WW1: creative historians
We began studying WW1 primarily through a book: All Quiet on the Western Front, a book by: Erich Maria Remarque. Through Remarque we began to learn the meaning of what I've come to know as a "truth of war" a topic we visited multiple times during the course of this project.
We were told to keep these truths in mind as we wrote our own stories. My own story was written to capture the civilian side of conflict, and how in such a time, innocence is lost, hence my story's name. The writing process , as a new student was relatively new to me. We wrote drafts to document our progression, but there were also things called peer critiques, wich were scheduled fairly often between these drafts. These critiques were conducted by our peers, everyone participated in critiquing their group's stories; without these I believe by final product would've been much less refined. In my story I'm proud of but also embarrassed by certain things. In my own opinion, I believe my strongest Element was showing, not telling. In my own words, this means to paint a picture with your words in the mind of the reader. To see my best example of this look to the changing point in my story. "We move to stare into the growing dusk. There wasn’t very much see—just the vague outline of the town, the surrounding hills, and the gently moving river. The clouds were a deep purple. It was one of the most beautiful sunsets I’d ever seen, yet what came next would shape my nightmares for years to come. Through the wispy shreds of purple you could just glimpse them. Six. Dual-winged things. Buoyant. Barely a hundred meters of the ground and almost level with the priory, our vantage point. They flew in a tight formation, then all at once arched towards us and spread out. Majestically yet chaotically they sliced the sky like knives. “Incredible,” I murmured. The town seemed to agree, people everywhere had turned their attention skyward to watch the spectacle. " While I can't flat out explain why this descriptiveness makes the story stronger, imagine it without it, essentially its only a few people watching planes flying into a sunset. But with with the added descriptiveness, it becomes almost majestic. A majesty that is abruptly shattered to pieces. You see, this paragraph's main mission is not to inspire beauty but to take it away. I won't ruin the story for you, but I will say that this paragraph only serves to make the next more devastating. In this aspect, it is very effective indeed. Despite my pride in my descriptiveness, this does not necessarily help what I consider to be my story's largest weakness- how over-dramatic it is. In many sections, I sought to show emphasis on words as I had imagined them spoken. I did accomplish this, but through bold and italics. These techniques, as I have come to recognize, should only be used where absolutely necessary. Overuse is bad because suddenly, everything becomes dramatic, even theatrical. If nowhere else but where I tried to use emotion. I'll spare you the quote, but I'll mention a rooftop scene, that after the story's completion, I wish I had toned down about ten notches. Despite neglecting to address that specific section, I did make at least two substantial revisions. For example, look at my previously quoted paragraph, It may be lengthy, but only long enough to say what it needs to, nothing more, nothing less. Prior to editing it was about twice its length, and included quotes from both characters, and an additional one who suddenly showed up to begin the scene. It was a location for this reader to lose interest rather than grab it- witch was the goal of my revision. My second major revision, and arguably most important, came through more clearly identifying my two separate speakers. In many of my peer critiques, people were confused that I used he and she interchangeably, I did this to try and subtly shift the point of view from one character to another, but perhaps it was too subtle, nobody even noticed it. So, I went through to every shift in perspective and did what I could to make sure it was very clear who was speaking, while still attempting to not make it blatantly obvious. This makes it much less confusing when: "the main character, a man, seems to suddenly be wearing a dress". |
|
Vietnam: Historical thinking and veteran interviews
During the duration of this project we examined it through multiple assignments of varying difference. These assignments completed are as follows...
We began this project by reading The Things They Carried, a war novel by Tim O'Brien, who was in the Vietnam war himself. About the time we were beginning to get to the middle of the book, the main part of the project was introduced. That main part within the project, was the Vietnam veterans interviews. Leading up to the interview itself we prepared by contacting a veteran, beginning to analyze the Gulf of Tonkin papers, and writing questions, I'll go into more depth with this later. Finally after a lot of preparation we completed the interview with our veteran, Joe Perino, and began to end that section of the project. While this was going on we continued to read, and analyze the Gulf of Tonkin papers. We continued this section of the project over Thanksgiving, at this time we were writing about weather the incident was provoked or not. Personally I said that it was, however so did everyone else... Finally after the essay, and thus, the project was complete we had an exhibition at the Animas City Theater, in witch we exhibited the whole project, but mostly exerts form our essays. You can see it here, in a video of exerts assembled by Keenan:
We began this project by reading The Things They Carried, a war novel by Tim O'Brien, who was in the Vietnam war himself. About the time we were beginning to get to the middle of the book, the main part of the project was introduced. That main part within the project, was the Vietnam veterans interviews. Leading up to the interview itself we prepared by contacting a veteran, beginning to analyze the Gulf of Tonkin papers, and writing questions, I'll go into more depth with this later. Finally after a lot of preparation we completed the interview with our veteran, Joe Perino, and began to end that section of the project. While this was going on we continued to read, and analyze the Gulf of Tonkin papers. We continued this section of the project over Thanksgiving, at this time we were writing about weather the incident was provoked or not. Personally I said that it was, however so did everyone else... Finally after the essay, and thus, the project was complete we had an exhibition at the Animas City Theater, in witch we exhibited the whole project, but mostly exerts form our essays. You can see it here, in a video of exerts assembled by Keenan:
My role in the interview portion of the Veterans History Project was to do the logistics. As the logistics person, I was in charge of paperwork. I was in charge of getting it signed by whoever it was required of, and turning everything in on time. I succeeded in this role by doing everything that was required of me, and being punctual. Since my role consisted entirely of signing, and getting people to sign paperwork, I'm not sure of any way I could've done it better. If I could've picked another role, I don't think I would have, If I did have to though I would be a commutator... who did exactly what the title suggests.
As I mentioned earlier, during the essay on the Gulf of Tonkin incident we analyzed a series of written accounts called, the Gulf of Tonkin papers. To analyze these papers we used historical thinking skills. Personally the skill I struggled the most with was critical thinking, or at least critical thinking for what we were writing about, because of this I eventually had to rewrite my whole paper, I'll go more into this later. On the flip side, the skill that came the easiest to me was reading the silences. Quite frequently in these documents, you could infer more about what they are truly saying, or even trying to hide by doing this. I think I did a fairly good job interpreting these silences to figure out the true purposes behind some of these documents. I think I succeeded in this skill because its something I sometimes try to do in real life. When I hear a speech or some politician on the radio, I like to think about all the holes in what their saying. I think I could refine this more by trying to do it more often, practice makes perfect I guess?
As I mentioned earlier, at one point in the project, I had to rewrite my entire essay. This was for a multitude of reasons, but for two in particular. For one I didn't follow the TEA (Topic Evidence Analysis) format, I was advised to revise it, and looking back at it now, I see how disjointed it actually was. The second reason I felt to need to rewrite the paper was that it didn't actually follow the directions. This is a problem I still continue to have and hope to get rid of; creativity is good, but going against a given set of directions is either being ignorant or stubborn, I see that now. I think my rewrite made my essay significantly easier to read, and understand. If I wasn't myself and I was reading my initial draft, I would've been confused at best.. Re-reading it now for myself in the TEA format ( vs. without it) makes that very much the case.
As I mentioned earlier, during the essay on the Gulf of Tonkin incident we analyzed a series of written accounts called, the Gulf of Tonkin papers. To analyze these papers we used historical thinking skills. Personally the skill I struggled the most with was critical thinking, or at least critical thinking for what we were writing about, because of this I eventually had to rewrite my whole paper, I'll go more into this later. On the flip side, the skill that came the easiest to me was reading the silences. Quite frequently in these documents, you could infer more about what they are truly saying, or even trying to hide by doing this. I think I did a fairly good job interpreting these silences to figure out the true purposes behind some of these documents. I think I succeeded in this skill because its something I sometimes try to do in real life. When I hear a speech or some politician on the radio, I like to think about all the holes in what their saying. I think I could refine this more by trying to do it more often, practice makes perfect I guess?
As I mentioned earlier, at one point in the project, I had to rewrite my entire essay. This was for a multitude of reasons, but for two in particular. For one I didn't follow the TEA (Topic Evidence Analysis) format, I was advised to revise it, and looking back at it now, I see how disjointed it actually was. The second reason I felt to need to rewrite the paper was that it didn't actually follow the directions. This is a problem I still continue to have and hope to get rid of; creativity is good, but going against a given set of directions is either being ignorant or stubborn, I see that now. I think my rewrite made my essay significantly easier to read, and understand. If I wasn't myself and I was reading my initial draft, I would've been confused at best.. Re-reading it now for myself in the TEA format ( vs. without it) makes that very much the case.
gulf_of_tonkin_v.ii.docx | |
File Size: | 20 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Globalization: Political Cartoons and OP-EDS
Over the course of this project we've looked at, well, globalization. If I've learned anything from this project, its that globalization is a very tricky to define. Globalization is many things. Globalization is free trade, Americanization, integration, homogenization - you can't put a label on it. Despite this, coming the the end of this project I feel as If I have a concrete understanding of what it is, and is not.
Over the course of this project, and even before it officially started, we have looked at globalization from many different angles. In the very beginning we were tasked with reading a series of documents, sometimes biased, on the topic. We learned the pros and cons of our unprecedented era of peace in the Lexus and the Olive Tree. We learned about sweat shop labor, how absolutely terrible it is, yet also how it is often the most attractive option for a large portion of the third world. We learned about organizations such as NAFTA and the WTO, how they massively impact the entire world, for better or worse.
Finally we took this information and were told to write about it. Everyone chose a topic, for these we wrote what are called OP-ed's a type of concise persuasive document. Topics varied significantly, but personally I chose to write about the WTO, and how it decides how nations choose to govern themselves.
Like I mentioned before, this is was a concise document, and for me, well that in of itself is pretty difficult. Trying to fit a comprehensive, persuasive argument into less than a thousand words was definitely something I struggled with, despite struggling to even meet the minimum word count early on. If nothing else, this exercise forced me to stay on topic, in the future of my writing career I feel like this will benefit me a considerable amount.
Along with the OP-ed assignment, we were also tasked with the creation of a political cartoon. Its difficult for me to describe the process of how I made my own cartoon,the process of refinement is very easy to see.
Over the course of this project, and even before it officially started, we have looked at globalization from many different angles. In the very beginning we were tasked with reading a series of documents, sometimes biased, on the topic. We learned the pros and cons of our unprecedented era of peace in the Lexus and the Olive Tree. We learned about sweat shop labor, how absolutely terrible it is, yet also how it is often the most attractive option for a large portion of the third world. We learned about organizations such as NAFTA and the WTO, how they massively impact the entire world, for better or worse.
Finally we took this information and were told to write about it. Everyone chose a topic, for these we wrote what are called OP-ed's a type of concise persuasive document. Topics varied significantly, but personally I chose to write about the WTO, and how it decides how nations choose to govern themselves.
Like I mentioned before, this is was a concise document, and for me, well that in of itself is pretty difficult. Trying to fit a comprehensive, persuasive argument into less than a thousand words was definitely something I struggled with, despite struggling to even meet the minimum word count early on. If nothing else, this exercise forced me to stay on topic, in the future of my writing career I feel like this will benefit me a considerable amount.
Along with the OP-ed assignment, we were also tasked with the creation of a political cartoon. Its difficult for me to describe the process of how I made my own cartoon,the process of refinement is very easy to see.
While it isn't comedy gold, nor terribly witty I feel like I've become a cartoonist in my own right during its creation. If nothing else the final product is much more clear, and better because of it, in more ways in one. Notice the sign the world (represented by the man in the earth shirt) is holding. After taking advice on how to improve my clarity, I made this much larger, and significantly more legible. Notice the caption attached to the tail of the pig, that was a definite improvement from having the text cramped up on the pig. These are accompanied by countless other minor changes, such as the spacing of the top caption, as well as the hand being attached to a suit.
So now that the project is complete, what do I take away? The largest thing I notice is a new found understanding and appreciation for everything that we have, but also what happened to get it to us in the first place. I notice things I've never noticed before, such as MADE IN HONDURAS labeled on most of my clothing. Also, as I mentioned previously, I know what probably went into its construction.
Also, I feel a new found distrust for our friends over in the WTO, but to hear about that, you'll have to read my OP-ed.
In conclusion of this project, I feel like I've learned so much more about this topic through project based learning then I could've ever learned through textbooks and multiple choice tests. Now that, is something I can write home about.
So now that the project is complete, what do I take away? The largest thing I notice is a new found understanding and appreciation for everything that we have, but also what happened to get it to us in the first place. I notice things I've never noticed before, such as MADE IN HONDURAS labeled on most of my clothing. Also, as I mentioned previously, I know what probably went into its construction.
Also, I feel a new found distrust for our friends over in the WTO, but to hear about that, you'll have to read my OP-ed.
In conclusion of this project, I feel like I've learned so much more about this topic through project based learning then I could've ever learned through textbooks and multiple choice tests. Now that, is something I can write home about.
ian_duthie_op-ed_final_draft.docx.lnk | |
File Size: | 25 kb |
File Type: | lnk |
Poetry Project
My Growth as a poet
|
Final poem
|