I know some of you are still confused about the characters and the action in the play, so I’m going to share some web resources with you, which I hope will provide you with more guidance in your study of Richard III.

What’s important is that you invest some time and effort into reading all the material including your text. You must also actively re-read your materials and refer to them continuously e.g. refer to the family trees as you read the history. This will help you make the connections which you need to better understand the play.

If you do this diligently and in a disciplined fashion, I guarantee that you will see the academic pay-off sooner than later.

1. Student Guide to the Play.
   This Insight Text Guide may be a six-page preview but I think it will help to clarify some of your doubts.

2. A Brief History of Richard III and the War of the Roses.
   I covered this in my introductory lecture, which can be found on Moodle along with notes for revision. If you feel that you need more background context/information, you can find it here:
   • You Can’t Tell the Players without a Scorecard.
     This is a simplified history which is quite different from the action in the play. Please bear this in mind when you read this article.
   • Richard III – A Man and his Times
     Another summarised history, which again is very different from the play we are studying. I’d like you to read this for insight into writing style; the tone of this article differs from the previous as it tries to dissuade the reader from believing the traditional portrayal of Richard III.
3. Family Trees.
   Last but not least, many family trees which you must refer to when you read the above material or the play, so that you can attempt to map the interactions between each character, or at least differentiate one similarly-named character from the other. A gentle reminder: there is also a Plantagenet Family Tree on p. 262 of your text.

(via Ansen’s Formspring.me page)

For those without image suppork:

Question: how to do lit ):
Answer: dunno i havent do:p

Question: What kind of lit rep are you?!
Answer: errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr r u mr laremy pretending to be my classmate?

Eh… Not me lei *makes whale sounds*

In any case, I have decided to get my own Formspring.me page too!

I think Lionel de Souza needs extra tutoring with regard to how to write an expository argument:

Other than being used for trysts and immoral purposes, rooms at budget hotels are also used by gambling syndicates to operate illegal “casinos”, drug addicts to abuse drugs, fugitives of the law who dare not return home for fear of being arrested, etc.

– Lionel de Souza, TODAY, Why budget hotels must be reined in

If this were an essay he submitted to me for grading, my comments would be as follows:

Lionel, where is your evidence? What makes you an authority on budget hotels?

I know you are a retired cop, but I don’t think you’d be privy to what goes on in budget hotels in this day and age – unless you hang out at budget hotels yourself.

Even if that were the case, citing personal experience is not always credible when it comes to making expository arguments.

Actually he needs a lot more help with his writing (look at the amount of fallacies in the letter!) but I can’t afford the time.

Besides, people seldom buy the cow if they can get the milk for free. (Though I must clarify that I always make it a point to buy the milk if I get to sample it first and I like what I taste.)

Anyway Lionel, if you do read this, and you like the taste of my milk, my rates are $100/hr - you know my name, look up the number.

According to a Stanford psychologist, you’ll reach new heights if you learn to embrace the occasional tumble.

(via)

~

This was quite meaningful for me because of two portions, one of which was this:

Such zest for challenge helped explain why other capable students thought they lacked ability just because they’d hit a setback. Common sense suggests that ability inspires self-confidence. And it does for a while—so long as the going is easy. But setbacks change everything. Dweck realized … that the difference lay in the kids’ goals. “The mastery-oriented children are really hell-bent on learning something,” Dweck says, and “learning goals” inspire a different chain of thoughts and behaviors than “performance goals.”

It’s helped me to realise why I took a certain something too seriously – I had been too focused on performance as opposed to learning, considering the stage I was/am at. I guess it was also, in part, due to mismanaged expectations. But better to learn this later than never.

The second thing which I found meaningful was this:

Dweck’s study showed that praising children for intelligence, rather than for effort, sapped their motivation. But more disturbingly, 40 percent of those whose intelligence was praised overstated their scores to peers. “We took ordinary children and made them into liars,” Dweck says. Similarly, Enron executives who’d been celebrated for their innate talent would sooner lie than fess up to problems and work to fix them.

Am going to start saying ‘good effort’ instead of just ‘good’ from now on!

Sounds familiar, though it is a story that is not entirely of my telling.

The rule is that when you have been absent from school, you have to bring a letter of excuse. He knows his mother’s standard letter by heart: “Please excuse John’s absence yesterday. He was suffering from a bad cold, and I thought it advisable for him to stay in bed. Yours faithfully.” He hands in these letters, which his mother writes as lies and which are read as lies, with an apprehensive heart.

When at the end of the year he counts the days he has missed, they come to almost one in three. Yet he still comes first in class. The conclusion he draws is that what goes on in the classroom is of no importance. He can always catch up at home. If he had his way, he would stay away from school all year, making an appearance only to write the examinations.

Nothing his teachers say is not already written in the textbook. He does not look down on them for that, nor do the other boys. In fact, he does not like it when, now and then, a teacher’s ignorance is exposed.

– Boyhood by J.M. Coetzee, pp. 107 – 108.

Cute right?

They will be missed muchly.

Student: Teacher, can go toilet?

Me: No.

Student: Huh…

Me: “May I please visit the washroom?”

Student: Okay.

Me: No! You; you!

Student: Oh. (Pause.) Can go toilet?

More photos here, although Facebook’s indiscriminate file-size reduction doesn’t really do justice to the photos.

1. Roads = traffic = exhaust fumes = global warming. This probably increases exponentially during traffic jams which occur during the morning and evening rush hours. Why are they rush hours? Because the bulk of the people are commuting to work/school. Why are we still commuting to work/school en masse when technology empowers us to work at disparate locations?
2. Warm temperatures in SG = increase in usage of air-conditioning = increase in electricity generation = increase in both fuels burnt (at power station’s end) and machines working (compressors and the like) = increase in output of heat = increase in temperatures in SG = global warming. Is air-conditioning the only way to reduce temperatures in SG, and on a macro level, the world?

It seems to me that both of these ‘problems’ are caused by sociological factors.

1. People, especially Singaporeans, place great value on ‘showing your face’. So be it for work or for school, the indicator people still stick to in order to measure work carried out or amount learnt is physical attendance. Perhaps this entails a paradigm shift: if we can harness the power of technology to delegate work or conduct lessons, we reduce the need for people to ‘show their faces’. Though it might mean an increase in computing power,  electricity generation, etc. which might also contribute to global warming. But at least there aren’t traffic jams, right?
2. For reasons that I still cannot fathom, we still stick to ‘Western’ dress codes of suits, jackets, long-sleeved shirts, tailored pants, etc. to go to work. Why? It doesn’t make sense to do so especially in our weather. Logically, we should be wearing clothes that aren’t so warm but we aren’t. Inadvertently, this artifically increases our dependence on air-conditioning. So will this blind embrace of ‘Western’ culture secretly be our undoing (and because I cannot resist it: what has happened to our Asian values??? LOL.)?

Your thoughts/comments?