Corellia

2003-01-14T17:24:00.000Z

Age?
24
Sex?
female
What is your degree subject (both if joint)?
Film Studies
Does ‘Being Bad’ relate well to the other modules you are taking?
Only the lecture based on cinema really.
If so, how? And if not, why not?
I don't see how I would incoporate the other lessons into my degree, but I like the idea as a whole relating to cinema.
Have you found ‘Being Bad’ too demanding, too easy, or at an appropriate level?
After I adjusted to the "relaxed" lesson programmes I found it quite appropriate, however the assignments I think could have been more demanding, and longer.
Do you think the list of topics covered on the module was appropriate?
I am not sure that being too religious was appropriate but the others, yes - however 2hrs is not really long enough to go into much depth could have bought in different cultural aspects though.
Are there any topics not included in the module that you would like to see included?
Drinking, drugs, casual sex, "bad music" eg Marilyn Manson supposedly influencing the Columbine attack and other such stories.
Do you think that the format for classes has worked well?
Yes but as I said above 2hrs not really long enough, 3 would be better, also breaking down into smaller groups for discussions as the whole class is quite overwhelming for this kind of topic.
What did you think of the module team?
fine, helpful when help was needed
Do you think it would have been better to have had more:
Small group discussions? yes
Discussion and debate among the class as a whole? noInformation and talk from lecturers? yes
The approach taken in the module is interdisciplinary (drawing on perspectives from English Literature, Film Studies, Creative Writing, Philosophy, Religious Studies, Media Studies and Politics): do you think this a useful way of approaching the topics covered in the module?
I didn't really get that from any of the topics, it is quite a broad spectrum, so in theory perhaps.
Do you think that interdisciplinary modules are a good idea?
I don't think so, not for one semester anyway.
Do you think you have benefited from the interdisciplinary approach taken in the module?
Again not from one semester but maybe I have started to think in a more rounded fashion, I don't know.
Would you like to see more modules that cover this kind of subject matter?
In film studies maybe, but not particularly
Are you planning to take the follow-up module PH2004 ‘Thou Shalt Not’ (note: the name of this module is likely to be changed to ‘It Shouldn’t be Allowed!’) at level 2?
I am still thinking about it, I don't yet see how it would be different enough to be interesting.
Would you recommend ‘Being Bad’ to a friend?
I wouldn't have at first but I did enjoy it come the end so yes probably
Do you think that the blogs (web logs) were a good idea?
yes, although I was never sure what I should be writing about
What did you think of the other assessments (e.g. would it be better to have one longer assessment rather than two shorter ones?)?
I think one longer assessment would have been better, it is very hard to say anything convincingly in 300 words.
What have you learned from the module?
To ask why? rather than just accepting things as I am told
What parts of the module have you found most useful and why?
the whole idea of looking at things critically.
What parts do you think were a waste of time and why?
some of the lectures as they weren't long enough,
Are there any other comments you wish to make regarding ‘Being Bad’?
Alton towers was good, thats it really.

2003-01-08T11:32:00.000Z

I was just reading Perry Chans Blog and she was talking about a lorry driver that bumped her car and tried to drive off (Tue 17 Dec). This reminded me of the time jsut after I got my first car. I was 18 and had my car for 3 months (an E reg fiesta but still it was mine!) I stopped at a roundabout to let other cars go and the hear this screech of tyres behind me. The next thing I know my back end is caved in (of the car I mean). These two morons get out of their blue van saying they didn't see me and all the rest. I, not really knowing what to do in these situations, say we should maybe exchange addresses. Oh they exchanged addresses alright, A FAKE ONE!!! The bastards, they took advantage of a young woman on her own with a broken car and tears in her eyes. How can anyone be so callous? I had to drive home with half a car (the days before mobile phones were everywhere). There is no real point to this story. Obviously I have not quite got over it yet, with time I am sure it will get easier to talk about. It just goes to show that there are some really BAD BAD people out there, thats all really.

2003-01-08T11:17:00.000Z

I wasn't in the last lesson. I had the flu. No that was a lie, but the flu sounds more dramatic doesn't it? You see where I am going with this right? Telling lies, hmmm. I don't know the name of the writer but I was looking at Blogs to try to get some idea of what went on and found one called Prise. Apparently the main reason people gave for lying was fear, fear of either hurting someone or I imagine getting hurt your self. I think on the rare occasion that I do lie it is so I don't get shouted at by someone. It's pathetic I know but I have a deep rooted fear of confrontation. But I don't lie very often because I also have a very low threshold for guilt, too much may tip me over the edge (may we suggest therapy? I hear you say). This may be different if I could actually lie convincingly. I am possibly the worst liar ever, I break out into a guilty smile or my eyes begin to water, two dead giveaways. Even when I am jokingly lying. Maybe this is because from a young age I have been taught that lying is wrong and now my body just acts accordingly. Is lying ever right? Maybe, maybe in life or death situations but other than that it shouldn't be nessasary. People should try and conduct their life so that they are not in the position where they need to lie. Easier said than done I know. But if you have to lie to those closest to you to spare their feelings then maybe you don't have a very close relationship with that person. This includes telling your friend that the tango orange jumpsuit just isn't for her. They will appreciate it in the end I promise. Lying is just the easy way out of situations to avoid confrontation. However, saying that I am a complete hypocrite because I lie when I phone in sick but really just want a day off, I lie when people bump into me and I say it's okay but really I am fuming and I guess I lie to myself a lot of the time, about various things. So, after all those things I said, I just contradicted myself, well so what? I would be lying if I said I was perfect.

2002-11-27T20:25:00.000Z

So, to continue, I found the information about other and older cultures and body modification interesting. Although a little repelling at times. It annoys me when western people who have no link to any of these cultures get tribal art, celtic or chinese symbols tattooed on themselves as they don't know what any of it means and it just seems a litle patronising. In a kind of "oh thats a pretty pattern I'll have it tattooed on my arse" way when it could have deep symbolic meaning to someone in another part of the world. I also found it hard to put aside my westernised views when looking at some of the tribal modifications, particularly when it was revealed what happens to children sometimes. I don't agree with it at all, not just from a western point of view but from the point of basic humanity, to deform children ,in my opinion, is barbaric. However I don't agree with Christopher R Barnett's (who obviously feels very strongly on the subject) view that it is a form of paedophilia. I think that paedophilia is associating lust with children rather than physically changing them - which I whole heartedly agree is child abuse. I also don't agree that it is a case of religion forcing mutilation upon the people. Religion after all is made and followed by the people and those who follow this or that religion do so out of choice and respect for it. They have taken their intepretation of whatever Sacred text they follow and acted accordingly. I don't think it is for us to say whether thier religion or culture is wrong or not because we, as a western society, have a completely different set of values. Someone in the lesson today said that it is not so much the act that is wrong than the reasoning behind it. I agree with that. Their reasoning for this modification is not out of spite or to cause pain but is done out of love or wanting what is best for those involved. No matter how warped the reasons or explanations seem to us.

2002-11-27T18:48:00.000Z

I found todays lecture really interesting and I have just spent 2 hours on the internet trying to fnd out more about it. It is fascinating. I have never had a problem with "socially acceptable" piercings or tattoos. My boyfriend has two tattoos and as soon as I stop being a wuss I am going to get on too, just for decoration, not for social statment. I have also in the past toyed with the idea of having a lip or eyebrow piercing but stern looks from my mum and then later my boyfriend soon changed this. I have always, however, looked at people with facial tattoos, transdermal implants, flesh tunnels? Is that what they are called? the big hole in the ear lobe anyway, I have always looked at these people with bemusement and sometimes amusement. I found it hard to understand why someone would want to violate thier body in this way. I didn't see it as really bad, I mean it is up to the individual at the end of the day, and living in Brighton for 5 years it became a regular occurence, it was more a question of why? After looking at some of the websites I understand a bit more, it's a hobby I guess, like classic cars but with more pain and blood. I think also there must be a certain element of shock involved, to seperate yourself from the rest of society perhaps, for whatever reason. Do I see these people as deviant? In some cases yes, I have my limits to what I find acceptable, to what can deal with on a rational level. I can't deal wih people who mutilate their genitals. I don't class 1 or 2 piercings mutilation in the deviant sense though, my friend had this one and I would not class her as deviant, she had it done to enhance sexual gratification - she offered to show me the piercings but I declined (yeah I'm a wuss, so what!) By mutilation I mean anything that involves the words splitting, cutting, splicing, scarring etc. WHY? And these people do it themselves, to themselves, am I missing something. Is there a great avenue of pleasure to be found that I am simply going to miss out on because I'm too "moral"? Another sub section of body modification that I find repellent is voluntary amputation. My Dad lost his leg through Cancer, I know he didn't get a big kick from it (excuse the pun wasn't intentional) Yet some folk choose to cut off (often caried out by themselves) toes, fingers, ven legs and arms. WHY? Why do they voluntarily handicap themselves? Why isn't there some kind of restriction on this because I think there should be. I t just shows a total lack of respect for your body,( I suppose though it coul be argued that smoking, drinking and overeating show a lack of respect for your body too, and I have certainly on one occasion or another been guilty of all of them). Why anyone would want to hurt themselves in this way is beyond me, a little bit of pain is one thing, hacking off your genitals is quite another. And as for those that find amputees attractive purely because of their lost limbs, well thats a different class of people altogether, I saw a picture on the internet of a tattoo of an amputee; my initial reaction is "oh my God thats sick" however I can't justify my reasons as yet because I haven't had time to think about it, but I will. Maybe it's the taking pleasure in others pain aspect, I don't know.

2002-11-27T14:58:00.000Z

Okay, so I can't put it off any longer. I am going to have to talk about The Devils at greater length, considering the subject matter and all, it would be rude not to. What I found quite intereesting, and a fact that I didn't remeber from when I was younger, was that it was based on "true" events; I only remembered the images (this is why children should not have videos in thier bedroom). Anyway, this fact lead me to wonder - why recreate them?. What relavance does it have for modern society? Does it have any relevance? probably, but for me the surreal inclusions seem to detract (why was the King shooting protestants dressed as birds, was that a normal practise in that time?) from the point. When Ken Russell chose to make a film depicting such depravity and corruption of religion and politics, true or not, he must have expected a backlash, film may be art but that doesn't stop people criticising and wanting to censor it. Don't get me wrong, I do "like" the film, or maybe appreciate it is a better word but I don't understand the reasoning of directors for making films like this. Is art their main priority? Or is shocking people thier main priority? I think this along with Larry Clarks "Kids", Lars Von Triers "The Idiots" and David Cronenburgs "Crash" are great examples of Bad Cinema. They represent parts of society that people would rather forget and ignore and I think that for the most part they are out to shock. Why do directors want to do this? Maybe to shock isn't thier intention at all but rather they do have an important message to get across. Should they be allowed to? Well then you get on to rules of censorship and that is too bigger subject to talk about now, so I won't.

2002-11-26T17:19:00.000Z

I watched "The Devils" just now. I had seen it quite a few years previous ( at an age when I probably shouldn't have been watching it) but it had an interesting documentary before it. I posted an image link to Oliver Reed in The Devils on the 18 November, how's that for foresight?,to link being bad and religion together. Talking of religion, I wasn't in the religion lecture but I have read peoples responses on it. The main feeling I got was that people talk too much apparently, but also that people felt that it was quite bias toward the Christian faith. I am not surprised though. It seems a lot more acceptable to pick apart Christianity than it is to pick apart Hinduism for example. Maybe it is a respect thing. Christianity has been ridiculed and has recieved a lot of cynical criticsim in this country but not many people would do the same for other religions. Not that I would incite them to do so.
I was reading Dan Hammond's and Wendy Andrew's blog pages. They were talking about the heirarchy system in organised religion (not just Christianity this time) and that it seems like there is alwalys someone at the top getting rich off peoples beliefs. Although I would not agree that this is the case in all religions and definately not in all strands of those religions. For example I was in a church for about 9 years of my life and there was nobody getting rich at the top, or anywhere else. But I do think that certain individuals will use the mask of religion to furthur thier own gains. I think you only have to look at the t.v preachers in America to see that. In the Bible there are stories where people were destroyed for getting rich off Gods name and making gold gods and such, although I haven't heard any stories like this lately!?! I don't think religion in itself is bad, niether do I think it is bad to follow a religion. What I do think is bad though is when people use it and the position they may hold in it for their own ends, like people who get money from it and those newspaper stories of Priests who molest children. And I think we can add cult leaders to that list as well. It is no wonder that religion has got a bad press. I think it is possible to get too involved in the "religious" aspect of a faith though and then lose sight of what it is you are fighting for.

2002-11-25T19:16:00.000Z

After worrying since the start of term about last weeks lesson and about what we would be asked to do, I actually found it to be the most enjoyable and interesting so far. I thought the extract from Portnoy's Complaint was very funny. I have just read Lucinda Iresons blog on masturbation (Thursday 21 November). Although I agree that as a society we tend to be a bit closed off on the subject of sex in general and in particular masturbation. However I don't think that we should be overly forthcoming in the information either. I can't imagine discussing my masturbatory (is that a word?) habits with the in laws over the dinner table - God forbid they should tell me about theirs! I have always been able to talk to my Mum openly about sex and I think that this is very important but I don't thinks it is necessary to go any furthur than this apart from with your partner obviously. I don't particularly want to hear about my friends masturbation exploits, is that wrong? I don't think masturbation is bad or deviant, and I definitely don't think it is worth castrating someone for. I just that it is a private matter as it describes a very "private" moment. Yes I think that we should be able to discuss it without going red or dissolving into a fit of nervous giggles but I think there is really only one place for this subject and that is in the bedroom... or in the bathroom, or in the car apparently.

2002-11-19T20:38:00.000Z

I thought I would post a link to the Joe Cartoon page. It is not "bad" particularly (well then again i isn't that moral either) but there are a couple of cartoons on there that are kind of related to tomorrows lecture, in an immature way anyway. I have linked it to the sitemap as it is easier to navigate but it is easy to get on to the home page. Under cartoons check out "look at my monkey" and "porno" for cheap, childish laughs.

2002-11-18T18:37:00.000Z

Teenage prostitution, no wonder Travis got so upset

2002-11-18T18:36:00.000Z

A very bad man, very very bad, evil even.

2002-11-18T18:25:00.000Z

The "hellraiser" himself, in the film "The Devils"

2002-11-13T19:20:00.000Z

Oh come on, they look cool and you know it!

2002-11-13T18:55:00.000Z

I had my first drag of a cigarette when I was 10. I was visiting my Aunt in Canada who smokes like a trooper, I tried her cigarette out of curiosity. That was it unil I bought my first packet, in Slough (there is not much else to do), when I was 12. Although my friends were involved there was no peer pressure. We were all curious, and we all wanted to look cool. Yes it is sad but true but my main reason for smoking for the most part was to give me an "edge". I agree with what Lucinda said in her blog about being the nice shy girl and wanting to prove that, yes, she could be bad too. I have always associated smoking with a certain image that I used to strive for. The image of just plain coolness. Not cool in a popular kid kind of way but cool in a reckless, loner way. Of course I could never achieve that aim because it just isn't me, but I tried. I don't think there is any denying that there is an image of cool and sophistication that comes with smokers. One of my favourite scenes in a film is in Goodfellas when Robert de Niro smokes while "Sunshine of your love" by Cream plays in the background. He looks great. Then there is Winona Ryder in "Heathers", Jimi Hendrix, James Dean, Uma Thurman in "Pulp fiction" and Patricia Arquette in "True Romance". These are the images that I did strive for when I was a smoker. It wasn't really a social thing for me. It became so later, but I just enjoyed the experience of smoking and I enjoyed smoking alone. As I got older and started to drink more then it became more of a social occasion. Particularly within the last few years when the enjoyment of the act faded but the habit and addiction lived on. Do I think it was bad of me to smoke. Not really. Yes it maybe an anti social, social habit but the only thing that is bad is the damage you do to yourself, which is your own choice and shouldn't be judged as bad by other people. Unless you are an unthoughtful smoker and smoke in front of those that are opposed to it, or smoke around children, I can't stand people who do that. But otherwise I don't think it is bad thing to do. Although I am aware of the fact that it has a bad reputation and those who smoke are thought of as a little more "reckless" than non smokers but I think this is purely image based. I gave up smoking about 3 months ago. I don't really miss it, well not every day. But I can't help thinking that maybe I have lost the "edge" that I felt smoking gave me. Maybe I should get a tatoo instead.

Tattoo of Betty Paige - 50s porn star - nice

2002-11-07T11:57:00.000Z

I have just read Julie Ann Rann's 1st of November Blog. The top Hollywood Psychos. Very Cool. Obviously the best ones were taken (the top three) but I thought I might add some aswell. Just because I can.
1. The Joker - Batman: Yup, being dropped in a vat of acid/toxic waste will do that to ya.
2. Randle P McMurphy - One flew over the cuckoos nest: The best non psycho psycho ever (I love Jack)
3. Max Cady - Cape Fear (Scorsese version): "I'm gonna make you learn about loss" okay then.
4. JD - Heathers: Used to be my favourite film, now worth it just for Mr Slaters hammy acting.
5. Travis Bickle - Taxi Driver: Aww bless him (I love Robert too)
6. Harry Powell (The Preacher) - Night of the Hunter: Oh my good God, run children RUN!

2002-11-05T19:34:00.000Z

I have just posted a link to the Grand Theft Auto website (It's a console game and it's bloody brilliant) check out the "Pogo the Monkey" link because it's quite funny. I think computer games are a theraputic and legal way to vent your anger and frustrations and to live out your immoral "fantasies". Where else can you steal a car, sleep with a prostitute, Beat an old woman with a bat, shoot someone in the head and still be able to look your mother in the face over the breakfast table? Not many places I can tell you. But all the above things are wrong. We know this. They are against the law and most people would agree that they are bad things to do (however I know some people who would disagree that sleeping with a prostitute is bad but that's another story). But is it wrong to do these things in an unreal situation? I mean why would we want to? Why do I want to? I don't know, it's just fun and I find it helps me to unwind. However if the only way I can unwind is to act out beating grannies with bats then maybe I should seek therapy.

2002-11-05T18:58:00.000Z

Play Bad

2002-10-31T14:23:00.000Z

Sick,Sick,Sick

2002-10-31T14:20:00.000Z

"Crime doesn't pay"

2002-10-31T14:03:00.000Z

Bad, maybe.Morbid, definitely

2002-10-31T13:52:00.000Z

I have just been looking for some more sites to link to and I came across a site called "The 8th Deadly Sim". Its based around the computer game "The Sims" which is taking over the world (I have unfortunately been known to dabble occasionally although I would not admit it in a court of law). Anyway on the internet you can download things to put in your own game, like kettles and armchairs, harmless things like that. This site is different in that you can download pornstars and each item has a sex and violence rating. You have to look at the preview site because otherwise you have to pay for it. Yes people will and do pay. There is also a link within that page which takes you to the "Seven deadly Sims " site which is obviously stuff based on the deadly sins. Now internet porn I understand. Its no different from buying a video but why oh why would you want internet porn based on pixelated characters? It's like those lonely individuals that fancy Lara Croft, no not the Angelina Jolie version, the non living, computer generated Lara Croft. Why?

2002-10-31T13:40:00.000Z

Bad, Bad...Just plain wrong

2002-10-31T13:23:00.000Z

Skiving is great! The Alton towers trip, that wasn't skiving really. That was authorised skiving so it doesn't really count. Skiving is best when there is only you or maybe one other person who knows about it. I took a part time A level in philosophy with a friend a couple of years ago, we wanted to pretend that we were intelligent really. Unfortunately we weren't as intellectual as the rest of the class (which was all male by the way) and spent most of the lesson time drawing pretty pictures on our notepads. One day as we were walking to college we decided to go to London instead. Neither of us had much money so we didn't do much when we got there but it was probably the best trip to London I have had. Just knowing that everybody else was sitting in a dull classroom going over Ontological arguments or something and we were roaming around London ( we couldn't afford to do anything else but roam) just because we could. It was quite a liberating feeling. Needless to say netiher of us finished the A level. Even just staying at home is better when you are not supposed to be there. My best days at home have been after pulling a sickie at work (I don't do it a lot mind you, just enough to keep me sane) because I don't feel obliged to do housework or food shopping like I do on my official days off (my life is just a non stop social whirl)because I wasn't going to be at home anyway, so there is no guilt, which is nice.

2002-10-28T12:39:00.000Z

I was looking on the web for some appropriate "Being Bad" websites. The first ("But Seriously") is a bit mother earthy and the writer does harp on about electricity for the majority of the piece but it is quite interestng none the less. The point, from what I understand of it, is that we, as humans, need good and bad elements to remain balanced. And that often we are too quick to dismiss "bad energy", we should instead be learning from it. The writer states that we (the public) refer to bad energy as that which makes us uncomfortable and that this is not an appropriate way of dealing with life. They say that we should take responsibltity for our feelings by saying "I don't like this" or "I like this" rather than making judgements based on our emotive reaction, "this is bad" etc. What do people think about this idea? I agree to a certain extent that we should not imply judgement onto other peoples behaviour, we should instead identify how we feel about the behaviour ourselves and why. But this idea only works for certain types of behaviour, not the act of murder for instance. Some behaviours have to be judged in order to give society boundaries.
The other website is based on Disney. Disney; which has long been regarded as the cornerstone of a healthy up bringing. Disney; which has delivered families with morally healthy flims for generations. Disney; which has been the center of many scandals revolving round drugs, sex, racism and the willful destruction of lemmings. The website has a glorious soundtrack, I believe taken from the film "Beauty and the Beast", and seeks to dispell or reinforce the myths surrounding Disney scandals. For example the Little Mermaid/Penis spire episode or the "subliminal sex messages in Disneys Aladin". "It's like a toddler introduction to porn" said one US housemaker, apparently. I think my favourite is the Seven dwarfs/seven stages of cocaine addiction story.
By the way, the name that I gave to the Disney website is a quote from "who framed Roger Rabbit?" spoken by Jessica Rabbit.

2002-10-28T11:57:00.000Z

But seriously

2002-10-28T11:55:00.000Z

"I'm not bad,I'm just drawn that way"

2002-10-23T15:20:00.000Z

Betty's Bad?

2002-10-23T15:00:00.000Z

What kind of risks do I take? When asked in class I couldn't think of anything, I just wrote that "I tend not to take risks". Not all risks involve some sort of immoral behaviour. I mean we all take risks on a daily basis. Small risks perhaps; isn't there some kind of risk involved getting on public transport; or driving your own car or even walking down the street. However if we were to dwell on this every day we would never leave the house. I am not a person who takes a lot of risks in life. I am probably as responsible as they come, as anyone will tell you. When I was younger I was most upset when my mum walked on the grass, in a park, when there was clearly a sign saying "DO NOT WALK ON THE GRASS". I was petrified that someone would see and send us to prison, or condemn us to death...could happen.
Thankfully I have lightened up a bit now but I am still too afraid of the consequences of my actions to take risks. I have, in the past, had my moments of unprotected sex, I have been a smoker for 11 years (although I did quit recently), I have ended up in hospital and at other times suffered various injuries because of my drinking exploits. To many people these would seem like big risks to take with your body. I could have ended up with an STD, cancer, liver disease. Yet despite all this I still say I am not someone who takes risks. I once went home with someone that I met in a club the same night- that is a risk surely. I have experimented with cocaine; at work nonetheless. But still I say I am not someone who takes risks.
So I suppose the point of all this babble is; who am I trying to kid? I like to think of myself as this moral, responsible person but I have indulged in things which contradict this. So maybe I need to re-think my out look.

2002-10-16T19:04:00.000Z

2002-10-16T18:36:00.000Z

I was discussing with a friend the topic of last weeks class. I asked my friend, who was not in the lesson, the same question we were asked. What have you done that's bad? To this my friend replied "Where do I start?". This is a good question. However an equally important question is how do I start? To answer this question we would first have to know what the definition of bad is. It is here that black and white answers blend into a kind of grey mass. A lot of students wrote smoking weed. Well, many people have indulged at one time or another, myself included. But it is not something that I would call bad behaviour. It is true it is illegal; but is that a good starting point? It was once illegal for women to vote and for black people to do... pretty much anything. I don't think we can always rely on the law to give us a true definition of what bad is. I think what's more important is the affect your behaviour has on yourself or those around you.