Sunday, September 23, 2007

Finding Your Voice

"And the truth of your experience can only come through in your own voice."

We cannot have someone else tell our story, if we do, there will be bits and pieces missing. And for that, we need to find our own voice, so we can tell our story. And then you know, every story has more than one side to it, so you need to be able to tell your side of the story. In a court case, everyone only knows their side of the story, pieced together, you find the truth amongst the lies, which is definitely a good thing. But Lamott says that we try to copy our favorite authors which isn't something that she suggests. But for me, I think that in order to find our own voice, we need to mimic the style of others, because by doing so, we develop a mixture, that becomes ours. The great thing about our own voice is that it is the one real thing.

I guess a good way of looking at this is that our voice is just another way defining ourselves. It plays a key role in our lives as to who we are and how we think. The way we speak sure does reflect the way we think. Whether we're being serious, just messing around or not even sure what is going on. Having a voice is a good think, not in the sense so we can say everything that we want to or because we are tired of being silenced, but because it is a way to express ourselves, to let people know who we really our through our writing.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Bird by Bird

I like to write, granted I’m sometimes horrible (majority of it). But that’s not the point. Almost everything that I write is from my heart. It is something that has been on my mind and tearing at my insides. Oddly enough, I write mostly poetry, it’s an attribute that defines me. Ask just about anyone that I’ve known for more than three months, and they’ll tell you, “Erica is almost always writing in one of her notebooks”. A funny story, I graduated early, worked really hard for it, but I still went backed and walked with my class (bunch of wild losers). Well, my boss lived about an hour from work, he just finished college a few years ago, and he tells me, “I’m going home this weekend, what would you like for graduation?” I’m shocked and have no idea what to say, I tell him he doesn’t have to get me anything; he argues that he does because this is a big step in my life. Well, that next Monday Mr. Mo comes back, calls me into his office and gives my present. I creative writing journal, one of those magnetic ones, along with a new journal, and a gift card for barnes and nobles. I’m very grateful for the presents mind you, but I had to ask why journals, his reply “you’re always writing. Half of the time I can’t get you stop and get back to work”. Mr. Mo is a funny guy.

What this story has to do with Lamott’s few chapters here is that she says to find someone who is encouraging of your writing, who will criticize it, but not just to criticize it alone but to actually help you. And that’s what my boss did. He had read a few of my short stories and a few of my poems, and he was encouraging me to continue writing. I remember him telling me just before leaving for Wisconsin to remember to write down all of my thoughts and ideas, no matter how emotional they get, don’t be afraid to let them out. If it’s something that will hurt someone, write it down, but don’t give it to them. I was able to find someone who encourages my writing, whether it’s horrible or actually good. But like Lamott, and I have to agree with her, having one or two people read your work, that you actually trust is good to have. I have only ever had a few people that I trust with my writing, my three friends Aimee, Tama and Samantha, my ex boyfriend (his name isn’t important), and my coworker Jacob. Aimee, Sam, Tama and Jacob would give me constructive criticism, tell me what was good and tell me what was bad. They would suggest changes here and there and sometimes I’d take their advice, and sometimes I wouldn’t. They’d remind to go more in depth with a character or what I was feeling and trying to get across. But I think mostly, they wanted to steal my ideas…..I’m totally kidding.

Lamott reminds us to go deeper into what we’re writing, discover more about it, observe what’s around us. Don’t be afraid to dig deep, and don’t take your first impression or idea too seriously, but do remember to get them all down. And it doesn’t hurt not to be a stubborn, arrogant….use your imagination to continue this…and actually listen to what others have to say. Just because it’s your thoughts and emotions and it sounds concrete to you, doesn’t mean it is, it might still be a little foggy. So have a friend look over it, but don’t let the friend be a jackass about it.

Sunday, September 16, 2007

The Wall, The Screen and the Image: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial

I've never been to Washington D.C. I've always wanted to though. To be able to see the buildings that give tribute to our history would be astounding. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial isn't a building that I ever really spent time contemplating about or even seeing, but after reading this article by Marita Sturken, I would actually like to visit this monument. I think that it is amazing how the black wall are not only screens that are projected upon, but also shield itself. I never knew that there were, I'm sorry, are statues that were built to go with this monument. I do like the fact that there are two different statues that represent the men and the women of the war, but I don't like the idea that there are two different statues. It would have been a lot more meaningful to have one statue represent both the men and women of the war. Which calls to my attention, why did they have to add more to the monument? Extra statues weren't really needed to get the full significance across.
I always thought that the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was in a shape of a V to stand for the "Vietnam" War. I never thought of it as representing anything else. I found this interpretation to be very weird. Ok, so the monument was designed by a female, that doesn't mean anything. And if we look at the fact that she didn't know anything about this war or what it meant to the people who served in it, she did a pretty good job at making it stand for something, really stand for something. It is a place for people who lost someone they loved, whether they were relative, friend, or someone they fought in the war with.
It doesn't matter that this monument has gone through huge amounts of criticism, everything that is great goes through it.

Freewriting

As I was reading Freewriting by Peter Elbow, I instantly thought of middle school and one of my best friends. We had most of our classes together and our lockers were across from each other, so the classes that we didn’t have together, left availability to sneak a letter into each others’ locker.

The reason this comes to mind is free writing in itself. Elbow claims that free writing is “most effective way I know to improve your writing”, is so true. My example of passing notes for one is an occasion where free writing can help to improve writing in general, but only if someone keeps the notes for later. In my case, I have almost every note that I passed in middle school. Only one of my friends is aware of this, she in fact has a good portion of the notes that I am missing. Whenever we get together, we pull out all of these notes we passed and we read through them. We laugh about what was going on in our lives that was so important that we just couldn’t pay attention in class. We laugh about how we how many mistakes we made as we were writing because we were in such a hurry and didn’t read over it to make sure it made sense, yet at the time when we passed it on and read it, it made perfect sense. But whenever we look at these old notes, we realize that because we wrote them for each others’ eyes only and not for a grade, they were fun and it didn’t matter what we wrote. (Well of course it mattered to us, but it wasn’t as important as making sure we would get a good grade on it. We didn’t grade each other on the content and grammar of our notes. Had we though, we may not still have these ridiculously funny notes).

It’s kind of like drawing a picture when you’re bored, a lot of people write when they’re bored. To their friends, relatives even just little poems and rhymes. No one ever sees them half of the time, but because we are writing for the heck of it, we are improving our writing. I don’t necessarily believe that we learn from just writing without going back and reading the last sentence when we are at a loss for words. I think that we do learn from going back and reading that last sentence or two to help us continue writing. So I can’t say that I can completely agree with Elbow in this aspect of writing about nonsense and just writing for the practice of it. What I can agree on is that writing for fun and just writing to write, whether or not anyone sees it, does improve our writing.

Shitty First Drafts and Perfectionism

Without shitty first drafts, we wouldn’t have amazing finished works. Lamott hits it right on the spot when she says on page 22 “very few writers really know what they are doing until they’ve done it.” I say this because it’s not only true with writing, but it’s true with a lot of other things in life. A mother doesn’t know how to change a diaper the first few times she does it, but she eventually gets it right. A nurse isn’t going to know how to draw blood the first few times, and that’s why she has to go to school to learn how. I really love how Lamott compares the first draft to a child, how it is allowed to be wild and free with all sorts of mistakes because it is an amazing way to let our visions come through. That’s how childhood is, isn’t it; full of mistakes and we let our visions and ideas run wild as if they are real. We have to make mistakes in our first draft to get to the real idea or what it is we are really looking for. We may think we know exactly what it is that we want to write about at first, but we end up changing our mind through each new idea; much like us college students and our majors. We know what we want to major in, but we change our mind if it isn’t what we thought it would be or even if it is too hard for us.

“Perfectionism is the voice of the oppressor, the enemy of the people.” –Anne Lamott

They say that practice makes perfect, but they also say that nobody is perfect, so why then do we let perfection control us? By being perfect, we are not allowed to make mistakes, but by making mistakes, we shape ourselves. Our mistakes make us who we are, whether the mistake itself is small or immense. For me, I would rather be able to make mistakes in my writing than in life, because in life, we only get one chance, even though we learn from the mistake and know not to make the same one. But with our writing, we are allowed to make as many mistakes as we make, we can go back, learn from them and fix them. We should really take advantage of being able to make mistakes in our writing. It seems to be the only place where we can make them without being judged dramatically and be forgiven for.

Saturday, September 15, 2007

How To Say Nothing In 500 Words

To say nothing in five hundred words is in fact easier than saying something in two hundred words. Roberts makes a point to mention that instead of bringing up every reason why football should be abolished in one essay, to keep the focus on one major issue. I have to agree. When I write, I try to keep my focus on the topic at hand, although I will admit that I tend to have many subtopics going through my mind. I find it easier to write a paragraph on each subtopic with all of my valid points, than to crank out a paper on many different subtopics with very little to say about each one. After doing this, I am able to depict which will make my stronger paper or essay. Which is one of the points Roberts is trying to make.

I also noticed that Roberts mentions many elementary skills to writing, that I was once taught by my loony tenth grade writing teacher. Be creative in what is being said, do not let it become so dull that whoever is reading it falls asleep, but better yet, use some flamboyant words; not everywhere, but in a few places. Do leave some dull points because the paper should not be too flashy. And sometimes it can be said better when it is dull than when it is spiced up. The more information you have to write the paper, the better the paper will be. Which brings up my subtopics issue from the previous paragraph. Having a set amount to write can be difficult. One either has more to say, or not enough. To write everything that is running through your mind, to not use the first few ideas and be blunt about it is better. I really like Roberts’ concept here, it makes a lot of sense. Though, shouldn’t this have been a given? I mean really, is it that hard to say what you really mean when you say it all the time to your friends and usually have more to say than what you really needed to in the first place.

But if you don’t have a lot to say, Roberts suggests rearranging the wording, so that you can say everything, which of course is not in fact easier than having too much to say. When you do have too much to say, you can break it down into what is more important. (As previously stated). The main thing that is taken from me in this article is that Roberts put a fun little twist on getting the basic points of writing across. Rather than informing us how to make our papers better and not boring as they apparently tend to be, he makes us interested in what he has to say by goofing around with is style and getting write to the point. (I meant to do that. It’s my lil pun). Which is exactly what Roberts is trying to get across.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

The Owl Has Flown

The article “The Owl Has Flown” by Sven Birkerts brought to my attention, that I cannot think of a single philosopher that is living today. That is very tragic. Of course I can think of philosophers before my time…but none today. Birkerts make some very valid points that I was able to catch right away, which I of course liked. (I did not feel stupid because of it). As he was talking about intensive and extensive reading, I automatically knew that he meant reading for a purpose and reading for information. I think along with that though, a lot of people today, read what they do because they either have to or want to be able to say, “oh yeah, I read that”, even if they cannot interpret it or give a deeper evaluation as to why it was important. As a student, I am able to confess that in the past, I have skimmed over a book for the sole purpose of being able to pass a test and not get anything out of what I read, let alone remember the title or author; within two days, I forgot everything. My generation has truly lost its value of tradition. Yes, we still practice traditions that have been going on for years, but do we ever really stop to think of what they really mean? June weddings, the point of the bouquet, why women wear white and men wear black. We don’t appreciate the values behind our traditions or the wisdom and knowledge that it brings. We are too busy in our lives today to take time out and reflect in our own silence. It is more about “going with the flow” or “doing as others are” rather than taking time to find out who we are and our purpose in life. Maybe we should all take some time and read the book about our purpose in life, and actually reflect upon it!

Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren for those of you who have no idea what I was talking about.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Imagination and Reality

“The reality of art is the reality of the imagination.”

“The honest currency of art is the honest currency of the imagination.”

-Jeanette Winterson

Our imaginations are only imaginations until we express them, then they become a reality. If what we imagine becomes a reality, it is only as good as its artistic value. Thus, if it is truly good, then it will enter the cycle of reuse. Take Picasso or Mozart, what the two of them created has artistic value because people like it and want it. From our knowledge, it is their creations, and no one else can claim them. Granted, people do not necessarily understand what Picasso’s message was in his painting, or even if he had one, but that is what makes it unique, admired and wanted. People like knowing the truth, but they also like being right; by this I mean that the viewer or listener of the piece of art can interpret any way that they please, letting their imagination run, creating an art from the art. It does not matter how many times we have heard Mozart’s Symphony No. 41 Jupiter in C major, every time we hear that silence at the second minute and then the chorus of violins strike up with the marching drum, we still do not expect it and the feeling that overcomes us is a dramatic feeling that the imaginer wanted us to capture in our own imaginations. Once a person expresses their imagination, it becomes an honest reality.

Monday, September 10, 2007

In Plato's Cave

Alright, so I'm not really getting why sex has to do with photography other than it is considered voyeurism and that that is a truth to life, and so I just wanted to state that now, even though I will be coming back to it later.

Now, this "In Plato's Cave" by Susan Sontag makes many good points relating to photography and art that I never thought of. That a painting is only life how that person sees it, how the painting is very subjective and opinionated, while a photograph is a document of life itself, an image of truth. How Sontag states that photos are captured experiences on page 466 is true, but not something I ever thought of. I like the way she puts it though. Today, photos are seen all over the web, people can download and send photographs of themselves, friends and family to, well, their friends and family. They can also just post them google for everyone to see. Or the fact that she mentions that photographs are proof that an event or experience actually did occur.

Sontag goes on, (this the whole sex scandal part), about how photography has "become almost as widely practiced an amusement as sex…" on page 469 (it would be on that page), which spreads out throughout the rest of the article. Mentioning that the photographer becomes the "voyeur" while taking the photographs of (what the hell, let's be sexist in this posting) his "subject" where "only he has mastered the situation", pg 471. In this same paragraph, towards the end, photography is voyeurism of all meanings of life. I can see where Sontag is getting at this now….The photographer has to separate himself from the photographed, much like in a play with a cast and audience.

Another well justified point is that photography is an everyday common sort of thing! YAY! Thank you Tom, myspace is a vast improvement on that. So much so that people are realizing the beauty of nature. Finally! It's about time! Continuing, Sontag points out that people are trading in killing animals for photographing them, which makes a lot of sense. Who REALLY wants elephant tusks when they can have a picture of a friend, or complete stranger, standing just near a LIVING one. Not even someone standing next to it. Having a picture of the elephant all on its own great too! I know some people who would pay lots of money for a picture of a living elephant, rather than the elephants tusks.

Which is yet another thing! (I'm almost done I swear…haha) Photographs make a longer lasting impact. Sure they fade, but they can remade and so can their image every time it's thought of. But pictures really do show the reality of what has happened and what is happening, or should I say "just happened" since the image has already been captured? It really does show lots of things no one ever believed or wanted to believe were true.

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Bird By Bird: School Lunches & Polaroids

School Lunches? Why on earth would someone who is trying to teach others to overcome writers block and become a better writer want to tell her audience about school lunches? Because Ann Lamott realized that there is so much there to write about. She picked a random subject for her students to write about and discovered that there was too much material. "...taking short assignments and then producing really shitty first drafts...can yield a bounty of detailed memory....characters lurking in the shadows". In the first two chapters, she mentions that a person should just keep writing and not worry about any errors until they are done writing. I have to say that this suggestion, along with the statement of short assignments producing more material then we could have thought there to be is bizarre. On the other hand, the fact that she thinks about it and breaks it down, contradicts what she is suggesting. She first tells us to sit down and write everything that we think of, yet she herself does not! Lamott, at first does, but then she realizes that she has too much material, so she sticks "with the contents" which is to say the least, any of what she could have written about. I know I am not one to say whether or not what she could have written about would have been better, but there is no way to know now, because she opted out writing what was going on through her mind, which could have been great. She later realizes that she cannot remember why raspberry jam was not well suited for a P.B.J. so she calls a friend. They begin talking and she realizes so much more that she hadn't thought of, which as she puts "came back with horrible clarity". Just a page after this- page 37 the first paragraph- she states that there's no way to know if any of her material is usable, but she just needs to keep writing and get it all down. Didn't she just contradict herself again

Okay, I realize that everybody contradicts themselves all the time, it is inevitable, but it is one of those "do as I say, not as I do" concepts that our parents teach us and we of course disregard. But the point is, why is she contradicting herself in a manner where she knows that if her readers are paying close enough attention, will be able to notice? I had no idea at first why she might do this, then I realized what Lamott might mean by this, if it was not a mere accident; it was something that was unimportant, but she would remember it in the event that she wanted to use it. Is that not the point? If you most definitely will remember it, there's no need to write it down. On the other hand, is it really that important...I suppose it is not that big of deal if the writer leaves something ridiculous out of their first draft, even if they are to be writing everything that comes to mind.


Which brings me to the chapter "Polaroids". We will not actually know how our first draft is going to turn out, until we have completed, regardless of how we envisioned it to turn out. Lamott goes on to discuss one situation that everyone hates, having to write when you really do not want to and absolutely have nothing to write about, but it sounds somewhat interesting. So you think about it, take notes as they come insight, knowing you still have no idea what you will be writing about or how the finished project will look like. But in the end, you find it, you reach your finish line, much like the young girl on crutches who is determined not to give up and keeps going until she reaches the finish line, even as the members of the crowd are starting to leave.


I think this has a lot to do with how we as students, progressing our writing, tend not to write. We do not generally write everything that comes to mind or that is important. We as writers tend to write until our brain runs out of ideas and we then stop. We reread, edit, erase, and add more right then and there, versus waiting or talking to a friend. Instead, we continue to write in circles about something that may or may not be important or that great to write about, leaving us to write in more circles. Though Lamott contradicts herself in saying to write everything, to continue writing down all of our thoughts, yet leaves out some of hers in writing about sandwiches, she's making a very impertinent point: If it really is useless and only has a little to do with the subject at hand, then save yourself the trouble of writing in circles and leave it out.

Which brings me to my last point, "thank you!" as you are shouting with your head and hands thrown upwards, that Lamott has proved her point. At first we think there is nothing to write about, but in the end, there is an endless amount to write about, with me being a prime example.....

Saturday, September 8, 2007

Cafe Painting

When we were first given this assignment, I will admit that I was psyched. I like art, I've always been more of an appreciator than an artist, so I knew that I would be able to have fun with the assignments; especially since we were told to be creative. So thus, I give you my thoughts and interpretation of our "Cafe Painting".


I instantly thought of a jungle, more specifically, the jungle from Lord of the Flies, by William Golding. I could see the scene where the hog was running from the boys, and started laughing. But as I looked on, gazing at this painting, I noticed so much more...The many shades of green; how it is darker in some areas, mainly the bottom right hand corner and lighter in others, the upper left hand corner. The fact that there is also a highlight over that last corner I mentioned, emphasized that there is so much more going on beneath.

Noting the above, it really dawned on me that this painting is from an outsiders view. From far above what lies beneath. I had noticed it before, right when I saw the painting, but I hadn't focused in on it until that moment. This specific painting is a symbol or metaphor, if you will, to human life. The first stages of friendship or companionship is getting to know that other person, but the outside can be very misleading, and often times is at first. From the outside, this painting is very peaceful and serene; on the inside though, terrible things are happening. There are poachers, thieves, animals killing other animals, thus leaving the left over components spread through the jungle, and so much more. It is dark and brutal underneath the outside.

Bringing back that I mentioned this is much like meeting a new person for the first time. This new friend can be, or appear to be, this amazing person through their lies and deception; while underneath it all, they're struggling, fighting their inner demons that tell them their not good enough, or too good, and quite possibly that you're deceiving them, whether or not you are. This painting represents, that what you see isn't always what you get, that there is so much more that lies beneath it all. It represents the conflicts that people in general, go through everyday, fighting their inner demons just to make it through each day.

I couldn't take my eyes off of this painting, which was because I was immensely fixated on what lies beneath it. Much like finding what lies beneath my friends or that new acquaintance, even myself at times. This painting is the embodiment of deception and misconstruction which is that of life.

And on that note, I would like to share two poems that I wrote, in which I also interpret this painting.


Curtain Call

Perform it all,
For me and them-
It's curtain call,
And I'm condemned.
I must sit
And I must stare-
Must watch your skit
And I don't care.
Don't care about your act,
It's just a plain sick joke.
Screw this friendship pact,
'Cause you always seem to choke.
All eyes on you
Have their attention.
I see your eyes,
I see your scars-
You cannot hide,
Behind those bars.
It's curtain call,
And you are late.
You performed,
Before your date.



Mistrust

I put my trust in you,
But all it was,
Was mistrust.
I put my faith in you,
But all it was,
Was mistrust.
I told you all my secrets,
But all it was,
Was mistrust.
I thought I trusted you,
I told you all I knew.
You knew just how I feel,
You know just how I deal.
I told you everything,
I never kept anything.
You knew it all,
Even the names doll.
You used it,
You abused it.
You picked me,
And you tricked me!
Now you call to brag,
And all this, is a drag.
You stole my mind,
Thoughts, ideas, jokes and names.
The friend you are is not my kind,
You are the one to blame.
I mistrusted you,
What a fool I've come to be.
Because now I see,
What you kept from me!
I put my trust in you,
But all it was,
Was mistrust.