Category: LIL120 (Page 2 of 3)

1. Quote: “A biographer’s alter ego is usually the subject himself, while a microhistorian’s alter ego may be a figure who plays the role of detective or judge in relation to the subject” (140). 
2. Comment: I think this can relate back to the main question in this essay -whether microhistorians have more or less sympathy for their subjects than do biographers. A biographer having an alter ego of the “subject himself” is getting so close to the subject, because affection is almost essential in biographies. Ann Douglas even mentions a page later that a successful biography has to be like a marriage, a love affair, between the biographer and the subject. They need to almost live their lives through them to understand their whole life story in order to write about it. Where a microhisorians alter ego being a detective or judge in relation to the subject, makes more sense because microhistory is less focused on the whole life of an individual or subject, but more about key events – and going into depth about what it really means. In microhistory you need to dig, because to understand the subject, the information might not all be on the surface.
   1. Question: I would say that microhistorians have less sympathy or the subject due the the lesser sense of closeness they have. But my question is, where does betrayal come into place (in biography)? If a biographer can get so close to the subject, to just end up betraying them, that shows no sympathy. So now I question my first thought about microhistorians having less sympathy.

2. Quote: “If biography is largely founded on a belief in the singularity and significance of an individual’s life and his contributions to history, microhistory is founded upon almost the opposite assumption: however singular a person’s life may be, the value of examining it lies not in it’s uniqueness, but in its exemplariness, in how that individual’s life serves as an allegory for broader issues affecting the culture as a whole” (133). 
   1. Comment: I really struggled with the concept of this essay and understanding what the author was trying to convey to us. I had to re-read multiple sections to try and get a hold on the concept of the difference between microhistorians and biographers. From what I can understand from this quote, microhistory deals with writing about someone who had done something in particular that is exemplary, and bringing this attention to a regular person.  Someone who doesn’t get this recognition in history, and bringing it back now. And a biographer more focuses on an individual’s life as a whole (someone important) and what they have contributed to history.
      1.  Question: What is the difference between the word uniqueness and exemplariness in this quote?

1. Quote: “Edmund Burke observed that people like to look at images of suffering. ‘I am convinced we have a degree of delight, and that no small one, in the real misfortunes and pains of others’” (Sontag 97). 
   1. Comment: I do not agree with this statement from Burke. I can get behind the notion that some people feel curiosity from looking at gruesome and horrifying images, but not necessarily images related to human suffrage and the “pain of others.” I just think you have to be crazy to get enjoyment out of watching people suffer, and maybe that is just a personal opinion. I want to add a related quote found a few sentences later “love of mischief, love of cruelty, is as natural to human beings as is sympathy” (Sontag 98). This notion of cruelty and mischief is a little different from human suffering and pain mentioned in the previous quote. I can agree with this more, because there is possibly a small twinge of satisfaction and again, curisotiy, and the inability to look away from these sorts of gruesome photos. These two things are not one in the same. 
      1. Question: Do people actually get delight out of watching people suffer, and the pain of others? When does this go too far? 

2. Quote: “The first idea is that public attention is steered by the attention of the media – which means, most decisively, images. When there are photographs, a war becomes “real” (Sontag 104). 
   1. Comment: This whole concept about “seeing is believing” and how the images show that something may need to be done is so hugely overlooked. Wars have the ability to be forgotten without images, media, and news sources – because when we aren’t seeing it – we are just going about our everyday lives. This is a sad, yet true statement. This is why war photography and media presence is such a key detail in wartime to bring awareness to what is going on in the world. We as human beings, are going to be more attentive and interested when we actually see images rather than reading a news article. I think this statement is even more relevant now in the present day with social media.
      1. Question: What would our life be like without images and media about wars? 

1. Quote: “We want a photographer to be a spy in the house of love and of death, and those being photographed to be unaware of the camera, “off guard.” No sophisticated sense of what photography is or can be will ever weaken the satisfactions of a picture of an unexpected event seized in mid-action by an alert photographer” (Sontag 55). 
   1. Comment: During the past few pages leading up to this quote, Sontag talks about the rearrangement that photographers do in war photography to make a picture look better. For example the Brady team had rearranged a dead confederate soldier to a more photogenic site for the picture. This is true for any photography – the photographers move elements around to try and get the best shot, which is seen to be true with even immobilized people. I feel as though this is not how it should be with war photography, because you’re now taking away from the realness and authenticity of the scene. Learning about this “staging” leads to this sense of disappointment almost. I like in the quote above where it says “We want a photographer to be a spy in the house of love and death” because that is where the real authenticity lies – in the realness of the scene rather than the staging of it. Growing up with social media, we understand the capturing of “candid” photos, and staging things that aren’t real -because they will look more aesthetically pleasing. I guess we had to expect that some war photos were going to be staged in order to look more pleasing to the public.
      1. Question: How many of the most memorable and well-known war pictures we’ve seen were staged? 

2. Quote: “Admiration is mixed with disapproval of the pictures for the pain they might give the female relatives of the dead. The camera brings the viewer close, too close; supplemented by a magnifying glass – for this is a double lens story- the “terrible distinctness” of the pictures gives unnecessary, indecent information” (Sontag 63). 
   1. Comment: This whole concept of “censorship” is talked about throughout this whole chapter (4). What should be shown to the public, and what should be kept private for the sake of the families and even just to prevent the shock and gruesomeness to the regular public. There were even bans put into place about certain press photography of war, and which military photographers were allowed to go near the fighting. I personally think this is smart, because there are some things that should be kept private, for the sake and dignity of the person in the picture and the families. I know that I do not like seeing the faces of the dead in war pictures, and this is why I liked that they started to stop this. Especially, imagine how it felt to be a family member of someone in a gruesome war photo depicting the pain in their eyes.
      1. Question: When did they come to this realization that some pictures should be kept private? How did they choose which military photographers were allowed to capture images of the fighting?

1. Quote: “The understanding of war among people who have not experienced war is now chiefly a product of the impact of these images. Something becomes real – to those who are elsewhere, following it as “news” – by being photographed” (Sontag 21). 
   1. Comment: This is a very common theme and concept throughout the first two chapters. Sontag tries to describe the difficulty of portraying war to people who are not present for it; it doesn’t have the same kind of meaning to them. To certain people, it may be just another news update – when the photographers really want to portray the realness and the pain of the war. They want the viewers to feel it, and they try to depict this in their photography. Comparing the reality of the war experienced by others and the viewers perception only from observation and images. 
      1. Question: How does the deepness of the image affect how the viewer at homes perceives the war? Ex: A mother at home seeing an image of a child, could really resinate with her more than the next photo of a destroyed city. Change their perspective on war and feel more “present” in the war scene.

2. Quote: “Photography is the only major art in which professional training and years of experience do not confer an insuperable advantage over the untrained and inexperienced – this for many reasons, among them the large role that chance (or luck) plays in the taking of pictures, and the bias toward the spontaneous, the rough, the imperfect” (Sontag 28). 
   1. Comment: This quote is wrapped around the paragraph about the 9/11 exhibit, which I thought was so empowering. In this exhibit, they had thousands of people submit photos they had taken during the tragedy. Everyone who submitted work had at least one piece included in the exhibit, and no names were given as to who the photographer was. You wouldn’t know if the photo was taken by an ammatuer or a professional photographer – which is what, I think, is the coolest part. Tying this into the quote about how photography is the most “loose” of the arts. You don’t need years of experience to take empowering, touching, and professional-looking photos. For some it comes naturally, and that is the beauty of it. 
      1. Question: I wonder if these people who submitted work (the amateurs) went on to indulge more into this “war” photography? Did this exhibit help them find their creative voice and a passion for it?

1. Quote: “Gates argued that computer screens are able to replace paper in all the functions that paper has heretofore assumed. He also insisted that, in addition to being less onerous, computers take up less space, and are more easily transportable; and also that the transmission of news and literature by these electronic media, instead of by newspapers and books, will have the ecological advantage of stopping the destruction of forests. A cataclysm that is a consequence of the paper industry. People will continue to read, Gates assured his listeners, but they will read on computer screens, and consequently there will be more chlorophyll in the environment” (Llosa 5). 
   1. Comment: This article was obviously written in 2001, so technology was nowhere near as advanced as it is today. Does that mean everyone is now reading on computer screens today? No. I think Gates was very wrong to want to strip people from reading hard copy, in-print books. My mom got a kindle for Christmas once, and I don’t think she’s touched it in 5 years. There is something about reading a paper copy book that feels more relaxing and more real. I almost feel I get more lost in a print book than reading on a screen. It hurts my eyes, it’s not relaxing at all. I understand using it to stay up to date with news, it’s actually more convenient, but otherwise no. 
      1. Question: It’s now been 20 years since Gates put out this statement. Do you think there will ever be a world where print books completely disappear and everything is technological?
2. Quote: “A person who does not read, or reads little, or reads only trash, is a person with an impediment: he can speak much but he will say little, because his vocabulary is deficient in the means for self-expression” (Llosa 5).
   1. Comment: I highly disagree with him on this one. This is one of the areas where I believe he goes way too overboard and his thoughts take over the reality. In my opinion there are no limits to creative expression and it can be shown in many different ways than through just vocabulary. A few sentences he mentions that a society without literature would resemble a community of deaf-mutes. This is very dehumanizing to me and there are so many instances in the world and in history where this does not apply. Although, I understand where he is coming from about using vocabulary to have a better understanding about the world around you, I just don’t think that is only way.

Question: What are Llosa’s though processes when writing this? Does he draw form history at all? How close minded is he?

1. Quote:  “Technology, the machine age, and mass society have been cited as the reasons why the private should be subordinated to the public. Several artists have flaunted depersonalization in their art as a response to modern society’s reality” (Pozzi 134).
   1. Comment: I love the ending “depersonalization in response to modern society’s reality.” I love art where it feels relatable and has so much meaning yet so little at the same time. If you’ve ever seen winning AP portfolios from artists with a concentration in “depersonalization” you know how real it feels. For example conveying a destructive mental disorder in the form of art. Or presenting the loss of ourselves in technology these days – the harsh reality of it. 
      1. Question: This paragraph is titled “privacy,” where does this come into play in this quote? Does it mean that the depersonalization piece and elementing that into art is the private piece? 

2. Quote: “Intentions become mere ever-changing, ever-updated, flexible instruments for the conduction (not the definition) of the art being made. They are a springboard for a flight or fall one never knows the end of. It is impossible to compare the works of art to the original intentions of the artist” (Pozzi 139). 
   1. Comment: I have taken many art classes in my life, especially in high school. In advanced art we had a specific unit that was all about the intention of the artists in their art. Everyone had different opinions about the true meaning, and they all could be COMPLETELY different from what the artist was truly trying to convey. Maybe we look so much into the deeper meaning of a piece, when in reality there was never a deeper meaning. Or maybe the artist doesn’t even know the meaning themselves. 

Question: In this quote “They are a springboard for a flight or fall one never knows the end of.” In this quote, what is meant by flight or fall?

1. Academic 

My short term academic goal is about how I’ve been thinking about possibly adding a minor into my study. I’ve been talking a lot about this with upperclassmen and hearing from professors that most people highly recommend it. This got me thinking. In my professional career I want to focus on marketing, and I think adding a business administration minor to my communications major will be really helpful in this field. I’m finding it hard to link this goal to any text we have read in the past. Business is not part of the liberal arts, so that is where it’s becoming difficult for me. It doesn’t directly talk about it in the handbook but it floats around the idea of being well-rounded. I want to be able to have multiple opportunities for jobs when I’m in that position and I feel like studying communications and pairing that with a minor in business will do that for me. I could even link this to Dweck’s Growth vs Fixed mindset. “… because once we know that abilities are capable of such growth, it becomes a basic human right for children, all children, to live in places that create growth, to live in places filled with yet.” Recently I’ve had a fixed mindset about adding a minor into my studies because I’ve been saying “I can’t, I will fail accounting.” This is now how I should be looking at it. From now on I want to take Dweck’s mindset into account and tell myself that I’m not good at it YET, but I will be.

2. Personal 

A short term personal goal is to learn how to accept change and roll with it, and not let it affect me as much as it does now.  It’s hard to link this to any of our readings but I drew a relationship between this and a section of the text in the “Critical Thinking: Human Response to Problems and Challenges” on page 3. I know this has to do more with classes and thinking critically in that atmosphere, but I think it can still relate on a personal level “Centering on the thinking process, as well as the on the issues, students research and identify causes of problems, generate and evaluate possible solutions, and decide upon a plan of action.” This can be used in a sense of working out a problem, in my case it’s about learning to grow with change and not resent it. I can use critical thinking here to identify the cause of my problem, coming up with solutions, and deciding on a plan of action on how I will start to fix this problem. 

I finished what I didn’t get done from last time I worked on this. I didn’t get to draw the relationships to the texts because I ran over the time limit with this, and I end up drawing the relationships in the two paragraph assignment anyway.

This is only how far I got on this assignment. The ones that I wrote down are the ones that came to mind the quickest. The long-term goals were harder because I’m still just trying to figure out right now. The field hockey (extracurricular) ones were easy enough because those are goals that I’ve had for a long time, since I knew I was playing in college. Personally, the personal goals are the hardest to think of. I didn’t get anywhere.

I didn’t get to the making connections part of this, but that is something I will add in. I at least wanted to get some goals written down to build off of.