TRUMP'S IMMIGRATION BAN KEEPS IRANIAN FILM DIRECTOR FROM THE OSCARS

Recently, the US president Donald Trump applied an immigration ban, which doesn't allow citizens of seven different countries in which Muslims mean the majority of the population. 

This news talks about Asghar Farhadi, an Iranian filmdirector and an Oscar nominee for the foreign language film award for his movie "The Salesman". Iran is one of the countries featuring in the list of the seven countries whose citizans can get into the US, which means he won't be able to attend the Oscar ceremony due to this policy.

Trita Parsi, the head of the National Iranian American Council, used his case to illustrate the situation of the Iran and the other six countries citizens, and she claimed that there is no way Trump is doing an exception for Farhadi. 

The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, responsible of the Oscars, protested saying the ceremony celebrated "the achievement in the art of filmmaking" in spite of the procedence of the nominees, so they were in completely disagreement with Trump's policy, as well as the TriBeCa Film Festival, which also state its disagreement through twitter. 

Parsi, convinced Farhadi, who had already won an Oscar in 2012, is not going to be able to attend the ceremony, only wishes the winner speaks about it and expresses the injustice of this event.

The director of the film is not the only one who has been on the news, one of the main actresses of "The Salesman" Taraneh Alidoosti, before the policy was officialy applied, already said she wouldn't be attending the Oscar's ceremony as a sign of protest.

PERSONAL OPINION:

I think the Trump's immigration policy is horrible: it is racist and it is like we are going back in time and letting go all the progress that has been made in this field. I think the case of the director, Farhadi, has to work as an example of the situations of many citizens. The fact that he can't attend the Oscars is not as important as the fact that many people are being banned from a country, which means, discriminated, only for their origin or their religion.

VOCABULARY: 

· To be barred: tenir l'entrada prohibida

· Boundary: límits

· Behalf: en nom de

LINKS: http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/28/media/asghar-farhadi-academy-awards/index.html 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/26/media/iran-trump-oscar-boycott/index.html

SELF EVALUATION OF THE ORAL PRESENTATION ABOUT MY RESEARCH PROJECT

This week I presented my Research Project (TdR), entitled Edgar Allan Poe on screen, in front of my class. In the presentation I explained a little bit what was the project about, my objectives, the different parts it had and the conclusions I got to after finishing the project. 

To start with, I used several visual resources to make the presentation more visual and agile. I used a Prezi to present the content of the presentation, and I also added two videos: one was to illustrate the process and objective of the animated storyboard and the other one was the short film I created, which was an important part of the project. About the body language, I think I did it well: I didn't read my notes, I tried to look at everyone in the audience and I also tried not to stand still and to move a little bit while I was explaining. 

I think the structure was also good: I started explaining what the project was about and its objectives, then I explained the theoretical part which was followed by the practical part, and finally I talked about the conclusions. And about the content, I tried not to explain too many things about the content of the project. With this I mean that I focused more on explaining the different parts of the project and a brief information about each of them than, for example, in giving information about Edgar Allan Poe. I did this because I thought it was more interesting for the audience. However, I also tried not to focus a lot on the theoretical 

part and to explain more the practical part, because I think it is the most interesting.

Finally, about the language, I tried to use voacbulary related to the topic, but I could have improved using more complex grammar, richer vocabulary and more sentence connectors. I think the pronunciation was quite good and I tried to use a good intonation.

In conclusion, I am happy with the result of the presentation, although some things can be imporved.

EMPOWER YOUNG CHILDREN

This news talks about the assumption, either of boys and girls, about boys being smarter than girls, at a very young age.

The journal Science realized a study on five-year-old children, boys and girls, and all of them encouraged their own gender, showing girls saw themselves like as good as boys.

One year later, with six-year-old children, the results weren't so satisfying. Both boys and girls saw only the boys as powerful and strong, a fact experts think can be a result of the influence of media, teachers and even parents.

This study consisted in different experiments. One of them consisted in telling the children a story with a “really, really smart” main character, but in which the character's identity isn't shown clearly. Then, they asked the children who they though the character was, and the results were quite surprising: the five-year-old children answers are more or less equalized between saying it was a boy and saying it was a girl; but in the six-year-old children's case, practically all of them answered it was a boy.

This study reveals that it is at the age of six when girls start to underrate themselves in many aspects, a fact that surprised many people. For example, Laura Lund, a primary teacher, who was shocked when she knew this happened at a such young age. She, talking about her experience with children, doesn't think this happens at this age, but she agrees with the fact that it happens, and that we should teach girls to value themselves.

A good way to do it is through books, as it explains in this article. Books can have a big influence on children, that's why it is important that they teach girls not to underrate themselves. The article gives a list of some books that can help empower young girls at a young age, and then it talks about an activity held in a school. It consisted in rewriting Cinderella's story to make it “more equal between women and men”. The report says that kids enjoyed very much the activity and that they were so enthusiastic.  

PERSONAL OPINION:

As the article says, I think it is important to teach girls the value they have, and it surprised me that it is at this age when they start to underrate themselves. I also agree with using books as a way to show this to the children, and not only in books destined to girls, but also in books for boys. Because girls guessed that a “really, really smart” character had to be a boy, but boys also thought that, and I think we should try to get to a point in which both, girls and boys, see that a girl can be as smart as a boy. And also the other way, with things that normally are identified with girls. For example, if they had said that the character was very beautiful, maybe all of them would have guessed it was a girl. So it is important to teach children that both, girls and boys, can be smart and beautiful. 

VOCABULARY:

· Bias: preferència, inclinació

· Loafer: mocassí

· Nurture: criar, criar

LINK: http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-38770936 

ARE SELFIES ART?

I have recently found an article which talks about an exhibition that is going to be held in the London's Saatchi Gallery and which will include selfies combined with other kind of portraits considered art, like Van Gogh's or Rembrandt's self-portraits.

I don't really know what people think about it, but I'm sure there is going to be people who will be against this exposition, saying that selfies are not art at all and can't be compared to works by artists like Van Gogh. But, from my point of view, it is an original idea.

As it says in the news, nowadays it is very common to see people taking selfies, anywhere and anytime, so I think we can all agree in saying that selfies have become an all-time present phenomenon in our lifes. And also, whether we like it or not, there are some selfies that have become very influential or famous, so much that are almost like icons. For example, the famous selfie some actors took at the Oscar's ceremony in 2014, or some selfies taken by celebrities or influencers that have become viral. Also, I think selfies can also be a kind of art. I don't think the last Kim Kardashian's selfie can be considered art, but I do think that as photographs by photophers are considered a way of expression and even a source of beauty, selfies can also be extremely creative and became the same: a way to express feelings, points of view or just something beautiful. That's why I think it is not such a harebrained idea to feature selfies in an exhibition.

Maybe the controversy lies in combining them with classical self-portraits created by recognized artists. About this, I don't think it is a bad idea, as long as people don't mix the concepts up. The exhibition needs to be clear enough to make a difference between the two types of self-images and to highlight that those are two different ways and types, which can't be compared. But I think it is a good idea to combine selfies and portraits in a same exhibition, because it is a way to show the contrast between the world nowadays and how it was years and centuries ago. And it is a shocking contrast.


Saying this I don't mean that selfies need to be placed in the same level as self-portraits by artists, because I really think that portraits have a greater value and a lot of work behind, more than a regular selfie. What I want to say with this is that selfies shouldn't be undrvalued just because they are easy to take or because everyone can do it. Selfies can be as complex as portraits, and I think it would be great if we took this into account and bared it in our minds. And also, it would be fantastic if we all tried to be more creative with our selfies, because we could create even works of art. (maybe saying "works of art" is too much, but who knows what can selfies become).

DIALOGUE

SCENARIO: Two women come across in the middle of the street.

CHARACTERS: Nancy, Claire


NANCY: Claire!!! What are you doing here? I haven't seen you in years, girl!

CLAIRE: Hmmm...

NANCY: What've you been up to? Are you still dating Johnny? He was such a cutie!

CLAIRE: Eeh... wait... and you're...?

N: Ha, ha, ha! You're still so funny! Tell me, are you married? I was, but I divorced a year later, because the man was so...

C: Wow, wow, stop. I was serious before, I haven't a clue about who you are. You must be mistaken...

N: Oh, no, darling! But I haven't changed at all. Well, maybe just a few tweaks, you know.

C: Hmm.. you mean, makeup?

N: Ha, ha, ha!! You're always with your jokes!! Sweetheart, don't make me say it out loud...

C: Say what?

N: Girl, are you living under the rocks or something? We're in 21st century! I can't believe you haven't tried with botox.

C: Botox? No way, are you crazy?!

N: Baby, getting botox nowadays is like buying a pair of jeans. And there are even discounts on it!

C: I guess you have taken advantadge of them a lot...

N: Haven't you recognized me yet?

C: Being honest... I have no idea.

N: I used to be the high school queen!

C: Rebecca Stewart?!

N: Are you kidding me? No! I'm Nancy Wallace!

C: What?! But you were brunette, and... your boobs were like two fried eggs!

N: And now they're like two watermelons. You should totally try it. Not meaning to offend.

C: Non taken. No.. em... I'm not really into these kind of things.

N: Come on! I have a lipo in half an hour and the surgeon owes me a favour... How much do you want to pay? 3000? No, no.. too much... 2000 is ok, isn't it?

C: Wait, what??? No, no, no...

N: Yeah, you're right... It's still too much. I can lower it to 1000. Trust me, the doctor is the real deal. I'm gonna call for a taxi. TAXI!

C: What the hell... You're fricking insane!!! I'm leaving.

N: Bye!!!! What a weird girl... It's curious how people change... TAXI!