SUBMIT YOUR STATEMENTS HERE
Send your photos to info@sampsoniaway.org with a quote about what freedom of expression means to you. We have an important privilege here, use it to tell our readers of Sampsonia Way how you feel.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
BELIEVE IN FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?
SUBMIT YOUR STATEMENTS HERE
Send your photos to info@sampsoniaway.org with a quote about what freedom of expression means to you. We have an important privilege here, use it to tell our readers of Sampsonia Way how you feel.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Byliner.com
I followed three different writers on Byliner.com, Chuck Klosterman, Colson Whitehead, and W.C. Heinz
I feel that especially Chuck and Colson are dissimilar from one another. One often writes about sport-like events, more urgent and political issues, and Chuck writes about music, bands, and subculture, three topics I'm particularly interested in. Heinz wrote "Death of a Racehorse" which I found extremely moving. I cried while reading it. Neither Chuck nor Colson will probably evoke tears from me while I'm reading their work, most likely because of their biting sarcasm and wit. Each writer possess something that the others don't. Chuck is extremely self-aware within his writing, as well as Colson, but he doesn't focus on himself as much as Chuck does. They both are aware of themselves within their works, just in different ways. Heinz doesn't include any moments of inner speculation and the way Colson may write about a sport, or Klosterman may write about a sport is completely different than how Heinz writes about sports. It's less about sports are more about the emotion and anxiety in that sport. Chuck depicts emotions very bluntly, while Colson is slightly more poetic about it. If there was a scale on the poeticality of each of these writers, it would be on a scale from most poetic to "least" poetic starting with Heinz, then Colson, and finally Chuck. All of their techniques are effective depending on their subject matter and these techniques give way to their individual styles as writers. All in all, I'm saying that the same technique can be used by three writers, but each writer may be on a different spectrum than another. It's interested to see how all writers are aiming to evoke emotions from an audience, but the unique ways they go about utilizing their craft to do so.
I feel that especially Chuck and Colson are dissimilar from one another. One often writes about sport-like events, more urgent and political issues, and Chuck writes about music, bands, and subculture, three topics I'm particularly interested in. Heinz wrote "Death of a Racehorse" which I found extremely moving. I cried while reading it. Neither Chuck nor Colson will probably evoke tears from me while I'm reading their work, most likely because of their biting sarcasm and wit. Each writer possess something that the others don't. Chuck is extremely self-aware within his writing, as well as Colson, but he doesn't focus on himself as much as Chuck does. They both are aware of themselves within their works, just in different ways. Heinz doesn't include any moments of inner speculation and the way Colson may write about a sport, or Klosterman may write about a sport is completely different than how Heinz writes about sports. It's less about sports are more about the emotion and anxiety in that sport. Chuck depicts emotions very bluntly, while Colson is slightly more poetic about it. If there was a scale on the poeticality of each of these writers, it would be on a scale from most poetic to "least" poetic starting with Heinz, then Colson, and finally Chuck. All of their techniques are effective depending on their subject matter and these techniques give way to their individual styles as writers. All in all, I'm saying that the same technique can be used by three writers, but each writer may be on a different spectrum than another. It's interested to see how all writers are aiming to evoke emotions from an audience, but the unique ways they go about utilizing their craft to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)