Thoughts on Who Knows What

Tonight was the night I began the first reading of  a long semester of many more. I was lucky enough to find a copy of an audiobook version of The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains by Nicholas Carr in the Fairfax Library, and not having to pay was a nice perk that had me going in with a bit more anticipation than I would have otherwise. I immediately sat down and began listening. That’s the nice thing about audiobooks, they’re so good to listen to when working on other non-engrossing and practically boring tasks. I figured it’d help me make it through a book I wouldn’t have picked if it weren’t required to.

My first impression was “wow this man sound like he has no sense of humor.” My current impression remains unchanged. It is one of the direst books I’ve had to read, and I usually love reading. I mean no disrespect when I say, Carr is the perfect example of an old fart. I realize that isn’t particularly eloquent of me, but it’s the best I can do to describe his statements thus far. I can already tell this book is going to infuriate me. One of my biggest pet peeves is when people blame the internet for rotting peoples brains. I couldn’t agree less.

The internet is one of those rare things in today’s modern world that actually brings people together instead of dividing them. Now, of course, on the internet there will be people of vastly different opinions arguing; but at least they’re having a discussion (minus the petty ones and the trolls, there’s always one). The internet provides a place for people to voice their opinions when they may not otherwise. That’s the whole reason Professor O’Malley is having us write this blog. I think it’s brilliant.

Another incredible thing about the internet is that it provides society with a vast pit of knowledge on every topic imaginable and then some. Not all of it is top-tier quality, but the things that make that “knowledge” less than incredible is valuable in its own way. It’s similar, in my opinion, to Professor O’Malley’s tip; if you can’t think of anything to say, think about why you feel that way and write about that. Having typed that up, it isn’t the most clear cut thought I’ve had, but I couldn’t think of any other way to make my point.

There was another point I wanted to make in relation to The Shallows. Carr claims that as the use of the internet has increased, people have begun to read books less. While this, at it’s most simplistic, isn’t entirely incorrect; it isn’t entirely correct either. I would hypothesize that now a days people still read many books, however, those books are more likely to be ebooks than paper books. With technology like Kindles, Nooks, tablets and cell phones, people have more access to their novels, more frequently, via the internet. Even if my hypothesis proves incorrect, I would remain stead fast in my statement that people read just as often as they used to. It has just evolved to become other sources; articles, blogs, status updates, even web comics and stories. Yes people are more impatient , but with that comes shorter reads more often. Instead of sitting and reading three or four chapters of a single novel, they read seven to eight articles or eighty to ninety status updates. I chose to be less dramatic than Carr in my interpretation of that, to me that isn’t much any less valuable or any more ridiculous than a book.

I would also like to point out (for own self-validation) that I’ve always been a book lover. It’s rare that I go anywhere without one on my phone, Kindle or paper book. It is a bit disheartening to hear from someone that they don’t read, but written media is so vast that even if they don’t read books, they still actively read. You have to be able to in this modern world.

Til next time,

Alyssa Vuilleumier

So here we are, the first day of a new semester. This is going to be my third semester and let’s just say, I can already tell it’s gonna be one a lot harder than the previous two. I guess that’s to be suspected, I’m not a freshman anymore (thank god). I figure I might as well introduce myself, personalize this whole blogging thing a little. My name is Alyssa Vuilleumier, I’m a criminology major minoring in forensic psychology and art and visual technology; and I’ve never done anything like this before (blogging I mean).

Basically I’m both terrified and excited for this class, HIST 390-004 for anyone who may not know what’s going on. My first impression is… I guess anticipation for a bit of a work load. It’s either that or this class is going to be super easy, I don’t know which yet. Initially I thought it was going to be a programing class or something since it counts as an IT credit. Now I realize who wrong I was, and I’m actually relieved. This class seems to be focusing on music and how it’s evolved over time. I’m not gonna lie, it took me a bit to feel confident I wasn’t in the wrong class; it’s just so different from what I anticipated. However, it seems like I’ll enjoy it a lot more than I expected to if I survive the work load. I realize I’m just jumping to conclusions, but isn’t that what the first week is for anyway? Honestly, @GeorgeMasonUniversity, you should push back those drop deadlines.

As for content on the first day, I’m intrigued. One thing Professor O’Malley said stuck with me… partially because it irked me but that’s beside the point. He made an assumption that songs like Firework by Katy Perry and Havana by Camila Cabello are the only ones people my age, of my generation listen to. I wish I could have pointed out how wrong he was. I am a lover of music, I’ve never been talented in it myself, but the songs and artists I listen to are incredibly special to me (probably more so than they should be). It easier to list the music that I don’t enjoy before that which I do, so I guess I’ll do that. The only genres that I don’t listen to are pop, RnB, gospel and rap (country as well, but I can appreciate it more). I do dabble in most other genres though, if only a little (if only you could see my Spotify, it’s a mess) The aforementioned songs are not ones I particularly enjoy. It is probably the case that Professor O’Malley didn’t legitimately believe his comment, however I felt the need to clarify.

I mention this simply because of his main point, that our generation only listens to music that has NO dynamics, emphasis on NO. Such a statement I find myself agreeing with in terms of socially coined “pop” music, and a solid bit of rap music as well. What I don’t agree with is that all modern music is dynamically flat. I would like to clarify that I’ve never taken any form of advanced music class, so there is every chance that I’m wrong in this. Here are some nonetheless that I feel are dynamic; Machines by Crown the Empire, Drunken Lament by Ludo, Crypteque by Danny Baranowsky, Forty Six & 2 by Tool and so many more I can’t even begin to list.

Now if we bypass my prejudices, and answer the question of “why is modern music less, if at all, dynamic than older music?”, I’d guess that it has to do with how technology has changed. Now we have devices and the such that require (or are compatible with) headphones. I would hypothesize that the electronics work a certain way and dynamics are sacrificed for technology. Another hypothesis I might make is that, pop music is trying to adhere to the most extensive audience possible, and to do that they (the producers, musicians, what have you) follow a general formula for a good song. This, I’d assume, is intentionally uninventive so as to not turn people away.

That’s about it, I’m looking forward to getting a solid answer.