Monday, December 5, 2011

Final Reflection Letter


Dear Mr. Harmon,
            Overall, I liked your class a lot and I would definitely take another themed class. I came into your class knowing that your class was based off of documentary films. I was excited to have a change of pace with English because it is not my strong point. My favorite part of the class was watching the documentaries in class. The most interesting documentary that we watched in class was “Catfish”. I recall not finishing the documentary in one class period, and then I was absent from the next class. However, I was upset that I could not see the ending because it left me at a cliffhanger. In my opinion, the worst documentary was “Lost Book Found”. I know that it added an academic element to the class, but it was kind of painful to watch. I understand that it was necessary for the class to watch to get a better idea for documentary films.
            I liked the first two essays because they offered me a chance to critically analyze something. Throughout college I will have to critically analyze many things, from texts to graphs to photographs. I will feel prepared to go onto higher courses with a decent background in how to critically analyze something. I would suggest you have one of the essays critically analyze a reading of some kind. That was one thing I felt like I was missing in my preparation for my future college career. Also, I know that this English class is based off of documentary films, but I would not require essay three to be about a documentary. I had a hard time adding my thesis into the film. It took a lot of time to make a film and I felt that I did not learn a lot from making it. In a higher leveled English class I think it would be more appropriate to have the students make a documentary. But I felt that I was cheated out of writing decent essays, like the rest of the University of South Carolina’s freshman English courses. I liked how essay four involved translating one of the other essays into another medium. This provided the students with more freedom and creative leverage. I liked the fact that you did not treat us like little kids and you were vague about what you wanted. Also, I liked your laid back teaching style. It was just enough to not dread going to your class, but you were strict when you needed to be. I wish you luck on your future career in documentary films! I enjoyed having you as a teacher this semester.

Sincerely,
Stephanie McQuillan

Essay 4. Final and Reflection

Dear Members of Congress,
            My name is Stephanie McQuillan and I am a freshman at the University of South Carolina. I am writing to you in hopes that you will support more legislation for Diabetes research, specifically for type one diabetes. I, along with my father and little sister, have to live with type one diabetes twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week. We get no days off from this condition and are forced to balance insulin, diet and exercise to maintain good control. If you are not familiar with the disease, it is an autoimmune condition where the body does not produce any insulin. We did not get this condition from eating too much sugar; there was something in our body that triggered this condition. As of right now there is no cure for this condition, although they are finding new, state of the art ways of managing the condition. Although finding new ways of managing Diabetes is fantastic, what I and all of the other diabetics in the world are looking for is a cure. I am speaking on behalf of all the diabetics out there when I say that being a diabetic is no “walk in the park”, and it would be nice to live without constant finger pricks and insulin injections. If you were to support the funding of more research for a cure, such as stem cell research, then you would be helping the lives of many diabetic people in the world. Stem cell research would not only help conditions like diabetes, but countless other conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. I understand that stem cell research is controversial but I believe that it will bring more good than harm into this world by finding cures for numerous conditions.  All that I ask is that the next time you come across something that supports diabetes research/stem cell research you say YES. It would be nice to be able to eat something and not constantly think about how many sugars and carbohydrates I have to account for with an insulin injection for it. Thank you and I appreciate the time you took to read this letter.
Sincerely,
Stephanie McQuillan


Reflection:
Stephanie McQuillan
Mr. Harmon
English 101
December 3, 2011

           
            In English 101, the task of essay four was to translate one of the previous essays I had done to another medium. I chose to translate my third essay, which was a documentary, into a “campaign” for diabetes research. In my third essay, the main point was to show that diabetes does affect millions of people around the world. Diabetes is an invisible disease and someone would not know another person is a diabetic only by looking at them. To translate my message to essay four, I added a twist by advocating for type one diabetic research. Through the process of translating my message to a different medium, it was important to make sure that the message of both “essays” remained true to it’s original form.
            I choose to make a campaign as my second essay because I am heavily involved with the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. As a child, the JDRF would reach out to my sister and I to advocate for diabetes research by writing letters to congress about the issue. I aim to write to congressmen from Massachusetts (my home state), particularly William Keating who is my representative. I may also send my campaign to congressmen in South Carolina because it is where I will be living for the next four years. Then I hope to send my letters to the Congressional Diabetes Caucus because they deal with Diabetes and politics together, which is my main goal. If the reception goes well with congressmen, I wish to send my campaign along to other people in politics such as senators.  When I was given the opportunity to “revise” an essay I choose essay three because the issue was so close to my heart. Instead of making a documentary about the class like many of my peers did, I decided it would be best to write about something that I was passionate about.
            To translate my essay three into essay four, I choose to stay with my main idea of type one diabetes. However, instead of writing about the general information about diabetes and how diabetes is an invisible disease, I choose to go in a new direction by advocating for diabetes research. I feel that advocating for diabetes research through a campaign, containing a letter and a poster, is more effective than showing a movie about diabetes. The letter and poster provide a more serious background for the reader, which is a good thing because the audience for essay four is people with strong educational backgrounds. This is not to say that if a person from congress saw my documentary they would look down on it. But, essay three was also not meant for people with strong educational backgrounds but more for the general public. For both “essays”, I kept in the general information about diabetes. I introduced my “essays” with general information about the disease. However the “body” of the essay four is what differed the most from essay three. For essay four I took out most of the parts about how diabetes is a silent disease and how the public does not know a diabetic just by looking at them. Instead, I focused on the idea of diabetes rather than the person with diabetes. I felt that omitting the parts about how diabetes is a silent disease was appropriate for essay four. Congress people do not want to know about that aspect of diabetes. Instead they want to know how their vote on diabetic research will affect the diabetics in the world. I feel that by focusing more on advocating for research, I made my argument for government officials stronger because it is something that may need to hear about for work purposes.
            When translating my essay three to essay four, I found that the visual element of the project that was present in essay three was lost in essay four. Using a visual for essay three brought a sense of creativeness to the project. This is deeply contrasted to essay four, which is rather dull and plain. The only visual element that was added to essay four was the poster. But, not adding as much visual element to essay four was an appropriate move for the audience it was meant for. Congressmen are used to reading many documents for their work, and so a letter goes along with the rest of the documents they are working with. Then, the poster adds just enough visual to make the argument a bit more interesting. The letter accompanied by the poster is the perfect combination for an audience of higher education, such as congress.
            By writing a letter, I was able to articulate my ideas in a more formal and easier way to the reader. In a letter I can explain exactly what I want to get across in a straightforward way. To get a similar idea across in a documentary or movie is a bit harder because I personally could not get my idea across without using a good part of the movie’s time. Looking back, I could have used a voice over to explain all that I needed to. But at the time I used more of a PowerPoint method in my movie. By writing my ideas on paper I could easily explain what I needed to in about a page worth of writing. It would not take a congressman a long time to comprehend what I was trying to say through a letter. But, they would have to dig deeper to find a meaning in my documentary film.
            Overall, translating my essay three into my essay four was not particularly difficult. I was able to keep the general idea of diabetes in the project, but I used a different approach/argument for essay four. It was proved easier for me to translate my thoughts into writing rather than trying to incorporate them into a movie or documentary. Although the original message was lost in essay three, the two essays were meant for different audiences. Making a campaign for diabetes research was a more sophisticated approach to talking about diabetes. Although most, if not all, of my peers did videos for their essay four, I believe that the campaign I made does my topic more justice than a video or movie would. Although, by adding the visual element of a poster I still managed to tap into the creative side that comes along with taking a documentary based class. Although essay three and essay four had different messages and different mediums, they still follow the same topic of type one diabetes and how it can affect people with the condition.
           
           

Essay 3. Final and Reflection

Follow this link to view my third essay final:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsMNv95ALVA


Stephanie McQuillan
Mr. Harmon
English 101
December 3, 2011
            For essay three, the close reading of an object, I chose to closely analyze my blood sugar kit. As a type one diabetic, my blood sugar kit is something that I use every day. The blood sugar reading that appears on the screen can decide and describe how I am feeling that day. If I have a low blood sugar I may feel weak, and a high blood sugar may be because I ate too much earlier in that day. A finger prick several times a day feeds the blood sugar meter so it can spit out a number that basically tells a diabetic how much sugar is in their blood. From there, they have to adjust accordingly with insulin. The blood sugar kit is such a vital part of any type one diabetic’s life.
            A person would not know a diabetic from any other person only by looking at them. Most times a diabetic does not show any outward appearances or signs that they are a diabetic, unless they are wearing an insulin pump. This causes diabetes to be a “silent” condition, filled with an underground diabetic community. The blood sugar kit is one thing that all diabetics have in common. Different diabetics may take different types of insulin or different dosages of insulin to match their lifestyles, but every diabetic checks their blood sugar to stay alive.
            This movie shows that diabetes is prevalent in the world, although a lot of diabetics keep their condition to themselves. When someone looks at another person who is diabetic, they do not realize what measures they have to go through to keep their blood sugars in check. Diabetics check their blood sugar whenever they eat something, whenever they exercise, and at other times that they feel they need to. They also need to inject insulin into their bodies to make sure their blood sugars are healthy. It takes a lot of work to keep a person’s diabetes in check, but at first glance no one would even know what a diabetic goes through every day, and how vital a blood sugar meter is to their lives . 


Essay 3. Draft

Follow this link to view my third essay's draft:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0PrVee_4Dk&feature=g-upl

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Essay 2. Final


Stephanie McQuillan
Mr. Harmon
English 101
October 11, 2011
Inside of the morally ambiguous prison, Abu Ghraib, many suspected terrorists were tortured at the hands of the United States Army. The torturous techniques at this prison included mental as well as physical torture. Photographs documenting this torture were uncovered in 2004, and Errol Morris used these photographs to try to uncover the truth about what happened there in his documentary “Standard Operating Procedure”. A scene that signifies the torture that these prisoners received included a man named “Gilligan”, who was forced to hold a box while wires were attached to him. He thought these wires would electrocute him if he moved, and so he was forced to stand still for hours at a time. It turned out that these wires were not attached to anything, but he did not know that. Through the scene’s use of reenactment, Interreton style interviews, and photographs of “Gilligan” this scene follows the larger message of the documentary, which was to reveal and expose what really happened at Abu Ghraib.
One of Errol Morris’ signature techniques of documentary filmmaking is his use of reenactment. Through reenactment he portrays the people and what happened in a very anonymous and unidentified way. In fact, “Gilligan” is a name the army officials gave him when he came to the prison. The army did not know his real name, which adds to the anonymous nature “Gilligan” portrayed. In this scene, Morris shows the box and the feet of “Gilligan”, and his arms attached to the wires. Morris fails to show his face and in this way he keeps “Gilligan” anonymous. With this portrayal of “Gilligan”, it seems as if he is not a “real” person. Because “Gilligan” was not given a face during the reenactment of what really happened, it is as if he is not a person with real dignity. “Gilligan” was housed in that prison because he was suspected of killing two U.S agents, so some could justify that he deserved the torture that he received. But, “Gilligan” was still a real person with feelings who most likely felt scared and desperate when he was being tortured. Portraying “Gilligan” without a face made him seem like he was not a real person, and so in this way it is somehow justifiable to treat him poorly.
Errol Morris also uses a revolutionary style of interviewing that he invented called the Interrotron. This state of the art machine has a head right next to the lens of the camera. This makes it seem like the person being interviewed is actually talking to the audience. It is in the human nature and the nature of technology to look off to the side when talking to someone or being interviewed. People rarely look directly into the camera. Morris’ goal with this machine was to achieve the first person by taking out the third party nature of an interview (Eye Contact). Through Errol Morris’ use of the Interrotron, it is as if the people who are being interviewed are directly addressing what the army did. Specifically in this scene, the woman being interviewed was actually there while “Gilligan” was being tortured. In this documentary, the woman is directly addressing what happened to “Gilligan”. She tells the story of how he was forced to stand on top of a box for hours with fears of being electrocuted by wires that were attached to his hand. The woman makes direct eye contact with the audience while doing this. She is not trying to cover up what the army did. In fact, she is doing just the opposite by openly talking about what the army did to “Gilligan”.  
Specifically in this scene, there are two photographs of “Gilligan”, both of which depict him with a bag over his head so the viewer cannot see his face. One of the photographs shows “Gilligan” lying over a railing, as if he is unconscious or not even alive. The other photograph in this scene shows “Gilligan” sitting on a chair, again with a bag over his head so the viewer cannot see his face, holding a box. With “Gilligan’s” face covered, it is as if the humanness in him is taken out. Again, it is as if “Gilligan” does not have enough dignity to be presented without a bag over his head. The army must see him as sub-human and so putting a bag over his head could be considered acceptable. Also, in both of the photographs “Gilligan” does not have real clothes on, only a blanket to keep him warm. This also shows that the army did not have enough respect for him to cloth him. Instead, they put “Gilligan” to shame by making him walk around naked. According to Susan Sontag on her essay about photography, when something is photographed it is as if it was proven (Sontag). It is harder to doubt if something happened or not if there is a photograph to prove it. In the photographs that show “Gilligan”, no one can deny that “Gilligan” and the rest of the prisoners were not tortured. The photographs provide hard evidence that “Gilligan” was treated and thought of as less than human. When someone sees the photographs of “Gilligan”, they can no longer deny the torture that he endured, and what was a rumor becomes reality. The photographs of “Gilligan” show that he really was tortured and treated poorly.
This scene that depicted “Gilligan” shows the larger depiction of the documentary on how inhumanely the United States treated the suspected terrorists in their prison. By forcing “Gilligan” to stand for hours at a time on a box and telling him that if he moves he will be electrocuted, the U.S army mentally and emotionally tortured him. “Gilligan” was never beaten or touched, but clearly he was treated in a less than humane way. “Gilligan” was only one example of how poorly the United States treated the prisoners from Abu Ghraib. Many prisoners at the prison received physical abuse as well as emotional/mental abuse. Some prisoners were beaten so badly that they actually died because of their injuries. It is also likely that their was some information and footage that was too disturbing to put into the documentary “Standard Operating Procedure”, so the audience may not even know the whole story of what went on there. “Gilligan” was one of the many suspected terrorists that was tortured by the United States Army, but through his scene and the style of the scene it is revealed that the United States Army did indeed commit torturous crimes against many other suspected terrorists as well as “Gilligan”. 

Essay 2. Draft


Stephanie McQuillan
Mr. Harmon
English 101
October 11, 2011
Inside of the morally ambiguous prison, Abu Ghraib, many suspected terrorists were tortured at the hands of the United States Army. The torturous techniques at this prison included mental as well as physical torture. Photographs documenting this torture were uncovered in 2004, and Errol Morris used these photographs to try to uncover the truth about what happened there in his documentary “Standard Operating Procedure”. A scene that signifies the torture that these prisoners received included a man named “Gilligan”, who was forced to hold a box while wires were attached to him. He thought these wires would electrocute him if he moved, and so he was forced to stand still for hours at a time with fears that if he moved then he would be electrocuted. It turned out that these wires were not attached to anything, but he did not know that. Through the scene’s use of reenactment, interreton style interviews, and photographs this scene follows the larger message of the documentary, which was to reveal and expose what really happened at Abu Ghraib.
One of Errol Morris’ signature techniques of documentary filmmaking is his use of reenactment. Through reenactment he portrays the people and what happened in a very anonymous and unidentified way. In this scene, Morris shows the box and the feet of “Gilligan”, and his arms attached to the wires. Morris fails to show his face and in this way he keeps “Gilligan” anonymous. With this portrayal of “Gilligan”, he seems as if he is not a real person. Because “Gilligan” was not given a face during the reenactment of what really happened, it is as if he is not a person with real dignity. “Gilligan” was housed in that prison because he was suspected of killing two U.S agents, so some could justify that he deserved the torture that he received. But, “Gilligan” was still a real person with feelings that most likely felt scared and desperate when he was being tortured. Portraying “Gilligan” without a face made him seem like he was not a real person, and so in this way it is somehow justifiable to treat him poorly. This was the way it seemed through the U.S army’s eyes.
Errol Morris also uses a revolutionary style of interviewing called the interrotron. This state of the art machine has a head right next to the lens of the camera. This makes it seem like the person being interviewed is actually talking to the audience. It is in the human nature to look off to the side when talking to someone or being interviewed. People rarely look directly into the camera. Morris’ goal with this machine was to achieve the first person by taking out the third party nature of an interview (Eye Contact). Through Errol Morris’ use of the interrotron, it is as if the people who are being interviewed are directly addressing what the army did. Specifically in this scene, the woman being interviewed was actually there while “Gilligan” was being tortured. Now in this documentary, the woman is directly addressing what happened to “Gilligan”. She tells the story of how he was forced to stand on top of a box for hours with fears of being electrocuted by wires that were attached to his hand. The woman makes direct eye contact with the audience while doing this. And in this way she is revealing what she and the other U.S army officers did to “Gilligan”.
Specifically in this scene, there are two photographs of “Gilligan”, both of which depict him with a bag over his head so the viewer cannot see his face. With “Gilligan’s” face covered, it is as if the humanness in him is taken out. One of the photographs shows “Gilligan” lying over a railing, as if he is unconscious or not even alive. The other photograph in this scene shows “Gilligan” sitting on a chair, again with a bag over his head so the viewer cannot see his face, holding a box. Also, in both of the photographs “Gilligan” does not have real clothes on, only a blanket to keep him warm. According to Susan Sontag on her essay about photography, when something is photographed it is as if it was proven (Sontag). It is harder to doubt if something happened or not if there is a photograph to prove it. In the photographs that show “Gilligan”, no one can deny that that really happened. The photographs of “Gilligan” show that he really was tortured and treated poorly.
This scene that depicted “Gilligan” shows how inhumanely the United States treated the suspected terrorists in the prison. By forcing “Gilligan” to stand for hours at a time on a box and telling him that if he moves he will be electrocuted if he moves, the U.S army mentally and emotionally tortured him. “Gilligan” was never beaten or touched, but clearly he was treated in a less than humane way. “Gilligan” was only one example of how poorly the United States treated the prisoners from Abu Ghraib. Many prisoners at the prison received physical abuse as well as emotional/mental abuse. Some prisoners were beaten so badly that they actually died because of their injuries. It is also likely that their was some information and footage that was too disturbing to put into the documentary “Standard Operating Procedure”, so the audience may not even know the whole story of what went on there. “Gilligan” was one of the many suspected terrorists that was tortured by the United States Army, but through his scene and the style of the scene it is revealed that the United States Army did indeed commit torturous crimes against many other suspected terrorists as well as “Gilligan”.