Mexican Food Culture

A classic Mexican dish would consist of rice, beans, tortillas, carne (meat), salsa, and pico de gallo. In order to bring out the spices of any 
great Mexican dish, one must add fresh cilantro, salt, queso (cheese), and lard. To the Hispanics of this world, carne, queso, and lard must always be included in a Mexican dish. They are used to enhance the flavor.

Horchata is said to be a 'sweet and refreshing' drink. it consisted mainly of rice, nuts, seeds and water and has subtlety of cinnamon and lime.

the most common type of quesadillas, tacos, chalupas, burritos, and chimichangas. These dishes taste good, and are simple to make :)

GRAB YOUR TABASCO SAUCE.

George Orwell - Reflections of/on Ghandi

George Orwell's Reflections of/on Gandhi is an analytical piece of a semi-autobiography Orwell had read. In Orwell's essay, he makes it clear that peace and realistic beliefs are not just a part of mentality but a part of Gandhi's life. Although, the bigger picture that the reader may get is Orwell's thoughts on parts of life. Through characterization of Gandhi, and several connotations in the essay, Orwell is trying to show points that occur or are believed in life through Gandhi, even though Orwell isn’t in dire awe of Gandhi.


Orwell begins characterizing Gandhi as a "humble, naked old man" who would shake "empires by sheer spiritual power". Orwell then gives background information possibly found in the semi-autobiography: "And though he came of a poor middle-class family, started life rather unfavorably, and was probably of unimpressive physical appearance, he was not afflicted by envy or by the feeling of inferiority." Gandhi was just a man who did not judge peoples due to race or status. He was a pacifist, as well as a realistic man in terms of how he grew up and where he grew up(his cultural influences). Orwell uses this characterization in such a way, that if the reader did not know about Gandhi, this would let them know who Gandhi is; in the eyes of Orwell, that is. Although Orwell's characterization was based off of Gandhi, Orwell could also possibly be telling the reader one of many characteristics life may have.




Orwell also gives the reader sentences in which have phrases that connotate or further extend/go beyond the basic definition. In "...fashion to talk...", Orwell connotates the possible words: hype, buildup. The act of connotation also gives the reader more room for imagination. Orwell continues with talking about Gandhi's Pacifism "... 'firmness in the truth' ...". Orwell may have translated the Gujarati word, satyagraha, to be not only the truth, but the firmness in the truth. This gives the reader a bigger grip on a word than just a one word definition which is in some ways not fully comprehensible in the sense that it can fully adhere to the rest of the essays meaning. Here the reader may get a sense of Gandhi's beliefs, then in which can also follow a bigger trail and possibly connotate itself and represent one of life's many beliefs. 


Orwell's characterization and connotations help a reader develop the sense of who Gandhi is, and possibly points that occur in life as well. Orwell characterizes Gandhi to be a spiritual, realistic man, which can be put on a bigger scale and seen as how that could be a characteristic of life. Through connotation, we notice that the reader either has more room for imagination, or more grip as to what Orwell's perception of Gandhi is.
Orwell may just be analyzing Gandhi, but a reader may see this as a bigger whole and notice that Orwell may be just using Gandhi to analyze characteristics of life as well.

George Orwell - Shooting an Elephant

Orwell’s Shooting an Elephant displays the impact of a society on one person’s decision.

Orwell uses characterization, hyperbole, irony of the situation, comparisons, and a slight epithet to describe the journey of not only himself/the narrator, but also of the elephant.

This essay had good flow and was easy for the reader to follow along. Although, the time it took to reach the climax was quite long. The use of literary features helped the reader follow along in a sense that they played a part in either characterizing a character, stressing about what joy it would be to "drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest's guts", comparing ideas or happenings that could relate to a situation.

Through characterization, the narrator characterizes himself as young and ill-educated due to the fact he thought he “could get nothing into perspective”. This tells the reader which characteristics to look for along the essay. As for the elephant, it is characterized as “not, of course, a wild elephant, but a tame one which had gone ‘must’”. Orwell uses characterization to possibly create a realization of who is a protagonist and who is the antagonist in this essay. This gives the reader the time to understand characters and their personality.

The narrator comes into a road of thoughts about people in Moulmein, specifically the British Raj and the Buddhist priest. He thinks that the British Raj is an ‘unbreakable tyranny’ and that he thought the “greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest’s guts”. This is Orwell’s form of a hyperbole. Although, this may sound exaggerated; anger could drive a person to do drastic things. Realistic, but also not as exaggerated due to the fact we have adapted to life nowadays in which could have been drastic a century or so back.

To help us understand situations, the narrator/Orwell uses comparisons that give us another possible picture that would relate to what is happening. As the narrator said he’s being watched by the villagers, he compares it to how somebody would “watch a conjurer about to perform a trick”. This could be the villagers’ curiosity, and want to be amazed that was shown through a simile. Describing how he felt, the narrator states how he feels like a leader of the pack, yet he feels that he “was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces…” and “a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib”. This shows the narrator’s weakness even though he tried to express his strength as well by holding a gun.

If a reader wants a clearer picture of something, an epithet is something that could help. The narrator describes the gun he’s holding not only as a ‘gun’ but as rifle that “was beautiful German thing with cross-hair sights”.
This helps the reader know the gun origin, and a feature of it – in this case it was also beautiful. Orwell uses this subtle epithet to unveil an items beauty to a reader, or at least describe its appearance. This could help a reader if there is any ambiguity of a character or item that could be part of a story, in this case – an essay.


Through Orwell's usage of characterization, hyperbole, irony of the situation, comparisons, and a slight epithet, he displays one mans journey with a village that had an impact on his own decision.