Yes but what does the rock symbolize?
If a WWE channel can exist then why not...
I would totally tivo the Undergrad Hipster Girl Network and the Geek Victims of Fox Network. I'm pretty confident if those two channels existed, I would watch no other channel for the rest of my life.
So here's the thing about Composition II. I am taking this thing on pain of death, my schools screwed me over and I shouldn't have to take it because hello, A in a 400 level English class, clearly I know how to write an essay. But whatever, I have to do my time. But here's the thing. I'm actually really enjoying it.
I've always been a writer (this is obvious to anyone who knows me) but as someone whose comfort zone is young adult fiction (and before that the children adventure series like Pony Pals, Jedi Apprentice, and Animorphs) I've never really appreciated craft. What goes into making a good novel good, grammatically, sentence structure etc.
When Team Constant Vigilance was visiting for the Ski Weekend of Awesome we got into a conversation about that very topic. JJ, who is much more educated on the subject than myself, used the analogy of a table. A table can be well constructed but not to your visual taste, and a table can be wobbly but you just can't stand to throw it out because you love it and it goes with everything. I have always been the type of reader (and writer) who goes for the table that I love, and I don't care if it falls apart at the seams, I'll just grab some crazy glue and put it back together. I appreciate a well made table, but unless I'm buying it for a school project, I'd rather not put my stuff on it in my spare time. Are you totally confused by this yet?
Since I was always a good writer, I got to skip the how-to classes. I didn't need to learn how to write an essay, I could already do it. But there are things you learn in those how to classes that I missed. Things like how sentence fragments can create emphasis. Recently we did an exercise where we had to say if the grammatical error was justified by what it was trying to prove. A paragraph on traffic jams was filled with comma splices, mirroring the stop and go traffic. A sentence about free will and individuality used a comma over a period or a semicolon. I used to be of the sort that would say "Well aren't you rebellious, you're breaking grammar rules! *eyeroll*" but I'm starting to understand how it can really aid to the argument you're giving.
I also hate hate HATE analyzing fiction. I can't stand the classes where I have to say "What did the author mean by this? What's the symbolism here?" Dude, we are giving this author waaay too much credit. I know when I write, I don't give a character green eyes because green is the color of wisdom and I want to show that he is a wise character. I happen to like green eyes. Maybe the actor I envision playing this character has green eyes. There's a plethora of reasons. And if the character turns out to be a complete dumbass, no I was not going for irony. I mean sure, certain things I want to have meaning. The main character in my novel I'm writing right now is named Hawk. I chose Hawk because it's a predatorial animal, very powerful, very serene, and very loyal. Hawks mate for life. This is a plot point, to a degree, in my novel. Blatant things like that? Yes. But Hawk has red hair because when I picture in my head, she's a redhead. But if by some miracle my book becomes the next Hunger Games (or heaven forbid Twilight) and they're reading and analyzing it in schools, surely some teacher will decide I gave her red hair because of a red-tailed hawk (Oh Tobias, how I miss you). Or because she's fiery. Or because red sticks out and it's further showing she's a loner. No. I pictured her with red hair, so that's what she got. Okay? No deeper meaning here.
But that's what I'm kind of loving about Comp II. On the first day of class we were given a picture of a coyote standing on an empty train platform. We had to analyze it. No speaking out loud, just writing it out and handing it in. First off, I thought the coyote was a wolf, so I went with a Big Bad Wolf vs Wolf as a Protector idea. Did he eat all the people on the platform, or is he protecting them? I was very thorough, and very convinced I was right. I was totally wrong, especially because it's a coyote. Other people had similar problems. But that just goes to show when you analyze something you are probably wrong. And that's what the professor was telling us. Analyze it how you want, let it mean to you what you think it means to you, but don't assume that's what the author wanted. That's what you want. Big difference.
So we're four weeks into this class, and already we've deconstructed every myth surrounding analysis (and thank you professor for saying outright there is no such thing as "deeper meaning". If the author wants you to know something they will smack you in the face with it) and increased my respect and awareness of craft, and how it can add to a story.
Maybe this class won't be so bad after all.
I would totally tivo the Undergrad Hipster Girl Network and the Geek Victims of Fox Network. I'm pretty confident if those two channels existed, I would watch no other channel for the rest of my life.
So here's the thing about Composition II. I am taking this thing on pain of death, my schools screwed me over and I shouldn't have to take it because hello, A in a 400 level English class, clearly I know how to write an essay. But whatever, I have to do my time. But here's the thing. I'm actually really enjoying it.
I've always been a writer (this is obvious to anyone who knows me) but as someone whose comfort zone is young adult fiction (and before that the children adventure series like Pony Pals, Jedi Apprentice, and Animorphs) I've never really appreciated craft. What goes into making a good novel good, grammatically, sentence structure etc.
When Team Constant Vigilance was visiting for the Ski Weekend of Awesome we got into a conversation about that very topic. JJ, who is much more educated on the subject than myself, used the analogy of a table. A table can be well constructed but not to your visual taste, and a table can be wobbly but you just can't stand to throw it out because you love it and it goes with everything. I have always been the type of reader (and writer) who goes for the table that I love, and I don't care if it falls apart at the seams, I'll just grab some crazy glue and put it back together. I appreciate a well made table, but unless I'm buying it for a school project, I'd rather not put my stuff on it in my spare time. Are you totally confused by this yet?
Since I was always a good writer, I got to skip the how-to classes. I didn't need to learn how to write an essay, I could already do it. But there are things you learn in those how to classes that I missed. Things like how sentence fragments can create emphasis. Recently we did an exercise where we had to say if the grammatical error was justified by what it was trying to prove. A paragraph on traffic jams was filled with comma splices, mirroring the stop and go traffic. A sentence about free will and individuality used a comma over a period or a semicolon. I used to be of the sort that would say "Well aren't you rebellious, you're breaking grammar rules! *eyeroll*" but I'm starting to understand how it can really aid to the argument you're giving.
I also hate hate HATE analyzing fiction. I can't stand the classes where I have to say "What did the author mean by this? What's the symbolism here?" Dude, we are giving this author waaay too much credit. I know when I write, I don't give a character green eyes because green is the color of wisdom and I want to show that he is a wise character. I happen to like green eyes. Maybe the actor I envision playing this character has green eyes. There's a plethora of reasons. And if the character turns out to be a complete dumbass, no I was not going for irony. I mean sure, certain things I want to have meaning. The main character in my novel I'm writing right now is named Hawk. I chose Hawk because it's a predatorial animal, very powerful, very serene, and very loyal. Hawks mate for life. This is a plot point, to a degree, in my novel. Blatant things like that? Yes. But Hawk has red hair because when I picture in my head, she's a redhead. But if by some miracle my book becomes the next Hunger Games (or heaven forbid Twilight) and they're reading and analyzing it in schools, surely some teacher will decide I gave her red hair because of a red-tailed hawk (Oh Tobias, how I miss you). Or because she's fiery. Or because red sticks out and it's further showing she's a loner. No. I pictured her with red hair, so that's what she got. Okay? No deeper meaning here.
But that's what I'm kind of loving about Comp II. On the first day of class we were given a picture of a coyote standing on an empty train platform. We had to analyze it. No speaking out loud, just writing it out and handing it in. First off, I thought the coyote was a wolf, so I went with a Big Bad Wolf vs Wolf as a Protector idea. Did he eat all the people on the platform, or is he protecting them? I was very thorough, and very convinced I was right. I was totally wrong, especially because it's a coyote. Other people had similar problems. But that just goes to show when you analyze something you are probably wrong. And that's what the professor was telling us. Analyze it how you want, let it mean to you what you think it means to you, but don't assume that's what the author wanted. That's what you want. Big difference.
So we're four weeks into this class, and already we've deconstructed every myth surrounding analysis (and thank you professor for saying outright there is no such thing as "deeper meaning". If the author wants you to know something they will smack you in the face with it) and increased my respect and awareness of craft, and how it can add to a story.
Maybe this class won't be so bad after all.