So... It's Over. What Do You Think?

I finally finished The Things They Carried last night. Wow. At first, I didn't like the book too much (as you can probably tell by my first blog post about it), but my view has completely changed. After reading the chapter Good Form, everything just kind of clicked for me.

At first the 'truth' part bothered me: it bothered me A LOT. But now I understand that he has all these thoughts and feelings in his head he is trying to get out. The only way he can explain his experiences and make us feel how he feels is by making up some of them. I understand and respect that, and that is what makes me accept the fact that he is fabricating many of his stories.

I'm interested to see the reactions of everyone else about the book. The second half took a turn for the philosophical route and I'm wondering what people thought about it. Personally, I loved it.

Tim O'Brien -- Am I Missing Something?

So to start off, I'll admit The Things They Carried is an interesting book. It goes into depth on the different hardships the soldiers endured on their tour of Vietnam. During class everyone is constantly saying how they love the book, the newest chapter is amazing, and the like. Personally, I find The Things They Carried to be a bit of a let down.

He has several different stories dealing with the war, but the problem is the truth. I am fully aware that war is so chaotic at points that the facts are hard to get straight. But fabricating entire stories? That seems unfair to the true acheivments of soldiers during the war. His choice of making up the stories detracts from the reading for me because I am constantly asking myself, "Is this real?"

Another style of Tim O'Brien that erks me is his use of repetition. He will tell a story once. Then he moves onto another story. Then O'Brien revisits the first story, and, oftentimes repeats word for word his descriptions. He slowly goes into more detail, but I find the repetition to slow down the pace of the story.

Even with my criticisim, I still think The Things They Carried is a good book--just not as good as everyone else thinks. Now, after saying all that, I'm slightly worried about what you guys might do to me in the name of Tim O'Brien and your love for the book.

Student Protesters

First of all, I want to talk about the Dow Chemical protests which we saw in the Two Days in October video. During class discussion I felt like many people thought the police were entirely to blame. None of us were there. Who knows what happened. Yes, the police maybe did come in swinging. Or maybe, instead, the police were already frightened by being highly outnumbered and a violent protester took a swing at them. That's all it would take to send it into a full out brawl.

Anyways, now that I got that out of my system, I thought the article about modern day protesting was misleading. You can't compare protesting now with protesting that happened 40 years ago. Our nation has changed and so has our perspective on things. Also, during Vietnam there was a draft. Forcing people to fight in a war that they feel is wrong does merit protesting. The Iraq war does not have a draft though; soldiers in Iraq joined the military on their own accord. It's comparing apples to oranges; it doesn't make sense to me.

Sound of Fury

I'll start off by saying that I missed the last day of the movie so I have no clue if the girl ever got a cochlear implant.

Now that I said that, there was something from that movie that really got on my nerves. As the parents, they shouldn't have even questioned the thought of the cochlear implant for a second. They didn't mention any side-effects so I'm assuming their fear of the implant wasn't due to medical reasons. No, it was just plain selfishness.

Throughout the movie, the parents used the excuse, "If she gets a cochlear implant she will forget all about deaf culture and become a hearing person only." That's complete crap. Both of her parents are deaf. How can she just forget about deaf culture? She has to be able to communicate with her parents, and I'm sure the way they raise her, she will be heavily involved in the deaf community.

The ability for her to function readily with the vast majority of the world offers her so much potential. Why her parents try to deny her that astounds me.

(Fear of) Heights

As the rollercoaster reaches the pinnacle, I can't help but to sneak a look over the edge of the car. There is the ground, seemingly thousands of feet below me. Closer and closer the rollercoaster inches. The wooden tracks shake. Thoughts race through my mind. And then I'm plummeting downwards, uncontrolably to what is surely my death.

Would I do it again? Probably. The thrill and adrenaline are a blast. Still, convincing myself to get on that rollercoaster was no easy task. Whether it's a hundred foot high rollercoaster, a sky-scraper, or a large bridge, I can't stand it. I'm the type of person who thinks of all the things that could go wrong when I'm high up in the air. The elevator could break sending me into a free-fall; the rollercoaster tracks could snap sending the car careening off; the bridge could crumble, causing me to crash into the ocean.

The thought of bridges is probably what terrifies me the most. I also have an innate fear of drowning, which, coupled with traveling across long bridges, tends to make me nervous. Small bridges don't bother me, it's just the ones that stretch across large bodies of water. If the bridge happens to break when I'm in the middle, I'm screwed. Assuming the fall doesn't kill me, I then would have to escape my rapidly sinking car and somehow swim to shore.

When it comes down to it, I'm not petrified with heights. Heights just make me think about some of the more unpleasant things that may happen to me. That's not to say I will never go skydiving--but for now, I'll save it for another day.

Presentations-- Good or Bad?

When Mr. Kunkle first mentioned that everyone would have to do a presentation at some point about an article of their choice, the first thought that popped into my mind was, "Great... another speech." After only two presentations, my view has completely changed. Our class does an excellent job of reading and thinking about the essays people present; we also get involved in the article and discussion.

I have noticed that during the presentations, debates start to happen because many of these topics tend to be controversial subjects. Still, everyone stays respectful, and I think a lot of good ideas and explanations surface. I'm glad to see that our class respects each others' opinions, because without respect, I don't think the discussions would be nearly as deep.

These essays also help with critical reading. We have to analyze the information and determine our own point of view on the topic. When I read the essays I usually develop a personal stance on the topic, and in doing so, I try to think of reasons to support my stance. This helps not only understand the essay more deeply, but it also makes you challenge the writer's ideas (which may not be correct!).

In the end, I think this assignment will turn out to help everyone. It helps the presenter because they have to make a 'speech,' but it also aids the audience by creating a situation for critical thinking. I can't wait to see what new articles people will share!

How I Write

If I had to describe how I write in one word, which would never do it justice, it would be a simple task: Vivid. When I write I try to immerse my reader in my world. Not only am I a stickler for detail, I also use a wide array of words to better help me get across a point or tell a story. I have found that my best writing is saturated in detail.

A simple trick I have learned to make writing look, sound, and flow much better is to avoid starting sentences with the same word. Oftentimes, I will write my paper and then go back during the editing phase and circle words that repeatedly start a sentence. It is usually an easy fix and makes the whole paper sound much more sophisticated. Likewise, I try not to repeat the same adjectives and verbs all the time. There are usually many different synonyms; the trick is finding the appropriate one to fit the context and situation.

A very important skill I learned early on and have begun to master is varying sentence structure throughout my papers. Changing the length of the sentences not only keeps the text fresh and interesting, it helps to keep the reader focused. Short sentences are excellent for dramatic, intense scenes whereas longer sentences tend to work well for descriptions and imagery. It is also extremely important to use advanced punctuation such as semi-colons, hyphens, colons, and ellipses.

As a final thought, I have learned that your introduction AND conclusion paragraphs are extremely important. The introduction should be clear, concise, and imformative. It needs to capture the reader's attention and make them want to read more. A strong thesis is essential to a well written paper because it gives the reader a preview of what's to come. The conclusion is important because it ties up all the loose thoughts. It's extremely common to see a solid paper up until the conclusion where it is evident that the writer just wanted to get finished. I can't express how important it is to tie your conclusion back to your introduction, and, oftentimes, leaving your reader asking a question makes your paper that much stronger.

The goal of my writing is to make the reader see what I see- to enjoy what I'm writing about. I want them to form their own opinions and to question what I'm saying. Hopefully after reading what I wrote, they will be interested in the subject. Who knows, maybe they will even research it themselves!!

The Prevailing Opinion of a Sexual Character Discussed

This article, written by Mary Wollstonecraft, was extremely frustrating and hard to read. It may just be me, but her 1700's style writing seemed difficult to interpret and discover the main points. I was able to decipher, obviously, that she was talking about the imbalance between the society ranks between males and females. The difficult part was sifting through her long, confusing sentences and finding the underlying reasons and points.

Oftentimes Wollstonecraft seemed to ramble and go off topic. Her vocabulary and sentence structure was extremely advanced, but, in my opinion, instead of enhancing her essay, it just made it more complex and difficult to understand. More than once after reading a paragraph (or even several that were closely connected), I sat back and said to myself, "What the heck did she just say?" I understand that the way people talk and write has evolved over time, but this story just seemed bland and boring.

Onto the few points I was able to comprehend and found to be noteworthy. At one point Wollstonecraft ventures to say that she does not believe private education is anything amazing; instead, she claims people need to learn from the society they live in. I believe that this goes to show either how outdated this writing is or how far off her opinions are, or even a combination of both. It has been proven that private education (school) obviously is extremely beneficial to the participant. I'm not saying that you shouldn't be street smart also (we don't want a bunch of book worms and nerds running around with no common sense), but it's obvious that private education has done wonders for society.

She does make a good point about how many authors' claims that woman are inferior to men are founded on an incorrect basis. Woman never receive an education comparable to men (back in their day), so how can one say that men are superior to woman? They are never given the opportunity to prove themselves.

Although this piece of writing is over 200 years old, Wollstonecraft does make a point that I believe everyone can relate to. While struggling for a position or relationship (or anything for that matter), you care for it; you want it. But once you achieve the goal, oftentimes you lose take it for granted.

After sifting through her writing, I think I was able to find several valuable lessons. I'm not very familiar with the history of woman's rights activists, but Mary Wollstonecraft seems to be one of the major early supporters of it. I agree with most of the things she said in her essay; woman should be given the opportunity to prove themselves, and they should be treated equally to men. I think if she saw today's world, she would be amazed with the changes in woman's rights.

The Land Remembers

Several days ago I finished reading The Land Remembers by Ben Logan. This is the Non-Fiction book that I chose to read for AP Comp, and I'm glad I decided to read it. Distressed to find out I needed to read a Non-Fiction book ("honestly who reads Non-Fiction?" I thought), I asked my parents for a recommendation. My dad suggested The Land Remembers, and with no other ideas, I decided, "sure, why not?"

The Land Remembers follows the author throughout his childhood on his 220 acre farm located in Crawford County in Wisconsin. This is the area of Wisconsin where the glaciers split and went around, leaving steep hills and wide valleys. Rather than following Logan's life chronologically, The Land Remembers takes a pleasant twist and follows his life through the four seasons. This style connects the theme of the book, which is that they are all part of the land.

Since I grew up with a handful of cows, some pigs, and a horse, I can relate to several things he mentions. Still, many of his experiences are foreign to me; through this book and his immaculate desire for detail, I was able to get a glimpse of what it would be like to live on a farm in the 1930's.

The Land Remembers is full of larger-than-life stories and old tales. It also has many old sayings. My favorite saying is in the foreword; it goes, "When you're trying to tell somebody who ain't been there just how hot it is in a hayfield with the temperature at a hundred degrees in the shade, it's not lying if you make it a hundred and ten." This saying has a lot of truth in it, and it also shows that Ben Logan knows that time may have exaggerated some of his details, but either way, it was freakin' hot (or cold, or heavy, etc.).

One of the amazing things about The Land Remembers is how much it really drew me in. Ben Logan's style of writing really makes you feel like you are there with the people. You can picture the big maple tree the family crowded around during summer nights, the blistering heat while bailing hay, even the bone-numbing chill as a winter blizzard falls over the ridge. I didn't realize it until towards the end of the book. Each person has their own unique personality that really separates them from each other. Ben, being the youngest child, usually helped his mother when he wasn't able to do the harder chores. He became very attached to her, and, unbeknownst to me, I did to. When she died towards the end of the book, I found myself devastated along with the rest of the family. No, this isn't one of those sappy tales, I didn't cry. But I kept asking myself questions like "who will cook for the family" or "who is going to tend the garden?" Then, in astonishment, I thought to myself, "Did I really just get that into a book?!"

That is what makes Ben Logan such an excellent writer. He is able to take a reader into another world (his world) and make them feel like they belong there, like they experienced what he experienced. The Land Remembers was a great read and I recommend it to anyone and everyone!

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

This essay was by far my most favorite of all. The essay brought technology and science together (not exactly a hard feat), and made for a very interesting and thought provoking read. Coincidentally, these two subjects happen to be my favorite subjects and I love learning new things about them.

My favorite quote of the essay is, "Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski." This quote not only provides excellent imagery but also serves the thesis of Nicholas Carr's essay: the internet is taking away the depth of reading books and replacing it with much more, albeit shallow, information. To an extent I find this true in my own life. I used to read A LOT; now, most of my reading consists of blogs and forums online. After I finish an article online, I close out the page and find a new website or topic, leaving little time to reminisce on any thoughts or opinions that may have been building up.

I found the study done by scholars from University College London provided some very interesting insight as to what the future may hold for books. Will books start to become shorter and more full of flashy and catchy phrases, yet lacking in substance? If the internet writing style begins to move into conventional writing and books, we may eventually be faced with a world that eerily resembles that of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.

At this point, I feel obligated to voice my opinion towards the comments made by Maryanne Wolf from Tufts University. She claims that as the internet pushes "efficiency" and "immdeicacy", we weaken the capacity for deep reading and comprehension. I don't disagree with what she is saying; in fact, scientifically, it is probably correct as explained throughout the article. The problem is that the internet is just shaping us into today's society. Yes, the internet does value speed and efficiency, but to survive in today's world, you need it. It may not be the best thing, but you need to use it to stay competitive so the internet won't be leaving anytime soon. The world is constantly evolving; the way we get information must follow the evolution and adapt.

Maryanne Wolf is also worried about losing the deep and thoughtful components of literature. While the internet may not be nearly as deep, it is definitely not a terrible abomination either. As mentioned earlier, it offers benefits such as ease of access (finding a newspaper article online from several years ago in seconds rather than looking through articles at the library) and much more information faster. In the past faster has tended to be better. Speed also typically leads to progress. Take for example the evolution of travel. At first, man had to walk everywhere. Man was isolated in a small community. Eventually man received horses and their range increased. Trading between communities increased and ideas began spreading. Then came the trains. This allowed for mass transport of people, food, and materials. And then finally we have cars and planes. I don't think many people would argue that cars are a bad thing (except for pollution), especially if they had to walk 10 miles to school/work every day.

Fredrick Winslow Taylor took a unique approach to improve efficiency in factories. By determining the most efficient way to produce each item, he increased factory output immensely. He helped change the way things were produced world wide, but he was wrong about one thing. He assured his followers that once his systems were applied to all acts of manual labor, it would create a utopia of perfect efficiency. Unfortunatley this statement is flawed. There will never be a utopia of perfect efficiency for the same reason that Communism will never completely work. People are individuals; they are not programmed like a computer. Everyone has their own thoughts and ideas. Conflicting ideas lead to disagreements. There may be the 'perfect' wage to pay factory workers, but the workers may decide that the wages are too low and go on strike, throwing off the whole system. Perfect efficiency is impossible just like a perpetual motion machine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion); there will always be something preventing it.

After reading this article, I was surprised to learn about the science behind what we read and our brains. While the internet may not be encouraging the best habits, I believe that its something we are just going to have to live with. I don't believe books will entirely fade away, and the internet is just such a powerful tool that without it, today's society would crumble away.

Folks, like it or not, the internet is here to stay.

Skunk Dreams

I found "Skunk Dreams" to be a very frustrating and time consuming piece of literature to read. Consequently, this response may seem rather lacking in comparison to my others.

Now, before I start ripping on Louise Erdrich, one thing I would like to say is that her writing is extremely detailed and descriptive. Her words painted vivid pictures in my mind and helped me understand what she was writing about. I found multiple words to use for my vocab flashcards in her essay.

As for the rest of her essay, well let's just say, I found it rather lacking for a writer. The essay seemed to jump around from point to point, rarely making solid connections. There didn't seem to be a moral of the story or any single point that Erdrich was trying to make. The closest I could find was that she loved the openness of the west, but she began to learn to love the woods. Potentially this could represent that you can love more than one thing.

It seems as if the event with the skunk opened the door to philosophy with Erdrich. On page 338 she talks extensively about the skunk having the same dream as her that night. For the rest of the essay, Erdrich brings up topics relating to philosophy. Her seeming obsession with philosophy makes me wonder just how much of an impact that skunk had on her life.

When Erdrich moved to New England, she talks about how she missed the openness of the prairies of North Dakota. "And yet, even though I finally grew closer to these woods, on some days I still wanted to tear them from before my eyes." I feel as if her want for the openness of land somehow reflects her views; the openness reminds her of all the possibilities that are out there.

Erdrich's essay had some good points to make, but I think the way she went about it made it overly complicated. The story was hard to read and understand, and the overall message was lost to me. In the end she did make me think a little bit harder about philosophy and the unknown, but I don't think it was enough to redeem her essay.

Response to "Talk of the Town"

I would like to start with Susan Sontag's article first. This article was extremely negative towards the U.S. government and the nation as a whole. I found it sickening that she was trying to defend the terrorists who took down the World Trade Center. Instead of calling the terrorists cowards, who, let me remind you, killed thousands of innocent Americans while they were at work, defenseless, she appoints American soldiers this title. The very same soldiers who are fighting these terrorists and protecting our freedom. I found a very interesting quote the other day that I would like to share:

"It is the Soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press; It is the Solder, not the poet who has given us the freedom of speech; It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer who has given us freedom to demonstrate; It is the Soldier-- Who salutes the flag; Who serves beneath the flag; and whose coffin is draped by the flag, Who allows the protestor to burn the flag."

It is a very strong statement, and while it is biased, I believe that there is a lot of truth in it.

I think it was a mistake for Sontag to bring politics so heavily into her article. The whole article is basically blaming President Bush for all the problems. Sontag even goes so far as to call him a 'robotic President.' Most Conservatives reading this article will probably be turned away by her very Liberal comments. This article seems to me to be more of a campaign sponsored by Democrats than an article with any real purpose.

Have some pride in your country.

On the other hand, I found Adam Gopnik's article extremely refreshing. There were many well thought out ideas in his article. I liked how Gopnik showed all the pain and grief the parents went through. The cell phones ringing while the students' bodies were carried out really draws on emotions.

It was nice to see an opinion Pro-Gun Control that didn't want to outright ban all guns. I agree completely that no ordinary citizen should be allowed to own an automatic weapon. You can't use them to hunt; nothing good can come out of people having automatic weapons. Pistols are a touchy subject though. While people don't hunt with them, they are very effective for defense. Unfortunately it seems as if in many instances they do more harm than if they wouldn't have been used at all.

There aren't many problems with shootings with rifles and shotguns (used for hunting). The problems come in when automatics and pistols are introduced. As Gopnik stated laws are there to prevent bad things from happening. Preventing scenarios such as the Virginia Tech shooting saves both money and an unmeasurable amount of pain.

Summer!

I just got back from Maine last week which is why I haven't been able to create my blog until now. I had a great time relaxing at my cousin's cottage right on the water. Unfortunately the weather wasn't great, but on the few sunny days we had, we made the best of them by tubing and swimming all day.
I have been reading my Non-Fiction book called The Land Remembers by Ben Logan. I'm already halfway through and I have to admit, the book surprised me. I went into it thinking it would be boring because ALL Non-Fiction books are boring. It turns out that this is actually a very interesting book about the author growing up farming in Wisconsin.
I haven't begun reading the articles yet, but I'm sure at least a few of them will be interesting. I really enjoy reading and writing and I look forward to getting to see everyone else's work! I hate to say it but summer is winding down; only about a month left (yikes!). Let's make the best of what we have left.