The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – movie about finding butterflies

Even a person who is imprisoned in the diving bell, can get out and fly away like a butterfly. Each person can get out from the worst situations; each person is able to overcome all kinds of limitations. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (Julian Schnabel, 2007) it is a beautiful movie about life. It shows the strength of each human being, how impossible might become possible, how people can change and find the energy and motivation to fight, to achieve something. This movie is very touching, showing us the tragedy of men, life and death, letting viewers reflect on their own lives, but most importantly it brings a lot of hope.

It is a movie about finding butterflies. The main character Jean-Dominique Bauby (Mathieu Amalric) has a very rare disease – lock-in syndrome. He is totally palsied, he cannot move, cannot eat, cannot speak; besides his brain there is only one eye which works. He is like in the diving bell: closed, unable to move, torpid and powerless. But he is as well like the larva, which is imprisoned in the cocoon and through metamorphosis transforms into something beautiful – the butterfly. Like the larva can become a butterfly, people can fight their cocoons and find their butterflies – find happiness, passion and the meaning of life.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly shows us the story about Jean-Do, chief redactor of ELLE, father of three children, and a successful person. We get to know him when he wakes up in the hospital. We see everything very fuzzily - doctors coming and leaving, green walls of the room he stays, flowers someone brought for him. We see the world with his eye. One of the most famous Polish cinematographer Janusz Kamiński, the director of cinematography in this movie, created very authentic images of the world seen with eyes of a paralyzed person, who doesn’t have contact with the world. He uses shallow focus and racking focus or going out of focus to show how weak is his eyesight. Because of that we can not see very clearly what happen on the screen, sometimes we have problems seeing clearly the face of someone or even reading the name tag of the doctor who examine Jean-Do. We have also the problem, to see all the people who are in the room. Camera is static like the patient’s body, no moves are possible. Because of that, the space we are able to see is very limited, especially when the objects are close to the camera. The use of the counted low angle changes the perception as well. This is how Jean-Do has seen the world from his hospital bed. People were not clear, he saw only part of his faces or even only the chest of the doctor or breast of the nurse, and he didn’t have control of anything.

Through the cinematography in this movie we can fully understand Jean-Do’s feelings; as viewers we want to have control on this what is happening, understand it, know more than the character, but it is impossible. We discover what happened together with him. The edition doesn’t help us as well. There is lack of establishing shots; we don’t even know what our hero, in whose body we are now, looks like. He doesn’t know either. We discover it together, step by step. Firstly, when he for the first time tries his wheelchair, he sees himself for a second in the window reflection, secondly when he tries to exercise him mouth and tongue, he sees this part of him body in the mirror. We cannot see his face because he cannot either.

What we can do is we can feel the same pain and fear as he feels. Especially in the scene when Jean-Do is learning that his eye is already dry and doctors wants to sew it up. He speaks but nobody can hear it. Then we just see the big needle which moves around the screen, and the eyelid which become closed forever. Even more expressive is the scene when Jean-Do cries. The picture becomes less and less sharp, the camera looses the focus, and we can really see the tears on the screen.

Although during the first 35 minutes of the movie we can just see the tragedy, pain, fear, and loss of humanity, it is not what the movie is about. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly shows us three different worlds: the world seen with the eye of Jean-Do, the world where Jean-Do lives and is part of, and the world of his memories and imagination. Our main character changes himself and even through he is paralyzed he finds his own world. He realized that “memory and imagination let him get out of his diving bell”. He creates his own world, in which he finally can feel happy. Even the flashbacks are not realistic, are improved, colorized, more beautiful. Like, his memories from the day of the accident, when he is driving through Paris. Everything looks like fairytale. Camera shows the pictures from Paris once from extremely high angle, then tracks on extremely low angle, in the mean time camera moves in all possible way – pan, tilt, shows Paris in the various of counted angles. In the background we can hear the title track from The 400 Blows (Francois Truffaut, 1959). Everything looks beautiful, magical and happy like his whole life should look like.

Jean-Do’s imagination shows us the authentic man’s desire. He dreams about all of those things he really wants and he cannot have. When the doctor comes and gives him a drip, which replaces food, he closes his eye and moves to the restaurant, where he sits in his pajama in front of the table full of extraordinary food. He sees also Claude (Anne Consigny), who flirts with him. He invites her to the table, feeds her, they start kissing. It shows how much he need passion, closeness, and other people like every other human being. He dreams very often about freedom – he sits on his wheelchair on the small podium on the sea. His face is turned into the direction of the horizon. Other times he just imagines nature – forests, grass-lands, ice-bergs, he dreams about himself skiing on the hill-side, on which nobody was skiing before. The nature in this case expresses freedom, which was taken from Jean-Do and never would be given back. Finally he remembers his family – his father of whom he used to take care; a person who is very close to his heart.

Through his dreams we can learn that he is still a normal person, that his brain is functioning like the brain of anybody else, that he has the same needs and desires like all of us. Through he is handicapped he is still a normal person who can love, care, have dreams. But it was not like that from the very beginning. It cost Jean-Do a lot of effort and internal strength to achieve it. He had to make one of the most important steps – accepting his situation and finding the will to live. We can see this acceptance, when the camera for the first time gets out from his head, from his perspective, and we can see paralyzed Jean-Do as he really is, on the wheelchair, with sewed up eye and deformed face. We are able to see it, because he is able to do it.

One more example of how strong he was is the process of learning the new way of communication. Through this he frees his butterfly. Firstly when the new language is introduced to him, he doesn't want to cooperate. His first words are “I want to die”. But with the time he realized that he has something to live for and he can learn how to get out from his cocoon. He realized that communication with other people is what he really needs. It would make him not feel lonely.

Jean-Do is somehow like a foreigner in a country, where he didn’t speak the language. What he needs the most is a way of communication. It can be done without words. All that is needed is a message created in a head of one person, which is codified, then transmitted to the second person and decodified, which means understood. Foreigners probably would use the body language and hands to transmit their message. Jean-Do used his eye. Together with logopediste Henriette (Marie-Josée Croze) they create the unique way of communication – one person reads the alphabet, where characters are classified to their use frequency, and Jean-Do blink each time when the letter he needs is pronounced. From that letters he builds words, from words sentences. This lets him communicate with others, talk on phone with those who are not able to visit him, and this let him even write a book.
In The Diving Bell and the Butterfly cinematography, edition and sound express how Jean-Do's delivers his message. The camera replaces the eye and ear, registers the pictures and sounds, and copies Jean-Do’s impression, cutted, deformated, shaking. Sometimes we can hear voices but don’t see the person; sometimes we don’t hear anything; sometimes we can hear the enjoyable sound of TV when the program ended. Everything exactly like Jean-Do might feel. Cinematography shows his thoughts, everything that is in his head and nobody else has access to; like our thoughts and dreams we never share with others. Edition is the code with which he transmits his message. We can notice that every cut is one blink. When he blinks for less the one second appears the brown-purple screen, what gives us impression that we see his closed eye. As Jean-Do, we were introduced to this code and without any further help we can encode the message and understand it. We have learnt this language together with our character.

This movie shows how communication is important; it proves that there are so many ways to express ourselves. We can communicate not only via language, via speaking, but as well via artistic expression. It can be music, it can be painting, it can be a book, and it can be a movie. Jean-Do wrote a book, which lets us understand his emotions and his situation. Based on the book the movie was created. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is a brilliant example of the way of communication. Firstly through this fill still Jean-Do is sending us a message, secondly director Julian Schnabel, as well as his cinematographer Janusz Kamiński, editor Juliette Welfling, and the rest of film authors tell us how amazing a tool of communication film could be, and how many things they can express through film.

Film it is not the simple story presented step by step, which shows us only what happened. In each movie we can find plenty of meaning, emotions, reflections, but in the same way as the language, we have to learn how to understand the movie. Let’s look for example on nondiegetic inserts, which shows diving bell deep in the water. Those are parts which let viewers reflect, think about the meaning, or even try to understand the characters’ emotions. When we see the diving bell, it might make us feel like Jean-Do, it helps us understand the lock-in syndrome, and imagine how difficult the situation is. The same with the nondiegetic insert with the ice-berg. As viewers we can see the scene where the ice-berg falls apart. But linking it with the whole movie and the place in the movie when this scene is presented, we can understand it. This scene is placed just before Jean-Do accepts himself, decides to write a book and uses the rest of the life as much as he can. The collapse of the iceberg symbolizes something important: change and freedom.

This scene might have one more meaning. Even if something falls apart, and it looks like it is impossible to fix, it is never too late. Like ice-berg which firstly collapsed, but in the last scene we can see how everything moves back, become normal, how it was before. Like Jean-Do, who after the accident, lost his all hope. But he realized in the end that through what happened his life became meaningful, he got closer to his family, he discovered what is important in life, and he left behind him something lasting – the book.

This movie is so special, because brings hope and a lot of positive feelings. Although says about person who goes through tragedy, is very positive and in many moments even amusing. As it is shown in the opening scene, through the series of the roentgen photos, we live very close to the things about which we never think about. We would never think about our bones, until something starts hurt. Maybe The Diving Bell and the Butterfly suggest us right now to look around, think what we have, and start enjoying it…

Can Islam be a cause of terrorism?

This post contain one of my papers I have writen during my studies in US. I am still ashamed of my writing, but I hope this paper is not that bad.



Can Islam be a cause of terrorism?



In war it is essential to know the opponent, to understand the strategy he uses and his motivation. The global situation, which we have right now, might be called war as well – for example “war on terror” which the United States leads against Islamic terrorism, or “holy war” – the term which is often used as a synonym for jihad. In order to understand the problem we need to analyze what kind of role Islam plays in modern terrorism, what is the definition of jihad, and what is the perception of this term in the eyes of Muslims. In this paper I will analyze whather we are allowed to talk about Islamic terrorism, if Islam and Islamic law are legitimate uses of power, if we can say that Islam is the reason of terrorism or if there are same others.
First, to analyze the connection between Islam and its’ role in terrorism we have to understand the term “jihad”. The word itself comes from Arabic and means “the struggle” or “striving” (in the way of God). Usually people translate word “jihad” as a “holy war” and based on this they make assumptions that Islam is the religion of violence. They very often associate jihad with fanaticism, cruelty, and intolerance. In fact, jihad is about being closer to God. It requires Muslims to strengthen the belief through moral, physical and intellectual.
According to the Muslim doctrine there are four ways of implementing jihad: by heart, by language, by hand, and in the end by sword. Jihad of the heart is spiritual and moral. For example, it might be by fighting with the one’s desires. There are the personal actions which lad to eliminate evil from life and improvement as a person. Jihad of the language it is simply promoting religion and the main ideas by talking about them and through giving the good example to nonbelievers. In jihad of the hand the main aim is to improve the Muslim community and combat injustice; it might be done even by making a good business. The most popular example of jihad by hand is zakat – one of the five pillars of Islam. Zakat is the obligation for all Muslims to give some percentage of their annual income to charity, those money are distributed among the poor. Finally there is jihad of the sword. This gets a bit more complicated, and here we can try to find out if Islam is really calling for holy war or not. In the Quran it is not clear. There are suras that are calling for the war against non-believers which legitimate the use of power, such as sura 9, verse 5: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” But in other suras we can learn that war and the use of military or any other form of aggression is legitimized only if the war is the defensive war, like Sura 2, verse 190: “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors”.
This is a really big problem because it gives the possibility for plenty of interpretations. There are the liberal concepts which call to interpretate the Quran as a whole (not just a single sura which might lead to misunderstanding) and do not use violence. They are rather following the idea (as well from the Quran) that killing an innocent man is like killing the whole population: “We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people” [5:32]. But there are as well the fundamental interpretations which claim that peace might be achieved only after the full victory of Islam in the world, and they are taking this to legitimize terrorism. Most of those fundamentalists are using sura 9, verse 29 to explain their actions: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
As we can see in the Quran there is no unequivocal answer if jihad allows Muslims to fight against nonbelievers and even encourage them to fight. It gives the fundamentalists the excuse to use their holy book to legitimize terrorists’ actions, but at the same time they forget that according to the Quran they are required to use the nonviolent methods to improve themselves as Muslims. The terrorists do not follow the ideas of the greater jihad, which rest on the constant improvement and elimination of all sins as well as work for the community. Terrorists don't follow the Quran as a whole, they don't admonish all the rules, and they don't understand what it means to be Muslim. They are brainwashed and that is the main reason which explains their actions.
In this point the most interesting question is, who are the terrorists? Who are the people responsible for attacks like 9/11, Madrid or London 7/7 bombing? Marc Sageman in the introduction to his book “Leaderless Jihad” presents the portrait of the typical terrorist. He presents Omar Sheikh, a person in charge of many terrorist acts, who spent five years in an Indian prison. What is interesting about him is that he was born in the UK in a middle class family, he attended the best schools, and for the first part of his life he lived in a “Western style”. Also, for a long time Islam was not important to him. This picture is sort of typical. If we will look at the biggest terroristic attacks in the past few years we will see that most of the people in charge of the attacks were either born in a Western culture or they were living in Europe or the US for a significant part of their lives. From the terrorists in charge of September 11, Mohamed Atta born in Egypt, who studied in Germany where he got in touch with Al-Qaeda; Ramzi Ahmed Yousef born in Kuwait, who since 1992 lived in the US; Mahmud Abouhalima, who was born in Egypt and since 1981 lived in Germany; Ahmed Mohammad Ajaj, who was born in the West Bank and immigrated to Houston, Texas, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was born in Kuwait and studied in the US. Most of the attackers completed their studies in Western universities where they for the first time got in touch with Al-Qaeda. Terrorists, who were in charge of the London bombing fit to this scheme as well. There were four boys with ages between 19 and 30 who were living in UK, who were studying or working, including one of them, who had pregnant wife.
What we can observe from presented information is that the majority of terrorists are either born in Western countries, or immigrate or study there for a significant part of their lives. A lot of them convert to Islam, from being atheists or agnostics. Lots of them became fundamentalists just after converting or realizing the importance of religion. It leads to the thesis that Islam itself in not a cause of terrorism and fundamentalism. As we can see from the example of terrorists who were in charge of the London bombing, two of them were good students, British citizens, and people who were not very interested in religion. However they changed after their trip to Pakistan. We might assume that they were brainwashed over there and it was the cause who they became terrorists and participate in the London bombing.
Marc Sageman in his book presents a conversation between two Egyptian Muslims. One of them, Ahmed Al-Sayed Osman Rabei, was implicated in the Madrid bombings, and the other, Mahmud, was his roommate and a nonterrorist. This conversation shows their different perspectives on religion. When Rabei claims that Americans are enemies of God, Mahmud answers: “Listen to me, there is only one God. Frankly, I do not care if someone is Jewish, Orthodox, or Catholic; everyone is free to pray to the God he chooses, and it is neither up to me nor up to you to judge. (…) I only know one thing: praying to God. The important thing is for you to know God, to pray, and not to behave badly, and to not do things that are not right. All the rest is superficial (…)”. In this conversation we find the contrast between two types of Muslims: one type, which followed the Quran and another type, which went through brainwashing processes and became capable of being involved in terrorist attacks. We can see from this conversation that being Muslim requires the acceptance of other religions. In Mahmud words we can see a lot of respect and mutual understanding, and the space for intercultural dialogue. Opinions presented by Rabei, especially claims like: “Do you like it when they [Jews’] kill our brothers”, “(…) you do not see the blood that flows over the land of the world”, or “They are asses, disbelievers, they exploit you, and after you have been here you have nothing, neither your honor nor dignity” shows the high level of indoctrination and how much he combines religion with politics. Osman Rabei was a political asylum-seeker in Germany, and then he moved to Spain. He was suspected of being the “recruiter” of the group and imam who was in charge of indoctrination of young Muslims.
Sageman answers the question if Islam can be the cause of terrorism by giving one more argument. He says that most of the terrorists are not well educated in the religion. He writes: “The majority of terrorists come to their religious beliefs through self-instruction. Their religious understanding is limited; they know about as much as any secular person, which is to say very little. Often, they have not started reading the Quran seriously until they are in prison.” We can ask then, why the religion became such an important factor in their lives. By answering this question we will answer as well why they became terrorists. There are probably different factors: either they met someone who exposed them into the radical views, or they were discriminated based on their ethnic background in the countries they were living. There is no evidence that Islam itself could be the reason.
There are many Muslims living in peace and negating all types of violence. Those Muslims (like Mahmoud) are definitely the majority. Although they follow the Quran and as well the rule of jihad they do not become terrorists. Therefore the religion cannot be the cause of terrorism. Muslims who become terrorists are rather the exception, and the causes are mostly based on factors not connected with religion.


This paper includes quotes and is partly inspired by:
Sageman, Marc “Leaderless Jihad. The networks in the twenty-first century”, University of Pennsylvania Press 2008

Studying in USA - FINALS

Once more I will say that the life at Hendrix College was totally different then in Poland, especially during finals. I remember from Poland that during finals I couldn’t sleep, I was studying days and nights, fighting with professors to let you even try to pass something. A lot of coffee, a lot of energizing drinks, tons on papers on the floor of your room, and I was getting crazy about all of this.

At Hendrix it was different. At first we didn't have that much to study and somehow I was better prepared! And come one, I didn't have to memorize 100 clasifications, which are almost the same:)

I took it easy, maybe I wasn't prepared the best I could, maybe I don't have only “A’s” from all my classes, but I have learnt a lot more the usually, and had a lot of fun!

1. Finals I had

All together I had three exams out of my four classes and papers to write. Everything was rather easy. Usually I had exams only from a small part of material covered during the semester. It was like this in class “American Parties and Elections”, the test was for 30 minutes and you had to identify and describe 10 terms. In one class I even didn’t have exam, just one paper to submit. This paper was done few minutes before deadline, and night before I was preparing Glueh Wein for my friends
There was one exam a bit more difficult, and much longer. We had test, few open questions and one essey to write. And I am damm bad in writing! But my biggest problem was that I had to go to the restroom! So I was writing this essey as fast as possible, and I was one of the firsts who done it. Then I looked on other people and what shocked me was – people had laptops with them – OPEN! They were going to toilets all the time. That is what would never happened in Poland. All of this might be considered as cheating, and of course all people would cheat!


2. Hendrix specials

I was afraid that my last days at Hendrix I will send alone while everybody else will be studying, and parties during finals won’t be possible. And it was much more quiet, in dorms they had early silent hours (also during weekends). Even during our last party in the last day, we were kindly aks to shut up.

But there are few traditions as Hendrix during the final week, which were surprising for me, but I enjoy it.

First was famous “Martin Run” (Martin it is a name of one of the men’s dorm). One of my friend from this hall told me to be in the library at 10 pm. He didn’t want to tell me what for, but I got to know I will enjoy it. So I went there.
Library which was usually quiet place, was this time laud, full of people smiling to each other, and waiting for something. They were not studying rather gathering together waiting for a show. The show started at 10.10pm. At first the brave group of Martin guys went to the toilet in the first floor, there they took off the cloths and put the boxes on their heads (not to be recognized). Then they started running around library complately nacked; some of them had green faces painetd on their asses!

The second even took place also in the library. This time it was not a secret, almost everyone got to know about it (mostly thanks to facebook and standart gossips). It was the library flash mob Rave, as a form of study break.

3. Party time

Someone may say that finals it is a study time. I will agree, but only partly! Maybe there was no big crazy parties, but for me it was one of the best times at Hendrix. There was no difference between day and night, we just wanted to have fun. So we had Christmas party, we were chilling out listening to a good music, watching movies in the middle of the night, I had friends sleeping oven in my place, we had Gluehwein party, we were creating drinking games with my roomates, walking around the campus at 3 am because of snow, and finally we were drinking just before exams.
Once I was studying in the library for exam, which I should have next morning. One of my friend who was also studying gave the idea, why not to have one drink before going to sleep. So around midnight we went to my place, and the time passed by, I remember that we involved my roomate into same serious discussions (she had exam next morning as well). I think that around 4 am we decided to be responssible:)
I think that Finals it was this time, when I had kind of parties everyday. I was very happy person then, and sad that I am going home soon.

Chinese proverb

It is something what I got today and I have to say, I really like it. One chinese proverb, which I found very interesting and true...

"Go to the people

Live with them

Love them

Learn from them

Understand their problems

Start with what they have

Build on what they have

When the task is accomplished

With love, let them say

'We have done this ourselves'."

Obama's Inauguration Speech - my comments

It was yesterday, the 44th president of United States took his office. There were millions of people in Washington's Mall and much more watching him in TV or most probably online (as I did).

I watch the “show”, today in the morning I red the whole speech one more time. And I would like to write about my first impression, parts that everyone is writing about because it looks like they will be famous, parts of the speech which are a bit more questionable for me and the general meaning.

Enjoy reading...

1. My first impression

I don't know what I was expecting from this speech, maybe to be great, maybe to be memorable, I wanted from this speech to surprise me. I was a bit disappointed. For the first time when I was watching Obama's speech I had the impression that he was very stressed. He was not smiling at all, his face was showing rather anger or maybe it was his seriousness. Instead of empathy he showed us that right now he is the most powerful man in the world.

The speech in general was good. He done, what he had to. He spoke about peoples' responsibility, how great is America and people living there, no matter of race, sex, level of education etc. He showed that he knows what people needs, he address his father roots and talked about the world policy (but not in this way that America will really get involved, it was rather call to other leaders for action). It was about everything he had to talk.

The thing that impressed me was his good relations with Bush, I was watching them meeting in White House then going together to Capitol and then after the change had happened. They looked like a good friends and somehow I was very happy about it.

2. What the world will remember

From this kind of important speeches there are always some parts that world will remember like:

"Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." - Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1933, in the midst of the Great Depression

“My fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.” John F. Kennedy (1961)

“There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America.” Bill Clinton (1993)

So what was special in the Obama's speech and why?

I have chosen three quotes that I think will be remembered for a long time. Sentences written with passion, important for Americans and “smart”.

“Today, I say to you that the challenges we face are real, (...) They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America, they will be met.”

- after this as far as I remember he got an applause; somehow many people said it before that this sentence has to be in the speech; it is good formulated and it will be memorable because of the content. Right now everyone expected Obama to say it, but in few years the reality will be just a history and the words will stay.

“To all other peoples and governments who are watching today, (...) from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born, know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.”

- tis was important because of the US position in the world. As we know there was a huge anti-Bush movement around the world which influenced the status of US. Moreover Americans truly believe that they can and should rule the world (somehow I can agree because they have money they want to spend), but they want to have this feeling that they are someone special (who doesn't). This words says America will be once more the world's superpower that everyone will respect.

“a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.”

- Obama address here in the very touching way the issue of race, somehow no matter who you are now it is not like 60 years ago, now we are equal. He proof it by being chosen as the 44th US president


3. What I don't like or don't understand

and in the end quotes that surprised me or just I want to comment.

“To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect,(...) To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history — but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

I was shocked that he address Muslim world at first. And I don't know how to understand this words. Let's say Obama make a move to the cooperation, talks about mutual respect and that US is willing to help, but I don't like how those words are formulated. I have this impression that Obama has very negative opinion about this part of the world. And for me this words are rather words of criticism than encourage to cooperation.

“With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in it's defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.”

I don't get this part either. I think that the aim of this was to show how strong America will be under the Obama's administration. Just I cannot imagine that he could say that “we will not apologize for our way of life”, he said as well that he won't defense it, but the meaning for me is clear. He doesn't take the responsibility for global warming, and for the wars Bush started, he doesn't think that it is US fault. Maybe Americans would like it, I don't know, I would like to hear any comments, but my understanding of this is rather negative.

4. The meaning

I think that this speech will be commented for a really long time. I like what I red today in the polish newspaper. That Obama is not to black but also not to white, he is not to young and not to old and he has not too much experience but also not to little. And I can say following this words he had chosen the right time to be a president:)

Before Barack Obama inauguration

It is about 3 hours before the ig change in US politics, as hopefully in world's politics as well. I felt the enthusiasm of people while being in US and it makes me follow what happens now.

Because the elections of 2008 are the topic of my master thesis, I would like to make same small analysis, just before the inauguration.

1. What will be in Obama's speech

There are of course many topics which will be covered in the speech. Obviously the economy, and most probably Obama will repeat parts of his speech from the election day. He will address the issue that he needs help from all Americans to make a change and it won't be a easy tasks, and all Americans had to get prepared for not easy times.
Secondly he has to address the issue of country's security, hopefully he will mention something about closing Guantanamo prison (as a human rights lawyer I think he should do it). I am still curious what he will say about wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have still in my mind his words from the campaign "We have to take the nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists" (only countries has nuclear weapons!). It makes me think what will be his position in the relation with Iran, Israel, Pakistan?
I don't think he will say a lot about world politics or international relation besides the security issue. I just hope or rather would like to hear about his plans for the global politics, his plan for fighting with global problems, helping the failed states, eradicating poverty, improving security in the developing world. And as the first Afro-American president who even during the campaign was traveling to Kenya, to the country of is father origins, I think he should do it (and that is not American point of view:) ).

There might be one more thing, very important in the speech - the bipartisanship. I think (or rather hope) that Obama wants to seek for the wide cooperation within the country. He wrote about it in his second book - "The Audacity of Hope". He wrote about his first time in the Capitol meeting the politicians and only the few of them, the oldest generation could easily cooperate for the better future. This situation used to be normal just after the second world war, because the politicians had the some background (most of them were soldiers in the was). In the last cupple of years both parties couldn't cooperate with other almost at all. In the book Obama dislike it, and hopefully bipartisanship will the the direction where his politics would go.

2. The meaning of Obama's speech

There is right now more then 2 million people in Washington or maybe even more already. In the universities students are organizing watch parties, many people watch the news at home, most probably the speech will be seen by most of the world.
There are very high expectations towards Barack Obama. What make this day even more special he will be the first Afro-American president in the history. He takes the country after the second less popular president in US history (first one was Nixon who had to resign because of Watergate). There is a lot of things to fix in US (economy and the biggest crisis in the last years) as well as in the world (Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantanamo, Energy crisis, failed states).

All of this leads me to the thought - Americans expect that this speech will be as important as "I have a dream speech" of Martin Luther King in 1963. Those two events will be compared and connected. Barack Obama will be standing in the some place as Martin Luther King, and he will be speaking as a first Afro-American president, while Martin Luther King spoke of his desire for a future where blacks and whites, among others, would coexist harmoniously as equals.

Maybe Obama's speech will be the last stage of Martin's Luther King dream being realized.

Or maybe he is just good selling product for all media, and this whole enthusiasm is caused by good PR?

Drinking games

Maybe it will sound stupid, but this is one of the things I can say I learnt in US - how to play drinking games. At first I was rather sceptical about it. I didn't like the idea of drinking to be drunk (and still I don't like this idea), but my perception on drinking games changed. I really have to say that I had a lot of fun playing them and I want to share with u the whole story and some rules.

1. Beer-pong

This is classic. Played everywhere, in each big party, very popular in Martin Hall. What u need is just big table, two ping-pong balls and 12 or 20 caps (ussually plastic caps are used). Cap with hot water would be also useful.

How to play: make 2 pyramids out of caps on the opposite sites of the table and then fill all the cups with the beer (or something else, everything is possible); choose person who is going to play with u. Stand in fron of yours caps, take a ball and through the ball into the other persons cap. If u will do it, your oponent has to drink what is inside. Then swich:)

Here u can find funny movie with instructions:


2. Card game with tasks.

One of the first drinking game I remember it was a card game. The rules are simple: place all cards on the floor and take one card.



Each card have a hiden task; depends on the number u choose u have to:
As - waterfall - u start drinking and the rest of the circle start, they will drink untill u stop:)
2 - youx2 - so choose the person who drinks twice:)
3 - me - u drink:)
4 - ... - girls drink
5 - make a toast - u make a toas and everyone drink
6 - dicks - so all guys drink
7 - guess + add - I don't remember what's that
8 - ticket mate - so u drink with one more person choosen by u
9 - rime $ relate - that is kind of roll game, one person has to choose word, then next one rime to it like chick and pig, second one has to relate like pig and animal then next one rime to animal and so one; who makes mistake drink.
10 - categories - u choose a category and people in a roll has to add something to this category - like US presidents, or capitals in Europe; why doesn't know drinks
jack - gesture master - person who has this card establis a gesture, when anyone make the gesture all has to make it as well; who will do it as last one drinks
queen - question - I don't remember how it is, but we can say person ask questions how answer first chooses person who drinks
king - make a rule - person can make any rule s/he wants to like noone can go to the toilet, or when I drink person X drinks with me and so one...



3. Game with hands:)

This game is very hard to explain but I will try because we had a lot of fun with this.
So sit in the circle and put both of your hands on the floor (it might be on the table). Then u have to mix hands a bit. The easiest way is to put the right hand behind the hand on your right and left hand behind (or maybe better say under) the hand on your left.
The whole game is about clapping. One person clap on the floor then the next hand in the circle has to clap and the next one and the next one... There is the possibility of changing the direction by clapping twice. Whoever makes mistake (even put the hand up) drinks a shot!

It was really amazing game. That night a lot of people pass out:) but still we end up still playing in the TV room around 5 am :)with people with good drinking condition

4. Every minute game

I think that this game has better, more proffessional name but I will stick to this one:) Well I wouldn't call it even game, it was rather kind of custom, always during the Wendensday fest in Martin Hall.
The rules are easy. You have party and the music change every minute, when music change you drink:) Usual time of playing is either one hour or 100 minutes. Enjoy!

5. "Never have I ever"

Game I have found boring but we played it few times with different people so I will write few words.
Rules are easy, one person says "Never have I ever..." and something they have never done in their life, and all people who done it drinks. Thats all.

6. Quarters game

Very popular game played by my roomate as well as in many of our parties (mostly on Huntington street). We have created many variation of this game.

Basic rules: All players stand around a table, and, in turn, try to bounce the quarter off the table into the shot glass. If successful, the player tells any other player to have a drink. If the player fails, play passes to the next in the circle.

Variations:
Because after a long play it becomes very difficult to place a quarter in the shot glass, the variation of this game is person whos turn it is, choose person who drinks, and in this way we have eliminated the difficult part - putting quarter in the shot glass:)

7. Pyramid game

Very interesting game. It was created during one party when it was already late at night, but my roomates were in the room and cupple of my guests. There is the game called pyramid, where u have to take cards and place them on the floor in the shape of pyramid. But when we have done it, we didn't know what to do next.
So we created our own rules. One person was choosing card from pyramids and turning it to see what card is it. Then the rest in the roll were choosing cards not from pyramid. And of course who had the lowest number was drinking.



IMPORTANT: this game is good to play late at night. When we tried to start one party with this game it was very boring.

8. Flying cards game

This is the most stupid game I ave ever created. But somehow it was fun:)

You take all cards u have, through them up and let them fall all over the room. The task is to collect as many cards as possible. Who will collect the biggest amout choose 3 people who drinks.

9. Red or Black:)

As well very stupid game. One person have cards and in the roll people have to choose if the next card will be black or red. If person will not guess, drinks. If person will guess, person on his/her right drink.

Very important in this game is that after each shot person has to howl to the full moon as laud as s/he can.

10. Game we have never played

The game we have never played, but I have found it in internet and find in interesting. It is called Drug diller. It is very entertaining.

the rules u will find here

_______________________________________________

I think that my history with drinking games has ended for a while. I am back in the adults world. In the beginning I have found the idea of drinking games very stupid, but with time I liked it a lot. There is one more thing very important - drinking games are not to get drunk! It is good to drink things U like! The most important thing is to enjoy your time and stop in the right moment. Not to get drunk and loose all the night of amazing party.