Extra Credit! :D

We have discussed a lot of different things concerning identity this semester, and it has really made me think about whether people really know who they are or not. People go about their day to day lives without much thought - it's just what they do. Do people realize the incredible power they possess in that they can make their own choices? They can decide who they are by the decisions they make.
This led me to think about how things that I say and do dictate who I am. Am I a friendly person? I don't like taking to strangers. I sit in classrooms for 16 weeks with people and never talk to them. Or, if I do, it happens to be right when the semester is about to end and I will most likely never see them again. So.. I'm not friendly - right? Some people think I am, though. Maybe they are wrong. Or maybe I am friendly only to those who were outgoing and talked to me first. I am a different version of myself for every person.
I think every person has countless layers. Not to pull a "Shrek," or anything, but people are like onions. Onions are comprised of several layers, but as a whole, they are still an onion. Just as someone can have different parts of themselves, but they can still be themselves no matter what.
Is that really true, though? If I'm outgoing and obnoxious amongst my friends but quiet and drawn in during class, am I really being myself?
Identity is just one of those topics that is really difficult to discuss thoroughly and come to a conclusion. I think it's impossible to know everything about someone, or even ourselves. There are too many "what ifs" and "if onlys"; too many hypothetical situations being blended with reality to really know how we would react to something. If I don't feel like I truly know myself, how can I expect to know someone else?
Identity is complicated and compelling. There are no right or wrong solutions or ways to find who we really are.

Final Project Obstacles.

I think my biggest obstacle will be making final decisions on how I want it to turn out. I can be indecisive and have a million ideas at once, so I think it will be hard to try and make a final copy of this project.

I am also my worst critic, so getting things to how I think they should be might be time consuming. So, time is another obstacle... I want to make sure I have PLENTY of time to make this good. I will definitely need it.

Also, I want my interviews to go well - I want people to have good answers to my questions and help me come to a conclusion on my topic. I think I've picked intelligent people.. But we will see. Maybe the results of the interviews will be obstacles, too.

Klosterman Group

1. Klosterman talks about how he'd prefer to ask questions rather than answer questions. Answering questions requires that a person be somewhat engaged with their own thoughts and sort of "know them selves." Asking is much easier because one can avoid being misunderstood. With respect identity, talking is a portrayal of oneself (accurate or not).

2. Why do people feel compelled to answer questions in the first place?

3. Basically, people talk just to talk. Morris mentions that if people are expected to talk, they do. It is exactly as Klosterman says, "something instead of nothing."

4. To an extent, you can trust an interviewee and to some extent you can't. Morris says that self-deception makes the world go round. People are generally going to try and put out what they think is true even if it is not. They create a narrative that they honestly believe in and therefore the interviewee is being dishonest with themselves first and then the rest of us as a consequence. People are constantly giving their view and position on the world and from another perspective the world appears very different. So this is why we are not usually the best informants of ourselves because we can easily deceive our self. At the same time other people will see the version of you they want.

5. Klosterman says that when interviewed people want to do two things: say something interesting and be perceived in the way that will be likable. Morris and Klosterman claim however that rarely can the both of these be accomplished, usually one is accomplished at the sacrifice of the other. Being interviewed allows the interviewee to become misunderstood and misrepresented. So if people were truly reasonable, they would indeed avoid interviews and avoid this dilemma altogether.

Something Instead of Nothing.

Why do people talk? Seriously, most of the time words and ideas we share only get us into trouble or create controversy and meaningless arguments.

I like Chuck Klosterman's list of why he continued to answer questions in his interview for that Norwegian book. Here is his list written in my "Pearl-ized" version:

1. People believe they have something worthy of contributing - so much so at times that they tell everyone else to shut up so they can talk. Most of the time whatever they thought was so important wasn't important at all. I could've lived just fine without ever hearing what comes out of some people's mouths.
2. While many of us talk without it being a formal, professional, paid job, we talk because we feel obligated to talk. If someone doesn't say anything, they look stupid. If someone doesn't respond or contribute anything, they don't know what's going on, or they don't care. Choosing to just stay silent is risky business.
3. It is also true that people talk just to be noticed and listened to. They just need to be able to talk and get things off their chests and have someone be there to hear it all and take it in.
4. People talk because they like to. For many, talking could probably be considered a hobby because they do it so often and with such vigor. They have nothing better to do than sit around and talk about everything and everyone.
5. People talk because it is polite to respond when questioned. While this is possible, all of the other reasons are much more likely. I don't think there are very many genuinely polite and nice people in existence. When people talk they usually have something to gain from it; they aren't just being cordial and offering their opinion and thoughts for nothing.
6. Responding and talking are instincts. I agree with Klosterman in that this is probably the most likely reason for why people open their mouths in the first place. When someone talks to me, it is almost automatic for me to say something back. I can't help it - even if all I can mutter is "Mmmhmmm." It's like taking turns.. Someone talks to you and takes their turn, and now it's yours. Speak, child.

Simpson's Coolhunt - In Class.

Homer was just basically trying to find a way that he could be cool, but according to the article, in order to be cool you must be instinctively cool. In the Simpsons episode, we learned that if you don't care if you're cool or not, you aren't cool. And, if you have to be told that you're cool, you're not cool. This is the same idea portrayed in the article. The "cool" kids that Baysie and DeeDee sought after were just cool - they didn't try to be cool, and they didn't have to be told they were cool.

Homer finally realized that what was cool when he was young isn't cool anymore - he was made fun of for being his version of "cool." This coincides with the fact that the word "cool" is very, very subjective, and what it defines is ever changing.

Cool-Hunting.

This article made me laugh, honestly. It had a lot of valid points, though. Baysie and DeeDee seemed about as real as reality TV, so they have to be supercool and know how to find "cool."

People want to know what is in, and what isn't. To find out, everyone goes on "coolhunts" from time to time, and everyone's coolhunts are a little different. "Cool" is such a relative term when talking about temperature - let alone when trying to describe something as "the next big thing." Things that I think are cool are not going to be the same thing someone else thinks is cool. And some things that people think are awesome, I do not understand. For example, I will NEVER understand why girls think it's a good idea to have a big messy bun right on top of their heads. But so many people do it, so it MUST be cool, right? Sure, it is for them - not for me. (If you're reading this and you're one of those girls, please don't take offense. I'm just not "cool" enough, I guess.)

I love that cool works up a ladder instead of trickling down. It starts with kids on the street doing something out of the ordinary, and then moves on up. This is so true. Someone does something unique or original, and then everyone wants to be unique with them (oxymoron). So in a way, being cool is just being collectively original.

PowerPoint Is Evil - In Class.

I agree with Edward Tufte. PowerPoint is speech-making made easy and can be very useful for presentations of information and ideas. However, it is greatly overused. I hate it when people have a PowerPoint presentation and just read everything off of the slides verbatim, without adding anything else of substance. PowerPoint slides should be an outline of what someone wants to say, not a script for his every thought. If I wanted to hear someone read, I would ask them to read me a story or something. Otherwise, I'm quite capable of reading for myself.

I think PowerPoint can take away a speaker's ability to really talk in front of people. If you really need PowerPoint to hold your hand along every step of the way, you probably shouldn't be giving a speech in the first place. Again, if PowerPoint is just being used as an outline, I don't think it's a big deal; don't let the white screen on the wall do all of your talking for you.

I do think that the use of PowerPoint with elementary children should be sparse. When children are still developing, they need the extra steps and examples so they know how to write in complete sentences and form complete thoughts - not create formulated lists of information.

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

I do believe this is a fair question. Google has made searching for information a million times easier than it used to be. When researching for a paper, I am positive that most students (including myself) refer to Google to find resources for them. We don't really have to know the Dewey Decimal System and look through stacks of books at the library; we just have to tell Google what to tell us about. Our ability to find information on our own has definitely been reduced by the ease of using search engines, but I think most people would still be able to find things on their own if they had to.

The commercials for Bing definitely contribute to the idea that Google makes us stupid. But, the pitiful people in the commercials suffer from "search-overload," not necessarily from stupidity.

However, I think that Google actually makes us smarter. Information is literally at our fingertips. Google brings the information we want and need right to us without much hassle. We can learn about anything that we want to through Google. How can such a great tool make us stupid?

Billy Sim

1. We don't necessarily realize who we are exactly or what it is that we have to do until it is brought to our attention. Whether through other people or, in this case, through a video game that "SIMulates" reality. He attempted to construct a character that adequately represented him in real life...but like Klosterman says, nobody truly knows himself.

2. We feel that it contrasts with "Slumming" in that Klosterman's Sim's character was only happy if Klosterman was buying things for him. His happiness was soley based off of the purchases he made. In "Slumming," these rich people already had all these nice things but they wanted to live a less luxuorious life and they took to the streets abandoning all thier possessions. They thought this would make them happier.

3. Children definitely become computer/Internet literate very quickly, which is beneficial in our technologically-centered world. However, we agree that children do think more like computers. Everything on a computer is systematic and everything is all already there. They lose imagination in a sense. Once they leave the computer and are forced to do homework on paper, write in journals, or just play with toys they do not know exactly what to do because they have been confined to following certain rules a machine creates for them.

"Final Draft" of Who We Are.

I do not believe there is a "final draft" of who we are until we die. I think a part of why humans are so different from other animals and beings is that we really do not ever stop evolving. I'm not talking about Darwin's theory of evolution... I'm talking about how we continue to make choices each and every day that alter our lives, even if the change is slight. We can't help but grow and learn from the world around us, even if it happens subconsciously.

I don't believe that people can't change - we can, and we do. It is possible for us to change for the better, for the worse, and neither. I do believe that "I am who I am" to a certain extent, but the twelve year old version of me is not the same as the sixteen year old version of me - and that version is not the same person that I am today, either.

The Sims and Materialism.

After reading the first paragraph, I wasn't really sure what I had gotten myself into. After reading the whole chapter, I went back and read the beginning again and laughed. It seemed so depressing and awful... What was this man really doing? He was just playing The Sims. That's all. I thought it was all kind of pathetic.

I've never played Sims, but my best friend plays religiously. He occasionally tells me all about his little Sim family. His Sim is married and has four kids - one of which just started college. Every time he tells me about his simulated video game life, I get so annoyed that he isn't actually living his life instead. I think this game does offer an escape from real life. Maybe if you create a good life for a little avatar on a screen, your life won't suck so much. Or, your life will suck even more because you're not doing anything to fix it and make it better. Instead you're spending your time living a fake life in a false reality.

When Chuck Klosterman mentioned all of the things he bought for SimChuck to make him happy, it really sickened me. I know it's not real money... But I thought it was just ridiculous. If we can be happy without material possessions, which I believe is completely possible, then Sim characters should be able to live just fine without fancy things, too, right?

I know it is just a game and there probably aren't so many controversial issues involved, but I can't help but think that that ideology is false. Overall, I am happy. Today I got pulled over because the red covering for my taillight broke off, so my right break light is a white light. I have to work in order to barely pay my bills and expenses. I don't have fancy clothes or a nice house... But I am happy. I don't need goods and services to make me feel good about my life, and I think it's sad when people think they do.

>>>Also, I loved that Klosterman referenced Fight Club. :D

Slumming.

I thought this story was incredible. The notion of billionaires taking a break from their wealth and becoming like any other bum on the streets is impressive. In a way, this story glorifies poverty - but only in the sense that when you have nothing, that includes having no responsibilities. Without being burdened by their image, Evelyn and Packer had the opportunity to just enjoy being alive. They really didn't have any cares or worries.

More than glorifying poverty, this story really degrades wealth. Without wealth, you can better appreciate the small things in life. "Just Packer's arms around his wife could be a duplex on Park Avenue. A villa in Crete." Evelyn and Packer no longer saw the need for fancy things, because they were happy with just each other. For them, being "homeless" was a great awakening into a whole new perspective of the world around them.

The girl who was kidnapped and murdered was a wealthy and attractive young woman. She was probably kidnapped because of her money - putting the high social status even lower on the "happy" scale. I thought that really was an important detail. It was also important for Evelyn and Packer to watch her try to escape and to be seen. Neither side of the spectrum is perfect. Wealth has its downsides, as does poverty.

I really enjoyed Inky's outlook on things. To her, everything was different than how it appeared. This is the new that, that's the new this. Everything was backward, and to some, she might seem crazy. I think she really had a lot of insight, though. There are things about being anonymous and hidden that really are the new famous.

I just really liked this story.

Very much. :)

I Am a Writer.

I don't necessarily call myself a writer when telling someone about myself, just because the term "writer" implies that writing would be my profession, or that I take it much more seriously than the average Joe. I don't think I do, but I guess it could be possible that I do write much more than a lot of people.

Writing is often looked at as a big deal - but it's not, really. Writing is just writing, and everyone does it at some point.

So, I suppose I am a writer after all. Dictionary.com says that a writer is "someone who writes, or is able to write; a person who commits his or her thoughts, ideas, etc., to writing." I write constantly about anything and everything. At various points in my life, I have written my thoughts, ideas, and everything that is included in etcetera, down on paper or online. I'm not a journalist, novelist, poet, or columnist - just a writer.

Vanishing.

"You can be anybody you want online, sure, but can you reinvent yourself in real life?"

This idea resonated with me as I continued to read about Ratliff's attempted vanishing act. What is more intriguing to me is that people actually succeed in having completely different online lives from what they live everyday in the real world. People can post Photoshopped pictures or pictures that they just found online to try and give themselves a "better" face. They can say they are younger, more active, and overall more appealing to the outside world. Online, it is possible to vanish from your life in reality.

In reality, though, it is much more difficult to vanish from life online. Everything is traceable, everything can be recorded or tracked, and viewed by other people. Kudos to Evan for going to so far and taking the extra measures to "vanish." I was so impressed by everything that he did - and more so by the crazy things that people did to try and find him, and that they did. There's no way that I would have been able to follow the micro-tracks that he left, or take the time to analyze his recent behaviors before his vanishing act to try and predict what he would do next.

In a way, I think it was inevitable that he would be found - technology is everywhere, and it can get you. There really is no way to hide from it, and I think Evan Ratliff's attempt proves it.

Literacy and Voice Questions - In Class

1. Well, of course in order to be literate you need to be able to understand what you read and write. However, being "technologically and digitally" literate involves a lot more. If someone doesn't know how to use a computer, they might be considered to be stupid by some people, but they might be brilliant in other areas.

In order to be able to text, you need to be able to to understand "text speak" like "idk", "idc", "ttyl", "omg", and all of the other crazy things people come up with to save time and energy.

Not only should you have a basic grasp on that, but to be technologically literate you should be able to operate and maneuver around a computer. So much of our lives are connected with the Internet that you almost have to be able to understand how it works.

4. So many people use other people's words and ideas on Facebook instead of coming up with our own way of saying how we feel. People post videos, lyrics, movie quotes, or quotes from other people (scholars) who actually can put together their own ideas.

It is difficult to create an original voice just for yourself.

We do think it is possible to use your own voice, but it isn't easy, and it isn't common.

5. People definitely view other people's voices as more authentic than others - and sometimes more authentic than our own. By using someone else's words, we are deeming their thoughts more credible than our own, so we use them in order to appear theway we want to Facebook or on other sites.

6. It is really hard to get around using something from someone. Pretty much everything we say has come from something else. No idea is completely original - chances are, someone has thought about the same thing before. Not to mention, it is must more convenient to copy and paste a chorus that explains how you feel instead of making your own "status."

Why I Write - Joan Didion

"...there's no getting around the fact that setting words on paper is the tactic of a secret bully, an invasion, an imposition of the writer's sensibility on the reader's most private space."

How cool is that? I think that is so awesome to think about. Anything I read is "an invasion" into my mind, and every time something I have written is read, I am invading the minds of others.

It sounds like science-fiction or something, but it's true. Every time we read something, we filter it with the knowledge and opinions we already have. Sometimes, though, those things we read can really impact our thoughts and help us to create new ones.

In the same way, each and every time we write something we let the page be the mediator and tool by which we dive into our readers' minds.

That should be why we write: in order to impact our readers' thoughts with our own. Writing is always so much better when it has a cut, clear purpose embedded throughout the words. So why would anyone want to write something that really has no goal or purpose? Such writing is a waste of time.

Writing is not a way of saying, "I have all the answers! Listen to me!" Many times people write to simply develop more ideas and thoughts. Joan talks about a novel she wrote, and how she had so many questions about her characters while writing her book. She kept writing and finished the story to answer her own questions that developed. She wrote in order to discover.

Why Write?

I write on a daily basis because I like to put my thoughts down on paper (or on a computer screen) so I can look at them. Whether it is a list for the grocery store, or a brief blog about something, I enjoy writing because I can look back and remember things. No matter what it is, writing allows me to go back and further analyze my thoughts.

I'm not usually concerned with whether someone else is going to be reading what I write or not. I write for me, simply because I like it. I doodle all the time, but most of my "doodles" are words, phrases, lyrics, or something else I'm thinking about. I write constantly, and most of my writing is done just so my brain can get some air.

As for academic writing, I write because I have to. :P

Obama's Edits - Response.

We think that Obama's edits helped the speech sound more personable. He made it apply to everyone - Democrats and Republicans. We think that he wanted to help his audience feel a sense of unity. Some worked with Ted Kennedy and knew what he stood for, and Obama's goal was to simply remind them of that. The matter was something that both Republicans and Democrats agreed on and worked together toward.

The blogger says pretty much the same thing:

"He drew individuals, members of Congress generally, and the American people as active agents into a joint national project of compassion and positive action."

Obama also spoke in first person throughout his speech saying things like, "I know," "us" and "we" making himself sound credible and relatable.

He thinks that through Obama's edits, he gave his audience a sense of "YEAH! We can do this!" Obama mentioned that hard work should pay off and the blogger felt that Obama gave a feeling of hope when he said, "the government has to step in and deliver on that promise."

So as a group, we agree with the blogger.

Thoughts and Questions on A&P

1. We have decided that the end feels more frustrating than anything else. Sammy now has to find another job on his own, and start over somewhere else. When he said, "I quit," I'm sure he felt liberated and relieved that he was finally done with that place, but once he got outside and looked back I feel like he regretted his decision.

3. This story really shows Sammy's personality, and therefore, his identity. Throughout the story we get to read his thoughts and see what he's thinking. He ends up quitting his job because he was upset that his boss embarrassed the girls in the store. I feel like he wanted to impress them and be the person they might want him to be, but it didn't work. Once he got outside of the store, he realized that he now has to find a new identity and a new place of work because he just threw his job away for a girl he will probably never see again.

5. As a group, we have decided that we would not have made the same decision. Even though he tried to be the hero, it didn't work out for him. It was a stupid decision that he couldn't take back. Keeping a job and trying to keep your boss happy (even when they are stupid) is a little more important than a scantily clad girl and her friends. They shouldn't have been going around town in just their bikinis anyway - it was in the 1960's, for goodness sake. Hahahahah.

A & P

I found this story very humorous, probably because it is so relatable. I've been working at a small grocery store for the past year and a half, and I get the same kind of customers. There are always old ladies waiting for you to mess up, and the second you do she calls you out on your mistake. There are always people who mosey around and stop to watch when something out of the ordinary happens. And, there are always people that catch your eye and you can't wait for them to be done shopping so that maybe, just maybe, they will choose your register.

While I'm at work, I notice the smallest things about my customers - the chipped nail polish on their nails, the slight stain on their collar, the grimace they always wear... I take all of those details I see along with the amount and type of food they are buying, and I imagine their lives before I even realize what I'm doing.

This woman came in the other day and bought ginger ale, popsicles, bananas, tea, and bread. I don't know if she has a family and I don't even know her name. All of the sudden I asked, "Is one of your children sick?" She looked at me quizzically and said, "Yeah, my 5-year-old has the flu." I wanted to ring up her things as quickly as possible so that she could get home to her child. It may not seem that odd to you, but it was the weirdest thing. For a second, it was like I knew her - but I don't.

The narrator of that story felt so in tune with those three girls ("Queenie" especially) that he quit his job because his manager had embarrassed them. That is a creepy kind of dedication.

Despite the different annoyances and injustices that transpire throughout my day, I am comfortable there. I got the job because my best friend's mom is one of the office managers. My best friend works there as well. I would not have the same courage and audacity to just quit my job like that. I hate it sometimes, but I haven't gotten to the point where I would just say, "I quit," and walk out the door. While I know it would be a good decision for me to get out of IGA and do things on my own, I need to muster a little more courage first. I do admire the narrator for being so spontaneous like that. It wasn't until he had actually walked out that he even gave his actions a second thought.