End

Just as a post to look as updated as possible, everything has been completed and revised. Enjoy!

Gaming Narrative

As suggested by the class, I have decided to give a hard look at what may be the only game I've had a chance to play in the last few years: Rockstar's Red Dead Redemption. In my limited opinion, it's a triumph of gaming, and in my opinion, it's also an engaging piece of literature, if you will.

A quick summary of this game will tell you that through a first person narrative, John Marston (above) is being shadowed and used by a corrupt government holding his family hostage. He is tasked with finding and killing his former gang members who left him for dead before the game itself actually takes place. It's a simple anarchist sort of set-up, making an enemy out of the controlling forerunners of society; in this case, the FBI. On the opposing hand, the outlaws you're chasing down are also in the wrong, choosing to kill anyone who gets in their way with no expense. After some while, when travelling through Mexico, Marston gets caught up in both sides of an ongoing war. Throughout the game, you have the ability to sway Marston to commit good deeds and bad ones, earning him a reputation dependent on such. Both will have their consequences, and both their rewards. In this sense, both concerning the main plot and your own choices, Rockstar pressures the player to ultimately take a neutral standpoint, which seems to be what their other games preach (which would be the Grand Theft Auto series). There is no right, there is no wrong, but there is always senseless killing.

As an experience, you are more or less forced to look through Marston's lens. His dialogue suggests fairly contemporary thinking, though it's a game based in 1911. He views women as his complete equals, he seems to be realistic about his situation and about the world in which he inhabits, and he cares very much for his family's well-being, rather than himself, and he defends people of other ethnicities and religion. In this sense, he's written as a fairly 21st century man in an early 20th century setting. This anachronism allows us to relate to a character who agrees with a more standardized modern politic.

The game borrows heavily from biblical themes and titles, and makes as many references as it can without getting lost on the player. As a piece of literature, the language is heavily researched and applied to the time the game is placed in. Questions of ethics and morality are common themes, and on a less philosophical level, we watch the world go from the old west to brick buildings and early automobiles, and we can see changes in culture, dialect, and clothing with the transition. Details like the whooping cough and people getting off their wagons or horses to take a leak near a rock are not lost on the developers.

Through the lens of media theory, it IS a truly immersive game, retaining much of its popularity though it was released over a year ago. With multiplayer titles on the rise, this game is no exception, and invites people from around the globe to explore the west together, an aspect that sucks many people in for months at a time. One guy even wrote a song about how he wishes he were Marston in the real world. Very strange, but the artist's emotional experience is less than unique.

One can only wonder what is next in the world of gaming and immersion, but this is a very interesting piece as it is.

Service Learning

Combined (above) are the 6 most effective and useful images, courtesy of the students at the Broach School. They are scenario cards that, in my thesis/board game, a player may draw after rolling. Each card represents our poor decision making, as well as the effect of life getting in the way of our trivial quest for success. Now, on with the experience!

A trip to the Broach School in Bradenton. This was an exciting project. In relation to my thesis, I was able to discuss with some of the kids a portion of what I like to consider the travesties of the human condition. I initially asked a choice few students to seriously think about their preconceptions of two kinds of people: the homeless and the criminal. They drew portraits and mugshots (respectively) of both, and I've posted my favorite examples of both. After that, I asked them to talk about any of their experiences with either, and we all discussed what does and does not constitute both. The subject of guns came up, and one particular kid gave me his take on them, being that both he and his dad enjoy going off to ranges an firing them for sport. This came up after another student drew his criminal character with a gun, and we manage to resolve that those who own guns aren't necessarily bad people at all (though we all agreed that anyone carrying a gun in the open probably does not have the best intentions).

With the homeless portraits, they all seemed interested in drawing beards and beers in tow, and we had a further discussion about how anyone can be homeless, and not necessarily be a drunk or a beard wearer, though limited provisions do push a number of obvious suspects to have a problem with both. After a few laughs, I had them all collaborate on a piece that built on itself as it went from student to student: a house that tragically catches fire. Together, they enjoyed watching the piece develop, and encourage each other to add certain details here and there (you'll notice how the fire in sai picture sways one way outside, but is static inside; very cool). My aim was not to show them that the world is a cruel and senseless place, but to explain that though life can be cruel at times, that it's all just a small part of something bigger. After this point, paper ran low, and I had them draw each other as well as still lives, and we concluded with another student's 'drawing with light' project by the time actual drawing got to be a bit exhausting (I walked out with some fifteen pieces from a shifting four to five students).

These kids were great. Completely engaged, interested in what I had to say, and interested in teaching me a bit about their own lives, and their own perspectives. It was nice talking about some of the cartoons I grew up watching, seeing that they were still running and popular with modern youth (I do feel so old some times) and it was a wholly gratifying experience having a group of strangers help me with my own thesis. Should I ever get to do this again, I think I'll try to bring more paper. They all seemed to love to draw, and although none of them wanted to pursue their individual talents as a profession, they all spoke about enjoying it as a lasting hobby. Art is a great connection between any group of people, so long as they can find a happy medium, and ours was exploring what we think we know. As with any venture in life, I learned a lot from them, and I only hope I managed to leave something behind.

Service Learning Proposal

I've been toying around a lot with this assignment. I think what I'd like to do is have my group of kids help me create a small portion of my senior thesis, namely, the interpretation of image through situational constraints. This feeds to a larger whole (a board game), as they will be taking any of the various scenarios I've come up with (cards that advance the player in game) and creating the image to go with the text. Immediate examples would be:

-You stub your toe. [The pain is agonizing enough to skip a turn.]

-Your house catches fire. [Terrible insurance gains you $100.]

-You decide to be a hobo. [Get $100 for begging.]

Et cetera. It will be a chance to test a portion of my game and, more importantly, adding a unique perspective on both my project and on a greater whole than what I am limited to seeing.

If it isn't interesting enough, I think I would like to draw faces/people with the kids. Have them draw each other to really see what they see. What information they choose to show and what they choose to ignore. I think that's an interesting project too.

Graphic Fiction

I have read David Mazzucchelli's Asterios Polyp, assignment is "TBA"!

Media and the Body

While I'm sure this is the obvious pick for a number of students, the Bodies Exhibition is, to me, a perfect representation of how media and the body relate. Not far from ballet, this bizarre post-exhumation and public display of people after death gives us a personal look at the literal insides of people while the world reacts to it all. The virtual statues of the men, women, and children have been the subject of both praise and anger, with indifference being less common a reaction than either. These figures, a blend of art, science, and philosophy, are also at the mercy of those who wouldn't want any body to be contorted and disfigured to be put in headlights, so to speak, as well as the families of the deceased being used, who, if I'm remembering correctly, have made claims that these bodies were not consenting to this kind of appearance before death. To that end, this is also a political ordeal, a religious upset, a question of morality, and a big vs. small phenomena. Is it okay to deface and manipulate someone who had no say in a matter if this person isn't even living? Especially considering the benefit of being able to explore the body (as a student, as a teacher, as a doctor, etc)? Does the end justify the means? in a nutshell. I'm pressed to say that the human body has been of so much controversy, especially through the lens of media, which is why I've chose this project as a representation.

Media and the Body

I have read Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake, assignment is "TBA"!

Cool Hunting

After reading William Gibson's Pattern Recognition and watching David Cronenberg's Videodrome, I am almost certain the next big thing is going to be profoundly sexual. But that may be a warped standpoint. My hopeful guess is that the next big thing is going to be an interest in human alteration. The only thing stopping us now seems to be ethics, but as soon as some twisted underground scientist gets his black rubber gloves and circular eye protection ready, the world will be ready for that kind of thing. What kind of thing exactly? Well, I have a few thoughts on the matter.

First and foremost, we find ourselves wanting to look younger and younger and live longer and longer. This is a bizarre dilemma, as youth enhancing products end up making a person look older when compared to their younger looking peers. Some people seem to fall into the uncanny valley, looking almost human enough to be human, but just a hair too un-human to be real. Even robots are looking more convincing these days! (Warning, video is terrifying.) So what's next? Well, we could all be robots. Or we could master the art of gene manipulation. Harvard Scientists have already reversed the gene that makes us age, and my guess is that they'll eventually have to try it on humans.

If that isn't the next big fad, I think we'll probably still be a pretty entertainment based culture. Entertainment has always taken a stranglehold of everyone, dating back as far as written language will tell. Those next-gen graphics look pretty amazing. I've read somewhere (though I can't find the link for this) that 'they' are in the talks of making fully immersive gaming systems, dwarfing the Xbox Kinect in quality and fluidness. Maybe instead we can just download our mental selves into some new persona, like in James Cameron's Avatar. And if we're more interested in movies by that point, I'm sure Cameron will come up with some way of keeping us awed in just the theatres. I wouldn't be surprised if both scenarios end up together. (Suppose for a moment an Avatar video game in 2020 could completely and physically immerse any player. All those depressed internet kids might never have to leave Pandora! )

Really though, who knows what the next big thing is? 2012 is just around the corner, and if we're not going through a rebirth of knowledge, then we're probably going to all be fried in some crazy electrical field, or the like. That would be just my luck. Graduating college then getting punished by the earth itself just for being born at the wrong time. Why me?

Television

I have read Marshall McLuhan's The Medium is the Massage, and these are what I came up with:

Autership

Ingmar Bergman was he subject heavy praise and criticism. People have stated ha he would be more suited for stage than film, and that his over-the-toppery was simply too... shall we say, over the top? Some of his films have been described as difficult, or too slow, or simply impossible to endure. These faults described, and many more, can be read here. Still despite the negativity of many of his films, there is a great deal of praise assigned to a select few, usually The Seventh Seal or Wild Strawberries. Perhaps the point I'm trying to make here is that I did enjoy the films I watched, but at their core, I'm far too overwhelmed by 'information' these days to have been able to enjoy them. All the same, the elements that make his films both beautiful and utterly unwatchable are attributes of his own autership.

I don't know how much I can say about the cast's supposed poor performance, as it was in another language, an my cultural ineptitude prevented me from being able to discern that properly, but I did notice many of the actors between the three movies (Wild Strawberries, The Seventh Seal, and Smiles of a Summer Night) I watched repeated many of the same actors. Gunnar Björnstrand, Åke Fridell, Bibi Andersson appear in all three, with a number of people appearing in at least two. With his expansive film list (59 titles!), you can imagine how many actors are repeats. So this is another so-called element of his film making, I suppose.

He has tackled a number of different genres of film; from drama, to fantasy, to comedy (at least, considering the films I watched), so it looks like he's interested in experimenting. At the same time, I've noticed that they're all sort of introspectives, likely into his own life. This self-reflexiveness I think is also a common element of his films. He has discussed themes as personal as love and death, and done so with an approach that is distinctly his own. Naturally, this is where much of his criticism comes in, the all too personal element that Hollywood has, since it's inception, tried to hold back. Some people really love it, some really don't.

The two most acclaimed films of those I watched, The Seventh Seal and Wild Strawberries were for me the most enjoyable, and I think that's because the themes of these are more-or-less universal, exploring deep themes (particularly death) with some of the most intriguing characters. Wild Strawberries' protagonist, Dr. Isak Borg, is a very interesting lens to be cast through, as we recount with him his troubled past, alongside his current life. It presents us with a whole spectrum of morality, emptiness, and acceptance, which seem to be present themes in the other films I've seen. Take for example what must be the iconic scene in Seventh Seal, where Antonio Block plays chess with death. There is a strange hope/futility sort of dichotomy ever-present through the movie, but that seems to sum up Bergman's message made. As for Smiles of a Summer Night, well. Not my favorite film at all. I had seen it last, and it was just so... different than what little I had come to expect. Cynical sort-of romantic comedy. When surmising autership, someone unfamiliar with the director for these three might be surprised to find it's even his film. Or maybe I just saw his only 'dark' films, but I' be surprised. Interesting guy, to be assured.

How to Read a Book like a Film

I have read David Marnet's screenplay Glengarry Glen Ross. Some thoughts:

My ideal cast:

Shelly Levene is the most normal character in the book. He is a bit older and is sort of forced to steal in order to help his once mentioned sick daughter. Seeing as how this is a common use of the Heinz dilemma, Shelly should no less be played by the fictitious Heinz himself. It would be perfect. Or if you need somebody real, why not the psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, famous for creating the scenario?

Ricky Roma, the dirty, sneaky, ambitious (and often victorious) salesman of the lot. He'll do anything to win, and he knows just how to hook an unsuspecting fish, so to speak. Because of his obvious talent in con-artistry, he should be played by George W. Bush pretty much any president Ronald A. Katz, inventor of automated call centers and those stupid automatic messages you're no doubt used to hearing. Hello, your call is important to us. Now, if you could please listen to this irritating music for 20 to 30 minutes, that'd be juuust super.

Dave Moss, the conspirator who plans to steal the client list that will get him and Levene rich. Loud-mouthed and obnoxious, selfish and cunning, he should be played by Canadian actor Robb Wells, who plays Ricky in the show Trailer Park Boys (a fantastic show about the moronic and violent life on a trailer park). The titular character is more or less the same person.

John Williamson, the manager of this agency, is a cruel and petty sort of tyrant. Playing the role of the greedy doctor in the Heinz dilemma, he should probably be played by Sam Walton, president and CEO of Wal-mart Stores, Inc. For those of you who haven't heard, he's kind of a despicable human being, and I use the latter term very generously. Much like Williamson, the characters of the screenplay would like nothing more than to see writhe in torment and agony for all eternity pass away peacefully in his sleep sooner rather than later.

George Aaronaw is passive, petty, aging, and filled with complaints in his life. He tries not to get caught up in any risky business, but despite his effortless attitude and fear that have him stuck as an incompetent salesman in the first place, he just might get caught up anyway. I can only see myself playing this character in the 40 years down the road. Maybe it would be a role suited for Stephanie Meyer or her diluted mirror image Bella Swan, if George were a girl.

Enough of them, I'm also going to suggest, in order to enrich the plot of this piece, that the plot be more... cruel than it already is. While it's magnificently written, I think that the biggest idea with this play is that cheaters always win, and winners always cheat better than losers. So, let's switch up the characters some.

I want Levene to be lying about his sick daughter. And I want him to ham up the lie as much as possible (dead wife, unsupportive parents, behind on mortgage too, etc). I think that the company should be larger in scale. Much larger. Have it be a chain or realtors, and have Williamson at the top. Dissociate his character some more from the employees, make him really hungry for money, and make him have it. Ricky Roma could be next in line for the top spot at this branch, and that would make the plot even more competitive and dirty. By the end of this all, have the guys who attempted to steal the leads get arrested (as they have) and have them be replaced by a few up-and-comers shortly thereafter. Roma could be expanded upon if he were already the boss of his sect, and could be gunning for Williamson's job, but this is probably pretty needless. I want to get the sense in there that this business is like the womb of a tiger shark. That's sort of how it is in real life!

Literary Fiction

I had my girlfriend read this book with me as I knew she would enjoy it as much as I had been at the time. When we finished, we took ample time to talk about it. Quotes were pulled from popular resources, but remain as relevant as any piece of text in the book.

Constantly fought about, banned in three countries for some lengths of time, and questionable though legal, Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita is no stranger to controversy, even from the very first word of the very first paragraph ("Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins."). Nabokov uses this piece as to deconstruct preconceptions about your average sex offender by putting you in the very shoes of one, and through copious amounts of pervasive language and mental exploration, Humbert Humbert manages to find some endearment beneath his tortured and monstrous shell. Of course, he is ultimately dissonant with us, though not for lack of effort, but I think this odd relationship we have with such an unlikely and despicable man is the true reason for this books controversy. Every thought of Humbert's is candid, and though disturbed, his outlook on an otherwise dismal reality without Lo is deliberately beautiful, rife with language and shakespearian eloquence.

All at once we were madly, clumsily, shamelessly, agonizingly in love with each other; hopelessly, I should add, because that frenzy of mutual possession might have been assuaged only by our actually imbibing and assimilating every particle of each other's soul and flesh; but there we were, unable even to mate as slum children would have so easily found an opportunity to do so.”

Mmm. Tragic like Shakespeare, too.

Humbert is, himself, a very fascinating character. As he's written, we are supposed to make him out to be very attractive, well built, well-to-do, intelligent, and worldly. His only real flaw is warped view on sexuality, which he manages to explain as pervasively as possible in the beginning of the novel. We can, to some degree, understand why he is stuck in the limbo that he is. We can applaud for him when he does show constraint, and given the onslaught of characters that are made to be hated (particularly Charlotte, I think) the world in which he lives truly concerns itself with just H. H. and Lo. We read with intensity when he doesn't show constraint. We want him to be happy. And we want Lolita to be happy too, which she seems to be from the beginning, though she does get caught up in a world over her head. Either way, these characters are very engaging and dangerously agreeable. Without Quilty, there would be little offset to the truly neurotic nature of the writing. Acting as the tails to heads, they are irrevocably two sides of the same coin, much to Humbert's chagrin.

We fell to wrestling again. We rolled all over the floor, in each other's arms, like two huge helpless children. He was naked and goatish under his robe, and I felt suffocated as he rolled over me. I rolled over him. We rolled over me. They rolled over him. We rolled over us.

Here is perhaps the best example of how Humbert understands his relationship with the dentist. Every negative statement about Quilty is immediately a part of Humbert's own life, and this reflection is a saving grace of sorts for this dangerous novel (apart from the completely necessary foreword). Though the language is beautiful and the content is as subdued as can possibly be, this will always be to most (and superficially to all) a book about a pedophile, and as unfortunate as that is, it does manage to hold its own against critics, and over fifty years after it's been written, it's still used as an example of important (or in this case integral) literature in schools and colleges the world over.

Pulp Fiction and the Organization of Genre

Dashiell Hammett's The Maltese Falcon can be quickly defined through presupposed genre labels: Mystery, crime, detective fiction, and according to Wikipedia, the film version of this book can be labeled as the first film noir production, which would likely make this book an early example of text noir, I guess. It is, in fact, an awesome piece of mystery literature, coaxing the reader to try to figure out what is going on before Sam Spade does. Whether you do or not, it is fantastically engaging, which is important for any mystery novel.

As a crime novel, differing slightly from the mystery marker, it involves the perspective of a slightly crooked cop who is unafraid to get his hands dirty. Another genre marker that is derived from this is the hard-boiled crime fiction marker, often involved with police. And that's exactly what we are given: a hard-boiled cop! It's probably not a stretch to assume it is an early pioneer of this marker too, especially after a confirming Wikipedia entry. Even if it isn't the first, it is certainly one of the most influential hard-boiled books on the market.

As with any good book (or film), it's important to note the use of sub-genres that further help to define this within the realm of literature. It's use of the objective point-of-view could arguably be a marker of its genre, and the varying character archetypes (the femme fetale, a traitorous and conniving Brigid, as well as the overly flamboyant Joel Cairo) could also be markers of the overall genre. Spade's relationship with his late partner Archer's wife, Iva, and later his dangerous relationship with Brigid, gives this an air of both romance and thrill(er), supporting themes that are never far from Hammett's mind. The rather unseen (and quite dead) Archer is himself a unique marker for this story, serving until the very end as a consciousness for Sam, allowing him to end both of his reckless relationships throughout the novel. He could be considered the voice of reason to the viewer as well, which would make him something of a genre marker, I think.

"You're a damn good man, sister," he said and went out.

Film and Literature

Steve Oedekerk's Kung Pow: Enter the Fist was not a movie that defined its audience, nor a generation. It was not a movie that changed America, nor the world. It was little more than nothing in the eyes of the media, and was commercially a box office flop. But there's something about it that has always appealed to me, and it has been my favorite movie since its inception in 2002. Looking into its context, I find it really is a striking marker of genre and pop culture, and I believe the primary reason for its failure was a severe lack of advertising. That in itself is very interesting when you compare it to other heavily advertised films of 2002 (Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Spider-Man, and xXx, to name a few), all of which are arguably less watchable than Kung Pow. Realistically, just about everything is arguably less watchable than this cinematic triumph.

To elaborate, if you haven't seen it (for shame), Kung Pow was conceptualized after Oedekerk's earlier productions, namely those short thumb lampoon series, with particular attention being paid to Thumb Wars, which you can go ahead and watch on YouTube for free. You won't be sorry (probably). His unique approach to editing key facial features onto thumbs and the like would spark his unique interest in putting things where they just don't belong in a parody setting. Footage taken from the classic 1976 film Tiger and Crane Fist was edited, replacing scenes containing Jimmy Wang Yu with Oedekerk himself. This takes the initial genre, which was unmistakably action/kung fu, and turns it into a parody of itself, becoming a comedy, though much of the footage (and even many of the original lines of dialogue!) remain the same. To this end, it's most defined by the limited selection and appeal of comedy kung fu movies (Shaolin Soccer, Kung Fu Hustle).

Where the film is constrained using a limited budget and technology, using very basic green screening techniques as well as limited 3d animation, it makes up for what it lacks through clever(ish) writing and an overall goofiness not replicated (or appreciated?) anywhere else in the world of film. For example, it's approach to in-film advertising, an example of which can be seen here, is in my opinion, pretty daring, and has undoubtedly influenced television shows like Arrested Development (have a look here for Burger King) and I'm sure a number of other programs scripted by the equally bold. It's effective, and ditties like that stuck in your head, to be assured.

While it's obvious this film is not for everyone, it has a reasonably large die-hard fanbase still waiting for the promised sequel who still enjoy the first film in its entirety, line for memorable line. It may not have set any real standards for film, but its place in film can't be ignored, though it is only on a small scale. I'm sure the sequel were to be made today, it would follow a similar low budget formula and be met with the same sort of (mostly negative) reaction. It was made in 2002, but I think even now, it's really a movie ahead of our time. You'll see.

Fairy Tales and Ideology

My modern fairy tale is simply about a girl who goes to a wonder land, of sorts. Talk about original!

Alicia has been waiting her whole life for this moment, it feels. The gates in front of her slowly open, and she is the frontmost figure in a small crowd, all waiting for the same thing. The grass seemed to grow taller as it came into vision, until finally it appeared more lush and green than anywhere else she had seen on Earth. The streets were welcoming this crowd of eager souls, and they marched off hurriedly in their independent directions. Friday after school was always pretty magical.

Her iPhone was quickly pulled from her pocket in order to send a text to her patient parents concerning her imminent return. What popped up on the homescreen however was a strange notification from a previously unnoticed app, named RABBIT. The notification just told her she had a new message. She clicked the option to Read it Now, and was shown a strange place with a little rabbit in it. It was pointing in a direction, and after some thought, she decided she had better follow it.

Alicia navigated through her neighborhood, to a strange backwoods looking area she had only passed by now and again. As she was directed through the thicket, she decided the rabbit might respond if she were to speak with it.

"Hello?" She asked, very curious about the creature.

"Hurry, Alicia! You don't want to be late!"

Oh my! she thought. It knew her name!

"Late for what? Were am I going?"

"Please, hurry!" The ever cryptic critter insisted.

After going deeper into the forest area than she thought was even possible, she took a look around her. These looked like woods children might never escape from. She hears the muffled laughter of forest children, looking for her to play with them. Undaunted, she asks the rabbit where they are, but the rabbit keeps pointing in the one direction.

"They will try to take it from you! You must hurry past them!"

What is it? Are these children to be feared? Where was she going? Many thoughts were buzzing through her mind, but she decided it best to follow what the rabbit wanted of her.

After enough travel, she came to a very large tree. By its roots was a huge hole that seemed to suck into the earth infinitely. As she approached the large hole, the rabbit interrupted her.

"No, not there! It's on the other side of the tree!"

"Oh, I'm sorry."

She moved to the opposite end, which was previously out of sight. Against the tree were a slew of vines, and she was sure something rested behind them. She looked toward the rabbit for guidance, and it gave her a simple, telling nod. She began to work at the draping foliage.

"It's..." She started, shocked at what she found.

"Yes. You get to play it first, because you found this before those other kids."

What she uncovered was an ancient video game, with a strange controller to boot. She picked up the device and clicked the ancestral power button. The screen that came up read simply: WONDERLAND, followed by (PRESS START). The forest children finally caught up to her, and she recognized the faces of her classmates who also just got off the bus. They would have to wait for their turns.

She was immediately engaged, and worked through twelve incredibly detailed and immersive levels that took her to another world entirely. She collected power-ups, she beat bosses, and she enjoyed the sandbox style gameplay that not even her real sandbox at school could offer. To this day, she reflects on her experience fondly, noting, "It was pretty fucking sweet." But eventually, she did get a game over, as all video games tend to make happen when they're in an arcade setting (which it was), and she was forced to relinquish her gaming power to the next person waiting; Alex. (Who would be followed by Alec, then Elise, and a whole bunch of other kids with variations on the name Alice. But not Alice.)

Alicia's parents took away her video games after she had not come home for hours, and she either became resentful and depressed, or she turned the other cheek and learned to play sports. (I haven't really decided.) Either way, she never returned to Wonderland again.

The End!

How are you situated, reader?

The titular question is deceptively broad. My situation, as a reader, is that I try to read... moderately often. I would say, not quite nightly, but certainly weekly. A book or two a week means anywhere between 40 and 100 pages a night(ish). I enjoy reading. As far as being contextually active with the content, I would say perhaps I find quite a bit going over my head at times; I find I tend to miss a lot of allusions, and I am always pained when having to reread things. It's a problem I'm working on. I don't index things, I don't underline, I don't highlight. I don't check references. I do however try to know about what I'm reading before and after I read. I research and I apply. I may not be incredibly critical of works on my own, but I find that reading opinions and analyses of others helps me form my own ideas and concepts. It makes the reading experience more fruitful for me on the whole. I strongly prefer books over ebooks. But I view books as a way to enhance myself (an idea that goes beyond self-help books) in my vocabulary and world knowledge. The books I try to surround myself with are ones that reflect that idea.

Writing, Literature and Print

Inspired by Plato's Phaedrus, I have made a platonic dialogue about media (the Mac store, in particular) between my friend Hunter, a film major, and myself, an illustration major. It's just interpreted, I'm afraid the dialogue isn't exact. You get the idea.

HUNTER

So get this: Our class took a 'field trip' to the mall today. I wasn't too sure about the idea at first, but as it turns out, it was pretty enlightening. Particularly the visit to the Mac store.

MARK

Do tell, do tell.

HUNTER

Let's take the store itself for starters. It's nothing like anything else in the mall. There is minimal product invasion, and really, the strange white bleakness attracts a bunch of kids to just sort of hang out and use their display stuff. Look at the counter where you go to buy things, too. There's no register at all. It's literally called a Bar, you know, a Genius Bar, but a bar all the same. They use stools, they've got beanbag chairs for the lower computers that the kids can use, and the only products in boxes are lined, confined against the walls next to said Bar. You overlook them in the vastness of it all, but when you catch sight of one product, you see every product. Confined space.

MARK

That's pretty interesting. They're pretty effective minimalists, I mean, really pretty effective. Their packaging for their computers, it's just a picture of the laptop inside, or the iPod, or whatever you're buying. Minimal text, if any, on the front and sides of the box. Compare it with Windows, you know? They have endless amounts of text describing whatever you're buying, but no pictures or anything on their packages. They're not attractive at all, and the Mac guys know that.

HUNTER

It's true. Everything about the business is super reduced. Even the employees: they just wear khaki pats and a blue shirt. Simple, clean, very sleek. They carry technology with them at all times. And that would make anyone want to have a product, seeing the employees using the equipment sold, these things must be effective, right?

MARK

I know. Subtle mind control. How about their logo? This super simple apple, right? And with it, often you'll see in the most recognizable, arguably the most effective font for any context: Helvetica. Target knows it. American Airlines knows it. Apple knows it very well. Everything is Helvetica. And usually, the font is even a subtle shade of grey. Simple reduction.

HUNTER

The entire company is founded around simplicity. Watching those ads, man, some are just those two guys standing around and talking, others are literally just the product in a persons' hand, I mean, they even have ads that only show the product itself, no hands, no box, and more surprisingly, no real environment. The subtle reflection of the table, the same repeated highlights on every screen of every product. It works, and they're geniuses of marketing for having capitalized on it.

MARK

What is most surprising about the effectiveness of the advertising is how much smarter it is for the average consumer to just buy a PC. All you're paying for with Apple is a style. They're still not mainstream enough for every program, but they're catching on I guess. Anyway, all Apple does is dress up their products to look very slick, and overcharge the customer an obscene amount. It really is, compared to most PCs. In terms of storage, RAM, overall effectiveness, et cetera. Macs just look much more simple, and they are, sure, but is it really worth paying an extra $1000 for a laptop? I think not.

HUNTER

You're just thinking too MUCH is the problem. You're the outlier on their bell curve, and you just don't count. There are thousands of guys and gals in every city in every state that would not mind losing a huge chunk of cash just to look cool. It's like rhinoplasty for your reputation. If you have a Mac, you're cool. If you don't, you're a shut-in geek. It's amazing how these things change, ah?

MARK

Geniuses of marketing, I'm telling you. How does something like that happen? Computers were pretty cool when I was in the 90s.

HUNTER

Things change, my friend. These are strange times.