Dead Poet’s Society Notes: Part 2

• Knox goes to the party, is ignored by Chris, then gets drunk
• The boys seem very annoyed by Dalton bringing girls to their meeting 
• Knox gets beat on by Chris’s boyfriend 
• Dalton publishes a article about the dead poet’s society in the school paper
• Dalton exposes himself as the writer of the article in an attempt to get thrown out of the school and Is punished for it
• Dalton is told to turn in everyone in the society
• Mr. Keating is confronted by the headmaster about his teaching methods
• He talks to Dalton about his behavior, but gently
• Neil’s father finds out about the play and tells Neil to quit
• Neil goes to Keating to talk about his father, and Keating encourages him to talk to his father and show what his passion is
• Knox tries to give Chris flowers. He charges into her class and reads her a poem aloud
• Neil claims that he talked to his father and his father is going to let him stay with acting. Mr. Keating doesn’t seem to believe him
• Knox invites Chris to the play with him, and she agrees
• Neil’s father shows up to the play
• Neil’s father reacts badly to the play and orders Keating to stay away from Neil
• Neil’s father says exactly what he thought he would and Neil passes up his chance to talk to him
• Neil steals his father’s gun and kills himself
• Cameron tells on the group, administration looks to make Keating responsible for Neil’s death 
• Keating gets fired
• The students give him a standing farewell
• What was the significance of what Keating taught them? Can we truly know the long term effects or can it only be inferred or assumed? 
• What was the difference between the way Keating affected his students vs. the way Escalante affected his?

Dead Poet’s Society Notes: Part 1

• The school has a law of discipline, excellence
•  Best school in the united states, lots of ivy league graduates
•  Todd’s older brother was apparently a great student and everybody reminds
• The one kid’s dad is very controlling; it seems that all of the kids have parents who dictate their lives
• The classes seem very difficult, with strict demands
•   The new English teacher walks in whistling and walks right out, urging the students to follow. They obviously have never seen anything like this in other classes
•   The new English teacher makes jokes, and the students don’t seem to know what to do with it
• The students think the new teacher is weird and creepy
•  Todd seems reluctant to join in with the other students. Is he shy?
•   Knox meets a beautiful girl in love with someone he considers a jerk
•   Mr. Keating has the boys rip a couple pages out of the book. They all seem to have fun. One of the teachers walks in and seems to be surprised by the fact that the teacher is sanctioning it.
•   That same teacher later talks to him with ‘realism’
•   Mr. Keating wants to teach the students to be ‘free thinkers’
•  Keating’s description of the dead poets society inspires the boys to resurrect it
•  Keating gives the boys a book for the society, apparently knowing they would start it
• The boys have to be very careful to sneak out at nigh
•  Mr. Keating makes the boys laugh all the time and teaches them how to enjoy Shakespeare
•   Keating encourages the boys to think for themselves, not to simply consider what the author thinks, but what they think
•   Neil gets excited about becoming an actor and trying out for a play
•  Neil keeps encouraging Todd to invest. He refused to let him stay in his own ideas
•  Keating uses sport to help his students get into poetry
•  Neil gets his part and writes a fake letter of permission so he can do it
•  Keating encourages the students—even the one who writes a bad poem
• Keating pulls Todd out and makes him do poetry, even when he didn’t write one. He makes Todd speak his thoughts and it turns it a poem, and everybody loves it. As he says, “don’t you forget this”
•  Knox gets invited to a party  by the girl he likes
•   Keating talks to the students of conformity and encourages the boys to believe they have unique ideas and stick with them
• Todd’s parents send him the same desk for his birthday two years in a row
•  Unlike in Stand and deliver, where the school was full of poverty and the educational level was lacking, this school is for the wealthy, is very high end, and demands excellence from teachers and students.
• Keating and Mr. Escalante both poke fun at their students, but Keating seems much more gentle and good natured about it, where Escalante sometimes stepped over lines

Stand and Deliver Personal Notes: Part 1 & 2

Stand and Deliver Part 2: Group Notes

How Do the Essays Differ?

Malcom X's "How I Learned to Read" and Rose's "I Just Wanna be Average" are different from the other essays in that they focus on the story and the narrative aspects of that story while the others are more concerned with the process and contain less narrative features. "How I Learned to Love Traveling Solo," seemed to me to be the most different of all the essays. I was more of a categorical listing of advice, with little enough of an actual narrative. While the author did mention some experiences she had, they were connected only to the category they were told in and didn't seem to me to be very relevant to the actual process in which the author actually learned to love traveling solo. "How I Learned to Live Google-Free" and "How I Learned to Program Computers," are similar to eachother but diffrent from the others. They are very chronological, with obviously divided sections, but they are more informational then "How I Learned to Read" or "I Just Wanna Be Average."

How I Learned to Love Traveling Solo

Cate Huston's "How I Learned to Love Traveling Solo" was very different from the others that we read. It seemed to be focused primarily on giving advice on how to enjoy traveling alone, in contrast to the other essays we had read, which focused on the story that led them to the point where they could give advice. The others were chronological and revolved around the actual experience, while this one seemed more focused on what kind of advice the author could give now that they had gone through this experience. The way the author formatted this piece may be helpful to us in writing our essay, but I also have a hard time trying to figure out how to connect this list of advice to an essay we are supposed to write in a narrative fashion...

English Essay #2 Brainstorm

For my second essay, I plan to compare two teachers who both affected me in very significant ways, one very negatively and one very positively. I really want to focus on what it was specifically about each of these teachers that translated into positive--or negative--results for me in the long run. I'm a little worried because the more formatted an essay, the harder it is for me to write. I'm so used to writing creatively that stuffing my thoughts into walls and formatting is painful for me...thus, my biggest fear for this assignment is how stifled and stilted my thinking will become through the formatting filter. I simply hope that I'll be able to stay clear and on topic, with clear flow from one subject to the next

Audre Lorde

Audre Lorde encounters a number of teachers, all very different and of varying significance to  her learning. One of her teachers was her mother. Audre shows how her mother is very fixated on rules and the 'way things are' by showing how distressing her mother found it when she did silly things such as leave off the 'y' in her name because she disliked the tail. She further illustrates her mother's attitude by simply saying, "No deviation was allowed from her inter-pretations of correct."
      She also shows her mothers stringency when she explains the reasons for her resistance to the materials she was provided in her kindergarten class, saying  "Having been roundly spanked on several occasions for having made that mistake at home, I knew quite well that crayons were not what you wrote with, and music books were definitely not what you wrote in" again asserting her mothers conformity to her beliefs and her demands that her daughter do the same, under threat of spanking.

      A contrast to her mother's seemingly harsh behavior was her kindergarden teacher. She seems to be kind and encouraging, as well as smart as shown when she motivates Audre o write her name, even with her black crayon by saying "Imagine that, a big girl like you. Such a shame, I'll have to tell your mother you won't even try," an gentle admonishment that shows she is smart because she is playing off of any child's fear of being in trouble with their mother' She then shows her encouragement by saying "Now just try dear, I'm sure you can try and print your A."
     Lorde also expresses her impression of the woman by saying that "Her voice smiled a big smile," showing an aspect of her personality through they way she sounded. This first impression of the teacher, however, seems to be disproved when the woman reacts extremely negatively to Audre writing her entire name rather then one letter.

Stand and Deliver: Group Notes

                The movie opens by clearly illustrating the condition of the school and the surrounding area. Graffiti covers everything, including the inside of the school—a fact which nobody reacts to, indicating that it is normal and expected. Mr. Escalante’s car gets broken into and some of his students attempt to intimidate him. Even more then that, he was hired to teach a computer class in a school that owns no computers, immediately putting him in a situation he was not expecting.

                  From day one, Mr. Escalante shows good teaching skills by showing the students he won’t be bullied and making jokes with the students in order to connect. He is often doing all kinds of things to connect with his student, and motivate them. For example, he teaches the kids in the class to gang up on students who misbehave or show up to class late, discouraging misbehavior and connecting the class by giving them something fun to do together. He is always mixing up the methods he uses to teach in order to keep his students interested, as is show when he comes to class dress as a cook and chops apples. 

                  You can tell that Mr. Escalante really cares about the kids and their learning.  One example of this is when he talks personally with that Ana’s parents to convince them not to take her out of school, and another is when he took Pancho on a drive to show him examples of how his current decisions could affect his future. These events are also examples of how Mr. Escalante works to reach his students on a personal level.

                  Another aspect of his good teaching is his high expectations of his students. As he says to the board, “Kid will rise to the expectations set for them.” In accordance to this belief, he treats his students like they can do what he asks them to, like they are good enough and smart enough. As he says “They aren’t stupid, they just don’t know things,” Another example of high expectations is his implementation of the calculus class and the summer classes. He puts a lot of trust in the abilities of his students, believing that they will rise to the occasion. He believes in them to the point that he opposes the other teachers ideas of their abilities and pushes for harder classes.

                  A contrast to Mr. Escalante’s good teaching and his belief in his students is the attitudes of the other teachers. While we haven’t seen actual examples of how they teach their classes, at the board meetings his fellow teachers show exasperation and frustration, as well as low expectations for the abilities of their students. One asks to be returned to teaching P.E and one quits for a better job. None seem to expect much from their students and believe that they have done all they can.

                  He reaches the kids by behaving in a way they can understand. He makes dry jokes and mocks the macho attitudes of some of the boys, making what they think is ‘cool’ seem silly and convincing them to work harder. He also sets up problems in ways that the kids can understand and enjoy. Some examples of this are when he explains negative numbers to the class with an analogies of sand removed from a hole. He also uses the gigolo problem to get the kids into solving a problem, and talks the kids with jokes and jabs that are similar to the way they talk to each other.

               He encourages the students to get into college and try harder by encouraging them and giving them pictures of what their life will be like if they don’t get into college

What Makes a Good Teacher--After Reading

     After reading Marie F. Hassett's What Makes a Good Teacher, I still have the same basic ideas about what I think makes a good teacher--but Hassett  clearly illustrated a point that, while in my mind, I hadn't really fleshed out until after reading her publication. That idea is one of flexibility. Much as I discussed in my previous post, a teacher must be able to adjust and change in order to reach all kinds of students. Hassette more clearly outlined this with her understanding of how a teacher must be flexible to reach a student. Having such a broad range of students over her career, she was able to clearly comprehend the fluid nature of the needs and minds of any given class, and as a result, the required fluidity of teaching methods. Acknowledging this as a requirement for any method, class or group is an important aspect of being a good teacher.

Good Teaching

Good teaching is no simple thing, as almost everyone could be best taught in one specific way, that may or may not be the same for the next person or the next. That being said, one could conclude that the only way to teach well is to except that all people are different, have different talents and learn in different ways, thus there is no one way to teach all people. Good teaching recognizes the need for diversity in teaching to reflect the diversity of the human mind. Perhaps good teaching could utilize many different strategies and formulas for education, thus reaching a further number of people. Whatever the actual application, good teaching would have to recognize how un-formulaic the minds of students, and from that realize that formulaic teaching methods are worse than useless—they are destructive. Good teaching would highlight skills rather than divert them. Good teaching would encourage the use of the mind for thought and growth, rather than for programing into a mold. Teaching today has a tendency to appreciate and value only one kind of learning and though process. Those who think differently are conditioned  through punishment—bad grades, or otherwise—until they better fit the mold.This kind of method will always do more harm then good.

Main Point of Essay

The main thing I wanted my readers to understand about my educational experience was how effective it was at changing my writing. The insults I suffered and the paranoia I adopted essentially, and please excuse the pun, rewrote who I was as a writer. I was never the same after the event. I didn't write the same kinds of stories, didn't use the same kind of words. Not only did my writing style itself change, but my very attitude towards writing and criticism changed. Everything I write today, is in some ways, a product of that experience. Even the fact that I can post what I write on a blog full of people I've actually met is because I became a stronger, more confident author after making it out of my difficult experience . Before, I would have been too nervous and embarrassed that people I actually knew would dislike or ridicule my writing. Now I can post with ease, aware that whether people like or dislike what I write, it doesn't change anything about my writing or my skill. I am what I am, and I'm confident in that existence.

Ed Narrative: Building A Writer by Burning Her Book

     Writing is different for everyone. For some, it’s an expression of self, a lens through which to show others the world as you see it. For others, it is a droll, painful task, best to be avoided at all costs. But no matter the fashion through which you see writing, the process through which your writing develops can be unpredictable, and more often than not, harsh. Writing for me began at age eight, quietly sitting in the oversized chair in my family’s living room. Slowly I henpecked my way through a sentence, then a paragraph, then a chapter. From that moment on, writing was in my blood. It became the deepest particle of my self-expression and I wrote constantly. My skill slowly and tenderly improved, fleshing out as my mind—and the word I saw—grew. It was not, however, till five years later that my writing was truly tested, and through that testing, jumpstarted into genuine maturity. This process took place in a world some writers never know or touch—the world of online writing. Surprisingly—or perhaps not—the feature of this environment that truly affected me was not the friendship, support and compliments I received there, but the brutality of the criticism that was the very backbone of the domain. The things I learned there are some of the most significant of my writing career.

            I was introduced to the website by a friend. She talked often and animatedly about not only the website and the content she posted there, but also about the Veritas, an exclusive group of writers she looked up to, and had been inducted into, as the website lingo went, a newbie.

I eventually joined, and with her help, I was accepted into the world of the Veritas. It was through this exclusive group, and the forum they hosted, that my writing first began its slow, painful climb to higher reaches. The online writing world is viscous, cruel and exceptionally creative in the expression of both characteristics. The Veritas were no exception; they had charged themselves with the care and up-keeping of the website, holy battalion in the face of literary pollution and dedicated slayers of clichés and Mary Sue's. Their weapon of choice was a process ‘fondly’ known as flaming. In principle, flaming is fairly simple as it has only one goal: destruction. A critique so cutting, graphic and cruel the author of the piece in question would be utterly crushed, and hopefully, sufficiently encouraged to never, ever write again. In composition, a flame has a wide range of possibilities. Some are short and concise, others far reaching, extensive and graphic. Among the Veritas community, your general standing on the forum and the respect you garnered by fellow members was based on two things; writing skill and your ability to flame. Those with a creative and original talent for flaming quickly scaled the ladders of standing and respect in the community, held in high esteem and often complimented and discussed by fellow members. Posting lists of targeted 'flammable' stories on the forum and encouraging fellows to add their own flame to the growing inferno was by no means uncommon.
            As a young writer myself, my introduction to this kind of highly critical and volatile environment was both intriguing and terrifying.  I became obsessed with the condition of my own spelling and grammar, spell-checking everything I posted twice and rereading everything for grammatical errors, terrified that the people that I looked up to would turn their considerable violence on me if I showed even a hint of weakness. This obsessive condition, while perhaps not the best way to learn, quickly and efficiently shaped me up. I forced myself to memorize and execute the grammar skills I was obsessively checking for. First, the proper use of your, you’re, they’re, their, then the proper use (and length) of an ellipse, and so the list went on… Eventually, the proper use of all of these became second nature. Next was spelling. As someone who reads as an addiction rather than simply recreationally, I have a large vocabulary. Unfortunately, spelling has never come naturally to me. I had to sound out words and then use those phonic versions to memorize spelling, often coming up with cheesy rhymes that helped me remember how the word was spelled rather than how it sounded. Eventually, I was polished and shiny, inculpable to even the most vicious and nit-picking of the Veritas. But in that online world, I was in no measure safe. Not by a long shot…

            The first time I got flamed is one I will never forget. It not only shaped my writing, but shaped my attitude for the future. The obsessive skills I had learned from my time on the forum were just as important in the creative writing that I posted. My grammar and spelling were spotless. I even had close friends read over my work before I even considered posting. So, when I say that the things I had up on the website were—to me at the least—irreproachable, perhaps you understand my meaning. The specific story in question was one of particular pride for me. It was no secret that I was at least three years junior to many of my fellow Veritas, and because of this I feared my ideas would be considered immature, my vocabulary lacking in comparison to older readers. To combat this, I created stories original, daring, and graphic. Where many of my fellow writers wrote humor or romance, I created chilling tales of unfortunate events, never fearing to stint on blood and gore, but balancing my creation with intriguing characters and moments of black comedy I’m surprised I possessed at the tender age of 13. This piece was no exception. It was violent, scary, and distinctly tragic. I was proud and glowing from the flow of praise that came in from my Verita friends. I checked the comments daily looking for more praise, more boosts to my burgeoning writer’s ego.  So when my eyes landed on the flame, sitting dark and hot in the midst of the rosy praise that occupied the majority of my page, it was like a kick in the gut.

I remember feeling sick and embarrassed, my former pride seeming a farce in the face of some stranger’s words. It hurt. Up to that point, the only people who had ever read my writing were my family and my friends. And yes, I counted the Veritas as my friends. Not at first, no, but it became that way. So while at the time I still dreaded their disdain, looking back I understand I wouldn’t have gotten any. They’d call me on it if I made a mistake—and occasionally they had to—but they’d do it kindly. Because of this I’d been rather, well, babied. The cruel reality of being a writer is that no matter how good you get, someone will hate what you write. I was as of yet unaware of such a reality. My writers skin was fragile and tender, my ego bloated and my mind devoid of any possibility that anyone would even think to insult me.  My writing was good. I knew that to the depths of my soul, hadn’t even an inkling of doubt. Because of this, I was unable to react properly or maturely to the insult. I couldn’t take it in stride. I couldn’t separate an insult to my writing from an insult to myself.  It felt so personal. My first instinct was to delete the entire story. Even the many compliments of the people I actually respected seemed inconsequential in comparison. That quick, I was convinced I’d created a horrific literary disaster.
             So how did this affect me in the long run?  At the time, I could hardly see past my humiliation, but looking back I realize that the flame was one of the most important things that ever happened to me as a writer. See, as the pain and embarrassment faded, I came to realize that my writing as a whole didn’t suck, and perhaps more importantly, that who I was and what my writing was, however connected the two felt to me, would appear as different entities to others. Perhaps most importantly, the event gave me a backbone. Today I have the thick skin any good writer knows to build. I can protect myself and my all-important writer’s confidence. I can take advice without getting defensive or hurt. I can understand that my writing won’t reach everyone. I know that some people will despise the words that still feel so personal and integral to me. All of these thing are because once upon a time, in a dark corner of the internet, the girl I was had her confidence crushed. Though I know I’ll never meet them, I secretly thank that witty, mean stranger for their harsh words, because without them, I wouldn’t be the writer I am today.

           All in all, my time on the website and the Veritas forum was one of the most difficult, fun, and constructive experiences I’ve ever had in my writing career. I was able to connect with other writers, become part of an exclusive society, and improve one of the most basic things every writer needs—good grammar. I learned how to avoid clichés and the hated Mary Sue. I learned to take an insult. I learned that an insult doesn’t make a compliment untrue, but that it can still contain constructive information. I got a thicker skin, and everyday, I’m thankful for that. I would never take back my time on the forum, nor the harsh words, or the stress or the paranoia. In the long run, it was all for the better.

Lingo: 

The Veritas are a group of writers that host a forum, sanction contests, and moderate many affiliate sites. The website description of the group read: We are the Veritas. By definition, the Veritas are not a cult, we are a political party dedicated to trying to make the fandom a better place. Or just chatting. Whatever strikes us. 

Flaming is the act of decimating the work of another author. Always brutal and cruel, often creative, and with a tendency to make rather improbable assumptions about the authors brain and other anatomical parts…Want to see some example? Check out the following links to review pages:

•  A compilation of famous flames from the most hated story in Fanfic history
•  A random review page for an unfortunate writer 
• and another random review page...
• and one more

Mary Sue is a character lacking in any discernible flaws, to the point that they become antagonist to the reader themselves. Usually unnaturally or unusually pretty, very good at everything and great at besting even their betters. For a better description, check out http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/mary-sue, and to test your character for Sueishness, go to http://www.springhole.net/writing/marysue.htm