Portfolio

Reflection

My final writing project in English 101 has really summed up my spring semester. I have chosen to revise my first project, in many ways it was my weakest writing sample and I felt I have improved on the project by being inspired on what I had learned during the semester.

During the fall semester in GRW, my focus as a writer was moved to the side and was taken over by a research paper. This switched my brain from interoperating to rehashing factual information on to the paper, which clearly did not improve my weak ability to be inspired by what I read. After making my to do list, it gave me the opportunity to really think about what I wanted to accomplish being an English student.

When in class writing my list I truly did not put my best foot forward, fortunately this time I did not spend in class, I made up after the first writing project. My original list was about five items long, consisting of the most generic topics of writing, for example outlining, vocabulary, and quotations. No elaboration needed, that is what was in my writing notebook. Although when I took a second glance at my list, the topics did not change I just made transition to the next level. Realizing I did need to outline my work because it tends to be scattered and unorganized. After I started to outline my work, not only in my English course I was able to stay focused and it made it easier to write the paper. After outlining, my issue with quotations seen to dampen, because I was focusing y idea I could pick quotes that actually helped and that I could expand upon.

The first projects topic could not have been more perfect for my situation as a reader and writer. Sven Birkets and I would not get alone to put it bluntly. I use technology as an escape from reading, even though I do enjoy reading. I am the typical 21-century child, moving too fast to slow down. I respect Birkets for his opinion, although mine varies from his own. I believe that one should be able to mix the pleasures of both technology and reading, and I myself do just that. With my ipad I have spent more time reading and finished more books then ever before, for both school and pleasure. The task of getting to my happy medium was difficult, it took being trapped boarding school to finally accept reading and I will never regret that. Now when reading a book for English or pleasure I can detect how I have transformed as a student, because my vocabulary has improved completing my to do list! Writing and revising the first project and transforming it into my final project has taught me a lot about my self and how I view my enhancement as a writer. I have gained many tools to develop my writing and improve it. Although I have areas of my writing that need to be farther established and I will keep my to do list close.

 

 

Final Project 

   Reading Over the Ages

My relationship with reading has changed enormously since I was a young girl.  When I was in middle school I just hated to read.  I dreaded being forced to read a book for schoolwork and I would never even consider doing it for pleasure. I was envious of my older sister who easily breezed though entire chapter books when I could barely finish the first chapter. I read so slowly that I just lost interest after the first few pages.  Books just couldn’t catch my attention in the same quick way that a tv show or a video game could engage me.  Reading discouraged me because I felt like it was a chore without any reward.  My mother and my sister would say “just wait until you get into the story, you will love it!”.  Not even the Gossip Girl series, my older sister’s favorite, could excite me.

Reading became an activity that I just dreaded. Instead, I focused my energy on subjects like math and science, not bothering to put the effort into classes that required any extensive reading. It seemed like such a clever solution at the time, but in reality it just exacerbated the situation and I fell further behind in my reading.  To add to my issues, technology also helped to overpower any slight interest I might have in a highly recommended book or article.  I was perfectly content to look at images on Google about a special place we were studying or read snippets about a famous historical figure, rather than take the time to do any real research and reading involving books.

Sven Birkets, author of The Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Reading in an Electronic Age, is a lover of books and a voracious reader. Unlike me, Birket has always found reading to be mesmerizing.  He also considers technology a threat to literature and to reading.  In his collection of essays he is struggling to figure out the fate of reading in an electronic age.  As a struggling reader and lover of all things flashy, fast and electronic, I am precisely what Birkets considers the problem.  Given the choice, I will always choose the high tech way of gaining information or enjoyment over reading a book. Birkets recognizes that “[T]his is perhaps the most devastating formulation of the causes of literature’s demise.”(189). I am ashamed that he might be right, but I am not prepared to accept that my love of technology will be the death of literature.  While I would rather google for a quick answer than hit the shelves of the library, and I suspect most of my generation would agree, I have grown to appreciate literature despite the excitement of technology.  It took awhile, but everything changed concerning literature when I was in high school. I went to boarding school and on boring Sunday afternoons with no access to TV, books actually became a method of entertainment. Suddenly, I craved novels and I could sit for hours without headphones, Wi-Fi or charging worries. I slowly learned to love reading and no longer cared how long it took me to finish a chapter and I stopped counting how many pages I had left to read for homework. Even in my spare time I began to read and appreciate the experience of reading a book cover to cover just for fun. Reading for me became a get-away; it was no longer a torture device and miraculously, a completely different attraction than a movie, video game or time spent on Facebook.  In addition, I found that I enjoyed discussing books with my friends and family, recommending certain authors and even reading the newspaper to get a more in-depth idea of what was happening in the world.

It appears that Birkets had a similar “revelation” to mine, “I had a great desire not just to be thought of as intelligent and well-read, but to really be those thing.”(46). while I have not begun to read as much as Birket, I can understand his desire.  Unlike Birkets, however, I believe that I actually read more because of the advances in technology. I love the look of the printed word on the screen and I don’t need to hold a book in my hands to appreciate the literature and the journey that the author takes me on.  Certainly I can appreciate that the experience might be richer if a fabulous book is also bound in beautiful leather and printed on expensive paper, but the value of an electronic book is not diminished any more than a paperback Wuthering Heights is less of a book because of its cheap cover.

I can also now appreciate how a book can take me to another world.  Apparently, Birkets has felt the same; “the life of the book suddenly invades me.”(101).  But, unlike Birkets, I do not need the written word of the book to be in a particular format to transport me.  Birkets states “I have not so much had my eyes opened as I have been taught to see more clearly.”(106) In that passage, he was discussing his love of books and his hatred of technology.  This position is particularly hard to accept.  If Birket had lived when the printing press was first used, would he accept only a hand written book and criticize a mass-produced volume?  I see the introduction of technology as  a form of modernization of the book.  Birkets has tunnel vision.  His mind is closed to the possibility that technology will expand the accessibility of literature and foster reading.  He fails to recall that hundreds of years ago, the advanced technology of the printing press had an enormous impact on both the availability and enjoyment of books.

Recently I have been introduced to hypertext and I must admit, i am fascinated by the possibilities.  Not surprisingly, Birkets’ dislike of technology includes hypertexts. “The changes are profound and the differences are consequential.”(154) On one level, I can understand his concern about hypertext.  The interactive notion of hypertext does recognize that the reader will leave the author’s word and additional facts and thoughts, separate from the flow of the novel, will be introduced into the reading experience.  Nor do I disagree with Birkets that “[T]he premise behind the textual interchange is that the author possesses wisdom, an insight, a way if looking at experience, that the reader wants.”(163).  But, having experienced hyperlinks, I am not sure I can completely accept Birkets’ dislike.  I believe that hypertext is capable of significantly enhancing my reading experience and I don’t believe that the interruption makes my immersion in a book any less complete.  But, I am prepared to accept that the utilization of hyperlinks may take some getting used to; and it may even be true that younger readers can adapt more quickly to the experience.

Birkets’ arguments go against my generation’s blind acceptance of technology as good and progressive.  I don’t agree with him but I can appreciate the fact that he has made me more aware of the sweeping changes that the internet and the electronic screens, keyboards and other devices have brought in my lifetime.  It is appropriate to question the value of new forms of technology, but having grown up with the advances, and having finally come to adore literature and reading, I only see the advances as an opportunity to enhance my experiences.  I am thankful to Birkets for bringing to my attention his misgivings about technology because I am more cognizant of possible threats to comprehension and focus with the flash of technology.  But, there is no stopping technology and Birkets’ desire to return to a simpler age will never occur.  Even so, I do not think that there is any realistic threat to the value of literature and the thrill of reading.  I consider myself a very valid test case who grew to love literature, read on either paper or a back-lit screen, despite my early and continuing fascination with the internet, electronic games, Facebook and video technology.

   Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber and Faber, 2006. Print.

Hypertext

Hypertext as a way of reading over books is a technological advancement that many “old fashion” readers dislike. Birkert’s dislikes technology, and hypertexts are no exception. “The changes are profound and the differences are consequential.”(154) His uncertainty with his hatred of hypertexts confuses me. Hypertexts make reading an interactive activity and promote reading itself. So, I disagree with him, hypertext are fun and a great way to read. When Birkets is addressing the hypertext he is aggressive to the point where there is no other argument. When I am reading his pages, I feel I am being scolded for the simple reason that I read hypertexts. Unfortunately for Birkets, his style of writing turns me away from continuing, not only in his forceful manor but he discards any positive ways hypertexts are good. “The premise behind the textual interchange is that the author possesses wisdom, an insight, a way if looking at experience, that the reader wants.”(163). Birkets is basically stating that readers have no intelligence that they need to be lead in the right direction to understand the information. Young minds should not need to be lead in the right direction, being young is when exploring takes place and you expand your knowledge basis, not have it be closed off. “The interactive text, I suppose, cannot be any better then its reader’s capabilities allow it to be.”(162) Although the same can be said about any book ever written. Reading is not determined by capabilities, but by the mind and how it can understand the context. The present generation is completely different then any other that has passed by, just because of technology. When Birkets is judging based off of his knowledge only it is on an unfair playing field. His inability to trust technology discredits his argument. “I did not feel the exhilarating freedom I had hoped to feel.”(162) When Birkets is reading he wants to feel dominated but expecting to be liberated when reading hypertexts, he only wants to fail. Reading of any types is a way of being liberated, from reality or to free your own mind and experience something completely different.

            Playing, reading, exploring the “Museum” on my computer was extremely enjoyable for me. Not only did it have the mystery of a novel but the inter-activeness of a videogame. Although the choices are pre made for me I still get to chose where I go with my story and I love that. Getting lost in a hypertext is easily done for me, and it always broadens my horizons and makes me think. This mystery in the museum and other hypertexts can also be a negative aspect for readers. The uneasiness of not knowing where and what to decide can turn readers off unfortunately. Although the “Museum” brings out that same mystery that is extremely enticing, “Let’s have a go at this Museum, shall we, and see whether it does indeed inspire us to great things.”(*) This quote screamed to me off the screen I was reading off of, it made me want to click to find something to inspire me. Making the choice to go forward the way you want to, although it is pre-destined is an amazing part of hypertexts. That you are never truly lost inside of them although it may seen that you can never get back. Surprisingly it gives the feeling of privacy when reading though the “Museum”. Almost as if you are walking though one, taking your time at the art and objects you want and walking by others. This privacy can’t be given in books to this extent, skipping around in novels does not happen, the story would not make scene. Skipping around is the wrong phrase to use, it is more choosing interests.  When choosing interest in the “Museum” it is broadening knowledge of multiple subjects unlike in a novel when it is only in one subject. Having multiple subjects in one texts make it possible to continually change to story, to not only have different pathways but to choose the same pathway and be able to interoperate it differently. These pathways lead to participation that is not available in books and novels. Not only does this participation change to story it leads to a social aspect that is not in books. Birkets disapproves of this when reading hypertexts, “I experienced constant interruption—the reading surface was fractured”(162). Although it may seem “fractured” it is a way of exploring like the mind does. Yes, it is a fragment, to put it in writing terms but sometimes fragments are needed to expand and broaden horizons.

            Hypertext like the “Museum” work, they open up pathways that would normally be unopened when reading a novel that is only dominated by an author. By clicking though a hypertext it gives a certain power that is only given by choice. Hypertexts are a form of entertainment, just like reading a regular book is. Getting involved with a hypertext opens up pathways to be traveled down, that someone would normally never think of. When given a choice you are more likely to be engaged, making you read for longer and expanding your knowledge. The only way for these hypertexts to fail is if no one was reading them, even then, not all hypertext involve reading. They are a form of giving information, and with all of the advancements with the Internet it is almost impossible for hypertext to not succeed.

Along with being a success, the “Museum” and all other hypertext are innovations, expanding minds, not only focusing on one story line. This allows the readers to focus on different interest as well as expanding and finding new interests. As all new innovations and inventions create controversy, there will always be an enemy afraid to change and evolve, like Birkets. Although, maybe our generation should not be so quick to pass up the book and get on the hypertext train. Books our apart of our history, something that created the pass time and were once an innovation of its own. Will losing the simple knowledge gained from a book remove something that is needed in our minds? I am a reader; I read long novels, textbooks, magazines, newspapers, blogs, and hypertext. Reading comes in all forms and disregarding one form is rude to all writers. Innovations change society, for better or worse. I accept the challenge to transform the “norm”, but keep the old. 

The pre-destined adventure.

Hypertext as a way of reading over books is a technological advancement that many “old fashion” readers dislike. Birkerts dislikes technology, and hypertexts is no exception. “The changes are profound and the differences are consequential.”(154) His uncertainty with his hatred of hypertexts confuses me. Hypertexts make reading an interactive activity and promote reading itself. So, I disagree with him, hypertext are fun and a great way to read.

Playing, reading, exploring the “Museum” on my computer was extremely enjoyable for me. Not only did it have the mystery of a novel but the inter-activeness of a videogame. Although the choices are pre made for me I still get to chose where I go with my story and I love that. Getting lost in a hypertext is easily done for me, and it always broadens my horizons and makes me think.

The invention of Hugo

The Invention of Hugo Cabret, by Brian Selznick, intrigued me as a reader because of the illustrations though out the novel. Not only is the medium of reading is used in the novel the beginning of a film is used. The introduction of the novel invited the reader to step into Hugo’s world.

The film aspect of The Invention of Hugo Cabret, guides the reader on how to view the novel. Reading is a person experience in the eyes of many. Although when reading the novel it transformed into a silent film that is playing for you and only for your eyes. The illustrations amplify this experience, for example the clock’s reflection in the old man’s eyes, and Hugo behind the clock. The novel wrote about this but seeing it though a camera lenses generates a more familiar and easier way of understanding the importance, because our generation is so focused on multimedia.

Hugo also has similarities to Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein.  Connecting the novel to the future by using film make the relation to an old classic such as Frankenstein. The lost boy, Hugo simulating Victors struggle as he isolated himself after the death of his mother. Finding the pleasure and almost obsessive purpose to complete the machine man, or as Victor sees the “Monster”. Although the plot line has nothing to do with anything in Frankenstein the relation is astonishing.

Writing Project #2

Comparing Creators

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein incorporates textual references to the Book of Genesis. The use of inter-textual implications in text makes the readers think deeper and trigger questions. Having the references to the Book of Genesis in the novel Frankenstein gives the novel a new meaning when Victor is compared to God.

The story of Genesis combined with a monster is why Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was a revolutionary novel for its time. When thinking about the Book of Genesis ones mind would never allow them to travel to the creature in Shelley’s Frankenstein. When reading Shelley’s novel, my mind will jump to the “beginning” of life and what it stands for although this does not just include life, but to good and evil. Victor tries to do good when he creates a new means of giving birth, far less dangerous then natural childbirth.  Quickly his good deed to save mothers like his own becomes the means of killing himself and family, essentially the creation of evil. Comparing Victor to God is a scary thought, yet it is almost too easily done. Humans make mistakes, Victor made a bad decision and the creature was created.

The life the creature was given was against society, just like Adam and Eve went against their creator, God. When Victor concealed himself after his creation was “born”, he knew it was not good and could be considered evil. This is similar to Adam and Eve’s decision to wrong God and listen to the snake. Today, we make decisions of right and wrong, though they are not always good vs. evil, they still matter. We disobey our creators because it is human nature.

 

Along with similar elements of “good vs. bad”, strong correlations can be made to the love Victor and God both have for their creations. The text describes Victor’s creation an unpleasant sight, composed of stitched together limbs from human corpse’s. Though grotesque, Victor still had strong admiration and love for what he created. This becomes apparent when he says, “His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful.”(60) Even though Victor knew his creature would not look like an average human, with stitches and scars all over his body, he still found what he created as beautiful. When one puts time into something along with immense effort, they will love and cherish it. Although they might discard it if it is not exactly how they would have imagined it to be. Victor similarly had the same problem when he created his creature. The resemblance between God and Victor is not found here because God never gave up, when Victor made his creation fend for itself.

 

Shelley’s inter-textual elements force the reader to think deeper. Her decision to add a piece of the Book of Genesis into her Novel Frankenstein was not to compare the creators, but to challenge the idea of intelligence and the ability to create life for good and evil. Today, incorporating different elements of text in novels is common practice, When Shelley weaves the Book of Genesis into her novel, Frankenstein, the result was unknown at the time. By comparing God to Victor as a creator of life along with good and evil petrified the masses because the Bible was so widely read. By incorporating what people knew and believed into her horror story, Shelley was able to create a compelling story that soon became a classic.

Comparing the Creators

The use of intertextual implications in text makes readers think deeper and trigger questions. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein incorporates textual references to the Book of Genesis. Having the references to the Book of Genesis in the novel Frankenstein gives the novel a whole other meaning when Victor is compared to God.

The story of Genesis combined with a monster is why Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was revolutionary for the novels time. When thinking about the Book of Genesis my mind would never allow me to travel to the creature in Shelley’s Frankenstein. When reading Shelley’s novel, my mind will jump to the “beginning” of life and what it stands for although this does not just include life, but to good and evil. Victor tries to do good when he creates a new means of giving birth, far less dangerous then natural childbirth.  Quickly his good deed to save mothers like his own becomes the means of killing himself and family, essentially the creation of evil. Comparing Victor to God is a scary thought, yet it is almost too easily done. Humans make mistakes, Victor made a bad decision and the creature was created.

The life the creature was given was against society, like Adam and Eve went against their creator, God. When Victor concealed himself after his creation was “born”, he knew it was not good and could be considered evil, similarly to Adam and Eve’s decision to wrong God and listen to the snake. Today, we make decisions of right and wrong, although they are not always good vs. evil, they still matter. We disobey our creators because it is human nature.

During the “Creation” of the Monster, and both Adam and Eve, their creators we undoubtedly in love with what was created. “His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful” (60). Even with the scars victor knew would be all over his creature. When I put time into something along with immense effort, I will love and cherish it. Although I will discard it if it is not exactly how I would of imagined it to be. Victor similarly had the same problem when he created his creature. The resemblance between God and Victor is not found here because God never gave up, when Victor made his creation fend for itself. Shelley’s intertextual moments force the reader to think deeper. Her decision to add a piece of the Book of Genesis into her Novel Frankenstein was not to compare the creators, but to challenge the idea of intelligence and the ability to create life for good and evil.

Incorporating different elements of text in novels is common practice. When Mary Shelley incorporated the Book of Genesis into he novel Frankenstein the result was unknown at the time. By comparing God to Victor as a creator of life along with good and evil petrified the masses because the Bible was so widely read by the masses. When Shelly used what people knew and believed in a horror story, made Frankenstein the massive success the story is now.

 

My argument is how the novel can mean so much more when Victor is compared to God.

Writing Project #2

The story of Genesis combined with a monster is why Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was revolutionary for the novels time. When thinking about the Book of Genesis my mind would never allow me to travel to the creature in Shelley’s Frankenstein. When reading Shelley’s novel, my mind will jump to the “beginning” of life and what it stands for although this does not just include life, but to good and evil. Victor tries to do good when he creates a new means of giving birth, far less dangerous then natural childbirth.  Quickly his good deed to save mothers like his own becomes the means of killing himself and family, essentially the creation of evil. Comparing Victor to God is a scary thought, yet it is almost too easily done. Humans make mistakes, Victor made a bad decision and the creature was created.

 

The life the creature was given was against society, like Adam and Eve went against their creator, God. When Victor concealed himself after his creation was “born”, he knew it was not good and could be considered evil, similarly to Adam and Eve’s decision to wrong God and listen to the snake. Today, we make decisions of right and wrong, although they are not always good vs. evil, they still matter. We disobey our creators because it is human nature.

 

During the “Creation” of the Monster, and both Adam and Eve, their creators we undoubtedly in love with what was created. “His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful” (60). Even with the scars victor knew would be all over his creature. When I put time into something along with immense effort, I will love and cherish it. Although I will discard it if it is not exactly how I would of imagined it to be. Victor similarly had the same problem when he created his creature. The resemblance between God and Victor is not found here because God never gave up, when Victor made his creation fend for itself. Shelley’s intertextual moments force the reader to think deeper. Her decision to add a piece of the Book of Genesis into her Novel Frankenstein was not to compare the creators, but to challenge the idea of intelligence and the ability to create life for good and evil.

Unconditionally

Frankenstein is a vastly different story then I had believed it to be when I read it at a younger age. The horror story was replaced by a tragedy for me. The constant illness and death throughout the novel seemed to affect me more now because I truly can understand these hardships.

The conflict between beauty and ugliness keeps repeating for me when I am reading. The most obvious for me is the Monster’s hideous appearance in contrast with his beautiful language.  Not only is he able to express himself, but also he does it with power. Although when his appearance is so hideous that no one will listen to his power of voice, which is what is so ugly and tragic of the novel.

Along with the Monster’s conflict Victor faces a similar one, love against fear. Victor can’t decide to love his creation or fear it. This love is not the conventional kind it is unconditional, because Victor gave the monster life. Victor also fears the monster tremendously. Killing the ones he loves, Elizabeth and Henry, only adds to his confusion and hatred of his creation. In chapter 16, the monster asks for the one thing he will never have, a companion. “I am alone, and miserable; man will not associate with me; but one as deformed and horrible as myself would not deny herself to me.” (129). Victors unconditional love is shown here because he does try to create the female version for him. Although Victor destroys her before she is completed, this part in the novel explains the fear that is built up inside Victor. Both men are plagued with love and fear of being alone. The monsters is the lack of a companion, for victor he no longer has Elizabeth because of his creation. 

Mirror View

Sitting in the backyard, exchanging scary stories with my cousins Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” was always told. The reenactments of the lightening bold and a hideously massive creature coming to life would paralyze me with fear. Now older and  reading “Frankenstein”, the creature that once haunted my dreams was a way for Victor to escape his horrible life.

“Unable to endure the aspect of the being I had created, I rushed out of the room, and continued a long time traversing my bedchamber, unable to compose my mind to sleep.” (Shelley 25) Although this creature is torturing Victor to his limits, I believe it was what removed him from actual depression of loosing so many family members. Victors fear of his creature is what keeps him sane in the first ten chapters. After losing his social life along with contact with loved ones when his mother passed away this creature is what brought him back to reality. Unfortunately this creature was plagued with the blame of Victors brother (William), but it gave him false faith in Justine that made him closer to the family members who still survived.

The end of our assignment, I was left with an overwhelming feeling of suspense. I want to understand this creature Victor created, not only to fill in the blanks but feel how he reacted to the solitude Victor forced upon him. When Victor put himself into this solitude it was to escape him pain, could he of wanted to punish the creature that unknowingly blocked his life for two years of was it for the purpose of completing a task other then the sorrow of lost family members.

Over the Ages

 

My relationship with reading has tremendously changed as I have gotten older. In middle school I hated reading, it was something that I dreaded doing for schoolwork and something I would never have done for pleasure. I was envious of my older sister who easily breezed through entire chapter books when I could barely finish the first chapter. I became discouraged at a young age because I felt like I would never be able to reach that level. This self conscious feeling haunted me through grade school; reading became an activity I dreaded. Even Birkerts felt the pressure of books invading his consciousness, ”We engulf them in our consciousness and then allow ourselves to be affected by them.”(Birkerts, 82). I instead focused my energy on subjects like math and science, not bothering to put the effort into classes that required extensive reading. This obviously didn’t help my issues surrounding reading as I continued to struggle. 

Everything changed when I entered high school. I went to boarding school and on boring Sunday afternoons with no access to TV; books were a method of entertainment. I slowly learned to love reading and no longer cared how long it took me to finish a chapter or counted how many pages I had left to read for homework. Even in my spare time I began to read and appreciate the experience of reading a book cover to cover just for fun. Reading for me became a get-away; it was no longer the torture device I had once experienced.

Birket’s considers it a crisis that reading has in many ways been taken over by technology. Our generation has become so infatuated by the easiness and availability of technology and of course the prestige that comes with using it. Even though I love technology and the advancements it has to offer, especially in the field of science, I have not turned by back on the simple act of reading a book. In many ways I think technology has brought the availability and portability of a book to the next level, with advancements like the kindle and the ipad. They make it possible to travel with a library of books instead of just one bulky hardcover.

For me technology has made reading more enjoyable. I love having tons of books and sources available at a click of a mouse. I think instead of condemning technology, one should look to see the benefits and possibility it offers to future generations. There is no possibility of turning back the hands of technology; it has been engrained in our modern day culture. Especially as students we need to embrace technology and its ever-changing advancements in hope that it will continue to enrich our everyday lives. 

Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber and Faber, 2006. 82. Print.