Deviating from the typical, mundane essay assignment, after reading Jane Eyre we were assigned to build a free-form mash-up. To my disbelief, it resulted in a very positive learning experience. It was thought-provoking in its own unique manner, and the team effort in the project actually produced a greater amount of insight into the novel.
The main reason I enjoyed the project so much was the postmodern, 21st century ideals behind it. Why write an essay on something from the 19th century that has absolutely no relation to current events and my life? The reason is, this contemporary project provided a link between Charlotte Brontë and myself. Through searching for quotes and media, I was able to uncover some important information and a deeper though process.
The topic my group chose to work on was individualism. Now, before this project and Jane Eyre, I had hardly a clue as to what individualism meant. So my first step in the mash-up was to find some declaration of what exactly individualism meant. Sophie's World accurately described it as the pursuit to distinguish one self or individual from a group. After finding this, how prominent this theme was in Jane Eyre. When first reading Jane Eyre, it is not very jaw-dropping. But after discovering what individualism was through other sources, I realized how greatly it pertained to Jane Eyre. When Jane is taken in context to the time period when her fictional character was created, I stumbled upon the individualism present in Jane's life story. Her whole life is a series of events in which she goes against the norms of society. She marries a man out of her class, disrespects her master, aspires to greatness contrary to most women of her time, and follows what she believes best.
The next step was to find sources outside the English curriculum. Being so naïve, I didn't expect any benefit to come out of this. I was wrong. I found quotes from the early 20th century, films from the late 20th century, and songs from the 21st century. Through perusing for individualism in each of these, I realized the different types of individualism present from Jane's lifetime all the way up to mine. From rights of a man, to breaking away from racial stereotypes, to simply making your own choice at restaurants, I suddenly understood this underlying theme that encompassed much of the world. By doing this mash-up, I exercised my brain to its full capacity, and explored new depths with much more relevance to my life.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Saturday, April 16, 2011
iMedia: The Instrumental
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=502AJXEGPNw
Lupe Fiasco is one of my favorite artists, but many people underestimate his sophistication and musical talent. In this song "The Instrumental" there is a lot of subtle meaning. I have often listened to this song on replay, each time picking up a new message. Also, because this music falls under the genre of rap/hip-hop, which is very popular amongst the newest generation, I think it has the potential to spread a deep and influential message throughout the world if people take this song to heart.
The first lines of this song are "He just sits, and watches, the people in the boxes. Everything he sees he absorbs and adopts it. He mimicks and mocks it, and he hates the box, but he can't remember how to stop it." I interpreted this song as a direct metaphor for the media, the box being the television. When 'he' mimicks and he mocks it, Lupe is referencing how people often criticize the media, but yet they are hooked to it and cannot get out of this media-dependent reality.
Just like an other brilliant artist or writer, Lupe Fiasco's adroitness in songwriting is portrayed in his lyrics through his clever manipulation of words. In this song the word "box" repeats a lot. The next lines in this song are "So he continues to watch it, hoping that it'll give him something to box with... Ain't got the combination to unlock it. That's why he watches, scared to look away. Cause at that moment, it might show him what to take off the locks with." He uses the word box to literally represent the television and media, but then he also uses it to represent the box that people live in, shielded from their own voice and opinion. Lupe uses 'box' as a verb, and in these lyrics he's saying that people think the media can help them 'box' with their dull, mundane reality. He is criticizing how people look for intrinsic meaning in their life through the media, and because of this the media has intertwined itself with everyday life, only making things worse.
A good example that recurs in my mind every time I hear this song is how big restaurants/fast food chains advertise their foods, and through the media convince people to buy their products. They grow obese and unhealthy, but then they can just turn back to the media to find pills or weight loss supplements to fix all the problems that were originally caused by the media. Ironic, perhaps?
"As the doctors jot it all down, with their pens and pencils, the same ones who took away his voice, and just left his instrumental." In these last lines of the first verse, Lupe is describing how researchers determine how to brainwash people addicted to the media, and they take away those people's "voice", because everything in the media becomes established as fact, and opinions are no longer needed. The reason for the title choice of "The Instrumental" is that an instrumental piece of music has no lyrics, just background music, which is kind of what Lupe thinks our postmodern reality is becoming.
In the first chorus Lupe says "And he never lies, because he never said anything at all." He is critiquing how people are afraid to go out a limb and voice themselves, since they do not want to argue with the modern culture established by the media. In the second chorus he says "You can't tell me just who you are. You buy new clothes just to hide those scars. You built that roof just to hide those stars. Now you can't take it back to the start." Here Lupe is pointing out that without clothes to hide our natural body,and without a house to protect us from nature, we are nothing. He means that if we look purely at ourselves as who we are, and not things we have taken from the media, or our earthly possessions, we are just 'an instrumental'.
The most contradictory thing is that Lupe is criticizing the media, claiming we shouldn't look to the media for answers. But yet his music is becoming more and more a part of mainstream media. The reason I like this song and artist so much is that he acknowledges that the media is brainwashing the public, which sets himself apart from the rest of the media. Whether or not one views this video as insightful, it still has much to tell us about the modern world.
Lupe Fiasco is one of my favorite artists, but many people underestimate his sophistication and musical talent. In this song "The Instrumental" there is a lot of subtle meaning. I have often listened to this song on replay, each time picking up a new message. Also, because this music falls under the genre of rap/hip-hop, which is very popular amongst the newest generation, I think it has the potential to spread a deep and influential message throughout the world if people take this song to heart.
The first lines of this song are "He just sits, and watches, the people in the boxes. Everything he sees he absorbs and adopts it. He mimicks and mocks it, and he hates the box, but he can't remember how to stop it." I interpreted this song as a direct metaphor for the media, the box being the television. When 'he' mimicks and he mocks it, Lupe is referencing how people often criticize the media, but yet they are hooked to it and cannot get out of this media-dependent reality.
Just like an other brilliant artist or writer, Lupe Fiasco's adroitness in songwriting is portrayed in his lyrics through his clever manipulation of words. In this song the word "box" repeats a lot. The next lines in this song are "So he continues to watch it, hoping that it'll give him something to box with... Ain't got the combination to unlock it. That's why he watches, scared to look away. Cause at that moment, it might show him what to take off the locks with." He uses the word box to literally represent the television and media, but then he also uses it to represent the box that people live in, shielded from their own voice and opinion. Lupe uses 'box' as a verb, and in these lyrics he's saying that people think the media can help them 'box' with their dull, mundane reality. He is criticizing how people look for intrinsic meaning in their life through the media, and because of this the media has intertwined itself with everyday life, only making things worse.
A good example that recurs in my mind every time I hear this song is how big restaurants/fast food chains advertise their foods, and through the media convince people to buy their products. They grow obese and unhealthy, but then they can just turn back to the media to find pills or weight loss supplements to fix all the problems that were originally caused by the media. Ironic, perhaps?
"As the doctors jot it all down, with their pens and pencils, the same ones who took away his voice, and just left his instrumental." In these last lines of the first verse, Lupe is describing how researchers determine how to brainwash people addicted to the media, and they take away those people's "voice", because everything in the media becomes established as fact, and opinions are no longer needed. The reason for the title choice of "The Instrumental" is that an instrumental piece of music has no lyrics, just background music, which is kind of what Lupe thinks our postmodern reality is becoming.
In the first chorus Lupe says "And he never lies, because he never said anything at all." He is critiquing how people are afraid to go out a limb and voice themselves, since they do not want to argue with the modern culture established by the media. In the second chorus he says "You can't tell me just who you are. You buy new clothes just to hide those scars. You built that roof just to hide those stars. Now you can't take it back to the start." Here Lupe is pointing out that without clothes to hide our natural body,and without a house to protect us from nature, we are nothing. He means that if we look purely at ourselves as who we are, and not things we have taken from the media, or our earthly possessions, we are just 'an instrumental'.
The most contradictory thing is that Lupe is criticizing the media, claiming we shouldn't look to the media for answers. But yet his music is becoming more and more a part of mainstream media. The reason I like this song and artist so much is that he acknowledges that the media is brainwashing the public, which sets himself apart from the rest of the media. Whether or not one views this video as insightful, it still has much to tell us about the modern world.
Monday, April 11, 2011
360 Degrees: Love
Love is one of the most enigmatic characteristics in the human life. Falling in love and getting married is right next to birth in death in significance of events (as described in "Our Town"). But one of the most controversial questions is, what does falling in love really mean?
People say that opposites attract. Sometimes someone so seemingly perfect for you is not perfect at all. But, especially in more primordial time, people often had arranged marriages and married for status or wealth. King Tut married his own half cousin just so they would keep money in the family! Values change over time, so who should get married is contingent on the time period. But still, falling in love is an unconditional feeling, which we can view from many angles and try to determine general features of two people who will fall in love.
There are two "appearances" of a person: the inner appearance and the outward appearance. Outward appearances include beauty, physical features, and other aesthetic characteristics such as wealth (or how fancy someone dresses). Inward appearances include personality, hobbies, intelligence, emotions, comfortableness, openness, etc.
Many people say "beauty is only skin deep", referencing how one's physical features may be attractive, but on the inside, they are a completely unappealing person. Now people say not to judge a book by it's cover. But looking at it from multiple angles, it is easy to overlook the fact that any initial attraction between two people begins physically. For example, if there is someone who may have a very compatible personality with me, but who I have never met before, if I am not attracted to them physically, I may not have the guts to go and talk to them. Also, many would argue that physical attractions often hold a couple together. Humans are built with an innate urge to physically bond with someone else, and these feelings, no matter how shallow they may be, always exist. So, you see, a physical attraction is necessary for a love relationship.
That doesn't go without saying that an intellectual attraction is needed as well. Most failed relationships, as the general observes in all the celebrity breakups, began with a physical attraction. So then I guess we can conclude that beyond the physical attraction, an intellectual bond truly shows that two people are compatible. That being said, to formulate true love, a balance is required between intellectual and physical attraction.
People say that opposites attract. Sometimes someone so seemingly perfect for you is not perfect at all. But, especially in more primordial time, people often had arranged marriages and married for status or wealth. King Tut married his own half cousin just so they would keep money in the family! Values change over time, so who should get married is contingent on the time period. But still, falling in love is an unconditional feeling, which we can view from many angles and try to determine general features of two people who will fall in love.
There are two "appearances" of a person: the inner appearance and the outward appearance. Outward appearances include beauty, physical features, and other aesthetic characteristics such as wealth (or how fancy someone dresses). Inward appearances include personality, hobbies, intelligence, emotions, comfortableness, openness, etc.
Many people say "beauty is only skin deep", referencing how one's physical features may be attractive, but on the inside, they are a completely unappealing person. Now people say not to judge a book by it's cover. But looking at it from multiple angles, it is easy to overlook the fact that any initial attraction between two people begins physically. For example, if there is someone who may have a very compatible personality with me, but who I have never met before, if I am not attracted to them physically, I may not have the guts to go and talk to them. Also, many would argue that physical attractions often hold a couple together. Humans are built with an innate urge to physically bond with someone else, and these feelings, no matter how shallow they may be, always exist. So, you see, a physical attraction is necessary for a love relationship.
That doesn't go without saying that an intellectual attraction is needed as well. Most failed relationships, as the general observes in all the celebrity breakups, began with a physical attraction. So then I guess we can conclude that beyond the physical attraction, an intellectual bond truly shows that two people are compatible. That being said, to formulate true love, a balance is required between intellectual and physical attraction.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Dialectics: Capitalism and Socialism
No one society has achieved a perfect economic system. Economies fluctuate around the world. Different economic systems have been implemented until the collapse of an economy, calling for radical reform. The supremacy of different economic systems has been a heated topic of debate for centuries.
In ideal socialism, the government controls the means of production, distribution, and exchange, striving to eliminate class distinctions. But often, this is not the case. If the government is corrupt, socialism ends up almost like a dictatorship, where an elite group controls society. And society doesn't become egalitarian. Radical socialism is present in countries like Libya. When the wrong people get into power, the original ideals are not conformed to. But in countries like Denmark and Sweden, a rather democratic socialism is present, and public happiness surpasses almost every other countries. In addition, those countries have some of the greatest world economies.
Free market capitalism creates incentive amongst the people, but also creates great class divides. Usually the gap between the rich and the poor is diminished through taxes and certain laws, but with great enough class distinctions, economies quickly hit a recession. Exhibit A, the United States. But in response to that, the US also has the biggest national economy in the world. In capitalism, people don't have the interests of the greater whole in mind, but often the interests of the individual. But people also strive to invent and produce new ideas and technologies. One problem with this, as mentioned before, people disregard the interests of the greater society. So often externalities occur, where in order to maximize production efficiency companies will burden others with hidden costs. Take pollution, for example. A factory may keep poor production standards, and save money developing their products, but they may harm the environment, which other people would then have to take responsibility for.
In a socialist system, people still have incentives to work, as their overall input to society is valued. But there is a lot of transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor. But problems, like negative externalities, exist in much smaller proportions, since the government is in control of production and distribution.
I guess the reason that the world still has not found one perfect economic system is because there is NO one perfect system. What works best for one country is respective to the environment and conditions of the country. And for certain political systems to exist, the "adjacent possible" must also exist. Some countries may wish for a different economic system, but transitioning is hard. Or a corrupt leader is preventing it. If the infrastructure doesn't exist, socialism could be too difficult to implement. A balance of individual freedom and government control needs to be achieved, and compromises need to be made, and then only will there ever be a near-perfect economic system.
In ideal socialism, the government controls the means of production, distribution, and exchange, striving to eliminate class distinctions. But often, this is not the case. If the government is corrupt, socialism ends up almost like a dictatorship, where an elite group controls society. And society doesn't become egalitarian. Radical socialism is present in countries like Libya. When the wrong people get into power, the original ideals are not conformed to. But in countries like Denmark and Sweden, a rather democratic socialism is present, and public happiness surpasses almost every other countries. In addition, those countries have some of the greatest world economies.
Free market capitalism creates incentive amongst the people, but also creates great class divides. Usually the gap between the rich and the poor is diminished through taxes and certain laws, but with great enough class distinctions, economies quickly hit a recession. Exhibit A, the United States. But in response to that, the US also has the biggest national economy in the world. In capitalism, people don't have the interests of the greater whole in mind, but often the interests of the individual. But people also strive to invent and produce new ideas and technologies. One problem with this, as mentioned before, people disregard the interests of the greater society. So often externalities occur, where in order to maximize production efficiency companies will burden others with hidden costs. Take pollution, for example. A factory may keep poor production standards, and save money developing their products, but they may harm the environment, which other people would then have to take responsibility for.
In a socialist system, people still have incentives to work, as their overall input to society is valued. But there is a lot of transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor. But problems, like negative externalities, exist in much smaller proportions, since the government is in control of production and distribution.
I guess the reason that the world still has not found one perfect economic system is because there is NO one perfect system. What works best for one country is respective to the environment and conditions of the country. And for certain political systems to exist, the "adjacent possible" must also exist. Some countries may wish for a different economic system, but transitioning is hard. Or a corrupt leader is preventing it. If the infrastructure doesn't exist, socialism could be too difficult to implement. A balance of individual freedom and government control needs to be achieved, and compromises need to be made, and then only will there ever be a near-perfect economic system.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
360 Degrees: Gaddafi Bailout
Roughly a week ago rumors spread that Muammar Gaddafi initiated a proposal that would end in him stepping down from power but leaving with pocketfuls of money, security for his family, and the right to not be persecuted. Rumors also speculate that these terms were rejected as Libyan rebels did not want an honorable resignation for an dishonorable man. But put to scale, Gaddafi is almost a 21st century Hitler of Libya, and when he has no concern for his people, and when he's slaughtering them at the slightest sign of resistance, this option may present itself as viable.
The actual terms of this proposal are very speculative; the proposal itself is only alleged. But if it were true, obviously the rebels wouldn't want their tyrannic leader who may have massacred their close friends and family to walk away with so much as a scratch. I would have the same opinion if I were in their positions.
But let's take the side of the major foreign nations trying to intervene in this. Sure, Gaddafi doesn't deserve justice. But I'm sure Gaddafi is scared out of his mind right now, with all these major foreign nations (U.S., France, Britain, Germany, Canada, etc.) demanding that he stand down. Saddam Hussein was executed after all. We have him in control. If we push for this deal, and persuade the rebels that this would be the best decision for their country, maybe the pros would outweigh the cons.
Gaddafi is still killing, and it's not going to stop anytime soon. If I asked someone if they could save the lives of a 1,000 people by letting one criminal go free, I'm sure they would answer yes in the blink of an eye. What does one life really matter to us? If he's abdicating his power, it will ensure an atrocity like this never happens again. We may be giving him free money (as part of the agreement), but think about all the money being dumped into international assistance. And now isn't exactly the greatest time for the U.S. be spending money in foreign countries. We have our own economy and our own people to worry about, wouldn't letting Gaddafi go free be the most judicious action?
The actual terms of this proposal are very speculative; the proposal itself is only alleged. But if it were true, obviously the rebels wouldn't want their tyrannic leader who may have massacred their close friends and family to walk away with so much as a scratch. I would have the same opinion if I were in their positions.
But let's take the side of the major foreign nations trying to intervene in this. Sure, Gaddafi doesn't deserve justice. But I'm sure Gaddafi is scared out of his mind right now, with all these major foreign nations (U.S., France, Britain, Germany, Canada, etc.) demanding that he stand down. Saddam Hussein was executed after all. We have him in control. If we push for this deal, and persuade the rebels that this would be the best decision for their country, maybe the pros would outweigh the cons.
Gaddafi is still killing, and it's not going to stop anytime soon. If I asked someone if they could save the lives of a 1,000 people by letting one criminal go free, I'm sure they would answer yes in the blink of an eye. What does one life really matter to us? If he's abdicating his power, it will ensure an atrocity like this never happens again. We may be giving him free money (as part of the agreement), but think about all the money being dumped into international assistance. And now isn't exactly the greatest time for the U.S. be spending money in foreign countries. We have our own economy and our own people to worry about, wouldn't letting Gaddafi go free be the most judicious action?
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Best of Week: Irony
This week we took the Heart of Darkness test, and one of the major themes/questions was irony. There are 3 types of irony: verbal, dramatic, and situational. Through much discussion in English class we came across the idea that an author intentionally creates irony to make his literature deft and complex. Verbal irony is when you say something and mean the other, dramatic irony is when the readers see something that the characters can't, and situational irony is when something unexpected happens.
But the thing that struck me the most was not just irony; it was the fact that we use so much irony in our everyday lives which we tend to overlook. I used to be blind to the irony present in our everyday lives. After having discussions about irony, I started listening closer to my usual conversations.
Sarcasm, one of my favorite things to evoke laughter, is no other than a pseudonym for verbal irony. Someone may ask an obvious question, and often it seems natural to respond with a sarcastic comment. After the other person realizes the sarcasm, they realize that their question was blatantly obvious, and then they look back at you and realize your wittiness, and realize their own foolishness. Point and case, this is also how authors build character in their stories.
Another good example is in modern television, when an idiotic character (e.g. Dwight from the office) is unaware of the actual situation he has put himself in, while the audience members are fully aware of it. The character may do something he thinks is beneficial, when everyone else knows he is just doing something stupid. This dramatic irony shows the producer's brilliance.
Overall, throughout the many pieces of literature we have read, especially Heart of Darkness, I came to recognize that irony is often an author's best tool.
But the thing that struck me the most was not just irony; it was the fact that we use so much irony in our everyday lives which we tend to overlook. I used to be blind to the irony present in our everyday lives. After having discussions about irony, I started listening closer to my usual conversations.
Sarcasm, one of my favorite things to evoke laughter, is no other than a pseudonym for verbal irony. Someone may ask an obvious question, and often it seems natural to respond with a sarcastic comment. After the other person realizes the sarcasm, they realize that their question was blatantly obvious, and then they look back at you and realize your wittiness, and realize their own foolishness. Point and case, this is also how authors build character in their stories.
Another good example is in modern television, when an idiotic character (e.g. Dwight from the office) is unaware of the actual situation he has put himself in, while the audience members are fully aware of it. The character may do something he thinks is beneficial, when everyone else knows he is just doing something stupid. This dramatic irony shows the producer's brilliance.
Overall, throughout the many pieces of literature we have read, especially Heart of Darkness, I came to recognize that irony is often an author's best tool.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
What If?: America No Longer a Superpower
During this week we have repetitively discussed America's limited status as a world superpower. I kind of realized this from all the buzz going around about the recession. From watching Obama's State of the Union and its controversial Republican response, I realized that America is no longer on a steady path. The fate of our country lies in the hands of the newest generation. But I keep thinking: what if we can't turn it around?
Ironically, if I had to rate the impact of recession on my lifestyle from a 1 to 10, 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, I would give it a 2. It made me understand that I have a lot to be thankful for. But simply saying my thanks is not enough. Maybe I have nothing to worry about my future; maybe I do. Either or, I should have my best interests in the greater community. The same goes for the rest of the new generation. It's scary to think about making the world better for my children, when I was just once a child. But it's imperative. It's nerve-racking to imagine children 6 years younger than me 6,000 miles away on the other half of the globe are surpassing me in knowledge. But we can't just accept defeat. We have to compete back.
What if China does really become the next superpower? What will the implications be? Will we become "Easternized"? Will China become the next world model, the country that has the best education, the best healthcare, the country that people turn to for help? It's a scary thought. We keep trying to prevent this shift of power, but do we need a backup plan in case America collapses? I guess it's for us to decide.
Ironically, if I had to rate the impact of recession on my lifestyle from a 1 to 10, 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, I would give it a 2. It made me understand that I have a lot to be thankful for. But simply saying my thanks is not enough. Maybe I have nothing to worry about my future; maybe I do. Either or, I should have my best interests in the greater community. The same goes for the rest of the new generation. It's scary to think about making the world better for my children, when I was just once a child. But it's imperative. It's nerve-racking to imagine children 6 years younger than me 6,000 miles away on the other half of the globe are surpassing me in knowledge. But we can't just accept defeat. We have to compete back.
What if China does really become the next superpower? What will the implications be? Will we become "Easternized"? Will China become the next world model, the country that has the best education, the best healthcare, the country that people turn to for help? It's a scary thought. We keep trying to prevent this shift of power, but do we need a backup plan in case America collapses? I guess it's for us to decide.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Metacognition: 1st Semester Reflection
A lot can change over 4 months, and for me, in these last 4 months my thinking and learning processes have transformed. I remember that in the beginning of the year every major assignment, every piece of literature, really anything that was time consuming, seemed like a struggle. From the moment they were assigned, I kept wishing I could hop into a time machine and teleport to the second after I turned in the project. But over the course of the first semester, I figured out what was really pulling me down. In my head I wasn't grasping the depth of the project. I'd begin working on a project and stare endlessly at a bright computer screen for hours. I forced myself to believe that the time wasted was "brainstorming", and so then it was okay to keep switching between Facebook and Microsoft Word, since I was seeking 'inspiration'.
It's funny; after I procrastinate and rush to finish a project, expecting a horrendous grade I tell myself that the next project I will space out, and do my best on to bring my grade back up. But yet the same cycle repeated, sitting in front of a computer, spending hours typing out no more than a sentence, and then spending the last half hour rushing it all in. The Healing of America essay, Ishmael essay, etc. It soon became routine; I decided it was time for a change.
And luckily, so did my well-educated English teacher Mr. Allen. After doing projects such as the King Lear group performances, we talked about patterns in class of how the tasks were completed. Most people agreed that first the quotes were chosen, then the plot was decided, and then the script was made. And I think that's what triggered this other side of my brain to go off; it told me that I needed to have some structure in what I did. Writing gibberish down on a page and later editing into a 'final draft' was Rohan no more. After that project I knew that the next time we had a project, I was no doubt going to feel much more confident.
Lo and behold, when the Sophie's World essay came around, I felt mentally prepared. I thought about possible topics in my head, and found possible philosophers to back each thesis up. My strongest topic was globalization. After I chose my topic and had my quotes, I had all I needed to start writing my essay, right? No. This is where the biggest improvement my thinking came in. I decided to take that next step, and plan out what each paragraph would be about. First paragraph introduces the topics, next three introduce the subsets, 5th poses the question, next 3 answer the subsets with each of the 3 different philosophers, 9th is conclusion. THEN I started writing my essay.
It felt miraculous. I was stress-free. If I got stuck somewhere, I could just skip to the next paragraph because I knew what had to be in it. Ironically, even with the planning ahead, my essay took a lot less time then it would normally take me.
I applied this attitude to almost everything I did, and something must've clicked in my head, because that month everything I did felt incredibly easy. Even in the most stressed situations, I didn't think "ugh I'm never going to finish", I thought "this will not take me that long, I just have to think about all the things I have to do breeze through it". The feeling is so hard to explain. I felt as if I started doing things backwards. It was like I finished the ending, and all that was left was the beginning and middle. My mind was revitalized.
It's funny; after I procrastinate and rush to finish a project, expecting a horrendous grade I tell myself that the next project I will space out, and do my best on to bring my grade back up. But yet the same cycle repeated, sitting in front of a computer, spending hours typing out no more than a sentence, and then spending the last half hour rushing it all in. The Healing of America essay, Ishmael essay, etc. It soon became routine; I decided it was time for a change.
And luckily, so did my well-educated English teacher Mr. Allen. After doing projects such as the King Lear group performances, we talked about patterns in class of how the tasks were completed. Most people agreed that first the quotes were chosen, then the plot was decided, and then the script was made. And I think that's what triggered this other side of my brain to go off; it told me that I needed to have some structure in what I did. Writing gibberish down on a page and later editing into a 'final draft' was Rohan no more. After that project I knew that the next time we had a project, I was no doubt going to feel much more confident.
Lo and behold, when the Sophie's World essay came around, I felt mentally prepared. I thought about possible topics in my head, and found possible philosophers to back each thesis up. My strongest topic was globalization. After I chose my topic and had my quotes, I had all I needed to start writing my essay, right? No. This is where the biggest improvement my thinking came in. I decided to take that next step, and plan out what each paragraph would be about. First paragraph introduces the topics, next three introduce the subsets, 5th poses the question, next 3 answer the subsets with each of the 3 different philosophers, 9th is conclusion. THEN I started writing my essay.
It felt miraculous. I was stress-free. If I got stuck somewhere, I could just skip to the next paragraph because I knew what had to be in it. Ironically, even with the planning ahead, my essay took a lot less time then it would normally take me.
I applied this attitude to almost everything I did, and something must've clicked in my head, because that month everything I did felt incredibly easy. Even in the most stressed situations, I didn't think "ugh I'm never going to finish", I thought "this will not take me that long, I just have to think about all the things I have to do breeze through it". The feeling is so hard to explain. I felt as if I started doing things backwards. It was like I finished the ending, and all that was left was the beginning and middle. My mind was revitalized.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)