skyessparknotes

[skyessparknotes]

final blog post 6

Honestly, my time in class has been fine. I've enjoyed the work, I feel that the workload wasn't anything too crazy, nor was the content anything too difficult. I liked the work, I found the content rather easy and enjoyed the weekly checklists, I just wish it translated to the canvas to-do list board thing whatever lol. Honestly, I really took this as a refresher along with space to write and get feedback without too much worry about criticism. I really enjoyed peer reviews, as well as writing pieces with certain concepts but free range. I don't think any of the assignments were particularly challenging, however, I did find the announcement part of the class a bit frustrating. I disliked that some assignments weren't necessarily dated or made as a post so it could be in my to-do list, otherwise, it was extremely easy to forget about them because of this. I don't think many pieces did stand out to me if I'm being honest, I'm rather particular with the works I like. However, Homage to my Hips has still been in my mind, as I have yet to decide whether or not I enjoy the poem, or am a heavy critic. Something about the vagueness upsets me, makes me feel as though she's still ashamed of these hips yet pretending not to be. I also wish the message was clearer as, reflecting now, it just looks a bit confusing and it's too vague and light, where is the depth?? I definitely will recommend this class, however, as it was very insightful and I did enjoy the teaching mode, along with the teacher.

[skyessparknotes]

blog post 5

While I am still learning who I am as a person, one extremely defining aspect of my identity would be being a woman. Being a woman is something that just feels so powerful to me, but sometimes not in the right ways. Men desire me because of my looks, giving me control but never respect. Being a woman means taking respect, even when it isn’t offered. As a woman in the workplace I have to work twice as hard compared to men, especially regarding respect. Not only am I treated differently by male coworkers, but I am treated horribly by customers and often get yelled at or harassed about my looks by older men, rarely by older women. However, when they are mad, it has nothing to do with me being a woman or

With my current job, I constantly see the difference in how my fellow female employees are treated in comparison to the 4 males working alongside us. Despite opening nearly everyday and taking on 67% of the responsibilities 30 hours a week, I am still questioned when I finish tasks quicker than others. Constantly I hear “you did all of that? And this? This too? Okay, well… it would have been quicker if you didn’t have acrylics…” rather than an acknowledgment and some gratitude. However, when it comes to the male workers, they are able to stand behind registers and wander off, come in late to every shift and even go on their phones without any real reprimandments. My favorite coworker, also a woman, is treated the worst simply because she can’t get around easily until she gets a new knee next month. My manager will constantly bash her capabilities to me or in front of others, even to her sometimes and it leaves me absolutely appalled. She comes in on time every shift, she doesn’t complain, she does what she can and she does it extremely well, yet constantly I am told how she doesn’t know how to do anything or “-----’s probably who messed this up”. You can also see this a lot in writing, as women are more heavily critiqued than men, and we are only expected to write love stories and not have any substance. I never understood this as women are some of the best thinkers and writers around, excluding J.K. Rowling, of course.

[skyessparknotes]

blog post 3

lately i’ve been thinking a lot about the multiverse, so i wanted to write about it.

The multiverse theory. This theory is - essentially - exactly how it sounds. A theory about multiple universes. To be more thorough, this theory suggests that any and all things imaginable can both exist and not exist, virtually at the same time. Believing in this theory is anyone’s choice, but there is no evidence to neither entice nor deter one from the possibility. As far as we know, we can’t confirm or deny how true it may be, thus making it completely possible. Of course that means it could be completely impossible too, but why would it be impossible? If we can’t even travel past our own moon who are we to say there aren’t more universes out there?

If, perhaps, we were able to prove this theory true or false, would we want to? Say scientists create some device that could let a human travel to another universe. Would they want to risk it? If they do risk it and they never come back, it wouldn’t prove anything. The same goes for time travel. The number one rule of time travel is to NOT run into yourself. Why is that? And why do we have a time travel rule when we know time travel is inherently impossible. And why would running into your past self change anything? Essentially, someone would have had to experience this, and create this universal rule that no one questions nor implements. That implies your past self is the same you. For example, unless you run into yourself from the same decade, this is an entirely different person from the current version.

The multiverse theory could be entirely possible for all we know. Think about this. Math is fundamentally made up. Most things could be. We only know what scientists and other persons of authority have led us to believe in. While we have substantial evidence, we also don’t. We have evidence with numbers and ideas we

have been taught. For example, why are trees called trees? Why not automobiles? Who came up with these names, why did they choose them? Most importantly, why do we virtually accept these terms?

There are studies based on the multiverse theory, striving to prove or disprove whether it exists. How exactly does one do that? Many devote their lives to finding even the most consequential piece of evidence, thus removing a tiny layer of our ongoing wonders. Take Einstein for example. He theorized that time is relative to gravity. He suggested that - necessarily - the higher above sea level one is, the quicker one ages. And while that is very minuscule - only having millisecond differences - it is still quite possible. Many theories have surfaced, questioning time, travel, and multiverse credibility.

Nowadays, more people are open to the possibility of less stability among ideas we found comfort in. But centuries ago, philosophers were not only exonerated, but ostracized for questioning the slightest things such as why apples are red.

The multiverse theory is both true yet untrue, which is where things become complicated. If the theory is proven true, that confirms a universe where the theory is also untrue. Perhaps we live in that universe? Anything anyone could ever imagine is a reality, the severity changes have can vary, and always will.

While the possibility of the multiverse could be written about for ages, the absence of sufficient amounts of substantial evidence can’t add more depth. The multiverse theory suggests that anything and everything is both possible and impossible. Such as suggesting there are universes where the multiverse theory is an entirely different theory, perhaps one disproving of common knowledge. Believing in the multiverse theory is a choice, and has no set reason to or not to believe in it.

[skyessparknotes]

honestly i didn’t like the homage to my hips post, as i felt it was meaningful but there wasn’t as much meaning behind it as there could be. there was a lot of inferences left to the reader and different interpretation which i felt drew away from the authors intent, rather than aided in illustrating it.

[skyessparknotes]

mosaic

‘you will grow out of it’

i never understood that statement

until the 12 year old curls look less like her and more like me;

we haven’t spoke in 4 years,

i am reminded that i ‘will grow out of it’

until i see the same signature, a bit messier and with 3 more stars, constructed from a tiny hand that now signs taxes instead of reading guides.

pennysylvania taught me to microwave my ramen,

and despite the songs of the california winds, i still hear the occasional beeping of the microwave.

‘you will grow out of it’ i am told,

except, that is not true

for i am a mosaic of everyone i have ever loved

the only person missing, is myself

[skyessparknotes]

wind blows and suddenly the once orange lights were now a fluorescent green

the headlights illuminated the cobblestone in a way that made the pieces look as though they were coming together, not breaking apart

cold air and whispsrs wrapping around your body

this is what December feels like

[skyessparknotes]

he looked at me with such rage

daggers thrown, mad at my existence

and suddenly

i am 10 years old again

waiting for angry footsteps of the angry man to pass by my door,

waiting for the shadow to fade away instead of grow closer

when you grow up with an angry man in the home,

there will always be an angry man in your home

[skyessparknotes]

Reading vs. learning

Reading for entertainment is usually something that is done purely for enjoyment, there isn’t much thinking going on behind. Reading for enjoyment is usually for a story, or something you find interesting, and simply want to consume. I think when it comes to learning through reading, there's a lot more brain power being used. I say this because you have to consume what you're reading as well as understand the information rather than just enjoying a story, for example studying. This is the same when studying rhetoric. as you consists of looking at the material in front of you, and analyzing everything from the diction, to how the aimed audience is supposed to interpret this text, and the credentials of information presented, as well as the author’s credibility.

When it comes to necessary techniques, understanding the context of the material presented is essential, because if the author is not clear and the reader cannot understand the topic or message behind, time is wasted and the communication is lost, which is the writer’s fault as they did not carefully make this connection for the reader. I also agree familiarizing yourself with the author can allow the reader further understanding as they recognize the author's methods of writing, and can follow along a little smoothly. This also builds the author's credibility and I find that very interesting. This is because while biases are supposed to be withheld, there is still a way to sense the bias by looking at other pieces by the author, as well as analyzing the diction and tone to see where they fall on the subject. Lastly, I definitely think that understanding who the audience is supposed to be is a necessary tactic as well, that way the reader can see how the piece is aimed, especially if there is an obvious bias or such.