Blogging Around: Ben and Chris J.

The two blogs that I decided to comment on were Ben's "iMedia: 1941" and Chris J.'s "iMedia: Haiti." These were two really interesting posts that had great insight.

Ben-

First off, it's great to hear you're still doing IMEA...you have to take advantage of your talent on the clarinet!! Anyways, I thought it was really cool how you found so much insight, understanding and overall interest in a piece of music you happened to be playing. It's great that you were able to take that and generate all these ideas - I'll bet that the rest of the people playing it didn't even think twice about the context of this what-so-ever. Also, I was quite excited to hear what you would say about this because I've actually heard The March From "1941" before at some point. So you, being the Social Studies enthusiast that you are, would of course provide plenty of thoughts about the basis and context of this piece that I have never thought about. Listening to it again, you definitely provided some interesting thoughts and observations about the musicality of this piece. It really brought some flashbacks back to band lessons at Springman and being lectured about WHY musical pieces were the way they were and what every little detail meant [and of course why that was so important!]. I had always disregarded that information, but this post has showed me how much better of an understanding you can have of a piece of music and it's context just by listening and analyzing the music and how the instruments sound themselves. Lastly, I found it really insightful how you connected this to the role of humor today. Though someone might find the connection to "Family Guy" a weak one, I actually think it definitely shows how we we're more open-minded and tolerant of a far range of humor. Today, "Family Guy" is considered a [somewhat] normal, humorous show...but back in the times of The March From "1941", a show of that sort would have been regarded as offensive, inappropriate, and would probably not last for very long at all.

Chris-

For a pretty short post, this could have probably been one of the most effective and thought-provoking thing I've read in a while. That picture is really...something. Just one look at it and you're flooded with all this emotion and questions. I mean, when I looked at that man, I saw all this desperation and confusion and longing in his face. It definitely, like you said, makes you think about the world and what's going on around us. We live in such a good, safe environment that sometimes we don't know the horrors that go on around us. This photo to some could really change someone's perspective of the situation [in Haiti] and could get people to try and make a difference. This picture and the post in general also made me think of the Letters to Haiti campaign we've been doing in French Club. We really wanted to reach out to the people in Haiti and get a primary source perspective of how things are going and how we can help them out. For about a week, we encouraged students to write letters in French [using translators if necessary] so we can send them to Haiti in hopes of getting letters back from Haitian students. We're also planning on doing a school supply drive to go along with it so we can help out the schools and the students. Additionally, we got some help from two GBS students who came from Haiti to escape from the situation. They had to leave their immediate family in Haiti and come here in hopes to get a good education and a better life. They live with some other family members here but keep in contact with their parents...it's a really moving story.

Lastly, I definitely agree with what you said about the photographer and about the mindset of most Americans. We seem to have trouble with looking beyond our problems and our needs to help others. It's a sad thing...

Metacognition [Get Organized]: My Desk.

First off: this blog assignment was a life saver. I've been telling myself to clean my previously cluttered desk for weeks already but have never really gotten around to doing it. And it was about time. To put things simply, it had gotten to the point where I refused to do my homework on my desk because there was no clean space. Sure, cleaning and organizing my desk was no easy [or fun] task, but the results were well worth it.

The first time I read this assignment, I knew exactly what I would have to do. And I'd be lying if I told you that I was excited about it. I was dreading it, actually. Yeah, I needed to do it...but over break? Why?! I couldn't understand. But it was an assignment so I got myself, well, forced myself to start working immediately. I told myself that I could do a little each day if it got too boring or if something came up, but to at least start my work so I got somewhere. Once I stood face to face with the mess, I became discouraged. "This is going to take hours!" I remember thinking. There were so many books, papers, cd's, and items sprawled around my desk, I didn't know where to begin. Once I had returned to a clear mind, I decided to start easy. Instead of focusing on every little detail, I would separate things into two piles: what I would keep, and what I would need to throw away.

This process was quick and in no time, my desk was clear and almost half of the things that were previously on my desk were in the garbage. The rest, what I needed, was in a pile, but a manageable pile none the less, on the floor. I instantly felt lighter and happier. The worst part of something I had been dreading for weeks turned out to be not so bad after all. And in only 10 minutes, I had made such an impact.

Next, I decided to tackle the little things. I looked at what I had collected. To my surprise, I saw some things in the pile that had oddly gone missing for weeks and I had been searching for for the longest time! Missing flash drives, an ID card, even some money, suddenly back in my possession! The excitement of finding these things and the look of such an improved space made me very optimistic and determined to finish my task at hand. Besides, I had planned on working for a maximum on 45 minutes on this today and I was confident that I would be able to finish it all in that time or less!

The next part of my cleaning and organization process was to put all the things I wanted to keep in a sensible fashion that would help keep things organized and clean for a long period of time. I didn't want to just take all the things that had been on my desk and re-position them back on there. Sure, I had thrown out some stuff...but maybe some of the things I was keeping didn't have to be on my desk. I wanted to keep the clutter to a minimum so I could easily fit my laptop, books, and daily homework on my desk when needed. By the end of my organization process, almost 3/4 of my stuff was put in a more appropriate place and the rest, the essentials, were nicely organized on my desk.

Once I had completely finished, I felt great. Such an awful task turned out to be kind of fun...and I had gotten some "lost" items back and of course, peace of mind. I was also surprised at how little I actually had that needed to stay on my desk: 80% of the things that were on there when I started should not have been there. It was funny how when I looked at all the things, I had no idea how I could organize all of that, when in reality, most of it had been misplaced junk. After cleaning and organizing my desk, my mind is clear and ready to take on other, more important tasks. I never realized how much stress and anxiety such a small process could inflict on someone. Even though I didn't really think about it directly, every time I passed my desk at home, it would make me feel more stressed...and I definitely did not need that to worry about during the week with all the homework, tests, and projects to deal with. Now I know that I can't leave unenjoyable things to simmer in my mind, because it only makes it worse by adding more and more stress and worry the more you put it off. I realized that I must get things over with right when I come face to face with them so that I have to peace in my mind that I don't have to deal with it later. And besides, the unenjoyable things usually turn out to be better than you think, just like this organizing exercise. My success with this project definitely leaves me excited and optimistic for the projects I'll be faced with in the future.

iMedia: "The Persistence of Memory"

The Persistence of Memory is a painting done by artist Salvador Dalí that, in my opinion, could be one of the most thought-provoking and interesting painting I've ever seen. This was painted by Dalí in 1931 and is considered one of his most recognizable works. It is currently held at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City and has been there since 1934.

To me, this painting is definitely significant. There are so many little underlying parts and details to be examined in here. For me and probably for most people, the clocks are the most interesting. At first glance, it's like "What?!" I wasn't really sure why they looked so fluid and soft. It also, in a way, plays with your mind, since clocks are so precise and strict. Clocks have fine lines, precise markings, and solid, specific rules. They're mechanical. So when you see something like this painting, it makes no sense. It makes you think "How can the hands of the clock move? Where did the markings go? How can it be bent and tangled like that?" and even deeper things like "If our clocks suddenly became like that, what would constitute time? Is time mechanical or is it fluid?" I soon came to understand that Dalí was getting at something very similar through his painting. The sagging pocket-watches suggest the irrelevance of time during sleep and the being in the middle of the painting resembles, at least to many, a human being asleep. Basically, when we're asleep and unconscious, time doesn't pertain, only memories do. To me, this actually makes sense. It's actually pretty easy to see that distortion of time, especially when you attempt to think about your own dreams; it just doesn't all add up in the confines of time. I think it also could have been a visual depiction of Einstein's theory of relativity. Einstein basically said that time itself is relative and not fixed. I think that could definitely work in the context of the melted clocks and the irrelevance of time.

A couple other interesting things I noticed in the painting is the use of light and the insects on two of the clocks. I thought it was really interesting how Dalí used light to show a contrast between obvious and not-so-obvious things. I think that the parts that are in the light, like the rocks, platform, and ocean are things that are constant, obvious things that are considered set-in-stone. Conversely, I think the shaded parts like the clocks and the being all, in a way, position toward this dark hole in the painting which shows that they're more creative and fluid ideas that are not as constituted as the light objects.Finally, the insects are definitely an interesting and probably disturbing point of the painting. If you look closely, there is a swarm of ants on the orange watch and a single fly on the clock right next to it. I think that signifies that regardless of how time is viewed or constituted, it will eventually lead to death.

I think this painting is really interesting and full of different ideas and details to explore. I think it can give viewers a new, visual way of viewing time and some questions to ponder. I also think that it dates back to some older ideas about the relativity of time and can show the viewers some of the thoughts and ideas that were going on in this time period. I think this is an essential work of art to be seen by anyone who's remotely interested in art because it's so abstract and full of little tiny details to be discovered.

Connection: Edmund and Rod Blagojevich

Edmund, one of the most distinctive characters in King Lear, has a very profound personality. He's cunning, clever, and crafty but also corrupt, manipulative, and deceiving. It's easy to say that whatever he does has only one purpose: to benefit himself, regardless of how it affects others.When I started to think about who I could connect him to as a modern day example, politicians started running through my head. I mean, most politicians are corrupt these days, no? Well, I didn't have to "search" far from home. In fact, I decided on our very own ex-governor, Rod Blagojevich.

Rod Blagojevich..there's so much to him that can be connected to Edmund. They both did things that were intended to benefit their own interests and lied many times to cover their tracks. Edmund had several, major offenses. For one, he created a letter and convinced everyone that Edgar, his innocent brother, had written it. He was successfully able to pull Edgar away from Gloucester, his own father, and make Edgar the town criminal in everyone else's eyes. In turn, it made him look more powerful and make him seem like a hero for trying to capture Edgar. Secondly, when Gloucester so importantly confided in Edmund to keep the secret that he would go help the king, Edmund betrayed him and told Goneril and Regan about it. That, in the end, killed his father, and Edmund seemed to care very little about it.Blagojevich had his own offenses...many, for that matter. Generally, he used his position of power to extort other politicians and businesses for self-gain and profit. When caught, he lied and denied everything even though there was significant proof of what he had done.

But what is the most intriguing similarity is that they both knew how to manipulate the public and remain in good graces to some extent. Edmund, though having done such terrible things, was able to keep everything quite secretive from the masses and even came out being admired and fought for by Goneril and Regan. His cunning and clever personality was the main reason why his twisted plans were able to work. He was able to convince people that he was a do-gooder and would never have any reason to do any wrong. The same idea goes for Rod Blagojevich. Though proven guilty and convicted, he still has a cheerful personality and great charisma. And, it seems like people still kinda like him! He has been on numerous commercials, t.v. shows, talk shows, and radio programs even though he's essentially a criminal.

So, why does this connection matter? Well, it shows us that such profoundly deceiving individuals are not only found in literature; they are among us as well. And this doesn't mean that they're the people who seem the most obviously bad: it could very well be the most outgoing, well-dressed, intellectual person. So, we should take note of the themes and ideas literature gives us, because more times than not, it reflects something in our own, modern society.

360 Degrees: "City Landscape"

Having recently taken a trip down to the Art Institute of Chicago, I was able to view many interesting artistic works, some very, very different from each other. I would go from detailed, intricate Renaissance art to quirky photography and then to simplistic, thought-provoking Modern sculptures. It was definitely an interesting experience for me. For looking at so many paintings, pictures and sculptures, though, I didn't think that any one work of art would stand out to me. But to my surprise, one did. It was the painting posted to the left of this text: City Landscape painted in 1955 by Joan Mitchell, an American artist and member of the first generation of Abstract Expressionists.

I saw this painting in the Contemporary Art gallery and vividly remember my reaction when I first saw it: confusion. Yes, I wish I could tell you that I had some sort of momentous revelation once I laid eyes on this painting, but then I would be lying. I was just confused. I didn't really know what to think of it. Should I be confused? Is that the point? If not, how should I be viewing this? Is there even a specific emotion or thought I should be getting out of this? But the burning thought in my mind, even upon leaving the museum was "I wonder what other people thought or said when they saw this painting." Was I the only one who was confused when I saw this? I mean, in many ways, it's pretty controversial, in the ways it can 'strike' someone. So I figured, this would be a great prompt to explore the many ways this painting could be viewed.

Let's start off at the primary source: the painter, of course! Even when seeing this painting for the first time, I knew Joan Mitchell had to have a purpose in mind for this painting. As abstract as it is, there must have been an idea, a vision, or meaning behind it. Through some research, I learned that Mitchell's general interest [artistically] was to create art about urban areas. The strands of solid, bright colors were painted to evoke memories of the bustling cities that Mitchell herself visited during her travels in the Midwest. In the painting, the feelings of a vibrant city were tangled in a clump of pinks, reds, blues, and mustards and the effect is actually not much different in the city streets and city architecture, where traffic and pedestrians bolt between the structures of the buildings.

Upon learning this, I gained much more appreciation for this painting. There was really some deep thought put into it and I was happy to have not passed up this painting once learning about the meaning behind it. I'm sure there are some people who view this painting who are very educated in this type of contemporary art and can quickly find deep meaning of their own in the painting or make their own connections to it, but I was certainly not one of those people. However, I believe that I would fall under a distinct category of people seeing this painting: a person that, even though they're not educated about these works of art or cannot really find a meaning in the painting, has an open mind about it and accepts that there is definitely value to the painting, to the painter and others. Whether this person leaves it at that or does research afterwards like I did, I think that there were more people than just me who would feel the same way about this painting.

Now, let's move on the the fourth and fifth perspectives that I have thought of. The fourth perspective that I thought of, would be someone who would look at it, see a jumble of colors, and walk away. Not that it's a bad thing, but I'm sure there are plenty of people who had that perspective. They saw colors, thought it was...interesting...and decided not to give it much other thought. No positive or negative reaction. Just a casual "I'm just here to look around one-dimensionally, I'm not planning on exploring the layers of this and I certainly can't see anything right off the bat." Lastly, my fifth perspective is one that's really popular and one that I definitely heard when I was at the museum. That would be the negative, defensive perspective. People who see nothing, assume it's nothing, and are instantly infuriated by the fact that it's in a museum. I heard a couple comments actually, like "What is this?! My four year old could probably do the same thing!" or "If I took a bed sheet and some paint and brushes, I could do the EXACT SAME THING! So why is this in a museum?" I respect everyone's opinions, but at the same time, it kind of makes me sad when I hear these things. People make flat-out assumptions about things they don't fully understand and could end up totally missing out on the purpose or meaning of something. In this case, these people missed out on learning about the meaning behind the painting, the stories and reflection of the painter in each line and stripe. It makes me sad that someone's lack of understanding about something could prevent them from seeing things between the lines, things that are so interesting and things that could definitely make you appreciate the thing ten times more than you initially did. Even more, it's sad that someone's disinterest in a painting could make them voice their negative opinion to influence others or make sweeping generalizations about the painter, even though they don't even mildly know the least bit behind what they've created.

Hence, is there a relationship among these perspectives? Well, I think there is. I think it depends upon your level of tolerance, your education about the subject, and the amount of interest you have in exploring the topic. What I see is that if you're interested, educated, or tolerant about a subject, you will be able to understand abstract things, like City Landscape with little thinking or some research. But if you decide to view things one-dimensionally or decide not to provoke the subject with thought, you will become infuriated with simple things and you won't be able to use your imagination or your thoughts to figure things out or come to interesting conclusions. And what if you did that? What if you always viewed things one-dimensionally? How would your life be then? I presume it would be boring. You wouldn't be able to understand complex ideas or make your own connections to contemporary or modern/abstract things. That's why I decided to take the route for the open-minded. I may not know a whole lot about a subject, but with a little bit of thought and a little bit of research, I was able to educate myself about something new and gain a whole new appreciation for contemporary art. And that, in my opinion, was well worth it.

Metacognition: Kite Runner Essay

As I opened my new Word document page to begin my Kite Runner essay, the first thing that popped into my mind was "How are all my thoughts going to fit into this essay?" I had my thesis statement, my Evidence Plan, everything! And with that, I had a mind full of connections, thoughts, and comments ready to be processed and put into my essay. The most tedious part of the essay was mostly done with, but my challenge at this point was to put it all together, a difficult task indeed.

By exploring the thoughts that came out of writing my essay and the actual essay itself, I definitely learned something about my writing. To start off, I put high priority in crafting an interesting introductory paragraph. In my eyes, if the reader begins any sort of text on a boring note, they won't be as interested in reading the rest as opposed to starting off with a great introduction. With the intro, I let my ideas flow so as to make it creative and interesting, avoiding too much structure and order. When there is too much structure, it makes it hard for you to try to sound like you're using your own voice and make any connection to the reader. I wanted my voice to be present and for it to seem like I'm reciting my own thoughts, not just the book's thoughts or copy/pasted information.

When writing essays, I find that my thoughts are usually scattered all over the place. I have so many ideas: some being great, some not so great, some completely relevant, some not as relevant. And they're all scattered around, waiting to be analyzed and formulated. There are so many thoughts that sometimes it's hard to even think and make the effort to analyze them and figure out what's worth writing..and to put it down on paper. But also, I notice that in the beginning of my writing, I don't have many ideas flowing and often have to sit and think for a period of time until I can actually get going. That said, it usually takes me a long time to start an essay, but the pace picks up after about the first paragraph. Once I get going though, then ideas start flowing. But sometimes, there are too many ideas. Often times I have so many ideas running around my brain I have to just write them down so that I have enough time to process them. As I write, my mind is always coming up with more and more ideas, connections, or comments to add into my writing, which is sometimes a hassle. It's great because I usually never run out of things to say or find that I'm at a lack of words on a certain subject, but at other times, I have so many connections and comments that I don't know when to stop. And then, I have to make sure I'm keeping my focus on the thesis and keeping it all concise at the same time....not getting drowned in my thoughts and going off topic.

I think it's interesting, none the less, of the mind's ability to come up with so many ongoing connections, sometimes without consciously wanting to come up with connections. It surprises me that I can think of so many things in a matter of minutes regarding a thesis or subject. It's really nice to have that ability, to connect and connect and make comments until you run out of room, and it sure makes for a unique, thought-filled essay. But at the same time, it's an area I would like to work on. I'd like to work on keeping my thoughts and connections concise and controlled, so that I can recognize and use my awesome connections, disregard my not-so-great connections, and keep everything relevant and interesting. I don't believe that 'the more you write, the better' but that it's rather how valuable or how powerful the thoughts are. A three-thousand word essay stating boring facts or one-dimentional observations about a book is far less valuable [in my opinion] than a seven hundred word essay with great voice and unique observations or claims. So I'd like to learn how to grasp my thoughts more effectively and put them together in a way that's effective but concise at the same time.

In conclusion, writing the Kite Runner essay and writing this blog post has really helped me in analyzing my writing and understanding what's good and what needs improvement in my thoughts and writing styles. I hope that this can help me retain what I think is good about my thinking and fix what's not so great about my thinking so that I can become an even better thinker and writer!

Blogging Around

Today I was able to read several blog posts by fellow Academy students. There were so many great and insightful posts that it was difficult to pick out the ones I wanted to comment on. But here were a couple of my favorites:

The first one I commented on was Faith's post titled "Metacognition: The Kite Runner."

Faith-

I really liked this blog post because of the way you were able to incorporate all of your factual information and connections you wanted to make but also add in your own voice into it. It made the blog post more interesting to read and it felt like you really took time to think out what you were going to say instead of just listing all of your connections and insights. But as for the actual content in the blog, there were definitely several points you mentioned that were very interesting to me. First off, I can definitely connect to what you said about your reexamination of the book and newfound approach to understanding Hosseini's writing. When I first started reading Kite Runner, I basically just read it to read it, not to examine it. I viewed it one-dimentionally, in a way: not looking out for underlying themes or anything other than the actual text. But as we started discussing it in class, I started realizing new things in the book [like you mentioned: themes with character interaction, specific punctuation to show emotion, etc. And as I continued reading, it started coming more naturally to me.

Another thing I found interesting was your insight about complex relationships and your connection to mind maps. I honestly never thought mind maps would ever come up again, to be honest. It was just such an out-of-the-box concept [but still interesting and a fun project] that I never knew when it could ever be connected again. But clearly, you connected it to this, and effectively! What you said about the 'theoretical' mind map of Amir that discusses his relationships really broadened my view on the book and really helped me bring together all my thoughts on the relationships displayed in Kite Runner. It really makes me value the idea of Mind Maps and makes me wonder if maybe even mentally visualizing a Mind Map to summarize aspects in novels could help gather your thoughts about important ideas in books. This post has brightened my view on Mind Maps and has left me with a new possible technique to understanding big concepts in novels, specifically character interactions/relationships.

The second blog post I commented on was Erika's blog and this one was titled "Captured Thought: Multi-Tasking"

Erika-

I really liked this blog post because of the witty insight and pleasant-to-read style of the post. First off I can say that, though I'm not proud of it, I can definitely be a multi-tasker, and a procrastinator. Though these are bad habits [and trust me, I know they're bad habits], sometimes they're hard things to break- especially on days where you have TOO much homework and not enough time. I think your insight about the fault in multi-tasking is really eye-opening. Now that I think about it, multi-tasking can definitely be much less effective than doing things the right way [in the long run]. I can definitely connect that with my Freshman math class. The class was easy for me- the content was easy because I had retained the information from previous courses, and I found myself being able to figure out problems in class just by 'doing what I remember.' At home, I chose not to do homework in depth, because I figured it was too easy anyways, and that I probably didn't need the practice-besides, I had plenty of other work to do that afternoon anyways. When I finally went to take the test...and when I got it back, I found that I made some stupid mistakes that could have been avoided if I would have just did the homework to reinforce what I already knew. Although it doesn't directly connect to multi-tasking, I think it's a good example for your idea of "Do the job right and do it well the first time, because if you don't it will come back to haunt you in the long run." This really reminds me of my learning experience and definitely makes me less apt to multi-task, procrastinate, or do half-done work. The way you voiced this 'aha' moment was really powerful and really made me want to fix my bad work-related habits.