Final Project

I feel that the biggest obstacle for this final project is going to be setting up my interviews, especially since some of the people I want to interview are not living close enough for me to physically meet with them.  What makes this really difficult is that the musicians are really busy at the moment.  One of the vocalists I might be able to interview is on a tour in Sweden, and another is getting ready to record a new album.  I've proposed to do video chats with them, or even phone interviews, but I haven't had any solid confirmation yet.  One vocalist welcomed me interviewing him, but is very pressed for time.  I might have to consider a new proposal, seeing that the project is due pretty soon.

I enjoy putting together videos, and getting sound clips or actual video footage is very important in this project.  I am somewhat not in complete control in terms of what I get back from these musicians, for reasons stated above.  If these issues with obtaining interviews is taken care of, I'm sure I'll be able to turn in something of value for the final project.

Something in Class

1. The point we often get to is that we all show ourselves differently to people and situations. Getting to the core is what often needs to happen and the article really focuses on getting to that point. Like the Norwegian saying that no one really cares about what he has to say and that he wont care what those people think. People unconsciously lie like Morris said.
2. Why should he answer questions that others have about him and why do they even care. There is no reason that it should even matter to anyone. Why would anyone care.
3. People just have a natural or innate curiosity to find things out and to seek out new information about people.
4. No we cant trust interviewees, even if they have the best intentions, they may be having self deception and editing what they are saying to make themselves look better subconsciously. In theory you should be able to ask questions to yourself and get different answers every time and from different people.
5. It makes sense, no one who is being interviewed will ever really be entirely honest and open themselves to attack. Thus, what they say isn't really factual or useful. And secondly, people who read interviews are therefore not really all that real or useful. Its no substitute for spending time with them and actually getting to know them.

Interviews About Interviews. So Meta.

I imagine a lot of people couldn't give an honest or accurate answer when asked the question, "Why do you do interviews?" Someone who I hope to be interviewing for this final project gave a response to that exact question-- he said interviews are a meeting between two people, and it's simply something that is really cool. Anyone who sets time aside to get to know someone better, and have a personal conversation with, is someone worth talking to.

What we actually get as a final product of an interview is something worth thinking about. I am so glad that Errol Morris brought up the idea that people might have "privileged access" to their own minds. I too, agree with Morris in the respect that people don't have any idea of who they are. I don't know who I even am, and I struggle with that all the time. This idea alone is enough to make me skeptical of everything, including the things I say and think. The human perception of reality is so skewed, that it takes conscious understanding, willingness to overcome cognitive biases-- and even then we can't know for sure what is real. So the accuracy of interviews is disputable, but as Klosterman alludes to, it is the best mean we've got; it is still worth doing.

When I first read about the way Prince use to conduct interviews, I thought it was brilliant. Like Morris said, "his words could not be taken out of context if there was no context." After thinking about it a bit more, I could see possible negative unintended consequences that might come with it. Having someone else convey your message is a very scary thing, especially when one is without knowing the interviewees intent. I'd only recommend this style of giving interviews to people who cannot craft their own words carefully, and has little confidence in their own ability to represent themselves.

I enjoyed the process of blogging in this class, and I am going to continue doing it on my own. It's a great way to be reflective, and not writing to satisfy an audience is liberating.

Simpsons/Coolhunters

Both the article and the show demonstrate that cool is being sold to you. In the Simpson's episode, the festival that Homer went to had ads and flyers everywhere showcasing the "cool" things.

Also, in the article he talked about how you can't really force trying to be cool, and in the Simpson's episode, that was exactly what Homer was doing with the cannon.Cool can't also just be "explained", for example how Homer just stumbled onto being hit by the cannon.

Gladwell also mentioned in his article how it's the cool people that decide what is cool and that was reflected in the Simpson's episode well with the Smashing Pumpkins, Cypress Hill, etc.

Powerpoint thoughts

The author's arguement may have been a bit overexagerated, but I can agree to a certain degree on many of his points. Much of the disdain people commonly have for powerpoint presentations is probably from the fact that it is the industry standard in any kind of presentation-- from schools to big businesses. The redundancy of the formatting and style is enough to take a toll on the audience.

Google Stupid Questions

1. Carr says his mind is changing by the way he gathers information. He used to be able to read articles in depth and want to investigate and find out more about the subject. Now he finds himself having a hard time reading more than a few paragraphs without losing his concentration.


2. He says that researching through the internet is obviously much faster than researching through a library. What was once done in days and weeks can now be done in hours.


3. Carr talks about one his proffessors that once was an avid reader who now does all his readings through the internet. Another example is the author who switched from writing with a pen to with a typewriter. After switching it was apparent that this author's writing style significantly changed.


4. We think that Carr is worried that we will rely on Google too much and that it will do all the thinking for us. He fears that eventually we will lose our original thoughts.

Google dependent

I work at a small web design company during the summer months, and I know firsthand just how powerful and systematic the Google engine is. On every site that is made, we use Google analytics to track what the visitor searched for to get on the page, how long they have been on every page, and which pages they have visited. From there we react accordingly, often to get the visitor to the product pages and checked out if that is what the nature of the business is. The end result is more organic than artificial to me. The web really reacts to what people do.

Reflecting on how we do things is very worthwhile. Just today I sat down and listened to a new album without doing anything else. It is such a better experience to focus on the music instead of a game, work, or some other project. The internet does amazing things for us, but sometimes at the cost of our thinking skills. It's important to recognize this-- maybe set some time aside to practice lateral thinking, or simply fixing a problem on our own. Too often people try to point the finger at something other than ourselves to explain what we are lacking. The argument may be logically sound, but it shouldn't sway anyone to do anything other than take responsibility and find a solution.

Based off of my claims in my first essay, I'll argue that Google makes us smarter, but more dependent. The internet is becoming more-so an attachment to our own intelligence, turning us into a kind human cyborg. We live and see things differently because of it, and the favorably of it is for each individual to judge. For me, the benefits outweigh the negative consequences. The only thing I fear is where the road will take us in the effect of Google's entry into the smart phone market, and the ramifications of net neutrality. The best thing to do is see the picture clearly, instead of being blinded by fear and only sensing futility and dread.

Side note: The Nietzche reference in the article was very cool-- I knew there was skepticism about his latest writing with the declining of his health and his sister's influence, but I never knew about his change to the typewriter. I would dismiss any changes in his style simply on his unstable mental condition alone.

Billy Sim - Group Questions

1. We thought that it was interesting that people in real life would like to view themselves from a different point of view and sort of live their lives through a computer. Its also interesting to see how Chuck, in reality, was someone who didnt value many material things and when he created his Sim Chuck he strived to be very rich and materialistic, therefore his real life identity was different from his simulated one.

2. We connected Klosterman's piece to the vanishing story. Like the man who tried to change his identity and lead a new life, it corresponds to the concept of the Sims game by creating a new identity and living your life in a different way.

3. We don't agree that the statement about children thinking like computers is true. Unlike being cold and rational like computers, humans still and will always have emotions and humans still act upon those emotions.

A familiar story

It seems like this was written with the intent to antagonize the main characters for their empty and narcissistic lifestyles. Charity events such as ‘banquets for people blown apart by landmines’ are all too familiar in reality, where self-promoting social events hold a greater value than the cause itself.

Taking another step into it, the story doesn’t only seem to be putting the generalized rich people in a negative light, but humanity as a whole. The very ending of the story confirmed it for me—“to go swimming with endangered gray whales. Sleep in the canopy of a dwindling rainforest. Photograph some vanishing zebras.” Making a difference is not really what is important to most people, but feeling like we are making a difference is. It’s a bitter pill to swallow for most people, and this would be very alienating to me if I had never admitted it before. I am not telling people to go out into the world and be more compassionate; I’m instead urging people to come to terms with reality.

It didn’t take long for Mrs. Keyes to realize that the homeless lifestyle wasn’t so extravagant, and that the free enterprise had the medicine all along.

Disappear

It is easy to criticize Evan for slipping up, but a big part of his challenge wasn’t just to remain undetected, it was to also create a new identity. For this reason I see it acceptable that he created new accounts under his new alibi, but the biggest mistake he made was checking up on his manhunt. Evan did everything right from the start, such as ditching his phone, online accounts, and credit cards.

I know that everything we do online is traceable and time stamped, but I did not realize how easy it would be for his pursuers to find a list of his archived posts on Facebook when his profile was set on private. It is a bit of a shock, and I underestimated the ease in hiding information from others. Usually people go about data mining by creating applications that pulls user information, but a simple google search did the trick. Wow.

I’m not sure what to conclude from this. Clearly the digital age is condensing the world and making it more transparent. There is not really an escape for it either—who knows how long it will be until paper money is obsolete, and even when our exact location is impossible to run from. All of these fears are in reality byproducts of what the digital age is meant to be, but it doesn’t change the fact that we are digging our own graves as far as privacy is concerned. Even if we aren’t physically being watched (people are in some parts of the world), our digital selves are; and it’s by our own hands.

Questions 2-16

1. Being literate today means being able to navigate around and actually do what is required with modern technology. Juts being able to do the basics would probably make you literate in that area, especially in looking at older generations.

4. Its more ambiguous to find your voice amongst the crowd, especially when you are active in so many mediums. There are a more influences now than ever that affect your "voice" and they are more easy to access than ever before. Its harder to make a unique voice but having a personal voice is still possible.

5. Obviously voices that dont follow the rules or are on the outside of normal are more authentic than others. People who dont just ramble off all the same word garbage as everyone else seem to be more authentic. Only the people who go directly with the flow seem to have become caught up and less authentic with the devloment of technology.

6.It seems like people use imitation of other to shape what people think about them. They are doing this to shape their outward sense of self in order make others think things about them. The idea being that others will like what they have said and they will be more relateable. Mimicry also show what we identify with and shapes our self to things similar to that.

Motives

Something that I find very true coming from both Didion and Orwell is their admitting of writing as an act of manipulating one’s mind. Whether a piece of writing is informative, aesthetic, or straightforwardly persuasive, all writing is meant to be read by someone. I liked Orwell’s story a lot more; although I have a bias from reading and thoroughly enjoying 1984.

Orwell stated that motives for writing usually fall under four different categories, and it is hard to tell which ones influence us the most sometimes. However, he admits that he knows which one ‘deserves to be followed’, which is writing with a political purpose. I personally welcome the idea of changing hearts and minds through writing or other means—it can be powerful, and its effects are at times immeasurable. I also think that egoism is always a motive in almost everything that people do, whether it is weak or strong. It doesn’t always have to be in expected ways, such as gains in approval, reputation, or recognition—it could be to make oneself wiser, to test ones limits, or to be a part of something bigger than ones self.
Just the thought of Orwell reminded me of a comic I bookmarked a while ago, which can really make you think if you haven’t thought about it too much before: http://www.recombinantrecords.net/images/2009-05-Amusing-Ourselves-to-Death.png

Orwell also mentioned his upbringing, and how his loneliness as a child attributed towards some of the reasons why he welcomed writing as a medium. I think that it is interesting, just reflecting on my life, how a lot of the negative instances in my life had more of a positive impact than all the good things that have happened. In fact, a lot of good things that happen to me have some negative consequences that go with them. I think that there is some kind of slippery slope effect that starts at ones childhood and can stick with them for the rest of their life. A lot of important development happens then, and it really can define us in that sort of way.

side note: I was suppose to post on Monday, but I went into this week thinking that Wednesday was the day for me to post (looked at 3/14 instead of 2/14.)

Reasons to write

Writing is an alternative form of expression that has good and bad attributes to it. One of the benefits of writing is that it can be edited and redone, where other means of communication and expression don’t have the luxury of getting polished. Now more than ever, writing is useful because it can be easily distributed and copied through email or copying machines. Writing can also be easily referenced, and there is less of a chance of miscommunication this way instead of relying on memory with vocal messages.

A big part of writing is that generally people feel more comfortable conveying information this way instead of spoken word. Public speaking is a very common and dominant fear in many people, and also involves other things to worry about when trying to get a message across, such as body language, tone of voice, posture, and confidence. Writing takes the message down to the simplest form, leaving out the other factors.

Obama speech edits

As a group we noticed that a lot of Obama's edits added a mixture of emotion and accountability to his speech through the edits. He often tried to convey to the audience that his statements were not broad generalizations, that they were from real people with feelings. Obama made many attempts to unify American belief on politics, that no matter which party one is from, everyone can agree to values such as good will. On top of this, Obama tacks on his own political agenda to these 'unifying' statements. For example, adding on "that only government can ensure" to an example of something that everyone stands for.

A & P Questions

1.)We think that the ending of the story kind of sucked for Sammy. he ended up not catching the girl's attention and subsequently did not have a job. The end of the story was both liberating and frustrating because you put yourself out there and get shot down by the girls and don't have a job.

2.) We disagree with Porter, because Sammy put himself out there honestly and got nothing out of it.

3.)Sammy changed his own identity from being a reserved person but then came out and spoke up in front of the girls.

4.) The purpose of the details in the story is to bring meaning to Sammy's decisions in the story. If there were not any details we would question the decision making of Sammy. On the other hand, he might not have wanted to end up like his friend who was 22 and was already married and had kids.

5.)If we were Sammy, we wouldn't have made the same decision because it was a such a small thing for him to quit his job and be left out in dust.

A & P

Something I picked out pretty fast from reading A & P was the level of detail used to describe the main character’s surroundings was very precise. The way Updike described many of the characters provided a clear depiction of them, allowing me to form my own judgments. I feel like I know Lengel and others beyond the accounts given to me, because I know people just like them. People may be predictable or common, or maybe I’m oversimplifying it.

I don’t know if it was Updike’s intent or not, but I felt the whole situation was kind of depressing—from the florescent lights to the ‘sheep-like’ people Sammy had to witness. This might have been an alternative motive to his resignation; instead of aiming to impress the girl, he might have been driven to commit an act of defiance against this environment. Whatever the case, the reader is the one to make a final evaluation of Sammy’s character and why he did what he did. Is he a hero, or a fool? In this case, there doesn’t seem to be that much of a difference.

A quick comic I made composed of internet memes.

Half-Empty Mouth Wash

1. One possibility is a person who mistook it for an unopened bottle. Or, a person with low income and bad oral hygiene. Possibly a person just looking to help him out, or to do it for the thrill. Then again, it could have been an underage alcoholic.

2. It probably sold because people wanted to help him out. People may have bought it to brag that they have an item of this mans life.

Stuff

Coincidentally, I viewed the same George Carlin video around the same week that classes started this semester. He is one of my favorite comedians, along with others like Bill Hicks. This clip and “All of My Life for Sale” are some good ways to think about how material objects affect our identity, and prepare for the first paper.

My favorite section in Freyer’s story is the recollection of him selling his toaster, and discovering that parting from this item would change him subtlety—he would stop eating toast. It is funny and insignificant, but creates the argument that ‘stuff’ permits us to do things we otherwise couldn’t. The notion that it changes who we are is still debatable.

Thinking about the toaster, I remembered a video I recently watched that I feel ties into these ideas well. The video describes a man’s attempt to build a toaster from scratch, and concludes that without the help of the rest of society, creating a toaster is nearly impossible. So if creating the things in our worlds requires a civilization, and the things in the world actually define who we are, then social forces do have a direct effect on our identity . . . that is, if the first two arguments are irrefutable.

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ODzO7Lz_pw

I found myself at a disagreement to the context of the “Shitty First Drafts” article. As I’ve said in an earlier post, I often find there is little I want to edit in my writing, or that I don’t know how to go back through and make it better. So at the end of the article when it asks, “From what Lamott has to say, is writing a first draft more about the product or the process?” for me, it is the product. If I did go about and write papers more carefree, I would not be sure if I could go back and make it suffice. I see a work of writing as a more holistic effort, rather than a form that is built piece by piece.

Writing Process

My writing process changes according to the material I am writing. If I am writing something research based or something presentational, I start out with looking through books or web pages, and formulate a really loose outline. If it is creative writing, or fiction, I tend to either jump into it or let ideas build up and play out in my mind. The part of the process I tend to neglect the most is the revision and editing part of writing. I can free-write and usually it tends to be at least decent, and has little to no grammatical or spelling errors. However, I don’t disregard this part because of time or apathy—I usually struggle with going back in and making it something better. The end result seems as if it was ‘patched together’ in a sense. I am not sure if not putting too much emphasis on revision works for me, or if I simply do not know how to do it adequately.

Critically reading Ann Raimes introduction

Discovering our identity is something everyone goes through to different extents, as Ann Raimes wrote. It is often easy to forget that an identity is not just how others or we see ourselves, but what we actually are. Throughout time, revered persons of societies and philosophers have made extraordinary claims to explain what we didn’t know, such as the presence of a soul, or that we are tools for a greater purpose. Even today, many people settle for those claims, or will look no further than their societal roles as identities.


‘We are what we do’ is a simple idea – we react to incentives, act hopefully with expectations, and generally live economically and conditionally. As used as an example in the critical reading excerpt, people have the ego, id, and superego; the fact that we have multiple personalities and manipulate ourselves to fit our situation is not a new idea at all. As people we are encouraged since birth to believe that we are unique, priceless individuals with our own unique identity, in that we leave impressions on the path of time. Contemplating how many people have lived and melded in this continuous steaming collective consciousness, I have a hard time understanding if any of it is true. What value is there to the marks I’ve made on the world, next to the paths taken if I had never existed?


All things considered, it is undeniable that identities change with time: physically and mentally. A person can replace their limbs with prosthetic ones, have organ transplants, sever their brain, intoxicate themselves with chemicals and concoctions – this is the extent of how far one can go to change their physical identity and maintain life. One can go as far as asking if there is even a point to where we can associate one persons identity with their previous one. If we are replaceable, is identity merely just association and observation? Is an identity we create ourselves as real as one that can be observed naturally from the universe? What makes something real, anyway?


On critical reading: Aside from its usefulness in gaining new ideas and expanding one’s mind, reading critically continually reinforces what any reader would expect from texts, and in turn allows one to write more effectively. It’s not good to assume that people will read your papers and digest it the way the you indented them to. Writing effectively requires persuasion, stimulation, and keeping the readers attention.