I have just returned from a very dull and soul-destroying council meeting. Whilst I understand that such meetings are vital in the mechanics of the council, they are not the best places for 18 year olds to congregate.
The meeting was held in Guildhall, in a large lecture theatre. at the front of the room was a long table, of 10 councillors, and the Mayor of Winchester. In front of this were 4 more councillors, facing the "audience". This audience was made up of the other councillors, sat spaced apart in rows, with name cards and microphones set up with each one.
The meeting began with the arrival of the Mayor, at which point everybody stood up, and bowed. Mr Mayor then proceeded to explain that the purpose of the meeting was to agree on a budget, but that there were other matters to deal with first. The council then went through each item in the book of minutes.
First of all were any announcements i.e The Landlord Service and Councils Service passing their yearly survey. Next were any apologies (absences) followed by 30 minutes of Q&A, where the councillors proceeded to argue and debate about matters such as council housing, and grants for voluntary organisations.
The next item to be discussed on the agenda was any petitions, of which there were none.
Finally, the councillors began to discuss the budget, however, by this time, the public gallery was full of discontented brain-dead teenagers, who, after over an hour and a half of this soul-destroying experience, left the meeting. I feel I must also add at this point, that we were not the only people in the room who were becoming restless, as one councillor seated in front of me began playing with his Blackberry, and 2 councillors, as well as the Mayor himself, on the main table, were eating some form of confectionery.
However I must admit that this was a new experience for me, and was relatively interesting for the first 20 minutes, however i do not have the capability to understand what the councillors were talking about, and so am really hoping that this will be the last council meeting that I am required to attend.
Thursday 18 February 2010
Tuesday 16 February 2010
Week 2 Seminar Reading
For anybody struggling to understand the seminar reading, I have found a fantastic source that simplifies it and makes it a lot easier to understand!
Also check out http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/onliberty/section1.rhtml
JS Mill- On Liberty (Introduction)
The object of this Essay is to assert one very simple principle, as entitled to govern absolutely the dealings of society with the individual in the way of compulsion and control, whether the means used be physical force in the form of legal penalties, or the moral coercion of public opinion. That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil, in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the conduct from which it is desired to deter him must be calculated to produce evil to someone else. The only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign." — John Stuart Mill, Essay on Liberty.
In this essay Mill also warns of a second danger to liberty, which democracies are prone to, namely, the tyranny of the majority. In a representative democracy, if you can control the majority (and get them to vote for, and elect, your candidates) then you can control everyone (because your candidates, once "democratically elected", will pass whatever laws are needed for this, as was done by Hitler's agents in the 1930s in Nazi Germany and seems to be happening today in the U.S.A.).
Here's what Mill writes in the Introduction to On Liberty about the tyranny of the majority:
Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant — society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it — its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and, if possible, prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. — On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7.
http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/jsmill.htm
Mary Wollstonecraft- A Vindication Of The Rights Of Women
Chapter IV
CHAPTER 4OBSERVATIONS ON THE STATE OF DEGRADATION TO WHICH WOMAN IS REDUCED BY VARIOUS CAUSES.That woman is degraded is, I think, clear. The power of generalizing ideas, of drawing comprehensive conclusions from individual observations, is the only acquirement for an immortal being that deserves the name of knowledge. Without it, where is the store laid up to clothe the soul when it leaves the body? This power has not only been denied to women; but writers have insisted that it is inconsistent with their sexual character.The grand source of female folly and vice has ever appeared to me to arise from narrowness of mind. Pleasure is the business of a woman's life, according to the present modification of society, and while it continues to be so, little can be expected from such weak beings. Exalted by their inferiority (this sounds like a contradiction) they constantly demand homage as women.Ah! why do women, I write with affectionate solicitude, condescend to receive a degree of attention and respect from strangers? Confined in cages, like the feathered race, they have nothing to do but to plume themselves, and stalk with mock-majesty from perch to perch. The passions of men have thus placed women on thrones; and, till mankind become more reasonable, it is to be feared that women will avail themselves of the power which they attain with the least exertion.Lewis the XIVth spread factitious manners and flattered women by a puerile attention to the whole sex. A king is always a king, and a woman always a woman: his authority and her sex, ever stand between them and rational converse. With a lover, I grant she should be so, and her sensibility will naturally lead her to endeavour to excite emotion, not to gratify her vanity but her heart. This I do not allow to be coquetry, it is the artless impulse of nature, I only exclaim against the sexual desire of conquest, when the heart is out of the question.This desire is not confined to women; "I have endeavoured," says Lord Chesterfield, "to gain the hearts of twenty women, whose persons I would not have given a fig for." The libertine who in a gust of passion, takes advantage of unsuspecting tenderness, is a saint when compared with this cold-hearted rascal.I lament that women are systematically degraded by receiving trivial attentions. I scarcely am able to govern my muscles, when I see a man start with eager solicitude to lift a handkerchief, or shut a door, when the LADY could have done it herself, had she only moved a pace or two.Men, in their youth, are prepared for professions, and marriage is not considered as the grand feature in their lives; whilst women, on the contrary, have no other scheme to sharpen their faculties. To rise in the world, and have the liberty of running from pleasure to pleasure, they must marry advantageously, and to this object their time is sacrificed, and their persons often legally prostituted.Yet, novels, music, poetry and gallantry, all tend to make women the creatures of sensation. It would be an endless task to trace the variety of meannesses, cares, and sorrows, into which women are plunged by the prevailing opinion.I am fully persuaded, that we should hear of none of these infantine airs, if girls were allowed to take sufficient exercise and not confined in close rooms till their muscles are relaxed and their powers of digestion destroyed. "Educate women like men," says Rousseau , "and the more they resemble our sex the less power will they have over us." This is the very point I aim at. I do not wish them to have power over men; but over themselves.In the same strain have I heard men argue against instructing the poor. "Teach them to read and write," say they, "and you take them out of the station assigned them by nature." Ignorance is a frail base for virtue!In the regulation of a family, in the education of children, understanding is particularly required: strength both of body and mind. Now, from all the observation that I have been able to make, women of sensibility are the most unfit for this task, because they will infallibly, carried away by their feelings, spoil a child's temper. The management of the temper, the first and most important branch of education, requires the sober steady eye of reason; a plan of conduct equally distant from tyranny and indulgence; yet these are the extremes that people of sensibility alternately fall into; always shooting beyond the mark.Polygamy is another physical degradation; and a plausible argument for the custom is drawn from the well-attested fact, that in the countries where it is established, more females are born than males. Forster, after observing that of the two sexes amongst animals, the most vigorous and hottest constitution always prevails, and produces its kind; he adds,- "If this be applied to the inhabitants of Africa, it is evident that the men there, accustomed to polygamy, are enervated by the use of so many women, and therefore less vigorous; the women on the contrary, are of a hotter constitution... and thus the generality of children are born females."The necessity of polygamy, therefore, does not appear; yet when a man seduces a woman, it should I think, be termed a LEFT-HANDED marriage, and the man should be LEGALLY obliged to maintain the woman and her children. The woman who is faithful to the father of her children demands respect, and should not be treated like a prostitute; though I readily grant, that if it be necessary for a man and woman to live together in order to bring up their offspring, nature never intended that a man should have more than one wife.A woman who has lost her honour, imagines that she cannot fall lower, and as for recovering her former station, it is impossible; prostitution becomes her only refuge. This, however, arises, in a great degree, from the state of idleness in which women are educated, always taught to look up to man for a maintenance, and to consider their persons as the proper return for his exertions to support them.In tracing the causes that in my opinion, have degraded woman, I not laid any great stress upon the example of a few women (Sappho, Eloisa, Mrs. Macaulay, the Empress of Russia, Madame d'Eon, etc). These, and many more, may be reckoned exceptions; and, are not all heroes, as well as heroines, exceptions to general rules? I wish to see women neither heroines nor brutes; but reasonable creatures.
http://www.btinternet.com/~glynhughes/squashed/wollstonecraft.htm
Also check out http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/onliberty/section1.rhtml
JS Mill- On Liberty (Introduction)
The object of this Essay is to assert one very simple principle, as entitled to govern absolutely the dealings of society with the individual in the way of compulsion and control, whether the means used be physical force in the form of legal penalties, or the moral coercion of public opinion. That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil, in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the conduct from which it is desired to deter him must be calculated to produce evil to someone else. The only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign." — John Stuart Mill, Essay on Liberty.
In this essay Mill also warns of a second danger to liberty, which democracies are prone to, namely, the tyranny of the majority. In a representative democracy, if you can control the majority (and get them to vote for, and elect, your candidates) then you can control everyone (because your candidates, once "democratically elected", will pass whatever laws are needed for this, as was done by Hitler's agents in the 1930s in Nazi Germany and seems to be happening today in the U.S.A.).
Here's what Mill writes in the Introduction to On Liberty about the tyranny of the majority:
Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant — society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it — its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and, if possible, prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. — On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7.
http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/jsmill.htm
Mary Wollstonecraft- A Vindication Of The Rights Of Women
Chapter IV
CHAPTER 4OBSERVATIONS ON THE STATE OF DEGRADATION TO WHICH WOMAN IS REDUCED BY VARIOUS CAUSES.That woman is degraded is, I think, clear. The power of generalizing ideas, of drawing comprehensive conclusions from individual observations, is the only acquirement for an immortal being that deserves the name of knowledge. Without it, where is the store laid up to clothe the soul when it leaves the body? This power has not only been denied to women; but writers have insisted that it is inconsistent with their sexual character.The grand source of female folly and vice has ever appeared to me to arise from narrowness of mind. Pleasure is the business of a woman's life, according to the present modification of society, and while it continues to be so, little can be expected from such weak beings. Exalted by their inferiority (this sounds like a contradiction) they constantly demand homage as women.Ah! why do women, I write with affectionate solicitude, condescend to receive a degree of attention and respect from strangers? Confined in cages, like the feathered race, they have nothing to do but to plume themselves, and stalk with mock-majesty from perch to perch. The passions of men have thus placed women on thrones; and, till mankind become more reasonable, it is to be feared that women will avail themselves of the power which they attain with the least exertion.Lewis the XIVth spread factitious manners and flattered women by a puerile attention to the whole sex. A king is always a king, and a woman always a woman: his authority and her sex, ever stand between them and rational converse. With a lover, I grant she should be so, and her sensibility will naturally lead her to endeavour to excite emotion, not to gratify her vanity but her heart. This I do not allow to be coquetry, it is the artless impulse of nature, I only exclaim against the sexual desire of conquest, when the heart is out of the question.This desire is not confined to women; "I have endeavoured," says Lord Chesterfield, "to gain the hearts of twenty women, whose persons I would not have given a fig for." The libertine who in a gust of passion, takes advantage of unsuspecting tenderness, is a saint when compared with this cold-hearted rascal.I lament that women are systematically degraded by receiving trivial attentions. I scarcely am able to govern my muscles, when I see a man start with eager solicitude to lift a handkerchief, or shut a door, when the LADY could have done it herself, had she only moved a pace or two.Men, in their youth, are prepared for professions, and marriage is not considered as the grand feature in their lives; whilst women, on the contrary, have no other scheme to sharpen their faculties. To rise in the world, and have the liberty of running from pleasure to pleasure, they must marry advantageously, and to this object their time is sacrificed, and their persons often legally prostituted.Yet, novels, music, poetry and gallantry, all tend to make women the creatures of sensation. It would be an endless task to trace the variety of meannesses, cares, and sorrows, into which women are plunged by the prevailing opinion.I am fully persuaded, that we should hear of none of these infantine airs, if girls were allowed to take sufficient exercise and not confined in close rooms till their muscles are relaxed and their powers of digestion destroyed. "Educate women like men," says Rousseau , "and the more they resemble our sex the less power will they have over us." This is the very point I aim at. I do not wish them to have power over men; but over themselves.In the same strain have I heard men argue against instructing the poor. "Teach them to read and write," say they, "and you take them out of the station assigned them by nature." Ignorance is a frail base for virtue!In the regulation of a family, in the education of children, understanding is particularly required: strength both of body and mind. Now, from all the observation that I have been able to make, women of sensibility are the most unfit for this task, because they will infallibly, carried away by their feelings, spoil a child's temper. The management of the temper, the first and most important branch of education, requires the sober steady eye of reason; a plan of conduct equally distant from tyranny and indulgence; yet these are the extremes that people of sensibility alternately fall into; always shooting beyond the mark.Polygamy is another physical degradation; and a plausible argument for the custom is drawn from the well-attested fact, that in the countries where it is established, more females are born than males. Forster, after observing that of the two sexes amongst animals, the most vigorous and hottest constitution always prevails, and produces its kind; he adds,- "If this be applied to the inhabitants of Africa, it is evident that the men there, accustomed to polygamy, are enervated by the use of so many women, and therefore less vigorous; the women on the contrary, are of a hotter constitution... and thus the generality of children are born females."The necessity of polygamy, therefore, does not appear; yet when a man seduces a woman, it should I think, be termed a LEFT-HANDED marriage, and the man should be LEGALLY obliged to maintain the woman and her children. The woman who is faithful to the father of her children demands respect, and should not be treated like a prostitute; though I readily grant, that if it be necessary for a man and woman to live together in order to bring up their offspring, nature never intended that a man should have more than one wife.A woman who has lost her honour, imagines that she cannot fall lower, and as for recovering her former station, it is impossible; prostitution becomes her only refuge. This, however, arises, in a great degree, from the state of idleness in which women are educated, always taught to look up to man for a maintenance, and to consider their persons as the proper return for his exertions to support them.In tracing the causes that in my opinion, have degraded woman, I not laid any great stress upon the example of a few women (Sappho, Eloisa, Mrs. Macaulay, the Empress of Russia, Madame d'Eon, etc). These, and many more, may be reckoned exceptions; and, are not all heroes, as well as heroines, exceptions to general rules? I wish to see women neither heroines nor brutes; but reasonable creatures.
http://www.btinternet.com/~glynhughes/squashed/wollstonecraft.htm
Monday 15 February 2010
HCJ Lecture: Liberty and Utilatarianism
Liberty is an idea about freedom which began as an attempt to limit the powers of the Government. This was done through bills of rights and the extension of the franchise, by locating authority in the individual. This links back to John Locke's inalienable rights (life, liberty and estate).
The liberals believed in a Laissez-Faire attitude to economics-favouring private property and free trade (Adam Smiths theory. They also prize freedom over equality, favouring equal opportunities over egilitarianism.
3 main figures that we looked at this week are:
Wilkes had a colourful life, being forced into exile several times, and elected into Parliament 3 times whilst in prison, and going on to become Mayor of London. His private life was notorious; he was buried in debt and had numerous mistresses, however was popular with lower class mobs in London and the Americans, because of his work in civil liberties.
This publication was followed by Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which although didnt go into much detail about the civil rights of women, looked into the current state of female manners, claiming that women accept the role given to them and that the education they recieve reinforces that. Her central idea was that men and women should be equal.
Mill, just like Wollstonecraft, agreed that all children should be educated-otherwise it is a "moral crime". A parent does not have the liberty or choice to withhold a childs' education.
The liberals believed in a Laissez-Faire attitude to economics-favouring private property and free trade (Adam Smiths theory. They also prize freedom over equality, favouring equal opportunities over egilitarianism.
3 main figures that we looked at this week are:
- John Wilkes
- Mary Wollstonecraft
- John Stuart Mill
Wilkes had a colourful life, being forced into exile several times, and elected into Parliament 3 times whilst in prison, and going on to become Mayor of London. His private life was notorious; he was buried in debt and had numerous mistresses, however was popular with lower class mobs in London and the Americans, because of his work in civil liberties.
Wilkes proposed male suffrage in his first bill in 1775. At this time, King George III had appointed a Scot: John Stuart, whom Wilkes detested, as Prime Minister. Stuart set up a paper called The Briton, and so Wilkes counteracted it with a publication called The North Briton, using it to attack the Government and the Scottish Cabal with scandulous rumours, including implications of a relationship between John Stuart and the King's mother.
The King tried to smash Wilkes with prosecutions and lawsuits, and even bribed him to leave the country, followed by an assassination attempt during a duel, however they could not prove that Wilkes was the author of the North Briton.In Issue 45, Wilkes called the King a liar, and so a general warrant was issued. A general warrant was very broad in nature and did not specify the individual criminal. Therefore, Wilkes was arrested, and proceeded to sue the Government for invasion of privacy and false arrest. At the time this was unheard of, but he won and so established these rights for the first time.
Once again, the Government tried to prosecute Wilkes, but they had learnt a lesson. Since they couldn't prosecute a member of Parliament, they expelled him from the House of Commons, before charging him with blasphemous libel.
His obscene poem: Essay on Woman, caused chaos when read aloud, so he fled to France, where he stayed for 4 years, only to be arrested on his return.
Whilst in prison, Wilkes was re-elected, but the House voted him incapable of filling a seat in the House of Commons, and so he was elected Mayor of London instead, where he began reporting on Parliament.
Mary Wollstonecraft is the next key figure we looked at. She had a difficult start to life-she had a violent, drunken father, and their social standing declined into lower class. Therefore, she was forced to work as a Governess to a wealthy family in Ireland, where she became obssessed with education.
In 1787, she wrote her first publication: Thoughts on the Education of Daughters. This argued that the education women recieved was superficial and promoted an obssession on vanity and appearance, and activities such as sewing and singing. This did not equip women with independence of thought or judgement.Some of the underpinning of these ideas came from Locke- in that the mind begins as a blank slate, and can be shaped by education. Locke's ideas were very attractive to Wollstonecraft, as they meant that people can be changed. Thus, if you educate people properly you can make them rational, responsible citizens.
Wollstonecraft then returned to London and set up a school before applying her ideas to religion, and becoming a Unitarian.
Wollstonecraft was fascinated by Rousseau, finding him inspirational as well as aggravating. She liked his anti-eliticism, and his attack on modern manners and egilitarianism. However, she was also critical of him in other circumstances. His idea of the ideal woman was submissive, and dominated by the needs and desires of men.
Wollstonecrafts second publication: Vindication of the Rights of Men was based on the ideas of Edmund Burke. Burke was very critical of the French Revolution, and believed that societies were built on tradition. Mary disagreed with this and believed that the ideas of hereditary power and aristocracy were mistaken.This publication was followed by Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which although didnt go into much detail about the civil rights of women, looked into the current state of female manners, claiming that women accept the role given to them and that the education they recieve reinforces that. Her central idea was that men and women should be equal.
Although Wollstonecraft seems like a role model and an idol, her personal life was a completely different story. She had a failed affair, after falling in love with a married man. This resulted in her attempted suicide. This time was also the beginning of the Terror in Paris, and her publications on Vindication were given a warm response. Mary later met and married Goodwin, who published a biography on Wollstonecraft, exposing the truth about her. This horrified people, and her reputation started to slip.
Wollstonecraft later gave birth to a daughter, Mary Shelley, (the same one who wrote Frankenstein) but died shortly after childbirth. Her reputation was severely damaged, until the end of the 19th Century when the Suffragette movement picked it up again, by using her as a role model for the work she had done for womens rights.
John Stuart Mill educated himself from a young age. He taught himself to speak several languages fluently at a young age, and went on to influence great changes in civil liberty. At the age of 17 he was thrown in jail for distributing literature on contraception, and was forwaeven threatened with death. He also put forward the first bill to give women the vote, before having a nervous breakdown at the age of 20.
Mill recovered from his breakdown by reading poetry, and went on to put forward ideas on freedom of speech. He believed that an opinion should never be silenced, as sometimes the majority may be wrong, and even if the majority are right, by challenging their ideas, their opinion is strengthened by the conflict. He also points out that Socrates, and Jesus, were both put to death for being dissenters.
Mill was against uniformity, and believed that living is an experiment. He dismisses the ideas of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau regarding the Social Contract, but admits that individuals must follow societies rules.
He believed that if an action affects society, then the State can enforce certain behaviour, however, the state should not interfere with peoples' choice of pleasures, as long as they do not harm others. He does state that the government can interfere in certain situations.Mill, just like Wollstonecraft, agreed that all children should be educated-otherwise it is a "moral crime". A parent does not have the liberty or choice to withhold a childs' education.
Utilitarianism avoids the problem of dealing with religious or moral ideas of right or wrong. This started with Benthams idea that ethics could be turned into a calculated science. Measuring happiness by determining the greater happiness for the greater number of people. He also believed that everyone's happiness mattered equally, regardless of class and social standing.
Mill was commited to producing the best outcome, but he focused on higher pleasures, andcreated a hierarchy. His education omitted all unnecessary factors, such as sport etc. He later became an MP claiming that you need to be educated to rule.
Utilitarianism is very appealing- we judge actions by consequence, favouring those that promote pleasure and reduce pain. A consequentialite theory is that we compare possible outcomes in relation to their consequences.
3 ways to look at this are:
1) Acts-evaluate the actions by determining the consequences
2) Moral rules
3) Disposition-evaluate actions in terms of traits they exemplify.
Friday 12 February 2010
A Bigger and Better Blog for the New Year!
The blog is back! Bigger and better for 2010, after a nice long break over Christmas. Enough dossing about, its time to get into some hardcore journalism! No more easing into the course and taking it slow. Its time to get thrown into the deep end with a bit of radio production, followed by TV production after Easter. I have been acquainted with my old friends, Intro to Media and HCJ for this semester, and although total lecture time is approx 8 hours this semester, I am sure there will be lots of blogging to do, as well as reading and trips out to council meetings and court cases!
Over Christmas I realised I did not put 100% into last semester, preferring to take shortcuts and leave things until the last minute, but alas, this is not the case for 2010! I did not leave my friends and family 100 miles away to come to Winchester just to doss about for 3 years. My sole aim is to achieve the highest grade I can and take home a degree in Journalism! Therefore, to all my followers, I am sure there will be many, many blogs to keep you occupied in the weeks to come!
I will make a separate blog post in which I shall get my teeth into this weeks HCJ lecture notes, but for now I will provide a quick update of the beginning of Semester 2.
Tutorials and exam results are in, of which I am pleased with the feedback, bar one minor hiccup (HCJ exam) but overall I passed every module. I have also managed to secure a house next year with two of my lovely coursemates, Cara and Justina, which I believe will be very beneficial, as we will all have the same work to do and lectures to attend. With that worry out of my mind, I am ready to start Semester 2.
I am also being reunited with an old friend from semester 1: Shorthand, which I have vowed to continue, after being advised that it will really help me with a future career in Journalism, as it will put me above anyone without it.
Practical journalism this semester involves Radio and TV production, and some VERY interesting lectures on the government. However, although the lectures may drag slightly, I am looking forward to getting off campus and going to council meetings and court cases, of which I will update my experience!
That's all for now. Next blog will be on HCJ lecture notes.
Over Christmas I realised I did not put 100% into last semester, preferring to take shortcuts and leave things until the last minute, but alas, this is not the case for 2010! I did not leave my friends and family 100 miles away to come to Winchester just to doss about for 3 years. My sole aim is to achieve the highest grade I can and take home a degree in Journalism! Therefore, to all my followers, I am sure there will be many, many blogs to keep you occupied in the weeks to come!
I will make a separate blog post in which I shall get my teeth into this weeks HCJ lecture notes, but for now I will provide a quick update of the beginning of Semester 2.
Tutorials and exam results are in, of which I am pleased with the feedback, bar one minor hiccup (HCJ exam) but overall I passed every module. I have also managed to secure a house next year with two of my lovely coursemates, Cara and Justina, which I believe will be very beneficial, as we will all have the same work to do and lectures to attend. With that worry out of my mind, I am ready to start Semester 2.
I am also being reunited with an old friend from semester 1: Shorthand, which I have vowed to continue, after being advised that it will really help me with a future career in Journalism, as it will put me above anyone without it.
Practical journalism this semester involves Radio and TV production, and some VERY interesting lectures on the government. However, although the lectures may drag slightly, I am looking forward to getting off campus and going to council meetings and court cases, of which I will update my experience!
That's all for now. Next blog will be on HCJ lecture notes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)