Everyone is glued to this world's technology and all the "must haves" the media claims have to be in our pockets if we stand a chance of being "in."
Like in Amusing Ourselves to Death explains,our world is constantly chasing its tail: as soon as you purchase the newest gadget, the next newest one appears on the market, making everyone feeling low again and buying yet another ipod, phone, etc.
I myself am a texter in class and have paid the price. If I stopped answering text both me and the person I was in conversation with may have gotten the lecture better and received better grades in that class.
All these gadgets just act like a crutch to us. For example my mom cannot go anywhere anymore without her GPS system instructing her with "Turn by Turn" directions. We no longer appreciate anything around us because we are too busy listening to basting music on our ipods or our eyes are glued to our phones and game systems.
I wish one could get away but sometimes it feels are world is too deep to escape.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Developing a Brave New World
"Chilling... That he gave us the dark side of genetic engineering in 1932 is amazing." -Providence Journal-Bulletin
I recently stumbled upon an interesting article about modern health/birth technology. It claimed that new birth control for males has been developed. I explored deeper into the subject of modern technology concerning birth and conceiving babies, and it was strangely similar to the world that Aldous Huxley predicted we would be living in. In Brave New World, the method used to conceive babies is similar to the methods of modern artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization. Birth control technology was also mentioned in the book. I found this strangely creepy. Technology has evolved into the future Huxley predicted 70 years ago. With superior medical technology, the "old-fashioned way" of waiting to have sex after marriage, conceiving a child, and raising a family has diminished. Babies are being created and planned technologically. With the combination of technology and birth control, people can genetically plan traits of a child and when they want to have the child. Conceiving a child has developed into a method using a few injections and test tubes. I think it is wrong to plan the sex of a baby, genetic traits, and the amount of babies born. The use of Sperm Banks also bothers me because the man will never know the woman he donated his sperm to, and the woman will never know the father of her child. Is artificial reproductive technology moral?
I recently stumbled upon an interesting article about modern health/birth technology. It claimed that new birth control for males has been developed. I explored deeper into the subject of modern technology concerning birth and conceiving babies, and it was strangely similar to the world that Aldous Huxley predicted we would be living in. In Brave New World, the method used to conceive babies is similar to the methods of modern artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization. Birth control technology was also mentioned in the book. I found this strangely creepy. Technology has evolved into the future Huxley predicted 70 years ago. With superior medical technology, the "old-fashioned way" of waiting to have sex after marriage, conceiving a child, and raising a family has diminished. Babies are being created and planned technologically. With the combination of technology and birth control, people can genetically plan traits of a child and when they want to have the child. Conceiving a child has developed into a method using a few injections and test tubes. I think it is wrong to plan the sex of a baby, genetic traits, and the amount of babies born. The use of Sperm Banks also bothers me because the man will never know the woman he donated his sperm to, and the woman will never know the father of her child. Is artificial reproductive technology moral?
Personal Democracy Forum
A talk by Dana Boyd -- up to the minute, cutting edge ideas on the class divisions online...you know? Cyber Alphas and Epsilons?
The Now Network
Have you noticed how mostly everyone has the lastest gadgets? How you can find anything on your cell phone? Now, with the America's 3G network or even better the 4G network, you can find about anything or make a call as easily as tying your shoe. Verzion and Sprint companies try to convince you in buying the best device they have that season, better yet in the commercials they tell you how you can search the web, update on the latest applications. " The telegraph is suited only to the flashing of messages, each to be quickly replaced by a more up-to-date message. Facts push other facts into and then put of the consciousness at speeds that neither permit nor require evaluation" (70). This is telling us how fast we can change everything so quickly that no one can even take a second look of what we have done if we wanted to change something else. So many people at this very second are texting or making calls that are pointless and that arnt necessary for us to know about. Sadly, so many kids at school text in class without many teachers knowing about it. Yet, what bothers me when they ask me later what we need to do or have me give them my notes while they could of done it while we were being lecture in class. I' am not going to lie, but the last month of school I got a cell phone and I texted in a few classes, but I changed that habit I would turn off my phone and put it in my bag and try not get tempted to text people what they are doing. I mean does it matter what they are doing? They're just probably in another class doing the same thing or trying to actually do work in class.
Can distraction really affect our actions?
In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman argues about the media and how big of an impact it has made to our lives. He believes that television and technology has a huge affect on communication, conversations, and actions. Neil Postman's metaphor of the smoke signals shows that the media uses distraction to shape, influence our choices on the world. I completely agree with his argument that media is persuasion and distraction. I agree because there are commercials and billboards out that persuades and distracts adults and children to do what they want. For example, in the beggining of a movie at the theater they show pictures of popcorn and soda that persuades people to buy. Another example, is that there are cigarette commercials of popular adults smoking that persuades people to think its a popular thing to do. In conclusion, Neil Postman believes that distraction and persuasion are secret messages shown through the media. Do you believe that distraction and persuasion affects people?
June is gone in 11.5 hours
Which means...the extra credit offered for early participation expires at midnight. I will sit back down here tonight and do my first round of serious grading.
BTW: 50 posts in the first month is a new record. I know that a bunch of those are mine, but still...good job. ALSO: The Annotated Webography assignment goes up TOMORROW! Yippee!
BTW: 50 posts in the first month is a new record. I know that a bunch of those are mine, but still...good job. ALSO: The Annotated Webography assignment goes up TOMORROW! Yippee!
Monday, June 29, 2009
What Horrors Await Us in the Future?
In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman gives the impression that he has no hope in a society influenced by television. It seems like he's mourning the gradual extinction of typography as a medium for public discourse. In the first chapter, Postman acknowledges the fact that television has taken over as the dominant media and that the printed word is relied on less and less. In the second chapter of the book, he points out the fact that people's perception of the truth is largely based on the method in which it is conveyed. He stresses that the shift in media altars our sense of truth and judgement. So with that in mind, is it safe to assume that humanity is mentally moving down the evolutionary chain by making advances in the fields of technology? Postman has made it evident that we're relying too much on television, but that doesn't seem to concern people (seeing as nothing's changed in the past few decades). I'm not that far in the book, but from what I can tell, Postman fears for a future without literature.
Truth is a Lie?
In chapter 2 of Amusing Ourselves to Death, “Media as Epistemology”, Postman says, “Our written statement would represent the ‘truth’. Our oral agreement would be only a rumor” (21). If this was proven to be true, then if someone were to tell you that Michael Jackson had died last Thursday, it would only be considered a rumor? In this day in age, oral agreements are a large part of the way that we communicate. Though oral agreements are sometimes unreliable, such Nelson Mandela’s falsely reported death in 2003; they can also prove to be very helpful.
I heard of Michael Jackson's death while I was on a message board and of course, I definitely thought that it was just rumor and not a proven truth. Both written and spoken statements can prove to be somewhat unreliable, but yes, in the end, written statements have proven to be more truthful and reliable.
I heard of Michael Jackson's death while I was on a message board and of course, I definitely thought that it was just rumor and not a proven truth. Both written and spoken statements can prove to be somewhat unreliable, but yes, in the end, written statements have proven to be more truthful and reliable.
Trapped or Free??
In brave new world, everyone is anyones... no commitment, no drama, no fights...
Many people think this might be a good thing, just pleasure and no form of commitment .How would you get hurt?.. Personally i disagree, i think humanity needs to belong to something, in this case, someone... I also think that commitment isnt that terrifying, peple might say they feel trapped in relationships, but i dont get why, your a free person and can choose to do anything you want, but just remember that your actions lead to different consequences.... I also think that everyone needs a little drama in their life to make it a little more interesting haha, just kidding:P. My main thing is that feeling loved and belonging to someone is a very fullfilling feeling. Someone that you can depend on for anything, but that just brings up another topic.. Can you rely on anyone one-hundred percent? Do you truely think so?
Another topic i want to discuss is fate....Do you believe in fate? That their is that special someone for you?
Many people think this might be a good thing, just pleasure and no form of commitment .How would you get hurt?.. Personally i disagree, i think humanity needs to belong to something, in this case, someone... I also think that commitment isnt that terrifying, peple might say they feel trapped in relationships, but i dont get why, your a free person and can choose to do anything you want, but just remember that your actions lead to different consequences.... I also think that everyone needs a little drama in their life to make it a little more interesting haha, just kidding:P. My main thing is that feeling loved and belonging to someone is a very fullfilling feeling. Someone that you can depend on for anything, but that just brings up another topic.. Can you rely on anyone one-hundred percent? Do you truely think so?
Another topic i want to discuss is fate....Do you believe in fate? That their is that special someone for you?
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Orgy-porgy!?
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley has got to be an all time favorite for me but I've always wondered what the man meant by the little song:
"Ford, we are twelve; oh make us one,
Like drops within the Social River;
Oh, make us together run
As swiftly as thy shining Flivver.
Come, Greater Being, Social Friend,
Annihilating Twelve-in-One!
We long to die, for when we end,
Our larger life has but begun.
Feel how the Greater Being comes!
Rejoice and, in rejoicings, die!
Melt in the music of the drums!
For I am you and you are I.
Orgy-porgy, Ford and fun,
Kiss the girls and make them One.
Boys at one with girls at peace;
Orgy-porgy gives release." (81-82)
Whew that took forever to type x-x
Okay but first of all, what is with the STRUCTURE of this chant? Every four stanzas are broken up with a snippet of what is happening at the meeting, where the event becomes more intense and hectic with each following. Then, in the first three stanzas, each line is flush to the left then tabbed (and repeat), BUT in the last stanza all the lines are set to the left. Does the structure mean anything or am I just being paranoid?
Now here's the REAL question(s), what does this all mean?! And, despite all the soma, why does Bernard still retain his ability to think clearly, or our definition of thinking clearly? ALSO(last question I promise), if he doesn't see or hear and the meeting means nothing to him, do any of the other members also not understand? Let me rephrase, is everybody else just pretending to see "the Greater Being" as Bernard did? What's your opinion?
"Ford, we are twelve; oh make us one,
Like drops within the Social River;
Oh, make us together run
As swiftly as thy shining Flivver.
Come, Greater Being, Social Friend,
Annihilating Twelve-in-One!
We long to die, for when we end,
Our larger life has but begun.
Feel how the Greater Being comes!
Rejoice and, in rejoicings, die!
Melt in the music of the drums!
For I am you and you are I.
Orgy-porgy, Ford and fun,
Kiss the girls and make them One.
Boys at one with girls at peace;
Orgy-porgy gives release." (81-82)
Whew that took forever to type x-x
Okay but first of all, what is with the STRUCTURE of this chant? Every four stanzas are broken up with a snippet of what is happening at the meeting, where the event becomes more intense and hectic with each following. Then, in the first three stanzas, each line is flush to the left then tabbed (and repeat), BUT in the last stanza all the lines are set to the left. Does the structure mean anything or am I just being paranoid?
Now here's the REAL question(s), what does this all mean?! And, despite all the soma, why does Bernard still retain his ability to think clearly, or our definition of thinking clearly? ALSO(last question I promise), if he doesn't see or hear and the meeting means nothing to him, do any of the other members also not understand? Let me rephrase, is everybody else just pretending to see "the Greater Being" as Bernard did? What's your opinion?
The Power of Words
In Chapter Four of Brave New World, Huxley states, “Words can be like Xrays, if you use them properly-they’ll go through anything.”(pg.70) This is very true. This statement makes you think about how strong words actually are. A similar analogy would be, “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” By reading further than the cover you can see into the meaning and thought of the book. An Xray reads beyond the outer shell of an object, just like words can help describe what someone’s feeling on the inside. The power of the spoken word can be just as powerful as the written word. For example, BULLIES. A bully can hurt a child’s feelings by making fun of their appearance. The mean words the bully uses can make the child cry. On the other hand, words can be used in a positive manner. A few nice words or a simple compliment can uplift a person’s soul.
I just finished Orwell's "Politics and the English Language." He says that overall the English language is declining, and with serious aftermath. What was interesting was that he didn't say we are ruining our language by using smaller words but quite the opposite! Orwell claims that we are over COMPLICATING our writing and speaking with unnecessary words and phrases. I myself need to try to simplify my writing cause I've been heading in the wrong direction; using longer and foreign words to try to "spice up" my writing.
His own writing was fairly easy to comprehend and he made his point very clear, which is exactly what he says we are not fulfilling by adding extra adjectives, adverbs, prefixes, and suffixes. for the most part i found myself only looking up words in the dictionary in the "bad" examples he gave us; he used smaller words whenever possible and cut out unnecessary words.
It would be difficult to remember everything in his essay but as long as i remember to not try to make myself "feel smarter" with complicated writing, I think I'll do fine.=P
His own writing was fairly easy to comprehend and he made his point very clear, which is exactly what he says we are not fulfilling by adding extra adjectives, adverbs, prefixes, and suffixes. for the most part i found myself only looking up words in the dictionary in the "bad" examples he gave us; he used smaller words whenever possible and cut out unnecessary words.
It would be difficult to remember everything in his essay but as long as i remember to not try to make myself "feel smarter" with complicated writing, I think I'll do fine.=P
Huxley's Utopia
So, I’m reading Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ as the rest of you are, and during the reading process, I’ve come across some bumps (questions) that I’m hoping some of you can answer for me or share your opinions on. In the beginning of Huxley’s book is a quote by Nicolas Berdiaeff:
“Utopias appear more feasible than was previously believed. And we are now faced with problems otherwise distressing: how to avoid their realization definitive ... Utopias are realizable. Life towards utopias. And perhaps a new century begins there, a century on the intellectuals and the educated classes dreaming of ways to avoid utopias and return to a non-utopian, less "perfect" and free.”
In chapter 1 the Director talks about cloning to help mass production industries or maybe to stabilize the economy. But how would that stabilize the economy? Wouldn’t more humans make things un-stabilized? More humans wouldn’t be my idea of a perfect Utopia.
“Utopias appear more feasible than was previously believed. And we are now faced with problems otherwise distressing: how to avoid their realization definitive ... Utopias are realizable. Life towards utopias. And perhaps a new century begins there, a century on the intellectuals and the educated classes dreaming of ways to avoid utopias and return to a non-utopian, less "perfect" and free.”
In chapter 1 the Director talks about cloning to help mass production industries or maybe to stabilize the economy. But how would that stabilize the economy? Wouldn’t more humans make things un-stabilized? More humans wouldn’t be my idea of a perfect Utopia.
The Power of the Media
In the last paragraph on page 7 of Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman writes, “The information, the content, or, if you will, the “stuff” that makes up what is called “the news of the day” did not exist-could not exist-in a world that lacked the media to give it expression.”
I agree with his statement 100%. There are so many things that go on in our world that our escalated due to the media. A great example of this media escalation I speak of is the death of Michael Jackson. Yes, Micheal Jackson was the "King of Pop", but his death was ridiculously escalated. Every music or news channel was talking about him. There are people on the news that are crying and they have never even met the guy. People sitting on his Hollywood Star crying. What Postman states is true. How many of these Michael Jackson fans would be crying if there was no media to get his death out there? There would be few, if any, that would've known of Michael Jackson's death without the media. There would be few, if any that knew things presently on the news if there actually was no news. Another thing that is "Flying" around the news is the swine flu. How many people would even know of the swine flu if it wasn't being talked about on every news channel? I know i wouldn't know what it was. It just greatly intrigues me what gets attention nowadays and what doesn't.
I agree with his statement 100%. There are so many things that go on in our world that our escalated due to the media. A great example of this media escalation I speak of is the death of Michael Jackson. Yes, Micheal Jackson was the "King of Pop", but his death was ridiculously escalated. Every music or news channel was talking about him. There are people on the news that are crying and they have never even met the guy. People sitting on his Hollywood Star crying. What Postman states is true. How many of these Michael Jackson fans would be crying if there was no media to get his death out there? There would be few, if any, that would've known of Michael Jackson's death without the media. There would be few, if any that knew things presently on the news if there actually was no news. Another thing that is "Flying" around the news is the swine flu. How many people would even know of the swine flu if it wasn't being talked about on every news channel? I know i wouldn't know what it was. It just greatly intrigues me what gets attention nowadays and what doesn't.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Stepping in for a moment
I would prefer it if we focused our attention on the media surrounding the death of Michael Jackson -- (if we must discuss it at all. Feel free to move on.)
Let's not spend too much energy on his music, career, persona or legal troubles -- we are surrounded by this already.
Metacognition means thinking about thinking. Step away from the details and watch how this story plays out over the summer. I remember when John Lennon was shot, when Elvis Presley died, when Princess Diana died. This is different...I don't know what to say about it yet. It's weird.
Anyway, the legacy of Michael Jackson will ultimately involve both his personal life and his music. History will no doubt note both the far reaching effects of his music and creative performances, and his scandalous and problematic personal life. Let's not concern ourselves with that here; it is already all over the media.
Instead, let's observe and analyze the media attention and the public reaction. Watch the adulation and the backlash. There will be camps opening up soon -- I see it already all over the place online: haters, skeptics and the sudden, ardent fans. Watch the consumer machine kick in; pay attention to sales statistics. The whole thing IS fishy.
Let's not spend too much energy on his music, career, persona or legal troubles -- we are surrounded by this already.
Metacognition means thinking about thinking. Step away from the details and watch how this story plays out over the summer. I remember when John Lennon was shot, when Elvis Presley died, when Princess Diana died. This is different...I don't know what to say about it yet. It's weird.
Anyway, the legacy of Michael Jackson will ultimately involve both his personal life and his music. History will no doubt note both the far reaching effects of his music and creative performances, and his scandalous and problematic personal life. Let's not concern ourselves with that here; it is already all over the media.
Instead, let's observe and analyze the media attention and the public reaction. Watch the adulation and the backlash. There will be camps opening up soon -- I see it already all over the place online: haters, skeptics and the sudden, ardent fans. Watch the consumer machine kick in; pay attention to sales statistics. The whole thing IS fishy.
Something Fishy
I find it odd that no one has mentioned the many allegations of molesting young boys that were made against Michael Jackson. He was an amazing artist, but that doesn't negate the fact that he was just slightly creepy during the last five to ten years of his life. He may have been exonerated, but that doesn't mean he was truly innocent. It's terrible if all of those accusations were lies, but he was still tainted by the label of "pedophile." I'm sad that he died. Sorry for upsetting anyone by bringing up the more unsavory parts of his life.
The Death of a King.
Michael Jackson ; their are only few words that can describe who he is and the life he lived. Michael has touched so many different kinds of people around the world and has opened up so many doors for other artists. Although, many people would say that he doesn't deserve all of the media attention, and for his death to be the cause of so much commotion around the world I think that he deserves it. He wasn't just an artists he was an humanitarian, philanthropist, and a list of other things. Jackson gave over 300 million dollars to different charities and helped so many different people even through music. Statistics show that no other artists has sold as many records, and sold out as many concerts as he has. After watching his music videos, they remind me so much of movies or short stories and their is really no artists that is as talented as he was. Although many people are mourning now, just remember that tough times never last but tough people do!
Thursday, June 25, 2009
The Media Controls the Importance of the News
When I was sitting in the dentist office and watching TV, I saw glimpses of Michael Jackson on TV but I brushed it off because I never really cared about him anyways. After coming home from today's dentist appointment, my mom who had just dropped me off at home, called and told me brother that Michael Jackson had just died. I was taken back at that moment, but not as shocked as how I was as I watching the news of his death take up hours of screen time on various channels. After I received the news from my mom, I got a bunch of text messages and IMs informing me of the same thing. Then I logged onto myspace and facebook, and "MICHAEL JACKSON DIED!" was in numerous people's status boxes. I was shocked at how quickly the news of his death spread to everyone. The news had taken over the television, internet through myspace, facebook, AIM, and phones through calls and text messages.
Why is the news of a celebrities death spreading lightening fast while more global news gets only a snippet here and there, if even? This seems to be a classic example of how cultural media has taken over news media. The lines between the two have been blurred so that people had hardly tell what is truly more important than the other. Thus it just appears that whatever has more screen time is more important than the news that does not have as much screen time. If this were actually true, that would mean Michael Jackson's death, Lindsay Lohan's relapses, the Transformers opening, and Megan Fox's ugly thumbs are all more important than the genocide in Darfur or Iran. It is even apparent as I am writing this post, I can't even think of the same number of pieces of global news as I can for celebrity gossip. I don't know as much about global news as I do about what's going on in each celebrity's life (with the help of MTV, the E! new channel, and those various reality shows that show viewers what each celebrity lives like), all because that is just what gets more air time.
*EDIT* I was just on Twitter and saw that one of the fashion bloggers I read posted this
She knew that he was in the hospital and on the verge of dying right as she tweeted (sorry for the twitter language) that. Then 2 hours later, he died and she tweeted that too. For one, I'm amazed as how much people twitter a day, and second, I was amazed at how she continued to update her twitter with news of Michael Jackson's condition as she found out the news. Just wow.
Our Current Breaking News
In Amusing Ourselves to Death, in the middle of the first chapter Postman writes how "our media-metaphors classify the world for us, sequence it, frame it, enlarge it, reduce it, color it, argue a case for what the world is like."
The world famous pop artist Michael Jackson is dead. This is a fact that for almost three hours has been on breaking news without commercials for almost three hours now. No disrespect intended, but I do not believe this news deserves its title as the most important devastating event presently occurring in the world. People are being massacred by the thousands in genocides such as Darfur, but this news is shown to the United States for about ten minutes tops, that is if it is shown at all. While news of starving countries is pushed out of being on the news and forced into commercials, Michael Jackson's death has dominated the television. The television is most peoples prime source of knowing what is happening in the world. Does anyone stop to think that maybe information is being kept from the general public? The media has programmed us to believe that the death of one man, that we ourselves have transformed into a God, is significant enough to overshadow the rest of world wide news. I can not help but think that news seen on television and read in newspapers is mostly a distraction with glimpses of what the real world is. Alot of people base the importance of a peice of news on the amount of time the event spent on the television news. This is how much power the media has. It not has the ability to keep information from the public, but also for most people the power to tell the public how important it is. For example as I write this my fifteen year old brother questions what Darfur is. I apologize to my brother in advance. No doubt he can recount Micheal Jacksons life story and now his death, but he is unaware of the fact that a genocide is happening and thousands of innocent people are dying. Why is that? Is it because the genocide does not effect him directly? I do not believe that is the reason because the death a famous man does not effect him directly either. I beleive it is the culture that we have been brought up in. Maybe if we were brought up in a culture where more significance was put on world issues, children would grow up with dreams of helping less fortunate countries, instead of dreams of becoming the next Britney Spears or Michael Jackson.
Lilliana Escobedo
The world famous pop artist Michael Jackson is dead. This is a fact that for almost three hours has been on breaking news without commercials for almost three hours now. No disrespect intended, but I do not believe this news deserves its title as the most important devastating event presently occurring in the world. People are being massacred by the thousands in genocides such as Darfur, but this news is shown to the United States for about ten minutes tops, that is if it is shown at all. While news of starving countries is pushed out of being on the news and forced into commercials, Michael Jackson's death has dominated the television. The television is most peoples prime source of knowing what is happening in the world. Does anyone stop to think that maybe information is being kept from the general public? The media has programmed us to believe that the death of one man, that we ourselves have transformed into a God, is significant enough to overshadow the rest of world wide news. I can not help but think that news seen on television and read in newspapers is mostly a distraction with glimpses of what the real world is. Alot of people base the importance of a peice of news on the amount of time the event spent on the television news. This is how much power the media has. It not has the ability to keep information from the public, but also for most people the power to tell the public how important it is. For example as I write this my fifteen year old brother questions what Darfur is. I apologize to my brother in advance. No doubt he can recount Micheal Jacksons life story and now his death, but he is unaware of the fact that a genocide is happening and thousands of innocent people are dying. Why is that? Is it because the genocide does not effect him directly? I do not believe that is the reason because the death a famous man does not effect him directly either. I beleive it is the culture that we have been brought up in. Maybe if we were brought up in a culture where more significance was put on world issues, children would grow up with dreams of helping less fortunate countries, instead of dreams of becoming the next Britney Spears or Michael Jackson.
Lilliana Escobedo
Soma vs. Television
"Television is the soma of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World," says Robert MacNeil in Amusing Ourselves to Death pg.111.
Soma in Huxley's world is a medicine-like substance in a bottle taken to relieve somebody when they may be stressed, sad, confused, frightened,or confronted with too much information they can't handle. It's their society's way of being under control and keeps those who take it happy because they became free from any troubles or worries. All the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons are in check thanks to soma.
Television can be compared to soma in that our society portrays it as the means to forget about life's disturbances and relax. When we watch TV our cares are put aside and we become enveloped in the entertainment set before our eyes. However, one dose of TV is probably not enough to satify our desires. Just like one needs to take many doses of soma to remain content, one needs to also keep watching TV to feel delighted. Pretty soon we might even begin to think that taking more and more doses of television is the single way to survive in this world.
Soma in Huxley's world is a medicine-like substance in a bottle taken to relieve somebody when they may be stressed, sad, confused, frightened,or confronted with too much information they can't handle. It's their society's way of being under control and keeps those who take it happy because they became free from any troubles or worries. All the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons are in check thanks to soma.
Television can be compared to soma in that our society portrays it as the means to forget about life's disturbances and relax. When we watch TV our cares are put aside and we become enveloped in the entertainment set before our eyes. However, one dose of TV is probably not enough to satify our desires. Just like one needs to take many doses of soma to remain content, one needs to also keep watching TV to feel delighted. Pretty soon we might even begin to think that taking more and more doses of television is the single way to survive in this world.
Why Hate?
In chapter 2 of Brave New World,The Director explains that they put the newborns through tests to make them hate things that we consider good, such as flowers and books. I find this a little odd. I am not judging their society I am just saying that flowers and books normally calm people down. That is why when people are stressed out they normally smell some flowers because of their scent can help release the stress in a person's body. If a person were to read a book it helps calm them down because they can get lost in the world of their book. To have 'instinctive' hatred toward items that can help calm you down seems a little weird.
Another example of hatredin this book I find awkward is between the groups in the book. How the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons are always judging one another to say that their group is better, prettier or smarter than the other groups. It reminds me of high school a little bit because of how some people judge others by how they act, what sport they play or how they wear their clothes.
I hope that one day hatred between all types of peoples in objects can go away because it messes up our world.
Another example of hatredin this book I find awkward is between the groups in the book. How the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons are always judging one another to say that their group is better, prettier or smarter than the other groups. It reminds me of high school a little bit because of how some people judge others by how they act, what sport they play or how they wear their clothes.
I hope that one day hatred between all types of peoples in objects can go away because it messes up our world.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
What if..
In, "Amusing Ourselves to Death," Postman is trying to point out two completely different ideas, when he says, "..the photograph presents the world as object; language, the world as idea." (72)
It's possible that Postman is trying to reach out to one in an intellectual way by having one realize that even the smallest things do matter. That the smallest things become more important than the most noticeable things. A photograph, for example, means nothing because it's just a picture of an object/objects. When it comes to people, photographs mean everything because it reminds them of certain memories or days. People probably don't notice what the photo is saying to them. All they probably see is the image. One should notice what's beyond the image being shown. The meaning of the photo should be comprehended. A picture can offer many varieties of objects and meaning that it's possible to have multiple choices of answers.
It's possible that Postman is trying to reach out to one in an intellectual way by having one realize that even the smallest things do matter. That the smallest things become more important than the most noticeable things. A photograph, for example, means nothing because it's just a picture of an object/objects. When it comes to people, photographs mean everything because it reminds them of certain memories or days. People probably don't notice what the photo is saying to them. All they probably see is the image. One should notice what's beyond the image being shown. The meaning of the photo should be comprehended. A picture can offer many varieties of objects and meaning that it's possible to have multiple choices of answers.
Oh wait. One last thing before I go.
Detractors from Maturity of Style & Perspective: Read and heed.One thing I ought to do as a writing teacher is to steer young writers away from those habits that detract from a mature, measured voice -- especially when writing analysis or argument. As my teacher, Chris Baldwin, explained -- and I agree -- one strike that young writers already have against them, the minute they step up to the plate, is their relative youth and inexperience. If young writers want to be taken seriously, they must try and avoid the following foolish writing habits.
A little disclaimer: some of these moves can be stylish and useful -- I am not suggesting that you can NEVER do some of these things. Breathlessness, for example, can be used to great effect -- I am thinking of some of the passages in Dave Egger's wonderful memoir, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius. But for the most part, at least in the first half of our year together, think of yourself as a beginner who needs to gain control of the process, and to establish credibility, before making these moves.
When writing analysis, avoid the use of the second person "you." Keep in mind: the use of the phrase "one," as in "one has to wonder if this is the case," is a thinly veiled substitute for "you." This goes double for the phrase, "the reader." Don't hide behind "the reader" -- rewrite the sentence, recraft the point of view. Like all rules, this is a rule that you must learn, and one you may one day learn to break. But don't break it until you can do it with intention and style -- for a good example of effective 2nd person point of view, see Ralph Ellison's "On Being a Target of Discrimination" in The Bedford Reader.
Avoid colloquial speech and immature, informal vocabulary. Examples:
- Your average Joe
- Nowadays [I hate this one]
- I would have to say...
- That would have to be...
Avoid the use of absolutes: always, never, everybody, "I'll be 99.9% of people," "absolutely unique," and other phrases that seek to cast a net over everything. I admit that when I encounter an absolute, my first reaction is to mentally challenge the speaker and to find the exception.
What is the difference, by the way, between "unique," and "absolutely unique"? If something is unique, it is unique. And just for the record, when I read that something is unique, I automatically doubt it, unless we're talking about DNA or snowflakes. And I'm not even so sure about the snowflake thing.
Avoid rhetorical questions, especially those with indignant responses:
- "Do we have to put up with this? I think not!"
Avoid exclamation marks, especially lots of them!!!! Be wary of excesses of tone: hysteria, breathlessness, indignation, self-righteousness, narrative asides (a favorite of mine), cutsie pie stuff, etc.
- "I'll bet 99.9% of the time, if a homeless man even talks, he gets arrested!! As a civilized society, do we have to put up with this? I think not!!!"
I don't let my students attribute ANYTHING to "society" until January. Don't try to tell me it's society's fault.
Avoid silly, weak, childish examples; immature writers tend to lack discernment with regard to the quality of examples or evidence.
- Don't use episodes of the Simpsons, American Idol, South Park, Fear Factor, or other pop culture references and plot lines as evidence -- UNLESS you are specifically being asked about pop culture -- (see AP Exam, Question 1, 2003).
Avoid clichés, all of them. If you have heard the line before, so has everybody else. The older readers in your audience (me, for example) have heard these hackneyed phrases for decades, and frankly, we're sick of them. Clichés signal a brain lapse; the writer has stopped crafting language, has stopped thinking. Instead of working with the rich and powerful English language, struggling for meaning and a fresh means of expression, the writer has dug up an old moldy potato and served it up for consumption. Bleech.
- Example: Readers of Question 3 at the 2005 AP reading encountered the phrase, "If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day; if you teach a man to fish, you feed him for life" about 500 times. I mean each reader. Maybe it wasn't so bad the first 50 times, but imagine that your essay is down deep in the stack, and the reader gets your essay on Thursday, Day 5 of the reading...and it's 3:30 in the afternoon...the reader is fighting off fatigue...and there it is, the cliche you felt so happy about when you thought of it: "If you give a man a fish..."
- This year, on Question 3 (2009), I saw two clichés over and over again: "that which does not kill you only makes you stronger," and I saw it attributed to a variety of sources, from Nietzsche to Kanye West. Both correct, but you get the idea. The other thing I saw at least 20 times a day was the story of a young mother/old grandmother/young teenager lifting a car/tractor/boulder off of a baby/child/husband/wife/mother/father. Do you really want to put yourself in the big crowd by using this kind of language? Don't you think of yourself as somehow unique? Like a snowflake?
Avoid most adverbs: basically, obviously, surely, certainly, very, etc. Again, what is the difference between "embarrassed" and "very embarrassed"? "Good" and "very good"? These words say nothing. Find other words: What about mortified, humiliated, abashed? Dazzling, scintillating, apropos? USE the English language.
- I have heard that the Nobel prize winning author, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, wrote Love in the Time of Cholera without using one adverb. I read the novel, but I cannot say whether the adverb thing is true or not. It's worth looking into, though. Maybe later. Better yet: you do it.
We don't know everything, and some of our theories may be far-flung. Hooray for that. Be bold -- and own your crazy theory. Stake a claim to your wild idea. And express doubt with authority. Say, "this suggests" or "this could be understood as..." This sounds like a mind at work. On the other hand, the habitual use of little qualifiers chip away at credibility: "I think," "in my opinion," "kind of," "sort of," "seems like," "perhaps," "maybe."
- In my opinion, I think that maybe you should perhaps get rid of these as quickly as possible.
- Often a young writer won't know what to say, but will want to say something, so they will say something they have not adequately supported with evidence, and position themselves behind the phrase, "this is my opinion," AS IF we may say whatever we please as long as it is our opinion. We somehow feel that opinions are sacrosanct. They are not.
Avoid excessive brevity. You must achieve critical mass -- we're going to have to discuss this a hundred times, I know. Every English teacher is familiar with the question, "How long does this have to be?" Critical mass has been achieved when the essay is clearly presented, its arguments are well supported with appropriate evidence, and a sense of closure is evident. Sometimes this is possible with 500 words; other times, it may take 5000 words. Who knows? This is a writer's decision, based on the writing task. When your teacher gives you guidelines, its only because some students present short little papers that are undeveloped and unsupported, and others will present long, redundant papers that could be edited down by half. You have to start thinking like a writer, not a student trying to satisfy an externally imposed length requirement.
- Having said that, let me just mention that I commonly assign 500 word papers.
Beware of over quoting. Use the text, but use it judiciously. Don't substitute the author's words for your own thinking. Use ellipses and line references when possible.
Do me a personal favorite, and don't ever, ever use these phrases:
- It paints a picture in the reader's mind, or
- What the author is trying to say is, or
- The author uses diction and syntax to write his ideas.
- "in today's society" Who is "society"? Are we a part of society, or apart from society? Writers who rely on this phrase, it seems to me, are positioning themselves AWAY from those that they are preparing to critique. It seems unfair.
So yes, build your credibility and jettison these goofy habits. And thank you for reading and paying attention.
Credit: This has been rewritten, revised, and modified from a list of the same name that I acquired at an AP Workshop, led by Mr. Chris Baldwin, AP teacher and Question Leader from Patrick Henry High School in San Diego, California.
I'm Out AND the Annotated Webography coming July 1
OK, this happened last year too. I have realized that I am dominating the conversation, which is not good for you. I'm leaving the blog until late July...I'm not posting or commenting on anything...unless somebody starts throwing rocks.
Surely you can see that this is a hardship for me -- I love to write and talk about ideas, but I'll just go elsewhere for a while.
You students -- 40+ of you now -- need to take over and get things rolling. I've done all I can, but I think maybe I'm scaring people with my grammar comments and stern admonitions. So, good-bye. See you in about a month. I'll be adding people to the blog, answering questions that are directed to me, reading you, but not writing or contributing. If there is something specific that you want or need me to say, just ask.
I will post instructions for the Annotated Webography Assignment on JULY 1ST.
Surely you can see that this is a hardship for me -- I love to write and talk about ideas, but I'll just go elsewhere for a while.
You students -- 40+ of you now -- need to take over and get things rolling. I've done all I can, but I think maybe I'm scaring people with my grammar comments and stern admonitions. So, good-bye. See you in about a month. I'll be adding people to the blog, answering questions that are directed to me, reading you, but not writing or contributing. If there is something specific that you want or need me to say, just ask.
I will post instructions for the Annotated Webography Assignment on JULY 1ST.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
One more thing, and then I'll shut up I swear
I don't know if you've noticed, but some of the older threads are still drawing comments.
Bloggers: 3 things
- I want you to watch the YouTube video I posted. I intended for you to watch it and COMMENT on it.
- I want you to read the poem I posted. I intended for you to read it and COMMENT on it.
- Thank you to those brave souls who are out here talking to each other and to me. This will get better and more lively once there are more voices involved.
Extra Credit!
Even if you don't plan on attending one of the California State Universities, the CSU Mentor site can help you plan and track your progress on your way to college. It's a great resource and it's free; and in your senior year, when it's time to fill out your FAFSA (Financial Aid) forms, you can transfer much of your information from your CSU Mentor site directly to FAFSA. How convenient! All you have to do is print out that page that says, Welcome So and So! and turn it in to me on the first day of school. Actually, though, this offer never goes away. Do it at anytime, and I'll deposit 15¢ into your piggybank.
You are going to want to create an account with a password; if you are like me, you may have so many different accounts and passwords everywhere that you may have trouble remembering them all. I have started using Passpack.com, a secure, online password manager. Now, no matter where I am or what computer I am using, I have access to my passwords. The only thing left to worry about is some rogue nation sabotaging our network, or some other rogue nation shooting a satellite out of the sky, or radiation poisoning, or a meteor hitting the earth, or -- oh, never mind. Too much to worry about! Let me go watch an old Law and Order rerun instead -- TV: the perfect anesthetic.
Do you find it ironic that although I clearly love technology, I have assigned all this anti-technology reading?
Does Maturity Lead to Good?
In Brave New World, Mr. Foster refers to the years as an immature child as, "Long years of superfluous and wasted immaturity" (15). With this he seems to hint that only good can come from a matured person. However, I believe this is not true at all. For example, look at Hitler or Stalin, both were full grown men, but did they do much good for the people they ruled? Both these men caused the deaths of millions of people, and as I read chapter 3 I noticed that Bernard Marx who was a matured member of the upper-caste of his society also had urges to kill or hurt Mr. Foster or the D.H.C. I think that given the opportunity he would cause them bodily harm, which leads me to disagree with Mr. Foster's idea of a completely mature society to be a problem free or perfect society.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Metaphor Overload?
Postman argues that the media shapes the way that we think and communicate. He says,
"A message denotes a specific, concrete statement about the world. But the forms of our media, including the symbols through with they permit conversation, do not make such statements. They are rather like metaphors, working by unobtrusive but powerful implication to enforce their special definitions of reality." (10)
I agree with Postman's statement that "the medium is the metaphor." If all forms of communication must be changed and warped in order to fit into a certain medium, then I do not know what to believe anymore. Are the messages given to us through television a bunch of nonsense? Is speech the only proper form of discourse left? After reading the first two chapters, I began to wonder if ancient stone tablets were more accurate than the internet, television, etc. are now.
Maybe one day, our world of media and entertainment will come crashing down on us, maybe in a sort of "media-metaphor overload", and we will have to start again from scratch. Think smoke signals and cave drawings.
"A message denotes a specific, concrete statement about the world. But the forms of our media, including the symbols through with they permit conversation, do not make such statements. They are rather like metaphors, working by unobtrusive but powerful implication to enforce their special definitions of reality." (10)
I agree with Postman's statement that "the medium is the metaphor." If all forms of communication must be changed and warped in order to fit into a certain medium, then I do not know what to believe anymore. Are the messages given to us through television a bunch of nonsense? Is speech the only proper form of discourse left? After reading the first two chapters, I began to wonder if ancient stone tablets were more accurate than the internet, television, etc. are now.
Maybe one day, our world of media and entertainment will come crashing down on us, maybe in a sort of "media-metaphor overload", and we will have to start again from scratch. Think smoke signals and cave drawings.
NIX on the "I haven't read the book yet, but..."
I am seeing this more and more on the blog and it is blowing my little mind.
If you haven't read the book, how on earth can you hope to participate in a discussion ABOUT the book? I was trying to keep quiet and remain patient, but I just saw this one more time and it pushed me over the edge. Cease and desist. If you want to talk with people about things you don't have any knowledge of, fine; I guess that is your right. The world is full of people like that. But you may not engage in that here. You waste time and bandwidth, and wear on my patience -- all of which may be plentiful, but not infinite.
It's just June. If you feel moved to participate, but you haven't read the books yet, go watch the YouTube video I posted, or the poem. You need no background knowledge to comment on either of those.
If you haven't read the book, how on earth can you hope to participate in a discussion ABOUT the book? I was trying to keep quiet and remain patient, but I just saw this one more time and it pushed me over the edge. Cease and desist. If you want to talk with people about things you don't have any knowledge of, fine; I guess that is your right. The world is full of people like that. But you may not engage in that here. You waste time and bandwidth, and wear on my patience -- all of which may be plentiful, but not infinite.
It's just June. If you feel moved to participate, but you haven't read the books yet, go watch the YouTube video I posted, or the poem. You need no background knowledge to comment on either of those.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Ford vs. God.
In "Brave New World", It's so interesting how "Ford" is constantly coming up and is replaced as our God today. The world Huxley has created is pretty fascinating and makes one think of how we are being controlled as a society today. "Ford, no!" (141) is an example of what I mean. Today, some would say "God, no!" or maybe even "Hell, no!" but Huxley establishes "Ford" as their God or higher power in this perfect world.
Also, when "The President made another sign of the T and sat down. The service had begun" (81). This is similar to what one would do today but forming a cross not a T. As a Christian, I often do the sign of the cross before eating, or before a big test and I would find it weird to do the sign of a T. I'm not sure what to think of this but it is interesting. This book reminds me of "The Giver".
Also, when "The President made another sign of the T and sat down. The service had begun" (81). This is similar to what one would do today but forming a cross not a T. As a Christian, I often do the sign of the cross before eating, or before a big test and I would find it weird to do the sign of a T. I'm not sure what to think of this but it is interesting. This book reminds me of "The Giver".
FIGURED IT OUT
I'm so excited that I figured this out finally! Now I can get started on my threds, :) Thanks Ms. Flecher
Forms Equals Contents
In Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, he points out a very important and unnoticeable reality about the decline of typography and the emerging dominance of television, and as I see it, technology as a whole. During the first couple chapters he focuses on trying to speak out his perspective on communication and that “how we are obliged to conduct conversations will have the strongest possible influence on what ideas we can conveniently express (6).” This didn’t make sense to me the very first time that I read the chapter, I don’t even remember catching the phrase, but after rereading it multiple times, I finally caught on to what he was trying to say.
The moment that I understood that “The Medium is the Metaphor,” I thought of Ms. Fletcher’s example of text messaging during the summer homework meeting. She points out that there are certain types of conversations that cannot take place when talking through LOLs and OMGs. At the same time, Postman uses smoke signals as a simple explanation of how the way we communicate can affect what we get across, he states, “You cannot use smoke to do philosophy. Its form excludes the content (7).” By saying that it excludes the content, wouldn’t it be the same reason why you cannot have a fight over text messaging? That feelings and emotions cannot be shown through abbreviated words and, thus, makes it less palpable.
Postman also remarks about the “news of the day,” he addresses that without television and the media there would be no need to inquire about daily news. “Without a medium to create its form, the news of the day does not exist (8).” Likewise, the Internet created a similar context, without it, would there be a need for blogging and Myspace and Twitter? All these new forms of communication are derived from the Internet, it allows us to communicate, but really to whom? WHAT are we trying to say?
When using Myspace everyone tries their best to make their profile stand out, all these hours spent on just trying to make an interesting page. Interesting enough so that your friends can spend their time reading or looking at the pictures and such that you post? With Twittter you talk about what you are currently doing as if everyone in the world wants to know. At this point, with the technological innovations taking place, we seem to have entered a whole new world. A world in which there are websites where we can talk about what we are currently eating or watching or even thinking in just one click of a button. Information is everywhere and anywhere, just google it and you can have your answer in as short of a time as three seconds. What kind of communication are we trying to establish by these various social sites? Comments, messages…. are they really a form of conversation? Or are we so bored with our lives that we spend practically hours and probably a total of years in front of this virtual illusion? If the medium really is the metaphor then what is the metaphor of the Internet? The Internet is a whole new world? A superhighway? A labyrinth of ads and flashing text that just holds you up for hours? Or maybe the Internet is why no one wants to go out and play anymore.
The moment that I understood that “The Medium is the Metaphor,” I thought of Ms. Fletcher’s example of text messaging during the summer homework meeting. She points out that there are certain types of conversations that cannot take place when talking through LOLs and OMGs. At the same time, Postman uses smoke signals as a simple explanation of how the way we communicate can affect what we get across, he states, “You cannot use smoke to do philosophy. Its form excludes the content (7).” By saying that it excludes the content, wouldn’t it be the same reason why you cannot have a fight over text messaging? That feelings and emotions cannot be shown through abbreviated words and, thus, makes it less palpable.
Postman also remarks about the “news of the day,” he addresses that without television and the media there would be no need to inquire about daily news. “Without a medium to create its form, the news of the day does not exist (8).” Likewise, the Internet created a similar context, without it, would there be a need for blogging and Myspace and Twitter? All these new forms of communication are derived from the Internet, it allows us to communicate, but really to whom? WHAT are we trying to say?
When using Myspace everyone tries their best to make their profile stand out, all these hours spent on just trying to make an interesting page. Interesting enough so that your friends can spend their time reading or looking at the pictures and such that you post? With Twittter you talk about what you are currently doing as if everyone in the world wants to know. At this point, with the technological innovations taking place, we seem to have entered a whole new world. A world in which there are websites where we can talk about what we are currently eating or watching or even thinking in just one click of a button. Information is everywhere and anywhere, just google it and you can have your answer in as short of a time as three seconds. What kind of communication are we trying to establish by these various social sites? Comments, messages…. are they really a form of conversation? Or are we so bored with our lives that we spend practically hours and probably a total of years in front of this virtual illusion? If the medium really is the metaphor then what is the metaphor of the Internet? The Internet is a whole new world? A superhighway? A labyrinth of ads and flashing text that just holds you up for hours? Or maybe the Internet is why no one wants to go out and play anymore.
Neil Postman talks about how magical typography was, it was a way in which we humans can communicate, it extended philosophy and made us capable of so many things. It was a way in which knowledge and discovery could be sustained. Oral people could only do so much, while people who are capable of writing, well.. they can do more. Typography is everywhere: warning labels, nutrition facts, news...etc. it gives us information and ideas. But we all know that too much of anything is never a good thing. As the age of typography declined and the age of electronics overpowered all forms of communication, it gave birth to many new "necessities" of my generation. Cell phones, the internet, gaming devices, and a whole new virtual world. But did we keep in mind that "Every tool we create, an idea is embedded that goes beyond the function of the thing itself (14)?" That cell phones give us the capacity to speak to someone anytime, anywhere. The internet made us capable of knowing anything we want with one click of a button. Gaming devices give us the thrill of being in a war, or racing, when we're just sitting on comfortable lumpy couches. This whole new virtual world, the craze of the 21st century.
Roll Call
Thirty four people can post to this blog, and 13 more have requested invitations but have not responded. Five people have actually posted (6 if you count "hey, I started my homework" comments, which I don't, and 7 if you count me, which I don't), and an additional few have made comments.
America, by Tony Hoagland
Then one of the students with the blue hair and a tongue stud
Says that America is for him a maximum-security prison
Whose walls are made of Radio Shacks and Burger Kings, and MTV episodes
Where you can't tell the show from the commercials,
And as I consider how to express how full of **it I think he is,
He says that even when he's driving to the mall in his Izusu
Trooper with a gang of friends, letting rap music pour over them
Like a boiling Jacuzzi full of ballpeen hammers, even then he feels
Buried alive, captured and suffocated in the folds
Of the thick satin quilt of America
And I wonder if this is a legitimate category of pain,
Or whether he is just spin doctoring for a better grade,
And then I remember that when I stabbed my father in the dream last night,
It was not blood but money
That gushed out of him, bright green hundred-dollar bills
Spilling from his wounds, and — this is the weird part —
He gasped, "Thank god — those Ben Franklins were
Clogging up my heart —
And so I perish happily,
Freed from that which kept me from my liberty"—
Which is when I knew it was a dream, since my dad
would never speak in rhymed couplets,
And I look at the student with his acne and cell phone and phony ghetto clothes
And I think, "I'm asleep in America too,
And I don't know how to wake myself either,"
And I remember what Marx said near the end of his life:
"I was listening to the cries of the past,
When I should have been listening to the cries of the future."
But how could he have imagined 100 channels of 24-hour cable
Or what kind of nightmare it might be
When each day you watch rivers of bright merchandise run past you
And you are floating in your pleasure boat upon this river
Even while others are drowning underneath you
And you see their faces twisting in the surface of the waters
And yet it seems to be your own hand
Which turns the volume higher?
Says that America is for him a maximum-security prison
Whose walls are made of Radio Shacks and Burger Kings, and MTV episodes
Where you can't tell the show from the commercials,
And as I consider how to express how full of **it I think he is,
He says that even when he's driving to the mall in his Izusu
Trooper with a gang of friends, letting rap music pour over them
Like a boiling Jacuzzi full of ballpeen hammers, even then he feels
Buried alive, captured and suffocated in the folds
Of the thick satin quilt of America
And I wonder if this is a legitimate category of pain,
Or whether he is just spin doctoring for a better grade,
And then I remember that when I stabbed my father in the dream last night,
It was not blood but money
That gushed out of him, bright green hundred-dollar bills
Spilling from his wounds, and — this is the weird part —
He gasped, "Thank god — those Ben Franklins were
Clogging up my heart —
And so I perish happily,
Freed from that which kept me from my liberty"—
Which is when I knew it was a dream, since my dad
would never speak in rhymed couplets,
And I look at the student with his acne and cell phone and phony ghetto clothes
And I think, "I'm asleep in America too,
And I don't know how to wake myself either,"
And I remember what Marx said near the end of his life:
"I was listening to the cries of the past,
When I should have been listening to the cries of the future."
But how could he have imagined 100 channels of 24-hour cable
Or what kind of nightmare it might be
When each day you watch rivers of bright merchandise run past you
And you are floating in your pleasure boat upon this river
Even while others are drowning underneath you
And you see their faces twisting in the surface of the waters
And yet it seems to be your own hand
Which turns the volume higher?
Have you tried...
Embedding a link? You can click on the little chain in the bar above the posting box, and embed an internet link. Here is an adorable gorilla face. I highlighted the words "adorable gorilla face", clicked on the link icon, copied the link into the box, and hit "enter."
Do you know how to bold a word? That's simple. How about italicizing words? Also simple, and best used in moderation.
If you click on the title of a post, you will see all the comments attached to that post. I like that feature quite a bit. You can also see the entire post with comments if you click on the "#Comments" link that follow the post.
Here is a portion of a poem called "America" by Tony Hoagland. I am going to type it, highlight it, and click on the block quotes icon and it's going to create a little pull-out section of text. Watch this; here's the first two stanzas:
Then one of the students with blue hair and a tongue stud
Says that for him America is a maximum-security prison
Whose walls are made of Radio Shacks and Burger Kings, and MTV episodes
Where you can't tell the show from the commercials,
See how easy it is to play on the blog? I put a photo in, too. That's the college trip from last spring; the kids are posing around the UC Berkeley sign while we're waiting for our tour guides to show up. Double click, and you can see everybody...it's a good one.
Soon, I'm going to post a YouTube video that I want you to watch.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
QUESTION ABOUT "BRAVE NEW WORLD"
In "Brave New World" , towards the beginning of chapter 2, the director says "They'll grow up with what the psychologists used to call an 'instinctive' hatred of books and flowers" (21 Huxley).
I understand why they want the kids to hate books, but why do they want them to hate flowers?
I understand why they want the kids to hate books, but why do they want them to hate flowers?
I Really Don't See What People Talk About
I have been told countless times about how much of a drag it would end up being to read the two books. Honestly?? Two small yet powerful books that add up to less then 500 pages? I was forewarned about the Postman book in particular. Well Ms. Fletcher, I totally have to agree with you when you said that Neil Postman is funny and brilliant. I mean, I have read but a chapter and i already think that he is a very comical writer. Any, "15-year old person (a person without a high school diploma or a drivers license or a resume, and who has read maybe, oh...ZERO books in their lifetime that are not narratives)," who just picks this book up, reads perhaps...half of a page, and then proceeds to throw it on a bookshelf where it will collect dust and be disregarded as boring is very sadly mistaken. Also, it is pretty saddening that people can be so ignorant as to prejudge something like that. Before someone disregards, they should (as cliché as it might sound to say) not judge a book by it's cover.
ANYWAYS, this book is one of the most interesting and funny books I have picked up in a very long time. I love that he makes it so that you have to be truly paying attention to the book to grasp the humorous that he injects into his book. Alongside those clever metaphors of his such as the clock or the smoke signals, this makes the book very easy to read.
I have always enjoyed such books about dystopia. But when it comes to the point when these predictions actually start to manifest themselves, that's when the situations start to creep me out just a little bit.
ANYWAYS, this book is one of the most interesting and funny books I have picked up in a very long time. I love that he makes it so that you have to be truly paying attention to the book to grasp the humorous that he injects into his book. Alongside those clever metaphors of his such as the clock or the smoke signals, this makes the book very easy to read.
I have always enjoyed such books about dystopia. But when it comes to the point when these predictions actually start to manifest themselves, that's when the situations start to creep me out just a little bit.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Check it out!
I just added the Grammar Girl widget, and in the appropriate size for the sidebar. Scroll down! You can listen to the current podcast WITHOUT leaving the blog. Talk about multi-tasking.
How to Post to the Blog
To anyone who might be a little confused about posting...Up toward the top of your screen, in the blue bar and on the right, there's a link called NEW POST. If you don't see it, then you're not signed in and you're viewing the blog as an outsider -- think of this like window shopping: You may look but you may not come in.
However, if you are able to comment (Kayla), then you ARE signed in, and should be able to write a post by clicking on the NEW POST link. Otherwise, you may be writing on a blog you have inadvertently created...think of this as sitting in a box all by yourself with the flaps closed. In your box, you may come up with the answer to life's most burning question, but since you're in there all alone, no one will know. And no one will enter it into the gradebook because they live OUTSIDE THE BOX.
(Have I told you all how much I hate that THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX thing? That it is has become so over-used, like a piece of week-old bubble gum, that THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX is NOW FIRMLY SITUATED INSIDE THE BOX?) Oh, yeah. True.
Back to our problem. How do you know if you have created a blog in error? You can check your DASHBOARD. And, if when you log on, you don't see my little thinking cap dude, you're not on THE blog.
Did you know that you may also EDIT what you write? I do this ALL of the time. I'll hit PUBLISH, and suddenly find an error or a dumb line that I don't like...I'll go back into POSTING, click on EDIT POSTS, find my old post, click on EDIT, and voila! I am empowered to revise my work.
Revising our work: possibly the single most important thing we can do in a free society is to learn to use language with precision and humility. This is no joke. Free people must speak well and speak freely. Tune into what's happening right now in Iran. Read Orwell's essay.
However, if you are able to comment (Kayla), then you ARE signed in, and should be able to write a post by clicking on the NEW POST link. Otherwise, you may be writing on a blog you have inadvertently created...think of this as sitting in a box all by yourself with the flaps closed. In your box, you may come up with the answer to life's most burning question, but since you're in there all alone, no one will know. And no one will enter it into the gradebook because they live OUTSIDE THE BOX.
(Have I told you all how much I hate that THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX thing? That it is has become so over-used, like a piece of week-old bubble gum, that THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX is NOW FIRMLY SITUATED INSIDE THE BOX?) Oh, yeah. True.
Back to our problem. How do you know if you have created a blog in error? You can check your DASHBOARD. And, if when you log on, you don't see my little thinking cap dude, you're not on THE blog.
Did you know that you may also EDIT what you write? I do this ALL of the time. I'll hit PUBLISH, and suddenly find an error or a dumb line that I don't like...I'll go back into POSTING, click on EDIT POSTS, find my old post, click on EDIT, and voila! I am empowered to revise my work.
Revising our work: possibly the single most important thing we can do in a free society is to learn to use language with precision and humility. This is no joke. Free people must speak well and speak freely. Tune into what's happening right now in Iran. Read Orwell's essay.
Back from Daytona Beach
Hey Kids, I'm back! Just sent out ten blog invites, and there are six that I sent out earlier that have not been responded to, so that makes 16 on deck and 24 now joined. Just read your recent posts on sexual maturity and maturity in general and I applaud your responses and participation.
I'd like to encourage you to step back a little and read Huxley less literally. Separate Huxley the writer from the world he is creating for you to consider. Your disagreement is not with Aldous Huxley, so if that is indeed the case, who ARE you disagreeing with?
I saw an excellent essay this week at the AP reading where the writer used Huxley and Brave New World as evidence in an argument -- the argument was about the role of adversity our lives. The writer used Brave New World to demonstrate what happens when there is no adversity, where drugs such as Soma remove the stress of daily living, where sex is easy, readily available and removed from human relationship...in a world without adversity, there is also no innovation, no struggle, no creativity and no growth. What do you think about that idea? None of us like trouble, but what if trouble was gone? Just gone from the face of the earth?
I heard speaker once describe what the hawk would be like if the mouse was slow. No need to develop excellent eyesight or speed. No need to fly, really. Just lay on the ground and wait for a mouse to wander by. The hawk would be slow, blind and fat. It's sheer beauty and hawk-nature is evoked by the challenge presented by the rodent.
As you read Huxley, I want you to observe an imagined world from 1934 where technology has numbed the human being. Don't get mad at Huxley! He's just holding a mirror.
And I want you to consider a 24-hour technology fast: no TV, no telephone, no computer, no video game, no movie, no iPod. Just you and your beautiful, powerful mind, your books, your drawing notebooks, your journals. Remove technology for ONE DAY and watch how you twitch like an addict trying to kick nicotine, or any drug that holds the user in a vice.
I'd like to encourage you to step back a little and read Huxley less literally. Separate Huxley the writer from the world he is creating for you to consider. Your disagreement is not with Aldous Huxley, so if that is indeed the case, who ARE you disagreeing with?
I saw an excellent essay this week at the AP reading where the writer used Huxley and Brave New World as evidence in an argument -- the argument was about the role of adversity our lives. The writer used Brave New World to demonstrate what happens when there is no adversity, where drugs such as Soma remove the stress of daily living, where sex is easy, readily available and removed from human relationship...in a world without adversity, there is also no innovation, no struggle, no creativity and no growth. What do you think about that idea? None of us like trouble, but what if trouble was gone? Just gone from the face of the earth?
I heard speaker once describe what the hawk would be like if the mouse was slow. No need to develop excellent eyesight or speed. No need to fly, really. Just lay on the ground and wait for a mouse to wander by. The hawk would be slow, blind and fat. It's sheer beauty and hawk-nature is evoked by the challenge presented by the rodent.
As you read Huxley, I want you to observe an imagined world from 1934 where technology has numbed the human being. Don't get mad at Huxley! He's just holding a mirror.
And I want you to consider a 24-hour technology fast: no TV, no telephone, no computer, no video game, no movie, no iPod. Just you and your beautiful, powerful mind, your books, your drawing notebooks, your journals. Remove technology for ONE DAY and watch how you twitch like an addict trying to kick nicotine, or any drug that holds the user in a vice.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Were you sexually mature at age 4?
In Brave New World by Aldous Huxley towards the end of chapter one, Huxley writes, "Pilkington, at Mombasa, had produced individuals who were sexually mature at four and full grown at six and a half. A scientific triumph" (14).
I am completely and totally disgusted with this. The funny thing is that there are kids who are 7 and 8 years old who are "sexually mature" and are very active today. I was watching the Tyra show a couple months ago, and there were kids in underground sex chains! Its utterly wrong and is corrupting kids today. At age 4, you should be learning how to ride a bike and going to Disneyland, NOT HAVING SEX. Now, i over hear kids talking about "how good that was last night"..what the heck! I think our youth is growing up way too quick and i dont think its a good thing.
Its ironic how it is a "scientific triumph". No, its definitly not. Science should only go so far, and that i think this is pushing the limit beyond human ways.
In case your interested, this is an article about how it is happening today:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/trafficking.html
I am completely and totally disgusted with this. The funny thing is that there are kids who are 7 and 8 years old who are "sexually mature" and are very active today. I was watching the Tyra show a couple months ago, and there were kids in underground sex chains! Its utterly wrong and is corrupting kids today. At age 4, you should be learning how to ride a bike and going to Disneyland, NOT HAVING SEX. Now, i over hear kids talking about "how good that was last night"..what the heck! I think our youth is growing up way too quick and i dont think its a good thing.
Its ironic how it is a "scientific triumph". No, its definitly not. Science should only go so far, and that i think this is pushing the limit beyond human ways.
In case your interested, this is an article about how it is happening today:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/trafficking.html
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Growing Up: A Good or Bad Thing?
In Brave New World in the first chapter in the middle, Mr. Foster mentions that the earlier we mature the better our world would be. I disagree with this fact because if everyone matured early we would be in a very dull world. If we all matured there would be no comedians, who are the kids at heart.
I know that people need to be serious at times but, Mr. Foster from the book claims we all need to be serious at all times. I believe there are time when we need to go with the flow and laugh at the funny jokes.
I hope that people never lose their kid at heart because the world will be full of bland and ordinary people. We need those people who live life for the jokes of life. So remember you have to find a balance between being serious and being funny.
I know that people need to be serious at times but, Mr. Foster from the book claims we all need to be serious at all times. I believe there are time when we need to go with the flow and laugh at the funny jokes.
I hope that people never lose their kid at heart because the world will be full of bland and ordinary people. We need those people who live life for the jokes of life. So remember you have to find a balance between being serious and being funny.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
NOTEBOOK QUESTION
Ms. Fletcher
I cannot find a notebook that you want. I was wondering if the notebook could be a little off. I have found notebooks that are 3 subject with 150 pages but no success with the 100 pages. Let me know as soon as you can.
I cannot find a notebook that you want. I was wondering if the notebook could be a little off. I have found notebooks that are 3 subject with 150 pages but no success with the 100 pages. Let me know as soon as you can.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Already started the notebook.
And it's coming along quite swell, if I say so myself.
One question though: Is there a certain order that everything should be in, besides all summer homework being in the same section?
Just wanted to make sure, because I'm starting on my vocabulary and I don't want any mix-ups.
One question though: Is there a certain order that everything should be in, besides all summer homework being in the same section?
Just wanted to make sure, because I'm starting on my vocabulary and I don't want any mix-ups.
Friday, June 12, 2009
I am interested in your meat talk
Kids, I like it that you are writing on the blog, but none of this counts for credit, OK? This is you utilizing a forum we've created to talk about meat dresses, which is remarkable and something to talk about. However, since it is not related, even tangentially, to Huxley, Postman or Orwell, I'm not marking it as part of your assignment.
Feel free to talk on the blog about whatever you want, but understand what counts for credit and what does not.
We don't do everything for a grade, just like I work with kids and talk to kids beyond my paid work day and work week. I do it because I'm interested and I like it. So if you can see the blog in that way, then please, carry on.
Feel free to talk on the blog about whatever you want, but understand what counts for credit and what does not.
We don't do everything for a grade, just like I work with kids and talk to kids beyond my paid work day and work week. I do it because I'm interested and I like it. So if you can see the blog in that way, then please, carry on.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Fashion meets Meat
Fashion has become a big part of life, now a days. People turn to magazines and celebrities to see what is fashionable, or as they say, "in". I stumbled upon something quite interesting just this afternoon and it intrigues me to know that people wear clothing that is made up of something that once had a life! Seriously, the title caught my eye. It was "Dress made from meat". Imagine that! How do people come up with these things? A while back I remember watching a show about a new line of latex clothing and it stunned me, now meat? I mean I applaud people for their creativity and what not, but meat is better off swallowed inside our stomachs than hanging off our shoulders.
If these vanitas (the proper name for these unusual dresses) get popular, people might resort to purposely killing animals for their meat! Maybe this could lead to a food shortage as well. You may argue that, "well maybe since the dresses ARE made of meat, then why not eat them. Food shortages will not be a problem." This may not be the case. Why? Well, I found an article on these dresses after reading the comments under the picture of the "meat dress" and it explained the process of how they are made. "The dress was stitched together from 60 pounds of raw flank steak and must be constructed anew each time it is shown. Following a centuries-old method of food preservation, the meat is heavily salted and allowed to air-dry. Over the span of the exhibition, the aging process drastically changes the appearance of the work." Now surely no one in the right mind would want to eat an overly-aged piece of meat that's been "heavily salted", would they? These dresses may cause a lot of problems if they continue to be made. It is unknown to me if it is still going on to this day, but it they are, precautions must be considered. Otherwise, the hope for a good future may be controversial.
"Dresses made from meat"
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/10/dress-made-from-meat.html
"Vanitas: Flesh Dress for an Albino Anorectic"
http://collections.walkerart.org/item/object/957
If these vanitas (the proper name for these unusual dresses) get popular, people might resort to purposely killing animals for their meat! Maybe this could lead to a food shortage as well. You may argue that, "well maybe since the dresses ARE made of meat, then why not eat them. Food shortages will not be a problem." This may not be the case. Why? Well, I found an article on these dresses after reading the comments under the picture of the "meat dress" and it explained the process of how they are made. "The dress was stitched together from 60 pounds of raw flank steak and must be constructed anew each time it is shown. Following a centuries-old method of food preservation, the meat is heavily salted and allowed to air-dry. Over the span of the exhibition, the aging process drastically changes the appearance of the work." Now surely no one in the right mind would want to eat an overly-aged piece of meat that's been "heavily salted", would they? These dresses may cause a lot of problems if they continue to be made. It is unknown to me if it is still going on to this day, but it they are, precautions must be considered. Otherwise, the hope for a good future may be controversial.
"Dresses made from meat"
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/10/dress-made-from-meat.html
"Vanitas: Flesh Dress for an Albino Anorectic"
http://collections.walkerart.org/item/object/957
I'm reading Question 3
Tell your friends (my beloved students from this year) that I'm reading Question 3. Rats. Q2 was my first choice (rhetorical analysis), and Q1 was my second choice (synthesis), so here I am on Q3, the argument. The question was so deceptively easy this year that I have a feeling we're going to see some goofy essays. We start tomorrow.
I flew all night, with small naps but no good sleep. Twelve hours later, checked into my yucky hotel room. I mean, it's the Hilton, but I have an ugly view. One year I was looking out at the Atlantic Ocean from my balcony, but this year, I don't even have a balcony and I'm looking out at the street.
I haven't been able to find my digital camera since sometime after the prom, but I brought my old fashioned camera that uses actual film (gasp!), so I'll buy a roll or two of film and take some pictures of Daytona Beach and this convention center -- filled with composition teachers, as far as the eye can see.
I flew all night, with small naps but no good sleep. Twelve hours later, checked into my yucky hotel room. I mean, it's the Hilton, but I have an ugly view. One year I was looking out at the Atlantic Ocean from my balcony, but this year, I don't even have a balcony and I'm looking out at the street.
I haven't been able to find my digital camera since sometime after the prom, but I brought my old fashioned camera that uses actual film (gasp!), so I'll buy a roll or two of film and take some pictures of Daytona Beach and this convention center -- filled with composition teachers, as far as the eye can see.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
I'm sad and blue
I feel very sad as I get ready to go to Daytona Beach, the redneck-iest beach town in America, home of some great big NASCAR event that attracts an enormous group of people who wear t-shirts with vaguely insulting slogans on them. And they DRIVE THEIR CARS ON THE BEACH. Very, very weird.
Anyway. Today, I said goodbye to my seniors, said bon voyage to my juniors, retired from coaching and said goodbye (sort of) to my golf team...I was a little distracted from so much to do, and I also felt like I could start crying any minute, so I kept my distance and didn't tell them goodbye properly, which I now regret. Then I put my beloved dog in a doggie bed & breakfast for 9 days. My stomach just hurts from all this sadness.
Hopefully, seeing my AP teacher friends and reading 2000 essays will make it all seem worthwhile. It WILL be worthwhile. I have to believe that.
Anyway. Today, I said goodbye to my seniors, said bon voyage to my juniors, retired from coaching and said goodbye (sort of) to my golf team...I was a little distracted from so much to do, and I also felt like I could start crying any minute, so I kept my distance and didn't tell them goodbye properly, which I now regret. Then I put my beloved dog in a doggie bed & breakfast for 9 days. My stomach just hurts from all this sadness.
Hopefully, seeing my AP teacher friends and reading 2000 essays will make it all seem worthwhile. It WILL be worthwhile. I have to believe that.
Lumpenproletariat
Lumpenproletariat- noun. A German word meaning "raggedy proletariat." Basically, it means the immoral "have-nots" of society, as coined by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.
Toodles,
Jen Jacques, Jessica Wu, and Melinda Ngo
Your Future Students :]
Toodles,
Jen Jacques, Jessica Wu, and Melinda Ngo
Your Future Students :]
Monday, June 8, 2009
Huxley
Here's a question for you:
Do we have Alphas and Epsilons in our society?
You may want to read the current post by Andrew Keen (check the Blogosphere over here to the right-->), in which he discusses Helen Milner's recent remarks: "She spoke impassionedly on behalf of the 25% of people in the UK who, she claimed, have neither access to the Internet nor knowledge of how to use digital technology. This 21st century unwired class, Milner suggested, was the new lumpenproletariat cast adrift in an increasingly online centric world of cheap and convenient Internet services and goods."
Lumpenproletariat. THERE'S a word concept for you. Figure that out before I leave Mayfair for Daytona Beach (2:45pm on 6/9) and I will give you a small package of sour gummy worms.
Do we have Alphas and Epsilons in our society?
You may want to read the current post by Andrew Keen (check the Blogosphere over here to the right-->), in which he discusses Helen Milner's recent remarks: "She spoke impassionedly on behalf of the 25% of people in the UK who, she claimed, have neither access to the Internet nor knowledge of how to use digital technology. This 21st century unwired class, Milner suggested, was the new lumpenproletariat cast adrift in an increasingly online centric world of cheap and convenient Internet services and goods."
Lumpenproletariat. THERE'S a word concept for you. Figure that out before I leave Mayfair for Daytona Beach (2:45pm on 6/9) and I will give you a small package of sour gummy worms.
Just a reminder
I see you all signing on using strange email names that may or may not be related to your actual name as I will come to know you. Since that is the case, please be sure you sign your posts before you publish, because I will not go look up your name. If I don't know who you are, I can't give you credit for posting. So, if you are currently signed up as "strawberryjamandham@hooha.com", just don't forget to sign off using an ACTUAL NAME.
Sincerely,
Henry Kissinger
Sincerely,
Henry Kissinger
Grammar Girl's Quick & Dirty Tips for Better Writing
We heart Grammar Girl. Here is her advice on How to Write a Great Blog Comment -- and the Sister Salad YouTube video is well worth four and a half minutes of your time.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Daytona Beach, Florida
Hi Kids:
I am leaving to read AP exams very early Wednesday morning...in fact, I leave so early, I'll be at the airport on Tuesday night. I am busy today doing laundry, working on the gradebook, writing sub plans, and taking care of all the last minute details.
I will check in from Daytona Beach, but I am not taking my laptop so I will have to use the public computers at the reading; there's always a line and a time limit, so I won't go online very often. Students who have not signed on yet may have to wait until I return on June 19. I'll do what I can. No promises.
Exciting news: the Mayfair Faculty and Staff bookclub is reading Neil Postman (The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School) this summer. Having said that, let me just offer a little Fletcher insight: I LOVE NEIL POSTMAN. Loooove him. I think he's funny and brilliant. From time to time, a 15-year old person (a person without a high school diploma or a drivers license or a resume, and who has read maybe, oh...ZERO books in their lifetime that are not narratives) will waltz into my classroom and proclaim that Neil Postman is BORING. This just happened out on the quad this past week; I was standing with some kids when a current AP student told an incoming student that "Postman is boring." What a disappointment that was. I felt like I had totally failed in getting through to this guy. Let me explain.
It is important for young AP students to avoid being dismissive. Often there are thinkers and writers on the AP exam that you have not heard of: Susan Sontag, Peter Singer, Neil Postman, George Keenan, Eudora Welty, Richard Rodriguez, and many others. These scholars and writers have careers and reputations that are well known in the larger world beyond Lakewood and Mayfair High School. When readers of the exam encounter a young writer who decides that Peter Singer is a "crackpot" or that Neil Postman is "boring," the credibility that the young writer is severely damaged. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO AGREE with everyone, (or anyone, for that matter), but you DO have to deal with ideas in a mature and logical manner.
One of the things that young people must fight against is the perception that they are immature. Why? Because often young people ARE immature: immature in behavior, in perception, in insight, in expression.
You are in your middle teens. Five years ago, you were in elementary school; five years from now, you'll be in college. You will be as different five years from now as you were five years ago. You are a human being in transition, so let me help you move TOWARD the person you are becoming. First off, please read fairly. If you don't understand something, don't dismiss it as "boring." Dense ideas resist simplistic explanations. Saying something is "boring" is a defensive statement. If you say it, I will ask you for a clear and cogent explanation of what, specifically, is boring.
More later. I have to go get to work on trip preparations. Be good. Keep reading. Ask questions. Challenge ideas. I will write more on the most common detractors of maturity of style and perspective later.
I am leaving to read AP exams very early Wednesday morning...in fact, I leave so early, I'll be at the airport on Tuesday night. I am busy today doing laundry, working on the gradebook, writing sub plans, and taking care of all the last minute details.
I will check in from Daytona Beach, but I am not taking my laptop so I will have to use the public computers at the reading; there's always a line and a time limit, so I won't go online very often. Students who have not signed on yet may have to wait until I return on June 19. I'll do what I can. No promises.
Exciting news: the Mayfair Faculty and Staff bookclub is reading Neil Postman (The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School) this summer. Having said that, let me just offer a little Fletcher insight: I LOVE NEIL POSTMAN. Loooove him. I think he's funny and brilliant. From time to time, a 15-year old person (a person without a high school diploma or a drivers license or a resume, and who has read maybe, oh...ZERO books in their lifetime that are not narratives) will waltz into my classroom and proclaim that Neil Postman is BORING. This just happened out on the quad this past week; I was standing with some kids when a current AP student told an incoming student that "Postman is boring." What a disappointment that was. I felt like I had totally failed in getting through to this guy. Let me explain.
It is important for young AP students to avoid being dismissive. Often there are thinkers and writers on the AP exam that you have not heard of: Susan Sontag, Peter Singer, Neil Postman, George Keenan, Eudora Welty, Richard Rodriguez, and many others. These scholars and writers have careers and reputations that are well known in the larger world beyond Lakewood and Mayfair High School. When readers of the exam encounter a young writer who decides that Peter Singer is a "crackpot" or that Neil Postman is "boring," the credibility that the young writer is severely damaged. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO AGREE with everyone, (or anyone, for that matter), but you DO have to deal with ideas in a mature and logical manner.
One of the things that young people must fight against is the perception that they are immature. Why? Because often young people ARE immature: immature in behavior, in perception, in insight, in expression.
You are in your middle teens. Five years ago, you were in elementary school; five years from now, you'll be in college. You will be as different five years from now as you were five years ago. You are a human being in transition, so let me help you move TOWARD the person you are becoming. First off, please read fairly. If you don't understand something, don't dismiss it as "boring." Dense ideas resist simplistic explanations. Saying something is "boring" is a defensive statement. If you say it, I will ask you for a clear and cogent explanation of what, specifically, is boring.
More later. I have to go get to work on trip preparations. Be good. Keep reading. Ask questions. Challenge ideas. I will write more on the most common detractors of maturity of style and perspective later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
