WoB Talk

January 9, 2012

January 9 – 21, 2012

Filed under: Uncategorized — Kari Maaren @ 3:05 am

‘Tis time for a break from the Maddening Mystery of Mr. Mulligan.  Have some zany Barbaraness instead.  You’ve never actually seen Barbara operating in the classroom, have you?  Well, here you go, then.

Advertisements

22 Comments »

  1. Naturally courses are numbered on a whim, if there was a system people would notice when things aren’t as they should be. At my undergrad uni the letters indicated the subject while the first number indicated the semester (in the course) and the last 2 numbers were probably originally from some scheme but not really. But then, they had to move a semester 6 subject to semester 5 – and it was really confusing for (some) people. Random is easier.

    What I hate is when they change the numbering but everyone refers to it by the old number. It took me ages to figure out a class I was teaching because the name I was given was no longer associated with the course. I finally turned to google, which turned up an old unit page and helped me figure out the link.

    Comment by Mer — January 9, 2012 @ 9:47 am

  2. Yeah, here the first digit roughly indicates the level/year of the course. Moreover, there seems to be some effort to give closely related courses numbers that are close together.

    Comment by fan — January 9, 2012 @ 1:26 pm

  3. Peper spray? Isn’t that a little extreme?

    Comment by Blackwolf3 — January 9, 2012 @ 1:56 pm

  4. When they’re trying to bring up Twilight? No.

    Yeah, at mine the first digit was what year you were roughly expected to be. 100 level was for freshmen, 400 was for seniors, 500 and up were for grad students, etc. They didn’t enforce it like that at all, it was just a general guideline.

    It struck me as interesting that Introduction to Probability was a 300 level course. I think it says something about how our society regards math.

    Comment by erwaro — January 10, 2012 @ 12:18 am

  5. I liked the book before all the movie things came out, I like Emmett. What about psychology there is a 400 course on terriorts and counterterrisom, and psyopaths

    Comment by blackwolf3 — January 10, 2012 @ 4:44 pm

  6. Would twilight been a good book if the movies weren’t made?

    Comment by blackwolf3 — January 13, 2012 @ 2:13 am

  7. Sorry, blackwolf3, but I’m not a fan of the books either. Admittedly, I’m probably being unfair, as I’ve only read excerpts (though I do know the full plot of each novel, as I’ve made it all the way through the blog Mark Reads Twilight. There’s a certain type of writing that I simply can’t read more than a page or so of without getting extremely angry, and Stephenie Meyer is a master of that type of writing. It’s just…awkward. As an example, take this tiny excerpt from New Moon (pulled off the Internet ’cause I don’t own the books): “Aro started to laugh. ‘Ha, ha, ha,’ he chuckled.” In this passage, which is nine words long, Meyer tells us three times that the character is laughing. That just makes me cringe.

    As well, I do agree with Barbara that Meyer is doing a disservice to women. Do we really need another series that informs us that a “heroine” is a clingy, obsessive, useless fainter who should just shut up and defer to her male betters? The Victorian period has been over for a while, hasn’t it?

    That’s just my opinion, however. If you have an alternate viewpoint, feel free to speak up.

    Comment by wobtalk — January 13, 2012 @ 2:33 am

  8. Don’t forget that all male love interest would eventually somehow end up with their shirt off. Also, that line of thinking isn’t only restricted to the heroine of the series. Victoria the female vampire protagonist of the third film have to use her feminine wiles to seduce a male vampire (Riley) to help her create an army, and who is killed because of her trickery, ergo even a female vampire are deceptive evil women (as oppose to her two male companion from the first film who simply use force).

    Does this “meticulously constructed flow chart” happen to be real?

    Comment by SunshineRain — January 13, 2012 @ 6:51 am

  9. I love the bit in the trailer for the latest film where Jacob runs out into the rain, petulantly ripping his shirt off as he goes.

    No, the flow chart isn’t real, but it probably could be.

    Comment by Kari Maaren (@angrykem) — January 13, 2012 @ 1:09 pm

  10. Is Casey some how wrapped up in that flow chart?

    Comment by Blackwolf3 — January 14, 2012 @ 2:03 pm

  11. No, Casey has his own flow chart (see the Fan Stuff page).

    Comment by Kari Maaren (@angrykem) — January 14, 2012 @ 2:05 pm

  12. I demand a real flowchart. Without one, my suspension of disbelief would be broken.

    Comment by Nur Hussein (@nurhussein) — January 15, 2012 @ 4:19 am

  13. I’m about to sleep, but I just want to say I seriously question the premise that any reading is better than no reading.

    Comment by erwaro — January 18, 2012 @ 5:09 am

  14. Erwaro: in many ways, so do I. However, people who read the icky stuff do sometimes eventually learn how to separate the icky from the non-icky. Others don’t. I guess it depends on one’s definition of “icky.”

    Comment by televisionclips — January 18, 2012 @ 5:13 am

  15. Oops…sorry. “Televisionclips” is me. That’s the sign-in name for the blog I use to store YouTube clips for the course I’m teaching at the moment.

    Comment by Kari Maaren (@angrykem) — January 18, 2012 @ 5:15 am

  16. Interesting, if given enough “muck” I wonder if people will be more likely to tell it’s muck or will they simply learn to adapt. On the other hand at least muck is consistent and doesn’t leave you til “2013 at the earliest” to tell you what happen, *sigh* I am Sherlocked.

    At least I finally got your “Merry Happy” reference, and as it’s near the end of Summer/Winter school: Merry semester, and a happy new one.

    Comment by SunshineRain — January 18, 2012 @ 2:02 pm

  17. Will you have the class go in to choas with one side Edward and the other side Jacob and Barbra in the middle with a taser and Pepper spray?

    Comment by blackwolf3 — January 18, 2012 @ 11:26 pm

  18. Yeah. I was gonna say some stuff about trying to define what, exactly, constitutes “Reading” in the “Reading is beneficial” sense. I mean, you technically read things in, say, a porn mag, but I’m pretty sure that’s not what you’re talking about. And then the question becomes “Well, where does ‘Twilight’ fall?”. I didn’t and don’t have answers to these questions, but that seems to be at the heart of the issue. And you’re right, there are certainly some situations where good comes out of it.

    I think I had a point when I started writing this, but I’ve forgotten what it is.

    Comment by erwaro — January 19, 2012 @ 12:07 am

  19. Yay! for extravaganza.

    Comment by emily — January 20, 2012 @ 4:53 am

  20. Ooh a Chinese New Year WoB extravaganza that last til I start work, how fortunate.

    Comment by SunshineRain — January 20, 2012 @ 9:06 am

  21. Woohoo! Extravaganza!

    *sheds a single tear of pure joy*

    Comment by fan — January 20, 2012 @ 1:32 pm

  22. Yay for the next extravaganza! I hope Casey will play a major role in it.

    But: What do you do with 8-year-old girls who name Twilight as their favourite movie? Is there any way to prevent the apocalypse?

    Comment by nobilis — January 21, 2012 @ 8:57 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: