http://sbowlson.blogspot.com/
I went to Shardaes blog and she had chosen a Scott McCloud comic called "The Right Number." Shardae describes the comic in her blog (link above) fairly well, but in order to save time, I will briefly tell the tale. I am using part 1 and 2. (and I really don't want to see part 3...if it continues it's path...creeeppppyyyy!)
This will get you to the page with this comic. It's in an interesting format, a zooming from frame to frame, only using action on the last frame of part 1.
Boy and girl meet at school and begin to date. he is so unaware that he actually calls the wrong girl (mixes up her phone number with Girlfriend 1) , and goes on a date (!!) with her- not knowing until later in the date that she is not his actual Girlfriend he thought he was meeting. He figures out eventually that she is not Girlfriend 1, but another woman that shares similar facial features. They have similar names as well as phone numbers,too. Eventually he breaks up with Girlfriend 1, and begins to date Girlfriend 2. Things follow the same sort of path- leading into meeting Girlfriend 2's BFF, and and the process begins anew starting with part 2.
Part two is creepy, and where I will focus, as it uses a change of color towards the end that signifies (to me) the essence of this guy. He embarks on finding his perfect woman, using the system he believes will lead him to perfection...a convoluted system with numbers and similar "things" that he believes will lead him to his "perfection."
With each frame, things get weirder. With frame 8, it Gert's really weird. Onto frame 18, where Kate says "all men are assholes". Of course, this is after he has pondered Kate as a choice to replace Jodie /Julie. After all, similar parts of the alphabet, right?? His madness is reflected in his eyes on frame 21- but there is fear, too, which is added later in words (Frame 24).
McCloud uses darkness in his characters drawings to make the character darker, which this cartoon (that word does NOT seem right for this) takes full advantage of. Without giving away any more, towards the end, much as McCloud talks about in his book on page 190, he uses color in this piece of work... In frame 32, McCloud uses a chaotic background to show (what I believe) is the mind of this man and his journey into some sort of madness. In frame 36, the background is a saw blade- and thankfully, nothing came out of that foreshadowing. (ugh).
Just at the end, the frames go deep into his eyes, and the color changes from a blue to a sickly green tornado color. Certainly gave me the chills....
All in line with McCloud and his ideas of identifying with the character. In a sick way, we all probably can identify- the sickness and strangeness of a lust for something- in his case, a sort of perfection...with numbers. In this, I wonder if McCloud was thinking about the "being there" (pg81) that he says Japanese art/cartoons are good at. I am not sure all that he used, but this comic was one that put you there. McCloud does use "silent" panels (pg 102) a few times to have the feeling linger (again, c c creepy)
Despite my "oucky" feeling about this comic, it was very well done, by someone that knows his genre very well. Yes, he does not like this term, or rather worries about it being used to describe a part of art. Here, I would consider his work here to be a particular genre of COMIC, not writing or only visual art. It is a lot darker then the Archie comics I know about from grade school.
What is most interesting to me is Shardaes take on this comic was very different then mine. She saw it more as "normal" then I did...or did not see the darkness as much as I did. (should I be worried about me??)
Shardae said "This comic involved a relationship that anyone can relate to in one way or another. It was not a typical love story that you see all of the time. This comic involved a relationship that anyone can relate to in one way or another. It was not a typical love story that you see all of the time. " Okay, that is true- I could relate, but it scared me! The first part of the comic was a bit more normal, although not the kind of "nice boy" behavior we might want from others. I guess it's really the 2nd half where things get weird.
I do agree, I do want to delve a bit more into his work, however. And most important, my (and I hesitate to use this word) fear of comics has been somewhat abated.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Understanding Comics for a non-understander. If that makes sense...
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2002-08-01/
I chose this comic after going Through a lot of them. See, I don't think I am an honest comic looker. I look at the "pictures" and don't often look for deeper meaning. I tried to make fun of that on the discussion phase of this, but it fell flat. Blooopppp kinda flat (a comic term! Well, not really, but imagine the picture if you will....)
So, using what McCloud says on page 42, he comments on Audience involvement and identifying with the character. So, with this comic, I was able to do both. It's simple, but did make me pretty pleased. I actually GOT it.
When McCloud talks about entering the cartoon, you see yourself on page 36, I think that is where I began to see more of what this is all about. I did mention that I liked the Far Side comic, Bummer of a Birthmark, Hal- and had that up in my office for years. I understand that does not work for this sort of assignment, but what I understand now is that I identified with Hal. What finally clued me in was the character in the middle (and I don't know his name at all...). His frustration with his boss (Devil Horns guy) and his office mate "brown noser" is evidenced by his throwing up his hands in surrender.
So, he is surrendering, but so is she. Her stretch pants comment is great. It's exactly what they are for...surrendering. Do not ask how I know this, please. She is more willing to surrender, (even if I think of it as brown-nosing Devil Boss), and kind of gives up with the doughnut...and her willing-ness to understand what Stretch Goals are. I fill in words for her in my head.
But back to my middle, exasperated man. How he can have a look, such a look, is amazing. Yet, there is no look really. Something happens between the panels that makes you feel what he is feeling- total "You have got to be kidding me...(insert your choice of phrases here...mine would not be good for small children's ears). I know this is the type of "moment to moment" comic, (page 70) so not much time has elapsed, but doesn't matter. Something happens, and it's pretty cool.
In discussing this assignment with my family, I think I know why this is really hard for me. I am not dyslexic in the sense normal people think of it, but instead, I see the world upside down and backwards. I also have no depth perception at all. It's been since I was 3, as I was born horridly cross eyed and the surgery fixed that but could not fix that vision change that happens when your vision does that 2nd flip in your head. SO...the amount of activity on the page is difficult for me- probably why I never liked comics, when everyone else around me did. So, a reason, not an excuse.
I actually looked at a lot more comics, including the one that McCloud has in his book with the Don't Drive Drunk/RIP Carl one. I am still wondering about that one...and he did not clue me in in the book!
I chose this comic after going Through a lot of them. See, I don't think I am an honest comic looker. I look at the "pictures" and don't often look for deeper meaning. I tried to make fun of that on the discussion phase of this, but it fell flat. Blooopppp kinda flat (a comic term! Well, not really, but imagine the picture if you will....)
So, using what McCloud says on page 42, he comments on Audience involvement and identifying with the character. So, with this comic, I was able to do both. It's simple, but did make me pretty pleased. I actually GOT it.
When McCloud talks about entering the cartoon, you see yourself on page 36, I think that is where I began to see more of what this is all about. I did mention that I liked the Far Side comic, Bummer of a Birthmark, Hal- and had that up in my office for years. I understand that does not work for this sort of assignment, but what I understand now is that I identified with Hal. What finally clued me in was the character in the middle (and I don't know his name at all...). His frustration with his boss (Devil Horns guy) and his office mate "brown noser" is evidenced by his throwing up his hands in surrender.
So, he is surrendering, but so is she. Her stretch pants comment is great. It's exactly what they are for...surrendering. Do not ask how I know this, please. She is more willing to surrender, (even if I think of it as brown-nosing Devil Boss), and kind of gives up with the doughnut...and her willing-ness to understand what Stretch Goals are. I fill in words for her in my head.
But back to my middle, exasperated man. How he can have a look, such a look, is amazing. Yet, there is no look really. Something happens between the panels that makes you feel what he is feeling- total "You have got to be kidding me...(insert your choice of phrases here...mine would not be good for small children's ears). I know this is the type of "moment to moment" comic, (page 70) so not much time has elapsed, but doesn't matter. Something happens, and it's pretty cool.
In discussing this assignment with my family, I think I know why this is really hard for me. I am not dyslexic in the sense normal people think of it, but instead, I see the world upside down and backwards. I also have no depth perception at all. It's been since I was 3, as I was born horridly cross eyed and the surgery fixed that but could not fix that vision change that happens when your vision does that 2nd flip in your head. SO...the amount of activity on the page is difficult for me- probably why I never liked comics, when everyone else around me did. So, a reason, not an excuse.
I actually looked at a lot more comics, including the one that McCloud has in his book with the Don't Drive Drunk/RIP Carl one. I am still wondering about that one...and he did not clue me in in the book!
Monday, July 21, 2008
Looking through the eyes of others at Williams and S&W.
Looking through the eyes of others at Williams and S&W.
Looking at other peoples blogs is really fun! When reading peoples thoughts about the past 2 books we have read, it's solidifies what I am feeling about both of these readings. Both have their place on my book shelf, with few reservations. They serve different purposes for me, and from reading others thoughts, it appears this is the same for others as well.
In Jennifer's blog I see something that is perhaps the hardest thing about reading S&W. They set forth rules that feel so restrictive, you feel boxed in. I believe this can truncate anyones writing, especially if they are timid, or new writers. I know that I am looking with an unpracticed eye at my own writing, and perhaps making stylistic errors when I delete something that may actually contribute to the point I wish to get across. While I think Prof. Strunk may prefer that writers, NOT write something if it's not stylistically correct, I don't agree that this is a desired outcome of reading this book. Some people may be talented, creative writers, and with practice, guidance and perseverance, may become talented, creative and stylistically correct writers. S&W seems to be so set in rules, it may put off the desire to even write at all.
Williams seems to allow for creativeness in ones writing, as he is not so much rule governed, but rule suggestive. If one can get through the complexity of Williams to the second part of his book, I believe that might actually free a writer to write and explore where their writing might take them. I think in some cases, they might be surprised! One thing that Williams seems to address, perhaps not directly, is that the writer must write. Sometimes, as he says in chapter seven Page 122 "Those of us who are already socialized in a field should think twice before we dismiss as incompetent a writer who seems wordy or banal. He may be, but he may also simply be learning his stuff."
Through out reading both books, I was amused at this thought. One of the major problems with a directive to "write a 5 page paper, with at least 3000 words" will create everything that both books address...excess words. Many students will do anything to fulfill the requirement of words, rather the point. This sort of language usage may be incorrect, but is used often! Gina's Blog from the spring 328 class elaborates on this point "Often, it seems that students use more words in order to reach a certain required word mark on an assignment", and I agree. If intelligent points are to be made, it seems as if the words used to create that point are more important then the amount or length of such a piece. I do understand how this is impossible given the nature of students and their lives and the job of a professor...but back to the Williams quote used before, maybe the student is still "learning their stuff" and is still sorting out their writing to fit their audience. Usually one crawls before one walks...may be awkward, but part of the process. That being said, I agree- S&W is a more accessible book for the novice writer, but Williams really helps the more advanced writer along the path.
It appears that other share this viewpoint. From Lauren's blog "It was relieving to see that for the most part, the class agrees on issues, namely that S&W is far more accessible for younger, more novice writers while the Williams is suitable for the advanced, experienced writer." Overall, this is the impression that most students in the 328 class came away with. Williams and S&W, while both having the word Style in their titles, are focused on different audiences.
I would argue that we, as students in a 328 class, are ready and indeed need to attempt to grasp (notice that I say attempt, I think this is a hard thing, and part of a process) the information in Williams book. Said in Beth's Blog"We're not in elementary school anymore; we're through with simple and easy. Now it's time to start delving deeper into the world of writing, and to write off a book because it's challenging is not going to cut it at this stage in the game. " That pretty much a blunt, honest statement.
We are here, in an upper-level writing class, and we have to step up to the plate. From Shardaes Blog in this semester, "The advice offered by Williams was more useful to me with my writings because it went more into depth about different topics and how we understand them in papers."
I agree with Shardaes entry. I gained more from Williams as a writer, and honestly, as a reader. But, I know that I will continue to use S&W to make sure that the basic rules are followed.
Looking at other peoples blogs is really fun! When reading peoples thoughts about the past 2 books we have read, it's solidifies what I am feeling about both of these readings. Both have their place on my book shelf, with few reservations. They serve different purposes for me, and from reading others thoughts, it appears this is the same for others as well.
In Jennifer's blog I see something that is perhaps the hardest thing about reading S&W. They set forth rules that feel so restrictive, you feel boxed in. I believe this can truncate anyones writing, especially if they are timid, or new writers. I know that I am looking with an unpracticed eye at my own writing, and perhaps making stylistic errors when I delete something that may actually contribute to the point I wish to get across. While I think Prof. Strunk may prefer that writers, NOT write something if it's not stylistically correct, I don't agree that this is a desired outcome of reading this book. Some people may be talented, creative writers, and with practice, guidance and perseverance, may become talented, creative and stylistically correct writers. S&W seems to be so set in rules, it may put off the desire to even write at all.
Williams seems to allow for creativeness in ones writing, as he is not so much rule governed, but rule suggestive. If one can get through the complexity of Williams to the second part of his book, I believe that might actually free a writer to write and explore where their writing might take them. I think in some cases, they might be surprised! One thing that Williams seems to address, perhaps not directly, is that the writer must write. Sometimes, as he says in chapter seven Page 122 "Those of us who are already socialized in a field should think twice before we dismiss as incompetent a writer who seems wordy or banal. He may be, but he may also simply be learning his stuff."
Through out reading both books, I was amused at this thought. One of the major problems with a directive to "write a 5 page paper, with at least 3000 words" will create everything that both books address...excess words. Many students will do anything to fulfill the requirement of words, rather the point. This sort of language usage may be incorrect, but is used often! Gina's Blog from the spring 328 class elaborates on this point "Often, it seems that students use more words in order to reach a certain required word mark on an assignment", and I agree. If intelligent points are to be made, it seems as if the words used to create that point are more important then the amount or length of such a piece. I do understand how this is impossible given the nature of students and their lives and the job of a professor...but back to the Williams quote used before, maybe the student is still "learning their stuff" and is still sorting out their writing to fit their audience. Usually one crawls before one walks...may be awkward, but part of the process. That being said, I agree- S&W is a more accessible book for the novice writer, but Williams really helps the more advanced writer along the path.
It appears that other share this viewpoint. From Lauren's blog "It was relieving to see that for the most part, the class agrees on issues, namely that S&W is far more accessible for younger, more novice writers while the Williams is suitable for the advanced, experienced writer." Overall, this is the impression that most students in the 328 class came away with. Williams and S&W, while both having the word Style in their titles, are focused on different audiences.
I would argue that we, as students in a 328 class, are ready and indeed need to attempt to grasp (notice that I say attempt, I think this is a hard thing, and part of a process) the information in Williams book. Said in Beth's Blog"We're not in elementary school anymore; we're through with simple and easy. Now it's time to start delving deeper into the world of writing, and to write off a book because it's challenging is not going to cut it at this stage in the game. " That pretty much a blunt, honest statement.
We are here, in an upper-level writing class, and we have to step up to the plate. From Shardaes Blog in this semester, "The advice offered by Williams was more useful to me with my writings because it went more into depth about different topics and how we understand them in papers."
I agree with Shardaes entry. I gained more from Williams as a writer, and honestly, as a reader. But, I know that I will continue to use S&W to make sure that the basic rules are followed.
Friday, July 18, 2008
S&W and Williams, where 2 worlds meet
I admit it- I have never read a book such as Williams, and this has been eye-opening.
S&W is great, still great. Has much to offer, albeit in a rather difficult format for me to get thru. I now understand that this is just the way it is... Writing about writing is hard. That's all there is to it! I still worry about my writing, as I have this fear that Prof Strunk is standing there, bow tie on, gray hair, shaking his head just so.
Williams? He is in some place where those that know go. I am not one of those people. I want to be, so I continue to read. Williams is a bit like a person that gets better as you get to know them. My husband is like that. It's like an onion, you peel off each layer, and then you get to the sweet, clear inside. This is my experience of Williams. The initial reading is kind of tough. I have actually read this book for the past several days, many parts over and over, dog eared pages (the shame!!) and written in the margins. I NEVER do that. But, for Williams, I am doing just that. I am sure that I will eventually have more the one copy. I have read Williams everywhere. Bed, Bathtub, in the car, at the kitchen table. Each place I read him I get something different. And, actually, once you get thru some of the harder parts, Williams is actually conversational. Hard to have a nice "voice" when writing something such as this book, but he pulls it off.
S&W does not have the same sort of style. It has a purpose, and that purpose is to be a handbook. I do not see the same sort of purpose to Williams. I state it's hard to read Williams, yet, it's also the type of book that you cannot really get snippets out of to help with your writing. You do need to read at least passages. There is a progression to Williams that seems natural...and one that follows what a writer should learn. Step By Step. Okay, you could think handbook, but not really...it's something more. It's a journey.
S&W is geared towards the normal writer. Williams is geared towards an advanced audience. I bet even Ph.D Students would use this book- and benefit. This man is impressive. Some of it is definitely over my head. Some sinks in; at strange times I think...OH! I get it! It is very embarrassing that I don't get some of the things he is talking about. Williams really wants to help make writing and the reading of complicated writing easier. I believe that he thinks about the new advanced writer, and wants to help make that transition less obvious and tramatic- for both parties, the reader and the writer.
The progression of books in 328 is as sensible as can be. S&W comes before Williams. At this point in our writing career, we are turning into better writers, and therefore, we do need to absorb, and attempt to retain, what Williams is offering us. Stepping stones. S&W beings the journey. Williams helps along the journey. Writing and learning is a never ending journey. How nice to have a helping hand.
S&W is great, still great. Has much to offer, albeit in a rather difficult format for me to get thru. I now understand that this is just the way it is... Writing about writing is hard. That's all there is to it! I still worry about my writing, as I have this fear that Prof Strunk is standing there, bow tie on, gray hair, shaking his head just so.
Williams? He is in some place where those that know go. I am not one of those people. I want to be, so I continue to read. Williams is a bit like a person that gets better as you get to know them. My husband is like that. It's like an onion, you peel off each layer, and then you get to the sweet, clear inside. This is my experience of Williams. The initial reading is kind of tough. I have actually read this book for the past several days, many parts over and over, dog eared pages (the shame!!) and written in the margins. I NEVER do that. But, for Williams, I am doing just that. I am sure that I will eventually have more the one copy. I have read Williams everywhere. Bed, Bathtub, in the car, at the kitchen table. Each place I read him I get something different. And, actually, once you get thru some of the harder parts, Williams is actually conversational. Hard to have a nice "voice" when writing something such as this book, but he pulls it off.
S&W does not have the same sort of style. It has a purpose, and that purpose is to be a handbook. I do not see the same sort of purpose to Williams. I state it's hard to read Williams, yet, it's also the type of book that you cannot really get snippets out of to help with your writing. You do need to read at least passages. There is a progression to Williams that seems natural...and one that follows what a writer should learn. Step By Step. Okay, you could think handbook, but not really...it's something more. It's a journey.
S&W is geared towards the normal writer. Williams is geared towards an advanced audience. I bet even Ph.D Students would use this book- and benefit. This man is impressive. Some of it is definitely over my head. Some sinks in; at strange times I think...OH! I get it! It is very embarrassing that I don't get some of the things he is talking about. Williams really wants to help make writing and the reading of complicated writing easier. I believe that he thinks about the new advanced writer, and wants to help make that transition less obvious and tramatic- for both parties, the reader and the writer.
The progression of books in 328 is as sensible as can be. S&W comes before Williams. At this point in our writing career, we are turning into better writers, and therefore, we do need to absorb, and attempt to retain, what Williams is offering us. Stepping stones. S&W beings the journey. Williams helps along the journey. Writing and learning is a never ending journey. How nice to have a helping hand.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Williams...Clarity for the serious writer.
Acceptance into the University is dependent upon meeting the admission criteria described below. Eastern Michigan University admits students at the freshmen and transfer level to the University. Added admission is required for the College of Business and the College of Education, as well as for several individual programs. Some academic programs are designed to include courses from more than one college
Theirs...
and mine!
Students are admitted to EMU both as freshmen and as transfer students from other Universities. Once accepted, students will apply for admission into one of our colleges such as the College of Business or the College of Education. In addition, EMU offers many programs of study that utilize courses taught at numerous colleges within the EMU framework. Admission at EMU is decided upon the criteria described below.
Well, this is pretty hard to come up with something better. In relating to voice, the only voice I hear is a catalog voice. So, I tried to make it clearer, more concise, yet in doing so, I actually added more words!
So, what I did was try and change this into something that was easier to read, flowed better and still was clear. I think that the first sentence that I have could be moved to the last sentence, with a few minor adjustments above it. That would satisfy the need for one sentence to lead to the next. It would also flow better as the "described below" is not actually accurate...strictly speaking, in Williams land.
Here's the thing-I am not really sure if it does read better or not. Since I wrote it (ah...back to Plato) maybe it is just better because I wrote it...I cannot correctly judge. Therefore, the idea of having an editor makes total sense to me. Rewrite, yes! I do a lot of that, perhaps too much so. In any event, it seems hard to re-write this. After all, it was written by someone who knows a hellofa lot more about grammar then I do. When Williams talks about grammar, I really have to reach and reach HARD to remember what things are. I think I know them when I see them, but don't have the knowledge to teach it. I think that may be honest knowledge...the ability to use, then explain it to others. At this point, I struggle to understand it myself.
Theirs...
and mine!
Students are admitted to EMU both as freshmen and as transfer students from other Universities. Once accepted, students will apply for admission into one of our colleges such as the College of Business or the College of Education. In addition, EMU offers many programs of study that utilize courses taught at numerous colleges within the EMU framework. Admission at EMU is decided upon the criteria described below.
Well, this is pretty hard to come up with something better. In relating to voice, the only voice I hear is a catalog voice. So, I tried to make it clearer, more concise, yet in doing so, I actually added more words!
So, what I did was try and change this into something that was easier to read, flowed better and still was clear. I think that the first sentence that I have could be moved to the last sentence, with a few minor adjustments above it. That would satisfy the need for one sentence to lead to the next. It would also flow better as the "described below" is not actually accurate...strictly speaking, in Williams land.
Here's the thing-I am not really sure if it does read better or not. Since I wrote it (ah...back to Plato) maybe it is just better because I wrote it...I cannot correctly judge. Therefore, the idea of having an editor makes total sense to me. Rewrite, yes! I do a lot of that, perhaps too much so. In any event, it seems hard to re-write this. After all, it was written by someone who knows a hellofa lot more about grammar then I do. When Williams talks about grammar, I really have to reach and reach HARD to remember what things are. I think I know them when I see them, but don't have the knowledge to teach it. I think that may be honest knowledge...the ability to use, then explain it to others. At this point, I struggle to understand it myself.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Wow- I had this book as a 10th grader! Obviously, not *this* book, but the Strunk and White book as it was then, the 1972 version. Kind of like finding an old friend!
So, I think I have commented before on my wordiness. Strunk would NOT be pleased that I have continued to be such a wordy writer! I try not to be, honestly, but I am. (there I go using But...;-) )
I will say this- I did well in 11th grade. I went to a school in California as a 10th grader, a private school, and then moved back to Illinois for the remainder of High School. I knew where certain passages worked and ones that didn't work. As a matter of fact, (drum roll, please!) I was the school winner of the Scholastic writing contest for 1979/80. It was a piece called "And He Just Smiled" which was about the popes visit to Chicago. This was a very unlikely thing for me to write about, but I did, and it won. It was read in a few venues, and I attended, too scared to read, so Syd Lieberman read it. He has gone on from teaching high school English to be a story teller. Taking this back to technology, how I wish I still had that story. If it was now, some data base would have it, and I would too. Sigh.
So, back to Strunk and White. I am still wordy, but I try and remember that motto. Short. No words that do not "tell" should be in a sentence. In my piece for the Technology unit, I used this, as I had started to read Strunk and White. Like EB White writes in the introduction, there are 1000 times certain passages should be shortened, and I have probably done it 500 times. So, batting average is not great, but I am working on it. I think the hardest part of this is I become very self conscious when I write. I think that may cause me some issues. So, at times, I wish I could tune out that voice over my shoulder and just write. I am such a huge re-writer, I know I could/would fix things. But, that's just how it is! (BTW, I just went back and edited out a number of blundering words!)
The other thing I took away from this reading was...clarity. Don't misuse words, don't use the wrong spelling. I admit that is one thing that feels intuitive to me. I use words fairly well for the most part. I can get awkward at times, and I continue to work on that.
In the chapter on Style, the sentence that resonated with me was... "Who knows why certain notes are capable of stirring a listener deeply, though the same notes slightly rearranged are impotent?" This is, IMO, what Style is. Simply put, the ability to line up words in a way that captures your reader, draws them in and demands them to pay attention. EB White does this better then so many writers out there, and he states he has Stunk to thank. Well, Thank you BOTH! In the introduction (yet again) EB White says that Strunk felt that he had great sympathy for the reader. In reading this book, you can tell- Strunk seems to be begging the writer to be clear, concise and correct. Good Goals, these are.
When I was first reading this small book, I was somewhat annoyed by the way it was put together, finding it hard to understand what was happening. It felt hard to read, and knowing that Steve said it was easy, I felt a bit chagrined. I still feel it's somewhat confusing. I wish it was a bit easier to go to what you want to know, get it, and go on. I am totally unfamiliar with MLA, so wish that information was there, easier to find. It is not in the index, which would be nice. I personally have no issues with pronouns, and don't care if someone uses "he" more often then "she" when talking in general, and most writing can work around that issue. I guess I would not worry too much about it overall. For the Pony Club Magazine, I use she more often, as I am writing to a mostly female audience.
I must say that in reading this book, while some things feel a bit out of date, it is a small wonder of a book.
So, I think I have commented before on my wordiness. Strunk would NOT be pleased that I have continued to be such a wordy writer! I try not to be, honestly, but I am. (there I go using But...;-) )
I will say this- I did well in 11th grade. I went to a school in California as a 10th grader, a private school, and then moved back to Illinois for the remainder of High School. I knew where certain passages worked and ones that didn't work. As a matter of fact, (drum roll, please!) I was the school winner of the Scholastic writing contest for 1979/80. It was a piece called "And He Just Smiled" which was about the popes visit to Chicago. This was a very unlikely thing for me to write about, but I did, and it won. It was read in a few venues, and I attended, too scared to read, so Syd Lieberman read it. He has gone on from teaching high school English to be a story teller. Taking this back to technology, how I wish I still had that story. If it was now, some data base would have it, and I would too. Sigh.
So, back to Strunk and White. I am still wordy, but I try and remember that motto. Short. No words that do not "tell" should be in a sentence. In my piece for the Technology unit, I used this, as I had started to read Strunk and White. Like EB White writes in the introduction, there are 1000 times certain passages should be shortened, and I have probably done it 500 times. So, batting average is not great, but I am working on it. I think the hardest part of this is I become very self conscious when I write. I think that may cause me some issues. So, at times, I wish I could tune out that voice over my shoulder and just write. I am such a huge re-writer, I know I could/would fix things. But, that's just how it is! (BTW, I just went back and edited out a number of blundering words!)
The other thing I took away from this reading was...clarity. Don't misuse words, don't use the wrong spelling. I admit that is one thing that feels intuitive to me. I use words fairly well for the most part. I can get awkward at times, and I continue to work on that.
In the chapter on Style, the sentence that resonated with me was... "Who knows why certain notes are capable of stirring a listener deeply, though the same notes slightly rearranged are impotent?" This is, IMO, what Style is. Simply put, the ability to line up words in a way that captures your reader, draws them in and demands them to pay attention. EB White does this better then so many writers out there, and he states he has Stunk to thank. Well, Thank you BOTH! In the introduction (yet again) EB White says that Strunk felt that he had great sympathy for the reader. In reading this book, you can tell- Strunk seems to be begging the writer to be clear, concise and correct. Good Goals, these are.
When I was first reading this small book, I was somewhat annoyed by the way it was put together, finding it hard to understand what was happening. It felt hard to read, and knowing that Steve said it was easy, I felt a bit chagrined. I still feel it's somewhat confusing. I wish it was a bit easier to go to what you want to know, get it, and go on. I am totally unfamiliar with MLA, so wish that information was there, easier to find. It is not in the index, which would be nice. I personally have no issues with pronouns, and don't care if someone uses "he" more often then "she" when talking in general, and most writing can work around that issue. I guess I would not worry too much about it overall. For the Pony Club Magazine, I use she more often, as I am writing to a mostly female audience.
I must say that in reading this book, while some things feel a bit out of date, it is a small wonder of a book.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
This is my first attempt at my Writing as A Technology assignment. I am not sure I will use it as my final one- I did this before I had done any of the readings, and since the readings kind of stressed that writing made things permanent, and my idea was that it was fleeting. Missed the boat, huh??
I did this one pretty quickly- before the sun really hit the ice so it began to melt. I LOVE that my icemaker allowed for such a cool alphabet!
Unit 2 posting-
Manguel and Barron are both talking about histories of writing technologies in different ways. What sorts of connections can you make between these different essays? How do you see your own relationship with writing technologies in any of these three essays?
as
What do you see as the relationship between the ideas about writing technologies and histories in these essays and the ideas discussed in the texts by Plato and Ong?
Okay- first -I like Arial! A lot!
I admit it- I am a mindless writer. I don't know HTML or understand coding on a computer. I just am grateful that when I hit an A, it happens. I know I hate that my seven and eight keys are missing, (thank you White Cat!) and my main bitch with my computer is that I don't have good battery life. I just know that when I type something, the keys do as they are told, and I am pleased. (Crossing my arms in pleasure now, staring down at my computer, good boy!)
I love pens, but hardly ever write with them- checks, lists, quick notes. We have a few yellow pencils around here, but most are mechanical ones, easier to use for most of us. When Barron spoke about ink being important for so many things, that was an "Ahhh" moment for me. Because, I am indeed mindless in many respects. When he spoke about pencils in class, and no erasers being allowed, well, I remember that! First college class? NO Spell Check (But I don't think my computer, in all it's green-ness even had spell check, but my Mac, 128 may have....)
Yup, Times have changed. My dad wrote a book that was on the best sellers list, and his editor lived with us for a bit. Because, you see, it was 1974-5, and...it was all by hand...Click Click Click-DAMN. Now, I can goggle him and find his text scanned in, but, nothing that he did was ever put into a keyboard such as mine right now. How hard was that? Pretty amazing. I guess that in many ways, I am lucky in this class, being pretty old compared to the rest of the class, that I have been through a lot of the changes over the years. Oh, I never wrote on onion paper, but we did turn in our alphabet on a portable chalk board we had at our desks in kindergarden. Yes, pens were NOT allowed until 6th grade, but then came colored paper- not allowed, either, and even though we could use pens? No colored ink! My poor 12 yo self was despondent.
I do think that litercy is important. And until I read Ong, I did not think of it as artificial. It was natural. I place litercy at the highest of human attributes. It's important. Sure, not perhaps in the highest sense at all times, but overall, I appreciate it for all it gives me. In reading Ong, I can see that indeed it IS artifical. I loved his musical connection. I guess for most of us, we practice literacy daily. But, for many, it might be an effort. I found that reading Ong out loud was interesting. I have NO idea how to pronounce some of the words, and I don't think my computer gets it right when I ask it either!
I wrote on the class discussion part (maybe too much- I am not sure what to write, and notice that not many DO write, so maybe I am doing this wrong- funny, if I was in class, I would be pretty quiet, I think...I don't tend to speak out loud, but write, I can do that! You would tell me that I was doing too much, wouldn't you?)
God Bless Mrs. Prescott. I think this woman deserves a lot more credit then she gets! So, I thank her from the bottom of my trash-book-beach-reading heart. And Orwell, poor guy, missed the boat again. Penguin- wow and amazing. They are...PENGUIN!
But, back to more of this later....
as
What do you see as the relationship between the ideas about writing technologies and histories in these essays and the ideas discussed in the texts by Plato and Ong?
Okay- first -I like Arial! A lot!
I admit it- I am a mindless writer. I don't know HTML or understand coding on a computer. I just am grateful that when I hit an A, it happens. I know I hate that my seven and eight keys are missing, (thank you White Cat!) and my main bitch with my computer is that I don't have good battery life. I just know that when I type something, the keys do as they are told, and I am pleased. (Crossing my arms in pleasure now, staring down at my computer, good boy!)
I love pens, but hardly ever write with them- checks, lists, quick notes. We have a few yellow pencils around here, but most are mechanical ones, easier to use for most of us. When Barron spoke about ink being important for so many things, that was an "Ahhh" moment for me. Because, I am indeed mindless in many respects. When he spoke about pencils in class, and no erasers being allowed, well, I remember that! First college class? NO Spell Check (But I don't think my computer, in all it's green-ness even had spell check, but my Mac, 128 may have....)
Yup, Times have changed. My dad wrote a book that was on the best sellers list, and his editor lived with us for a bit. Because, you see, it was 1974-5, and...it was all by hand...Click Click Click-DAMN. Now, I can goggle him and find his text scanned in, but, nothing that he did was ever put into a keyboard such as mine right now. How hard was that? Pretty amazing. I guess that in many ways, I am lucky in this class, being pretty old compared to the rest of the class, that I have been through a lot of the changes over the years. Oh, I never wrote on onion paper, but we did turn in our alphabet on a portable chalk board we had at our desks in kindergarden. Yes, pens were NOT allowed until 6th grade, but then came colored paper- not allowed, either, and even though we could use pens? No colored ink! My poor 12 yo self was despondent.
I do think that litercy is important. And until I read Ong, I did not think of it as artificial. It was natural. I place litercy at the highest of human attributes. It's important. Sure, not perhaps in the highest sense at all times, but overall, I appreciate it for all it gives me. In reading Ong, I can see that indeed it IS artifical. I loved his musical connection. I guess for most of us, we practice literacy daily. But, for many, it might be an effort. I found that reading Ong out loud was interesting. I have NO idea how to pronounce some of the words, and I don't think my computer gets it right when I ask it either!
I wrote on the class discussion part (maybe too much- I am not sure what to write, and notice that not many DO write, so maybe I am doing this wrong- funny, if I was in class, I would be pretty quiet, I think...I don't tend to speak out loud, but write, I can do that! You would tell me that I was doing too much, wouldn't you?)
God Bless Mrs. Prescott. I think this woman deserves a lot more credit then she gets! So, I thank her from the bottom of my trash-book-beach-reading heart. And Orwell, poor guy, missed the boat again. Penguin- wow and amazing. They are...PENGUIN!
But, back to more of this later....
Friday, July 4, 2008
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Totally a copy! From the Foxview blog...
Style- and not in a fashion sense!
Style- what and how does my style impact how people read what I write, and do I convey what I want to write well enough to make sense?
For the past several years, I have written for the USPC(United States Pony Club) National Publication. Sometimes as myself, but often as a ghost writer for someone else. Here is an example of one of my articles- Um...it starts on page 4, is a large file, and I have noticed mistakes that I did not see before! maybe you DON'T wanna click on this!! not one of the best, but... you can get an idea. I have written the past 8 opening letters of this quarterly magazine.
Several times I have had to write something for someone as if it were my point, but in all honesty, I often have not agreed with what I am supposed to be stating. Despite this, it has been some of my best writing! Nothing like seeing a letter to the editor that says "Great Article! Well stated, and I appreciate you sharing your viewpoint." Ha ha! It's not even HIM that wrote it! :) This is a big time where revisions have come in to play however- removing any traces of me- inserting whomever I am writing for. Googledocs is great for that!
So, IMO, style changes to suit the audience. For USPC, I am usually dealing with a mixed population of horse parents, as well as kids. Often when doing the writing for this publication, it has to be geared someplace between those two groups. Sometimes, I have had to address tough issues (deaths of horses and kids being an all too common one in the past year) and for that, there is more thought that has to go into the delicate balance. Currently, I am rewriting the standards of proficiency. This is dry. No personality needs injecting, as a matter of fact, the less words, the clearer it is, the better it is. I bet you can tell, however, that I can get wordy! :)
In my younger years, I used to think that I needed to be...artsy in my writing. I now see there are many places to be in the written world, and while there is a time for that creativeness, I like being able to be readable by many.
Style- what and how does my style impact how people read what I write, and do I convey what I want to write well enough to make sense?
For the past several years, I have written for the USPC(United States Pony Club) National Publication. Sometimes as myself, but often as a ghost writer for someone else. Here is an example of one of my articles- Um...it starts on page 4, is a large file, and I have noticed mistakes that I did not see before! maybe you DON'T wanna click on this!! not one of the best, but... you can get an idea. I have written the past 8 opening letters of this quarterly magazine.
Several times I have had to write something for someone as if it were my point, but in all honesty, I often have not agreed with what I am supposed to be stating. Despite this, it has been some of my best writing! Nothing like seeing a letter to the editor that says "Great Article! Well stated, and I appreciate you sharing your viewpoint." Ha ha! It's not even HIM that wrote it! :) This is a big time where revisions have come in to play however- removing any traces of me- inserting whomever I am writing for. Googledocs is great for that!
So, IMO, style changes to suit the audience. For USPC, I am usually dealing with a mixed population of horse parents, as well as kids. Often when doing the writing for this publication, it has to be geared someplace between those two groups. Sometimes, I have had to address tough issues (deaths of horses and kids being an all too common one in the past year) and for that, there is more thought that has to go into the delicate balance. Currently, I am rewriting the standards of proficiency. This is dry. No personality needs injecting, as a matter of fact, the less words, the clearer it is, the better it is. I bet you can tell, however, that I can get wordy! :)
In my younger years, I used to think that I needed to be...artsy in my writing. I now see there are many places to be in the written world, and while there is a time for that creativeness, I like being able to be readable by many.
First Blog! Well, for 328
which means...it shall not be littered with horse pictures, and/or stories of things that happen at the farm.
This is me on the left- last summer, and my DIL, Sam, took the picture. That white stuff is electric fence...strong, and very scary to the horses!!
This next picture is why the farm is called Foview- Mr. (or Mrs?) Fox decided that Chicken Dinner was on the menu. We lost 2 that day. Now-imagine, we were that close! Rabies did cross our mind....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)