Pick and Roll

dreamweaver class

2006-12-05T21:18:00.000-06:00

I just finished up the Dreamweaver class over at Helen C. The class was very informative, starting right from the beginning of making a webpage. Although it was mostly stuff that we've already learned, it was nice to go back and kind of get a feel for starting up a new page. There were some new things introduced, like making a table and adding pictures, captions and links to it. They also introduced some CSS stuff right at the end of class. Although the class was a little long, it was a nice review of the DW software and provided some good guidance for beginning my webpage for my final project.

Discussion from week of 11/20/06

2006-11-26T19:21:00.000-06:00

Last week on Monday we discussed Chapters 3 and 4 of Steven Johnson’s Emergence. We resumed our discussion of Chapter 3 from the previous week, talking about Alexa on the web in relation to the idea of emergence. Alexa is a system on the web that learns to adapt to personal preferences based on the ratings of others with similar interests. In other words, if you were to go to Amazon and search a subject or a book in specific, the website would refer you to other works that people with the same search purchased or identified with. We came to the conclusion that the specific Alexa software was indeed emergent, based on the idea that a simple program is creating complex results through figuring out the needs of the user based on the wants and needs of similar customers. However, the internet couldn’t really be considered emergent due to the fact that it is not really growing on its own. Alexa has a system of networks that keep branching out and creating more and more complex results, while the internet doesn’t have the branching out characteristic – it is just kind of there.

The subject of our discussion of Chapter 4 was the similarities and differences of positive and negative feedback. While positive feedback constantly pushes in one direction, negative feedback is the reactionary type of feedback that is constantly working and being regulated to reach equilibrium. We talked about negative and positive feedback as they relate to writing in the blog. An example of negative feedback would be regulating your writing of the blog based on others’ feedback – the reactions of others would play a huge role in the direction of others. Feedback of all sides would push the blog to equilibrium, and the forces would be constantly working. Positive feedback in this type of writing would be ignoring the outside force of readers’ opinions and keeping the blog moving in one direction.

Discussion from week of 11/13/06

2006-11-21T23:47:00.000-06:00

In discussion last week we focused on the introduction and the first three chapters of Steven Johnson’s Emergence. Johnson defines emergence as “the movement from low-level rules to higher-level sophistication” (18). I see emergence as a definite collective action, like the idea presented by Johnson about communication among ant colonies. Although the sounds they make and the signals they give to each other in their local groups may be simple, the results are global and complex in nature. Ants must be very aware of the other ants in their larger system in order to get the necessary information out to every ant in the group. We also discussed pacemakers in the context of both ants and human life. With ants, there are no pacemakers, or individuals that send a signal to the other ants to perform a task – all are created equal. None of them factor in the decision-making or the overall knowledge and preferences of the other ants. However, in human society, several pacemakers exist. We talked about the media, government and education as some of the main pacemakers in the institutions of society. We went in depth on the pacemaker education. Many factors at the University of Wisconsin serve as pacemakers on campus. The dean, athletic coaches, professors, TAs, and even roommates serve as pacemakers for the individual at the University. Additionally, we compared emergence to the art of sampling. I think that the two are very much related, because it seems that without sampling we wouldn’t really have emergence – smaller or younger ideas would never develop into large ideas. With respect to education, the documents published by professors and other academics would not evolve as quickly without the participation of students in reading and discussing the publications.

Friday’s discussion focused on Chapters Two and Three. There was a particularly interesting question raised in discussion: With people dying out and new people coming into cities, how does the city keep going and where is the information stored? One of the places is neighborhoods. People that have been in the area for a while seem to spread information to the new neighbors through communication on a local level. Interactions in the neighborhood are essential to the preservation of cities, especially with the complicated nature of a city network. History also plays a role, especially through any museums, historical sites and education about the area. Furthermore, tradition plays a part in the city’s identity. Several city-wide events take place during the year, and people take pride in carrying on the culture of their predecessors and neighbors of the area. The clustering, organization and self-interests of the residents of cities play an important role in carrying out and extending traditions.

One last observation: I think a pretty good example of emergence would be the cell phone, the artifact that I am writing my paper on. The cell phone began as a simple device in which people could make phone call more conveniently via a wireless mobile phone. Now, it has evolved into a device capable of having the internet, a camera, text messaging, AOL Instant Messenger and several other functions. Devices have evolved that are related to the cell phone such as the Treo, which is a lightweight hand held device that acts as both a computer and a phone.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Some thoughts from the week

2006-11-16T22:22:00.000-06:00

1. This one's for all of the basketball fans out there - I'm sitting here blogging and watching the Kings and Warriors on TNT. Baron Davis already has eleven assists - through one quarter. That is absolutely unheard of - I think the record for one game is like 30, so he's on pace to eclipse that mark.

2. For those of you who can't put this blog with a face in class, now you can. I'm the guy with the nose cast. Last week on Wednesday I broke it when I took an elbow playing basketball over at the SERF. It was a pretty nasty injury. They shifted the nose back into its rightful place on Monday, and I have to wear this cast until this coming Monday. Hopefully it won't look too black and blue.

3. It's time for some timetable fun again. I just registered today, and just like every year, it seems like one or two classes I really want to get are full! I was looking through the sociology department classes and I swear, the two classes that I would have taken were full, while every other class seemed to have plenty of open seats. Yuck.

4. Thanksgiving will be a great break for pretty much everyone on campus. It seems like everyone is scrambling to study for exams, write papers, catch up on readings and the like. I think with all of thest things stacked right before the break, the break will be that much more enjoyable. I'm definitely looking forward to it.

Discussion from week of 11/6/06

2006-11-12T23:11:00.000-06:00

This week we viewed the movie Lost in Translation starring Bill Murray. Overall it was a pretty good movie, one that I thought tied in very well with our discussion of network culture. It especially tied in well with Marc Auge’s selection from his work Non-Places. There were a couple of passages in particular that I thought were quite applicable to the movie from page 103 of the Auge reading. Here’s the first one:

“Subjected to a gentle form of possession, to which he surrenders himself with more or less talent or conviction, he tastes for a while – like anyone who is possessed – the passive joys of identity-loss, and the more active pleasure of role-playing.”

Bob Harris (Murray) and Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson) definitely take on the identity loss and the idea of role playing in the movie. Both are in a space where they must sacrifice their real personality to make themselves feel like they “fit in.” It seems like Charlotte is even having somewhat of an identity crisis as we see her crying by herself in the hotel room and reading one of those “where do I fit in” books. The feeling of lost identity is enhanced by the angles of the camera, as both are shown usually as a “part” of something bigger, either with a number of large buildings or a large number of people in the background of their silhouettes. When they are wandering about by themselves, they definitely take on a possessed nature as well. Bob seems much distanced from everyone, especially when he is at the hotel bar, until he meets Charlotte. When they come together, they are able to rid themselves of this identity loss and role playing, and are able to create a “place” through the shared identity of being American and speaking a common language.

Another passage relating to the non-place from Auge’s reading on the same page relates to the film as well:

“The only face to be seen, the only voice to be heard, in the silent dialogue he holds with the landscape-text addressed to him along with others, are his own: the face and voice of a solitude made all the more baffling by the fact that it echoes millions of others.” (103)

Bob and Charlotte are both only able to hear only their voice in their own head, and the reason for the awkwardness is that everyone else knows the same thing. There is little to no communication among people in the movie, as hundreds of people walk on the streets in one direction or another, not seeing anyone else, not talking to anyone else. Their only goal is to get to the place that they themselves have to go. A big characteristic of the non-place is this kind of solitude. Among the masses, the bright lights and the noises of the city, Bob and Charlotte feel solitary among hundreds of solitary objects or subjects.

Film Session

2006-11-10T15:35:00.000-06:00

Watching Lost in Translation in class today was probably the first time in my collegiate career that I've watched a Hollywood film in class. I thought it was pretty cool of Scot to put that on for us, and I really think that it fits into our ongoing discussion throughout the semester of network culture.

On the topic of movies, I thought I'd list a few of my favorite movies and why I like them so much. This quick list will give you a little better idea of who I am through what types of movies I really enjoy.

10. The Rock
9. Van Wilder
8. American Pie series
7. Celtic Pride
6. Major League

5. Gladiator – the ultimate guy movie. I love Russell Crowe as Maximus and the phrase “strength and honor” is something that you could apply to every aspect of life. Joaquin Phoenix makes a pretty sweet villain too.

4. Happy Gilmore – so many hilarious quotable scenes in that movie. Adam Sandler is phenomenal, and the celeb cameos of Lee Trevino and Bob Barker add so much to the movie.

3. Super Troopers – I don’t know if I’ve ever laughed so hard through the first viewing of a movie.

2. Billy Madison – Another Sandler flick that is so weird it is hilarious. We all love Veronica Vaughn (Bridgette Wilson) and Chris Farley as the crazy bus driver. I could probably quote this whole movie (sadly), but I still laugh every time I watch it.

1. Wedding Crashers – What’s not to like about this movie? It’s got two comic geniuses in Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson, very attractive women (Rachel McAdams and all those other women in the beginning) and a plot that has never really been seen before. I never thought that I’d like any movie more than Billy until I saw this one. So many memorable lines and situations, and the late entrance of Will Ferrell as Chaz Reinhold puts the icing on the cake.

Discussion from week of 10/30/06

2006-11-05T16:53:00.000-06:00

Discussion from this past week dealt with two readings, Fredric Jameson’s “The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism” and Marc Auge’s “From Places to Non-Places.”

After a first read of the Jameson text, I was a little lost. Not only were the ideas of economic modernism and postmodernism difficult to grasp, but I was also a little unfamiliar with the vocabulary and terminology Jameson employed. It was much easier to think about it in the context of Van Gogh’s painting “A Pair of Boots” versus Andy Warhol’s “Diamond Dust Shoes.” Jameson makes clear that systems are not natural, as they are constantly in flux and in motion. Speed is a large part of this, and the system moves faster as we increase our technologies and therefore our information intake on a daily basis. This was also discussed in the Auge piece.

As a group, we were able to come up with several characteristics of Van Gogh’s high modernist painting as opposed to Warhol’s postmodernist art. With “A Pair of Boots,” we are able to see a wealth of detail and depth, giving it almost a sense of significance by the simple pair of boots alone. With Warhol, we see something that is very abstract, flat, superficial, and with a stress on form over content. I think that an important distinction to make is that Van Gogh’s painting allows us to come up with our own conclusions on the meaning of the work – it is simple, elegant, and not overdone. This allows us to give the pair of boots their own meaning, or history. With Warhol’s painting, we see a number of different shoes with different features and details. The painting does not allow us to draw any kind of deeper meaning – the meaning is out on the surface.

With all of this, I think Warhol is pointing to a society that is becoming “empirical, chaotic, and heterogeneous…” (1) as seen through art, poetry, music, novels, architecture and other forms of expression. After talking about the Westin Bonaventure Hotel in Los Angeles as a place where people become detached from themselves, he refers to this chaos as “postmodern hyperspace,” which has disabled the individual human body from being able to locate itself in a mappable external world.

In Friday’s reading about places and non-places, Auge refers to a non-place as a kind of movement between spaces in relation to time. He states that we lack any kind of intricate identity with those surrounding us. He describes a place as having a communal quality; it is relational, historical and concerned with identity. One of the big points made during discussion was that although both places and non-places exist everywhere in society, there is no clear cut distinction between the two, as there is a constant relationship and overlap between the two. I think this passage on page 103 in the text makes pretty clear how a person feels upon entering a non-place:

“ … a person entering the space of non-place is relieved of his usual determinants. He becomes no more than what he does or experiences in the role of passenger, customer or driver. Perhaps he is still weighted down by the previous day’s worries, the next day’s concerns; but he is distanced from them temporarily by the environment of the movement.”

I think Auge is referring here to a person kind of stepping out of his/her normal personality, and taking the role of the only mark of identity that he/she has with the other people in the non-place. For example, at a grocery store, all customers have only one point of identity – they are all there to buy groceries. Because of this, a person can separate from their usual personality, or whatever personalities they contain. It seems like a temporary emotional detachment from the normal institutions of life – school, work, family, home life, etc.

Discussion from week of 10/23/06

2006-10-29T16:58:00.000-06:00

This past week we discussed two readings. On Monday we talked about Sherry Turkle’s chapter “Identity Crisis” from her piece Life on the Screen. The reading suggested that we are increasingly creating new identities through online games such as Multi-User Dimensions (MUDs) and are finding new ways to be multiple and coherent at the same time. Through online life, it seems like people enjoy creating a distinct character on the internet that is different from life outside of the chat rooms and text games. I think people are also learning new things about themselves through this new character development and are finding new identities that they may or may not want to possess in real life. Many people are much more comfortable in an online environment as opposed to an environment in which you are physically present with people. Or, as we see with the story of the one-legged Ava that Turkle discussed, communication online can help you better identify with your own physical self. Ava reported that after the accident that left her without the limb, she made love through MUD before she ever did again in real life. She said that her comfort with her MUD personality allowed her to be more comfortable with her own physical self. Despite the good that comes out of this example, a move into communicating virtually could have dire social consequences. I don’t think people will lose contact all together, but a lessening of contact could build up tensions between people and groups. With more and more media developing as means of communication, this also allows for more chances of tension and could lead to more threats and scares that could harm society. Eventually, virtual life could overtake real life and we could find the concept of discussion in person to be inconvenient and slow.

On Friday we discussed the chapter “Writing in a Culture of Simulation” by Carolyn Miller. Miller writes about the relationship between the simulation and the real as well as the relationship between ethos and rhetoric. One main example she draws on is Julia, an anthropomorphic identity in MUDs that talks with other users as if she is human, showing emotion and carrying on conversations with actual users. We talked about how talking to Julia would sort of be like talking to your pet, with the only difference being that you don’t need to be the one to initiate engagement with your pet, but you do with Julia.

Later, we had an interesting discussion about ethos and rhetoric. Ethos, defined as the quality of character that a person brings to his or her identity or performance, plays an integral role when engaging in rhetoric. We used the example of a political candidate. The politician is using ethos to portray a personality that is appropriate and favorable to his or her audience while engaging rhetorically with them. Plato wrote that there is a certain trickery or deception that is inherent in speech. We are constantly tricking our audience into believing that we are someone that we may or may not be, while deceiving them in our search for their approval. Ethos and rhetoric are inherent in both the world of simulation and the real world, hence Miller’s statement that simulation is the real.

Happy Halloween!

Making a case for the NBA

2006-10-26T17:45:00.000-05:00

Some of the people who saw this subject title may have already stopped reading. The NBA has such a bad rap, especially in a football-loving state like Wisconsin. I here it everywhere: they're never trying, they don't play defense, the games don't matter, it's not even basketball, they're overpaid, etc., etc. People who really believe this, in my opinion, don't really watch NBA basketball. Yes, the League may not play as much of a team game as they do in the NCAA. But here's the thing: they've all proven that they can play the game as a team in the college ranks, and probably stood out in doing so. It's just that the players in the NBA are so individually talented that the game is played to exploit their individual strengths. The League's offenses pretty much consist of a few cutters off of screens and and then one guy isolated for a take to the basket or a screen and roll. These guys only have 24 seconds to shoot it, not the 35 that they get in college basketball, so they don't really have time to keep screening off of the ball and passing it around to get open shooters.

For those of you who say that the games in the NBA don't really matter, I agree with that to some degree. But when you play an 82-game season with a typical week containing three games or more, how could you not say that not every game is significant? In college, each team probably has a 30-game schedule, playing one or two times per week. Obviously, college basketball games are more meaningful. But games in the NBA are just as meaningful when it comes down to it - you win, you'll be in the playoffs; you lose, you go home.

Don't get me wrong, I love the NCAA and the NCAA Tournament is one of the greatest sports events of the year, if not the best. But the NBA is just as much fun to watch if you truly appreciate the talent of some of the greatest athletes in the world. The playoffs are even better, with huge raucous crowds and big plays seemingly at every moment. Last season's playoffs were probably the best I've ever seen in my lifetime. There's no reason to think that this year's playoffs won't be just as good or even better. The trio of Dwyane Wade, Carmelo Anthony and LeBron James have been hailed as the next stars of the League, the next Jordan, Bird and Magic. The fun 'n gun Phoenix Suns are back and even better with a healthy Amare Stoudemire. How can you not love to watch point guard Steve Nash run up and down the floor, swishing jumpers, dribbling with such finesse and finding open teammates without a sweat?

Season starts next week. Enjoy that as well as the remainder of the World Series (Cards in six).

Discussion from week of 10/16/06

2006-10-22T14:18:00.000-05:00

On Friday we discussed Steven Shaviro's Connected as well as Chapter 7 of Jeff Rice's Writing About Cool. The two readings tied together quite nicely on the issue of sampling. Rice's chapter discussed sampling in a musical sense, when artists take the beat or the melody of a certain song and make their own lyrics or add their own twist. Several popular artists or groups have used sampling as a part of their repertoire - Public Enemy, Beck, "Weird Al" Yankovic, Puff Daddy/Puffy/P. Diddy/Diddy just to name a few. It was funny because this morning I was laying in bed flipping channels, and sure enough, I come to VH1's Top 20 countdown. No. 3 on the countdown was Weird Al's newest single "White and Nerdy", a play on Chamillionaire's "Ridin' Dirty." I got a pretty good laugh out of it, and it got me thinking a little bit about Friday's discussion.

The question about sampling being plagiarism was pretty tough to think about. The words themselves kind of give us an idea. When someone says you're "sampling," we usually don't really think anything bad about it, we tend to just think that "Oh, they're just sampling something, it's harmless, it's not a big deal." When we hear the word "plagiarism," we tend to attach negative connotations. I definitely associate plagiarism with something that has serious consequences, something that is completely illegal, and something that I would never consider doing. I agree with the statement made in discussion that sampling is basically writing on top of a pre-made canvas, using the tone or the background of the previous work to create your own ideas. We use sampling all of the time in our lives, not just in music, but in writing our own papers as well. Even academics are constantly using samples and quotes from other researchers and writers in their own documents. Writing papers, in this sense, is just like writing music - we are making our own unique ideas or points with material from others as support.

Conglomeration and big corporate business seem to be driving forces in sampling as well in the world of entertainment. A song that is recognizable will probably sell better, and if you are sampling from a well-known artist, that will obviously help. Even movies such as the Scary Movie series and Not Another Teen Movie play on stereotypes of certain genres of movies that are prevalent in American picture making. Huge conglomerates and CEOs will use sampling to achieve their ultimate goal: money making.

It is safe to say that sampling has become so prevalent in the production of media that it has really become an institution.

Discussion from week of 10/9/06

2006-10-15T15:47:00.000-05:00

On Monday we discussed Malcolm Gladwell's introduction to The Tipping Point as well as Chapter 5 of Writing About Cool by Jeff Rice. Rice discussed the "tipping point" within the context of epidemics. Rice states that ideas, products, messages, and behaviors spread just as a virus would. It was interestingly pointed out in class that the process of an epidemic of a product in society is not really complex at all. For example, with the Hush Puppies, no one was actually trying to sell the shoes. People started to wear them in trendy night clubs in Manhattan and eventually the product sold like crazy. It is unexpected happenings like this that come to define epidemics - it is not always about a cause and effect relationship. I believe that the movie Napoleon Dynamite would be another example of this. As a low budget, unpopular movie (at first) with absolutely no plot, no one expected the film to do extremely well, let alone break out onto the pop culture scene. It was almost as if it was intended not to do well, and because of this, it did do well. One strategy that advertisers use is to employ appropriation as discussed in Rice's chapter five. Appropriation was defined by Rice as "taking an idea, object or style from its original context and redoing it in a manner different from its original purpose. Scot showed us an Apple commercial in which the images of the Dalai Lama, Einstein, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and others were used to portray the idea that Apple is challenging the norm or going against the grain, hence the slogan "Think Different." Apple used popular figures of world history in its own context in order to drive their pitch home.

On Friday we covered another Gladwell reading, "The Coolhunt", as well as Rice's Chapter 3 in Writing About Cool. Gladwell discusses the different advertising ploys used by retail giants, including PR representatives walking around and "looking" for what is "cool" in young America. This is quite different from the 1960s and 70s, in that, as pointed out in discussion, people are telling fashion designers what is cool rather than the designers telling the people what is cool. I found two things quite interesting in discussion. One was that there are definitive regional trends and preferences that make it difficult for the advertisers to pinpoint what kinds of ads to put out there on the national scene. I think that people on the West Coast tend to have a little more freedom to experiment with what they are wearing, as the weather is a little warmer and they can wear pretty much whatever they want (or don't want) day in and day out. People of the East Coast and Midwest cannot be as experimental. However, the big cities of the East Coast are very accommodating to designers, so it kind of evens out in that respect. The second thing that I found interesting was our discussion of Reebok and why it has not been as popular as Nike or Adidas. First of all, I think Reebok really lacks star power. In a very individualized country like the United States, Nike has really sought out to find the best athletes in sports that stress the play of the individual rather than the team. Nike has struck gold with icons like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods and LeBron James. Adidas uses more of a worldwide approach, and has become the main supplier of soccer equipment and apparel, as soccer is the most popular sport on a global scale. Reebok has not found that star to latch onto yet, and has not really defined itself as to what kind of corporation it wants to be. The use of Allen Iverson was pretty good, and his shoes sold pretty well. However, even with the outbreak of Iverson apparel and shoes, Reebok just didn't reach a tipping point. It is that tipping point that they need to find just as Nike did with Jordan and Adidas has done with soccer. It will be interesting to see what kind of approach Reebok takes in the future. Also, I think it is critically important that Reebok finds some sort of simple ad campaign, like Nike's "Just do it." Americans like this - it is short, simple, and says nothing about the product at all. The slogan almost acts as a way of living rather than an ad campaign. This is pretty much what all advertisers seek to find, and is a good example of winning the "coolhunt."

Hope everyone had a good weekend!

same old story - just wait 'til next year

2006-10-12T16:41:00.000-05:00

As I sit back and watch the MLB playoffs this October from time to time, I sit and wonder when my Milwaukee Brewers will finally get there. After last season's .500 mark, I was highly encouraged about what might happen in 2006 to a team that seemed destined for a breakout year. I even bought a nine-pack of season tickets for the summer just so I would have first crack at playoff tickets. However, just like the past ten seasons or so that I have followed Wisconsin's team, I was left disappointed, and thinking about what could have been if not for closer Derrick Turnbow's meltdown, three-fourths of our infield getting injured, and Chris Capuano's second half slide. So I've decided to look at the positive things about what happened this season.

The Crew established a nice little starting rotation despite injuries to ace Ben Sheets and No. 4 Tomo Ohka. All five in the main starting rotation, including Sheets, Ohka, Capuano, Doug Davis, and Dave Bush, finished with an ERA below 5.00. I was pleased with Sheets' strong finish (28 IP, 31 K, 2.25 ERA in his last four starts), and the longetivity of Davis, Capuano, and Bush (all three threw 200+ innings on the year). Bush evolved as a solid option as a No. 5 starter, leading the team in wins with 12. If all five can stay healthy next year, especially Sheets, the Brewers have a legitimate shot at 85-90 wins.

The mid-season acquisition of relief pitcher Francisco Cordero may have saved the bullpen. Cordero was lights-out for the Crew this season, going 3-1 with 16 saves and posting a 1.69 ERA. The club rewarded him, picking up his $5 million option for next season. The middle relievers, including Matt Wise, Brian Shouse, Dan Kolb, and Jose Capellan, need to step up next year or the Brewers' bullpen will again be a liability.

Jeff Cirillo was absolutely huge for the Brewers this past season. Cirillo expanded on his veteran presence in the locker room, proving that he can still do it on the field. JC stepped in and played everywhere for a depleted Brewers infield, stepping in at times for the injured Corey Koskie while being one of the top pinch hitters in the National League. 'Rillo batted .319 on the season in 112 appearances.

The most valuable player on the Brewers for '06 was undoubtedly utility man Bill Hall. Hall, who appeared at seemingly every position on the diamond, had a breakout season at the plate, leading the team in homeruns (35), RBI (85), and doubles (39). Hall's versatility is invaluable, and I think he should be playing some outfield next year with the return of SS J.J. Hardy, 2B Rickie Weeks, and 3B Koskie. It will be fun to see some other young guys out there, hopefully Corey Hart and Tony Gwynn Jr.

So now all we can do is wait until next season. Hopefully we won't be saying that come October 2007.

Discussion from week of 10/2/06

2006-10-08T21:18:00.000-05:00

In last week's discussion sections, we looked at two chapters from Duncan Watts' Six Degrees: "The Connected Age", and "Epidemics and Failures."

I enjoyed reading "The Connected Age." The chapter was pretty straight forward, and Watts made some great points throughout the reading on the significance and characteristics of networks. Networks exist everywhere in American society and are extremely complex (I will not even try to explain them). Facebook seemed to be an example of a network that many of us could identify with. It seems like the "six degrees" theory is fairly accurate, as you could find most people on Facebook have some sort of connection to you through the "mutual friends" list or the list of chains of people on how you connect to that person if you don't have mutual friends. One interesting point brought up in the discussion was that the individual is much harder to understand than the whole. In a network of people, the whole will usually identify with eachother on one or two different levels. However, with an individual in the network, there are many different aspects of that person that we cannot take the time to understand. That relates to the point that the whole, with each individual playing an equal role, functions much better than putting too much weight on an individual in the network. This is seen in the power outage discussion in class, with certain generators within the network being asked to do too much at one time. I believe there is a parallel with sports as well - when you can have each individual on a team identify with one goal, winning, then that makes it much easier to function. When you have other aspects of certain individuals in play, then the whole doesn't work well. It's safe to say that Terrell Owens fits the description of the latter.

I did not enjoy the second chapter that we read for Friday as much. I got a little lost in the scientific explanation of the certain models of networks, and the reading just seemed a little choppy to me. The discussion of shortcuts within networks as the most effective way of spreading a disease or epidemic was pretty fruitful. Shortcuts, although very powerful in enhancing a certain epidemic, are not effective in all cases, because, as Watts points out, infected individuals tend to interact with other infected individuals, so the disease cannot spread as rapidly to susceptible populations.

That's all for this week. Enjoy the baseball playoffs this week.

Discussion from week of 9/25/06

2006-10-03T14:26:00.000-05:00

In the first discussion section from this past week, we discussed Meg Hourihan's "What We're Doing When We Blog" and Chapter 12 from Rice's Writing About Cool. I thought Hourihan's accusation that political blogs began only after 9/11 was pretty accurate - the event definitely helped to accelerate the use of a medium that was already available but not yet primarily used. I think part of the reason that 9/11 really propelled the rising of blogs was that it was an easy way for people to communicate with others and debate with others on an event that everyone as a U.S. citizen could identify with. Sure, many other political debates occurred before 9/11, but not debates that everyone could have some sort of identity with. I think many of those debates involved people that were more directly affected by the political event or idea.

On the subject of blogs, I think Hourihan was right when she claimed that the organization, or how we write the blog, is just as important or more important than its content. Links are always important in helping people to notice your blog, and I think people are more drawn to personal accounts/experiences rather than just gobs of information to back up a certain point. I agree with Scot when he said that the breakdown of the blog features by Hourihan was a strong point of her article. It was both interesting and educational to read her section "The Anatomy of a Post" because it really simplified the elements of the blog and stated its features very concisely and the importance of each.

When discussing Rice, I think Steph made a nice comparison with the Hayles reading, that it seems we like to mimic real life on the internet in order to create familiarities within a place that we may not be most familiar with. The web terms "home", "cut", "paste", "bookmark", and "file" are just a few of the everyday terms that show up on the web. These terms help us, especially the older population, identify an unfamiliar and crazy space with common words that we use every day at the office.

In Wednesday's discussion, we talked about Miller and Shepherd's "Blogging as a Social Action." The voyeurism and exhibitionism present in today's society has allowed the blog to become as popular as it has become. The blog has become a personal space for self-cultivation and validation to stabilize what is being unsettled in every day life. I would agree with this because I think there are a lot of things that we as people do not feel comfortable sharing with anyone else face to face. I think that the use of technology such as the internet has allowed people to kind of hide in technology and has been something of use for those who are insecure in certain social situations. I'm not saying that everyone is insecure, but I think that there are times when we'd all rather use the internet to communicate something than to say it to someone's face. AIM and text messaging is a good example of this. Let's say you're out on a date with a person of the opposite sex, and you have a pretty good night and then head your separate ways. Then about five minutes later, you receive a text message that says "Hey, I had a really great time, but I think I need time to get serious" or "Can you come back and sleep over?" or something of that nature. I know that this has happened to a couple of friends of mine. This is just an example of one of those situations in which one person is not comfortable telling something to another person to their face. Technology is allowing us to save those touchy comments for later.

In Friday's discussion, we talked about MacGill's "Introduction to Chaos and Complexity Theory" as well as Taylor's The Moment of Complexity. I thought Taylor's reading was pretty well done and straight forward. The example of the architects of the postmodern era was very easy to see within the difference between grid and network cultures.

I'm out. Make sure to check out the MLB playoffs beginning this week.

Discussion from week of 9/18/06

2006-09-24T21:22:00.000-05:00

We started off on Monday talking about the introduction and first two chapters in Jeff Rice's Writing About Cool. After a brief introduction, Rice talked in the first chapter about the meaning of cool as it was originally used by the media. Rice hit it on the head when he identified the two main characteristics of cool in the media as independence and rebelliousness. He stated that cool was often thought of in the context of behavior or personality traits. What came to my mind right away was the Marlboro ad with the cowboy. I thought this was a good reflection of what is portrayed as "cool" by the media. Young men see this cowboy on horseback, and he's laid back, rugged, macho, and confident all at one time. In class, we discussed Rice's example of James Dean photos. Dean is just leaned back in his chair, smoking a cigarette and looking aloof and disinterested. His leather jacket, tight jeans, and gelled hair all help to portray an image of rebelliousness. In chapter two, we talked about the internet's use of cool. The web plays on the media's early definition of "cool" to attract the desired audience. Rice makes this clear on page 17 by defining the rhetorical meanings of cool "as a series of shifts":

Prior to the internet--cool means rebellion, individuality, mystique
Aftern the internet--cool means an attractive tool for luring potential customers

In our class discussion on the second chapter, we talked about "cooling" as using linking to produce unexpected relationships among ideas. One thing that I took from that discussion was that linking sort of makes the web - it makes things much more rhetorical and can send you in hundreds of different directions.

I thought the Hayles' reading from Writing Machines was somewhat of a tough read, and our small group was a little confounded by both the text and the website. What I understand as Hayles' main argument was that new media has allowed us to see kind of a bigger picture, and really dig deep with respect to certain assumptions in society. We can go in several different directions with electronic print that we really can't go with print books. One point that I thought was important was the point that hypertext does not just exist on electronic media, but print media as well. With electronic media these links are much more accessible, and will therefore make people more apt to dig deeper and engage in more rhetoric.

I can't believe I was like that two years ago

2006-09-21T17:05:00.000-05:00

Walking around campus on a weekend night, whether it be Thursday, Friday, or Saturday, can be quite entertaining. You can be sober or under the influence of alcohol, but you will still find things to be very humorous. One reason for this is watching the new influx of freshmen strut their stuff on campus.

Let me give you some characteristics of the groups from the Southeast dorms on a weekend night. First of all, there are at least 10 in the same group. After taking their shots and beer bongs in the dorms, they grab everyone they can to roam the streets of Madison. It's funny because really, they will probably be friends with them for about the first three or four weeks of classes. Secondly, at least half of them are on their cell phones, either talking to their boy/girl friend or trying to find any house party that they can. Drunk dialing their close friends from their hometown is not uncommon. And of course, one of the people (probably a guy) is calling his/her best buddy on another campus telling him how drunk s/he is and exactly how many shots/mixers/beers s/he had so far in the evening. Finally, even if you don't go out that evening, you can probably hear a group of freshmen walk by your apartment because they just happen to be YELLING to their friends that are one foot away from them. And that's only part of it.

As an upperclassman, this is extremely entertaining to witness, not only because I am probably under the influence of alcohol, but because I can say to myself, "Wow, that was me and my buddies two years ago. I can't believe we were like that!"

If you're a freshman reading this: don't worry, your time will come.

Discussion week of 9/11/06

2006-09-17T18:08:00.000-05:00

In our first discussion this past week about rhetoric, one of the things that I was thinking about was that rhetoric is a sort of necessity in American society. Herrick clearly and completely defined rhetoric and laid out several roles of rhetoric in a social context. After reading that, I decided that rhetoric is very important to the flow of ideas and is an important tool in every day life. It is vital to daily decision making, and especially crucial in helping to make ideas that we come to accept, significantly through education. I think Herrick was right on with his claim that rhetoric addresses contingent issues. Rhetoric helps very much in weighing options before coming up with solutions to certain issues. Another factor that I found very important in participating in rhetoric is to have a good background knowledge of the audience before speaking. I believe it is extremely critical to identify early on with who you are speaking to in order to engage them in what you are saying. Herrick’s discussion of appeals as strategies that we use to try and tug at the emotions or loyalties of the audience was quite convincing.

Yancey’s address was a little confusing to me at first, but was made a little bit clearer by the class discussion on Wednesday. Yancey’s idea of integrating new media into the English curriculum was both very enticing and quite bold on her part. I agree that the knowledge of new media is critical to going along through life, especially in the professional world. However, at the same time, isn’t the purpose of English class to lay the foundation of basic writing skills so that this is made easier in the learning of new media? I think that if teachers are quick to hop on the new media bandwagon, they will possibly overlook some of the more vital basic writing skills. Kids are starting to blog on the internet in their own time, so why not focus class on important styles of writing more thorough, thoughtful essays and documents? Additionally, most teachers will probably not be readily qualified to teach new media in their classes. This probably won’t be much of a problem in the next ten years, but for now, we probably shouldn’t rush them. Also, not everyone is fully accessed to internet and other new technologies that would likely be a part of the curriculum. The kids who do not have access would possibly fall behind the kids who do have easy access. All in all, I just don’t think Yancey’s proposal would fit well into the curriculum yet. Faigley makes a good argument in favor of slow rhetoric over fast rhetoric. However, with today’s competition in society, especially among college graduates in search of a job, I don’t think it is quite possible to slow things down in that respect.

McLuhan’s chapters on media were both a little rocky and unstable, and I was a little confused by both of his arguments. McLuhan is in favor of oral literacy over typological/print literacy, claiming that the development of writing has had negative sociological consequences. I agree that writing is very much individual in nature, while oral literacy is much more collective in nature. I tend to sway more towards print literacy because I feel like it is a better simulation of life in the professional world. I still don’t quite understand McLuhan’s claim that “the medium is the message.” I thought I had a pretty good idea of what it meant coming into class on Friday, but I left feeling a little more insecure of its true meaning. From what I understand, he’s saying that the medium is much more important than the content within it. The consequences of the medium are much more powerful than the consequences or repercussions of the content. The medium shapes the receiver’s perception of the content, and ultimately controls the content. It would be extremely difficult for me to really get to the bottom of that statement, but I feel like I have somewhat of a clue.

Riffs about sports and rhetoric

2006-09-14T22:02:00.000-05:00

Here are a few of my observations about happenings in Wisconsin sports this week (and one on the end about rhetorics).

1. The Packers looked awful last Sunday. I told my friends before the season that I'd like to see Brett Favre go to another team because the rest of our team is going nowhere and would make him look bad. After watching the game against the Bears, I'd say I was both right and wrong. The offensive line is pretty bad - I think the Bears sacked Brett three or four times in the first half. Because they sat back and rushed three or four at the quarterback in the second half, Ahman Green got his 100 yards, but Brett couldn't find a man open to save his life! I'd say one of his two interceptions was pretty bad - Greg Jennings was open and Brett just flat out overthrew him. I'd say the defense was pretty good, given how much they were on the field in the first half. Plus, one of the Bears' touchdowns was on a punt return. If the offense and special teams can't get it together, it's going to be a long season for No. 4 and the Pack.

2. It's September, and as usual, the Brewers have me feeling blue. Just like every other year, they play pretty good ball up until about late July (although this year it was more August), and then run off some horrendous losing streak (10 games this year) to close the book on the season. There are a few things I'm encouraged by on the season. The young guys, specifically Corey Hart, Tony Gwynn Jr., Prince Fielder, and Bill Hall have been impressive. Hopefully the Crew will dish out the bucks to Hall and get him back for the long run. Jeff Cirillo is an ageless wonder - it seems like he always finds a way in clutch situations. His .322 batting average isn't too shabby either. Finally, it's good to see Ben Sheets closing out the year strong. The Brewer's 40 million dollar man had a perfect game going through six on Wednesday. As always, can't wait 'til next year!

3. Wisconsin football plays San Diego State this weekend down at Camp Randall. The game that could make the Badgers' season, though, is next week, when they head to Ann Arbor to take on Michigan in their Big Ten opener. Can't wait for that one.

4. We discussed fast rhetoric in Wednesday's discussion. Fast rhetoric are exactly what they sound like - fast, not thorough and convenient. I think if we were to actually sit down and try to engage in slow rhetoric, the world would fly right by us. I don't think any of us have a choice. It seems like there just isn't enough time in the day anymore (that's not necessarily a bad thing). Although it would be nice if we practiced slow rhetoric more often, I just don't think it's possible. Who knows if that will doom us in the future. But for now, we just all have to keep doing whatever it takes to get the job done.

What is rhetoric?

2006-09-10T21:19:00.000-05:00

Before diving into this week's readings, I really didn't have much of a sense of what the word rhetoric stood for. When I thought about rhetoric, all I could think of was someone speaking in public in an attempt to persuade a person or group of people. After reading Herrick's piece, An Overview of Rhetoric, I now have a little bit better of an understanding about the way rhetoric works and the social roles that it plays.

It turns out that rhetoric can be much more than persuasion. According to Herrick, rhetoric involves the practice of effective symbolic expression with respect to persuasion as well as other purposes such as clarity, beauty, or mutual understanding. It is simply the use of symbols, mostly through language, to be used at the communicator's disgression. Herrick notes that rhetoric is a type of discourse that is marked by several characteristics and serves many social functions within today's society. You can learn a lot about people in rhetoric, and rhetoric seems to provide people with a means of discovering and shaping new knowledge and facts. After reading this document, my new definition of rhetoric would be that rhetoric is the methodical use of symbols through language to communicate ideas and achieve the purposes of the person who is using the symbols.

According to the Silva Rhetoricae reading, rhetoric has often been criticized as dealing only with style and eloquence in speaking and writing, not with the content. However, after reading this week's readings, I realize that rhetoric must have some sort of understanding with respect to both content and style.

Introduction to Pick and Roll

2006-09-08T12:47:00.000-05:00

Hi, my name is Chris, and I am a junior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I will be blogging for the next four months or so as part of a requirement for English 201.

I am a journalism major, and for my career I would like to become involved in my true passion, sports. Because of my love for sports, I have named my blog "Pick and Roll" as a tribute to my favorite sport of all time, basketball. A pick and roll is one of the most effective plays at all levels of basketball, in which one offensive player screens the defender of the offensive player with the ball. The two offensive players play off of that - the man with the ball can drive to the basket or shoot, and the screener can "roll", or cut, to the basket for a pass. Hopefully that was somewhat understandable for those who don't know the sport well...

Half of the blogs posted on this website will be having to do with the readings of English 201. The other half will most likely be about sports. I'll try to chime in once in a while on other current events, but you can count on a majority of my posts having to do with current sporting events.

Make sure to catch the U.S. Open this weekend as well as NFL football!