Listen to the Violin Master (Yeah... she knows how to live)

Music Is Time by Jill Bialosky

Music is time, said the violin master.

You can’t miss the stop or you’ll miss the train.

One, two, three, four, one, two, three, four,

one, two, three, four.

 

She clapped her hands together

as the boy moved the bow across the strings.

One, two, three, four, one, two, three, four, the violin master shouted,

one, two, three, four,

 

louder and more shrill so that her voice

traveled through the house like a metronome,

guiding him, commanding him to translate the beat,

to trust his own internal rhythm.

 

Good boy, she said.

See how hard you have to be on yourself?

How will your violin know who you are

unless you make it speak?

 

 

     Music is my life. I don't how else I can express that to everyone that knows who I am. Perhaps if played a piece like Badinerie on the flute you might really understand my passion for the art of sound. I've loved music all my life but it wasn't until I first picked up a flute in 5th grade that I understand the meaning of playing music from the heart. The structure and sound of a flute is just so beautiful that I can't really put it into words. Time is everything in music... that's something I was told since the beginning and it really is. You can play the piece wrong from beginning to end and it wouldn't be a problem if the timing was right throughout. You could play a piece perfectly but it would be awful if the timing was wrong. I really don't understand why that is but I guess it's a matter of time before I get a firm understanding of that idea/rule in music. I remember how hard my teachers were on me if I didn't have the timing right. One day... one day I'll write a blog post in response to the question I once made on why timing is more important than getting the notes right.

   

     I noticed that this poem doesn't talk about a topic in general, it grasps a fragment of the boy's life; his violin lesson. I think grasping that moment made the poem more powerful than talking about how music is time in general because it made the complexity of the phrase, music is time, a bit similar... if that makes sense. As I'm sitting down and thinking about the title of the poem, I'm starting to create my thought on what that means. Music is time... it's true. It's true because the beat is just one, solid tone that needs rhythm to be added in order to create that art which I so dearly love: music. 

      A line I really found powerful was, How will your violin know who you are unless you make it speak? I found this line powerful because you would think that for someone/something to know you, you have to speak to it and introduce yourself but in music, the instrument knows who you are through the music you play and your level of knowledge on the instrument. I think that Jill is trying to say that music isn't just a sound, but a voice and that art, in all forms, isn't just art; art tells a story and portrays expressions through creativity, imagination, and feeling.  

The last line on the thirds stanza (to trust his own internal rhythm) means to play music that comes from you. As a musician, that means to trust that you're a good musician and that if you play something wrong, keep going but keep the tempo so the piece isn't thrown off balance. As a person, I think that line means that you should trust your instincts because they sometimes know more than you do. Your instincts help you make decisions and decisions are the structures of life because one choice leads to another and so on... your life is practically full of endless possibility.

 

      Since this poem is about music, it would make sense if I first draw an inference based on music. Now that I've thought about the title for some time now, I think that the poet is trying to say that to be able to learn something, in this case music, you must have a solid understanding on the basics; you can't play music well if you don't how to maintain a stable tempo (the timing of the piece). I think that she's implying what every good musician says/knows: timing is everything in music. To say that music is time is to say that time is the base of all music. When the poet writes commanding him to translate the beat I think of time being music itself... in disguise. The beat goes on but what makes it a beat and not music is that it's one simple tone that keeps the music from continuing fluently.

      But thinking of this on a deeper level the violin is a wise person guiding someone younger (the boy) into life, which in this case is the music piece that the boy is playing on the violin which can be thought of as the young person's heart and brain. Like I mentioned before, decisions are what move someone on with their life but their instincts are what lead them there. So when the violin master continuously repeating music is time, the wise person is teaching the younger one that decisions create life. I think that the last stanza was placed in the right spot. See how hard you have to be on yourself? how will your violin know who you are unless you make it speak? ; See how much you have left to learn about life? How are your heart and mind going to know the person you're going to be in life if you don't let them guide you?

    

      Music is my life... music is life... life is a music piece; it has to start as well as it ends. The beginning marks a first impression on a music piece as well as a person. The end has to leave an impact on the musician and the audience as well as the world in general. I follow my instincts... most of the time so I guess in life a task for me would be to keep the tempo and not go to fast or too slow because it would ruin the entire music piece (this was meant to be thought of metaphorically). The piece I play everyday has some low notes and some high notes, too. Each breath I take is one more note in the myriad of notes that I played and that I'm going to play as the piece advances. I want to make an impact on the world and on as many people as I can, whether the impact was small or big or great or not-so-great (which I hope isn't the case for anyone). My goal in life is to play music for a long time and that when the piece I was selected to play comes to an end, it would end on a good note... remembering those words of wisdom that the violin master spoke.   

How the Past Leads the Future

  It's a new year!! I haven't really made a resolution; I mean I always want to learn from the mistake and the praises I receive in order to help shape who I am and who I will be in the future. It's always the past that helps a person make his/her way to the future and its past (the present). Which brings me to what I want to talk/write about today.
  I'm reading The Vampire Diaries: Stefan's Diaries Vol. 1: Origins by L.J Smith. Since I just started the book today I haven't read much of it but I've read the series already. I've known how Stefan and Elena get through the various obstacles that try to tear their love apart in each and every one of the books. But I was most eager to open this book and begin reading because well the title is pretty self-explanatory; it's about the origins and how Stefan met Katherine, the girl he fell deeply in love with before discovering she was a vampire. This is the book that explains how it all started. It "reveals what really happened between Stefan, Damon (his brother), and Katherine - and how the Vampire Diaries love triangle began," quoting the blurb.
  How it all really began is what I'll find out as I flip each page of the book and let the Salvatore brothers' history sink into my mind. The past, I find, is as valuable or sometimes even more than the present itself. 
  One thing I've always wondered is if Damon is an antagonist or not? There are so many times throughout the series in which he has made it seem like the antagonist because of how he makes Stefan and Elena suffer but then there are times when I just say no, he's not bad because he wouldn't have saved Stefan and Elena's lives on multiple occasions if he truly was an antagonist. My hopes are that with this book, i get to know Damon as the person he was before the eternal brotherhood rivalry broke out between Stefan and him. I hope to get an insight on the fragment of humanity he had within himself before he decided to trap it and let ice freeze it inside of him.
  Considering that this took place in 1864 (it's not based on a true story) I'm keeping in mind that the 1860s are not much like today and that setting has a huge role in how Stefan and Damon have changed
over time... before meeting Elena and breaking out the rivalry that was lying restless inside each of them once more.
  This is the start of it all. The first time Stefan saw Katherine. The first time he knew that he couldn't go a day without seeing her. The day Stefan found out Katherine was a vampire. The day Katherine didn't want to choose between Stefan or Damon so she chose both of them. The day that made Stefan's and Damon's lives last for an eternity. And the rapid growth of a rivalry that was stronger than the love Stefan and Damon had felt for Katherine.

Vampires Again: They've Changed My Reading/Writing Life (no, it's not Twilight) *Mega Spoiler Alert*

  Well, this will be the last blog post I have to write for the year 2010. Wow, I've read so many books, each so well-written, intriguing, and just amazing in their unique ways. But there's one series that really has impacted my writing and reading style/life greatly.
  To start the year off, I was completely, totally obsessed with The Vampire Diaries by L.J Smith. I still am and I'm waiting for the next book in the series to come out next year. The way that she was so descriptive was, to me, amazing because trying to use very descriptive language in my writing always turns out boring or unnecessary to my story. It's the series in general that has impacted my style in the language arts. One thing I really learned from that series was that I'm a vampire; OK no, that's not true (umm... hehehe...).
  As a writer, I learned that in fantasy, there's always some sort of interaction between humans and fantastical creatures. In the Vampire Diaries, that interaction is the base of the plot. I learned that the bad guy, or antagonist, is the person you'd least expect it to be. Just like any other story, for the most part, the main character ends up changing in some way, whether it's helpful to their society or not.
  There has to be some sort of battle between good and evil throughout the book. In The Vampire Diaries, I used to think that the battle was between Stefan and Damon because Damon was always making Stefan and Elena suffer since he, too, loved Elena. But as I started to type up this post, I realized that no... he was never evil himself; it was his past and all of the painful experiences that he'd gone through that were evil themselves; he was just a victim of them, though he never wanted to admit it. This bring me to my next point.
  Moments. As tiny as they can be, together they form an event in life and eventually a life itself. We all have those good moments and those bad moments. And there are those moments that one would rather not share with anyone. Reading the series as a writer, moments must have purpose in a book, especially in fantasy because that one moment can be the one that changes the course that one character's life veers off to. Like when Elena walked in to Stefan's room and found him feeding on a white dove (book 1). It was that moment when she realized that hey, Stefan is a vampire. If L.J Smith would've decided to have made Elena find out later, the book would've been written differently.
  I would, of course, prefer to let the words of each page sink in as a reader because I enjoy the story more. God, Stefan and Damon are so attractive (but Damon more) in the actual T.V show, The Vampire Diaries (Thursdays @8pm on the CW11 *-*). Anyway, Stefan, as any other main character, has a rebellious side to him. But their stubbornness is what often leads them to their problems. You need to read the series to understand why Stefan is against drinking human blood but it's basically because he feels that he's taking someone else's life so he can get the energy he needs to sustain his life.  
  The biggest theme/idea I got from reading The Vampire Diaries was that there are times when trying to bring peace can lead up to creating war. I really hate turning on the T.V or reading the newspaper and constantly watching/reading the same thing; there's yet a war going on. War is caused by many reasons and in the end, it's the government that gains something from it. But is it necessary? I would love to say no because that's what I thought until I looked at the subject closer and realized that some wars are fought to bring peace to two different sides or to settle disputes that without war, would end up in massive chaos. In the end, the people don't have a voice if there's someone that's superior to them.
  To conclude my final blog post for the year 2010 (that sounded nice) I want to tie up these ideas that I evolved throughout this post. L.J Smith is undoubtedly an author that I admire both as a writer and as a reader because her series, The Vampire Diaries is packed with ideas and words that combined... combined... combined what? Well combined, are amazing, awesome, wickedly great, descriptive, and outstanding. I have so much more to say about this series so I'm definitely going to write about it in my next post because they're really powerful ideas that I would prefer to write about separately.
  Enjoy life, make new year's resolutions, make the holidays amazing because waking up early next year will be painful and just... chill. So yeah... watch the Vampire Diaries. =)

If Cruelty Can't Be Beautiful, Why Have Perspective?

  If there's one thing that I dislike about the way the world is, it's that it's so cruel. I, as well as many others, feel that something must be done about cruelty because in our perspective, it's awful. 
  There's this small line that I came upon while I was reading Possessed by Kate Cann that I found quite thought provoking. The line was, Beauty is Cruel. Cruelty is Beautiful. I thought that this line was a bit disturbing at first due to the fact that many try to make this world a better place. Afterwards, I looked a bit deeper and I realized that my first reaction to this line was to be perturbed because I was taught that cruelty is just purely distasteful; I basically grew up feeling this way towards cruelty because the perspective of everyone surrounding me was just that; disturbing.
  My reaction was both right and wrong. What made it right and wrong was that cruelty is just a matter of perspective, as are many other situations in life. For others, like whoever wrote this line, cruelty isn't awful; it's quite nice... quite beautiful. But according to them, what makes it beautiful? Is it because suffering, to them, is a pleasant sight, or is it because knowing that this world isn't perfect is a comfort?
  Perspective makes up about 50% of our daily lives. Though what we think may seem unimportant to society, if no one had a say, how would we be living today? Would we still be "uncivilized"? Would "civilized" even be a word to describe a group of people? Though perspective is an immense part of how we live, who we're surrounded by builds a base for what we think.
  So what really makes up one's perspective? To me, perspective is made up of what others have told me to believe but also, what I think about what they say and whether I agree with it or not. It's made up of what I've experienced and what I learned as a result of that experience.
  I remember growing up laughing if a guy in class got pink construction paper but that's only because I had been shown that pink is a girl color. To be honest, I'm highly opposed to this statement; not that I'm emo but i prefer black over pink. What is it that made it bad if a guy liked pink? Why was it bad? It was because in others' perspective, pink was just a girl color so I went along with it.
  Thinking deeper, I'm wondering, if we are all entitled to an opinion, why do many refuse to share it and decide to go along with what everyone else says? There's this certain fear that many have that if they think distinctively than those surrounding them, they'll be treated differently or they might think that what they have to say is wrong.
  So I guess that beauty can be cruel; if you think it is than well, it is. Cruelty might just as well be beautiful if injustice is wrong. There's no "correct" answer and you don't have to believe what those surrounding you say if you don't believe it yourself. It's called perspective and everyone is entitled to one.

You Can't Trust the Directors of Movies that are Based on Books that Have Been Previously Written

  Here I am, freezing and angry because they won't turn the heater up in this place cornered by 4 walls that I know of as my home. I'm still taking in the fact that I've now seen Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows twice; I've never done that with any other movie. Though I'm still trying to take in all of the details from the movie, I'm also going over the parts,in utter disappointment, that they took out or made less intense and thought-provoking as they were in the book.
  I know that this isn't the first book that they've made into a movie and I know as well that it won't be the last one. But the thing with movies is that they tend to ruin the book and not just because they take some scenes that aren't important. Every scene, to me at least, in a book is well-written, for the most part, and has a purpose; if it wasn't meaningful then the author wouldn't have thought to write it in the book in the first place because it just wastes paper. In my opinion, removing scenes from a book when making a movie takes away purpose to the film.
  When you're writing a book, you're basically taking ingredients and testing them and mixing them until you have created a whole new appetizing invention that needs every single ingredient in order to have that same savory flavor. When a director removes a scene from the book, he/she (I'll let you pick the gender of the director) is basically removing an ingredient, as diminutive as it may seem, that changes the course that the author's enticing invention takes.
 Like in the part where Hedwig dies (tear, tear); in the book, J.K Rowling makes it so emotional that I really start to cry. Her use of words to express her death makes it more painful and truly makes me feel. Disappointingly, in the movie, we just see Hedwig being killed by a Death Eater's spell and she just falls from the sky. It was still really sad and heartbreaking (yes I am very emotional) but it didn't have the same power, actually seeing it, than it did with J.K Rowling's use of words.
  Isn't a picture worth more than a thousand words? Then why why wasn't this scene as powerful as it could've been? I generally like the books that are turned into movies because I can see how director's see the story. Even though I enjoy watching movies that were based on books I've read, if it's a fantasy book, it destroys my imagination, turning my fragments of creativity into the pile of old books with torn pages that are mistaken with nothing but rubble.
  This is the bad thing about watching the movie before reading the book; when you watch the movie first, you see how the directors want you to see, just to name a couple, Hogwarts or Terabithia. Actually reading the book first, declares your mind the creator of the world and you see the imaginary world and myriad of creatures how you feel like picturing them. The purpose of writing a book in which the world is fantastical, is so it represents a larger theme where you can add your own spices to it; the author just creates a base for this world.
  You can't trust the directors of movies that are based on books that have been previously written. If you do trust them, you're an idiot... no, I'm just kidding but honestly, they can NOT be trusted. Don't be mistaken, I admire, respect, and thank the director that casted Rupert Grint (better known as Ron Weasley), Emma Watson (Hermione Granger), Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), and Oliver and James Phelps (Fred and George!!!).
  You might completely agree with me or you might contrast in opinion so comment if you'd like. Do you know of any other books that have been partially screwed by the movies?   

Truth: When Hidden for Good Reasons Can Prove to Be Bad (*Spoiler Alert!*)

   So here I am, typing up another blog post for ELA. Luckily, this one's for Harry Potter.
  Harry Potter. Albus Dumbledore. Both are united by power being the great wizards they are and of pasts, so painful and horrific that, to others, is almost unimaginable. But that's where they're both separated; everyone knows about The Boy Who Lived but how many people really knew about Ariana or about the friendship between Dumbledore and Grindelwald before their epic duel?
  Harry thought that he knew Dumbledore because he had confided in him and he had, in a way, been Harry's mentor. But when Rita Skeeter published everything about Ariana, Dumbledore's sister, Harry started to question him and that questioning only grew when he learned that Dumbledore and Grindelwald had been friends and that they had planned to control the muggle world. So in the end, I was only able to say that it seems that Harry hardly knew Dumbledore; Dumbledore had been the one that knew Harry really well.
  In the end, something I started to wonder was, did Dumbledore really help Harry? Or was he trying to gain something by killing Voldemort? I had never doubted Dumbledore's care for Harry but I have started to wonder whether or not he thought about gaining something from Harry's victories.
  Trust is something that you gain you don't just automatically have someone's trust. Trust is dangerous yet safe because placing your trust in the wrong person's hands can end up with you being killed. Yet there are also those that place their trust in  what seem to be the wrong people but end up being unlikely heroes but their actions make them enemies to both good and evil.
  If you don't know who I'm talking about then you should re-read Harry Potter 7. Severus Snape was in the Order of the Phoenix and he was also a Death Eater. If he was on both extremes, then which side was he truly on? In Harry Potter 3, he saved Harry from being attacked by lupin when he turned into a werewolf. He could've just let him die or was he thinking of his obligation as a teacher?
  Dumbledore and Snape were both heroes but who was the greater hero? Dumbledore showed a lot more care and affection towards Harry but he made Harry feel like he never knew who he was. Snape shows no sign of care for Harry but yet he has protected Harry many times.
  Truth. Snape never told Harry much. Dumbledore's decision in not telling Harry about his past when he was alive effected Harry greatly because he had to hear it from Rita Skeeter which, being a Harry Potter fan, completely sucks and is very sad. In my opinion, one must speak with truth personally as opposed to hearing it from someone else because other words that aren't yours penetrate your feelings more than if you said it up front. 
  Truth is, Dumbledore chose to make these decisions for reasons that are unknown to us and will probably never be answered. He wanted to prepare Harry for time came to confront Voldemort and by not giving him answers, I think he tried to teach Harry to solve his problems independently.
  Oh snap!! Ok so one last comment. I just realized that Grindelwald and Dumbledore were the greatest wizards of their time when they confronted each other and in the end, Dumbledore won. Now history is repeating itself and like last time, good wins because Harry was able to defeat Dumbledore.

Hogwarts Was Never Created

  Harry Potter. That first sentence says it all. It marks the beginning of a journey, the beginning of an era, it marks the beginning of a story that has, since the first book came out, captivated millions. But most importantly, it introduces us to Hogwarts, a school in which a really powerful wizard, known as Harry Potter, has been enrolled in that J.K Rowling discovered.  
  Yes, you heard right, J.K Rowling did NOT create Hogwarts, she discovered it. Hogwarts was always there but no one decided to write about it because being muggles, we didn't know that such things as magic were possible. This kinda reminds me of Bridge to Terabithia because I didn't know of Terabithia until Katherine Paterson helped Jess and Leslie open the doors to Terabithia for me.
  Harry Potter. Now, who is Harry Potter? Laugh all you want but the answer to this question is more complicated than you think. It's a complicated question because there are, like, a billion answers to this question and all, for the most part, are true. It all depends on perspective. For example, if you're Harry's uncle, Vernon, you might say that Harry is a very troubled boy and that he's good for nothing... one of the worst of his lot. If you were Hermione or Ron, you might say that Harry is a really great, caring friend and that he can be somewhat of a troublemaker but that he's also courageous. But being him that we're talking about, Harry might say something like, "I'm just me".
  Another reason why this is such a complicated question is because there are so many parts to this answer that not even J.K Rowling knows. You can attempt to fully answer this question but there's always many more questions that follow your explanation. It's practically impossible to not have a question.
  What lured me into the Harry Potter series was the possibility that such a wizarding world like that could really exist. Even though I've read all 7 books in the series I haven't really learned everything I wish I could've about Hogwarts. I think it would be really helpful if there was a book by J.K Rowling just about Hogwarts then it will really help me understand Harry and Dumbledore as well as others a bit more (not that I ever really understood what went on in their minds).
  Well, to conclude I would like to, once again, repeat what I first said: J.K Rowling did NOT create Hogwarts. Hogwarts has always existed since the day it was first founded (I temporarily forgot when in time this happened) but it was J.K Rowling that told us that it existed by writing her first Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. Ever since then Hogwarts has inspired her to continue to write such a well-known and well-written series that has caught the attention of many readers.
  So do you agree with my logic? Can you prove me wrong? (Don't worry it's completely cool if you prove me wrong [not]). =)

     **Note: Harry Potter 7 in theaters in 4 days!!!**