I think Reed's discussion about how it's not up to the technology that can change the way we live, but rather how we as humans respond to it. In a sense he's right, we have solar roadway panels now, high technology stuff that encourages safer roads and driving, something we all value. However, we're not putting it to use because it has flaws such as it's expensiveness. We have the technology to change, but right now humanity value saving money at the moment. There are a lot of technology that falls short due to human's values. We ask if something it too much or not relevant and serves as just a trinket, rather than changing the lives of people. However this mentality, I believe is what leads to underdevelopment in the digital culture. To embrace new technology can change the lives of people day by day. However, we are all afraid of change, and that makes sense. You can't force people to acknowledge or accept certain things because we all lead different lives.
He also mentions corporations and how our technology can affect them. He's right, and 3D printing is one of the examples he uses. Another I can think of from the top of my head is the printer that prints make up. Any kind because the creator found out that makeup is made of essentially the same material. You can grab whatever color you like and print out eyeshadow, lipstick, blush, etc. This technology is amazing, however it screams loss of profit for makeup companies.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Reading his chapters, I felt more compelled to write about chapter 4. However I'm going to emphasize on the gender AND race issue. While it is important to understand that women are most likely to be harassed or assaulted, the way issues are handled and the way they are publicized is an issue of race too. What I'm going to begin talking about is the fact that white women have more privileges than any other race. African-American women have stigmas attached to them, whereas white women don't. The closest a white woman can get to being stereotyped is being too "basic" or "blonde-jokes". African-American women, on the other hand are sexualized or stereotyped into being someone who is 'sassy' or 'don't-need-no-man' attitude, taking both stereotypes into jokes. African-American women's cases are seldom to be heard on the news, they experience the blow of sexism with little or no help from publicity, as people are outraged with the many stories of white women, the reports of other women are rare to see on the news. This also applies to the recent case of Mike Brown, where black people are shown as 'not an angel' even when they are the victims.
Reed's comment on the default and unintentional white-created internet is a relief to read from someone with a professional background. People can claim racism is over or that they 'don't see color', when in fact, the internet is, by default, a white, male community. Their privileges expand across languages, dominating the web with English rather than all the other languages that exist in the world today. What this shows is that sometimes the presence of other races is not welcomed online as it should be. On tumblr, people are dubbed as SJW (social justice warriors) and while this sounds like a positive thing, many (mainly cis-white-men) cry out how we are femnazis or too sensitive. But they don't understand anything outside their bubble of delusion. They don't understand that they don't experience racism. What is sad is a concept of white feminism. And it prevails today. Many white women involved in feminism looks past the issue of race. When someone of color calls them out on bigotry, they are quick to defend themselves. They also don't understand issues that they should if they want equal rights for EVERYBODY.
Now, on a personal note, the problem with race and being a women, I encountered one first hand. I'm not sure if this is TMI, but I think it's innocent enough. I love clothes, but only Asian-fashion clothes. I find myself wanting to buy them, but unless I live in Taiwan or in Chinatown I don't have access to their style of fashion. So I like to look online and see if I can buy them from companies instead. I found myself enjoying their lingerie, more cute and airy than the ones westerners wear and sell. So I googled "Asian lingerie". Lingerie is a word in fashion, is a word seen in store bold for women to see. However, some part of me wasn't surprised, but primarily disgusted, at first it was just weird festish-y sites. Then on the next page I started getting pornography. Pages of pornography. I never did it again. Fuck the internet. Why must you sexualize my people and slap them on the front pages of the web, when I just want to look cute.
Reed's comment on the default and unintentional white-created internet is a relief to read from someone with a professional background. People can claim racism is over or that they 'don't see color', when in fact, the internet is, by default, a white, male community. Their privileges expand across languages, dominating the web with English rather than all the other languages that exist in the world today. What this shows is that sometimes the presence of other races is not welcomed online as it should be. On tumblr, people are dubbed as SJW (social justice warriors) and while this sounds like a positive thing, many (mainly cis-white-men) cry out how we are femnazis or too sensitive. But they don't understand anything outside their bubble of delusion. They don't understand that they don't experience racism. What is sad is a concept of white feminism. And it prevails today. Many white women involved in feminism looks past the issue of race. When someone of color calls them out on bigotry, they are quick to defend themselves. They also don't understand issues that they should if they want equal rights for EVERYBODY.
Now, on a personal note, the problem with race and being a women, I encountered one first hand. I'm not sure if this is TMI, but I think it's innocent enough. I love clothes, but only Asian-fashion clothes. I find myself wanting to buy them, but unless I live in Taiwan or in Chinatown I don't have access to their style of fashion. So I like to look online and see if I can buy them from companies instead. I found myself enjoying their lingerie, more cute and airy than the ones westerners wear and sell. So I googled "Asian lingerie". Lingerie is a word in fashion, is a word seen in store bold for women to see. However, some part of me wasn't surprised, but primarily disgusted, at first it was just weird festish-y sites. Then on the next page I started getting pornography. Pages of pornography. I never did it again. Fuck the internet. Why must you sexualize my people and slap them on the front pages of the web, when I just want to look cute.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
When reading the first three chapters, what made the largest impression on me was his telling of the dark side of the electronics industry. He prompts us to think critically of the electronics companies which we buy our products from. And it makes sense. The companies constantly turns a blind eye and feigns innocence when approached with the subject of unethical work labor. As Reed puts it, the people on top are the dreamer and successes of a major discovery. The second tier are the app makers and such. The last one is the majority, Reed says, made up of mainly women who work below minimum wage in terrible conditions. The poor conditions range from working 16 hour days to committing suicide or dying in a fire.
These unethical standards only show the corruptness of large companies who take advantage of people's needs to work, especially poor people. They say corporations are people, but I highly doubt that. But a good point that Reed brings to the discussion about labor in factories is that the topic seems to die off after the scandal is exposed. As he says, the movement dies off from public view, easily wiped, like a memory from Men in Black or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
He also bring the issue of E-Waste that plagues the industry. People seldom forget that there are waste that goes beyond our islands of trash floating in the ocean. It is poisoning the workers, who deals with these toxins every day. He remarks that the workers are dressed in seemingly protective gear. However its not to protect them from the waste, but so the electronic device won't be contaminated by the human. It's an almost ironic situation.
I think this subject needs to be brought back to life. It's difficult to imagine a world without technology, but even more so about the people who work in shitty enviroments, creating the very base of what we hold in our hands.
These unethical standards only show the corruptness of large companies who take advantage of people's needs to work, especially poor people. They say corporations are people, but I highly doubt that. But a good point that Reed brings to the discussion about labor in factories is that the topic seems to die off after the scandal is exposed. As he says, the movement dies off from public view, easily wiped, like a memory from Men in Black or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
He also bring the issue of E-Waste that plagues the industry. People seldom forget that there are waste that goes beyond our islands of trash floating in the ocean. It is poisoning the workers, who deals with these toxins every day. He remarks that the workers are dressed in seemingly protective gear. However its not to protect them from the waste, but so the electronic device won't be contaminated by the human. It's an almost ironic situation.
I think this subject needs to be brought back to life. It's difficult to imagine a world without technology, but even more so about the people who work in shitty enviroments, creating the very base of what we hold in our hands.
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
My focus on this blog post is going to be around a topic I'm fairly sensitive to: The family. I could easily write about activism which is another I enjoy, but family is something I have to write about so I can somehow bring my parent's stories into light.
I found the segment about Parent Helicopters fascinating, mainly because how true they are! As a highschooler I was constantly humiliated by my parents' constant policing. For my mom, she was upfront and blunt about me getting home late (late was apparently 10pm on a prom night, in hindsight, I WAS a sophomore dating a senior that my mom didn't trust, and she was right). My dad was extremely passive-aggressive, sometimes more scary than my mom. It is true what Tapscott evaluated, that parents do this because they're protective of their children in relation to the horrifyingly rising crime rates. I knew they just wanted the best for me, but in the end it became suffocating. I spent a lot of time online, just to find peace and solitary entertainment from my parents. It was to a point my father set an "internet curfew". The internet would turn off automatically at 1 am. Eventually he turned it off when I reached 17 years old. He didn't do so out of fear of the internet or anything, just so I can actually sleep at night, haha. I truly bonded with my family when I left for college, and ended up being miles away from them. It was...amazing. I did find freedom and found myself more productive in school, earning high grades, finding time for my own hobbies. I also found myself appreciating more of my parents. I made sure to call them once in a while, finding relief in being able to do so with technology. When I did go home, I didn't have the luxury in spending time with them, since they worked full-time, but when I did, we all kinda sat together with our computers or tablets and the tv on. But even with all this noise...we really still felt at home.
There are a few things that I've observed about my own family. We're not technophobes. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. That's what I want to talk about. My parents never gave me the sex talk, never gave me a talk about strangers online, or anything of that sort. The only talk they seriously gave me was about education and going to college and graduating, finding a good job. Why didn't they talk to me about all that other stuff? I never asked but I felt they trusted my sister and I at such a young age with the internet. Only recently when I told my mom about some online friends I met that were giving me gifts, was my mom concerned with my activities online. She was baffled at my willingness to give away my address for them to send me gifts. I reassured her, that it will be okay. And it was, it really was.
My entire family is not technophobes, not even the grandparents. My grandpa back in the days enjoyed tinkering with computers, even at 40 or 50 years old. My uncle and father both dealt with computers and my household had at least 5 or 6 computers running at the same time. My sister and I had individual computers, one in the "computer room" for my sister and I to play games on, my dad had one, my uncle had one, and I believed there was even one upstairs in the attic where my uncle slept. Our family had 9 people living under one roof in a three bedroom house, 1 story with an attic. 7 adults, 2 children. Eventually we dispersed but the number of computers in my household remains the same. Except this time it was laptops. We have 3 laptops, and at least 3 desktops in the house, and 3 tablets and 4 smartphones.
The fact we have this much technology is something my mom revels in. She's not even the one competent in computers. She loves it so much because she can talk to her family in Taiwan. She has no one in the United States. So being able to call them, Skype with them, and use the new app called Line to freely contact them with no payment. She understands technology better than those technophobic baby boomers in America. English isn't even her second language, it's her third. Is it America's obsession with our Westernization and traditional roots what's holding the baby boomers back from truly uncovering the extraordinary usability of technology? I believe my parents found themselves enamored with technology because it's something universal. A universal language, and they didn't need to learn fluent English to understand its importance and capabilities. My dad and uncle picks up fast in technology. They don't moan or groan about how absurd this is or how useless and harmful to children. They see us as intelligent and fast. I believe my father knows more about computer than me, and I'm the millennial, the one born into technology.
Oh, and I have to mention that my dad bought the NES without my sister and I even knowing what it was. He also bought a Playstation. We definitely had no knowledge of it. He played it, and we did too. My uncle frequently played Tomb Raider (the first one) and we would crowd around him and watch him play it avidly. He also played the Playstation a lot. I didn't ask for the Gameboy color. The only time I began asking for these high-tech gaming systems was when the GameCube came out. My parents really wanted to get the Wii and encouraged us to get Guitar Hero. They were the ones who asked us if we wanted Rock Band (they looked excited about it at Fry's when we saw it on display). Even recently, just 2 days ago, my mom called me about if I wanted a new camera, a nice one with wi-fi, but we both didn't understand why it needed wi-fi haha.
If my parents, strict and definitely loomed behind me every step of my life until college, understands technology, then I shake my head at technophobe baby boomers. They simply don't want to learn, don't want to accept the age we're in. The only difference I can see is that my parents came to America with hope in their hearts and stars in their eyes. My mom said tears were in her eyes when she ate her first hamburger at Burger King (the Whopper). My dad playing video games with a large smile on his face. My parents yelling at me to get off the internet when someone was calling. My uncle showing me for the first time, video chatting across the world to Taiwan. My dad getting a ping-pong table and how he and my uncle would sometimes play until they sweated. Family is important to me, and their stories bring pride to be a first-generation child. I relied on technology to get where I'm at, and so did my parents.
Tapscott, he's right in many ways, but I can't truly connect with all his statements. Simply because I'm a lucky millennial who grew up with parents that understood technology and foresaw the dangers of increased tuition, so invested in GET to pay for 4 years of college without the cost of inflation. They're smart folks, and I love them. I only hope baby boomers will understand stories like this. Immigrants and first-generation children also make up this technological world. It's not only limited to the Western world and their obsession with tradition. It's time to move on. And the world is waiting for us.
I found the segment about Parent Helicopters fascinating, mainly because how true they are! As a highschooler I was constantly humiliated by my parents' constant policing. For my mom, she was upfront and blunt about me getting home late (late was apparently 10pm on a prom night, in hindsight, I WAS a sophomore dating a senior that my mom didn't trust, and she was right). My dad was extremely passive-aggressive, sometimes more scary than my mom. It is true what Tapscott evaluated, that parents do this because they're protective of their children in relation to the horrifyingly rising crime rates. I knew they just wanted the best for me, but in the end it became suffocating. I spent a lot of time online, just to find peace and solitary entertainment from my parents. It was to a point my father set an "internet curfew". The internet would turn off automatically at 1 am. Eventually he turned it off when I reached 17 years old. He didn't do so out of fear of the internet or anything, just so I can actually sleep at night, haha. I truly bonded with my family when I left for college, and ended up being miles away from them. It was...amazing. I did find freedom and found myself more productive in school, earning high grades, finding time for my own hobbies. I also found myself appreciating more of my parents. I made sure to call them once in a while, finding relief in being able to do so with technology. When I did go home, I didn't have the luxury in spending time with them, since they worked full-time, but when I did, we all kinda sat together with our computers or tablets and the tv on. But even with all this noise...we really still felt at home.
There are a few things that I've observed about my own family. We're not technophobes. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. That's what I want to talk about. My parents never gave me the sex talk, never gave me a talk about strangers online, or anything of that sort. The only talk they seriously gave me was about education and going to college and graduating, finding a good job. Why didn't they talk to me about all that other stuff? I never asked but I felt they trusted my sister and I at such a young age with the internet. Only recently when I told my mom about some online friends I met that were giving me gifts, was my mom concerned with my activities online. She was baffled at my willingness to give away my address for them to send me gifts. I reassured her, that it will be okay. And it was, it really was.
My entire family is not technophobes, not even the grandparents. My grandpa back in the days enjoyed tinkering with computers, even at 40 or 50 years old. My uncle and father both dealt with computers and my household had at least 5 or 6 computers running at the same time. My sister and I had individual computers, one in the "computer room" for my sister and I to play games on, my dad had one, my uncle had one, and I believed there was even one upstairs in the attic where my uncle slept. Our family had 9 people living under one roof in a three bedroom house, 1 story with an attic. 7 adults, 2 children. Eventually we dispersed but the number of computers in my household remains the same. Except this time it was laptops. We have 3 laptops, and at least 3 desktops in the house, and 3 tablets and 4 smartphones.
The fact we have this much technology is something my mom revels in. She's not even the one competent in computers. She loves it so much because she can talk to her family in Taiwan. She has no one in the United States. So being able to call them, Skype with them, and use the new app called Line to freely contact them with no payment. She understands technology better than those technophobic baby boomers in America. English isn't even her second language, it's her third. Is it America's obsession with our Westernization and traditional roots what's holding the baby boomers back from truly uncovering the extraordinary usability of technology? I believe my parents found themselves enamored with technology because it's something universal. A universal language, and they didn't need to learn fluent English to understand its importance and capabilities. My dad and uncle picks up fast in technology. They don't moan or groan about how absurd this is or how useless and harmful to children. They see us as intelligent and fast. I believe my father knows more about computer than me, and I'm the millennial, the one born into technology.
Oh, and I have to mention that my dad bought the NES without my sister and I even knowing what it was. He also bought a Playstation. We definitely had no knowledge of it. He played it, and we did too. My uncle frequently played Tomb Raider (the first one) and we would crowd around him and watch him play it avidly. He also played the Playstation a lot. I didn't ask for the Gameboy color. The only time I began asking for these high-tech gaming systems was when the GameCube came out. My parents really wanted to get the Wii and encouraged us to get Guitar Hero. They were the ones who asked us if we wanted Rock Band (they looked excited about it at Fry's when we saw it on display). Even recently, just 2 days ago, my mom called me about if I wanted a new camera, a nice one with wi-fi, but we both didn't understand why it needed wi-fi haha.
If my parents, strict and definitely loomed behind me every step of my life until college, understands technology, then I shake my head at technophobe baby boomers. They simply don't want to learn, don't want to accept the age we're in. The only difference I can see is that my parents came to America with hope in their hearts and stars in their eyes. My mom said tears were in her eyes when she ate her first hamburger at Burger King (the Whopper). My dad playing video games with a large smile on his face. My parents yelling at me to get off the internet when someone was calling. My uncle showing me for the first time, video chatting across the world to Taiwan. My dad getting a ping-pong table and how he and my uncle would sometimes play until they sweated. Family is important to me, and their stories bring pride to be a first-generation child. I relied on technology to get where I'm at, and so did my parents.
Tapscott, he's right in many ways, but I can't truly connect with all his statements. Simply because I'm a lucky millennial who grew up with parents that understood technology and foresaw the dangers of increased tuition, so invested in GET to pay for 4 years of college without the cost of inflation. They're smart folks, and I love them. I only hope baby boomers will understand stories like this. Immigrants and first-generation children also make up this technological world. It's not only limited to the Western world and their obsession with tradition. It's time to move on. And the world is waiting for us.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
In the second part of the book, near the end, the author revisits the "The Dark Side" and I'm glad of it. If anything about this book strikes me as impacting, is his immediate presentation of the "The Dark Side" in the beginning of the book. It was the one thing that made my blood boil hotter than the sun. However, Tapscott goes back and responds to each one effortlessly and much more positively. I especially enjoyed the segment about stealing. He basically described his ideal music platform like Zune Pass, I believe. ( I don't think Pandora and 8Tracks count, as they are radio-esque). But he makes a point, as a generation, it becomes...a money waster to spend $1 per song you want to download. Considering how much music is being put out these days, and how much music form other countries are gaining popularity, it certainly adds up.
On the topic of pirating, basically, a famous author Neil Gaiman says this, "We took “American Gods,” a book that was still selling and selling very well, and for a month they put it up completely free on their website. You could read it and you could download it. What happened was sales of my books, through independent bookstores, because that’s all we were measuring it through, went up the following month three hundred percent." He realized that pirating, like a case in Russia, was practically free advertising for him, and when people read his works for free, they were more inclined to purchase the material and anything he published in the future. For the net-gen, we've become more and more frugal and weary of where we're spending our cash (well at least the middle-low class). So it comes down to the point that we're curious about products, and want to have it for free to see if we'll like it. We don't want to spend potential rent/grocery/laundry money on a movie we buy and end up hating it, and you can't resell your ticket, digital copy, or DVD.
The Net-Gen is remarkable I think, nothing wrong with narcissism either. What may appear as narcissistic behavior for the baby boomers, is strange, since isn't this self-esteem celebration? Why is it considered hazardous for someone to embrace their chubby bodies, or dark skin? To look good and feel good?
And the response from net-gens about the book "Stupidest Generation" are so snarky and on-point. Which is awesome.
On the topic of pirating, basically, a famous author Neil Gaiman says this, "We took “American Gods,” a book that was still selling and selling very well, and for a month they put it up completely free on their website. You could read it and you could download it. What happened was sales of my books, through independent bookstores, because that’s all we were measuring it through, went up the following month three hundred percent." He realized that pirating, like a case in Russia, was practically free advertising for him, and when people read his works for free, they were more inclined to purchase the material and anything he published in the future. For the net-gen, we've become more and more frugal and weary of where we're spending our cash (well at least the middle-low class). So it comes down to the point that we're curious about products, and want to have it for free to see if we'll like it. We don't want to spend potential rent/grocery/laundry money on a movie we buy and end up hating it, and you can't resell your ticket, digital copy, or DVD.
The Net-Gen is remarkable I think, nothing wrong with narcissism either. What may appear as narcissistic behavior for the baby boomers, is strange, since isn't this self-esteem celebration? Why is it considered hazardous for someone to embrace their chubby bodies, or dark skin? To look good and feel good?
And the response from net-gens about the book "Stupidest Generation" are so snarky and on-point. Which is awesome.
Monday, September 29, 2014
This book is certainly an ego-booster. The author's enthusiasm for this generation is rare nowadays, and just having him gush over the prospect of a brighter future is encouraging. The critics he mentioned earlier is a discouraging read, how much technology and our generation is being put down upon just because they seem attached to their way of living so much, they forget that it's a new era and they need to accept it. Baby boomers are a puzzle. And those that call us lazy or unintelligent, or anything of that sort seem critical of how we live. It's a well known fact though, they (forgive my language) essentially fucked us over. Tuition costs are higher than ever, and the minimum wage is sluggishly trailing behind, being held back by greedy politicians. A baby boomer stayed in school longer because they could afford one year of college with a summer job. Today? I worked 40 hours each week for 4 months, and I can only pay for half a semester of college. That's what's sad, and they don't feel sorry for us. That's why we turned to the internet, a mostly cheap way to gain entertainment and information.
What is this fear that we've become more distant, when in reality we've gain more and more diverse friends and communication than ever. Why is the idea of text over speech more important than the other? However, the author looks past this, and supports our ability to multitask and absorb the new technology so easy. This book is what this generation needs. When we were born, we gained the problems the baby boomers put on us. And all they did, first thing, is expect us to do what they did, even if we can't because we don't have the luxury they had (even if it's not entirely rich).
Technology did wonders for us, some people call it laziness, but honestly it's a solution to all the shit we've been through. And it's true, we've become more accustomed to listening to other people and learning from them. We've become more connected to the world, and we're able to talk to people who do not have a say on the radio, the newspapers, the television, but from people who can freely talk on the internet. We've become more diverse and sympathetic.
It's nice to have this confirmed by somebody who cares for our generation. We need encouragement, we need hope, we need the baby boomers to believe in us, and know that we are humans who can do great things.
Sorry, I have a lot of feelings about this.
What is this fear that we've become more distant, when in reality we've gain more and more diverse friends and communication than ever. Why is the idea of text over speech more important than the other? However, the author looks past this, and supports our ability to multitask and absorb the new technology so easy. This book is what this generation needs. When we were born, we gained the problems the baby boomers put on us. And all they did, first thing, is expect us to do what they did, even if we can't because we don't have the luxury they had (even if it's not entirely rich).
Technology did wonders for us, some people call it laziness, but honestly it's a solution to all the shit we've been through. And it's true, we've become more accustomed to listening to other people and learning from them. We've become more connected to the world, and we're able to talk to people who do not have a say on the radio, the newspapers, the television, but from people who can freely talk on the internet. We've become more diverse and sympathetic.
It's nice to have this confirmed by somebody who cares for our generation. We need encouragement, we need hope, we need the baby boomers to believe in us, and know that we are humans who can do great things.
Sorry, I have a lot of feelings about this.
Thursday, September 25, 2014
I am... getting second-hand embarrassment right now. Livejournal. Holy shit, I have not seen that word in a while. Nowadays it's all about Blogger, Wordpress, Tumblr, and Pintrest. I have a confession to make. Yes, I do have a Livejournal. I've had it since 2005, and that means I was 13 years old. However, I have abandoned it in 2012. What was I thinking when I made it?
I was interested in communicating with people that had the same interests in me, and while I had at least one friend and a sister that liked the same thing, it wasn't enough. The need, the want for material to sate my obsession is what drove me online, to write for others, and draw for them. Publicly post them when I don't even show them to my friends. It seems that being able to publish things without going through a publisher or anyone to tell you "no" is a great thing about online writing. And how I feel personally about having authors online, is that it's a great place to learn. I've read so many fanfics online, written gorgeously by people I don't even now, who has the ability to make someone cry, laugh, or squeal in excitement, and that's something many books out there can't offer. It's a person with passion the same as yours is always an exciting thing to experience. I'll advocate writers online till I die. They are such passionate people who will do things for free, simply because of the freedom you can experience.
Fan written material is sometimes (personally, most of the time) better than the source material. However, this just depends on the person. But that's just what's so nice about the freedom of choice and what you choose to read.
I was interested in communicating with people that had the same interests in me, and while I had at least one friend and a sister that liked the same thing, it wasn't enough. The need, the want for material to sate my obsession is what drove me online, to write for others, and draw for them. Publicly post them when I don't even show them to my friends. It seems that being able to publish things without going through a publisher or anyone to tell you "no" is a great thing about online writing. And how I feel personally about having authors online, is that it's a great place to learn. I've read so many fanfics online, written gorgeously by people I don't even now, who has the ability to make someone cry, laugh, or squeal in excitement, and that's something many books out there can't offer. It's a person with passion the same as yours is always an exciting thing to experience. I'll advocate writers online till I die. They are such passionate people who will do things for free, simply because of the freedom you can experience.
Fan written material is sometimes (personally, most of the time) better than the source material. However, this just depends on the person. But that's just what's so nice about the freedom of choice and what you choose to read.
Monday, September 22, 2014
This novel is an interesting read, while Ong seem to mainly focus on orality (at least that's what I've perceived), Baron's book is on literacy. His in-depth observations really shed some light on things I've never paid much attention to. For example, he explains the nature of humans and their tendency to rely on literature. He tells us how we see text as the truth and how it has shifted from oral to literacy in the aspect that it's easier nowadays to learn. He makes a point saying that everything important to us is mainly recorded in text.
We have books holding our "sacred texts", our laws are written down, and IOU's are too, and so forth. What this shows is that as humans, we will more than likely make mistakes through words. For an example, I for one, enjoy retelling stories of events in my day, if they are memorable enough. However, I tend to say, "I'm not sure how it went, but..." My memory is not exact when I tell the story to someone. But if I had recorded the words said, as they have happened, I could have told the specifics to my audience. It could have supported my words or even improved my storytelling. Baron also makes a point about how writing is everywhere, and not only in the form of books or stories, but just information (whether it is actually true or not). Our food packaging tells us the ingredients that make up the food, and how it might be "yummy" and "beneficial". It gives us information in text, so we tend to believe in them. It's a form of trust, even if it is a corporation out for your money, they have some form of authority and possibly knowledge that we don't have.
In a later segment, Baron touches on how computers have people who enjoy their capabilities, and also they have enemies. Technophobes, they are called. People who live by the fear that computers will destroy the life of books, corrupt writers, encouraging self-published authors. And other fears too.
I have strong feelings about these people, honestly. Not positive ones. They live in a world that constitutes that their world is the one we all should live in. Think of Sale's tale to Wired. Wired is a magazine. Magazines are typically written by computers and contact people, most likely through means of technology. Sale's audience, how did they find out about him in the first place? Was it truly all through the word of mouth. Did Sale use flyers or newspapers, or even the internet to advertise him lecture to people? If it was indeed through the word of mouth, then that is impressive. However, flyers are created through technology. Unless Sale's did all of them by hand. Why be so afraid of something that creates a convenience for society.
Also, his world is certainly very narrow. I have a family that enjoys computers very much. My father, uncle, and even my old grandpa, find it fascinating to learn its language, its components, and anatomy. They even have hobbies of tinkering with them. However there is a side that really makes my point.
My mother came to the United States with my dad's family. Guess what? She has absolutely no family residing in the US. She left them all behind in Taiwan. How does she communicate with them? Letters? No, that is too expensive. Flying on a regular basis to talk face-to-face? No, a round trip ticket to Taiwan is already $1,000. Emails, phone calls, wireless chats, video calling, these are all so easily accessed at a cheap price. Would Sales argue that putting a price on family worthy of destroying technology? Technophobes do not understand beyond their own lifestyles, making assumptions that technology is unhelpful and toxic to the world. The world is beyond traveling on old-timey boats and the Wright brothers' archaic planes. Does he drive a car only made in an assembly line with no technology and drafting designers working solely by hand? Does he travel and fly in planes guided by computers to ensure he doesn't die in an accident?
Now, to address his phobia on self-published writing. Sales seem to vouch for the fact that writing and literacy is encompassed, and to him, rightfully so, people who have money and are of a certain age to do so. Trust should not be limited to that. He seems to have little faith in humanity. A 14 year old girl may be using computers and the internet to write her stories and thoughts to people who can share her writing. Validation of a human's capability of literacy should not be limited to if she could go off and publish her writing and share to a limited audience. She could share in a forum that specifically caters to her topic and with people who understand.
Technophobes make me sad, how something so amazing such as technology becomes something to fear, especially on narrow assumptions. Paranoia and quick judgement with little thought of the world beyond one's biased thoughts truly makes a fool out of technophobes. Am I being too critical or judgmental? I may be. But at-least I take in consideration people's experiences that can be shared easily and side with humanity. Most people do not have privileges that Sales seem to revel in. But they all have stories just as valid as a published novel. They all have a voice and it may not make sound, but it still speaks; and it's just as loud as Sales' sledgehammer.
We have books holding our "sacred texts", our laws are written down, and IOU's are too, and so forth. What this shows is that as humans, we will more than likely make mistakes through words. For an example, I for one, enjoy retelling stories of events in my day, if they are memorable enough. However, I tend to say, "I'm not sure how it went, but..." My memory is not exact when I tell the story to someone. But if I had recorded the words said, as they have happened, I could have told the specifics to my audience. It could have supported my words or even improved my storytelling. Baron also makes a point about how writing is everywhere, and not only in the form of books or stories, but just information (whether it is actually true or not). Our food packaging tells us the ingredients that make up the food, and how it might be "yummy" and "beneficial". It gives us information in text, so we tend to believe in them. It's a form of trust, even if it is a corporation out for your money, they have some form of authority and possibly knowledge that we don't have.
In a later segment, Baron touches on how computers have people who enjoy their capabilities, and also they have enemies. Technophobes, they are called. People who live by the fear that computers will destroy the life of books, corrupt writers, encouraging self-published authors. And other fears too.
I have strong feelings about these people, honestly. Not positive ones. They live in a world that constitutes that their world is the one we all should live in. Think of Sale's tale to Wired. Wired is a magazine. Magazines are typically written by computers and contact people, most likely through means of technology. Sale's audience, how did they find out about him in the first place? Was it truly all through the word of mouth. Did Sale use flyers or newspapers, or even the internet to advertise him lecture to people? If it was indeed through the word of mouth, then that is impressive. However, flyers are created through technology. Unless Sale's did all of them by hand. Why be so afraid of something that creates a convenience for society.
Also, his world is certainly very narrow. I have a family that enjoys computers very much. My father, uncle, and even my old grandpa, find it fascinating to learn its language, its components, and anatomy. They even have hobbies of tinkering with them. However there is a side that really makes my point.
My mother came to the United States with my dad's family. Guess what? She has absolutely no family residing in the US. She left them all behind in Taiwan. How does she communicate with them? Letters? No, that is too expensive. Flying on a regular basis to talk face-to-face? No, a round trip ticket to Taiwan is already $1,000. Emails, phone calls, wireless chats, video calling, these are all so easily accessed at a cheap price. Would Sales argue that putting a price on family worthy of destroying technology? Technophobes do not understand beyond their own lifestyles, making assumptions that technology is unhelpful and toxic to the world. The world is beyond traveling on old-timey boats and the Wright brothers' archaic planes. Does he drive a car only made in an assembly line with no technology and drafting designers working solely by hand? Does he travel and fly in planes guided by computers to ensure he doesn't die in an accident?
Now, to address his phobia on self-published writing. Sales seem to vouch for the fact that writing and literacy is encompassed, and to him, rightfully so, people who have money and are of a certain age to do so. Trust should not be limited to that. He seems to have little faith in humanity. A 14 year old girl may be using computers and the internet to write her stories and thoughts to people who can share her writing. Validation of a human's capability of literacy should not be limited to if she could go off and publish her writing and share to a limited audience. She could share in a forum that specifically caters to her topic and with people who understand.
Technophobes make me sad, how something so amazing such as technology becomes something to fear, especially on narrow assumptions. Paranoia and quick judgement with little thought of the world beyond one's biased thoughts truly makes a fool out of technophobes. Am I being too critical or judgmental? I may be. But at-least I take in consideration people's experiences that can be shared easily and side with humanity. Most people do not have privileges that Sales seem to revel in. But they all have stories just as valid as a published novel. They all have a voice and it may not make sound, but it still speaks; and it's just as loud as Sales' sledgehammer.
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Well, that last half of the book was quite the ride. I'm going to talk about the parts in the book that stood out most for me (and the fact they remind me most of Ong's book). First that caught my eye is the folk stories that the woman swap with their children. There is no written books or documents to read from, but they pass on tales through word of the mouth. In the story that Ekwefi told Ezinma, a turtle attempts to reach to the sky and eat with the birds. The story emphasizes on the turtle's cleverness and his "sweet tongue". He made it up to the sky with his words and "was soon chosen as the man to speak for the party because he was a great orator". It seems that there is no trace at all of writing or literacy in their culture, as their folk tale is based all around the skill of orality.
Later in the book Ezinma is kidnapped by the priestess, who was chanting madly to her god. Ekwefi was deathly frightened for her child and ran after them. However she was in reconnaissance and did not want to be seen. Even then, when Ezinma sneezes her mother whispered "Life to you." I LOVE THIS. Think about it, they haven't fully conformed to the ways of the Christians, so "Bless you" does not exist for them. I just have to say that I love "life to you" so much. It's lovely. No attachment to Christianity.
Now the last part of the book is when things truly falls apart. In the end, Christianity had gained the upper hand and not only did they bring religion, but also government. However neither of these bodes well for the village. The book says that they appreciate the things that they brought such as the trading posts. However, when Mr. Brown came into town, he convinced (frightened) the village people to send their children to his school to learn. It described Mr. Brown as someone who listened and understood more than his successor, and the people liked him enough. However, in the book it says that "Mr. Brown learned a good deal about the religion of the clan and he came to the conclusion that a frontal attack on it would not succeed". He may have been a listener, but not for the right reasons. Eventually his school and presence in the village began to take effect, people began going to the school and new churches began rising up. The quote "From the very beginning religion and education went hand in hand" really raises some interesting insights, if the people wanted anything that can benefit them, they have to do it with a God attached. Moreover, not their own. The way Christianity spread was through what appeared to be out of pure good faith from humans to a quest to conquer "primitive" lands with God.
Orality is important in Okonkwo's village. He was talking to Obierika when this popped up.
"Does the white man understand our custom about land?"
"How can he when he does not even speak our tongue?"
The Christians were never interested in cooperating with the natives, instead they came with the purpose to conquer and "help" the "savages". If they had, like Obierika says, then they would have learned to speak their tongues, rather than hire interpreters to speak for them.
Another thing to note, is that as a literate culture, although they see themselves as higher up than Okonkwo's oral culture, Okonkwo shows frustration with their haughtiness. "One of the most infuriating habits of these people was their love of superfluous words". It's pretty much true to this day, I believe, the more we become literate, the more we find ourselves finding intelligence connected with vocabulary, essentially, superfluous words. Is this true though? I can't say.
Last thing I want to talk about, is the Commissioner, his thoughts in the end is definitely an insight for things to come: imperialism and colonialism. "The story of this man who had killed a messenger and hanged himself would make interesting reading"..."He had already chosen the title of the book, after much thought" The Pacification of the Primitive Tribes of the Lower Niger". I feel that these are the first of the many books to come where it convinces its Christian readers that they are the superior religion, superior people, and they have the power to change primitive tribes to fit their mold.
Later in the book Ezinma is kidnapped by the priestess, who was chanting madly to her god. Ekwefi was deathly frightened for her child and ran after them. However she was in reconnaissance and did not want to be seen. Even then, when Ezinma sneezes her mother whispered "Life to you." I LOVE THIS. Think about it, they haven't fully conformed to the ways of the Christians, so "Bless you" does not exist for them. I just have to say that I love "life to you" so much. It's lovely. No attachment to Christianity.
Now the last part of the book is when things truly falls apart. In the end, Christianity had gained the upper hand and not only did they bring religion, but also government. However neither of these bodes well for the village. The book says that they appreciate the things that they brought such as the trading posts. However, when Mr. Brown came into town, he convinced (frightened) the village people to send their children to his school to learn. It described Mr. Brown as someone who listened and understood more than his successor, and the people liked him enough. However, in the book it says that "Mr. Brown learned a good deal about the religion of the clan and he came to the conclusion that a frontal attack on it would not succeed". He may have been a listener, but not for the right reasons. Eventually his school and presence in the village began to take effect, people began going to the school and new churches began rising up. The quote "From the very beginning religion and education went hand in hand" really raises some interesting insights, if the people wanted anything that can benefit them, they have to do it with a God attached. Moreover, not their own. The way Christianity spread was through what appeared to be out of pure good faith from humans to a quest to conquer "primitive" lands with God.
Orality is important in Okonkwo's village. He was talking to Obierika when this popped up.
"Does the white man understand our custom about land?"
"How can he when he does not even speak our tongue?"
The Christians were never interested in cooperating with the natives, instead they came with the purpose to conquer and "help" the "savages". If they had, like Obierika says, then they would have learned to speak their tongues, rather than hire interpreters to speak for them.
Another thing to note, is that as a literate culture, although they see themselves as higher up than Okonkwo's oral culture, Okonkwo shows frustration with their haughtiness. "One of the most infuriating habits of these people was their love of superfluous words". It's pretty much true to this day, I believe, the more we become literate, the more we find ourselves finding intelligence connected with vocabulary, essentially, superfluous words. Is this true though? I can't say.
Last thing I want to talk about, is the Commissioner, his thoughts in the end is definitely an insight for things to come: imperialism and colonialism. "The story of this man who had killed a messenger and hanged himself would make interesting reading"..."He had already chosen the title of the book, after much thought" The Pacification of the Primitive Tribes of the Lower Niger". I feel that these are the first of the many books to come where it convinces its Christian readers that they are the superior religion, superior people, and they have the power to change primitive tribes to fit their mold.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
Things Fall Apart is a novel that has elements of importance of orality in it. From the get-go, you are introduced to the main character, a man who is said to be extremely well known and strong. He has proven himself as the strongest wrestler in 9 different villages. He has already become a wealthy farmer with two barns of yam. He has also just married his third wife. However, the book looks at his father also. Basically he's described as a disgrace and in deep debt.
Okonkwo is also introduced as someone who can't speak well, but doesn't have to since he has proven his worth and title in other deeds. He stammers and can't speak well, which I can see is his weakness. But I think it's something that differentiates him from his father. The father seems to be someone who is well spoken, not so much greatly successful, but he seemed to have managed to get ot of paying his debts by just talking and using his words wisely.
Another character s introduced, Ezeugo, a "powerful orator and was always chosen to speak on such occasions". It seems someone in this village who has a powerful voice can easily sway the audience he's speaking to. It says in the book, "And in a clear unemotional voice he told Umuofia how their daughter had gone to market at Mbaino and had been killed...The crowd then shouted with anger and thirst for blood."
Okonokwo is escribed to have a heavy-hand in ruling his house hold, out of fear, perhaps of ending up like his father, someone weak. I wonder if it has to do with his silence? Like, his inability to speak, so he lets his actions do it for him. In some cases, anger, which ends up terrifying his wives.
It seems that after reading Ong's book, I can't help but see the descriptive ways the author sometimes describe someone when they speak, instead of using "Said, says..." There's a part where it says, "Hold your peace!' screamed the priestess, her voice terrible as it echoed though the dark voice." She didn't just scream, her voice is terrible and it echos.
It also seems in this culture, it's mainly an oral culture, I have not read yet that they have any system of writing. It doesn't seem to affect them too much, they seem to be doing fine without it.
Okonkwo is also introduced as someone who can't speak well, but doesn't have to since he has proven his worth and title in other deeds. He stammers and can't speak well, which I can see is his weakness. But I think it's something that differentiates him from his father. The father seems to be someone who is well spoken, not so much greatly successful, but he seemed to have managed to get ot of paying his debts by just talking and using his words wisely.
Another character s introduced, Ezeugo, a "powerful orator and was always chosen to speak on such occasions". It seems someone in this village who has a powerful voice can easily sway the audience he's speaking to. It says in the book, "And in a clear unemotional voice he told Umuofia how their daughter had gone to market at Mbaino and had been killed...The crowd then shouted with anger and thirst for blood."
Okonokwo is escribed to have a heavy-hand in ruling his house hold, out of fear, perhaps of ending up like his father, someone weak. I wonder if it has to do with his silence? Like, his inability to speak, so he lets his actions do it for him. In some cases, anger, which ends up terrifying his wives.
It seems that after reading Ong's book, I can't help but see the descriptive ways the author sometimes describe someone when they speak, instead of using "Said, says..." There's a part where it says, "Hold your peace!' screamed the priestess, her voice terrible as it echoed though the dark voice." She didn't just scream, her voice is terrible and it echos.
It also seems in this culture, it's mainly an oral culture, I have not read yet that they have any system of writing. It doesn't seem to affect them too much, they seem to be doing fine without it.
Monday, September 8, 2014
Ong opens up to discussion of being human in relation to orality. This can be seen with his example of how "civilized" people have long separated themselves from those who are inferior, considered "savage" or "primitive". He says this is a behavior that is not limited to snobby folk at cocktail parties or in opinionated conversation, but in fields of studies. Mainly, historical works and anthropological studies. What this shows is that we as society consider that "illiterate" societies are not smart enough for perhaps a sustainable civilization. This seems to put pressure on these oral-oriented cultures. Ong says that while they lament on losing their sense of culture, they're not opposed to learning to be literate, in fact he says they try to learn it as quickly. It's funny how humans begin with only orality then forget that, and try to brand the terms like "savages" or "primitive" on them, when that is the roots we began with. This shows are willingness to branch off from traditions, even if it creates a discourse with people who still has an oral based culture.
Ong goes on to discuss that speaking has a very important trait of addressing oneself. He says that our subconsciousness is fundamental to speaking. To speak, he says, you need to address another person. He makes a statement by saying that "People in their right minds do not stray through the woods just talking at random to nobody. Even to talk to yourself you have to pretend that you are two people." I think our brains learned to speak just because we needed to communicate with others. Since that is the prime reason we even speak, our brains are wired to create an audience to communicate to. Ong says that "I have to be somehow already in communication with the mind I am to address before I start speaking." It's odd to be conscious of something that we've been subconsciously doing for all our lives. I think of the nights I am hunched over a journal in the middle of the night. If someone were to walk by, they would just see me scribbling words over a page. That is all they can see. And all that I can hear, are my own thoughts. I think and write. But I don't even notice that I am speaking with another person, even if it is myself, reiterating my own thoughts to perhaps form a conversation.
In the afterwords, the man named John Hartley briefly mentions something that caught my eye. He says "One of the oddest things about printing was that it delivered monopoly control over the expression of the truth to those who controlled publication. It seemed to liberate thought for all, and was so hailed by many over centuries, but this was a read-only freedom."
This is what intrigues me the most. I've heard stories how American history books loves to omit information about what they deem unimportant. A good, recent example was of Texas' school board approved of a history book to... water down slavery. They avoided the word slavery as much as they could, like excluding that word from "slave trade", calling it instead as "Atlantic triangular trade." History textbooks are introduced to us ever since we were old enough to read. We learned of our founding fathers and how slavery was bad and a lot of stories of white men doing great deeds. History books are a publication that is primarily written by people who can decide what is important to learn, and what is optional. A good argument is that we are required to learn "American history", which neglects to go remotely in-depth of how cruel slavery was, how brutal the post-slavery era was. It hides the history of America's own internment camps for Japanese-Americans, and how the Chinese built the railroads on their backs, and how the native Americans are still living a not so luxurious life. And presently, how racism still exists today (And how there are 160 KKK groups still active today.) A publication is read-only. You can scribble and cross out words, but it will not be seen as official or published. Publishers still have a say today, and it silences the people that reads it. We can go off and publish our own, but like Sherman Alexie's book; The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, a book he claims is 78% true, is banned from school across the nation. Even a partly fictional book can be banned. Young adult novels featuring people of color are not popular. And it might be for a reason... What I'm trying to say is that the people who run publications are predominately white. They can set things in pages that we take as true facts or quality writing. They can hide things as well, like true history and experiences of people they don't understand. They decide which texts should be on the Best Selling List in the New York Times, and gain lots of revenues. While other texts which they don't see as worthy can be shelved at libraries, and hidden in #2330 popularity on Amazon's book list.
We should expand our views on publications, listen to those unheard who can only write online, or speak in public or private. Don't just read what is claimed to be true, think and question what they are saying to you.
Ong goes on to discuss that speaking has a very important trait of addressing oneself. He says that our subconsciousness is fundamental to speaking. To speak, he says, you need to address another person. He makes a statement by saying that "People in their right minds do not stray through the woods just talking at random to nobody. Even to talk to yourself you have to pretend that you are two people." I think our brains learned to speak just because we needed to communicate with others. Since that is the prime reason we even speak, our brains are wired to create an audience to communicate to. Ong says that "I have to be somehow already in communication with the mind I am to address before I start speaking." It's odd to be conscious of something that we've been subconsciously doing for all our lives. I think of the nights I am hunched over a journal in the middle of the night. If someone were to walk by, they would just see me scribbling words over a page. That is all they can see. And all that I can hear, are my own thoughts. I think and write. But I don't even notice that I am speaking with another person, even if it is myself, reiterating my own thoughts to perhaps form a conversation.
In the afterwords, the man named John Hartley briefly mentions something that caught my eye. He says "One of the oddest things about printing was that it delivered monopoly control over the expression of the truth to those who controlled publication. It seemed to liberate thought for all, and was so hailed by many over centuries, but this was a read-only freedom."
This is what intrigues me the most. I've heard stories how American history books loves to omit information about what they deem unimportant. A good, recent example was of Texas' school board approved of a history book to... water down slavery. They avoided the word slavery as much as they could, like excluding that word from "slave trade", calling it instead as "Atlantic triangular trade." History textbooks are introduced to us ever since we were old enough to read. We learned of our founding fathers and how slavery was bad and a lot of stories of white men doing great deeds. History books are a publication that is primarily written by people who can decide what is important to learn, and what is optional. A good argument is that we are required to learn "American history", which neglects to go remotely in-depth of how cruel slavery was, how brutal the post-slavery era was. It hides the history of America's own internment camps for Japanese-Americans, and how the Chinese built the railroads on their backs, and how the native Americans are still living a not so luxurious life. And presently, how racism still exists today (And how there are 160 KKK groups still active today.) A publication is read-only. You can scribble and cross out words, but it will not be seen as official or published. Publishers still have a say today, and it silences the people that reads it. We can go off and publish our own, but like Sherman Alexie's book; The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, a book he claims is 78% true, is banned from school across the nation. Even a partly fictional book can be banned. Young adult novels featuring people of color are not popular. And it might be for a reason... What I'm trying to say is that the people who run publications are predominately white. They can set things in pages that we take as true facts or quality writing. They can hide things as well, like true history and experiences of people they don't understand. They decide which texts should be on the Best Selling List in the New York Times, and gain lots of revenues. While other texts which they don't see as worthy can be shelved at libraries, and hidden in #2330 popularity on Amazon's book list.
We should expand our views on publications, listen to those unheard who can only write online, or speak in public or private. Don't just read what is claimed to be true, think and question what they are saying to you.
Thursday, September 4, 2014
In Ong's book, on page 59, Ong discusses 20th century bards. I had little knowledge of bards until I played a video game called The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. Skyrim is an open-world RPG that has fantasy elements and folklore inspired from Scandinavian Vikings. I've played this game for over 100 hours, finding myself immersed in a game like never before. The obsession grew to the point I'd wake up at 9 am and play until 5 am. With breaks in between, of course. I'd defend the game to my grave is someone were to say it's the worst game possible. I found many faults with it, and I admit to them, but reading Ong's discussion of bards, I find myself pondering on the dynamics of the games when it comes to the singing storytellers.
While the presence of these instrument-touting, singing folks were not predominant in the game, they still are there. It turns out that while traveling in the vast map of the game, you will happen to encounter them in the wild. Otherwise, you can easily seek them out playing in inns, taverns, and bars. You can speak to them and request a song to sing. What strikes as interesting to me in the book is that it explains that bards is part of an oral culture. It explains that bards learn by listening to other bards sing. And this happens for month and years. It's been researched that bards will not sing the same song in the same way, instead it becomes a formula. Almost like a plug and play, they can change the way it is sung, but can't change the foundation of the song and its meaning. With literacy, a bard can read the song and memorize it. But the further apart from memorization and the performance, it weakens the ability of the bard to recall the words. However oral bards found that singing the song at least a day after allows them to not be held back by the boundaries of literacy. This means that the day they don't sing, they can let the song soak in and he can essentially remix the story with his own themes and formulas. This allows creativity and diversity in their songs even if they are based on the same story.
This is an interesting observance. Referring back to the game, it seems that the bards in-game are literate bards. If the player goes into the Bards College, then they can find the vast library of the stories the bards can sing. Each story is not a song, however, it still has to be translated into music for the bards to sing. This would make one think, according to Ong's book, that they would have different variations of the same story, but with different words and flair to them. However, while this is most likely fault with the laziness of the game designers, the bards in the game each sing the same exact song. When requesting a song, they ask which one you would like to hear. So it shows that there is common folklore in the country of Skyrim. You can request one and they will sing it. Then the player can travel across the map and ask a completely different bard to sing about the "dragonborne" or something and they would reiterate the song sang by the other bard, word-for-word. Needless to say, this demonstrates that bards in the video game Skyrim are literate bards, each having attended a "college" to memorize texts and sing the same songs.
Then there's the case of traveling bards. They're more rare in Skyrim, and in personal experience, out of the 100+ hours I've played, I recall only meeting about 2 different bards in the wilds. One would think that because of their journeys and exposure to a greater world, that they would find new songs or find a way to improvise the one they learned from other bards, but that is not the case. Skyrim is an excellent game, with many bugs and improvement needed, and there are mods for that too. However their bland representation of bards leave more to be desired. A college for bards seem to create a robot mass of them, each becoming literate and memorizing texts rather than listening to other bards and improvising the songs on their own terms.
There are mods for this game. But I have yet to see someone create dynamics for bards to create music and tell stories uniquely.
While the presence of these instrument-touting, singing folks were not predominant in the game, they still are there. It turns out that while traveling in the vast map of the game, you will happen to encounter them in the wild. Otherwise, you can easily seek them out playing in inns, taverns, and bars. You can speak to them and request a song to sing. What strikes as interesting to me in the book is that it explains that bards is part of an oral culture. It explains that bards learn by listening to other bards sing. And this happens for month and years. It's been researched that bards will not sing the same song in the same way, instead it becomes a formula. Almost like a plug and play, they can change the way it is sung, but can't change the foundation of the song and its meaning. With literacy, a bard can read the song and memorize it. But the further apart from memorization and the performance, it weakens the ability of the bard to recall the words. However oral bards found that singing the song at least a day after allows them to not be held back by the boundaries of literacy. This means that the day they don't sing, they can let the song soak in and he can essentially remix the story with his own themes and formulas. This allows creativity and diversity in their songs even if they are based on the same story.
This is an interesting observance. Referring back to the game, it seems that the bards in-game are literate bards. If the player goes into the Bards College, then they can find the vast library of the stories the bards can sing. Each story is not a song, however, it still has to be translated into music for the bards to sing. This would make one think, according to Ong's book, that they would have different variations of the same story, but with different words and flair to them. However, while this is most likely fault with the laziness of the game designers, the bards in the game each sing the same exact song. When requesting a song, they ask which one you would like to hear. So it shows that there is common folklore in the country of Skyrim. You can request one and they will sing it. Then the player can travel across the map and ask a completely different bard to sing about the "dragonborne" or something and they would reiterate the song sang by the other bard, word-for-word. Needless to say, this demonstrates that bards in the video game Skyrim are literate bards, each having attended a "college" to memorize texts and sing the same songs.
Then there's the case of traveling bards. They're more rare in Skyrim, and in personal experience, out of the 100+ hours I've played, I recall only meeting about 2 different bards in the wilds. One would think that because of their journeys and exposure to a greater world, that they would find new songs or find a way to improvise the one they learned from other bards, but that is not the case. Skyrim is an excellent game, with many bugs and improvement needed, and there are mods for that too. However their bland representation of bards leave more to be desired. A college for bards seem to create a robot mass of them, each becoming literate and memorizing texts rather than listening to other bards and improvising the songs on their own terms.
There are mods for this game. But I have yet to see someone create dynamics for bards to create music and tell stories uniquely.
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Video: I'm okay in video. Worked with actual footage before, but it wasn't a serious attempt.
Writing: I can definitely write and do enjoy it. But it's not something that I'm insanely passionate about.
Coding: I enjoyed coding very much and would be more than happy to do it again.
Design: I also really like design. I haven't had much experience with logos or anything, but still something that sparks my interest.
Writing: I can definitely write and do enjoy it. But it's not something that I'm insanely passionate about.
Coding: I enjoyed coding very much and would be more than happy to do it again.
Design: I also really like design. I haven't had much experience with logos or anything, but still something that sparks my interest.
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
What I'm going to change, from advice from my peers, is not to put my screenshots and explanations inside my speech bubbles for the marine animals. Instead, cutting to a full screen with simple arrows should be good enough.
I also had input on audio. One suggested actual talking, and another said a sound should be good enough.
I'm still not sure yet.
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
For Project 2, I found a campaign that is one of great interest to me. The Shark Trust. This campaign focuses on conservation of sharks through means of "science, education, influence, and action". I found myself charmed by the campaign, although the website leaves much to be desired. I figure what I'll do for the project is among the lines of 2-D animation. If I cannot fully animate the time-based project, then I intend to use still images that I made myself to promote the campaign in a more aesthetically pleasing manner.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Referred Website: flutter bum
Technical aspects: This blog was made from short tutorials with basic effects and how to hand-make your own two-column website. I eventually deviated immensely from this tutorial and took a few codes from other makers who provided them for free. These codes were only used for effects, such as picture fading, and the drop-down menu box. These involved scripts and complicated code.With my very basic knowledge of CSS and html, I felt this was necessary. Otherwise I learned from reading articles and from the w3school website! They were very thorough and had a library of codes to learn from.
Up to this day, my largest challenge was beginning to code. I enjoy the aesthetics of tumblr themes (not Tumblr provided but by tumblr users) and so wanted to create a website that has the simplicity of them. However, I had used the tutorial from the link above. This tutorial was design to specifically make tumblr themes and thus had a lot of meta tags. I had a fun challenge reading the code and reinterpreting them to code efficiently in two separate documents (the users of tumblr are advanced to the point they can style inside their html) and also as a regular website. Another challenge was to some little trinkets to work, especially involving javascript, which I ended up just scrapping anyways. Instead of trying to solve it, I felt alright with abandoning them for something better, and easier to code. Sometimes the more complicated and fancy effects are not essential to the overall design of the website.
Ideal Website: My initial vision for this website was completely different. I was hoping for something more calming, quiet, colored with grey scale, and minimalist. But as evident from the website, I completely coded a different vision. I felt this design gave me more freedom to make a website that truly expresses me as a person. If I had more knowledge about code, I would fill the empty space with perhaps another column that can harbor moving tabs. I would also really like to dive into more features of CSS3, like moving backgrounds, animation, and transitions.
Modes: I would say that my website included almost all of the modes. With linguistic, I definitely did not have a professional tone and was very casual and whimsical. I hope this will help the audience see that I'm definitely a laid-back, friendly, and a freaky person. The quotes I pulled for each page in the sidebar also are fun rather than serious.
With visual... it's very pink and cute. The layout is simple, just filled with choice of pictures. Everything is mostly pixel related, so they're very small rather than large. This was I hope the audience will get the sense that I really like cute things. Also maybe uncomfortable about how pink it is haha.
Aural I incorporated a music player into the website that has songs that I feel fits the mood of the website. Cheerful, soft, and cute. Hopefully with the audio being played, the audience can feel the intended atmosphere I wanted.
Spatial wise, I wanted to give the audience a website where there's a lot of space (but not entirely empty) to not feel too constrained. I put spaces in between everything that needed to be separate, especially bodies of text, like the side bar. The title has a space underneath it for a brief description, then another space to transition to links.
Not sure if this counts as gestural, but I put a lot of animated gifs, which provide gesture to the website. Especially the dancing ones! I felt this brought movement to a mostly static medium. This I hope made the audience felt that the website was not so still and boring, that it has life and spunk to it.
Design Strategies: With audience, I knew this website was meant for peers, so I felt I shouldn't be too professional and that I could have fun with expressing myself to others. Although, I am quite shy, so I wanted to do so without putting my face out there, personal pictures of friends/family, or with any personal information. I wanted this website to be me, without people knowing who exactly I am. Like a persona.
With context, I provided external links in my website that goes to websites that relate to mine. Adventure Time's website for the fact that I used their image as the prominent feature. The Canvas Cycle in appreciation of pixel art which the website is mainly based off of, and the WSU website because, well, I'm a student and the context of this would provide an understanding that I'm still in college and not a professional worker yet.
With the pinkness, pixels and soft colors, and minimalist layout, I really hope the audience will see with these design choices that I'm delicate in a sense. I did not include any boldness or sharpness in my website, I wanted soft and light to be the perceived theme.
Genre wise, I think my website really dabbles into a blog of some sorts. Although not the conventional one where my personal life is visible. Is this a conventional website? I don't think so. So while the website genre fits in both, I didn't stick to the layout or theme. However this most definitely fits into the genre of tumblr themes (particularly in pixel related ones).
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
The multimodal text I chose was Kentucky Route Zero's website.
Kentucky Route Zero is an atmospheric, adventure video game created by Cardboard Computer and features 5 acts.
This website's author seems simple and bold. This seems to be the case with the minimalistic design that also is bold, but not in a loud sense. The information provided is not demanding or passive. What's clever is that the actual summary of the game is provided after the audience scrolls past the header picture, the title, the awards won, then the option to purchase, and then the trailer.
The purpose of this website is to definitely sell the video game. As evidently noted above with the placement of the summary. It also tries to evoke curiosity with its abstract header picture. The fonts are big and white, contrasting nicely with the simple black background and they provide information to the main parts of the website.
The audience would have to be video game players, especially of those who tend to gravitate towards "art"-type video games where the main focus is on design, storytelling, and atmosphere. Which works well in this website. If one was to look at other video game websites, they ALL follow a formula, which gives people the immediate ideal of a highly funded game, rather than indie. With this website, it's design is simple and doesn't have the typical "About", "Media", "Downloads", etc. sections.
The genre is borderline product advertisement and a portfolio. This can be said with the outgoing links that link to a demo done by the designer of the video game and another "abstract" downloadable game? Not sure what "The Entertainment" is. But what's pretty amazing about this website is the lack of navigation bars most websites put in for the user to automatically travel in. Despite it's one-scroll page, which is nicely done with the separation of parts through contrast and proximity, the user is invited to read the whole website and click on the provided links a little down the ways. It is also under the "artistic video game" genre, where the unconventional website design tells about the video game itself. It's not an action shoot, a fps, a mmorpg, or anything of that sort.
The context is definitely web-based. Simply because this video game is not provided in a physical format, only through online downloads. So the website would definitely be found through other websites that are knowing of the independent video game genre. It would make sense that the author decided the best way to house the video game information is through a website that can intrigue both gamers, artists, and anyone else looking for something magical to experience.
Kentucky Route Zero is an atmospheric, adventure video game created by Cardboard Computer and features 5 acts.
This website's author seems simple and bold. This seems to be the case with the minimalistic design that also is bold, but not in a loud sense. The information provided is not demanding or passive. What's clever is that the actual summary of the game is provided after the audience scrolls past the header picture, the title, the awards won, then the option to purchase, and then the trailer.
The purpose of this website is to definitely sell the video game. As evidently noted above with the placement of the summary. It also tries to evoke curiosity with its abstract header picture. The fonts are big and white, contrasting nicely with the simple black background and they provide information to the main parts of the website.
The audience would have to be video game players, especially of those who tend to gravitate towards "art"-type video games where the main focus is on design, storytelling, and atmosphere. Which works well in this website. If one was to look at other video game websites, they ALL follow a formula, which gives people the immediate ideal of a highly funded game, rather than indie. With this website, it's design is simple and doesn't have the typical "About", "Media", "Downloads", etc. sections.
The genre is borderline product advertisement and a portfolio. This can be said with the outgoing links that link to a demo done by the designer of the video game and another "abstract" downloadable game? Not sure what "The Entertainment" is. But what's pretty amazing about this website is the lack of navigation bars most websites put in for the user to automatically travel in. Despite it's one-scroll page, which is nicely done with the separation of parts through contrast and proximity, the user is invited to read the whole website and click on the provided links a little down the ways. It is also under the "artistic video game" genre, where the unconventional website design tells about the video game itself. It's not an action shoot, a fps, a mmorpg, or anything of that sort.
The context is definitely web-based. Simply because this video game is not provided in a physical format, only through online downloads. So the website would definitely be found through other websites that are knowing of the independent video game genre. It would make sense that the author decided the best way to house the video game information is through a website that can intrigue both gamers, artists, and anyone else looking for something magical to experience.
Monday, February 3, 2014
Had a lot of fun coding this website from a template provided from my DTC professor!
http://studentweb.engl.wsu.edu/355/rlai/sample/
- Rebecca
http://studentweb.engl.wsu.edu/355/rlai/sample/
- Rebecca
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
The two twitter profiles (Figures 1.7 and 1.8) are both similar in the respect of layout. Both have the menu on the left and the profile and tweets on the right. The difference between the two is primarily the color scheme. Figure 1.7 (Arola's twitter feed) is blue. The background is a light blue and the links are blue. For Figure 1.8 (Sheppard's twitter feed) is a light green and has green links. The background images both represent nature. Arola's has a winter-ridden, bare tree, while Sheppard's has leafy branches with even a cloud floating nearby. The other difference would have to be the profile pictures, but that is a given.
These differences can definitely shape the ideas of each person. The blue is a cool color and can give off the feeling of "coldness" but in this twitter feed's profile, the profile picture (a cartoon panda with a pink background) shows friendliness and someone who is "hip". For Sheppard's twitter feed, the green nature-y hues are a dead giveaway to a cheerful person.
Looking at both, Arola's with the cartoon panda, can be seen as a personal twitter, for friends and family. The lowercases and whimsical description gives off an air of minimal professionalism needed. With Sheppard's, her profile picture is of herself and her child. Her description is very concise and so it is seen as a professional twitter to an extent.
I do not have a twitter.
For two twitter feeds of my choosing though, I chose Pen and Franchesca Ramsey.
Ramsey's twitter profile is one of a professional's. Someone who is constantly promoting her channel and and skills. The background picture has a picture of herself and a list of websites she can be found out and what she is most prominently skilled in. Her profile picture is one of herself and underneath is a description of some little tidbits of herself along with her skills (comedian, graphic designer, video blogger). One can definitely tell this is one of a professional's conveying herself as one.
Now Pen's. Pen's twitter feed is interesting. Pendleton Ward is his real name and he's a professional and a huge name in the animation industry. however his feed is completely one of an artist's. Simple description (I created a cartoon series called Adventure Time on Cartoon Network), simple profile picture (a cartoon head of a cat), and his background... light peachy pink with crudely drawn fairies on repeat. Looking at this twitter feed one cannot tell right away that he's a professional. It's a personal twitter, to be put simply. A professional in disguise (similar to Arola's).
These differences can definitely shape the ideas of each person. The blue is a cool color and can give off the feeling of "coldness" but in this twitter feed's profile, the profile picture (a cartoon panda with a pink background) shows friendliness and someone who is "hip". For Sheppard's twitter feed, the green nature-y hues are a dead giveaway to a cheerful person.
Looking at both, Arola's with the cartoon panda, can be seen as a personal twitter, for friends and family. The lowercases and whimsical description gives off an air of minimal professionalism needed. With Sheppard's, her profile picture is of herself and her child. Her description is very concise and so it is seen as a professional twitter to an extent.
I do not have a twitter.
For two twitter feeds of my choosing though, I chose Pen and Franchesca Ramsey.
Ramsey's twitter profile is one of a professional's. Someone who is constantly promoting her channel and and skills. The background picture has a picture of herself and a list of websites she can be found out and what she is most prominently skilled in. Her profile picture is one of herself and underneath is a description of some little tidbits of herself along with her skills (comedian, graphic designer, video blogger). One can definitely tell this is one of a professional's conveying herself as one.
Now Pen's. Pen's twitter feed is interesting. Pendleton Ward is his real name and he's a professional and a huge name in the animation industry. however his feed is completely one of an artist's. Simple description (I created a cartoon series called Adventure Time on Cartoon Network), simple profile picture (a cartoon head of a cat), and his background... light peachy pink with crudely drawn fairies on repeat. Looking at this twitter feed one cannot tell right away that he's a professional. It's a personal twitter, to be put simply. A professional in disguise (similar to Arola's).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)