Cold v. Prepared Seminar

Whenever a piece is discussed in class, we usually use seminar format, in which two separate sessions keep a conversation about the piece going according to key points or questions. In terms of seminars, there are two types: a cold seminar and a prepared seminar. Both end up in lengthy discussions, but which is better? Personally, I prefer the cold seminar. I enjoy reading through the piece and finding the deeper meaning in a quick manner, rather than having everyone find it as they active read over night. The prepared seminars usually contain more analysis, but it feels robotic because everyone is always looking for the same rhetorical features. When a deep analysis or revelation is made during a cold seminar, the reaction is much more satisfactory and entertaining because the time of thought taken to dwell upon this is shorter. Therefore, the class gets hit harder; this also helps with quick analysis that is useful on AP exams and standardized testing that involves reading and analysis. When I leave class after a cold read in which I actively participate, I feel much more accomplished, whereas when I leave after discussing a piece from the previous night, I feel all that has happened is a homework review. In this, I would enjoy more cold read seminars to prepared seminars.

Making Fun of Yourself

Athletes always quarrel over whose sport is the better sport. Well, all I can say is that hockey is most certainly NOT a good sport. Whoever thought, "oh, let's attach knives to our feet and use them for fun!"? And it still is difficult to skate efficiently. If you can't stop, you just fly off to the side and go barreling into the boards and crash, taking a huge blow to which ever part of your body is unlucky enough to hit first. The physical pain endured through the outrageous play can take its toll on the players: lost teeth, concussions, countless bruises, broken bones, and the occasional laceration caused by those horrible blades on the players' feet. All of this just to put a small rubber cylinder into the net. How are the fans even supposed to see it? Watching something that small move that fast can make someone dizzy and eventually just stop watching all together. So why do it anyway? But despite all of this, the worst has yet to be discussed: the cold. How can people have fun doing hard work in such a cold environment? The playing surface is FROZEN. I get the chills just thinking of being stuck in an ice box for over two hours just to watch such a harsh game. And still, those hockey boys with their ridiculous long hair and their "sick dangles" love their game and continue playing for years on end. Why? The world may never know.

In class this week, satire was a focus in the pieces we discussed. Satire is a humorous way to bring attention to an issue, but it can also be a good way to humble oneself. Satirizing yourself can help a person see the opposing side of themselves, a view of someone on the outside looking in, which can help create a more understanding idea in a person's mind.

Okefenokee Zoo

In the passages about Okefenokee Swamp discussed in class, there was a large difference in the names used to describe the swamp: a "wildlife refuge" in passage one and a "hellish zoo" in passage two. These two names are a world apart, yet they describe the same place. This is possible because of perspective. People outside the swamp cannot fully understand the harsh life lived inside it. As Ms. Valentino says, "passage one looks like it could be in a sixth grade textbook". It resembles the views of the outside world on the swamp. Looking at a travel brochure, most people would see the swamp as a fun tourist attraction, which is the portrayal of the swamp in the first passage. The first passage comes from someone who has not been to the swamp, someone making assumptions based on facts. The second passage gives detailed imagery about the harsh and adventurous world of the swamp. This passage resembles The Things They Carried in which the war horrors were seen from someone who actually witnessed them. Anyone can write about a place or event based on facts and data, but to experience the world in the first person can create a whole new story about the same exact thing.

Puzzle Post

Once upon a time, women had to fight in order to gain suffrage; today, suffrage is such a normal ideal that some women do not even use it. Florence Kelley's speech at the Woman Suffrage Association Convention in Philadelphia helped propel the women's rights movement from the point of no suffrage to today's standards. Kelley uses rhetoric, such as excess examples and appeals to pathos. The loaded diction used relates to fighting and creates a fire in the audience, just like the crashing of the symbols does in Dumbo when the pink elephants dance. Instead of being a pretty little froo froo angel who runs about living like Jesus and scorning those that do not appear in Church on Sunday (my grandma), as women were thought of back then, Florence Kelley speaks loudly and boldly. This creates a powerful image of her in the minds of her audience

This was fun! I enjoyed the task of fitting in the certain words and punctuation marks, no matter how drawn out my sentences may have become... I fit three in my first sentence! Woo hoo!

Fighting Prejudice

In "Black Men and Public Space", the social issue of racism is brought to mind. Staples gives accounts of his own experiences with racism and how he is able to affect public spaces because of it. Much of this is due to outward appearance and stereotypes. Black people live more commonly in urban cities and ghettos and seem "scary" because media stories of rapes and muggings portray them as more violent than other ethnic groups. This is proven when Staples includes black people in the list of those who lock their doors as he walks by. The public has ingrained this vision of black men into every single mind, and it affects those whom the stereotypes are about more than the people that make them are harmed by those that the stereotypes form from. This piece aims to teach the public about the effects of stereotypical viewpoints. People judge based on outward appearance while in public spaces, so the piece leaves the question in mind: Are these people actually bad people in private, or is this just the public view of them? Before judging someone, try to think about what that person may actually be like on the inside, not just on the outside.

From Father to Son

This week, the pieces "Shooting Dad" and "Arm Wrestling with My Father" were discussed. Both pieces discuss a relationship with the authors' fathers, but one deals with a father-son relationship and the other with a father-daughter relationship. In class, these relationships were compared and contrasted according to the experiences by the class. I believe that the father to son relationship is what affects the father-daughter relationship most. In "Arm Wrestling with My Father", Manning describes his relationship with his father as purely physical, and not much actual conversation was ever had, where as Vowell's relationship is more verbal. Fathers seem to be able to show more affection outwardly to their daughters, and this is probably because of how the father and the son relate to each other. As a son grows older, the father starts to treat him as a man and give him advice about women, mainly that they are to be respected and should be treated with absolute love. This usually applies to the son's mother and sister, but eventually when he starts his own family, this will carry on to his wife and his daughter. The ripple effect all starts with the father-son relationship and trickles down to the father-daughter relationship.

Racial Integration in America

Fitting in is one of the most prevalent social issues in America. Integrating multiple cultures into one is a difficult task and always causes problems, because people fear what they do not know or what is different from them. This shows in Amy Tan's "Fish Cheeks" in which an American boy named Robert is embarrassed to be around Tan's Chinese culture, which in turn embarrasses her. This boundary between cultures stops advancement in some societies because people have to get along and work together in order to create a better environment. The pieces that were discussed in class this week open the eyes of their audiences to certain aspects of this issue, such as why identity is important and how difficult it can be for some to assimilate. The key point to remember is that individuality runs America and that it is perfectly fine to be different. If a person cannot accept you for who you are, then they are not worth it anyway.