The Filth -
Actually one of the things that I loved about the Filth was the introduction or otherwise known as Warning! I thought it was really interesting and funny to do something like a warning in a book. I thought to myself...why didn’t The Ticket That Exploded have a warning section? I think the part that really made me laugh was the part where pregnant women should be careful or not be taken/read during that time, and like a warning for women to not become pregnant while reading The Filth. I think that when the reader reads this section before they read the entire book they will understand that the author has a sense of humor, and also helps someone realize that the book is not meant to be serious. Also he mentions the use of metaphors, as almost if he wants us to stop after each section and find the metaphors he has used and to help us to understand the reading better.
I think looking over the reading The Filth is quite funny if you look at it closely. I mean the main job is to be "garbage men" and they "stop the world's back yard from stinking". And while reading this and realizing that they are supposed to be helping save the world and stop people from "creating the world's end" it looks as if they are living in Hell. I mean the entire book just shows violence, porn, and other crap that fills their world. There are so many people that are trying to over take the world, whether it’s with giant sperm or overtaking the President. I mean The Filth themselves seem to have problems. Tony or Ned Slade doesn't even know who he really is, and can't quite grasp either world that he lives in. Plus all he cares about is his dang cat. There is something wrong with the world if the only thing you care about when you are being put in jail is your cat. I think one of the most disturbing pages is 150 where it is talking about the world of Anders Kilimakks and all of the babies are supposed to be copies of him, but they are all super creepy babies and that world would be horrible to live in as well. I think all in all if you look at the Filth as a whole, I wouldn’t want to live in that world, or any of the world’s that people are trying to create or where certain people want to be leaders or take over everyone else.
What I think is interesting is to compare The Filth to the other books we have read and in all honesty I think that they are all similar in many ways and I would not want to live in any of these worlds. It seems like technology that has advanced has just caused more problems for everyone, obviously in different ways, but it always creates destruction. Also I feel like each world creates a new or different problem and I think like if our society were to look at these books and see that multiple authors think that our world is headed towards a society like any one of these we might start trying to be more careful. We might try to keep our lives how they are and not advance our technology, or worry about how much smarter we all could be. I think all of these books have kind of been like a message saying watch out our world could become something like this at any point in time if we are not careful. We already have enough issues, I couldn’t imagine having more like in these books. I mean I think some of the things in The Diamond Age are cool, but in all honesty I think that they would cause destruction and unhappiness and father away from the world of peace that everyone wants. I think that these books are all cool in the way that so many authors have had such creative minds and all different that create possible societies that we might become if we are not careful. It’s been very interesting to see all the different books and the lives the people live. I am excited to read the last book and see how it varies.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Filth
I have read through the 7th Article and I am getting the hang of how to read the comic book style, but its still a challenge every once and awhile to know which bubble to read next. Sometimes I find myself skipping the bubbles or like going in the wrong order so I have to re-read a page. I think Filth is interesting, and although this is mentioned in class, why is Slade so important, especially if he isn't even doing good? I feel like he has so many mixed personalities. Also the entire book he doesn’t even want to be working with Filth. The second he actually remembers Slade and who he was he was like "I quit". I thought for sure that once he figured out who he was and maybe why they needed him he would be like oh yea I need to save the world and clean up their crap.
Another thing about Filth I find interesting and not unsure of is why is it ok for us to see the women in the book naked and not "blurred" out but all of the men are "blurred" or censored. I started to wonder if this was on purpose and had some kind of hidden meaning to it...like that we are just so used to seeing naked women and not naked men that its awkward, or the author just didn't want to be picturing naked men. But then I think to myself, most of the women are seen with one type of body and for some reason its really muscular or "masculine" and I am wondering once again if this is the way that the author likes women or if its just part of the story. I was not quite sure, but I was questioning the point to how the women and men look and why the men are censored and the women are not.
Also, I am not quite sure I understand the monkey? Is it just because we “came from monkey” that is why he can talk and be “human” I just don’t get it. I am not sure that this is necessarily a book that I would love to read, but I am trying to understand it. I am also trying to read the book quicker than in 2 weeks because I think that it would be something that would make more sense if you read it all together at once.
I really thought Article 6 and 7 were funny in a way because Gregory John Feely was so worried about his cat and like even when it was obvious that the police was not joking around and wanted him to be serious he was like “please my cat”. I had to laugh to myself because I think so often that so many of us would worry about our animals before we might worry about things going on in our own lives. We love our pets and hate to see them in pain, yet when we are in trouble, or in pain, we car for them first. Maybe because we are supposed to be taking care of them and loving them, and when we mistreat them we mistreat ourselves in a way? If that makes sense at all, but we love our pets so much we would do anything for them. I know people who paid ridiculous amounts of money for their dog to live when it was mean to die. They gave them multiple shots a day at a certain time of that day and the dog was on pills and had surgeries…it goes to show how much we care about our pets.
I am not going to lie, this book would be better without all the sex, but then someone might argue that this book wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t in here. That’s true, I just feel like along with the Ticket that Exploded it can mess with our emotions, and for me it makes it harder to enjoy the book. I don’t really enjoy reading the sex parts and it is not something I would chose to read if I had the choice. I guess this is what happens when you don’t actually look that the books you are going to be reading before hand. Although I am not enjoying the sex part of the class…I still think there are things to be learned and I still think that the class overall is interesting that the topics and discussions that are brought up are interesting, even if I don’t agree with everything.
Another thing about Filth I find interesting and not unsure of is why is it ok for us to see the women in the book naked and not "blurred" out but all of the men are "blurred" or censored. I started to wonder if this was on purpose and had some kind of hidden meaning to it...like that we are just so used to seeing naked women and not naked men that its awkward, or the author just didn't want to be picturing naked men. But then I think to myself, most of the women are seen with one type of body and for some reason its really muscular or "masculine" and I am wondering once again if this is the way that the author likes women or if its just part of the story. I was not quite sure, but I was questioning the point to how the women and men look and why the men are censored and the women are not.
Also, I am not quite sure I understand the monkey? Is it just because we “came from monkey” that is why he can talk and be “human” I just don’t get it. I am not sure that this is necessarily a book that I would love to read, but I am trying to understand it. I am also trying to read the book quicker than in 2 weeks because I think that it would be something that would make more sense if you read it all together at once.
I really thought Article 6 and 7 were funny in a way because Gregory John Feely was so worried about his cat and like even when it was obvious that the police was not joking around and wanted him to be serious he was like “please my cat”. I had to laugh to myself because I think so often that so many of us would worry about our animals before we might worry about things going on in our own lives. We love our pets and hate to see them in pain, yet when we are in trouble, or in pain, we car for them first. Maybe because we are supposed to be taking care of them and loving them, and when we mistreat them we mistreat ourselves in a way? If that makes sense at all, but we love our pets so much we would do anything for them. I know people who paid ridiculous amounts of money for their dog to live when it was mean to die. They gave them multiple shots a day at a certain time of that day and the dog was on pills and had surgeries…it goes to show how much we care about our pets.
I am not going to lie, this book would be better without all the sex, but then someone might argue that this book wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t in here. That’s true, I just feel like along with the Ticket that Exploded it can mess with our emotions, and for me it makes it harder to enjoy the book. I don’t really enjoy reading the sex parts and it is not something I would chose to read if I had the choice. I guess this is what happens when you don’t actually look that the books you are going to be reading before hand. Although I am not enjoying the sex part of the class…I still think there are things to be learned and I still think that the class overall is interesting that the topics and discussions that are brought up are interesting, even if I don’t agree with everything.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Blog Questions & Answers!
I decided to go through and answer the comment questions to all my previous blogs this week as my blog. Thought it would be interesting to go back and revist some of the books.
But how do we separate ourselves from technology? Or is the impulse to separate from technology a technological desire in itself?
I think that it would be tricky to try to separate ourselves from technology because yea we have become so dependent on it. I think it might be in our best interest to separate from it, or be careful how attached we become to it. We could attempt to keep less technological devices in our homes, or places where we could “avoid” having to use them. I think a lot of the things we use are unessential to our lives. So many years people went without cell phones, personal laptops, and other devices. I would actually assume the opposite with the second question. The technical desire is probably for us to become attached and for us to become dependent on it, its so hard for us to realize that life is doable without the technology that we have in it. It would be really a challenge for us to get rid of our cell phones, and to try to hand write everything, or mail someone instead of e-mail. An example of something that many college students hate is when we are required to write a paper we have to find sources outside the internet. This is really a challenge to get to the library and find articles, or books. Often times we resort to online databases that work as sources off the internet, yet we found them on a form of technology.
But we still desire to change? I find it really interesting that you see books as more intimate than other forms of media. Why do you think that that is?
As I have been able to think about why I see books as more intimate than other forms of media I think its because books are powerful and can either relate to our lives or not, and we give meaning to books. We always are searching for the moral of the story and we are always reading for a purpose (even if its for fun). I think when you are going to be entertained by the media you are not looking to relate it to your life, you tend to watch movies and forget about them about an hour later. Even if it was a heartbreaking story in a movie, I think it doesn’t pull at your heart quite like a book can. Books we imagine our own picture, we imagine the characters and what we think is happening. Movie’s are images and meanings that are given to us, and we do not find them educational, like we might find a book. I think it’s a lot easier to persuade someone to do what you want them to do, or to create intimate emotions in someone through a book than it is through a TV show, movie, or other forms of media. I know for me reading books that are nothing like my life is most interesting because those books will help me form images of what someone else’s life might be like. If I were to watch a movie it might just be because it looks interesting or entertaining or funny.
I greatly appreciate the difficult work that you are doing here. I have been thinking more about this might it be the Burroughs gives the reader a view that he assumes they already have of homosexuality? I think of buzzwords like "gay agenda" and when put with this novel it seems like the author is making a satirical point about the cultures view of homosexuality.
Yea I think it is very interesting that he seems so open and honest in homosexuality. I once again think, its not necessarily the homosexuality part that threw me off, but how grotesque and disgusting he presented sex itself. He made it seem like it was not a big deal at all, and he just explained it how it was, and the descriptions were too vivid and gross to read.
The moral center of the movie has to do with getting it right in order to break out of the repetition cycle. Other films such as Run, Lola, Run and Blind Chance deal with this in different ways. But is it that it is a comedy --and as that genre needs a resolution--makes the morality be the only acceptable way out of the loop?
After I wrote this we had a class discussion on what the “real” reason was why he was able to break out of this loop. I started rethinking my opinion, but part of me still believes that morality was a part of it. Another part of me started realizing, “Oh yea, he did break out the second he got the woman in bed.” So the moral of the story to us viewers is, once you break even the strongest woman, and “become a better person” for her than you have won. Its interesting I think a woman’s perspective and a man’s perspective might be different after viewing the movie. I think that a woman might not pick up on the fact that he finally got to the next day after he won over the woman and did everything that she wanted from him, where a man could easily see that. I think the woman wants to believe that there always is a good guy and you can find him if he is willing to do all that work for you and change into a better person for you. The class never came to a conclusion, but it did make me think a lot more about it and I did laugh at the fact that it probably wasn’t because he became a better person that he got to the next day.
But how do we separate ourselves from technology? Or is the impulse to separate from technology a technological desire in itself?
I think that it would be tricky to try to separate ourselves from technology because yea we have become so dependent on it. I think it might be in our best interest to separate from it, or be careful how attached we become to it. We could attempt to keep less technological devices in our homes, or places where we could “avoid” having to use them. I think a lot of the things we use are unessential to our lives. So many years people went without cell phones, personal laptops, and other devices. I would actually assume the opposite with the second question. The technical desire is probably for us to become attached and for us to become dependent on it, its so hard for us to realize that life is doable without the technology that we have in it. It would be really a challenge for us to get rid of our cell phones, and to try to hand write everything, or mail someone instead of e-mail. An example of something that many college students hate is when we are required to write a paper we have to find sources outside the internet. This is really a challenge to get to the library and find articles, or books. Often times we resort to online databases that work as sources off the internet, yet we found them on a form of technology.
But we still desire to change? I find it really interesting that you see books as more intimate than other forms of media. Why do you think that that is?
As I have been able to think about why I see books as more intimate than other forms of media I think its because books are powerful and can either relate to our lives or not, and we give meaning to books. We always are searching for the moral of the story and we are always reading for a purpose (even if its for fun). I think when you are going to be entertained by the media you are not looking to relate it to your life, you tend to watch movies and forget about them about an hour later. Even if it was a heartbreaking story in a movie, I think it doesn’t pull at your heart quite like a book can. Books we imagine our own picture, we imagine the characters and what we think is happening. Movie’s are images and meanings that are given to us, and we do not find them educational, like we might find a book. I think it’s a lot easier to persuade someone to do what you want them to do, or to create intimate emotions in someone through a book than it is through a TV show, movie, or other forms of media. I know for me reading books that are nothing like my life is most interesting because those books will help me form images of what someone else’s life might be like. If I were to watch a movie it might just be because it looks interesting or entertaining or funny.
I greatly appreciate the difficult work that you are doing here. I have been thinking more about this might it be the Burroughs gives the reader a view that he assumes they already have of homosexuality? I think of buzzwords like "gay agenda" and when put with this novel it seems like the author is making a satirical point about the cultures view of homosexuality.
Yea I think it is very interesting that he seems so open and honest in homosexuality. I once again think, its not necessarily the homosexuality part that threw me off, but how grotesque and disgusting he presented sex itself. He made it seem like it was not a big deal at all, and he just explained it how it was, and the descriptions were too vivid and gross to read.
The moral center of the movie has to do with getting it right in order to break out of the repetition cycle. Other films such as Run, Lola, Run and Blind Chance deal with this in different ways. But is it that it is a comedy --and as that genre needs a resolution--makes the morality be the only acceptable way out of the loop?
After I wrote this we had a class discussion on what the “real” reason was why he was able to break out of this loop. I started rethinking my opinion, but part of me still believes that morality was a part of it. Another part of me started realizing, “Oh yea, he did break out the second he got the woman in bed.” So the moral of the story to us viewers is, once you break even the strongest woman, and “become a better person” for her than you have won. Its interesting I think a woman’s perspective and a man’s perspective might be different after viewing the movie. I think that a woman might not pick up on the fact that he finally got to the next day after he won over the woman and did everything that she wanted from him, where a man could easily see that. I think the woman wants to believe that there always is a good guy and you can find him if he is willing to do all that work for you and change into a better person for you. The class never came to a conclusion, but it did make me think a lot more about it and I did laugh at the fact that it probably wasn’t because he became a better person that he got to the next day.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Ideas from Tuesdays Class Extended....
Tuesday in class we discussed how technology is a comfort to us and we don’t necessarily need it, but we are getting to the point where we wouldn’t know what to do if we don’t have it. I feel this is so true because for instance, what do we do when the power goes out? After a few hours of playing board games and sitting in the dark we are frustrated. When our phone dies or we forget to bring it somewhere with us we tend to feel we are missing something, even if we are not planning on using it. Many tend to say “I feel naked without my phone” It has become part of our outfits and something we need rather than a communication source or an emergency need.
We also discussed in class how technology is ruining our lives and taking away from our cultural identities. We are taking away from any special talents one may posses an this is creating us to need to be special and different. In the book Ribofunk people are being put into different “cultures” and identity groups and trying to find meaning in their lives. The technology has gone so far that they are feeling the need to change their human form into something else so they can be identified. Is this a result of technology? Possibly, but can we just blame technology or is it our own faults? Technology may be the underlying cause of it all, but we are a consumer society, always trying to have the next best thing whether it’s a technological advancement or any other form of advancement.
I think that the point brought up in class was really interesting because the part that got me the most about the book was where the daughter decided she wanted to be a bug and was changing herself into one, and the mom was turning into a cat. I thought to myself. I would be mad too if my daughter wanted to be a bug, but really a cat? I would be a dog first of all….but to think that technology and our world could advance to that point where we need to change our human form into something else to find identity and to have a culture is upsetting. I would never want my children, grandchildren, or even myself to have to change into something I am not. But when you look more closely at the “bigger picture” you see that we are already doing that, just not to the extreme yet. We are getting plastic surgery, and trying to look younger, sexier and what we “were meant to look like” we are trying to all be the “upper class” and have the latest fashion. Why can’t we all be ourselves, and show who we really are how we want to express ourselves?
I think there are so many things that goes deeper into the first part of this that I was discussing. The other day there was a question, what makes someone real or fake, and in reality only that person can know if they are real or fake. But why is it so hard for us to be real with people? Why do we hide behind something we are not and what is causing us to not show people our real background, what we stand for, live for and love about ourselves? I think this class has brought up a lot of good points, where the technological advances allow us to hide. The media which is now in forms of technology tell us what we should be and who we should be. We have these ideas of who and what we are supposed to be. I think taking away all the advances in our lives may cause us to see who each of us really are truthfully. We wouldn’t be able to hide behind a computer screen or text someone saying one thing and really meaning another.
Something that I have been curious about while I have been learning in this class is will we ever stop advancing technology or will it take us over. Will we be so dependant on technology that it takes away jobs, and it takes away what might give us meaning to our lives or how we identify ourselves? In the discussion group for Diamond Age I was just talking about how cool I think Dovetail is because that group of people didn’t allow technology to overtake their life. They went back to way before all the technology and make everything by hand and are doing things “old school” in a way. And they have their own culture because they don’t want to conform to the culture outside of them. Its an interesting topic to think about what technology can do for our culture or what it can take away from our culture and its meaning.
We also discussed in class how technology is ruining our lives and taking away from our cultural identities. We are taking away from any special talents one may posses an this is creating us to need to be special and different. In the book Ribofunk people are being put into different “cultures” and identity groups and trying to find meaning in their lives. The technology has gone so far that they are feeling the need to change their human form into something else so they can be identified. Is this a result of technology? Possibly, but can we just blame technology or is it our own faults? Technology may be the underlying cause of it all, but we are a consumer society, always trying to have the next best thing whether it’s a technological advancement or any other form of advancement.
I think that the point brought up in class was really interesting because the part that got me the most about the book was where the daughter decided she wanted to be a bug and was changing herself into one, and the mom was turning into a cat. I thought to myself. I would be mad too if my daughter wanted to be a bug, but really a cat? I would be a dog first of all….but to think that technology and our world could advance to that point where we need to change our human form into something else to find identity and to have a culture is upsetting. I would never want my children, grandchildren, or even myself to have to change into something I am not. But when you look more closely at the “bigger picture” you see that we are already doing that, just not to the extreme yet. We are getting plastic surgery, and trying to look younger, sexier and what we “were meant to look like” we are trying to all be the “upper class” and have the latest fashion. Why can’t we all be ourselves, and show who we really are how we want to express ourselves?
I think there are so many things that goes deeper into the first part of this that I was discussing. The other day there was a question, what makes someone real or fake, and in reality only that person can know if they are real or fake. But why is it so hard for us to be real with people? Why do we hide behind something we are not and what is causing us to not show people our real background, what we stand for, live for and love about ourselves? I think this class has brought up a lot of good points, where the technological advances allow us to hide. The media which is now in forms of technology tell us what we should be and who we should be. We have these ideas of who and what we are supposed to be. I think taking away all the advances in our lives may cause us to see who each of us really are truthfully. We wouldn’t be able to hide behind a computer screen or text someone saying one thing and really meaning another.
Something that I have been curious about while I have been learning in this class is will we ever stop advancing technology or will it take us over. Will we be so dependant on technology that it takes away jobs, and it takes away what might give us meaning to our lives or how we identify ourselves? In the discussion group for Diamond Age I was just talking about how cool I think Dovetail is because that group of people didn’t allow technology to overtake their life. They went back to way before all the technology and make everything by hand and are doing things “old school” in a way. And they have their own culture because they don’t want to conform to the culture outside of them. Its an interesting topic to think about what technology can do for our culture or what it can take away from our culture and its meaning.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
