Rhinosplode

Apparently, this site is worth something.

Our old domain, rhinosplode.com, lapsed a couple of years ago. Someone bought it and wants $648 for it. Six hundred forty-eight dollars. For a domain name.
Now, I’m not knocking the ‘Splode–it’s a decent little site, after all–but $648? In its current incarnation as a WordPress blog, our biggest day in terms of pageviews was just over 50. That’s not very much at all, even in this age when everyone and their moms have blogs. My mom does not yet have a blog. –Ed.
But I guess it’s worth something. I’m assuming the value of domain names is determined by some weird formula involving searches or something. It couldn’t be that some shady character is convinced that what we have to say here is worth shelling out $648 for, could it?
Anyway, I’d maintain that this place is worth something. As a group blog (a very small group, but that can change), the writing here is certainly a bit more polished than your average tweet. The value, though, at least for me, lies in the community that we have–er, had–on Rhinosplode. There was a lot of writing here, and photos and jokes and all kinds of other stuff, including a thriving message board. And I’d love to have that back, but I think the times have moved on and left this sort of site behind.
Still, it’s kind of fun to go to the Wayback Machine and look through some of the old things. Like this letter, reprinted in its entirety:

Dear Rhinosplode,

I have recently had the misfortune of being hounded by gypsy ladies who want me to kiss their baby. Please send me as many free products as possible.

Yours truly,
A concerned citizen

Filed under: Matters Technological, Thing of the Day

I’m leaving Facebook.



Garage, originally uploaded by One Ping Only.

And no, it has nothing to do with the new layout or whatever–it’s ugly and dumb and too Twittery for pretty much anyone’s tastes, but that’s got nothing to do with it.

The problem is that Facebook doesn’t do anything better than any other app, and yet it’s way more time-consuming.

Let’s see–what have I used Facebook for recently?

  • Looking at photos of lots of people smiling, most of whom I don’t know. I have a Flickr account that’s way more flexible than the Facebook photo app.
  • Mail. I have an email address. Gmail works great. Also, even our super-retentive network filter at work lets us check email.
  • Finding out what friends are doing. Actual human contact is kind of cool, as are phones. Email’s good enough. Twitter? Not so much.
  • Getting invited to events. If someone really wants me to go, they’ll call, text, or email. Just no more evites, please, okay?
  • Promoting shows. We’ve been using Facebook to invite people to Terryl Lee Band shows, but we’ve got a mailing list that’s better.

What else do I do online? I follow a couple dozen blogs via RSS, use Google Docs for my word processing, and occasionally stream some audio.

The worst part about this is that I feel like I’m just doing the electronic equivalent of telling you kids to get the hell off my lawn. I’m not anti-Facebook the way some of my colleagues are. I definitely get it. I get Facebook so much, in fact, that I’ve let myself waste way more time on it than I care to admit publically.

And that’s really why I’m looking to bail out. I want to get some time back. With Facebook, I found myself logging in to check one or two things–who’s coming to a show, for example, or whether I was tagged in the photos from last weekend’s festivities–and then 30, 45, 60 minutes would go by as I checked people’s status updates, photos, news, etc. And I think I’d like that time back. Checking email and reading stuff via RSS, while time-consuming, is much more manageable, with much less of a sense of urgency and transience.

I’m reclaiming my time in the only way I know how–pulling myself out of what for me has become a huge timesuck. I want to use my after-work Facebook time for getting stuff done, so that I can then spend more evening and weekend time with the people I love. I might even start reading more, or watching the movies that Netflix sends me, or taking more pictures, or spending more time outside. None of these are bad things, and Facebook isn’t either. It’s just not for me anymore.

I’m shrinking my world, in a good way. And I’m still not going the Luddite route–I’m actually planning on spending the weekend upgrading my laptop so I can do more with it–and I still believe in social networking. It’s just that I need more control over how much information I feel like I need to deal with in any given day. My soul needs to select its own society, as Emily Dickinson might say.

Filling the time will be easy. Spring is here.

Filed under: Matters Technological

The great disconnect

The writer behind Post-Punk Nerd once described a big problem.  His/her writing had become terrible.  It was

usually short, no more than a few paragraphs…and add[ed] very little to the public discourse. I have, once, tried to write a piece deeper than the typical blog fare, but in review I find the results to be poor: the language struggles, the sentences enjamb unnaturally and it reads as if I were a mumbling street preacher. What I am trying to say is important, I don’t doubt that, but I lack the skills to say it.

I bookmarked that post and have come back to it time and again.  It almost always leaves me feeling a little empty–not because it doesn’t say anything, but because the solution it poses is simultaneously elegant and impossible in my line of work.  Post-Punk Blogger has decided that rather than write a whole lot of short blog posts, s/he will now focus on writing longer, deeper, harder-hitting pieces.  They will be published less often, but will be of a higher quality than the typical blog writing one often sees around the Internets.

This is a great idea.  Twitter and whatnot have their places, I’m sure (though I still can’t figure out why I’d want to limit myself to 140 characters about a sandwich), but my professional concern is with writing.  Real writing.  The kind of writing that examines and develops and spreads ideas.  The kind of writing against which current school practices seem almost diametrically opposed.

Let’s take timed, in-class writing assignments as a particularly easy example.  And let’s ask a very simple question: What’s the point?  What is the possible educational merit behind having a roomful of students write something until the bell rings, something that will be assessed as evidence of skill at writing, or formulating ideas, or something like that? 

I guess you could make the argument that it’s the kind of writing students have to do on standardized tests like CAPT or the SAT.  Fine.  Respect.  But what else is it for?  Aside from exams (in college, perhaps, or in civil service or the military), when will students have to do this kind of writing?

I know, I know, the tests exist.  But where is the movement to change the tests?  Rather than bitch and moan about having to prep the kids for various state exams, college entrance exams, &c., why not push for tools that actually assess skills that students will need when they enter higher education or the workforce? 

I don’t know a single instance in my professional life when I’ve achieved more with the very first rough draft version of something I’ve written or created than something I’ve labored over.  From budget-nag emails in my first job out of college to software manuals I’ve written to lesson/unit plans to grad school admissions essays to songs, the experience has been the same.  Pushing something out for the sake of pushing it out leads to, at best, mediocre work.  If we’re about teaching students that it’s better to hand in some kind of crap rather than nothing at all, we deserve what we get.

This week, my colleagues have been into talking about Turnitin.com, a very expensive subscription website that schools use to make sure their students aren’t cheating when they write papers.  And fine, whatever, I have no problem with teachers who want to use it.  I won’t go near Turnitin, though.  The one semester I did have my students was a psychological hellride–rather than spending my time getting to know my students’ writing, I found myself hunting down every single highlighted passage in their work, rubbing my hands together with glee when I discovered an unattributed source.

If writing, especially school writing, is about playing gotcha with students, I need a new job.  I don’t have the temperament for that kind of work; if I did, I’d be a detective, which would at least get me out of having to go to faculty meetings.  But is it possible that there’s a way to rethink student writing, even at the high-school level, that increases students’ ability to write clearly and stylishly and makes it far less likely that they’ll cheat?

Filed under: Matters Educational, Matters Literary, Matters Political, Matters Technological

New look/gadgets @ terryllee.com, & other web-related musings

I spent a little too much time yesterday (time which should’ve been spent on my presentation on “Mary Wollstonecraft: The Gender of Genres in Late Eighteenth-Century England” by Mary Poovey for Thursday evening’s ENG334 class) performing some much-needed upgrade work on terryllee.com. I changed up the header image, for starters, making a scissors-and-tape collage of photos and some highbrow littrachure. I also finally figured out how to embed a music player without having WordPress freak out (hint: think Vodpod) and put the mailing list thing directly onto the site.

I think the time was well-spent, even though it’s not what I really should’ve been doing. The band’s starting to build up a little bit of a following (between our email list, Facebook, and MySpace, we’re at almost 900 people in the greater NYC area), and we’ve been recording a full-length album. I’ve been looking at other artists’ websites and am constantly amazed at how easy it is to make a professional-looking site, and how important said site is for first impressions. MySpace is great for what it is, but if we’re gonna play with the big boys and girls, we need a legit site.

I’m going through a similar issue as the tech liaison/webmaster for the Connecticut Writing Project @ Fairfield. Since we’re a pretty big organization that actually, y’know, serves a purpose, we need a real web presence.  For the past two or so years, we’ve been going back and forth about the necessity of making our site into something more than just a series of static pages that are hard to update, the necessity of paying somewhere between US$0-10k to make that change, where to host it, etc.  So this morning, when Chris called me to talk about some final decisions/deadlines (ie, Presidents’ Day), I though we were good to go.  We’re still not (it’s all administrative stuff right now, like getting the old TL to reassign admin privileges to me so I can change the host, etc), but I think it might actually possibly happen.  Finally.  And then I can get on with my actual TL duties, which involve figuring out ways to support the CWP’s initiatives using technology, training our people, etc.

One other thing: I’m really impressed with the Blackboard Vista system that Professor Qi, who teaches the aforementioned ENG334 course, has us using.  It would be really nice if our school portal were as good; unfortunately, well…

Filed under: Matters Musical & Artistic, Matters Technological

Sorry, everybody

But I find myself entirely uninterested in matters ed-tech, ed-policy, or ed-anything related, aside from what’s going on in my own classroom.  The Twitterverse (cringe) bores the hell out of me; I’ve nothing to blog about; and too much of my time has been taken up by meetings about technology products that are supposed to make my life easier from a paperwork point of view but don’t give me anything to work with in terms of things my actual students need to do.  I had a whole blogging assignment set up for my new Am Lit II students, but I’m not going to make them do it.  I don’t know how I’d assess it (nor do I want to think about how I’d assess it), and to be honest, I’d much rather spend the time reading On the Road with them.

I think the problem is I’m just sick of all the technology stuff.  I’ve wound up on this committee (I think I’ve written about it before) that has put me in the position of basically being the tech support/training guy for the English department.  Fine, I don’t mind, but that’s not my job.  I’ve pared the list of Web 2.0 apps that I actually use down to a few: Google Reader (and I’ve eliminated 2/3 of my reading list), del.icio.us, and Facebook.  Everything I need is there. 

So, sorry.  Sorry to anyone who thought I’d be part of this big ed-tech revolution.  Sorry to anyone who’s been eagerly anticipating my next blog post.  I’ll keep this site up, and plan to keep writing on it, but I’m going to move, for the time being, more toward non-school and non-tech matters.  I need a break from this whole sphere.  Okay?  Okay.

Filed under: Matters Educational, Matters Technological

Facebook FAQs

Answers to three FAQs:

1) Yes, I’m on Facebook. *

2) No, I don’t “friend” my students. **

3) I’m really not sure what to make of this:

In the wake of scrutiny of the hot social network by Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, his New York state counterpart, Andrew M. Cuomo, has subpoenaed Facebook asking for information on how it handles complaints regarding the inappropriate solicitation of under-age users.

I have to think about this issue in two ways, which is the problem. On the one hand, I think the idea of going after Facebook because of what some of its users use it for is kind of ridiculous. Yes, the internet can be a dangerous place. Yes, there are sketchy people who want nothing more than to bother (and worse) teenagers and children. Yes, the internet makes it a little easier for them to do that. But at the same time, our students know far more about the internet than we do, and if we spend our time babying and coddling them while they’re in high school, there’s no way they’ll be able to fend for themselves later.

But then, I realize that as a teacher, I have to be concerned about what my students are getting themselves into that could harm them. One reason I don’t want my students to try and “friend” (when did that become a verb, anyway?) me is that when they do, they allow me to look at their profiles, and it’s so tempting for me to do so and make sure that they’re not doing anything stupid. And then we have to have the awkward conversation the following morning about Why It’s Not A Good Idea To Friend Your Teacher When Your Profile Picture Shows You Drinking Beer Right From The Pitcher.

So what’s the deal? Should Facebook do more to protect its users? Is there anything weird about “friending” your students? Is Facebook some sort of new paradigm, or is it going to fade out soon?

Added: A couple of pieces worth reading about social networking as a sociological phenomenon: “Virtual Friendship and the New Narcissism” and “Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace.”

* I joined a while ago, but didn’t really use it for much until I got back from SUISS this summer and found that most of my friends from over there were using it to communicate. Email is pretty much dead if you’re in your 20s or below. Since then, I’ve gotten hooked, I admit, on a couple of the external apps: Scrabulous and iLike (which I use to dedicate the worst songs I can think of to an old friend of mine who I rarely see in real life).

** So just stop trying, okay?

Filed under: Matters Educational, Matters Technological

Radio, Radio

I woke up early this morning, at around 7. Not early by my usual standards (I’ve mastered the art of moving silently through the upstairs of my current living space in almost pitch blackness, and can tie a tie without looking and manage, most mornings, not to stub my toe on anything dangerous), but early for a Saturday morning. I knew I had to get over to Fairfield U by 9:30, so I’d counted on waking up around 8:45, getting a quick shower, dressing, and driving the 15 or so miles to get here.
But I was awake at 7, and the light was coming through the thin blind just so, creating a red haze behind my eyelids when I tried to shut them. The temperature in my room was perfect, so I didn’t want to mess it up by pulling the blankets up over my head, so instead I gave in—I knew I’d regret it later, as my triplet friends are celebrating their birthdays this evening—and switched on my radio.
Saturday morning radio. I never was much of a fan of Saturday morning cartoons growing up. It might have been the sensory overload—there were just too many to watch, too many characters to know, too many bright colors and loud noises and banana-peel sound effects. I don’t know. I do remember that every few weekends, my parents, my sisters, and I would walk around the corner to Ed Mitchell’s, that bastion of really expensive clothing. My parents dropped us off in the kiddie area, where there was a large TV, plenty of soda, and a huge bowl of lollipops. Meanwhile, they’d walk around the store, admiring clothing which they’d most likely never buy. I can see it now, though I never saw it then, my dad fingering elegant silk ties laid out neatly in plump piles on small round wooden tables, my mom trying on wool jackets. They wouldn’t buy the clothing here when they could get similar items from less-glamorous stores, but still they browsed. Also, if you looked serious about your browsing, you felt less guilty about cadging hotdogs and hamburgers from Ed Mitchell’s parking-lot barbecue.
Saturday morning radio, though, is a different beast entirely. Morning and weekend radio has been the bonus track to the soundtrack of my memories for a very long time now. In middle school, my dad would drive me to school most mornings. I remember sitting on the sticky vinyl front seat of his blue Chevy Malibu, tracing a capped pen or my finger along the light blue plastic (but woodgrained, for some reason) molding on the dashboard and door. The car was so old, so non-fancy, that it only had an AM radio (at some point, my dad bought an FM radio that attached to the steering wheel, which can’t be right, but I think it’s right). I got my first exposure to morning shock-jocks riding in that car, and in the ’83 Buick hand-me-down that followed it. My dad was a huge fan of Don Imus’s radio show. This was Imus before he got interested in politics, before he interviewed people like John McCain and Andrea Mitchell. This was Imus while he was still on drugs, when the show consisted mainly of skits and parodies (I remember a serial story about a Mexican cowboy named Tres Huevos). For the most part, I had no idea what he was talking about, but it was loud and boisterous and my dad liked it, and that was enough for me in 6th grade. Note: This piece was written before Imus’s very public career suicide. So it goes.
DSCN0655.JPG On Sundays, my mom drove the return trip for our hebrew school carpool. After a long morning of nothing of any particular value, my friend Wendy and I would find my sisters (and sometimes this other kid, Josh) and make our way out to the parking lot where Mom would wait in our silver Volvo wagon. Despite my pleas, Mom never had any good music in the car—my attempts at slipping in a Bon Jovi tape were always foiled—and instead listened to Jonathan Schwartz’s Sunday afternoon radio show on WNYC. The show, which I now listen to regularly, consisted of an old man talking about songs only moms liked, then playing the songs. “Listen to this version of ‘I’ve Got You Under My Skin,’” he’d say in his soothing this-won’t-hurt-a-bit voice. “Remarkable. From the same year that Sinatra recorded his, same arranger, but completely different. I love this.”
It’s amazing how much of an impact this kind of radio listening had on my sisters and I. During the week, my mom always listened to the news on WCBS, which is one of the most well-regimented, anally-scheduled stations I’ve ever encountered. I haven’t listened to it in years—I think their 9/11 coverage was pretty much the end of that for me, because pretty soon after that I moved out of my parents’ house for almost the last time, into a room in Morningside Heights, and I kept my radio tuned, as any good arty intellectual New Yorker would, to WNYC and its NPR programming. I can, however, still tell you, at any given minute, what’s going on on that station. If it’s the top or the half of the hour, they’re reading two-sentence top stories. At the :08s, they’re doing first traffic (and there’s a schedule for when they focus on Jersey, Westchester, or Connecticut traffic), then weather. :15 and :45 are sports, :50 is business news, and :55 is entertainment news, which usually has to do with the show Wicked. In between are a lot of commercials for the US Window Factory or some guy with a really nasal voice telling you about smart investing. One time, when we were driving back from Florida, we saw a car in the parking lot at the Vince Lombardi rest stop. The remarkable thing about this car was that on the rear ledge, Hannah and I noticed, was some equipment labeled “WCBS 880.” As Mom and Dad went into the rest stop one last time before the final leg of our trip, Hannah and I listened to the radio, trying to figure out which of the reporters we grew up with were reporting live from the Vince Lombardi rest stop. Even the realization that the report obviously wasn’t live (because it was played on the radio about fifteen minutes after the car pulled out of its spot) didn’t dampen our excitement. And we thought this was normal.
Anyway, back to this morning. Among other things I heard was a report on Morning Edition that Major League Baseball has made a deal that would pretty much make it impossible to watch televised out-of-market games without a satellite dish. They’re trying to squeeze the cable companies and make them carry their new channel, but in the meantime, watching baseball this year is going to be weird. It won’t be that bad for me, as the Mets are carried here in the Connecticut suburbs, but I think about Evan, who is a Red Sox fan living down here, and Aaron, who is the only Royals fan east of Kansas City, and my friend Kat, who proudly (and regrettably, I am afraid) supports the Yankees all the way out in Seattle.
But then I realize that it might be better not to be able to watch baseball on TV at all. Because I remember being in third, fourth, fifth grade, when I loved baseball for the first time, when I used to keep box scores while watching the games on Saturday afternoons, happily wondering why strikeouts were recorded with a K and why people persisted in calling a walk a Base on Balls, instead of just a walk. I had gotten into the habit of listening to the radio at bedtime, as background music first for reading, then for drifting off. In the winter, I’d listen to an elevator music station, getting really excited when I recognized a Simon & Garfunkel song in the syrupy violins and xylophones. But from April until September, I’d listen to the Mets. Bob Murphy’s gruff, nasal voice was somehow reassuring and was not unlike the voices of the old men in my life. Gary Thorne, the other guy whose name I could never remember, seemed to know everything. I’d listen intently for the first five or six innings, then fall asleep. Rarely would I wake up when my mom came into my room to shut off the radio after she and Dad finished watching on the TV in their room.
About an hour and half before the baseball broadcasting report, Kurt Andersen spoke with British author Howard Jacobson, who is, apparently because of his seeming obsession with Judaism, modern life, and the humiliating and fulfilling intersections of same, called the “British Philip Roth” about his new novel. From what I can gather, it’s a book, much like Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint, about a Jewish guy trying to make it in Gentile society by doing such things as marrying (and discarding) WASPy girls with names like Chloe and Zoe and internally bristling at Holocaust exploitation jokes. It actually sounds like a book I’d enjoy reading, and like the kind of thing I’ve tried writing.
Andersen asked Jacobson how he thought being Jewish in England was different from being Jewish in America. The answer, Jacobson replied, was that in America Jews are all over the place. Yes, we’re in the arts, the media, the economy, politics, but more importantly, we’re in the culture. Yiddish words are spoken as part of American English. I can’t tell you how weird it is to correct a beautiful blond corn-fed Kentucky girl from her lifelong habit of calling her admirably posterior her “tookas,” instead of her tuchus. Seinfeld could only come from the US. And nobody on that show is even blatantly Jewish—a couple of the actors are, but the closest I’ve ever seen the show get to dealing with Jewish issues was the episode in which Jerry makes out with his date while watching Schindler’s List. But it’s still our pop-culture’s best depiction of that kind of American Jewishness that blankets pretty much everyone who lives in certain parts of New York City—either Upper Side, large swathes of Queens and Brooklyn—and its suburbs. Old women wearing plastic rain kerchiefs pushing wire-mesh carts with their groceries, middle-aged men in light spring jackets and sneakers, the fact that even Jesuit Fairfield University can sell you a good bagel, Broadway and Jonathan Schwartz and all that. I’m not talking about the hip Jewish underground, or even the mysterious popularity of proselytizing Hasidic reggae artist Matisyahu in Greenwich, but the hardcore, the shellfish-eating Jews who go to Friday night services and out to dinner afterward.
In England, though, Jacobson said that Jews are taught from an early age to keep their heads down, to not expose their differences to the outside world, to stay insular. This has, I suppose, kept the Jews of England safe since Cromwell invited them to return, but it seems to me that England’s been missing something. And it got me thinking about aspects of my own upbringing and childhood that I don’t let out all that often. My radio fixation is definitely one of them. Now, at 29, it really is nothing more than fodder for inside jokes with my sisters—I made Hannah, that devotee of all things WCBS, a mix CD consisting only of songs that mentioned oft-congested thoroughfares in the great New York area: rapper Busta Rhymes bragging that he’d “bounce down the Henry Hudson,” punk-rockers Rainer Maria complaining about “going nowhere on the BQE,” etc. But it’s something that’s part of me, that has influenced how I look at the world and how I get my information. And even though I’m a blogger, a Web 2.0 enthusiast, a person who aggregates his own news from a hundred sources and repurposes it to his own needs, sometimes there really is nothing better than laying in bed on a weekend morning and letting a faraway voice tell you what it thinks you should know.

Filed under: Matters Literary, Matters Metaphysical & Philosophical, Matters Technological

A letter to the editor

Last week, the Greenwich Time and Stamford Advocate ran an Op-Ed by Joe Pisani decrying the effects of the “PlayStation effect” on people’s reading habits:

Would any of the young people waiting for the new PlayStation — some of whom had guns and were prepared to commit armed robbery to get one — have shared my enthusiasm?

How has so much changed in 50 years since that book first appeared? Despite all the technological advancements during the last half-century, fewer people read, and fewer, it seems, can read. Equally worrisome, fewer even want to read, which is a social problem created in part by the PlayStation mentality.

Leaving aside Pisani’s fear of heavily-armed PlayStation-craving teenagers, I found his premise to be fairly ridiculous. Hence, I sent in a letter. Below is my original version, a lot of which I had to cut for publication (they have a 450-word limit for letters to the editor):

Dear editor,

As an English teacher by trade, and an avid reader by inclination, I read with interest Joe Pisani’s column entitled “Finding Little Rhyme or Reason in Video Games.” I guess I am predisposed to agree with his main point, which seems to be that the hype surrounding the launch of the PlayStation 3 is a good reason to reexamine why he loves poetry and why he is worried that today’s youth will miss out on the chance to memorize “The Rhime of the Ancient Mariner,” which will be a great loss. But I’ve got some fundamental issues with his opinion on the matter.

I’m not sitting here memorizing Coleridge (though my students memorize Shakespeare), but I as I type this on my laptop, I have three open browser windows bringing me a wealth of information that I am working my way
through. Window #1 has my RSS aggregator, which collects news from literally hundreds of sources around the world (ie the BBC, Iraqi citizens’ blogs about life in their neighborhoods, professional and nonprofessional writers) and displays it in an easy-to-access format. Window #2 has the New York Times Sunday magazine, which led today with an article about educational policy and NCLB. And Window #3 has the good old Greenwich Time. To complete the picture, I’ve got a copy of Moby-Dick next to my bed, as well as notes on Huck Finn and Their Eyes Were Watching God for my classes this week sitting on my desk.

Reading isn’t dead, despite what the alarmists say. There was a study done in 2002 by the National Endowment for the Arts, which I suspect was the source of Mr. Pisani’s comment that “[F]ewer people read, and fewer, it seems, can read. Equally worrisome, fewer even want to read, which is a social problem created in part by the PlayStation mentality.” And yes, the survey found that fewer adults “read for pleasure,” which, in my line of work, is certainly dismaying news. But I don’t think that technology is to blame for that. In fact, I would not be surprised if the members of today’s prized 18-34 demographic are reading far more than ever before. I’m firmly in that demographic and I can barely keep up with my daily reading list, which includes anywhere from 30-100 blogs and other online sources (not all are updated regularly), student work, scholarly journals, and keeping up with Ishmael. It’s true that I haven’t purchased any books since the summer, but I’ve patronized the library and used online sources like bookmooch.com to acquire books for my temporary and permanent collections.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that Mr. Pisani shouldn’t panic. Maybe I’m unusual, but I don’t think that technology is ruining reading. People read for different reasons today than they did yesterday. Gone are the days when young men could even hope to believe, as Mr. Pisani did, that reciting verse would attract a mate. And while I like a good poem as much as anyone possibly can, I’m not mourning. I’ll read some brand-new poetry someone wrote for her blog, and I’ll make comment with the poet and offer my observations and critique, and I’ll enjoy reading.

Thoughts?

Filed under: Matters Educational, Matters Literary, Matters Technological

Add to Technorati Favorites

Reading list

Archives

RSS sunshine daydreamin’

  • turkey for the girls, turkey for the boys.. November 24, 2009
    With all the craziness these past few weeks, I haven't been able to update on my favorite holiday: Thanksgiving. Our plans this year? Oh yeah, just hosting it for 15 of our relatives. No biggie.I'm honestly not too worried about it, my grandma is making the turkey, our moms are making a lot of the sides. I just wish I had more time to get stuff don […]
    Erica
  • busy bee November 17, 2009
    Just need to get through this week. Just need to get through this week. Breathe, breathe, breathe. Have you ever had those weeks where it feels like everything and anything is going on? All good stuff, but still totally consuming all my time. For all you local folk, come to the Stamford JCC on Thursday night if you're around. The *jewelry without jewels […]
    Erica
  • bermuda November 14, 2009
    Out the door--headed to the post office--getting a passport! I know, I know--26 years old, and no passport. I've lived a sheltered life ;) We're going to Bermuda in December, where we'll be ringing in 2010! Woohooo
    Erica

Blog Stats

  • 2,297 hits