In reading Johnson-Eilola and
Selber’s journal they bring up the recent phenomenon of a remix culture and
what that could mean in relation to the strict plagiarism and copyright
policies of our society. The journal discusses assemblage as being apart of the
remix culture and how, through a change of notion on plagiarism, could actually
be applied to an improved academic curriculum and setting. Instead of academic
institutions holding students originality so highly in writing, the journal
suggest a shift to application and how students can remix other texts to solve
problems or enact social action. How it is conceived today, the journal
acknowledges a hierarchy in academics that holds students original writing
above all, especially borrowed work. This hierarchy is exemplified by not only
the strict plagiarism policies seen around the country, but also the citation
practices that act as an indicator for teachers to what is borrowed and what is
original. However, the journal brings up how these citation practices, that
value borrowed text less than students original work, are problematic and often
are what lead students hide their borrowings. If academic institutions took on
the reconception of downplaying the value of originality and instead focused
more on problem solving, assemblage could be a very beneficial part of
students’ composition skills. By teaching and encouraging students to build on
existing texts in order to bring about resolutions, as opposed to hiding the
unavoidable interactions with the work of others behind concepts of citations, an
entirely new skill can be put into use.
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Blog#4
“Read and respond to Richards: In each of these excerpts,
what do you think Richards is saying? What parts are you confused about? How
might these readings relate to our discussion of Remix thus far?”
It was very confusing reading Richards, most of the time I
had no idea what was going on and it had to do a lot of re-reading because I
would lose track. It took me a long time to read because of that and it just made
me become more and more unfocused. After multiple reading this is what I got
from it Richard is trying to say that the words around the importance words,
are of more importance. He is basically
saying the way that your sentences are set
up you, and how they are organized to express whatever was meant to me
understood in that sentence. The words around it, is really give that word its
true meaning, because if they chose to use other words or decide to place the
words differently it can have a totally different meaning. It relates to remixing,
because remixing is based off other things as well not just that remix, but
what the original piece was so that it is very much similar to what Richard is
saying. Things are built open each other, and that’s what makes it what it is.
It wouldn’t be that without the influence of others. For example, you wouldn’t be
able to create a sentence without using different words that you have learned
over time to do so.
Sunday, February 8, 2015
Ideas for Genealogy
As
a music major my focus in life is classical music. It is passion/drive that I have
so I thought it would be a cool idea to analyze how the geniuses behind the
foundation of what music is today got ripped off. I have three composers in mind
that have gotten their compositions ripped off and well as some may call it “remixed”
One example of this is Gustav Holst, one of the most prolific composers got one
of his biggest compositions stolen by a very famous composer now a day, john
Williams. John Williams stole the main theme of Hosts symphony "The Planets".
Another Idea I have in mind is actually the use of a big movie such as "We are the Millers" It is a comedy that is actually a remix of many other movies. The focus of the movie moves around the idea that a drug dealer has to go to another country and has to smuggle drugs into the U.S. The main character is then encountered with many comedic barriers that make his life that much harder. This is very similar to 21 jump street. The comedic relief is pretty much the same, also it focuses on the drug issue and how they should find it.
Another Idea I have in mind is actually the use of a big movie such as "We are the Millers" It is a comedy that is actually a remix of many other movies. The focus of the movie moves around the idea that a drug dealer has to go to another country and has to smuggle drugs into the U.S. The main character is then encountered with many comedic barriers that make his life that much harder. This is very similar to 21 jump street. The comedic relief is pretty much the same, also it focuses on the drug issue and how they should find it.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
“Read and respond to Richards: In each of these excerpts, what do you think Richards is saying? What parts are you confused about? How might these readings relate to our discussion of Remix thus far?”
Richards excerpts were very interesting but slightly difficult to understand. The beginning section about his opinion on how words can never be labeled or judged was unclear the first couple of times I read it. However after revisiting the text a couple of times I was able to gain a better understanding. Overall I believe Richard is saying that individual words do not hold nearly as much weight as the words around them, if some at all. I believe that he feels that the way in which you use certain word and chose to organize sentences is more capable of judgement than specific words by themselves. This relates to our class discussion on remixing because it is assemblage in its own right. In order to complete a thought or fulfill the requirements of a proper phrase you must pull from many different areas of your own vocabulary.
Richards excerpts were very interesting but slightly difficult to understand. The beginning section about his opinion on how words can never be labeled or judged was unclear the first couple of times I read it. However after revisiting the text a couple of times I was able to gain a better understanding. Overall I believe Richard is saying that individual words do not hold nearly as much weight as the words around them, if some at all. I believe that he feels that the way in which you use certain word and chose to organize sentences is more capable of judgement than specific words by themselves. This relates to our class discussion on remixing because it is assemblage in its own right. In order to complete a thought or fulfill the requirements of a proper phrase you must pull from many different areas of your own vocabulary.
Blog Post 4- Ryan McCormick
“Read and respond to
Richards: In each of these excerpts, what do you think Richards is saying? What
parts are you confused about? How might these readings relate to our discussion
of Remix thus far?”
Richard’s writing was very difficult to read, interpret,
and understand. I found that he took a long time to make his point and could
inform the reader his thoughts in a much simpler piece of writing. His writing “flow”
was off and his vocabulary was old-fashioned and difficult to read. However,
after reading the excerpts several times, I finally understood what Richards
was trying to say and why he was saying it. He is saying that the meaning of
words is different for every person. We all interpret words differently and the
word itself does not define itself, the words surrounding it defines it.
Therefore, Richards says “No word can be judged as to whether it is good or
bad, correct or incorrect.” His point is that not one word in the dictionary
has only one true meaning. It changes for every person and the words around it
form the meaning. Just like our discussion with remixes. Everything now is a
remix, we see one’s work and transform it into our own.
Honestly I don’t really understand some of the article at
all. I am having a hard time gripping the text as a whole. I don’t really
understand the point it’s trying to portray. I tried and there are some things
that are familiar but I just don’t get it fully. For instance I understand the
meaning of word and I get that but the rest of it is new to me and I’m not
getting it. The meaning of word is familiar because I deal with that a lot
outside of the class. Words and its context are used multiple times. It’s the
meaning of the word and its description. Other than that stuff I don’t what it’s
saying. It is a complicated text to read. I know that we are going to talk
about it more in class so hopefully that helps me get a grip on what’s being
talked about. Can you please explain what it is really saying I get the meaning
of word part I just need to know the rest of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)