A Letter to Ms. Lamott

Ms. Lamott-

I couldn’t help but relate to all your fears and anxieties about writing. It is definitely a difficult process, and I know that I find it most hard to start typing away when I really have no idea where or how to begin. Much like you, my mind begins to wander after a few minutes of frustration, and once I come back to task and stare at the blank word document, I curse myself for wasting time. Hoping it doesn’t become a habit, I start worrying about how long it’s going to take to write, and if in fact I can write anything interesting at all. More time gets wasted; it’s a hideous cycle.

With that said, I really found your concept of the “shitty first drafts” helpful. I had never thought to just write down what I was thinking, as I am usually so concerned with the formatting and organization of essays. With a bad first draft, however, there is no worry about mistakes and errors. There is only room for improvement, and through editing your writing could be made into one of your best works yet.

I also agreed with your suggestion at having an honest and reliable source read your writing. Sometimes a fresh pair of eyes is the best thing for your writing, for they see things you, as the writer, do not. This way you can see how your audience may respond and you can tweak something just write to get the reaction you wanted in the first place.

While I also agreed with your idea of the “one-inch picture frame” and writing “bird by bird”, I also think it’s important to have bigger goals in mind so that your writing can work to this point. If every paragraph were written like a short story, you would never get anywhere. Everything would be an over-dramaticized version of itself. Sometimes, things need to be short and to the point so that the real focus is on what matters, not what really doesn’t.

I truly enjoyed your article. It was a pleasure to read and I will certainly put your suggestions to work in future writing assignments.

Thanks,

Lauren Caccamo

The Internet vs. the Human Brain

                Nicholas Carr’s article “Does the Internet Make You Dumber?” makes a very convincing argument through his use of examples and quotes. He does very well to bring up intelligent, important people as well as prestigious universities, like Cornell University. In fact, the very beginning sentence recalls a Roman philosopher and even later quotes a Nobel Prize winner. He also describes experiments done; one testing the multi-tasking abilities of those who use the internet often, the other testing the focus of students web browsing. With statements such as theirs backed up by their obvious intellect and success, it’s easy for any reader to accept their opinions, and in the case of this article, believe that the internet is truly making society dumber.

                Clay Shirky’s article doesn’t seem as convincing. He relates his argument to the past, when new inventions and technologies were also questioned. He refers to Guttenberg and the printing press of 16^th century Europe, but not everybody can relate to that. Shirky also seems to attack the concept of books, implying they’re evil and reading them in “an unnatural act”. However, books are often linked to intelligence and learning, so the idea of them being something “evil” doesn’t seem quite right.

                 The overall argument, I believe, is about distractions, and how humans are to spend their time in the future. Both articles argue about how new technologies and internet affect human’s brains, as well as their daily rituals, culture, etc. With all the distractions we are faced with today, it is a legitimate concern to raise about whether or not we, as a growing generation, will be able to focus on important issues, maintain a decent society, and be able to expand in learning and technologies.

The Ghost of Tom Joad

In the opening of Rage Against the Machine’s version of “The Ghost of Tom Joad”, the music grows louder and louder, and the quick, past-faced guitar makes it sound as if somebody is running away from something. It gets louder and faster until it just fills your head with noises. Suddenly, the music comes in with a strong beat with high energy that is sure to excite any crowd. The repetitive chords make it seem like there is no end for this man’s struggle. Towards the end, however, you get the feeling that the man is not only going to beat everything that’s getting him down, but help others in the fight against evil (“You’ll see me!”). In the context of Tom Joad, he is a character that choses to help his family through the thick and thin of the Depression, and this song certainly expresses his interest in a way that perceives his character as tough, strong, and brave.

                Bruce Springtseen’s version, however, does the exact opposite. Rather than creating a heroic sort of character out of Tom Joad, he becomes more relatable—simply a man trying to get by. The harmonica opening sets the sad, slow tune echoes the sense of the Depression and the impact it clearly has on Joad and his family. The quietness of the music in the background forces the listener to focus on Springsteen’s deep, sincere voice. The song ends just as it begins, a solo with the harmonica. Ending the song this way leaves the listener to wonder how exactly life turns out for the man, and if he ever found strength to help everyone he promised to.