The movies list has been added to the site. Enjoy!
Despite some issues yesterday with US Airways, I am now back at Cornell!
Warning: For the high-res pictures, my camera captures in 4320 × 3240, so they may take a while to load.
1. View from New York La Guardia airport hotel, where I stayed last night. It was freezing, quite literally.
2. Cornell RPCC [high-res available—click picture]
3. Mews Hall (I live on the 3rd floor in the building on the left)
4. CKB (Court-Kay-Bauer)
5. Balch Hall
6. Rawlings Green, with snow [high-res available]
7. Thurston Bridge from North Campus
8. View of gorge from Thurston Bridge
9. Another gorge shot [high-res available]
10. Rockefeller Hall
11. Cornell tower and Uris Library [high-res available]
So I am returning to Cornell from winter break, and my flight back to Ithaca consisted of three parts: Austin to Charlotte, Charlotte to New York, and New York to Ithaca. My carrier would be US Airways, for all three, on Friday, Jan 21, 2011.
The first segment went well; I haven’t ever encountered a problem at the Austin airport.
Charlotte to New York was delayed by at least an hour. The plane came in 20 minutes late, and after “deplaning” (a term used by the airport announcer!), inspection, and boarding, we were stuck on the runway for 30 minutes due to “air traffic” at New York La Guardia.
The shock came when I got to La Guardia: I found that the New York to Ithaca flight was canceled. No big deal, right? I go to the US Airways “Special Services” desk, and they tell me that the next flight to Ithaca would be Sunday at 5 pm. Seriously? Perhaps more reassuring was a flight from New York to Syracuse on Saturday morning, and I took a ticket for that. Only two big issues with it:
- It was actually a New York to Philadelphia to Syracuse flight, and because of snow, there was a chance that Syracuse would be canceled. That would mean a chance of being stuck in Philly, which is farther than New York.
- Syracuse is not Ithaca. I mean, it’s like 60 miles away, but that’s still pretty far.
Then they don’t provide me with complimentary hotel lodging. It’s like a nightmare kinda—I have no clear way to Cornell, and I don’t have a place to stay.
Eventually I booked an airport hotel myself, and they did give me free shuttle service.
When I got to the hotel at around 10:45 pm, I talked with some people (via the Internet), and Linda pointed out the bus from New York to Ithaca, which I had used before but had completely forgotten about. We decided this would be much more direct than taking two flights and then still having to find ground transportation.
So this morning I woke up at 5 am and took public transit from La Guardia to the Port Authority bus terminal in Manhattan, and departed at 8 am. I’m on my way to Ithaca via Shortline bus as I speak—it has free wifi! Looks like my New York to Philadelphia and Philadelphia to Syracuse tickets will remain souvenirs.
Even though the first semester at Cornell seemed to last a long time, winter break in Austin—5 full weeks—passed by QUITE rapidly! Assuming schedules are met, in 12 hours I shall be on a plane just departing Austin, and 12 hours (+2 connections) after that, I’ll be in Ithaca, NY, where it will be, according to The Weather Channel, 3° F. Pretty warm, I’d say! The ravenously intense Winter: Texas Edition will be missed.
Well, since I have a bunch of things to say, and I don’t have the focus right now to put them into paragraphs, here’s a list!
- My new camera will (hopefully) be put to good use.
- I am tentatively taking 22 credit hours of academic courses this semester. I figured if I could survive last semester (16 academic credit hours + marching band) while playing 7.65 hours a WoW or writing 1667 words of a novel per day, I can go for a bit more intenseness. Just for fun, of course.
- Here is my schedule, if for some deranged reason you really want to know.
- Seeing all of you, err, I mean y’all in Austin has been fantastic! I can’t believe I’m saying goodbye again!
- Remember in one post I said something about a certain birthday present that “should not be mentioned”? It’ll be revealed soon, appearing in my dorm room. I’ll post a picture of it here. 😉
- I am actually pretty excited for this semester, more so than I was for last semester!
- According to The Weather Channel (again), Ithaca, NY will experience this Sunday, the 23rd, a 5° F high and a -12° F low. Seriously? MINUS 12? God, have you no respect for Texans?
- I just re-watched one of my favorite movies, Star Wars (the original), and I’d like to end with this very short but incredibly perfect scene, the Binary Sunset:
An article from the Wall Street Journal went viral on the Internet earlier this month, sparking passionate debates from the American and Asian-American public. Titled “Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior,” it is an excerpt from a book by Yale law professor Amy Chua, now known as the “Tiger Mother.” In essence, the article makes the argument that strict Eastern parenting is superior to lenient Western parenting.
The arguments in a nutshell:
- Chinese parents are stricter than American parents.
- Chinese parents stress their kids’ education a whole lot more.
- Drill/practice builds on itself: the better a child is at some activity, the more fun it will become, and the more he or she will want to improve (a “virtuous circle”).
- “Chinese parents can get away with things that Western parents can’t.” E.g., make their kids get straight A’s. Control their extracurricular activities. Make violent threats. Insult them openly.
- The Chinese system produces superior results, is better.
When I first read the article over a week ago, I was honestly not sure what to think. I let it drift around in my head for a little while. But if anything, my initial reaction was a respectful disagreement. Chua’s points made perfect sense on their own, but something seemed lacking, as if there was some side of the argument that was kept hidden. I looked back at the article looking for signs of a one-sided argument, but saw that it does, to some degree, highlight pros and cons for both parenting styles. So what was missing?
A few days later I showed the article to my own Chinese mother. I was very interested in what she thought of it; indeed, my suspicions were confirmed. She called the totalitarian strictness in it “ridiculous.” And now I think “ridiculous” is the perfect word to describe the article.
I feel very blessed to have a Chinese mother who is NOT like Amy Chua. Granted, I’ve seen my parents’ “Chinese” side. But to me, they are more like Western parents. They obviously wanted me to get A’s, but if i got a B on anything, it wasn’t the end of the world. They gave me control over what extracurricular activities I did and how much effort I put into any of them.
Eventually I became a chess aficionado, though my parents had never pushed me into chess. In fourth grade I saw some friends playing chess and was intrigued by the game enough so that I joined the school chess club. I think that was the first time in my life that I made an important decision for myself. Sure, it didn’t seem that significant then, but for a while in my life I was a chess person. I traveled, I went to national tournaments, I shook hands with grandmasters. It was my passion.
I don’t think it would ever have become a passion if my parents had forced me to play it.
Which brings up an interesting fact, that my parents had forced me to play the piano starting in first grade, as well as do a whole slew of other things. I suppose I was okay—not brilliant, but not terrible either, as I faired well in competitions. But in fifth grade I got tired of it. Sitting at the piano for an hour was becoming a daily chore, instead of a hobby. Did I enjoy it? Did I want to play it? Did I even make the decision in the first place that I wanted to play it? No, no, and no.
Now don’t get me wrong, I think the piano is wonderful. But my 11-year old self, for some reason, didn’t see it that way. So he rebelled. And there was no “virtuous circle” of feedback that Chua was talking about. This boy saw no meaning in the high marks that he was receiving at piano competitions. He couldn’t enjoy it; the piano wasn’t for him.
So he told his parents that he wanted to quit, but of course this didn’t work. (Try this one with Chinese parents.) For weeks, tension was built. Then he started to make excuses, pretended his hands hurt, but eventually his mother stood next to the piano and forced him to play. (Think Amy Chua-style here. Actually that’s kind of scary.) But the only playing he did was the frustrated banging of random keys, creating a symphony of cacophonous sounds. He wouldn’t touch that piano again for two years.
That was the second time I had made some important decision in my life.
In retrospect, was it a good decision? I’m not really sure. In chess, there’s a saying, “A bad plan is better than no plan.” Is a bad decision likewise better than indecision? This quote certainly wasn’t running through the little boy’s head at the time, but he must have felt that way. I think making a decision in the first place was the correct choice.
As to the title of this post, I have just turned 19, which could make me a “kid” depending on the context, but really, it’s that 11-year old’s rebellion to sitting in front of the piano.
After the piano incident, my parents became Western parents. When I said that they tolerated B’s and allowed me to do what I wanted—that was AFTER this event.
Not that I cared less about education; in fact, it was quite the opposite. I became learning-focused instead of grade-focused. In class, I would be the one asking bizarre questions about material that seemed only remotely connected to the curriculum, but I never asked such a cringe-inducing question as “What percent of the grade is this assignment?” or “Is this for a grade?” or “Is this going to be on the test?” or, my favorite one yet, “Is there extra credit?”—and by the way, I’ve heard these countless times in high school from my Asian peers.
I remember on one AP Chemistry test I was supposed to get a 94 but my teacher (who is brilliant by the way) accidentally misgraded it and gave me an 88. I couldn’t have cared less about the 6-point discrepancy; I let it go. And yet, I knew many people who wouldn’t hesitate to fiercely argue with their teachers that their 96 should actually be a 97 for some wrong answer that could remotely be correct.
My parents did become “Chinese” once again when it came to the PSAT and SAT. In reality, American colleges look for a lot of other things besides standardized test scores. But my parents were used to a system, which still exists in China today, that cared solely about one score on a national exam.
So of course they tried to enroll me in some PSAT/SAT prep course (which would have cost $$$), but I told them I would refuse to go if they did, and that they should spend their money more wisely. I told them that I would compromise by doing PSAT review on my own with practice books. Of course my Chinese parents weren’t pleased with this, so they made me this $100 bet, initially as a threat. If I made National Merit, I would win. Otherwise, I would lose and also have to take a prep course for the SAT. Yeah, pretty ridiculous, right?
So they bought a plethora of PSAT review and practice exam books, and made me do all of them. And here is where I lied to my parents. I did only the first practice exam, just to see what it was like, but that was enough. For the other bajillion of them, since the PSAT is all multiple-choice, I just copied the answers from the back of the books, strategically bubbling a few wrong answers as to appear inconspicuous. After finishing the entire test in five minutes, with still hours left, I would read novels or program on my TI-84 calculator (neither of which my parents had much encouraged me to do).
I won the bet, without any dedicated “studying” for it, and eventually got into a nice college which I am enjoying. I’m still undecided about my major, and my parents are pretty Western about it; they don’t mind what I study, as long as I can enjoy it and excel in it.
Chinese parenting may be better for clawing higher grades, but Western parenting seems to be better for creativity, initiative, and all that other stuff that actually matters.
Mom and dad, if you are reading this, you may be startled about my not actually doing the PSAT and SAT reviews. But know that I meant the best.
And Amy Chua: you are, as my mother said, ridiculous.
I guess this shall be my mid-January tradition, to make a blog post with short reviews on the movies of the previous year. (For one year before, see the post Movies of 2009.)
2010 had some nice films, some of which I still haven’t seen. Once again, I’ll go in order of release date.
*At some points I quote my other posts. Just fyi.
Youth in Revolt (Jan 2010)
This is one weird but witty movie. Nick (played by Michael Cera, perfect for this role) and his alter ego (also Cera) are both hilarious, either in being awkward, as in the first case, or in being a super rebel, as in the second. A few parts of this movie are done very well—there are some very witty and nicely placed remarks—but most of the film is nothing special. Still QUITE funny though!
Leap Year (Jan 2010)
It was pretty funny at times, but seems overly dramatic and full of clichés.
The Book of Eli (Jan 2010) (New)
It lasted too long for what it delivered; the only parts with any meaning were at the very end, when a couple of key facts are revealed. Otherwise, it was very uninteresting: the plot moved slowly, the fight scenes were dull, and the characters undeveloped.
The Spy Next Door (Jan 2010)
Throughly funny and entertaining, but utterly lacking in any depth. It seemed the whole purpose of the movie was to star Jackie Chan.
Edge of Darkness (Jan 2010)
Mel Gibson’s acting doesn’t make up for the virtual lack of anything else in this “movie.”
Shutter Island (Feb 2010)
This is a deep, mind-boggling thriller with a strong cast and artistic direction; however, it wasn’t the most thrilling and it moved at an unsteady pace.
Alice in Wonderland (Mar 2010)
As I have said here before: “It is difficult to create a bad movie from Lewis Carroll’s ingenious vision of Wonderland, and likewise, it is exceedingly difficult to imitate or surpass it…. Tim Burton’s version takes place in a different time, and is hence necessarily different, but loses much of the fine wit and ridiculousness of the original work.” Otherwise pretty good. Just nothing outstanding about it, which was the whole point.
The Bounty Hunter (Mar 2010)
Yeah, I don’t recommend anybody to watch this. I should really be giving this a 1, but because you get to hear Jennifer Aniston occasionally saying funny things, I’ll bump it up to a 2. (Though if you wanted that, you could just watch Friends, which is much better.)
Diary of a Wimpy Kid (Mar 2010)
The problem is that at the end I could identify with none of the characters; even the protagonist was very unlikeable. And it’s plot seems without a lot of thought.
Hot Tub Time Machine (Mar 2010)
An unusually creative use of time traveling. It has its funny moments, but feels lacking overall.
How to Train Your Dragon (Mar 2010)
This animated film had a very convincing plot, excellent plot twist, and a good mix of Viking customs with dragon lore and fantasy. I was delighted by the film’s humor as well, especially in the protagonist’s name—Hiccup—and in the blacksmith’s tone that is jolly no matter the situation. The only part sub-par was the music, which I really wasn’t paying attention to.
Clash of the Titans (Apr 2010)
“I have not seen the 1981 rendition, but I will say the 2010 Clash of the Titans (the 2D version) was fairly nice. A fascination with Greek mythology also helps, as in my case, and it is fun to see the fight of gods from a modern lens.” Sam Worthington’s acting is pretty awesome, and the special effects that include the gods are dazzling.
Kick-Ass (Apr 2010)
Although the story is somewhat silly, one actress single-handedly more than compensates for it: Chloë Moretz. Her brilliant (and extremely violent) performance as Hit-Girl makes this possibly the most entertaining movie of 2010.
A Nightmare on Elm Street (Apr 2010)
This is a boring horror movie, which is almost a contradiction in terms. The plot is extremely simple: a bunch of teenagers get killed by Freddy. There is very little meaningful character development, and each death is predictable and unsatisfying. Many non-horror movies, such as The Terminator, are scarier than this.
Iron Man 2 (May 2010)
TOO MANY EXPLOSIONS!!! Seriously though. Every minute, approximately two things blow up—I didn’t actually count, but that’s what it felt like—and it wasn’t too pleasant at all. Later on, about two things blow up every second. The plot too was very fictitious and not developed the most clearly. Then again, I haven’t watched the first Iron Man, but even so, it should be watchable stand-alone, which it wasn’t quite. The acting is quite brilliant though. Props especially to Robert Downey Jr.
Splice (Jun 2010)
A fresh, original sci-fi movie, and that alone gives it at least an 8. The philosophical questions it raises are quite profound, and that for me bumps it up to a 9. The plot is basically that two genetic researchers illegally splice human DNA into a mix of other animals’ DNA, and the result is a creature named Dren (‘nerd’ backwards). Splice is a very believable movie—it could easily happen five or ten years from now, and it’s very scientifically accurate. [read more]
The Karate Kid (Jun 2010)
Jaden Smith and Jackie Chan are amazing actors. The fight scenes are excellent; however, there is not enough of it—the beginning and the middle of the movie are rather slow. This is more than compensated in the last 15 minutes, a scene that is one of the best in film history.
Toy Story 3 (Jun 2010)
Though this one in my opinion not as good as the first, it’s still a heck of a good movie. There were a lot of nostalgic moments from the earlier ones, and the timing of the release itself was perfect: the summer before the class of ’14 would go to college. (Yep, class of ’14 ftw!)
Predators (Jul 2010)
Fairly weak and uninteresting; it does not compare at all to the original Predator (1987), which I think is great. A Predator film without Arnold is like a Terminator film without Arnold—oh wait…
The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (Jul 2010)
Terribly, terribly cheesy, but not too bad. The acting was done well, and I loved how physics played ironically a large part in the plans of both the good guys and the bad guys.
Inception (Jul 2010)
A film of intellectual brilliance. With stunning scenes as well, this is a solid film. Reminds me of The Matrix (1999).
Salt (Jul 2010)
Salt has a remarkable plot and equally remarkable acting especially from Angelina Jolie as Evelyn Salt. The other characters however seem stereotypical and uninteresting.
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (Aug 2010)
Despite the extremely predictable role of Michael Cera’s character (not that he’s a bad actor, but he’s pretty much the same person in every single movie), everything else about the film was entertaining, creative, witty, or a combination of the three.
Machete (Sep 2010)
A surprisingly good movie that exceeded my expectations significantly. The acting and action are perfect, and though the story may be cheesy, it does manage to provide a good amount of social commentary as well. The gritty scenes follow perfectly the crime-filled plot. And for an action movie, it does have a sizable share of scenes that scream awesome.
Resident Evil: Afterlife (Sep 2010)
Definitely not the worst, but perhaps the most disappointing movie of 2010. Having seen the first three Resident Evil’s (2002, 2004, 2007), I was expecting something interesting, but the creativity seems to have run out by the first movie. Also, I felt that this film would be very hard to grasp for someone who has not seen the other films in the series. The plot DOES make sense in context. But by itself, this film is quite random.
Easy A (Sep 2010)
Let me get this clear: I’m usually not into teen comedies. But there is so much wit in this movie that it’s hard to not like. It’s also really satisfying to hear Emma Stone make clever retorts at everything. Overall, it is a much more sophisticated film than most of its type.
The Town (Sep 2010)
An interesting crime movie, and a very good one too. The resolution was fairly weak, but this was made up for by the film’s overall intensity.
Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole (Sep 2010)
Pretty engaging for a movie about owls. Even with an incredibly cliché plot, it manages to be convincing and provide beautiful scenes.
Let Me In (Oct 2010)
I found this impressive but at the same time unimpressive—it matched up almost scene to scene with the Swedish film Let the Right One In (2008) on which it was based. (I gave the original a 10/10, by the way.) The American version is basically different actors, same movie. Then again, it’s still a strong film on its own.
The Social Network (Oct 2010)
I think this was overhyped a bit; I didn’t think it was THAT good; then again, it wasn’t bad. And I’m actually quite a fan of Zuckerberg and Facebook, but after this movie, I was more unsure of Facebook’s origins than I was before.
Due Date (Nov 2010)
Funny most of the time, but Robert Downey Jr.’s role definitely could have been funnier than it was. Also, some of the funny parts were more awkward-funny than comedic-funny. For a good laugh, I’d watch Iron Man 2 again over this, and that says something.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (Nov 2010)
Yet another Harry Potter movie. Some scenes were cool, but many seemed forced and less emotional than before.
The King’s Speech (Nov 2010)
A splendid performance! It’s funny, serious, dramatic, and passionate.
The Warrior’s Way (Dec 2010)
What was the point of this? I have no idea. The only part interesting to see the juxtaposition of an Asian warrior culture with the small-town culture of the American West.
Black Swan (Dec 2010)
A very cohesive movie, more artful than any other in this list. There isn’t much action, but it manages to move at a brisk pace.
The Tourist (Dec 2010)
Another excellent film, its only weakness is that it pins all of its excitement on one single plot twist, which isn’t too hard to figure out. It was genuinely entertaining the first time around, but I’m not sure I could enjoy it a second time, knowing what happens from the very start.
Tron: Legacy (Dec 2010)
Some of the best visual effects I have ever seen, especially in 3-D. The storyline is a bit lacking though, and the dialog is nothing but cliché.
True Grit (Dec 2010)
Truly one of the best movies of the year.
Trópico de Sangre [Tropic of Blood] (2010)
A tale about oppression in the Dominican Republic under the rule of Rafael Trujillo, one of the most ruthless rulers in the Americas. If you watch this, I would strongly recommend that you watch this in the original Spanish version, even if you don’t know Spanish. I watched this in the English-dubbed version, and the voices were laughable. I initially gave this a 5, but then I saw a trailer of this in Spanish, and it was so much more convincing. I’m giving it the benefit of the doubt for a 7.
My Favorite 2010 Film:
- True Grit or Inception (woohoo!)
Movies of 2011 that I really want to watch (definitely incomplete list):
- Sucker Punch (see the trailer if you haven’t already!)
- Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (big fan of the Pirates series)
For films outside of 2010, see Movies.
“My whole life, I thought I was a Capricorn. Now I’m a Sagittarius? I don’t feel like a Sagittarius!”
In case you haven’t heard already, the winds of the zodiac have shifted.* On second thought, they must have been some pretty darn strong winds, to have thrown off Earth’s rotation by that much. So yes, there is apparently a new zodiac:
Capricorn: Jan. 20-Feb. 16.
Aquarius: Feb. 16-March 11.
Pisces: March 11-April 18.
Aries: April 18-May 13.
Taurus: May 13-June 21.
Gemini: June 21-July 20.
Cancer: July 20-Aug. 10.
Leo: Aug. 10-Sept. 16.
Virgo: Sept. 16-Oct. 30.
Libra: Oct. 30-Nov. 23.
Scorpio: Nov. 23-29.
Ophiuchus: Nov. 29-Dec. 17.
Sagittarius: Dec. 17-Jan. 20.
Now, having once been very interested in astronomy, and as a person who loves math and science and logic, I can’t say I very much believe in astrology. Really, I don’t care about astrology at all, and in fact, I didn’t even know what zodiac sign I was (before or after) until I checked just now whether it had changed.
With a birthday of Dec 28, I apparently used to be a Capricorn (Dec 22 to Jan 19), but no, I am now a Sagittarius, as shown by the revised list above. This is somewhat interesting because the person in the opening quote encountered the same ordeal. Anyway, that is not the point of my post.
Here I have copy-pasted the “[zodiac sign] in a nutshell” of three different signs: Sagittarius, Capricorn, and Aquarius, and shall somehow see how closely I match up with each one. They’re all from the same same website [here] so they should be consistent. To indicate hit/miss, I’ll adjust the text color: green for hit and red for miss. If it is neither hit nor miss, or doesn’t apply, the text will be unchanged. Ready? Go!
Sagittarius in a Nutshell:
Sagittarius seem to be guided by luck, good things happen to Sagittarius and this is usually because of their optimistic outlook and positive disposition which attracts good fortune. Despite hardships, Sagittarius is always optimistic that good things will happen tomorrow and the future carries good luck. Sagittarius have a vibrant, expansive personality that is free like a bird, Sagittarius cannot be contained. They are full of curiosity and they always look forward to the future, never dwelling on the past. Sagittarius are detached from emotions because emotions hold a person back, they do not like to talk about their feelings, they simply experience them and move on. Sagittarius can be reckless and irresponsible because they will jump at a suggestion of something new before they weigh the advantages and disadvantages.
Capricorn in a Nutshell:
Capricorns are very ambitious people, they always have something they are pursuing and they want their lives to be fulfilled and important. Capricorns are extremely patient and will wait a long time for something they want, when the opportunity arises, they will plan their steps carefully to others, they might appear hesitant but this is not true, they know that there is only one chance to succeed and they are filing together their information to take the proper steps to accomplish their goal with flying colors, not just second rate. Capricorns have a very active mind and strong powers of concentration. Capricorns like being in control of their surroundings and everyone in their life. Capricorns are very cautious but this only to survey the situation before leaping in, they will never make a hasty jump in. They accept change but introduce it slowly so they can get used to it and incorporate it into their life. Capricorns tend to see life in black or white, definitive’s only. There are no gray areas for these are areas that are not understood and this makes Capricorn feel uncomfortable. They tend to be in control in a romantic relationship that way they are never vulnerable to another person.
Aquarius in a Nutshell:
Aquarius is the sign of visionaries, unconventionality and intellectual independence. Aquarius are the people who deviate from the crowd and go their own way. They are always after intellectual stimulation, constantly discovering something new, forming new opinions and stubbornly traveling their way regardless of what other people think. Aquarius are filled with paradoxes [emphasis added] ,they are interested in the opposite ends of the spectrum, they like to be alone yet are social butterflies, they like to experience both sides and see both opinions as they formulate new ideas with their forward thinking, active mind. Aquarius have a ‘live and let live’ policy where everyone is free to be themselves, an Aquarius never judges others because as human beings, we are all equal and entitled to our own opinions. They are verbally skilled and very witty, they observe people and learn how to interact with others through observation. They can be masters of manipulation justifying anything they do or think. As a result, they can deal with any type of personality and adapt to any situation. They welcome change because boredom is their enemy. Anything new is an opportunity to Aquarius. Aquarius can act as an expert on any topic, they are very good at inflating their own importance, they feel it is deserved because their eccentricity makes them unique. Conventional people beware, Aquarius likes to shock and deviate from the norm, this is how they live. Aquarius is known to pick at anyone they find weak or dull-minded. It is simply an easy target for verbal exercise for them, no harm is meant but it might be taken from the other person. Deep inside, Aquarius would never intentionally hurt anyone, they have respect for every human, even thought this might not seem apparent to the more emotional types.
So Aquarius seems to fit me better than either Sagittarius or Capricorn, which are my two real signs (depending on which zodiac). I’m not saying I would believe in astrology if I actually were an Aquarius. In fact, I’d say it’s pretty clear that these descriptions are simply loaded with generic terms, so that anyone could fit more or less any of the signs. To people who do believe in astrology: how do y’all believe this?