« February 2005 | Main | April 2005 »
March 29, 2005
Intensity Monger... good band name
This is an excerpt from an essay about writing and writers, but I think it applies to artists of all sorts.
I suppose what most people associate with poetry is soul-searching and fiercely felt emotions. We expect the poet to be a monger of intensity, to pain for us, to reach into the campfire so that we can watch without burning ourselves. Because poets feel what we're afraid to feel, venture where we're reluctant to go, we learn from their journeys without taking the dramtic risks. . . . In promoting a fight of his, a boxer once said: "I'm in the hurt business." In a different way, artists are too.
And yet, through their eyes -- perhaps because they risk so much -- we discover breathtaking views of the human pageant. Borrowing the lens of an artist's sensibility, we see the world in a richer way -- more familiar than we thought, and stranger than we knew, a world laced with wonder. Sometimes we need to be taught how and where to week wonder, but it's always there, waiting, full of mystery and magic. I feel that much of my own duty as a writer is to open those doors of vision, shine light into those dark corners of existence, and search for the fountains of innocence.
-Diane Ackerman, Language at Play
Posted by Megan at 08:45 PM | Comments (2)
March 14, 2005
Intellectual Diversity Debate
The following is an article I wrote for the conservative newspaper at St. Olaf, The Counterweight.
*****
I knew the debate was going to be fiery and spectacular as soon as the introduction referred to "the aftermath of the Nobel Peace Prize Forum." The Intellectual Diversity Committee, a subcommittee of SGA, held the forum in Viking Theater on March 2. Professors Gorton and Zorn discussed their views on professors incorporating their political views into their classes.
A Professor in the Mathematics department, Zorn only brought up his field a couple of times, much to my relief. At one point, I heard the words "equation" and "pi" in the same sentence, and I decided that I was at the wrong forum. Fortunately, Zorn soon returned to the topic of the debate, and I returned to my seat. Keeping it simple, Professor Zorn affirmed that diversity of opinion is indeed a good thing and that political indoctrination is, in fact, bad. However, he lamented the lack of concrete evidence to support students? claims of classroom bias. I could only wonder how he would respond if students began recording his classes with a video camera.
Professor Gorton offered the suggestion that, from a pedagogical perspective, a more complete understanding comes through exploring all academically sound sides of an issue or theory. Gorton is a Political Science professor so, by nature, the subjects he deals with have multiple sides. The only multilateral issue that Zorn would address would relate to geometry. In his classes, however, "pentagon" does not necessarily have anything to do with the building in Washington D.C.
Much of the discussion revolved around the issue of the disproportionately large number of liberals compared to conservatives in the field of academia. Zorn suggested the academy and liberalism both appeal to skeptics. I'm skeptical of this argument myself. Gorton proposed that conservatives may be more attracted to careers with corporations, while liberals may be skeptical about such businesses. Thus, a consensus was reached: liberals are skeptical.
Gorton also mentioned the idea that liberalism in academia may be perpetuating itself. His solution for conservatives unhappy with this phenomenon was for more conservatives to enter the academy. While several members of the audience nodded in agreement with this profound solution, images flashed through my mind of Daniel in the den of ravenous lions.
Cynic though I may be (although not liberal), I walked out of the debate with mostly positive feelings. Lo and behold, two sides of an issue were presented. Granted, it took two professors to accomplish this great feat, but it was achieved nonetheless.
Posted by Megan at 01:27 PM | Comments (0)
March 10, 2005
Sacrilegious?
I'll admit that I have a zany sense of humor. I'll blame it on genetics. But sometimes I find myself laughing at something and then feeling extremely guilty about it. I've started to wonder where the line falls between a joke involving religion and a sacrilegious joke.
Example 1: I've recently entered the world of Facebook. I never knew it before, but evidently Jesus Christ attends St. Olaf College. After adding Jesus to my list of friends, I decided to poke him. For those who aren't familiar with Facebook, poking is basically a virtual game of tag. The computer enters into the following dialogue with me:
"You are about to poke Jesus Christ. Jesus will be informed of this the next time they log in."
There are then two buttons: Poke Jesus and Cancel. I, of course, opt to click the Poke Jesus one.
"You have poked Jesus Christ."
Example 2: God Names Next "Chosen People"; It's Jews Again
Example 3: WARNING -- if you found either of the above to be sacrilegious, I would suggest skipping this one.
Dress Up Jesus
I really hope I haven't offended anyone. I honestly just want thoughts on where the line should be drawn.
Posted by Megan at 12:08 AM | Comments (2)
March 08, 2005
Quotes of the Days
I recently realized that I have been neglecting to include my traditional Quote of the Day in my posts. Thus, I shall post quite a few in order to catch up.
"When they're cute, I just love them. But when they cry, I just want to stick them in a trash can." -Suzanne, on small children
"They're like monkeys -- they can learn anything." Again Suzanne, and again on small children.
"What's Britt blending?" -Julie, asking about the noise from the other room at 3am.
"She's blowing up." -Katie, forgetting to add "the air mattress" at the end of her explanation.
"It doesn't matter what's on the inside." -Phil, on women.
"Then you need to look for a husband." -Derek, advising us girls on what to do next after graduation.
Hopefully I will remember to keep the tradition from now on!
Posted by Megan at 11:42 PM | Comments (3)
March 06, 2005
Welcome to My World
With all the time I'm spending on writing essays for school, my blog is suffering! :( Maybe I'll just have to post my school stuff.
In my media studies class a couple of weeks ago, we were discussing signs and symbols in the media and how specific images can hold meanings that are influenced by our culture. For example, an advertisement depicting a thin woman would probably interpreted in our culture as representing beauty and wealth, whereas in another context it could be interpreted as poverty or mental illness.
Our assignment was then to create an "unconventional resume" by using a sign to represent ourselves. After much deliberation, I harnessed the power of my color printer to create an 8.5" by 11" image of myself and our beloved President.
The next day of class, after my professor proceeded to collect each student's "unconventional resume," he proceeded to tape them each to the chalkboard for the entire class to see. Then, he decided to leave them there for an indefinite amount of time for the rest of the classes, and all who passed through that particular classroom, to observe. I don't know why.
I have three friends who each have separate classes in that same classroom. They all happen to be CRs, and commented to me about my fine display of affection for Mr. Bush. Then, one day about a week later, I was playing racquetball with two of them.
"Hey Megan, what happened to the pic of you and Bushie?"
"What?"
"Yeah, it's not on the chalkboard anymore."
"Are the rest of the class's up there?"
"Yeah, just yours is gone."
I proceed to nail the racquetball with all my might.
"Sorry Megs, I just figured you took it back or something."
In class the next day, I note that my resume has indeed disappeared, while the rest of them remain in tact. When class is over, Julie and I chat with our prof as we leave, as has become tradition. He smiles and points to a new addition to my Nalgene: a GOP sticker. I seize the opportunity:
"By the way, did you notice that my little piece of free speech is gone from the chalkboard?"
"What?"
He goes to see for himself.
"Yours was right here?" He points to an empty portion of the board with only a piece of scotch tape remaining.
"Yep."
He stares at the space for a while longer, a look of sheer disbelief on his face. Eventually, he remarks a little about the rudeness of it all, and how we should do something to retaliate. I am surprised at his strong reaction, and mention that I'm not so bothered, since I'm really pretty used to this sort of thing. He tells me that I should be bothered.
In the next class, the prof decides to bring the issue before the rest of the students. He points out the disappearance and asks for opinions on the subject. He then mentions that he spoke with the issue about a few people, including his wife. He actually says, "I'm POed."
It's my turn to react with surprise and disbelief. It's like he never realized this sort of thing happens. If only he knew how many times I had to replace CR signs in the commons or the republican paraphernalia on my door.
He mentions that there are plenty of recording devices available, and we could set something up in an attempt to capture the culprit on film. Finally, after the most uncomfortable classroom discussion I've ever experienced, he looks me in the eye and says, "When you decide what you want to do about this, let me know. I'm with you. I'll follow your lead." I agree, and the class finally proceedes.
I haven't decided what to do about it yet. I would have probably just let it go, but now I feel like I'm expected to do something -- like my prof would be disappointed if I failed to take action. This is a unique experience for me. I can't decide if this is a different kind of prof or if most profs would have a similar reaction if they knew what went on behind the scenes. Either way, I feel like I have taken part in a tiny enlightenment.
Posted by Megan at 06:52 PM | Comments (2)