When I heard about the social network craze, I was in 8th grade and I thought it was stupid. Why in the world would I put myself on the internet and talk to all my friends that I already knew in person? why not talk to them in real life?
I went to a pretty small school system, my graduating class was around 206 people, and I knew most of them, so I really didn't think that I would jump on that bandwagon as quickly as I did. I had a couple of rules though.
-not too much personal information
- Don't friend strangers
- (eventually) no emo statuses, people in general won't care
With the death of myspace, I didn't have to worry about changing my profile song or arbitrarily ranking my friends anymore, that was nice.
Then we come to Facebook and its infamous news feed.
I don't know what all the initial fuss was about, I post everything with the assumption that everyone would be able to see it, even if it wasn't true. It's a social network, privacy almost doesn't belong.
The description of the change of our social dynamic was interesting. We keep in touch with many more people now, and maintain several weak ties with people that we know, literally "networking" across all of our social circles, and when we lose contact with people, they remain our Facebook friends. I have facebook friends that I haven't talked to in over a year. I still think that this doesn't affect the way we see our close ties with close friends. We all, as of now, follow a relatively normal schedule, and with that comes contact with the same people and the closeness of a shared experience. This overtakes anything that our virtual "weak" connections have on us.
I found the ambient knowing bit to be intriguing as well. I've found that I can still keep up with what my close high school friends are doing, and still feel a little bit of connection to them, albeit not very much.
I also find my status updates a useful tool for introspection. Even though most of them are jokes, I find out a lot about myself with how I project myself to others, kind of like looking at an ideal portrait of myself.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Under all that armor, we're all still human, probably.
I would like to start today with what my avatars in World of Warcraft were.
Johnlocke- eventually was my main, 80 troll shaman. Male
Whowhatwhen- Level 61 Blood elf Paladin. Female-OK LET ME EXPLAIN MYSELF
When me and my brother started playing Horde, we immediately thought "wow, all these races look tragic, why would we play any of them?" We eventually warmed up to their appearances, but the first thing we thought was "Man those blood elf females are the only attractive thing the Horde has."
Also, I wanted to be a paladin and the males looked like sissies.
Me and John had arguments over which one of our avatars was hotter, it was kind of funny looking back on it. We did eventually start getting hit on, and it got really weird really quickly.
But I felt much like myself when playing that troll, I'm not sure why. I'm sure not only avatar creation goes into subliminal description of the player beneath, classes matter too. A warrior or Paladin is going to have heavy armor, be the tough guy that takes all the hits. The mages want to seem intelligent, and the damage dealers want to be the ones that matter. The healers are the benevolent ones that would rather help their allies than fight.
That's what I think anyways.
What originally had me hooked on shammy was dual wielding. Anytime anyone forgoes a shield in favor of another club or axe to beat enemies down with, you know that guy means business. I wanted to be a guy that meant business.
I found myself in a weird support role, dropping totems to increase the party's stats, along with my own. I was a jack of all trades, using magic, support abilities, healing and physical strength all with equal prowess. I helped people out in a party and could take care of myself on my own. I was very well rounded, and that may have been a projection of what I wanted to be.
I'll be honest, I miss those guys a bit.
But I digress, a little anyways.
in the realm of other games combat oriented or otherwise, avatars serve to break barriers and take out the social aspect of physical appearance. People all look how they would like to be seen, and that's how prejudices are broken. We're blind to color and appearances, and can all just communicate on level ground with similar interests and goals. I'd argue that gamers are more social than the average person because of this. Sure, they may be less interactive with people in the real world, but there are more people on the virtual realm they can relate to. They can even create real friendships in the virtual world, support each other and help get through things in the real world; and they don't even know what the other looks like. Some people create guilds and linkshells and clans for the sole purpose of socialization.
Johnlocke- eventually was my main, 80 troll shaman. Male
Whowhatwhen- Level 61 Blood elf Paladin. Female-OK LET ME EXPLAIN MYSELF
When me and my brother started playing Horde, we immediately thought "wow, all these races look tragic, why would we play any of them?" We eventually warmed up to their appearances, but the first thing we thought was "Man those blood elf females are the only attractive thing the Horde has."
Also, I wanted to be a paladin and the males looked like sissies.
Me and John had arguments over which one of our avatars was hotter, it was kind of funny looking back on it. We did eventually start getting hit on, and it got really weird really quickly.
But I felt much like myself when playing that troll, I'm not sure why. I'm sure not only avatar creation goes into subliminal description of the player beneath, classes matter too. A warrior or Paladin is going to have heavy armor, be the tough guy that takes all the hits. The mages want to seem intelligent, and the damage dealers want to be the ones that matter. The healers are the benevolent ones that would rather help their allies than fight.
That's what I think anyways.
What originally had me hooked on shammy was dual wielding. Anytime anyone forgoes a shield in favor of another club or axe to beat enemies down with, you know that guy means business. I wanted to be a guy that meant business.
I found myself in a weird support role, dropping totems to increase the party's stats, along with my own. I was a jack of all trades, using magic, support abilities, healing and physical strength all with equal prowess. I helped people out in a party and could take care of myself on my own. I was very well rounded, and that may have been a projection of what I wanted to be.
I'll be honest, I miss those guys a bit.
But I digress, a little anyways.
in the realm of other games combat oriented or otherwise, avatars serve to break barriers and take out the social aspect of physical appearance. People all look how they would like to be seen, and that's how prejudices are broken. We're blind to color and appearances, and can all just communicate on level ground with similar interests and goals. I'd argue that gamers are more social than the average person because of this. Sure, they may be less interactive with people in the real world, but there are more people on the virtual realm they can relate to. They can even create real friendships in the virtual world, support each other and help get through things in the real world; and they don't even know what the other looks like. Some people create guilds and linkshells and clans for the sole purpose of socialization.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Be gentle, it's my first time...
Okay, so maybe that title was a bit risque, but it holds true when I talk about this paper. I've never faced a task such as this, using one source and analyzing it to the point where we've developed five pages.
It's quite daunting. The more I think that this paper was crazy to write, I could see some sense in it.
It really has helped me identify my very sporadic writing pace, I can come up with 200 words in 15 min, and then be stuck for an hour, but that must have been the procrastination setting in. I sat stuck at around 700 for a very long while, analyzing away until I found a whole new layer of rhetoric to develop. This was a challenge I warily accepted and it ended up paying off. This assignment was a real eye-opener for me and let me know that I was in a whole new playing field as a writer in college.
I'm sure my editing is going to take a huge hit too, usually my rough drafts and final drafts look incredibly similar, but I'm almost positive that won't be the case this time.
I was one of the lucky ones who was only up until 1:30 finishing up the draft, but I'm still going to have to pace myself in the future so stuff like that doesn't happen often.
It's quite daunting. The more I think that this paper was crazy to write, I could see some sense in it.
It really has helped me identify my very sporadic writing pace, I can come up with 200 words in 15 min, and then be stuck for an hour, but that must have been the procrastination setting in. I sat stuck at around 700 for a very long while, analyzing away until I found a whole new layer of rhetoric to develop. This was a challenge I warily accepted and it ended up paying off. This assignment was a real eye-opener for me and let me know that I was in a whole new playing field as a writer in college.
I'm sure my editing is going to take a huge hit too, usually my rough drafts and final drafts look incredibly similar, but I'm almost positive that won't be the case this time.
I was one of the lucky ones who was only up until 1:30 finishing up the draft, but I'm still going to have to pace myself in the future so stuff like that doesn't happen often.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Convergence and beauty.
Dove's campaign for breaking down the impossible standards expected of women today is a very good thing.
Diversity is what makes us human, and all of us as individuals should present a different image. Emulating a magazine or billboard doesn't make a woman more beautiful, it makes her less attractive and less diverse.
Think about it, if everyone achieved their ideal beauty from a magazine and presented it perfectly, the idea and concept of beauty would be lost.
I'm sure everyone has a different concept of beauty of course. That in itself should be already tearing down the impossible bars women set for themselves. We even have different words describing attractiveness: cute, lovely, beautiful, sexy, hot, attractive. These all have slightly different connotations depending on how we use them. The English language itself proves that we all have differing concepts as a whole, and therefore shouldn't have converging concepts of beauty settled on one or two images. We'd lose a little bit of diversity, something we should be celebrating as a whole.
I feel it should be said that not all women feel that they need to fit this mold. The same way I don't feel I need to be muscle bound and lifting weights to be awesome, I'm pretty sure most girls don't feel like they need to be 6 foot tall sticks in heels to feel attractive. Yet this ad campaign gives the ones that do feel the need to emulate models a well needed kick in the pants and a compliment to boot.
Diversity is what makes us human, and all of us as individuals should present a different image. Emulating a magazine or billboard doesn't make a woman more beautiful, it makes her less attractive and less diverse.
Think about it, if everyone achieved their ideal beauty from a magazine and presented it perfectly, the idea and concept of beauty would be lost.
I'm sure everyone has a different concept of beauty of course. That in itself should be already tearing down the impossible bars women set for themselves. We even have different words describing attractiveness: cute, lovely, beautiful, sexy, hot, attractive. These all have slightly different connotations depending on how we use them. The English language itself proves that we all have differing concepts as a whole, and therefore shouldn't have converging concepts of beauty settled on one or two images. We'd lose a little bit of diversity, something we should be celebrating as a whole.
I feel it should be said that not all women feel that they need to fit this mold. The same way I don't feel I need to be muscle bound and lifting weights to be awesome, I'm pretty sure most girls don't feel like they need to be 6 foot tall sticks in heels to feel attractive. Yet this ad campaign gives the ones that do feel the need to emulate models a well needed kick in the pants and a compliment to boot.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
What kind of name is Skenazy?
These readings were more on the topic of photography, with emphasis on it's advancements and delving slightly into amateur cinematography (Youtube).
First were Skenazy and Williams et. al. Skenazy recognized the ability to capture and express the good moments in photography and nitpicking what is portrayed into the ideal family album. We, as families, don't want to soil our good names and want only to be seen in top form when looking back on memories. This is an extremely bad thing, according to Skenazy, because we are neglecting truths and essentially giving our memories a makeover to where they are hardly recognizable.
Williams et. al. Tracked the progression of photography, and its descent into the impersonal and easily accessible tool it is today. It seems to condemn the end result, saying that it went from painstaking and carefully constructed to snapshots easily taken and uploaded to the cloud in an instant. They do seem to appreciate the rise of amateur photographers in the middle, who seemed to break the mold and not follow the concrete rules of photography and created new boundaries for the art.
Pogue writes about various sites, and seems more of an objective informational article than anything. It seemed to be put into the reading solely for the purpose of showing how many sites that hosted photos there were and how easily accessible they were. Strangelove knows what's going on, relying on kairos to defend the development of Youtube, letting us know that our affection with viral videos is something thats very important. It reminds us that with all this impersonal technological development, we still haven't lost one of our most important human characteristics; we still have a firm grasp on our sense of humor.
First were Skenazy and Williams et. al. Skenazy recognized the ability to capture and express the good moments in photography and nitpicking what is portrayed into the ideal family album. We, as families, don't want to soil our good names and want only to be seen in top form when looking back on memories. This is an extremely bad thing, according to Skenazy, because we are neglecting truths and essentially giving our memories a makeover to where they are hardly recognizable.
Williams et. al. Tracked the progression of photography, and its descent into the impersonal and easily accessible tool it is today. It seems to condemn the end result, saying that it went from painstaking and carefully constructed to snapshots easily taken and uploaded to the cloud in an instant. They do seem to appreciate the rise of amateur photographers in the middle, who seemed to break the mold and not follow the concrete rules of photography and created new boundaries for the art.
Pogue writes about various sites, and seems more of an objective informational article than anything. It seemed to be put into the reading solely for the purpose of showing how many sites that hosted photos there were and how easily accessible they were. Strangelove knows what's going on, relying on kairos to defend the development of Youtube, letting us know that our affection with viral videos is something thats very important. It reminds us that with all this impersonal technological development, we still haven't lost one of our most important human characteristics; we still have a firm grasp on our sense of humor.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Photography, rhetoric, and synthesization.
Today's topic is photography, and how it is used to convey messages, and to portray and perserve what the artist sees.
Most rhetoric in photography relies on pathos or kairos. It uses mostly context and feeling to evoke the desired reaction in the observer. Photographs aren't meant to capture a moment, they are meant to prolong and preserve it, so that others may observe the event much later. Sometimes this leads to exaggerations in the situation portrayed. A photo of a family fighting may unintentionally make observers believe that family's home life is a wreck, even if it was one fight. On the flip side, a photo of a family saying grace at the table peacefully may portray a serene home life, when that moment is fleeting and home life is nowhere near that.
This means that photography could be a good vessel for propaganda, finding ways to exaggerate and extend situations like environmental disasters, or wars.
The reading also included commentary on how the world of photography has changed over the years. In it's infancy, photography was painstaking and tedious. Exposures took hours and developing the pictures took even longer. Over time, photography has become easier and more accepting of amateurs. These new photographers revolutionized the art by breaking the standards, and creating much more diverse pictures. Over time, we've developed the capability to take photos instantly on our smart phones, making our memorable moments much easier to catch, and the number of pictures taken increase exponentially. These photos still hold value to the people taking them, but there is such volume, and such little true photography involved in these pictures that most of them don't make any impact to the masses. In some ways, this new wave of photos has sacrificed quality and impact for quantity in personal value.
Most rhetoric in photography relies on pathos or kairos. It uses mostly context and feeling to evoke the desired reaction in the observer. Photographs aren't meant to capture a moment, they are meant to prolong and preserve it, so that others may observe the event much later. Sometimes this leads to exaggerations in the situation portrayed. A photo of a family fighting may unintentionally make observers believe that family's home life is a wreck, even if it was one fight. On the flip side, a photo of a family saying grace at the table peacefully may portray a serene home life, when that moment is fleeting and home life is nowhere near that.
This means that photography could be a good vessel for propaganda, finding ways to exaggerate and extend situations like environmental disasters, or wars.
The reading also included commentary on how the world of photography has changed over the years. In it's infancy, photography was painstaking and tedious. Exposures took hours and developing the pictures took even longer. Over time, photography has become easier and more accepting of amateurs. These new photographers revolutionized the art by breaking the standards, and creating much more diverse pictures. Over time, we've developed the capability to take photos instantly on our smart phones, making our memorable moments much easier to catch, and the number of pictures taken increase exponentially. These photos still hold value to the people taking them, but there is such volume, and such little true photography involved in these pictures that most of them don't make any impact to the masses. In some ways, this new wave of photos has sacrificed quality and impact for quantity in personal value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)