I ♥ (insert word here) [revised]

The symbol “♥” is easily recognized as being a heart, even though it may only vaguely resemble a human heart, and is commonly used to represent the emotion of love. How specific and true is this symbol and the word “heart” to only meaning love? In a strictly biological sense, the heart is “The hollow muscular or otherwise contractile organ which, by its dilatation and contraction, keeps up the circulation of the blood in the vascular system of an animal” (OED). In this sense a “heart,” used in its simplest form, is the central motor organ to our vascular system. But, the heart and its symbol have become more than just an organ and today is used widely to represent many things.

The actual symbol “♥” originated from other symbols that represent union and togetherness (symbols.com). It is even related to the symbol for unisex bathrooms in Sweden. Certainly symbols have been used as a main form of written language with Egyptians, cave writing, and calligraphy. But a more Western meaning is of love, passion, and sex. Valentine’s Day in the United States is saturated with the symbol and it is used for marketing on this one holiday. In a more contemporary setting, the symbol has been used as a lighter form to mean liking something. For example, t-shirts that say “I ♥ NY” or “I ♥ Obama.” The symbol is read to mean that the individual loves something, or at least likes it. Using this symbol denotes a lighter usage of the word love in which case someone may not necessarily have a strong feeling or passion for something they “♥”, but rather they may simply like something.

The word as discussed earlier has a literal meaning of being the central organ that pumps blood through our vascular system. It is a symbol of our core innards that keeps our blood flowing. Hence, the usage of it being the center or reason when “getting to the heart of the matter.” Ancient Mayans and Aztecs are both known for their human sacrifices where the sacrificial human’s beating heart was pulled out of their chest. They believed the heart was the center of a person’s soul and therefore controlled the emotions and personality of a person. In this case the heart of a person, or the center of the person was their soul, or origin of emotions and personality.

The heart is also a source of energy and strength. In sports when a person puts passion and effort into the game, they exert extra energy and power. They are said to have played with heart. In this sense, “heart” seems to mean passion, a form of love and commitment, for the sport. Of course “heart” cannot be completely separated from “love”. When used, the word itself implies love. Especially when used as someone being heartbroken or a heart-felt action.

“♥” and “heart” both have multiple meanings and usages in our vernacular today and can be very ambiguous at times. “♥” is even replacing the actual word “heart” in several digital environments including myspace and facebook. T-shirts that say "I ♥ NY" are read as "I heart New York" indicating that the wearer of the shirt either loves or likes New York. But why can't it be read as "I am the central organ that keeps the blood of New York flowing?" Certainly then "heart" will be used in its simplest form. Couldn't heart surgeons then use "♥" as a way to describe what organ they are operating on? Or even sports articles will describe players playing with "♥." Some day symbols may again become a main form of written language similar to calligraphy. Even the artist formerly known as Prince has used symbolism to name himself. This poses the question whether or not “♥” will be accepted as a word, and what will it mean?

A+ Blogging

When I first signed up for this course, I was thinking, “Okay, UWP 101 will be a basic writing class where I have to figure out what the professor wants to hear and then write it out in 12 point font and double spaced.” It turned out I couldn’t be more wrong. Blogging was not only a different experience in writing for me, but also a chance for me to discover my own style of writing. Ever since grade school while learning the basics of sentence structure and correct punctuation, I despised writing because of all the formalities and guessing games of figuring out what the teacher expected me to write and how he/she expected me to write it. I would spend a great effort in trying to write a paper that my teachers would find “A” material, but apparently they just thought it wasn’t good enough and I became accustomed to receiving “B’s.” It was always, and will continue to be, difficult for me to write what my professors believe is “A” material, but this class helped me find my own writing style through blogs. Since the blogs provide a somewhat informal setting for writing, I wasn’t afraid to write what I wanted or the way I wanted. Of course there were still guidelines I needed to follow, but nothing as strict or demanding as a traditional writing class.

Another aspect of this course that made writing much easier for me was the idea of analyzing the very basics of written language: words (Keywords to be more specific). Our text forced us to step away, look at the bigger picture, and analyze words that we take for granted in everyday use. It makes me hesitant to use words such as “race,” “family,” “media,” and “image” since now I know that these words can mean many different things all at once. I guess this is what makes written or recorded language so difficult, but because of the informal setting of blogs and studying the backbone of writing, I have a better understanding of good writing and critical thinking.

I think the idea of blogs is a great idea and more classes should be taught this way because it gives everyone a chance to write for an audience other than the teacher. Students are less restricted by what the teacher wants if the teacher is willing to use blogs to their full potential, which is allowing writers to get what they have to say across in their own style. We have all gone through the processes and fundamentals of writing from grade school through high school, so why can’t college be the time that we use what we have learned to create our own style of writing that is efficient and effective? Maybe now I’ll be able to write “A” material.

Teenaged Pregnancies and Us (revised)

Carol wrote a post on the group of 16-year-old girls who made the pregnancy pact along with the news story on it. After reading the post, it seems like the news channel was putting a lot of blame on the sexual education system and considered the cause of the situation to be failure of the system. Carol even goes on the state that the system needs to be changed in order to prevent such “scandals” from happening again. I can’t help but wonder who really is to blame, or what influenced this situation. I don’t think I’d be able to give a correct answer, but I feel like many of our keywords can be used as a way to analyze the cause of this situation.

First, there’s the media. How does what we see, hear, and read affect our lives? Of course recently, as mentioned in class, the movie, Juno, is based upon teenage pregnancy. Also pointed out in class, other forms of visual media are based on pregnancies such as Knocked Up, Secret Life of an American Teenager, and even Oprah’s interview with the pregnant man. With this said, couldn’t what we watch in our homes and in movie theaters also be an influence of this situation? We fall in love with Juno’s character and support what she's doing as we watch the movies. The movie ends up almost glorifying her as a strong, independent teenager.

The contradiction here is teenagers are considered to be the youth of our culture and the youth is seen as being naïve and unfit to make logical and rational decisions for themselves. This is why the parents in the news clip seem disappointed in the decisions made by these teenagers. Juno contradicts our common conception of "youth," because it shows Juno as a teenager able to make rational and mature decisions given certain situations despite what older generations may think.

Biologically, 16-year-old females are physically ready to have children. Our history as humans is an everlasting example of this. In older cultures 16-year-old females were sometimes expected to have children with men who were much older. Kings would have multiple concubines kept for the purpose of having children. At 16, the female body has already developed all the necessary reproductive organs to have a child. Instead, our culture tells the female she cannot have a child even if her body is physically ready to have one because parents think, and may often be right, that teenagers cannot provide for themselves or the newborn child.

Again, how can we just blame sexual education systems for something like this when commercialism pushes and force-feeds us sex all the time? The common slogan “sex sells” is true and can be seen in advertisement with both female and male models (not to mention the infamous Abercrombie and Fitch ads). Consumerism is driven by our personal, and sometimes perverted, interest in sex. So, why couldn’t we say that consumerism and advertisements are also part of the influences of the pregnancy pact?

As I have stated before, I couldn’t give a correct answer, but it seems to me that the pregnancy pact raises a lot of questions about what our culture has become and what it portrays to teenagers. We promote sex in consumerism and provide entertainment based on pregnancies, but then turn around and say that teenage pregnancy is irresponsible because teenagers are presumably unfit to make rational decisions for themselves even though their bodies are physically ready to reproduce. I'm not saying that teenage pregnancy should be socially accepted, but I am questioning why we blame sexual eduation systems as the main reason. Parents and our culture tell us that teenagers are unfit to have children, but biology would say that teenagers are physically ready to have children. Sexual education tells teenagers to be careful or not have sex while our entertainment and advertisements push sex in our faces. It seems a teenager could get pretty confused about their sexual feelings leading them to make decisions such as becoming pregnant.

Longboard

Here is a picture that I took with my Casio EX-Z50. It shows my longboard leaning against the wall in my hallway. I wanted to take this picture because I liked the idea of capturing two images at once. The first image is of the longboard while the second is the image that is on my longboard. First I thought about the best way to orient the longboard in order to show both the longboard and the image on it clearly. I originally had the longboard standing straight up vertically and then held my camera vertically, but the sample image that came up on the LCD didn’t quite capture what I wanted. If I were to then edit the picture by displaying it horizontally, the viewer would then see a vertical horizon (1:07 - 1:33), or at least a vertical ground. Next, I laid it sideways hoping to fix the vertical horizon effect, but still the picture just didn’t quite look right. I then settled on this angle in which the board fills as much of the frame possible and then the viewer can see the image on the longboard as well.

I also thought about “photoshopping” the image since photographers make the image seem more real by in fact essentially making them more fake. In my picture, I inverted the colors to make the picture contrast from just seeing an ordinary picture of a longboard. To invert the colors of this image, I thought there would be a program already installed on my laptop that would do that for me, but to my surprise, there wasn’t (or at least not one that I could find easily). I had to search the Internet for a program that would do this for me and I ended up downloading a demo version of a program that allowed me to invert the colors and save the image on my hard drive.

I know that this image does not seem real and it shouldn’t, considering the inverted colors, but I chose to invert the colors to make the viewer question what image they are really looking at. Are we looking at an image of a longboard or are we looking at an image on a longboard? What are we really seeing in this picture and what should we get out of it? The longboard appears to have a wave in the sunset invoking a mental image of being on the ocean. The image of a longboard is definitely based off of a surfboard, so I would understand the choice of the image on the bottom. Why on the bottom though? People can’t see the image if the longboard is being ridden. Only when it’s not ridden is the image displayed. Though, when the board is actually ridden, its purpose is to be seen as if the rider is surfing on the road, hence the terms “road surfing” or “street surfing.” I guess in a sense this image can either been seen as telling you where to surf or what to surf with.

Youth of the Nation

Eddy’s post really relates to our discussion on youth and how it is seen today. The video gives a great example of how childrens' ideas and opinions are shaped by the world they grow up in. Based on an individual’s physical appearance, this selected group to represent the “youth” of the United States came to certain conclusions based on the current events that happen within their lives. The Arab man was depicted as evil and mean to the children because of the stereotypes that arise from the September 11 attacks upon our nation.

The children were seen as naïve and almost ignorant, but isn’t this a representation more of the current times rather that the youth not knowing any better? The youth of our nation should not be defined as naïve or ignorant, but rather a representation of the current times. For example, when rock music was really popular among younger people, teenagers and other rock fans were seen as rebellious. But, this rebellious nature was only seen as such because it differed from the previous cultural norms that the parents and older generation had grown up in. Even before rock-n-roll music, swing dancing and The Blues were considered rebellious at times because it was something new from the current widely accepted popular culture. Today, we see this change happening in technology and the Internet.

Fifty years ago, dating without actually seeing the person was probably unheard of. Today, there are many online dating services that allow you to contact a person through digital media without even seeing the person. To some, this may not even be considered dating, while to the younger generations it seems perfectly normal. Just in communication itself, we have transitioned from physical to digital interactions. Cell phones were a hot topic for discussion on how they connect to the Internet anywhere and therefore allow us to stay connected 24/7. This seems to allow us to be more mobile since we are not restricted to a hard telephone line and allows us to connect with people anywhere we go. But we also argued that there is a restriction created by those who are seemingly connected to us 24/7 because they are able to contact us whenever they want even when it is inconvenient for us. Today’s youth has grown up with this luxury of being able to be connected 24/7 and has adapted to it by bringing their lives, or even an alternate life, to this digital media.

Myspace and Facebook are two of many ways for today’s youth, and anyone else for that matter, to live in the digital world that the Internet and cell phones have created. Writing a letter and mailing it to someone in order to keep in touch has became inadequate for some. Now, our youth embeds their lives into the Internet in order to keep in touch with others. As a result, social abilities are difficult to develop such as public speaking or even just talking to someone in person without becoming uncomfortable. We then rely on hiding behind our computer screens and iPhone LCDs to communicate and connect.

The youth of our nation, including students in our class, are living proof that the younger generations are not ignorant or naive, but rather a product of the popular culture that we grow up in. Not only do our parent influence who we are and how we act, but also our peers and the current popular culture. It is not that we are ignorant or naïve, but rather, we are influenced by the world around us today and not the world that was around the older generation.

The biology of Tiger

Biology is the study of life and we like to separate the different disciplines of science by the way we explain certain phenomena. But if we are studying life and what happens in it, then all disciplines must be used to fully explain phenomena that we see every day. With this in mind, I will observe a commercial featuring Tiger Woods in a biological way.



Here we see Tiger Woods standing at what seems to be a driving range on a very clear day. He is wearing a black hat, black slacks, black shoes, and a red, white, and blue shirt with black sleeves and collar. His clothing material appears to be cotton, a fibrous material produced by cotton plants to protect the seeds. Fiber cells in plants are usually long cells that contain cellulose and the protein lignin, which both give it their strong yet flexible properties.

The club he is using is a sand-wedge, the club with the greatest loft angle so it is easier to position his hand while he bounces the ball. The ball bounces because there is a rubber insert inside. Rubber, now artificially synthesized in labs, was first discovered as a product of trees in their sap. The latex that was produced by the trees is a form of protection if their dermal (skin) layer is broken. This prevents infection for the tree along with protection from predation.

The ball also bounces because his arm provides the club head with a counter force to gravity. When the ball hits the clubhead, an upward force is applied projecting the ball in the direction of the force. In order to create this force, Tiger’s muscle fibers must use up stored chemical energy (ATP) to actively pull his hand and, as a result, the club upward to provide an upward force to the ball. His muscle fibers contract and shorten at a speed that moves his whole arm upward with a force strong enough for the ball to go against the downward pull of gravity.

Biology can explain how cotton is made and how our arms are able to move the way they do, but other explanations are just as valid. Chemistry can explain the make up of the dyes in the cotton clothing, or the make up of the cotton fibers used. Physics can explain how a ball can be moving up when gravity is pulling down. Even in my own explanations I couldn’t help but use chemistry and physics to explain Tiger Woods’ clothing and the bouncing ball. Biology is the study of life, and since every phenomenon we see or experience is in life, aren’t all science disciplines one in the same? Or at least inseparable when used for explanation?

iPod for mobility

Here I can see a crime scene where a victim has been outlined by iPod headphones (funny that Microsoft Word on a Mac doesn’t recognize iPod). There is black asphalt in the background and the white iPod stands out along with the headphones. I also notice the white line in the corner of the image suggesting that the victim is lying in the middle of the road. Perhaps he was crossing the street and was run over by a car because he couldn’t hear the car with his headphones in. The way the victim is dressed would suggest he’s a normal person who most people could relate to. It seems like he was an active individual because of the Nike jacket he is wearing, but the jeans, seatbelt buckle, and shirt suggest he was more casual before he became a casualty. Obviously he was either going somewhere of coming back when this happened (being very mobile). I wonder what happened to him and why he is in the middle of the road. How did his iPod headphones end up perfectly encompassing him? His face would suggest that he did not die in pain or is in any pain. Maybe he isn’t even dead.

The message I see within this picture pertains to our word of mobility. An iPod is a poster child for mobility because it’s whole purpose is to bring your entire music library with you anywhere you go. Music is a huge part of our lives and the iPod is a way for us to carry that piece with us in our pocket. But, maybe an iPod provides more mobility than we think. As stated before, we are put into our own iPod worlds of music (and even videos now). There is mobility between reality and an iPod world. Maybe the outlining of the headphones is in fact a threshold separating the two worlds. After all, his expression isn’t one of pain, but more an expression of peace. He is also in the middle of the street, a place where mobility is at its finest, but if he’s lying there in the road, the road seems to provide less mobility. In this sense, being in the iPod world makes reality seem to stop or at least slow down and restrict mobility in reality.