Meddy's Video

Inventing Meddy S posted an interesting youtube video on their blog. The short video began with a baby properly operating an iPad (although I believe it was being held upside down). A series of shots then showed the baby struggling to turn a magazine page because it did not operate in the same way technology did. This video relates to class because it shows how society is moving away from the late age of print and into a new generation of writers that will only appreciate technological writing. I chuckled when the video ended, and the filmmaker commented on the effect Steve Jobs will forever have on society. The baby expected the magazine to operate like the iPad, something she learned how to operate. Ironically, a few decades ago technology was critiqued for not being user friendly, and today children view print media in the same fashion. A new generation of reading and writing is beginning, as the youth of society will continue to prove.

Why does punctuation matter?

Punctuation matters because it is part of the English language. The article discussed that for nearly 5,000 years punctuation was non-existent. Although this is a fact, today punctuation is necessary for our language to be the same. When I read a writing that is incorrectly punctuated, I assume the author is unintelligent or uninformed. But realistically, a lack of punctuation is due to laziness. People do not take pride in their work, so they slack of instead of learning the basis of the English language. I do not assume that an author's content is flawed when a paper is incorrectly punctuated, but for me it becomes a distraction. Missing or misplaced commas irritate me, because punctuation matters. Without punctuation, our language would not be the same. Punctuation helps the reader feel the flow to the writing, while it allows the writer to separate his or her thoughts.

Peer Review

I am peer reviewing a colleagues draft of project three, and my first reaction is that this draft is a solid starting point. The author used great examples to support her argument that Philadelphia in the eyes of a local looks nothing like Philadelphia through the eyes of a tourist. To make her paper stronger, I recommend that she uses more rhetorical moves, such as incorporating similes and metaphors to make her examples stronger. Starting in the first paragraph, she successfully used parenthesis helping her to accent what is important about her points. If she takes her strong examples and elaborates upon them her Philadelphia paper will form a strong argument that the reader will enjoy reading.

project 3

I've been thinking about m own draft for project three and I have to tell you Dr. Lay that I am not proud of my essay. This assignment did not come naturally to me. I struggled to find a place that is two shades of grey. My personification and similes might sound forced, because throughout most of the essay, they are.

A sentence starts out like...

A sentence starts out like the beginning of a wooden roller coaster. It takes time to load all of the passengers and check for safety, like it takes time to compile the ideas for a sentence and ensure that the content makes sense within the context of the writing. A sentence begins slowly. Roller coasters seem to take forever to reach the top of the first hill. The suspense is often nerve wracking and uncomfortable, just like the beginning of a sentence. By the end of the ride, passengers are excited, and often want to take another ride. Once a writer finishes a good sentence, they are anxious to start their next one. Over time, a writer may even be brave enough to try other roller coaster, maybe less shaky as they work their way to smooth, steel roller coasters.

What is Michael Wesch's argument?

Michael Wesch's video argues that technology has more of an impact on youth than traditional forms of learning. Students wrote using pen and paper to provide statistics about their education, their time, their priorities. Every few points were written on a laptop, a detail that caught my attention. Wesch argues that society is beginning to change, but he recognizes it will take time. The fact that not every student was using a laptop in class to make their statements represents this fact perfectly. I found the video to be a unique and creative way to make the viewer think. I thought about my education, my priorities, my time. The video noted that the information is on the blackboard, and is always at the front of the classroom. Even as technology progresses, teachers will always hold the information students need. The way we receive the information is what will continue to change over time.

My relationship with my reader

I often don't know my reader, beyond my teacher for an assigned piece. I rarely write with a single reader in mind, because i recognize that my audience changes. I fear my reader. I hold back, fearing harsh judgments. The more effort I put into my writing, the more vulnerable I feel, the more nervous I become when others read my work. I work to fill my pages with colorful descriptions and powerful verbs, trying to impress my reader in a way. My relationship with my reader is like that of a musician with their audience. Musicians pour their hearts out in their lyrics. They make mistakes, face critiques, but they stand strong with what they produce. Even with my worst paper, or dumbest response, I still support my thoughts. I think musicians feel the same way. After what they feel is their worst concert, they will face harsh critiques, but they will also have those fans who support them regardless. When writing, I just want one reader who respects my thoughts, my writing. I look at my teachers as the one unconditional fan, who even on my worst day will support my effort, while every other reader disregards my writing altogether.

Home might be like...

Home might be like an iPhone. It is filled with modern technology, much of which is rarely (if ever) used. You may want to take your home everywhere, but no one does. A home may store thousands of games, but its highly unlikely. A home might be like an iPhone if every important document is locked inside. If a family only communicates at home, it might be like an iPhone. A home might also be like an iPhone if it needs an expensive case (say a high-class fence) to keep it from being broken. But for those who live in the real world, your home is probably not like an iPhone.

home is not like..

Home is not like a good Broadway musical. Instead of being nearly perfect, home has flaws. When I leave a room, more than a set changes. People do not break out in song and dance. Home is not contained to one stage. A home can have many performances, many emotions. Home is not like Broadway, there is no fee. Home does not have a maximum number of seats, and a home does not fill up every night. On Broadway, the actors work to make a general connection with everyone, not a personal connection with each member of the audience. A home is not cheesy. A home offers real emotions, real like issues. A good musical makes the audience want to return, but a good home makes the visitors never want to leave.

Coney Island of the Mind

I began watching this short video with no expectations. The author, presumably young at the time, chose to have an older man read her work, an bold decision that paid off. As a young writer, I often want to hide behind my work, but when good, I expect credit. Having an older man tell her story of the "dreamland" Coney Island is to her inspired me to think about the amusement park I grew up going to. In the story, the author admits the amusement park will never fit the definition of sweet and heavenly. To be honest, what amusement park does? For the author, Coney Island offers pleasant memories of rides and food. The honesty felt real, the emotions were not faked. The man reading the poem felt much older, but when talking about the practicality of taking the F train, and pigging out on the food available (a Nathan's sign appeared in the video for more than a few seconds) it made the words more believable. No adult will trust the "old memories" of a teenager just beginning their life. A man who lived decades travelling to Coney Island will offer much more credibility.
The young author focuses on the idea that the real Coney Island may only exist in our minds if we allow ourselves to dream. I am not from the area, and therefore have never been to the well-known amusement park. I, however, would venture to say that the amusement park lacks thrill from the rides, and is not a huge attraction for locals. She writes that the "imperfections make it real," which I can relate to my childhood amusement park. Sure too many people cram into the park, they only offer fried food, but for her, Coney Island is where her first date may haven been. Or where she first went on a roller coaster. Whatever it may be, Coney Island is what you make it. If I went with friends, it likely would have little meaning to me. However, for the author, it hurts to say goodbye, so she returns because it is her dreamland. Everyone, whether willing to share or not, as a special place that is not perfect, but offers something unique to them. Coney Island is filled with history and tourists, but every visitor has a different view on what the amusement park has to offer.

First Thoughts

Home is like a farm. For me, almost literally. In Amish country many of my friends live on farms, but  its just figurative in my case. Farms are huge open spaces that anyone can walk through if they really wish, but few people ever take the time to go through. Farms can be peaceful and relaxing, a place you want to be. They can also be stinky, and you just want a break from doing work (like cleaning and doing laundry).

inkshedding

Bolter claims mediums of writing attempt to outdo their competitors. Today, the goal is immediacy. The iPad exemplifies this perfectly, because it incorporates a computer and an e-reader (such as a nook or kindle). The device is compact, yet powerful and incorporates both a writing space and a writing place. In other words, the iPad allows for the user to use the device as an e-reader, as well as a word processor through applications that include basic word documents and social media sites. Bolter notes that transparent media separates us from reality. With the use of blogs, writers can read and share with people across the world. Social media offers an immediate experience, while the writing space continues to evolve. All forms of technology continue to build off of each other. The iPad evolved from the laptop, as an even more compact form of technology. Writing itself will remain the same; however, the way we utilize writing will infinitely change. As the writing space changes, communication begins to change. The way in which people communicate has moved from a personal act to one in which people hide behind a computer screen or telephone. As text messages become more popular and advanced (faster, more interactive), the definition of writing has expanded into the world of basic communication. A text is a writing space in which people rely on written word to express what was traditionally said in person. The writing space will continue to evolve, and as with any advancement, new inventions create new controversies.

A super rough copy of my Bolter essay

Megan Andrews

Composition 001

Doctor Lay

21 October 2011

What is happening to writing?

            As society moves through the late age of print, the name given by Jay David Bolter to the current state of writing, the threat of technology on the writing process becomes more evident.  “The shift to the computer…threatens the definitions of good writing,” Bolter boldly states as he begins to write his winded opinions about the impact of technology on writing (Bolter 4). The writing process must constantly be challenged, along with technology itself. The advancement of writing continues to challenge the modern definition of technology, while making writing more prominent in society and more widely utilized.

            The infinite changes to writing began before any document was ever officially scribed. Before any writing form becomes popular, people are criticized for their ‘absurd’ ideas. Think of the first man to suggest using blood to write in a cave, or the first man to suggest standardizing an alphabet. At the time, society likely harassed these brave men. It takes time to adapt to change, although many would argue the great benefits change has on society. Countless forms of writing were used before the mere invention of paper. After paper, the typewriter is the next prominent advancement in writing. These inventions make history today, being credited as some of the best inventions of all time. Yet, centuries ago, challenging the practicality of a rock as a writing surface was viewed as irrational.

            Looking to more current times, the computer shows a similar type of progress. When the computer was first invented, society was stunned. Thirty years ago, no average citizen would have listed the current capabilities of a computer. They were unthinkable. The average citizen questioned computers--their accuracy, speed, reliability, capabilities. Without skeptics, what incentive would exist for improvement? Society is right in challenging advancements, challenging technology. Writing itself challenges the definition of technology. As Bolter notes, technology is more than just a machine, it also includes skills (15). Using this definition of technology as a reference, the continuing advancement of the writing space, which currently includes word documents, blogs, e-mail, and countless other virtual places, constantly expands the writer’s skills.

            A decade ago, a computer was still a luxury. Electronic writing was possible, but not necessary to succeed in school or even the workplace. Pen and paper represented writing to the average citizen, not a computer and a keyboard. Today, however, the perception of writing has evolved. When assigned an essay, people log into their account as opposed to opening their journal. In a decade, Microsoft Word replaced spiral bound paper as the primary aid for writing. Advancing the way in which a formal paper is written is just the beginning of the impact computers have made on the writing space.

            Social media, over the last few years, created a brand new place for people to express their thoughts and feelings through written word. With the creation of sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr, people around the world can meet on one world wide web page and share what they wish about their lives. Each site listed differs in their own way, allowing electronic text to reach an even broader audience. Prior to the late age of print, textbooks and printed novels were the only forms of writing accessible to a majority of citizens. Some people kept personal journals, or came across poetry once in a while, but for the most part, textbooks were the only way information was spread throughout society.

            The creation of social media opened the door to writing in an entirely new light. Twitter gives a user 140 characters to express whatever they wish, while Tumblr uniquely offers a blog accessible to anyone, anywhere in the world. Tumblr expands the definition of writing, allowing for quotes, text, images, videos, or any combination of the above. Social media cites help “to regard the mind itself as a writing space” (13). A computer acts as a tool for expressing the thoughts and ideas that form in the mind on a surface that allows for sharing among other readers. The internet aids writing, it does not allow for technology to do the writing itself. Facebook offers another unique writing space, because it allows for both public and private communication with friends. People often critique the computer as technology that controls writing, yet no technology can function as a writing space without people to control them (17). Facebook allows for primarily social writing, but similar to the idea that the more you read, the better reader you become, the more you write, the better of a writer you become.

            Arguably the strongest benefit of social media sites has little to do with what is actually written. Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr, along with countless other social media forms, allows for more people to take part in writing. In the early age of print when paper was a modern creation, everyone wanted to get their hands on it and take part in the newest advancements. Although computers themselves are not the newest advancement in writing, the relative infancy of social media sites helps them to strengthen their popularity. The more people who take advantage of social media sites, the more prominent writing will become in society.

            As more members of society begin to appreciate the wonders of writing, the more people there will be to critique its advancements. As Bolter wisely writes, “When one medium sets out to remediate another, it does so by claiming to do a better job” (26). The obvious truth in this statement allows for a deep analysis of the evolution of writing. When the computer was first invented, and the ingenious Bill Gates invented Microsoft, the writing space changed for what society currently views as ever. Yet, this new space for writing will eventually be overturned. Likely not in the next few decades, or maybe even centuries, but ultimately the computer is bound to be replaced. Again, look to ancient times. It may sound pointless to think about, but everything in society ultimately gets replaced. The invention of a computer proved that there is a better way to write papers, and the keyboard helped to replace many of the issues and criticisms of the typewriter. The computer challenged the typewriter, claiming to do a better job, by offering new advancements. The same can be seen when the typewriter was first invented. Although it lacked the flexibility the computer now offers, the typewriter helped to speed up the writing process and refashioned the writing space for a majority of writers.

            This refashioning of the writing space may occur when a dominant technology is challenged (22). Although the definition of technology remains debatable, assuming that writing is a technology, when paper first challenged the very traditional form of writing on bricks and rocks, the writing space was refashioned. In more modern times, the electronic replacement of paper is evident.

            It is clear writing continues to advance and reach a broader group of people, but debate continues about how beneficial electronic text is to society. Taking an optimistic approach, electronic writing allows for text to be flexible and easily accessible to the majority. Electronic writing can “continue indefinitely,” largely due to hypertext (27). The creation of the World Wide Web allows for countless links to be embedded into web pages, further not only the writers’ capabilities, but also the power of the information presented. Using Wikipedia as an example, hundreds of thousands of links are embedded to help give as little, or as much, detail as one may be searching for. For ironic purposes, if you search writing on Wikipedia, it displays one web page that includes an overview of writing, its history, and countless links to various sources as well as deeper definitions of terms used throughout the article. If reading the web site for a research paper, the World Wide Web offers hyperlinks so the reader can access as little or as much information as he or she may want. The internet not only allows American readers and writers to access, as well as change this information; it allows writers from around the world to access the online encyclopedia in their respective languages. This versatility proves that the writing process continues to evolve and offer more possibilities that did not exist just a few years ago.

            As you can see, the advancement of writing is indefinite. Similar to any technology, as long as critics continue to voice their opinions, writing will never stop advancing. Regardless of a personal definition of technology, there is no debate about the improvements of the writing space over the last few decades. The invention of the computer and the keyboard allows for a faster, more complex writing space that is user friendly. The flexibility that word processers offer makes writing painless, as well as opens the doors to new styles of writing, as seen through social media sites. Writing continues to advance and reach a wider audience, allowing for more critiques of the writing space. Hundreds of years ago, before the typewriter or a computer, the writing space had a limited definition. Today, the opportunities are endless, and the writing space will continue to advance and evolve as long as humans are alive to write. 

Chapter 3 argument, group two

This group argued that print text needs to be corrected and changed because it was defected. I really liked how they began with a dictionary definition because it helped to support their argument. I do not recommend beginning an opinionated paper with a definition, but for this purpose it was successful. The strong view that print must die definitely causes much debate, but they did manage to use valid examples to support their radical statement. I also like how they acknowledged new technology usually replaces old, and did not go to the extreme of saying always. The RIP format seems interesting because looking to the past, we see that it is very rare that anything in the past completely dies. There will always be those who choose to ignore the advancements in technology (such as those who refuse to purchase a cell phone, because a landline still places calls). I like how Bolter calls hypertext a remediation, not the death however. During their analysis, they said that "you can't rip the internet." With that statement, I would argue there will eventually be a way that for a majority of society replaces the internet even if they do not physically damage every computer. One aspect of their prezi that distinguishes them from the other groups is the fact that they chose such a strong argument. When writing my paper, I will likely take a strong stance on my argument, much like how this group did. As far as memorability, their prezi will stay in my mind more than some of the others (that I already forget), primarily because of their strong stance that was well supported.

Chapter 3 argument: group one

This prezi had an ingenious path design to help accent their argument. The group views writing as a never ending path, and argues that writing will continue to advance. Although I believe many of their examples had many layers of analysis, the group failed in my opinion to demonstrate their knowledge of Bolter's text. For example, the yellow book example they used in attempt to show printed text cannot easily be re-arranged fell short for me. I liked their interpretation, because it is true print text does not have the accessibility of electronic text; however, the example was absurd. I found it ironic that one of their videos could not be embedded into their prezi. Just a few slides after mentioning the interconnections of the electronic writing space, a glitch in the advanced technology appears. I think it is important to note that without an issue, the remediation of print would likely not occur. They showed an example of an issue with print text (the immobility of the writing space), yet I highly doubt that they intentionally tried to show a glitch with the modern writing space. This small issue itself may never be fixed, but it shows the writing cycle and advancement of writing is a never-ending process. A final point in their argument that caught my attention was the idea that it takes time to appreciate the current state of writing. They used Van Gogh's art as an example, but I would consider using text messages as an example. Many people today may argue that their lives would not be the same without text messaging, but when it first was invented, a majority of phone users failed to use texts, and those who did, likely did not recognize their future potential to change society. Overall, this group selected great examples, but the viewer must take the time to further analyze their never-ending path argument to fully understand the power of Bolter's text.

Taylor Mali

Taylor Mali's poetry can be found in numerous forms on the internet. I watched two, one in which Mali spoke the poem in front of a small crowd, and one set up like a prezi, with a recording of Mali playing as the words appeared on the screen. The poem itself stay constant between the two versions, yet I took a completely different meaning away from each short clip. When I watched Mali deliver the poem wearing a geeky scrabble t-shirt and jeans, it allowed me to see the type of man stating the truth through poetry. With the added visual of hand gestures, it helped me to focus on what the author wanted to emphasize. In the print version, although very interesting, I found myself more focused on reading all the words as they were creatively arranged, and it took much of the meaning away from the poem. Although in the text form different fonts and sizes were used to help accent the important phrases in the poem, seeing every word appear in a non-traditional form was too overwhelming for me.  I chose to watch the print version first, so without the prior knowledge of the type of man Taylor Mali is, it allowed me to make my own prediction. I noted his appearance early on in my entry because it stuck with me throughout his entire performance. If I were to stand and read his poem, a majority of the audience would take a different meaning away. Live, Mali successfully uses hand gestures along with his diction to accent the main points in his poetry. Although his voice sounded identical in the print version, with only words in front of me, I struggled really listen and focus on the words of the poem. This exercise proves that style really does impact meaning of a writing piece. One person's interpretation of an essay, novel, or even poem can easily change by simply viewing the text or only listening to the words.

John Edward Weidman

Author John Edward Weidman spoke to the Hofstra community, spending a majority of his time reading an excerpt from his latest, unpublished novel. The African-American, Pennsylvania native published over twenty books, with countless awards to demonstrate his credibility. A creative writing professor introduced the older author, stating how his realistic diction makes his writing approachable. One book she referenced was written in the perspective of an African-American male, who speaks as a true black teenager would. He writes in slang, making his voice realistic, something I took to be important for Weidman. After hearing the short excerpt from a published book, I was unsure what to expect when he began to speak. He spoke professionally and intelligently, like one would expect from an award winning author. His latest work, tentatively titled Fathers and Sons, uses his own style of voice to paint a vivid image of what life was like in 1955 for a controversial African American family. He began from the beginning, reading about the background of what becomes Louis Till's life. The book stresses racial inequality at the time, talking about the murder trial of Emmett Till. The young man was killed because he whistled at a white woman, and his killer was acquitted. The audience could hear the emotion in the authors voice, because as an African American man who was presumably alive during the mid 1950's, he was reading about a topic close to his heart.
Before Weidman began reading, he briefly talked about how he loved teaching. He spoke on the importance of teachers in his opinion, and said how he loves to share his opinions with others. Speaking to a group of about half faculty or staff, he called them heroes. I think Weidman writes in a more informal voice that people feel comfortable reading because he wants to teach his readers about what life once was life. The book he read from was what he called 'half fiction, half non-fiction.' He uses a realistic voice for his characters and for his story, making his story more credible. I often write in a very formal voice, using the same type of descriptions as Weidman does. I often laugh at people who write in the exact style they speak, but Weidman proved that you can be a fluent, intelligent speaker and successfully write in an informal tone.
One observation I made while the author spoke was about the number of African Americans in the room. Weidman attracted a relatively large crowd to his reading, some fans, others students. But I took notice of how few black men and women attend the reading. Hofstra is a pretty diverse school, and  knowing that Weidman is a black man himself and writes in a stereotypically 'black' voice, I was shocked to see how few African-Americans attended the event. Likely, there is no significance in this observation, but I only counted five in the entire room. I would venture to guess Weidman writes to inform primarily the minorities who were greatly effected by the racial inequalities during the civil rights movement. Overall, I enjoyed Weidman's presentation and the opportunity to hear a professional writer's work in the editing stages.

What is the argument? Chapter Two, Group Two

This prezi demonstrated a more advanced thought process in my opinion, offering a large image to view as a kind of summary, yet I still do not agree with their argument. This group also argued that writing is a technology, offering the reference to Bolter's text where he uses the term 'techne' to describe technology in a broader sense. The image of a computer formed by the videos, quotes, and analysis' was very creative and helped to enforce their argument. Although creative, I personally hated the design. I struggled to follow because I was so caught up in trying to read the jumbled words. I think the design of a computer could have been used with the text more spread out, to help keep the general argument while making the entire presentation easier to follow. This group made an interesting argument, saying that humans are essentially a part of technology. I understand how humans help make writing a technology, but I do not think they expanded on this interesting point enough to make it valid. One part of their argument I enjoyed was when they focused on the fact that technology cannot function as a writing space without people. This not only makes sense, but also helps to argue why writing could be considered a technology. Overall, I enjoyed this prezi because the support to their overall argument that writing is a form of technology was elaborated on and explained.

What is the argument? Chapter Two, Group One

In their prezi, they made the argument that writing is a technology. They used examples such as the purpose of a phone, while showing its advancements over time. Today, phones are more user-friendly and have many different purposes, rather than simply making a call. A telephone is more obviously considered technology in our culture, but they showed how writing is also a technology because the purpose of writing is the same today,evan as it continues to advance. Their prezi began by stating that all arts and trades that require skills and tools are technologies. By this definition, they argue that writing is a technology, because a writing tool or electronic device is needed along with the ability to form thoughts. The group of girls focuses on how writing changes along with culture, using an image of socialite Kim Kardashian blogging as their primary example. This argument had legitimate support, as Bolter explains in chapter two; however, I still do not believe that writing is a technology. The focal point of the presentation was the fact that "writing is a technology that is an active part of culture and the social world." Although their prezi demonstrated this, I do not understand how something that continues to improve and requires tools and skill is a technology. I believe it is too broad of an argument to be efffective, and it must be considered that electronic writing is not the only form of writing used today. People still use handwriting to take notes and I would argue many edits are done by hand first, then placed onto an electronic device. This is a general weakness I see in their argument, and I think they should have thought on more specific terms to make their argument more effective.

Am I afraid of writing?

In a sense, yes, I am afraid of writing. I fear the judgements and critiques that come along with publishing any writing (such as in this public blog). When I do take the time to write, I feel like I have to prove myself to my readers. I carefully select every word, in hopes of sounding both informed, while keeping an approachable voice. No one wants to be judged or harshly critiqued when doing anything. For me, writing is vulnerable, and my thoughts and opinions have some special meaning to me, making it harder to have others reject my work. Publishing even one crappy piece of writing gives anyone the chance to give me a label. I know when I read a thoughtless piece of writing filled with linking verbs and a lame analysis, I judge the writer. I label them as lazy and uninformed. Why would I expect my readers to hold back judgement? This is why I fear writing.
Jacques Derrida takes writing so seriously, I questioned how serious he was. When I write, I do not over-analyze every word or argument I have. I do not fear being negatively viewed because I took a controversial stance or because I may have a different opinion than one of my readers. To me, a good writer can organize their opinions and analysis in a way that is easy to understand. I do not take writing as seriously as Derrida because I see no reason for the extra stress. A majority of writers will never change their opinion based on my essay, but I put in time to prove to my readers that my thoughts are valid, even if not what they consider correct.

Bolter Chapter One Prezi

http://prezi.com/cpbafxzd2x99/bolter-chapter-1/