Review/Preview

Yesterday, I reviewed a manuscript for a new first-year composition textbook and reader. Part of the reason for my ability to review the text is that last year I taught from Stuart Greene and April Lidinsky's From Inquiry to Academic Writing: A Text and Reader, a text that the editors and the publisher of this new manuscript see as competition. I thought it would be an interesting opportunity, and the decent honorarium made the opportunity even more appealing. Though after the hours and hours, I am not sure if the $125 was worth it.

Below is an excerpt of one of my answers on the review questionnaire. I was asked to comment on the text's project which was outlined by the prospectus.

What is perhaps most appealing about the prospectus is the text’s emphasis on cross-disciplinary connectedness, on genuine WAC conversations, and on the importance of focusing almost exclusively on academic, scholarly work (which the prospectus argues current WAC texts fail to do). The prospectus emphasizes the importance of argumentative prose, of providing models for students to look to, and of providing contemporary readings to indicate to students that the work they are engaged in is part of ongoing conversations.

These attributes which make the text so compelling also point to the ways I see it as potentially problematic (though these problematics would likely not prevent me from adopting it for my class). In the prospectus’s insistence on seeing cross-discipline connectedness, I worry that it could ignore or gloss over the very important differences and disconnections between writings in separate disciplines. While I definitely understand and appreciate the text’s desire to point out that similar conversations and inquiry projects are being taken on in a variety of disciplinary locations, it is easy (but irresponsible) to erase differences in disciplinary writing. While the text does acknowledge that it will have to address differences, I worry that it will not take into account the ways that very specific disciplinary genre features are indicative of greater epistemological and ontological differences between disciplines. I would encourage the writers to consider some of the recent work done in genre studies that examines the relationships between genre and ways of being and thinking in the world. Writing is always situated rhetorical discourse, and ignoring its situatedness would be irresponsible.

I also remain somewhat dubious about the potential for a course to prepare students to write across the disciplines. No course has the time to allow students practice in writing for all disciplines. Such a goal also assumes that one can forget the situatedness of the particular classroom in which the text is being taught. All courses are situated by the department in which they are housed and by the instructor who is teaching the class. Perhaps more important than that impossible goal of preparing students to write in every disciplinary context is the teaching of ways of recognizing discourse features, to see which disciplines employ particular discourse features, and to allow for a discussion of why particular discourse features are found in given disciplines and why they are absent in others.

I also think that the prospectus’s criticism of textbooks which include sections of writing from outside of the academy seems contradictory to the prospectus’s insistence on the importance of a WAC/WID reader. The prospectus chastises traditional single-discipline (humanities) writing instruction for being too insular and failing to address the ways that similar discussions are going on in other disciplines, but then the prospectus seems very invested in seeing the academy’s insularity. Wouldn’t there be a benefit in showing that conversations occurring in academic spheres are also being explored by the general population, in popular genres? This contradiction in the rationale in the prospectus reveals one of the text’s key weaknesses—its failure to address the ways that new media sources are impacting and changing the ways that academic writing is disseminated, cross-disciplinary work is being facilitated, and the ways that new media is allowing for changes in discourse features.

On the Loss of a Car.

"Everything in life is somewhere else, and you get there in a car."
- E.B. White

“The car has become a secular sanctuary for the individual, his shrine to himself, his mobile Walden Pond.”
- Edward McDonagh

At approximately 1:35am on Monday, January 4th, 2010, my called stalled in the intersection of Garden and Chestnut. I was on my way to pick up the lovely Caitlin from the airporter, but I never made it there.

After madly turning on my flashers and trying in vain several times to get the car to start, I put it in neutral, got out, and started the very difficult job of pushing my car off of the road, a task made much more difficult by the fact that I was on a slight incline and the car wanted to roll backwards. I called Chris to get Caitlin, called the tow truck, said the word "fuck" an obscene amount of times, and then waited--first alone, then joined by drunk college students, and finally by Chris and Caitlin. Caitlin was amazing enough to stay until the tow arrived and to drive me home.

The potential for car trouble is one of those things that constantly causes me anxiety. I am always convinced that I am a second away from the engine dropping out underneath me or from something bursting into flames. I am assured by friends and by professionals that things like that rarely happen. Apparently other things can happen, though. For instance, on a random early Monday morning, the timing belt could break, likely completely destroying various other components of your engine. Of course, none of this is for certain; there is perhaps a 50% chance that the car is fine, that it has not caused damage in excess of the car's value. The tricky thing is, though, that I would have to pay well over $350 just to find out. It was a difficult decision, but as luck seems to be against me so far in 2010, I decided not to hand over the $350. I made the decision to sell the car to a salvage yard, to say goodbye and take the insultingly small amount of money they offered for the car. I rationalized that I probably would never feel at east driving the car again. Plus, I don't really need a car.

Despite the lack of need, I miss it already. It is incredible how much my worldview had been shaped by the fact that I had a car. There will be no more late night movies, no insane trips to the grocery store to buy the limes that I forgot to put on the shopping list. I wont feel comfortable asking people to go out because I wont want to ask for a ride. I cannot just drive to kill time. Everything changes.

At the conference Joy and I went to at Rice University, Sharon Marcus questioned whether cars are what books were in the 18th and 19th century. Both have been items of cultural capital, both have shown integration into society at the same time that they have provided a sense of autonomy, isolation, and individualism. Both can be thought of as escapes and mergings. It is an interesting question... one that points to the way that objects, that things are related to so many other issues.

It will likely be a while before I get another car, but I am trying to focus on the good things that will come of it. I will save money, be outside more, and I will get to experience the world at a different pace.

New Year's Pics and A Playlist for a Decade.

I am obviously intoxicated because I am taking pics of myself.










Some dignity.










Drunk.


Yellow created an amazing and beautiful playlist which she dedicated to this decade. It inspired me to create my own. See below. Yes, I know; hers is better. She is more skilled.

Zach's Best of 2009

"Best of" posts are always slightly dangerous for me to write because I can never find enough time to see everything or listen to everything. Several people have asked me for various lists recently, though, so this is my attempt to oblige their requests. If you feel that I have neglected something hugely important, please feel free to comment and let me know.

Movies

Top Seen
1. Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
2. A Serious Man
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Star Trek
5. I Love You, Man
6. District 9
7. Fantastic Mr. Fox
8. (500) Days of Summer
9. Up in the Air
10. Away We Go

Movies I Wish I Had Seen
1. Broken Embraces
2. The White Ribbon
3. Avatar
4. The Road
5. Up

Television

Top Seen
1. Modern Family
2. True Blood
3. Glee
4. Nurse Jackie
5. Parks and Recreation
6. Big Love
7. 30 Rock
8. Lost
9. The Office
10. Law and Order: SVU

I Should Have Seen
1. Fringe
2. House
3. Mad Men
4. Battlestar Balactica
5. Sons of Anarchy.

Albums

Not even going to attempt to discuss the albums I haven't listened to. Below are my favorites of the year that I have spent the most time thinking about.

1. Grizzly Bear, Veckatimest
2. Andrew Bird, Noble Beast
3. Animal Collective, Merriweather Post Pavilion
4. Phoenix, Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix
5. The Dememberists, Hazards of Love
6. Camera Obscura, My Maudlin Career
7. Neko Case, Middle Cyclone
8. Bon Iver, Blood Bank
9. The Mountain Goats, The Life of the World to Come
10. Beirut, March of the Zapotec

Double Feature

On my first day back in Bellingham after spending the holidays with my parents, I decided to cram in all of the things that I missed while at the 'rents'. I slept in late, I went out for coffee, I went grocery shopping, and I went to two movies. I always try to see all of the films nominated for multiple awards, and that typically means I have to catch a lot of films at the end of December/beginning of January. Today I saw Up in the Air and Precious, two films based on very interesting novels. Below are very brief thoughts on the films. Though unintentional, both of these reviews center on issues of voice and perspective.

Up in the Air









Adapted from Walter Kirn's novel of the same name, Up in the Air could not have been released at a more perfect time. With the economic crisis, rising unemployment, discussions of executive perks, and a cultural obsession with flying and air security, the novel about a "career transition counselor"/axe man with a goal of reaching 10 million air miles holds an interesting relevance. I do wonder if the timeliness of the film somehow overcompensates for other attributes of the film that are weaker. Though George Clooney is his sexy self in the film, he seems to play the exact same person in all of his films. He is clever, but he seems all too familiar to the viewer. What is so powerful about Kirn's novel is that it gives voice to one of those anonymous men and women that we all see in airports standing in the MVP boarding line or walking into the mysterious airline club rooms. It presents the insights of someone who lives in the place that most of us think of as transitional space. With Clooney playing the lead in the film adaptation, the viewer knows this character, there is little new that the viewer gains. I am also slightly annoyed with the way that the chronology of the novel was rearranged to facilitate the development of a plot arc more consistent with romantic comedies. It is a film that seems really tongue in cheek and lacks a grate deal of teeth.

Precious









I was very nervous when I first read that a film adaptation of Sapphire's novel Push was in the works. My concern was not the very valid concern about how the filmmakers could possibly represent the horrific sexual and physical abuse on screen; the first concern I had was related to one of the novel's central issues--literacy. What is exquisite about Sapphire's novel (and what makes it incredibly difficult to read) is the way that the novel gives voice to illiteracy. Sapphire's choice to write in her protagonist's voice, to include nonstandard spellings, syntax, and misuses of words forces the reader to slow down and to confront both the writing of someone with limited literacy and to also consider to complicated nature of literary and the ways in which it is socially defined. The fact that the reader is able to comprehend the nonstandard text reveals the constructedness of standardization. Because this aspect of literacy has to be seen in textual form and not heard, I wasn't sure how the film would be able to explore it. The answer? It really doesn't. The nonstandard spelling and syntax are relegated to a very strange place--it is explored in the opening credits. I suppose it is nice that the filmmakers tried to touch the issue, but it feels a little off in the paratextual material.

Despite my fears about adapting the film and my slight frustration that the very important literacy issue takes a backseat, I must say that I think it is the best film I have seen this year. It is certainly the best acted film of the year. It's complex and emotionally-intense subject matter is brought into powerful, dizzying, and sickening focus in the dialogue, in the voice-over narration, and in the use of images as mental process. The entire cast was amazing, but certainly the star Gabourey Sidbe as well as Mo'Nique and Mariah Carey must be mentioned. Their affects and their presences on screen surpassed everything else I have seen this year. The film's use of montage, juxtaposition, and superimposition was incredibly smart and thoughtful. These visual techniques allowed the filmmakers to examine the very difficult issues of physical and sexual abuse and incest without feeling like a Lifetime movie.

***

Both films are definitely worth seeing. I would likely suggest waiting until DVD for Up in the Air. Push, in my opinion is worth the $10, but it is a difficult film. Still, it is incredibly executed in my opinion.

You gotta have faith.

It is criminal how many webpages I had to sift through to find out where each document went, and then what the actual addresses that I needed to send things to. The idea of spending almost $1100 on applications and spending so many countless hours on these applications felt suddenly overwhelming. I really hope I get in somewhere...

Qualify this!

I turned in my Qualifying Exam essays on Monday morning after a weekend of writing. Despite the craziness involved in the writing, I actually sort of enjoyed the process. Below are abstracts for both of my papers. I was going to make each abstract under 50 words, but I gave up.

"Trying Literary Men: Walter Pater, Walt Whitman, and the Libel Trial of Oscar Wilde"

This essay examines the aesthetic and social implications of Walter Pater and Walt Whitman's work and how the influence of these two 19th century figures manifested itself in the 1895 libel trial of Oscar Wilde. It argues that the 'ontological aestheticism' of Pater, Whitman, and Wilde were on trial more so than the question of whether or not Wilde was, in fact, "posing as a somdomite [sic]."

"Haunted History: Surfacing the Supernatural in Morrison's Beloved and Kushner's Angels in America"

This essay works from Derrida's Specters of Marx and examines the rhetorical and narratological functions of ghosts in Beloved and Angels in America. It examines the way these two novels use ghost figures to reflect on history, announce their own historical situatedness, and challenge and/or reconstruct existing metanarratives.

----------

I dont really have energy to write an interesting post. In other news, I have been super obsessed with MGMT's "Time to Pretend" for some reason. I used to hate the song. The video is interesting. I love the Alejandro Jodorowsky references.


Time To Pretend

MGMT | MySpace Music Videos