My parents were not comfortable with me going out and interviewing people, so I interviewed my mom. We talked about when she was in her 20s and she had four piercings on one ear.
I first asked her why she wanted to have that many piercings, and what about it appealed to her. She told me that she liked it for two reasons: first, because she thought that it was artistic and creative, and second because she thought it showed that she was different. Along that line, I asked her how she felt when she saw other people with the same style, and she said it made her want to get more piercings to show that she didn't belong to their group either. I asked her if that couldn't become a bit of a slippery slope, a self-destructive cycle. She said it probably would have been, but she had her family and her career to consider.
The one main thing that I do like that is wear clothes along the lines of Japanese fashion. It's definitely not to fit in and probably not to please people, seeing as the type of people who I would be fitting in with or pleasing are on the other side of the world if not entirely fictional. Japanese fashion in general tends not to just be about the clothes or the company, it usually has to do with identifying with a certain type of character (see lolita fashion-- fans of the style do indeed like frills, but are mostly interested in capturing a sense of leisure and whimsy often identified with Rococo era nobles), and this is something that I definitely partake in.
I (sometimes) base my outfits on what I see in anime and manga, but I don't want to please the characters, I want to be them. After at least 10 years of buying bellbottoms I now wear skinny jeans, not because they're 'in' but because they have a similar fit to the pants from a Japanese schoolboy uniform. It's not because I want to look like my favorite characters, it's because I want to feel like them-- my friends may notice I've got much more of a "go get 'em" attitude in skinnies (not a word) than bellbottoms, because the one in bellbottoms is always the gentlest character. I adopt the manerisms of anyone I like, and if I see myself as that person it helps even more.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Top-Down processing
Bottom-up processing refers to processing something subconsciously and then dealing with it consciously. Top-down processing refers to considering something consciously and then digesting it and deciding how to act on it subconsciously.
In this assignment, we are asked to take the desire to be "cool" as an attempt to fill a greater void inside of us, to cover up the emptiness . This is somewhat similar to the Existentialist view that we are all lost and searching for our identity. The attempt to be 'cool' could be seen as one way to define ourselves, and therefore fill the void of not knowing exactly who we are.
My personal view is more akin to Social Constructivism. Social constructivists believe that nothing is completely intrinsic, that everything we define ourselves as is created within a social context. With this belief, it is impossible to pin down one definite source of the 'emptiness inside' or even claim that it definitely exists, because the social context in which people reside is different for everybody.
Along these lines, I believe that no one is above the influence of the outside world, and if they were they would be in deep trouble. And while I agree that there is no one source of this emptiness and that how it translates into our daily lives is, though not 'different for everybody', at least widely diverse. Therefore, I am going to speak from experience and claim only to know the inner workings of my specific group: teenagers who live in nice neighborhoods of urban areas and have had very little go wrong in their life.
With regards to that group, I have my own theory as to one of the potential sources of this emptiness, and it has to do with top-down processing. I believe that in some cases, instead of the desire to be cool being spawned as a solution to the emptiness we feel, the two are more like siblings: both descended from a desire for acceptance which quickly became impatient and devolved into a desire for attention.
Instead of starting with a basic, untouchable, intrinsic emptiness that we attempt to fill with acceptance in the form of admiration (aka. 'coolness'), we start with the essential human desire for attention and from that begin to spin off methods for fulfilling it. One possible solution is to be cool-- to gain attention by having others flock to bask in your glow. Another potential method, almost the 'evil twin' of the cool method, is to create this emptiness-- others will flock not to soak up your happiness, but to lend some of their own. It's the same thing as a child falling down and then, when nobody notices, staying on the ground and saying 'ow' much louder than really necessary.
In this assignment, we are asked to take the desire to be "cool" as an attempt to fill a greater void inside of us, to cover up the emptiness . This is somewhat similar to the Existentialist view that we are all lost and searching for our identity. The attempt to be 'cool' could be seen as one way to define ourselves, and therefore fill the void of not knowing exactly who we are.
My personal view is more akin to Social Constructivism. Social constructivists believe that nothing is completely intrinsic, that everything we define ourselves as is created within a social context. With this belief, it is impossible to pin down one definite source of the 'emptiness inside' or even claim that it definitely exists, because the social context in which people reside is different for everybody.
Along these lines, I believe that no one is above the influence of the outside world, and if they were they would be in deep trouble. And while I agree that there is no one source of this emptiness and that how it translates into our daily lives is, though not 'different for everybody', at least widely diverse. Therefore, I am going to speak from experience and claim only to know the inner workings of my specific group: teenagers who live in nice neighborhoods of urban areas and have had very little go wrong in their life.
With regards to that group, I have my own theory as to one of the potential sources of this emptiness, and it has to do with top-down processing. I believe that in some cases, instead of the desire to be cool being spawned as a solution to the emptiness we feel, the two are more like siblings: both descended from a desire for acceptance which quickly became impatient and devolved into a desire for attention.
Instead of starting with a basic, untouchable, intrinsic emptiness that we attempt to fill with acceptance in the form of admiration (aka. 'coolness'), we start with the essential human desire for attention and from that begin to spin off methods for fulfilling it. One possible solution is to be cool-- to gain attention by having others flock to bask in your glow. Another potential method, almost the 'evil twin' of the cool method, is to create this emptiness-- others will flock not to soak up your happiness, but to lend some of their own. It's the same thing as a child falling down and then, when nobody notices, staying on the ground and saying 'ow' much louder than really necessary.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Merchants of cool
I personally tend to subscribe to the "of course they manipulate us. So what?" kind of view about advertising. I mean, in some instances, corporations are definitely in the wrong. I heard from a friend that Coca Cola buys the cheap water for their soda from poor villages in Africa even if they're in a drought and people are literally dying of thirst. That undoubtedly fits under the category of evil.
Still, I don't really see pinning down and even manipulating customers for profit as "evil". At most, it's a little rude. The main reason I think like this is because the way I see it, from the customer's end it's pretty much the same. Since advertising companies are intentionally pursuing the result it counts as manipulation, but if they just sat there and did nothing youth culture would still happen. It might happen differently, and a little slower, but teenagers would still get obsessed with whatever crazy thing they came up with. I really don't see a problem with what they're doing until it causes a genuine tragedy, like a teenage girl committing suicide because she doesn't live up to supermodel standards.
Which I'm not saying doesn't happen. Things like self-confidence issues and the related definitely are a terrible side effect of modern marketing culture. But we have to remember that while we're criticizing society for victimizing teenage shoppers, those shoppers are part of society too. Those teenagers are the ones that decided what's cool, and the process of it getting commercialized and processed and made and packed and shipped doesn't really change that.
Basically, the way I see it, advertising is a phenomenon that takes advantage of an already existing culture. There are nasty reprecussions, and I'm not saying it's the best thing in the world or completely without flaw, but I am saying that the system isn't completely at fault. It may accelerate both the negative and the positive, but if there was more positive to begin with then we wouldn't have these problems with it.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
The coolest informal research you ever did see
This homework assignment was to do informal research on some of the sources of cool. I tried to focus specifically on "guides". What I mean by this is sources that tell you how to 'be' a certain way. If there are instructions for it out there and it's not something that you'd have to do with the instructions or not, someone must think it's cool.
Smugopedia. Web.
As this website describes itself, "Smugopedia is a collection of slightly controversial opinions about a variety of subjects. We offer you the chance to buy a fleeting sense of self-satisfaction at the small cost of alienating your friends and loved ones."
Within some circles (I think this includes our classroom as well) the slightly controversial opinions offered are seen as the "uniqueness" so often thought of as cool, and the sense of self satisfaction that comes from all but shamelessly proclaiming the superiority of your opinion is what is defined as "confidence". Worth reading if your circle of friends thinks like this, but in that case chances are you're not satisfied to use someone else's opinion.
"How to be Ninja (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009..
"How to be Gangster (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009..
"How to be Emo (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009..
"How to be Nerd (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009. .
"How to be UFC Fighter (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009..
These are all of the videos from Ryan Higa's "How to be..." series. Even though the videos are meant as parodies, I still think it's valuable as an example of perceptions of archetypes in our culture. They won't really teach you anything about being those things, but they might teach you a bit about how to be like Ryan Higa and his friends.
Ryan Higa has thousands of subscriptions to his youtube channel and has gotten popular enough that he has acutally been contracted to make a full length movie which will be comming out in theaters. Based on that, I'd say he's considered pretty cool.
Andrews, Scott. "What Men Want." AspireNow. Web. 12 Dec 2009..
This is one of the many online guides to what men want from a relationship. There is a corresponding guide to what women want on the site as well.
The matter of what men or women want is the subject of constant pondering and several cheezy romantic comedies. These guides attempt to offer a solution. Whether their advice actually helps probably depends on who you use as a test subject.
"Guide to COOL--fd." Web. 12 Dec 2009..
This is a parody of cool, desplaying many of the same ideas we've discussed in class. It makes fun of alterations usually thought of a cool on objects like cars (such as making them lower, faster, and louder), highlighting their rediculousness by demonstrating them on a cat.
Especially cohesive with the themes of our class is the idea that desplaying a big company logo on something makes it cooler. Given the use of this concept in a parody the artist behind the comic probably also subscribes to the view of the masses as corperate puppets.
"Top 100 Coolest people in the World." ListAfterList. Web. 12 Dec 2009..
This is a comprehensive listof the top 100 coolest people in the world. I figured this probably fit with the theme a little, because if you wanted to rip off someone else's cool these are the people to immitate.
What impressed me most about it was that it seems to draw from a wide variety of perspectives on cool, listing people ranging from Justin Timberlake to Thich Nhat Hanh.
Smugopedia. Web.
As this website describes itself, "Smugopedia is a collection of slightly controversial opinions about a variety of subjects. We offer you the chance to buy a fleeting sense of self-satisfaction at the small cost of alienating your friends and loved ones."
Within some circles (I think this includes our classroom as well) the slightly controversial opinions offered are seen as the "uniqueness" so often thought of as cool, and the sense of self satisfaction that comes from all but shamelessly proclaiming the superiority of your opinion is what is defined as "confidence". Worth reading if your circle of friends thinks like this, but in that case chances are you're not satisfied to use someone else's opinion.
"How to be Ninja (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009.
"How to be Gangster (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009.
"How to be Emo (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009.
"How to be UFC Fighter (nigahiga)." Web. 12 Dec 2009.
These are all of the videos from Ryan Higa's "How to be..." series. Even though the videos are meant as parodies, I still think it's valuable as an example of perceptions of archetypes in our culture. They won't really teach you anything about being those things, but they might teach you a bit about how to be like Ryan Higa and his friends.
Ryan Higa has thousands of subscriptions to his youtube channel and has gotten popular enough that he has acutally been contracted to make a full length movie which will be comming out in theaters. Based on that, I'd say he's considered pretty cool.
Andrews, Scott. "What Men Want." AspireNow. Web. 12 Dec 2009.
This is one of the many online guides to what men want from a relationship. There is a corresponding guide to what women want on the site as well.
The matter of what men or women want is the subject of constant pondering and several cheezy romantic comedies. These guides attempt to offer a solution. Whether their advice actually helps probably depends on who you use as a test subject.
"Guide to COOL--fd." Web. 12 Dec 2009.
This is a parody of cool, desplaying many of the same ideas we've discussed in class. It makes fun of alterations usually thought of a cool on objects like cars (such as making them lower, faster, and louder), highlighting their rediculousness by demonstrating them on a cat.
Especially cohesive with the themes of our class is the idea that desplaying a big company logo on something makes it cooler. Given the use of this concept in a parody the artist behind the comic probably also subscribes to the view of the masses as corperate puppets.
"Top 100 Coolest people in the World." ListAfterList. Web. 12 Dec 2009.
This is a comprehensive listof the top 100 coolest people in the world. I figured this probably fit with the theme a little, because if you wanted to rip off someone else's cool these are the people to immitate.
What impressed me most about it was that it seems to draw from a wide variety of perspectives on cool, listing people ranging from Justin Timberlake to Thich Nhat Hanh.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Cool family member interview
For my cool family member I interviewed my mom (not Paula, this one is Nancy, a professor of social work).
When I asked her what makes someone cool she said that it is important for someone to be different, a little rebellious, funny, and reflective of the underdog. She is a Mets fan, as am I. I asked her whether she thought that this is just what society expects of a cool person or if those qualities are truly admirable, and she said that she really does value them in a person.
I then asked her what she thought the coolest aspect of herself was, and after thinking for a while she answered "My candor." When asked to elaborate she said that often her students say she is cool because she talks openly about her own life; she isn't just a professor to them, she's a real person. She continued by saying that she thinks it takes courage to step out of a role like that.
I asked her who the coolest member of her side of the family was. After verifying that I was only talking about her family and she could therefore not answer Bruce Springsteen, she answered that they were all cool but it was probably a tie between herself and her brother David. She said that he was probably the most rebellious. I pointed out that her sister, Joanie, is an anarchist communist who had once taken a building hostage as part of a protest in high school. She said that that didn't quite fit the criteria of being a little rebellious.
When I asked her what makes someone cool she said that it is important for someone to be different, a little rebellious, funny, and reflective of the underdog. She is a Mets fan, as am I. I asked her whether she thought that this is just what society expects of a cool person or if those qualities are truly admirable, and she said that she really does value them in a person.
I then asked her what she thought the coolest aspect of herself was, and after thinking for a while she answered "My candor." When asked to elaborate she said that often her students say she is cool because she talks openly about her own life; she isn't just a professor to them, she's a real person. She continued by saying that she thinks it takes courage to step out of a role like that.
I asked her who the coolest member of her side of the family was. After verifying that I was only talking about her family and she could therefore not answer Bruce Springsteen, she answered that they were all cool but it was probably a tie between herself and her brother David. She said that he was probably the most rebellious. I pointed out that her sister, Joanie, is an anarchist communist who had once taken a building hostage as part of a protest in high school. She said that that didn't quite fit the criteria of being a little rebellious.
Cool people interview
Can you tell I got tired of thinking of witty titles?
Anyway, here are some of my friend's thoughts on coolness. I tried to interview cool looking people on the street, but no one was comfortable having their picture posted online.
Yu-Xi:
Why do you like clothes like that? *indicates*
Um... they're comfy. And warm. Versus nudity.
What is a really cool outfit that you'd want to wear?
I don't really have a cool outfit that I like to wear. I like to wear just a T-shirt and Jeans, because that's easy to wear.
What do you think are important elements of coolness?
I like someone who... is interesting? And... ah... not closed-minded.
Yay! *we high-five*
Na:
(she didn't ewant her picture posted)
What makes a person cool?
Um... I guess... uniqueness? Like... someone who does something you wouldn't see every day.
Why do you wear the kinds of clothes you wear?
Oh, my mom bought them for me. 'Cause she's like 'you have to fit in', but I don't really care. I don't really get to choose what I wear.
If you did get to choose, what would you wear?
Um... I have no idea.
Ja Min:
Can I take a picture of you to put on the blog?
No. Say that not taking pictures is cool.
What do you think is the coolest outfit you have?
Nothing.
You think being naked is the coolest outfit you have?
What? No. Wha... I didn't mean 'no clothing.'
Anyway, here are some of my friend's thoughts on coolness. I tried to interview cool looking people on the street, but no one was comfortable having their picture posted online.
Yu-Xi:
Why do you like clothes like that? *indicates*
Um... they're comfy. And warm. Versus nudity.
What is a really cool outfit that you'd want to wear?
I don't really have a cool outfit that I like to wear. I like to wear just a T-shirt and Jeans, because that's easy to wear.
What do you think are important elements of coolness?
I like someone who... is interesting? And... ah... not closed-minded.
Yay! *we high-five*
Na:
(she didn't ewant her picture posted)
What makes a person cool?
Um... I guess... uniqueness? Like... someone who does something you wouldn't see every day.
Why do you wear the kinds of clothes you wear?
Oh, my mom bought them for me. 'Cause she's like 'you have to fit in', but I don't really care. I don't really get to choose what I wear.
If you did get to choose, what would you wear?
Um... I have no idea.
Ja Min:
Can I take a picture of you to put on the blog?
No. Say that not taking pictures is cool.
What do you think is the coolest outfit you have?
Nothing.
You think being naked is the coolest outfit you have?
What? No. Wha... I didn't mean 'no clothing.'
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Overkill
The assignment was to write a short story about a really cool person. Well, you said 3 paragraphs to 25 pages. You did ask for it in that regard. Here it is, 8.35 pages in Word, single spaced. Sorry, it's kind of an epic, and I wouldn't exactly call it compressed, but I wanted to show what kinds of activities Gabriel would be involved in and how Shane changes in different situations. And then... well, I did say I was a writer...
Main characters are Shane and Gabriel. Enjoy.
Main characters are Shane and Gabriel. Enjoy.
Chapter 1— Shane
Shane shifted his leg up on to the next stair to better support his sketchbook. He was sitting on the stairs of the front entrance of the school at dismissal, just close enough to the wall that the shade of the arch didn’t touch his paper. He brushed his stringy blond hair out of his face and flicked his light blue eyes back up to his model. She hadn’t been in school that day, she was at some sort of event, but at least he could look at her now.
He’d made a hobby of drawing his classmates, but she was giving him a bit of trouble. There was something about her hair... he had wanted to draw her hair blowing in the wind, and her side swept bangs had turned out alright, but there was just something about the jagged ends of her haircut that wouldn’t let him capture how pin-straight it was without having it plastered to her head. Maybe he’d actually color this one in, once he finished. Then he’d have to deal with finding the exact right shade for her brown hair, with it’s almost golden sheen. But of course, he’d already shaded in her ruby red lips in black and white...
He pushed up his sleeve with a long, pale, charcoal-smudged hand and felt a chilly breeze cut across his forearm. It was cold enough for some people to be wearing sweaters, but Shane was dressed like he always was: long-sleeved white collared shirt tucked into his jeans, brown belt, black nondescript sneakers. He held his sketchbook at a distance to get a new perspective on his drawing, then sighed and started erasing. His drawings were never good enough, he usually just ended up throwing them out. Well, he’d try finishing this one again when he got home. He closed up his sketchbook, put his charcoal back in it’s case, and stuffed everything into his bag. Hoisting it onto one shoulder, he stood up and moved towards the street.
“Shane!” someone called, and he jerked his head up to see his father jogging towards him.
“Dad! What’re you doing here?”
“I have to talk to a classmate of yours for a case I’m working on, and I figured I’d come pick you up,” his father said, hands in his pockets. “Car’s around the corner, if you want a ride.”
“Oh... for a case? Who do you need to talk to?”
“Gabriel Jericho.”
“...yeah, that figures. If anyone was gonna kill someone it’d be him...” Shane muttered.
“So I hear,” his father said, and paused to grin at his son.
“...what?” Shane asked uncomfortably.
“Who was that girl?”
“What, the one I was drawing? That’s Rachel...”
“Oh...” his father nodded and continued grinning at him in a way that suggested his fatherly wisdom was kicking in. “What is she wearing?” He asked, glancing back at her. She was in a red strapless dress that looked like it belonged at a cocktail party.
“I don’t know, she was at some sort of event today. She’s kind of famous, she does some acting and modeling... Rachel Allan Grey, you know her?” Shane took a moment to evaluate his father’s widening grin. “What?” His father only chuckled, and Shane let out an annoyed breath before turning and stalking towards the car.
“‘Ay, Shane!” called a boy in a Yankee cap, and started over towards him. Shane made no indication that he heard him, but sped up a little. “I saw you lookin’ at Rachel,” he said with a smirk. Shane occupied himself by slipping his other arm through the strap of his backpack as he walked. “Aw, look at him, he’s blushing! Don’t be shy,” the boy persisted, easily matching his stride. A few of his friends had caught up with them, they laughed. “Hey,” the boy pushed him on the left shoulder, bringing them both to a stop, “you like her?” He asked.
Shane took a moment to breathe angrily. “...It’s none of your business, Todd.”
“Oh s—t, Shane’s a G,” Todd said, and his friends snickered.
A slender leg encased in a black slip-on shoe and a dark colored skinny jean stepped quietly out of the shadows, followed by a T-shirt covered by a black leather jacket. As he stepped into the sunlight, the boy’s black fedora kept his large green eyes in shadow. “Hey, don’t mess with my man Shane, he knows karate,” Gabriel said, punching Todd on the shoulder as he walked by.
“Oh s—t Shane, you know karate?” Todd asked, taking a fighting stance. “C’mon, show me a move!”
“He’s gonna kick your a-s!” Gabriel called through cupped hands, walking backwards for a few paces before righting himself and rounding the corner.
“Oh yeah? Show me what’cha got, Shane!” Todd said. Be bounced on his toes for a few moments, making noises he had learned from friends imitating martial arts movies, and took a swipe at Shane’s head. Shane dodged and, with a reddening face and a glare to slay the gods, ducked into the back seat of the car. “Aw, you’re no fun Shane!” Todd’s muffled voice came, and he banged on the window a few times. Shane breathed deeply and stretched out in the car.
Chapter 2— Gabriel
“Rachel, baby! Looking yummy as always,” Gabriel said, grabbing her by the elbow and dragging her away from the gaggle of girls that had been admiring talking with her. “Hey, speaking of, you have any snacks? Oh, wait, I forgot, you’re a model.”
“Wha- hey! That doesn’t mean I’m like, anorexic or something...”
“No, it totally does.”
“Oh my god, no!”
“Oh? Then, how come you don’t like eat?”
“I do so!”
“Oh, really? You shouldn’t do that you know, you’ll get fat.” Gabriel glanced around as Rachel rolled her eyes and let out a slightly annoyed/slightly amused sigh.
“Hey,” Gabriel said, angling himself so that his back was to the rest of the block. “Shane’s dad is here.”
“...the detective? Why?”
“Not sure.”
“You think he wants to talk to us?”
“How should I know?”
“Well what should we do?”
“Ok... I have a plan.”
“What?”
“How about this...” Gabriel began seriously, “let’s make out.”
“Gabriel...” Rachel said exasperatedly.
“No, I mean it!” Gabriel replied with a signature crooked grin. “and be like really graphic about it so he gets all awkward and leaves!”
“Oh my god, can you be serious for like one second?”
“What, you don’t like my plan?”
“...My car is right there, let’s just get out of here before he gets to talk to us.”
“Fine, be that way! See if I care!” He said, voice booming with fake outrage. “I’m driving,” he added, striding over and getting in to the driver’s seat of her car.
Rachel let out a breath that could’ve been mistaken for a sarcastic laugh. “Don’t you usually call shotgun?”
Gabriel rolled down the window. “Yeah, but then I’d have to shoot people, and that’s way more work.”
Chapter 3— Duck and Cover
“Why do you always sit in the back seat?” Shane’s father asked him, climbing into the car and taking the parking break off.
“More room back here,” Shane said, angling his leg on the seat to lean his sketchbook against it. “You talk to him?”
“No, he got in a car, I want to see where he goes. Mind if we follow him for a bit?”
“I don’t care.” Shane’s father turned the key in the ignition and the car slid smoothly out of it’s parking space.
For a while they drove on in silence.
“Hey, mind scooting down a bit?” Shane’s father eventually said. “I don’t want him to see you.”
Shane shrugged and lay down on the seat, flipping over onto his stomach so he could continue his drawing. “You’re taking this pretty seriously...” he commented.
“Well, he is a suspect, and you never know what he could have in the car...”
Gabriel’s green eyes flicked up to the rear view mirror, and he gave a faint smile. “Son of a b—ch is following us...”
“Seriously?!” Rachel whispered, as though she was worried that they would be overheard. She glanced backward, then quickly shrunk down in her seat, red manicured nails tugging at at the high hem of her dress.
“Relax, it’s fine. It’s not like I’m going anywhere important, anyway...”
“What’re you gonna do?”
“...let’s see what happens.” He made a left turn off the highway, into a sparsely populated industrial area of the Bronx.
...
“...he’s leading me in circles...” Shane’s father said under his breath. In the last 30 minutes they had made three left turns. He bit his lip for a moment and flicked a button in his dashboard. Red and blue lights began flashing in the grill of his car.
“There he goes!” Gabriel said, and pulled the car over next to what appeared to be an abandoned factory. “Get down, wouldja?” He said quietly to Rachel over his shoulder as he got out. She slid down in her seat and watched him through narrowed eyes.
“Hey, Agent James McPherson,” Shane’s father called, getting out of his car and flashing an NYPD badge at Gabriel.
“Oh, hey, aren’t you Shane’s dad?”
“Yeah, I’ve seen you before, haven’t I?” James said casually, moving forward to shake Gabriel’s hand.
“Probably. Hey, is Shane here?” Gabriel asked, releasing James’ hand so he couldn’t feel him sweating.
“He went home.”
“Oh. Hey, I thought you were a detective, what’re you doing pulling people over?”
“What are you doing driving in circles?”
“...Well I thought you were like a creepy stalker or something... I have a lot of those, since I’m so good looking... why were you following me anyway?”
“Where were you Sunday night, around eight?” James asked, hoping that the suddenness of the question would catch him off guard.
“Sunday? Ah... I don’t really remember, but chances are I was making love to a beautiful woman.”
“Ha ha. No, really.”
“Well that actually is what I’m usually doing...” Gabriel let his smile fade as though he was seriously considering the question. “Really, though? I was probably at home.”
“Can anyone verify that?”
“Uh... my parents were out... we don’t have security cameras or anything... oh, I know! Your son, I called Shane for the homework around then. What’s with the third degree?”
“Does the name Jessica Gardine mean anything to you?”
“No, who’s she?”
“Dead. We found her body a few days ago. Coroner puts her time of death on Sunday at around eight pm.”
“...and you’re asking me all these questions... what, because I’m a suspect? You seriously think I shot someone while having a completely normal phone conversation?”
There was a pause. “...Gabriel... how’d you know she had been shot to death?”
Gabriel stared at him for a moment, then let out a shakey breath and looked down. After a second he looked around, then leaned in close to James and spoke in a low, uncertain voice. “You know... there are a lot of things that I really like about my school. And, um...” he paused to rub his forehead and reached into his coat as though looking for something. “One of the things I’ve always really liked is...” he stepped back and whipped a silver revolver out of his coat. “They don’t have metal detectors.” James pulled out his own gun but it was too late, Gabriel was the only one that got a chance to fire.
Chapter 4— Backup
“Hey!” Shane shouted, jumping out of the car.
“...Shane! Good to see you! I didn’t know you were here...” Gabriel called, trying to conceal the scene. Shane ducked behind the passenger seat door and, turning, ripped it open. “I can still shoot you through the windshield,” Gabriel called, dropping all pretense of niceness.
Shane tore open the glove compartment and grabbed the gun that his father kept there. Even if he’d never fired a gun before, his father had shown him how to aim one. He spun around and, steadying his hands on the hood of the car, fired twice. “Don’t move!”
Gabriel jumped backward to avoid the gunshots. Glaring at what he could see of Shane he slowly raised his hands and knelt as though to put down the revolver... then suddenly turned and dashed into the building. “Get back here!” Shane called and fired after him once, but he was already inside.
Shane moved to chase him, but stopped short and glanced down at the glove compartment. Inside was a walkie talkie and a pair of handcuffs. Keeping the gun aimed at the door, he reached inside and, with shaking hands, pulled out the walkie talkie. “H-hello?”
After a short pause there was a burst of noise. “Who is this?” came a voice distorted by static.
“This is Shane McPherson... I’m James McPherson’s son... he’s just... been shot...” Shane said quietly, still staring intently at the door.
“Is the shooter still there?”
“Yeah... he ran into a building... he still has the gun, I have one too...”
“Alright, where are you? I’ll send backup.”
“Uh... I’m not sure...”
“Is the car with you? I can trace the GPS.”
“Yeah...”
“Alright, well don’t do anything until we get there... listen to me, Shane. Does your father have a pulse?”
Shane took his eyes off the door for the first time and stared intently at the walkie talkie. “I don’t know,” he said, looking down.
“Ok, well stay calm Shane... can you check?”
Shane swallowed. “Yeah... yeah. Hang on a second.” Looking back up at the door he crept forward, staying low. Reaching his father’s body, he moved his fingers slowly up to his neck.
The voice waited until it seemed like an appropriate amount of time had passed. “...Shane? Anything?”
Shane considered the walkie talkie for a moment before lifting it to his mouth. “...no.” He switched the walkie talkie off and glared up at the building from behind his hair. He stood up slowly and walked back to the car. He put everything back in the glove compartment, but found that he couldn’t bring himself to close it. He stared at it’s contents again.
He left the handcuffs, he took the gun.
Dammit! Gabriel swore to himself. He could probably talk himself out of anything, but he just had to go and shoot the guy... he had seen the building from three different angles as he drove up and there didn’t seem to be any exits other than the way he came in... and Shane was probably guarding that... he’d probably already called for backup... dammit. He could probably get Shane, but if the police showed up he was done for... what he needed to do now was call for reinforcements. If he played his cards right he could let his guys and the police shoot each-other while he slipped quietly away. He flipped open his phone—
The door downstairs banged open. Gabriel was one flight up, but as far as Shane knew he could be anywhere in the building... if he called now, Shane would hear him... even the beeping of his keypad if he tried texting would give him away... he could hear the old sheet metal steps creaking as Shane walked up them anyway... Gabriel aimed his gun at where he predicted Shane’s head would be, but Shane stopped a few steps short. He braced himself and ran up five steps, then flattened himself to the stairwell. Gabriel’s shot hit the wall behind him. Jumping up he fired in Gabriel’s direction, but he had already dodged behind some piece of mechanical equipment. Shane lept up the remaining few stairs and flung himself behind a similar machine.
He breathed heavily for a moment, back to the machine, gun held in front of his face, head turned to try and move around the corner at any time. He slowly stood up, and heard a faint tapping on the floor as Gabriel did the same. He moved behind another machine, both hands on the gun. The room was dark and windowless, the only sound was their soft footfalls as they ducked cautiously from machine to machine and the drip drip of water leaking from the ceiling. Very unhelpful. “Show yourself!” He called after a moment.
Gabriel tightened his grip on the revolver, but the sound echoed so that he couldn’t tell Shane’s position... he grinned. If the room’s acoustics wouldn’t give away Shane’s position, they wouldn’t give away his either. He lifted his cell phone and dialed.
“Gabriel?” the man on the other line answered.
“Hey, how’s it goin’?” Gabriel responded, still circling the equipment looking for Shane. Without waiting for an answer, he continued, “Listen, I have a bit of a situation here. I’m gonna need you to send like 20 or 50 guys over.”
“Where are you?”
“Just trace the call.” At the moment, he didn’t particularly care whether or not he revealed that he had contacts in the FBI.
“Alright, stay on the line.”
Gabriel stopped moving and grinned. “Hang on a second, I have to shoot someone.”
He has a clear shot?! Shane tensed and looked around. Somewhere he has a clear shot... but I can’t see him from here... the only place like that... Shane whirled around and fired at Gabriel, who ducked behind a machine, cursing softly. Dropping his phone he scampered behind the line of equipment to avoid Shane’s next shot. Launching himself back onto the stairwell he paused only for a moment to fire back at Shane twice before ascending to the next floor.
The gunshots echoed to the cars outside. Watching from the lower corner of her car’s tainted windows, Rachel exhaled softly through her reddened lips. That idiot, Gabriel...
Chapter 5— Friendly Fire [Kiss Me Kill Me]
A total of six shots had been fired inside the building. Neither of them had six bullets when they went in, so each person had fired at least once. If the shots were divided up evenly, that meant Shane was out of bullets. The car door clicked open and Rachel’s stilettos slid daintily out in the fading light. They carried her over to James’ body, where she bent at the waist and delicately pulled the gun from his lifeless hand with her forefinger and thumb.
The exit to the stairwell on the third floor led into a hallway. There was a window behind the exit, so the rusting hall was stained with golden light, but it didn’t help much. Gabriel was nowhere in sight. There were two doors before the right turn at the end of the hall. Examining the doors Shane found that the dust on them hadn’t been disturbed, but if the doors had been open already when Gabriel got upstairs he wouldn’t have had to touch them to get inside...
Shane gripped the gun in front of him with both hands and stared at the first door, preparing to kick it in. Oh wait, he was out of bullets...
He kicked the door in anyway. The room was empty. Thank god. Taking a deep breath, he steeled himself and repeated the motion on the other door. Nothing again. He moved back out of the room and pressed himself against the wall, preparing to round the corner. He could always try bluffing... but Gabriel could do the math, and he had already shot at him three times when the gun was actually loaded...
There was a faint tapping on the stairs behind him. He turned his head to see Rachel, silhouetted in the gold light, slowly raising the gun in her left hand. “Drop it, Shane,” she said quietly. For all she knew, he could have some bullets left. He leaned forward, and slowly and deliberately placed the gun on the ground. She followed him with her eyes... but not with the gun. Suddenly he kicked off from his kneeling position and raced towards her. “Ah-!” her eyes widened; the gun had only been for threatening, she hadn’t been prepared to actually use it. She quickly moved her other hand up to try and aim but he was already there, he kicked her hand and the shot hit the ceiling as the gun clattered to the floor.
Turning her around he shoved her against the wall, pressing her face against the window and pinning her arms against her back. He stepped back slowly and, securing her wrists in his left hand, ducked down and grabbed the gun in his right. She did not resist. A few strands of her auburn hair slipped slightly from behind her ear and looped across her face. “This is bigger than you, you know,” she said quietly. He pointed the gun at her. They walked.
They moved slowly down the hallway, him behind her, gun at the ready over her shoulder. Shane brought them to a halt at the end of the passage. Rounding the corner quickly he pulled Rachel out in front of him, gun pressed to the side of her head. “Don’t shoot!” He said, looking out from the gap between the gun and his human sheild’s shoulder.
Gabriel hesitated. He had been able to tell that Rachel had been disarmed, but he didn’t actually think that Shane would take her hostage... he lowered his gun slightly.
“Gabriel, I’m so sorry about this...” Rachel truly did look sorry. She had just been trying to help...
“Don’t worry about it,” Gabriel said, and put a bullet in her left lung.
Shane swore and dropped his hostage, firing a shot that ended up at Gabriel’s feet before ducking back behind the corner. There was a door in the hallway that led back into one of the rooms Shane had entered earlier. Glancing over his shoulder, he scampered in.
Chapter 6— Your Life
At one end of the room there was a ladder to the next floor. There was a window into the hallway along the wall next to it, and a door back into the hall just in front of that. Shane crouched and moved quickly over to the window. He could see Gabriel clearly, peeking around the corner looking for him. The light that had been slowly fading was gone now, but in the moon’s silvery sheen he could still see well enough. He aimed carefully.
Gabriel had moved to the the corner and was looking into the hallway, but he already knew where Shane was. He had come in through that very room, and he knew Shane would take the opportunity to shoot at him through the window. He only had one bullet left, if he could just get Shane to waste a few... He had his ear pressed to the wall, and he listened intently to Shane’s light, quick steps. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9... The footsteps stopped. Gabriel listened a moment longer, then flattened himself to the floor. The glass shattered, and three bullets whizzed over his head.
Shane burst out through the door but Gabriel was already there, pinning down his right wrist and pressing the revolver under his chin. Instinctively Shane swatted at Gabriel’s arm, and somehow managed to knock the gun from his hand. Not pausing to think he shoved him down and pointed the gun in his face.
There was a moment of silence. The light from a ventilation fan far above them splayed in strange shapes on the floor. “Give up,” Shane said quietly. Gabriel was genuinely surprised, but didn’t make a sound. “The people I called will be here any minute, so just surrender,” he continued softly after a moment. “It’s over, you can just turn yourself in and face justice. But... I’m seriously going to kill you now, so...” Below them there was the sound of a car pulling up. They both paused to listen to it.
Gabriel’s green eyes swiveled back up to Shane. “What do you want to bet those are my guys, not yours?” he said, in a voice that suggested nothing unusual was happening. “How ‘bout your life?” With that he swept his leg around and knocked Shane’s feet out from under him. He was on his feet and through the door in one motion. Grabbing his revolver he clamped it between his teeth and flew up the ladder. In a flash, Shane was after him.
Gabriel slammed the trapdoor above him open and took off running, barely even noticing that he was outside until he was halfway across the roof. He paused. “What now, Gabriel?” Shane called from behind him. “Somebody’s allies are running up the stairs right now. Do we just wait and see who wins?”
Gabriel hesitated for a moment, clenching his fist. Then tilted his head to look over at Shane, grinning like no tomorrow. “I’d rather be young and sexy when I go to hell.” With that he took off running and vaulted himself off the roof.
Shane ran after him, stopping at the edge of the roof to look over. He knew Gabriel was crazy, but that was just ludicrous, for all he knew he had a 50% chance of being saved...
Shane considered his father’s body on the other side of the building, and jumped off the roof after Gabriel. Gabriel held on to his hat in one hand and twisted to point his gun up at Shane, who aimed down at him as they fell...
Bang.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
As cool as it gets
Sorry, I know my posts are out of order, but at least they're here.
This is the beginning of the 'Cool' unit, for this assignment I have to write a few paragraphs exploring the concept of 'cool'. So, heregoes.
A lot of people have mentioned that they find it cool when someone marches to their own tune, and doesn't care what anybody else thinks. I don't think that's quite the whole story, though; they only like someone if they don't conform in the same way that everyone else doesn't conform. If I came in wearing florescent colored goggles and a frog suit, nobody would think I was cool. In order to be cool on that scale you have to be "too cool to care" or something to the effect; you have to like the same stuff as everyone else, just not because you're worried about fitting in. When people say they don't like people who conform, I think what they're really thinking of is people who are desperate for attention.
I personally don't care about conformity in the slightest. I don't think conforming or not conforming makes a person any more or less cool, it's just an unrelated part of who they are. One of the main aspects of my personality is that I am a writer, so I tend to look at life from that standpoint. As such my definition of a cool person is a good character; someone who will capture my interest and my imagination, who interesting things might happen to. I find someone cool if I want to hear more from them, someone with interesting quirks and philosophies that fit nicely into an engaging story.
More often than not, that means that the person either has something wrong with them or is extremely badass. I like characters with handicaps to overcome, be it a physical disability to out-and-out ignore (in fiction, usually blindness) or an inner demon of some sort. I like a character who is willing to sacrifice their subordinates, who has deluded themself into thinking they're doing the right thing. The crazier the better, as long as it doesn't get grotesque. Essentially, the more likely they are to die the cooler they are to me, and if I'd actually miss them once they die even better.
Of course, all of these people sound pretty dangerous in real life, and as such I'd probably only like a very small amount of them if I actually met them. Still, I've never actually met them, so I can't be sure. But in fiction, these guys are as cool as it gets.
This is the beginning of the 'Cool' unit, for this assignment I have to write a few paragraphs exploring the concept of 'cool'. So, heregoes.
A lot of people have mentioned that they find it cool when someone marches to their own tune, and doesn't care what anybody else thinks. I don't think that's quite the whole story, though; they only like someone if they don't conform in the same way that everyone else doesn't conform. If I came in wearing florescent colored goggles and a frog suit, nobody would think I was cool. In order to be cool on that scale you have to be "too cool to care" or something to the effect; you have to like the same stuff as everyone else, just not because you're worried about fitting in. When people say they don't like people who conform, I think what they're really thinking of is people who are desperate for attention.
I personally don't care about conformity in the slightest. I don't think conforming or not conforming makes a person any more or less cool, it's just an unrelated part of who they are. One of the main aspects of my personality is that I am a writer, so I tend to look at life from that standpoint. As such my definition of a cool person is a good character; someone who will capture my interest and my imagination, who interesting things might happen to. I find someone cool if I want to hear more from them, someone with interesting quirks and philosophies that fit nicely into an engaging story.
More often than not, that means that the person either has something wrong with them or is extremely badass. I like characters with handicaps to overcome, be it a physical disability to out-and-out ignore (in fiction, usually blindness) or an inner demon of some sort. I like a character who is willing to sacrifice their subordinates, who has deluded themself into thinking they're doing the right thing. The crazier the better, as long as it doesn't get grotesque. Essentially, the more likely they are to die the cooler they are to me, and if I'd actually miss them once they die even better.
Of course, all of these people sound pretty dangerous in real life, and as such I'd probably only like a very small amount of them if I actually met them. Still, I've never actually met them, so I can't be sure. But in fiction, these guys are as cool as it gets.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
A History of Humor: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Sorry about the formating funkyness.
When examining the current phenomenon of digitalization, it is important to remember the clarity of thought and intellectual capability that human kind once possessed. Indeed, since the
internet began gaining popularity, there has been a massive drop in--
Works cited:
Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. Washington Square Press ed. USA: Pocket Books, 1972. 1-2. Print.
"Funniest Puns." Pun of the Day. 01 Nov 2009. Web. 8 Nov 2009..
"T-Shirts." XKCD.com. Web. 2 Nov 2009..
"slapstick." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 01 Nov. 2009.
"mime and pantomime." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 08 Nov. 2009.
"Grape lady falls!." Web. 1 Nov 2009..
"100 funny falls" Web. 1 Nov 2009..
"Freak show Summary." Book Rags. Web. 8 Nov 2009..
"Lazarus and Joannes Baptista Colloredo." Web. 8 Nov 2009..
"Funny Weird and cool Hairstyles." 8 Nov 2009. Web..
"charlie schmidt’s “cool cat”" 8 Nov 2009. Web..
"Lolcats 'n' Funny Pictures of Cats." I Can Has Cheezburger?. Web. 8 Nov 2009.
Marcellinus, Ammianus. "Ammianus Marcellinus (c.330-395 CE): History, XIV.16: The Luxury of the Rich in Rome, c. 400 CE. ." Ancient History Sourcebook. Ancient History Sourcebook, Web. 8 Nov 2009..
Peck, Linda Levy. Consuming splendor: society and culture in seventeenth-century England. USA: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 14. Print.
"Rococo." Smarthistory. Smarthistory, Web. 8 Nov 2009..
"The History of the Car." Random History. Random History, Web. 8 Nov 2009..
When examining the current phenomenon of digitalization, it is important to remember the clarity of thought and intellectual capability that human kind once possessed. Indeed, since the
internet began gaining popularity, there has been a massive drop in--
And now for something completely different.
It’s-!
A History of Humor: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
by Remy Stern-Beckerman
When asked about how they feel about modern technology and the digitalization of our daily lives, most people have a clear, defined opinion on whether it has a positive or negative impact on society. Those that view it as positive make arguments about how it is aiding communication, and making information more accessible. Those that view it as negative point out that time spent interacting on the computer takes away from time spent interacting in person, which is far superior. But almost everyone agrees on one negative point: TV rots your brain. Or more specifically, digitalization is training us to use our brains less. The view does make sense. TV, computers, phones, and gaming systems are all designed to give us exactly what we want exactly when we want it: the maximum in instant gratification. And once we have found a program that we want to watch or a game we want to play, we can just sit and stare at it for hours, perhaps occasionally twitching our thumbs. It stands to reason that this life of mindless entertainment is being prompted by the new digital age, and that the availability of these devices is what makes us so committed to the pursuit of recreation above all else. But there is a fatal flaw to this argument: it’s not true. By looking at history, one can see that actually, mindless entertainment has been a priority from the beginning. The main piece of evidence for this argument comes from an unlikely source: comedy. Though the concept of humor has been around for at least as long as the human species, the idea of making someone laugh for the sake of it has absolutely no foundation in almost anything useful. By looking at some of the good (wit), the bad (slapstick), and the ugly (freakshows) elements of comedy throughout the ages and today, this paper will explore the human attitude towards recreation; and demonstrate that though digitalization makes instant gratification more accessible, humanity has always been prone to seeking out pure entertainment with no intellectual rewards when available.
While perhaps at the more intellectual end of the spectrum, witty humor still often plays into one of humanity’s most basic drives: poking fun at something. From satire of language, to satire of oneself, to satire of others, to satire of machines-- you get it. This desire to make things funny simply by pointing them out for absolutely no good reason is not some new product of the digital age. There are historical examples of witty humor at every turn. In fact, the not-so-famous first lines of Shakespeare's famous Romeo and Juliet feature a series of puns in a wholly different tone from the rest of the piece:
Sampson: Gregory, on my word, we’ll not carry coals.
Gregory: No, for then we should be coalliers.
Sampson: I mean, an we be in choler, we’ll draw.
Gregory: Ay, while you live, draw your neck out of collar. (Shakespeare 1-2)
And so on. While this makes almost no sense to the average reader today because of the change in language since the play’s original publication around 1595, such language barriers also serve to show just how universal the material is. The business of grammatical humor is still alive and well, as the existence of websites like “Pun of the Day” ("Pun of the Day") demonstrate. If you are in the mood for a pun, there is no doubt that it is easier to log on to that website and look them up than read an entire play, but the desire to be entertained by a grammatical loophole has not changed since the days of Shakespeare (and indeed, probably long before). What draws us to wit is not only the desire to be smarter than the next guy, but also to be more likable. This is one of the basic desires of the average human, and something completely universal. This is a point backed by not only the existence of XKCD.com (“a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language”) but also spectacularly demonstrated by their popular comic T-Shirts (right).("T-Shirts") 
Wit is an enduring part of human culture, spanning the globe and the ages, unrelated to the recent influx of technology. But Remy, you might say, wit is somewhat useful. Because of its satirical nature, witty humor can be used as a means of social commentary. Silly reader, I wasn’t talking about that usage. But as long as you’ve brought it up, we might as well move on to a less high-brow brand of humor...
If wit is the intellectual of the family, slapstick is the crazy aunt with lipstick in colors that no one’s ever heard of. Commonly regarded to as one of the lowest forms of humor, slapstick is also one of the most basic. Relying entirely on the concept of catastrophic physical failure often combined with odd or ironic timing, slapstick has its roots in the undeniable realities of life. While slapstick comedy has probably been around since a few minutes after the evolution of a brain region responsible for processing humor, the actual term comes from the English name for a special paddle used in physical comedy routines in the 1500s commedia dell’arte to produce a loud noise while doing very little damage. ("Slapstick (comedy)") Slapstick humor can be dated as having begun earlier than there are written records of, as it played a large role in Greco-Roman mime, some of which dates back to the fifth century B.C. (“Mime and Pantomime”) When put in this context slapstick is easily identifiable as one of the earliest historical examples of mindless entertainment, but this often escapes notice when criticizing one of the top digital sources of mindless entertainment: the funny home video. Slapstick reigns supreme on Youtube, as the examples provided show. ("Grape lady falls!") (right, 4,358,055 views)
(“100 funny falls”) (left, 2,376,176 views) 
While the medium has changed, the act of watching it is still fulfilling the same basic desire to see people fall down (a form of entertainment with absolutely no use whatsoever, or indeed any rational explanation as to what makes it funny in the first place). Perhaps, you might cut in, we are engaged by the pure strangeness of the event. Nay, I would say in such a situation, that is what our next form of entertainment is for.
While not strictly a form of comedy, the freakshow is still one of the most popular historical forms of entertainment. While viewers may initially become interested because of their curiosity and not just for fits and giggles, that curiosity does not translate into desire to learn more about the uncanny attraction. Rather, the viewer is prompted to want to see more, a fact capitalized upon by many a traveling showman. While the sideshow was popularized in the early 1800s, Lazarus Colloredo ("Lazarus and Joannes Baptista Colloredo") (right)
toured around Europe showing off his parasitic brother John Baptista in one of the earliest recorded novelty acts in the 1630s. ("Book Rags") The pursuit of all things weird and wondrous can also be recognized as one of the historical elements of entertainment carrying through to the mindless entertainment thought of as a product of digitalization. Like slapstick, the exhibition of things unusual or extreme has found an audience in videos, as demonstrated by the two examples, ("Funny Weird and cool Hairstyles") (left, 15,856 views)
("charlie schmidt's "cool cat"") (right, 3,833,102 views) 
but in this case it’s not the video that makes the show: it’s the cat. In the exhibition of all things visually questionable, cats have become the new stars, stepping in now that the freakshow has become morally objectionable. The same curiosity that led Victorians to seek out “freaks of nature” before it was recognized as offensive has created stars like ceilingcat, monorail cat, cheezburger cat, ("I Can Has Cheezburger?") and countless others. Something may seem wrong about sitting and staring at cats for hours, but the change in media is the only difference in mental stimulation between the two displays.
But Remy! You may interject. These videos have millions upon millions of views! People are just sitting at home for hours doing nothing but watching funny videos or looking at pictures of cats! Surely this must be the laziest era in human history, and it’s all due to digitalization! I’m glad you brought that up, reader. Allow me to direct your attention to an even lazier lifestyle: that of the Noble. Almost anywhere in history with distinctly defined upper and lower classes and a large gap between them, the upper class has lived a life of leisure and luxury at the expense of the lower class. From ancient Rome (Marcellinus) to 1600s England (Peck 14), examples of a life of luxury being led by those that could afford it are abundant no matter the time period investigated. Perhaps the strongest example comes from pre-revolution France, otherwise known as the Rococo era. Here, the nobility lived a life of luxury and whimsy, devoting their ridiculous wealth and power to the pursuit of recreation and romance while 97% of the population starved in the streets. ("Smarthistory") Ignorant, more interested in entertaining themselves than learning about the world around them? Yes. Prompted by digitalization? No.
So there you have it. From wit to slapstick, freakshows to sheer ignorant bliss, people have always sought out mindless entertainment when available. The current tendency toward recreation is no different than the essential human preference that has prevailed throughout history. So why do we blame technology? Perhaps the reason is simply because digitalization is a new phenomenon. Human society has always had a nack for condemning change, despite also specializing in causing it. For example, as the automobile first became popular, it was thought of as so dangerous that Britain passed a law requiring the vehicle to be preceded by a man on foot waving a red flag and blowing a horn at all times. ("Random History") Perhaps we wanted a scapegoat for our own behavior. Whatever the reason, it seems that it is in our very nature to deny our very nature.
Works cited:
Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. Washington Square Press ed. USA: Pocket Books, 1972. 1-2. Print.
"Funniest Puns." Pun of the Day. 01 Nov 2009. Web. 8 Nov 2009.
"T-Shirts." XKCD.com. Web. 2 Nov 2009.
"slapstick." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 01 Nov. 2009
"mime and pantomime." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 08 Nov. 2009
"Grape lady falls!." Web. 1 Nov 2009.
"100 funny falls" Web. 1 Nov 2009.
"Freak show Summary." Book Rags. Web. 8 Nov 2009.
"Lazarus and Joannes Baptista Colloredo." Web. 8 Nov 2009.
"Funny Weird and cool Hairstyles." 8 Nov 2009. Web.
"charlie schmidt’s “cool cat”" 8 Nov 2009. Web.
"Lolcats 'n' Funny Pictures of Cats." I Can Has Cheezburger?. Web. 8 Nov 2009.
Marcellinus, Ammianus. "Ammianus Marcellinus (c.330-395 CE): History, XIV.16: The Luxury of the Rich in Rome, c. 400 CE. ." Ancient History Sourcebook. Ancient History Sourcebook, Web. 8 Nov 2009.
Peck, Linda Levy. Consuming splendor: society and culture in seventeenth-century England. USA: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 14. Print.
"Rococo." Smarthistory. Smarthistory, Web. 8 Nov 2009.
"The History of the Car." Random History. Random History, Web. 8 Nov 2009.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
outline comments
Amber
Amber,
This looks good. Your outline really brings up the points you want to discuss, which will be helpful in writing your essay. The only problem I saw was that your thesis may not be specific enough for Andy--it may help to say what kind of a change it is (ie. that we are relying on digital media more. It seems self-evident, but you can still get called out if you don't say it).
Other than that, the only thing that I noticed is that there doesn't seem to be a huge connection between your arguments and your thesis, but that's probably because I'm reading the outline and not the paper. as long as you tie it in in the introduction and conclusion, it should be fine.
Can't wait to read your paper,
Remy- Andrew has not yet posted his outline.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Outline
This is my outline for the final essay in the digitalization unit of the class Personal/Political. The essay will be called A History of Humor: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
Essential question: What are some of the various forms that mindless entertainment and comedy have taken over the course of history, and how does this relate to digitalization today? What does this tell us about human society as a whole?
Thesis: Though digitalization makes instant gratification more accessible, humanity has always been prone to seeking out pure entertainment with no intellectual rewards when available.
Paragraph 1: high-brow humor (the good)
points (not necessarily in order):
-Beginning of Romeo and Juliet: puns
->Talk about wit, cite: http://www.tk421.net/quotes/
-Modern use:
icons
www.xkcd.com
->("maybe if this shirt is witty enough someone will finally love me")
Paragraph 2: slapstick (the bad)
Points (not necessarily in order):
-Recognition as one of the lowest forms of entertainment (find a quote!)
-Origins in ancient Greek and Roman comedy
[source: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/548077/slapstick]
-Named after 1600s paddle-like weapon
-Modern use:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMS0O3kknvk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AbQpzn6t4c
Paragraph 3: the weird and the wonderful (the ugly)
-freak shows: http://www.nfa.dept.shef.ac.uk/history/shows/freaks.html
-modern relevance:
Cats! http://www.amazingcatcollection.com/
Essential question: What are some of the various forms that mindless entertainment and comedy have taken over the course of history, and how does this relate to digitalization today? What does this tell us about human society as a whole?
Thesis: Though digitalization makes instant gratification more accessible, humanity has always been prone to seeking out pure entertainment with no intellectual rewards when available.
Paragraph 1: high-brow humor (the good)
points (not necessarily in order):
-Beginning of Romeo and Juliet: puns
->Talk about wit, cite: http://www.tk421.net/quotes/
-Modern use:
icons
www.xkcd.com
->("maybe if this shirt is witty enough someone will finally love me")
Paragraph 2: slapstick (the bad)
Points (not necessarily in order):
-Recognition as one of the lowest forms of entertainment (find a quote!)
-Origins in ancient Greek and Roman comedy
[source: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/548077/slapstick]
-Named after 1600s paddle-like weapon
-Modern use:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMS0O3kknvk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AbQpzn6t4c
Paragraph 3: the weird and the wonderful (the ugly)
-freak shows: http://www.nfa.dept.shef.ac.uk/history/shows/freaks.html
-modern relevance:
Cats! http://www.amazingcatcollection.com/
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Treasure hunting
Amber:
Amber,I will post a comment for Andrew whenever he posts.
I really enjoyed reading your post. I felt like you stated your opinions very clearly, and it really helped me get a sense of what you were trying to say.
Basically, you see the merits of both arguments, to an extent. Overall, you mainly think that it depends on the situation at hand and the materials involved. In general I feel the same way; I think that it is usually more helpful to consider each individual situation than to generalize whether something is all good or all bad.
The only thing that I found confusing about your post was that at times it was difficult to tell which author's opinion you were referring to or even if you were stating your own, but this may just be my reading of it.
One thing that interested me was in your first paragraph, when you were talking about how TV shows and such would be no fun if we had those "flashing arrows". The main reason for this, of course, is that it would completely destroy the subtlety of the scene, and thus ruin the suspenseful atmosphere. But another thing it made me think of was the author's argument that plots are growing more complex-- in fact, now a days we NEED plots to be full of intricate networks of tiny clues just to stay interested.
I enjoyed your post, and look forward to reading more from you!
Remy
Monday, October 26, 2009
Sleep Tight
I read the long excerpt of Everything Bad is Good For You.
Basically, the argument was that all of the technology that people are constantly accusing of 'rotting your brain' is actually helpful to us, cognitively. For example, videogames, while seemingly mindless, actually teach us to reach long-term goals and follow complex patterns. Television teaches us to keep track of complex plots and pick up on social cues. As for the internet, Steven Johnson seems to feel more or less the same way that I do (that it allows for much more efficient information exchange and social interaction), also pointing out that the sheer complexity of the technology itself requires us to expand our understanding.
On a whole, I agree with Johnson's main points. The argument that especially resonated with me was his perspective on videogames. From the outside, when all an observer sees is a player staring blankly at the screen, twitching their thumbs and only vaguely aware that someone is telling them that dinner is ready, it's easy to come to the conclusion that their activities are sapping their brain power. But actually, the reason that they are so out of touch with the moment that they are in is because they are focusing all of their attention on the task at hand. Whether that is because they have to be able to quickly spot the hundreds of virtual enemies they're fighting before they get shot or because they need to figure out logically how to get past a complex barrier, they are engaging their minds fully in a task that is probably more difficult than those that they would face in life.
Games like Zelda, which Johnson used as an example, also force people to think creatively--something encouraged in English class and condemned as almost unhealthy in most other places. My mother Nancy, who is professor of social work and more than proficient in almost every cultural study imaginable, is utterly befuddled when confronted with concepts like sword fighting or telekinesis. Videogame players, on the other hand, are not only able to accept these obscure concepts quickly, but are able to adapt to them and use them to their advantage with equal speed. While those specific examples may not be particularly helpful in life, being able to quickly asses and solve a problem involving elements outside one's comfort zone is undeniably a valuable skill.
The main point that I disagreed with was his argument on reality television. While it's true that in those programs we may be able to get a better grasp on social cues and even the nature of human emotion, it really all depends on the quality of the program. Shows like Survivor are designed to put people in situations that will always make them feel the same way, because seeing people feel that way is the reason that the audience is watching. It is possible that one could grow more perceptive to emotion by watching a reality show than a cheesy soap opera where exaggerated expressions are held for a solid minute for emphasis, it is much easier to pick up on them through normal interaction. At the very least, reality shows can teach us no more about social cues than a normal conversation would.
Johnson is definitely contradicting the message presented by Tobin in Feed, but the arguments are not really compatible. Tobin cites consumerism and the tendency to ignore calamity, but he provides no real evidence that the technology itself is to blame as opposed to general human nature and corporate greed. On the other hand, Johnson claims that technology can force us to think in ways that are helpful to us in the long run, and while his evidence that it is being used in these ways is solid his conclusions may be a bit overreaching. Overall I agree with the essentials of both arguments, but as for the specifics I'm more on Johnson's side.
Basically, the argument was that all of the technology that people are constantly accusing of 'rotting your brain' is actually helpful to us, cognitively. For example, videogames, while seemingly mindless, actually teach us to reach long-term goals and follow complex patterns. Television teaches us to keep track of complex plots and pick up on social cues. As for the internet, Steven Johnson seems to feel more or less the same way that I do (that it allows for much more efficient information exchange and social interaction), also pointing out that the sheer complexity of the technology itself requires us to expand our understanding.
On a whole, I agree with Johnson's main points. The argument that especially resonated with me was his perspective on videogames. From the outside, when all an observer sees is a player staring blankly at the screen, twitching their thumbs and only vaguely aware that someone is telling them that dinner is ready, it's easy to come to the conclusion that their activities are sapping their brain power. But actually, the reason that they are so out of touch with the moment that they are in is because they are focusing all of their attention on the task at hand. Whether that is because they have to be able to quickly spot the hundreds of virtual enemies they're fighting before they get shot or because they need to figure out logically how to get past a complex barrier, they are engaging their minds fully in a task that is probably more difficult than those that they would face in life.
Games like Zelda, which Johnson used as an example, also force people to think creatively--something encouraged in English class and condemned as almost unhealthy in most other places. My mother Nancy, who is professor of social work and more than proficient in almost every cultural study imaginable, is utterly befuddled when confronted with concepts like sword fighting or telekinesis. Videogame players, on the other hand, are not only able to accept these obscure concepts quickly, but are able to adapt to them and use them to their advantage with equal speed. While those specific examples may not be particularly helpful in life, being able to quickly asses and solve a problem involving elements outside one's comfort zone is undeniably a valuable skill.
The main point that I disagreed with was his argument on reality television. While it's true that in those programs we may be able to get a better grasp on social cues and even the nature of human emotion, it really all depends on the quality of the program. Shows like Survivor are designed to put people in situations that will always make them feel the same way, because seeing people feel that way is the reason that the audience is watching. It is possible that one could grow more perceptive to emotion by watching a reality show than a cheesy soap opera where exaggerated expressions are held for a solid minute for emphasis, it is much easier to pick up on them through normal interaction. At the very least, reality shows can teach us no more about social cues than a normal conversation would.
Johnson is definitely contradicting the message presented by Tobin in Feed, but the arguments are not really compatible. Tobin cites consumerism and the tendency to ignore calamity, but he provides no real evidence that the technology itself is to blame as opposed to general human nature and corporate greed. On the other hand, Johnson claims that technology can force us to think in ways that are helpful to us in the long run, and while his evidence that it is being used in these ways is solid his conclusions may be a bit overreaching. Overall I agree with the essentials of both arguments, but as for the specifics I'm more on Johnson's side.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Turn 'Em Into Flies 2 (a critique of Feed as a work of art)
Looking at Feed as a work of art, there are some aspects that I really like and some that I really don't.
One thing that I thought worked extremely well was the use of a typical teenage narrator. Tobin could have created a much more tragic atmosphere by using a narrator who could clearly see the world falling apart around them (one of the rioters, for example), but a narrator who had no idea what was going on definitely got the message across better. A narrator with too much perspective would have made it read more like a dire warning than a parallel. I also thought that the ending was particularly well done. I'm not a big fan of the actual way the book ended, but highlighting "everything must go" as the last line really drove home the sense of irony that Tobin was probably trying to convey.
That being said, I'm not particularly fond of that irony in itself. Through the medium of artwork it is almost impossible to suggest a literal solution and be taken seriously, but I still dislike it in general when people point out a problem and then stand back sadly and shake their heads at it. I also don't think that the plot necessarily did as much justice to the message as it could have. Since it was meant to be a parallel and not an exaggeration the people stayed more or less the same as they are today, but I don't think that really worked. The technology was so much more advanced, and yet it had no more effect on people than our technology has today. One of the things that people worry about with technology is the sense of disembodiment or disassociation from life that we've talked about in class--but the characters in the book were going out to parties, meeting in person, going on dates, and overall living social, in-person lives. I also thought that the addition of a personal tragedy actually took away from the deeper underlying tragedy of society--instead of mirroring it, the situation with Violet kind of overshadowed the real message.
As for Feed being a 'mirror or a hammer', I would have to say that Feed is a mirror (a metaphor that I'm about to take way too far, so I'll stop using it now). It reflects the negative aspects of the world, but offers no ideas for how to change them. With art, this reflection of the world in and of itself is a method for trying to shape it, but it has the serious flaw of only being available to those who already wanted to see it.
One thing that I thought worked extremely well was the use of a typical teenage narrator. Tobin could have created a much more tragic atmosphere by using a narrator who could clearly see the world falling apart around them (one of the rioters, for example), but a narrator who had no idea what was going on definitely got the message across better. A narrator with too much perspective would have made it read more like a dire warning than a parallel. I also thought that the ending was particularly well done. I'm not a big fan of the actual way the book ended, but highlighting "everything must go" as the last line really drove home the sense of irony that Tobin was probably trying to convey.
That being said, I'm not particularly fond of that irony in itself. Through the medium of artwork it is almost impossible to suggest a literal solution and be taken seriously, but I still dislike it in general when people point out a problem and then stand back sadly and shake their heads at it. I also don't think that the plot necessarily did as much justice to the message as it could have. Since it was meant to be a parallel and not an exaggeration the people stayed more or less the same as they are today, but I don't think that really worked. The technology was so much more advanced, and yet it had no more effect on people than our technology has today. One of the things that people worry about with technology is the sense of disembodiment or disassociation from life that we've talked about in class--but the characters in the book were going out to parties, meeting in person, going on dates, and overall living social, in-person lives. I also thought that the addition of a personal tragedy actually took away from the deeper underlying tragedy of society--instead of mirroring it, the situation with Violet kind of overshadowed the real message.
As for Feed being a 'mirror or a hammer', I would have to say that Feed is a mirror (a metaphor that I'm about to take way too far, so I'll stop using it now). It reflects the negative aspects of the world, but offers no ideas for how to change them. With art, this reflection of the world in and of itself is a method for trying to shape it, but it has the serious flaw of only being available to those who already wanted to see it.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Turn 'em into flies...
Turn 'em into
Turn 'em into
Turn 'em into flies
Turn 'em into
Turn 'em into flies
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives,
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxand I decline
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxand I decline
It's the end of the world as we know it...
That's a few lines from a song called It's the End of the World as We Know It (and I Feel Fine) by REM that I was reminded of when I read Feed.
As for Feed being a parallel to modern life, I think that in some cases it is accurate and in some it's not. The main point of Feed, our manipulation by the big companies, is only partly on base. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but to me, there's one major factor making the representation in Feed inaccurate: Advertisements aren't that effective. The most effective example of advertising that I've ever seen was having a restaurant play the food channel in the waiting area to make customers hungrier. In Feed, all of the advertising is like that; manipulative on the subconscious level. But now a days, even if everything is really that well thought out, most of it doesn't work that well. A picture of a bullet shooting through a bottle of wine and exploding out the bottom as a car is cool, undoubtedly, but it doesn't make me want to buy the car.
The main inaccurate parallel however, the one that really bothered me, was the complete lack of panic. This is odd, in my opinion, because irrational panic is one of the more commonly cited potential reasons for the collapse of society. In my last post I talked about the phenomenon of Hype; how when we talk about things a lot they seem like a bigger deal than they really are. This also ties into Hysteria. One example I used in my last post was the Swine Flu madness that's going on, and how it seems like so much bigger of an issue than it really is. We can compare that to the other health issues in Feed--like the lesions or the Nostalgia Feedback. It might be true that we tend to ignore catastrophe that's far away or happening to something else (like climate change, for example) but the second anything happens to us (in this case, our bodies falling apart) we freak the heck out.
I think that for something like this a more accurate parallel would be the Titanic going down. The Titanic was supposed to be the epitome of luxury, the "unsinkable ship" (like those companies being "too big to fail," ha ha). When it hit the iceberg everyone in storage knew right away that they were in trouble, but the people in first class just complained about the little bump. For a while, the staff convinced them that everything was fine, and got them into their life jackets without really making anyone that nervous. But once the water started coming in and everyone knew they were going down, no amount of cheery violin music could stop the panic. As far as I'm concerned, Feed may be right about us ignoring the warning signs for a while. But once something goes wrong enough close enough to home people will run around screaming like lunatics until it gets fixed (or at least gets far away again).
That's a few lines from a song called It's the End of the World as We Know It (and I Feel Fine) by REM that I was reminded of when I read Feed.
As for Feed being a parallel to modern life, I think that in some cases it is accurate and in some it's not. The main point of Feed, our manipulation by the big companies, is only partly on base. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but to me, there's one major factor making the representation in Feed inaccurate: Advertisements aren't that effective. The most effective example of advertising that I've ever seen was having a restaurant play the food channel in the waiting area to make customers hungrier. In Feed, all of the advertising is like that; manipulative on the subconscious level. But now a days, even if everything is really that well thought out, most of it doesn't work that well. A picture of a bullet shooting through a bottle of wine and exploding out the bottom as a car is cool, undoubtedly, but it doesn't make me want to buy the car.
The main inaccurate parallel however, the one that really bothered me, was the complete lack of panic. This is odd, in my opinion, because irrational panic is one of the more commonly cited potential reasons for the collapse of society. In my last post I talked about the phenomenon of Hype; how when we talk about things a lot they seem like a bigger deal than they really are. This also ties into Hysteria. One example I used in my last post was the Swine Flu madness that's going on, and how it seems like so much bigger of an issue than it really is. We can compare that to the other health issues in Feed--like the lesions or the Nostalgia Feedback. It might be true that we tend to ignore catastrophe that's far away or happening to something else (like climate change, for example) but the second anything happens to us (in this case, our bodies falling apart) we freak the heck out.
I think that for something like this a more accurate parallel would be the Titanic going down. The Titanic was supposed to be the epitome of luxury, the "unsinkable ship" (like those companies being "too big to fail," ha ha). When it hit the iceberg everyone in storage knew right away that they were in trouble, but the people in first class just complained about the little bump. For a while, the staff convinced them that everything was fine, and got them into their life jackets without really making anyone that nervous. But once the water started coming in and everyone knew they were going down, no amount of cheery violin music could stop the panic. As far as I'm concerned, Feed may be right about us ignoring the warning signs for a while. But once something goes wrong enough close enough to home people will run around screaming like lunatics until it gets fixed (or at least gets far away again).
Monday, October 5, 2009
Reaserch on the internet
Fun with Googlefight
That link leads to a fight between Facebook and Myspace, but you can type in any keywords and watch them "fight". The winner is the one with the most results on Google. I thought this was relevant (a little) since what I decided to research was what we like most on the internet. What are we drawn to? Why? (a note about that: "websites" was the second most popular ending for "top 10 most popular" in google's suggestion box, just behind "sports")
http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/US
http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/US
Alexa.com is a site provided by Amazon.com devoted solely to monitoring the popularity of other websites, and cited by many as one of the most accurate. I found it pretty surprising how few of the top US sites are entertainment related. Youtube is the only one really acknowledged as being purely for entertainment value, the others (facebook, myspace, blogger, twitter, and Flickr) fall more under the category of social networking that sheer look-at-something-funny-until-you-realize-you-haven't-blinked-in-four-hours entertainment. Otherwise, most are search engines. That probably explains the lack of diversity; people are using the search engines to get to less popular sites that aren't showing up.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Users-Spend-Three-Times-More-on-Social-Networks-than-a-Year-Ago-122705.shtml
This contains a pretty interesting article on the increase in growth among social networking sites. One thing in particular that caught my attention was the stark contrast between the sites' growth and the growth of their advertising income. While the sites themselves have only become about 11% more popular, their advertising sales have gone up by 119%. To me this ties into the phenomenon of Hype, the fact that the more something is talked about the bigger of a deal it seems to be. Like swine flu-- contagious, maybe, but the symptoms are actually slightly less than a seasonal flu. Yet, thanks to all the hype, it seems like a deadly epidemic that could claim anyone as its next victim. It's not at all uncommon for hype like this to make things seem like a bigger deal than they really are; who hasn't heard someone on a comedy show proclaim that their ridiculous group is "serious business"? All the press that the internet gets (especially being the internet itself, self-perpetuating and all) has swelled its reputation, but even knowing this it's still incredible to see how disproportionate our understanding really is.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb270/is_2_28/ai_n31488501/
A fairly straightforward list of the top 10 blog topics of 2008. I'm not quite sure what the percentages refer to, seeing as how the first three alone add up to 142%. I find it interesting that these topics seem to be a bit more in-depth than the topics one would typically see on other sets. Usually, since blogging involves a lot more writing than most other forms of online posting, a blogger has to be more devoted to their topic and have more material. Therefore, blogs are more likely to be based on complex social issues (like an editorial) or personal experiences (like a journal or a log).
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Users-Spend-Three-Times-More-on-Social-Networks-than-a-Year-Ago-122705.shtml
This contains a pretty interesting article on the increase in growth among social networking sites. One thing in particular that caught my attention was the stark contrast between the sites' growth and the growth of their advertising income. While the sites themselves have only become about 11% more popular, their advertising sales have gone up by 119%. To me this ties into the phenomenon of Hype, the fact that the more something is talked about the bigger of a deal it seems to be. Like swine flu-- contagious, maybe, but the symptoms are actually slightly less than a seasonal flu. Yet, thanks to all the hype, it seems like a deadly epidemic that could claim anyone as its next victim. It's not at all uncommon for hype like this to make things seem like a bigger deal than they really are; who hasn't heard someone on a comedy show proclaim that their ridiculous group is "serious business"? All the press that the internet gets (especially being the internet itself, self-perpetuating and all) has swelled its reputation, but even knowing this it's still incredible to see how disproportionate our understanding really is.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb270/is_2_28/ai_n31488501/
A fairly straightforward list of the top 10 blog topics of 2008. I'm not quite sure what the percentages refer to, seeing as how the first three alone add up to 142%. I find it interesting that these topics seem to be a bit more in-depth than the topics one would typically see on other sets. Usually, since blogging involves a lot more writing than most other forms of online posting, a blogger has to be more devoted to their topic and have more material. Therefore, blogs are more likely to be based on complex social issues (like an editorial) or personal experiences (like a journal or a log).
Friday, October 2, 2009
Comments about other people looking somewhat less stupid...
My comment for Amber:
My comment for Andrew:
Nice post, I found it really insightful. I feel like you really captured your feelings about watching your video, and most people probably empathize with you.
Basically, Watching the video was a really weird experience for you. You feel like it's not really you, since that person doesn't look like they were having the same experience that you were. However, this doesn't tarnish your feelings that technology can be really useful and even necessary for some things.
I think that most people probably felt the same way you did about the video seeming like another person. I know that whenever I see myself on camera or even in photos I feel like it's not really me, because it doesn't make sense to me that an image of a person I can see from the outside can be me on the inside. With DRDs, where our internal thoughts are carried over into an entirely separate world and skip over our bodies completely, the contrast is even more striking.
I thought your post was interesting overall. One more thing that you might do is talk about the effects of these issues on others (within those you know or in society) a bit more, but really your post wasn't any worse off without it.
One interesting thing that you brought up was how in the future kids will be using technology because it's always improving. I often think about the concept that really, no matter how much some people dislike it, the ones making the machines are going to keep making them. Technology is going to happen, even if some people oppose it.
I enjoyed your post, and I look forward to reading more from you!
Remy
My comment for Andrew:
Andrew,
Nice post. I think that your post goes with your video really well and helps me understand what's going on in it.
Basically, you weren't that absorbed in the whole project that much, or any one particular thing that you were doing. You also don't care how much time people spend using DRDs, but know that if they spent forever on it no one would get anything done.
Something interesting that I noticed in your video that I don't think most people did was that you were multitasking. We talk a lot about being totally absorbed in a topic, but your video shows that it can work the other way too: Digitalization lets you easily do homework, listen to music, talk to friends, and whatever else you were doing on the computer, all at once.
The only thing that I saw a little out of place here was that you were interacting with people and not just the DRDs, but on the other hand that's kind of a good thing because it introduces the whole concept of multitasking.
That whole concept of being able to multitask isn't really mentioned as much in association with DRDs as much as I think it should. To me it seems like kind of a hidden perk--on one hand it's destroying our sense of focus, but on the other it's allowing us to participate in more activities at once.
Thanks, I look forward to reading more from you!
Remy S.B.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)