Return to the Blog
I've noted something lately: Rather than thinking of my life in approximately 600 word essay format, I've come to discursively frame it in one to two line subjectless snippets, as in "finds it unpleasant to have my hair tangled in velcro" or "is sitting in traffic wishing I hadn't ordered a large (venti! venti! venti!) coffee earlier" etc. While these short snippets do occasionally lead to more in-depth discussion later in the "Comments" section, Facebook has definitely influenced the way that I conceive of my life in words. (While posting status updates on Facebook is labeled by some as "narcissistic," I would like to point out that it also encourages thinking of one's self without the "I," which in a sense could be viewed as a practice in ego-dissolution, but I digress…. as I often do….)
All that said, I have missed blogging -- I like talking in lengths longer than one sentence at a time -- its' what I DO!!!! (A lot.) (Or used to.) And since I still have this here account, I thought -- why not? Who's going to stop me? But now that I am here, I find myself blogging about blogging, rather than blogging about some other topic, or discussing what I'm doing in my life, or blogging about any of the other subjects I've considered blogging about over the past few weeks, etc.
Though I must say that I feel a giddy sense of freedom beginning two sentences with "and" and "but," which is exactly the sort of thing that I've been required (more or less) to discourage students from doing for lo these many months. It is a weird thing, teaching "English" to people who already speak it just fine. There is some odd, almost fetishistic thrill to me surrounding arcane grammar rules but 1) I enjoy breaking these rules quite regularly, so who am I to teach otherwise and 2) I am fully aware just how arbitrary, mutable, and impermanent these rules are, and thus do not take them very seriously. At the same time, I also tell my students about how these rules represent access to power and that NOT understanding them may result in less access to that power, thus if this is something that interests them, then learning these rules may be of benefit.
What is it that makes access to and use of "proper" English criteria for value judgments? Why is someone perceived as "better than" someone else because of the particular way they manipulate language? I don't ascribe to that way of thinking, but I see it happen all the time, especially among the "educated" or those in power positions. I understand the idea of something (like a language) having a standardized version so that anyone (ostensibly) who reads it can understand it clearly (which is how I frame the idea of what others call "proper English"), but I do not see the use or disuse of this standardized form as evidence for intelligence or ability to think. It may be indicative of class, educational opportunities, or personal proclivities, perhaps, but not intelligence. Yet, still, the prejudice persists.
Life: It's one big writing contest.
And on that note, I think I'll end this little foray into the essay-esque musings of my life/mind. Perhaps tomorrow or some other day I'll come back and talk more about what I'm doing here and there, but for now, I'll just talk about talking about it; that suits my present mood, whatever that is.
All that said, I have missed blogging -- I like talking in lengths longer than one sentence at a time -- its' what I DO!!!! (A lot.) (Or used to.) And since I still have this here account, I thought -- why not? Who's going to stop me? But now that I am here, I find myself blogging about blogging, rather than blogging about some other topic, or discussing what I'm doing in my life, or blogging about any of the other subjects I've considered blogging about over the past few weeks, etc.
Though I must say that I feel a giddy sense of freedom beginning two sentences with "and" and "but," which is exactly the sort of thing that I've been required (more or less) to discourage students from doing for lo these many months. It is a weird thing, teaching "English" to people who already speak it just fine. There is some odd, almost fetishistic thrill to me surrounding arcane grammar rules but 1) I enjoy breaking these rules quite regularly, so who am I to teach otherwise and 2) I am fully aware just how arbitrary, mutable, and impermanent these rules are, and thus do not take them very seriously. At the same time, I also tell my students about how these rules represent access to power and that NOT understanding them may result in less access to that power, thus if this is something that interests them, then learning these rules may be of benefit.
What is it that makes access to and use of "proper" English criteria for value judgments? Why is someone perceived as "better than" someone else because of the particular way they manipulate language? I don't ascribe to that way of thinking, but I see it happen all the time, especially among the "educated" or those in power positions. I understand the idea of something (like a language) having a standardized version so that anyone (ostensibly) who reads it can understand it clearly (which is how I frame the idea of what others call "proper English"), but I do not see the use or disuse of this standardized form as evidence for intelligence or ability to think. It may be indicative of class, educational opportunities, or personal proclivities, perhaps, but not intelligence. Yet, still, the prejudice persists.
Life: It's one big writing contest.
And on that note, I think I'll end this little foray into the essay-esque musings of my life/mind. Perhaps tomorrow or some other day I'll come back and talk more about what I'm doing here and there, but for now, I'll just talk about talking about it; that suits my present mood, whatever that is.