HW 31 - Exploring Methods of M,M,C,A, & Aggrandizing the Self

Part A

For this assignment, I decided to ask my sister because she is the only one who did ear piercing, which I think it would be interesting to write about. Since she is my sister, I did not really have to talk to her in any typical ways. But she is very easy to get annoyed when I asked her too many questions, so I decided to make this more informal, like a random chatting.

I first asked her does this two little ear holes make her feels like above all of the other family member and she said, “No, I just think it will make me look prettier.” Then I asked her to describe her experience and what makes her to have the courage to do something like that (a mark on yourself) since neither my mom nor me did piercing before. She said, “Ear piercing is different than tattoo because if you don’t keep the earring on after you punch a hole then it’ll grow back soon, so even though you regret for doing it, you still have a chance to go back. Also, you and your mom do not really value this kind of prettiness, like putting make up and stuff then it is up to you guys. I did it because I think by doing it, I can put more accessories on me, is like a way to decorate yourself other than just putting on clothes.” So I asked how was it when the moment that person punch a hole on your ear? She said, “Well, nothing special. But weird, because once you get there and you told them you want one, they’ll ask you to sit down and do it in a sec. I was surprised at the moment, because she did not tell me before doing it. She just did it.” I replied, “Wow, so are you regret for having them at that moment? And by the way how much does it cost to do one of those?” She said, “Cheap, is less than a U.S. dollar. Oh, and I don’t regret for having it because I wanted one.” Then I replied something that I considered defensive but she didn’t take it that way. I said, “Damn, that is CHEAP! Doesn’t it make yourself a little worthless instead of being ‘special’ kind of, in the family?” My sister said, “No, it doesn’t matter, I just wanted one, and I got one. And also, I don’t think it is really that ‘special’” “Oh, okay, would you get another one?” “No, one on each side is enough for me.” “Okay, I think the earrings that you have right now fits you.” “Thanks…” (The tone might sound very defensive between me and my sister, but that's the way we communicate with each other.)

I think my sister’s answer is kind of unexpected, and pretty interesting. As I asked more detail question, I think I really did get some answers that are worth to talk about. Especially when she said it costs less than a U.S. dollar, I think it is interesting. It’s almost like the ear holes itself on the ear worth more than the moment. You can simply pay certain amount for the piercing, but not for that typical moment of your life that has changed. In one way, it seems like people’s value has been twisted. In another, it seems acceptable, because the hole is the ultimate mark that is worth to remember other than the cost. In addition to that, I think my sister’s differentiation between tattoo and ear piercing is pretty interesting. In one hand, tattoo is a bigger project to be aware of and it is a typical image. But in the other, ear piercing could be seemed the same thing, if the person make a mistake, it could ruined your body also. Which it raised a question to me was that, what makes people to be more aware of, or thoughtful to decide to have a tattoo than a small ear hole on the ear? Aren’t both having the same amount of chance to ruin your body? Why rely on an ear (less meaning) piercer more than a tattoo (more meaning) piercer? Overall, when my sister gave me these answers, she really seems careless for having the ear holes and I never saw her showing off of her earring or the piercing. So perhaps, sometimes leaving a mark on your body like this is not necessary trying to make yourself special in the group, but just a way to live cool.

The answer of “because I like it, it’s for me, not for the others”, or like my sister, “because I wanted one, so I get one”, both are kind of the same attitude, the kind of “I do whatever I want, I don’t really care what others think”. All these answers are ego speaking, very insecure about the self. It’s like a way to protect the self or a way to tell the other that you are confident of whom you are. But after all, where is the self? If you are really doing something for yourself, it doesn’t mean it does not affect the others although you did not intended to, all it means is that you do not care about the consequence of your own action (irresponsible). (Like my sister, perhaps to her, having the ear hole does not really seem to be affecting anybody. But simultaneously, she is supporting the ‘group/trend’, which it does affect the outcome of making more people to do body piercing.)

Part B

As for myself, I always bring my camera with me wherever I go other than at school. It is almost like a symbol to me or to the others that I am a fan of photography. I personally think that is ‘cool’ because the meaning of taking photos is to remember certain things in my life. The way I see it, is that I appreciate things around me more than the others, because I do certain things to prove so. Not only taking pictures, I also upload them when I get home. The process of sharing these photos, I often put a name that I create on the photos, but not my real name. It’s could be seem as a nickname, so when people view my photos, it is easier for them to recognize and remember that’s my work. My purpose of taking photos is because I got compliments on my works from the others. This does not only help me find the sense of self importance, it also gives me a reason to continue doing what I am doing. Everything that people choose to do or act towards it, it requires a response (external approval) in order for the person who done the work to feel their existence. In other words, everything needs attention from the others to be existed. Therefore, when someone finds their interests, or certain things in themselves that are accepted by the others, they will keep doing the same thing, or keep them. That’s the only way for a person to live on.

Connect this back to what I mentioned in Part A, everything that we have done we tempt to receive it in a way that it seems to be ours. It could be the ear holes, photos that I took, nicknames, all these things we have the temptation to make it personal, and just for our own, and to make it seems like a legacy of us. By doing that, we have values to live on even when we die. Often times, people will get offended when someone cross the line and say “No, you are not doing that for yourself” because it challenge that person’s personal value. I believe a lot of us do know that it is not just for ourselves because we do it to get external approval from the others. How could it simply be our own? But people put it that way, or propose it with that type of attitude because they want to reveal their values in a secure way. They don’t want people to say bad things to their values that will challenge the worth of that method. It is not that they do not know it is not only for themselves, is just that they want to protect their self values to keep it to their own. So when they said, “I do this for myself, not the others”, people can’t really trash it because it has nothing to do with them. To conclude my point, I think people are aware of what they are doing (I do it for myself), but they just have the temptation to defense their methods because that is their meaning to live.

HW 30 - Psychological and Philosophical Theorizing of Cool [revised]

“‘How things really are’ is described in Buddhist philosophy as Emptiness (shunyata). Emptiness is often mis-understood in the West to mean ‘nothingness’, as if to say that nothing exists. This extreme view is known as ‘nihilism’, and it is a great obstacle to Buddhist practice. If you cling to the idea that nothing exists, then you may behave in ways that only solidify your own ego and cause harm to yourself and others.”

Based on the passage above, it seems that emptiness does not parallel with the word nothingness. But if the western culture really did misinterpret the word emptiness, then the passage does make some sort of sense. We “behave in ways that only solidify” our “own ego”. In other words, because we view emptiness as the meaning of nothingness, therefore, we only reacts to our own perception of the world of what it actually exists. This explains the reason why human are obsessed with the task of giving meaning to life to have a sense of importance to prove they once existed on this planet. Because we identify what we see is consider what it actually exists, thus we only see our own ego and fulfill it as much as we can by doing varies of acts such as “be cool” to satisfied our own desire.

But if the western culture really did mis-understood the word emptiness, then what does it mean in Buddhism?

“On the other hand, emptiness does mean that things don't exist the way we think they do. Things seem real and solid and permanent to us, but when we analyze closely, we see that everything is impermanent and constantly changing. In other words, they are "empty" of our confused projections. Recognizing this not just intellectually but experientially removes our ignorance and confusion, and creates a tremendous sense of space in our lives.”

An analogy for the passage above would be a pen that we perceive as a pen that is make of a plastic tube with ink inside of it that we can write with, therefore it is a PEN to us (real and solid- permanent). But this does mean the pen exists inherently because things are constantly changing. With this being said, emptiness means something does exist but not in the way we view things, and “nothing exists inherently”, in order for something to exist, there must be a cause or a relation with other things.

Following the path of what emptiness is in the vision of Buddhism, it seems we are trying to be cool because we view things as solid and real while they are “impermanent”. We are just fools of our life fulfilling something that is not there, because we barely can visualize what “emptiness” really is. If nothing exists inherently, nothing really has ever existed. In order for something to consider exist, is something that appears on earth with no cause, which is impossible because every effect there is a cause. To conclude all the above, emptiness does not exist, and yet, “all things are totally empty of any defining essence”.

Side Note:
I am interning in the Rubin Museum of Art, and I have the chance to talk to a Buddhist practitioner, who gave me some insights of emptiness in a Buddhist vision. As to summarize what emptiness really mean based on my own understanding of Buddhism was to imagine there are mud in a cup. If we were to stir the cup, it will be muddy and we will never get to see a clear cup of water. Just like our everyday life functioning back and forth non-stop, (fulfilling our desire, busy with the task of being cool), therefore, we thought to ourselves that we never see the empty part of ourselves. But if we stop stirring the cup (does not mean stop functioning, we are still living), we let the mud to settle and sink to the bottom of the cup – emptiness as following the task of meditation. With the explanation of emptiness being said, a clear empty mind does not mean it is completely empty, it is still there but we just let it be and not let it bother. By understanding the meaning of emptiness and knowing that everything is constantly changing and nothing really does exist inherently, we soon recognize the relationship of all things. Everything is connected, and we all are part of the other and they are the proof of our existence. In Buddhism, they believe that by practicing this belief, people will soon remove ignorance and getting closer to be enlightened. Emptiness means compassion, realizing everything is changing and connected, and soon we won’t try to compete over the others but to offer help for the others because we need others to help us to see our own existence.

Through the research of Nagarjuna, he believed that emptiness aren’t something bad that “leave us with a sense of metaphysical or existential privation, a loss of some hoped-for independence and freedom”, but “a sense of liberation through demonstrating the interconnectedness of all things, including human beings and the manner in which human life unfolds in the natural and social worlds.” If we realized the real meaning of emptiness, we soon notice that after all emptiness does not mean anything or have even existed. It is just a word that we give meaning to, therefore it exists somehow in our lives. By knowing we are all connected, and every effect has to encounter a cause, we will soon know that there is no need of covering or filling the hole of emptiness. Because emptiness does not really exist and there is no need of doing all different kinds of acts (live cool/methods discussed in class) to make ourselves to feel satisfied (external approval). We need the others to make ourselves exist, why competitions?

P.S. : I do not fully understand the concept of Buddhism and their definition of emptiness, therefore, all above is based on my own understanding of the research. If there are any misinterpretation, welcome to correct my mistakes.

Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness

Sunyata - Emptiness of All Things

Buddhist Philosophy

Nagarjuna

Buddhism and Emptiness - seeing our relationship with the Universe

HW 29 - Merchants of Cool

Do the teenagers know what is going on in their lives? So what if the corporations sell absolute nothing to the “victims”, would they be able to come up with something on their own to live a “meaningful life”? Watching the “Merchants of Cool”, it seems like the corporations are so wicked that they are trying to sell the teens tons of things and manipulate them as puppets. But we are puppets in many ways; the strings are infinite to cut off from. If the advertisements or commercials are not sending out any manipulated messages, the parents or teachers or friends, might be offering some messages also. It is nearly impossible to have your own identities without the ideas from the others. We are all connected somehow living on this earth, and we are not just individual bodies like what Banach claimed. By saying that, I am arguing that we cannot blame the corporations for selling “cool” to us, and advertising do not have to be banned from young people.

If we are smart enough to come up with our own ideas of what “cool” is, then the corporations would not even be able to enter the teens mind and manipulate it. It is because we are not smart enough to be aware of what the corporations are doing to us, that’s why we are just puppets that re following the trends created by companies. Are we really the victims after all? Did we born with no freedom to think, or to decide who we want to be and what we want to do with our lives? It sounds like we walk to this world like prisoners and we have no right to do what we wanted. It is true that we all have the temptations to fit in to this society, and it is extremely important to keep up with the flow. But after all, everything in life is about choices that we make. If the teenagers were smart or conscious enough to make choices in their life, the corporations would not be able to enter their world so easily. It is not really the ads that are brainwashing our minds and shape us to think in certain ways of what “cool” is, it is us who gives permission for these “monsters” to take advantages from us.

From the clips from 2001, the experts reported that we saw 3,000 ads a day. It seems like a massive amount of ideas are flowing out there every day in our life that we will be able to choose from. It could be seen in both ways, either we could consider it as a manipulator that shapes our lives, or we could see it as massive choices that we could choose from. If one claimed that ads should be banned from the young people, then it should be banned from everybody. It is definitely possible that adults do not know how to make smart choices also, or even be aware of in the first place. If they were aware enough of what the corporations are doing to the juveniles, then it doesn’t even matter whether these ads exist or not. The parents should be able to control what their children should perceive at a young age. They should be able to know what is best for their child. If nobody consumes or buys the message from the ads, so what if they took these ideas from the teens and sell it back to them? I believe we do or should have the knowledge to be aware of what is going on to us, and it is totally two different issues to consider between the ads fault or the parents’ fault Furthermore, we should at the very least have the power to shape our lives when there are so many choices that we could choose from.

From the “Merchants of Cool”, there was a part talking about how market researchers are following a task called “hunting for the cool”, it is basically going into the teens’ mind and “speak their language” to understand what they want and sell it back to them. Although it might seem the corporations are evils that are controlling the teenagers mind, nevertheless, these ideas are from the teens themselves. If what the “experts” are saying is true, that they took the ideas of cool from the teens, then that is the life that teens want to live. Other than they are paying for it for losing their money, I don’t see the problem of living off your own ideas of cool or what most teens are consider “cool”. If that is the trends that most teens has created and goes back to the corporations, and selling back to them, then in some levels, I would say it is the trend that the teens wanted. Therefore, you can’t really argue that the teens are manipulated by the ads from corporations. Some point, these ideas of creating new trends are from the teens themselves.

Additionally, on Tuesday Matt Fried said that we all have the tendency to feel “good” and we often look for that feelings from somebody else instead of ourselves, which it makes us “vulnerable”, because we letting the others to control how we feel. If we learn how to get the feeling of satisfying or good within, then we won’t try so hard to be cool and get the acceptance from outside to make ourselves to feel better. I do agreed with him that looking for the sense of acceptance from the others will make us “vulnerable” and it is true that having control over ourselves is better than letting the others to control who you are. Just as what I previously mention, some of the ideas are from the teens although they got amended by the corporations. Thus, at some levels they are our “own”, ideas of what cool is. If that is true, why do we still look for something to fulfill the hole? Regardless of the corporation’s fault, I think the roots of each person; their parents should be another factor to be considered of this issue.

Are all messages from the commercial or ads are considered bad? I don’t think every single company are trying to harm the youngsters, and just trying to make a profit off of them regardless of the consequences. I think there are some valuable messages that might worth to follow. Thus, advertising should not be banned from the teens. It is all up to the teens to make the decisions of what they want to do. It is a choice, not something that is mandatory to do in lives. The reason that the teens opened up the doors for the “wolf” is because they look at the world in the simplest way although it is so much more complex than they think it is. They nearly have any idea what the “truths” are behind the simplest things, and neither do any of us know what the ultimate truth is also. Perhaps, truths do not even exist or it is impossible to know, but teens are just too lazy to learn how to realize it and be aware of it by themselves. Or they do not want to know and just wanted to live in the world of fantasy. There are many possibilities why teens are being shaped the way they are and corporations are not the ultimate fault why the teens act the way they are. I believe there are good ads out there that send out “cool” messages that is relevant to the reviewers and they are for our own good.

Imagination Whale Japan Ad Council - Watch more funny videos here

HW 28 - Informal Research - Internet, Magazines, and TV Shows

This website called “Wordnik”, is a place where people can make a list of words that has the similar meaning or just related to that particular word. Then the others can add more words on the same list or just give comments on those words. Basically, it is a place for people to share their own opinions on a particular word by providing examples, own definitions, pronunciations, comments, photos from Flickr, topic related from Twitter, and etymologies.

Looking down on the list of “The History of Cool”, it is obvious that the word “cool” is not simply just a word that defines it all. Everybody views it differently, and uses it for different meanings. It could mean “a beauty”, and some use it to mean “brutal”. It turned out that the word “cool” doesn’t seem to have a specific meaning that people can define like the “one”. I draw the conclusion that often times these adjectives are very subjective. Nobody can truly know what it means when others use it to comment on them, but all they know is either something that is good/bad. For example, the word “beautiful” could mean “cool” also, although nobody clearly know the meaning of it, we categorize it in our mind that it must be something “positive/good”. In the other hand, if people say “ugly”, we automatically know is something “bad”. So this list really reflects on how a word can mean so many things as time goes by, and how people define it as a category, not by the word itself.

“The History of Cool” Parker Smith. Wordnik.com. Wordnik, 2009. Web. 8 Dec 2009.

“The Johns Hopkins News-Letter” is an independent student newspaper of the Johns Hopkins University, and it has been published since 1896. Basically it is a place where people posted articles about any topics from sport, science, news, art to entertainment, and then everybody can comment on it. Of course, when I said people, I mean, people from this university. The article that I am reading is called “Dealing with the Consequence of being Cool” by Emma Brodie, it defines what cool is in her perspective, and she offers some tip to deal with competitions, in other words, trying too hard to be cool.

Right in the beginning of the article, she proposes the idea of cool is like a “game”, and you have “to be on top while acting as if it takes as little effort as possible”. Although she stated that cool is “an elusive term”, she draws the conclusion that everybody is “competitive”, and even if you are trying to avoid hanging out with the “competitive ones”, it reflects that you are secretly competitive inside of yourself. So, with that being said, she is saying that everybody is trying hard to be cool, and it is human nature, we are all competitive in many ways. But then she talks about how no matter how hard you try, “you can never win”. The solution to this is to “bringing it back to the cavemen”, accept the fact that “we’re genetically programmed to be competitive: competitiveness isn't something you can ignore and it's not something that's going to go away”. Then from there, don’t take anybody more serious than yourself, love yourself more. In my opinion, not only the author is contradicting herself by saying we are all cool, but actually nobody is. She is telling the others to be true to themselves, while they are actually lying to themselves that the only way to win the competition is to tell yourself that you are the only one who is cool.

“Dealing with the Consequences of being Cool” Emma Brodie. jhunewsletter.com. The John Hopkins News-Letter. 24 Sept 2009. Web. 8 Dec 2009.

This blog post is by a member of the Fast Company, who wrote about “cool” and his own definition of what “coolness” is all about. What is unusual is that only members are allowed to comment, which is not what I normally see. But overall, I think the website is pretty eye-catching, and it focuses on technology, design, ethonomics, leadership, and magazine/newsletters.

I find this article pretty amazing because this person actually creates a formula for coolness, and he claimed that he is cooler than lots of people. While claiming that, he also notices and aware of what the readers will say about him. Then he explains his definition of cool, which is all about your own “perception of the world”. He meant, “Our own little worlds”, and there are no one who really decides what cool is. Therefore, who are just individuals in this world and cool is all about “what you think it is”. In other words, the competition does not even exist. In my own opinion based on what this person wrote, I think he did make a good argument, and I mostly agreed with what he said. But is cool really just about “how you perceive your world”? I highly doubt about his hypothesis although he does make a good point.

“You’re not cool – I am. What is cool & finding the cool factor”. Doyle Buehler. Fastcompany.com. The Fast Company. 24 Jul 2008. Web. 9 Dec 2009.

This article is very short and is also from the Fast Company, called “The Nine Coolest Subway Stations in the World”. I think this article clearly defines “cool” as better than the others, putting others down in a competition of certain things. But one thing that I disagree with this article was that the subway in United States wasn’t as bad as they describes. Although what is more creative, and new is usually seem as the cooler ones, I think the subway in the U.S. still has its own taste in it. Of course, it is not the best, and is old and loud. But I think its design still has its typical recognition in it that people can easily know where it is from. If being creative and artistic about architecture is consider “cool” in this case, why aren’t the ones in New York is “cool” also?

“The Nine Coolest Subway Stations in the World”. Cliff Kuang. Fastcompany.com. The Fast Company. 24 Jul 2008. Web. 9 Dec 2009.

The song is from the album called "The Best of Sweetbox 1995-2005" by Sweetbox. I don't exactly know who they are, but I think the song gives a pretty different perspective of cool.

It is actually the first time I listen to this song called “Life is Cool” by the Sweetbox. Anyway, I think the definition of cool from this song is to appreciate life, and look at life from a positive side instead of complaining about the bad. I like the lyrics a lot, especially the lines “we’re all so busy tryin’ to get ahead…never satisfied, the grass is greener on the other side”. I think it basically sums up what “cool” is all about, to reach for the better, and never satisfied with what we already have. I personally agree with what this song mostly said, and I think it did provide a different perspective of what “cool” is all about.

“Life is Cool”. Sweetbox. Lyricsdownload.com. Lyrics Download. Web. 9 Dec 2009

HW 27 - Informal Research - Interviews and Surveys

Family Interview:

I choose my brother to interview because I think he is consider “cool” by his friends, lots of family members including myself, and sometimes strangers. [People want to be his friends because he is tall and nice looking, strangers think he is cool because often times people asked where you get that can we trade? My family likes to shop with him, because he has a typical good taste, often trying to be buy the piece that he brought. But my reaction of him was that it is not really because of the things that he brought, it is more of his original potential that brings it out,makes the "product" as attractive as they are to the others. He is always good at that, I don't know how.] I first asked him what is cool, and his definitions are different from most of the people that I asked or interviewed. Since both of us including our family did not really live under the American culture of “coolness”, my brother did not really used the word “cool” to mean attention, special…etc. “Cool” to him is just to describe a person’s who doesn’t talk a lot, and is hard to approach to. I would say his definition of “cool” lies more on the Chinese culture of cool, and that is what the dominant Chinese culture will define “cool”. But as I keep asking him, he said he is aware of how Americans used this term, consider a "nice/positive term to use", but he would never used that to categorize people. To him, if a person is wearing something typical or having a strong fashion sense, he will just call that person has taste, but he would not say “cool” as a response.

I noticed my brother is a very talkative when he feels like to be in a conversation, so I keep on going more in depth into the topic. I asked “is it possible to be true to yourself or does it even exists?” His answers are pretty neutral and as I said, he is aware of it. He never tries to stand on an extreme side, but talk about the possibilities and what he knows about different answers. For example, he will say “it depends; you can say I did copy somebody’s style or I didn’t, it is very inarguable”. He said he knew his style is not the one and only, but he is not trying to be anyone or his icon. He is just following certain style, not a specific person. Whether you think he is copying or not, to him, it is just depending on how you view it. Then I asked a follow up question, “what about you get a piece from this store, and another from a different store, and it matches perfectly, is that your style?” He said, “you can say it is, but again it is designed by varies of designers, so you can’t really say it is mine.”

Our conversation went pretty far, and somehow we talked about life and our dreams and who we want to be. Especially how we view the society and how fast things are changing every single day. I believed we did hit many of the insightful points, and I do believed we are aware of who we are and what we are doing although none of us end up with any solutions or conclusions. To end our conversation, I summarize his perspective and confirmed with him, “so it is possible to be yourself, and even you are trying to be certain ones that you look up to, as your example, Michael Jackson has someone that he looked up to even though he is the king of pop (is not about who starts it, is all about who does it better), you are being yourself, because that’s who you want to be, instead, if you are not trying to be the person you want to be because of others’ distraction, that seems more of not being true to yourself because you change your goal for the others. Is that right?” “Yeah, I do believe people can be themselves, the phrase, ‘we are the same, but we are different.’ Ad nauseum…”

Street Interview:

As I walked out of the school front door, I make a left and walk straight. The first person that I walked up to is a college student who said she is “rushing to class”, but I stopped her anyway since I knew she is not really “rushing”, she is just like any other person including myself, doesn’t like to get stop by strangers while walking. Anyway, so my first question to drag her into the conversation is “who is the coolest person that you look up to?” She looked kind of blank, so I gave her suggestion to guide her and said, “like any celebrities or characteristics of cool…”, then she said, “a person who is rich and have a lot of money is cool”. I was a little surprised by her answer, but to keep up with the conversation I asked, “where does that come from?”, she replied, “errr…I guess the media.” I saw looking at her watch, so I just asked her the last question, “do you think being cool is the most important thing in life?”, and she said, “no, there are more out there.” Then I let her go, and thanked her for the interview.

The second person that I walked up to is an old lady who is walking with her dog. I thought she would be nice enough to do a short interview, but she rejected and I don’t know why.

The third person that I get to interview is a guy around 20ish, just waiting to cross the street. So I walked up to him and asked, “hey, what is cool to you?”. He smiled a little and said, “oh, cook is a person who wears nice clothes, looking fresh.” Since he seems to be interested, I asked a follow up question, “where did all these ideas come from?”, he replied, “the media, magazines, big stars…etc.” I noticed he was aware of this topic, but the traffic light is about to turn so I asked, “do you mind answering the question whether you are cool or not?”, he is being really nice and said, “yeah, I think I am cool.” Then I thanked him, and he walked across the street.

The fourth person that I get to interview is a man walking with his dog, he looked pretty free so I walked up to him and asked him questions about coolness. My first question was “what do you think of cool?”, and he said, “I don’t know.” In order to continue the interview, I asked, “what about the newest things like the iphone, computer…etc.?” He seems annoyed and said, “I don’t care, I don’t value those things.” Then I said, “so you never try to be cool at all?” trying to make him to think of himself a little, and he said, “no, I am just trying to be myself.” From there, I said, “aren’t being yourself is cool?” His seems to be little surprised and said, “Well… I guess if that is the definition.” and walked away.

I realized people on the street often just don’t want to be bother and mostly refused to think and provide insightful answers, so I walked to a lady who walks very slow and thought she wasn’t rushing, and is possible to offer some cool answer with her red lip stick. But she immediately say “No, not right now!”. So I leave her alone.

The last person that I interview is a person who sits on the bench smoking. She saw me walking towards her and she didn’t go away, so I thought she doesn’t mind to be interviewed. Then I start asking, “What do you think of cool?”, and she said, “is to be yourself, and gets attention, just like a main character in the book.” I am amazed by her answer by putting it as a metaphor so I kept asking. “Oh, is it possible to be absolute yourself?” “Yes, of course we took it from the others or from different places, but then we somehow changed it make it our own.” I told her I agreed with her, and asked her one last question, “so it is not the original?”, and she said, “yeah, I guess you are right.” Then I thanked her saying “nice talking with you today” and told her it is time for me to go back to school and we smiled back to each other.

Friend Interview:

I consider this friend of mine normal, and when I said that, I mean she is just like any other 12th grader, who follows trends, has someone that she looked up to…etc. However, since she is not in this course, I choose to interview her and see what she thinks cool is. She replied, someone who is skinny, nice looking, and has a lot of money to spend on brands. Within my expectation, I asked her a follow up question, “what about being yourself? Is that cool?” She thought about it, and say, “Yes, trying to be unique and all…, but is not always cool. Sometimes people will get too self center, and that’s not cool.” “So cool is not all about being who you want to be but having nice clothes and appearance? You mean?” “Well, it depends. I would say both, people who dress in certain way because they wanted to be that way, whether they are being themselves or imitating, it is pointless to argue. Especially now a day, it is not about who is following who, it is about what group or style that you are in.” I am a little surprised by her answer, and since she seems to be interested, I keep asking. “Wow, it seems like you did think about this topic. Do you believe in such thing ‘to be true to yourself’?” “Yes, I do. We all know we are the same, but very different like DNA, identities…etc., but I do believe there is such thing call ‘yourself’. I know that exists, but whether you can find it or not, is all up to people.” “Right, before you find yourself, you must lose it first.” “Yeah, I agreed with what you say and I do believe most of us do feel that sometimes.” “Cool, thanks for the interview.”

HW 26 - Photos & Questions

1. Do you think you are cool? If yes, do you think you can be cooler?

Yes, I do think I am cool but of course not the coolest one.

2. What do you think cool is in terms of the way you dress?

Before I am very into fashion, I always think the most expensive clothes or brands are consider very cool. But as I know more about it, I notice that sometimes the small stores have some cool clothes also as long as you know how to mix and match them. Like the suit that I am wearing it right now, is just $70. I have few passerby asking me where I got that also...same for the shoes that I am wearing.

3. Where does your idea of cool come from?

hm...some from the people that I look up to like celebrities, and often times fashion magazines. But of course, I have to make sure their styles fits me or not, sometimes it looks good, but it is not necessary fits. So I have to revise the idea a little and make it my own.

4. How much time do you spend per day to make yourself cool?

At least 2 hours.

1. Do you think you are cool? If yes, do you think you can be cooler?

Instead of saying yes or no, can I say I am ok?

2. What do you think cool is in terms of the way you dress?

I think cool in a fashion view is to dress up with your own style, and when others look at you, they think you look acceptable or comfortable in a way.

3. Where does your idea of cool come from?

Some is my own style, and some are inspired by the trendy ones.

4. How much time do you spend per day to make yourself cool?

Around an hour.

1. Do you think you are cool? If yes, do you think you can be cooler?

Sometimes.

2. What do you think cool is in terms of the way you dress?

be classic, high fashion and a little edge

3. Where does your idea of cool come from?

magazines，TVshows，famous photographers,friends around me

4. How much time do you spend per day to make yourself cool?

if i am going to meet someone important or attend a party, i will spend 30mins to choose my dress and about 40mins to hair and make up and 5 mins to check all my cloth,shoes,bag,hair and make up to ensure everything is prefect

HW 25 - Story Comments and Analysis

To Dinorah,

"The third time was actually my first time. And it was like her thirtieth time. I knew it because those guys around me told me their night adventures with her. Then I felt disgusted."

I like this part a lot, because usually people values "first time" and called it cool. But when his third time is count as the "first time", he seems to hate it. Very ironic.

To Richard,

This is a very confusing stories, because in some ways it seems like he is a cool person since he has some insights about the world. Also, he thinks and be aware of things around him. But what makes him very lame was that he doesn't care about this and that. Although in class we mentioned "not care" is an element that is consider "cool". In your story, it doesn't seem that way. "Not caring" about "anything seriously" actually makes him a very lame person to me.

You have a very good point in your story that sometimes not caring is not necessary "cool" all the time.

To John,

I think the part that Ryan passed the note to David was not that "cool". Maybe texting and take out the phones when they are not supposed to make more sense in terms of "cool" in my definition. Anyway, I think you got the element of being cool in this story.

To Andy,

I agreed with John also this story it is somehow very mysterious. You create the characters that could have so many possibilities, and the readers did not get all sides of them. (I didn’t even see any names in this story, which it shows what I mean.)

The story is very plain in a way, but I do see the idea of cool in here. But whether the guy who is staring at clouds is cool, or the guy who plays video games and sign on aim, I don’t think you draw the line clear in this story.

To me, they are both not cool regarding on my definition. xD

To Sandy,

Wow, Sandy. I really like this story just like all the ones above me. Based on my definition of cool, I do think the character that you are depicting is cool. I really like the way that you show but don’t tell in this story, and most of the description is well enough for the others to see she is cool.

Although you did not intend to tell the readers what’s going on at the end, it makes Lynette a very mysterious character. Is she pretending to be tough in front of the friends? Or is it something personal that she wouldn’t share. In this case, I do see that she does care about her situation inside, but externally, she is not showing that she doesn’t care but just decided not to tell.

Very nice story, it defines cool differently over all the stories that I have read.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One pattern that I see throughout all the stories that I have read is to be special and make a commitment to your own self. All these characters that I have read are very truthful to who they want to be, and never intended to be somebody else. They have their own ideas of being “cool”, or did not even intended to be cool but others view them as “cool”. Somehow they just act different over the rest of the crowds and they do not have to be popular from what I see throughout all the stories. What it really makes them cool, is to have attention from certain people. Just like what we discussed in class before that being cool is just depending on the “groups” that you are in. In certain groups, you might be super cool, but in the other group, they might view you as not that cool or lame.

Like in Andy and Richard’s stories, there are only two characters in it. So the reader cannot really say being popular is consider cool. But all you can draw from that is that they are special, and they are somebody that you do not necessarily see over the rest of the group. But while being special and cool, in other words different from the others, they are somehow the same as the ones who admired them. However, often times, the characters do not really realized that they are actually the same. Because most of us, as human always think we are special and think we are different from the others. Always looking for the better and wanted to be superiors to have control over certain things.

Overall, Sandy, Dinorah, and John’s stories have certain crowds/groups that people are in, and they play a role as the archetypes. Either the peacemaker, or the badass, they do have their own characteristics depending on the archetypes. This contradicts with the “being special” idea of consider cool, because although they are special. They are not necessary the only one, they are just one of the typical in the group. If the “cool” one hangs out with his similar types, it would be bunch of the same types. Although it did not mentioned in most of the stories, I will assume that the one who is cool must have someone that they look up to. None of the idea of “being cool” seems to be pure, it is more of like a combination of the ideas of your own and from the others.

From all these patterns of being the special one, plays a role, be different…etc., the major pattern of being cool is to pursuit a certain sense of pride from the others as a satisfaction of being accepted, and thus it proves you once existed. It is not about right or wrong, it is about a way of living then pass down to the next generation and modifies it as another way of living. Either copying the others or being your own self, within all, people are just being who they are and reaching for the “mythic” state of living.

HW 24 - Short Story 1

When Pakho snaps a picture of the beautiful sunset and planning to upload it when he gets home, he saw one of the class clown passing by that caused him to giggle.

“Ha…what a loser.”

The wind blows through Pakho and the class clown Eddie as they walk pass by each other. Meanwhile, the tiny small sunlight cause the cloud to completely separate from each other. The dark ones and the dark orange ones, all blend in together hanging upon the sky.

Simultaneously, Shawn walks out from a fashion shop and saw Pakho, one of the good friends.

“Have you seen the Olympus PEN E-P2 yet?”
“Yeah, the electronic view finder is hot!”
“Right. They are mailing it to me; I probably will receive it by tomorrow.”
“You want to check out what I just bought?”
“Sure.”
“Wow, this ‘Levi’s 501 Unbuttoned’ fits you so much man.”
“Where are you going now?
“I will head to DJ Becareful’s new opening bar to cheer for him.”
“Another new bar?”
“Yeah.”
“Okay, have a good time; I am going home to upload some of my new pictures. Check them out.”
“Sure! Nice Subcrew X Clot Cap!”
“Thanks.”

While the MacBook Pro is turning on, Pakho takes off his JS Wings and grabs his guitar to play few notes. Sits down on his little couch, grabs the USB and starts uploading his new updated photos, 1000 comments from the old post. Mostly are from the girls.

Smiles a little, upload succeed.

Signs in Maskbook, uploads his new modeling pictures for some known brands. Fingers typed in http://www.clotinc.com/ and sees himself being the CEO of the brand in his head.

Goes back to Maskbook page and looking at what’s going on to the people in his school.

Lame. This is stupid. Boring. Living in the age of dinosaurs. Not COOL.

Checks out the anonymous blog that he usually goes, and loves almost every line this person writes.

Lights dim, shower, sleep.

Sunrise, puts on the clothes that he usually wears and sprays some perfume. Put on his bags, goes out and shoot.

Walking along the beach and saw his friends Shawn and the class clown Eddie. Even DJ Becareful is there. Fishing.

As he walks over and greets his friends, his eyes are wide open and have a question mark face to his friend Shawn. Winds blow on him and the sunlight has a very soft orange and a darker orange reflected to the clouds. All combines into one hanging on the sky.

“Hey, I know. But seriously fishing doesn’t mean it is not cool. It is one of DJ Becareful’s favorite activities.”
“Oh! Cool. I still have to shoot a few more photos. See you and have a good one.”
“Hey, I like your camera. Check out my blogs, we can be friends.”
“Sure. I am trying this new one that I just got it this morning.”
“Oh, I got it too. But I didn’t open the box yet.”
“Nice! I’ll check it tonight. See you all.”

Walk passing the cooler ones and the chilly winds are like sharp pins blowing through him. His shadows fade away.

Goes back home and signs in his blog account. Saw DJ Becareful’s fishing pictures and his new bar pictures. Right on the left corner, there are some recommend links that DJ Becareful post. One of them is exactly the same as the ones he used to go everyday by some unknown person. But DJ Becareful named the link differently; it said Eddie – very cool insightful writer.

Right at this moment, Pakho is absolute defeated.

The cool game is OVER.

HW 23 - 1st Constructivist Exploration of Cool

Cool steals your identity and creativity. Often times when you are trying to fit in and be cool, you begin to lose yourself. Not that because you are not cool, but you are just consider not cool in certain groups or usually the majorities. Then this makes you want to be cool as them so you look alike compared to the “cool” person and at that point, you are no longer original and pure. By doing this, you did not just lose yourself; you blind yourself to the fullest at the same time towards your own creativity. You might think being cool sometimes have to be special and typical, but then you would ask then why I am not cool? Is cool really tried to be special after all? But being the same only labels you nothing else cooler other than just a follower. Everybody is cool, but you make yourself not cool because you join the majority. If nobody supports the one and only, everybody is cool, nobody is cool.

Cool reflects your vulnerability, you are lame. I asked myself why people always support the only one that they admired but not trying to be cooler than their “icon or hero”. Does this reflect you are vulnerable and you are just impossible to be better? Or it shows you know how to appreciate or flatter? Being a follower or a fan of somebody does not make you look cool but reveals your weaknesses somehow. Because you cannot be better, that’s why you will never be the lead. Perhaps you are looking for the better and use that to create something else. Is just like putting sentences or quotes in another word and say it is yours. Does this mean everybody is plagiarizing? This does not only lessen the possibilities of being creative, it makes the world having mirrors all around that reflects you. Aren’t that’s what we all once wish for? World Peace.

Cool is a commitment, meaning no freedom. It seems like this is the only word that can leads you to be accepted and make a living. Therefore, even this word does not worth anything other than just 4 letters, you value them. If you have your own product, but nobody buys them, you fail. This means everybody have to be cool in whatever the group’s definition is, and live on from that. It almost seems like an investment, you have to invest the word “cool” to live. The moment you were born, this word is already being tie to you, and there is no way out. This is the only way to live, be cool. The toughest life style. What a tragedy.

Cool directs you to the maze. Now in the class, most people might have wonder what this word mean. But who knows exactly what that means? Aren’t we all just swim along with the flow? Not only thinking about this is complicated, it almost seems as it leads you to a maze that you will never find a way out. You or I don’t know what cool really is and we will never know. You have your own definition, and I have mine. Maybe it looks like an equal sign between our definitions, but you will never fully know or learn my meaning. Yes, this doesn’t mean anything or have any values. Nevertheless, the most complicated words that I find it hard to explore from seem to start with the “C” also. Who makes it so contradictive and complicated? Why is it so complex? C is not like the "O", it makes you walk half of the circle, and never be able to walk back to where you start from. This is not cool.

HW 21 - Art Project 1

Transformation

Poladroid (looks more like "photograhphy" now...)

1. Is your art a hammer or a mirror? Why?

Looking at the photos that I took, I think it is both a hammer and a mirror. But of course, mirror comes first. Many of the ideas are based on the unit and I believe it really did reflect our perceptions and how we view the world. Therefore, it makes my photos a mirror that shows how people acts in the world towards digitalization. Then, rather the photos are a hammer or not, I think it is not really for me to decide. But to me, I think somehow it did send out some messages to the others regardless whether it is strong enough to shape the others, it is not really for me to say or to judge on.

2. Does your art make you fink and theel? What are some of your own reactions to your art?

At first, when I was jotting down ideas about how to set the scenes up and do some shootings, I think that part went very well. Especially after I went to the library to look at many photos from different sources, I got more ideas of making the art project to happen with some confidents. But when I actually want to get started to do the actual work, there are many difficulties that keeps happening to me (fail to make fake blood, lack of professional scenes and props…etc.) which it bothers me a lot to a point that I am close to give up on it. When I am done and try to edit all the photos, it gets even more frustrated because I realized the first picture that I took is totally unrelated to “digital”. But I decided to upload it because I think it is the similar idea that now a day many things that we used are just a representation of reality and we are not very interacting with the actual reality. So I think somehow it is relevant to the digital unit if people look at it as a metaphorical perspective. Overall, it turned out to be something else that I did not expect to make, and my reactions towards my art is simply a disappointment. Not only that I do not like it, it also leads me to see my weakness in many ways.

3. What was the most interesting aspect of your making of the art?

The most interesting aspect of making the art is to imagine and face the reality. Before making the actual product, all the images and the art piece in mind is pretty satisfying, and I still do believe my ideas are pretty good while i was dreaming. But what is more interesting and upsetting, is that I am lack of the strength to make it happen. I realized that not only that I am imagining too much for being childish, I am unable to put everything together to form my imagination into the actual art piece. I totally lack of the strength to bring out what is in my mind to real life and I have found another weakness in me while doing this art project. I should have learned that people should not expect too much and live through their imagination, and I should know that there is a gag between hallucination and reality. Anyway, this art project is awakening. Not towards the others, but to myself personally.

Knowing there was a chance to do something more than just typing words and upload it as a post, it is very excited. I actually enjoy doing this type of assignments more than the others, and it is way more challenging than I thought it is. Although it did not meet my own standard, I am glad that I saw my own failure. So now I learned.

This is not COOL! :(

Few Notes for Who May Want to Know:

• the photo with the flower and perfume, it is really just a picture that tries to send out the message that people actually prefer something that can help them to alienate from the reality more than interacting with the reality (although it is flower vs. perfume, you can also look at the flower as people hanging out and chatting, and the perfume as a cell phone talking through air)
• the photo with 2 usb port, this picture is trying to bring out the message that people now a day no longer need to remember things and the usb will actually enlarge their memories when they insert the usb into the port
• the camera lens in the eye is probably the most obvious one, what is really saying was that people use their cameras to capture the meaningful moments instead of witnessed and enjoy it with their own eyes first, what is more important is to show off what is being captured, not what they really see
• the reflection one is the one that I do not like the most, but what I am trying to do is to make a person who look at the mirror and found their own reflection that it is not really themselves, but a person's identity that got taken and replaced by various of brands
• the last one is one of the picture that is on my dislike list, but what it is trying to portray is that in order for a person to live, it is not really from eating but from the charge of the computers, we need the computers to keep us alive

If I did succeed in bringing out these messages above

without typing this long description but through the images,

then the photos are considered ART to me.

HW 22 - Big Paper Final Draft

Introduction

In this generation, digitalization has played a big role in our lives. Not just the teens, even adults and some seniors have been using these digital representational devices obsessively to keep up with the society’s pace. We did not only abuse these efficient devices that can make our life more convenient, we used them conventionally for everyday life as a necessity. Most of us immerse ourselves into these addicting devices, and came to the conclusion that these dead objects are the murderer of our intelligence. No doubt that we rely on these devices the most now a day, but what we don’t realize was that we are the one who can actually decide whether to use it or not. Moreover, these attitudes could form us into varies of ways such as disvaluing the precious things, blame others for our own fault, and avoid the truth behind reality. Many of us attempt to blame the digital representational devices have directed us to the trail of stupidity while the digital representational devices are the real victim that got censured.

Argument # 1

While inviting or avoiding the digital representational devices into our daily life, we only pay the center attention to the objects, not much of ourselves. In the book Feed by M.T. Anderson, he used allegory to enhance the idea that the feed (DRDs) have made us into ignorant, and it caused people to lost the ability to think. However, he did not address the real cause and effect that has turned the teenagers into ignorant. He did depicts some characters especially Titus who obsessively used the feed in his daily life. He also mentioned the habits of teenagers using these digital representational devices. But he never claimed that we, human are the one who caused ourselves to be stupid. All he stated is the feed that caused the problem.

Although he talked about how people are abusing these DRDs, and illustrates the way people are using them deeply, he did not seem to think it is our own fault. One quote from his book was “Nobody knows. The feed is tied into everything. Your body control, your emotions, your memory. Everything. Sometimes feed errors are fatal. (Anderson, 2009)” This shows that he thinks the feed is causing the dangerous in a regular digital teen, not the teen themselves. Perhaps, he does not want the readers to feel offended by his perspective. Therefore, he writes in a tone demonstrating the teens as the victim. Nevertheless, making the teen to realize their own mistakes for overusing the DRDs, it could harm them, but not telling them the roots of the problem, it forms the teens to have the attitude to blame the others. They will no longer have the tendency to be self critical about themselves for not looking for the momentum to think while there are available sources that are for them to simply search from.

Argument # 2

Additionally, from the book Everything Is Bad For You by Steven Johnson, he also writes in a perspective that only focused on the digital representational devices, but not on us. Throughout the excerpt that I read, Steven John claimed that video games, television, and Internet are actually good for us. He tried to break through the wall of how the dominant culture thinks and he argued that these things are actually making us smarter in different ways in terms of how we think. Although he did not have the tendency to blame these DRDs, he is directing his attention towards the objects, not the human. This means, when the DRD turns out to be wrong or having errors that affected us negatively, we will directly blame the devices, not ourselves for causing it.

Especially when he talks about the video games that catch our attention because there are obstacles to overcome and they are not actually having “fun”, he is saying that when people are playing games, “what you actually do in playing a game – the way your mind has to work – is radically different; it’s about finding order and meaning in the world, and making decisions that help create the order.” In other words, video games will somewhat help people to deal with problems in real life other than just having “fun”. However, these solutions may not always apply to real situations that people might face in life. If it directs the person to cause even more problems, the DRDs soon become an excuse that people will use for unable to resolve whatever they are facing. Even the video games might be able to suggest some great tips about life that people can use, people start to take these things for granted and stop pushing themselves to think.

This may seem obvious that it is the digital representational devices’ fault for assisting DRD users to form the habit of relying and using it as an excuse, but what people don’t realized is actually themselves who is leading themselves to the trail of stupidity. Steven Johnson did not blamed the DRDs for causing the problem, but he neither said it was our own fault, which it prevents the reader to reach the state of self-revelation.

Argument 3:

Furthermore, we all make excuses for our own fault and we refused to admit to the fact that our intelligence is killed by our own hands. One of the article that I read called Is Google Making Us Stupid by Nicholas Carr, it is directly blaming how now in modern days these massive sources on the Internet prevents people from reading books for a long period of time. Moreover, it shapes people’s habit to skim through lines instead of actually reading it. First of all, what is a better reason for reading books over reading researches online? The whole purpose of a book existed, is for people to read. What is the juicy part of the books are the words or quotes that the author brought to us. Therefore, this applies to articles online too.

The main goal of reading either from books or from the sources through Googling is to learn and to expand our perspective about the world and ourselves. Either it is from the book or through a screen; it will be exactly the same. What it actually matters are our habit of reading the texts. While Nicholas Carr blamed Google for making us stupid, what it really causing the problem is people’s own habit of reading not the object itself. “Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged”. This quote reveals how Carr believes reading texts on the Internet could distract people from focusing on reading, which it lowers people’s ability to interpret and make rich connections.

This is a perfect example of how human did not realize their own mistakes but blame the DRDs for causing it. If the reading is well interested enough whether it is from a real book or through the internet, there is no such thing that book is better than the sources on the internet because one has more distractions. Reading a book definitely has the possibility of having distractions from the environment also. By using the DRDs or not using it, we often view ourselves as the victims of the matter, and have the tendency to blame for causing the effects.

Argument #4

When we are blaming the digital representational devices are making us into ignorance, we don’t realize they are just objects that made out of human hands and it caused no harm, we are really the one who is in control. In Feed, the teenagers rely on feed to do everything for them, and therefore they do not think. They take what has been offer for granted and they do not learn how to manage things for themselves. Because feed solves all the difficulties and make their life easier, they get lazier to think for themselves and allow it to completely dominant their life. It is not the feed that caused them to be stupid, it is the way they rely on the DRDs that caused them to be ignorance, which it shows they did not realized their own mistakes and to just to blame.

If they have more self awareness like Violet, one of the characters in the book who realized feed has dominant her life, they will have more self critical. “Everything I think of when I think of really living, living to the full – all my ideas are just the opening credits of sitcoms. See what I mean? My idea of life, it’s what happens when they’re rolling the credits. My god. What am I, without the feed? It’s all from the feed credits. My idea of real life.” If the teenagers think as Violet, being more self-critical, they will realize their own true mistakes that they are the one who opens the door for letting the feed to dominant their life. Although in the book, the teenagers did not blame the feed yet, but it is obvious that they are ignorance. It is expected that they will not realized their mistakes because they do not even know how to think.

As a result of this phenomenon, we can predict that these teenagers will blame the feed in their future when it becomes a problem for them. Because they do not realized they have the actual “control” over what to do, they just keep relying on these digital representation devices to solve their difficulties. But what they don’t realize is that these DRDs are unable to solve their problems for overusing the devices, and the only way to get out of the obstacle is to think for their own. Since they let feed to dominant their life, the way they sees it is the feed that is controlling them, not themselves controlling the feed.

Argument #5

During the interview that I have with the pass by on the street, around 30 years old, male, he realized it is not the digital representational devices’ fault, but human. He claimed that, “people do not know how to use it and they just filled it with crap”. This shows that we as human are the one who is really in control over the DRDs, not the other way around. When he said “do not know how to use it”, he meant that people do not know the true meaning of the DRDs’ existence, and they just take everything for granted. If people learn and really use it effectively, soon they will realize the DRD could actually assist them to be smarter instead of leading them to the trail of stupidity. It is because many people do not know “how to use it”; they do not know how to manage using the DRDs, and starts to rely on it. If people realized they should not rely or let the DRDs to completely dominant their lives, they will soon realize they are the one who is controlling the objects to help them. Just as the person that I interview said, the DRDs are actually “a great source to look for information” if people know how to use it.

Argument #6:

Similar to the book Feed, a song by a band named Bad Religion called “21st Century Boy” who also blamed the digital representational devices is the cause of people being ignorance. This song basically talks about how the DRDs have dominant people’s lives and they no longer know how to read, and it just make people getting stupider. Lines like “I don’t know how to read but I got a lot of toys”, it really shows how most people do not realized the fact that these “toys” do not have legs or hands that controls us in certain ways. What it is really causing it, is the way we consume to these “toys” and used it obsessively to allow it to take over our lives even identity. Another line like “I don’t want it, the things you’re offering me, symbolized bar code, quick ID”, it shows that people do not realize that they have the right to choose whether to take the “offer” or not. All they know is that the DRDs have dominant and replace their identity, but do not know they can actually change that. While people are blaming the digital devices, they do not realize they are the ones, who are in control, not the objects that caused no harm.

Connection & Significance

If people keep making the mistakes and refused to realize it is their own fault, soon this will become an even more dangerous phenomenon than obsessively using the digital representational devices. As we all see now a day in this society, the way people value things are definitely insane. Everybody carry their cell phones with them even when they are in the park or hanging with their friends. Additionally, student texting in class is another image that people can often see now a day. This show how people starts to value things differently. While they could have enjoyed the beautiful day and the great surroundings they are at, they rather spend time on staring at the screen. People no longer learn how to appreciate and starts to take things for granted. Moreover, people will start to train themselves with the habit relying on the others to do the things for them. If everybody tempt to think of the idea that “somebody is going to do it”, then nobody will contribute to the society and this will no longer be digital corrupted, but also socially corrupted.

Not only that people will stop taking responsibilities for the others and themselves, they will start to avoid reality sooner or later. Since now a day the digital representation devices are getting more advances for people to use, many people no longer live in the actual reality. They could blame the DRDs for making them stupid, and they could simply rely on these devices to do the work. But if they keep refusing to face the reality, the reality will soon deal with them. They did not only prevent themselves from the guilt for leading themselves to the trail of stupidity, they also start to train themselves to live in a world that alienates them from the reality. Many of us might think we will be able to run away from our mistakes and just keep live their lives ignoring the problems. But if people keep echoing the same actions in everyday life and form into a habit, this will become an endless chain that people can keep on blaming the others for making their own mistakes.

Opposing View Point

Another way of looking at this is that it is not really the human’s fault. We are not the "murderer of our own intelligence" and it is the "dead objects' fault". The world needs to improve, and that requires experiments. Therefore, when these products are being made accidentally, and it works conveniently, why not using it? This also means when it breaks or it affects us negatively, it is the DRDs’ fault even though we invented it. Because we are just “trying” it as an experiment to make the world a better place, and the DRDs are simply coincident inventions. We do have to keep the world running, and even though the DRDs might be harming us in some ways, there always should be solution for the problem. We do realized we are the one who is in control, but these DRDs do have a lot of power over us because we need to use them and rely on it most of the time in order to make everything more efficient and faster.

In addition, people did focus on the way they used the digital representational devices and they are aware of the issue. People do realize their mistakes, but not fully to a point that is powerful enough to make a change. Many times people do recognize their own mistakes especially when most of us have learned and discussed about this digital unit in the class, but why they are still not strong enough to change us? It is not that we do not know it is our fault, including myself while writing this paper, but why I am keep making the same mistakes? This reflects that there are people who are aware of this issue and it definitely leads to another issue to talk about why people making the same mistake even they do realize it. My theory about this further issue was that it is just the way of living, and most people do not want to dig for more problems when they are comfortable of being who they are at the period of time. When it actually comes by them, people could make a change as quick as a blink of the eye.

Lastly, I do like Andy L.’s comment about “you can't really put blame on someone being stupid”. For my paper, I think I did not draw the line between being “stupid for not knowing it” and “blame” clearly. When I write the paper, I did not really think about this point. But I do agree with Andy that there are people who are simply ignorant and they are not blaming, they just don’t know what is going on. There is definitely a difference between someone who knows their mistakes and blames the others and someone who completely don’t realize their mistakes. Thus, I think I could have clarified more specific on the targets that I am focusing on in this paper. It is definitely not the ones who do not know their mistakes’ fault for blaming, but the ones who do know but blame the others.

Conclusion

As the digital generation keeps going on and on, people did not only refuse to realize their own mistakes, they are blaming the digital representational devices as the murder of their intelligence. This is not only a reflection of people's bad attitude towards refusing to take their own responsibilities; it also shows how people avoid reality in these days. If this continuously happen and people do not admit their own mistakes, they will soon be the murderer of their own wisdom. It is as blaming your own child for causing such inconvenient when you actually decided to have them.

Work Cited:

Bad Religon. “21st Century Digital Boy”. Against the Grain. Westbeach Recorders, Hollywoord, California, 1990.

“Google Is Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr. The Atlantic. July/August 2008.

M.T. Anderson. Feed. United States: Miramax Books. 2002

Steven Johnson. Everything Bad Is Good For You. Riverhead. 2005