First Year Writing Showcase

On Wednesday, I was able to attend the First-year writing showcase.  I'm so grateful that it counted for Cult & Civ credit and College Writing 2 extra credit, so it killed two birds with one stone!  And it worked with my class schedule so it was like Hallelujah!  My literacy memoir I wrote last semester in College Writing 1 was nominated so I would have been there anywhere even if it didn't count as credit for other classes.

I had no idea by professor nominated me until I ran into her in the library.  When she told me, I was immediately freaked out about the 5 minute presentation part.  Of course I was grateful that she thought to nominate my writing, but my brain decided just to focus on the presentation part.  I was never a fan of speeches so I was debating faking an excuse to get out of it.  I've gotten better over the years and I got to the point where I can speak clearly without rushing through it.  The only part I have a problem with is making eye contact with the audience, and I'm not sure I'll ever figure that part out.  Ultimately, I decided to go read of paper even though I was filled with anxiety leading up to it.  My professor from last semester kept telling me that I would be great, but I didn't believe her. 

  

When I got the program I was immediately thankful I was not first.  The downside of that though was knowing that after every person who went it got close to me.  And when it was my turn it wouldn't be me if something didn't go wrong.  I had to use a microphone since my voice wasn't loud enough over the air conditioner.  I never used a mic before and I felt so important and official.  Overall, I thought the presentation went pretty good, but of course I could have done better on looking up.  But I got through it and that's the most important part!  

All of my life I never really though I was a good writer.  My mom and teachers kept telling me I was, but I never believed any of them.  This whole experience felt like reassurance that I was doing something right when it came to writing.  The fact that something I wrote was one of the papers chosen from God knows how many is pretty unbelievable.  Even though I didn't believe it was good enough, I'm extremely grateful and honored that the people who did the nominated saw something I didn't.    

iMovie Meet Your Master!

I finally did it!  I figured out technology *self high-five*!!!

Love/Hate Relationship with Technology

I love technology, but most of the time it only brings me pain.  My mom is an expert with computers and my dad is the TV whisper.  The only thing I seem to be able to do with technology is break it.  I never permanently break it, it just stops working!  When I have projects that require me using technology, I always have these grand visions for how I want it to turn out.  Most of the time, however, my vision doesn't pan out.  I always have to either google or ask my mom how to do something.  I try so hard to be good with technology, but it just seems to hate me even more.

So far with the multimodal project, technology is again not on my side.  I'm always optimistic and I think, "This is it.  This is when we'll finally get along."  But no.  Maybe I'm destined to continue my love/hate relationship with technology forever.  I'll never stop trying though.  Someday we'll bury the hatchet and we will be the best of friends!  

Summary/Analysis Update

I'm going to be honest.. I'm not confident in my analysis at all.  I feel confident about my summary portion because I know how to do that.  I’m not as secure in my analysis skills because I never really thought I was good at it.  I always thought I managed to give the illusion I knew what I was doing when I used big words in the analysis.  So either the big words distracted my teachers into thinking I was good at analysis or they saw what I couldn’t see.  Well, if I’m going back honesty, I never really thought I was a good writer either.  So maybe I’m just being overly critical of myself and I need to rein in the perfectionist in me.  Or maybe I’m legitimate in my fears of being horrible at rhetorical analysis.  I guess only time will tell.

I have been working on my analysis for give or take a few weeks and I don't think I've gotten better. One of the problems could be the article I chose to analyze. I picked a scientific article with a lot of big words I need google to understand. That's fine for summary, but it makes analysis all the more difficult. How can I analyze what they saying when I don't even understand what they are saying in the first place? It could be a full lot of nonsense for all I know. To me, the big words could be an appeal to ethos. Ethos is credibility and what is more credible than using words people need google to understand? Anyway, I'm going to continue working on it. The student sample is helping me with formatting because I was having a hard time trying to figure out where to work in the analysis with the summary. I know I'll get there eventually, it's just a matter of getting to the finish line with a draft I'm confident in.

Acrophobia

The article I chose to summarize was Deconstructing Acrophobia: Physiological and Psychological Precursors to Developing a Fear of Heights Carlos M. Coelho, Ph.D and Guy Wallis, Ph.D. I wanted to research about fear of heights, or acrophobia, because of the documentary I watched, Man on Wire. The documentary was about a man who willing walked a tight rope between the Twin Towers in New York. He was completely unafraid of the height he would be walking at, so it made me more curious about people who have a fear of heights.

I have a fear of heights myself, so I was interested in learning about others who share my fear. The article by Coelho and Wallis was the first one I clicked on and it immediately caught my attention. The article studied the factors that could lead a person to developing a fear of heights. I continued reading because I wanted to see if I agreed with what they were saying. And, I did. Two of the factors they were studying was vision and balance. When I'm at a height that makes me anxious my vision gets blurry and I feel unsteady. I can't see the ground beneath me so I have no clue how high up I am plus I think of scenarios of me falling to my death. So, yeah. My imagination is a very vivid place. Anyway, back on topic. I agreed with everything the scientists said and they provided factual evidence so I couldn't argue with them. Including data tables makes it pretty hard to say they made everything up. Plus they used big words so I knew I could trust them.

The Reality of Reality TV

Reality TV has become a permanent fixture in popular culture.  Either you love it or you hate it, you can't deny the fact that our society has become obsessed.  Our obsession has grown to the point where a good portion of the television shows on right now are reality shows.  Networks know we watch them so they keep making them.  One of the most popular reality shows on TV right now is The Bachelor franchise (yes, franchise because this one show has multiple spin-off series i.e The Bachelorette, Bachelor in Paradise, etc.).  And I'll admit it, I watch every single one of the shows involved in that franchise.  They're completely ridiculous and frustrating, but I love them so much.  As I'm watching these shows, I'm questioning how "real" they actually are.

The question of how "real" it actually is starts with the premise of the shows.  The Bachelor is about one man dating 30 women in the hopes of finding his wife.  The Bachelorette is basically the same except the gender roles are switched.  And my personal favorite, Bachelor in Paradise, is when all the unstable cast aways from previous seasons all go to Mexico in the hopes of, you guessed it, finding love.  Most the couples that do find "love" on the show, don't last in the real world.  The majority break up a few months into their relationship and only a handful of the couples actually make it down the aisle.  The point is, the shows track record for successful relationships is terrible. The latest couples from the franchise who happen to still be together are in engagement limbo.  They're either going to get married or appear on People magazine with a rip down the middle.  The question is now why doesn't it work out?

The contestants are in the Bachelor "bubble" for 2 months with no contact to the real world.  Their phones are taken away so all they can do is focus on the "relationships".  The dates these people go on are out of a fairytale.  They go on extravagant dates in planes and boats with random hot tubs put in the middle of nowhere.  The point is, these are not the type of dates one has in the real world.  When they get out of the "bubble", it is a shock to their system when all they have is each other and Netflix.  When that time comes, the "winner" may realize they fell in love with the fairytale as opposed to the person.  That's just my thoughts on the matter.  I'm not a relationship expert, but I am a TV expert.  I know a good show when I see it and this franchise is full of good shows.  It's like watching a slow moving train wreck and I can't look away.  I have fallen way too deep into the Bachelor hole so even if its not as real as it wants people to think it is, I'm still going to sit on the couch every Monday and watch the Bachelor (but not until May because the season ended... WHYYY!).

Ambiguity

Ambiguity is the quality of being open to more than one interpretation of something.  It usually leads to doubtfulness and uncertainty since it has a different meaning to different people.

In the documentary Urbanized, director Gary Hustwit shows ambiguity by showcasing Bogota's interpretation of a "perfect city."  The documentary features a tour of the city given by the mayor of Bogota.  The city features a bike lane that is separated from the main road by cars in the mud.  The safety of pedestrians on bikes is a priority for Bogota and it is a feature that adds to their interpretation of a perfect city.  This is an example of ambiguity because not every city as the same definition of what a perfect city is like.  For some people a bike lane could be an important feature in their definition, but for others it is not.      

Freewrite Reflection

I learned that as I writer I tend to use a lot of "fluff."  In all of my high school classes they teach us the typical 5 paragraph essay that needs to be a certain amount of pages.  When you have that kind of page requirement, they taught us to drag out what we have to say and add a lot of detail that does nothing for the overall purpose of the essay.  I also tend to try to find a creative way to start each paper I have to write.  In my previous writing classes, I was taught the importance of a good attention getter that makes the reader want to keep reading.  I always liked to start with a quote and then find a way to connect that to my topic in the introduction.  For the microtheme, I had to let go of all of that.  I had to get to the point right away because this didn't require a fancy attention getter.  I also couldn't add as much "fluff" as I tend to.  I usually drag the topic of one of my body paragraphs until there is nothing left to say about it.  For this assignment, I had be speculative and add only the necessary information.  I couldn't drag something on and on like I was taught to do.

What I learned about myself is that I try to avoid picking sides as much as possible.  If it's a topic that I have a clear stance on then I don't have a problem with sharing my opinion.  But if it's something that I don't have a clear stance on, then I try to see from all points of view.  Yes, I'm the cliche person who always says, "I'm Switzerland."  I do care what others think and I tend to be a people pleaser.  I try to please as many people as possible because I don't like to offend anyone especially when it's an argument between some of my friends.  I like to remain in the middle so I don't offend anyone.

By writing this microtheme, I learned something about the nature of truth.  Everyone has their own opinions and points of view on an issue, so whatever they believe in that is their truth.  That is the thing they believe with all their hearts to be the absolute right thing.  Everyone has their own truth which makes it unique to them.  People might share similar opinions up to an extend, but then they will disagree as the discuss it in further detail.  A person's truth can not be changed.  They know in their heart and mind that it is the truth because they believe it to be true.          

Microtheme Revision

Original

Revision

A revision strategy I learned is to edit anything that sounds like a traditional essay.  Delete wordiness and words that aren't found in your day to day vocabulary (i.e. plethora).  I also need to make sure I restate the problematic question when I explain the causes/consequences.  

Microtheme reflection

Having never written a microtheme before, I feel pretty good about my draft.  I chose to write about the problematic question of why people still smoke given everything we know about the dangers.  Growing up around smokers gave me a lot of personal experiences that I could draw from while writing.  I have watched my family members smoke all of my life and then I had to watch as they lost their lives because of it.  I saw first hand what smoking does and I'm still confused as to why people continue to do it.  In my introduction I give some background on how my personal experiences have shaped my opinion on the matter and I feel like that's one of the things that is working in my microtheme.  I could make it more concise, but I feel like its a good starting point.

It really became more challenging as I got into the 2nd paragraph.  I had to get in to the mind set of someone who smokes and ask the question of why they do it.  I like to think I have the ability to emphasize with people in order to understand their points of view, but continuing to smoke is the one thing I have a hard time understanding.  Instead of trying to get into their mind sets I decided to think more about the different circumstances a person could be in that would lead them to smoke.  Another challenge was having to let go of everything I was previously taught about writing.  I was taught to always use an "attention getter" to make the reader interested, but with this I had to get straight to the point.  It is also not the traditional essay where I use big words to sound smarter ( don't lie, we all do it ).   Big words is just another way to bead around the bush and you can't do that when writing a microtheme.  You only have one page to get everything you want in there so you have to get to the point quickly.  

Documentary as a Rhetorical Tool

I'll be honest... Documentaries were never my favorite films to watch.  I never knew why exactly.   Maybe it was because the ones I saw had horrible effects that I just couldn't get past.  Or maybe it was because I never saw one that was interesting enough for me to want to keep watching it.  And then I watched Blackfish (2013).  It completely changed my way of looking at the documentary genre.  Not did it have a message that I strongly believe in, but it was also compelling to watch.  And then I realized that I do like documentaries when it is the right one.

Going into the documentary project, I followed the same guidelines.  I looked for one with a premise that intrigued me instead of one with the shortest run time.  The film I chose, Man on Wire, not only helped cement my appreciation of the genre, it also improved my rhetorical writing abilities.  In my previous writing classes, I was always encouraged to bring myself and my opinions into my writing.  This project taught me how separate myself from my writing.  I was able to be bring the focus off of me and bring focus to what the film does.  This was the first time I had to be objective in writing and it was a challenge I embraced.  It helped me grow in terms of my writing and I feel it is a challenge everyone should face in their writing careers.          

Comparing & Contrasting Man on Wire Review

Many of us have read film reviews by Roger Ebert during his life.  If you haven't you must have been living under a rock.  If that's actually the case, then welcome to the world!  Roger Ebert was a film critic for the Chicago Sun-Times for 46 years.  Our reviews do share a lot of similarities, but we also have different opinions on certain aspects of the film.

In both of our reviews, we straight away acknowledge the fact that we have a fear of heights.  That fear is also what ultimately what drew us both into watching this documentary.  We are both drawn into Petit's story and in awe that he did what he set out to do: walk a high-wire between The Twin Towers.  Philipe Petit's passionate energy about the event was clear in his present day interviews and it was something we were both intrigued by.   

While we share the same reason of why we were initially drawn into the documentary, our thoughts on the movie as a whole is where we differ in opinions.  Ebert praised the use of flashbacks by saying how combined with photos and re-enactments helped to "flesh out the story."  I was more critical on the flashbacks by saying how they felt out of place and brought me out of the story.  His review includes more backstory on the event while I went straight into my opinions.  He explained exactly how they got into The World Trade Center, while I didn't go into too much detail about it.  I also spoiled the use of the bow and arrow while he was more mysterious about it by claiming if we don't already know how they did it then he won't tell us.  

Overall, we shared the same reasons of why we were drawn into the film, but our opinions of how well certain aspects were executed is where we differed in our reviews.  As a whole we both enjoyed it, but I was more critical.  Wow.  Never thought I would say I was more critical than Roger Ebert..

Here is the link for Roger Ebert's review if you are curious!: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/man-on-wire-2008

Man On Wire Documentary

"To me, it is so simple. that life should be lived on the edge of life.  You have to exercise rebellion.  To refuse, to tapper yourself to rules, to refuse your own success, to refuse to repeat yourself and see every day, every year, every idea as a true challenge.  And then you are going to live your life on a tight rope." - Philipe Petit.

Maybe this wasn't the best documentary to watch as a person with a fear of heights.... Or maybe it was exactly the right one.  To me, nobody in their right mind would attempt to walk a high-wire between the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center.  And yet, someone did.  On August 7th, 1974, a French high-wire artist named Philipe Petit walked on a tight rope between two of the highest buildings in New York.  As soon as I found that out I had two reactions.  My first reaction was immediately thinking, "Ok, this guy is insane."  My second one was being instantly intrigued by this story.  The idea that someone actually did this made me want to know what possessed them to do it.

 I was surprised by how many times I felt like I was watching a heist movie instead of a documentary. We got to see the planning that went into it as well as re-enactments of the actual "heist".  Every questions that flowed through my head was answered.  You may be wondering how exactly they got a wire from one tower to another.  The answer... a bow and arrow.  Yeah, you read that right.  He's Katniss Everdeen.  You also may might be wondering how they managed to sneak into The World Trade Center.  The answer... several steps that I don't want to spoil for you because it's insane how much was involved in this process. 

The scene that really stuck out to me was, yes, the Katniss Everdeen moment.  The members of the heist gave present day interviews reflecting on the experience and they spent a lot of time discussing how they were going to connect the wire to both towers.  They came up with several ideas like using a helicopter or a fishing pole.  The team finally landed on the bow and arrow idea and real footage of them practicing archery was included.  One member would shoot the arrow and the others would run to find it to see how far it went.   Side note.. I'm convinced they somehow knew there would be a movie made about them.  I mean why else would they record themselves running after arrows and tacking each other to the ground?!  Okay rant over.  Focus, bow and arrow!  We now return to our regularly scheduled program.  The actors in the re-enactment scenes also recreated a small portion of their archery skills.  Their plan didn't go exactly to plan as they had to hide from guards for several hours, so they had to shoot the arrow in the dark.  The actor aimed the arrow and let it fly.  Of course they didn't show they arrow flying through the air and landing on the other tower.  The scene cut to present day Philipe re-enacting how he had to frantically search for the arrow in the dark. 

When I first heard they used a bow and arrow, I was instantly skeptical.  I really didn't believe it would actually, but it miraculously did!  I know from personal experience that archery is not easy. Watching movies like The Hunger Games makes archery look so much easier then it actually is.  I took one class and I walked into it thinking it would be easy and that I would be great at it.  Oh was I wrong.  A part of my down fall is that it actually involves some upper body muscles that I don't I have.  Now you see why I didn't believe their plan would actually work.  And the fact that the only had one shot to do it only added to my skepticism.  And yet it worked.  Whether it be luck or an act of God, the arrow made it across to the other tower.   

After watching this documentary, I was left with a lot of questions.  Why did the people involved agree to help Philipe in the first place?  Did Annie ever find out that Philipe cheated on her right after he got released from jail?  (Yes, a black and white montage of it is included.  No, really, I'm serious.  And again how is there video of this?!)  Did the group ever reconnect or did they fall out of touch after completing what they set out to do?  How many years of practice did Philipe do to be able to be that confident on a high-wire?  

I was also left with an increased fear of heights after I watched this documentary.  The next day I was even hesitant around stairs.. yeah, stairs.  I just kept picturing myself falling down them (which I have done) and just lying there on the floor with several broken bones.  Yeah I know I have an over active imagination.  Besides that though, I now have a new found curiosity about high-wire walkers.  I want do some research into the background of it and who the first high-wire walker was.    

The use of actual photos and videos of Philipe walking made the viewer feel like they were actually witnesses to something that happened 30 years ago.   The fast pace of the documentary allowed the audience to feel exactly what Philipe's team did.  The thrill, the sense of urgency, the terror of almost being caught all made it feel real for the audience.  The documentary did lose traction when the flashbacks weren't as interesting as the actual heist.  Sometimes it actually did bring me out of the experience when the flashbacks didn't connect to what was happening during that particular stage of the heist.  I have yet to find a movie/TV show that doesn't struggle with flashbacks, so I know it's a hard thing to do right.  Every film has its faults, but this documentaries faults didn't stop me from enjoying it as a whole.  I would recommend this documentary to anyone who wants to know about an intriguing story.   A word of caution though.  If you don't already have a pre-existing fear of heights, you may develop one after watching this film.  You have been warned.        

  

Words Have the Power to Change Us

Have you ever opened a new Word document with the intention of writing for hours on end and then suddenly realizing your mind is blank?  Have you ever just typed the heading and then just closed the document accepting defeat?  Don't lie... We've all done it.  I mean I did it just now before I started typing this post!  If you claim you have never experienced this feeling, you are lying to yourself.   When we close the document we tell ourselves, "Oh we'll get back to it later."  That's where the problem lies.  "Later" has a different meaning to all of us.  It could mean hours later or it could mean weeks.  Now it's not just writers who experience this phenomenon.  Every type of artist can relate to that feeling.  Painters could step in front of an easel with their paints all ready to go and then BOOM!... their mind goes blank.  You may be thinking, "What does painting have to do with writing?  They're totally different!!"  Actually, they're more similar than you think.  Now if we treated writing like designing, then it would be a whole new world!  Insert Aladdin song here.

 Writers don't use paint for storytelling.  Their tool is their words.  Each word written is like a new stroke of paint.  Every word is essential to creating the overall story or picture.  A single word has the power to change the readers viewpoint of a character or place.  If a scene is happening outside and the writer provides no description for it, then we all come up with our own interpretation.  Some may think it's sunny while others may think it's on the brink of a hurricane.  Now if the writer uses the word "gloomy" for description, it changes everything.  The mood of the scene is changed to reflect its environment.  It's no longer happy or tragic it has underlying tension along an added sense of darkness all because of one word.

The entire writing experience would be different if it was treated like designing.  The placement of each word would be as meticulous as each paint stroke.  Each stroke is essential to the overall image just like each word is essential to the story being told.  Sure the process will probably take a lot longer if we're constantly worrying about which word will fit where and how will it affect the overall story.  But let me tell you a little secret... There's such thing as a delete button.  If your like me and you stress out over word placement from the start, the delete button is a gift from the Heavens!  Focus on getting all your thoughts out first, and then go back to freak out about which word should go where.  If you approach writing like your painting, then it will be a different experience entirely.  You get to create a picture using your words, and if you succeed then that's something to be proud of. If you touch someone in a meaningful way along the way, then it makes all of the struggles worth it.   And we all know words have the power to change us.  No, I didn't come up with that on my own. Yes, it's a quote from a book.... i.e Clockwork Angel.

*Taps Microphone* Testing.... Testing

Testing.... Testing..... 1..... 2...... 3......