Not Recommended

For class on Thursday, we read the introduction and first chapter of “Emergence” by Steven Johnson. Johnson introduces the emergence through the example of slime mold. Slime mold is an organism that usually lives as a single cell, moving about independently of other slime molds. However, when resources in the environment are scarce, all of the cells will self-organize into what looks like one single organism, without the direction of any one cell, or pacemaker. In one sentence, emergence is “the movement from low-level rules to higher-level sophistication” (Johnson 18). Johnson points out how this theory can be applied to ant colonies, cities, and even “simple-pattern recognition software” such as amazon.com’s recommendation feature that recommends products based on your wish-list or past purchases.

Amazon.com is basically one of my favorite websites ever, mainly because of the wish-list feature. I have been buying stuff off of Amazon and maintaining a wishlist ever since middle school. I mainly started one so that I my family would get some clue as to what to buy me for Christmas (yea, I was that greedy). But now I basically use it to remind myself of books and movies that I heard were good and want to check out at the library or video store. Despite the fact that I have been using the site for so long, I had never looked at the recommendation feature. When we checked out the site in class, I became very skeptical of whether or not emergence was at work there. In middle school I must have bought a Backstreet Boys album from Amazon.com because the first 7 products recommended to me were related to my former favorite boy band. After checking the not-interested box for all of those (my inner 7^th grader is crushed), about half of the new products were either related to Nsync (gross!) or ballet documentaries, which is what I bought my mom for Christmas this year. After continually refreshing the list, it finally stopped recommending me boy band products, but it still hasn’t gotten over the whole ballet thing and now keeps on recommending poker books, which is what I got my dad for Christmas, and every single Jack Johnson CD, because I said I liked the one I own.

Johnson suggests that a feature of emergent systems is, “the distinctive quality of growing smarter over time” (Johnson 20). Perhaps my tastes are too complex or I’ve messed up the system because of the gifts I have bought for other people, but I’m failing to see emergent behavior in Amazon.com. I have made many purchases for myself since that Backstreet Boy CD, but the recommendation feature has not “grown smarter” and realized that my tastes have changed a bit.

Lost In Translation

The first time I watched Lost In Translation I didn’t like it. I thought it was pretty boring, did not have much of a plot, and I hated the ending. I think my movie tastes have matured a bit because this time I really enjoyed it. There was a lot of subtle humor, which I liked, and I was fully equipped with theories of non-places to apply to the movie!

One thing that I found interesting that I don’t think we really touched on in discussion was the whole issue of identity in a non-place. Auge claimed that people using non-places do not really have an identity, especially if they are traveling alone. For Bob, since he was a celebrity, everyone seemed to recognize him and his Japanese entourage was always doting on him, giving him gifts, and making sure he felt at home. Despite the fact that they were in a hotel, Bob already had an identity there, and once he and Charlotte established a meaningful relationship, the hotel became even more of a place than his actual home.

I also thought it was interesting that Tokyo didn’t become a place for Charlotte until she became friends with Bob. Although she was living there for a certain amount of time with her husband, she still felt alone and didn’t have an identity. I think that she attempted to make it a place at first by going to the Buddhist (I think?) place and making the flower centerpieces, but, as she said on the phone, she felt nothing. Once she became friends with Bob, she revisited the Buddhist place and she appeared to find the meaning she was originally looking for.

After watching the movie, I think that above all others, relationships are the defining part of a place. Bob and Charlotte were both lacking meaningful relationships in their lives, and once they formed one, Tokyo became a place to them. Relationships are what give people identity and history in a certain space.

A little more on Non-Places

For this week, we read “From Places to Non-Places” by Marc Auge. It was kind of long and I did not really understand what Auge was talking about when I initially read it (which was during my two hour flight delay at Logan International Airport— just a tad ironic). After our discussion on Tuesday, everything became a lot clearer.

Basically, Auge feels like there are two different types of spaces: places and non-places. Places, in the anthropological sense, are those recognized as having to do with relations, history, and identity (Auge, 77). Non-places, therefore, are everywhere else. In class, we summed up the main characteristics of non-places, which include transit, traveling, and movement, being anonymous, use of text, solitude, and absence of communication. However, all of these characteristics don’t hold for all non-places. Some of the non-places we came up with are buses, airports, hotels, malls, elevators, supermarkets, and hospitals.

Auge clearly feels that studying non-places is very important because we spend a good part of our lives in them. After our discussion, I started thinking about this more and was very intrigued. I started to think about all of the non-places I go to everyday. One “non-place” that stuck out was the elevator in McArdle Lab. I go to that building once or twice every day, and therefore ride the elevator up to and down from the eighth floor about sixteen times a week. This week, I started thinking about the whole “non-place” theory while I was in the elevator and it made me kind of nervous. I see some of the same people every day in the elevator, but I know absolutely nothing about them. Usually when I’m in the elevator, I check my phone or put my headphones in. Perhaps it is because I want to remain anonymous? Unfortunately, I’m way too shy to actually strike up a conversation with anyone in an elevator, but it definitely got me thinking.

I was bored the other night so I went on youtube, and found this very interesting short documentary on non-places. The beginning has some text in it, but it is in Spanish so I don't know what it says. Also, there is a very interesting part where a girl falls down, and it doesn't really go with the rest of the video. I thought it was pretty funny.

My Experience on the Bus

Today, since the weather was so crummy, I decided to ride the bus. In class we determined that the bus can be considered a non-place, mainly because the reason for taking the bus is transit. You don’t really ride the bus expecting to talk to anyone, and most people are anonymous “travelers.”

I usually don’t take the bus because I always feel lazy when I do, but I had to go to the registrar’s office to get my transcript and I was told that the 85 drops off right in front of it. I got on the 80 on Charter and rode that to Memorial Union, where I picked up the 85. I then felt really stupid because I soon realized that the 85 stops at the same stop that I got on the 80 on Charter. Oh well! After I got my transcript, I got back on the 85 to Memorial Union, and then I took the 80 back to my dorm. The four bus rides probably totaled about 20 minutes.

In those 20 minutes I observed that the majority of people riding the bus just stare off in space, and they usually look annoyed or angry. Some people were listening to/playing with their mp3 players and others were talking on their cell phones. Some people that obviously knew each would start conversations, but it was usually just about where people were going or where they came from; nothing of any substance. Other than that, the most common words that were exchanged were “excuse me,” “sorry,” and “thank you.”

One interesting thing I noticed was that when people were not silent, such as when they were having a conversation, talking loudly on their cell phone, or, at one point, playing the harmonica, a lot of people on the bus would give them annoyed looks. I think that most people want to relax when they ride the bus, especially if it is towards the end of the day. In that sense, a non-place can sort of exist as an escape from stressful places, such as work or home. When people are talking, or playing musical instruments, it kind of disturbs the peace. I’ll admit, it was nice to have twenty minutes of solitude, but I found it kind of depressing that everyone looked so unhappy. Perhaps it was the weather. Seriously, when does it blizzard in April?

True Life: I can't Stop Cleaning

So recently I have discovered that I love cleaning. I know- weird, right? I was the biggest slob when I lived at home—my floor was just like another shelf to throw stuff on. In fact, you couldn’t even tell I had a floor. It also didn’t help that my parents are basically “OCD” about cleaning and organizing, so it always felt like you were walking onto another planet when you entered my room.

Then I came to college and had a double room in the fabulous Bradley Learning Community. And my roommate was a bigger slob than I was. She and I got along great and I really enjoyed having her as a roommate, but I think her messiness changed me. I would get so freaked out when our room was messy that I would move all of her stuff to the side (yea, I was one of those people) and would vacuum the rug twice a week. I would make sure my bed was always made and my books and clothes were always put away when I wasn’t using them. I couldn’t control her mess, but I had to eliminate mine.

Then this newfound cleanliness started to spread to other types of domestic responsibilities. When I went home, I would look forward to doing my own laundry because I got to do as many loads as I wanted. Despite the fact that we finally got a dishwasher, I would volunteer to wash the dishes by hand. My parents thought someone had replaced their daughter.

This year I have my own room, so I get to clean and keep it as tidy as I want. And you don’t want to know how excited I was when my housefellow said that they bought a new vacuum for our dorm. Whenever I finish cleaning, I always feel like I just accomplished something. It often helps settle my nerves when I’m really stressed out, and it helps me focus right before I need to study for a big test.

Next year, I will be living with six of my best friends in a house. And some of those girls are very skilled mess makers. I have pictures to prove it. You don’t want to see those pictures. When we spent a weekend at our friend’s lake house in the summer, I got the nickname, “Mom” because I was constantly cleaning and cooking. I realize that I’m being just as annoying as my parents, but I have to do it.

MUDs: New Technology or Avoiding the Real World?

We have been reading several articles dealing with how our identity fits into the whole network culture idea. The first was a chapter titled “Identity Crisis” from Sherry Turkle’s book Life On the Screen. It was about how many people now go online into internet communities, and create alternate personalities and identities. The second was from the introduction of Andy Clark’s book, Natural Born Cyborgs, which looked at how humans rely on technology and, how we are basically merging our minds with technology. We also looked at this website, which shows the work of STELARC, an “artist” that creates machine parts to put on his body.

In class, we began to explore the concerns that exist with our increasing dependence on technology. The Matrix is definitely an extreme example of what could go wrong, but I think that the STELARC guy shows how there is a fine line between using technology to create something new and exciting, and becoming too obsessed to the point that threatens one’s safety.

We also talked about how technology can potentially cause us to lose control or lose our sense of self and identity. We looked at the story from “Identity Crisis” about a woman that lost her leg and could not face the real world until she saw how people reacted to her in a MUD. I had never heard of a MUD before, but I think they are kind of like The SIMS, which my friends and I were obsessed with in middle school, only you can interact with other users. At first, I thought that it was kind of sad that the woman needed to use the MUD to find out how to live in the real world. I always thought that you should never use the internet to try to replace what is actually going on around you. But the more I thought about it, I began to think that the MUD just acted as a resource to the woman to get help. Rather than going to a support group for people with disabilities, she found support through the people in her MUD, which ultimately helped heal her.

I think that my initial reaction was probably normal considering that MUDs are a newer technology. I remember with I first started using instant messenger, my parents often criticized how impersonal it was, and how it would be much better to get together with my friends and talk in person. Now, most see that instant messenger and e-mail are just another way to communicate with one’s network of friends and coworkers.

I don’t think that I will ever personally use a MUD; I’m just not interested. And I think that, just like most things, it would not be healthy to become obsessed with a MUD and never talk to people outside of it. But I think that if it makes one happy, and if it allows one to have fun and feel comfortable to explore different aspects of their personality, who am I to criticize it because some say that it is not part of the “real world?”

Samples from Public Enemy and Beck

Our reading for Tuesday was focused on the art of and the controversy behind sampling. Jeff Rice, in chapter 7 of Writing About Cool, describes sampling as stringing together multiple parts of songs, that leads to either commercial or rhetorical purposes. Sampling brings about a lot of questions dealing with copyright laws and ownership. If you are using someone else’s music, how much of it can you use before it becomes stealing. If you distort the sample enough so that it is barely recognizable, does it even matter then?

My dad is a lawyer and mainly deals with boring stuff like nursing-home contracts, but in the 80’s he represented a client that sued the BeeGees for copyright infringement. His client claimed that the BeeGees used some of his music in one of their songs. I don’t know the exact details of the case, but in the end the judge ruled that the two songs did not sound enough alike to warrant the BeeGee’s guilt. My dad’s client felt that he owned the music and that it was stolen from him, but, in this case, the BeeGee’s sampling was deemed perfectly legal.

In class, we also talked about the different reasons why Beck and Public Enemy use sampling. I had never heard much from either of the artists but from the reading we deduced that Public Enemy had used sampling for social change, and Beck used it mainly because he could. Since I don’t really know Beck and Public Enemy’s music, I "youtubed" them. Unfortuantely, I don’t really know music in general, so I can’t really tell when they are sampling other artists, but their videos show sampling as well.

This one is kind of long, but right away you see that Public Enemy is sampling from images and a newscast from the March on Washington. They also show a clip of Elvis and John Wayne, and while rapping that they were both racist. From their video, you could tell that Public Enemy was using sampling to "create a sense of power in the African American community" (Rice, 60).



In this video, Beck does a little sampling of images too, such as the car race, the girl playing the drums, the guy fishing, and the two guys dressed as astronauts. However, this sampling doesn't really seem to have a reason behind it. It seems that Beck just stuck these images in his video because he could. I do not know if they really have a rhetorical value, but the samples just add to the overall oddness of the video.

It's all about who you know...

I had never heard of the “Keep Austin Weird” campaign until class on Tuesday, but I find it really interesting. I’m all for keeping the integrity of small towns, but I also love the fact that when I’m at home, I have my choice of three Targets in short driving distance. In my hometown, despite the fact that we have two Starbucks a block away from each other and a Subway right next to a Quizno’s, there was a heated debate over whether or not a Borders should be opened. The fear was that it would out-compete a locally owned bookstore. Personally, I wanted the Borders because I don’t like the locally owned bookstore—it’s over-priced and they wouldn’t offer me a summer job.

Anyways, I think that the PowerPoint presentations we made really highlighted the importance of connections in a network. In Austin, it was very beneficial to the people who were starting off the campaign to have a lot of important connections. Without those connections, they would not have been able to spread the word or expose their merchandise, such as the bumper stickers. The use of the internet was definitely a catalyst in the spread of the network because, without it, it would have taken a very long time to gain support for “Keep Austin Weird.”

Although those Texans were able to use connections for a good cause, Albert-Laszlo’ Barabási mentioned several negative outcomes of living in such a highly connected society in his book, “Linked: The New Science of Networks.” Barabási looks at the example of how the spread of HIV in North America was partly due to the promiscuity of one man, Gaetan Dugas. Barabási uses the term, “hub” to describe Duga’s role in the HIV “network” since he seemed to have spread the virus through over 2,500 sexual connections.

Barabási compares the spread of HIV to the spread of computer viruses through e-mail. Once a virus hits a hub, or a person that has a ton of links in their address book, the virus can be spread to hundreds, and then thousands of computers. It is for this reason that it is difficult, if not impossible, to get rid of even the least contagious viruses.

I think that it is kind of scary how fast anything from a simple e-mail to a fatal virus can be spread today. It is also scary to think that you don’t really have control over what networks you belong to. I have no control over who puts my e-mail or screenname in their address book or buddy list. Also, I have no way of knowing if one of my “connections” could be considered a hub in a network. I think that we are so quick to assume that being so highly connected as a good thing, but I never really thought of the consequences until I read Barabási.

Hunting for Cool

I think cool was taking a vacation from Madison today because my “coolhunt” did not turn up much coolness. Also, my camera is MIA, so I was not able to document any of the cool that I did find.

1. First I started out in the library. I went to the Open Book Café, got a Chai tea, and sat at a table. However, it was only 3 in the afternoon, so there weren’t many people there. The few people that were there, were just studying, which isn’t particularly cool.

2. After I finished my tea, I decided to venture outdoors and walk up State St. What I found was perhaps not cool, but definitely cold. I saw a couple of people who some might call “rebellious” (I would prefer “stupid”) because they were not wearing coats! Yes, despite the fact that it is early March, we live in Madison, Wisconsin (latitude: 43.073N), and it was about 30 degrees out, I witnessed about five people wearing t-shirts. Maybe these brave people were trying to convince themselves that it is really Spring, or perhaps they are innovators, trying to start a new, “cool” trend. However, I think that Barabasi, author of Linked: The New Science of Network, will agree that the “threshold” for this trend will never be met because most will not be convinced to pick up on it. The “spreading rate” for not wearing a coat in the middle of winter, in the Midwest, when there is still about five inches of snow on the ground, is very low (Barabasi 131).

3. While continuing to walk up State St., I noticed that most people (about 75%) were either talking on the phone or listening to their ipod (or some other music player). Perhaps the coolness of having and using these gadgets in public is wearing off because I think that this trend has reached the “late majority” that was mentioned by Malcolm Gladwell in his article from The New Yorker. To not have a cell phone, or at least not use one, is kind of innovative now since it is rare not to see someone chatting away no matter where you are.

4. I also noticed that several stores had St. Patrick’s Day decorations in their windows, and my two very Irish friends were talking about how excited they were for it. I have never really “celebrated” St. Patrick’s Day before, but I feel like I am missing out on something “cool” when I see all of the t-shirts and other merchandise that stores are selling and my friends are wearing, and when I see the pictures of the St. Patrick’s Day themed “Unofficial” party that all of my friends at University of Illinois put on Facebook. I don’t think celebrating St. Patrick’s Day is very innovative since people have been doing it for several years, but I was definitely convinced today to adopt the idea.

Those are the results of my coolhunt. Unfortunately, I think that maybe I couldn’t find very many “cool” things because of one of the rules of cool presented by Gladwell: “….[cool] can only be observed by those who are themselves cool” (Gladwell 155).

Defining a Network

In class on Tuesday, in response to Mark C. Taylor’s chapter from The Moment of Complexity, we tried to categorize different types of writing into either “grid” or “network.” Initially, one would think that academic writing, what I always think of as English essays or research papers, belongs under grid because it follows Taylor’s definition of an assembly line: “Separate individuals, entities, and events are joined in a predictable chain where effects are proportional to causes” (Taylor 29). In order to produce a piece of academic writing, the author must follow certain guidelines and the paper is almost always organized in the same way. However, especially if one looks at research papers, it is difficult to say that academic writing belongs only in the “grid” category. For one, several people might contribute to a paper, either through writing or editing, or references could be added to the end, which can be considered “network” attributes.

It is easy to classify non-traditional writing, such as blogs and wikis, as belonging to the “network” category, because they often seem so different from academic writing. The fact that they contain links to other people or other sites is what sets them apart. However, blogs and wikis still have a certain form, and they usually have to follow grammatical guidelines. Should they also be considered grid-like?

I think that we should just forget about trying to categorize writing as either grid or network because there is no clean break. However, I think that looking at the idea of emergence, brought up by Duncan Watts in Six Degrees, is a good way to determine what could be considered a network. Watts says that “emergence” comes about when “the interactions of individuals in a large system can generate greater complexity than the individuals themselves display, and sometimes much less” (Watts 27). In class, it was brought up that neurons working together in the brain, or the expression of several genes to create a functioning organism, are examples of where emergence is happening. Individual behavior aggregates to collective behavior, without one individual standing out as the leader. Maybe I just like this idea of emergence because there was a way to tie genetics into it, and I’m a genetics major, but I think that it really shows the importance of the idea of a network.

If you look specifically at blogging in this class, my individual post is connected to the posts of everyone else, and all of our separate ideas come together in the network in hopes of obtaining a higher level of understanding. This would not happen in a regular English class where all of our assignments would be turned in directly to the instructor. Let’s just hope that our network can create “greater complexity,” that Watts wrote about, instead of something “less.”

I Quit!

I hate running. I absolutely hate it. It hurts my feet, my knees, my back, and even my shoulders. But for some reason I always sign up to do it. I was on the track team for two years in high school, and I quit the team twice. I ran hurdles, which, although completely ruined my lower back, I didn’t mind. However, I would do everything possible to get out of the several mile warm-up and cool-down. Whenever my hurdle coach told us we had to join the sprinters or long-distance runners for a practice, I would usually run once around the track and then run straight to the locker room.
This goes completely against my perfectionist and competitive personality. I’m haunted by that whole type-A thing because, usually, if I set my mind on something, I follow through. Perhaps that is why I joined the track team again. But then I quit, again. Last year, I set my sights really high and decided I wanted to train for a half-marathon. I bought new shoes. I went to the gym every almost every night. I would get up early in the morning to go running. I even looked up training schedules online. I quit that after two weeks.
As much as I hate running, I hate quitting even more. So that is why I have promised a couple of my friends that I would run with them in the Crazylegs race on April 28th. It is an 8K, which is a lot more achievable than a half-marathon. However, I’m still a little worried that I’m going to fall back to my old ways of taking a nap instead of going for a run. And if I don’t feel like a nap, gorging on Cheez-its and catching up on old episodes of the Real World always seems more enticing than pounding on pavement, being out of breath, and sweating.
But this time, I have support from my friends, which might just make the difference.

How Very Complex

Before last week, I had heard of chaos and complexity theories before but I never really knew what they entailed. From Victor McGill’s website, The Complexity Pages, I learned that chaos theory describes a circumstance in which very simple things come together to form something very complex. Complexity theory, on the other hand, looks more at how something very complex can work with other complex things to self-organize and create something simple. Some examples that were brought up in class are an ant-hill, and all of the cells that make up a body.
When I first viewed the website and read chapters from Mark Taylor’s book, “The Moment of Complexity,” I felt like these “theories” were kind of useless and didn’t have any practical application. While I still think they are useless, I started to realize how many different ways these theories can be applied, especially in science.
The one thing that I am having difficulty applying the chaos and complexity theories to is architecture, which was Taylor’s focus. I understand how today’s “network culture” is “between order and chaos” and is “emerging” from this “moment of complexity”; however, I do not understand how this relates to the architecture that was brought up in the chapter (Taylor, 25).
Kurt, Becky, Kristin and I agreed with Taylor that architecture often represents the social, political and economic state of the time something is built. Taylor brings up how several architects used a grid model after the introduction of the assembly line. Taylor uses Mies van der Rohe’s Illinois Institute of Technology, which is where my brother attends, as an example. I thought this was very interesting because I did not think there was any architectural design behind IIT, unless boring is considered a design.
Taylor then goes on to say that the new, complex network culture is giving rise to more flowing architecture, such as the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao. This is where Taylor lost me. I did not understand how this new architecture had anything to do with the complex theory. After viewing the video I found on YouTube.com about the museum, I thought it is perhaps because all of the parts that make up the museum are complex, but they just organize into a simple building. I’m still a little skeptical of Taylor’s argument, but it is definitely intriguing and has forced me to think about how complex theory is applied.



The narrator is a little boring and the giant dog is kind of creepy, but I thought this video was interesting.

McLuhon=Crazy?

Confusion is the only word that comes to mind when I think about the pieces we read and discussed by Marshall McLuhon. While I was reading “The Medium is the Message” and “Media Hot and Cold,” I had a very difficult time understanding if McLuhon supported the new forms of media that were making on impact on society, or if he felt they were damaging. In class we discussed how McLuhon embraced new media and believed that it would unify society and encourage participation, while print literacy supports fragmentation. In the first chapter he seems to praise the movie, or the medium it represents, by saying that it “carried us from the world of sequence and connections into the world of creative configuration and structure” and encourages “involvement.” (McLuhon 27-28). This information seems to support the fact that McLuhon was a proponent of new media. However, McLuhon suggests in the same article that we are “numb in our new electric world” (McLuhon 31). In the next chapter “Media Hot and Cold,” McLuhon calls the movie a “hot” medium, which he says is one that involves little participation, which is a complete contradiction to what he said before.

McLuhon also states that we are in a “TV age of cool” that has “turned the hot American culture into a cool one that is quite unacquainted with itself” (McLuhon 36, 40). If McLuhon supports new media and feels that is will unify society, why does he feel that movies do not support participation and that television is damaging society? Why does he group television in a different category of media than movies? Perhaps television was different at the time that McLuhon was published, but now I feel like television is very similar to movies, especially with dramas like “Grey’s Anatomy,” and “24.”

Usually class discussions help to clarify a confusing reading, but I left Tuesday’s class in bewilderment and questioning McLuhon’s sanity when he wrote “Understanding Media.”

Attempt at Writing Cool

This is going to be interesting…

Today in my genetics lecture, my professor mentioned that bananas are going to become extinct in less than 10 years. These beloved fruits are no longer resistant to several diseases and pathogens due to years of genetic engineering so that consumers can get bigger and sterile (seed-less) bananas to go with their ice cream. However, the rhetoric my genetics textbook uses suggests that fruits were originally genetically engineered to help world hunger. And that world hunger, in Faigley’s opinion, is caused by the fact that we are consuming our resources too quickly because of our technological-based, fast-paced lives. It is basically a never ending circle: we try to use new technologies to fix problems, but that just creates more problems, which we then try to fix. And uniform circular motion has constant velocity and centripetal acceleration… I tried to get physics in there, but it doesn’t really relate…

This has become the "Real World"

This week, to advance our exploration of the rise of the blog, we read and discussed an article titled, “Blogging as a Social Action: A Genre Analysis of Writing,” by Carolyn R. Miller and Dawn Shepherd. The article outlined the main points of blogs, such as their purpose in society, their “ancestors,” and reasons as to why they have become so popular.

What I found to be the most interesting aspect of the article is the term that the authors have coined as “mediated voyeurism.” The authors theorize that, especially in the 90’s, there comes about a “peculiar intersection of the public and private” spheres because, “…as people relinquish control over increasing amounts of personal information, they expect increasing access to information in return” (Miller et al.) With the rise of reality TV and the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, society has become increasingly obsessed with knowing about the private lives of celebrities and “regular” people. The line between private and public information has not only been crossed, it has become extremely fuzzy. Today, thousands of people are willing to share very personal issues on TV (or just act completely ridiculous), as well as on their blog. As “regular” people are becoming “celebrities,” there is an ever-increasing demand for information to show how celebrities are regular people. And people, me included, can’t get enough of all of this “private” information. The list of reality shows and celebrity magazines that my friends and I can’t go a week with out seeing is a little embarrassing (we quote Vh1’s I Love New York on a daily basis).

One interesting point that was brought up in discussion was how, as a society, we are becoming more skeptical of what is considered “reality.” We know that what we see on The Bachelor or The Apprentice is not an adequate representation of real life, and what we read in magazine about celebrities is most likely not true. This is where I think the genre of weblogs is separating itself from the other types of media included in “mediated voyeurism” and “mediated exhibitionism.” (Miller et al). I’m going to ignore the example that was given in the article about the women who lied about the child with cancer, but I think that most people tell the truth when writing in a blog. I don’t think that blogging has really caught on yet with people my age, but I think that others blog so that they can share their thoughts. If they wanted to seek attention by fabricating stories they could just go on Real World or one of the other hundreds of reality shows.

STS Class: Wikis, Blogs, & Podcasts

Yesterday I attended the Wikis, Blogs, and Podcasts class provided by STS. The class was fairly straight forward and the instructors were very helpful. We spent the first hour and a half learning how to record our own podcast using Audacity, which is a free program, and then we uploaded the podcast onto the internet. After that we set up a blog through wordpress.com. I really liked this weblog provider because it had a lot more options than blogger. After blogs, we moved on to wikis, which, we learned, is Hawaiian for quick. We kind of rushed through this section because there wasn’t much time left. Basically they showed us that there is a special code for writing in wikis, and it is very easy to edit what other people have written.

I think that the class would have been very beneficial if I hadn’t already set up a blog. The podcast section was a little complicated so that took up most of the time. I would have liked to learn a little bit more about wikis because they mentioned how wikis can be very useful for collaborative projects.

Overall, this class was okay but I think I might attend a Dreamweaver class for more software training.

"New Media" in the English Classroom

The majority of my experience with “academic writing” comes from high school. I wrote a few papers for various social science classes, but most of the things I wrote were focused on analyzing literature for English class. Most of the essays were structured the same: five paragraphs with a thesis statement in the introduction and a conclusion. For AP English we wrote so many practice AP test essays that were all exactly the same (pick two elements of style in the passage and describe them in a four paragraph essay), so for any other “writing” assignments my teacher gave us a variety of mediums to use. For a couple of assignments we could make videos, compile an album of songs, or make a PowerPoint. I liked the different options we were allowed to explore because they were a nice departure from monotonous essays.

I think that by introducing “new media” into English classrooms, as my AP English teacher started to do, it would allow student to further explore aspects of literature and composition. It would definitely “challenge” traditional writing because it would help to get students more excited about assignments if they are allowed to choose different methods and be more creative. Also, as Jeff Rice described in “Networks and New Media,” which we discussed on Tuesday, different forms of media will allow students to make more and different connections and relationships that simply writing on paper does not provide.

Another benefit to introducing “new media” is that it will give students invaluable skills and experience with up-and-coming technologies that they will be able to utilize as they enter the workforce.

However, I think there are several risks that come with introducing new media into the classroom. I’ll admit that when I first heard that we were going to be using blogs and web design in this class, I almost switched. I have never been computer-savvy (my laptop and I often get in heated arguments, and I usually lose), and I was afraid I was not going to be prepared. Most people still think of English class as a course focused on writing or typing papers and I think it is going to take a while to change this misconception.

Also, especially at the college-level, students have a mosaic of different experience levels with using computers, videos, the internet, and other forms of “new media. By only focusing on these new forms, students that are not very comfortable with technology might be alienated. Moreover, as we discussed last week, students that can not attend schools that can afford newer technology are going to be left behind in this movement.

I really see this use of “new media” as interesting and exciting change from what I always thought of “academic writing” in the English class. However, I definitely think that getting comfortable with it is going to take time.

The Evolution of Writing in My Life

Reading Notes 1: Wikipedia Discussion

The readings assignments for last week addressed two different view points on how the new world of technology is affecting or could possibly change the English classroom. The first reading, “Made Not Only in Words: Composition in New Key,” was from a speech that Kathleen Blake Yancey gave at CCCC. Yancey compared the emergence of this new technological era to that of 19^th century Britain and the invention of a new, cheaper printing press that allowed more people to read novels. At that time, people became excited about reading and often read together in groups. Yancey believes that composition classes need to embrace new “media” of writing and communication, such as blogs, in order to get students excited about composition. She often praises new technology because it constantly evolves and promotes more depth in composition.

The second reading, “Rhetorics Fast and Slow,” which was written by Lester L. Faigley, addresses the negative aspects of using new technology in the classroom. Faigley often compares “slow rhetoric,” which he describes as “lengthy exposition, explicit logical relations, sobriety, and order,” to “fast rhetoric,” which includes all of the new forms of communication we now use in the 21^st century (Faigley 4). While reading his essay, I felt that Faigley was very antagonistic to fast rhetoric. Instead of seeing the flood of information that is easily attainable today as a good thing, he basically states that it is the cause of war, famine, and environmental problems. He states that this new, fast-paced technology “brings risks” and society needs to learn how to slow down (Faigley 5). I was also surprised to learn from his reading that there exists a Rhetoric Society of America.

In discussion, we read an article describing how professors at Middlebury College have banned students from using Wikipedia. The class discussed how Yancey and Faigley would view the ban. I felt that Faigley would support the ban because Wikipedia is another example of fast rhetoric: anyone can obtain whatever information they want but there is a risk that it is not correct. However, someone is the class (sorry, I don’t have all the names down yet) brought up that Wikipedia was proven to be more correct than Britannica and other encyclopedias. I initially thought that Yancey would not support the ban because she was very supportive of embracing new technologies in the classroom. But someone else brought up a good point that Yancey would probably encourage teaching students to make more “rhetorical choices” and how to properly use a site like Wikipedia, without cutting them off from anything.

The end of the discussion shifted more towards what will happen if some students do not have access to these new technologies. Faigley mentioned that digital technologies are available to people with “disposable income.” If they are the only ones with access, then students in low-income areas will not be exposed and an even larger divide in society will exist. I was very interested in many people’s experiences in inner-city schools. Before reading the assignments and listening to the discussion, I never really thought about how much technology has become so important in my education and how, unfortunately, some are not able to have access to the resources that I have all the time. I feel that it is important to expose students to all of the new forms of technology, but something needs to be done so that every student has the same opportunities.

The Voting Results Are In: Sports Are Better.

Da Bears are playing in the Super Bowl on Sunday, and I am getting really excited. All of the hype and anticipation going on in Chicago reminded me of a theory brought up by one of my Dad’s favorite radio personalities as to why people care more about sports and their favorite sport teams than current politics. The man thought that it was because you can care a lot about and be very attached to a team, such as I am to the Bears or several of my friends are to the Packers, but whether they win or lose, your life is not going to be changed. If you start to care a lot about politics, and the politician or legislation you supported loses or does not pass, then your life could be affected. He theorized that people are more or less afraid to get involved in politics because they figure that they will not notice that their life is being negatively affected as long as they don’t care.

My main disagreement with his theory is that sports are way more fun than politics and it is kind of stupid to compare the two. Besides that, I think that people don’t vote or don’t get involved in politics because of several different reasons, but fear of the possible outcomes is not one of them for me. I was scowled at a lot last November because I did not vote in the Wisconsin election. My reason for not voting was that my insane schedule last semester did not afford me the time to look up information on the candidates and referendums. I decided to not vote at all rather than make an uneducated vote.

I’m not saying that I don’t understand how important a freedom it is to have the right to vote. My senior year of high school I was involved in the Center for Civic Education’s “Constitution Team” (super dorky, I know), so I basically spent 7 months of that year studying the Constitution and our nation’s government. I read up on a lot of the founding fathers thoughts on the right to vote, as well as many other things that I don't remember at all. Also, I had to keep up with current events because we could be asked about anything going on in politics during our competitions. After all that I was prepared to vote in any election, but I wasn’t 18 yet. Politics, for me, takes a lot of time. Last semester I just didn’t have that time.

I’m going home this weekend for my Mom’s birthday, so I will have time on Sunday to cheer on the Bears. I’ll probably be stressed out during the game, because I stress about everything, but hopefully they win. If not--I guess it won’t affect my life too much.

I was way off.....

Before the readings I had a vague definition of rhetoric. Basically, I thought it was just the way one writes or speaks. I had heard the saying, "that is mere rhetoric," but, to be honest, I did not really understand what it meant. The reading assignments enlightened me on the many extensive definitions of rhetoric and the fact that there is argument over its true meaning.
I think Aristotle had a good basis for rhetoric when he divided speech into logos, which Silva Rhetoricae defined as "logical content," and lexis, which is "style and delivery." This helped to fill me in that rhetorics is about the form or style of what is said or written that adds to the overall meaning that the author or speaker is trying to say.
After reading Herrick's detailed analysis on the art of rhetoric, I realized how large a role rhetoric plays in everyday life, and how important this tool can be for more than just authors and speakers. From this description, I realized that rhetoric is a tool of persuasion that can be used by everyone from politicians and attorneys, to artists, and even dancers. I was especially interested in what Herrick said about how doctors use rhetorics often to persuade patients and other doctors about controversial medical procedures or the effectiveness of a debated medication. At first I thought rhetorics would never pertain to me if I were to become a doctor, but here I was proved wrong!
What really stood out to me was how rhetorics can be very powerful. If one is able to master the "art of rhetoric," then one could possibly shape the beliefs and actions of others. Depending on who masters it, rhetoric could be used for good or evil. After learning this, I was confused as to why so many have argued that learning rhetorics is useless.
After the readings, I have changed my definition of rhetorics to the way one uses symbols, style, and knowledge in order to communicate persuasively their ideas to a specific audience. By using rhetoric, one is able to effectively make their private thoughts public, and perhaps create change in society. This is still a fairly vague definition, as opposed to Herrick's, but I feel like it hits the main points of rhetoric.

Also, I have finally chosen a title for my blog: Che Stress! This is a saying (translation: What Stress!) from a calender featuring a popular Italian comic called Mafalda. It is about a girl, Malfalda, that stresses about everything. My parents bought me this calender when they were in Italy last September because I am always stressing about something. I'm sure being stressed out will be a common theme in many of my blogs. If not, I will do my best to find a more creative title!

Bloggerific!

Hello! I'm Liz and I set up this blog for English 201: Rhetorics of Network Culture at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I'm in my second year here and am pursuing a Genetics major. I hope to go on to medical school and become an oncologist one day, but I have a lot of things to accomplish before I sell my soul to the medical field.
I was born in Chicago, Illinois but my parents moved my brother and me to Park Ridge, a suburb, when I was a baby. I adore the city of Chicago and I am a huge Bears fan. I am also an avid reader (currently I'm reading Sense and Sensibility), I love to cook, and I enjoy movies (especially scare ones). Also, I am fortunate to be surrounded by a great group of friends that really know how to laugh and have a good time.
I have never had a blog before and I am very interested as to how this will work out. I am usually a fairly private and shy person, so posting my thoughts and ideas publicly on the internet might be a bit of an obstacle for me. However, I am going to do my best to have fun with this!