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).

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. 

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?

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.

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

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.

Revised Four-Letter Word Project: Play

Here is my final draft on "play":

Four-Letter Word Project: Play

"Play" Take One

Here is my original video on "play": 

"Play" Take One

9 of 12: You Can Read My Text If You Would Like

When I wear text on my shirt, I normally am not anticipating readers. Actually, I wear shirts in an attempt to match and if they happen to have words on them, then you can read them. My intentions are not mainly to have my shirt read though.

There are rare instances where I do wear clothing to be read. For instance, when I go to a sports event, I try to wear a shirt supporting the team and a player that I like. Is this considered wearing a shirt to be read or would you say I am just trying to interact with you?

8 of 12: A Peer's Argument About the Flexibility of Non-verbal Assertations

A peer wrote a composition with crayons that said with words:

"I think it is true. By not putting restrictions and identifying the voice, readers have the flexibility of interpretation. When aspects of writing (such as voice) are not identified or are open to interpretation, the reader's imagination can run freely, providing a great deal of flexibility. If the character's voice is not clear cut or writer's identifiable, the reader must then raise the voice how he/she wants. When the reader gets to decide or interpret aspects like voice, the possibilities are endless. So yes, I find it very true" (Jhenna).

7 of 12: Crayons Are For Drawing...Shouldn't We Use Them That Way?

In the composition that I read, I do not think the writer was very influenced by the writing implement that she used. She wrote in crayons to depict that images can do what words can do, yet she wrote with the crayons. Why didn't she draw a picture with the crayons to be more creative?

She was a little creative though, because she used different color crayons for each sentence. Similar sentences were the same color. However, I am still baffled why this writer chose to use words? If she believes that images can be flexible, don't you think that she should have illustrated the page with the crayons instead?

While the composition could be much better, it still is unique. She was definitely constrained by the difficulty that crayons present to writing with words, but she still took on this task. She added a twist to this composition by using different colors to show logical sections of her writing. The main question I wonder about once again is why we chose to write in words when we are given a utensil that is more suited for another depiction, such as crayons?

6 of 12: Social Media May Just Be Our New Personal Communication

The parody "Twouble with Twitter" raises many intriguing questions about Twitter. The animation uses satire to ridicule how crazy many of us can be with microblogging, posting short tweets to update where we are or what we are doing. I honestly believe that Twitter is an excellent social media website; however, millions of users have become too obsessed. 

Why do we feel the necessity to tell everyone who reads our tweets what we are doing or so much about our life? Is spilling our lives to the whole world part of the Twenty-First Century? In fact, I wonder if most people who tweet about their personal lives are really this expressive in person. I know I would rather call one of my friends and talk to him or her, like the animation suggests. I do not think it is necessary to tweet everything about our lives. We do not completely know who is reading what we are tweeting and even if we have our twitters private, those following us on Twitter could be sharing our personal tweets with others. 

While it may not be an immense issue to consider, is our generation courageous or not? We post personal information online for many people to see, which is definitely bold, yet in person we hide this information from others. The more important statement to notice is that Twitter is allowing those who normally may never express their opinions to feel like they can. Therefore, Twitter can be seen as a significant way for someone to be personal without being afraid. 

Furthermore, if we look at the progression of technological communication, we can notice an interesting pattern. Instant messaging began as a great way to communicate, which led to a more mobile form known as texting. Then Facebook became popular so that people could share information, on a less personal basis though. Finally, Twitter is now popular too. What do these advancements mean for the writing space?                
                                                         
These social, electronic advancements are also important for our generation because everyone goes on these websites. It almost appears that someone who does not text, use Facebook or Twitter will most-likely feel secluded or "not connected to the world". However, should it be the other way around? By using our phones or going online all the time, how do we have time to hangout with our friends in person to really connect with them? When we tweet every ten minutes, are we looking for attention, simply addicted to Twitter, or do we feel like we need to go on these social medias to stay hip and connected with our friends? Should we need to think we are pressured to go on to Twitter to feel connected to the world? 

Nevertheless, while I do not agree with microblogging, it may just be a form of communication in our present-day society and (maybe ironically) the way that some people can be personal. The writing space has to advance and transform with our progressing civilization, but is Twitter the most appropriate change to the writing space of the Twenty-First Century? I guess until someone else reinvents a more popular writing space, we should just optimistically accept the microbloggers on Twitter. 

3 of 12: Twitter is More Social Than Educational

What is writing? Is tweeting writing? And what is the purpose of tweeting? 

These three questions are compelling when one ponders about twitter. The social online writing space is a new advancement of technological writing. Writing on twitter is called tweeting and it definitely is writing, conveying an argument or information with words. Tweets incorporate arguments where anyone can understand the tweeter's intentions because hashtags (#) are used to concisely sum up a tweet. For example, if I am trying to say that Hofstra University is awesome, I may tweet: "I love Hofstra University #awesomecollege." 

Therefore, how could you not consider tweeting to be writing? In a tweet, words are used to convey an argument or information. Tweeting is just a newer form of writing that has been reinventing the writing space by adjusting communication to what our society wants.

In addition, twitter allows us to look at common tweets. After I tweet, anything I have hashtaged becomes a link; I can could now click on the hypertext. This link takes me to a page where I could can view anyone else's tweet who has hashtaged awesome college too (#awesomecollege).

While twitter only permits you to post a limited number of characters per tweet, and therefore words, the messages that you can deliver are endless. We must also remember that this website is normally referred to as a social network. Consequently, although tweets should be considered a form of writing and can be informative, we must acknowledge that twitter is more of a form of entertainment than an educational website.    

2 of 12: Portable Writing Services Are Just Our Friends

Have you ever noticed that many people wear text on their clothing, legs, and even their bodies? An intriguing thought to ponder about is whether these people realize how their texts are portrayed. For example, sometimes I judge people depending on what their shirt says--yea, I know that's not right but isn't a shirt part of who we are? We are the ones who decide to wear the text instead of choosing to wear a shirt without text. 


Sometimes text on a shirt even allows me to start a conversation, such as when I see someone wearing a familiar text (a baseball team's logo or a favorite brand of mine). However, this invitation to read our shirts can be awkward. Occasionally I see someone I don't know looking at me like I have about ten heads. I wonder if he or she is reading the text on my shirt or what this person is looking at. And then, you notice the awkward eye contact with that guy from your economics class that you have never spoken to. Why is he checking me out?....He is actually looking at my shirt. 


Although there are many analyses of the text on our shirt, maybe these texts are just good for our society. We could look at the texts this way: by someone else wearing a shirt with text on it, he or she is saying, "You can look at my shirt. I won't bite you." This friendly view should not be overlooked because text is really just an invitation for a new friendship.