Furthermore, Smith does not believe that there should be a difference between a president's voice and the many voices that a poet can have. All of our voices should be able to coexist. However, Smith admits that she is unsure of the possibility of a multi-voiced president: "My audacious hope in Obama [his different voices] is based, I'm afraid, on precisely such flimsy premises." (194) Smith continues to talk about her opinion in the next paragraph where she states, "We'll see if Obama's lifelong vocal flexibility will enable him to say proudly with one voice, 'I love my country,' while saying with another voice, 'It is a country like other countries'"(194). As Smith says, I guess we will have to see if President Obama's voices will be effective or not.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
5 of 12: The Voices of a Poet and President Obama
According to Zadie Smith's essay Speaking in Tongues, it is better for a poet to have multiple voices than it is for a president. "Being many-voiced may be a complicated gift for a president, but in poets it is a pure delight in need of neither defense nor explanation" (193).
4 of 12: We Should Speak In Tongues
1. Zadie Smith states her opinion on the difference between her hometown and college town in an interesting way. "Willesden was a big, colorful, working-class sea; Cambridge was a smaller, posher pond, colorful, and almost univocal; the literary world is a puddle" (180). Why does Smith use such simple adjectives to describe Willesden (big and colorful) juxtaposed to Cambridge (posh and univocal) since she ostensible prefers the language of her hometown?
2. "In Dream City everything is doubled, everything is various. You have no choice but to cross borders and speak in tongues" (184). Although Smith is saying that we should have multiple voices, what about those who only have one voice? If the people from Dream City have no choice but to speak in tongues but they cannot talk in another voice aside from their own, what will happen?
3. Smith exclaims, "The idea that one should speak one's cultural allegiance first and the truth second (and this is a sign of authenticity) is precisely such a deformation" (186). However, how does this statement help her argument to express the immense importance of one speaking in his or her own tongue? Was explaining some of Smith's additional frustrations the purpose of her including this statement?
4. In Speaking in Tongues, what exactly does Smith mean when she claims that the term "keep it real" reminds her of a prison cell where one cannot live comfortably because it is too narrow (188)?
5. Why does Smith believe that "someone should make a proper study of it [the voice of the philosophic historian]" (192). The paragraph mentions what she hoped to see in politics, but does voice need to shape one's speech? A historian and politician can both speak of the same matter, using different voices, in a coherent way for a broad audience. Right?
6. What is the real basis behind why Smith wrote this essay? Was she trying to argue about her life (the two tongues), Obama, or both of these arguments?
2. "In Dream City everything is doubled, everything is various. You have no choice but to cross borders and speak in tongues" (184). Although Smith is saying that we should have multiple voices, what about those who only have one voice? If the people from Dream City have no choice but to speak in tongues but they cannot talk in another voice aside from their own, what will happen?
3. Smith exclaims, "The idea that one should speak one's cultural allegiance first and the truth second (and this is a sign of authenticity) is precisely such a deformation" (186). However, how does this statement help her argument to express the immense importance of one speaking in his or her own tongue? Was explaining some of Smith's additional frustrations the purpose of her including this statement?
4. In Speaking in Tongues, what exactly does Smith mean when she claims that the term "keep it real" reminds her of a prison cell where one cannot live comfortably because it is too narrow (188)?
5. Why does Smith believe that "someone should make a proper study of it [the voice of the philosophic historian]" (192). The paragraph mentions what she hoped to see in politics, but does voice need to shape one's speech? A historian and politician can both speak of the same matter, using different voices, in a coherent way for a broad audience. Right?
6. What is the real basis behind why Smith wrote this essay? Was she trying to argue about her life (the two tongues), Obama, or both of these arguments?
Friday, December 9, 2011
12 of 12: Some Advice For Those Starting Out
Just like Ron Koertge states in his poem, when you begin college you should be relaxed. Be ready to enjoy your college and writing experience. You do not have to be serious all the time--definitely make sure you give yourself time to have fun.
While many students think college is just about doing your work and getting good grades, it is important to be social, make friends, and stray away from the normal obedient student.
Get out of your seat. Be creative. And be willing to "laugh so loud everybody in the world frowns and says, 'shhh'"(Koertge). Although you are getting older, you are all young at heart. Let your child inside of you show. Let it shine. And do not be afraid to be who you are.
College is not as scary as you think. It is actually awesome to be able to do whatever you want when you want it. As well, there are so many students here, which will soon become your friends.
While many students think college is just about doing your work and getting good grades, it is important to be social, make friends, and stray away from the normal obedient student.
Get out of your seat. Be creative. And be willing to "laugh so loud everybody in the world frowns and says, 'shhh'"(Koertge). Although you are getting older, you are all young at heart. Let your child inside of you show. Let it shine. And do not be afraid to be who you are.
College is not as scary as you think. It is actually awesome to be able to do whatever you want when you want it. As well, there are so many students here, which will soon become your friends.
10 of 12: Should we listen to Rodney Jones or Jacques Derrida?
Read the poem and then check the brief analysis at the bottom of the page:
Hubris at Zunzal
Hubris at Zunzal
by Rodney Jones June 22, 2009
Nearly sunset, and time on the water
of 1984. Language its tracer.
No image like the image of language.
I had waded out about thigh deep.
Then a shout from the beach.
I held in my hand half a coconut shell
of coconut milk and 150-proof rum
and dumped it white into the waves
when it came on me how sweet it had been,
then the idea I was not finished,
then the act of reaching down
with the idea I would get it back.
Analysis:
In the poem above, by Rodney Jones, the poet is arguing that once you dump your drink into an ocean, you cannot get it back. This can be related to writing in real life; once we have posted online or on our blogs our words are gone forever. Anyone can read what we have written, and although we sometimes may want to take back what we have said, we cannot. The internet is like an ocean.
Could you imagine spilling a drink into the ocean? It would be impossible to get that drink back. Therefore, when we spill our drinks into the ocean (when we write online), we should also be wise with what we say because we cannot get our words back.
Isn't it intriguing to compare Rodney Jones and Jacques Derrida? Jones tells us to be careful while Derida tells us not to be afraid. Who should we listen to when we are writing?
11 of 12 Our Four-Letter Word Projects Are Writing
Are the four-letter word projects writing? (What is writing?) Or are they compositions, inscriptions, or something else?
In order to determine if the four-letter word projects are writing, we should first consider what writing is. According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, one of the definitions of writing states "[writing] is a style or form of composition" to communicate (Merriam Webster). However, many writers often write books or arguments using words. Does this mean that writing cannot be images that make an argument?
Images can definitely make an argument. The four-letter word projects are compilations of images, which is what formulates a composition. Therefore, since a dictionary defines writing the same way that we can define the project, shouldn't the projects be considered writing? Who said that writing has to be making an argument with words? Although the four-letter word projects do not use words, they are argumentative compositions that should be considered writing.
In order to determine if the four-letter word projects are writing, we should first consider what writing is. According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, one of the definitions of writing states "[writing] is a style or form of composition" to communicate (Merriam Webster). However, many writers often write books or arguments using words. Does this mean that writing cannot be images that make an argument?
Images can definitely make an argument. The four-letter word projects are compilations of images, which is what formulates a composition. Therefore, since a dictionary defines writing the same way that we can define the project, shouldn't the projects be considered writing? Who said that writing has to be making an argument with words? Although the four-letter word projects do not use words, they are argumentative compositions that should be considered writing.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)