my mix tape or cd was constructed with my friend Jack in mind, but it can directed towards many people. he does seem to appreciate music, but has never been to a concert or played any instruments of his own. this cd's purpose was to not only introduce new music to Jack, but somewhat fill in on his lacking of concert experience as well as instrument knowledge.

i intended to introduce to him acoustic music, which i indicated on the cd as music at its "rawest and purest form". with acoustic music, he could somewhat listen to what could be a concert or the basis of a concert; music that you hear outside of the radio, tv, or cd player. in other words, music that is not generally the reproduction from a studio; the final pieces you usually hear. also, with acoustic music, he could again somewhat get a feel for what playing an instrument is like. in this case, he would hear just the purity of a single guitar, so that he would know what it sounds like without all the editing, the electronics.

digital drone

on Wednesday we discussed technology and how it is becoming a major incorporation in our lives. i feel it has become more than just an incorporation. it has become our lives. what has happened to our culture? what is this notion of "plugged in," and why is it everyone's necessity? what does it even mean? what is it about "digital" that draws us, compels us, make us desire it's characterization?

so these days all i see is everyone walking around with their headphones glued to their ears as if the ears extended out into a white wire and ended with a 3.5mm jack, searching for a plug. ipods, iphones, mp3 players, cell phones, laptops, organizers, schedulers. mostly everyone is always plugged in, to the internet, the stream, the digital dimension. what happened to the days where conversation was held randomly, a hand was used to gesture hello or goodbye as one passed another. i guess "i"pod explains it a little. it seems as if everyone is locked into the digital dimension and zoned out. like drones that are roaming from place to place with their starbucks cup in hand and vibing to the digital rift. what do we make of this? what's in the future? it seems as though "digitalism " has become our lives, the next step would assume that it take over our lives...

So i saw Emily's piece and the huge backwards copyright symbol gave me an idea. i added a yellow backwards copyright symbol that resembles Pac-Man and "anti-copyright" which it is eating up a regular copyright symbol.

my first collage was pieced together basically with a copyright symbol on top of each picture. these pictures included general media, such as websites, pictures, books, and film. i also included pictures of piracy and other relevant copyright images. basically each image is stamped with the symbol on top or has the copyright symbol embedded. this image symbolizes the power of copyright as well as the restrictions that it places on these areas of creativity. the image also suggest that the laws lift some copyright power since it seems that it will only be heavier in the future.

the second collage is very similar to the first one. since we were only allowed to use "common" material, i decided to use the Microsoft clip-art gallery, which is entitled to whoever has access to it, and does permit the use of it's images. many of the images i used here had to be edited. trying to make the same argument as with the first collage, i found very similar images and then further edited the pictures with a copyright symbol that the clip-art gallery provided. this entire image makes the same argument with a few tweaks and added points.

it is obvious that the second collage was more difficult. when working with the first one, many of the pictures already had an embedded copyright symbol and i did not have to take the time to edit one and place it on top. in the second collage, i had to place each copyright symbol manually which took a bulk of the time. even though i still had very similar images with the second collage, it still took more work and time. the difference is that i feel the argument comes stronger from the second collage. this may be due to the tweaks that i applied more frequently compared to leaving some images as is from the first collage. i also prefer the second collage to the first one, since i feel it is more my work than someone else's.

so is creativity being threatened? what do you think? i think it depends. creativity is such a broad term. there are so many areas where creativity can be applied so it cannot be threatened in all areas. the world is constantly changing with new technologies and discoveries by the minute. there is always room for something new, something better. if it isn't new or better then it shouldn't apply as creative.

don't get me wrong, i still believe that creativity is being threatened in certain areas. this would include literature, music, and film. music, film, and writing are expressive and there can only be so many ways to express a thought or feeling before it is expressed again in a very similar manner.

i think lessig's solution makes sense and it should have been approved. objects entering the public domain does allow for less complication if a similar work is created. i believe that many people will still not understand what the public domain is. also this would create more work for the government, which could be a good thing or a bad thing. overall it's still the best idea so far.

so i have used image editing software frequently for minor works, such as birthday cards or raw image editing, but i have never created a major project digitally. this should be an interesting assignment since i am totally software savvy but believe myself to be artistically challenged. it is said somewhere that as we age we progress in most things we do. it seems that my artistic skills as well as mind set have declined from my younger years in which i was known as an artist.

i did not understand the assignment at first since i could not make clear how to make an argument out of a piece of art and especially a collage. after the example that was shown in lecture, i "re-realized" that all pictures and art are arguments. pictures are a 1000 words right?

i have not yet decided or even brainstormed any ideas for a topic; not to mention my argument. this is an open assignment which makes it flexible and invites more interest (if i am wrong and we are given a topic already someone please let me know). this should also be interesting since i have never used images or pictures in an English class before.

on Wednesday we spent the class in the writing center mimicking instructors in search of plagiarism. i think either my group did a pretty good job at concealment or perhaps my first attempt at plagiarism spotting did not go so well. when Scot and the other instructors came in to speak about plagiarism, they made it seem so easy to detect and find the source. i definitely had a hard time and found nothing for about half an hour.

at first i was searching entire sentences with quotations as Scot had suggested. that returned very few results if any at all; in any case none which proved plagiarism. then i figured i'd shorten the sentences to phrases and sometimes even just words. this improved my search results slightly, but now i was getting too much material. my final trick was to keep the longer phrases but take out the quotation marks, and was finally able to find a few sources.

i can now see the ethics behind plagiarism from the grading instructor's point of view. we looked at only a couple papers, whereas a TA porobably looks at 60+ papers. imagine taking my struggles in searching for plagiarism and multiplying that by 60+. i can see now why some instructors get mad at students for plagiarizing, on top of the fact that it is just plain wrong.

after reading the syllabus about a plagiarism paper, it took me a second to let it sink in. a plagiarism paper for an English class? was our professor serious? i was a bit shocked, but i figured it would be a "first one and only" thing. as with the ghostwriting experience this proved to be much more difficult than i had anticipated.

i actually found the ghostwriting experience less challenging than the plagiarism experience. for the ghostwrite, my client was present at the writing so i was able to write accordingly, but with the plagiarism paper what i had were just a bunch of sources. plagiarizing definitely took a lot more time and thinking than did the ghostwrite or if i had not plagiarized. i believe i can attribute the extra time to going back into the paper to fix and conceal the plagiarized content. at times i couldn't decide if i should just let something slide or change it, so making the decisions also took valuable time.

as a compliment to physical difficulties, i believe that ethical and emotional issues strew in also to make the experience that much more difficult. all of our lives we have been trained to not plagiarize, so it was a struggle to go against the just. i certainly did not feel accomplished after completing this paper, and it did not feel right putting my name on it.

the ghostwriting experience was a lot more difficult than i had anticipated it to be. there were so many factors of ghostwriting that i had not thought of prior to commencing the project that i would soon find out later to affect the writing and the persons involved. ghostwriting is usually done for someone who has less literature/language skills by someone who excels at expression. if that isn't a clash of styles and thoughts then i don't know what is. for this project, i had definitely overlooked the style shift. another difficulty was the process of getting into the mindset of the client. at times i felt i was writing more of my opinion than that of the client, which makes me question where most thoughts and ideas of ghostwritten literature come from. it was difficult to stay on track. another issue that came up was the structure of the writing. my client uses a less formal voice and inserts two spaces after each sentence; two things that i do not do. the challenge was to either adapt to the client's style or employ my style.

my original thoughts about ghostwriting were pretty harsh; the sole unethical, non-righteous view. that has changed a bit due to the ghostwriting experience and just through learning more about it in general. i did learn something about myself that makes me a little more accepting although i am still opposed to ghostwriting in general. i learned that i can express myself a great deal better in writing than i can in speech. i could see how this problem could affect people in the opposite manner, which would signal the need for a ghostwriter.

i do believe that the ghostwriting experience did challenge my authorship. i did not feel so comfortable putting someone else's name or ownership on something that i had produced. it did not make me feel proud or satisfied to complete a piece that i knew was going to a cause other than my own.

if there is one thing that i got out of all my English classes up until now, it is to not plagiarize. it is like the equivalence to not looking at another's exam when taking one. "do not copy someone else's work, do not copy someone else's work, do not copy someone else's work." the message has been ingrained. i have yet to take a class that involved any writing where i did not hear "do not copy someone else's work," but it's a good thing teachers are doing their job.

i have been accused of plagiarizing once. it turns out that one student that i had helped out had taken a passage out of my paper and plugged it into their paper. fortunately i did not get into any trouble. it is difficult because plagiarizing does come in different forms, and one could be plagiarizing and not be aware of it. unfortunately most or almost everyone has probably done some form of plagiarizing already, and some will even more in the future.

ownership is a very important aspect of authorship. without proper ownership, plagiarizing and property rights would be chaotic.

when i was younger, we used to watch this show called ghostwriter. it was pretty old fashioned; right about when computers were first getting popular, and the internet had just recently been introduced. i don't remember much, but i do remember that it was not a show about presidential speeches. rather, it dealt with a "real" ghost, which was CG animated (i believe). the ghost was basically a white misty dot that flew across the screen. anyhow, this ghost worked together with a group of kids who formed through writing (???) and together they solved mysteries/crimes. it was not the best show, but i'd have to admit it was interesting.

ghostwriting is a awkward subject because in a sense it is not quite plagiarism. the use of ghostwriting pieces vary also. most people think (me included) that ghostwriting is morally unethical. my take is that you should not claim for that you could not produce. it's almost like hiring someone to go to school for you, and then you show up on graduation day with the cap & gown. so why is it that ghostwriting is accepted in society? then again, why is gay marriage banned? why is gambling legalized? why does racism persists? questions upon questions. it's funny because many people have, are, or will engage in ghostwriting and not even know that they are doing so. for those who do, they are probably making a living out of it.

the word aura has always intrigued me since around middle school when i first learned about it. back then i really didn't understand exactly what the word meant, but i had a rough idea. now that i think about it, the word still doesn't make full sense to me. the question is, will it ever? probably not. an aura is a concept, which makes it more difficult to grasp, along with the fact that there are different meanings for different types. concepts can still be fun though. let's take the color red for example. you know that the pigment red exists, but really it only exists in your mind. one cannot go and collect a bucket of red; it is just a perception from our mind. the same is for an aura. you cannot see an aura, not to mention collecting it, but it exists as a perception in our minds. auras are a radiance of whatever the outward quality is, which is felt by others around the emitter.

someone mentioned in discussion that in order for someone to feel certain auras, there must be a connection between the giver and a receiver; that connection must be physical and mental. in fact if both of those connections are not acquired then there is no aura. no aura can be felt if the person/object is not present, and no aura can be felt if there is no perception of it. when you do have both, there is satisfaction/fulfillment from Picasso's original painting, or one's favorite sports idol, and yes, even one's significant other.

so what of this Roland Barthes? is this guy insane, or is his intelligence far from perceivable? who is he and what is he trying to accomplish? questions stem from questions. perhaps that is what Barthes wants. a philosophical piece of teaching, maybe not. maybe there is no goal to seek/accomplish-no message-no portrayal, maybe he wrote out of thin air; perhaps he was under the influence. with that, we are where we began.

"Death of the Author" a most notorious piece. a painful reading; can't imagine it's construction. was Barthes just writing or was he tying to relay a message? was it both or perhaps neither? what if he desired it to be both and neither. what lies in the middle? an unknown.

Barthes wrote/thought to accomplish this unknown. why? he doesn't want an author, nor a reader it seems. a piece of work just out there-no evaluation, no analysis, that is unknown. little understanding, barely readable. that is unknown. but as i stop typing, i have done exactly that which Barthes did not want me to do. is it inevitable or unknown?

Interesting Class?

so it seems that i have again stumbled into what i may consider a fun and interesting english course. previous experiences at the UW have proved the opposite, but this one begs to differ.

the content of the course breaks from the classic concept of an english course, which is basically to read a book a week, write a follow-up 10 page paper, take some midterms related to the readings, and end with a cumulative final comprehension.

this course seems to have less readings, which is a plus for my time and my money. on top of that, the assigned readings and the course agenda look pretty interesting. i'm actually looking forward to plagiarizing a paper as part of the coursework.

i must not forget that the very action i am performing right now is also part of the coursework. blogging. this shows that along with technology, our education is advancing in many great ways. it looks to be that another course may gain the right to be placed on my list of worthwhile things in college.