(th)Ink Shedding

"'When you Grow up poor, you might not practice delay as much,' he says. 'And if you don't practice then you'll never figure out how to distract yourself.'" Well when you are poor or used to going without, when you do get something, you essentially pounce. Like a starving person would devour a meal once it was put in front of them.Therefore they do not know how to restrain themselves from their desire as well as those who always have what they need do. I think this is what he meant by that. Practicing delay might be something done by those more fortunate to practice obedience. Poverty can create a great desire for wanting and therefore would make practicing a delay almost unrealistic. Because there has never been a feeling of having, the moment something is theirs they will take the opportunity. People who already have what they want and need would not understand how it feels to not have at all. Putting people in that type of situation might help, because "you don't know what yo have until it's gone". Giving fortunate people the ability to be thankful for what they have compared to less fortunate people. though many times when the poor finally have something, they use it up like their supply is endless like antibacterial soap. they'll use maybe 2 maybe 3 pumps when it's practically full. As it decreases they may begin to delay gratification and use less and wash less.

Signed,
Cassandra Rose Blaise DeMarco

Will Power (Initial thoughts/notes)

• I remember learning about the marshmallow study in AP Psychology! It is quite a famous experiment showing the effects of having to abstain from a beloved item for a period of time.
• Why were they able to watch video from the experiments but not get the testing information? that's strange. 
• I guess it's nice to know Mischel's back story. I just don't know why that is relevant to the experiment. As a tool for personalizing/novelizing it I suppose, but it just seems like it should maybe be a separate story. I am having trouble reconciling why I should care about the entire back story of this researcher.
• The correlation between academic/financial success and the test results is cool. how much is hereditary? Nature/nurture? evolutionary? economic? there are a lot of fun questions it brings up.

small object, LARGE SUBJECT

Can I confess something?

I drink Red Bull all the time. Almost everyday. Heck, if it wasn't so expensive I would have 3 square off-the-charts Red Bulls meals 7 days a week. Goodness, I enjoy that liquid.
I don't have work often, I have it three times over the whole week and I only work 12 hours. But those hours are 12-4 AM and 4-8 AM depending on the day. and the other hours of the day? Well, I'm blogging. Or doing homework. Or trying to stay/get healthy by trekking to the fitness center, or going to rehearsal, or drinking Red Bull and taping my eyes open, or, oh yeah class. Fact is, I don't get much sleep. It's the college kid life, and I am in no way complaining.
When I got here I heard something that several people have said to me since then. They say that you have three choices in college: sleep, studies, or a social life, and you can only pick two. Red Bull allows me to stick by my choice of studies and social life. Before college I had never actually tried Red Bull. I grew up around good coffee. A lot of coffee. Potentially radioactive amounts. I had an energy drink a couple of times and I liked the feeling but coffee was (still is, but he doesn't call me as much) my best friend.
There is no good coffee at Hofstra. I say that knowing that maybe I haven't tried every coffee, and maybe only basing it on the fact that I don't like Seattle's Best (it's WATER), especially on the 3AM shift of Dutch Treats where they figure that nobody will be drinking anything but decaf. So, I found Red Bull. Mostly through free Red Bull given at events the first few weeks of school (so there's proof that their advertising strategy worked) and have never looked back. Wow, I make it sound like I only drink red Bull. I suppose that is misleading. I drink about three medium coffees per day, or a chai tea with espresso shots. Then, if I need to be awake for long, I drink a Red Bull. At times, I've shamelessly double-fisted coffee and Red Bull to the horror of those around me. I guess I have a caffeine/taurine issue, but that is another point. What I'm trying to figure out now is: WHY DOES RED BULL EXIST? I wanted to give this back story though, to keep in mind that the following are the words of a very big fan.

I think that the sheer existence of a substance such as Red Bull is a signed of a deeply troubled society. Energy... in an 8.3 oz. can. The fact that people take it simply to perform the tasks the they are expected to and desire to is one of the single most Twilight Zone disturbing things about this crazy future that we live in. Also, it isn't as though the product is inexpensive and readily available. It costs 2.50-3.75 depending on where you get it around here. Truth is, if health and wellness were taught from early ages and enforced by positive examples in our adults, we wouldn't want to put this concoction into our bodies. And we wouldn't feel the need to. Personal fitness is the best energizer that we have, and it is constantly placed on the back burner to focus on work, play, and being a ready-to-go member of society.


**these are opening thoughts, to be continued.

Signed,
Cassandra Rose Blaise DeMarco

Overcoming Ad-hair-sity.

Well. About that Pantene commercial...

Getting over my outraged consumer virtues and diving right into my post here... Let's see... Finding something not at all cliche or superfluous to discuss the deeper meanings of...

So, that butterfly, eh?

Wait, wait, wait. I know what you're thinking. "Butterflies? Lame!" "A third grader could get that symbolism" My pet goldfish could get that symbolism." "How much money did they spend between butterfly/hair CGI animation?" "Couldn't they have focused on ending animal testing in their facilities with the ridiculous amount of effort this commercial must have taken?!" Sorry, sorry, consumer outrage flaring up again. I really should get that checked... Back to the topic.

At the climax of Pantene's short film about a deaf violinist with incredible shine and luster, said deaf girl performs Pachabel's Canon at a Classical music competition. the performance is notably full of life and energy, with intense hair-flipping and images of various memories in her life as well as different images from nature. The particular one that I am interested in talking about is the butterfly coming out of it's chrysalis and flying away. This metaphorical imagery is on of much popularity in many cultures. The butterfly symbolizes transformation and growing up and breaking out of the shell of our former selves. While It has these obvious relartions to the story of the girl, it can also be an effective marketing strategy.

One thing that I thought might have been at work here was the idea of breaking out of a chrysalis being linked to trying new things, which in turn can be linked to trying new products, i.e., Pantene. The idea I am referring to is that if this girl did not venture out past the usual realm of deaf girls and strive for something beautiful, she would not have reached it. If the butterfly did not leave the safe chrysalis it was entombed in, it would never see the sun. If we do not leave our current hair products in favor of Pantene, we will never shine. In that sense, I can see the butterfly as a sort of advertising ploy in that relatively subliminal way. I mean, it isn't likely that we realize the tricks being played on us when we watch these commercials but they feed into our subconscious regardless.

On a final note, When Dr. Lay told us that the old Pantene logo was a butterfly, I was mostly just annoyed by the fact. But, thinking about it in relation to my above comments on trying new things to get new customers, displaying an image tied to the Pantene brand of old, the butterfly, can serve as a reminder to loyal customers of the brand. Our even to ones that used to use it and have veered a way. There is always a ping of nostalgia when we look at old labels of our favorite products from years ago. The memories involved in our use of them come back and it is just a nice feeling of sentimentality. With this, advertisement, Pantene is reaching out to customers old and new, and annoying me the whole time

Signed, Cassandra Rose Blaise DeMarco

about my last post...

Wow. That last post... was... long. I promise I won't do that again. For everyone's sake.

Have a hot potato kinda night, cool cats.

Society in 64 Colors... (Sponsored by Crayola)

Question 1: "first thoughts" response

While I performed the writing assignment for "Tell All the Truth" by Emily Dickinson I found myself sort of constricted. I did not have a crayon, a variety of colors in my marker choice, and an unlimited amount of space. I certainly did not respond well/overtly constructively to the assignment presented. I felt as though I had to keep within a limit, especially without a variety of materials with which to write. I absolutely found myself trying to conserve space by cutting out thoughts and picking and choosing. Also, On a separate and equally stifling note, I am relatively uncomfortable with the quality of my handwriting, which makes my handwritten work tend to be more shy and simplified.

Question 2: Adjectives describing work of peers

The adjectives I used to describe several of the works of my peers are: organized, full, simple, plain, bright, manic, unique, divided, radial, fun, interesting, complete, peaceful, slant, colored, free, ornamental.

First of all, I'm having a debate as to whether I should call these essays or artworks, so I think I'll stick to "works" and call the author/artists "creators" for good measure. Now, on to the adjectives. The qualities that each of the works have seemed to justify the words that I associated with each. For example, I said that one was organized because the color scheme of blue, purple, and green, all cool colors, seemed preplanned to be calming and not to draw attention from the message of her piece. slant was an adjective I used for one that was written in three boxes that descended in diagonal order. The slant of the writing was symbolic of the slanted truth that Emily Dickinson advocates. Some of these works were clearly freeing for the creators, especially one which was written from three start points all toward the center, which I describe as radial. One which I had a more physical reaction to I had described as "manic". While the formatting itself was organized, there was a neon orange marker used which made for difficult reading and focusing. I believe that the choices that each of the creators made for their works are to serve a purpose. The goals of aiding comprehension, adding whimsy, grabbing attention, and others were achieved by the creators through the collective creativity of this collection of work.

Question 3: Imagine a culture with only crayons as writing implements. How would that culture differ from ours? What would that culture be most proud of, or would consider to be signs of intellectual prowess?

To start, I feel it is only fair to say that my hands are already trembling at this prospect. Don't get me wrong, I understand and associate with the consummate feel-good colors and textures of the almighty crayon as much as the next kid, but even while I was growing up I would get exhausted from writing with the things. Maybe in this hypothetical society the citizens won’t as weak-wristed as I am, but I just wanted to get my digit's fears out into the open air before going on to answer the question. Now, obviously, some drastic changes would occur in society if this were the case. The key words to these changes would be: concision. There would absolutely be no more daily newspapers, J.K. Rowling would have much more time on her hands (albeit, less wizards) and hand massages would be at a premium price. Not to mention the inevitable change in the standards of beauty. The new “dumb model” archetype would be hand models (“Did you see her relaxed hand with no tension?! Has she ever written a blog in her life?!”) Clearly the way that writing would achieve a more concise goal would be to eliminate flowery language, useless plot twists, and excess adjectives, shortening the average romance novel to roughly 3-4 sentences total. Sequels would cease to exist, as well. Realistically, these are all positive changes. Learning to wane unnecessary language is a skill that good writers possess, so we might have more precise writers and less fluff. Clearly, another change would be the creative aspect of writing. Long seen as an medium focused on hearing and seeing, authors would have liberties to make books a more visual experience. Picture books are one thing, but what if the colors, shapes and orientation of the words could illustrate the points of the author? Not only in grade school, but picture books with colored text in college would be a norm. The standard of intelligence would change from “who can write to longest book” to “who can say the things they want to say, in a beautiful way, while taking up the least amount of space. This would simply be because there is nothing intelligent about cranking your wrist for the slow process of crayon writing. The geniuses of this society wouldn’t waste their time on fluff. Rather, they would make the few words that they use beautiful and colorful, while explaining their point.

What general observations about writing implements and bodies do you want to venture, based on your experience of this crayon exercise? What general observations about writing implements and thinking do you want to venture?

This makes me want to look into the physical aspect of writing a lot more. This is something I really have not thought much about. While I talk jokingly about how difficult I find it to write in crayon, there are writers with handicaps that make it much harder to write and probably impossible to do comfortable. I would like to think more about writers with Parkinson’s disease or arthritis who fight for their write. As for though, I might like to explore further the idea of different mediums producing different patterns of thought. While we are still the same people with the same mind regardless of what’s in hand, different utensils bring out different results. If I write with a smooth pen, as opposed to a crayon, I become a different author. If I dictate into a microphone, as opposed to typing, I become a different author. these observations and ideas are intriguing to me and thoughts to keep in mind as I move forward with this class and this blog.

Signed, Cassandra Rose Blaise DeMarco