who was sacrificed to the village of Umuofia by their neighbors to avoid bloodshed. The ill-fated lad was called Ikemefuna.” (8). This is a major change in the story, because Okonkwo and his family’s whole lives were changed. Okonkwo’s wives and children came to love Ikemefuna, and Ikemefuna’s maturity made him sort of like a role model to Nwoye. Okonkwo was happy about this because his son finally seemed to be interested in “manly” things, which he knew was due to Ikemefuna. This also caused Okonkwo to actually love Ikemefuna, which was very rare, for Okonkwo thought that compassion and gentleness were womanly weaknesses. (Of course, Okonkwo never openly displayed his affection for Ikemefuna.)

2. “Yes, Umuofia had decided to kill him.” (49). This refers to the clan’s decision to kill Ikemefuna after him living in Umuofia for three years. His death brought changes to both Okonkwo and Nwoye. Okonkwo had come to love Ikemefuna, and after Okonkwo killed him, he couldn’t stop thinking about him. Also, killing a boy who had become a brother to Nwoye caused something to snap inside him, and led him to begin questioning and doubting his clan’s traditions. What had Ikemefuna done to deserve to die?

3. “All was silent. In the center of the crowd a boy lay in a pool of blood.” (105). This boy was the son of Ezeudu, and “Okonkwo’s gun had exploded and a piece of iron had pierced the boy’s heart.” This incident was actually pretty ironic, because the young boy was killed at the funeral of his father, who had been the one who told Okonkwo not to take part in Ikemefuna’s death. Now, Okonkwo was also responsible for the death of Ezeudu’s son. This incident causes a big change, because Okonkwo and his family were forced to flee Umuofia, and go to Okonkwo’s motherland.

4. “The arrival of the missionaries had causes a considerable stir in the village of Mbanta.” (119-120). After hearing about the men of Abame being killed by white men, the people of Mbanta knew that white men would soon come to Mbanta. White men did come, and brought a lot of change. They spoke of a new religion, in which there was one God, and that all men are sons of God. Many men of Mbanta thought it was ridiculous, but one “callow mind was greatly puzzled”, and that mind was Nwoye. The hymn that he had heard the men singing seemed to answer one of the questions about his Igbo culture that “haunted his young soul.” (122). This, and the doubts about his culture that had set him apart from the rest of his clan, eventually led him to convert to Christianity. Nwoye’s converting was a change not only in his life, but in his family’s, too. Okonkwo was ashamed of Nwoye, and didn’t acknowledge him as his son anymore. Also, his wives and children had to act as though he was not a part of the family, too, and so it was almost as if they’d lost him.

5. Finally, Okonkwo’s seven years of exile were over, and he could return to Umuofia. “Umuofia had indeed changed during the seven years Okonkwo had been in exile. The church had come and led many astray. Not only the low-born and the outcast but sometimes a worthy man joined it.” (142). These changes show how much power the church had gained. And, the fact that ‘worthy’ people were now converting to Christianity possibly means that it might have influenced more people to convert. “But apart from the church, the white men had also brought a government.” (142). Now, the white men were forcing their laws and judicial system onto the Umuofians. It was no longer acceptable for twins to be thrown into the evil forest and left to die; people who tried to do so, along with other men who had molested the Christians, or any other “men who had offended against the white man’s law” (143) were locked up and guarded by court messengers. A District Commissioner judged other cases in a new court built in Umuofia. However, the reason that all of these things were such big changes is the fact that now people were being locked up for what they had always believed.

6. “The white man is very clever. He came quietly and peaceably with his religion. We were amused at his foolishness and allowed him to stay. Now he has won our brothers, and our clan can no longer act as one. He has put a knife on the things that held us together, and we have fallen apart.” (144-145). This is an important quote that supports the theme of change. Here, Obierika said that divisions in the tribe over religion had weakened the ties of their kinship, and they were no longer able to act as a whole. The profound changes that led to these divisions made him
believe that things had fallen apart.

7. “The clan had undergone such profound change during his exile that it was barely recognizable.” (150). These changes in Umuofia also caused changes in Okonkwo. Because “the new religion and government and the trading stores were very much in the people’s eyes and minds”, Okonkwo grieved for his clan, feeling like things had changed forever, that the men had become “soft like women” and wouldn’t fight against the changes, and felt as if things were “breaking up and falling apart”.

8. “Mr. Brown’s successor was the Reverend James Smith, and he was a different kind of man.” (151). Mr. Brown was a kind white missionary who didn’t force the converts to completely reject their old beliefs. When Mr. Brown had to leave and was succeeded by Mr. Smith, things changed a lot in the church. Mr. Smith saw things as “black and white”, and didn’t want the converts to hold onto any of their old beliefs. Unlike Mr. Brown, he didn’t care as much about the number of converts he received, but wanted his converts to really understand Christianity, and reject their old ways to truly embrace Christianity.

9. “One of the greatest crimes a man could commit was to unmask an egwugwu in public, or to say or do anything which might reduce its immortal prestige in the eyes of the uninitiated. And this was what Enoch did.” (153). Enoch was an “over-zealous” convert who killed an ancestral spirit, which threw Umuofia “into confusion”, and caused some changes. The Umuofians were extremely sad and angry, and finally, to Okonkwo’s pleasure, wanted to fight back for the first time. So, in reaction to this event, the egwugwu confronted Mr. Smith at the church, and then burnt it down. Of course, this was a violation of the white men’s law, and the men were locked up, only allowed to be released when a fine was paid. Once they were released, the Umuofians realized that they had to make a decision how to act: either finally fight the white men, or not fight the white men. This decision would be a turning point in their entire lives and change everything.

10. “In a flash, Okonkwo drew his machete. The messenger crouched to avoid the bow. It was useless. Okonkwo’s machete descended twice and the man’s head lay beside his uniformed body.” (168). While the Umuofians were meeting to discuss what actions they should take, court messengers arrived telling them that they had been ordered to stop the meeting. Okonkwo killed the head messenger, but knew that things had change permanently in Umuofia, because the other men let the messengers get away. Because Okonkwo saw that they had not chosen to fight with him, he gave up on his people and himself. He walked away, and then committed suicide.

6.) One movie I have seen that has the theme of change is “Roots”. In the movie, the main character, Kunta Kinte, is living in a small African village, when, as a young man, his life changes forever when he is captured and shipped to America and sold into slavery. Kunta Kinte probably believed that he would live in his village for his whole life, but, like my theme says: the only thing certain in the world is change. So, Kunta’s world changed forever when he was separated from his family, and sold into slavery. The way that this theme is introduced in “Roots” is similar to how it was introduced in Things Fall Apart. At first, both Kunta and Okonkwo’s lives are pretty normal, and their villages stick to their traditions. But, in both stories, their lives are soon changed forever. However, in Things Fall Apart, change was introduced more slowly than it was into “Roots”. In Things Fall Apart, change starts with rumors of white men, then kind white missionaries entering their society. In “Roots”, Kunta’s life is suddenly changed almost out of nowhere. He is captured by misfortune, and changes in his life begin immediately, whereas in Things Fall Apart, change is more gradual.

C.) I absolutely agree with this theme, and it connects perfectly with my personal ideas and philosophies about life. I believe that this theme applies to everything in the universe and is the universal theme of life. Think about it: anything that has ever happened was a change. You can find examples either on a small scale or a large scale. On a small scale it would be changes that have happened in my lifetime, or even this generation. People dying, disasters, wars, etc., have been changes and in turn caused more changes. On a bigger scale, it would be changes that have happened millions of years ago, for example when humans evolved from who knows what type of species. Change is why people have expanded to all corners of the world, and why we have the technology and knowledge that we do today. It applies to the changing of seasons, the earth revolving around the sun—changes are everything and everywhere!


7.) Summary and Thinking Response

Summary: Okonkwo, the main character of Things Fall Apart, is a man who holds true to all of his beliefs up until the very end of his life, even though it is not the same for all of the others around him. As changes happen that cause his fellow people to let go of their culture, he sticks to his belief that confrontation will solve their problems and get rid of the white men’s influence. When Okonkwo first heard of the white men in Obierika’s story about how Abame was wiped out, he voiced his opinion and said that the men were fools for not arming themselves with guns and machetes after the Oracle had warned them that danger was ahead, “even when they went to the market.” (pg. 117). Then, after he returned to Umuofia, he and Obierika were discussing Abame again, and Okonkwo said “we must fight these men and drive them from the land”, to which Obierika replied “it is already too late.” (pg. 144). Later, after Enoch killed one of the egwugwu, Okonkwo was very happy when his clan had decided to finally confront the white men from the church, and then burn it down. Then, after he and the other men were imprisoned and later released, all the men of Umuofia were called to meet. Before the meeting started, Okonkwo talked with Obierika about a man named Egonwanne, whom he criticized because he thought that he would try to speak against war. (Okonkwo called him a coward.) Okonkwo believed that war was necessary, and said “I shall fight alone if I choose.” (pg. 166). Then, when the messengers arrived to order them to end their meeting, Okonkwo was filled with such hatred that he killed the head messenger.

Thinking: I believe that the quote from the prompt is true. From all of the instances I discussed in the Summary section of this response, Okonkwo acts on his belief that confrontation and fighting will solve his problems. He criticizes those who think otherwise, believing that not wanting to fight is a “womanly” weakness, a weakness of cowards. This is part of his tragic flaw. Okonkwo’s fear of failing and fear of appearing weak lead him to believe that confrontation and fighting are the only ways to handle situations. What he doesn’t realize is that still he is “tragically helpless before the modern power and persuasion of the missionaries”. No matter how hard he believes in it, it isn’t enough. In the end, Okonkwo fails to make other people believe the same, which he notices after he kills the lead messenger and the Umuofian men let the other messengers get away. After realizing this, he gives up on his people, and commits suicide, knowing that his clan’s traditions and cultures are gone forever. I think that reacting in a violent way is not a very smart thing to do. In his situation, Okonkwo could have reasoned and tried to have been just as clever and persuasive as the missionaries. I think that by doing that he could have been more successful. He thought that not fighting was foolish, but I believe that fighting in their situation would actually have been foolish. If Umuofia had gone to war, which was what Okonkwo wanted, then they would have been outnumbered, and not even have been a match for the much more advanced and powerful Europeans. So therefore I do believe that this quote is true. Okonkwo represents a culture that is struggling to not fade away and struggling to keep its traditions, but his beliefs cause him to be tragically helpless in front of the European powers that brought so much change to Umuofia.

Nonfiction Write-up--The Children of Henry VIII by Alison Weir

Grace Irwin
Beginning with the death of King Henry VIII in 1547 and ending with Lady Elizabeth’s accession in 1558, The Children of Henry VIII, by Alison Weir, tells the fascinating nonfiction story of Prince Edward Tudor, son of Henry VIII and Jane Seymour; Lady Jane Dudley, niece of Henry VIII; Lady Mary Tudor, daughter of Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon; and Lady Elizabeth Tudor, daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn, and their conflicts over power, religion, and succession.

Henry’s will clearly stated who should succeed him. First would be Edward VI and his heirs, then the Lady Mary and her heirs, and then the Lady Elizabeth and her heirs. Edward VI, a ‘staunch Protestant’, succeeded his father to the throne when he was only nine years old. At the age of fifteen, he became sick and died, but members of his council who feared that Mary would return England to Catholicism tried to place Lady Jane Dudley on the throne. This rebellion failed, however, and Mary was proclaimed Queen in the summer of 1553. Lady Jane was beheaded, and Mary seemed to be rid of threats for the time being. Mary married Philip of Spain, the son of the Holy Roman Emperor, returned England to Catholicism, and began burning heretics. However, after she had two false pregnancies and burned more and more heretics, her people began to lose faith in her, and were overjoyed when she died in November of 1558, and was succeeded by the Lady Elizabeth.

Although some topics in this book may raise some controversy, the author, Alison Weir, remains objective throughout, telling mostly the facts. She also mentions some of the rumors that were circulating during this time period, and other uncertainties in this part of history, but never offers her opinion. She manages to convey a voice in her writing through describing the actions of people involved in this time, so that you can almost guess how she feels about the main ideas of this book, but still she remains objective. I think that as the author, she does an awesome job in making this book very interesting, and flow almost like a novel. It’s amazing how she’s pieced all of her resources together, looking specifically at different people’s actions and seeing how they tie into one another in order to tell such a complex story.

There were several big themes that played a role in this book. Religion and perception of gender are only a few. Religion played a part, in the fact that Henry VIII died a Catholic, yet all of his heirs were Protestants except for Mary. Mary was persecuted for holding mass in her home when it was forbidden by Edward VI, and when Mary became Queen, Elizabeth was forced to become Catholic. Also, disputes over religion across the country affected everyone. Mary believed it was her duty to God to rid her kingdom of all heretics, and that she must burn them all at the stake so that they would repent when they felt the heat of the fire, and therefore be saved from eternal damnation. At first she believed that the number of heretics would go down once she began the burnings, but it actually had the opposite effect; the people began to view those executed as martyrs, and still resisted the Catholic faith. Mary showed no mercy, and the burnings continued.

This concept greatly disturbs me. Being brought up in a century where you are taught to respect people who have different ideals, and living in a country that has religious freedom, made me wonder throughout the whole book: Who deserves to die such a horrific death when they simply love the same God as the person condemning them? Who deserves to die for not accepting someone else’s belief? It just shows how different things are now from the way they were back then. Religion played a big role in politics and the everyday lives of people, but this began to change after the Renaissance and the Reformation. I think that, in a way, Queen Mary actually fed the Reformation and Renaissance. Because she forced Catholicism down everyone’s throats and burned anyone at the stake who resisted, she made her people begin to hate Catholicism, which only made them welcome even more the possible accession of a Protestant princess.

Another big theme in this book was perception of gender. In different parts throughout the book, it mentions how it was important that Mary and Elizabeth get married. Throughout their entire lives, strategic marriages were attempted for Mary and Elizabeth that would benefit England. Once Mary became queen, her Council wanted her to marry quickly, because they thought that a woman could not rule a country. When she married Philip, he had some ambitions and plans that Mary vetoed, and so the idea that a woman was subordinate to her husband conflicted with her power over him as sovereign.

Even though I do not agree with the idea that women are subordinate to men, I do not think that Mary was best suited to rule England, for two reasons. One, which I don’t think is entirely her fault, was her education. Even though she had good tutors and was smart, she was not educated in affairs of the country and was not taught as a future Queen of England, and therefore wasn’t prepared intellectually for the task of ruling the kingdom. For this, I would actually blame Henry VIII, because he neglected to give Mary this education in the hope that he would have sons who would one day rule instead of her. Edward VI received an education that truly prepared him to rule; Mary didn’t.

The second reason has to do with her upbringing. She had an awful childhood: she was declared a bastard, separated from her mother, and put through other incidents that greatly scarred her emotionally. She wanted so much to love and be loved, that she soon became obsessed with the idea of marrying Philip after she became Queen. I think that this made her a little crazy. She was so determined to please her husband, and when she failed to have a child, it made her depressed and angry and incompetent. So therefore, in her circumstance, she wasn’t prepared emotionally, either, to rule England, and once again I blame her father. He treated her so badly after her mother died, not showing her love anymore, and really put her through a lot mentally, never thinking that one day she would actually rule. Overall, Henry VIII neglected his daughter and heir, and I feel like that is why she was incompetent, and why her reign was a dark period in English history.

There are some religious implications for me. I became Catholic when I was little, yet I respect and don’t criticize other denominations of Christianity, or any other religion. However, back in the sixteenth century, there was only one ‘true’ religion, and that religion was determined by the current monarch. If you lived in England and disagreed with the ruler, then you could be burnt at the stake. This made me question my faith a little, but made me think that Mary was a little misguided, and maybe a little crazy in the days of the burnings. It wasn’t even as if she were sending people who believed things completely different from her, she was killing people who loved the same God as she. How can you justify killing hundreds of people when they simply love God, yet have slightly different beliefs?

I think that there are also other religious implications for city, state—and entire world. Some people may blame Catholicism for the deaths of the many during Mary’s reign, and so the religion’s integrity might have been scarred a little. Sometimes now when I think about the history of Catholicism, I think of Bloody Mary, and that kind of disappoints me. I love my religion, yet feel like Mary’s reign was an embarrassing hour in its history, and I’m sure that other people may feel the same way. But, now we’re in a time of religious freedom and respect, which I believe is the best course for the world.

Many parts in this book can remind of me of other situations. Since the beginning of time, people have been struggling for power in the world, which was a big part of this book. After Edward VI died, one member of his council, the Duke of Northumberland, tried to put Lady Jane Dudley on the throne because he felt like he could easily influence her, and therefore have more power in government, like ruling through her name. This kind of reminded me of another situation where an outside source has influenced a monarch. During World War I in Russia, when the Tsarina of Russia was left to rule when the tsar left to fight in the war, she was highly influenced by Rasputin. I think that this type of situation can apply to many modern situations. Usually, leaders or rulers will be influenced by people who are close to them. I’m sure that rulers are always a little influenced by their husbands or wives once in a while, as well as their friends, and other family. That type of instance may be not harmful, and actually helpful. But, if someone is completely ruling through someone who is just a figure head, then that is the sign of a corrupt government, and a sign that things need to change.

Mary’s battle to cleanse her kingdom of all non-Catholics reminds me of learning about holy wars in history class, where some highly religious Christian or Islamic power would fight to gain land, and then force their religion onto the conquered people. The two situations are actually pretty different, but just the whole idea of someone trying to force their religion onto someone else is really similar. Like I said before, I think that religious freedom is the best course for the world, so that people can learn to respect their differences and then move on to deal with other matters that don’t have to do with religion. I think that one of the main problems during Mary’s reign was how she focused so much of her energy on trying to gain religious uniformity in England—so much so that she wasn’t able to fully devote herself to other matters, like politics, and England’s economy. It was actually proved that her efforts were wasted when everyone happily welcomed Elizabeth, a Protestant princess, as queen. It proved that she hadn’t wiped out everyone who had objected to Mary’s policies; therefore, you can never be successful when you are trying to completely force your beliefs onto someone else (a universal theme).

I learned several things from reading this book. I have always been interested in the Tudors; I’m not sure why, but writers and historians have obsessed over this royal family for a long time—writing books and making movies and TV series. I read a few Philippa Gregory historical fiction novels in eighth grade, starting with The Constant Princess up until The Queen’s Fool, because that era in history fascinates me. Of course, those books are fiction, but I still got the main ideas of what happened, even if the author made up some details. I actually read another of Alison Weir’s books before reading The Children of Henry VIII, called The Innocent Traitor (about the life of Lady Jane Grey). I had known that Alison Weir wrote nonfiction as well, and so that was why I picked The Children of Henry VIII to read. The Children of Henry VIII was almost like a novel in how it was written, but I still learned many new facts about the period of English history following the death of Henry VIII. I learned about how the actions and feelings of each person affected other people and related to important events; I learned how religion played an important role in the decisions of the government and the actions of the citizens; I learned about the true character of people through Weir’s remarkable piecing together of facts and events; and I learned about how events described in this book relate to things now, and how I can relate this book to things that have happened in my life and lifetime.

Although this book was well written and an interesting read, I still thought some parts were boring. I’ve come to learn that that’s what can be expected from nonfiction books—some parts may be interesting, but when you’re sticking completely to facts, at times it is going to get boring. I absolutely love reading fiction, and one major difference I’ve noticed between nonfiction and fiction is how the story is told. Fiction stories can be right now, in the moment—specifically detailing every part of the plot: the scene, the characters’ thoughts, etc., whereas in nonfiction it is much more general and just more like a collection of facts instead of a story where at all times you can picture being in the moment. I’ve read some pretty boring nonfiction books in my life (actually, some fiction ones, too), but The Children of Henry VIII was definitely one of the better ones. I think that part of the reason why I enjoyed it so much was the fact that I had a prior knowledge to the events described in the book. I think that that is key to reading a nonfiction book, so that you’re not totally confused while reading it. Luckily for me I had that advantage while reading, and that helped me to comprehend everything, realize significant events, and to truly digest The Children of Henry VIII.

The Lovely Bones By: Alice Sebold—Reading Log 9/17/09

Summary: Chapter 10 was about when Susie’s sister, Lindsey, and her boyfriend, Samuel Heckler, went to the statewide Gifted Symposium over the summer, which is like a summer camp for really smart people. The final challenge was supposed to be “Make the ultimate mousetrap”, but then was changed to “design the perfect murder”, which really upset Lindsey. Also, Susie discovered the key to leave her heaven, the key to seeing her dead grandparents. All she had to do was let go of Earth, and leave it behind.

Thinking: It was ironic how the new theme for the final challenge was the “perfect murder”, when Susie’s death had been the perfect murder. You would think that the new assistant principal who came up with the idea would have known about Lindsey’s sister, and would have been a little more sensitive about Lindsey’s situation at Gifted Camp.

If I were Susie, then I think I’d try to let go of Earth, and try to find my dead grandparents. She always said how she’s incredibly lonely, and finding her favorite grandpa could finally make her happy. She can’t change anything that’s happening on Earth, so she just needs to let go.

The Lovely Bones By: Alice Sebold—Reading Log 9/15/09

Summary: In what I read today, Susie’s dad began to have suspicions of Mr. Harvey. Susie was trying so hard in heaven to break through, and give him some kind to let him know that he was on the right track towards discovering what had happened to her, but she couldn’t, and just watched helplessly from her heaven. Susie’s dad called the police officer assigned to her case and asked him to check out Mr. Harvey, but the officer didn’t find anything out of the ordinary.

Thinking: I thought that it was really ironic in a sick way how Susie’s dad ended up building a tent with the man who murdered his daughter. I’m glad that her dad realized that something wasn’t right with Mr. Harvey. By the end of this book, hopefully, Susie’s murder will probably be solved, and if Mr. Harvey hadn’t asked him if he wanted to help him build a tent, then the mystery of Susie’s murder might never be solved.

On the page I left off on, Sam showed up at the Salmon’s house on Christmas Eve to see Lindsey. Lindsey thinks that Sam is cute, and so maybe she’ll be distracted during her visit. I think that maybe Susie will be upset and jealous, and maybe feel like Lindsey’s forgotten her. I think that Susie will maybe feel this way, because after Sam said “Merry Christmas” to Lindsey, Susie said that “Lindsey’s heart, like an ingredient recipe, was reduced,” and that “regardless of my death, she was thirteen, he was cute, and he had visited her on Christmas day”.

Letter About Literature--My Sister's Keeper

Dear Jodi Picoult,

When I was in the eighth grade, 13 years old, I read your book, My Sister’s Keeper. It was the kind of book that I don’t come across often—it deeply affected me emotionally, I thought about it for the longest time after I finished, and I was able to relate to it a little bit.

My mom was the first one to read My Sister’s Keeper in my family, when I was nine or ten years old. Obviously I was way too young to read it then, but I remember my mom crying one day when she had finished. I had the same reaction when I finished it, too, almost exactly one year ago from now. I sobbed for so long, even though my mom had told me the ending and I had been expecting it. For some reason it hit me really hard how horrible it is to lose a sibling, to lose a sister.

I am two and a half years younger than my older sister. My mom always jokes that I’m the “nice one”. She says that “if Catie would just be nice to Grace, Grace would be the best, most loyal, loving friend.” And I think that’s pretty true. For some, rare moments, I love having a sister. When she’s actually acting decent towards me, it’s really nice—we crack up at stuff together, and sometimes even have serious conversations.

But for eighty percent of the time, I can’t help but absolutely hate my sister. She can be so nasty, unhelpful, and mean to me at times—for no reason! I’m not an annoying little sister, or mean to her, and I don’t mess with her stuff. I just feel like I’m her punching bag whenever she’s in a bad mood. She knows how to make me hate myself, and bring out pure hatred for her.

Reading your book really made me think what would happen if I lost my sister, or what would happen to my sister if I died. It’s not the most pleasant thing to think about, but it was inevitable when I was reading My Sister’s Keeper.

I’ve never really lost someone in my life. The death of my great-grandmother a few years ago didn’t greatly affect me because we were never very close, and I was only six when my grandma died. I know that I can’t even fathom what it’s like to lose someone, and I probably won’t know until one day—hopefully many—years from now. When I was little I used to think a lot about what would happen if I lost my parents, but I never thought about losing my sister. I always thought that siblings were like married couples. You grow old—not necessarily together—but at the same time. The major difference is that you have each other since birth. That’s a lifetime, and until I read your book, I didn’t think about how easy it is for that to be taken away.

Even though it sounds like a stupid, feeble comparison, I couldn’t help but thinking that, if I was sobbing for a fictional character in a fiction book, how would I feel if I lost my own sister? Before I had said that I can’t fathom what it’s like to lose someone, but your book gave me a small insight. Even though sometimes I hate my sister, I still love her to death, and hope that when we’re adults we’ll be best friends. I learned from your book that you can’t take anything for granted, like a sister. I’m lucky to have a sister, and I realize that now.
Thanks for the amazing book,
Sincerely,
A fan

Comparing and Contrasting Christianity and Judaism

Too many times in history have there been wars and disputes over religion. The truth is that if people just stopped and tried to understand other religions, maybe then they would respect them. Maybe then the violence would stop. Christianity and Judaism, for example, seem different, but in fact are actually very similar—just with subtle differences. Their theism and holy book are very similar, though their beliefs of the messiah and their celebrations differ.
Monotheism is the belief in one god, whereas the belief in more than one god is polytheism. Both Christianity and Judaism are monotheistic—in fact, the god they love and worship is the same. The major change comes with the birth of Jesus Christ.

The birth of Jesus is the reason why Christianity and Judaism’s holy books are slightly different. Judaism’s holy book, the Torah, is the first five books of the Old Testament. Christianity’s holy book, the Bible, includes all of the Old Testament, and the New Testament, which begins with the birth of Jesus. The Torah doesn’t talk about Jesus, because Jews don’t believe that Jesus is the messiah.

A messiah is a savior or ‘prophesized deliverer’. Jews believed that Jesus was just another prophet, while Christians believe Jesus is their savior, their messiah. This is the major difference between Christianity and Judaism. Jews believe that Jesus was not the savior they were waiting for, and believe that their messiah has yet to come. That could be why their holidays and celebrations are so different.

Over 2,000 years ago in the city of Bethlehem, a boy named Jesus was born. His mother was the
Mary; his father, Joseph the carpenter. Before Jesus’ birth, an angel of the lord came to Joseph and said to him: “Mary will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” Right before his birth, Augustus Caesar ordered a census of his whole empire, and said that all men need to go to the place of their birth to be registered. So, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem, Joseph’s birth place, where Jesus was born in a manger in a stable because there was no room at the local inn.

This is the story of Jesus’ birth, which Christians celebrate at Christmas time. Also, there are other parts of Christmas that aren’t religious, like Christmas trees, presents, and, of course, Santa Claus. The cool thing about Christmas is that it also kind of celebrates the winter solstice, so anybody can celebrate it.

The most significant holiday for Christians is Easter. About three years after Jesus started teaching, he was convicted of blasphemy and of organizing a revolt against Rome. He was crucified, buried, and then—Christians believe— that after three days, he rose from the dead. Easter celebrates his resurrection from the dead, and that he died to forgive sin. And, like Christmas, there are other traditions at Easter that don’t really have anything to do with Christianity—like Easter eggs, bunnies, and candy.

One major misconception to non-Christian people (and even to some Christian people) is that the most significant holiday is Christmas. In reality, the most significant Christian holiday is Easter, because of their belief in the Resurrection of Jesus.

Thousands of years ago, the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt. Moses, a prophet, went to the pharaoh, trying to free the Jews. This is where the famous verse “Let my people go” comes from. The pharaoh refused, and so Jews believe that God unleashed terrible plagues upon the land of Egypt. One of them was the death of the first born son in every family, except for those whose doors were marked. These were the Jewish homes. The Jewish holiday, Passover, remembers when this horrible thing passed over them.

There are other Jewish celebrations like Hanukkah—the festival of lights, and bar/bat mitzvah. Bar mitzvah and bat mitzvah celebrate when a Jewish boy or girl turns thirteen and is recognized as a son or daughter of the commandments, or basically recognized as an adult.
There is also another misconception concerning Jewish holidays. Many people (Non-Jewish and some Jewish) think that Hanukkah is a major holiday—a “Jewish- Christmas”. However, the only similarity between Hanukkah and Christmas is that they both fall around the same time of year. And, actually Hanukkah is not a major Jewish holiday. Hanukkah doesn’t celebrate anything that was written in the Torah, while holidays like Passover (which would be more significant) do. Yom Kippur is a major holiday which celebrates when God forgave the Jews for worshipping a golden calf, as well as Rosh Hashanah, which is known as the Jewish New Year.

Christianity and Judaism are more similar than most people know. Christianity grew out of Judaism. Jesus Christ actually grew up Jewish. Their ideas of love and forgiveness are the same, and they both love and worship the same god. People need to understand other religions, so that they can respect them. Now, hopefully you understand Christianity and Judaism a little better. Understanding leads to respect, and respect will hopefully lead to less wars and disputes over religions all over the world. That’s why everyone needs to know and understand.