Final Project

I think the biggest obstacle for my final project will be getting the brothers in my fraternity house I live with to answer the questions I ask on time seeing as they are very busy as well. The hardest part of this project will be getting all the results and organizing it to get a just answer based off an average. For now I completely understand what is asked of me for this assignment and what needs to be completed.

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.

Something Instead of Nothing

I feel that with this article the art of speech really comes into play. Asking a question is ALOT easier than answering one. When you answer a question formally during an interview alot of what you might normally say is cut out of your vocabulary because you don't want to be frowned upon or looked down at. I also agree that getting people to loosen up when interviewing them is easily one of the smartest techniques there is in the art of interviews. If someone is tense and answers your questions you might end up with angry responses or stern. I feel that it all really depends on how you go about asking questions and your intentions in receiving certain answers. As for answering them I feel sometimes that the best words go un-said.

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."

Powerpoint is really evil...

I agree with the author in this article because I for one have never enjoyed making powerpoint slides. My problem with powerpoint is that it is to simple for me. I always think to complex into things or just enough but never enough to fit it on a slide, "especially if I have to put clipart in there." I feel like powerpoint is to simplistic that people who need to present or speak on a very in depth topic would have big problems using powerpoint efficiently. I have always preferred projector presentations and speakers because it forces them to take notes in a way that people can take notes from the notes they have taken. I know it sounds confusing but what I am trying to say is that people who write down notes for a projector have also read the material and either memorized it or learend it to where they could present it without slides. In conclusion powerpoint is to simplistic.

Cool Hunters

This article was unique in the fact that it tackled a topic that has been unanswered for many years, and really will never answered. That question is "What really is cool?" Since it's hard for me to describe it I will just say what I feel it is in my best words. I think that when someone asks what is cool, they are asking people what makes me fit in and get the most attention. Now a days, even proved by the article people associate "being cool" with having the best name brand clothes, having all the new technology that is the best advertised. Pretty much it seems that to be cool you have to have a lot of money. Also no 0ne will ever truly know what it is to be cool or how cool is cool.

Google or no Google?

Carr starts off by stating the meaning of the article very clear, that the way we think now a days is changing because as stated by him, "I used to be able to pick up an article or book and read it with ease," with that statement it seems that people today can't sit down for long and read a book without being distracted by something else. Carr goes on to speak about the ease of finding information on the internet. I agree that yes information is in fact hard to find but also it does depend on the reader and how they perceive the information. One of his examples where he said in the British library they have online computers to look up stored databases of articles and books. The concern with that was that everyone who looked up information would only skim read and not complete the article, and that if they couldn't find anything that they liked they would just skip it and move on to the next article. All in all yes Google has made people lazy in finding and interpreting information but when it comes down to it, it depends on the focus of the person as a reader.

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.

"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.

Slum Dog Billionaire

I felt that this article was a bit disturbing at first because of the vast detail in the hobos drinking alcohol and the detail of sexual intercourse, because it doesn't go in context with the reading I feel. I felt that hearing about how two rich people go and pretend to be poor to try and have fun or try something new is a bit rude because some people are in fact poor because of their up bringing and can't help it. The fact that they had money and led to a life like the article I feel fits perfectly under the typical rich person who is so bored because they have everything they want, but can't ever enjoy the intangibles in life. I feel that this article more or less discouraged me to read further every page I read.

I feel that they shouldn't have gone to a life of the poor, but rather maybe have studied it or understood their are other people out there other than rich people. When it comes down to it, part of me wants to agree with what they did living like that but my conscience says that no one should ever want to live that way. If I was in their shoes I would have told my friends to get therapy for trying to live poorly; but rather to help the poor instead of embracing it. I found that through many years of community service you learn more from the less fortunate than you do trying to live like them or act like it.

The Real "Houdini" or Not?

The introduction of this reading is very interesting and seems like Evan is under surveillance by some government officials. Really the introduction can be taken anyway because he makes it seem like he has to escape something that is wrong. He really gets the reader feeling suspenseful for the first part of the article really wanting to figure out why he is fleeing or rather just escaping something.

He has a very interesting way of getting people to read his articles because he turns it into a game, which would require the reader to stay up to date in order to find him and win the money. The fact that so much time was spent to ensure that the game would proceed is extensive to the point where the reader would have to stay tuned. I feel that if I had read this back when this game was going on and had free time, I might actually try finding him myself. Another thing that came out of this game is that the writer even got his own readers involved. They had used social networks, blogging, and chatting amongst themselves in hopes to find Evan.

The fact that Evan got caught I feel gives perfect evidence that it is in fact to hard to escape a digital world unless you COMPLETELY remove all forms of technology from your life. The only way I could see him not being caught is if he was in a cottage and lived like the Sniper from the book "Shooter". Evans story is very interesting.... Maybe Houdini never really could break out of the straight jacket?

Questioning Our Literacy

Facebook and texting is more conversational writing. Writing is a large umbrella with many little topics underneath it, such as conversational writing, scholarly writing, and free writing, just to name a few. People are able, hopefully, to tell when each one is appropriate to use when composing something.

I think, to find one’s own voice, you have to write how you feel comfortable with and in a way that gets the point across. We believe the writer might take bits and pieces of anothers' opinion but not all of it. Once they read some topic, that idea is in the mind of the other person and the writer works from there to construct their idea. Everyone’s voice is kind of a patchwork of others but by doing that, we are able to create our own.

By copying a voice or someone else's voice, writers might not exactly have their own genuinely authentic voice of their own. I think many people would like to keep to the norm, so there is little room for variations in writing. In school, it might be hard to grow a new, unique voice because teachers (at least in high schools and middle schools) try to make their students write in a certain way because some ways of writing might be too “out there.” Not trying to bash the school system or how teachers teach, but sometimes they try to push their thoughts, habits, and ways of writing onto their students.

“It depends on what you open yourself up to…what you experience and even how you’re raised.”

“I think it goes back to what we said earlier… you adopt certain ideas from other readings and use a combination of them to make your own voice. … it really depends on each person because it varies”

The media plays a big role because it exposes societies to certain things that could influence certain behaviours, way of speaking, and even people’s way of life.

Why Write?

Writing is another form of communication from the writer to the reader(s). Sometimes thoughts and words one would normally speak to one another is better be written down just incase the person can't get that thought out quite yet. I write alot of things down all the time in books, notes, homework, tests, because trying to remember them doesn't work out. However I do feel that writing is a more formal way of speaking, as well as a way to get information down that is important that you do not want to forget no matter what.

Why I Write?

Why I write by Joan Didion was an interesting article. I agree that when you start to think about why you write it has that position that you want to impose yourself to someone. It's interesting to think that it can actually be aggressive writing because your putting your words/thoughts down on paper meaning it can in fact sound harsh or even so subtle that one might not pick up on the crudeness of your own writings. I like How Joan goes on to state in this reading because it seems to be proving that writing in such manner is aggressive. She states her facts sound and clear. To me personally I feel that Joan was more agressive to the self rather than to the reader or person who would interperet the reading. Joan uses many phrases like "I didn't, I won't, I can't," which I think can give the reader that aggressiveness of the writer towards them self.

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 people watchers)

I enjoyed reading this story because I used to talk to people and also write like the author did with intense detail, except for me it would be grammatically incorrect in the eyes of "error" by Williams. I feel like "people watching" can almost be a hobby for some people, however I do mean that as you just watch people without having any desire of poking fun or scrutinizing them. I know for a fact in Georgia sometimes when I go to the mall with family or friends we will eat in the food court but in the middle where you see everyone pass by while eating. We essentially will talk about those people while eating but not in a rude manner.

For instance, I am someone who rarely uses the word "cute" in anything, no pun intended, but when I was at the mall one day I ended up seeing two little twins about 3 years old eating in big chairs pretending to be there parents. When one of the brothers had dropped his napkin I heard the other one say to him, "it's OK brother I'll get you another one." and they just went on pretending to be adults. That to me is something I had considered cute.

My depiction from above is kind of what I used to type and write like except worse. Lastly I also feel that sometimes just observing people who might not be wearing or acting like what you might think is normal, can help open one's eyes to how different we all really are and that we do in fact have our own identity's.

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.

Error or Not?

Actually before reading Williams Phenomenology of Error I looked up the definition of error. According to dictionary.com definition #1, "Error - A deviation from accuracy or correctness; a mistake, as in action or speech: His speech contained several factual errors."

After having read Williams paper, I feel that the first few pages were simply describing the common misunderstanding of what an "error" is on a social level. Due to so many people seeing just the "seriousness" of error, it lacks that understanding that the definition of error itself is not a serious or unjustified action; simply just a "deviation from accuracy or correctness."

I feel that the main point Williams is trying to tell us is that even though he might see error one way(on a more proper professional level), us(general public) might see error another way, and when asking one another if there is an error in X we ourselves end up with more errors than we began with.

Williams goes on to show that people with fine grammar violate their own rules which I feel correlates to what I said in the paragraph above. It has to be seen as what the reader understands to be an error, and how that understanding of error got into them from it's origin. I see that Williams is more closely trying to explain error in the sense of the reader rather than the writer because error is physical on paper; but not physical when it come's from within ourselves.

Even after writing this post I noticed multiple errors in my preview in which I understand to be simple grammatical errors, but maybe to others something far more different.....

Selling My Life Away

While looking at the page, a few items struck our attention:

The Handmade Book: someone who was reminiscing about the past, remembering something that they lived through or wants to learn more about the past would probably buy this object. Piecing together a past that they might or might not have lived through.
“Because someone was trying to keep a token of their time.”
“This was something that was homemade… you get a sense of who [Freyer] is.”
Maybe someone would buy this because it could help the buyer relate to someone else in the world. "I think it would be cool to buy the book... to look at it."


The picture- Truthfully, I (Jen) would buy all of the pictures he sold because I collect things like that, trying to piece together a past of someone who I don’t know. Maybe someone would buy this because they want to tell a story, one that might relate to their life or might be a fantasy of what they wish they had.
The buyer did teach photography at Hamilton College, so that is one key reason to buy a photo- whether good or bad, "to motivate themselves and others" or to learn from mistakes