Deviancy!

Hey, feel free to pop over to http://creativewriter92.deviantart.com/ where I have a lot more content. Photographs, drawings, poems. Hope you enjoy xx



Wednesday, 26 January 2011

Deadlines and Essays?!

Hey everyone, no I’m not dead. No I’m not a zombie come back from the dead. No I’m not a brain eating creature that had risen from the grave to munch on my flesh eating brethren. Ok, enough with the death! I’ve just voluntarily put myself into a metaphorical hermitage where I have been focusing on my media coursework.

We I have finished a lot of the work we have to complete, but we I still have loads more to do! I mean, we still have some filming to do tomorrow ... and the deadline’s Friday!



I still have to LOADS more work, and my partner is getting on my nerves a little. Granted, he is doing more work than before (and we had a little chat about how he is being distracted by his gf and its affecting OUR work), but he’s just not good at the video commentary. I know how that sounds, but when you have to literally tell him what to talk about .. when your just talking about what you filmed, and he gets it wrong ... it gets frustrating. Trust me!

So I’ve been working ridiculously hard the last week or so to try and get it done in time, but its a lot of work, and I may have to try to get an extension. It shouldn’t bee too much trouble, as she knows how many problems we’ve had.

So what else have I been doing? I filmed on sat for my media. We created a facebook event and rented out a big hall to film crowd shots. We invited about 40 people and ONE turned up. 15 minutes before we were supposed to be out of there. But oh well, we finished and got the shots we wanted, so wasn’t a complete failure.

I also had two exams. I had one in Sociology, where we had to study crime in society and the reasons why it exists. Its quite an interesting topic, where we applied theory to modern-day events, like the Reccession and some older events like The Clapham Junction Crash; as well as some more general ones like Rape ...

... Did you know after 5 hours of searching for a female rapist in Britain, I only came up with one name?! Claire Marsh. And she didn’t even rape the victim, she stood on the sidelines and helped to strip her and harass her, but she is classified as a rapist and got more time than the other people who actually raped the victim. Interesting how things like that work. Sorry if I sound unemotional, I’m just rushing to get this post finished lol. And so my exam went quite well, we get three questions and we have to do two of the essays. And guess what?! Two of the questions are on my favourite and best sections, so fingers crossed!

My other exam was maths. I had the weekend to revise, and I did a lot, but not enough. I’m always like that though. But the exam went quite well. The questions were simple, and I had already done a couple of them in practice papers, so I knew how to do it. Although I did have to leave one question as it didn’t factorise :/

 I’m sure some other stuff has happened, but I’m drawing a blank, so until then ...

Ttyl, Jack xx
P.S. I love you baby! Hope you come back to Bloggerland soon :( xxxxxxxxxxxxx

P.P..S. My friend took this photo and I LOVE it, just though I'd share it :)


9 comments:

Wayne said...

'metaphorical hermitage'; I like that line lol. Nice to see you focusing on your media project and exams without getting derailed by drama. You know people can be so self righteous about crime. I think crime can be separated into 'evil' crime and crime out of circumstance and necessity. We like to think we are 'civilized' humans when in fact we are first and foremost biological beings, the 'intelligent' members of the primate family; in nature it is called 'survival of the fittest' and in our civilised society it is called crime. I think if we observe the behavior of primates in the wild then our behaviour becomes a lot easier to figure out. Btw the sexual behaviour of chimps and bonobos in the wild would do justice to the kinkiest of porn websites both gay and straight. Keep up your good work Jack and be sure to have some fun when you get the chance. Say hello to Peter. bfn - Wayne :)

A Wandering Pom said...

Hi there, Jack

It's good to hear from you, and reassuring to know that you haven't turned zombie - though I think I'm far enough away that I would hear on the news before the flesh-eating hordes came banging at my door... :-)

Taking a break from blog-land in order to get your coursework done is eminently sensible, and I can understand your frustration with your partner. Presumably you do need both of you talking about what you've done in order for it to be counted as a proper joint effort.

It sounds as if the exams went quite well, overall. I'm curious, though, about why the Clapham Junction rail crash should come up in a course on crime. And it can't be that long ago - I remember it! I'm also curious about the maths question that didn't factorise (but was presumably supposed to); I'd be interested to give it a try myself.

I hope you're feeling better after last week.

Take care

Mark

Jack xx said...

Haha, thanks guys.

@ Wayne: you have an interesting concept of crime, one that does not follow any sociological school/theory that i have studied, but your theory is flawed. What about crimes of passion, crimes for enjoyment or boredom, crimes for bennefit? What about subcultures? Is it to do with power, masculinity, class, ethnicity?

But i find it fassinating how studies are completely different from one another and yet simmilar. Functionalists believe that crime is inevitable in society and is essential for communities to florish. Yet marxists believe that crime is inevitable as the upperclasses manipulate the working classes. Feminists criticise everyone as they ignore women ... and yet, they ignore men! I'm yet to see a single unified theory that does nto have a major flaw. But then you would be opperationalising a 'natural' trait.

@ Mark: the chapham crash was quite recent and was deemed as an 'accident' officially; but when you get down to the details, it is a technicality. Basically there was a train that was told to stop and nother train was told to go, so they crashed into each other. Then a third train (empty) crashed into the wreckage.

This was because the signaler was over worked (13 hours straight). ALSO, there was a problem with the rails themselves, as they hadn't been fully upgraded, nor had the train carrages themselves (as it would have cost £3 billion) so they opted for the cheaper and weaker carriages.

However, as the upgrades were optional they couldnt be charged, and further upgrades were suggested but not manditory. I think out of 97 suggestions in the OFFICIAL INVESTIGATION, only 3 or so were carried out. AND its made more complicated as the company blames the overworked worker, while he blames the company for overwoking him. Which one is correct? If you cant prove it was a crime, then how can it be labeled so. I think it was Becker who once said "deviancy is only deviance is so labled".

As for the maths, i think it was something like:

2Cos2A = 1 – 2sinA

which i got to the form:

2sin²A – 2sinA – 1 = 0
or
2Y² - 2y – 1 = 0

...
Good luck, and all the best xx

jaygeemmm said...

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry, sorry, Jack! HAHAHA, OK I'll laugh. It's good you're getting it all done.

I really like the picture your friend took. Well done.

Peace <3
Jay

Micky said...

Rarely are two partners in a project (or in a crime!) equal. I wonder if your media project partner is slagging you off too? But your determination is such that you'll see it through to a brilliant conclusion.

Are these the sort of exams where the Staff would show you how that maths equation was supposed to work, were you to ask?

That picture - death of New Labour? or maybe Death in Darwin?

Jack xx said...

i know Micky, and i'm sure he is. I dont blame him, i'm a total Bitch lol, but only because i have to demand that he does something, so that he actually does something!

If i remember the question correctly, yes lol, but we've mooved on andx i'm not too fussed right now.

And pardon? lol. Idk te influences of the photo, but my friend took it of a band that hired her. Its only a local band of my friends. Actually, the one on the far right was the ex bf involved in the threesome lol

Jack xx

A Wandering Pom said...

Hi there, Jack

Thanks for following up about the Clapham Junction crash - you inspired me to read the official report for the first time. I'm afraid I was being a bit facetious about how recent it was - I'm well aware it happened 22 years ago (12 December 1988). I should say that railways are one of my particular interests, so major train crashes do tend to stick in my memory. I would guess that it's not regarded as a crime because no individual had enough responsibility for what happened - responsibility was spread all the way up the chain of management, from the signalling technician who left two wires touching when they shouldn't have been, causing a signal to stay green when it should have gone red, to the Regional Signal Engineer who did not ensure there was a proper system for testing such work. British Rail accepted legal responsibility immediately, and as far as I know did not seek to blame the technician. I'm fairly sure most of the recommendations in the official report were carried out, eventually.

I'm happy to talk about the maths problem if/when you're in the mood.

*hugs*

Mark

Jack xx said...

I'm glad i could inspire you :) and yh, it was a long time ago but still recent (relatively lol).
And wow, i didnt know you liked trains?

i couldnt agree with you more.

But legal responsibility and personal responsibility are different things. Saying'yh, our company is to blame' is different to 'WE are to blame'. One word changed makes all the difference.

As for the maths problem, i'm all ears lol. Just say when.

Jack xx

A Wandering Pom said...

Hi there, Jack

Someone was up bright and early this morning, notwithstanding cider the night before :-)

Yes, I'm very much interested in trains, and have been for over 20 years. I particularly enjoy travelling on them, hence nearly all the absences from Blogger than I warn about.

I've been thinking a bit more about the Clapham Junction crash and criminality. Another element to consider is intent: did those responsible intend to cause harm to others, or were others harmed because they were recklessly negligent? I don't think either of these is the case. Also, on the railway (and in other industries with a strong safety culture), the approach is usually much more to find out what went wrong, so that as far as possible it can be prevented from occurring again.

I've got the maths problem written up; I'll e-mail you.

Take care

Mark

Post a Comment