Frankenstein!

I think Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein, chose to lead into the stranger's story with Robert Walton's letters because it makes you wonder who is this Robert Walton person, what is his importance to the story, where is Frankenstein?, and how does it tie into the story? I think she also wants you to make connections. It makes you wonder and want to read on further. Though the language is hard to understand at some points, it does make sense. I have only read up to the end of chapter 1, and when Frankenstein starts his story it is pretty interesting!

My impression of the book so far is boring, but I'm sure it will get better. I don't particularly love or like this book at the moment, but I think I will once it gets more interesting. The reasons why I don't really like it at the moment because it's not fast paced or "mind-blowing", it's kind of slow. I think most books start out slow though because you need background information and all of that. I think I will end up liking it tho, I heard it gets good. I'm excited for that.

Missed Blogs

1) Informal Essays

Writing an informal essay was not hard for me at all. I like a lot better than a formal essay because ther rules are so strict. With informal essays you can use creative angles, talk to the reader, use informal language, and not have to worry about following the strict rules. When writing an informal essay, you can almost talk about anything. When its a formal essay, it's usually something about something important. I think informal essays are easy to write, and fun. Writing a formal essay is a lot of work because you cannot use informal language and that makes it really hard. Although, when you are finished it feels good. But when I think of an informal essay I think of funny, "easy going", and it could be about anything. They are fun to read and I enjoy writing them.

2) Frankenstein
I have never read Frankenstein before, but as we are starting to read it I'm having a hard time understanding what is going on. It is not that the language is extremely confusing, but it is kind of boring right now. I heard it gets better after chapter 5, and after reading chapter 1 which was slightly interesting, I'm excited to get to that chapter and on. So far, I know that Dr. Frankenstein is a scientist and he creates a monster. I also know that he was in love with his adopted sister. I have not watched the movie before, so I'm still a little blank when it comes to Frankenstein. I always thought Frankenstein was the monster.
I am excited to read further though because people say it is a good book and it does get more interesting. If it doesn't, I will be disappointed. I always thought it would be a good book and a good movie, but since I have never watched or read it before, the parts I have read are disappointing. I'm thinking positively about it though because, as I said before, I've heard it gets more interesting. Well, I hope everyone is right! I'm ready to read on!

Documentaries

The study of Roger and Me and Spellbound has not changed my view of documentaries for the future. It will probably not change the way I view other forms of media like the news, television shows, or newspaper articles. If I were to watch Michael Moore’s documentaries again, the only thing I would be thinking differently is "are the events in chronological order? Or did he change them for effect?" That is the only thing I would see differently in Michael Moore’s documentaries. Other documentaries I would probably watch and think exactly the same thing the documentary is trying to persuade me to. The only ones I have ever watched were persuasive ones with a lot of information, for example Sharkwater by filmmaker Rob Stewart. He is trying to show the bad effects of shark finning and trying to save the sharks. It is a very sad documentary and I was basically crying for half of it. But, after analyzing these other documentaries I still have not changed my views on them. The only opinion of mine that has changed is if they are leaving out very specific information against their topic in order to make their views on the subject better and for more people to "join" their side. Or if they have put the time line in a mixed up order for effect, but most documentaries I would believe were in the correct order and were not bias in anyway or else I wouldn't like the documentary and would stop watching it.