This was supposed to be an intro to an essay

"Perception and presentation go hand in hand. By altering presentation, the way the world perceives the individual changes. Experiences like this are common, from the way we dress to the way we act society relentlessly judges us." Notice the intended subject of these lines, at first a vague statement with no subject. Then a vague individual is mention, this is subtly implied to by the reader because in this sentence an action is proposed to no one in particular but impacts an individual. As a reader becoming aware of this connection and capable of taking this action you become the individual mentioned. Common Experiences addresses all of humanity, but the "we" addresses only the people aware of the connection between presentation and perception. The society the relentlessly judges includes not only the people that don't know this connection but especially those that do and will judge others with the understanding of what is going on. Yet us again refers to only those who understand the connection. Though these few lines were addressed to different audiences and intended to be read different ways.

I have learned basic grammar today. It is not the grammar aspect that interests me, it is the reasoning for choosing to phrase a statement in one way rather than another. The majority of this statement is phrased so that I am the teacher and the reader is a sort of student. Yet if this kind idea wanted to be enforced the sentences could be rearranged to the connection was less vague. What reason would someone have for doing this? I have know this about language for a long time, today i actually understand it. It's about time.

Otter disapointment

Fun fact, sea otters have pockets.

There are a lot of different topics that can fill a page or cause a debate. Some of these topics came to my mind when thinking about what I should write about video games as an art form, why modernists believe that understands only makes you unhappier, the last lines of Winesburg, Ohio, and feminism. Well, video games as an art form would require examples, and focus to craft an argument. POCKETS!! Enough said. I was afraid to discus disillusionment because the answer might not be satisfactory. Discussing Winesburg didn't actually come to my mind, having a list of there is general writing practice and that is unacceptable. If saying the wrong thing gets you not only backlash but whiplash as well its a topic I'm going to avoid, feminism. Sea otters having pockets seemed as good as any other topic to write about. After all some where in the world a child is visiting an a aquarium and is absolutely fascinated my the sea otters. This experience will gradually drift out of the young boys mind, life will go on and it will take the boy by the ear. In two years after he will have failed a test he will happen to sea  picture of a sea otter and that will make his day. While a general consensus will agree that Winesburg and disillusionment are worth more study and thought than sea otters this boy may but probably wont exist in the future values sea otters more. The fact that is created him for the sole purpose of valuing sea otters more than Winesburg, Ohio is not important. In the past five seconds this boy has come to represent the diversity of the human experience for me, because that boy is different in his interests, and as people our interests are different from the boy's. People must be diverse. A=B, B=C so A=C.I know this logic is faulty, and if i was writing about disillusionment that might bother me. The point is (No way, there is a reason for the madness!) i have wanted to write something worth reading, something of weight, something that is worth the space on a page, but knowing that importance is subjective. Its are to write about something the is "important" without sounding cliche, yet the consensus exists for a reason. While this does keep writing interesting it keeps me set up for failure, there is no proper way to do things. So I accept this failure and wrap my writing in humor knowing with pride that at least my thoughts are my own.
Like a sea otter *insert vague connection about a sea otters over coming adversity, call it symbolism*

Fondling

Internet nomads and fellow English students, we are gathered here today to talk about Inception. We do this only slightly because a teacher demands this, but also Inception is the best movie ever, and that it has taken me 5 days to get my **** together and actually write this blog. Otherwise I'm sure we would have done this sooner. (Inception is not my favorite movie, nor is it the best movie ever. Let me be dramatic if I want to) Honestly Inception is still worth talking about, because Inception is more than dramatic shoot outs, even more dramatic shootouts that never actually happened and 8 people sleeping on a plane between Sydney to Los Angeles. Inception has a story to tell, read the wiki if that's what you want, or better yet watch the movie. I'm here to tell you that not only is this a movie about dreaming, but the movie itself is a dream. The entirety of inception takes place within Cob's mind, every shoot out, every one liner, everything. This is possible because Cob is in limbo, in fact he has never left limbo.
In the "real world" lets think about how Cob and the crew get around, one second they are in a building, next second they are walking towards a plane, and five seconds later Cob is in France talking the grandfather (I'm calling him the grandfather, because i think he is Mel's father, but I'm not sure. Frankly that detail is irrelevant to my point anyways) While that's not exactly how things happened in the movie it represents how Cob and friends travel the world with very little context of what their travels were like. Cob points out to Ariadne that one of the ways to tell that your dreaming is to look back and ask yourself how did you get to your current location. I'm afraid that Cob and crew do a little too much instantaneous travel for us as viewers not to be a little suspicious.
Now lets look at the company has Cob has in his travels. Arthur, Eaves, Ariadne, Mr. Siato, and Yufus. Hes that guy how creates the sleep serum that works so well, while he has the best name ever, and no apparent combat experience Cob brings him anyways. These are all very interesting characters, but you should ask yourself why are they doing this. Arthur help Cob because he is loyal, even though he thoroughly believes inception is impossible. Eaves wants money... we think, but there are easier ways to make it. Ariadne like building things, although she doesn't have to risk here life for inception. She could start with more basic measures. At least we know Yufus wants money. Then there is Mr. Saito. Expert tracker. (finds Cob at his hotel, admittedly has a little help) Has enough money to buy out an airline a head of time in case he will need it at some point, but still can't compote economically with his rival (probably shouldn't have gotten the airline them). He is even an trained solder (When shot through the chest hold off and "army") Literally this guy is a miracle on legs. We can admit while interesting these characters are not too complex. Now contrast all of them to Mal or Cob's projection of Mal. She is as a complex if not more than Cobs cohorts, especially Mr. Saito, he's not human. So would it be reasonalble if Cob could create Mal be could create Arthur, Eaves, Yufus, Ariadne, and Mircale Saito.
Why would Cob do this, because he can't accept that he is actually stuck in limbo. Isn't it strange that when you go too deep into a dream you eventually wake up in limbo. Death in a dream can bring you there too, is your using the right serum. Yet this incredibly hard to reach place which is supposed to be impossible to escape, all you have to do is die and you wake up again. No limbo is supposed to be a mental prison a next level of seclusion. What if Cob became desperate, he had been stuck in limbo for so long with Mal that he had become desperate for something real. When Mal and himself get run over with the train he imagines himself in a "real world." A world that he is desperately models after everything he knows about the real wold, and to him this real world. It acts like the real world because that is how Cob's subconscious modeled it to work. Robert Fischer for example while clearly trapped in a dream does not put in a lot of effort to wake himself up because he need this dream to reconcile with his father. Like wise Cob needs this dream to believe he is in the real world.
We see the same children through out get movie, realistically they would have grown in Cob's absence.
Murder is terrible, but very rarely does it unify and entire country against you in the way that Cob feel he is being hunted.
Mal is speaking the truth, it is the rational part of Cob's mind telling him to accept his fate. Cob is stuck in Limbo for what is going to feel like an eternity.
The ending does not help clarify if Cob is "dreaming" or in a "real world."
Cob is in a dream, within a dream, in limbo dreaming that he can be in a dream, within a dream, within a dream, in dream, that leads back to limbo that he created for his dreaming purposes. Yes I really had to say that, doesn't inception somehow seem even more epic than before.
You can disagree with this idea, it is a bit absurder. then again we are talking about a world where you are able to consciously share a dream with 8 people at the same time, think about the science behind that. In this reality I can safely say i have given enough proof that Inception might all be Cobs dream. It doesn't have to be true, it just has to be possible, that is enough for me.

And you thought this paper was going to be about fondling.....

Lets get this over with

It's 10:08 p.m. on a Thursday evening, which on its own is no big deal. There will be a Thursday next week and the week after that. There was a Thursday last week and a thursday last year, there have been and will continue to be many more Thursdays. No its truly how we use this time that makes it special, I happen using this time to write this. After all I'm pretty good at procrastinating, I'll master it later. Its not the writing that bothers me this  night, or that the third Thursday was not capitalized, its fondling. Sooner or later I was going write about fondling, and so ill just get it out of the way now. In case your thinking right now "hey its the fourth Thursday that's not capitalized." I know, I did that on purpose. Let me have my fun.
Fondling was never something I gave much though to. It seems more like an action that really doesn't need a word to go with it, something that is very taboo. Unless your not that kind of person and in that case you can probably find more aggressive language. Grope, grope is a good example. Caress also exists, it has the same meaning as fondling just less likely to send you to jail. Caress has a gentle, poetic connotation that fondling never will. If that's not enough you can always use dandle, because that is apparently a word. Thesauruses are amazing. Folding rests some where between caress and grope. Fondling is a small path next to a stream, caressing/groping are mountains that make up everything else. This would be true if English was a valley, but then would a valley be English?
I hope I never reread this.
Along with everyone else English class was the last place I was expecting to be fondling, but it's purpose is brilliant. Fondling is enough care to pay attention and treasure the details, yet enough strength and fondling-ness to go deeper into the details to take them apart. Metaphorical fondling is superior! I bet metaphorical deadlines would be better too. Yes, this blog was due 9 minutes ago.
Strange how a very physical, tangible word describes literary analysis so well. Wow, this is how I should have started this blog.