TA: Our favorite subject...

All right: Applying what we learned in class, specifically in the context of a Technical Analysis. I guess basically that means rehashing the presentation from Wednesday, but I also like critiquing the delivery itself.

Arguments: I think the best way to get conversation and dialogue started is to present a controversial topic (I guess you don't have to, but that's easier), give a few points arguing for each side, and then ask what people think. If it's a topic that people are particularly passionate about, it's almost harder to get them to shut up than get them talking :).

The group on Wednesday was talking, of course, about sex ed, which is not particularly my favorite topic, but what the hey. I'm not sure how exactly factual the whole thing has to be-- as in their statistic that 1/6 condoms fail was debatable. I guess the presentation is mostly just to get discussion started, not necessarily to be a specific educating spiel. If we wanted to do that, we'd actually pull out the articles and study those, rather than getting it 3rd or 4th or 20th hand. I actually found it interesting that people didn't understand what, exactly, was failing... it seemed pretty clear to me, but I guess that that's why you have to review your presentations and make sure that what you're trying to communicate is clear. I guess just something good to keep in mind.

Freewrite: My Life Is a Soap Opera

Good heavens. It's been a soap opera since high school, and I don't even like tv. It comes complete with all the intrigue, the surprises, the cat fights and love triangles... it's almost ridiculous. That's not to say that I don't care for the people who have been involved in all my little episodes, because I very much do, but if I wrote a true story of my life, I wouldn't have to change a single detail of it to make it dramatic and ironic. It's incredible. I really should sell my life story and get the rights off of it, because I'd have all the teenage drama queens squealing and crying over my stories.

I feel like spilling everything in my soapy little insides here, but there's a reason it's called "personal life"... aaand, why I have a journal. I think it's interesting when people spill their entire personal life and all their details over the web to everyone with no reservations. Meh, I'm a little more reserved than that. Anyway. I'm going to bed :).

TA: ..... dun dun dun.....

Technical Analysis: Analyzing the process of thinking through art.

I've had several classes about analyzing art, film, theatre, etc, and I have to say I rather enjoy it. It usually ends up boiling down to looking at the different technical issues, ie: Intent, emotion, form, style, time period, influences, expectations, method, color/scheme, design, etc. Obviously, the different forms of expression will have different means... paintings will have color, and so will theatre and film, but the eras will change the means available... ie. the old black and white films had only depth and contrast and lighting-type mediums to work with instead of color. They didn't have the means to use that kind of symbolism or influence, so they had to be creative and find other ways to express what they wanted to put across.
Ironically, in live theater, we can't use that alternate method. I'm thinking specifically of the BYU production of Hamlet where they basically made their entire set and costume design solely out of shades of black, grey, white, and red as their symbolic color (bit of trivia, it was symbolic of people who betrayed Hamlet, or were about to. Ingenious, if I do say so myself.) But, if they had wanted to stage a production imitating the black and white film, their natural state would interfere with it... by that I mean skin color, eye color, and hair color. In that regard, film has an advantage that we would not be able to use in live theater. We could go to some very big extremes to create that (ie. black/grey/white makeup and highlights, contacts, hair dye), but it wouldn't be natural. [...actually, that would make a really interesting experimental theater piece. Doing the whole thing in black and white... ooh. Ponderances.]
I find it interesting that we could analyze art even from an English standpoint. I hadn't really thought that was possible. I usually thought of it in the context of using English as a vehicle to write about theater/art through... but that's a cool new medium in and of itself.

RA: And not the person that babysits the Freshmen

Assignment to analyze a painting/picture, pull out an argument.

What strikes me when I look at this painting most is the absolute serenity of the Listener. The quote next to it, which I quite like, said,
"There are two types of people; those who wait to talk and those who listen."

All of the characters in the painting are loud, obnoxious, and incredibly detailed. The Listener is simple, quiet, and doesn't have the dynamic body positioning that the other characters do. He is the only one who is positioned squarely to the viewer point of view, and there is a tranquility about him.

The argument that strikes me from this painting is that those who listen possess that tranquility that those who are constantly chattering lack. He has a meditative understanding, whilst the others seem to be merely throwing words at each other. I suppose my WATCO would then be thus: WATCO talking too much on acquiring wisdom?

Audience: People who want to gain wisdom, people who like to talk, any conversationalist, counselors, people who have a lot of personal interaction.

Talking too much will decrease the opportunity to gain wisdom, because talking too much quashes the expression of the other conversationalist.

Thusly. And, speaking of people who talk too much, I have a headache and I'm going to bed, because my roommates are.