· web viewword. document and send it ... awkwardly. “you mean – like jesus?” comes the...

1

Year 7 (2017-18) becoming Y8 (Sept. 2018)

Paul’s Learning Enrichment Y7 2018

2

Beloved Year 7, soon to be Year 8,

Most of you will be familiar with the idea for this booklet after last two year’s version.

With each article, or review, you should look up the highlighted words and define them as instructed in the tables. In some cases, you are also asked to find suitable visual images to help fix and explore the meaning in your mind. Make sure you know how to copy-paste and size images into the tables. It only takes a few minutes and you can learn easily. Do talk to your family and discuss the readings with them. There is plenty to chew on. Make sure that you try to complete the definition and image tables. You must complete this document as an electronic Word document and send it to me and Paul Cheetham at the beginning of term . Please remember to SAVE as you go along when you working. When you e-mail it, please make sure you label it as follows:

SURNAME FormEinstein 8C (your new form)

This makes it easier for us to save and look at. These booklets can then printed off at school and we use them in enrichment lessons and further mock interviews.


3

Please read the extracts carefully. You will be asked to discuss them on your return in your Enrichment Comprehension classes with PC, PK and others. Make sure that you have looked up the words you do not know! Those of you doing MTS and considering scholarship applications must work through these exercises with particular care.

It is very easy to copy-paste definitions from an on-line dictionary and I provide you with help within the booklet.

The following is a concise list of online English dictionaries whose definitions are based upon well-established content.

American Heritage Dictionary American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Ed. Collins Online Dictionary Collins Unabridged English Dictionary; Collins Unabridged Thesaurus; Collins Webster's American English

Dictionary Dictionary.com Dictionary.com Unabridged, based on the Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary Merriam-Webster OnLine Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary Oxford Dictionaries Online Oxford Dictionary of English; New Oxford American Dictionary; Oxford Thesaurus of English; Oxford

American Writer's

There is no excuse for saying you cannot do this over the period of the summer! These exercise will further enhance your comprehension skills and we hope you enjoy the articles and reviews.

Please e mail your completed booklets to: Paul C at: [email protected] to me via my PA at [email protected]


4

Please read this review of AVENGERS INFINITY WARS TWO TIMES; then fill in the grid.

Read the first version and then the second which highlights words in red

Not infinity perhaps, but a really, really big finity war. Colossal, cataclysmic, delirious, preposterous – and always surreally entertaining in the now well-established Marvel movie tradition. It’s a gigantic showdown between a force of cosmic wickedness and a chaotically assembled super-team of Marvel superheroes made more complicated by Doctor Strange’s tendency to multiclone himself in moments of battle stress.

There are some very unexpected family relationships that we had no idea about – potentially compromising unity in the face of encroaching evil. There are also some very surprising deaths – of which, of course, the less said the better. There are, moreover, some surprising omissions in the cast list. Or are there?

Avengers: Infinity War is a giant battle for which directors Anthony and Joe Russo have given us touches of JRR Tolkien’s Return of the King and JK Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. The film delivers the sugar-rush of spectacle and some very amusing one-liners.

Whatever else it does, this Marvel movie shows its brand identity in the adroit management of tone. One moment it’s tragic, the next, it’s cracking wise. It’s absurd and yet persuades you of its overwhelming seriousness. And there are some amazing Saturday-morning-kids-show moments when you feel like cheering.Earth is being threatened by a massive malign hunk with a huge ridgey chin called Thanos, played by Josh Brolin. If he can gain ownership of all the talismanic infinity stones and place them in the holes in his custom-built gauntlet then he will have the ultimate power to destroy anything he wishes in the universe. And he has a chilling wish for mass slaughter of half the sentient beings in existence, ostensibly so that the other half will have enough food to eat – but really so they will bow down to him as the tyrant lord. Ranged against him, of course,


5

are the good guys who come together not in a single phalanx but a constellation of improvised groupings, in which the alpha males have a tendency to bicker. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) is nettled by Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and his supercilious air of intellectual superiority – and vice versa. Spider-Man (Tom Holland) shows up and annoys the hell out of them both with his millennial’s flair for pop culture references. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) finds himself having to do a ride-along with the Guardians of the Galaxy and Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) is intimidated by Thor’s godlike machismo and finds himself trying to do the basso profundo voice. Vision (Paul Bettany) and Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen) are tormented by the glowing stone in Vision’s blue head, and they’re agonised by the thought that self-destruction is the only way to keep it out of Thanos’s huge mitts. Their own situation brings them into contact with Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) – who prefers his non-super name now, not Captain America, and also the always frowning Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), together with the frankly traumatised Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo).

Scenes and situations whoosh by like a bizarre and bizarrely exciting dream. A sudden trip to Wakanda, with its secret world of remedial hi-tech surgery, seems entirely plausible. T’Challa, or Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) greets the visitors with his habitual Shakespearean bearing and princely calm. Inevitably, there is a little confusion. Groups of superheroes clash and each thinks the other is on Thanos’s side. “What master do you serve?” shouts one, awkwardly. “You mean – like Jesus?” comes the exasperated reply. No. Thor is the only god around here and even he isn’t guaranteed a result. It’s all in the cosmic balance. In theory, all these superheroes crammed into one movie should trigger the law of diminishing returns and the Traveling Wilbury effect. And yet somehow in its pure uproariousness, it works. It’s just a supremely watchable film, utterly confident in its self-created malleable mythology. And confident also in the note of apocalyptic darkness.

I know it’s silly. And yet I can’t help looking forward to the next supersized episode of mayhem.


6

NOW READ A SECOND TIME!

Not infinity perhaps, but a really, really big finity war. Colossal, cataclysmic, delirious, preposterous – and always surreally entertaining in the now well-established Marvel movie tradition. It’s a gigantic showdown between a force of cosmic wickedness and a chaotically assembled super-team of Marvel superheroes made more complicated by Doctor Strange’s tendency to multiclone himself in moments of battle stress.

There are some very unexpected family relationships that we had no idea about – potentially compromising unity in the face of encroaching evil. There are also some very surprising deaths – of which, of course, the less said the better. There are, moreover, some surprising omissions in the cast list. Or are there?

Avengers: Infinity War is a giant battle for which directors Anthony and Joe Russo have given us touches of JRR Tolkien’s Return of the King and JK Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. The film delivers the sugar-rush of spectacle and some very amusing one-liners.

Whatever else it does, this Marvel movie shows its brand identity in the adroit management of tone. One moment it’s tragic, the next, it’s cracking wise. It’s absurd and yet persuades you of its overwhelming seriousness. And there are some amazing Saturday-morning-kids-show moments when you feel like cheering.Earth is being threatened by a massive malign hunk with a huge ridgey chin called Thanos, played by Josh Brolin. If he can gain ownership of all the talismanic infinity stones and place them in the holes in his custom-built gauntlet then he will have the ultimate power to destroy anything he wishes in the universe. And he has a chilling wish for mass slaughter of half the sentient beings in existence, ostensibly so that the other half will have enough food to eat – but really so they will bow down to him as the tyrant lord. Ranged against him, of course, are the good guys who come together not in a single phalanx but a constellation of improvised groupings, in


7

which the alpha males have a tendency to bicker. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) is nettled by Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and his supercilious air of intellectual superiority – and vice versa. Spider-Man (Tom Holland) shows up and annoys the hell out of them both with his millennial’s flair for pop culture references. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) finds himself having to do a ride-along with the Guardians of the Galaxy and Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) is intimidated by Thor’s godlike machismo and finds himself trying to do the basso profundo voice. Vision (Paul Bettany) and Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen) are tormented by the glowing stone in Vision’s blue head, and they’re agonised by the thought that self-destruction is the only way to keep it out of Thanos’s huge mitts. Their own situation brings them into contact with Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) – who prefers his non-super name now, not Captain America, and also the always frowning Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), together with the frankly traumatised Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo).Scenes and situations whoosh by like a bizarre and bizarrely exciting dream. A sudden trip to Wakanda, with its secret world of remedial hi-tech surgery, seems entirely plausible. T’Challa, or Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) greets the visitors with his habitual Shakespearean bearing and princely calm. Inevitably, there is a little confusion. Groups of superheroes clash and each thinks the other is on Thanos’s side. “What master do you serve?” shouts one, awkwardly. “You mean – like Jesus?” comes the exasperated reply. No. Thor is the only god around here and even he isn’t guaranteed a result. It’s all in the cosmic balance. In theory, all these superheroes crammed into one movie should trigger the law of diminishing returns and the Traveling Wilbury effect. And yet somehow in its pure uproariousness, it works. It’s just a supremely watchable film, utterly confident in its self-created malleable mythology. And confident also in the note of apocalyptic darkness.I know it’s silly. And yet I can’t help looking forward to the next supersized episode of mayhem.


8

Tricky word of phrase

Definition Can you write another sentence showing you know it?

Colossal,

cataclysmic, adjective: cataclysmic

(of a natural event) large-scale and violent.

"

:

disastrous, catastrophic, calamitous, tragic, devastating, ruinous, terrible,

violent, awful

Informal

used to emphasize the extent of something bad or unwelcome.

There was a cataclysmic earthquake in San Francisco.

The defeat against Chelsea was cataclysmic


9

delirious, preposterous

surreally adjective

1.of, relating to, or characteristic of surrealism, an artistic and literary style; surrealistic.

2.having the disorienting, hallucinatory quality of a dream; unreal; fantastic:

When he had the fever caused by sunstroke, he acted surreally.

There were moments in that cartoon which were surreal.

cosmic

chaotically

multiclone

encroaching evil.

omissions

sugar-rush of spectacle


10

brand identity

adroit adjective

adjective: adroit; comparative adjective: adroiter; superlative adjective: adroitest

1. clever or skilful.

Donald Trump is an adroit politician and campaigner; he won!

Ronaldo is adroit in the penalty area.

malign

talismanic

gauntlet

sentient

ostensibly


11

tyrant

phalanx

nettled

supercilious air

intimidated

machismo

basso profundo

traumatised

remedial

habitual

law of diminishing returns

Traveling Wilbury


12

uproariousness,

malleable mythology.

apocalyptic darkness.


13

Film review: Solo: A Star Wars StoryThe new Star Wars film tries to flesh out Han Solo’s backstory but it’s an ungainly mess, says Kevin Maher

Kevin MaherMay 25 2018, 12:01am, The Times

★★☆☆☆The first eight minutes of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade are exquisite. Steven Spielberg’s 1989 blockbuster delivers a breakneck action sequence that nonetheless furnishes us with a busy and rewarding backstory of the franchise hero, Indiana Jones, made famous by Harrison Ford. As Ford’s younger screen self, played by River Phoenix, flees from a ramshackle gang of treasure hunters we witness the emergence of pivotal Indy characteristics — his fear of snakes, his penchant for improvisation (“I’ll think of something!”), his ability with a bullwhip, his translation skills (he speaks Greek), his prominent chin scar and, finally, crucially, his acquisition of that iconic fedora. This, I will remind you, takes eight minutes of screen time. And it’s beautiful.

Solo: A Star Wars Story, on the other hand, attempts to give us the backstory to another famous Ford hero. Only this time it takes more than two hours and it’s an ungainly, ill-conceived, patchwork spectacle. Ford’s younger screen self is here played by the newcomer Alden Ehrenreich, who was previously an effective cowboy himbo in the Coen brothers’ comedy Hail, Caesar! For the latest instalment in the Star Wars franchise, Ehrenreich has nailed those cartoonish Han Solo mannerisms (the over-enunciation, the finger-pointing, the goofy “who, me?” look), yet the movie frequently hangs him out to dry, with nothing to do but awkwardly blank imitation. (“Tonight, Matthew, I’m going to be Han Solo.”)


14

His Solo, in a threadbare yarn, joins a crew of good gangsters (led by Woody Harrelson on autopilot) to steal high-value rocket fuel on behalf of some bad gangsters (led by Paul Bettany with facial scars and panto-villain delivery). Along the way he meets the swaggering gambler Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover), befriends a Wookie named Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo) and secretly hopes to win back the heart of his ex-girlfriend Qi’Ra (Emilia Clarke). It’s not a plot in the traditional sense. It’s merely a framework on which the film, directed by Ron Howard with workmanlike anti-flair, can hang a series of deadening backstory beats. This bit here, for instance, this is how Solo got the name Han Solo. And this is the bit where he does the “Kessel Run” that they mention in the first Star Wars. And this is the bit where he outmanoeuvres a giant space slug just like he does in The Empire Strikes Back and thus demonstrates his fearlessness as a pilot. And this is the bit where he develops his love of shooting first. And this is the bit where he reveals his propensity for dumping his smuggled shipments at the first sign of trouble, just like Greedo said he did in the creature cantina, before he was shot by Solo, in the first Star Wars. See what I mean? It’s agony.

Backstory is not story. Spielberg knew this. That’s why he crammed it into eight blissful minutes on top of the opening credits. Solo: A Star Wars Story, instead, is horribly constricted by itself. Nothing breathes. The story can’t live on its own terms. It’s too busy hitting meaningless nerd notes (and this is the bit where Chewbacca develops the hatred of manacles that will later be demonstrated in the Death Star sequence in Episode IV — seriously!) to make time for pesky little things such as emotional resonance and character development. In this sense Solo: A Star Wars Story is a true prequel and, ultimately, the worst Star Wars prequel since the Star Wars prequels.

Perhaps it was doomed all along. The film’s production was a “troubled” process. The problems peaked last June when Star Wars head honcho, Kathleen Kennedy, after four long months of shooting, clearly unhappy with the results, fired the movie’s then directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller and replaced them with Howard. (He is believed to have filmed more than 70 per cent of the finished movie.) The problem with the film, however, is


15

not one of direction. It’s a core concept disease. It’s the self-consuming script by the father-and-son duo Lawrence and Jonathan Kasdan. It’s a project ravaged by prequelitis. In fact, Kennedy’s decision to hire a new director for Solo was like staring at a dead body in the morgue and announcing, optimistically: “What we really need here is a new doctor.”

On the positive side, Glover is wonderful in the movie. (He is not, thankfully, “doing” his older screen self, Billy Dee Williams.) And so is Fleabag’s Phoebe Waller-Bridge, playing the smart-mouthed robot sidekick L3-37. They give you tantalising hints of where the film could have gone and where the Star Wars franchise might yet live, if only it can liberate itself from the fatal urge to satiate the nerds.


16



exquisite. extremely beautiful and delicate.

intensely felt. "

The wedding ring was exquisite.

The experience of seeing the goal go into the net was exquisite.

breakneck

furnishes us

franchise franchise noun (FILMS)

a series of films that have the same or similar titles and are about the same characters:

The next instalment in the Star Wars franchise is out soon.

The next instalment in the Star Wars franchise is out soon.

ramshackle gang


17

pivotal

penchant

prominent

acquisition

iconic fedora.

ungainly, ill-conceived, franchise,

mannerisms

over-enunciation,

threadbare yarn,

panto-villain

swaggering

workmanlike anti-flairdeadening


18

outmanoeuvres

propensity

crammed

blissful

constricted

meaningless nerd

manacles pesky

emotional resonance

“troubled”

prequelitis.

tantalising satiate


19

wing Tricky word of phrase

Find a good picture, image or cartoon to illustrate these words!

franchise

ramshackle gang

prominent

iconic fedora.

panto-villain

swaggering

crammed

blissful constricted “troubled”


20

tantalising


21

Please read these 2 articles, by Ron Liddle and David Baddiel, reacting to and reflecting upon the England defeat of Sweden in the World Cup


22

Rod Liddle: We’ve buried ghosts and learnt to love our team again, so bring on the next lot!

Rod LiddleJuly 8 2018, 12:01am, The Sunday Times

In the otherwise utterly deserted streets I saw a bloke, a fairly hefty bloke, in a Saint George’s cross T-shirt running home as fast as his tortured legs would allow.

It was five to three and the players were warming up on the pitch in Samara. There were no cars on the road, no people. Oddly, not even the usual stray dogs. Just total silence apart from the wheezing, the terrible exertion, of this man as he ran.

You could have mistaken this vista for something altogether more sinister — something post-apocalyptic or maybe pre-apocalyptic, the famous four-minute warning. Thirty million English people confined to their homes, or to the pubs with their big screens — a nation, for once, coming together, their guts united in that usual wrenching agony of watching England play football. Leavers and remainers. Black and white. Northerners and soft southerners.

I hope the chap made it home without suffering an embolism. Made it back to the TV and the opportunity to do what the rest of us did on that rather marvellous Saturday afternoon — fall back in love with our national football team. After so long. After so, so long.


23

We have had decades of unfulfilled expectation, of course. Beginning in 1970 with a second-half capitulation to the dreaded Germans in a quarter-final which still makes me shudder when I think of it.

I thought of that defeat, at the time, as a weird anomaly and that all would be put right very soon. It wasn’t, of course. We have had teams since then which should have done much better than they did — the 2006 side should have won the World Cup, and the 1990 team wasn’t very far behind in terms of quality. And yet each time we watched them we kind of expected failure, to be not quite up to the mark. And failure was indeed delivered, with reliable regularity.The players thought too highly of themselves, were overpaid and insouciant. The managers were useless. There was too much hubris on display. Good though these previous teams were — and in some cases unlucky — they were difficult to actually love. And so a certain cynicism and despondency registered itself among football fans. Until, maybe, now.

Football’s coming home. At least, that’s how it felt given a three o’clock kickoff on a Saturday, which is how things were always meant to be before the TV companies and the money got in the way. And England did that most unexpected thing — they won, and won comfortably, with a clever and often exhilarating performance which probably merited more than a two-goal margin. The nerves we all had at the beginning surely evaporated long before half-time, when it became clear that the Swedes had decided upon a quiescent neutrality as their game plan, as ever. They offered no more threat than had England’s previous opponents, Colombia, although to their credit they were also far less inclined to thuggery and cheating.

And so Gareth Southgate’s unlikely squad, written off before the tournament began, find themselves 90 minutes from a World Cup final. And this latest performance, against the Swedes, was unquestionably our most impressive in the knockout stage of a competition since 1966.


24

So many ghosts of England past were banished in that easeful hour and a half. The first ghost — Sweden, who looked like the England of yore (ie about 2012), with an antiquated formation and reliance on height and weight and resilience, devoid of wit and nuance and the ability to pass the ball. And then the ghosts of perennial and predictable failure, the corroded chains clanking behind them: pinch yourself — this time, we got through. And the ghosts of more gilded England teams in tournaments, sides way too reliant upon the undoubted but fragile talents of single individuals who, when push came to shove, failed to step up to the plate, or limped off, or became petulant and were sent off.The thing which I think the nation likes in this England team is its unity and apparent humility, personified by the soft and often self-deprecatory lisp of its lantern-jawed captain, Harry Kane. These have been exemplary team performances so far in this World Cup, canny, disciplined and occasionally enlivened with verve. We may not have the panache and speed of the French and the Belgians — surely the two most exciting teams in this tournament — but, hell, who needs panache and speed when you have Jordan Henderson and Ashley Young to clear the lines?

I liked watching my wife, not an habitual football aficionado, maddened with joy when Dele Alli headed that second goal. And up and down the country people whose connection to football is perhaps fleeting and tenuous, feeling exactly the same way, screaming to the rafters, beside themselves.

It reminds me that we are a country, even if we only come together like this very occasionally — and even then, to live our lives vicariously for 90 minutes, dependent upon a bunch of kids we really know nothing about.Bring on the next lot, Croatia. They can’t be more thuggish than Colombia or more boring than Sweden. And feel the love for this England side. Somehow Gareth Southgate has rehabilitated England — and even football — to people who had long since given up the ghost.


25



utterly deserted

hefty

tortured

exertion

this vista

sinister —

post-apocalyptic 1.

denoting or relating to the time following a


26

nuclear war or other catastrophic event.

"a post-apocalyptic action picture of the ‘Mad Max’ type: tough loner fights for survival against hordes of barbaric scavengers"

2.

denoting or relating to the time following the biblical Apocalypse."the post-apocalyptic kingdom of God"

The film opened with a post-apocalyptic landscape.

pre-apocalyptic,

confined

wrenching agony

embolism.

unfulfilled expectation,


27

capitulation

shudder

weird anomaly

reliable regularity.

insouciant. adjective: insouciant1. showing a casual

lack of concern.

He was given a sanction for his insouciant reaction to the request to see his homework diary!

hubris

cynicism

despondency registered exhilarating

evaporated

quiescent neutrality thuggery

noun: thuggeryThe drunken sailors were prosecuted for their thuggary


28

1. violent behaviour, especially of a criminal nature.

"a cowardly act of mindless thuggery"

banished

easeful

yore

antiquated formation

reliance

perennial predictable corroded

fragile

petulant


29

humility,

self-deprecatory lisp lantern-jawed

canny,

disciplined

enlivened

verve.

Panache

habitual

aficionado,

fleeting

tenuous


30

rafters,

vicariously

rehabilitated

given up the ghost.


31

Tricky word of phrase Find a good picture, image or cartoon to illustrate these words!

utterly deserted

sinister —

confined

wrenching agony

capitulation

shudder

hubris

exhilarating

banished

corroded

fragile


32

petulant

humility,

disciplined

Panache

aficionado,

fleeting


33


Opposite word(s)/phraseAntonym

Sentence with opposite word, showing you know it

utterly deserted

hefty

sinister —

wrenching agony

capitulation

hubris

exhilarating

fragile

petulant

humility, arrogance His arrogance annoyed the other playersverve. Panache


34

habitual fleeting tenuous


35

David Baddiel: I dare to believe football’s coming homeJuly 8 2018, 12:01am, The Sunday Times

At 2.15pm yesterday, my guinea pig died. I took this as a bad omen. And yet, as I sat in Frank Skinner’s living room watching England play Sweden — the team confidence and spirit so clearly there, Harry Maguire’s and Dele Alli’s headers sealing the day, Jordan Pickford a god among men — I started to experience a strange new feeling.It’s been, though, a strange week. Since we beat Colombia, a song that Frank, Ian Broudie and I wrote 22 years ago has become — well — what it was 22 years ago, but this time, because of social media and nostalgia and maybe a country in need of a song to sing together, multiplied by 10.

Harry Maguire’s goal slips past the Swedish goalkeeper to give England a 1-0 lead half an hour into the matchThree Lions expresses a number of things, including vulnerability and uncertainty and the memory of disappointment, but it also channels, through all that: hope. This time round, more than ever. When we wrote the song, the refrain “Football’s coming home” referred both to the fact that the tournament was being held in England, and to the more mystical idea that we might win. But now the first meaning doesn’t apply, so the song seems to mean only we might win, and more and more, as the week went on, and the meme and street party jubilation rose, yes, we are going to win.Even as the co-writer of that lyric, that was beginning to worry me. Football — particularly any football involving the England team, as the song indeed warns you — is not a game in which you should count your chickens before they’re hatched. In fact, generally, I would advise not counting them until they are breaded, fried and lying in a KFC Bargain Bucket. Where I’ve noticed you normally get one less than you’ve asked for.

Perhaps I’ve overstretched that metaphor. Point is, I was nervous. Even when we won against Colombia, when


36

others on Twitter were reaching straight for #Itscominghome, I went for “It’s still just about coming home”. I was quoted, I believe, in the second half against Sweden, by the commentator, as saying that even if football isn’t yet coming home, it is maybe packing its bags.I remained tentative, the result of feeling too often hurt by rising hopes in the past. But then, the game started, and we scored, twice, and, if Raheem Sterling had got his feet right, we could have had more. England were dispatching Sweden, a team that had put Italy out of the qualifiers, who had been talked about as one of the toughest teams to beat in this competition, easily.

Yes, there were one or two scares, but England were not just winning: for once, they weren’t even putting us through the wringer. This has never happened before in my living memory at this level. At significant quarter-finals we have either lost, or — v Cameroon in 1990, v Spain in 1996 — got through by the skin of our teeth. The psychology of England, so often riven, like the country can be, by doubt, by self-destruction, by a sense that we can be so much but maybe that sense itself, and the fear that comes with it, of not meeting our potential, is what undoes us . . . it wasn’t coming into play.We were the better side, and — ergo — we were winning. This was the new feeling: an ease, a comfort, a sense of expectations met, around winning. It was like being Germany, but without the sense of entitlement.

So now I am daring to hope. Even though some very good teams still lie ahead of us; even though we have got to semi-finals before and been disappointed, I am daring to hope because I think this is a team marked by joy and newness and youth and Gareth Southgate’s deep emotional intelligence. We have shrugged off, for the moment, both in Russia and here at home, the suffocating burdens of our history. Let’s go further than hope, to belief.

We still believe, says Three Lions ’98, so yes, all right, I believe: it’s coming home. So much so that by the time I


37

was walking back from Frank’s house after beating Sweden, I had become convinced that my guinea pig’s death was, clearly, a good omen, because his name was Bjorn.



omen.

sealing

nostalgia

vulnerability noun

1The quality or state of being exposed to the possibility of being attacked or harmed, either physically or emotionally.

He is confined in isolation because of his vulnerability to infection’

England were vulnerable to a counter attack.

uncertainty

mystical


38

meme

1.

an element of a culture or system of behaviour passed from one individual to another by imitation or other non-genetic means.

2.

an image, video, piece of text, etc., typically humorous in nature, that is copied and spread rapidly by Internet users, often with slight variations.

jubilation

tentative,

dispatching

putting us through the wringer.

be put through the wringer

To be subjected to some ordeal, difficulty, trial, or punishment; to undergo an unpleasant experience.

psychology


39

riven, verbpast participle: riven

1. literarysplit or tear apart violently.

"the party was riven by disagreements over Europe"

archaicsplit or crack (wood or stone

"the wood was riven with deep cracks

The Beatles was riven with competing egos.

ergo —

sense of

entitlement.

emotional intelligence.

suffocating


40

burdens


41

wing Tricky word of phrase

Find a good picture, image or cartoon to illustrate these words!

nostalgia

vulnerability

uncertainty

mystical

jubilation


42

putting us through the wringer.

sense of entitlement.

emotional intelligence.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=imgres&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiTsbHR4ZvcAhWBWxQKHcU6C5oQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson&psig=AOvVaw12i0PT-QYc3isSsaKs7ceq&ust=1531560506624331

43

The Use of Drones

President Obama personally presides over the selection of terror suspects to be killed in drone strikes from Pakistan to Yemen, reserving for himself the right to decide whether to attack a target even if civilians might be killed. The revelation about the President’s role in ordering the controversial attacks, published in The New York Times yesterday, comes amid mounting calls from human rights groups for the Administration to reveal the rules and criteria used in the top-secret process. The report contained few details to satisfy those demands, but focused closely on Mr Obama’s minute involvement in the process. It painted a portrait of a coolly ruthless Commander-in-Chief drawing on his legal background to justify, intellectually, the killings, including that of Anwar al-Awlaki. The American-born cleric, involved in every known terrorist plot against the US since the 9/11 attacks, was killed in a joint strike by a drone and US fighter jets on his convoy as it travelled through a remote mountainous region of Yemen in September last year. Senior Administration officials were quoted in the report — with the White House’s blessing — giving the fullest picture yet of the process over which Mr Obama presides. It was seen as a clear effort to boost his national security credentials after repeated Republican attacks. “He’s a President who is quite comfortable with the use of force on behalf of the US,” Tom Donilon, his National Security Adviser, said.


44

But the disquiet of Administration officials was also revealed, including the dismay of Cameron Munter, Washington’s Ambassador to Pakistan, at the scale of the drone programme. He complained that “he didn’t realise his main job was to kill people”. The drafting of the President’s kill list begins with a weekly teleconference between more than a hundred national security officials, who pore over biographies of suspected terrorists in Yemen and Somalia before recommending targets. Those in Pakistan, where the CIA operates drones, are selected in a separate process and forwarded to the White House. By his own insistence, Mr Obama signs off on every strike, either by the military or CIA, and reserves for himself the ultimate decision on whether or not to give the go-ahead when civilian lives are at risk. That process has often required greater legal and moral trade-off than Mr Obama would have envisioned when he took office; as in the case of Baitullah Mehsud, the Pakistani Taleban leader. Mehsud, whose organisation fought the Pakistani Government primarily, did not meet the Obama Administration’s criteria for targeted killing, as he did not demonstrate an imminent threat to the US. But Pakistani officials, on whose approval the covert drone programme there depended, wanted him dead. Mr Obama and his advisers ultimately decided he could be regarded as a threat; if not to the homeland, then to American personnel in Pakistan — thus qualifying him for killing. In August 2009, Mehsud came into the CIA’s sights while visiting his in-laws’ home in Pakistan. John Brennan, Mr Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser, relayed the message from the CIA that they were in a position to kill Mehsud — but not without collateral damage. Mr Obama told the CIA to take the shot and Mehsud was killed, with his wife and an unknown number of family members.


45

Officials told The New York Times that Mr Obama’s resolve to take aggressive action against al-Qaeda was stiffened by the attempted bombing of an airliner on Christmas Day, 2009, by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, a Nigerian recruited in Yemen. At the time, Mr Obama was under intense criticism from Republicans over his decision to have terror suspects read their rights so their cases could be heard in civilian courts, in a step towards closing the military prison at Guantánamo Bay. Soon afterwards, he ordered the expansion of drone strikes to Yemen to deal with the emerging al-Qaeda threat there. Several current and former members of the Obama Administration have criticised the drone programme, saying that the civilian casualties it produces are helping to breed a new generation of terrorists. Dennis Blair, the former Director of National Intelligence, told The New York Times that the focus on drone strikes had sidelined discussions about a long-term strategy to defeat al-Qaeda. “The steady refrain in the White House that ‘this is the only game in town’ reminded me of body counts in Vietnam,” the retired admiral said. William Daley, Mr Obama’s former Chief of Staff, admitted that the existence of the kill list raised unanswered questions — among them, when to stop. “One guy gets knocked off and the guy’s driver, who’s No 21, becomes No 20,” he said. “At what point are you just filling the bucket with numbers?”

Catherine Philp Washington

Published at 12:01AM, May 30 2012


46

WORD PLEASE PROVIDE DEFINITIONPreside

civilians

revelation

Controversial

human rights

the Administration

coolly ruthless

justify

Cleric


47

convoy

credentials

disquiet

By his own insistence

envisioned

criteria

imminent

qualifying

collateral damage.


48

aggressive stiffened

intense expansion

Sidelined

steady refrain


49

Please read and listen to these 2 poems.

Shakespeare Sonnet 73

That time of year thou mayst in me beholdWhen yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hangUpon those boughs which shake against the cold,Bare ruined choirs, where late the sweet birds sang.In me thou see'st the twilight of such dayAs after sunset fadeth in the west;Which by and by black night doth take away,Death's second self, that seals up all in rest. In me thou see'st the glowing of such fire,That on the ashes of his youth doth lie,As the death-bed, whereon it must expire,Consumed with that which it was nourish'd by. This thou perceiv'st, which makes thy love more strong, To love that well, which thou must leave ere long.

Please look at these links:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J27cpy-To8s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXIuNqoAquo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXIuNqoAquo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J27cpy-To8s

50

Strange Meeting Wilfred Owen

It seemed that out of battle I escapedDown some profound dull tunnel, long since scoopedThrough granites which titanic wars had groined.

Yet also there encumbered sleepers groaned,Too fast in thought or death to be bestirred.Then ,as I probed them, one sprang up, and staredWith piteous recognition in fixed eyes,Lifting distressful hands, as if to bless.And by his smile, I knew that sullen hall, -By his dead smile I knew we stood in Hell.

With a thousand pains that vision's face was grained;Yet no blood reached there from the upper ground,And no guns thumped, or down the flues made moan.'Strange friend,' I said, 'here is no cause to mourn.''None,' said that other, 'save the undone years,The hopelessness. Whatever hope is yours,Was my life also; I went hunting wildAfter the wildest beauty in the world,Which lies not calm in eyes, or braided hair,But mocks the steady running of the hour,And if it grieves, grieves richlier than here.For by my glee might many men have laughed,


51

And of my weeping something had been left,Which must die now. I mean the truth untold,The pity of war, the pity war distilled.Now men will go content with what we spoiled,Or, discontent, boil bloody, and be spilled.They will be swift with swiftness of the tigress.None will break ranks, though nations trek from progress.Courage was mine, and I had mystery,Wisdom was mine, and I had mastery:To miss the march of this retreating worldInto vain citadels that are not walled.Then, when much blood had clogged their chariot-wheels,I would go up and wash them from sweet wells,Even with truths that lie too deep for taint.I would have poured my spirit without stintBut not through wounds; not on the cess of war.Foreheads of men have bled where no wounds were.

I am the enemy you killed, my friend.I knew you in this dark: for so you frownedYesterday through me as you jabbed and killed.I parried; but my hands were loath and cold.Let us sleep now...'

Please make sure that you look at the following You Tube extract.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O06a7sspY3c


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O06a7sspY3c

· web viewword. document and send it ... awkwardly. “you mean – like jesus?” comes the...

Documents