Jean Baudrillard describes, in his writing, the Simulacrum- when the distinction between reality and its representation breaks down. He says that an image-sign goes through 4 stages:
1. It is the reflection of a basic reality
2. It masks and perverts a basic reality
3. It marks the absence of a basic reality
4. It bears no reality to any reality whatsoever- it is its own pure simulacrum.
I think this process is a reflection of our lives at Concordia University. First as writers. We spend a lot of time reading the words and works of other writers of creative non fiction, (1)then we try to imitate what they have written (because they are obviously 'good' - whatever that means - and maybe we can be good to if we imitate their style, subject matter, etc). In our writing, (2)we make subtle differences to make it our own. (3)we recognize that in our absence it doesn't quite measure up to the standard we sat set based upon others' works, therefore (4)it really isn't anything like the other writer. This would not be a problem except for the justification we have created to copy their writing (it is 'good'), and our writing isn't like their writing so it must be 'bad'.
Another example. We claim to be 'Christians'- (1)to act in the way Christ acted and follow his teachings. (2)we can never really follow those tenets because we lack the ability,(3) then we see our actions not matching up, so we create justifications and modifications to the rules (I will pay back the money I stole from my roommate, or she didn't get the money legally anyway so it isn't technically stealing). This again leads to (4)our rules being drastically different from, if not opposite to, the teachings of Christ.
I think a portion of Christianity needs to be reflected onto our writing. Just as we have received forgiveness from our sins by Christ's actions, our writing is liberated from its 'badness' by the acceptance and consideration from our peers. We look to these other writers and try to create standards based upon what they write about or how they write. Instead we should look to each others writing and be honest (both good and bad) and we should give our writings to each other in a similar fashion- expecting honesty and keeping an open mind about what others say. No matter how 'good' 'bad' or 'unchangeable' we feels our essays to be, lets be honest with one another and give each others opinions weight. If we are going to put so much stock into a person who cannot address our questions and desires specifically, why not rely more so on those who can reflect and comment on our writing specifically.
Dustin
1. It is the reflection of a basic reality
2. It masks and perverts a basic reality
3. It marks the absence of a basic reality
4. It bears no reality to any reality whatsoever- it is its own pure simulacrum.
I think this process is a reflection of our lives at Concordia University. First as writers. We spend a lot of time reading the words and works of other writers of creative non fiction, (1)then we try to imitate what they have written (because they are obviously 'good' - whatever that means - and maybe we can be good to if we imitate their style, subject matter, etc). In our writing, (2)we make subtle differences to make it our own. (3)we recognize that in our absence it doesn't quite measure up to the standard we sat set based upon others' works, therefore (4)it really isn't anything like the other writer. This would not be a problem except for the justification we have created to copy their writing (it is 'good'), and our writing isn't like their writing so it must be 'bad'.
Another example. We claim to be 'Christians'- (1)to act in the way Christ acted and follow his teachings. (2)we can never really follow those tenets because we lack the ability,(3) then we see our actions not matching up, so we create justifications and modifications to the rules (I will pay back the money I stole from my roommate, or she didn't get the money legally anyway so it isn't technically stealing). This again leads to (4)our rules being drastically different from, if not opposite to, the teachings of Christ.
I think a portion of Christianity needs to be reflected onto our writing. Just as we have received forgiveness from our sins by Christ's actions, our writing is liberated from its 'badness' by the acceptance and consideration from our peers. We look to these other writers and try to create standards based upon what they write about or how they write. Instead we should look to each others writing and be honest (both good and bad) and we should give our writings to each other in a similar fashion- expecting honesty and keeping an open mind about what others say. No matter how 'good' 'bad' or 'unchangeable' we feels our essays to be, lets be honest with one another and give each others opinions weight. If we are going to put so much stock into a person who cannot address our questions and desires specifically, why not rely more so on those who can reflect and comment on our writing specifically.
Dustin
I just haven't been pleased with the guide book at all. It places definitions where it has no business or authority to do so. Following that book puts us in a cramped box and hinders the growth we should be experiencing in our writings.
ReplyDelete