Group Discussion- Klosterman

1.As he talked with Ira Glass, we learned that Ira was projecting more than actually sharing, he edited as he spoke. However, if you sound sincere people are more willing to talk to you which is what Glass uses to interviewees to open up. This applies to the concept of the cultivated identity and how people try to seem like what others think they seem like. 2.Klosterman wonders why people answer questions about themselves. Why they would open themselves up to an audience they don't know and talk even though there is a good chance they can be misrepresented to that large unkown audience. 3.He tries to answer this question by asking himself why he answers questions. Is he a nice person? Is it just human nature to answer a question? Or do some people just like to talk? In some ways this is adequate because he brings up good answers to these questions but personally, I think that there is no standard formula why a person is compelled to answer a question. 4.Errol Morris talked about priviledged access and how we should be able to ask ourselves a question and get the answer. When talking about Rick Rosner he mentioned that people have a little black box inside that needs to be opened up and that talking it out with someone else helps to figure out what is in that box. Both of these apply to the idea of trust in the answers because sometimes a person doesn't know how to answer if they ask himself but when talking with another person, it helps to release ideas he may have realised he even had. 5.It is a reasonable assumption. If you don't like what is going to be printed you probably shouldn't be interviewed but I think faith comes into play. Having faith and being optimistic about what will come out of an interview is usually what compels a person to openly to talk, so that they are understood better or that we as a whole can understand human nature.

The Cool Hunt- Simpsons Style

The definition of cool is always changing and people are always looking for the new "it" thing. It went from Teenage Angst songs to watching people get hurt. Rock and roll, that lost it's title of cool was moved to the oldies and newer music was the next best thing. Homer was caught in a struggle between thinking rock was cool then trying to be the new, updated version of cool by working at the freak show in Lollipolluza. The kids and youth seem to be the group that dictates what goes and what stays, even if the older population doesn't understand or doesn't agree with that idea. The Simpsons episode may have exaggerated some ideas in the episode when it went from thinking music was cool to thinking strange is cool. In today's society we see that. Specific example- people focused on Lady Gaga's music at first but then she started dressing a bit more.. out there... and the idea of cool shifted from music to "freak show." Homer was trying to be a freak to be accepted in society and by doing so he was famous. In the readings, a boy liked a womens' shoe so the company tried to advertise it towards men. By being a little different, the company found a new "cool."

Something Instead of Nothing

This article is quite profound in the respect that no matter the amount nor content of questions being asked, nothing is really accomplished. We try to seek truth through questions, but when it comes to journalism and interviewing, what is the real point? What is the point of asking stupid questions? Is it because of an insatiable need to know? I certainly think so. The author makes a valid point that in order to fully understand the complexities of the world, we need to know what others' perceptions are. By knowing how other people see the world, a reality is unanimously created. What is real is beyond me, but when understanding what is real in other peoples' lives, a piece of theirs becomes mine. Whether or not I want to accept it or agree with it, is up to me. Sometimes though you have to sit back and look at the big picture. You have to manifest yourself within the other person in order to achieve a certain knowledge that ultimately forms your own reality. It forms your identity. Once you've understood the experience of interviewing, whether it's pointless or not, you've learned something about not only the interviewee, but yourself as well. I feel that that is ultimately the point of interviewing. As quoted in the article, "We have to do it, because it's better than nothing". Asking questions and answering questions may be pointless in the respect that nothing is physically accomplished, but knowledge is at least something.

Powerpoint

I agree with the author of the article for the most part. I feel that there shouldn't be an emphasis on technology related presentation, but writing. Writing is the basis for all communication and it baffles me to see that the younger generations taking no interest in it whatsoever. Instead, they just focus on learning everything they can on a computer to just half-ass presentations. I understand the use of technology in the classroom, but we need to get back to basic writing for A Powerpoint is a good aide for reinforcing what your content consists of. Pictures, for example, is a great way to show and emphasize certain aspects of the provided rhetoric. I feel that an essay can stand alone a lot better without the outside help of other media. However, with Powerpoint, you are limiting the amount of information to provide. Furthermore, if you merge the two, using visual aides to back up the rhetoric, it would be a very simple, yet effective way to further convey your thesis. What teachers should be teaching is when and where it is appropriate to use Powerpoint.

Cool

When it comes to what is cool, who's to say exactly. The term itself is rather ambiguous. When it comes to people being cool, I have no idea what that entails. All throughout my life, it's been nothing but one beauty contest after the other. The 'cool' kids always reigned as the most popular. It seemed like their so-called 'coolness' had nothing to do with their identity, but those they aspired to be like. Their facades definitely matched the superficiality of Hollywood. They wore name-brand clothing, listened to the most popular music, and never bothered to associate with anyone who wasn't 'cool'. They had all the worst qualities, for the wrong reasons. What cool is and what cool is concieved as are two completely different things. I feel that the truely cool people are the ones with personality; who are original in thought and aren't afraid to express their true selves. Everyone is unique in their own way, why not celebrate that. Isn't that what ultimately defines cool?

Is Google making us stupid?

1: The amount of information that is out there on the internet seems intoxicating because it breaks our focus on what we really use it for. The way we perceive information is changing because when we look up topics online we rarely spend the time to actually remember it, but rather just reference it since we could easily look it up again at anytime.

2: The internet is one of the most convenient information databases to look up practically anything that you find interesting. Your able to post opinions about anything, speak freely, explore any topic in great detail. Pretty much you can live in the internet. The tools out there are vast and rising, as well as the ability to purchase anything that you would need to live from the internet. I'm pretty sure Amazon.com has virtually anything the consumer would need.

3: British library offers access on online journals. People who read these articles that are offered online make people impatient because they end up just skimming through a few pages of the article and then if they can't find what they want they just skip to the next website. Reading online causes people to interpret text, which makes the mental connection that forms when we read in detail without being distracted, makes us largely disengaged.

4: A big concern of his seems that Google tries to lead us to distractions, as a way for companies who sponsor Google to make money. Some of the information is right there at your fingertips so since you can look it up so quick, he says then why bother even trying to remember it.

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Overall the article makes very clear arguments as to how the technology world is colliding head-on with the intellectual world. I honestly don't think the internet is hindering anyone's mental capabilities. I feel with all this information right in front of you, people tend to become lazy. They find the information they want instantaneously, browsing website after website, not even bothering to read the articles in full. It has everything to do with the fast-paced society that technology has forged and nothing to do with mankind's stupidity, but laziness. Technology, specifically the internet can be both a useful everday tool for quick research, but I feel that it should be used in moderation. I do believe people today are becoming more and more attention deficit. Whether the internet is truly to blame is beyond me. I can make all the speculations I want, but it still holds strong that society moves extraordinarily way too fast. The internet is convenient in many ways and doesn't necessarily cause stupidity, but unintended laziness when when it comes to reading and comprehending.

"Sim"ulated Reality

1. We thought the most interesting part of the reading was how philosophical he became when playing God. At first he was addicted because he could make SimChuck could do whatever he wanted but he saw how materialistic his character was and he became conflicted with the game by intertwining the reality of SimChuck with the reality of real Chuck and not seeing that sometimes a game is just a game.

2. Vanish by Evan Ratcliff was the first reading that came to mind because Evan changed his appearnce and his identity so many times trying to reinvent himself the same way Chuck was trying to reinvent himself through SimChuck.

3. In some cases, children may advance too fast depending on the uses they have for the computer, but it would be a stretch to say that children would solely think like a computer because they have the capacity to imagine, to create out of nothing whereas a computer only has the capacity to do whatever it is programmed to do.

"Final Draft"

I don't really think we as human beings ever stop evolving when it comes to our identities. I know for example, the more I learn, the more my views change about my surroundings; thus, effecting who I am. We never stop learning, which I feel plays a critical role in defining who we are. It's a fast-paced world, where information and technology is ever-changing, and I feel people nowadays have to keep up with this, causing changes in how we think on a daily basis. I also feel that as we mature, we tend to change our views based on how we percieve the adult world; moving from adolescence to adulthood is the biggest transformation. Again, returning to knowledge as the catalyst for such changes. We may have a generic set of characteristics, but when it comes to certain ideosyncracies and taste, we are constantly shifting our views and opinions. The metaphor "final draft" suits my argument further; you can work on a paper for a so long, and get it to a point of completion, but in reality, there is so much more you could change about it...it's never really finish, and the same holds true for identity. So, when it comes down to it, we never really have a set "final draft" of ourselves.

Billy Sim

The essay expressed very valid points when it comes to technology and identity. It made clear that this generation is looking more and more into technological entertainment as a means of escapism and ultimately a way to discover themselves. Just the fact the author looked to The Sims as a means of discovering something about himself seems a bit ludicrous, but the logic behind it is perfectly understandable. I mean, who wouldn't want to look at their own daily rituals and actions from a third person perspective? Throughout the rest of the essay, the author is able to distinguish harsh personality differences between his pseudo-character and his real self. It's funny how the author is able to discover so much about himself not through similarities, but differences. However, the most profound realization that is made in the article is the realization that the only thing that made his Sim character 'happy' was being emancipated. The author came to the conclusion that his Sim character was ultimately just as unhappy as he was, and 'deployed actualization'. In comparing the author and his Sim, they were both just as longing for a reason to live. They were just waiting for their own emancipations from the materialism and society as a whole; virtual, or real. Through the rejection of society, comes a free-will to think whatever crosses your mind or do whatever you feel. Without the rules of society, you are able to be what you've always longed for; to be you.

Slummin'

So, after reading this article, I realized the only way to be happy is to be a hobo. In order to feel alive, the homeless characters in the article, give up their old, billionaire lives. They give up their affluent titles and luxuries in order to slum the streets. They want to see what happens when they turn their whole worlds upside down. As mentioned in the article, nobody notices who they truly are, which is something of a thrill for them, because they are able to get away with pretty much anything and nobody turns a head. In a society where money is everything, who would notice dirty homeless people literally reaking havoc. The most interesting aspect of the article is the fact that all the characters had a scewed view of what is trendy in standards for society. For example, 'Poverty is the new nobility'. However, with these scewed views come truths about life. This statement is profound in the respect that it doesn't matter what you have, financially, as long as you are happy. In this case, the homeless in this article are the nobility of their domain. They are happy with the way they live their lives. Another profound statement is 'nothing to lose, is the new wealth'. To them, wealth brings nothing, but unwanted trouble. So, when it came to having nothing to lose, the risk of losing everything wasn't worth it, especially one's life. In the end, they lose everything, even when they didn't have anything, which is a bit ironic. They had everything, wanted nothing, and ended up losing everything.

Vanished

Overall, the idea of someone just disappearing is completely unorthodox in this day and age. Don't get me wrong, I think what Ratcliff did should be commended in the regard that he lasted as long as he did. However, with technology being as advanced as it is today, it was only a matter of time before he was caught, which turned out to be true. I can easily relate to the author's feelings of wanting to disappear, but in order to fully disappear I feel you need to cease communication completely with the outside world. When it came to the experiment as a whole, I felt that in the end, by losing himself in this other alias, he was able to find himself. He tried to create a new identity, but in the end it only strengthened his true self.

Writing

Honestly, I don't consider myself a writer. It' s not my field of expertise and I'm certainly not as talented as those whose profession is simply writing. Even though I enjoy writing and am semi-decent at it, I'm not a writer. I leave it up to those who have studied the written language extensively and who have the genuine prerequisites to be a writer. I'm an amateur in the process of learning how to write; and since writing isn't my major, my writitng education will most likely be limited.

Why Write?

Writing is such an important and integral part of human communication, that it's absolutely imperative that you clearly and consicisely convey your message. Writing serves as both a practical and expressive mode for communication. The more practical way conveys a clear, defined message, whereas with expressive writing, the message is open to interpretation. Whatever kind of writing it is, I feel it's important to express your own thoughts and knowledge no matter what you're trying to say. I feel it helps us to understand things when written down, for example, directions. It's much easier to write directions down than to explain them verbally. As far as the expressive part goes; that has go along with your identity. However you want to convey a message is up to you and only you. It reveals something about you.

New Media Literacies

The new media literacies is a set of skills that everyone needs to use in today's culture; to function in the current media environment. Whether it's a computer, cellphone, we are constantly interacting with an ever-changing, high-paced technological culture. These skills will help society become creative artists, better citizens, and good workers in society. Before other modes of media, consumers really had to pay attention to what was being conveyed. During the 90s, everyone apparently retired to Portland when they were young and put birds on things as art. Nowadays, people are becoming the consumers and producers of their own artwork and blogs, via internet, etc. People are their creators to what they want conveyed. Instead of interpreting the different artists, we ourselves are the metaphoric artists. We are now finding out that we have to tap into our own identities. These skills are for the real-world. They are used to help us find ourselves in a manner of expressing who we are in a societal environment.

Overall, Obama made the speech more familiar.
Makes it more listener friendly
Revisions pulled it all together
More personal
"That large-heartedness -- that concern and regard for the plight of others -- is not a partisan feeling"
Unified audience
"members of Congress -- Democrats and Republicans -- did not back down. They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind."

The People Watchers

1. He seems like a realist in the end in comparasion to the beginning and middle of the text. It seemed like he had always wanted to quit his job but this story gave him a profound reason to quit his job at the grocey store. The story was bitter-sweet because he has to come to reality at some point and realize what is going on.

3. He seems to be able to see others identites because people fall into a certain pattern after a while espeicially in the grocery store where you see people shopping in a grocery store every day. The setting of the grocery store never changes but the people who enter it and leave it do change which could give Sammy upper hand on seeing one's identity.

4. Writing in that intense detail is very interesting because it is evident that someone can get so lost in the moment with explaining one simple story. The purpose of the details is to give the reader a good image of what Sammy saw through his own eyes as well as the feelings he was going through at the time.

A&P

The light-hearted, almost comedic tone of the piece is a juxtaposition to the overall theme of the story. I felt that throughout the story, the author included many comedic elements in order to evoke a sense of reality to the reader. The ridiculous terminology used is further evidence to the silliness of the story. However, even though the beginning seems quirky and funny, the tone changes. The author is trying to convey the realities of life. Some people want to move forward and have the opportunity to, while others just stay miserable; some by choice, others not so much. The metaphor of sheep with the girls that walk in is not only humorous, but has meaning as well with following one another. The protagonist finds this extraordinarily mundane. And so by the ending he ends up quitting his job at the grocery. I interpreted this as him moving on, possibly to better things; however, the ending paragraph he comes to the realization that he is just going to end up fatigued by a second-rate job; "checking the sheep through", just like Lengel.

Errors

Overall, the article made some very good points when it came to writing errors. Errors in the English language are so prevelant, it's impossible not to make mistakes, even when you are a well-known author. As long as the mistakes don't distract from the main intention of the piece, you, as the audience wouldn't even question the so-called mistake at hand. The truth is, writing in general is so subjective, that it doesn't really matter what mistakes are made. Writing is an art form that should be left up to the writer to break said guidlines. Rules are made to be broken, especially for the creative spirit. And as pointed out, some of the greatest authors of all time never really followed all the rules of writing. I personally find bad grammar irritating, but if it doesn't affect the overall themes of the piece, I can accept it. Writing, like many things should be judged on content, and nothing more. As long the author conveys their message effectively, then all the rest should be secondary.

Spam Rhetoric

The spam letter that we read was the Spam Rhetoric letter. The letter shows all three rhetorical appeals in trying to persuade the reader to participate in working with him. The author uses ethos by telling the reader that he is aa Audit Debt Manager for the Bank of Africa. He also uses pathos by telling us about the family who died in Iraq and asking the reader if he can trust you and if you are ready to work with him. Logos is used in the introduction when he opens his letter with "How are you." He makes it informal to sound more like a friend than a stranger. He also uses it when telling the reader about the sum of two million five hundred thousand united states dollars. Another part that shows logos is when he makes the letter sound confidential by telling the reader if he is not interested to delete the letter. Overall the letter is poorly written but shows all theree forms of rhetoric.