Tuesday, November 18, 2008
To me, no personality can be into a single, narrow category. People aren't always one way or another. In fact, some people might not even be more of one thing than another.
There are certain situations, preferences and biases, that affect a person's attitude. With some people, they have one attitude, and with others they have another.
I think Mr. Covey was trying to abridge a subject that should have had it's own book into a single chapter. Human attitudes are simply too broad a subject to write a few pages on and then say that those pages have everything there is to know about attitudes and personalities.
Writing this book, Sean Covey seems to have only barely touched on human personalities.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
For instance, "Begin With the End In Mind", the second habit, talks about knowing where you're going before you even get started.
The chapter says that this approach to things can help you get them done faster, more efficiently, and with a better mind-set. I think that that is 100% true.
Sometimes, certain things are harder to do than others. You just don't want to do them and you absolutely can not make yourself get them over with. But when you pause for just a second and think about how you'll feel once you've done whatever it is you need to do, it is suddenly far, far easier to go and accomplish that task.
Also, there is something called a personal mission statement, a motto that states what your life is all about.
To have a personal mission statement is to have laid out the most basic guidelines you want to live by.
I'll be working on my own mission statement, and I'm sure many of my classmates will be as well.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Honestly, people. Whatever happened to good literature?
The things I HATE about the Twilight Saga:
- That they're called a 'saga'. Why can't it just be called a series? Is it special or something?
- The 'vampires' aren't even vampires. Call me crazy, but isn't a vampire an evil demon that feeds on human blood, is scared of the Christian cross, burns when exposed to sunlight, and hates the smell of garlic? How is that Edward? He ate pizza. Last time I checked, most pizzas had garlic.
- Bella. I think Stephanie Meyer decided to make up the weakest minded, most boring, unremarkable character that she could just to see how many people would actually like her. I mean really... the girl is... ridiculous. She's a stereotype MarySue damsel-in-distress. I can't find a single character discrepancy that would make this type of heroine figure even remotely acceptable.
- The books are sexist. They give the impression that a woman is only important if her man is. The woman is weaker, the woman is always in distress, and the woman is utterly nothing when paralleled by the man.
So, people tell me why these book are appealing to you? Is it the extremely subtle (but very acceptable) eroticism between Edward and Bella? Is the the perfect of Edward's devotion to Bella (or even hers to him)? Is it the fact that some women apparently still like the damsel to be small and helpless, always being rescued by her leading man?
Are these things what have made the series (sorry, saga) so appealing? Have these things gained thousands of followers despite the bad plot line, underdeveloped characters, unintelligent writing, and cheesy, naive romantic notions?
Honestly, I thought the only good characters were Jacob, Jasper. They were the only real ones. They had character flaws, but I had to love them anyway. They were just an arrogant boy with jealousy problems who didn't always know the best course of actions, and a man who loved his woman and had a dark past and evident demons.