I chose to read a short story titled "The Story of an Hour". The story was very short, but yet very descriptive. It was about a woman whose husband had been killed in a train accident. Her sister was the one that had to break the news to her. After being informed of the death of her husband, she went to what I would call, "her safe place". It seemed as if she began to daydream to cope with the pain of this tragedy. The scene where she is looking out the window includes every detail possible. The usage of vivid details painted a picture of the scenes. The course of action was no longer than one day, it happened very fast, fitting the title, and was clearly stated. The main characters were Louise, her sister, and Richards. All three characters remained present throughout the story until the end which shows the technique we discussed in class, as well as concrete instances that show the course of action. The word usage was easily understood and very detailed. In one scene, she describes the clouds and tops of trees, and paints a mental picture of the character's view, which was also included in the "Architecture" piece. Her word choice made me feel as if i was sitting beside the main character experiences the same things. The ending was confusing to me, so I had to read it multiple times. Finally I figured out that her husband was not really killed, but Im not sure why they told her that. The mystery involved in the ending leaves room for the reader to determine the course of action that the story could progress in. After reviewing this short story, I have realized that I may need to delete certain parts from my own, to leave more mystery for my readers. My conclusion in my story ends kind of the same as the one in "The Story of an Hour" by leaving room for questions. I feel as if this is a good technique to make the reader think and determine their own ending. Personally as a reader, mystery keeps me entertained, so I tried to use that particular technique in my writing.
Structural Analysis
After reviewing the "Architecture" document, I found out that I have used some structural techniques in my story that I didn't even know I was writing. It seems that I wrote my story based off of suspense.
"Put an initiating event upfront that has the potential to lead to a significant outcome. Then follow that up with obstacles. These will make the reader concerned for the character. Then,write in the final significant event."
My story includes an event, followed by obstacles, and then my final event is implied, but not concretely stated. There is curiosity and resolution also included in my story. The ending of my story involves mystery. It leaves room for the reader to determine their own ending. Although this story is based off of true events, I wanted my readers to really engage in determining the conclusion. I believe my story is "short and simple", as well as "simply structured."
"-Simple linear structure
--1 or more characters engage in a series of action that follow logically from one to the next
--characters motivations are revealed in text
--logical conclusion / resolution / outcome"
I also believe that I followed the "mental model." Which states that the reader has the ability to map out the sequence of events and is able to picture the scenes as well as the characters.
I also used engagement and interest, which is what I am interested in hen i am reading a story. If the story does not capture my attention and keep me engaged, I am unable to fully comprehend the story altogether.
There are some techniques mentioned in the "Architecture" piece that I am going to try to incorporate into my story. Some of the details in my short story need to be more engaging and entertaining so that my readers will be able to follow the story more easily.
3/10/2014
Games I am going to play:
1. Arcuz www.agame.com/game/arcuz2. Sword www.agame.com/game/sword
Can we explore games as allegories for the world we live in?
As I was reading Wark's work, I thought he was talking about the life of someone real. I never once thought that he was describing a game. Before reading his explanations, I would have said that it is not possible to relate our daily lives to video games. Video games are animated characters with animated activities and that is not comparable to real life. When I think of video games, I think of a few different things. One, is athletic games, having two brothers, these games were often played in my house. The second thing I think of is animated monsters or characters that you are trying to defeat. Thinking about an animated character trying to defeat a monster is not even close to being real life to me. The athletic games could be seen as more life-like, just because people really do play sports in their daily lives. Overall, I would never have considered video games representing real life.
After reading Wark's "Allegories", I seemed to have changed my opinion on whether or not video games can be used as allegories to real life. Like I mentioned before, I thought Wark was describing the life of a human, not a video game character.
"Perhaps a game like The Sims could be a parody of everyday life in ‘consumer society’. Benjamin and his friends dream of things. Things make them happy."
This statement stands true for most people. We as humans do dream of having certain things, and when we get those things, we are happy. Some are happy with material things, and some are happier without. In playing this game, he said that the character gets rewarded after buying something. This particular instance could be taken incorrectly in real life.
Lev Manovich: “As the player proceeds through the game, she gradually discovers the rules that operate in the universe constructed by this game.”
I feel as if the above statement is also able to be related to real life events. As we go on on life, we learn from our experiences, what to do and what not to do. These certain "rules" are created by society. We learn what is right and what is wrong as we continue throughout life.
Comparison and Critique
The first multimodal argument I viewed was Sudin's Multimodal Argument. He played three games, and displayed images for each. His intentions were to display an animated argument as to whether video games are able to related to real life. He did a very good job by using pictures and animations that showed images from the video games themselves. His explanations were clear and easy to read as well as informative. He did a good job describing each game and what the task was. In his final argument, he used examples from the games along with research to prove his point. At the top of the page he asks, Are You a Psychopath? This heading is very catchy, because it is going to make people read his explanations. Overall, I think he did very well portraying his argument.
The second page I viewed was LW Multimodal Project. The first thing I noticed was that I chose the same template for my website. This particular structure is also easily read and interpreted. The authors intentions were to portray video games as narratives. They also used pictures and animations to show images from the video games. They used one image per game whereas Sudin used multiple images. This person's narratives were also shorter than the first, but still explanatory and detailed. Their final argument had a good question that caught my attention as well. It said, "Have you seen your shadow yet?." In order for me to be able to answer this question, I had to read their explanation.
Both pages used information from Jung's work and had good, detailed explanations. They both portrayed good arguments as to whether video games can be interpreted into real life situations. I also believe that both attempts were effective in that they were easily understood and able to read. They both had their own opinions and views pertaining to the subject.
Jung's Dream Interpretation
Jung says that the dream can also be considered the "problem child" among the puzzles of medical psychology. In his explanation, he used fundamental aspects of dream psychology and interpretation so that someone with no experience in the field can have some idea of the problem and method of inquiry. The dream is considered a fragment of involuntary psychic activity, barely conscious enough to be reproducible once awake. Many of them are less transparent and less understandable. A dream is usually strange and possesses bad qualities. A dream follows no clear formation or structure.
"But how do we arrive at a plausible meaning and how can we confirm the rightness of the interpretation?"
- predict future happenings from the dreams by means of a dream-book and to verify the interpretation by subsequent events assuming of course that the meaning of dreams lies in their anticipation of the future.
Memory images are often apparent in dreams. If something is memorable, it is most likely something that stood out to you. It is never possible to interpret a dream without the dreamer. The dreamer has to determine the associations with the help of the analyzer. Jung states that no sixth sense is needed to interpret or understand dreams.
"The meaning of dreams is not in accord with the tendencies of the conscious mind but shows peculiar deviations, we must assume that the unconscious, the matrix of dreams, has an independent function. This is what I call the autonomy of the unconscious."
He states that the compensation has to be distinguished from complementation. He also says that if the conscious attitude is for one side, the dream will be for the opposing side. Therefore, if you choose the "wrong" side in a dream, its because of your subconscious. Not all dreams are of equal importance. Some dreams are insignificant and not remembered whereas other dreams may be considered significant and you will remember them or pieces of them for a while if not forever. Symbolic images are important to dream interpretations, again making it impossible to interpret without the dreamer.
As far as the form of dreams go, there are usually 4 phases.
- statement of place, protagonist, exposition
- development
- culmination
- solution
In my argument, I will be able to use some of Jung's techniques to help me determine how my video game playing can be interpreted into real life situations.
Close Reading for Aarseth:
Why do people play video games? Why are we asking these questions?
In Aarseth's article, he describes the video game and its physical setting in the beginning. I really liked a lot of points he made throughout the entire article. He really brought forth a new point of view for me. Personally, I hate video games, I don't see the point in playing them because I get no satisfaction out of it. Even while trying to play for this project, I became frustrated because I did not know how to play and I couldn't seem to grasp the concept. On the other hand, Aarseth said, "Are game worlds ends in themselves, objects of desire, rather than the terrain of gameplay, and subject to game mechanics, and never to be understood
in isolation, but always as a background to the gameplay design?" This particular statement stood out to me, it gave me a new outlook, or way of thinking about video games. To me, they mean nothing, but to some, it is a get-a-way. I have never thought about that until this project. Some people love their video games so much to the point that they wish it was real life. That is scary to me, to think that someone wants to live in a world where they go around killing people on a mission. I particularly have something against violent video games, I feel as if children and motivated by these and think they can go participate in these types of activities.
"Computer games all tend to incorporate a coherent, accessible playing space; a continuous, reliant area or set of areas for the players to explore, conquer, and inhabit," this was another statement that stood out to me. It is truly amazing that people can put themselves into these environments and feel as if they are really there,(worldwide).
In arguing my point about how video games are pointless, I would give reasoning as to why people dont need them, why they could be dangerous, why they have no meaning to me, and so forth, but then again there IS a counterargument. A video gamer may prove to me why video games are important, and I would now be able to understand his/her side because of the readings.
Along with cultural associations, it may important for someone to play those games. Maybe the games have specific meanings as to what they want out of life, or maybe the games help them relieve stress. Cultural associations are difficult to me, because I am not familiar with other cultures. After reviewing different works though, I am further able to understand the cultural associations attributed to video games. As the video games are being interpreted as dreams, I am able to relate all of the subject matters, including cultural association, to further examine the "dream."
Cultural Associations: "The gameworld" can be related all over the real world.
Rhetorical Analysis: for "The Perfect Crime"
While reading this article, I noticed that the argument did pose both sides, and it continued to flip and show different points of view from each side. Some of the points were agreeing/similar, while others were conflicting and different. It references in the article that although you may be trying to go for a certain type of argument, your resources and actions throughout the writing may really be leaning more towards a different style. A type of source, or cue, you may use can relate subjects more closely.
What I took from this was, the smallest detail can enhance your story. The slightest change may explain your point, or make it more clear and easier to understand or relate something to something else in your story. Also, relating your details to something gruesome or traumatic can grasp the attention of your audience as well.
At the beginning of this article, it stated that film makers call into question the "reality" of the footage they portray, sometimes blurring the distinction between fact and fiction. By saying this, they proved their point by including examples about how people act differently when there is a camera recording. Almost as if, as humans, we want people to "know" what going to happen next. We want to appeal to their senses.
But in reality, we should stimulate their minds, and make them think about what is going to happen next. This point was also mentioned in the article. It mention that Berlinger and Sinofsky present their information to ensure that the audience has access to all of the information relevant to the case. This indeed seems to be a good method to me, so that they audience may think for themselves and make their own conclusion.
Including contrast in the setting may also stimulate your audiences' minds. If you propose a scene and they think they know the conclusion, then you blow their minds with an alternate detail, it cause them to re-evaluate and think about their previous conclusion. The contrast in the statement below shows how someone can be distracted from the main detail, while focusing on the surrounding details, but still connecting them both to search for a conclusion.
"The use of Metallica music within this series of shots makes the connection between the children's corpses and the accused teenager's families even more explicit by demonstrating the common bonds of victimhood that unite the murdered children with the suspected criminals."
No comments:
Post a Comment