Aha!!!

On Sunday I found binary opposites that exist outside of Theory class. I was in church and during one of the prayers we were praying for the poor and wealthy, men and women etc. I had an Aha! moment when I realized they were binary opposites. So I was super excited I had found my blog topic for the week. The only thing with these binary opposites is that some of them were opposite to how society had them classified. For example, society would say the binary opposite was wealthy/poor people. The center of this being wealthy. However, in the Church the two words are switched and it becomes poor/wealthy. Therefore, the Church believes that for this binary opposite the poor people are at the center. I am not really sure why this is.
I assume it is because the Church is supposed to be a more loving, caring community. Therefore poor people are not viewed as a nuisance, but as people. Jesus also didn’t judge people based on wealth. Maybe this is why the poor side of the binary opposite is the center.
I’m not really sure what I am trying to get at here but I know three things: every institution in society has binary opposites, depending on what the institution is depends on what side is the center and I was able to relate the class to the OUTSIDE WORLD. (I’m very excited about this).
As a side note the sermon for that day was partly on interpretation, honestly it felt kind of like Theory classJ:)

difficult

So for some reason writing this essay was extremely difficult for me. When I got to class i was worried that nothing i wrote about would be discussed and my worst, failing fears, would be confirmed. Instead I arrived in class to an introduction on difficulty. This is a talk I never thought I would hear coming from one of my University Professors. For some reasons I have this view that in University you are left to the wolves, and your own devises. Probably because that’s the feeling that was opposed on me in high school and it is hard to shake. Needless to say I was excited to see the topic of difficulty openly discussed today. It made me feel that maybe my Profs do understand what we’re going through.
I will argue, however, that complaining can be productive. Sometimes if I’m really worked up on a piece of work I have to do I need to vent. If I don’t vent my mind will never be able to focus at the task at hand. This is when calling my mom or my boyfriend comes into effect. I’ll have my rant about how I don’t get it, or the expectations are unclear (not in this class of course) and then I’ll start to bounce ideas about the project. Before I know it I’ve gone from complaining to my outline in one swift shot.
A couple points on what Dr. Pound said.
a) Writing is thinking. What a profound thought!!
b) Think process not product. Between this and writing is thinking, I may have just been given the answer to my procrastinating problems
c) I think about a piece of work, what I want to say etc but am so wrapped up on the end result I don’t start writing. I’m definitely going to try these two ideas for the next essay
One final thought, Dr Pound is completely right...my room is cleanest right before an exam.

music, cats and tirangles

In Claude Levi-Strauss’ article “The Structural Study of Myth’ I found one of the most interesting area, and the one that stands out the most, is how he divides myths. He has them separated into columns and rows. To me this organisation makes perfect sense. The columns are grouped into like events, characteristics, symbols etc. When reading the rows left-right you and read the story in sequence. This relates exactly to the musical elements of melody and harmony. I have a little musical background, and the combination of two passions, literature and music, has opened the door to understanding a little more about myths. With the combination of rows and columns you are given the whole myth, insides and out, with all its twists and turns. Just as in music, melody and harmony are combined to create a beautiful piece of music. When analyzing a myth these interlocking aspects enable a myth to be taken apart and put back together flawlessly, just like a puzzle.

As I start to think about the essay do next week one aspect of Structuralism seems to stand out for me. The fact that the word cat is the word cat because it is not bat, or hat or mat, that there is no connection to the word and the creature that begs me for food. I don’t know why this aspect keeps popping out in my mind. I think it could be because it is the opposite of what I believed to be the connection of meanings to their words. I always assumed there would be a specific kind of connection. The idea it is what it is for what it is not just boggles my mind. It is almost like the process of elimination was in affect. If a cat was named first, the word cat could not be assigned to a dog. Who would of thought I could be typing on a cat and petting my computer with his method.

The idea of words having no connection to other words brings up another point. If there is no connection between a word and its meaning what is the deal with words like, triangle. Tri means three and angle ``is the amount of rotation needed to bring one line or plane into coincidence with another, generally measured in radians or in degrees, minutes, and seconds″, which is read as 12 degrees, 10 minutes, and 30 seconds``. So, the word triangle and the meaning are connected. Not just connected by elimination, but by a direct link of meaning to word. This is the case of many words in the English. The original Latin of some words could stand up to a Structural interpretation, however the English cannot.

angle definition from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/angle

this and that...

First off, HAPPY THANKSGIVING:)

For some reason this week I’m having a very difficult time coming up with a blog topic...So I think I’ll just take about my thoughts for this week’s classes.
I thought the class discussion on “Anecdote of a Jar” was pretty insightful. At first I was worried I was way off the mark with my close reading. But, by the end of the class I think we all shared something in common with what we interpreted the poem as, even if that commonality was taking the opposite stance on a viewpoint. Also, I think having this discussion after the paper was due was a great idea, because we all had solidified our thoughts about this poem, so we all had something to say, or at least think.
As for the random Act of Poetry, I thought that was pretty cool. Personally, I’ve never heard of them before but I think the concept is a good one. I think my favourite reading was Duncan’s second poem, with the microphone. I think it is because I am a fan of organised nonsense. I really hope they are getting a good reaction all over Thunder Bay!
As for Thursday’s class on Structuralism, I thought Dr. Pound broke down the ideas in an easy to grasp manor. When I was introduced to Structuralism in one of my classes last year some of the ideas were clear, but overall it was pretty fuzzy. Between our two readings and Dr. Pound’s explanation I think the majority of the information is pretty clear. However, don’t quote me on that, we’ll have to see at application time.

quick thought...

So, I was thinking, there were the two sides: the ones who bellieved in absolute truths and those that believed you brought something of your own to every truth. Scientific fact would be considered an absolute truth then, right? The how do they justify the discovery of new facts and the change of old ones as a result of more research?

I think what was being said in class about how science was full of rhetoric is right on the money.

I really don't to much to say on this that wasn't covered in class...