Saturday, December 5, 2009
Last Post for ENGL 105
Due to technical difficulties, I could not copy and paste my last post for my English class onto this blog. However, here is the blog post on google docs.
Second Draft of Paper: "Life of H1N1 as a News Story"
Here is my second draft. I tried to revise the paper, but most of my changes were done by editing. I tried to make this draft read a little smoother by changing some of the wording.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Monday, November 16, 2009
Taking an Approach
Harris says “taking an approach” is like reworking a piece. How can you rework a piece and maintain what the author was saying, while creating a new approach of your own. I think that without careful work, the process could be mislabeled as plagiarism. However, it goes on all the time, as Harris points out. “The cover song, in which one musician reinterprets a song associated with another, is a staple of rock and roll. And what you listen for in a good cover is not an imitation of the original, as in karaoke or American Idol, but a new rendering of it.”
News stories are very similar to the above example. Each writer reads an article, or several articles, in order to formulate the basis of his article. He takes what others have said into account, but the paper he writes is based more upon what he feels about the subject. Just like in music. The songwriter takes someone else’s words and expands or reworks them to formulate his own opinion.
This idea borders on the idea of plagiarism. Why? Well, you are taking other peoples’ work and creating your own piece out of it. But you do not cite your sources because you are not copying from them. You simply take what they have to say, and rework it in order to take some approach of you own. Though, this occurs all the time in the real world, I still feel like the idea of taking an approach should be further investigated by a writer in order to be fair and genuine in their work.
News stories are very similar to the above example. Each writer reads an article, or several articles, in order to formulate the basis of his article. He takes what others have said into account, but the paper he writes is based more upon what he feels about the subject. Just like in music. The songwriter takes someone else’s words and expands or reworks them to formulate his own opinion.
This idea borders on the idea of plagiarism. Why? Well, you are taking other peoples’ work and creating your own piece out of it. But you do not cite your sources because you are not copying from them. You simply take what they have to say, and rework it in order to take some approach of you own. Though, this occurs all the time in the real world, I still feel like the idea of taking an approach should be further investigated by a writer in order to be fair and genuine in their work.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
In Revision of "I Contradict To Contradict"
Though I do agree with my previous statement that you should not contradict a work unless there is some underlying purpose, I would, however, choose to “re-present” the term “contradict.” When in fact the post should have been about countering, I used the wrong terminology. Though, I do still hold that “the effectiveness of a contradiction should not be based on how well argued the ideas are, but rather of why they are being argued in the first place.”
Rather I wish to point out that in using the term “contradict,” I have in fact biased what Harris was saying. Harris would likely use the idea of contradicting in a different way than countering, whereas I was using the two interchangeably. Contradicting is the act of arguing against what someone is saying to the fullest. However, countering is more centered on the idea of taking what you are reading or thinking about, and forwarding it. The idea of “yes, but…” is more of what Harris is saying.
Though I did not realize it at the time, the words are terribly different when looked at again. Thus I have begun to realize the true value of word choice. We need to be careful in what words we choose to represent what we are trying to say. Even as I write this, I am consciously considering each word that is making up this blog post. Without effective word choice, the ideas you are trying to express can be hampered by the readers misunderstanding of the words you use.
Therefore, I have hopefully learned to consider whether I have picked the correct word or not. Granted, you can never truly know if your point is coming across the way you wish it, you should at least try to be correct in your word choice in order to do your point justice.
Rather I wish to point out that in using the term “contradict,” I have in fact biased what Harris was saying. Harris would likely use the idea of contradicting in a different way than countering, whereas I was using the two interchangeably. Contradicting is the act of arguing against what someone is saying to the fullest. However, countering is more centered on the idea of taking what you are reading or thinking about, and forwarding it. The idea of “yes, but…” is more of what Harris is saying.
Though I did not realize it at the time, the words are terribly different when looked at again. Thus I have begun to realize the true value of word choice. We need to be careful in what words we choose to represent what we are trying to say. Even as I write this, I am consciously considering each word that is making up this blog post. Without effective word choice, the ideas you are trying to express can be hampered by the readers misunderstanding of the words you use.
Therefore, I have hopefully learned to consider whether I have picked the correct word or not. Granted, you can never truly know if your point is coming across the way you wish it, you should at least try to be correct in your word choice in order to do your point justice.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
I Contradict To Contradict
If you are contradictory for the sake of being contradictory, then you need to stop contradicting. You need to produce something from your contradiction in order to make a necessary contradictory statement. Why?
It is quite easy to contradict a piece for the sake of showing the faults of that piece. But, when Harris quotes his professor, we see a new idea. The idea that it does not matter what the writer did wrong because you have chosen a piece that is easily contradicted and for no great purpose. This idea of contradicting for a purpose is exactly what Harris discusses in this chapter.
So, we know what Harris’s statement is, but why would he say this? The effectiveness of a contradiction should not be based on how well argued the ideas are, but rather of why they are being argued in the first place. Harris believes that in order to effectively contradict someone there must be some purpose that would help society. The kind of purpose can be argued, but the main idea is that you almost further a piece if you successfully contradict it. If you can bring up old topics, or put a new spin on them by your arguing, then I believe Harris would likely say that you effectively contradicted for some purpose.
In all of Harris’s statements and opinions, he pushes for the idea of “re-presenting.” Therefore, Harris, himself, uses contradictions in order to further his own writing. So, the next time you read a Hedges article, don’t immediately respond to it. Think about how what you write could further what you have read, not only your own piece.
It is quite easy to contradict a piece for the sake of showing the faults of that piece. But, when Harris quotes his professor, we see a new idea. The idea that it does not matter what the writer did wrong because you have chosen a piece that is easily contradicted and for no great purpose. This idea of contradicting for a purpose is exactly what Harris discusses in this chapter.
So, we know what Harris’s statement is, but why would he say this? The effectiveness of a contradiction should not be based on how well argued the ideas are, but rather of why they are being argued in the first place. Harris believes that in order to effectively contradict someone there must be some purpose that would help society. The kind of purpose can be argued, but the main idea is that you almost further a piece if you successfully contradict it. If you can bring up old topics, or put a new spin on them by your arguing, then I believe Harris would likely say that you effectively contradicted for some purpose.
In all of Harris’s statements and opinions, he pushes for the idea of “re-presenting.” Therefore, Harris, himself, uses contradictions in order to further his own writing. So, the next time you read a Hedges article, don’t immediately respond to it. Think about how what you write could further what you have read, not only your own piece.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Rewriting as in Forwarding
Forwarding has many definitions. According to dictionary.com, the word “forward” has eighteen alternate definitions. However, all of the definitions have a similar meaning. Forward is an act of going further than that of the before. According to Harris, though forwarding is the idea of taking an existing conversation (i.e. paper, discussion, or anything of literary value) and furthering that conversation.
Even images or videos can spur a response. Harris is really saying that in order to forward a discussion, you have to add to that discussion. The hardest task, I think, would be if you were given a dead argument to bring back to life. That is what Harris is saying here. You need to bring an argument, in whatever form, back from the graveyard of literature. For example: The article you are being given is on the idea of the plague being a worldly epidemic in the 21st century. Well, obviously, this is a dead subject. But, if you could draw from the past some shred of evidence that says swine flu is the new black death of the time, then you could successfully bring back a dead subject.
But, after all, what would it matter? Well, Harris goes at the basis of how we should forward a work. His process includes “illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, and extending.” As we continue to read through all these processes, we are geared toward the fact that what we are doing, or trying to do, with the forwarding of a piece is to make it better. Every piece of literature has some meaning to some particular people in society. In order to make that piece of literature continue to have a meaning, we “re-present,” as Harris calls it, the material in a new way. So, we do this because we don’t want a subject to die. We don’t want to wake up one day and realize that what we love to read about is not a news story anymore and therefore has been deemed unnecessary for viewing. So, Harris’s “Forwarding” chapter helps us to see how discussions are forwarded, and the chapter leads us to believe that without this idea of forwarding, that the world of literature as we know it could cease to exist.
So, “the next time you write an essay in which you discuss a nonprint text, try to find a way to incorporate that text as seamlessly as you can into your document.” And revisit the old in order that you may further the conversation with your paper.
Even images or videos can spur a response. Harris is really saying that in order to forward a discussion, you have to add to that discussion. The hardest task, I think, would be if you were given a dead argument to bring back to life. That is what Harris is saying here. You need to bring an argument, in whatever form, back from the graveyard of literature. For example: The article you are being given is on the idea of the plague being a worldly epidemic in the 21st century. Well, obviously, this is a dead subject. But, if you could draw from the past some shred of evidence that says swine flu is the new black death of the time, then you could successfully bring back a dead subject.
But, after all, what would it matter? Well, Harris goes at the basis of how we should forward a work. His process includes “illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, and extending.” As we continue to read through all these processes, we are geared toward the fact that what we are doing, or trying to do, with the forwarding of a piece is to make it better. Every piece of literature has some meaning to some particular people in society. In order to make that piece of literature continue to have a meaning, we “re-present,” as Harris calls it, the material in a new way. So, we do this because we don’t want a subject to die. We don’t want to wake up one day and realize that what we love to read about is not a news story anymore and therefore has been deemed unnecessary for viewing. So, Harris’s “Forwarding” chapter helps us to see how discussions are forwarded, and the chapter leads us to believe that without this idea of forwarding, that the world of literature as we know it could cease to exist.
So, “the next time you write an essay in which you discuss a nonprint text, try to find a way to incorporate that text as seamlessly as you can into your document.” And revisit the old in order that you may further the conversation with your paper.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Interesting Relationships and Terrible Drawings
When you start to think about all the differences and similarities among The New York Times and blogs, you find that The New York Times tries to expand upon the news of a second ago. However, blogs such as Big Government and The Daily Dish are always trying to update the news with a bias. The writers of these blogs are always rewording the news in order that their readers can relate to what they are reading. People like to know the facts of the second when they go to the Ney York Times.
After you have sufficiently read the news, you will undoubtedly be drawn to certain articles. Maybe, you even care enough to do more research on your own. Thus you would turn to a blog. Say you are following the political implications surrounding ACORN. Would you not wish to read from the site in which ACORN is a constant topic? Of course you would; it would be understandable that you would go to Big Government.
But how do all of these things relate to the “press sphere?” Well, when you start to realize that you are drawn to certain issues, certain articles of the day, then you begin to see that you are the controller of the “press sphere.” Whereas, in the past, the ecology of news in relation to you was more readily viewed as a funnel in which you get everything poured through the funnel for you,
now, you can decide what comes out of the funnel because you are engineering what is going into it. Have fun with that.
After you have sufficiently read the news, you will undoubtedly be drawn to certain articles. Maybe, you even care enough to do more research on your own. Thus you would turn to a blog. Say you are following the political implications surrounding ACORN. Would you not wish to read from the site in which ACORN is a constant topic? Of course you would; it would be understandable that you would go to Big Government.
But how do all of these things relate to the “press sphere?” Well, when you start to realize that you are drawn to certain issues, certain articles of the day, then you begin to see that you are the controller of the “press sphere.” Whereas, in the past, the ecology of news in relation to you was more readily viewed as a funnel in which you get everything poured through the funnel for you,
now, you can decide what comes out of the funnel because you are engineering what is going into it. Have fun with that.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Sullivan The Builder
While Jeff Jarvis blabbers on about the facts of how news has changed, we are not given any type of opinion explaining whether Jarvis believes that this has helped us or not. No, rather we are just threatened by oversimplified charts that show that the world has changed from the old way of news gathering (directly from the press to us), and has evolved into a system of overlaps enclosing the “me-sphere” as Jarvis calls it.
But, did we not already know this? Of course. We have been reading similar issues for the past few months. So, I get to Sullivan. In what Jarvis lacked in sophistication, Sullivan made up for in opinion. Jarvis tries not to take any role in whether he agrees or disagrees with what has happened. Sullivan, on the other hand shows his views from the start. As I have said in class, I believe it would have been easier to write about Jarvis’s blog if he would have expressed some opinion.
So, what is Sullivan’s opinion, and why does it matter? Well, as we all know Sullivan thinks that the shift from the old ways of reporting, and news gathering to the new are a good thing. He even defends his view with: “To the charges of inaccuracy and unprofessionalism, bloggers could point to the fierce, immediate scrutiny of their readers” (Why I Blog). For those who would say that this shift toward the more internet based news makes the news that Americans see, unedited and unkempt, Sullivan would disagree. He says that the more internet based we have become, has helped the ways in which we can view the kinds of news we want. Therefore, is it not enough to say that, though Jarvis told of the change, Sullivan enlightened the community of what exactly was inferred?
But, did we not already know this? Of course. We have been reading similar issues for the past few months. So, I get to Sullivan. In what Jarvis lacked in sophistication, Sullivan made up for in opinion. Jarvis tries not to take any role in whether he agrees or disagrees with what has happened. Sullivan, on the other hand shows his views from the start. As I have said in class, I believe it would have been easier to write about Jarvis’s blog if he would have expressed some opinion.
So, what is Sullivan’s opinion, and why does it matter? Well, as we all know Sullivan thinks that the shift from the old ways of reporting, and news gathering to the new are a good thing. He even defends his view with: “To the charges of inaccuracy and unprofessionalism, bloggers could point to the fierce, immediate scrutiny of their readers” (Why I Blog). For those who would say that this shift toward the more internet based news makes the news that Americans see, unedited and unkempt, Sullivan would disagree. He says that the more internet based we have become, has helped the ways in which we can view the kinds of news we want. Therefore, is it not enough to say that, though Jarvis told of the change, Sullivan enlightened the community of what exactly was inferred?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Press v. News
At first I thought, “But, are not the press and news the same? Are they mutually exclusive?” At the beginning of Jeff Jarvis’s “The Press Becomes the Press Sphere,” I was wondering at what he would define press, and if that would be different from news. I would have to think that they are vastly similar, if not the same. However, through his writing, I see what he is trying to say…I think.
Jarvis is attempting to say that though what we used to think of as the press relationship in news is still there, we have opened into another world where news is now influenced upon us through the uses of our peers. Now, we read what we believe to be news, but what, in all actuality, may not be related to the press at all. Our friend says to read something on some website, claiming it is news. We read it because we trust our friend, but what we read has no interrelationship with the press at all.
So, why is this bad? Well, if the press is not related to a specific “news” website, then such a website was not edited. But, what does that matter, you ask? Well, if a publication is not edited by a professional, there is no way of knowing if what you are reading is just some rogue opinion. You do not know if you should trust what you read. So, as Jeff Jarvis says, “if the news is important, it will find me.”
Jarvis is attempting to say that though what we used to think of as the press relationship in news is still there, we have opened into another world where news is now influenced upon us through the uses of our peers. Now, we read what we believe to be news, but what, in all actuality, may not be related to the press at all. Our friend says to read something on some website, claiming it is news. We read it because we trust our friend, but what we read has no interrelationship with the press at all.
So, why is this bad? Well, if the press is not related to a specific “news” website, then such a website was not edited. But, what does that matter, you ask? Well, if a publication is not edited by a professional, there is no way of knowing if what you are reading is just some rogue opinion. You do not know if you should trust what you read. So, as Jeff Jarvis says, “if the news is important, it will find me.”
Friday, October 23, 2009
The News is no Better than the Tabloids
Is it the New York Times, or should it be called the new world stories? The New York Times has undoubtedly become a mainstay for the social intake of news in the world today, especially in the U.S. It is very easy to see that The NY Times has influenced many Americans in how they view the news.
Take this class for example. We are given to read The NY Times every day. Why? To make us more socially and politically active? Maybe. However, I cannot see where reading a news story about how a little boy supposedly was trapped in a flying saucer shaped balloon that could not have carried him in the first place has anything to do with the good of the people.
So, then, we ask ourselves why exactly we are being given such an unimportant subject to read. There is a simple solution. We are given such things to read because those are the kinds of things that we like to read. The newspaper would not make any money if it did not have advertising. Advertisers look for a popular news site that offers its viewers what they like to see. So, therefore we see the unimportant because we like to see the unimportant.
As I have said in past posts, newspapers are very similar to tabloids, in that you read the tabloids for a certain subject: gossip. Now, we have begun to read our newspapers with the same idea in mind. We want to read that which is entertaining.
So, how do I think I have changed? Well, I still view the newspaper as a factual subsidy for news, but now I also see it as another entertainment website, made for the pleasure of its viewers.
Take this class for example. We are given to read The NY Times every day. Why? To make us more socially and politically active? Maybe. However, I cannot see where reading a news story about how a little boy supposedly was trapped in a flying saucer shaped balloon that could not have carried him in the first place has anything to do with the good of the people.
So, then, we ask ourselves why exactly we are being given such an unimportant subject to read. There is a simple solution. We are given such things to read because those are the kinds of things that we like to read. The newspaper would not make any money if it did not have advertising. Advertisers look for a popular news site that offers its viewers what they like to see. So, therefore we see the unimportant because we like to see the unimportant.
As I have said in past posts, newspapers are very similar to tabloids, in that you read the tabloids for a certain subject: gossip. Now, we have begun to read our newspapers with the same idea in mind. We want to read that which is entertaining.
So, how do I think I have changed? Well, I still view the newspaper as a factual subsidy for news, but now I also see it as another entertainment website, made for the pleasure of its viewers.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Wait, You Don't Really Care, Do You?
Discourse, from the Latin discursus, is defined by Wikipedia as the written or spoken communication or debate. How then can we relate that to a discourse community. Simple: a discourse community is a group of people who discuss and debate on certain issues. In our class we have been focusing solely upon debate through news. But how can we be sure that the debates and communications are truthful? How can we trust the author who writes for our behalf, so that we may know the news of today?
One way is to take into consideration the amount of popularity the blog/news site has. Most of the time, but not all, the website’s popularity may be a good indication of how much viewers trust what they are reading. Of course, there are instances in which viewers are seeking out the bizarre and potentially untrue, like for instance in the tabloids. But, I believe it is safe to say that a viewer would not be inclined to trust a site if its main heading was that aliens landed on the planet or of what color underwear your favorite celebrity was wearing. Usually we would uphold the idea that celebrity news and world news are mutually exclusive.
So, what do we care? Well, we wonder at how accurate our news coverage is, and we wish it to be strictly facts. We even seek out the author’s background: prior work, knowledge about the field of study, and the like. However, we seek out the controversial headlines. Each of us is drawn towards the upsetting. An example is an article in Big Government entitled, “Rush or Reverend Al?...Will the Real Racist Please Stand Up?” I was drawn toward reading this article. Why? Because the title hinted at a very controversial subject, controversial and thereby entertaining.
Thus, I wonder if it really does matter that a news source be truthful. Would we care if the author of a tabloid had gone to prison for four years, or would that just add to the effect? Yet, we couldn’t stand the idea that a reporter for a strictly news source had even thought about putting his beliefs into a news story. Why?
One way is to take into consideration the amount of popularity the blog/news site has. Most of the time, but not all, the website’s popularity may be a good indication of how much viewers trust what they are reading. Of course, there are instances in which viewers are seeking out the bizarre and potentially untrue, like for instance in the tabloids. But, I believe it is safe to say that a viewer would not be inclined to trust a site if its main heading was that aliens landed on the planet or of what color underwear your favorite celebrity was wearing. Usually we would uphold the idea that celebrity news and world news are mutually exclusive.
So, what do we care? Well, we wonder at how accurate our news coverage is, and we wish it to be strictly facts. We even seek out the author’s background: prior work, knowledge about the field of study, and the like. However, we seek out the controversial headlines. Each of us is drawn towards the upsetting. An example is an article in Big Government entitled, “Rush or Reverend Al?...Will the Real Racist Please Stand Up?” I was drawn toward reading this article. Why? Because the title hinted at a very controversial subject, controversial and thereby entertaining.
Thus, I wonder if it really does matter that a news source be truthful. Would we care if the author of a tabloid had gone to prison for four years, or would that just add to the effect? Yet, we couldn’t stand the idea that a reporter for a strictly news source had even thought about putting his beliefs into a news story. Why?
Monday, October 19, 2009
Blogs I Shall Read
Well, I guess I have decided on Andrew Sullivan's blog and Big Government. I found that both of these suit my conservative views, while still giving me the news. I hope that each will help me to become better informed.
Jaded News
Desperately I yearned to hear that I was not alone. Could it be true that others, too, don’t watch the news as much as I? Haven’t we all heard that only the uncultured do not watch the news? Frankly, I do not in the least believe that garbage. How can we say we are cultured just because we read/watch the news? We cannot.
No, actually, I feel like the news has become almost an inconvenience to us. After reading some of the blogs in the class, it has registered in my mind that each of us receives news, but also that we each have a unique way to attain the news, apart from everyone else. Some people are quick to go to their favorite website. Some hear about the news when it is not new, but rather from word of mouth. Some read the newspaper. And some watch the news on their TV. However, no matter how much we try to get the news just as it is happening, we can never fully see it happening. Actually, no matter where we get our news, that news has been broadcasted and therefore has the potentiality to be jaded. If you read your article from the internet, someone with a brain and opinions wrote it. If you watch the news on TV someone has told you about the news through their point of view.
Am I saying that it is all a conspiracy, and that the FCC is controlling our minds to see what they want us to see? No. But, what I am saying is that we all are in a desperate search for the true news, but, in reality, we may never find it.
No, actually, I feel like the news has become almost an inconvenience to us. After reading some of the blogs in the class, it has registered in my mind that each of us receives news, but also that we each have a unique way to attain the news, apart from everyone else. Some people are quick to go to their favorite website. Some hear about the news when it is not new, but rather from word of mouth. Some read the newspaper. And some watch the news on their TV. However, no matter how much we try to get the news just as it is happening, we can never fully see it happening. Actually, no matter where we get our news, that news has been broadcasted and therefore has the potentiality to be jaded. If you read your article from the internet, someone with a brain and opinions wrote it. If you watch the news on TV someone has told you about the news through their point of view.
Am I saying that it is all a conspiracy, and that the FCC is controlling our minds to see what they want us to see? No. But, what I am saying is that we all are in a desperate search for the true news, but, in reality, we may never find it.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Who News?
Mostly, it would be safe to say, I don’t know what is going on. Usually, I do not bother myself with the “news” of the world. What is the world, but a rotating globe of depressing news? Well, perhaps it’s not that bad. After all, we all need to know what is going on in the world today. However, I have known people to seek out the news of today. That aspect of being informed has never really seemed important to me. If I wanted to be informed, I would just ask my Mom. She always has the kind of news I want to hear. Well, did you hear about so-and-so? He went to the hospital for this particular thing.
Now, I am not saying that I agree with gossip. Gossip is such an ugly word. I prefer to think about it as news. After all, how did news start in history? With the passing of thoughts and with the passing of stories. Now, we see news as being very factual, or, rather, we hope that our news be completely factual. However, my primitive means of news are very important to me. Without local news, how can we coexist with the people around us? Not to mention the fact that I know the local people. I hope, since now I am away at college, to still hear and know how each of my friends is doing.
Thus, I wonder as to how people can say that I cannot function in society, because I do not know the world’s news. I don’t need to know what is going on in the world, but I do need to know what is going on in my world. Thus, I do not have a definitive answer to the question of where I get my news, if you are considerring the world's news, but I get the important news of today from my mom.
Now, I am not saying that I agree with gossip. Gossip is such an ugly word. I prefer to think about it as news. After all, how did news start in history? With the passing of thoughts and with the passing of stories. Now, we see news as being very factual, or, rather, we hope that our news be completely factual. However, my primitive means of news are very important to me. Without local news, how can we coexist with the people around us? Not to mention the fact that I know the local people. I hope, since now I am away at college, to still hear and know how each of my friends is doing.
Thus, I wonder as to how people can say that I cannot function in society, because I do not know the world’s news. I don’t need to know what is going on in the world, but I do need to know what is going on in my world. Thus, I do not have a definitive answer to the question of where I get my news, if you are considerring the world's news, but I get the important news of today from my mom.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Wall Blocks
The wall is white and dusty. Block. Block. Block. It has shade, light, texture. It stands, unchanged, for all its life. When people talk to it, like a gentlemen, it listens. Things hang upon it, and it does not mind, nor complain. Just as we see how it holds us up, we tear it down.
The gentlemen in their rare, and now rather antique cars, travel down to the market for their groceries. They chaffier their wives or their dogs in their old trucks; the woman rides in the back, the dog in the front passenger seat. Or if she gets lucky, the wife may get to ride underneath the old hound dog, spit slinging into her hair. But, it is not her fault. Don’t blame her. She has a mental problem. The husband loves her for what she is. She loves the husband like a brother. Day after day he drives her to the store so she can hang her head out the window, gaping at the same trees and fields, cows and birds.
Of course, you know, the husband is no bad man either. He lets his wife/sister have what she wants, and he only asks for a little. Companionship. The old man was a loner, a traveler with no home. But, he fell in love with her. Though, may it be odd or not, he does love her. He even lets her ride in the back of the pickup truck sometimes. She loves it. She loves him, but only for a short time. When they get to the grocery, she feels like they all look at her. All those walls are staring at her. Are they judging her?
The husband stares at the walls as they round each aisle. He is protecting her, so she feels a little better. Then he looks back at her, asking if they need any more toilet paper. Toilet paper. It is white. Pure. But, not as white and immense as those walls. She quivers. He gets an extra pack just in case.
They get home. He packs the groceries in. She goes directly to her room. He wonders at himself, at her, and at the spoiled milk in the refrigerator. He forgot the milk. Later that night he sits at the table, drinking his coffee, staring at the wall. White and immense, it holds the husband together. He leans on it. If he only knew that in the next room, his love was building her strength up. It would be tonight. She would attack.
At midnight, when all was quiet, and her husband slept calmly, she slipped out to look at that wall. It was asleep, so it seemed. So, she gathered her homemade dynamite. Shotgun shells add up with gunpowder, plus the television can teach anyone anything. She placed those sticks at its feet. Now was the time. She didn’t hear her husband come to the door. She lit the sticks and looked in awe as the boom echoed through the fields. And the cows and birds stirred in their sleep, but did not awake.
The husband, still trapped under the rubble of the giant wall, clung desperately to life. How could the wall kill him? He loved the wall for what it was. He saw it as an immense ocean of faith, the blocks that held him up. Just as we see how the wall holds us up, we tear it down.
The gentlemen in their rare, and now rather antique cars, travel down to the market for their groceries. They chaffier their wives or their dogs in their old trucks; the woman rides in the back, the dog in the front passenger seat. Or if she gets lucky, the wife may get to ride underneath the old hound dog, spit slinging into her hair. But, it is not her fault. Don’t blame her. She has a mental problem. The husband loves her for what she is. She loves the husband like a brother. Day after day he drives her to the store so she can hang her head out the window, gaping at the same trees and fields, cows and birds.
Of course, you know, the husband is no bad man either. He lets his wife/sister have what she wants, and he only asks for a little. Companionship. The old man was a loner, a traveler with no home. But, he fell in love with her. Though, may it be odd or not, he does love her. He even lets her ride in the back of the pickup truck sometimes. She loves it. She loves him, but only for a short time. When they get to the grocery, she feels like they all look at her. All those walls are staring at her. Are they judging her?
The husband stares at the walls as they round each aisle. He is protecting her, so she feels a little better. Then he looks back at her, asking if they need any more toilet paper. Toilet paper. It is white. Pure. But, not as white and immense as those walls. She quivers. He gets an extra pack just in case.
They get home. He packs the groceries in. She goes directly to her room. He wonders at himself, at her, and at the spoiled milk in the refrigerator. He forgot the milk. Later that night he sits at the table, drinking his coffee, staring at the wall. White and immense, it holds the husband together. He leans on it. If he only knew that in the next room, his love was building her strength up. It would be tonight. She would attack.
At midnight, when all was quiet, and her husband slept calmly, she slipped out to look at that wall. It was asleep, so it seemed. So, she gathered her homemade dynamite. Shotgun shells add up with gunpowder, plus the television can teach anyone anything. She placed those sticks at its feet. Now was the time. She didn’t hear her husband come to the door. She lit the sticks and looked in awe as the boom echoed through the fields. And the cows and birds stirred in their sleep, but did not awake.
The husband, still trapped under the rubble of the giant wall, clung desperately to life. How could the wall kill him? He loved the wall for what it was. He saw it as an immense ocean of faith, the blocks that held him up. Just as we see how the wall holds us up, we tear it down.
Monday, September 28, 2009
The Literacy Revolution
Here is my English 105 paper. Please comment on what you like/dislike about it.
Friday, September 25, 2009
At First To Now
When at first I was scared, you said not to fear. As, I found that the fear could be moved other fears came into the picture, but, again, you said not to worry. When at last I conquered my preconceived fears, another was brought in, and once more, you told me that it was nothing. Now I see how true your words were. Throughout my career as a blogger typist, I feared that I would inhumanely exhibit some form of writing, or unjustly use the internet as something of an embarrassment to myself. Yet, as I found, through the writing of these blog posts, I could not hinder the ways in which writing have been formed. Writing, as a whole, continues to be unchanged. So why did I worry?
It is not so hard to identify with each of my classmates as intellectuals, but it was interesting to see how anti-internet some people were. I had held that notion for many years, but it was one of my beliefs, stereotypes you might say, that I was a “madman” when it came to my intellectual views upon the internet. However, when I furthered my understanding of exactly how the internet has influenced our daily life, on the basis of writing, I was surprised to find that I had changed on my viewpoints toward the internet. At the very first, I would have claimed that the internet and “texting” had changed the structure of our everyday life for the worse. Now, I whole-heartedly believe that the internet has helped spread writing into all the walks of life, and, therefore, has helped us reach further into the realm of academia.
Further, I feel as if this class has helped me see that there is always another side to matters. In each of our readings, and assignments related to those readings, the way I saw each person’s viewpoints, tended to be through how they were written. Thus, I grew as an intellectual, and as a person, in that I saw the implications being made by each author, and was able to understand/relate to each author better. Though, I am sure, some of my posts (one in particular) may not have reached the intellectual goal I have set for myself with the enrollment of this class, I do, however, feel that with each post, I learned something, thus growing more intellectually.
Therefore, I can conclude that with this class, and nine blog posts under my belt, I have nothing else to do, but thank the person who told me not to fear. Thank you for encouraging me.
It is not so hard to identify with each of my classmates as intellectuals, but it was interesting to see how anti-internet some people were. I had held that notion for many years, but it was one of my beliefs, stereotypes you might say, that I was a “madman” when it came to my intellectual views upon the internet. However, when I furthered my understanding of exactly how the internet has influenced our daily life, on the basis of writing, I was surprised to find that I had changed on my viewpoints toward the internet. At the very first, I would have claimed that the internet and “texting” had changed the structure of our everyday life for the worse. Now, I whole-heartedly believe that the internet has helped spread writing into all the walks of life, and, therefore, has helped us reach further into the realm of academia.
Further, I feel as if this class has helped me see that there is always another side to matters. In each of our readings, and assignments related to those readings, the way I saw each person’s viewpoints, tended to be through how they were written. Thus, I grew as an intellectual, and as a person, in that I saw the implications being made by each author, and was able to understand/relate to each author better. Though, I am sure, some of my posts (one in particular) may not have reached the intellectual goal I have set for myself with the enrollment of this class, I do, however, feel that with each post, I learned something, thus growing more intellectually.
Therefore, I can conclude that with this class, and nine blog posts under my belt, I have nothing else to do, but thank the person who told me not to fear. Thank you for encouraging me.
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B7i1Meb836wFZjkzZDI4ZTQtOTg2NS00ZDA2LWFiYWYtY2JiYzVjNjcyMjVk&hl=en
Here is a website that explains the definition of literacy a little better. It is an academic journal.
Here is a website that explains the definition of literacy a little better. It is an academic journal.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
For Better or Worse
Death. Destruction. Defeat. Our democracy is dying saeth Chris Hedges. As if we didn’t see what was approaching as we picked up Hedges’ “Bad days for Newsrooms-and Democracy,” he is quick to confirm our preconceived notions of his opinions. Hedges continues to inform us on how the world is drawing itself more and more downward towards the pit of intellectual defeat. Well, at least he is continuing to be optimistic.
On the other hand, we have the inspiring, yet not overbearing, Clive Thompson and his piece, “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy” telling us the complete opposite. While Hedges blabbers on that the internet is continuing to kill our intellectual beings and that it is rapidly destroying the news, Thompson refutes Hedges opinion, saying “technology isn’t killing our ability to write…it’s reviving it.” Thompson, then, drives us back out of the black hole of worrying and enlightens us that technology may very well be helping our intellectual growth, rather than forcing it into submission. Thompson makes an interesting point when he talks of how much writing the average student does out of class: “Those Twitter updates and lists of 25 things about yourself add up.”
While Hedges and Thompson most certainly disagree upon the outcome technology has had on the intellectual parts of our everyday life, both would agree, and obviously so, that the internet and technology have had a radical change on life. Hedges argues that technology has had a negative effect, but Thompson assures us that it changed for the positive. Frankly, I would have to agree with Thompson. As he says, people, young people in particular, write more now than ever before in history.
Thus technology changes our lifestyles, changes our habits, and changes how we view the world. But ask yourself this, was it for the better or worse?
On the other hand, we have the inspiring, yet not overbearing, Clive Thompson and his piece, “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy” telling us the complete opposite. While Hedges blabbers on that the internet is continuing to kill our intellectual beings and that it is rapidly destroying the news, Thompson refutes Hedges opinion, saying “technology isn’t killing our ability to write…it’s reviving it.” Thompson, then, drives us back out of the black hole of worrying and enlightens us that technology may very well be helping our intellectual growth, rather than forcing it into submission. Thompson makes an interesting point when he talks of how much writing the average student does out of class: “Those Twitter updates and lists of 25 things about yourself add up.”
While Hedges and Thompson most certainly disagree upon the outcome technology has had on the intellectual parts of our everyday life, both would agree, and obviously so, that the internet and technology have had a radical change on life. Hedges argues that technology has had a negative effect, but Thompson assures us that it changed for the positive. Frankly, I would have to agree with Thompson. As he says, people, young people in particular, write more now than ever before in history.
Thus technology changes our lifestyles, changes our habits, and changes how we view the world. But ask yourself this, was it for the better or worse?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Literacy - So What?
Being illiterate is an honorable trait. Honorable in the sense that a person can go through life without the knowledge of how to read. Yet, we say that illiterate people are worthless. Is that not what you said, Hedges? Our society is becoming more and more illiterate. So, what is the purpose of an illiterate human? Are they worthless? Are they perpetually shunned to “punch in orders on cash registers?”
I wonder at your meaning, Hedges. It is as if you are saying that those who are illiterate cannot do anything worth doing? You refer to the illiterate as “they” and “them.” As if you could look in a restaurant and say, “Look at him; he is illiterate.” Being literate is not important. There are many examples of illiterate people who have lived out their lives. I personally know several. So, that is why I cannot, in the slightest, agree that there is no purpose for someone who has had no experience in being literate.
The older generation had several important priorities. Reading was not one of them. We preferred to look after our future, the next generation. Is it not true that what our ancestors “suffered” for with not being literate, has helped further the human race? Are there not more students who attempt a college education now than ever before? Thus, the illiterate are a dying breed. But, you said that the semi-illiterate are the ones who “punch in orders on cash registers.” I wonder if you know that most restaurants require a high school diploma.
Of course, illiterate people are out there in the world, but though they are illiterate, it is obvious that they are good at something. Some examples can include but are not limited to: construction workers, machinists, mechanics, farmers, etc. Without those people that have strengths in other things, where would the foundation of this country be? We need people who are good at other things than just reading. Therefore, I ask, so what if people are illiterate? Are they useful is the main question.
I wonder at your meaning, Hedges. It is as if you are saying that those who are illiterate cannot do anything worth doing? You refer to the illiterate as “they” and “them.” As if you could look in a restaurant and say, “Look at him; he is illiterate.” Being literate is not important. There are many examples of illiterate people who have lived out their lives. I personally know several. So, that is why I cannot, in the slightest, agree that there is no purpose for someone who has had no experience in being literate.
The older generation had several important priorities. Reading was not one of them. We preferred to look after our future, the next generation. Is it not true that what our ancestors “suffered” for with not being literate, has helped further the human race? Are there not more students who attempt a college education now than ever before? Thus, the illiterate are a dying breed. But, you said that the semi-illiterate are the ones who “punch in orders on cash registers.” I wonder if you know that most restaurants require a high school diploma.
Of course, illiterate people are out there in the world, but though they are illiterate, it is obvious that they are good at something. Some examples can include but are not limited to: construction workers, machinists, mechanics, farmers, etc. Without those people that have strengths in other things, where would the foundation of this country be? We need people who are good at other things than just reading. Therefore, I ask, so what if people are illiterate? Are they useful is the main question.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Adaption and Change - The Internet
The internet is making us stupid; or is it? Nicholas Carr exemplifies throughout his text, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" that the internet has had many influential changes to the human brain since its upbringing and massive popularity. “A style that puts ‘efficiency’ and ‘immediacy’ above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace.” Is this bad? Are we deteriorating as intellectuals because we read information through the internet in different ways? Carr certainly thinks so. But, I counter, what is it that makes the internet and our changing habits bad? Can we not continue to prosper as long as we see the relationship?
Carr says that “what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.” Though the internet may be interrupting his normal habits of concentration, there is no way that the Net is interfering with Carr’s sense of contemplation. Carr is reading into the internet farther than he believes. Thus the internet, while Carr believes has deteriorated his contemplation, has, in fact, furthered the knowledge to contemplate. For example, Carr has contemplated and written a response to the internet’s influence on his life, though he believes it to be a negative influence.
Further, I cannot, in good conscious, say that every intellectual is influenced negatively by the use of the internet. Rather, it has been proven that many intellectuals see the relationship between themselves and the internet, and they rebel. In my own class, there are some who have declared independence from the internet for some certain purposes. Thus it is very hard to say that Google is making us stupid, or for that matter that the internet is. While Carr may have a point that the internet has changed each of us intellectually, it is also true that the change may have been for the better.
Carr says that “what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.” Though the internet may be interrupting his normal habits of concentration, there is no way that the Net is interfering with Carr’s sense of contemplation. Carr is reading into the internet farther than he believes. Thus the internet, while Carr believes has deteriorated his contemplation, has, in fact, furthered the knowledge to contemplate. For example, Carr has contemplated and written a response to the internet’s influence on his life, though he believes it to be a negative influence.
Further, I cannot, in good conscious, say that every intellectual is influenced negatively by the use of the internet. Rather, it has been proven that many intellectuals see the relationship between themselves and the internet, and they rebel. In my own class, there are some who have declared independence from the internet for some certain purposes. Thus it is very hard to say that Google is making us stupid, or for that matter that the internet is. While Carr may have a point that the internet has changed each of us intellectually, it is also true that the change may have been for the better.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Harris - Will It Work?
Instantaneously, you see the processes begin. “Copyright notice.” Referencing all your backgrounds. And the processes begin. Harris has began to make a series of processes that you should use in which to write a paper. Not just any paper, of course, but a paper in which you review the other’s views, and you respond to the author. It is not an uncommon fact that each of us have our own way to understand the author, and view our own ideas, in order to create a paper that has any kind of value.
Then Harris introduced the fact that, through his book, you can gain the knowledge of the process in which to create a complete and beneficial paper. But how can all of us follow the same process? We each learn differently. We each reflect differently on a subject. Thus I wonder how Harris’s book can be beneficial to all of us.
However, as I read on, I begin to get more and more convinced. Maybe this can help me. I cannot say that Harris can help everyone that reads his book, but the main point is that he has tried. He has begun to explain that each person, though they may learn differently, can be helped with this book. It may be very interesting to see if each person in the class is helped in some way by the reading of this book. Harris, I wonder and I also hope that this book will assist in each of our processes of formulating a paper in response to another.
Then Harris introduced the fact that, through his book, you can gain the knowledge of the process in which to create a complete and beneficial paper. But how can all of us follow the same process? We each learn differently. We each reflect differently on a subject. Thus I wonder how Harris’s book can be beneficial to all of us.
However, as I read on, I begin to get more and more convinced. Maybe this can help me. I cannot say that Harris can help everyone that reads his book, but the main point is that he has tried. He has begun to explain that each person, though they may learn differently, can be helped with this book. It may be very interesting to see if each person in the class is helped in some way by the reading of this book. Harris, I wonder and I also hope that this book will assist in each of our processes of formulating a paper in response to another.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Ponder It
It emerges through the shadows.
The shadows.
It.
It barrels forward.
Squeals.
Screeches.
Get out of the way.
Can't!
It keeps coming.
No stopping it.
The black horn of the night cries out.
Cries.
Watch it.
No!
It throws the shadows.
Striking.
The shadows grow longer.
Stretched.
Obscured.
The heart races.
Fear.
Darkness.
It won.
The shadows.
It.
It barrels forward.
Squeals.
Screeches.
Get out of the way.
Can't!
It keeps coming.
No stopping it.
The black horn of the night cries out.
Cries.
Watch it.
No!
It throws the shadows.
Striking.
The shadows grow longer.
Stretched.
Obscured.
The heart races.
Fear.
Darkness.
It won.
Communication Change
Facebook. Facebook. Facebook. The one place that each of us goes. We go there to network. We go there to communicate. And we go there to keep in touch with friends. The common factor is our familiarity with the basis to contact each other. It was fairly interesting to see how each of us spends our time on the internet.
I was not very surprised at my classmates’ dependency on the internet. For me, the internet has always been a big waste of time. I could never figure out why anyone would want to waste so much time, which is precious already. Then I came to college. I have found myself changing how I view the internet, now that I have changed locations. The main thing that I like about the internet, now, is that it does waste time. It seems that since I have come here, I have so much more time to waste.
I started this blog off talking of Facebook, and the ties each of us has to it, but throughout the writing of this post, I have come to realize that Facebook is not the only thing that helps to immerse us all into the internet. However, it is one of many sites that help us to stay connected, while we continue to grow by way of using the internet for information exchange. Facebook, while it can be categorized into entertainment, also helps each one of us get our names out into the world. So, therefore, can it not be said that Facebook, in itself is a learning tool. The networking that goes on can only help to show everyone how to navigate through the many avenues and back alleys of interesting subjects the internet has to offer. Therefore, I have changed in my views through this assignment. It may have just helped me to learn a little bit more about myself.
I was not very surprised at my classmates’ dependency on the internet. For me, the internet has always been a big waste of time. I could never figure out why anyone would want to waste so much time, which is precious already. Then I came to college. I have found myself changing how I view the internet, now that I have changed locations. The main thing that I like about the internet, now, is that it does waste time. It seems that since I have come here, I have so much more time to waste.
I started this blog off talking of Facebook, and the ties each of us has to it, but throughout the writing of this post, I have come to realize that Facebook is not the only thing that helps to immerse us all into the internet. However, it is one of many sites that help us to stay connected, while we continue to grow by way of using the internet for information exchange. Facebook, while it can be categorized into entertainment, also helps each one of us get our names out into the world. So, therefore, can it not be said that Facebook, in itself is a learning tool. The networking that goes on can only help to show everyone how to navigate through the many avenues and back alleys of interesting subjects the internet has to offer. Therefore, I have changed in my views through this assignment. It may have just helped me to learn a little bit more about myself.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
The Mouth of The Cavern
To most people, I guess, it would seem I had not done my assignment, but in fact I have. We will analyze these internet logs in class. Well, you can still analyze mine just fine. The lack of sites signifies that I do not rely on the internet for entertainment, or, for that matter, anything but entertainment. Thus here is my log of forty-eight hours worth of internet usage:
September 6, 2009
8:30 am – facebook
8:40 am – youtube (family guy)
8:55 am – e-mail
12:00 pm – blackboard
12:05 pm – blogspot (random blogs)
12:10 pm – facebook
8:00 pm – e-mail
September 7, 2009
10:00 am – ebay
10:05 am – mapquest
10:10 am – e-mail
September 6, 2009
8:30 am – facebook
8:40 am – youtube (family guy)
8:55 am – e-mail
12:00 pm – blackboard
12:05 pm – blogspot (random blogs)
12:10 pm – facebook
8:00 pm – e-mail
September 7, 2009
10:00 am – ebay
10:05 am – mapquest
10:10 am – e-mail
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Why You Blog
You have intrigued me through your blog posting, "Why I Blog." I can hardly believe that what you say is true. Mr. Sullivan, one of the most popularly read bloggers, was as common a person as I? Technically challenged, you said. Well, it is fairly inspirational how blogging changed your life. It is very interesting that you referred to blogging as “like taking a narcotic” (page 2). If such is the case, it is fair to say that blogging, to you, was a way in which to live on the wild side. Therefore, you blog because it warrants your inner beast to thrive.
The promise of greatness is very appealing to some, in that one could become famous for their simple writings, yet you blog because you like the thrill of it. The thrill of the hunt and killing of the old ways. The thrill of finding new avenues of thought. You, as you say, felt like a revolutionary. A revolutionary is someone who sees what society is doing and acts for a certain reason, for the good of the people. Therefore, it is fair to say that you were a revolutionary. You have helped others into seeing different ways to broadcast their thoughts. You helped society grow. You helped clear the brush along the trail to linguistic salvation.
I do not feel that the reasons why you blog are terribly important, as if you cared to say the reasons why you eat at a certain restaurant. But, what is important, and what you do wonderfully, is make people think deeply about what they write, or for that matter, what they read. In your story of why you blog, you continue to show what blogging did for you. Maybe it could help others to express themselves. It surely helped me.
The promise of greatness is very appealing to some, in that one could become famous for their simple writings, yet you blog because you like the thrill of it. The thrill of the hunt and killing of the old ways. The thrill of finding new avenues of thought. You, as you say, felt like a revolutionary. A revolutionary is someone who sees what society is doing and acts for a certain reason, for the good of the people. Therefore, it is fair to say that you were a revolutionary. You have helped others into seeing different ways to broadcast their thoughts. You helped society grow. You helped clear the brush along the trail to linguistic salvation.
I do not feel that the reasons why you blog are terribly important, as if you cared to say the reasons why you eat at a certain restaurant. But, what is important, and what you do wonderfully, is make people think deeply about what they write, or for that matter, what they read. In your story of why you blog, you continue to show what blogging did for you. Maybe it could help others to express themselves. It surely helped me.
Friday, August 28, 2009
The First Therefore The Eldest
Always, I have wondered as to what purpose someone would use a “blog” - I use the word as if I know what it means. If only I had come to finding a way of creating a blog. As if it was hard. No, the process, I was sure was quite easy, so perhaps my real reason was fright. Fear is the one thing that drives the technically challenged into staying right where they are, coexisting with technology, but not really understanding it. Therefore, perhaps I have broken the bonds that hold me. Gladly, and to my surprise, I have found the experience very informative. Thus, I will try, to the best of my knowledge, to explain the relationship of a blog with society, because, though “blog” may have a definition, I haven’t a clue of what it might be.
Therefore, a “blog” is the networking of ideas and thoughts through the digitally functioning web we call the internet. Simple, right? Well, what about all the similarities among every blog ever posted? Are these similarities a fraction of copyright infringement? No. The similarities are only the necessity of society to hold some things to be true or untrue, and therefore limiting the uses of words. Thus, we begin to delve into the realm of blogging as a competitive arrangement of many similar words.
So, what have I learned from my first experience with blogging? I have come to the conclusion that, though we wish to evaluate our thoughts through the written word, the written word can only be maneuvered in so many ways, and, therefore, we are all competing, in our creation of blogs, to achieve a perfect collaboration of words to form the perfect blog. Sounds fun.
Therefore, a “blog” is the networking of ideas and thoughts through the digitally functioning web we call the internet. Simple, right? Well, what about all the similarities among every blog ever posted? Are these similarities a fraction of copyright infringement? No. The similarities are only the necessity of society to hold some things to be true or untrue, and therefore limiting the uses of words. Thus, we begin to delve into the realm of blogging as a competitive arrangement of many similar words.
So, what have I learned from my first experience with blogging? I have come to the conclusion that, though we wish to evaluate our thoughts through the written word, the written word can only be maneuvered in so many ways, and, therefore, we are all competing, in our creation of blogs, to achieve a perfect collaboration of words to form the perfect blog. Sounds fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)