Monday, January 31, 2011

Lit 101 - Essay #1, Rewrite

Darlene McCoy
Jody Greene
Lit 101
31 January 2011
Concepts, Employed
    In his essay, Creation and the Other, Derek Attridge argues that, "Creation is both an act and an event, both something that is done intentionally by an effort of the will and something that happens without warning to a passive, though alert, consciousness" (26). To reach his conclusion, he defines two concepts: the other, and the idioculture. He then employs the two concepts to explain his overall argument.
    The first part of Attridge's essay contains the definition of the idea of the other, "that which is, at a given moment, outside the horizon provided by the culture for thinking, understanding, imagining, feeling, perceiving" (19). It is necessary for the reader to understand the idea and workings of the other, because the other is used in the process of explaining Attridge's thesis. In this paragraph, Attridge also writes on how the other operates. He states that the other is something that is just out of grasp of the would-be creator, and that it can only operate within the materials present in the creative mind. It must probe the limits of that mind (22). Attridge gives this information because it will become relevant when he explains his thesis later in the essay.
    The second subsection of Attridge's essay deals with the concept of the idioculture. He begins by defining "culture" in the way that he will use it. Then, after clearing up his idea of culture for the sake of clarity, he introduces idioculture as, "the name for the totality of the cultural codes constituting a subject, at a given time, as an overdetermined, self-contradictory system that manifests itself materially in a host of ways" (22). He explains idioculture a bit further, "The complexity of a cultural field or an idioculture is something we can barley fathom; it is certainly not something to which we can achieve discreet access," in the hopes that the reader will retain the additional information, for he will need to recall it later (22).
    After Attridge defines the two previously mentioned concepts, he commences explaining his thesis in the third component of the essay. The process of creation begins with a human sitting down and beginning to write. He wills himself into the creative mindset, and labors, which Attridge then defines as an act. He then encounters the other, which reforges his prior knowledge into new knowledge. Attridge defines this as an event. Both are components of creation, one needs the other in order to function. The other cannot be encountered if the human does not will himself into the creative mindset, the act, but creation cannot take place until the other comes to him at a certain point in time, the event. Without the definitions, the thesis would continue to cause confusion. Yet, one loophole remains without further explanation -- where does the other come from? Attridge draws upon the previously retained information presented in the earlier sections of the text. Because humans do not have the capacity to fully comprehend their idioculture, there are cracks in their minds. The other creeps into these cracks, and lies in wait until its encounter with said human. Without the retained information, this once loophole could not be fixed, but because Attridge implemented it, there are no holes in his argument. The patching up of loopholes and the use of defined concepts make his thesis clear and irrefutable.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

EXCEPT

THAT SHIT AIN'T PERFECT WHITE. FUCK THAT. NEEDS TO BE WHITE SO MY BANNER BLENDS INTO THE BACKGROUND. FUCK. FUCK. FUCK.

BACK TO THE NORMAL BLACK THING BECAUSE I THINK I STILL LIKE IT THE BEST. BLOG HAS LOTS OF COLOR, SO BACKGROUND IMAGE TYPE STUFF DOESN'T NEED TO BE.

STILL TYPING IN CAPS. OMG. WTF. BBQ. SO MANY BBQS. I LOVE BBQ SAUCE.

SAUCESAUCESAUCE OMG SAUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCE

x.x I need to sleeeeeeep

ADD.

CHANGED BACKGROUND AGAIN. FELT LIKE PINK. LIKE ZEBRAS.

QKDIWSUBFKSJDNBGWIUFRNV NOT GONNA GET TO TALK TO WILL, HAS TO SLEEP.

SAD.

W;PDKNMGW9IREUOHTNBKESFNFVKAH48TIWHTG

More Axolotls!

EVER SINCE I WROTE ABOUT THESE LITTLE GUYS I LIKE THEM A LOOOOOOOOT.

AND THIS IS REALLY CUTE:



I'M REALLY COMFORTABLE, THEREFORE THIS BLOG POST IS IN ALL CAPS.

I'M WAITING FOR WILL (READ: CUTE GUY I'VE BEEN CHATTING WITH LATELY) TO FINISH SOME PROJECT SO I CAN CHAT WITH HIM FOR ABOUT 30 MINUTES BECAUSE I HAVE TO GET UP AT THE CRACK OF DAWN BECAUSE FUCK EVERYTHING. OMG CAPS ARE SOOOOOOO COOOOOOOOOL.

MY LEGS FEEL SO AMAZING. SO DOES MY HAIR. I LOVE SHOWERS. I LOVE SAYING "I'M GOING OFF TO GET HOT, WET, AND NAKED."

MWAHAHAHAHAHA. MURRRRHURHURHUR ♥

CUTE CUTE CUTE CUTE



AND SUPER CUTE DOOOOOOOOOOOODLES IN PINK!
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG
MAN, I THINK I'M BORED. PHILLIP MADE US BANANA PANCAKES.AND WE PUT NUTELLA ON THEM. WHICH WOULD BE TOTALLY FUCKING AWESOME, EXCEPT, I'VE GOT TO WRITE ON DEREK ATTERIDGE AGAIN. FUCK MEEEE!
GOD DAMNED STUPID LIT CLASSES TAKIN' OVER MY LIFE 'N SHIT.
I DO HOMEWORK FOR FUN NOW. FUCK. FUCK. FUCK.
AT LEAST WHEN I WAS OBSESSED WITH VIDEO GAMES, I FELT LIKE I ACCOMPLISHED SOME THINGS WITH MY DAY... XD DUNNO HOW THAT WORKS, BRO.

OMG CAPS. OMG CAPS. SO MANY CAPS FOR SO MUCH COMFORT. I THINK I MAY CHANGE THE FONT OF THIS POST TO MAKE IT EASIER ON THE EYES, THOUGH.

OR MAYBE I FEEL LIKE THIS POST IS FUNNY, IN SOME STUPID IRONIC WAY THAT ONLY I CAN FIND FUNNY.
MAYBE. I'VE GOT AN ODD SENSE OF HUMOR. BUT EMMY LIKED MY GAGA HUMOR, SO IT'S GOOD. ^^/

OH RIGHT, CUTE DOODLE:
WAIT, BEFORE DOODLE:

I ONLY WROTE ALL THAT SHIT SO THERE COULD BE SOME TEXT IN BETWEEN PICTURES. I DON'T LIKE THE WAY A BUNCH OF PICTURES ALL TOGETHER LOOKS. 'CAUSE I'M CRAZY, AND KIND OF OCD.

NOW, DOODLE:


EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

The Broski and I



I love him. ♥

Mooski #21 Ghosts 'n Stuff - Deadmau5 ft. Rob Swire

Just a song everyone should know, 'cause it's awesome.

Super Anti-Glee Article

Minorly bat shit insane. I got a few good laughs from some of it.
Highlighted 'em in purple.

It's so disgusting to think that people are filled with such hate. So sad.

http://christwire.org/2010/01/what-every-parent-should-know-about-the-tv-show-glee/
stephenson billings on glee and homosexuality
An innocuous little show popped up on America’s tv screens late last year. Its name is “Glee” and it’s full of vibrant teens dealing with the gentle challenges of high school life. These are fresh-faced kids, hard working and motivated, who can break into song at the drop of a sweaty football. But is there more to this sugary pop of a series? Should parents be concerned about any subtext of adult themes and situations? What makes this show so popular?

An in-depth analysis of Glee will certainly raise the eyebrows of parents across America. It contains a surprising number of mature scenarios– from pre-marital sex to drug use, from adultery to abortion, from premature ejaculation to explicit homosexual experimentation. Glee goes out of its way to appear wholesome at first glance. The first 15 minutes of every episode is quite polite and that’s part of its success. It is colorful and cheerful with a scent of innocence. The message it seems to send is that teens should stay in school and aim for college. Yet beyond that (once the adults in the room tune out), it descends into a much darker place.
The Parents Television Council warns that Glee contains, “gratuitous sex, explicit dialogue, violent content, and obscene language. It is completely unsuitable for children.” This is reason enough parents should be tuning their teens out of Glee. But I would go even further– the ethical and social risks that Glee poses are so severe that it is unworthy of a home on a national network and should be removed from broadcast. I sincerely believe that no person or organization should continue to finance this show.

SEXUALITY, SPORTS AND SHOWTUNES

To understand the dangerous implications of this poorly conceived series, let me start with the characters. They are just not believable. All the women students look to be in their late 20s or early 30s in real life. The teachers aren’t the suffering and hardened types you’ll find in real American public schools. This rosy little place of Glee is devoid of gun violence, sexting, drug dealing, suicide and larger questions of faith.
stephenson billings on glee and homosexuality
Instead of a real world high school, we have a fantasyland of happy, shirtless teens hanging out in the showers or dancing on million dollar stages. Why must the producers of this show have so many shots of the football team in the locker room? They’re constantly dropping their shorts and jumping into a steamy shower, showing off tight biceps or lathering themselves all over with a fresh bar of soap. Is this some crafty attempt to appeal to the homosexual segment of the show’s audience? Is it really appropriate for today’s male teens to let this sort of softcore utopia influence them?

Additionally, the show has far too many musical numbers. From R&B hits to showtunes to classic rock & roll, the boys and girls of Glee really can put on a performance. But it’s not convincing on that million-dollar stage. They come across as trying too hard with their exaggerated facial expressions and hip posturings, the soaring voices ranges. They’ve clearly been coached. The singing is just too finely polished. The dance numbers are too excruciatingly choreographed. No high school kids can put on these sorts of shows at the spur of a moment. These things require years of gut-wrenching training.
stephenson billings on glee
Ultimately, these ad hoc songfests give children a very false impression about talent and success. They are led to believe if they just spin around and shout, they’re creating world-class music. They are led to believe we live in a world where anybody and everybody can succeed as long as they have heart. But this is far from true. Some people are born with the vocal chords for music, others have the bodies for football and others have the brains for math. That is reality. But this show is a drug of false expectations that will inevitably harm our children. It convinces impressionable teens to avoid serious career training in favor of having “fun” in the “arts.” Also, the music numbers just drag down the plot of the show.
On a related note, Glee’s actors constantly make the argument that excelling at athletics does not contribute anything to the college application process. They posit the theory that a singing club will make you more likely to get into Ohio State or Princeton. This is false and it’s reckless for the creators of this show to promote such disinformation. Athletics have been a proven stepping-stone for academic and business success for over a century. The number of athletes who have gone on to full scholarships at the very best universities in this country are legion and legendary. Nothing even close could be said of a minor high school singing club. If children take this belief to heart, it could wind up seriously hurting their chances of college survival as well as their health (sports are essential for keeping fit, strong and attractive!).
Another major fault with the show is its fawning celebration of teenage homosexuality and consumer indulgence. Again the show makes the case that accepting the gay lifestyle and making yourself as outrageous as possible will help you achieve something despite whatever social limitations you may have. Disregarding any sense of fair play, the show does not offer any alternative to the gay lifestyle argument. There are no teens cured of their relentless and wild male sex desires, there are no moral figures on hand to give a comforting hand, there are no popular boys who say, “I don’t want to hurt my family anymore and I love Jesus, so I am going to stop doing gay things with guys in the bathroom.”
stephenson billings on glee and homosexuality

THE GOLDEN GIRLS CONNECTION

Recently, I wrote about studies that revealed the dangerous influence that the 1980s tv show “The Golden Girls” had on American men now in their 30s, 40s and 50s (see “The Golden Girls: How One TV Show Turned A Generation Of American Boys Into Homosexuals”). The link between watching the Girls and increased risks of homosexual behavior was made abundantly meaningful. In a nutshell, the Golden Girls turned a generation away from procreation. It made our American boys into the most raunchy, campy, carnal people on the planet. If, as a society, we could have returned to the 80s with what we know now and stop that show, American culture might be drastically different today.

As I write about Glee now in 2010, I can’t help but think that America is on the threshold of another dramatic cultural shift. If we let this show continue, our children will find a way to watch it. It is a drug that is that addictive. If our children continue to watch, they will undoubtedly be influenced by its radical same-sex messages. A generation from now, when these children become adults, what kind of country will the United States be? How many middle-aged men will find themselves in a dead-end Glee-based lifestyle? Will they be ostentatious and sensitive, their dreams smashed up against a wall crying out to have that giant hole in their souls stuffed with some musky foreign thrill? Will they be violating what’s left of our traditional cultural landscape with unimaginable high-tech perversions, drenching, nay drowing the bright young men of tomorrow in their relentless sauces of net porn and showtunes, maximized liberties and stem-cell party drugs? Will male sports just become an excuse for gay locker room orgies? How long until these types also legislate to destroy the beauty of marriage, the safety of religion, the rights of the righteous? Look into the eyes of a young Kurt Hummel. Is that not the face our of future’s polymorphously perverse intellectual terrorist? Change the channel my friends. Change the channel and change the world!
stephenson billings on glee and kurt hummel

PARENT’S GUIDE TO THE CAST OF GLEE
  • Football Player Finn: An implausible character who goes both ways– glee club geek and handsome football star. He reminds one of the old lady Sophia on The Golden Girls– a bit of a cute, befuddled sidekick with some comic lines, but not a central character in the best scenes on the show. I truly feel for the actor who performs this poorly-written role, though I do enjoy his deft moves on the football field.
  • Sue the Cheerleading Coach: Her acting comes across as pretentious and egomaniacal and possibly too masculine (is this intentional?). Tone it down a bit, that’s my advice. Bea Arthur of The Golden Girls has already done everything and anything you could possibly imagine doing in your career, Sue.
  • Jewish Rachel: This girl is beautiful (and 30). I don’t understand why she’s playing like she’s ugly and unpopular! When gay people write tv dramas they often have no clue about what real women are like.
  • Artie, Wheelchair: I don’t believe he sings. The lip-synching is frighteningly obvious and a sad footnote to this show. Couldn’t they have gotten an actual talented singer for this role? Plus, he needs a sidekick or a funny catchphrase.
  • Mercedes Jones: Her sassy attitude does not set the right example for today’s young girls. She does sing well, and I appreciate that but I really don’t think this show is the right fit for her career. She really sticks out like a sore thumb. I could see her in a church choir, however. Or maybe play the wheelchair role?
  • Quinn, Slutty Cheerleader: She is most definitely the “Blanche Devereaux” of Glee.
  • Gay Kurt Hummel: I am afraid the makers of this show have dangerously indulged this young man’s fetish for expensive outfits. Children watching may be tempted to experiment with similar radical wardrobe choices. Why is everything he wears so bright and tight? Are we supposed to guess at the source of his income for such extravagance? Why did he quit football team? Will the writers of this show actually force him to do an on-air homosexual kiss or even worse? Sadly, with his clothing obsession and sassy attitude, Kurt Hummel may be destined to become this generation’s Betty White.
  • Football Coach: Is it really necessary to have a man his age in such small shorts so often? Is this supposed to be funny?
  • Will Schuster, Head of Glee Club: This effeminate charlatan is a surprising choice for the horndog adulterer. For many adults, he is not convincing in the least. Personally, I do not believe in having homosexual educators (or adult actors, for that matter) in such intimate, private contact with young people. Please, we do not need to see any more half-hearted and frankly laughable sex scenes involving this wet noodle.
  • Victor Matlin: I really don’t know why he is on this show. He was in Titanic! I find the hugging with his son unseemly.

Luls in the Mornin'

Friday, January 28, 2011

Note to Self:

Deer hoof/leg found behind Theater Arts. Don't forget. Write about it.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Education Day 1!

SO! The kids came into class today. First time. LOVED WORKING WITH THEM. SO FREAKING CUTE OMG WOOOOOW.

One little girl just attached herself to me. Full on body hug. I melted.

BLAAAAAAAAAH DON'T WANT TO WRITE RIGHT NOOOW

(Continued)

I remember when the kids first walked in -- second graders have got to be the cutest things in the world. Their excitement and energy just set me off! I was instantly about fifteen times more elated than I was the minute before. Participating with them was just so much fun -- I saw so much joy on their faces. It was quite possibly the most memorable hour this year.
Our program could have gone a little better, but coming up with a new plan entirely on the spot is sort of hard. I'm pretty sure the group before us was supposed to do sequencing/warm up and all that jazz, but they added what we were going to do at the end of their segment, which totally threw us off. It was really embarrassing to be unprepared, and upsetting that we had to change our fairly solid plans that we had formulated down to the wire on Tuesday. Luckily, it wasn't a total fiasco, and we pulled through somehow. Our music worked really well, to my great satisfaction, so that was nice. Ryan did an excellent job teaching everybody his group's plans for creative work. It was really nice to see him excel. :)

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

FRL! Article

Pukin' Like a Pro - Darlene McCoy

Dear Freshmen:
Now that you've survived a quarter at UCSC, you've probably realized that parties happen, so puke happens - a lot. In light of these facts, the FRL! has put together a small guide on how to Puke Like a Pro.
Pre-Game: Eat Gogurt. All kinds, all colors. The brighter the colors, the better. Also try some rice -- with this small addition, you can create a trail of slime covered fruity pebbles. If you don't have any Gogurt on hand, the dining halls always provide something of an odd color or texture, too. (I'm looking at you, avocado-flavored soft serve.) Eat as much of whatever you can possibly fit into your mouth. The noms, they shall be so intense.
Once drunk off your ass: Start vomiting spontaneously. Don't stop. If your chunks are projectile, the deeper angle you get, the better. It creates more of a fantastic spectacle, especially if you ate the colored yogurt, you're a vomit rainbow! Beautiful. Continue to erupt: evolve into a vomit volcano, let your regugitated rainbow mush rain fire on the awaiting Pompeii. Toss yo' cookies, toss 'em over everything, everywhere. Take special interest in the furniture, especially, because the smell will seep into the fabric, causing its owners to remember you and your vomit time and time again. They'll never forget you. If you're feeling creative, spewing a smiley face, heart, or any shape of your choice on the window might be a nice touch. By this time, all eyes will be on you. Don't let them make you nervous. You are a champion, a performer, and this is your show. They are staring because they are mesmerized by your skill. Bonus points if you manage to puke on one of them. Friends love to be vomited upon -- the two of you will be even closer in the morning. They might even start vomiting. If they do, make sure to grab them and position them so you're back to back. Tilt your head a bit to get that deep angle that allows vomit to be so round. First you were a vomit rainbow, and now, with the addition of your friend, you're a heart of hurl! It's been said, by a very wise old man, known only as Mr. Daniels, that friends who puke together, stay together. So, after choosing your best friend for life and the rest of ever, fall down, to all fours, and flip your hair whilst continuing to vomit. Crawl, leaving a trail behind you, toward the restroom. When you arrive, give the toilet a hug. Toilets are lonely, they need love too! Then puke on it. On the toilet, not in it, mind you. Someone might be lucky enough to discover your present later! How sweet! If you are still feeling nervous, or a hint of stage fright is creepin' on your soul, now is a good time to talk to the toilet -- it is the only one that understands how you're feeling. Let all your stress go, cry into its arms if you need to, a toilet is always there. After recovering -- if needed, that is, you might just be the best damned puker on the planet - wipe any excess off your face. Good job and well done, you mighty pukester, you!
Exiting Stage Left (or Right): after finishing up, bring yourself to your feet, and prepare for the grand finale! Sprint, as fast as humanly possible, (which should be quite fast at this point) toward the exit. If you're an advanced drunkard: falling, tripping, and running into walls is recommended for additional artistic effect. Once at the door, swing it open with all your might. Expel yourself through it, vomit yourself through that door, because tonight, you have achieved victory. Continue on your path to the bus stop (drunk driving is bad, you asshole!), leaving sparatic trail of regurgitate along the way. Don't make them even -- you don't want any CSOs on your ass -- or thinking that all that vomit came from one motherfuckin' pukin' champion. Once the bus arrives, make your way to the back, where the row of five seats are, and bring up a small mountain upon the center one. Proceed to not give a fuck, and sit upon your throne. Gaze upon your subjects; note their mystified faces. Finally get to wherever the hell you live, stumble indoors, and take your pants off. (You just sat in vomit for a bus ride, remember? No? Good.) Then, dear champion, you deserve some rest. Pull yourself into bed, close your eyes, and drift off into a world of your own. You have done well, young padawan.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Lit 101 - Short Assignment #1

Darlene McCoy
Jody Greene
Lit 101
January 24 2011
Poetry on Papyrus or Paper, Written by Pen or Pencil?
    Some poetry defies time. Some poetry reads in a foreign language. Some people, brave souls, translate old, foreign, poetry. Each translator brings different aspects to their work, each edits a word or phrase in some way that is appealing to their mind, each gives the piece a materiality that they, not the author, created. Two souls, John J. Winkler and Anne Carson, braved the translation process, and developed unique translations of "Fragment 1," a poem written by the ancient Greek poetess, Sappho. While the meanings derived from each translation more or less embody one another, the materiality of the text creates a subtle difference between the two.
    John J. Winkler translated "Fragment 1" in 1990; Anne Carson did so in 2004. In Winkler's translation, he uses a more formal tone than Carson. Lines 3-4 of Winkler consist of "do not tame my spirit, great lady, with pain and sorrow. But / come to me." The phrase expresses the voice of the poem's need of Aphrodite's aid in words that relate more to Greek culture. Carson's lines break differently, so the "equivalent" phrase occurs in lines 2-4, "I beg you, / do not break with hard pains, / O lady, my heart." This phrase expresses the more modern, and personal notion of the idiomatic idea of breaking a heart. Winkler uses the words "divine" and "goddess" in his translation, which create a distance between the poem's voice and the Gods and a feeling of formality in the poem itself - making it more of an address to Aphrodite. Carson employs a more casual word choice, choosing words such as "crazy" and "birds" for her translation. It lacks the more elaborate description of Aphrodite found in Winkler's. The more casual words lend a romantic sense to the poem. It becomes more of a soft, casual, love poem written by a woman in pursuit rather than a formal address to the Gods, written for the pure epicness of the event. Feminine pronouns find themselves embedded in each translation - but one more than the other. Winkler's translation holds to a singular "her," used to denote the poem's voice's beloved. In traditional Greek culture, "the identification of the gender of the beloved, the one now pursued, is delayed until the very last word of the penultimate stanza, etheloisa," the singular "her" follows Greek culture (DuBois 9). Carson's sixth stanza overflows with six uses of the word, "she," which alludes to the idea that the voice of the poem's beloved is a woman, and clearly not a man. This almost overuse of the word "she" implies that Sappho was more than a mere poetess - she was a woman with real feelings, a living being. Winkler breaks the poem's lines in a different manner than Carson does. Winkler's structure forms a rectangle, making it look more modern and classical. It also confines the poem to a set space, and disallows the reader freedom to think between the lines. Carson divides the poem into eight stanzas, each separated by space, as if to signify the space between stanzas on the original papyrus it was written on. The space gives the reader some time to digest each stanza's meaning.
    Though Winkler and Carson translated "Fragment 1" only fourteen years apart, the differences in the materiality of the text create different feelings and meaning for the reader. They also form alternate views of Sappho's character. Winkler's translation defines her as a Greek poetess, and Carson's defines her as a woman lusting after another. The materiality of each translation changes the meaning of the text, and with each translated translation, the mere paper each is written on will continue to do so.

WELL

Turn of events.

Darlene is sooooo bi-polar.

MWAHAHAHAHAH :DD

Administration

Not allowing anonymous comments for a bit, rather angry and need to make sure that contact is not made.

Goodbye~

Raging Darlene

UUUGGGGGGGGGGGGH.

Really? REALLY?

REALLY?

How the fuck could you expect me to find this lighthearted and silly?

So angry. So angry. And then you go off and cry to Tiffney? REALLY?

Fuck this. Fuck yoooou.

I was so damned freaking nice to wait until you got here in SC so I could tell you personally, face-to-face, that it wasn't going to work. I gave you the respect you deserved, as a friend of mine, and a human being. That's a whole hell lot better than over the phone, as I usually would, like a damned coward, and now you throw this in my FACE? REALLY?

I can't even believe this shit. Just. Ugh. UGH UGH UGH. I've got ballet today, and a paper to write. I really want to go to ballet, but I've more or less lost the motivation due to the SICKENING FEELING IN MY STOMACH.

Why am I so mad? You've proven, once again, that you will stop at no bounds to get what you want. I'm sorry you're bored. I'm sorry you're lonely. I'M SORRY I WANTED A DAMNED WEEK TO NOT STRESS ABOUT YOU. FUCCCCCCCCCK.

So angry. So angry. Blogs are good for anger. So are froot loops.

You expect me to talk to you. Hah. Maybe when I've got the time to be emotionally exhausted... 

Fuck everything. So sad...

Thursday, January 20, 2011

DA FUCK?!

Final Fantasy XIII-2?

WHAAAAAAAAT?!

MORE VANILLE!

And homyGod, I didn't know Lightning could even be any cooler.

yayayayayayayayay ♥



Coming out this year ^^/

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Lit 101 - Essay #1, Summary of a Critical Argument

Darlene McCoy
Jody Greene
LIT 101
19 Janurary 2011
An Alien Encounter - Explained!
     When asked, "How in the world did you come up with such a tale?" many an author would reply, "I'm not sure, I just wrote it." If an individual could just "create," if he could just draw from his knowledge and articulate it in a certain way, the most learned man in the world should have an abundance of works around the globe. Yet, he does not. The process of creation must contain an unknown catalyst that allows one author to be more creative, chilling, or enticing than another. Creation must encompass more than the devising and execution of a plan.
    Thoughts, like a butterfly's wings, flutter in and out of one's conscious; they depart just as soon as the mind can grasp them. These fluttering thoughts - identified by Derek Attridge as the other, pose a possible explanation for the process of creation. He defines the other as, "that which is at a given moment, outside the horizon provided by the culture for thinking, understanding, imagining, feeling, perceiving" (19). The other does not displace old ideas, it simply reworks them into ideas that are essentially the same; but different because it has influenced them. The other requires the creator to think in an uncommon fashion, thus an encounter with it occurs only when the being enters another state of mind. He must be passive, unaware of his encounter, but alert to his mind. Finally evoking the other may emerge from many failed attempts at doing so. Unlike his regular thoughts, the creator cannot command the other's presence. The other separates itself from a being's natural thought process, but somehow relates to his individual. If the other fails to relate to the individual, the other ceases to exist, because the individual could not possibly create something out of nothing. The other materializes from a being's knowledge, and is the reworking of that knowledge, so it cannot be entirely foreign.
     Every mind contains its own unique other. Where does this "being of thought" come from? Are humans without the capability to fully comprehend their own knowledge? Attridge explains his theory on the creation of the other in an attempt to answer these questions.He begins by stating that each person possesses an individual other because each person possess an individual idioculture. Idioculture is "the name for the totality of the cultural codes constituting a subject, at a given time, as an overdetermined, self-contradictory system that manifests itself materially in a host of ways" (22). Basically, an idioculture embodies an individual's thoughts about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness at a given time; it emerges into the world in different forms - art, literature, speech - anything. An idioculture is unfathomable in size - so unfathomable in fact, that human minds can only perpetrate a fraction of it at any given time. A fraction of a wall would not be the most effective at keeping foreigners out, and because perpetrated human idioculture is fractional, the other can seep through the cracks, and into thought. The moment at which the other enters conscious thought is an event, a single happening. It is also an act - because the will of the individual must make the mind alert and attentive in order for the discovery of the other to take place. Derek Attridge concludes his theory with, "Creation is both an act and an event, both something that is done intentionally by an effort of the will and something that happens without warning to a passive, though alert, consciousness" (26).

I really dislike the cliche about butterflies. Hah. Too lazy to really fuck with it though...

Monday, January 17, 2011

Purple, Encore!

Ohi new blog background thing.

Black is kinda too dark for me -- decided to lighten up the blog a bit by finding some fabulous purple flare!

Gotta get to readin'... or putting clothes on... so lazy...

Meh

You fucked it up for me, life.

Fuck you too, bro!

~.~

Grumblegrumblegrumble munch munch munch hungry hungry for some brunch brunch brunch~

Still feel awful, but more stabbed, hello bleedin', what's up, wanna listen to some jaazzzz~?

URG. Awfulawfulawful.

Just gotta get through this paper and some du Bois today~

Thank God for Logan, and Ryan, and Tanner, and Alec.

And, y'know, everyone else... just they were so nice to me yesterday! ♥

Got a lot of open wounds right now; I really didn't need the salt.

I miss college group...

OMG THIS IS FANTASTIC

Love Tumblr in the mornin'.

Sunday, January 16, 2011

The Amount of Stupid, It Is So Intense.

HOLY GOD LAST NIGHT. WOW.

I can't even believe myself. I'm so embarrassed. I know it wasn't good. I know Jacob's kind of dying. Oh man, oh man, oh man. I feel so bad... texted Riley like a crazy mother fucker, man oh man. Didn't mean to do that. Stupid drunk girl. I must be so annoying.. ugh... Ryan is def not pleased with me... but hopefully he won't be too, like, annoyed at me... I really hope so... argggggggh. So... everything worrying my brain... gotta apologize to Riley; my stupidity gets the best of me sometimes, wits are sometimes lost. Fucking vodka. Hmmm. Whatever. Whatever whatever whatever. What can I do, what can I say? It's a new day... ~.~

blahblahblah, I feel like shit, blahblahblah, fuck everything...

...there's also a random cut on my foot, wtf?

Monday, January 10, 2011

The Amount of Bullshit, It Is So Intense.

Darlene McCoy
Tandy Beal
Arts Education in the Community
10 Janurary 2011
"We Can Work It Out" Reflection
     When I first opened We Can Work It Out, I was thinking to myself, "Oh great, another silly self-helpesque pamphlet thing for me to look over once, and never again." I found myself surprised by Marshall B. Rosenberg's clarity in his explanations, which were so clear that I actually paid attention to what he was saying. It was quite the nice change from what I expected from this short piece. His explanations of a strategy versus a need was probably the clearest - and from what I've read, the most important to have such a clear explanation. His examples were more or less relative to everyday life, save the warring tribes example, so I felt I could relate to them more (not that I'm a wife, but I can see domestic problems clearer than more violent issues). While reading his work, I felt that I understood the difference between a strategy and a need. I also felt I understood how common it is for people to analyze and insult each other rather than work a conflict out. I feel like the ability to sense another's needs come mostly with time and practice, but it was nice to see how in the text Rosenberg demonstrated his own skill. It was also helpful that he provided a list of common human needs, so that I, as a young conflict resolver-type person, have a basic outlook on human needs so I can attempt to sense whatever needs the parties in conflict desire. Rosenberg points out that checking with each party for understanding is an important step in his Nonviolent Communication. He has each side repeat the need of the other, which I feel is very important to the process. I feel like a conflict isn't truly resolved if both parties don't comprehend the entire process. He also has them repeat what the want in positive action language, saying what they need clearly, not what they don't want, so that definite communication is established. Obviously, all conflict meditations must be followed by the actions agreed upon, and Rosenberg states that clearly. At the end of this presentation, he writes a bit about conceding and respect. He explains that there is a way to talk that demonstrates your interest in your own needs, and that of another's. It's quite helpful information, especially dealing with smaller children who can misinterpret words and notions easily.
     I plan to use Mr. Rosenberg's ideas to solve any conflicts I may come upon in this course. It doesn't really matter what will or will not happen - I feel that anything can be solved in this fashion, I just have to make it happen, and remember that everyone is human and has their own needs. I've also got to remember that when dealing with children, they're not always aware that another person's needs need to be met. I'm sure that this brush-up on necessary communication skills will be quite useful in the term to come.