I have read two of other student's post about "Lifelike", one of them say that there was diversity of people getting involved with taxidermy, meaning it could be a teacher, butcher. It could be anyone, and other students says that she puts the setting very good that matches the title. It does make sense, anyone can be a taxidermist, there is no requirement, you can just go to taxidermy school and learn and become one, and even learn alot from other people to become one. Even some of the student think taxidermy is cool which to me is, ugh, don't think so.
For my next essay when I write my reflective essay, I would show a lots of choices that she made that connects to her title, and that made sense. It could convince other that taxidermy is intresting buit to me they are not, I sitll label it murder. When I write the essay about what Orlean wrote about and what information she gives while i give my opionion, my feelings about it,even some agreement or disagreement, I am sure the audience will understand me, why I am against it, and why I do not like them calling taxidermy art. I am sure that some people in the audience will disagree with me, and maybe some will agree with me, who knows? At least they will know how I feel about taxidermy and why. They will also understand why Susan wrote this in some gossip magazine.The tone I would use is seriousness, blunt,and disgusted.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Assignment 7
The choices that Orlean made is not odd to me, but why does she uses most of the dialogue in that article? why does she hang around them instead of researching on them, meet them online? Seems like she uses the dialogue of taxidermist's conversation to show that she was there, she heard them, and she talked with them. She want people to know that she did get the right information about taxidermy, and wasn't a lie. She hangs around with them instead of using the internet for information, to see how they live their life as a taxidermist, what they do, how their wives react to their odd hobby or career. The internet is not always true, she did research on the internet but it doesn't seem to satisfy her so she decides to hang around them to get the real information, and to see what being taxidermist is like. Pretty much it is easy for me to read and understand her choices and why she uses them.
Assignment 6: Choices
It might be very odd for Susan to write "Lifelike" in a gossip magazine, but she did it for a reason. For example, do you really think she will write those article in a taxidermy magazine, it would make sense right? But why, those people who are interested in taxidermy or are taxidermist, they already know these thing, they do not need to be convinced so why should they read it? So she picks a gossip magazine to get a new readers, maybe to pull in a new people to be interested in taxidermy. Or maybe she is trying to help them understand that taxidermy is not a bad thing? She uses the right word, it is not hard or easy, it is just right, she uses the word that taxidermist uses but still put them in the right sentence to help people understand, and she makes it sound exciting so people will keep reading it. She even compared taxidermy to art, the word craft, clay, hairdressing is all in that article that is related with art, and even the word zoology to relate to someone who loves animal and science but not a taxidermy. That would be a good "pull in" to have them get involved in taxidermy because it is art, and animal science.
Assignment 6
When I read Susan Orlean's article, she is very detailed, she even had a proper introduction that keeps us reading, and helps us understand what we will be reading. She doesn't seem to have any grammar mistakes. She uses the right words to fit into her article about taxidermy, she learns those grammar by the taxidermist that she meets at the convention, the words that we do not often see everyday unless you are around taxidermist all the time, those words that she uses in this article is; fleshing machine, acetone,bondo,noonkester's #NRBERH head sculpted by Bones Johnson, arcane, javelina, Talmudic.. etc, she uses a lots of words that taxidermist use that we don't use everyday. So she did pretty good with describing what they do, she even talked with them to get more information and use their words, and also she hears them. Her arrangement is very good, like I say she had a good introduction, she even added history before she writes more from what she has learned when she is around at the convention.
Her tone, she seems to make it exicting, artistic, natural that makes us want to read more. She seems to try to convince people that taxidermy is art, an hobby, and that people has a love for animals but only in a dead way, and they want to show the world what animal really looks like upclose, and that taxidermy is very important. They had a World Taxidermy Championship, taxidermy was around for generations, they even have websites, they even make a lots of money, " Taxidermy is now estimated to be a five- hundred- and seventy-million-dollar annual business, made up of small operators around the country who mount animals for museums, for decorators, and mostly for the thirteen million or so Americans who are recreational hunters and occasion want to preserve and display something they killed and who are willing to shell out anywhere from two hundred dollars to mount a pheasant to several thousand for a kudu or a grizzly bear." She gave a good details of how much they make just for mounting animals, and made them sound like a profession not murder, which I still disagree. I think she picked a magazine to do her article in is to have people who has never experince those thing, and learn something new and accept it nor maybe try it because it is a natural thing. The genere she uses is odd because it doesn't matches the people who reads them but she knew what she was doing, why put it in taxidermy magazine if those people that reads it already knows, so put it some kind of people magazine or fashion magazine or gossip magazine so people would read it and understand why taxidermy is around.
Her tone, she seems to make it exicting, artistic, natural that makes us want to read more. She seems to try to convince people that taxidermy is art, an hobby, and that people has a love for animals but only in a dead way, and they want to show the world what animal really looks like upclose, and that taxidermy is very important. They had a World Taxidermy Championship, taxidermy was around for generations, they even have websites, they even make a lots of money, " Taxidermy is now estimated to be a five- hundred- and seventy-million-dollar annual business, made up of small operators around the country who mount animals for museums, for decorators, and mostly for the thirteen million or so Americans who are recreational hunters and occasion want to preserve and display something they killed and who are willing to shell out anywhere from two hundred dollars to mount a pheasant to several thousand for a kudu or a grizzly bear." She gave a good details of how much they make just for mounting animals, and made them sound like a profession not murder, which I still disagree. I think she picked a magazine to do her article in is to have people who has never experince those thing, and learn something new and accept it nor maybe try it because it is a natural thing. The genere she uses is odd because it doesn't matches the people who reads them but she knew what she was doing, why put it in taxidermy magazine if those people that reads it already knows, so put it some kind of people magazine or fashion magazine or gossip magazine so people would read it and understand why taxidermy is around.
Assignment 5
Susan did pretty good at the beginning of the article, she describe very well what the article is going to be about. I think she tried to have a reader to keep reading by showing the details to interest them, to have them want to know more about taxidermy.
When Susan say that they were setting up the competition at a hotel, "Crowne Plaza hotel, the sort of nicely appointed place that seems more suited to regional sales conferences and rehearsal dinners than to having wolves in the corridors and people crossing the lobby shouting, 'Heads up! Buffalo coming through!' " I think it is silly, they should be doing this competition show somewhere else less fancy. Susan wrote a lots of dialogue in this article, writing down what people has said that interests her. " 'The toes on a real competitive piece are very important. I think Bondo works nicely, and so does super glue.' " I think that is disgusting, talking like they are in a craft class like children.
I even do not like when I read this part, it outrages me even more, " I knew a fellow with cattle, and I told him, ' If you ever have one stillborn, I 'd really like to have it' I thought it would make a really nice mount." That makes me really mad! It is a stillborn cattle, have some respect!
Susan did a good job with little of history of taxidermy, but honestly I already know that it has been around for long time, "Has been around since the eighteenth century, but it was first brought into popular regard by the Victorians, who thrilled to all tokens of exotic travel and especially to an domesticated representations of wilderness." Susan.
"As long as taxidermy served to preserve wild animals and make them available for study, it was viewed as an honorable trade, but most people were still discomfited by it." Susan. I understand that there is other reason of being taxidermist but gosh, I can't stand the thought of them doing that to animals so they can be poked and prodded.
I am really surprise the most about this, "Taxidermy schools opened; previously, any aspiring taxidermist could only hope to learn the trade by apprenticing or by taking one of a few correspondence courses available." Susan.
"To be good at taxidermy, you have to be good at sewing, sculpting, painting, and hairdressing, and mostly you have to be a little bit of a zoology nerd." Susan. I think it sound like art, cosmetology, and science combined!
I think Susan could possibly be fansicated by taxidermy, "I said that his bobcat was beautiful and that even icicles on the piece looked completely real."
I do not know about anyone but when I read this, I feel angry, I did not want to continue read this. And it seems like Susan is very involved in taxidermy, she hang around the show, talked with taxidermist, and research the history. She did good job at it, a lots of details of people talking, and how they feel about it. But damn, it make me mad, I kept reading this piece is because my sister encourages me to do it even though herself hates taxidermy too.
When Susan say that they were setting up the competition at a hotel, "Crowne Plaza hotel, the sort of nicely appointed place that seems more suited to regional sales conferences and rehearsal dinners than to having wolves in the corridors and people crossing the lobby shouting, 'Heads up! Buffalo coming through!' " I think it is silly, they should be doing this competition show somewhere else less fancy. Susan wrote a lots of dialogue in this article, writing down what people has said that interests her. " 'The toes on a real competitive piece are very important. I think Bondo works nicely, and so does super glue.' " I think that is disgusting, talking like they are in a craft class like children.
I even do not like when I read this part, it outrages me even more, " I knew a fellow with cattle, and I told him, ' If you ever have one stillborn, I 'd really like to have it' I thought it would make a really nice mount." That makes me really mad! It is a stillborn cattle, have some respect!
Susan did a good job with little of history of taxidermy, but honestly I already know that it has been around for long time, "Has been around since the eighteenth century, but it was first brought into popular regard by the Victorians, who thrilled to all tokens of exotic travel and especially to an domesticated representations of wilderness." Susan.
"As long as taxidermy served to preserve wild animals and make them available for study, it was viewed as an honorable trade, but most people were still discomfited by it." Susan. I understand that there is other reason of being taxidermist but gosh, I can't stand the thought of them doing that to animals so they can be poked and prodded.
I am really surprise the most about this, "Taxidermy schools opened; previously, any aspiring taxidermist could only hope to learn the trade by apprenticing or by taking one of a few correspondence courses available." Susan.
"To be good at taxidermy, you have to be good at sewing, sculpting, painting, and hairdressing, and mostly you have to be a little bit of a zoology nerd." Susan. I think it sound like art, cosmetology, and science combined!
I think Susan could possibly be fansicated by taxidermy, "I said that his bobcat was beautiful and that even icicles on the piece looked completely real."
I do not know about anyone but when I read this, I feel angry, I did not want to continue read this. And it seems like Susan is very involved in taxidermy, she hang around the show, talked with taxidermist, and research the history. She did good job at it, a lots of details of people talking, and how they feel about it. But damn, it make me mad, I kept reading this piece is because my sister encourages me to do it even though herself hates taxidermy too.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
group work reflection
The group work we did last thursday was good. We had a lots of agreements, we worked together fine and understood each other's ideas and our ideas combined and made sense. I even learn something from her too about the conclusion of Stein's article that helped me want to reread the article again. "Ultimately, the message of the Macintosh ad is an old one echoing cultural faith in the machine and in technology-engendered progress. Technology per se does not yield the Big Brother figure and its control over brainwashed and roboticized masses. It is the wrong technology that creates such a state. The right technology in this case the Macintosh will provide salvation."
I am having hard time reading the rest of groups paper, but from my memory, the group that did the history part where the old computer takes place in business where male works, not female. And the new era of Mactonish computer has created a new technology that gives us the opprounity to use computer for various reason at home, library, etc. I like the introduction, they did pretty good with the drawing, and telling what we will be reading ahead.
All the comparison that Stein did in the article, and the word Salvation shows that we don't have to stay with the old same thing, we can try something new, something better, and that everyone can use not just mens or business.
I am having hard time reading the rest of groups paper, but from my memory, the group that did the history part where the old computer takes place in business where male works, not female. And the new era of Mactonish computer has created a new technology that gives us the opprounity to use computer for various reason at home, library, etc. I like the introduction, they did pretty good with the drawing, and telling what we will be reading ahead.
All the comparison that Stein did in the article, and the word Salvation shows that we don't have to stay with the old same thing, we can try something new, something better, and that everyone can use not just mens or business.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Assignment 5
When I read lifelike by Susan Orlean, I did not like the article at all. I don't believe in taxidermy. But I am trying to understand the article. I think Susan is very invlove in taxidermy, trying to get information from them by going to the competition, talking with them, seeing what they do. I think when she wrote this article, she is trying to convince people that taxidermy is art, and it is a profession not a strange hobby. But she has a weird way of showing it because she does wrote some things that would make me mad, and not want to continue read this article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)