Response to Absolute Powerpoint by Ian Parker

Lets rewind all the way back to the Caleb Crain article at the beginning of the semester when I commented on the experiment with Power Point:

In reference to the recent experiment concerning PowerPoint, in which the silent readers retained more information and were more entertained than those who were informed both visually and audibly, I would have to say I am not surprised. Personally, I have never understood the recent PowerPoint craze.  PowerPoint just seems like another good excuse on top of Google and SparkNotes for students to slack; to cut and paste and replace solid research with entertaining photos. Ironically, many teachers seem to praise it in the name of moving forward with education. When I am viewing a PowerPoint presentation I always feel as if I am getting random, disconnected phenomenon thrown at me rather than absorbing one cohesive lesson, and in the case that the PowerPoint was compiled by a student, this is usually not far from the truth. I would much prefer reading from a textbook where I would take the personal initiative in retaining the information rather than have it chopped up and fed to me in pieces via PowerPoint. Perhaps this has something to do with some sort of psychological conditioning of my brain to shut off and recline in a La-Z-Boy boy every time a screen pops up.

Now coming back to "Absolute Powerpoint" by Ian Parker I have to say my views have not changed that much. Although I definitely see the efficiency of the PowerPoint I still have to agree with the view that Parker seems to lean toward that our thoughts and actual level of thinking may be getting cut short by the bullet point format. However, since PowerPoint is obviously not going anywhere considering that Parker mentions in some social circles not arriving to a presentation with a PowerPoint is like forgetting your shoes, I think we must find a happy medium. We must take the responsibility to be prepared presenters, and not just mindlessly read word for word what is written on the slides. We have all had that teacher who insults us by reading what is right in front of our faces for an hour as if our eyeballs and brain were not able to communicate with each other. Then again, there are those teachers that can grab your attention with their knowledge to the point that you forget that there is a PowerPoint behind them. So in some ways this is just another one of those arguments in which the effectiveness all depends on the individual.     

Picking on Wiki

Embarrassingly enough, I did not understand how Wikipedia worked until I arrived at college and none of my professors would allow me to cite it. The fact that Wikipedia is a collaborative site subject to error was a detail that my high school teachers somehow managed to skip over. I have always used the site as my first resource when I am about to tackle a foreign topic. It is nice to have all of the neat little dates and categories laid out before me on one site. Upon beginning college I was told that I may use it as a resource, but that I could not cite it which still didn't make much sense to me. I didn't understand why Wikipedia was always getting picked on and treated like a lesser specimen. Now that I more fully understand the concept I am able to see the reasons behind its being labeled as not credible.

The back and forth between Wales from Wiki and Cauz from Britannica was pretty entertaining. I loved the musical metaphors that they both came up with to describe their dominance over the other. According to Cauz Wikipedia is what American Idol would be to Juilliard, and from Wales point of view Britannica is what easy listening would be to rock. It was also interesting to learn about the site's terminology such as "wikignome" and "wikitroll". Internet communities have always been something I have never really understood, but they are interesting to observe.

Acts 3-5 Pygmalion

While reading the first half of the play I was very much reminded of the movie adaptation. However, after reading on, the play began to take its own unique form apart from my previous knowledge. In fact, I do not recall any of the scenes as having been in the movie. To me, the most intriguing part of the second half of the play was the scene in which Eliza is getting back at Higgins for his insensitivity. It is interesting to note the tactics she uses to upset him. There is something timeless and childlike about it. She takes his friend, Colonel Pickering, and contrasts him to Higgins. She describes Pickering as the one who truly educated her while Higgins simply taught her the mechanics of language. She says that Pickering is the real gentleman that makes her feel like a real lady. Higgins comeback was unexpected for me. He said that what really distinguishes a man or woman in society is whether or not they treat everyone the same, like he does. The last conversation between Higgins and Liza is truly entertaining. Bernard Shaw certainly had the personalities of his characters well thought out and must have been acquainted with similar personalities at some point in his life. The sequel, I thought, was very comical in that it delved into great detail about the future of the characters as well as some very particular reasons why Liza could never have ended up with Higgins. 

Acts I&II Pygmalion

I am a bit embarrassed to admit that I never knew that Pygmalion and My Fair Lady were essentially the same thing. I have watched the musical My Fair Lady several times and heard the play Pygmalion brought up in discussions and never connected the two. That kind of thing is pretty common though. Someone will write something based on another authors work and it becomes well known to the general population, overshadowing the original work. The dazzling Audrey Hepburn can probably take a lot of the credit for this particular situation. I remember watching the movie when I was very young and singing along with the catchy rhymes like "the rain in Spain falls mainly in the plain". The contrast of the willful and unlearned Liza to the gentlemanly manner of Higgins was always something that entertained me. One of the scenes that stood out to me was when Liza was at the horse race and starts getting all worked up and yelling obscenities at the horse they had bet on- something along the lines of "move your bloomin' arse!". Her character was endearing because even though she may have transformed into a lady, in the end she never lost her spunk. Another quote I recall is when she was trying to make lady like conversation and made a comment like "gin was mothers milk to her". I can only guess that lines like this must have come directly from Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion. So far the play is very entertaining. I find myself paying close attention to the way in which it is written since I do not read many plays. It is interesting to note the little details that playwrights add in so that the play can be directed in the manner in which the writer imagined.

Marveling at Marvell

I must say I was immediately enraptured by this poem and taken in by the sincerity of its voice. Andrew Marvell really knew how to reach the ladies. Whoever his "coy mistress" was had to have felt the depth of his emotions for her. The initial idea that I gleaned was that the kind of love affair that she deserved was too great for one lifetime. He wanted to give her a love through all the ages including past, present, and future. I don't think it gets much more romantic than that. The way he incorporated important world events was beautiful. 

The second time I read it I felt more of a sense of urgency in his voice. It was less that he wanted to be with her forever, and more that he was urging her to make a decision. He is almost being a little pushy about it when you look into the wording. He says in the first two lines that "had we but world enough, and time,/This coyness, lady, were no crime", meaning that her shyness or playing hard to get would be pardoned if they had the time for it, but they don't. So in a round-about way he is really telling her that the way she is acting is criminal-perhaps a little harsh Marvell? The somewhat passive-aggressive tone in which he begins the poem, however, can easily be forgiven because of the next forty-four lines.

I cannot help but question his choice of wording though when we approach the stanza about time being short. Perhaps I over analyzed it but it seems as though the focus of lines 21-32 is sex with lines like "... then worms shall try/That long preserv'd virginity" and then later on with "The grave's a fine and private place, But none I think do there embrace". I have no problem with this reference, I only question his choice of referring to her honor and then his lust: "And your quaint honour turn to dust/And into ashes all my lust". To me this could almost suggest that he is eager to sleep with her because of his lust and he wishes that she would not take forever to make a decision about it. This is a long shot, but worth thinking about. 

The ending is absolutely breathtaking. Who wouldn't want to look at life that way? Life is better lived when two people combine what they have ("Let us roll all our strength, and all/Our sweetness, up into one ball;) and take on struggles together ("And tear our pleasures with rough strife/Thorough the iron gates of life"). The last two lines are memorable and inspiring. We can't stop the sun, but we can make it run- I feel a hit song coming on...

Perhaps a little crazy, but periodically correct

Feminists- they do not have the best reputation today. Many view them as women starved for attention and trying to twist everything they hear in order to confirm their own self imposed victimization. I have always grouped feminists in the same category that I do people involved in New Age and the sort, and I do not always understand the point of their arguments and insight. I do however believe that women have been oppressed just as much as any other minority. Yet in today’s world it sometimes seems that they try to create imaginary discrimination or fight for rights in ridiculous and petty situations.

Reading the first essay I found it hard to hold the feminist criticism on the same level as Marxist and cultural, but that is just my personal opinion. To me it feels as though the feminist critics go out on a limb to link their concepts with those in the books that they critique. The idea that women need to “write their bodies” in order to “realize their sexuality” sounds a little bizarre. When they use terms like “female power” and the like, it just seems to glorify the female sex, or rather just pull an awkward attention to it.

As far as the second essay is concerned though, I do not feel like Pykett stretches the truth since the period in which Wuthering Heights takes place is one of blatant restrictions for women. The novel is quite obviously centered around Catherine’s choice between Heathcliff and Edgar. It is also apparent that Catherine’s strong personality and power over the men in her life only seems to cause trouble for herself and others. It is interesting that she points out that the novel explores the “dangers involved in women thinking of themselves, or their love, as gifts to be bestowed”. I did not fully understand where she was going with this point, so I would like further insight on it. 

Getting Truthful

Before I began reading the essay “Marxist Criticism and Wuthering Heights” I couldn’t help but wonder why I was reading “Marxist Criticism and Wuthering Heights”. Then, comically enough, I am greeted with: “To the question ‘What is Marxist criticism?’ it may be tempting to respond with another question: ‘What does it matter?’” Let’s face it; this isn’t an essay most students would read out of curiosity or because of the sheer tempting nature of the title. I am not one for politics, so I probably procrastinated the reading further than most. When I was finished with the first essay I felt rather disappointed. I do not feel like the question: “What does it matter?” ever really was answered after my reading. The content seemed to consist heavily of power hungry men fighting to have their own personal views of literature claimed as correct. The way that some of them tried to structuralize literature and view writers as the product of the times bothered me. Life just isn’t that simple. Perhaps it was all a little over my head and the point got lost.

However, reading on to the second essay where the topic was narrowed down to cover Wuthering Heights, my mind heaved a sigh of relief and I felt more clarity and interest. I do wish that I had read Jane Eyre since both articles contrast the two novels repeatedly by labeling Charlotte’s work to be mythical in an ideological sense and Emily’s as mythical in a timeless “worldview” sense. The thought that really engages me is when Eagleton speaks of Cathy’s trying to live two lives after she knows that she has made the wrong decision to marry Edgar.  She has indeed committed a “spiritual suicide and murder” that naturally causes her own life and those around her to spiral out of control. This is not to say that Heathcliff didn’t cause sorrow, because he most definitely did his best to make everyone miserable. But when you betray yourself and do not seek to make things right, the balance of life is upset and only tends to get worse. I never really looked at their situation in light of this important factor.

Catherine is not the only one who betrays herself. Heathcliffe becomes “contradiction incarnate” when he rises from oppressed to oppressor and a sort of dark comedy is the result when he must use his powers within the confines of the capitalist class and the culture that he hates. All of this contradiction and self betrayal is perhaps what makes the novel so difficult to get through, but it also makes it truthful. Life is full of contradictions and pain, and not only do our social and physical situations cause us sorrow, but so does our tendency to make choices that betray ourselves. More times than not, we bring about our own suffering.