Say Anything - I Want To Know Your Plans
I want to know your plans and how involved in them I am.
When I go to sleep for good will I be forgiven?
And If you want roses you can go buy a bouquet.
If that just won’t cut it, well what can I say?
Wow, does she even speak Chinese?
“Chang” is one of the most common last names in the Chinese language - it is the Wades-Giles romanisation of the word 张 or 張. It could also be the Wades-Giles romanisation of the word 章, although this last name is less common. It could also be the pinyin of the word 常, although this too is a less common last name. This would hold true for the Cantonese and Mandarin pronounciations of the words too, although “Cheung” would also work for Cantonese. The author of the very famous books “Wild Swans” and “Mao: The Untold Story” is named Jung Chang, for example, and I can assure you that she is definitely Chinese. In fact, according to a survey, there are 88 million people in China surnamed 张 alone, and I haven’t even taken into account the other two. But I’m sure that they are all secretly Korean.
“Cho” could be multiple different words in both Cantonese and Mandarin. In Mandarin, it could be 周, or any one of the multiple words
with the same pronounciation shown above, which using romanisations other than pinyin, could translate to ‘cho’. It could also be the romanisation of the Cantonese word 秋, which is what was used in the Mandarin translations of the Harry Potter films. There are multiple other Cantonese words which could be translated to “Cho” in English.
Yes, “Cho” and “Chang” are both Korean last names - but they can also be Chinese names. It’s like calling an American character “Kim Lee” and complaining that her name is made up of Korean last names: yes, it is, but “Kim” and “Lee” are also English names.
Anyone who speaks even a little bit of Chinese would know this, so either the lovely lady in the gifset doesn’t speak a word of it, or does, but is deliberately using misleading facts in order to portray J K Rowling as racist.
What a pathetic attempt.
NO.
Do not belittle this incredibly powerful piece of spoken word just because of one poorly communicated verse.
Go watch the FULL original here and her humble response to her critics here (where she apologizes for her mistake with the name and explains where her intent was miscommunicated). Both contain very important insights into how race is portrayed in popular media.Don’t dismiss this video just because it criticizes something you love. She does not hate Harry Potter, in fact she loves it. But it is important to examine the things we love critically so that we can make things better in the future.
Yes, actually, I will point out incorrect criticisms that I come across on my dashboard. I’m sure the rest of her video is fantastic; unfortunately, I can’t access them because I live in, er, China, and youtube is blocked.
Where did I say I was “belittling her entire video”? I’m only responding to the post - that is, the gif set - and not once did I mention anything about the rest of her video.
Did you even read the post? I’ve not dismissed the whole video because I love Harry Potter - I’ve dismissed this particular passage because I speak Chinese, and know what she’s saying is complete bullshit. The fact that it’s about Harry Potter is completely irrelevant: I would make the exact same response if it was about, say, Lord of the Rings, which I’ve neither read or watched. If she says something factually incorrect, then she will be criticised. In fact, I’ll say the same thing to you as you’ve said to me: it is important to examine the things we love critically. In your case, it’s your precious angel baby gif set lady.
Your hypocrisy is astounding.
Cosmos Will Get a Sequel Hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson
More than three decades after it aired, Carl Sagan’s groundbreaking, brilliant 13-part TV series Cosmos:A Personal Voyage will finally get a sequel.
Cosmos, which originally ran in 1980 and was rerun many times over the following decade, is widely regarded as one of the first, and best, TV shows to make science accessible to everyone. You can watch the show now on Hulu, but despite its brilliance it is still a show from more than 30 years ago, and you can tell — the special effects are primitive by today’s standards, but more importantly some of the content has been superseded by discoveries in the intervening years.
So, it’s high time someone made a sequel to it, and now someone is! In partnership with Sagan’s colleagues Ann Druyan (who is also his widow) and Steven Soter, Seth MacFarlane — yes, that Seth MacFarlane — is going to produce a new 13-part series to serve as a sequel and modern update to Sagan’s masterpiece.
Taking over the hosting duties will be none other than well-known astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, who has served as host of NOVA ScienceNOW on PBS for the past five years, so he has plenty of experience making science accessible to the general public. It would be difficult to think of anyone who would be better able to succeed the late, great Carl Sagan.
The folks working on it will take their time and do it right — it’s not scheduled to air until sometime in 2013.
The producers of the show say the new series will tell “the story of how human beings began to comprehend the laws of nature and find our place in space and time.” They go on to boast: “It will take viewers to other worlds and travel across the universe for a vision of the cosmos on the grandest scale. The most profound scientific concepts will be presented with stunning clarity, uniting skepticism and wonder, and weaving rigorous science with the emotional and spiritual into a transcendent experience.”
That’s the good news. The bad — or at least, potentially bad — news is that, because of MacFarlane’s involvement, the series will air in prime time, and on Fox.
Now, in one way I’m all for showing it in prime time on a major network, because it’ll be that much more likely that people who routinely ignore the Discovery Channel, the Science Channel and, yes, PBS will actually see it.
I’m less thrilled, though, that it will have to compete with other, more mainstream prime-time shows — and it’ll be on Fox, which doesn’t have the greatest track record for giving shows a chance to pull their ratings up once they go down.
Now, maybe the fact that MacFarlane is involved — and Joss Whedon isn’t — will help. I certainly hope so.
You can find out more about the plans for the series.
