Half Caste and Two Scavengers in a Truck, Two Beautiful People in a Mercedes :: John Agard Lawrence Ferlinghetti Culture Essays

Half Caste and Two Scavengers in a Truck, Two Beautiful People in a Mercedes Of the two poems from the other cultures booklet, I have decided to compare â€Å"Half-caste† by John Agard and â€Å"Two Scavengers in a Truck, Two Beautiful People in a Mercedes† by Lawrence Ferlinghetti. In this essay I will discuss the meaning of the two poems and what the poet is trying to get the reader to think and / or realise. The poem describes four people held together for a moment at a red traffic light. There are two scavengers, garbage men 'on their way home' after their round, and two beautiful people, an elegant couple 'on the way to his architect's office'. The garbage men’s day ends where the young couple's begins. The poet compares the two pairs in detail, and then seems to ask - at the end of the poem - whether America really is a democracy. The poem's structure is fairly free. The poet doesn't use punctuation; instead, he begins a new line when he wants us to pause in our reading. This slows the poem down and gives us time to appreciate each idea. The poem appears very fragmented on the page. This might suggest the fragmented or 'broken' nature of society? The language used in this poem is used in different ways to convey his ideas. For example; the title shows us straight away that the poem will be about the contrasts between two pairs of people. ‘Scavengers’ is a belittling term for the garbage men because it suggests that they live off the rubbish of others - a scavenger beetle lives off rotting flesh. However, Beautiful People is a compliment. So, right from the start, we feel the garbage men are at a disadvantage. In line 7 Ferlinghetti writes the garbage men are 'looking down' into the Mercedes. This is literally because the garbage truck is taller than the car; there is a hidden ironic message too. You might have expected the rich couple to 'look down on' the garbage men, not the other way round. The descriptions of the four people are very visual, making it easy to imagine the scene. Appearances tell us a lot. The rich couple are very fashionable: he has an expensive 'hip three-piece linen suit' (line 11) while her blond hair is 'casually coifed' (line 13). On the other hand, the garbage men are grungy (line 17). The younger one has sunglasses & long hair (line 24) just like the Mercedes driver, which forces us to compare the two. The poem wants us to seriously consider how different two people of the same age and race could be so

Essay --

800 words - Christiana Aiyeola Priority Seats Are Like Marmite; You Either Love Them, or You Hate Them. The number of people that see priority seats is ever growing every day. These seats are located the front of most buses asking regular passengers to relocate the other seats nearer the back of the bus. The debatable subject about it is, ‘Are they really needed? Wouldn’t we already give up our seats for the elderly?’ So I ask; Priority seats - Manner or Menace? Whether or not you believe that priority seats are needed to tell us what we already know; those who regularly take the bus to school or work will have undoubtedly experienced sitting in a priority seat. There is a certain feeling of nervousness that you experience, as you carefully keep an eye on the front door, steadily waiting on the edge of your seat, expecting the arrival of an OAP. Next, one of two things happens – one enters, or one doesn’t. Either way you are left pondering one question: ‘Why did I ever sit here in the first place?’ If a senior member of the public does enter you are forced to transfer all of your belongings elsewhere; if one doesn’t, your trip is ruined anyway since your peaceful journey has been interrupted by your constant watch of the front door. The truth is, even though priority seats are not made to make you feel guilty, they accomplish his by just existing. They are supposed to guarantee a safe and comfortable journey for all. Instead, they do the complete opposite by ensuring that those who do not harbour some sort of disability or are not of old age have to suffer from disapproving looks from other passengers as well as an indecisive inner conscience. This is unacceptable. Are we are better off without them? The British public are not s... ...ere so much kerfuffle over one seat you ask? Simple - there is a bigger more philosophical idea behind the priority seat. Yes, it does sound ridiculous - though it makes sense. Society has created yet another item that was supposed to be put to good use, but has been spoiled by those who have chosen to take notice of its correct purpose. Can we ever create an item solely to have a good function? Priority seats have a good idea behind them, but until we become a more civilised society, they will never show their true colours. Our solution is simple: we teach our kids manners when they are young, so that soon there will be no need for priority seats. In my opinion, I think the future is pretty bleak for them as they are the result of much conflict, though I can’t decide whether we need them. It all goes back to the main question; Priority seats – Manner or Menace? Essay -- 800 words - Christiana Aiyeola Priority Seats Are Like Marmite; You Either Love Them, or You Hate Them. The number of people that see priority seats is ever growing every day. These seats are located the front of most buses asking regular passengers to relocate the other seats nearer the back of the bus. The debatable subject about it is, ‘Are they really needed? Wouldn’t we already give up our seats for the elderly?’ So I ask; Priority seats - Manner or Menace? Whether or not you believe that priority seats are needed to tell us what we already know; those who regularly take the bus to school or work will have undoubtedly experienced sitting in a priority seat. There is a certain feeling of nervousness that you experience, as you carefully keep an eye on the front door, steadily waiting on the edge of your seat, expecting the arrival of an OAP. Next, one of two things happens – one enters, or one doesn’t. Either way you are left pondering one question: ‘Why did I ever sit here in the first place?’ If a senior member of the public does enter you are forced to transfer all of your belongings elsewhere; if one doesn’t, your trip is ruined anyway since your peaceful journey has been interrupted by your constant watch of the front door. The truth is, even though priority seats are not made to make you feel guilty, they accomplish his by just existing. They are supposed to guarantee a safe and comfortable journey for all. Instead, they do the complete opposite by ensuring that those who do not harbour some sort of disability or are not of old age have to suffer from disapproving looks from other passengers as well as an indecisive inner conscience. This is unacceptable. Are we are better off without them? The British public are not s... ...ere so much kerfuffle over one seat you ask? Simple - there is a bigger more philosophical idea behind the priority seat. Yes, it does sound ridiculous - though it makes sense. Society has created yet another item that was supposed to be put to good use, but has been spoiled by those who have chosen to take notice of its correct purpose. Can we ever create an item solely to have a good function? Priority seats have a good idea behind them, but until we become a more civilised society, they will never show their true colours. Our solution is simple: we teach our kids manners when they are young, so that soon there will be no need for priority seats. In my opinion, I think the future is pretty bleak for them as they are the result of much conflict, though I can’t decide whether we need them. It all goes back to the main question; Priority seats – Manner or Menace?

An Imperialistic Love Triangle in “The Quiet American”

The Orient is traditionally viewed as separate, backward, erotic, exotic, and passive. It mirrors a past of unscrupulous tyrannical power involving carnal pleasures and deviating from the restrictive morals of the â€Å"occidental. † The Orient displays feminine vulnerability with its progress and value judged as inferior to the West. Graham Greene’s The Quiet American presents the treatment of Phuong as a metaphor for how foreign occupying forces treat her native country of Vietnam, and her depiction as having no control in matters of her love life is a motif of the Orient being a feminized other.Hegemonic masculinity is a sociological term referring to the socialization of men producing normative perceptions of masculinity to be correlated in being unemotional and dominating others, especially women. Hegemonic masculinity brings an interesting pairing to the ideals of post-colonial imperialism in Vietnam. The French, British, and American all have aimed to elevate the people out of ignorance and savagery, and lead them to a more sophisticated social and political livelihood. They engaged in a gendered polarity with themselves and the effeminate other, Vietnam.Love PoemIn The Quiet American, the French, British and Americans viewed Vietnam as a feminized entity. It is non-threatening and an outlet for the carnal pleasures and delights of all things exotic: women, opium and trade. As such with the context of this paper, Pyle and Fowler's battle over Phuong is a clash of male dominance. Phuong is the most interesting character in Greene’s novel. She is depicted as a voiceless beauty without any power or opinions of her own. As her sister Hei affirms in Chapter 3 of part 1, â€Å"[s]he is the most beautiful girl in Saigon. [†¦] She is delicate, [†¦] She needs care. She deserves care.She is very, very loyal† (Greene, 46). At this part of the novel, Hei meets Pyle and instantly wants to set her sister up in a marriage with him. Hei sees him as a better match than Fowler because he is younger, single and wants children. The underlining stereotype that is reinforced through the Phuong character is a feminine and weak Oriental awaiting the dominance of the West. She is a defenseless woman that exists for, and in terms of, her Caucasian male lovers. Her role in the love triangle is reminiscent of her homeland’s colonial restraints. She is only presented in terms of what the two men want from her.Pyle wants her to become a typical American housewife with children. Fowler wants her to remain just as she is: his servant and lover. This love triangle and the emotions that the male characters feel towards Phuong correlate to deep personal sentiments of the way they feel about the country of Vietnam itself. Vietnam becomes feminized, taboo, and sexualized just as Phuong does in Pyle and Fowler's eyes. The novel’s rendering of the central plot involving Fowler and Pyle struggle over Phuong represents t he approach that Britain and America engaged in their fight to â€Å"save† Vietnam from communism.Pyle's' intentions toward Phuong, although similar in some cases to Fowler's, harbors fundamental differences. Both men view Phuong as a sort of object that needs to be saved or require some sort of assistance in order to endure life. When Pyle falls in love with Phuong upon their first encounter, he decides that he must do whatever he can or whatever he deems necessary in order to â€Å"save† Phuong from a deprived existence. This is the exact same way that Pyle views Vietnam and its present condition. In Chapter 1 part 2, Pyle suggests that Vietnam is in need of a Third Force to combat the Communists.In response, Fowler states: â€Å"He would have to learn for himself the real background that held you as a smell does: the gold of the rice fields under a flat late sun: the fisher’s fragile cranes hovering over the fields like mosquitoes: the cups of tea on an old abbot’s platform, with his bed and his commercial calendars, his buckets and broken cups and the junk of a lifetime washed up around his chair: the mollusk hats of the girls repairing the road where a mine had burst†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (23) Pyle spoke about how a Third Force is needed in Vietnam, yet he does not have a clue about the workings of the country.He is so absorbed in trying to spread the ideal of freedom of democracy that he neglects the significance of applying culturally appropriate approaches in relations to Indo-China. The Vietnamese government can make their own choices concerning political rule, however America’s anti- Communist agenda thwarts their ability to do so. This reflects the American stereotype of being overly idealistic, naive, and arrogant as they feel the need to meddle in issues of other nations in hopes to enlighten them to become more progressive. On the other hand, Fowler has learned to appreciate Phuong and Vietnam.The â€Å"gold of the ri ce fields, the fishers' fragile cranes,† and other beautiful aspects of this country have made him adopt it as his own. Fowler understands Vietnam and is fond of it; Pyle does not understand Vietnam and wants to improve it. Consequently, Fowler does not want to become concerned with the circumstances occurring in Vietnam and does not become involved in the situation between Pyle and Phuong until he is forced to do so. He prides himself on having no opinions and not taking sides, but instead he believes himself to be a true reporter who only observes.The British act in a similar fashion. The great imperial power of Great Britain historically is known to have a hands-off approach with their colonies and common wealth. They embrace some of the traditional and ethnic practices and social structures of the region; yet require both financial and political loyalty of their Oriental provinces. He essentially permits Phuong to decide whom she wants to be with until he is compelled to l eave his state of neutrality when it no longer benefits him.In a similar way, Fowler believed that Vietnam should be able to choose what would occur in its own future although he worries that they would make the wrong decision and elect a Communist leader. Fowler is not in love with Phuong but he wants her. He wants things between them to remain the way they are. He does not want her to marry Pyle. In this sense his motive to murder Pyle is partly personal as well as political. He spends a lot of time justifying his involvement with Pyle's murder as the only way of stopping him from doing further damage to the Vietnamese people, yet his true motives are more complex.In Chapter 2 of part 2, Fowler's discourse on Phuong reads very sexist and racist in his conversation with Pyle. â€Å"But she loves you, doesn't she? † â€Å"Not like that. It isn't in their nature. You'll find that out. It's a cliche to call them children–but there's one thing which is childish. They lov e you in return for kind-ness, security, the presents you give them-they hate you for a blow or an injustice. They don't know what it's like -just walking into a room and loving a stranger. For an aging man, Pyle, it's very secure-she won't run away from home so long as the home is happy. I hadn't meant to hurt him. I only realized I had done it when he said with muffled anger, â€Å"She might prefer a greater security or more kindness† (125). In the quote above, Fowler believes that Phuong and other Vietnamese women only â€Å"love† men based on what they give them and how secure the men make them feel. For Fowler, this notion is ideal for he believes that Phuong’s proclivity for loyalty will prevent her from leaving him as she is like a child who loves in return for kindness, gifts, and security. Both Fowler and Pyle objectify Phuong in different ways, but with the same result.In Chapter 3 of part 2, Fowler praises Phuong for her readiness to comply with his s exual demands: â€Å"Kiss me, Phuong. † She had no coquetry. (†¦) she would have made love if I had asked her to, straight away, peeling off her trousers without question†¦ (143). She services Fowler by preparing his opium pipes and providing him with sex any time he wants it. When Pyle shows an interest in her, Phuong abandons Fowler to live with Pyle. She shows little reaction to Pyle's death but readily moves back in with Fowler. In addition to Phuong’s depiction as a sexual object, opium is in its own right serves as a thematic object in The Quiet American.The heavy use of opium by Thomas Fowler portrays the lack of moral dexterity of the colonial powers. It is associated with indolence and vice for the Fowler character. He is mostly concerned with his ability to live as comfortable a life as possible in Vietnam. He writes the occasional news article for the British newspaper he s employed by, but prefers to spend his time smoking opium and enjoying the c ompany of Phuong. He smokes opium, which enhances his sense of total detachment, even from his own death. Nothing matters to him and he has no real ambitions except to avoid being sent back to England and to the an estranged wife.Opium is a highly addicted recreational drug used in Indo-China. The fact that Fowler smokes opium so frequently highlights his link to Vietnam and the moral conflicts revolved around the pleasure he takes in his Vietnamese life such as his lover, the people, and the culture. In sum, Phuong’s role in The Quiet America’s main plot reflects the dichotomy of imperialism in Indo-China and an ongoing love triangle. When Pyle discusses Phuong with Fowler, he starts talking about love, but Fowler replies: â€Å"Love’s a Western word†¦we use it for sentimental reasons or to cover up an obsession with one woman.These people don’t suffer from obsessions. † Phuong exists for the benefit of her lovers and even for her own sister to ensure her own security. Vietnam provided its colonizers what they wanted. Its people didn’t care who ruled them, they gave loyalty to any who could preserve a livelihood with the necessities such as food, jobs, and national defense. Likewise, Phuong’s decision to remain with Fowler wasn’t a consequence of her being a victim of circumstance, but of her playing an active role in maintaining survival through the protection of marriage.

J. D. Salinger and Catcher

Rye went into 14 printings within a year of publication and continued to have a large sale. The book had been translated into 30 languages and had sold more than 65 million copies. After his divorce with his second wife, Claire Douglas, he went to New Hampshire to be alone and be isolated. He stopped writing books and cut off most public contact. He would only write in private and enjoyed his time alone. Slinger died on January 27, 2010, of natural causes at his home in Cornish, New Hampshire. (American Decades. Deed. Judith S. Bushman. StudentResources in Context) Critics say that The Catcher in the Rye is a quest story but Holder's quest is aimless and incomplete. The Catcher in the Rye is most frequently compared to Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. The Catcher in the Rye was received enthusiastically by the reading public. The Catcher in the rye was a rapid success, The Catcher in the Rye was mostly praised by critics but others thought it was a failure. It was als o controversial for its adult language and situations. The Catcher in the Rye became a classic coming of age tale about maturing from childhood to adulthood.Slinger filed a lawsuit against Ian Hamilton for writing â€Å"J. D. Slinger: A Writing Life. † Slinger wanted to protect his privacy. Slinger influenced many people like Lynda Barry. I find J. D. Clinger's writing fascinating. His themes are powerful and relatable in The Catcher in the Rye. I really enjoyed the novel and I would love to read some more of his works. (Encyclopedia of World Biography. Detroit. Student Resources In Context. )

Bantu education and source analysis Essay

1. The main aims of the Bantu Education Act were mainly (at least according to Dr. Verwoerd) to transform education for natives into Bantu education, which will teach them things they will need to know in their lives. This is stated clearly in Source A, where Dr. Verwoerd is quoted saying â€Å"Education must train and teach people in accordance with their opportunities in life, according to the sphere in which they live.† Reading between the lines, Dr. Verwoerd is saying that the Bantu are an inferior race that will never be equal to the whites, and that it would be a waste of resources and effort to try and teach them things they will never need to know. By saying the he almost directly suggests that the blacks should be kept down, as it would be absolutely ridiculous to try and teach him mathematics, for example, when all he will ever amount to is a farmer or a tailor. I In Source C it is directly stated that, as most blacks will become agriculturists, the most useful things that can be taught to them are gardening and needlework. He doesn’t even give the blacks a chance, immediately dismissing them as complete idiots whom wouldn’t even want the same type of education as the whites. Therefore, when planning the different syllabuses for all education, the black systems should be limited to very simple skills such as reading, writing, farming and perhaps very simple mathematics. We wouldn’t want to overload the blacks with information that will only confuse them and make them unhappy, now would we? According to the Commission on Native Education the blacks; knowledge of anything requiring intelligence should be barred. In another speech by Dr. Verwoerd (Source B) he states that â€Å"The Bantu must be guided to serve his own community in all respects† and:   Ã¢â‚¬Å"Until now he has been subjected to a school system which drew him away from his own community and misled him by showing him the green pastures of European society in which he was not allowed to graze†. Basically, these two  quotes state that Verwoerd doesn’t want any wannabe Europeans around. He defends his arguments by saying that it would also be unfair to continue educating the Bantu like the Europeans, as it is only showing them new horizons they will never be allowed to explore. Educating them like this would therefore create Bantu that had the skills of Europeans, and not their people. As whites into would never hire them the administrative positions their education levels demand, they would be forced to go back to their people and farming, in which they would have no skills. This would cause discontent in everyone, so it is better not to educate the Bantu at all. Apparently it would also be very uneconomic to spend money on education without a specific aim, and disrupt the community life of the Bantu. His main point behind the arguments states this: We don’t want to have the blacks interfering in our lives. Source E further supports these arguments. In this photo four black schoolboys are looking very happy walking down a road. This photograph seems very arranged to make the outside world think the South African government is doing all they can to bring light into the darkness that is the life of the Bantu. 2. Assessment of source B Source B is an excerpt from a speech made by Dr Verwoerd to the senate of South Africa on the 7th of June 1954. I think this source is very valuable, as it is a primary source from the time period. It gives us direct information about what Verwoerd said in his speech. It also tells us a bit about what kind of government was in power at the time. This can be seen from the fact that he can give such a racist speech. If someone gave this speech today, he would be severely criticized and ridiculed. At the time the speech was given it would appear that the senate would be expecting to hear something like this, and be satisfied by it. This again proves what a racist government was in power at the time of the speech. It does not leave much room for bias, except by censorship, or having some parts of the speech left out. This source is also very limited in many ways. It doesn’t tell us many things, as it is only a part of a speech. For instance, it doesn’t tell us who recorded this speech, and chose the parts to be included. We don’t know either what Verwoerd said in the parts that are not included. It would also give a clearer image of the government in power if we were told about the senate’s reaction to the speech. If they cheered madly, this would prove what a racist system was in power at the time. A tremendous help would be if we found out what happened after the speech. Were all his suggestions made reality, or were they regarded as a failed idea. I would also be very interested in finding out what inspired him to give this speech. Was he requested to give a speech on the topic, or did he himself think the time was appropriate for such an exclamation. Assessment of Source E This source is a photograph of four black schoolboys stating how happy they are, and what a good job the government are doing at getting all the Bantu into school. This photo is very valuable specifically because it is so obviously staged. This is a good example of a heavily manipulated propaganda photo. It is meant to give us the idea that all is well with blacks, and they are the happiest of all. If you dig deeper, though, you can deduce many things. Obviously the photographer has told the children where to stand and to apply a huge smile to their faces. This tells us that the South African government was concerned about their image with the outside world and human rights activists. This photo was obviously taken to soothe the minds of anyone worrying about the ill treatment of the blacks. The main limitation of this photo is we don’t know how much the photo was manipulated. Maybe the boys were walking down the street, and were told to smile while a photo was taken. Maybe the four boys were rounded up, put in school uniforms and made to walk down the street in exchange for a small payment. We don’t know. 3. In my opinion, Source B is absolutely the most useful. It really captures the mentality of the current government and the people. It tells us Dr.  Verwoerd’s opnion about the blacks and their treatment. Although he doesn’t directly announce his hatred for blacks and how he wants to shoot them all, we can see he is more concerned with the wellbeing of the European community than that of the Bantu. It is also a primary source, so chances are it has not been subject to too much manipulation. It gives us a good understanding of the government, Dr Verwoerd and how the blacks are being treated. It is a bit sugarcoated, but once you delve deeper it is obvious what they really think. I think this source is the most useful because it captures the attitudes towards the Bantu at the time.

Buddhism vs Jainism

There are great differences as well as similarities when comparing Buddhism and Jainism. The major difference that stands out to me would the doctrines of these religions. Mahavira and Buddha parted ways over doctrine differences. Mahavira and Buddha were powerful and charismatic in the eyes of society. They both obtained the amazing skill to convince and influence which are extremely important in start-up religions. Naturally, these two religions often disagreed over finer aspects of their prospective beliefs. Buddhism was more defined in its criticizing of Jainism. Both sought to convert others. The leaders of the two seemed to have put great efforts in support of finding converts. Both leaders, Buddha and Mahavira were from royal families. Mahavira was the last and most popular of the thirthakaras. These people worshipped in temples as â€Å"enlighten beings† who live on earth as humans. Buddhism was actually founded by Siddharta Gautama who later became Buddha entering his mother’s right side white elephant. Jainism and Buddhism were considered atheistic religions. Neither believes a â€Å"supreme God† exist. However, Buddhism seems to be more agnostic due to speculation that Buddha refused to publicly denounce or dismissed the idea of a â€Å"supreme God†. Both Jainism and Buddhism believe that karma is the force that is responsible for suffering on earth. Unlike Buddhism, Jains believe karma is not just a result of ones actions. However, karma is a real substance that becomes attached to each jiva, like impurity, performing many actions while on earth. In Buddhism the eightfold Path and four Noble Truths are what are needed to minimize the effects of negative karma and strive for their ‘salvation’. Both religions believe in liberation. There are great differences regarding who achieves this. Jains believe souls become entangled in the causative phenomena and fall to the law of karma. If liberated souls are pure and divine, but if bound they result in birth and death. According to Jain doctrine, the soul can free itself from suffering of physical life by leading a pure life as taught the thirrthankaras. Buddhism does not believe eternal souls exist. Therefore liberation is physical and mental perspective. This would be considered an individualistic approach. This indicates this person is not eternal neither Devine. Nirvana is a state in which the person’s personality becomes free. Buddhism opposed the order of the Vedic society system that divides people in caste. The Jain did not technically oppose the cast system; however everyone was treated equally under the umbrella of Jainism. Buddha’s teachings also revealed that humans suffered on earth as a direct result of negative karma, becoming attached and full of worldly desires. The Buddhism belief is the world is filled with evil and discomfort. Man is bound to the cycle of births and deaths until righteously committed. Buddhism opposed rituals of Vedic religion and concentrated more on righteous living to achieve liberation. Jainism did not oppose religious rituals. They worshipped the thithankaras in Jain temples. Jain is an austere religion; it focuses more on the individual’s actions and purity for gaining liberation. Buddhism has gained more notoriety than Jainism worldwide, most likely due to its practices. Besides, a major difference lies in the dominions of both the religions. Though both, Buddhism and Jainism, developed and originated individually in India, but difference how they went about teaching and converting. While Buddhism went abroad to other parts of the India, Central Asia, far eastern countries, and parts of North America and Europe as well. Jainism remained confined to India and seems to stagnate as it pertains to growth. Buddhism today is culturally diverse.

Can videogames cause an andrenaline response Essay

Abstract Can video games cause an adrenaline response? Our group thinks that playing video games will affect your adrenaline response because we think it will increase your breathing rate, heart rate, and pain tolerance.For this experiment, Richard and Matthew played Black Ops 2 and then we tested their reflexes, breathing rate, and pain tolerance. We compared it to the test we took before playing the game and the results was the breathing rate, reflexes, and heart attack increases which proves our point that video games does affect an adrenaline response. Introduction Your body works in many ways to help keep homeostasis, where all internal processes are stable and constant. Your body uses the sympathetic nervous system to help deal stress and stressful situations. The nervous system is arranged with a fight or flight response, also called the acute stress response, to increase your ability to survive when in danger. The response is provoked instinctively in reaction to a recognized threat survival than to motivate consciously or by choice, and alters your body’s systems to ready you to either to fight the danger or to avoid by running away. When your mind is focused on watching a horror movie or playing a videogame with intense action, even though you might not be in real danger, your adrenal medulla gland still continues to start up because of your stressed state. It releases hormones and a surge of adrenaline that could help you confront or escape by increasing blood pressure, heart rate, and breathing rate, transformation of fat into available energy, and dilating pupils. All of these factors function together to raise your strength and speed. Dilated pupils help you see more clearly, and muscle tension and increases blood flow readies your muscles for action and heighten agility. During an adrenaline response, your body responses increases perspiration to prevent overheating due to the raised rate that you’re expending energy. Your body even increases how fast your blood coagulates so that if you’re injured, you’ll experience less blood loss. Decreased or no awareness of pain, called analgesia, is also an effect of these life preserving hormones. Method 1. First, we have to collect information about the test the subjects. We  will collect their ages, genders, and the experience they had with the game. 2. Then, we will collect the subject’s breathing rate by counting the number of breaths the person takes in one minute. 3. We will also take the subject’s pulse rate counting the number the of times the heart beats in one minute. 4. After that, we will test the subject’s reaction time. We will use the ruler test and test him four times and find the average. 5. We will then tell the subject to play for 10 minutes, and after he is done, we will measure his breathing rate and record it down. 6. Then, we will tell the subject to continue for 5 minutes. We will pause the game and take the subject’s pulse rate and reaction time. 7. Then, we will resume for another for another five minutes and we will poke him 15 times for pain tolerance and ask him after he played if he felt anything. 8. Finally, we will record all of the data and use the same steps for testing the second subject.