Category Archives: DG13E

Dogs are great animals. I would know, I have two myself. One of them is actually my mothers dog,  Charlie the chihuahua. I dont consider him my dog beause he hates me. Each time I come close to him he starts growling, barking and biting me. The second dog is my cute little white Fluff Ball. He is a Havanese named Peotr Pervi, english Translation: Peter the Great. But we just call him Petya. Ever since  was a litte kid each time my parents would ask me if I wanted a brother or a sister, I would respond by saying, ” I want a doggy!”. Dogs have been a huge part of my life. I used to memorize each and every breed and learn everything about them.

I, from first hand experience, know that dogs bring families closer. The help a family to bond, and just bring pure and simple joy into their lives. I feel as though the movie, “Best in Show” shows how everyone strives to be the best at everything. And there is always this competition in being the best in everything. Honestly, I think people try to hard to be the best, and they get caught up in being this perfect robot that they forget to be happy.

My Uncle breeds, Dobermans, Boxers, English Bulldogs, French Bulldogs, and German Sheapards. And most of his dogs are world champions. The puppies of those pure breds go up to three thousand dollars. I personally dont believe that life is about being ‘pure-bred’ its all about being happy, even if you are born a mut.

Hills Like White Elephants

Jig and the American are waiting at the train stop. Maybe Jig is from somewhere else because Hemingway used “the American” instead of his name. It sounds like the couple is having some troubles. They were talking about drinks and then Jig brings up absinthe and blames it on her boyfriend? that he started it. Later on the man says the operation is “awfully simple.” She is probably traveling to a place where they can get an abortion for a cheap price. Maybe Hemingway said “the American” to point out that it was a cultural thing that normally Americans had abortions? Every time Jig says she could have everything, the man shoots it down saying they cant. She keeps repeating it; her mind is just elsewhere. She kept repeating “the white elephant” and that could’ve meant her baby because usually white is associated with being pure. The “everything” she kept repeating could have meant her baby or maybe her wish to have something to call her own. She probably doesn’t have anything because she looked “at her bags against the wall of the station. There were labels on them from all the hotels where they had spent nights.” Jig would do anything for him so he could be happy. She said she didn’t care about herself and if it would make him happy she would do it. He told her the baby was the cause of all their troubles, but I think there’s deeper problems than just that.

I was doing the assignment and this song came up and it makes me happy. Maybe it’s the lyrics. (;

Best in Show is a mocumentary of several dog owners followed prior and during the Mayflower competition. The owners all share the quality of loving their dogs.  Because they love their dogs, they strive to have possession of the blue ribbon given to the winner at the competition. They all treat their dogs as their own children, whether it was therapy sessions or providing toys for them to play with.
It seems that the reason the dog owners entered the competition was so that they could win. Winning, to almost everyone, will make him or her happier than they already are because it gives them that extra self-confidence. Each owner groomed his or her dog to become best in show. After several rounds, like in every other competition, there are winners and there are losers. In the end, even after many struggles, Gerrie and Cookie Fleck are awarded the ribbon to go home with. They won the competition.  The remaining dog owners, even though they lost show no sign of being upset. This in fact proves that, it wasn’t the idea of winning that made them happy, but rather their dogs that gave them the happiness they needed.
Happiness doesn’t come from winning anything. But it comes from something you love doing or being around. Watching this movie made me think about my cousin’s dog and how much we all love her.

The movie “Best In Show” highlights the fact that in order to be happy, one must come out on top of all endeavors. The dog owners scramble to pamper, and make thier dogs beautiful before the final pagent. Throughout the movie, all five dog show enthusiasts go through countless episodes of stress, trauma, denial, and hardships. Through their perception, the dog owners only way of achieving happiness is to win the show. This however shouldnt be the only way that they feel happiness. It may make sense that only by winning, can these people truely attain happiness. but this theory is disproved at the end of the film. by the end of the movie, when of course only one dog wins, all other dog groomers feel unhappy, but cant help but feel happy for the dog that wins. Just by being able to be in the pageant and going through all those hardships, the other owners are engulfed by a sense of relief.

happiness should be constitued by the ability to be able to do what one loves. all these dog groomers were able to do what they love and groom the dogs. Weather they won or not didnt matter to them. they felt happy nontheless of winning because they were able to enjoy just from the experience

-Aleksandr Poltilov

Best in Show Critique by Mikhail Shimonov

According to the movie, Best in Show, happiness is a perception that apparently can only be achieved if one is victorious in whatever they choose to venture.  The movie displays a group of owners that strive to be the best they can be in terms of how well they groom their dog, how they treat the dog and how well they train their dog – each trying to win in a certain contest and in the end the whole competition. Following in this pattern, it would seem obvious that in order to try to reach happiness you would have to be best, number 1, best than everyone else you’re up against.

This, however, is a post hoc fallacy because you would assume that winning would lead to happiness and therefore since a precedes b, than it would make sense that a caused b, but that is not true. As shown at the end of the movie, only one dog was chosen as the winner yet all the dog groomers inevitably became happy – even if they weren’t during the majority of the movie leading up to the final competition.

In conclusion, the argument of happiness being the outcome of victory is a complete hoax. It is simply not true given the scenario above. One can always achieve happiness from either being successful at something or simply because they finally they did something they liked, not always from winning competitions.

When I read Hills Like White Elephants, I tried paying very close attention to the small details in order to develop a greater understanding of what the woman and man were talking about. My experience reading was very different to how I usually read, most of the time I try to pay attention to details that seem important or that tie to the meaning of the story. But when reading this text, the first thing that I notice is that there isn’t a point to the text (isn’t written down). Instead I need to draw a conclusion based on the small hints that the characters give off that can signal what the whole text may be about.

I thought that the story is about a couple (most likely married) that is having some financial troubles, and is looking to solve these problems by committing a heist. I felt that the woman was very nervous yet serious about carrying about this task and possibly the reason why she insisted on drinking so much in such a short period of time. While the man started realizing how this might not be such a good idea and that they may be caught and arrested. The reason why I assumed they had money troubles was from what I got out of the woman saying how “all of this could be ours” this of course when discussing whether they should go through with their plan or not.

I feel that other than a heist they could be referring to holding up the train they were waiting for. I noticed at the end how the woman seemed to have a self-assuring attitude of “okay, I’m ready to do this” once they prepared to board. It seemed strange to me because she sounded very cautious and so ready to board the train, when in fact they would have 2 minutes to board, which is plenty of time. Almost like somebody showing too much confidence in doing something as simple as a trip to the post office. Maybe she had a gun in her suitcase as well, because if she were to hold up a train or commit a heist then of course they would need a weapon. This could explain why I got such a strange vibe from her. She looked very ready and dangerous, being the “boss” of the situation by continuously reassuring the man that everything would go as planned and that he need-not worry of anything.

Competition is defined as a contest between two or more parties when they strive for a goal which cannot be shared. Survival and prestige await the winner of such a contest while failure awaits the unfortunate loser. This is a central theme of Best in Show. Upon watching the first few minutes of the movie, I was unaware of what the movie was about. I saw a young couple discussing their personal problems to a therapist in the very first scene and I instantly thought to myself that this was one of those dramas about dysfunctional families that Hollywood churns out every year. To my surprise, I was not entirely wrong in my assumption.  Best in show is a mockumentary in a similar format to such films as Borat: Cultural Leanings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. It involves several fictional characters and their canine companions in their quest to be crowned winner of a fictional dog show.

Despite being a fictional documentary, the actors bring a sense of realism to the picture from start to end. They represent archetypes of real life personalities whether it is the homosexual couple, the socialite princess and her wealthy old husband, the yuppie (young urban professional) couple, the odd couple, and the redneck stereotype. The humor is never dry and is always satirical in nature. I find the arguments between the young urban professional couple to be the most relevant to my life. I often find my parents arguing over the simplest things when it comes down to my life. I wasn’t expecting this movie to mirror the events that happen in my life, so the surprise was thoroughly enjoyable and hysterical at the same time.

The movie tries to be witty while maintaining a sense of satirical realism and it does not disappoint the viewer in the slightest. The dogs are equally as fun to watch as their dysfunctional owners and add even more visual appeal to the overall picture especially when you are a dog lover. The scenes involving the exploits of the redneck stereotype were by far the most fascinating in the entire movie. In one scene, he describes the life a Southerner to the yuppie couple. They stand in confusion and apparent boredom as he continues to mumble jargon. Overall the movie was equally hysterical as it was intelligible. It satirizes very real situations. Bottom-line this movie should definitely be watched by those who seek a funny and intelligible movie. I highly recommend it!