4. Garreth’s writing style, especially in his conclusion, was really verbose and confusing. While this might appeal to an academic audience, it was difficult to read and understand. He could fix this by simply toning down his writing, using fewer big words, and generally simplifying things. Also, while his arguments for the claims were persuasive, by the time I had gotten to read them, I’d forgotten what they were, and thus they were not as effective. All he needs to do there is put his translation of the outcomes at the top of each paragraph or something like that. The last thing that really could use fixing was just the general organization of his site– sometimes he put the prompt on the page twice, sometimes he didn’t put up Jentery’s response to it, etc. He should have just put one of each thing in once, in the same place, and made sure each part was there every time.

5. From this portfolio, we learned that adding in your own personal tone can help to make the portfolio more personable. The way that Gareth writes is very direct and he tries to have a theme, but throughout his portfolio he fails to make the page interesting. So, in the service of our portfolios, we can add our own charcter and tone so that the reader wants to actually read it.

1. Briefly explains your new sound-script (e.g., its purpose, audience, and narrative style).

Well, my new sound-script has the purpose of making the opening scene of Simon Birch actually seem like a scary movie.  In other words, when I watched the movie with just visuals or just sounds, it does seem like a scary horror flick so I am going to make my new sound-script into a horror script.  The audience that I am trying to please would be my 121 classmates and of course Jentery, to bearer of good grades.  I want to use the narrative style of someone that is a little spooky.  Not so much cliched, sitting around a campfire at night telling ghost stories type voice but a legitimate, creepy person (possibly someone from the Ave. ?) 

2. States your research question

“How does the narrator’s casual, reminiscent tone conflict with the words that he is actually saying in the movie Simon Birch?” 

3. Expresses the main claim of your first major paper and why you believe the claim is reasonable and risky.

My main claim is that tone is one of the most important aspects of creating a compelling sound-script.  Tone embodies a person and can change the way that ideas and words are perceived.  I am hoping that in my new sound-script I will have a narrator with a tone that will go along with the creepy opening scenes and create a horror atmosphere that the viewer can get completely immersed in.  It’s sort of like that point that I believe Cruz was trying to make saying that sounds give you a full body experience while visuals do not.

4. Explains the stakes of your argument and why your claim and new sound-script are both important.

I don’t really understand what you mean by stakes.  Like what is at stake for making this arguement? But anyways, my new sound-script and claim are important because they expand on why sonic culture is important.  The sound-script is important because its new representation will show how a little change, like tone of voice of the narrartor, can completely change the tone and feeling of the film.

5. Articulates how – through sonic analysis – your new sound-script serves to augment, critique, or complicate your chosen multimedia composition.

By multimedia composition, do you mean movie?  My new sound-script will aument Simon Birch because it will show how the introductory scene can be perceived in many different ways.  And that the audience expects something by seeing the opening scene of the movie, like something family oriented and wholesome, but when you change the tone of voice you can get something completely new and differnt.

6. One artifact that I will be using.

I’m going to definetly have to throw in some of those Schafer terms like keynote and signal sounds.  And probably something a little spicy from the first reading, was his name Cruz?

7. Nervousness, frustrations or questions.

Well, I’m not thinking of any off the top of my head.  But I know that the questions will come during the conference.

     A question that I have about Alcoff’s claims would be: Does she consider the good that does arise from people speaking on behalf of others?  She seems to have a strong distaste, or pure hatred, towards people that speak for others but is it all bad?  I don’t think so.  Ask the people who have been helped by others and perhaps you will see that it is not all that bad.  I also had a question about “location” and how it plays a role in how people view someone?  I got a little confused when she tried to explain the importance of location.

     I think that the article intexturalizes quite well with our class.  Since we are offering a service to those who are less fortunate than us, then I see how some of Alcoff’s fears would come into play.  When we think of and define the word “service,”  we have made many observations about how it can be seen as a superior-subordinate relationship.  And, as Alcoff points out, “the practice of privileged persons speaking for or on behalf of less privileged persons has actually resulted (in many cases) in increasing or reenforcing the oppression of the group spoken for.”  So, this article relates to our work at the Boys and Girls Club because we have to make sure that we aren’t oppressing others.  Or maybe not oppression, but that we are actually helping and doing good and not hindering this group.

     This article was useful to me because I have not really ever thought of the differences between “speaking for” and “speaking about” a group of people.  I think that as we create our public service announcements or whatever for the Boys and Girls Club, we have to make sure that we not getting lost in the ambiguity of those two phrases.  It just raises the point that we have to be doing this service learning to truly help someone and not because we feel like we should or want the power. 

    

-“I think it is possible to empower learners (through service learning) and not promote the common good (by reinforcing a sense of inferiority among those “served” or a false sense of power among those who “serve”).

-How do you avoid the sense of inferiority if/when service is seen as a process?

-The other questions we have are: How does it relate to other service not just missions in Mexico?  If your motivation for service is skewed, then is your service towards people beneficial or detrimental?

-These questions are worth pursuing because the answers can give insight into whether or not a person should even be involved in service.   

“I think it is possible to empower learners (through service learning) and not promote the common good (by reinforcing a sense of inferiority among those “served” or a false sense of power among those who “serve”). I found this quote at almost the end of the Nadinne Cruz article. It is functioning as the sentence that sort of explains all of her feelings and concludes her final thoughts. I think that if you insert “process” into the quote you will find how the word “service” functions in this quote: “I think it is possible to empower learners (through service learning) and not promote the common good (by reinforcing a sense of inferiority among those “PROCESSED” or a false sense of power among those who “PROCESS”). I think when you use the definition of process instead of sevice, it shows one of Cruz’s arguements that participating in service learning is a sort of process and does not necessarily come from the heart and support the common good. It extends her arguement that those who “PROCESS” are looking for power and those who are “PROCESSED” are the wounded by-product a processor’s power trip.