[Catherine McCormick]

I agree with Casey also, it is very easy to skip over the parts of a text that may not be as important. I wonder if the reason we do this is because of the society we are in today. Based on the many social media sites and television itself, long attention spans are not necessary. Maybe in order to keep ourselves entertained we have to skip over anything that is not immediately important. This could be because the media forms we experience today do not encourage more than a good 5 minutes of attention in order to receieve and understand content. The average attention span of human beings has decreased greatly due to social media. This could create a hostile envoirnment for media forms (such as books with paratext) that require extensive attention and research.

[Catherine McCormick]

I think that when reading a piece of work with paratext associated with it, it is still important to acknowledge the paratext. The publisher, for whatever reason, assigned a specific set of paratext to go with a specific work on purpose. This paratext may have important information about the work that one never would have known if not reading it. While this may be true, I dont think that one should take the paratext at full value, it is still important to make your own decisions about what should or should be related to a piece of work. Paratext can both be helpful and harmful when analyzing a book.

[Catherine McCormick]

I am under the belief that real change takes time. The fact that even today these issues are still prevalent saddens me, but at the same time show that there is still room for improvement within society today. People are aware of, discussing, and trying to change this situation is a good sign. It means that even in little ways change is happening. Although these prejudices are still in works today, i believe that the presence is lessening and soon will become extinct. The goal is to continue to inform people about the wrongness of these prejudices. This is why ignorance is such a threat, if people continue to ignore problems then nothing will get done.

[Catherine McCormick]

I agree that Social Media has a huge impact on what is seen, read, shared, etc. This source has the ability to make someone small huge and vise versa. Without this ability in Douglass’ time, I can see how it would be harder to figure out what to use as paratext because there was not immediate feedback. Every time someone comments on a text online the author is able to recognize what good and what bad the paratext has done for his/her work. This correlates with the “who decides” part of our question as one could ask: Who gets to decide what paratext is used and not used in a specific text.

[Catherine McCormick]

I noticed that the very first line of the Nicolay version differs from the other versions. Instead of saying “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” The Nicolay version puts “all men are created equal” in quotation marks. This revision struck me because I thought it was odd that he would put this in quotes. Then I realized that this may be one of the earlier versions Lincoln wrote, meaning he may have revised the version realizing that this could offend alot of people. Four score and seven years ago, the nation may have had the goal of equality but at that point many believed that all men are not created equal. That is why this part is in quotation marks. I understand that Lincoln would revise this in order to get his point across clearer: Now all men should be treated equally, as was the goal of the founding fathers. The quotation marks also mess up the rhythm of the piece because they require a slightly complicated though process. One would pass over these quotation marks and see them as a less serious part. The quotations take away the legitimacy of that statement even though they were put in to support it!

[Catherine McCormick]

Although I find Kasey’s interpretation of this quote interesting, I thought of it in a different manner. When reading this quote I found it to be relatable to all media forms in general. The publishing world deals not only in written word, but also in photographs, music, etc. When I think about anything getting published I imagine it is for the sole purpose of getting these medias as widespread as possible.  This is important because the theme in Walden is to expand one’s thinking. By believing that one can get important and relevant information out of not only literature but music and/or photography one can open up his/her world view.

[Catherine McCormick]

When thinking back upon our question I realized that we are also representing the “Who Reads” part. When this book was published it may have only really been available to a certain group of people. Not everyone could afford to buy books nor could everyone read and comprehend the language used. I believe that this book was for those who where closer to Thoreau’s class. This is important because this message may be easier for them to understand and incorporate. People who lived a more “hand-to-mouth” existence would not have the time or resources to embrace this.

[Catherine McCormick]

In order for this question the definition of technology has to be decided upon. In older times techology was simply known as a tool or method used to make a process easeier to achieve a overall objective. I find this definition to be to general in society today. To me, technology is related to using electronic devices. Following my definition of technology Thoreau using these tools in “Walden” is not going against his advice to get away from technology.

[Catherine McCormick]

I agree with Daisy’s interepretation of this question. War between humans and war between animals cannot be fully compared. For animals it is instinctual and for some sort of survival. Even babies animals still “fight”, although it seems more like playing, to learn skills and hone instincts. Whereas people fight for reasons such as political issues, border arguments, etc. The difference is that human understand the consequences and harm wars can cause and yet they continue to engage.

[Catherine McCormick]

While I agree that individuality is important, I feel there is a process to being recognized for ones individuality. Sometimes it may be the group work, or mass participation, that inspires one to strike out on their own. Mass participation has the advantage of being able to, in many cases, reach a wider audience. To be able to be a successful individual voice many need first the reassurance of a group.

[Author]

Posts