After reading most of the other Being Bad blogs, it seems i have forgotten to suggest something to do in week 12. I'm afraid i'm not a drinker, so i wouldn't be up for visiting the pub and getting sozzled like most of the other bloggers think would be a good thing to do. In response to Mathew Davis' blog with the suggestion of visiting Joseph Fritzl's house, this guy was way past just being bad. He was a paedophile, rapist and kidnapper, besides other things, so i'd say he comes under the category of evil. I have a friend who visited Fred West's house in Gloucester before they demolished it, which i thought was morbid.
Some people have suggested a police station, prison or law courts, which would all be good and interesting. For those people interested in art we could visit The Museum of Bad Art ,- "The Museum Of Bad Art (MOBA) is the world's only museum dedicated to the collection, preservation, exhibition and celebration of bad art in all its forms." Although this would not personally appeal to me.
Maybe we could have a lecture about the psychology of bad behaviour, or a lecture about the so-called bad gene that is supposed to contribute the questionable behaviour of some people.
The end of the world? Robots and cloning
A recent article about scientists who are working with a robot and hoping to learn it to talk made me think about the Terminator film. If robots are eventually able to think and learn for themselves, could we one day end up with the war like the one in the Arnie film where robots are battling humans for co
ntrol of the earth? I feel this could one day actually happen, i know it sounds stupid now but if these super robots become more human like, surely they will have individual personalities. So we could end up with one like Hitler who wants to over take the world, which sounds silly, but it could actually happen if they become that advanced. If they learn to repair, modify and advance their own technology on their own, its obvious this could become a reality.Whilst on the subject of robots and what i think are bad things that scientists do, what does everybody think of cloning? Personally, i feel its not for humans to interfere with 'gods' design, which is what cloning does. Whilst in some countries it is illegal to undertake research of this kind, there are countries that are not in the EU and who open their arms to any mad scientist and allow them to do whatever research they like in return for a nuclear bomb. I feel any kind of genetic engineering, such as that of GM foods, is wrong but i know its only a matter of time before some one clones a human. There is an interesting website that contains endless pages on cloning with both for and against arguments, and even though i'm not religious i agree with Pope Benedict XVI who stated "Human cloning is more dangerous than weapons of mass destruction". But isn't this guy from the same clan who told people in Africa not to use condoms during the Aids epidemic? or am i wrong? I remember the world wide frenzy when the Raelian sect declared they had cloned a child which had been born from an egg that was fertilised using a skin cell from the mother. The Raelian sect was established by an ex journalist on the belief that humans were firs
t cloned 25,000 years ago by aliens, although i've yet to find any evidence that backs up their claims. Its strange to see that the Raelian logo (on the left) actually incorporates a Nazi swastika in the middle.Most religions have stated cloning is immoral and should not be used for any purposes. But what about the parents who have already had one disabled child so are having the egg genetically modified to ensure their next child does not suffer from the same problems, does this make them bad people? I can understand why they do it but its difficult to say if its bad and whether they should be allowed to do it or not. Genetic engineering is a new science and who's to know what problems doing that kind of thing could cause in the future.
Smoking
On the subject of smoking which has produced a lot of discussion on the classes blogs, has anyone had a read of
'Smoke gets in your eyes' by Michael Thibodeau and Jana Martin? [Link to Publishers Comments page]. Its an interesting book if your into the history of smoking and cigarette design and packaging over the last century. Its obvious the number of smokers has declined rapidly over recent years compared to the 1940' and 1950's, but after reading this book its easy to see why smoking was seen to be so attractive back then. Cigarette packet designs evolved with the times and reflected what was happening in peoples lives. Different designs were created to attract certain types of people, and its funny to see the different types of designs that were aimed at different social classes. Cigarettes aimed at the upper classes were covered with royal crests and things like that (even fake wood) and came with names like Tophat, Cartier, Lyrics, Pearls and Old Golds, even Marlboro were aimed at these type of people, where as designs for the lower classes were adorned with mainly pictures for the illiterate which reflected whatever was the fad at the time. Designs contained pyramids, Chinese symbols and stuff like that, and came with names like Death, Black Cat, Spud and Hope. There are fag boxes designed especially to attract the ladies with names like Syrena which had a mermaid on the box, Fems, and Belinda's super king menthol's.Cigarette designs were influenced by everything. Politics and propaganda designs were popular during both World Wars, with designs covered in B5 bombers for the Americans and the red rising sun logo for the Japanese. Presidents in the USA always advertised on fag boxes, and would usually contain a collectible gimmick to encourage sales. Animals were also popular as were scenes of trees and plants. There were Bonny fags with an Alsatian on, Black Cat and Tigers all covered in the relevant animals. Other favourites were cars, horses, Chinese and Indian designs, pictures of the sea and boats, and even a box called Star which were covered in graffiti and were aimed (although very covertly) at the youth market until the government stepped in. All these designs show just how much what was on the cover of the box influenced who would buy them. Its also interesting to see how the designs changed after the advertising ban and warning labels were introduced. They also show just how much smoking was a popular past time.
References
Thibodeau, M. & Martin, J. (2000) Smoke gets in your eyes. New York: Abbeville Press
No comments:
Post a Comment