Thursday, March 24, 2011


            Roberts’s piece echoed many ideas I use when writing. When given freedom to use any topic I prefer to abuse this freedom. I never worry about if the teacher would agree with my statement. I prefer to have them disagree in the grandest factor. No one was recognized for tip toeing around to avoid stepping on people’s toes. I don’t want to be the small homely paper. I want my paper to be a 4.6 ton origami elephant within the overcrowded class room crushing everyone’s toes.

            My research question comes from my first method of finding a subject; take a small observation in to a full blow problem and exaggerate it till Rush Limbaugh would say you went too far.
How do umbrellas cause more harm than good?

            This idea came during class when I failed to come up with a normal topic for our counterargument exercise. As Robert suggests I take the less usual side of an argument although I may invent the argument of umbrellas or enduring the rain. Most importantly to make this work I will need the abstract. I will have very little concrete evidence for my side of this argument. My main concern isn’t if my reasons can be reinforced by facts, rather if I can find reasons. I believe any reason can have facts to support it because in this world there are many sides to every argument and somewhere someone slipped up and said something that can help my case. It may not be directly related but if I claim: “by protecting yourself from rain you avoid the chance of getting sick,” then relate it to; “whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger,” I am quite confident that someone somewhere agreed with each one of those points.  For safe measure I will most likely prepare another reassure question in case this doesn’t work.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Something Borrowed

            In Malcolm Gladwell’s essay, Something Borrowed, he explores the aspects of plagiarism. In doing so he tells the story of Dorothy Lewis’s case with the Broadway show “Frozen.” Throughout the piece the tone of the essay changes from supporting to against copyright laws. After many friends had suggested the show “Frozen” to Lewis the group preforming the play asked her to speak to the actors because of her expertise in the main subject of the play. She asked for a copy to read which shocked and angered her. It appears that the entire premise and multiple lines were taken from her book and other writings which were then turned into the play. She felt violated that her life was taken and put on a stage. She began the process of suing for plagiarism. As her story progresses then reader is given instances where in plagiarism isn’t necessarily bad. As the story continues, Lewis’s opinion changes. She then believes that copy write laws are a strange and in some ways a destructive force on humanity. The essay points to the idea that plagiarism in just a reactionary and natural occurrence; plagiarism is taking inspiration from and expanding ideas from not stealing.
            I strongly agree with this essay. People who, with greed inspired actions, place copyrights on drugs that could potentially save lives. By doing this they can charge more money for their product. Actions like this are only slowing the advancement of humanity. There is a fine line between plagiarism and being influenced. Sometimes this line can disappear when people have alternative motives for their ideas (i.e. money). I personally believe that copyrights interfere with the growth of society and technology. Life is reactionary thus we learn from previous music or ideas, then from that we create new music and ideas that seem similar to the previous but are still new.