So far in class. . .

Well, I've read many of the stories we've read so far so that part is kind of aggravating, though I understand it's very hard to choose a shorty story that nobody has read so far. Other than that, some of the stories have been interesting. I loved the fact that we were able to have a free choice story. I loved being able to choose to read what I wanted. I loved reading "The Little Mermaid" and would love the chance to choose another story to read. So far I think that's the best thing we have done; the fact we've been given the chance to choose what we want to read. I feel like it should happen more often. The novel was a good choice I think. Grammar guides are kind of boring and a pain to type up, but they do help us in class, though I don't really like having to write the paragraph for vocabulary. I like learning the new Grammar Guides, just don't like having to type it all up afterwards. I wouldn't mind them if we were able to get rid of the typing part. The worksheets are fine, as well as taking the notes, but the typing I could do without. I thank you for all of the extra credit because many teachers don't give extra credit. It's nice to have that choice.

The Little Mermaid

Setting:

It was mostly nature. Hans Christian Andersen gave great detail of the world around the mermaid. A lot of the setting was the world below the sea and the world above the sea: the land. The setting also spoke a lot about religion, which seemed to be a large theme in the story. The time was uknown, as well as the place, the acctual part of the world that it was placed in. There were beaches though, white sands, and it is on the coast, of course. The setting was mostly nature and its beauty.

POV:

To me the point of view was third person and spoken through the main character, the little mermaid. I felt that the point of view was limited omniscient narrator because the narrative was restriced to the little mermaid. Her thoughts were the only ones you really heard and her emotions were the only ones you really felt. Others' emotions were felt by the way they looked or acted. You were unable to know who they were or how they felt, you could just tell. But with the little mermaid, you were able to be given her thoughts and actions through what the narrator said and through her thoughts. You heard nobody else's thoughts.

Compare and Contrast "Bartleby" and "The Birthmark"

1) Both authors seemed to use the same plot structure: in medias res. They began in the middle of the plots, beginning in the middle of the lives of the characters, and in the middle of the relationship for "The Birthmark." In each plot, one of the main characters is trying to change something they don't understand. In "Bartleby" the lawyer is trying to change and understand Bartleby because he doesn't understand him. He understands every other one of his workers, but Bartelby. It is similar in "The Birthmark," where the scientest tries to control nature and its footprint on his wife. He tries to control smething he doesn't understand. By doing this he kills his wife, just like in "Bartleby" Bartleby dies in the end.

In both stories, the characters are motivated. The Lawyer is motivated to understand Bartleby and the scientist is motivated to remove the birthmark on his wife's cheek. Both have dynamic characters: the wife, who realizes she hates her birthmark as well, and the lawyer, who realizes he can't understand Bartleby. They both have dynamic characters as well: the scientist and Bartleby.

2) By comparing the two stories, we can see their similarites. Though they are both set in different places and are about different characters and instances in life, they can be similar. They are both centered around the fact that characters want to change that which they don't know: nature and human nature; why people act they way they do and why nature acts the way it does. By comparing these stories, we see similarities, but placed in two different stories by two different authors. We can see the similar ways in how authors write.

Extra Credit: 45% Of Students Don't Learn Much In College

I don't know what many students do during college, but I don't feel like I'm not learning more at college. I feel like I've learned far more information being at college than I ever did in high school. Even in classes like my Survey of Biology, which was a large, lecture class, I feel like I learned a lot and retained a lot of information, far more than I ever did in my Biology class in high school. I also feel that I read a lot of pages of reading a week, that could be because I'm in English major, but I feel like if I had more pages of homework, I wouldn't learn more, I'd just feel more stressed out and probably wouldn't finish all of my homework. True, I don't write as many papers, but I feel like papers are just grades. I feel like, even if I wrote more papers, I wouldn't learn more than what I was already learning in class. Usually students tend to write papers on what they already know, this way they know what they're talking about. If we had to write more papers, I don't think it would boost the amount of information we learn or the amount we retain. I think it would be a waste of time. Some students do choose classes that are easier, but that's usually only when they have to take gen ed classes. With majors and minors, you tend to have to take requirements, so there is no way around having harder classes.

What I think needs to happen is that the teachers need to teach more. I feel like some teachers tend to just follow the books they teach from and read from them, word for word, instead of thinking of new ways and new, interesting information they want to teach their students. If you want your students to learn more, have the teachers teach more. Have them teach from other sources, not just textbooks, or have them create their own words from the textbook rather than reading word for word. Also, it would be nice if some teachers actually cared about teaching. With many teachers you can tell they don't care, they don't care if you learn or what you learn, they just want to get through the day. When teachers are passionate about what they're doing and truly passionate about having their students understand what they're teaching, you can tell. You can tell by the way they act with their students, by what they say, by all of the help they give to their students. If all teachers were this way, more students would learn and retain what they learn.

Bartleby and the Birthmark

To me these stories were similar because of what they centered around. To me they centered on the idea of the unknown; the idea of something or someone that remains mysterious, that you can't understand. In "The Birthmark," I felt like the scientist was trying so hard to understand nature through his experiments. He was trying to control nature by taking away the one blemish that nature gave to his lovely wife. It was like he was trying to play God by changing Nature, which is the unknown of life. Nature is something that is unknown and does as it pleases. Nature cannot be controlled by anything. With "Bartleby" I felt like the lawyer understood all of his employees, by the way that he describes them in the beginning. He knows their habits, he knows their motivations, and he knows their personalities. When Bartleby is employed, he doesn't understand him; Bartleby becomes the unknown, just as nature is in the first story. The lawyer can't understand Bartleby so he tries to control him, tries to help him become normal. In both stories, the characters try to control that which is mysterious to them, that which they can't grasp or fathom. These acts of control fail and death is the outcome.

Fake Twitter Accounts

This article made me think that many of the writers of the fake Twitter accounts are people linked closely to these republican and democratic representatives. At least that's how the said representatives felt. Maybe that's a clue that these fake accounts are created to unleash some steam about the people they work with? Maybe it's a way to dish the dirt on their fellow representatives or workers?

I did like thhat Mackowiak said that it was a nice "ego check." I think that's a good way to put it. These fake accoutns gave these people a way to see how they're portrayed by the population. It's their way to change maybe how they act or the things they say. What they might say may be different than how we portray them. It's like a reality check for them and, though it could be a boost to their egos that somebody is actually taking the time to make a fake account about them, it's kind of a slap across the face as well. It's a new look into what they say and the truth of what they say, especially when the Tweets are so closely linked to what the real people do and say.

About the Paper

I felt like I had an okay time to do the paper. For the second draft that we sent in, I didn't have too much of an idea on what to change, so I felt like that was kind of not useful. If we would have had more time to talk to our peers, I think it would have been better, but this time it didn't help too much for me at least. I did like the one-on-one time with you though. I think that helped a lot and it was nice to be able to talk to you about it, instead of just getting a paper back with scribbles all over it. This way we could ask questions and have that time that we have to go to. We had no choice and I liked that. Other than that, I don't think I was unsure of anything with the paper. With having to have three drafts turned in, I think it helped make sure the paper was good and it helped us get the papers right.

I'm a bug...

Once you talked about how Gregor never realized that he is a bug, it made me pay attention to that fact throughout the whole book. It's strange to me that he doesn't even wonder why he turns into a bug when he wakes up, like it's an every day occurrence to him. Oh, just one day I'm going to wake up and turn into a bug? I felt like he felt that it was a normal occurence. All he worried about was getting to work on time and going to work. He never asked why he was a bug or why he turned into a bug. His family never asked either? I thought that was strange. Everybod just accepted that he was a bug and that somebody in their family could turn into a bug...

Works Cited

Hutchings, William. "Structure and Design in a Soviet Dystopia: H. G. Wells, Constructivism, and Yevgeny Zamyakn's "We."" Journal of Modern Literature 9.1 (1981 - 1982): 81-102. JSTOR. Web. 30 January 2011.

Leatherbarrow, W.J. "Einstein and the Art of Yevgeny Zamyatin." The Modern Language Review 82.1 (1987): 142-151. JSTOR. Web. 30 January 2011.

Zamyatin, Yevgeny. We. Trans. Natasha Randall. New York: The Modern Library, 2006. Print.