Is it just me, or are these readings getting longer?! Upon beginning to read this article by Nicholas Carr, I thought this was going to be an article all about Google and how they're almost controlling the Internet and must be stopped. But as I read on, I began to agree with the points the author was making. The Internet is making us dumber! Instead of us reading an entire book on a topic we want to know more about, we run to our computers and type it in on Google, Yahoo!, or Ask. And the information we get from links on this website may not even be from a referable source. Anyone can post anything on the Internet. Even Wikipedia, even though it looks like the articles are written by professionals, can be updated by anyone with an account.
Newspapers and channels like CNN, BBC, and FOX News have their own websites, but even the articles on those sites are super-short tidbits on the latest stories. For example, I wanted to research the recent standoff that happened on Broadhead Street in McFarland the night I heard about it on the news. So I logged on to my computer and went to all three local news channel websites: WKOW 27, NBC 15 and Channel 3000, but they all three had the same amount of information about the standoff. But I then read about it in the State Journal the next day, and I found out a ton more information about what happened in the newspaper than I did online. Things like this is what proves Carr's point. The articles online just don't give enough information about a topic, even on legitimate sources of information.
But Google is not to blame for the transformation of our minds from a deep, rich piece of fruit into a thin, spread out "pancake", as Carr puts it. It is just one fish, although quite big, in a giant ocean that is the Internet. Google is just a company that has capitalized on the chance to compile all of the information on the Internet onto one site. It's what encyclopedias do with information in the written world. Both of them do the same thing: they take all of the known facts (or keywords, in the case of Google) on a topic and put them together into one piece of work, a book for an encyclopedia and a website for Google. Google is like an offspring of the Internet. If the Internet didn't exist, then Google wouldn't exist. Period. We created this monster that is Google Corp. You really cannot blame the creators of the website for capitalizing on such an opportunity. I mean, who wouldn't! Wouldn't you, if you could become a multi-billionaire because of it? Imagine how rich the creators of encyclopedia like World Book or Encyclopedia Britannica became after they were created?
Lastly, Carr's writing style. He used a lot of words unknown to me, which means his writing ability is definitely at a high level, as I read at an above-average level. I thought the introduction fit in perfectly with the entire point of the article, saying at the end how computers are going to become like the supercomputer HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey, being directly linked to our thoughts and feelings and responding as such. The writing flows quite well, and Carr really uses a variety of sentence lengths to keep the reader from losing interest in his essay. He also doesn't keep emphasizing a certain point, but has many points to argue his side of the issue. Also, Carr uses examples and evidence from other works to back up the points in his arguments. I give this paper high regards in terms of its message and writing style, and, despite it's length, it has been my favorite reading out of the three summer essays I have read thus far.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 30, 2010
Skunk Dreams
As I began to read the skunk story in the beginning, I noticed one thing about Erdrich's writing style: flow. She uses words and sentence structures that really make the story easy to read and to follow. Sentences of different lengths kept the story from being too mundane. As the writing continued, the flow remained, but my understanding of the meaning of it all did not, and although I made the connection of the dream of a fence in a rundown motel in North Dakota and the discovery of the game park in New Hampshire, I did not understand the little discussion on dreams in between the two stories.
To me, the anecdote on dreams in between the two stories was completely deep, even too deep for my comprehension. The Chinese proverb nearly knocked me out of my chair with its depth. Like stepping straight into a well. I could do nothing but smile, however, when the two stories came together as she walked in front of the fence and saw the same elk she saw in her dream!
Many metaphors appeared to me in this reading. The first metaphor was when she was talking about obstacles. The fence to her sacred place, that thin, x-shaped fence to the game reserve on the other side. I saw this as a connection to her explanation of life after death. Our body is the fragile hurricane fence to the place we want to be, no matter our religion.
I also see the last few phrases about wanting to be a skunk to be a metaphor to live your life as a skunk: it never runs from harm, just turns its back (lays a stink) in total confidence (don't run from your problems, confront them with your strongest areas with confidence), it lives fearlessly (or to the fullest, in human terms), eat anything (take in everything, but only digest certain things (what you need, i.e. what you think is important), gestate your young for only two months (your worst pain and problems will only last a short amount of time compared to your entire life), fall into a state of dreaming torpor when the cold hit hard (go to your happy place when things get bad or uncomfortable in your life), and, finally, leave your sloppy tracks (leave steps behind for someone else to follow along your path, so they can live their life how you lived yours).
To me, the anecdote on dreams in between the two stories was completely deep, even too deep for my comprehension. The Chinese proverb nearly knocked me out of my chair with its depth. Like stepping straight into a well. I could do nothing but smile, however, when the two stories came together as she walked in front of the fence and saw the same elk she saw in her dream!
Many metaphors appeared to me in this reading. The first metaphor was when she was talking about obstacles. The fence to her sacred place, that thin, x-shaped fence to the game reserve on the other side. I saw this as a connection to her explanation of life after death. Our body is the fragile hurricane fence to the place we want to be, no matter our religion.
I also see the last few phrases about wanting to be a skunk to be a metaphor to live your life as a skunk: it never runs from harm, just turns its back (lays a stink) in total confidence (don't run from your problems, confront them with your strongest areas with confidence), it lives fearlessly (or to the fullest, in human terms), eat anything (take in everything, but only digest certain things (what you need, i.e. what you think is important), gestate your young for only two months (your worst pain and problems will only last a short amount of time compared to your entire life), fall into a state of dreaming torpor when the cold hit hard (go to your happy place when things get bad or uncomfortable in your life), and, finally, leave your sloppy tracks (leave steps behind for someone else to follow along your path, so they can live their life how you lived yours).
The Talk of the Town
This post is my response to the two essays by Adam Gopnik and Susan Sontag in their "The Talk of the Town" section of The New Yorker. First up, Mr. Gopnik's essay.
In Adam Gopnik's essay, the sleek, well-written format of the writing really keeps one's attention. The introduction talks about the ringing cell phones of the victims of the shooting at Virginia Tech in 2007 that claimed 32 students' lives. He really makes us grieve with the victim's parents by using words like "heartrending" and "unbearable" to make the feelings seem all too real. He then throws another element into the mix: irony. He goes on to say how right after a shooting is not the right time to question gun control, and how after terrorist attacks (assuming he meant 9/11) is not the right time to question national security. Shouldn't that be the time to question these things? If not, then when is? When another incident happens and more people suffer? It's this irony and sarcasm that really keeps the reader's attention as he moves on to make his point on how gun control would eliminate, or at least lessen, shootings such as the one at Virginia Tech. He later goes on to say that gun vendors in the US sell guns to "madmen". Well, gun vendors aren't aware that they are "madmen." They just sell them a gun with no knowledge of what his or her plans are to do with it, and although it seems right to prosecute the gun vendor as well for selling the murderer the murder weapon, it really isn't, as, like previously stated, the store had no knowledge of his intent with the weapon. The store could make assumptions, but a courtroom doesn't want assumptions, it wants evidence. Gopnik lastly goes on to say that handguns should be outlawed. He states, "If having a loaded semi-automatic handgun kept you safe, cops would not be shot as often as they are." I have one question following that statement: What guns, then, should police officers use? Pursuit would be fairly difficult on foot if an officer was carrying a fully loaded shotgun or assault rifle, and the weapon could be knocked out of his hands more easily. Plus, the use of a handgun leaves one hand free for things like flashlights. He does however, say that guns should be used (with control) for hunting. I, being the hunter that I am, agree with Adam on this. Overall, this is a very well-written, well-worded persuasive essay with a unique intro and a clear main point, but I do not agree with all of the points given in this essay.
Now, onto Ms. Sontag's report:
Here we have another well-written report, this one related to the 2001 terrorist attacks on 9/11. It focuses on what the media and government think of the attacks: it happened, but everything's O.K. and the United States is O.K. Over 3000 innocent Americans died that day, but everything's O.K.? Where's the sensitivity?
I completely agree with the point this essay is making: our government and media do nothing to solve these problems, but they say "everything's going to be O.K.". Early in the easy the topic of cowardice comes up. She states that the media or citizens believe that someone who did something like this is a coward who attacks "civilization", as Susan puts in her report. Although cowardice appears only once throughout the whole essay, I believe it is one of the main points Sontag was trying to make. The US media and government is showing cowardice by refusing to stand up and do something about the problems our country has by passing legislation. Instead they avoid them by saying "everything's going to be O.K.", and they just forget about it. Until another similar problem comes up. And Ms. Sontag writes about this in her essay: "A few shreds of history awareness might help us understand what has just happened, and what may continue to happen." Basically, she's saying that history repeats itself, and, in this situation, another attack will occur again. And when something like the 9/11 attacks does happen again, maybe the government and media will confront the problem instead of just saying "it's going to be O.K."
In Adam Gopnik's essay, the sleek, well-written format of the writing really keeps one's attention. The introduction talks about the ringing cell phones of the victims of the shooting at Virginia Tech in 2007 that claimed 32 students' lives. He really makes us grieve with the victim's parents by using words like "heartrending" and "unbearable" to make the feelings seem all too real. He then throws another element into the mix: irony. He goes on to say how right after a shooting is not the right time to question gun control, and how after terrorist attacks (assuming he meant 9/11) is not the right time to question national security. Shouldn't that be the time to question these things? If not, then when is? When another incident happens and more people suffer? It's this irony and sarcasm that really keeps the reader's attention as he moves on to make his point on how gun control would eliminate, or at least lessen, shootings such as the one at Virginia Tech. He later goes on to say that gun vendors in the US sell guns to "madmen". Well, gun vendors aren't aware that they are "madmen." They just sell them a gun with no knowledge of what his or her plans are to do with it, and although it seems right to prosecute the gun vendor as well for selling the murderer the murder weapon, it really isn't, as, like previously stated, the store had no knowledge of his intent with the weapon. The store could make assumptions, but a courtroom doesn't want assumptions, it wants evidence. Gopnik lastly goes on to say that handguns should be outlawed. He states, "If having a loaded semi-automatic handgun kept you safe, cops would not be shot as often as they are." I have one question following that statement: What guns, then, should police officers use? Pursuit would be fairly difficult on foot if an officer was carrying a fully loaded shotgun or assault rifle, and the weapon could be knocked out of his hands more easily. Plus, the use of a handgun leaves one hand free for things like flashlights. He does however, say that guns should be used (with control) for hunting. I, being the hunter that I am, agree with Adam on this. Overall, this is a very well-written, well-worded persuasive essay with a unique intro and a clear main point, but I do not agree with all of the points given in this essay.
Now, onto Ms. Sontag's report:
Here we have another well-written report, this one related to the 2001 terrorist attacks on 9/11. It focuses on what the media and government think of the attacks: it happened, but everything's O.K. and the United States is O.K. Over 3000 innocent Americans died that day, but everything's O.K.? Where's the sensitivity?
I completely agree with the point this essay is making: our government and media do nothing to solve these problems, but they say "everything's going to be O.K.". Early in the easy the topic of cowardice comes up. She states that the media or citizens believe that someone who did something like this is a coward who attacks "civilization", as Susan puts in her report. Although cowardice appears only once throughout the whole essay, I believe it is one of the main points Sontag was trying to make. The US media and government is showing cowardice by refusing to stand up and do something about the problems our country has by passing legislation. Instead they avoid them by saying "everything's going to be O.K.", and they just forget about it. Until another similar problem comes up. And Ms. Sontag writes about this in her essay: "A few shreds of history awareness might help us understand what has just happened, and what may continue to happen." Basically, she's saying that history repeats itself, and, in this situation, another attack will occur again. And when something like the 9/11 attacks does happen again, maybe the government and media will confront the problem instead of just saying "it's going to be O.K."
About Me
Hello fellow AP Comp classmates (and Mr. Kunkle)! I finally decided to get started on my summer AP Comp blog, so this first post is to describe a little about me, my family, and my hobbies. So let's get started!
First, about me. As most of you know, school is important to me. I do well in school, and for me, doing well in school means doing well for your future. But success comes with hard work, it's not given to you. I have hours of homework every night on top of my extracurricular activities, and what I gain in studying I lose in sleep! For some people, it's hard to do well in school. I feel truly gifted and blessed with the strive and ability to succeed.
When I'm not in school or studying, I do have many interests and hobbies. I play two sports for our school, one in fall and one in spring. Every new school year means a new football season for me, and a new opportunity to be part of a possible Rock Valley conference championship team. I have been part of the past two conference championship teams, and nothing would please me more than to win a three-peat my senior year! But, as with school, success comes with hard work. I begin preparing for the upcoming season in June with a weightlifting program that continues through July and ends a week before the season starts (the end of July) The season starts the second Monday of August, and ends either at the end of October or the beginning of November. So as you can see, almost of the half of my year is dedicated to the rough-and-tumble life of a football player. But once March rolls around, I put away my cleats and string up my racket: it's tennis season! I have always had a secret liking for tennis, but I didn't start playing for our school team until my sophomore year. I enjoy tennis because it is a nice break from the intensity of the football season. I am also in Student Council, Chess Club, NHS, and am the sports editor for the Spotlight. When I do have spare time, I enjoy
watching TV (especially sports), and both hunting and fishing with my dad and brother.
Lastly, I need to tell you about my family. My mom, Karen, works at WPS Health Insurance over in Monona. My dad, Ron, is currently unemployed and gaining Worker's Compensation for a back injury while working at the USPS building over on Milwaukee Street in Madison. I love my family very much, and enjoy spending time with them on weekends.
Well that's pretty much me in a nutshell. I look forward to having AP Comp with all of you and reading your blogs!
First, about me. As most of you know, school is important to me. I do well in school, and for me, doing well in school means doing well for your future. But success comes with hard work, it's not given to you. I have hours of homework every night on top of my extracurricular activities, and what I gain in studying I lose in sleep! For some people, it's hard to do well in school. I feel truly gifted and blessed with the strive and ability to succeed.
When I'm not in school or studying, I do have many interests and hobbies. I play two sports for our school, one in fall and one in spring. Every new school year means a new football season for me, and a new opportunity to be part of a possible Rock Valley conference championship team. I have been part of the past two conference championship teams, and nothing would please me more than to win a three-peat my senior year! But, as with school, success comes with hard work. I begin preparing for the upcoming season in June with a weightlifting program that continues through July and ends a week before the season starts (the end of July) The season starts the second Monday of August, and ends either at the end of October or the beginning of November. So as you can see, almost of the half of my year is dedicated to the rough-and-tumble life of a football player. But once March rolls around, I put away my cleats and string up my racket: it's tennis season! I have always had a secret liking for tennis, but I didn't start playing for our school team until my sophomore year. I enjoy tennis because it is a nice break from the intensity of the football season. I am also in Student Council, Chess Club, NHS, and am the sports editor for the Spotlight. When I do have spare time, I enjoy
watching TV (especially sports), and both hunting and fishing with my dad and brother.
Lastly, I need to tell you about my family. My mom, Karen, works at WPS Health Insurance over in Monona. My dad, Ron, is currently unemployed and gaining Worker's Compensation for a back injury while working at the USPS building over on Milwaukee Street in Madison. I love my family very much, and enjoy spending time with them on weekends.
Well that's pretty much me in a nutshell. I look forward to having AP Comp with all of you and reading your blogs!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)