I will dedicate this category of the blog for language learning, I'm going to start a little experiment with a new language teaching method that I'm developing right now.
I make this method using the Assimil and Pimsleur philosophy and also combining the teaching philosophy of a few teachers that I had, my personal experiences in learning languages and the philosophy of a few polyglots that I know , loki2504 is one of them, you should definitely subscribe to him if you if you’re a language lover.
Another great youtuber in the area of languages is FluentCzech his videos are awesome and incredibly useful
This is a webiste that I recommend alot for everyone trying to learn any language:
When you start investigating methods of how to teach languages, you will soon find out that, there are these two opposite methods, these two opposite methods that are always in conflict with one an other, which are those methods?, well there’s the method that wants to teach almost the entire language as if it was a really theoretical science with a bunch of rules and with a bunch of grammatical equations like physics or like chemistry. We will call this the Conservative method, and there’s this other method way more liberal, that say’s the hell with rules, the hell with grammar, just listen to the language, you will eventually know how to speak it, you will eventually know how to read it and all the grammar that it has, you'll learn naturally because that’s the way that you learned you mother language. Let’s call this the Liberal Method.
And, you know, these methods are right and wrong at the same time, what these two methods don’t realize is that they’re both complementary to each other. Learning the language just with a bunch of rules, with a lot of vocabulary without context, you know, learning it as a really strict science, is not effective, if you just learn the language theoretically you will fail at the moment that you start a conversation, because you don’t really know how people actually speak, you don’t know their common day expressions you don’t know the rhythm of a conversation , and besides of that, the Conservative Method is a truly boring method you will never learn to completely speak a language if you learn it as a science, you can apply this method in the really advance stages of your learning, but do not start with learning every single grammatical rule, there are important rules that you should know right from the beginning, but do not focus in the more advance rules at the beginning of your learning, focus on the simple ones.
And there’s this other method that says, screw grammar, you don’t need it, you don’t need it at the early stages just listen to the language, you will eventually know how to speak it, you will eventually know how to read it and all the grammar that it has, you'll learn naturally because that’s the way that you learned your mother language.
Yeah is not as simple as that, you need grammar, simple grammar, the simplest grammar ever, but you need grammar, once that you’re familiar with the really really basic grammar you can procede to the 4 stages which are: Listen, Speak, Read, Write.
Now the great objection that this method has against grammar is the following: You don’t need grammar, because when you were a little baby you naturally learn how to speak your mother language without grammar or without rules, just listen and speak, and that’s how you will learn any other language.
You know that is actually true, except for the final part, “and that’s how you will learn any other language” mmm not exactly, you learned you mother language that way, because you were in the adequate environment to learn it. Every person that you were in contact with, spoke that language, you were listening to that language all the time, you we’re in contact with that language 24/7, and that language was the only way to truly communicate with other people.
Now that I’ve said that, the Liberal Method might actually work if you, for example I’m learning French right now, and the Liberal Method might work for me if I go to France or to Belgium and I stay there for maybe 6 months or a year. I’m sure that if I do that, the Liberal Method will work, I’m going to be in contact with French all the time, I’ll be listening to francophone people all the time and I’ll eventually know how to speak it fluently, I’ll eventually know how to read it, and how to write it. But my point is that you need to be in an environment where you will be in contact with that language all the time. And if you don’t have this environment you will not learn a language by this method, or maybe you will but it’ll take you decades or even more.
But there is something that it’s absolutely correct about this method, this method strongly encourages you to listen to the language. And that’s the most important thing that you have to do when you’re learning a new language, listen to that language. You need to listen to that language a lot. Because a the end of the day, a language is an spoken way of communication, you can also write it, of course, but what is the most common way of communication that you use in your daily life, spoken communication, you speak with people, that’s the most common way to communicate, and what do you need to speak with people? Know how to speak their language , and how will you learn how to speak, their language?, you listen to that language!
So with that little rant that I just made, you’re probably wandering: okay, but, what’s your point? , which one of these methods is the correct method?
I think that the correct method is the combination of these two methods, why do I think that? Because that was the way that I learned English, with these two methods combine.
You see I listen to a lot of English, because all of the English speaking media that was around my country: all the video games, all the music, all the films, all the TV, and I learn English grammar in school and that’s it. The grammar that I learn in school was grammar that I could’ve easily learned in just one year. It was simple grammar, but that simple grammar made me understand a lot of English. So your question is why do I need grammar? Because if you study the common grammar of the language, you’ll learn that language so much faster, you will understand it so much faster, you will save years of learning with the Liberal Method if you just stop for a second, and you know, check out the common grammar of that language, and if you apply this two methods together you will learn a language in a fast and effective way.
And for that reason, I created a Language Learning page on this blog, where I'm going to put useful stuff for learning languages and also, try to develop my own teaching/learning method.
Al prinicipio solo existia, existe y existira el Caos, el comienzo, el pasado, el presente y el futuro de todo, el Caos existio, ha existido y siempre existira, nosotros somos los hijos del Caos y mediante el Caos, descubrimos nuestra razon de ser. Somos sus habitantes y deberiamos de agradecerle, el creo todo lo que vemos, todo lo que sentimos, le debemos nuestra vida, aunque pagarselo sea imposible, imposible tal vez no sea alcanzar lo inalcazable. El Caos existe pero no es lo unico que existe, no es lo unico en nuestra realidad, algo nacio del caos, una nueva fuerza que descendio de el ,su mas grande progenitor, la hija directa y la madre directa de todo. Con el nacimiento de la naturaleza, patrones empezaron a emerger, viviendo en un mundo caotico. La amalgacion entre naturaleza y caos creo el mundo y la realidad en la que vivimos. La amalgacion de la naturaleza y el caos creo la vida. Fue en esta amalgacion impotente y trascendental en donde la tercera y ultima fuerza nacio, los bastardos de la naturaleza y el caos surguimos, fue aqui en donde Luca nacio.
El naciemiento de la vida debio de haber sido un proceso demasiado gracioso y demasiado anti-ortodoxo para las cosas que se veian en ese tiempo, el nacimiento de organismos capaz de recraerse asi mismos, habitar e interactuar con este mundo creado. Capaces de interactuar con la naturaleza que los creo y con el Caos en el que viven. El proposito de vivir es vivir, eso era algo que los primeros portadores de vida entendian bien, y para vivir necesitaban sobrevivir. Y la mejor manera de hacer esto, era mediante el simple y hermoso instinto de supervivencia, y aquel que lo supiese usar mejor iba a vivir mejor y mas. Pero ellos tambien sabian, que vivir no era suficiente, tambien tenian que trascender. El enemigo mas grande de los seres humanos o mejor dicho, de todas las especies vivas, es el tiempo, el tiempo es la muerte. Los primeros organismos sabian esto, tenian que derrotar su tiempo de alguna forma, dejar su huella en el mundo que habitaron antes de que fuera demasiado tarde, de alguna manera pasar algo de ellos mismos hacia la siguiente generacion que cada vez esta mas cerca. Y es ahi, donde ellos tuvieron la brillante idea de la reproduccion y con eso, aseguraban su inmortalidad para las siguientes generaciones por venir, con eso vencian a la muerte. Entonces, el esquema de la inmortalidad surgio porfin, este esquema era sencillo y solo consistia en 4 pasos: Nacer, Sobervivir, Reproducirse y Morir, ese era el esquema para su inmortalidad. Y con eso nuestros microscopicos ancestros habian creado toda esta sabia filosofia, habian desarrollado todo este conocimiento simplemente mediante el insitnto de sobrevivir, esta fue realmente la Primera Filosofia.
Eklegein es el proceso de la lluvia que he creado consciente y subconscientemente, un manifesto el cual me ayudara o me hara todo mas dificil, buscando la constante a la que me aferro, no es mi unica manera, hay miles, esto me liberara o me destruira, si es que hay alguna diferencia, los meteoros que caeran han estado flotando es este espacio por mucho tiempo y es hora de impacten en mi tabula rasa, lo que realizare es un pequeño experimento de perspectiva, todos concordaran conmigo, nadie concordara conmigo, pero no importa, lo que me he asignado va mas alla de mi o ellos, lo que me asignado va hacia mi o ellos, por que solo hay dos maneras en que alguien pueda vivir una existencia. Vivir para nosotros mismos, o para la vida y lo demas. Esa es la decision que tomamos aqui. Que al final de los dias concluiras que esas dos se unifican en el proceso mas fundamental e imaginable. De cualquier manera que se eliga vivir, se debe de hacer en su posible totalidad, ya que si no vivimos una posible totalidad aqui, puede que jamas la podamos vivir, o tal vez simplemente debamos seguir esa totatilidad sin la mas minima idea si podemos alcanzarla o no, la pregunta eterna con la respuesta infinita, la colision de esa pregunta y esa respuesta es lo que llamo vida.
Amor Fati is an attitude in which one sees all the events of one 's life including pain, frustration and suffering as good things. I stumble upon this way of thinking several months ago, I was going throught a Nietzche-Stage at the time.
So yeah, I remember that I read about this school of thought or attitude if you wanna call it like that, and I thought it was just the most wise thing I had ever read in my life, and I'm still thinking that, I mean the concept of just accepting your existence and embrace whatever may come to you is such a powerful idea.
Enjoy, experience, observe, learn and most importantly embrace what has happened to you, because it has happened to you, existence is a really mysterious thing and you don't know if it's going to repeat itself, you don't know when it's going to end, and you don't know what will happen after that, so you might as well enjoy what's going on.
As Manny Calavera once said:
[caption id="attachment_137" align="alignnone" width="300" caption=""You know, sweetheart, if there's one thing I've learned, it's this: nobody knows what's gonna happen at the end of the line, so you might as well enjoy the trip.""][/caption]
But now it comes the other side of the coin, there have been many people who criticize the idea of Amor Fati by saying is just another justification for conformity.
Ok, I agree that the idea itself draws from a really conformist point of view, but I think many people misunderstood the concept.
Is not about just accepting what has happen and that's it, it's about accepting what has happen to you and moving on.
Get it MOVING ON, something happen to you, you accept it, and you move on, you don't stay in this stationary stage that conformity is all about, because you move on to the "okay what will happen next".
As Church from Red Vs Blue once said
[caption id="attachment_138" align="alignnone" width="206" caption=""You know what Caboose, I learn something: It doesn't matter how bad things may seem, they can't be any better, they can't be any worse, because that's the way things fucking are, so you better get used to it Nancy, Quit your bitching""][/caption]
Wow can you belive that I'm actually pulling out deep philosophical and realistic quotes from video games and machinima series?, I guess true art and philosophy have really change this few years.
I know that there's so many people who have live so many tragedies, that are living in so much suffering, yes I know the world is not fair, but once again who said it such be?
If you have lived a really horrible event of your life and you're thinking this is all bullshit, that's complete fine, If I was in your shoes I think I would also think that, but if you decide to embrace this attitude, you'll become really strong and just another think, always remember: Life is too fucking short and on top of that time fucking flies.
I think that the only way that Amor Fati could work at it's best potential is if you have make a plan. We all have a goal, a dream, a plan, a duty or whatever you may wanna call it. It doesn't have to be specific, it can be as vague and as abrstract as you want (I think it works better in this way) You have to set a finishing point, you have to set a direction to where are you going, so you can start you trip, and in that trip, whatever happens to you, is going to be fine, if you encounter a wall, tear it down, if you can't, maybe you can find another way, if you can't either maybe you can change you direction completely, do what everything you want, the point is to keep moving and accept what happens to you while you move.
So, I don't know what's the deal with us Generation Y, we are really some strange fuckers, I mean yea we are cool we have technology we know how to use this gigantic web of communication, but that's pretty much it, our only value, our only characteristic is in a really superficial way, we have the greatest communication tool ever develop by mankind, and we use it to check our status on Facebook. Really that's all we do.
Just check this out:
The Silent Generation, well they were really ignorant but they survive a lot of stuff and they went through a lot, they were loyal and they stick to their principals, that could be annoying for some people, but for me is admirable.
[caption id="attachment_125" align="alignnone" width="236"] Boy, they look like they're having fun[/caption]
Baby Boomers, they just live some of the greatest revolutions of modern mankind, had the greatest music ever, watched the man land on the moon (okay I don't wanna get in any controversy here, whether we did or we did not land on the moon that day I personally don't care, I just figure that it must had been really cool and exciting watching that on Tv with your friends and family... I guess is better than watching two giants buildings been completely destroyed). Most of the Baby Boomers we know are our parents, my parents are like really responsable and conservative now, but they seem to had a real blast when they were young back in the day.
[caption id="attachment_126" align="alignnone" width="300"] BOY, THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'RE HAVING FUN[/caption]
Then it came Generation X, you know, they were cool, or at least they tried to, naaaaaah just kidding, yes they were really cool and very independent, they really didn't care about world ideals or anything, they just live for themselves and the ones close to them, and that's really admirable to, I wish I could do that, free and independent.
[caption id="attachment_127" align="alignnone" width="300"] Okay, you all know that is impossible to talk about Gen X without mentioning Friends so here it is[/caption]
So then we, Generation Y appeared, and we are... I don't know, by my experience I don't know how to define our attitudes, I guess we are just... regular whinning teenagers with technology, and that's pretty much it.
[caption id="attachment_128" align="alignnone" width="300"] Okay, you all know that is impossible to talk about Gen Y without mentioning Facebook so here it is, man... this is truly the most representative thing that I could find about us[/caption]
I guess we try to be like Gen X, we try to be like free and independent but we fail miserably. I don't know anybody from 20 to 25 who lives alone and by himself, everybody still lives with their parents, and I don't know anybody from that same age who works in a job that he got by himself alone without any help from his parents or another adult person. I really didn't knew how to stereotypically define us, so I look up on the internet to see how was our stereotype or what is expected from us.
And oh boy, did I find our stereotype, here it is:
[caption id="attachment_120" align="alignnone" width="228"] tataaaaaaa...... wait a minute, WHAT THE HELL?[/caption]
Leaders?
Yes, that's how they see us, I'm not kidding, future young Messiah's of the world, I was really amazed by the overwhelming optimism that society has on us, we are like this new wave of idealistic social revolution for them. I was really amazed by that because I really didn't expect it. I thought than when I type the words Generation Y on Google, it was just going to appear what good 'ol Spider Jerusalem describes as the New Scum.
[caption id="attachment_123" align="alignnone" width="194"] "These are the new streets of this city, where the New Scum try to live. You and me"[/caption]
But no, we are like the complete opposite of that, I just can't believe it. They expect that we will bring this new ideal to the world, that we will create the definitive ideal society that will change everything. Entrepeneur fuckers that will lead the way.
I don't know, I'm really skeptical about this, I mean of course technology, business, media communications and all that changes trough out the years, but the world is pretty much the same, not because you use more technology than you grandfather it means that you are smarter or better than him, its stupid, Technology doesn't change people's attitudes, it just changes a few aspects of how they live and that's all.
Maybe that idealistic revolution will happen, it's really probable, but I don't see it happening right now, it will take years for that to happen.
I mean, all my friends and all the people who I know are my age, they don't care about anything of that, they just want to live their lives and that's it, pretty much like Gen X, and you are telling me that we will bring this absolute new ideal that will change future generations... You know I really wanna think that but I just don't see it happening.
And what about Generation Z
[caption id="attachment_124" align="alignnone" width="300"] Well let's see, 5 year olds already hook up with laptops... man that's some sad shit[/caption]
I'm sorry if I sound to pessimistic here, but what I'm really trying to say is that please don't be disappointed at the end of the day when it turns out that we really didn't do anything significant in our time.
But you must to admit, WE HAD THE GREATEST NICKELODEON EVAAAAAA
"Mathematics is the language of nature, everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers, if you graph these numbers patterns emerge, therefore: There are patterns everywhere in nature"
- Pi
Fitting quote for the theme of this post.
I have re watch all of Darren Aronofsky's films once again, without any doubt he is one of the most talented directors of this generation, all of his films are memorable, his writing and story-telling is crushing, devastating and beautiful and not so many films today can generate those kind of feelings in such a way.
[caption id="attachment_112" align="alignnone" width="298"] "In the end it's all nice"[/caption]
But I will not review every single of Aronosfky's films, I will discuss about his style, his unique filming techniques and (as you have may read on the quote on top) I have re watch all of his films, and I have found that in all of them, patterns emerge, both technically and conceptually.
First of all, you have to agree with me, all of Aronofsky's films have a really claustrophobic nature, all of them are truly and deeply centered in his main characters and everything that they're going trough, you only see the film trough their eyes, and most of them, are extremely alone characters, either that or are extremely obsess with something.
Max with the number (Pi). Harry, Marion and Tyrone well... with drugs, Sara Goldfard with her appearance in that TV Show and her weight loss that ultimately drives her into insanity (Requiem For A Dream). Tom with finding the cure of death (The Fountain). Randy with his golden days of wrestling (The Wrestler). Nina with her dark role in Swan Lake (Black Swan).
[caption id="attachment_91" align="alignnone" width="300"] "If the number's there I'll find it!"[/caption]
All of the characters are desperate and in need of something, in all films we can explore all the consequences of their obsessions, but never them actually trying to overcome this obsession. Except in The Wrestler.
[caption id="attachment_93" align="alignnone" width="300"] The Ram in probably the last moments of his life[/caption]
In The Wrestler, Randy is the only main character who tries to overcome his obsession and leaving it behind, at the moment when his doctor tells him he can't wrestle anymore. He struggles to find a new job, tries to reunite with his daughter and set a normal life, although he sadly fails, is the only of Aronofosky's character that we see in this transition.
Although many people have made the comparison between the similarities of The Wrestler and Black Swan (both dealing about the life of a performer) this two films, explore the same concept in drastically different ways, The Wrestler in a more personal, introspective and realistic way and Black Swan in a more metaphysical, philosophical and allegorical style.
And besides of that, the protagonist of this two films are really different and they really don't have a lot in common. Were I can see a truly similarity is between Nina Sayers (Black Swan) and Sara Goldfarb (Requiem For A Dream)
Seriously, these characters are almost the same person. They are both shy and lonely women, not really confident about themselves and suddenly this huge opportunity is presented in front of them, they don't know how to deal with this huge opportunity, they try their best but end up obsessing with it, until that obsession drives them into complete self-destruction.
I know that obsession is a theme in pretty much all of Aronofsky's film, but in this case, Sara and Nina's insanity is manifested in similar metaphysical and surrealistic ways.
[caption id="attachment_99" align="alignnone" width="300"] Nina with the whole "WTF I'm turning into a fucking swan" thing[/caption]
Of course Nina with the Swan transformation but not only that, also with the whole Lily imaginary counterpart and the surreal scene we see when she enters her room and watches all the drawings talking.
[caption id="attachment_100" align="alignnone" width="300"] And Sara's Fridge[/caption]
And in the other hand, we have Sara with her terrifying fridge and not only that, the TV also starts tormenting her when the characters of the TV show come to life and throw a party in her house, completely humiliating the poor woman.
So yea, one of them just wanted to be on a TV show and the other just wanted to be perfect, is that too much to ask?
Other couple of characters that are really alike are Max (Pi) and Tommy (The Fountain) both scientist trying to reach something impossible and finally they realize at the end that some aspects of the world or some aspects of nature can't be changed or controlled.
[caption id="attachment_109" align="alignnone" width="300"] "When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun. So once when I was six, I did, my pupils shrunk to pinholes and everything came into focus and for a moment I understood."[/caption]
Okay so, moving on in more technical ways:
My brother actually was the one who made me realize this: in every one of Aronofsky's films, there's a transition shot or camera angle that is heavily use trough the entire film.
Don't believe me? OK
We have the constant fade to white transition that it is used in Pi, mostly in the end of a surrealistic or crazy scene. We have the famous hip-hop montage/transition used in Requiem For A Dream every time the characters sells or consumes drugs (this technique is also use in Pi, but Requiem really exploits it).
And in The Wrestler and Black Swan, we have the constant following from behind-shot
[caption id="attachment_105" align="alignnone" width="300"] I couldn't find an image of Black Swan, but you can see the shot on the trailer in 0:41 and 1:19[/caption]
Also another thing, in Black Swan the fade to white transition it's also use several times.
Getting back to a more conceptual area, I also realize another thing about most of the protagonist of the films: They all have some kind of really horrible condition that is either killing them or causing them a lot of pain, and all of them end up ignoring that condition causing some really horrible damage at the end.
[caption id="attachment_107" align="alignnone" width="300"] "SHIIIT Harry, since how long you have that?"[/caption]
So well in Pi we have the "brain tumor" or something... that ends up been the physical manifestation of the number and is killing Max from the very inside. In Requiem For A Dream, Harry has... that thing that makes him lose his arm in the end, in The Wrestler we have Ram's heart condition and in Black Swan we have the scratches and scars from Nina on her back, fingers and toes.
[caption id="attachment_110" align="alignnone" width="300"] Max is the only one who takes drastic measures as you can see[/caption]
So yea, all of the films have a lot of aspects in common and I like that, I like when a director or writer or musician or artist tries to create his own style and repeats some things here and there, of course an artist most reinvent his work, but having your own style is as important.
And if you haven't watch any of Aronofsky's films or if you haven't watch all of them, please do, he's work is easily one of the best cinema of this years, and also he always work with the genius composer Clint Mansell making every soundtrack profound and epic. For me Aronofsky has perfected what some people call "Modern Tragedy" and.... GO WATCH HIS FILMS.
[caption id="attachment_111" align="alignnone" width="300"] Juice by Darren juice by Darren Ohhhhh Darren's got juice Darren's got juice[/caption]
