A Partial Narrative

            Why do I write? Why does anyone write for that matter? Is it just because we have to? That sounds reasonable. Many people don’t like to write so what ends up going behind their words is an apathetic voice filled with a colorless void. No passion, no meaning, no genuine thoughts are detailed through those words. But for people who do like to write, a entire vast of possibilities are here to explore. For me, I like to write in a way that goes outside the box. I write to break the conventional ways of writing. I like to imagine writing as a kind of game. I can play with words, tease the opponent, or reader, and create ideas according to my own rules.  Does this sound quirky? If so, I don’t care. We write however we want, in what style we want, in what way our brain thinks. Who needs the generic brand of writing; the five basic paragraphs, a three -point thesis, or the illegal use of first person narrative. These formats serve to restrict who we are as writers and to keep our tones in exactly the same, monotone manner.  Don’t get me wrong, we need to sound professional, but aren’t there other ways to do so? It can’t be one way or the highway.  I write what I see in my head. I don’t see the structured format; I see a river flowing gently down the hill of a large Appalachian mountain, with each little ripple forming its own path, creating small waterfalls or big ones until it comes to a stop at the edge of the mountain. I don’t see where the river must end or where the river must form. It is there and I don’t need a cement pool to contain the water.

            It is dark now. I can’t see the words I write in front of me. That is okay by me. I don’t need light to see what I’m thinking. The power is out. I have a strange sensation that I’ve traveled back to the sixteenth century where the only light available was by candle. Yet now I find myself lost in words. Where should I begin my tale? Perhaps it shall be one of communication since that is on my mind. And my mind is a flowing river of ideas.

            I find it rather interesting that there are several forms of communication that exist. We have sign language, Morse code, gestures, and languages such as Swahili. We can do anything with language and communicate in many ways. What if that communication was cut off?  Would any of my written words make sense? Perhaps the world would become blurred by incoherent ideas floating around because no one can understand what is being said.

            As a writer, I try to mess with the reader’s mind. I tried to sidetrack you with this excerpt from “ Writing in the Dark”, a blog post by yours truly. Why do I write this way? I do not know. No one in particular pointed out all the little tricks I try to consciously use. So what advice can I can you, the developing writer? According to Ron Koertge, “ You who asked for advice, listen: When the tower falls, be like that child.” Basically, when you are starting out, you don’t have to be confined to the space around you. Roam around, explore ideas, or be like the kid who knocks down a tower of books: unconventional. Exploring seems to be the best option. There is no right way in writing the first words. It is something that becomes developed over time through practice.  I believe Koertge wants a person to write in a way that works and that isn’t necessary a typical style. The old fashioned fancy notebook or staying in a desk doesn’t allow the mind or hand record the wonders of the outside world. There are endless possibilities when in comes to writing.

            Writing typically starts out through a series of sentences. How you decide to form these sentences will in turn form your style. A sentence is like a railroad track. In the beginning, you have to wait for the train to start, but after awhile the train begins to move at a steady pace down a path that goes straight, left, or right and has twists and turns. There are several stops the train makes, but then it gets going again. That’s what I’ve been doing as I’ve been telling you my story on writing. I hope you’ve been paying attention because it’s important to know that writing has many twists and turns as well as derails and delays. But eventually there is an ending. When the writing ends is up to the train.

            Now that I told you how I write, I would like to here from you. But I guess we’ll save that for another time since I have to get to class. But here’s a quick thought; does anybody write in way that hasn’t incorporated anyone’s own writing style? According to Joan Didion, she admits from stealing a title from George Orwell because it deemed fit for her intended purposes. Why George Orwell though? There are so many people to chose from. I admit to learning from Jack London, the author of “ The Call of the Wild.” Why did I chose him? It just seemed right. It seems that is the reason to how we write- it just seems right.

Just Can't Get Enough

So here we are again. We come back to the subject of writing. Well there is just so much to say about it that I just can't get enough. Never mind the fact that this is an assignment to respond to a prezi. Curiosity is at stake here. Curiosity has been brought to my attention. Haven't you, as a reader, ever wondered about the works in front of you? No? Hm, well let me tell you what I think.

Everyone should know that technology is taking over our lives. How we explain things, how we write things, and how we express our thoughts are done through technological means. Let me first explain the prezi I saw. It is a basic, bland platelet of black text on a white background. There are some images, actually one, that helps give a visual explanation. See? We even have visual demonstrations now. Still, there could be more to the presentation to get the overall message across. There are so many different messages being conveyed that there must be an overall connection to link them together, which there is. There still i this constant " Technology v.s Pure Writing", but technology has made writing more efficient and simpler. we no longer need to dictate word for word on paper the president's speech or the life of George Washington. We can use the computer, in which no paper is wasted. Editing is much more convenient. How we look and analyze works are now changing. Handwriting is at a consistent legibility and ideas are constantly expanding. Instead of priests being the only authoritative figure, now anybody can write about anything. So now I ask: who is the authority now? Why are they the authority? Is it because of our growing reliability and dependance?

Another good thing about the prezi was the use of individual definitions to help explain the topic. An audience can follow along, but may not understand what they are saying due to vocabulary. Do you understand what I am saying? Everyone learns differently. In fact, we learn how to " write properly". In English, we are given a structure on how to write an essay. Why is that? Can we not freely write or express how and what we want? " No," we are told," you must sound professional." That may be true, but is it necessary to have it one way or the highway? We are restricted in who we are as an individual through structured writing. There are constraints and limits placed on us because we are suppose to write in a way that is similar to how everyone expects or wants it to be. So we are all little robots, writing the same five paragraph, three point thesis model. We should be allowed to go outside the box, as long as it can be professional, dignified, and coherent in its own right. We should allow differences more. 

This brings me to reading. Have you ever wondered about the production of what you read? How we seem to read things that belong to our culture? Do we realize that we are reading works by authors from ireland, England, or Singapore? Are there any differences between the works, besides potential language barriers? I like to think that all writing has become uniformed. With or without translations, with or without different cultural values, writing is writing and it has become more universal as time goes by. Writing meant nothing to the common people of the past; now it holds more value. it also contains what we value implicitly through our ideas and creativity. Ok, enough is enough. I don't know how much more I can talk about writing. You don't need to know more. Have you had enough? Well, too bad because as long as writing keeps expanding, there is always going to be something said about it.

The Evolution of Writing..What a Dosey

Once upon a time in a faraway land known as the Beginning, there lived a small civilization of human beings. Before the foundation of industry, these people lived in small clusters near coves and caverns. These early people, or cavemen, relied on the elements of nature to get by. Instead of electricity they had lightning and fire. Instead of indoor plumbing, they had forest trees and leaves. Before they had up to date means of communication, they had fingers, voices, and sticks. There wasn’t a telegram that could be sent across the country. There wasn’t a letter that could be sent through mail. All that was available were chalk or dirt drawings and their own voices. Writing had to start from somewhere. Society is not where it is today because of an automatic presence of digital and printed texts. Writing has developed to more advanced forms through the ages. Why is this? What has caused this? What is happening to writing as it stands today?

            Writing started off as a standardized method of conveying ideas or cultural conventions. It started as a place to record stories or songs that represented important historical events or characters. But over the years as our culture began to advance, so did the writing. Writing has changed from a simple technique to a more stylized and utilized component to society. At first, methods of writing expanded slowly. There was the telegram and the letter, which could take days to deliver. Now there exists instant email and text messaging to receive messages quicker. Writing has transformed from a traditional, aesthetic form to a pure technological one. As cultures begin to speed up their lives the need for word processors and digital print intensifies in order to match the daily life. Gone are the days of beautiful chalk writings, ink written love letters, or hieroglyphics to tell fantastical stories. Or record historical and personal reports. Now there is a vast variety to convey these topics as well as convey annual reports, research, and magazine articles via the Internet and word processing.

            These expansions confide to the new established needs of the public. The creation of hypertext, according to J. David Bolter, has helped expand the previous limits to accessibility. Hypertext links an individual to several different sources with the simple click of a button. Instead of spending tedious amounts of time searching the books in the library, as grandparents once had to in those college days, now information can be gathered in a simple search. Hypertext also provides a means of gathering more information. Books are limited in that there is so much information out there to gather that it is extremely improbable to obtain it all through time- consuming searches from book to book. Being able to obtain more information through data streams has given more knowledge to how an individual writes. Writing probably was not as structured in the early beginnings, for there was not much to go on. It started as a mainstream way of passing information and now it is growing into more versatile uses such as speeches, newspaper articles, and protests.

            But writing is also growing towards a more digital era. How many articles are being printed via computed instead of being printed manually and physically? The number is draining as people are now using such instruments such as nooks and kindles. The newspaper is not as thick anymore. Even writers publish their books by digital means. No one actually writes much by hand these days except to write checks, sign their name, grade papers, and other trivial chores.

            These days there had also been an addition of visual aid to writing.  It is more common to paint a picture with words and paint words with a picture than to have words without the image or image without the words. Hieroglyphics was a language used among the people that have taken archeologists years to decipher. Is there a way where images can coincide with words that everyone understands? Traditionally, writing was not so widespread; making the variety that writing possesses limited to each community. How would the English know about the stories of Huckleberry Finn. Or how would the Chinese understand the take to The Scarlett Letter.  Each culture has something considered to be separate from other cultures, yet there are universal images and words that apply to general standards. Fear, sadness, and happiness are recognized worldwide, so it can be possible to form those words into a plausible image. Writing has become more artistic over the ages. It has strayed away from the arduous task of meticulous handwriting, which generally applied to recording history or epic sonnets. Now there are new forms in the style of newspapers, magazines, printed text, and digital billboards.

            According to Bolter, “ Words should be seen, not just read.” There should be depth in the words written, which he implies is an unusual custom to do. Writing has expanded to the point where there can be a lot of depth in what an individual reads. When writing about a boy who has fallen down a well, one should be able to visualize the scene with the painted words. One should be able to smell the cookies made by grandma or taste the droplets of rain falling on their lips. So much can be gathered behind the meaning of words that another world can be created out of it.

            But now it is time to wonder if too much can be gained from the evolution of writing. In the past, there wasn’t too much accessibility to absorb everything in. People were less educated then than they are today. Nowadays a simple link will take a person to any information in the world instead of being confined locally. But is there a limit to the growth of writing. At one point, how does one know that the information they are searching for is correct? There is so much to sift through, that it can become overwhelming to find what one is looking for. Plus, these days anyone could write about anything, such as the mating habits of unicorns, and call themselves an expert. There is a good chance tat they reader will believe them, if there are enough articles to support it. Writing has traveled through time opening new gateways to social interaction.

            Now lets go back to the fourteenth century and look at writing in the form of a manuscript. There was yet to be the invention of the printed press but there was access to parchment and ink. It is curious to wonder how people during that time would react to such drastic changes in writing that society has today. They probably didn’t think about the remediation of print and how it could extend to serve more purposes. In those times, a person was considered extremely important if they knew how to write. Today, it is a requirement to know how to            write. With writing comes all sorts of creative possibilities that expand upon what was previously done. Technology gives special effects behind the pictures that coincide with words. Instead of a two dimensional drawing that depicts a fire eating away at a village, technology adds mobility and three dimension to draw more power behind a written description of a village. There is so much writing can do these days that it couldn’t do before.  The problem is, will the expansion ever stop.

As long as technology keeps advancing, so will writing techniques. It is now necessary to have a class that teaches one to type quickly on a keyboard. But is there a limit to writing? How far can we go with writing? If the advancements stop, will society revert to old ways after being out of practice? Writing has become an essential tool in communicating across the globe and channeling individual expressions or ideas. Where would society be without writing? So many questions about this can be refuted in so many different ways. For instance, Will has argued that pictures are not necessary companions to words. But others’ such as Bolter and Virginia, regard pictures as another gateway that tags along with words. Writing comes in many different shapes and forms, and as Virginia puts it “visuals are an important part of metaphors, which are incredibly successful at conveying feelings” as well as adding to the significance of words. Writing can be descriptive, analytical, dialectical, or expressional. There is no right way to writing, unless one gets into technical grammar and spelling, but people should be able to write freely or structured. It is more than an educational habit. Writing has evolved to many stages so a person isn’t stuck in the past copying Latin or writing a diary. Writing is a part of society that has changed for the better.

Once upon a time there was a place called Haven where people got along well enough. They were satisfied with business, content with technology, and indulged in writing. Though writing can be slipping away, people are generally pleased by the fact that whatever they publish can be viewed from across the world. The best part is they can write about anything: sports, pumpkin pie cancer, and armadillos. Each day they secretly thank their ancestors for bestowing this gift upon them. Without this ability to write, who knows where society would be now. The change from scriptures to digital has not delayed society; they run at a quicker pace now so they need quicker technology. It’s too tiresome to write by hand now. Although that may die out, writing itself in every form, whether its chalk, pencil, ink, or computer, will remain intact. It doesn’t matter what tool a person uses to write- it’s the quality that comes from it. Writing means nothing if there isn’t a type of quality that doesn’t confuse the reader. But as long as a person needs eyes to read, there will always be someone to write, no matter how evolved it has become.

Breakout of the Visual

Start

There is this pretty interesting prezi ( I've never really heard of it but it can do amazing things) about the emergence of visualization of media and how it aids to textual argumentation. The main point of interest that gets the message across is this video on the distortion of beauty. I must say, that really is the strong point because it actually applies to how we view billboards and models today. How many of us become disillusioned by images? Visual text refashions how printed and oral text is presented.

If you never heard of a prezi, the layout is pretty simple. You chose the background and special effects. You type in text that circles around the screen, providing a lively encounter with the information presented. You can add images and videos to help support what you want to convey. Otherwise the meaning can easily be lost among in an overwhelming sea of communication, depending on how complex the subject matter is.

" Words should be seen and not just read". What if someone can't read? How can they still learn when they cannot read the information? Although images can be misconstrued, some images provide a great deal of information without printing a single word. In the prezi, there was a point made about a shoe advertisement and how without reading the article, you can tell that the realization image of the older woman surrounded by crazy shoes implies how there are so many different shoes out there that there is always a right shoe for you. Or something along the lines of that. You can get the main idea from images. Sometimes words cannot provide the right image for you. When explaining a complicated play in sports, some people do not fully understand the context until it is put into visual action. Diagrams and charts can be just as complicated to understand as text. Sometimes there just needs to be a simple, clear cut way of viewing things in life.

Post Script: Questions Unanswered

Yes, everything can leave out something we want to know.

For instance, I did not quite understand the metaphor image of the pie. Therefore...

1. Can you use other instances of visual metaphors? Can you explain where they fit in society? I would like to know about that more.

2. What exactly is Ekphrasis, according to Bolter?

3. Where do MUDS fit in?

4. Many of the texts use state a fact. Can you provide images to go with those facts so we can see what it means with an example?

5. Out of curiosity, how many ways can text be depicted in general?

6. This revolution, or remediation, of the printed text has led to visual representations. Why has this become so? Is it from the trend of hieroglyphics? What makes communication in different forms so special nationwide? Is it merely for understanding each other's cultures or is there more to it? Why can't everyone just see everything in the same way?

These may be redundant questions, but these are my questions that I find missing in the prezi. Maybe the answers were there, but I didn't understand them. No judgments should be made at this time.

End

The Battle Wages On

So the printed book and its vast army of loyal followers come to a stalemate with the digital print.
" So what makes you think you're so better?" asked Commander Manuscript.
" Because I'm more advanced," retorted Commander Nook.
Both parties had come to a halt. The printed army could not get past the complicated construction on new age technology. They had no weapons to penetrate the highly built wall of computer screens and digital font. Yet the digital army could not obliterate the strong legions of followers, such as Ralph Waldo Emerson and Thomas Jefferson, that still held tight to the old ways. Neither could gain or lose ground.

So will the war never end? Or was there never really a war to begin with?

" I propose a remediation of sorts," said Commander Nook pompously.
" I don't think that's a great idea," responded Commander Manuscript. " You already change the way we look and feel. And you make us seem difficult to use."
" Nonsense!" laughed Commander Nook. " We have merely revolutionized the meaning of text! We help people look at things in a different light. Plus, they're too lazy to want to flip the pages of the dictionary. Bahahaha!"

Suddenly a flash a lightening streaks across the deep blue sky. A figure materializes between the front lines. " Halt!"the voice shouts. " I am the great J. David Bolter and I say halt!"

The two armies grow silent. The figure continues to loom over them. " Now listen, you may not agree with what I say, heck I don't even agree with what I say, but I've been inspired by the mighty Dr. Lay to disagree with my own statements, or at least voice different opinions about them. This bickering feud between you has got to stop. Can't you work together in the same world? Yes, people are going to like Commander Nook better. Yes, people are going to like Commander Manuscript better. But the message should still be the same. Readers of all kinds should be able to get the same information. What should be the difference? One mode is not better than the other- they are the same. Although I'd much prefer the feel of the book than that of a kindle, yet nevertheless neither form should become outdated. Technology took time to develop- older generations didn't have what we have today. Yet now that we have technology, we can't let books fade out of existence. Digital print is not ruining the past. it is merely providing another way for people who are lazy or hate reading to search for things required of them to read. They don't want to flip through a book because they hate books. Likewise, a person may not know how to use technology. You can never go wrong with a paperback. Now stop this squabbling and learn to deal with each other. Can't we all just get along?"

The mysterious figure leers at each party. No one moves. No one looks interested to move. Is the stalemate continuing? If so, for how long? Will one army finally diminish or will one grow? Or are both sides just too stubborn or slow to adapt to their environment? Stay tuned and find out what happens next in the future...

Writing in the Dark

Great. The power is "out". I can't see anything, yet Somehow I still have the capability to write. I wonder how many erros will occur...

It seems strange sitting here writing my thoughts. i feel like I've been transported back to 1729 where writing by candlelight was most common. But i do not have a candlelight. I am literally writing in the dark.

So where should I begin my tale? The tale of communication that is. There are so many different ways to communicate, it's astounding. We have sign language, morse code, gestures, etc.  We can communicate without actually having to speak words. I guess that's where I can begin to answer the question : "What are some of the earliest encounters you remeber with language, written or verbal? Why do you think you remember them?' Well, here's the thing. Not to get to personal, but i'll let you in on a little secret: for the first six years of my life, I couldn't hear. In fact, i nearly became deaf. So I don't remember much on how I communicated. I know it wasn't with words much. it was gestures mostly. Or I would just scream  my head off, you know the average thing a kid likes to do. Most of the time it isn't easy for me to say something, so i would be unable to express it or just signal with my body. These days i like to write things down because it is so much more fluid for m,e to get messages across. I mean, its not harde to forgwet about a time where you couldn't heaar or say much in the early years. I remember communication being difficult and the way I had tro express it because it is still difficult for me today. But hey, we all struggle with something and do the best we can do. So i don't know if i answered the questioned properly, but this is sometthing I'm not afraid to share because we havwe to communicate everyday. it is a part of our lives and sometimes it can be overlooked because sometimes we think everyone communicates in the same way.

I hope i didn't drag you on a long, boring story. I told you I had a tale. i just hope there aren't too many mistakes in this. I can't look nback once this done. But hey, i can't write anything that comes to mind- it is a free write after all.

There once was an elf named Gilda. She lived the forest by herslf. One day... oh wait, I don't think that's the kind of tale you want to hear. I'll save it for next time then.

Fare thee well, neighbor!

How to Describe a Boy and a Girl

Tell me, what are the first words that come to mind when you think of a boy or a girl? You would think it would be something ambiguous or pleasant such as sir, madam, lady, angel, gentleman, cookie, and mister. But instead, more derogatory words such as womanizer, slut, whore, douchbag, skank, asshole, and bitch are seemingly deemed more proper. Then there are the slang words, such as bro, brah, suga', and hussy. I'm just curious, is this how we really view people today or is it that we are more cynical and optimistic about characteristicas of people that they deserve such lovely terms. As much as I find this hilarious, and the fact if you put a bunch of young adults together to make a list this is what you mostly get, there is something striking about it. the days have since pass where a man would be called a gentleman and a lady a madam or miss. Is it that people don't act in the way a gentleman should act anymore or that we have just lost all respect, dignity, and faith in people's humane characteristics. The ugly words, whore, bitch, and asshole, are given to people we find distasteful or hold in disgust. What is it about our attitudes to create such a "trashy" atmosphere. is it too outdated to use such pleasantries as sir or angel? Or have we forgotten that people can be endearing and sweet and kind that we can term them with lady or miss.

I find it kind of ironic that the first thought that comes to mind in this circumstance are potentially hateful and seething words. It's ironic how free association works out. Have our inner workings of our mind become so dirty and filthy as to lose sight of the wonderful things people can be? I'm just curious as to why the custom as become to describe someone as "horny', "trashy", " slutty", etc instead of " homely", "angelic", or " cutiepie". What has become disdainful about it? Or at least that is what it seems. So maybe we should all play a game. I'll ask, you give me the first thing that flows into your head. If I say describe to me Presidents , what would your first response be? ( I can tell you what i would say, but that would ruin the fun).

Ink Shed, Shed Ink

First of all, even the most organized of all people can be disorganized, or just plain lose stuff. Twice now, as I'm sitting here upon my blog ready to type, I cannot find the simple assignment I had just done in class. I'm supposed to record a quote from Shelly Jackson's "Stitch Bitch" that I did not understand. But before I can write down my classmates opinions, I cannot find the paper in my binder. So I thought I would be idle and just write about how I lost it when suddenly the paper makes itself visible to my eyes. Dang it. I guess all it took was for me to flip my backpack inside and out, search my car, and shift through past weeks work a dozen times. Nothing screams success but a long, tedious, potentially frustrating search.

"Bad writing is all flesh and dirty flesh at that.."

CM1: "Writing as she relates it has a life of its own. It is an organism consisting of living parts. Bad writing is sullied, sickly flesh."

CM2: " She compares writing to body parts throughout this section. Flesh is on the outside of a person. You must dissect someone to know the most about them. But bad writing is like flesh because it just scratches the surface and does not get deep into observations."

CM3: " Bad writing could act as flesh because it is covering all of the important stuff. Flesh doesn't allow you to see what's under it, sort of how bad writing can prevent you from understanding the meaning of something."

Ah, now I understand the meaning of the quote. Thanks to the power of ink shedding( as well as shedding some ink from using our pens so much), the value of other classmates thoughts has shed some light( i wonder how many times I could use 'shed' in a sentence). Out of curiosity, I wonder if there are times when no one understands the quote and just puts down random thoughts that do not help the initial questioner find a solution. So much for ink shedding in that scenario then.

Arguing Against An Arguable Argument

I've always wondered how people could argue for the sake of arguing. There is always that one person that has something to say about everything, even if there is not much to say about it. They like to debate. They like the challenge, even it others don't see the challenge presented or just find the person annoying. Right now, I'm going to try to be like that person. I'm going to step into their shoes and argue about something that seems so insignificant to many, but to others it is the most important thing at hand.

How can I argue about someone else's argument? In that lies the fun and excitement. What is it about sample R's argument on the four letter word project that I can argue about? Is it just merely disagreeing with one statement that can propel me into a paragraph's worth debacle disregarding that one sentence? Yes, yes it is. The simplicity of one statement can open the doors to endless counterarguments.

Sample R states how an image does not have to be in order to be able to understand the message or theme. But if the images are particularly descriptive, such as a transformation from failure to success, then doesn't that require an order? If the topic being stated about being fake just shows random pictures of different modes of faking, then can you discern the message of how the way people are fakes is advancing from mere fake identities to plastic surgery? What if there's a hidden message? What if the word can be interpreted in more than one way? The presentation involving images of twins and homosexuals conveyed love to most people but it was really same. Does the sequential flow of image matter? In some cases, yes. It depends on what is being said. Visualization and words can be used equally. Some words don't just have one image that can be associated with it. Many words can be used to symbolize many different things? How do we decipher such words and images? Sometimes organizing them into a single, coherent theme. But hey, what do I know, I'm arguing for the sake of arguing, whether I have a purpose or not.

This is War!

Today, I came across a Barnes and Nobles bookstore, which whenever I pass a surge of enthusiastic energy creeps through me and I cannot resist the desire that it creates. I browse through the sections passionately; my hands pressing lithely through the fresh pages. I enjoy the feel of holding a book. I enjoy the turning of its pages. As I walk out of the store with a new book in tow, my heart glows with the flow of  love that a mother may have for her child. This book I now possess. This book is possessed with new words and ideas that I cannot wait to unfold. A journey awaits me within the confines of the pages. I hold on tight to the book as if it were the bible. An actual book to me is worth more than gold.

But today, it seems like technology is dictating the presence of books. No longer to people wish to read text in a book. Now there is technology to take care of it for us. Out of pure laziness do we wish to rely upon the internet or a kindle to provide for our hobby. Instant access is what we all want. The printed word universe is slowly fading because people do not wish to take time to search for a book or go out of their way to find one they like. Technology can choose for them. To me, there is no thrill to reading through the internet. An all out battle has begun between the printed books and the technological ones. Since technology is constantly advancing and people are constantly in desire to get things as quick as possible, the printed books are losing ground. According to Writing Space, " it now seems possible that many texts may never be printed, but simply  distributed in digital form." There will no longer be a point in publishing text in a tangible form- an individual can read anything they want from the internet. Technology has in its arsenal video representations, book voiceover recordings, and easy-free access. Most articles can be read for free or paid for online. There is no need to walk out the door to the nearest news stand for a magazine or newspaper. Technology can kill business. What does printed text have in its arsenal? Not much to cause a dent against technology, which has consumed people's interest. So who will win this war? Only time will tell.

I should add that everyone falls victim to internet use. Why go to the library when it might not have what you want? Basically, there should be a balance between having printed text and internet text.

Like..You Know... That Time When... You Know

When watching Taylor Mali's video word poem, I couldn't help but laugh at some of his lines. He mocks the current everyday conversation where people are constantly using "like" and "you know" in a way that isn't clear to everyone. People sometimes get caught in the notion that others know what they are going to say or know what they're saying so the person does not need to detail much. The mockery is displayed in a spoken representation and a textual representation. The textual manifestation isn't as useful to understanding the poem without the spoken piece. Alone, the text does not convey the tone the writer is trying to create, which can alter the meaning significantly. Reading the text word for word, the reader may read the words in a different voice than what the writer initially intended. For me, I don't think the visual was necessary, but it was creative and perhaps it would catch attention better than just having the poem spoken charismatically. But there still needs to be a voice behind it so there isn't any misinterpretations. Misinterpretations can really be a downer.

The Human Patchwork

So I was reading this article by Shelley Jackson and I got to thinking about the words she used in " Body Not Whole". Apparently, the physical and mental states of the body are separate and work in an intangible/tangible system. We cannot feel or see how our brain generating the thoughts produced but we know and see that the brain processes thoughts the the work we show or the actions we take. Our mind provides and generates the thoughts, but our body holds everything together. We can draw diagrams and analyze cells with microscopes, which puts our mind at work, but our body cannot physically identify the sensation of a red blood cell.

Next I make a stop at "No-Place" where I think Shelley implies is the centerfold for creativity. Normally, we wouldn't be able to write about a talking alligator wearing a blue swimsuit in an article dictating the natural habitat of the Florida alligator. In an unrealistic setting, such as a novel, we can get away with writing ideas that come from nowhere. You can't pinpoint a thought and ask where it came from. It just did. There are numerous possibilities stemming from a place without confines. So the place becomes a "no-place" because there is no right lace for the ideas. It is like being able to run wild in the Safari desert without thinking where you have to go. Thoughts can be free-flowing from anywhere.

Here's a Word Cloud for You... Tell me What it Means

word cloud

Rejection of the Image

I guess in some poetry imagery as an argument is an impossible task to complete. In Rodney Jones "Hubris at Zunzal" there comes a point where the writer gives up on the description of an image and just writes the subject plain and simple. Although the exact point is not as lucid as other poems, the point of rejection is still there. "No image like the image of language" could be the line, for instance. Because following that, the author uses phrases like " Then a shout from the beach" and "then the act of reaching down". These phrases exert the idea that there is no way to put an image to what he wants to say. He can't describe what a voice looks like or how to compare the act of reaching down. He can tell it just how it is, plain and simple, without a hidden meaning. What else can come from " then the act of reaching down"? The meaning behind certain subjects cannot be told, or so the writer here displays. There may be difficulty in describing an argument, but I believe it can be done. Sometimes , though, it is best to just write things in a way not so complex. The best way to write is to just write, letting the flow decide if the words to form an image will or will not come.

From tablet to telegram to telephone to cell phone

We have come a long way since the time of the caveman. No longer do we transcend messages by voice or paper. Now we have a modem that can transcend messages through air and space. it wasn't that long ago when society was given its first cabled telephone. But we have advanced at a much quicker pace then what society can handle. One generation grew up without knowing the computer and the next one knows it like they know the back of their hand. You are supposed to learn from your elders but in the case of technology our elders are learning from us. I for one am not surprised by this change. I grew up knowing technology and watching it grew so I am accustomed to it and being more versatile to adapt to the changes. These changes are beckoned from the need to find efficiency. Back in the old days, the average college student would have to write a twenty page paper by hand, making the work so much harder. Now we can do things in the snap of a finger... well, almost.

A Sentence Starts Out Like...

A sentence starts out like a railroad track, for its beginning is hard to find but once you get started it can lead you to endless possibilities. When I first get on a train, I like to look at the track below to see where it goes and where it may begin or end. Once the train gets going, I wonder where it will take me before I get to my final destination. There are many stops along the way, but I get to view the scenery that goes by me along the tracks. When I get to the end of the track or to my stop, there's a sense of finality, like this is the way I was supposed to go. A sentence can have a hard start, but once it gets going it can travel through different possibilities until the right idea comes out. When it reaches its final stop, that is how the sentence is suppose to be. But a sentence can be many things. This is just the first thing that came to mind.

Let Me Help You Out There

I found some questions that need answering. Don't you worry, they're all based on the same subject: Billy Collins lous-- er, I mean, inspirational poem.

Why do you look at the love poem like it is a joke?
Believe it or not, some people find love is a joke. It is too serious for them to take seriously. But for Billy Collins, I'll give him a break. He may have found the metaphors just as ridiculous as the rest of us so he decided to re-image it for comical purposes. Perhaps he wanted to show what not to do with a love poem. Maybe he wanted to show how some people view love, which can be cynical, insensitive, and serious. Who knows what his reasons were for such a strange poem.

Do you feel that every love poem writer secretly craves similar metaphors to be written about his or herself?
Frankly, I'm not quite sure how the average person would feel about being compared as "the bread in the knife" or " the pigeon on the general's head." These are not flattering and I wonder if the average love poem writer would know that. I would think if a love poem writer was full of love and inspired by it that they would use metaphors expressing themselves in more clearly defined and serious terms. But then again, it depends on the personality of the writer. if he or she is bitter about love and scoffs at it, the metaphors may be more comical. But if he or she is blissfully drowned in the waves of loves, the metaphors may be more endearing. Every writer is different and expresses themselves differently.

Why did you incorporate metaphors about yourself in the poem?
He probably wanted to poke fun at himself. Maybe he wanted to reveal some of his own feelings about love, which would provide some interesting assumptions about his own love life and how successful it may or may not have been. Perhaps he just wanted to give some lively spirit to the poem and give it some fun by being able to laugh at himself. If he was poking at himself, it would suggest what a charismatic character he is. It is not easy to be able to laugh freely at yourself, especially in front of a crowd. But again, these are just theories.

In the end, I didn't fulfill the questions by giving concrete answers. but some of these questions can only be answered by Billy Collins himself without passing judgment behind the ridicul--uh, I mean, fascinating poem.

Give Me Another 6 Reasons

To continue my point from before, I find reading scholarly papers to be tedious at times. But not this time. 

"Apple's iPod: I've Got the World on a String(Shaped-Earphone Chord)": How it makes me think

1. The title itself makes me wonder how dependent we are on technology

2. The introduction makes me realize how quick and easy the iPod makes everything and how convenient it is

3. The iPod assists us on things we want: easy access music, a traveling companion, a portable alarm clock, an extra watch, and endless amounts of games to provide entertainment in times of boredom

4. I start to wonder if this is so amazing, what are the possible consequences to the iPod, such as lack of attention when in the car with a conversing mom.

5. How has this sort of technology been made possible? And I mean the foundations of the idea to create such a product and the constant additions being made. What will come up next? All the designs presented really makes me wonder sometimes...

6. How does the iPod affect people socially? Are people treated differently if they don't have one? How are the people who don't have an iPod affected? 

The Downside:

1.  Everything written sounds the same and monotoned, which can turn me off to listening to what the argument has to say

2. If you have an iPod, you will most likely agree to how the iPod has become an essential everyday tool

3. It is written scientifically, without much creative stray, which has the potential to cause boredom for me

4. The iPod is a device designed for the younger generation. What do the older generation think?

5. Is there more to just one side of the iPod? What else could be discussed, such as the effect it has in other cultures. Is it the same?

6. There is so much more that could be gained about the iPod, such as its origins behind the necessary creation.

Note: This too was a very impressive paper. Again, not too much that put me off. It all depends on the readers interest.

Give Me 6 Reasons

I hate reading papers. They can be so unmoving at times. They don't usually affect me or get me to think. They can be too repetitious. But after reading "'It Gives You Wings'" and "Apple"s iPod" I've discovered that papers aren't all that bad. Some can actually be moving, although at the same time they can still have points where I'm unfazed by the topic.

"'It Gives You Wings'": How to think about Red Bull in a new way

1. Never thought how Red Bull could be a healthy lifestyle

2. "embodies the spirit of energy"; Never thought how it could apply to athletes in keeping them energized

3. The comparison of Red Bull to an angry bull; how the animal builds up energy when it is mad and how Red Bull builds up the body's energy

4. Reflecting how often people use Red Bull and realizing how much it is needed during stressful situations

5. The necessity of " speed, efficiency, and convenience" of Red Bull is similar to our fast needs of drive thru windows, credit cards, and other on-the-go tools

6. Red Bull can benefit those trying to lose weight actively

How it does not provide stimulation:

1. Some repetition of the same information is dulling

2. Not enough narration that could capture my attention more

3. Some points are vague and generalized: "The colors on the can are stimulating as well. The bright red bull attacking a yellow object against a metallic blue is very stimulating" This has potential for more creativity and excitement

4. What about other energy drinks? Should there be a mention of their effects as well? An expansion into the field of energy drinks maybe?

5. What about the culture, race, and ethnicity? How does that come into play. I lose interest because I assume there's nothing more when there is more to know or compare.

6. Do not fully comprehend the paragraph on symbolism therefore I lose some interest

Quick note: There wasn't much that didn't move me in this paper. I am impressed and pleased because I can read more work from this person and enjoy it

....

It is 48 degrees today and yet the sun still hides itself beneath a thick wad of clouds. As I make my way across the pedestrian-filled street, a cool breeze still gnaws at me from behind. If the sun could only break out of the smothering shell to give a few extra degrees of warmth. Spring is on its way; its scent can be traced through the wispy air. The dawn of spring puts the darkness of winter to a welcoming end. The gloomy weather that encompasses winter with an iron fist taunts us and brings us down into a somber state. But the first fresh burst of gleaming warmth penetrates the darkness and lifts us up once again. Eagerness spreads across the face that is freed from the restraints of a harsh winter. The sun shines merrily once again and tells me I don't have long to wait until the fresh warm air is summoned back.

A Poem for my Beloved

I don't know about you, but I never was one to understand poetry. As much as it can sound beautiful, poetry can also be flabbergasting, confusing, complicated, subtle, misunderstood, and infuriating. Sometimes the language is not clear enough and sometimes the meaning is difficult to grasp. At least for me, I find it difficult to grasp the meaning. I tend to read too into it. And  "Litany" is no exception. Filled with metaphors of humorous and thoughtful characteristics, I am still left confused at what the poem is getting at. If I had to ask six questions, they would be as follows:

1. What strategy was used to describe the relationship?
2. How do the metaphors fit into the relationship?
3. Could there be other tactics, such as over exaggeration, to describe the relationship?
4. Why were those particular metaphors used?
5. Is the relationship rocky like a boat floating in the ocean on good and bad days? Is this what can be assumed?
6. Did the metaphors originate already or were they made up? What could replace the some of the metaphors used to make it clearer?

How to Describe a Paper

To the average college student, writing papers isn't exactly an ideal fun time. But we have to do it, no matter if we mechanically go through it like robots or if we meticulously dedicate ourselves to the making of it. And we all assume that writing a paper is done in the same way. As I'm sitting here with my "Materiality" essay in class, I am to take note of other papers written by other students. And I notice, perhaps for the first time, that everyone writes their paper in a different way. I don't mean by content- everyone is going to have a different content- but by format. Who ever thinks about the format anyway?

I see that everyone has the same white vertical paper with black ink. Most likely the font is Times Newman. Some people have put their names in the left corner, others in the right. Some have double-spaced, others have not. Some gave headings and used bold print. Others have not. Now the question becomes: why have we done this? What is the point of this format style? Why is it dictated as such? It can be assumed that we all think the same thing: it's professional, it's how we've been taught, it seems like the proper way,etc. But it seems like a boring way. Why can't we use black paper instead of white or landscape mode instead of portrait mode? Why can't we use crazy font or write in a different language? Why can't we do whatever we want to our paper? Because society has it set in stone what it wants. If we try to do otherwise, it is sometimes seen as an "error".

Some teachers can fail you for papers they consider to not "fit the mold". Employers can decide not to hire you if your resume appears "sloppy". I wrote may paper the way it is because that is how I've been taught and been told that this is the way to do it. But what constitutes as the "proper" way of "fitting the mold" to writing? Who decides what's okay to use in a paper and what isn't? What is "the conventional way"? Is there a conventional way? So many questions are left unanswered.

If I could re-format my paper, I would stylize it based on my topic, just to be chaotic and creative. Since i wrote about blush and beauty, I would write my paper in eyeliner, then place blush on top of it to give it a musty look. I just think that papers get boring without getting creative and need some spicing up. But I guess for now it just has to be deemed "presentable".

Birds and Words

As much as I love to read, I am immediately turned off by dialogue filled with scientific language and an lecture-like format. It is bland and boring. I struggle to stay awake. In order to capture my attention, I need a more descriptive and narrative format that can provide much more excitement for my eager mind. What is most clever about Don Stap's "Flight of the Kuaka" is that he conceals the science underneath a layer of descriptive narration. He begins the passage with his experience in New Zealand and then drifts off into the scientific nature of the passage. He also manages to decrease the amount of superfluous and technical language that science articles so often require. The appeal to the subject of the E7 is change dramatically just by altering a few boring words into more descriptive and lively phrases.

Although many scientific journals are educational, I find myself not learning anything because of the dryness and complex articulation of the information. But the information presented by Stap's is much more fascinating. First, he classifies the different bird species by introducing their proper names, which are easily pronounced and slightly humorous. For instance, there is the Bar-Tailed Godwit, the Black-Tailed Godwit, Bristle-thighed Curlew, Whimbrel, and the Eskimo Curlew. Sometimes I wonder if scientists could come up with better names.

Before I forget, the tone of Stap's is also tweaked a bit. The way he described the feat of the E7 implied a voice of incredulity that I was able to feel myself. How he emphasized that the E7 flew for eight days without stopping made me stop in bemusement. Scientific articles usually don't provoke any reaction, but the way the author formed his work made this experience very, very different.

say what?

"In thinking about a certain idea, many sentences and ideas can be drawn by using detailed words within this idea."


Not to be critical, but I must wonder what exactly this sentence is trying to say because it is very unclear. The message that is trying to be represented comes off in an obscured and vague manner. It is too generalized. It is hard to know what the writer is saying. But I have no right to judge because every writer's style comes off as different and unique. There are just ways to better oneself in prose.

I can assume that the writer is trying to convey how many powerful and logical descriptions can stem off of a specific idea. For instance, when suggesting a child's energy is like a rabbit, words like hyperactive, bouncing, excited, bountiful, and playful can be perfectly suited. But this is my assumption. Who knows what other people assume when they read this sentence. The proficiency is not high, but with a few changes, it could become rich in meaning and communicating. Everyone makes errors in writing. But with some adjustments, a reader does not have to scratch their head and mutter " Huh?"

What does this mean?

There are many things in life that can be read but looked at with a "Huh?" expression. The way a piece of work is written can make the reader think " What the devil is this rubbish?" Sometimes we can stare and stare at a passage, with firm eyes fixed intently on the words and the mind repeatedly cycling ideas around. But alas we cannot find the answer. In frustration, we give up on the piece of work instead of letting a new pair of eyes collaborate with you.

But when I read Jonah Leher's "Don't", not only did I have one extra set of eyes but four. Each set brought a variety of new opinions with inter crossing ideas, yet none were related to what puzzled me in the first place. I didn't quite comprehend the quote " She found that the ability to delay gratification... was a far better predictor of academic performance than I.Q." Although I value and respect the opinions of my classmates, I was left even more baffled because my initial befuddlement was not satisfied. I was wondering how the ability to delay gratification was related to academic studies. I thought the initial comparison was to personality, so I was unable to comprehend any other possibilities.

The meaning of what is confusing is obscured, so I'll give it that. No one can be a mind reader. All we know is that if a statement is confusing, it's confusing. And what's confusing about it can be interpretted in many different ways. But I think the statement has become clearer since reading everyone's insight. To me, if a person can delay their desire to not study and go watch t.v instead, then they will perform better on tests than those who can't wait any longer to watch t.v and do not study. Sometimes I think a matter can best be understood after trying to read hard into it because after a while you come to a point where a light bulb goes off and you say " Oh now I get it."

Red Bull, Red Bull... Gimme some Red Bull

One morning I walked into the library and spotted a friend sitting at a desk with a pile of books. On closer inspection, I see that her eyes are bleary and red, her clothes are ruffled, and her hand is placed firmly on a starbucks coffee cup. Clearly, she had spent all night studying and needed extra energy to keep her going. Coffee is not the only caffeinated beverage that society requires these days. With an increase in buzzing, fast-paced activities that consume our lives, companies have been producing more products to give people more time and energy to do things for longer periods of time. Such a product that has become highly coveted is Red Bull, which, as the slogan suggests, "gives you wings".

From late night studying to working overtime until 2 am, every age group requires something to keep them going. For toddlers, it is candy. For adults it is Red Bull. Designed in a slender, aluminum can, Red Bull advocates that it will make a person feel more awake and alive in moments they feel tired and in a slump. The slogan emphasizes just how much better a person will feel on Red Bull- it'll feel like you are floating and flying high towards the heavens. It is merely just another type of beverage that people can enjoy on a regular basis. It exercises more energy, but so does Synergy drinks, 5 hour energy drinks, and Monster drinks. It is just another brand that people are willing to use. It seems to produce the desired effect since there are no complaints and there are still advertisements.

Parents are constantly running between work and children. Teenagers are constantly spending time studying, playing sports, and being with friends. Young adults are looking for a place to live while maintaining a living. Live is in a constant rapid state that sucks on our energy. We supposedly need Red Bull because there isn't enough hours in the day to get what we want done. We supposedly need an extra boost in energy so time can be on our side. Red Bull is just another instrument that preys upon society's busy lives.

Butterflies do have Wings

Never have I ever seen a commercial that was over a minute long. Yet despite this, I somehow was able to enjoy the wonderful story Pantene had told. Perhaps they should become more involved in emotional short movies. Who knows, maybe they'll be nominated for an Oscar.

It took a while for me to see what the commercial had to do with hair. At first, I thought it was going to be an advertisement for art school, but the end caught me off guard. For some reason, I found myself short-changed because it was such an intense and dramatic storyline and then it ended abruptly with the resolution about hair. I thought how stupid that was. But looking back, it was brilliant. The word shine applied to the protagonist as well as the condition of hair. The butterfly represented how the girl can rise on her own wings and shine as bright as her hair. The producers created a more powerful implication of a subject as simple as hair.

Yet despite the wonderful storytelling, there were some social stereotypes being played out. Everyone assumes that an Asian loves studying and doing activities concerning higher classical teachings. It is assumed that they only play the piano or violin or other instruments that demonstrate high intellect. But not Asians are like that. Not all girls are mean and catty either. They depict the average high school to be crawling with mean rich girls who always pick on the poor nice girls. They depict the poor girl as the hero when that is not always the case. They imply with the butterfly, which seems to symbolize feminism, that boys could not possibly relate to this commercial. Yes, it may be aimed for a female audience, but there can be some boys just as much into their hair as girls.

The producers intended to captivate us into its story so we could sympathize and relate to the characters, therefore making us buy its product. It had the girl struggle through deafness and schoolmates. It made the butterfly emerge while the girl was caught in her music to persuade how all of us have a butterfly waiting within us to emerge and find its place in the world. It made it seem as if we wanted to be like the girl. But all it did for me was leave an unfinished feeling in the pit of my stomach. No, I do not wish to buy the product. Instead, I'm  interested in how the story plays out. I wished it was an advertisement for art school for the disability instead.

A Magnificent Color

In childhood, all you're supposed to do is color. When you get older, you're supposed to leave it behind. Today I got to reacquaint myself with crayons, which I've almost forgotten how to use. Unsure of what to do, I began to write, letting my hand adjust to the thick feel of the crayon. I thought nothing of the assignment at hand; I pretended that I was still writing with a pencil. After my initial thoughts of how odd it was to be writing in crayon again, I concentrated on what I was supposed to do. My mind was blank; no creative incentives pulsated through my mind. I just wrote for the sake of writing, forgetting that I once again had a crayon in my hands and had the opportunity to be like a child again.

I never realized that crayons were just for children. I never thought to imagine what it would be like if a culture could only use crayons as a means to do everything. Yet in the past Mayans and Egyptians relied on tablets and papyrus to record everything. They didn't have technology, but they had a fascinating language that are still analyzed today. We still marvel at the hieroglyphics inscribed by the egyptians. I guess a culture that relied upon writing would value creativity and artistry as intellectual abilities. I don't think there biggest concern would be content, but the ability to captivate and intrigue society with a craft unique and spectacular. I don't know. Crayons are something to write with. Like many things, they have the add in bonus of just plain fun.

I've always been fascinated in writing. I've always wanted to wander outside the box and explore different possibilities that could be curved into good storytelling. Writing can be wonderful if you are open to it. I would love to be able to get into a creative mindset and write fantastical stories of history, magic, folklore, and mystery. At least when writing with crayon I'm free to do whatever I like and explore different routes to produce something unique and captivating. I guess that's why colring is so magnificent: it opens a door to a whole new artistic world.