Archive for My Glog

Intro through Ch4

{ September 5, 2008 @ 3:35 am } · { Frankenstein, My Glog }
{ Tags: , } · { Leave a Comment }

Few key points:

-Nature vs. Technology

-Religion vs. Technology/Science

These issues are still prevalent today (abortion, stem cell research)

As I was reading I began to notice repetitive words and I tried to unravel the meaning and significance of their mention. A lot of ideas in these first few chapters relate to science and life, but words that are repeated are divine images. Also in the introduction Shelley mentions her inspiration for Frankenstein came from Darwin’s experiments. Darwin was a man of controversy in his time, coming up with theories of natural selection and evolution, and therefore questioning many religions’ belief systems. I think Shelley brought some of that controversy into her work by constantly repeating science and religious imagery. I’m not sure if Shelley is going to make a statement about religion or science. From what I can gather, a man (the creator of the monster), reached suffering from his search for knowledge.  I’m assuming that Shelley is making a statement about science and that certain limits should not be crossed, such as creating life. I wonder if Shelley was a religious woman in her time…though her publishing of Frankenstein was certainly controversial. It’s hard to hypothesize Shelley’s message at this point, but so far I think she is rejecting some of sciences’ aspirations.

Notes:

Motifs/repeated words:

·         Animation/animated

·         Nature

·         Divine/God/Halo/Guardian

·         Spirit/Soul

·         Creator/Creation/Creature

·         Evil/Demon/Dark

·         Ice/Cold

·         Fog/Mist

·         Eyes (eyes are passage to soul-symbolism? Significance?)

·         Melancholy/Despair/Depression/Misery

·         Violence

·         Noble

·         Wild/Madness

·         Sea/Ocean

-Some repeated words relate to the themes of Religion vs. Technology/Science and Nature vs. Technology

-Speaker became immensely fascinated with books on the sciences

-Importance of books, to be well educated…this book also brings up the idea that knowledge can bring suffering and misery (Is ignorance bliss?)

-Some mention of cycles, such as seasons, death to life and life to death

Ch 2 (first ten pages)

{ August 28, 2008 @ 11:20 pm } · { Birkerts, My Glog }
{ Tags: , , , , , , } · { Comments (1) }

After reading part of Ch 2, I realized almost all of Birkerts statements in Ch 1 about reading and technology result directly from his childhood. A lot of emotion is associated with reading for Birkerts. My theory is that a lot of Birkerts’s father’s comments were extremely painful for Birkerts to hear. He had a deep passion for reading and thoroughly enjoyed almost all aspects of literature. When reading Birkerts could escape his world; he looked for characters in his stories for advice and companionship. This section of the book was extremely captivating to me because of all the psychology involved—I’m a psych major.

 

Birkerts’s father

Some of Birkerts’s father’s thoughts about reading were extremely negative. Birkerts’s father believed that reading was “feminine” and that Birkerts should not spend his time isolated in an imaginary world (pg 38). His father also believed that “doing is prized over being or thinking”, one only read when “all other options have been exhausted” (pg 38). Maybe a somewhat casual comment this left Birkerts extremely tortured. In a sense it was wrong for Birkerts to enjoy reading, so he read in private. This could be why Birkerts believes that reading in privacy is the only way to fully experience writing–when Birkerts most enjoyed reading, and possibly when he most enjoyed his life.

Isolation

Reading in a secretive manner became a thrill for Birkerts because it was forbidden and this was how he expressed teenage rebellion. Birkerts said he was most attracted to books with “moody-looking young [men] with some suggestion of meditated rebellion” (pg 36). This sentence is particularly revealing. Earlier in chapter one Birkerts states there are no leaders outside of literature. That statement he truly believes because when he was growing up the characters in Birkerts’s books were his idols and mentors. Even in school Birkerts felt isolated from his peers. English was his second language and he enjoyed school (pg 39). Birkerts said he was “playing the role of the normal American kid” (pg 40). He “concealed” his life and hid “behind the mask” 9pg 40). How awful it must have been for Birkerts to pretend to be someone else his entire life; his only escape was the literature. What’s worse was that “private absorption” was challenging his father’s authority (pg 37). Birkerts states: “this notion of hiding, secreting myself in a text was important to me—it underlies to this day my sense of a book as a refuge” (pg 35). Reading was the only time Birkerts felt he wasn’t being judged and it also served as a way for Birkerts to fight his “father’s strictness” (pg 34).

Attachment

Birkerts believed that reading was rebellious and exciting. He also believed that reading was a way he could find acceptance and role models.

Are there other attachments that Birkerts has towards reading?

Well Birkerts describes his feelings towards reading as “love”, “pleasure”, “sensuousness”, and “finding joy” (pg 39). Those are very strong emotions. I’m not sure if there are more reasons why Birkerts loves reading so much, but it is clear that he is quite captivated by literature. Also Birkerts realized that many authors had exciting and unusual background stories—in laments terms…unique—so he felt he could relate with them. From this evolved Birkerts’s desire to become a writer (pg 41).

Connection to Technology

One sentence I found particularly unusual was when Birkerts described his favorite books. Growing up he referenced “James Bond” as a favorite series with its reek of “high-class gadgetry” (pg 36).

If Birkerts hated technology so much then why would he enjoy reading the James Bond books AND particularly mention the gadgetry involved?

This question I pondered for a bit and realized that in fact Birkerts does not dislike technology. He may admire the times of the past before technology, but he really doesn’t hate technology. In today’s society technological advances, such as television, iPods, and internet, have replaced reading. There lies the problem. Birkerts loves literature so much that anything that may impact its success is automatically an enemy. If all of a sudden sports were the most important thing in American culture I believe that Birkerts would take offensive to that as well. Birkerts will defend literature until his death, because as a child it was his only source of safety and pleasure. I believe this is why Birkerts seems so close-minded towards the benefits of technology.

 

ch 1 glog

{ August 27, 2008 @ 10:38 pm } · { Birkerts, My Glog }
{ Tags: , , , , } · { Comments (1) }

Ch 1 Glog

Summary

Birkerts’s opinion of society today is that technology is greatly influencing today’s youth and culture. He believes that literature helps one grow into a unique, focused, and intelligent being and that too much technology can lead to attention disorders (such as add or adhd) and a lack of language understanding(pg xiv). SB argues that literature takes a person to place of fantasy and glorious isolation, expanding their creativity and imagination. SB experiences the world a century ago by removing all aspects of communication for one week (pg 25). He admires the intense focus it takes to remove oneself from all of reality’s basic chaotic distractions and he imagines living in the 20th century with no transportation except a borrowed wagon and the serenity of silence. Birkerts doesn’t believe that all technology should be erased from the planet, but that literature should be pushed to the front. Birkerts expresses his opinion on reading as slipping out of one’s “customary time orientation;” reading may be an amazing escape from reality but a person growing up in a world filled only with fantasy in their thoughts and ignorant of the world’s technology would not be able to survive in society. Birkerts fears conformity in a society overruled by technology.  Human nature leads one to desire acceptance and therefore embrace conformity.

 

Disagreements

In my opinion Birkerts’s ideas are too reminiscent of the past. One cannot stop change; it is inevitable. His opinions of technology are too harsh in my opinion. Technology has brought people together, which shouldn’t be considered atrocious. I also don’t think that “looking out at our society, we see no real leaders, no larger figures of wisdom” because there are no “points of moral and psychological reference” (pg 21). There are presidents, prime ministers, scholars, scientists, and teachers that many children learn from and get inspiration from. I would consider these people to be points of moral and psychological reference. I understand that some of these role models do not always behave perfectly, but perfect characters created in a perfectly crafted world of fiction would neither be realistic or relatable role models. Birkerts is convinced that a world of simplicity would be better for today’s youth, but simplicity does exist in the world today. In third world countries even a wagon isn’t an available source of transportation, so technology is not prevalent among all countries. I also think that Birkerts’s view of television and the “Beauty and the Beast” movie are a bit severe (pg29). A person cannot “evolve an independent identity” just from reading. Reading someone else’s thoughts does not make someone an individual and, with encouragement from a parent, a child’s love for literature wouldn’t be of their own will (pg 29). By calling literature “the good and true” Birkerts is denouncing all modern forms of technology, which seems intolerant and ignorant (pg 30). Without technology literature could not be shared throughout the world as readily as it is today.

 

Agreements

I do agree with some of Birkerts’s points; reading is more difficult for people who enjoy fast paced entertainment such as movies and television. Also patience and attention spans of much of today’s youth is deteriorating because of the fast paced technological world. I do think that Birkerts’s fear of the elimination of language in modern society is too extreme and an unfounded thought. How can humanity exist without the basic form of communication, language? Further still even though technology runs rampant in society how can there be book crazes such as The Da Vinci Code or the phenomenon that is Harry Potter? Obviously literature still has a tremendous impact on society.

 

Questions

Birkerts opinions do leave me with some thoughts:

o   What is the best way to embrace literature in a technological world?

o   If Birkerts embraces isolationism and individuality how is one supposed to survive in an ever populating social existence?

o   Birkerts believes that literature in society is diminishing, that the printed word is lost due to the World Wide Web and other flashier attractions, such as television. I disagree…in a physical form books deteriorate from wear and tear. On a hard drive in a computer the work cannot be lost. One can make infinite copies. In a physical form can’t a books lifespan increase due to technology?

o   With the availability of books and writing online what role does plagiarism play? Are authors more vulnerable to theft through internet printing?

o   I would also like to have more evidence that technology is destroying the world of literature. Where are SB’s statistics? His only evidence thus far is one class reaction to James’s prose. How is this one incident give proof to the elimination of literature’s influence in an entire culture?

Conclusion

My opinion about literature in today’s society is that it is disappearing. Many children don’t read for enjoyment anymore, they only read what is required for school. I also think how a child was raised, which would include those in a technology centered society, influenced their own reading habits. I don’t feel that literature is the only source of learning though, and I don’t think characters in literature are the only people to admire. Birkerts believes that reading should be a private matter, but I believe that group discussion and public readings help one connect to the central message of the work. Also discussing a piece of literature can help one to better understand other layers of the work that one may have over looked otherwise. Some points that Birkerts makes are valid, but I don’t necessarily agree with all of his conclusions and assumptions.