STS Class

So, last night I finally went to an STS class...good thing because I think that it might have been the last one. So, the class I attended was Dreamweaver I and it was held at College Library. I did learn some things, but I think that if I were to do it again, I would take Dreamweaver II. So here's some of the cool stuff I learned:
First of all, apparently if you name your homepage "index" (or the page that you want people to see first) then that page will automatically come up first. To illustrate this point, the instructors told us to type in www.wisc.edu/index and it takes you to the UW homepage. I think that this is a very good tip, especially if I were to make bigger webpages-this way, I don't have to cut and paste the specific page that I would want one to see first.
Secondly, I learned how to put an mp3 on dreamweaver. This was actually pretty cool, because I tried to do it on my last project, but failed miserably. Anyhow, it's very easy, you just have to save the music file just as you save images and link to it. There is a way, using CSS (or so the instructors said) that you can have the music file play as soon as you open the page, but because that's particularly annoying, it's not as easy as it used to be.
So I did learn some very useful things, except that if I could do it all over again, I would rather take a higher level dreamweaver and not spend 2 hours on stuff that I've already learned.

It's Crunch Time

So it's finally here, the end of the semester. For many of us, that means it's crunch time. In this class alone, we are all pretty bogged down concerning final projects. But whatever, it's about time to finish out the semester and I'm hoping to finish out strong.

So, on that note, I also wanted to put up here that I recently found out I was accepted into the Teach for America program and will be teaching either K, 1st or 2nd grade starting in August at an elementary school in Phoenix, AZ. This is truly my dream job and I'm very excited. But I'm also stressing out. On top of all my final projects, graduation plans, etc. I have to read through many more text books before June, study for my educator's proficiency exam, log in many hours at an elementary school here and move to Phoenix by June 3rd. Aghhh! Hopefully, it will all come together.

So that's all I wanted to say. I know many of you all are in the same boat, I feel your pain.

Non-place

So, I waited to write this post until I had completed the movie, Lost in Translation. I think that this was a very good artifact to choose, especially as a critique of Auge's article.

After comparing the two together in class today, I am reminded of an old quote, something that we've probably all have already heard: Sometimes a crowded room feels the most alone. I think that this is a good distinction that Auge clearly makes when describing a non-place. Even though it's an area as busy as a train station or airport terminal....elevator, we still feel like we're alone. Even as indicated in the movie, we may pass the same people everyday in these same exact places, we might even smile at them, but we don't know who they are and we rarely ever converse with them.

But something that the movie suggests, which goes a little further than Auge's article, is the fact that maybe some people feel less alone in a non-place than a space that they would more readily call as a place. For example, Mr. Harris and the girl felt more comfortable around each other in the hotel bar than they did in their own hotel rooms. Furthermore, Mr. Harris felt more "at home" or in Tokyo than he did at his own house, with his own wife, and his own children, who were "used to him not being there."

So I think that the movie made a good example of how a place and non-place is greatly interchangeable. Furthermore, I think that an argument can be made (straying slightly from Auge) that a place is something more than relational, historical, but emphasize it's connection with identity. I think that it's this psychological connection that we have is what truly can define something between a place and non-place. For example, my old bedroom at my parent's house. I can relate to this place and it does have history (for sure), but I don't connect the old bedroom (which has since been re-modeled and all my stuff has been taken out) with my identity anymore, making it a non-place for me. This is the same as in the movie, when Mr. Harris is used to being away from his house, not caring about the carpet color or a shelfing unit (because he no longer associates it with identity-his identity).

All in all, I think that it's easier to interchange a place to a non-place and vice versa. Although Auge agrees with the interchangeability, I think that it is just more easy than he makes it out to be.

Non-place....or place...

For my blog post today, I am re-writing some notes I took of the non-place I chose to view- Charley's on State St. I decided to use this place for a variety of reasons, mainly because it's convenient for me, but also because I work there. In using this place for my blog post (when I got off of work) I could see the fine line that is drawn between a place and a non-place, something that I never really thought of before.

Auge states that if "a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space which cannot be defined as relational, or historical or concerned with identity will be a non-place." As we suggested in class, these areas would be like large lecture halls, shopping malls, grocery stores, restaurants, etc. So, I chose to view a restaurant.

What I found interesting, is that I never really noticed before that such a place could be a "non-place," but after sitting down and viewing it for awhile, it is quite obvious that it is. For example, no one really communicates with each other or other parties seated in the restaurant, although they are eating right next to each other (eating the same food and reading the same newspaper no less). Furthermore, you have no idea about an individual's history, why they are there, or if they're crazy or not and you're sitting right next to them! I find that so fascinating. I think this is why an airport terminal represents a non-place so well, because you have no idea if people are coming or going, etc.

Spring "Break"

So, I decided to do the spring break thing this year (kind of). On Monday, I went with a bunch of friends to the Dells and stayed in one of those water-park hotels. It was a pretty neat experience, but all in all, I'm glad it was only one night. First off, I was sick. That nasty flu that was going around during Christmas break was not the only flu going around I guess, as it struck me again. Being the sick one, no one even wanted to share a bed with me, so I ended up sleeping on the floor right next to the bathroom. Great.

Other than that though, it was a pretty interesting experience. Because our spring break was so late this year, hardly anyone else was there, so there were no lines for the slides or other pools, which was pretty nice. We also explored the downtown Dells area and went to some pretty cool places (not just bars) which made it worth the trip (although put a huge dent in my bank account.

But since Monday night, I have been back to the daily grind, working full days, trying to finish all my essays due the day after spring break, getting everything ready for graduation (I guess we are suppose to get our cap and gown already?) and going on those ever-popular job interviews (in which I'm competing for one position with all the other thousands of college-grads). My one hope is that it gets nice out soon, so I can sit outside and do this stuff...the library is getting old.

Anyhow, I hope everyone else is having an awesome spring break too!!

Modernism and Weird

So, as you all can probably tell, I'm a little bit behind on the posts. Here is the post concerning the reading notes for last Tuesday (I apologize about that).

So last week in class, we discussed this idea of Modernism and post-Modernism and what the differences are. For instance, we (as a class) decided that Modernism would encompass individuals such as Wright and Taylor (in the grid and the network piece). But somewhere in th mid-20th century (give or take) a new genre gave way, that of post-Modernism. In our reading, it seems as though post-Modernism is a type of movement away from the absolute truth (maybe to get away from the horrors of what happened previously?) For a post-Modernist, things just aren't black and white, there is a bit of a grey area.

Thus, in terms of Modernism, we decided that language can perfectly account for the world as we see it. A post-Modernist, on the other hand, would state that language cannot perfectly account for the world as we see it. We are using something man-made to explain things that are beyond ourselves-something that a simple word like "sky" can't begin to account for. But, the post-Modernist would also agree that language, even with its short-comings, is all we have and we develop such meaning through language.

I think that the discussion of such terms was one that was incredibly interesting. Although I mostly think about it in terms of art and artistic movements, the concepts of Modernism and post-Modernism mean something more and can have a greater meaning within our lifetime. Such concepts coincide with political movements and socialist movements. It links with the idea of anti-foundationalism and sets the stage for issues of identity and difference. I think we will definitely see more ideas of post-Modernism and how it relates to the world on a larger scale, not just one of art.

Am I a Cyborg?

For this weeks reading, we studied a piece by Andy Clark entitled Natural Born Cyborgs. Although we only read the introduction, the argument Clark seemed to be trying to make was that we are "thinking and reasoning systems whose minds and selves are spread across biological brain and nonbiological circuitry" (p 3). Basically, his mission is to convince us, through a series of evidence, that we are a sort of natural-born cyborgs.

To be honest, when I was reading the introduction, I really didn't buy his argument, at least in the beginning. One of the first examples that he used to demonstrate his point that we are these natural born cyborgs was the fact that we use pen and pencil to figure out long-handed multiplication problems. Somehow, by acting in "concert with the pen and paper" and not being able to do such mathematical problems without these devices, our brain interacts with these external resources. In some sense then, I believe what Clark tries to do is connect this use of a pen and paper and the fact that we have evolved to not being able to do difficult math in our brain and are thus propelled to use external resources, makes us a sort of natural born cyborg. Is this true? I think it's quite a leap. Afterall, we don't really need a pen and paper for our survival, right?

But maybe I'm just mistaken on what the author means when he uses the term cyborg. In the first few pages of the introduction, he tries to make the point that we are becoming sort of highly-developed. We have an ability (one that is solely a human capability) to enter into "deep and complex relationships with nonbiological constructs, props, and aids" like a pen and paper. But even more than this, Clark makes the point that many of our tools are not just "external props and aids, but are deep and integral parts of the problem-solving systems we now identify as human intelligence." So I am a little confused. Have we always been cyborgs, unique to other species, or have we just recently became them, as our technology continues to grow and we become more dependent on it? It was hard to determine what he meant within the reading.

Lastly, Clark tries to make the connection of the cyborg issue with that of a "wired world" or the connection age.