Blog 20: Nonfiction article

Ginny wrote about women that feel the need to get married, and soon. Once women reach a particular stage in life, it seems that society, and more importantly, some families, expect women to find a husband. I felt that her third person, insightful but not introspective, point of view was very appropriate. As a woman, Ginny most probably has feelings about the topic, but she did not allow these to creep into her article. I felt that I was reading the women's stories, not a story spun to make things seem a certain way.

I particularly enjoyed the status details of the first woman that Ginny interviewed. For some reason, knowing where the women lived and worked really set the tone and helped me to see where the women are/were in their lives with respect to getting married.

One thing that might have helped some is variety. Understandably, all the women are local teachers/students and around the same age. It may have helped to have an older woman talk about how times have changed and if this race is anything new. Women have become a lot more goal/career oriented and have most often moved away from the MRS degree. Are societal expectations just not caught up with women's goals and timelines?

One part that was confusing for me was the title. After Ginny's work with Black Like Me I was thinking this had something to do with actual race rather than a competition. But this misconception was quickly cleared up.

Sadie's story also employed third person narrative to tell about the soup kitchen. The pacing of this story flowed well; the proper amount of time and description was given to each aspect/stage of feeding the hungry and her scene by scene construction allowed me to follow through her morning as it progressed. I also enjoyed the little bit of dialogue and banter among the people in the kitchen. The exchanges between them showed that they are real people and care for each other and their cause.

My favorite part(s) of the story are the little bits that describe each person at their respective job. Although these sections are very short, I am able to see their personalities and the part they play in the mission. Even more physical details could have been added here. Also, I really enjoyed the snippets of conversation from the people that came for food. More description could have been added here as well. Were there children? Did anyone get out of line or act louder than anyone else?

There was really no confusion throughout this story. Each aspect is straightforward and presented clearly. Sadie asked at the end of her story if she should put herself into the story. This could be helpful if she talked about the effects the volunteers and their open hearts had on her. But this is also given more subtly through her descriptions of them so I don't find personal inclusion to be necessary.

Ben wrote about the Miami Heat game and his experience with the changing of the team and the fans. Ben's status details really pushed his point. The way the fans were dressed, how much they were willing to pay for amenities, and the fact that some noted fans didn't stay to the end of the game really reinforces that the Heat game was a status thing and much less about the winning and losing, although it takes a team foreseen to win to draw a crowd.

This was written from first person perspective, but might have been made stronger if utilized more. The story doesn't really say if Ben was there as a status boost or to watch the game. He stayed to the end and knew the final score which causes me to assume he cared, but maybe a little more talk about the game and how it went and the reception of the big names would help show that Ben was interested in more than the court-side proceedings (which were not bad details- very helpful). This is something that I also would've liked to hear more about.

More could have been added to the story from Chloe and Andrew's perspective about the game and the team. Chloe is a central figure because she provides the tickets but there is nothing about what she thinks of the team and their 'status' to other attendees of the game. Is she one that comes just for fun or does she have an interest in if the Heat win or lose?

I really enjoyed the comments from Jose Lamas. He seemed to be a loyal fan and had the authority to that others were there for 'sceney' reasons and not necessarily for the athletes and game.

Michelle wrote her story about the horse farm in the first person perspective. There were few status details about the people and place itself; much more space was alloted for the horses themselves. To me, that speaks greatly, if indirectly, of the owners. The horses seemed to be well-groomed and cared for, which shows that the owners are doing their jobs and living their dream.

The growth of the farm and how it functions worked really well. Giving the place and sharing that the owners accept donations is good to note if a reader wanted to visit the farm or help the cause. Also, does the Humane Society help with the farm at all? Their policies were quoted and I wasn't sure if that's because they are the animal authorities or if they have a hand in the farm.

The details about what could happen to the horses if not cared for at the farm really reiterates the work that the Gregorys are doing for the animal community. My favorite part of the story was the fact that even though the Gregorys have lived and traveled in many different countries, they felt that Alachua county was the best place to start their vision. Their mission is a great asset to this part of the state where there are horses in need of help.

Casey covered the cadaver lab from the perspective of a new physical therapy student with side notes from the professor. Casey used 'subjective arrangement of reported information to effect.' He slowly reports concrete detail that he wants us to know, holding out on certain status details of the environment of the lab and what sets it apart from every other lab on campus.

I really enjoyed the slow release of detail, which also matched the slow progression of comfort that the remaining students would feel as they continued with the program. Senesac serves as a guiding light both to the students she teaches/counsels and to the reader; the description of her voice had a calming effect on me as well as I read. One thing that I am curious about, though, are the students' expectations before coming into the lab. Do they know what they are going to see and how the bodies will be presented? Upon entering the program, did they know they were going to be working with cadavers?

There was no confusion for me in this article, and I felt that enough space and detail was alloted for both the students and the professor to express being nervous and express and instill calm, respectively. My favorite part is the paragraph when Alyssa has completed her first day in the lab and the background that she doesn't know about is explained. There is a lot of work and financial input that is needed to get these cadavers so the students can use them.

Blog 19: Tracy Kidder

Tracey Kidder's writing appears to be an off-shoot and fusion of new journalism respectively coupled with travel journalism. Kidder is not quite immersive because he doesn't need to cover himself or hide his goals. Instead, Kidder travels to the story and makes a story out of what he sees rather than thinking of an opportunity and crafting a story around what he senses to be an opportunity. Having the ability to see a town like Hamp/Noho, notice fringe members of the society and write a story that weaves them together into a journalistic book makes Kidder a traveling journalist, in my opinion. He writes the details that are the essence of the place and uses the characters' unique characteristics to define them, not exploit them. For Mountains Beyond Mountains, he attempted to paint the man as man, as father, as human. Kidder wanted to show the power but also the making of Paul Farmer. He did not immerse himself in the subject but rather observed and saw Farmer's cause, adding to the travel journalism aspect while detracting from immersion.

There shouldn't be a question of this as a legitimate form. The genre of new journalism leaves room for experimentation and Kidder has innovated what has already been accepted. It appears that he presents his characters as truthfully as he sees them, making these works more than just fiction and more than a simple relay of what he has witnessed. Also, being able to bring the stories of the people together makes this more than a simple retelling but also a weaving of a society. But one attribute that does not coincide with travel journalism is the excitement of his subjects. Rather than traveling to exotic places and bringing audiences tales of places they can only read about and never visit, Kidder takes the ordinary townspeople and makes their inner lives more prominent.

I would like to do something like this because it seems to involve getting out into the community and getting to know people on their level, not just professionally or in one respect but how they think and what they are like as people, intricacies and 'character flaws' included. Copious notes wouldn't be my favorite part of the job, but understanding the subject in such depth is pertinent to the story. I would also love to travel so that is another plus for this genre.

Blog 18: Avis Meyer

Meyer is not necessarily defending literary journalism. Instead, he brings attention to the fact that the writers were so varied and although branching from many previous experiences and writing backgrounds, each has built on the empire of writing. He seems to be defending the merit of the writing more than the ability of the writers themselves. People seem to have discounted the writing of these authors because they do not write traditional news stories in the inverted pyramid style.

On page five, Meyer makes distinctions about the authors and the different genres they write for different literary publications. He does not esteem one author or genre over another; each is portrayed with care and attention that shows his belief that each is necessary to journalism as a whole. Each one has contributed to the growth of publication of the written word (i.e., newspapers, magazines, journals).

Meyer also points out the vocations of the writers before and sometimes after they write for newspapers or magazines. He may do this to show that these authors did not just materialize and begin to write, regardless of skill or experience. He verifies that these writers are professionals and have a solid background in reporting and the field of journalism.

Also, in Sandburg and Hemingway's cases, Meyer points out the usefulness of their careers before poetry and writing, respectively. Before these two notable authors took the stage in other genres, they got their feet wet in the little stream known as literary journalism. In Steinbeck and Hemingway's cases, Meyer relates how the background experience that they had fortified them as writers. Hemingway relied on his experiences of writing in Europe and Steinbeck used his Hooverville sightings in writing The Grapes of Wrath.

The career paths of the writers that Meyer mentions show that literary journalism can be used as an occupational plateau and/or stepping stone for writers. Some of these writers continued to go on and publish more outside of this realm while some created names for themselves in this genre. He shows the effectiveness and questions why some people do not give the full amount of credit due to these writers; they have proven themselves prolific and talented with the ability to relay information and inform their audience as well as entertain.

Blog 17: Sketch like Crane's

The crowd jostled and moved, dipped and swayed, not in unison but not against each other. Each movement was jerky or smooth, planned or erratic, but each was an attempt at keeping time to the thumping bass on the dance floor, oblivious to the heat waves emanating around the small room.

The music pulsed and the peopled danced, meshing and colliding with each other. A heavy set drunk in red stumbled backwards. Her shoulder length brown hair was plastered to the frame of her face as she sloshed into the arms of strangers. With their support, she regained her feet and a little of her posture. She turned with enormous eyes and a smile stretched wider than a taxi with open doors and jumped around, promptly losing her footing and tumbling again into the crowd. She was caught again but this time pointed in another direction, maneuvered towards the stage where her chances to balance herself were increased. She turned her smile-stricken face and jumped away into the throng of bodies, moving, beating, shaking with rhythm.

A main stage crowded the back of the room. Couples danced tightly, twining arms through arms, around faces and over shoulders as legs weaved to create a structure of support. Trios move together, complicating the already desperate attempt at finding a common ground and jiving, touching, pulling, tripping together while maintaining balance. Cigarette smoke climbs high into the air and the beer coats the ground, adding to the obstacles of their already complicated dance.

A girl with hair pinned up on her head, more straight than her dancing routine, treaded on stage as "Here we go again, I feel the chemicals kicking in..." blared from the speakers beneath her. A young man in a dark shirt promenaded playfully towards her as she turned her body to receive his advances. The bass dictated their movements as he stepped closer, bringing their proximity to uncomfortable in the sweltering room. They joined hands and reveled together in each other's grace and fluid motions. The girl's small frame and low visibility due to her dance partner's size rendered her unaware of another young man sauntering up to her dance partner. The darkly clad young man was enraptured with the girl and failed to see his pursuer, with dark jeans and a white shirt, stepping slowly closer to him and seemingly wondering how close, how close, this much closer...

The heat seemed to infiltrate the crowd, making one person for every two and filling the space between groups. Instead of swishing, skirts stuck. Instead of hanging, shirts clung. Movement increased and diminished as the songs became dominated by bass or lyrics. Words had a soothing effect on the pulse of the crowd while the music amped the reactions. Higher and higher the crowd climbed, as the beat pounded. Hands left hips and were raised above heads. Drinks were lifted to avoid the crash and crumble of the crowd. "I'm supposed to interfere, I'm coming from your fears" throbs from the speakers on the floor, flooding the room with techno sounds. Girl's hair is flipped this way and cleaves another's shoulder with a sweaty grip.

The last song drips from the speakers as people drain the last of their beers, fix their tabs and find their original or new escorts. "Payin' anything to roll the dice, just one more time" permeates the thinning room as the crowd spills onto North Main Street.

Blog 16: Markey

Markey’s treatment of writing about Number 48,227 is exactly the inverse of what the other ‘characters’ would have readers believe.  While the buriers, priests, superintendents and morgue workers are most concerned with people that are identifiable, that have names and families that will knowingly miss them, Markey has taken Number 48,227 from the rest, out of oblivion, and made him a person.  Despite the lack of persona or identification (even Willie seems trivial), Number 48,227 becomes the only name/recognition that anyone receives.  Even the workers are nameless and faceless.  But Markey does name all the places and inanimate objects; the boat name is known, the East River is mentioned, as well as the park, island, places and gates that the company passes through on their way to burial.  Number 48,227 practically becomes one of these inanimate objects and a part of the surroundings because he is the only person referred to with a title.

            The use of status details is used to reinforce the anonymity of Number 48,227 and to secure his place as a respectable person.   Markey ensures that he is given proper respect and care because he is buried in the Catholic lot.  He is cleared of any crime because his prints don’t match those of a common local pickpocket.  Markey seems to imply that he was well off and not part of the working class because he had a decent amount of money and his hands proved that he was not accustomed to hard or rough physical labor.  His scapular proved that he had faith in God and no one could prove that he had committed suicide so he took his place amongst other Catholics. 

            The scene-by-scene construction serves almost as a purgatory.  He travels through the ranks and is cleared of guilt on each level, eventually gaining the blessing of a priest before being interred in the burial plot.  In each office or room, Number 48,227 is given a positive attribute or saving grace that clears him of guilt and he gets a free “release for burial” stamp and is sent to the next level. 

            The dialogue doesn’t seem to add a lot of context.  While it helps to set Number 48,227 apart because he has no voice and cannot tell his story or whether he was murdered or committed suicide, I don’t feel that it really adds much depth to the story.   In having a numeraled man with a description among a sea of faceless workers, Markey has already set the unidentified dead man apart.

            Markey was a writer that did a good deal of traveling and chronicled what he saw.  He also wrote a moving piece about the beginning of Alcoholics Anonymous.He played a backseat role, often documenting the movement and action around him while being immersed in it but never played a central part.  He toured 16,000 miles of the country and had his observations published in This Country of Yours.

For my article, I would like to cover something either sports or community related.  Possibly an event in the community or some kind of athletic event.  I'd like to write about the place and possibly pick a person to shadow throughout to see the event through their eyes as well.

Blog 15: Undercover journalism

Of all the articles we read for this week, the "Deception/Hidden Cameras Checklist" is the most effective at describing when and how things have gone wrong or right.  I think it is through this scope that the rest of the cases must be measured.  Bly's experiment exposed extreme indecency being performed on individuals that were unable to defend themselves or fight back (to any effect).  She satisfies the most important part of the requirement for this type of journalism, "must prevent profound harm to individuals."  In uncovering the ethics in the asylum, Bly got a great story but more importantly, she saved the people from their situations.  There was also no other way to prove this kind of thing was happening except through first-hand-experience.  She was willing to admit her methods for getting the story and had evidence to back up her allegations and pleas for fixing the current system.

Pam Zekman also falls into this category.  As long as she didn't come into owning a bar illegally and never misrepresented who she was, I believe that she carried out her mission effectively.  She did her job and while offering the money, it is the law enforcement's job to make sure they 1) don't take that money and 2) supervise her to do her job effectively.  Unfortunately for them, they took the money so she could continue to run a sub-par bar.  The only way to really prove this sort of thing is to run through first hand, just as Bly did.

The Food Lion scandal is another story.  I am bothered because they lied to management and were not honest about previous work experience.  This reminds me of Conover's stint at Sing-Sing, but Conover completed the training and didn't have to lie about previous work experience to get the job.  The Food Lion debate also causes me to question why the workers wanted to go undercover at that grocery store.  Had people complained about being sick from their food?  If that was the case, I feel that these complaints would have surfaced and consumers would have been able to decide for themselves about the quality of the food.  If no one else had complained then I don't think that this investigation met the 'appropriate' standards on several points, including "When the harm prevented by the information revealed through deception outweighs any harm caused by the act of deception."


As for the lobbying scandal and the phone line issues, I believe both of these could have been achieved in different ways.  I also don't believe that these news organizations used "excellence, through outstanding craftsmanship as well as the commitment of time."  When confronted with the ethical implications of their arguments, these investigative reporters became defensive and pointed out that if the perpetrators were doing things illegally, they should be allowed to uncover them illegally, which happens to fall under the 'criteria that do not justify deception.'  


Unfortunately, there is no way to say that things definitely are or definitely are not ethical or appropriate. I have trouble drawing concise lines to delineate what should and should not be allowed.  But I do believe that if a reporter is undercover and confronted with the truth (if they are found out), they should reveal their identity UNLESS their lives are in danger.  If their cover is blown, they should take the hit and walk.  If they are in danger of losing their lives, they should cease investigative reporting but not let their cover down.  Anything beyond this guideline really becomes subjective.

Blog 14: Gay Talese, DiMaggio

Gay Talese seems to want to show the private life of DiMaggio; he wants to describe his habits, his person, his fears, his dislikes and his likes, among other things.  This is shown best by the fact that Talese was unsuccessful in getting an in=depth interview with DiMaggio.  DiMaggio was a very public figure that resented the spotlight, which typically made him all the more mysterious.  This mystique was aided by his short marriage to Marilyn Monroe, who coveted the spotlight.  Talese seems to be chasing this allusive American hero, hoping to give more insight into his life and habits, and in a way, he is successful.  At the same time, DiMaggio never faces Talese squarely to answer any questions and adds to his shy nature.

The plot can be a bit confusing if the reader is not careful.  Talese uses a series of 'present' actions as well as flashbacks to show his story.  The 'season' Talese refers to can be seen as a baseball season (for a team and sport that he no longer plays) or as a season in his life- he wants privacy, to be left alone, and is most often noted as brooding and quiet.  Which, ironically, seems to be the way that he lived his entire life.  For the majority of the article, Talese writes about a specific day in DiMaggio's life, which is an ordinary day.  He intersperses flash backs then returns to that day.  The last page or two of the article glosses over a 30 day period where DiMaggio goes to camp with the Yankees.

Dialogue is heavily relied on for this article, yet indirectly.  There is no discourse between the author and the baseball legend.  All insight through conversation is gleaned through that 'fly-on-the-wall' reporting style.  Direct quotes from DiMaggio are short and few, which ultimately aid his reputation as a reticent talker.  When he does talk, it's often about sports, (not much about his baseball), or short quips tat respond to questions without really answering them (see the exchange on p. 157 with man with 'wine on his breath').  Comments from friends, acquaintances and outside sources give a lot of characterization for DiMaggio.  Interestingly, though, I was struck by the amount of his direct quotes that were about pretty women.

Talese's scene by scene construction is weakened by his narrative style, but his status details are strong.  I felt that he did a good job of detailing places and people without telling his audience what to think or how to feel.  Mentioning that DiMaggio "slept crossways on three seats" shows readers that he is a tall man, and the way "flabby men in he locker rooms of golf clubs sometimes steal peeks at him when he steps out of the shower, observing the tight muscles across his chest..." show readers that DiMaggio has retained the young man's baseball figure (although Talese does feel compelled to spell this out for this audience a little later in the passage).

Talese absolutely leaves the writer out of the picture.  He writes from an immersed standpoint and fly on the wall, a position relegated to him by DiMaggio himself by not granting an interview.  This makes the 'exploration of inner experience' extremely difficult.

Gay Talese is a nonfiction writer (because he didn't want to change the names) and has written an assortment of articles and books.  He has reported for the New York Times, Esquire (where this particular article was published), The New Yorker, Harper's Magazine, and others.  He has been credited by Tom Wolfe as the inventor of "New Journalism."  He has been married for 50 years to Nan Talese, who works with a publishing company.  After witnessing his parents' "claustrophobic" marriage, he is happy that they are able to function independently of each other, especially when he is away writing.
http://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/talese/index.html ; also articles/interview available.

Talese believes that patience and curiosity are most valuable to a journalist; he has both.  Although he has been writing for 55 years, he has only written "five long books, two short ones, and four collections."  His process of note-taking, writing, editing and typing are extremely tedious.  Talese also needed patience and curiosity to complete the piece about DiMaggio.  If he employed the same tactics as he did for his famous article about Sinatra, Talese followed DiMaggio around, gleaning everything he could from people that he passed and spoke to as well as friends and family members.  If DiMaggio had a conversation with someone, Talese may have approached them later to find out the specifics of the conversation and possibly gotten their information for more quotes and source info later.

Question: Talese's method of following DiMaggio around reminds me of tabloid writers that stalk their subjects to see what they say or do, yet Talese seems much more refined than that.  What is it about his approach that makes him different, while what he does is basically the same?

Blog 13: Journalistic Immersion

Jack London's People of the Abyss includes little of what I remember of The Call of the Wild in elementary school.  Stark weather and forest descriptions have been replaced by bleak city and people.  Instead of talking about wolves trying to survive the wilderness, London focuses on people trying to survive their surroundings.

Part of London's interest in this subject and motivation for writing this piece seems to be if he can accomplish it or not.  A large bit of writing in the beginning shows that he has trouble even finding the East End; when he is successful, he almost seems to take it as a sign that he should continue.  He is out to conquer other people's 'you-can't-find-it' mentality as well as prove to himself that this is entirely possible.  Once he actually finds the location of his choice, he takes the pains to transform himself into a local because London also wants to see how the East End inhabitants dwell and function.  But he seems unaccustomed to the slum conditions of that part of the city and the people and wants to see and experience what it takes to survive in the squalor.  His tone shows that while he has become a part of them, he is still a little awed at their manner of living.

The plot line in this short excerpt is 3/4 seeking and 1/4 finding and adjusting.  London details his search for the East End like a pirate searching for treasure; he has to ask, pay people off and hire a guide of sorts before he finally comes to the East End.  The search for the people is nearly more invigorating than actually finding them.  London almost seems smug about being able to hold his driver until he has discovered where he wants to be.  Then the last few paragraphs show London's realization that he has indeed found what he was looking for and through his transformation, has become a person of the abyss as well as dispensable.  Interestingly, London cannot seem to be a part of the East End and accepted by them until he has relinquished the things that tie him to his (relatively) upper class situation.  He feels like he could be in danger there until he becomes a slummer; when his transformation is made, he feels cheapened by the upper class and accepted by the East End.

London uses status details as well as concrete details most strongly from the list of elements.  He vividly describes the slums and how difficult it is to find them.  Page 86 is a great example of showing, not telling as he paints a picture of the streets and market place (nowhere in the streets...devoured on the spot).  He could not have told his readers better than his descriptions explain his surroundings.  His status details help paint the people (especially the way things change when he himself changes his clothes) and his descriptions paint the scenes.

Dialogue also is a strong suit in this excerpt.  London's exchanges with cab drivers and policemen show the incredulity of his observers.  This also becomes an example of showing rather than telling.  Instead of saying what they will, people "urge" or "order" or "demand" or "spluttered unintelligibly."  I wish I could come up with such attribution for my magazine and feature writing class.  E

ach conversation is lit with vernacular and descriptive attributions that prove people's skepticism of London's travels.

London's own exploration of how this makes him feel is portrayed powerfully in this piece.  He searches and searches to find these East End people and to become one of them, yet when he has accomplished this feat he becomes introspective and shows surprise that he no longer truly means anything to anyone around him because of the quality of his clothes and the way he appears.  He is invagorated about that because he has fulfilled his transformation but at the same time is saddened that life can become so inconsequential.

After glancing through London's biography, this work appears to be one of the few that was set in a city scape.  His most famous other works include animal subjects but mostly take place in jungles, wilderness, or on the sea.  People of the Abyss does adhere to his Darwinism tendencies.  London was the child of an unwed mother and grew up in the lower middle class.  He worked many 'hard labor' jobs that took him around the country, into the Yukon and across the sea and neglected his schoolwork and any writing until he was 19.  He became known as a socialist in his community and even ran for mayor on that ticket.  He was never successful in the political realm.   http://london.sonoma.edu/jackbio.html

To write this book, London went and lived in the 'under world' of the East End for 7 weeks.  He wanted to see first-hand the experiences of the people:  "I was open to be convinced by the evidence of my eyes, rather than by the teachings of those who had not seen, or by the words of those who had seen and gone before." (http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/PeopleOfTheAbyss/preface.html).  As the writings show, London became an East End inhabitant and learned what he could of the people and environment around him.


Question: I am bothered by the last few sentences in this selection: "I had become a part of it.  The vast and malodorous sea had welled up and over me, or I had slipped gently into it, and there was nothing fearsome about it-with the one exception of the stoker's singlet" (89).  London has thrown off every constraint and made it seem that he is indeed a slummer.  But yet he holds onto this money even though he is afraid.  Does this cheapen his immersion to anyone else?  Was it really necessary to hold onto this money 'just in case?'

Research Outline

 I. Introduction
A.Dr. Lloyd's feelings about movies-what good?
1.His personal favorite- Jane Austen
B.How much are students gaining from videos vs. reading the real thing?
C.Introduction of Weinstein's article- movies
D.Why this matters- introduce issue of gonzo writing and attempts to remake experiences in film

II.Lester Bangs
A.Role in gonzo
B.Effects he had on culture
1.Why he is remembered today
2.His general subject matter
C.Why he became the subject of a movie
*-*
III.Hunter S. Thompson
A.Role in gonzo
B.Effects he had on culture
1.Why he is remembered today
2.His general subject matter
C.Why his writing became the subject of a movie
 *-*

IV.Movie renditions
A.Almost Famous
1.How truthful?
2.How embellished?
3.How Gonzo?
B.Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
1.How truthful?
2.How embellished?
3.How Gonzo?

V.Why do we care?
A.Conclusion

(*-*) =still trying to decide if I want to put authors with their movies, or do authors, then movies (as shown)

Sources:

Atton, Chris.  "Living in the Past'?: Value Discourses in Progressive Rock Fanzines."   Popular Music, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Jan., 2001), pp. 29-46.  Web.

Atton's article will give a valuable frame of reference for Bangs' work.  Although Hunter did not cover the music scene, Bangs wrote for several critical music publications, and this article should provide a critique of those critiques.  Bangs' articles were published in Creem mostly, but he was also featured in Rolling Stone and a couple of other publications.  This will hopefully not lean too far into the music side and will give an unbiased review of Bangs' reviews. 

Bangs, Lester, ed. John Morthland.  Mainlines, blood feasts, and bad taste: a Lester Bangs reader.  Google books.  http://tiny.cc/8bxzt.  Web.

This book by Bangs will provide good background for his style and range of thinking in the same way that Thompson's books provide background.  I will use this as a reference for Bangs' frame of reference as a musician, critic and writer.

Carroll, E. Jean.  Hunter: The strange and savage life of Hunter S. Thompson.  Plume: New York, 1993. 

After reading only the first chapter of this book, I see that Carroll has attempted to write a biographical type of book about Thompson in gonzo style; her style is satirical and entertaining, not sparing information but fixating on what some may consider the rude or obscene.  Throughout the book, Carroll includes statements from friends and family members, giving the reader a better idea of Thompson, where he came from and how he developed.  Also, Carroll’s style will help to reinforce the gonzo tradition.

DeRogatis, Jim.  Let it Blurt: The Life and Times of Lester Bangs, America’s Greatest Rock Critic.  Broadway Books, New York: 2000. 

This book provides background information about Bangs, his childhood, adolescent years and adulthood.  DeRogatis includes extensive notes and appendixes that will further aid my research by reassuring the thoroughness of his.  The book also includes a section of selected lyrics that will give insight into his writing as well.

Hirst, Dr. Martin.  “What is Gonzo? The etymology of an Urban Legend.”  School of Journalism and Communication Publications, Queensland, Australia: 2004.

This journal/publication explores the beginning of gonzo journalism and its frontrunners, especially Hunter S. Thompson, but more importantly, it examines the beginning of the new style of writing itself- where it came from, how it originated, even how the name was founded and introduced.

IMDB.com

This website will be used for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Almost Famous by/about both authors.  In this section, I can find reviews, pertinent information about actors, actresses, directors and dates for the movies.  Of all internet movie sites, this is the most up-to-date and correct information I have found.  This may also lead to other review sites.

Kramer, Michael J.  “Can’t Forget the Motor Ciry”: Creem Magazine, Rock Music, Detroit Identity, Mass Consumerism and Counter Culture.””  Michigan Historical Review.  28.2, 42-77.  JSTOR.

Kramer writes about the magazine Creem and how Bangs contributed to its pages and content.  Because Creem formed the base from which Bangs jumped to go on to his career and why he was featured in the movie “Almost Famous”, I think this is an important source and viewpoint to include in research.

MacFarlane, Scott.  The Hippie Narrative: A Literary Perspective on the Counter Culture. MacFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, North Carolina: 2007. 

Thompson has not been selected for this book because of his hippie qualities or tendencies; instead, he is noted for gonzo journalism.  The new journalism movement was one of the ways that society was breaking free from prior constraints and hippies see Hunter’s writing as a continuation of that form.  Hunter’s writing also jives with some hippie standards because of his drug use; he not only used many drugs but wrote about them as a first person experience.

Tamony, Peter.  "Gonzo".  American Speech.  Vol. 58, No. 1 (Spring, 1983), pp. 73-75.  Web.

Once again, this article should give clarification for the idea of gonzo and why each author is part of the movement.  Due to the fact that gonzo (and writing styles in general) can have such mobile definitions, I think it is wise to include several sources for the definition and style ideas that characterize each.

Thompson, Hunter S.  Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Other American Stories.  Random House, Inc., New York: 1996.  

Only by reading Thompson’s writing can one get a true feeling of gonzo writing and the methods used to bring gonzo to life.  His original work will serve as a template on which to base my own opinions; I want to be able to critique how well the movie producers matched Thompson’s writing to the work they put on the screen.  Also, reading original work gives a better understanding of the man himself.

Thompson, Hunter S.  Fear and Loathing in America: The Brutal Odyssey of an Outlaw Journalist (1968-1976).  Simon and Schuster: New York, 2000. 

This collection of letters will be able to provide more insight into Thompson’s thoughts and feelings, rather than relying on what others believed he thought or felt.  This also includes extensive letters to political powers which will provide background information about Thompson’s thoughts and musings about the government.

Torrey, Beef and Kevin Simonson, ed.  Conversations with Hunter S. Thompson.  University Press of Mississippi, Jackson: 2008.

This source will be useful because it places Thompson in the genre of gonzo; not only does the book include conversations with and about Thompson and others that played a critical role in his development but also gives background and definition to the literary invention of gonzo and how that development fits with the larger creation of new journalism.

Weinstein, Paul B. "Movies as the Gateway to History: The History and Film Project." The History Teacher, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Nov., 2001), pp. 27-48.  Web.

This source will show what impact the films had for gonzo itself.  Although it is a blanket piece, Weinstein's article will help to show that there is an enormous correlation between the industries of writing, movies, music and history.  I believe this will help to show my point that information is spread faster and some reverence preserved with the making of a movie about these writers/pieces.  Also, more people are informed of the movement with this platform.

Blog 12: Rick Bragg

For this assignment, I chose to read Rick Bragg's Somebody Told Me.  This is a collection of news articles he has written, most (if not all) dating from 1995-2000.  There are often several articles that deal with the same incident or issue and are broken down accordingly into sections.  For example, one entire section of the book is devoted to the proceedings surrounding a woman who was carjacked with her two toddler-aged sons in the backseat.  Bragg's articles follow the search for the man, the car, and the boys, and continues to follow as the story unfolds into the mother confessing that she let the car go into the lake with the boys strapped in the backseat.  One large section also deals with the Oklahoma City bombing, finding the man responsible, the lives it touched, and then following the trial proceedings.

I chose this book superficially- my sister loved Bragg's book All Over But the Shoutin' and I never gave it half a chance.  When I saw that a book on the list for this class was by Bragg, I felt like I could redeem myself and Bragg's writing by reading.

There is not a traditional plot line to this story.  Because the entire book is a collection of news stories, there are common threads and subjects but not one coherent plot.  One common characteristic of the book is sadness; it's hard to put this book down and feel uplifted and happy.  Out of the 15 individual sections of the book, there are four that share stories of fun, tradition, or triumph.  The remainder are heart-wrenching, I-can't-believe-this-stuff-really-happens stories.  Some stories and areas that hit me the hardest included the section about children and violence in schools ('Schoolyards') as well as the stories "The Story of Dirty Red" about a child falsely accused of sexual assault and "Living with a Grief That Will Never Die" about a man that lost his sister and wife in separate bizarre episodes of murder.

Bragg relies heavily on his details and sources to really draw readers into a story.  He often begins with a soft news lead that takes note of things that few people would recognize and most often uses the lead to characterize the people in the story.  He also uses this strategy with places, pointing out one thing that makes that particular place or that place at that time unique.  In the same way, Bragg closes with detail or a clinching quote to drive home the intended affect on the audience.  To incorporate an element, Bragg uses specificity of concrete detail as one of his strongest points of writing.

Bragg writes hard news stories from soft news angles, so he is limited with the amount of subjective arrangement he can use (although he does introduce people first and appeals to the humanity of the subjects and readers then fleshes out the inhumane treatment or problem, often pushing readers to one side or another) and uses the third person perspective to relate each story.

Scene by scene construction is used wisely.  There were plenty of times when Bragg could have been very specific and detailed in the way a murder was conducted or the terrible pains a person went through.  But most often, he doesn't draw out these details so much as he focuses on the present- how people are feeling now, how the victim is reacting now, the way they lock their doors at night or won't go outside because of how the news story events have changed them.  He skips the malicious details and lingers on the things that show rather than tell his point.

Although this really isn't a new element for our literary journalism list, I feel that Bragg's strongest point is personal detail.  He brings stories to life because of the people that he interviews and the attention he pays to qualities of those people.  Often, I would question why pieces were put in a story, such as some context detail about what someone is drinking or that they are sitting in the dark in the interview or the types of toys children played with.  But as I continued reading, I realized he included this to let his readers get a better sense of what these people are feeling and so the audience can know the subject better.  And I got a better understanding of where each person was in their recovery or story.

Rick Bragg was born in Alabama and grew up near Jacksonville, Fla.  He joined the New York Times in 1994 but became a kind of national correspondent.  Most of his stories cover the south east, even reaching over into Texas.  His experience includes writing for the St. Petersburg Times, the Los Angeles Times, and several smaller papers in Alabama.  Since the publication of this book in 2000, Bragg won a Pulitzer prize for his articles about Elian Gonzalez.  Bragg now works as a writing professor at the University of Alabama.  http://www.bookbrowse.com/biographies/index.cfm?author_number=77

Question: Does the subject matter of Bragg's writing (most oftentimes death and sadness) make him the writer he is?  Would he be as powerful if he wrote about happier times, places, and people?

Blog 11: Gonzo +

Throughout The Scum Also Rises, I felt inundated by the resemblances to what Thompson was saying about the weather to what he was saying about the political climate in the city.  Several words are repeated to make the heat, the rain and the discomfort level real to the reader and show how this permeates people's actions.

The description of the hot rain in the beginning relates to the sweat and discomfort that Thompson himself feels as he lounges by the pool in his wet bathingsuit.  Also, people's "eyes cloud over" (308), there is "lashing" rain on the windshield which is the same way that Nixon lashes the kelp on his arm, and the water sucking at Nixon's ankles proves that the weather is a powerful force.  The remark about being strapped to the bed in his sleep (305) also reinforces a discomfort in tone that reminds me of the lashing.  The reference to the fog Nixon disappears into at the end shows the continuity of this message.

(Did anyone else catch the allusion to TS Eliot on page 308?)

Another recurring word that I found interesting was balls.  Whether they were eyeballs, balls of sweat or breaking balls, there were several mentions to the circular shape which typically means regrowth, rebirth and continuity.  Interesting, considering we are looking for rot, dissipation, decomposition.  Perhaps this leads to the opinion that these actions are circular; this Nixon scandal will be cleaned up but that doesn't mean that the 'rot, dissipation, decomposition' will never again infiltrate the the White House or the govt.

The fog at the end shows the chaos that Nixon threw the govt and country into when he began this scandal.  Quite a way to end the article with all the weather allusions pointed out throughout the story.  As stated previously, the weather ties with the climate of the city.  But I find it interesting that the honky tonk (some may consider it primitive entertainment and I may be speaking rashly) is juxtaposed with the center of the country, the center of intelligence: Washington, DC.

Question: Did anyone else notice the 'balls' recurrence?  Did that stand for anything to you?

Blog 10: Gonzo

One characteristic of gonzo is fact reporting mixed with personal feelings.  Thompson gives a "compact description of rancid, criminal sleaziness" that includes the gang's colors, numbers, bands, brands and typical appearance.  Just the fact that he uses those terms show that is telling the audience what to think but provides them with the facts to prove that readers would probably have come to that conclusion on their own.  Taibbi uses this same approach.  He presents information that he believes as factual, such as lists of numbers, names of individuals and companies, and adds his own flavor and opinion between the lines.  If the statement " The bank is a huge, highly sophisticated engine for converting the useful, deployed wealth of society into the least useful, most wasteful and insoluble substance on Earth — pure profit for rich individuals" doesn't scream of opinion, then I'm not sure what does.


The polarity of Taibbi's piece proves that gonzo is not restricted to writing about music, crazy times, or sex.  He captures moments that are critical and controversial in and to society and writes about why people should be concerned.  This point also correlates with the openness of sex; Taibbi isn't afraid to address the political evils or hide his opinion.  


Rosenbaum's piece is also kind of like factual reporting.  He is sure to include place and time of pictures, as well as the names of people that he interviewed and what connection they had with his case.  He doesn't vaguely allude to people but provides names and good reasons for their involvement in his article.


Rosenbaum and Thompson both give opinions from sources that aren't as highly thought of or given much credit- both the women's discomfort in taking the photos; the doctor and professors' reasonings behind what others would find ridiculous; and the Hell's Angel's opinions of what happened that dreadful night with the girls, respectively.  In this light, gonzo can be seen as championing the underdog; Thompson and Rosenbaum aren't afraid to show the less popular opinion and give them a platform for 'why.'


One quality that lends nothing to journalistic function is Thompson's style.  I am reminded of Virginia Woolf's To the Lighthouse, written in stream of consciousness.  But his writing is not so neat and clean as Woolf's.  Instead, he writes and writes for paragraphs at a time like a deer dashing through the thicket and only once he thinks he's lost his pursuers does he bother to look back.


Another characteristic of gonzo is the overt sex appeal.  Rosenbaum focuses on the sex in the Bones article.  Thompson writes about girls and women blatantly; he's attracted to them, doesn't care who knows it and is willing to tell anyone why.  The details of the girls proves this point.  In a way, Thompson makes it appear that this is how the riders function and their interest in sex is the reason he writes about the encounter.  But I think Thompson is also interested in this kind of attention and therefore leans heavily on description and recounting of the incident.  This also comes from a few background readings, but a query on google for 'gonzo' returned a lot of porn hits.  Also adding to this theory is the entire piece by Rosenbaum.  An issue given so much press (not in the inverted pyramid style) affirms the idea that gonzo is rooted in sex.


Of all these writers, Taibbi stands out as the most 'in your face' author.  Most of this assumption is probably because of the profanity he uses, but is also driven home by the fact that he doesn't seem to represent anyone else; he represents his own opinion.  Thompson and Rosenbaum represent other causes and show two sides to the argument.  Taibbi shows his side and Goldman's side.


Rosenbaum and Thompson make the role of the reporter/writer prominent.  Their actions in the story as well as reactions to what happen are just as interesting and become just as much a part of the action as the events themselves.

Blog 9: Romantics vs. Rationalists

Webb tackles the concept of 'new journalism' that I struggle with the most: addressing the subjective thoughts inside a person's head while still factually reporting what is happening outside of that head.  I have difficulty reconciling such a questionable, 'factual' reporting ground and still calling the pieces truthful journalism.

The scale provided by Webb asserts that a person cannot be purely realist or purely romantic; instead, they have a bit of both.  Where is an audience to assimilate, though?  At what point must a writer share with an audience that a work is mostly romantic or mostly realist, when both works appear on the same page?  Or are we expected to discern for ourselves when each piece comes in the same package with the same wrapper?  Or believe that they are the same and not try to make differentiations?  Most of the pieces we have read proclaim to be factual reporting; Hersey and Capote both believe their writing to be pure truth without any conjectures.

Yet their writing is categorized with Wolfe's, who believes that reality is internal.  Instead of arguing about names and constraints, shouldn't we find categories and subcategories for this literature?  If Capote, Hersey, Herr and Boswell wrote with the belief that truth is external and must be made apparent by external factors, should they be grouped with Wolfe and LeBlanc, who create a world based on their opinion of the truth around them, including their perception of someone else's perceptions and feelings?

Also, is there a degree that must be reached for one to admit their writing is primarily romantic or mostly realistic?  Should we classify these writings in different sections, set apart by percentages of truthfulness?  This is not to say that the merit of writing should be judged according to the amount of truth that is found in the pages.  Each writing is remarkable and noteworthy in its own right.  I just feel that if there were other categories of writing rather than "journalism" and the still-not-widely-accepted/liked "new journalism" we could stop quibbling about specifics and worry about the writing and what makes each so impressive.

Capote and Hersey claim to be cut from a different cloth than Wolfe or Whitman because of their reportage but none of these writers were even present for the things they wrote about.  Wolfe's writing even has the chance to be more accurate because he has footage and video of the events he writes about; Hersey and Capote have people's thoughts and memories.  Defoe purported that his writing was factual and yet audiences today see too many irreconcilable differences in facts and his work.

Boswell works with Webb's idea well.  He writes in a factual style, was present for the encounters he reproduced, and when he makes a claim that is subjective, does not try to pass it off as anything but that.  The audience is able to see when he is making a statement based on what he saw versus reporting what he saw.  In this way, he shows the audience both the subjective feelings of human beings that Webb refers to and the factual side, ie, these people met, at this time and place to discuss this issue...

Question: If you were to rename and classify new journalism with many different subcategories, what would you name it and how would you break the writings apart?  What litmus test would you use to say where each piece of writing should go and why?

Blog 7: In Cold Blood

As Dick and Perry begin to confess their crimes and statements are made (the tapes or scripts presumably where Capote got his dialogue), the dialogue takes on a much bigger role.  There is much less vague referencing than in the first parts; the characters interact and the specific dialogue makes the scenes more intense.  Dick and Perry's exchanges/confessions about the murder and each of their feelings about what happened make the story more brutal and horrifying.

The scene by scene construction is especially evident in the retelling of the murder scene.  Over and over, the audience is readmitted to the site where the family is killed.  Each time, the reader sees the house as the characters see it: as home to the Clutters, as a scene of violence and horror to the girls, as a murder site for the men and detectives, as a scene of despair and hatred and conniving evil to the murderers.  Each time Capote describes the house and rooms, he reformats the appearance to show what stuck out to each character and what they felt (which could support the fiction aspect of this novel if the characters didn't tell him how they felt).

This could also tie into status details.  What each character noted in the scene makes obvious what most appealed to each character.  The murderers rarely note the blood or any detail that might tell of the violence and brutality of their crime.  Instead, Perry says he "aimed the gun.  The room just exploded.  Went blue.  Just blazed up.  Jesus, I'll never understand why they didn't hear the noise twenty miles around" (244).  Instead of worrying about blood and mess, Perry worried about how loud they were and getting caught.  More status details are mentioned in reference to the men's families.  The way each is described and how they relate to their families proves another interesting piece of status detail.  Perry's disgust with his father and sister is contrasted with the admiration that Dick feels towards his parents.  Yet Perry is the one that gets sappy over the moonlight and cries about nothing in particular, then admits to robbing an old woman and not feeling bad about it! (192-93).  The relation of these attributes makes the story more intriguing and twisted.

The structure of the narrative is novelistic.  Capote has two different stories running on two planes; while he tells each one horizontally, in an almost chronological way, they run towards each other like train tracks, eventually intersecting.  In that sense, Capote had to make each travel vertically so that they could reach each other.  There were several points that caught my attention in the novel as reportage.  "Part flu.  But mostly sheer excitement," he later informed a journalist" (216).  "And Dick, awake in a cell on the floor below, was (he later recalled) equally eager to converse with Perry... (227).  I feel that with this wording, Capote is trying to add fact to his writing but that makes me question the validity of the rest of his statements.  I have written in the book at certain points, 'how does he know?' and 'how would he know this?'  Especially on page 200, Capote somehow diverts into some theorizing of his own, "Envy was constantly with him; the Enemy was anyone who was someone he wanted to be or who had anything he wanted to have."  How could Capote deduce this?

Question: What aspects of Capote's writing make you question the truthfulness of his reports, if any?  Does anyone else struggle with some but not all of this being entirely truthful (and not sure which is which)?  At what points do you want to know if that's what 'really happened' or are there points that you feel must be fabricated?  Why?

Blog 8

rsale1@ufl.edu

At first, I thought that Wolfe would epitomize the type of writing that Breslin talks about.  Wolfe's content can't be too hard to follow, right?  But as I looked back over the readings, I realized Wolfe was the most complicated of the four.  Capote was simple- simply put, simply stated, generally simple to understand.  Breslin and Greene are just as simple as Capote.  They are a little less rigid and more conversational and personal than Capote but still don't really put airs on their writing; when they say something, they say it.  But of these writers, I feel that Greene's writing most portrays what Breslin meant.  This has to do partly with the words he uses but also subject matter.

Breslin writes about death and honor and an emotional time historically that some younger audiences may not understand or be able to relate to.  Capote writes simply but about gruesome death and more intense matter.  Greene writes about a hero, his hero, the chance he gets to meet him, and finds that he is just a man as well.  I think that this is a situation that most people can understand.  His narrative takes on a nostalgic, almost child-like quality with his admiration for Connery.  Even when Connery admits being afraid of needles, I still get the feeling that that doesn't diminish the respect Greene has for him.  The naive reverie that Greene writes about happens to most people and we are able to associate with him as he draws us into that experience- both with his simplistic language and subject matter.

After a second look at Wolfe's writing, subject and style aside, I realized the words he used were not as well known and required a little more leg work to understand what he meant.  "There was no more reason for them to remain in isolation while the ovoid eyes of La Honda suppurated" (172).  There is a much more simple way to put this statement, and the same for this: "The befuddled citizens could only see the outward manifestations of the incredible stuff going on inside their skulls" (176).

Wolfe's subject (a bunch of hippies on a road trip, constantly abusing and using drugs) tricked me into thinking the reading would be simple- the language/vocab would be simple, even if the narrative was harder to follow.  (If it was a bunch of drug-induced memories then how could that really make sense to anyone else?)  But Wolfe keeps the narrative flowing and relative to his readers by making the story (mostly) logical and entertaining.

In a way, Wolfe's writing with elevated vocabulary in such an altered mental state works best.  He keeps the reader guessing and second guessing with the way he weaves the tale and the words- I think I understand what he means but there's always a little bit of me that wonders if that was really the point and if I truly understand.  But in the experiences that Wolfe describes, is there really a way to KNOW?  Can drugged-out people writing about being drugged out KNOW?  By continually second guessing if I really understand what I'm reading, I almost feel connected to the drugs; there's no way to really KNOW, and as long as I'm still flowing and following and trying, I'm getting what I need.

Question: Did anyone else in class have this experience with Wolfe?  I feel that a lot of my feelings in this post were very generalized, especially with Wolfe's writing.  Did anyone else feel that they were following a wild goose throughout the reading, and you do think that's the intended purpose?

Blog 6: Whitman and Herr

rsale1@ufl.edu

A large part of the feelings of war are presented in the way that Whitman writes, not necessarily what he says.  The broken sentences with dashes and ellipses make the reader feel as if there are bombs falling near them, as if they are ducking for cover or having to drop their voices to avoid being detected.  Also, his points of narration without interruption harbor these feelings as well.  These points of calm are broken just enough with emphatic statements that we as readers feel our safety net has been disturbed and our privacy invaded.  Whitman also employs form to relate to his readers a feeling of chaos.  "Then the camps of the wounded--O heavens, what scene is this?--is this indeed humanity-these butchers' shambles?  There are several of them.  There they lie, in the largest, in an open space in the woods, from 200 to 300 poor fellows--the groans and screams--the odor of blood, mixed with the fresh scent of the night, the grass, the trees--that slaughter-house!"  By using dashes and especially exclamation points (that reporters are often encouraged not to use because they make writing appear too dramatic), Whitman makes us feel that we are witness to this scene, a scene that could've been constructed because it doesn't really convey particular facts (not who, when, where, or even how many [200-300 is a pretty big estimation]).

Herr is able to use this same kind of writing, but often without the exclamation points except to emphasize what someone says.  He rarely adds them in his own musings.  In a way, Herr's understatement of emotions makes his writing more real to his readers because at first, I'm sure we all believe 'we can handle it.'  He thinks he is capable of doing things around the bases and should be regarded with at least a common decency by the men around him.  Yet he is (at first) surprised and then understands that these men are here fighting, not just for their country or someone else's country or freedom; they are clawing and beating against death that follows them.  When he is able to get on the chopper and leave these fields, they are not; that is their duty. 

Herr also uses quotes (Whitman does not).  He is able to point to facts and people and distinct conversations, making it clear that he was present on the field.  Part of his strength here is not identifying the soldiers he spoke to.  In the same way that soldiers are unidentifiable in the field of wounded and dead, Herr has chosen not to identify these men.

I do think that Whitman and Herr use organic style.  They both exemplify the horror they felt (or would have felt, because Whitman wasn't present) by witnessing such massacres and feats of humanity.  If this had been written about an afternoon of merry-go-round watching, the exclamations and conversations would have been much different and dictated another attitude and tone.  If the subject had been children, there would have been much more circular conversation, music playing in the background, and light humor- all implied through the description of the scene and wording.  Instead, readers smell the blood and are forced to sidestep fallen comrades as they read through Whitman and must hush their voices and keep their pleasures at bay while crawling through the jungle with Herr.

Is Whitman's style and writing less powerful because he does not use quotes?  Would we believe him more if he did?  If we know he wasn't there, would we want him to fabricate quotes to add power?

Paper proposal

Rsale1@ufl.edu

Goal: To compare and contrast the movie renditions of two gonzo writers Lester Bangs and Hunter S. Thompson.  I will research the background history of the two men, the subjects of their writing and what made them so memorable, their styles, and what set them apart from others that drew producers to their stories.  With all of this information, I would like to compare and contrast the movie(s) done about them and whether or not people believe that these movies ‘captured the capture’ of what the authors tried to portray in their writing.

A portion of this will be subjective; not everyone will agree on the film renditions of the authors or how well each was portrayed.  In this case, I will try to give a fair selection of reviews so both positive and negative sides are stated.

Sources:

Carroll, E. Jean.  Hunter: The strange and savage life of Hunter S. Thompson.  Plume: New York, 1993. 

After reading only the first chapter of this book, I see that Carroll has attempted to write a biographical type of book about Thompson in gonzo style; her style is satirical and entertaining, not sparing information but fixating on what some may consider the rude or obscene.  Throughout the book, Carroll includes statements from friends and family members, giving the reader a better idea of Thompson, where he came from and how he developed.  Also, Carroll’s style will help to reinforce the gonzo tradition.

DeRogatis, Jim.  Let it Blurt: The Life and Times of Lester Bangs, America’s Greatest Rock Critic.  Broadway Books, New York: 2000. 

This book provides background information about Bangs, his childhood, adolescent years and adulthood.  DeRogatis includes extensive notes and appendixes that will further aid my research by reassuring the thoroughness of his.  The book also includes a section of selected lyrics that will give insight into his writing as well.

Hirst, Dr. Martin.  “What is Gonzo? The etymology of an Urban Legend.”  School of Journalism and Communication Publications, Queensland, Australia: 2004.

This journal/publication explores the beginning of gonzo journalism and its frontrunners, especially Hunter S. Thompson, but more importantly, it examines the beginning of the new style of writing itself- where it came from, how it originated, even how the name was founded and introduced.

Kramer, Michael J.  “Can’t Forget the Motor Ciry”: Creem Magazine, Rock Music, Detroit Identity, Mass Consumerism and Counter Culture.””  Michigan Historical Review.  28.2, 42-77.  JSTOR.

Kramer writes about the magazine Creem and how Bangs contributed to its pages and content.  Because Creem formed the base from which Bangs jumped to go on to his career and why he was featured in the movie “Almost Famous”, I think this is an important source and viewpoint to include in research.

MacFarlane, Scott.  The Hippie Narrative: A Literary Perspective on the Counter Culture. MacFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, North Carolina: 2007. 

Thompson has not been selected for this book because of his hippie qualities or tendencies; instead, he is noted for gonzo journalism.  The new journalism movement was one of the ways that society was breaking free from prior constraints and hippies see Hunter’s writing as a continuation of that form.  Hunter’s writing also jives with some hippie standards because of his drug use; he not only used many drugs but wrote about them as a first person experience.

Thompson, Hunter S.  Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Other American Stories.  Random House, Inc., New York: 1996.  

Only by reading Thompson’s writing can one get a true feeling of gonzo writing and the methods used to bring gonzo to life.  His original work will serve as a template on which to base my own opinions; I want to be able to critique how well the movie producers matched Thompson’s writing to the work they put on the screen.  Also, reading original work gives a better understanding of the man himself.

Thompson, Hunter S.  Fear and Loathing in America: The Brutal Odyssey of an Outlaw Journalist (1968-1976).  Simon and Schuster: New York, 2000. 

This collection of letters will be able to provide more insight into Thompson’s thoughts and feelings, rather than relying on what others believed he thought or felt.  This also includes extensive letters to political powers which will provide background information about Thompson’s thoughts and musings about the government.

Torrey, Beef and Kevin Simonson, ed.  Conversations with Hunter S. Thompson.  University Press of Mississippi, Jackson: 2008.

This source will be useful because it places Thompson in the genre of gonzo; not only does the book include conversations with and about Thompson and others that played a critical role in his development but also gives background and definition to the literary invention of gonzo and how that development fits with the larger creation of new journalism.

Blog 5 Rachel Sale

rsale1@ufl.edu
Rachel Sale

Journalistic objectivity is the idea that a reporter/journalist/editor should not have any bias for or against any person or cause about which an article is written.  A reporter must leave all these things aside and report the facts.  No introspections should be made; nothing should be added to the story that can't be accounted for.  For example, a reporter shouldn't say that a crowd burst into applause at the conclusion of a speech.  This assumes that the audience was excited about the speech, and infers that they agree with the cause.  Instead, a reporter could say that applause followed the speech, or that people applauded.  The phrase "burst into applause" makes this a subjective statement.

"On the Periodical Essayists" celebrates Montaigne's form of writing; he wrote to please himself and as an outlet for his opinion.  The conveyance of information (true or otherwise) was put on the back burner so that he could say what he wanted.  But according to the uncertainty principle, maybe this makes finding Montaigne's position easier.  We are able to see that he speaks of his own mind and is not motivated by anything else so we don't have to guess if there are other motivations.  We see his personal opinion under his words and don't have to search through adjectives or the lack thereof, trying to find where his convictions truly lie.

Hutchins Hapgood seems to be introducing and championing the marriage of reporting and literature like it is his novel idea.  Yet this marriage comes under fire when Hapgood suggests "taking only what fits into the picture and in rejecting what is untypical and superfluous" (425).  This is asking for trouble not only in the literary world but also in the reporting world.  To take a person's story and turn it around and twist it into something that the author believes acceptable or better really makes it a work of pure fiction because of what is left out.  Hapgood adds to this fictitious air when he says that "if enough of an artist, [I] could reproduce [the lives/stories] with the right accent and with a selection judicious enough to picture at once the character of the man and the character of his class environment" (425).  This kind of writing sounds much more like a novel and less like any reporting.

Yet the advice that Stead gave to a beginner (Steed), about removing "every superfluous word, above all, adjectives" (p. 6).  is exactly how I feel journalism should be.  A reporter that lets one adjective creep into his writing has posted his position about an issue and readers can decide for themselves how every statement that follows is for or against that issue.  Also, Stead's assertion that editors have the final say about whether or not the writer has 'something to say' is correct.  The internet has shaken this value of newsworthiness to its core; anyone with at least a dial-up connection can transmit their thoughts and feelings (or lack thereof) over the internet, regardless of the content.

A journalist that attempts to become a fly on the wall can even have some affect on the proceedings of a story and history.  A reporter might deter a mugger from attacking someone merely because that person is not alone.  A fly on the wall is still visible and people may act differently because there is someone around that they are not familiar with or not used to.  A television show on Food Network about a brother and sister sharing a restaurant portrayed the sister as a tyrant and a bitch.  But I think she played a role for the camera; she didn't want the public to think that she didn't run a tight ship or that she would overlook mistakes.  I believe she wanted people to know that she was serious about her job and her tenacity made her appear rabid.

A disrupter almost seems like a better alternative because readers know that interviewees are being as honest as possible with the given circumstances.  Instead of trying to pass a story off as not having any interference, readers are aware that there is some change due to the disruption but the story is not being presented as if there were no interruptions (as a fly on the wall story would be).

Blog 4: Elements-- Rachel Sale

Rachel Sale
rsale1@ufl.edu

Boswell's recollections of Johnson, particularly the exchanges at dinner, makes me wonder how Boswell could have remembered every statement and also to wonder how much he planted there himself.  Boswell takes the liberty of giving introspections that Johnson makes about Wilkes.  These are included but become more of a 'he said, she said' remembrance.  For example, Johnson believes that Wilkes is "acquiesced" during a particular conversation (33).  Who is Johnson to say that Wilkes is truly put at ease?  Wilkes may just have been unwilling to say any more and push the subject farther.

Daniel Defoe's writing about Jonathan Wild also causes eyebrow raising.  The lengthy, detailed conversations documented in AOF can hardly be taken at face value because of their detail.  Defoe must have taken that conversation from someone else's vantage point and written all he was told that the witness remembered.  I doubt he was standing there transcribing the entire conversation word for word.  The line of fact and fiction seems to be skewed here; this write-up of Wild doesn't seem to want to report any thing newsworthy so much as it wants to make Wild a kind of legendary figure.  More is added to his noteworthiness than to factual reporting, which makes him a sort of Robin Hood character.

Dickens' use of Pangloss is another reason for concern.  The information presented appears factual and conceivable but when taken into account that there is a composite character, I start to wonder if there is any angle that Dickens exaggerated.  Where the sailors really suffering that much?  Did Pangloss and other crew men really turn a blind eye?  The information is believable, but is it truthful?  The use of a composite character seemed to be less of a problem in Dickens' day than it is today.

What raises all these accounts to literature and brings them past the level of reporting is the way the information is reported.  Not only does the relation of 'facts' have a little bit of embellishment but also there is no inverted pyramid and the main idea/fact doesn't come out and announce itself.  The reader must run through hedges before getting to the front door.

One extra element that I would cite is the relation of 'facts' from a character to the narrator and the attention of that character.  Readers of Wuthering Heights can run into trouble if they do not question the narrator's voice.  The narrator is biased and therefore unreliable.  Being skeptical of the related information becomes pertinent to understanding a story and getting the most objective facts.  In the same way that readers must question the source of their information, readers should also look at the source for potential biases or reasons for them to skew information.

Questions for class mates on Tuesday: Could the literary content eventually outweigh the fact portion of writing?  If the audience is aware that some things may be made up, can these writings still be considered newsworthy?  Or does this make the writing more fit for novels and short stories?  How much of the information must be embellished for the story to become novel?

Blog 3: Sublimity Rachel Sale

Rachel Sale
rsale1@ufl.edu

Mitchell's short story Up in the Old Hotel was quite a momentum builder, only to be a let down in the end. I was fixated, as was Louie, as to what could possibly be on those top floors of the hotel.  I was extremely disappointed that there was not only anything up there, but Louie was not willing to go any farther than the 4th floor.  Mitchell's use of the floors as time made the story line a bit more complex.  Often the audience thinks of time as being on the same horizontal plane; Mitchell made the floors the barrier between times and the past was above the present and closer to heaven.  Maybe this was a reference to the ancestors that had already passed away and as Louie pulled himself into the past he pulled himself closer to his (death in the) future?

Louie's reaction to the top floors was also a let down to me as a reader.  For someone that appeared anxious to begin on a journey to the top floors (while still not taking advantage of any opportunity), he was very quick to state that he didn't want to see any more; he had seen enough and wanted to go no farther.  I feel that it was a sense of disappointment that cause Louie to react the way he did.  He had wanted for so long to see what was above his restaurant that when he got there and there was nothing, no significant ties to his past or really to anyone else's, he wanted to maintain some kind of illusion about what could remain on the floors above.

In the tornado story, the AP writer works with the subjectivity.  Even the titles hint that Bragg got more literature use and ways of looking at the story than the other author(s).  The AP writers even mentioned the devastation that took place in other areas of the country.  Bragg focused on the issues in Piedmont and came across with a story that told not just of a destruction to one family, but the damage that the tornado inflicted on the church, its people and even reaching into the community.

Bragg writes and expounds on the viewpoints of several people but puts the most hurt and aching heart into the perspective of the pastor and his wife that lost their daughter.  Through their story, he is able to look extrospectively at the rest of the people and the loss that they must have encountered.  Several people's tales and perspectives are given but Bragg makes the pain and damage the focal point for church goers, townspeople, pastors and farmers alike.