I'm a geek

I can't decide if I'm a total geek or if I just like to use one aspect of teaching or learning to procrastinate from another. I am building a website for the English course I will be teaching. I'm excited to be able to do this. I think it will be beneficial to have. So, am I a geek that I would rather be working on this website than out doing other things during my Christmas break? Possibly. Or, am I just a procrastinator because I should be reading, cleaning, or the like?

Gruesome Santa

You have to wonder about things like this. A family in New York is making a statement about all that has gone wrong with Christmas. Read the news story here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051214/ap_on_re_us/slasher_santa

I'm not sure this is the best option. Don't get me wrong-- as a student/teacher, this is not "the most wonderful time of the year." And I agree that it is really easy to forget why we celebrate Chirstmas in the first place. But I'm not sure having Santa killing the toys really shows that Christmas has gotten to commercial. Santa exists because of the toys-- he is the reason Christmas is shop keepers favorite time of the year.

Addition on Plagiarism

If you want to successfully plagiarize-- at least pick a topic that you are interested in. If you pick a topic that completely goes against your personality, then it will get noticed as odd.

The Process

I have to wonder, what makes someone a good writer? And I have to believe that a part of it is natural and a part of it is practice.

It's always interesting to see someone who has practiced themselves into expertise because it is something he/she wants to master. I think of 2 people I know who play the piano. You can hand either or them a difficult piece of music and both would be able to play it, but one would make it sound so much more meaningful than the other.

Whenever I read about writers going through the writing process, it seems that they follow very similar patterns. They set aside a specific time of day to write. They set themselves up a distraction free environment. But, they also set aside a relatively short amount of time for themselves to do writing. "Good" writers have patterns that they follow. Is it the patterns that make them good? I don't think so-- I think it's the practice that led to the pattern being established. They try different things-- they practice, and the see what works the best and then go with it.

Too often I think writing becomes peoples after rather than priority. All of the research on being a successful student/ business person emphasizes structure. It also all stresses the importance of knowing which tasks are priorities and which can be dismissed. I really like Jack G****'s Energy Performace study which talks about the importance of energy management vs. time management. Often we have time to do so much more than we do, but we don't have the mental energy to follow through.

I think poor writers forget about the necessary mental energy for doing good writing. Maybe good writing is a matter of instinct-- when we have the energy we should prioritize the activity.

I'm not sure, but I know that when I feel like my writing sucks I can't quit-- rather I have to look at it is an opportunity to continue to practice so that hopefully in 20 years I can see that my writing has improved.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Peter Hunt, in his book Criticism, Theory, and Children's Literature, answers the question "Why Study Children's Literature? by saying "Because it is important and because it is fun." Roald Dahl wants to remind people of that. His official website contains both important information and fun.

http://www.roalddahl.com/

Tim Burton recently adapted Dahl's novel Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to film. Some people say this is a remake of the Gene Wilder film Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory-- which was also based off of Dahl's book. But Burton's film is not a remake of the old movie-- it is a new interpretation of the text.

Film is funny like that-- it becomes an entity all to its own, and because there are so many remakes in film, viewers often forget to consider that there might be another source-- unless it's Shakespeare. There are numerous movie versions of Hamlet, and no one thinks that they are remakes of each other-- people know they are interpretations of the play. So, the new Charlie in the Chocolate Factory is following in the footsteps of Shakespeare-- it is not a movie remake-- it is a new adaption of the text.
Johnny Depp stars in this movie as the infamous Willy Wonka, and he raises the level of quirkiness within the film.

People say that this adaption of the text is much closer to the book than the Wilder version, and in some ways it is. It allows Wonka to say some of the rude things he says in the book, but it adds something to the book that I believe is a result of J.K. Rowlings. It adds reality to fantasy.

Dahl considered this book a fantasy. Although it starts with poor Charlie and his suspiciously nice family, everything that takes place in the factory could not possibly be real. Yet, in the film version, Wonka keeps having flashbacks to his childhood to explain to the audience why he is as quirky as he is.

Fantasy is losing some of its elements of imagination, because there has to be some realism. Yet, Dahl didn't want to create realism. We don't really want to think about a family so poor that they can only afford Cabbage Soup-- or where 4 Grandparents share one bed-- that's just not entertaining.

Dahl wants his audience to see Charlie's luck. Burton wants to add this didactic element of taking care of one's family and the importance of loving people who are in your life. I don't disapprove of Burton's message, I just don't think it's Dahl's.

So, why study Children's Lit-- because it is important-- and it is fun. It is important to look at what people do to Children's stories to try to accomplish their own agenda. And, it's fun to allow yourself to imagine the impossible every now and then.