Triumphs and failures

The class went well. I thought i wrote the instructions well, but apparently people with little concept of what a butterfly looks like built the kit. I was frustrated about the group who we gave the kit seemed determined to screw around. While i know the instructions were a little distant,  I had no idea that people could be this thick. I was pleased how the monkey i built went. I liked the monkey. I learned to be a bit more clear and a bit more through in my writings.

Amy Tan is encouraged to peruse science and math over English because her vocal language may be sub par. She may have spoken with a slight Chinese accent, which in our American view, is an indication that person does not speak English well. While there is some similarities to spoken English and written English, these 2 skills are separate. A fine orator may not be the best writer.

Amy Tan is trying to disprove the thought that verbal skills indicate intelligence and writing abilities. Her mother may not speak correct English, but it does not mean she deserves poorer treatment or judgement. A child may speak "better" English, but they will still understand their mother.

The meeting with Joel for CWS was a nice revisit. I haven't seen some of those people since the last CWS lab, and i found out that the American education system has failed. While I will not mention names, a person in our class failed to realize the difference between Washington D.C. and Washington State. She also failed to locate Oklahoma, Texas, Pennsylvania, and New York on an unlabeled map.
At the meeting, we went over how our semester was coming along. Joel asked if we had any questions, concerns or problems he could help. The silence was deafening.

Topic for Digital Story telling

My first kiss and the atomic fallout resulting from that kill

This article is organized by topic of the metaphors. It is almost arranged like a text book. There is a heading at the top of each new subject. The metaphor the stuck out at me the most was about the eagle and the artificial bait. I can relate to the feeling of accomplishment, only to be shot down by a stupid error. The thesis of this article was how the writers view themselves. This was not like an argument or persuasion paper, where the thesis is supported by concrete facts. This thesis was supported by flowing metaphors and other literary techniques.  "Good" writers view themselves in a positive, optimistic way, while "bad" writers view themselves negatively or out of control of their situation.

Wikipedia is a useful tool for research. It provides good insight and a broad understanding of most topics. With this said, it should not be used for in depth research. Wikipedia is good for getting general data on certain non controversial topics, like when Hans Zimmer was born. Die hard Encyclopedia lovers point out that they have the same information in book form. What they fail to mention is that encyclopedias are heavy, expensive, and not always up to date. The nice thing about Wikipedia is that it is always being updated and changed. It has articles from topics that happened only last week. It might take years for that to reach print. Just because something is printed on paper, doesn't necessarily make it true. The negative aspect of Wikipedia is that some topics, such as abortion, Christianity, the war in Iraq, and which way the toilet paper should fall, are disputed and not always accurate. ( the paper should always come from the top!!!). So, with these points being out there, Wikipedia is a tool for getting base knowledge of a topic, but it should not be used as a crutch to sustain an argument.

No. I still feel like he was a stupid, arrogant, dumb@$$ who got him self killed. His die was preventable, and not romantic like it is portrayed. He starved to death, which is a painful way to go. He caused unbelievable pain to his parents and family. No child should die before their parents. I feel sorry for his mother and father. They know in their heads that their son died a horrifically painful death. I feel like Chris deserves some pity, but not idolized like he is in the book. He thought he could survive, and he was wrong.

The author included these chapters to show that Chris wasn't alone in the goal to find "himself" in the wilderness. Some of these stories end the same way as Chris's, like "Nemo". Nemo went by that name to reflect the personality of Capt. Nemo in 20000 Leagues Under the Sea. This fit his personality better. Ironically, Nemo in real life ends up like Nemo in the book, they both disappear in strange circumstances, whether that being a desert or a Malstorm. The other outcasts like John Waterman and Carl McCunn, all die. Does anyone else see a common theme in this? Whats the point of finding yourself if you die in the pursuit?

These epigraphs exemplified what Chris wanted to do. These talk about travel, and the freedom associated with it. Chris wanted to truly be free from material, government control, and anyone telling him what to do. I think these quotes can help establish a balance of freedom and attachment. One should not be so attached to what they have, that when an opportunity comes along, you don't take it. One the other hand, being attached can give you a stable base to live on. Friends and family are a part of being attached. I am sure most people would not give up all contact for the sake of "freedom".

To reinvent yourself, I think, is overrated. To reinvent yourself implies that you have a new start in everything. The slate is completely clean. What bothers me about this concept is nothing good is retained. Is there nothing about you worth saving? Every person has a unique thing about them that makes them different. This should be preserved. I propose, instead of reinventing oneself, adapt and change. To change in parts would help you change the bad parts and mold them into parts that are more acceptable to yourself. Why throw out the entire fruit when you can cut out the bad spots?

I feel like Chris was foolish and stupid for doing what he did. Wilderness survival is hard, even for the best trained people. Bear Grills does it, but his goal is to survive and be rescued. He was arrogant to believe that he could survive in one of the harshest places on earth with no formal training. I could probably survive for a while but then again, I did wilderness survival for 6 years. When Ralph Waldo Emerson did Walden, he knew what he was getting into, and he was in a more civilized area then Alaska. While Chris's death is tragic, it was easily preventable.

Nature is important to me but not central. Nature should be preserved and protected from unnecessary waste and thoughtless destruction. As an Eagle Scout, I have spent countless nights in the woods, and have walked through virgin growth forests in northern Canada (my analysis of Canada: Lots of Mosquitoes.), and I appreciate nature. I don't know if I will ever "find" myself in the woods, but I feel a connection with the woods.

Being all  materialistic is not good thing. But being simple as possible is also not a good thing. The key to this problem lies somewhere in the middle. This balance of wanting stuff, and being happy with what you have is  key to satisfaction. While a "simpler" way may seem nice, its progression is slower. Without the desire for stuff,    a lot of inventions would have never happened. On the other hand, pure materialism will lead to dissatisfaction, because you will never achieve the amount of stuff you want. To be balanced is to be happy

To be honest, I haven't changed much since I started college. I still think it is cool when a Prof. swears. It maybe a college freshman thing, but when a Prof lets a stream of profanity loose, it just makes me laugh. I am still the same goofy kid that i was when i started. I may have picked up some skills I didn't have in High School,  such as SCUBA diving, but the core of me remains the same. I joined some clubs in the beginning of the year and I remain active in those clubs. This shows my interests haven't changed. Maybe later this semester, I will realize how much I have changed.