Analyzing Monsters - Family Cures
Breaking Bad has been known to hide messages in its episode titles.
Analyzing Monsters - Family Cures: The Drew Peterson Saga - Dr. Dan Budenz - Google книги
When put together, the titles of the first, fourth, tenth, and 13th episodes of Breaking Bad 's second season spell out " down over ABQ," which turned out to be the resolution of the season's central mystery. But if those episode titles served as the literal Rosetta stone for that season, the episode titles of Breaking Bad 's fifth season serve a more symbolic purpose. It may seem self-evident to say that an aspiring drug kingpin who says he's in the "empire business" is interested in making a lot of money. It's why Walter is befuddled when new recruit Todd waves away his earnings, saying, "We can talk money once I get this right"—if it's not about money, what is it about?
But Walter's interest in money isn't about actual value anymore; it's the validation that the money represents. Taken at face value, this revelation is a little trite. Walter's greediness is rooted in the legitimate hundreds of millions he lost by selling his shares in the company too early, and his illegitimate meth business is a subconscious attempt to make those millions back. But in the full context of the series, it tells us something about Walter that Breaking Bad has only hinted at before: that the point at which Walter had the capacity to "break bad" happened long before the series began.
In chemistry terms, cancer was merely the catalyst for Walter's transformation; all the elements that have since turned him into a monster were already in place. Breaking Bad airs its midseason finale on Sunday, but even halfway through the final season, everything about Walter's so-called "business" has changed.
Walter's old lab partner quit the business, and his new lab partner is so motivated that he shot a child to prove he was a go-getter. Walter picked up a new distributor at the bargain-basement price of 35 percent, and dispatched an old one who refused to say "thank you. With his new deal with Declan, Walter's blue meth is continuing to spread across the American southwest, and as his influence grows, so does his misplaced sense of self-worth. But the audience knows better.
The Big Secret of 'Breaking Bad': Walter White Was Always a Bad Guy
Visual Monstrosities 7. Why do Japanese Ghosts have No Legs?
Idols Revisited National Monsters Modernity and Modernism The Sublime Monstrosity: C. Baudelaire on Modernity — Loretta Vandi Religion, Gods and Theodicy Burns Our monsters take human shape; dwell in our belief systems and in our culturally beloved texts, narrate the terrain of nationalism and politics, cultural idols and visual representations, surrounding us with images that are often grotesque, disturbing and revealing.
What is revealed through these modern monsters leads us to a mirroring of the human self. Not only do we live in a world inhabited by monsters — we are monsters ourselves. Monstrosity appears in many guises in our culture — we often celebrate it as a defiance of bourgeois attitudes, or examine it beyond the confines of what is deemed morally acceptable. Declare your study in monsters to an unsuspecting colleague and gauge their reaction — I find it is questioned with caution, and probed with an eye of suspicion. By investigating our monsters, we reveal the complexities of our culture, past and present.
The word itself brings both condemnation and fascination for its intended subject. The hallmark of Interdisciplinary Press lies in the breadth of studies on Monsters gained with each conference proceedings; always fascinating, enlightening and tapping into the rich cultural vein monsters offer.
The papers in this collection were presented originally in Mansfield College, Oxford, in September Our many delegates are scattered across four continents - a geographical cross section of academia - offering a wealth of cultural diversity and disciplines. Scholars of film, literature, popular culture, history, law, politics, philosophy and art came together for an intensive four days of presentation, discussion, deliberation and informal conversation, while in the historically gothic and academic environs of Oxford. As with all Interdisciplinary. Not all participants at the conference submitted their papers for this collection, but those who did, a vast majority, represent an accurate account of the conference.
When coalescing the papers into one volume, which would accurately reflect and thematically link the papers included proved to be an enormous challenge.
Some of the papers included bled across many of the thematic frameworks of each section. The result intended for both authors and readers of this volume is to approach each section as its own development on the titled theme, while connecting with the over-arcing theme of the entire collection. I can only hope that readers and authors who undertake reading the entire volume will not view my selection process as dogmatic, but rather, thematically interpretative.
Part 2 examines the visual monsters in our culture, from video and online games and body horror to dog-headed women and in the morphology of modern advertising. Sections 6 and 7 question the monster as an oppositional character or force, offering different readings on pain, pleasure and celebration — how we come to regard and respect the existence of our monsters. Section 7 views the monster as a theological entity through the ages — debating monstrosity, akin to evil, being an eternal essence existing through many gods and within many religious faiths. The vast terrain contained within these pages could not be regarded as a definitive text or framework for studies on monsters and the monstrous.
- The Feast of the Virgins and Other Poems (TREDITION CLASSICS).
- Jordan Peterson: ‘The pursuit of happiness is a pointless goal’ | Global | The Guardian.
- Analyzing Monsters - Family Cures: The Drew Peterson Saga by Dr. Dan Budenz (Eng.
The sheer volume and cultural exploration in studies on monstrosity disallows such categorisation. I have always defended the study of monsters as an arguably un pleasant re-examination of human history, narrating fears, cultural translations and anxieties, desires and forbidden dialogues. It is with this belief that I cast the prognosis that our reflections are monstrous only because they reflect our true nature. I wish to thank my fellow authors and colleagues for their papers and their patience during the time it took to bring this collection together. But on a close examination of what basis in general we can use to determine that a person's character is morally objectionable, it appears that there is reason to question this popular assessment.
This paper begins by looking at what recent scholarship tells us about the effects on children of sexual activity with adults. It then goes on to discuss some of the recent controversy in the psychological community about whether or not the sexual attraction to children should be regarded as a mental disorder. It continues with an examination of what moral philosophers have to say in general constitutes having an evil character and then goes on to show how such criteria are not met by most people who are sexually attracted to children. Then it is argued that there is in fact reason to think that in most cases those who are attracted to children are more deserving of moral praise than blame.
The popular view of paedophiles, however, forces most people who have such attractions never to share voluntarily that fact about themselves with others. In the final part of the paper an argument is given for why the general population has a moral obligation to make it safe for paedophiles to be open about their sexual attractions without fear of a hostile reaction.
We call her, not coincidentally, a monster. The appellation 'evil' thus serves to distance its subjects from the rest of us, to emphasize the profound moral and psychological gulf between them and the rest of us.
It is not unusual to hear people express the view that no crime is worse than the sexual assault of a child, not even murder. So the paedophile represents the combination of the worst of the worst. So strong is the hatred for those who sexually victimize children that even those people who are attracted to children, but have never committed a sex crime almost always conceal this attraction for fear of the reaction they would receive. Most people do not tend to make a distinction between paedophiles who have victimized children and those who have not.
- BORN TO BE A BRIDE (TV FICTION CLASSICS Book 46)!
- The Sea of Monsters Discussion Guide | Scholastic?
- Logging out…?
- 11th Annual Monster Bash: Fabulous Halloween Fun for the Fam!.
- Analyzing Monsters - Family Cures: The Drew Peterson Saga!
- Data Protection Choices;
- PMSing; Blue-Collar Werewolves II (Blue Collar Werewolves Book 2)!
It is not uncommon for people to think of paedophiles without a criminal record as just those who have gotten away with it so far or those who have just not committed sex crimes yet. But just as the fact that some heterosexuals commit rape does not give us a basis for morally condemning the sexual attraction to adults of the opposite sex, the fact that some paedophiles rape children should not be taken as a legitimate basis for the general moral criticism of people who are sexually attracted to children.
http://multiphp-nginx.prometstaging.com/2.php Before looking at the question of whether there is a basis for saying that paedophiles have immoral characters, we should note a couple of things about the morality of sexual activity with children. Firstly, it is widely thought that paedophilia is a mental disorder. Paedophilia is listed in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, but this listing is controversial. Recently a growing number of mental health professionals have argued that it should not be considered a mental disorder at all. Furthermore, having a mental illness is typically regarded as mitigating the moral responsibility of people who commit transgressions as a result of such a condition.
The general debate goes well beyond the scope of this paper, but I will assume for present purposes that those who claim that paedophilia is not a mental illness are correct. This is not just because I believe that they are right, but because even the possibility that they are right opens the door to other, more interesting considerations about what grounds there might be for morally criticizing paedophiles.
Secondly, it is also widely thought that adult-child sexual activity is usually significantly harmful to the child. But, again, recent scholarship has called this belief into question. But this is a complex and controversial issue on its own, so for the remainder of this paper I will assume that there is generally enough risk of harm for us to judge all adult-child sexual activity as wrong.
There are several different bases for what constitutes a morally evil character typically cited by philosophers.