In Is Violence History, Peter Singer elaborates on the book Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker. Singer touches upon an interesting topic to talk about. Better Angels of Our Nature brings to light many of our common day questions and topics. The author, Pinker, takes on a philosophical approach of declining violence in society. Pinker makes the observation that people nowadays are less likely to suffer from a violent act or violent death. The decline of violence refers to anything – family, tribes, states. Pinker has even noted on the declined death rate amongst countries. For example, the chance of getting murdered in Europe is one tenth. On a deeper approach, Pinker questions whether this decline is related to Enlightenment, genetic changes, an increased I.Q. amongst the people and so forth. For example he asks, “Why are homicide rates higher in the southerly states of this country than in northern ones? Are aggressive tendencies heritable? Could declines in violence in particular societies be attributed to genetic change among its members? How does a president’s I.Q. correlate with the number of battle deaths in wars in which the United States is involved?” Pinker makes a really good observation and correlation between violence/death and the civilizing and intelligence of society.

As we proceed into newer generations, paperback books are becoming somewhat of an outdated source for reading. Like many households that have replaced big-boxed televisions and computers with flat television and computer screens, the e-reader and other technological devices have replaced the old form of books.

Amongst the most popular devices is the Kindle e-reader.  The Kindle allows you to purchase and read books on a screen without the hassle of turning pages. It is “the biggest-selling e-reader” and of course it cannot stay on top unless it offers the best resources.  That is why Kindle has now made library e-books available to its customers. Library e-books allow people to borrow books online for up to two weeks. But there is a downside. E-book borrowing will defeat the purpose of e-book buying.

There is truth in this. Julie Bosman points out a good problem. With the purchase of an e-reader or the use of other technological devices to access readings, it is obvious these consumers do not have much care for the essence of a book. They are looking for the most convenient way. Now that there is a better, more efficient and cheap way to access books, why not take advantage of it? Although e-books are convenient and beneficial to the consumers, it will most likely have a negative impact on the publishing industry. Publishers will not earn what they deserve. While it may be easy and free of cost; a worthy piece of literature should be appreciated in its traditional form. Julie Bosman talks about the positive and negative issues which are very much agreeable.

Seaport, located by the lower Manhattan waterfront, has always been a popular neighborhood with many offerings ranging from street performances and concerts to shopping and food markets. It is a great place to experience the hustle and bustle of New York City. Check out the shopping mall or South Street Seaport Museum!

An upcoming event that you should take notice to, however, is the Orange Alert. Commemorating the tenth anniversary of 9/11, this play centers around the lives of six people who live in the aftermath of 9/11 and currently work at Ground Zero (where the play takes place). The play is about love, construction, and loss. This is a great opportunity to remember and come together with others as the sensitive topic that touches many of our lives is brought to hand. Buy and reserve tickets to one of the performances on September 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 at the Algonquin Seaport Theater located at Pier 17 89 South Street.

Check out the rich, upbeat and lively atmosphere and the events offered at Seaport this season!

To draw the reader in and to have a successful review, the reviewer should provide some knowledge to the topic at hand to create some type of interest in the reader. It is important for the critic to have a firm standpoint whether it be positive or negative. It is crucial to make clear how he/she feels about the piece being reviewed and to make the reader understand, but not necessarily agree, why he/she feels this way.

In Shuffling and Mirroring In a Sort of Simon Says, Brian Seibert gives a short but descriptive introduction of the choreographer Noémie Lafrance and her previous works. By doing so, Seibert shows that he has an interest and understanding/opinion in the works of Lafrance. Seibert then proceeds directly into a description of the project, ‘The White Box Project’, that he is reviewing. He analyzes the methods that Lafrance uses in this dance piece. Seibert clarifies what he is focused on, “the line between audience and performers should blur”; the way Lafrance depicts this aspect of her work compared to her prior projects. He proceeds to make a stand on how he feels about this method. He says, “But Ms. Lafrance has revolted against traditional ways of presenting theater more imaginatively before. This project lacks the visual stylishness….” and so forth. It is clear that Seibert feels this is one of Lafrance’s weaker presentations. I feel as if I am able to hear Seibert’s voice/opinion while reading his review. The review has its own definite character and standpoint; it is firm and therefore I do not question it. He gives a persuasive pull towards his opinion. Not only do I feel that he is believable, he has made me unconsciously formulate a positive curiousity towards the previous works of Lafrance that he says is distinguished by “visual stylishness”.

In Hindu Mythology Comes to Life in the Streets of New York, I am unclear of the direction that the review is heading towards. Is this review making a negative or positive standpoint? Does Alastair Macaulay feel that “Visions of Forever” was a good performance? How does he make me feel about it? Macaulay starts with a lengthy but somewhat pointless introduction. From the title, I assumed I would mostly be reading about the dance presented by Sutra Dance Theater from Malaysia. However, Macaulay introduces with a lengthy description of the Downtown Dance Festival that had little relation to ‘Visions of Forever’ except that it was the closing program to the festival. When Macaulay finally talks about the performance, he is somewhat contradictory. On one hand he says, “although there are real drawbacks…”, “one big problem was a voiceover”, and “a smaller problem…”. On the other hand, Macaulay compliments that it has “an abundance of color and dance detail” and “depicts Hindu mythology with marvelous costumes”. He also has a lengthy positive opinion of one of the dancers, Ms Govindarajoo, and how his eyes ‘kept singling her out’. What is the point he is trying to make in the end? Is he focusing on the detailed dances and successful Hindu mythology representation or the problems that he points out? Is the performance mediocre or do the positive aspects weigh out the faults?