Picture

I also just uploaded a picture for my little icon thing as to put off actually starting my documented essay. Haha, good thing I did it before the last post of the semester! Oh wait......

"Absolute PowerPoint" Review

Well, what can I say? I didn't really agree with anything Ian Parker said in his article about PowerPoint.  I feel like he goes on and on with some insignificant drivel about how much he thinks PowerPoint is taking over the world, or something.  There is a lot of facts and historical information (which is a little boring for my taste, but still provides good information); however, I feel like he includes all of it just to establish some ethos so that we might believe his argument.  He goes from historical information to saying that PowerPoint is imposing to more historical information to calling it immature...It's like an ethos/absurdity sandwich, and that, in my opinion, would taste really bad.

What is he beef with PowerPoint? Seriously? I think that PowerPoint is one of the most innovative tools that is available for businesses, teachers, and students alike.  It's clear, easy, and handsome when presented.  I, being the visual learner that I am, prefer it to almost anything else.  There are times when a presenter or teacher will do nothing but read straight from a slide show, and I find that to be most irritating, but it would be the same as if they were reading from note cards or a paper.  When a teacher uses a PowerPoint as a tool for lecturing and note taking, I love it.  It's an easy way for me, the visualizer, to see what I'm learning as I'm listening to what I'm learning. 

I'll give him this: he's an excellent writer.  I especially enjoyed this tidbit about the AutoContent Wizard function: "But Microsoft took the idea and kept the name- a rare example of a product named in outright mockery of its target customers" (Parker 5).  I laughed a bit at that.  But, while I'm on the subject, I have never even heard of, let alone used, this AutoContent Wizard that he seemed to hate especially.  Has anybody ever used it?  Maybe I'll go investigate...

Overall, it is well-written and factual, but ended up really annoying me.

"Know It All" Review

Confession time: I love Wikipedia.  I don't know what it is in particular that makes me love it so much, but I love it.  The design is so simple and uniform for every article.  The site is extremely easy to search through and read.  The writing of the articles is, for the most part, very clear.  Now, I might be a little bias because I have actually written a sentence for one the articles (go to the Beatnik article, and find the sentence "In the animated television series, Doug, Doug's older sister, Judy Funnie, is characterized as a beatnik." That was me.  It has an embedded link and everything), so I find that particularly exciting.  But on a serious note, I truly find Wikipedia to be an excellent source for material. 

Now we all know that it may not be an entirely reliable source for academia (CERTAINLY not something you would want to cite in any paper or presentation), but I turned to it just today to learn more about a new band I've been listening to because some of the band's biggest and most dedicated fans update the Wikipedia page, so they tell me what I want to know.

One thing that I love about the site, that the article mentions, is just how reliable the information is even considering that anybody can be its author. "Wikipedia is an online community devoted [...] to a higher good."  However, "it is also no more immune to humane nature than any other utopian project" (Schiff).  This is why it can never be completed accepted among the masses.  Because anyone and everyone can update or edit the articles, there is a difficulty in the regulation.  It's hard to know what is actually truth and what is the brain child of some forty-something couch potato (probably still living with his mom) who thinks he knows everything there is to know about Black Sabbath.

But to me, Wikipedia will always be my number one go-to site for quick searches to end disputes or finally settle my brain about where Liam Neeson was born.  In the end,"Wikipedia offers endless opportunites for self-expression.  It is the love child of reading groups and chat room, a second home for anyone who has written an Amazon review" (Schiff).

Pygmalion #2

I really enjoyed the first half of this play, but the second half just didn't "flow" as well, to me.  It seemed like there were times where the plot was moving so fast and then others where it dragged on and on.  For instance, the plot moved incredibly fast after Eliza and Higgins had the slippers fight.  She left, and suddenly she and Freddy were madly in love.  She then, somehow, got settled into Mrs. Higgins house.  When I read it, I had to go back to make sure I didn't miss anything because it just came out of nowhere. It just seemed a little too fast paced.  And then other times in the play, there were arguments and discussions that went on for nearly entire acts.  Now, I know that this could have been due to the inability to have fluid set changes (as we discussed in class last time), but it was so easy to get lost in a mess of words.

Even through all of these issues, I did quite enjoy the play overall.  Especially the end.  I liked seeing the dynamics of Higgins' character in the last fight between him and Eliza.  She finally got to speak up to him, and I think it shocked him; this showed us, if only briefly, a side of him that we had never seen previously.  And even though he seems to show this different side, he still speaks in that way that we love so much. "I shall miss you Eliza [...] I have learnt something from your idiotic notions: I confess that humbly and gratefully.  And I have grown accustomed to your voice and appearance. I like them, rather" (Shaw 100).

Pygmalion #1

So far, I am really enjoying this play! Bernard Shaw has created characters that are interesting enough to keep me interested, but they also seem like some "everyday" kind of people that come from different walks of life.  Well, everyday kind of people that take in other people to teach them how to act upper class.  However, the framework of this play is one that we see in many other pieces of literature and even in some recent popular culture adaptations such as "She's All That" and even in an episode of Family Guy.  Obviously, it is a storyline that is easily accepted by audiences everywhere. 

What I find the most interesting about the play so far is the role of dialect.  Not necessarily language, but the hundreds of different English dialects.  More specifically, I find the roles and associations of these dialects interesting.  For example, Eliza cannot even have a job much higher than a flower girl on the street because of the way she speaks.  The only way she can even dream of moving up in the world is by learning how to speak "properly."  This was hard for me to understand because in America it is not like that at all.  The only connection I could make is that sometimes Americans assume people with a southern accent are dumb or that people with a northern accent are mean (among other, more ridiculous assumptions).  I was talking to my friend from England, and she said that it's still the same!  That you can assume so many things about people just because of the way they speak.  It blew my mind.  But I also think it's really interesting, and I love that they whole play is based around such a concept.

"To His Coy Mistress" Review

As I was reading "To His Coy Mistress" I could not help but smile.  It seemed like such a romantic poem.  I know I seem like such a giddy girl (and this is a great first impression for my new blog group, haha), but it is a really beautiful poem.  I loved when he describes how he would study each part of her body for thousands of years.  

"An hundred years should go to praise
Thine eyes, and on thy forehead gaze;
Two hundred to adore each breast,
But thirty thousand to the rest;
An age at least to every part,
And the last age should show your heart."

It was such a charming way for him to tell the woman how much he adores her, that he would do nothing else but study and take in her body for decades.  

While some men, and even some women, might say that all he is seeking is sex, I have to disagree.  Although the poem is clearly sexual, I believe that it is so much more than a physical attraction.  The speaker is obviously quite in love with this woman.  It is easy to see in his diction and tone.  He has no intention of tricking her or using his words to have his way.  He simply wants to spend the rest of eternity in her arms.  

Besides the theme of love, there is also a clearly present idea of time and running out of time.  He isn't worried about dying, per say.  He is worried that he will not have enough time with his love.  So while there are more than one theme presented in this poem, everything links back to the over-arching idea of pure love.  Mark Strand says, "Love, the act of love, the pleasure it seeks might offer the illusion of sidestepping the inevitable" (Strand xx).  The speaker believes that the love he and his coy mistress could share could help them live the rest of their short lives.   

Isn't sappy love so wonderful? :)

"Feminist Criticism" Review

I can honestly say that I enjoyed this criticism the most of the three that we have read.  I believe it is because it was the easily relate-able to the text itself (not to mention, I do love any "powerful women" ideals :) ).  While the Marxist and Cultural criticisms were interesting and made some valid points, this Feminist criticism actually allowed me connect its ideas to the very plot of Wuthering Heights and explained some of Catherine's reasoning in the novel.

Most of the essay describes Catherine's power domineering over the men in her life throughout Wuthering Heights.  She ultimately escapes Hindley's harsh rule, marries a wealthy man who loves her more than anything, and drives Heathcliff mad with ideas of what might have been.  She is, clearly, a very headstrong woman who gets what she wants.  However, Lyn Pykett argues, it is this power that drives her to her death.  Pykett talks about how Catherine holds such power over the men in her life, but how she must "ultimately submit to the legal control of her father, her brother, and subsequently her husband" (Pykett 472), and then Pykett goes on to say, "Caught uneasily between these conflicting subject positions, Catherine is ultimately broken by the pressures of the contradictions" (Pykett 473).  It is because Catherine is so much of a controlling character, that she simply cannot stand the pressures of her feminine role. 

It is definitely interesting to focus on Catherine as a female character.  She has so much power behind her that she certainly makes for a compelling character within the novel.   I enjoyed reading Pykett's ideas about how Catherine's being a woman affected the story line and themes of Wuthering Heights.  The plot would have unfolded most contrastingly had Catherine been a male.