Year Review

The Project:

When my group and I first started the project, I thought the most difficult part was go soon realized it was getting together with our “stars” that we were going to focus the documentary on. It actually wasn’t necessarily difficult but rather… inconvenient… for my group. What makes me most proud of the project was the fact that my group and I finished the project. It wasn’t that I had doubts about my group or anything, it was just a burden and was in the back of my head constantly. But when we finished I felt a sense of ease and happiness. Something I would change if I could was time management towards the start. In the beginning we wouldn’t get any work done unless we were all together but we finally realized that it was easier to do as much as we could on our own then meet up when it was convenient. What I was personally responsible for was the voice overs and I myself and the other two all had a hand in recording. I didn’t have to promote a healthy atmosphere for our group because it was already a good atmosphere. I personally wished I had stepped up and volunteered more of my time but with what effort I put in, I felt like it was a fair amount.

The Class:

            This WRD 110 class reminded me a lot of my senior year English IV class due to the fact that both teachers wanted to inspire not just thought but new ways of thinking. The course allowed myself and other students who took the class to get some experience with video recording/editing but more prominent were the blogs (which most people have never read one, let alone make one and regularly post to it.) The class helped me a lot with my public speaking skills, especially with the wet-feet speeches, which in the beginning I dreaded but once it was over I learned not to sweat the small stuff. Although writing formal essays are one of my stronger subjects, I had a lot better time doing the activities we did in this class. The style used in the course, Mr. Horton’s section specifically, was unique and was good at teaching me to think differently and with more depth. Addressing the questions asking if I’d prefer more lectures, homework, etc… No I would prefer to do as little as I have to. With that being said, even though we were let out early many days, I still feel like I came out with equal or maybe even more knowledge I would have gained from other WRD instructor’s or and CIS course. Although the discussions were always something that I enjoyed because it’s easy for me to know my opinion, and it’s usually easy to tell what an instructor’s opinion is, but it’s hard to tell a fellow classmate’s opinion, especially if you seldom know them. The class was enjoyable and taught me good information but for all intents and purposes to prevent plateauing and to become better, maybe for blog topics there could be a selection of more controversial material. And maybe bonus points to those who regularly post to their blog (I know that this course is “easy” enough to get an “A” or a “B” but this could potentially entice individuals to post more… Maybe even put a “5 point” cap on it… Food for thought.) If I could change anything about this class, I wouldn’t necessarily change anything. I’m not an instructor nor do I plan to be and I understand that this question may be poised to point out things I Felt were done wrong but I have nothing to say negatively about this class. Wouldn’t ask to change anything but by all means take the advice above if you choose to.

With that being said, thank you Mr. Horton for teaching a fun class and Merry Christmas, Happy New Years, and/or Happy holidays to any reading this

http://youtu.be/-2PQHVvvbMo

link for video

The born into Coal video had both a human interest and standard narrative. Although it had both elements, it seemed that it was more human interested because it focused on individuals rather than tell a story with facts and points. It involved sadness, happiness, fear, hope, love, etc.

I selected this image because of a few reasons. First off, one will see a dirty man with dirty clothes in front of a coal mine... safe to assume that he's a miner. Second, one can observe the stern look on his face like he's been through a lot. Third, the stand still recording is a good effect (I don't know why this is a good effect or if it even is a good effect, but even ESPN will record an individual in a stand still pose instead of just taking their picture.) Lastly, one can see his name in the corner for knowledge of his name, and then his relation to somebody else.

This shot can be done in my video group of a lifter and we could put his name and stats or some statistic about him... For example.

The Last Supper Blogpost

Of the two visual rhetoric presentations, I believe "The Last Meal Project" to have more substance to it. The author's main point was "document the face and last meal of a convicted killer and is without question, honest and true." Henry Hargreaves' document displayed the meal the accused had for their last meal, told how they were executed, and why they were executed. "The Last Meal Project" had blood-like words and and a picture of the convicted, both giving a sinister element to the project. This sinister element was able to show that these individuals were "honest and true" killers.
Hargreaves' said that researching and putting together the presentation made it feel like he knew the convicted through their last meal. When i went through the slideshow, it wasn't personal for me nor did i identify with them. I think if Hargreaves put pictures of the convicted and their families (or some other heart-warming element) next to the last meal (or even threw out the last meal picture) then I, the reader, could have identified. Better yet, having a picture of the convicted eating their last meal would have caused an immediate identification. The individual would have displayed fear, happiness, content, or any other array of emotions someone would feel while eating their last meal before they're executed.
"The Last Meal Project" also posed the question "how is society really served by the death penalty?" Throughout the slide show, random facts would come up like "hey, reader, did you know this?" These facts were the answer to his previous question.
Overall, "The Last Meal Project" had more visual rhetoric's and was constructed better. But, I feel if Hargreave's changed the point his was trying to make or even changed the materials he used, then his presentation would have been better. The blood red words, the old black and white photos of the convicts, the crumpled ripped paper with the "stats" illustrated the points "The Last Meal Project" stated to the reader.

Rise of the NBA Nerd: Belated Post

Wesley Morris wrote an article concerning NBA players and their dress. His first comment is about Kevin Durant and his "nerdy" dress that he wears to a press conference and even provides a picture. Morris points out that athletes used to dress like they just threw on whatever, but now they dress more professionally. He later compares a black athlete dressing nerdy to having a black president. Most NBA players have ''cleaned" up their dress, but some, especially the NBA celebrities, have taken it to a whole level. Morris compares the "nerdy" dress to that of Carlton Banks from the Fresh Prince of Bel Air, an accurate comparison at that. And at first glance, Carlton and those who acted like him at the time, were weird and ostracized. But taking a another look at this, Carlton is actually someone that should, in a way, be looked up to. Like Will Smith did. Morris talks about how with Carlton's impression of being nerdy also came the impression of being gay, and pointed out the press conference with Dwight Howard. He ends it saying that there is a radical change to this sport,  it that there is no more "normal".
In my opinion, the idea of dressing up for a public press conference is a good idea, but some of the stars have taken it to a whole new level. Whether they're doing it to try and inspire a new trend or they're just being smart asses, it's being noticed. The fact that big name stars such as LeBron, Kevin Durant, and Dwight Howard are making such an extreme means that there will be a change in the future.
They way people dress definitely has a lasting impression on those who first meet you. Although humans are creatures with higher thinking than other animals, we still have a primal instinct of us that causes us to judge by appearance. So if someone were to wear lounging clothes or "gangster" wear, they wouldn't be taken seriously in most instances besides lounging around. On the other end of the spectrum, if one were to wear a suit or clothes one would wear to church, they would be taken seriously. If the NBA celebrities are trying to come off as jack-asses, they're doing a good job. I understand that they may be trying to get a message out that a way someone dresses shouldn't be the deciding factor of how they're viewed, but that's the way it is right now. Now, if the players are trying to get a trend started by making "nerdy" popular, they will probably succeed to some extent. I understand that some things are purely fashion accessories that have no real use, like a backwards ball cap, or earrings/other piercings, and even lens-less glasses, but the backpack Kevin Durant wore was a stupid touch.
Changing the opinion of the masses isn't impossible, but it's unlikely to do when it is attempted to do so quickly. The Rise of the NBA Nerd will have spread out opinions. Some will like it and start following the "new" trend. Other's might think it is stupid/ goofy and the players need to care about their actual appearance more. And the rest will just not care.

Ted Talks

http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_shargaa_please_please_people_let_s_put_the_awe_back_in_awesome
http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_rees_can_we_prevent_the_end_of_the_world#t-147579

                The first Ted Talk I viewed was “Can we prevent the end of the world?” Martin Rees was the speaker, and he discussed exactly what the title illustrated. Martin started with a few jokes and then the talk became serious and thought-evoking at the same time. He presented facts about are advances in technology (which had great advantages, but also had possible disasters.) The total talk was under seven minutes, but he got his message through and didn’t deviate from what the title was supposed to entail. Martin didn’t move really at all, so it felt as if the ted talk was a lecture, but it was quick and to the point. Although it is an opinion, I personally liked at the end of Martin’s talk was a quote. I believe that quotes that pertain to the subject can inspire the audience to think beyond the Ted Talk session.

                The next Ted Talk was “Let’s put the ‘awe’ back in ‘awesome’”. Jill Shargaa was the speaker and she was quite the “comedian.” She started with a few jokes, then gave the Webster’s dictionary definition of it. To sum it up, it’s basically an adjective describing something that causes fear and amazement. Jill made a few snarky comments about how the picture of one’s sandwich is not awesome. She then proceeded to give examples of actual awesome things, but there were a few that didn’t fit the Webster’s definition that she promptly used. For example, she used the wheel. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great invention, but it didn’t pertain to the definition she used. However, I did enjoy the fact that she moved around and made the talk less tense.

                All in all, both topics were interesting to me and I believe it would be interesting to the majority of people. The seriousness of Martin’s talk and the casual movement of Jill’s talk could make an attractive presentation. As stated above, Jill’s talk was more like a comedy sketch and she deviated from her own (Webster’s, but she provided it) definition, which, in a way, strayed away from her own topic. Martin’s body language seemed like a professor (which he probably was or still is) giving a lesson.

Bruh

Scott Mendelson essentially said that the women who had their nude pictures leaked were violated and they shouldn't have to take extra steps to keep people from hacking into their phone."Outlets as mainstream as People and CNN are referring to the photo leak as a “scandal.” All due respect, it’s not a scandal." 

I agree completely because it's their PERSONAL phone, not a public cell phone. They shouldn't have to put the nude files on a flash drive that's locked in a Swiss bank. Some may argue that they shouldn't have "inappropriate" pictures of themselves, but that's a personal opinion. It'd be inappropriate to display the pictures in a grade school class room, but as i said before, it's their personal phone. What they intend to do with the pictures is up to them.
Mendelson had pointed out that the victims shouldn't have to apologize, which i agree, but i understand why they did it. Public relations is a bitch to control, especially when individuals suddenly become prudes when a sexual "scandal" pops up. Our society hypes up "Today's" hot stories and everyone becomes a critic, as if they had been fighting against the "issue" at hand since birth. The female celebrities apologized so that those whom were actually offended get the apology the believe they deserve.
In conclusion, the celebrities had been wronged, but it wasn't as big of a controversy as it should be (thanks to public opinion though...) If people want to have nude files, that's fine. If they want to make them public, put them in a correct area (ie. porn sites or something along those lines.)