The Future Generation of TASP
Check out the TA website: www.tellurideassociation.org/tasp1.html, for next year's TASP topics have been chosen. Cornell I (foreign policy subversion) seems extremely interesting to me, and a marked contrast to Cornell II (medieval literature). In any case, this is a nice guide for TASP recruitment activities (something tells me Co'Relous will be a '06 TASPer). More importantly, this means the official application will be out soon, hopefully with our beaming faces featured prominently.
posted by Charles Wu at 10:56 PM
39 Comments:
Hey, look!
Jenny's the factotum for Cornell II.
4:12 AM, November 16, 2005
My adviser just received the student recommending form today, and she was asking me about who I thought would be good. Unfortunately, she was looking at last year's brochure. I was horrified, after all our hard work at being photogenic, that I might not see the fruit of all our efforts.
We shall see.
7:30 AM, November 16, 2005
Wow, the UT Austin TASP looks extremely abstract. And the U-Michers are going to Arab Detroit! Maybe they all need to read Emma's research paper . . .
1:15 PM, November 16, 2005
No! no one is reading that thing. Ever! I'm ashamed to recall it. But I wish I could go!!!! Oh, Noha would love it!
2:24 PM, November 16, 2005
Why aren't I a junior?! Those topics are sweet! When I was reading it over, I got all excited like I did when I first read them for myself, and I could almost smell it. Oo, there it is again.
2:41 PM, November 16, 2005
Cornellis? You mean Co Re'lous (I can't exactly remember how his name was written)?
The Austin seminar does seem really... abstract when compared to the others. Typography is interesting and all, but perhaps not for six weeks straight.
Cornell I and Michigan have topics that interest me the most. They're also unusually contemporary or at least relevant to events in the news.
I didn't know that there were only two Cornell factota. With 32-ish kids, maybe that's why things got out of hand in 2005. Oh well, good luck Jenny!
2:48 PM, November 16, 2005
Cornell I and II look awesome. Then again, our year's Cornell topics were awesome too.
I dunno guys, sociology is boring. I'll be the first to say it. Feel free to deride me for doing so, lol!
5:03 PM, November 16, 2005
Hey, random cool observation: one of the Austin factota is from Balliol College (of Oxford University).
Sociology? You mean the Michigan seminar? Learning about religions is not my thing. Most of the time. But when we're talking about one of the most high-profile, controversial and perhaps most misunderstood religions (at least from my point of view), I really wouldn't mind a seminar on that. I thought that the "as experienced and implemented" bit sounded especially promising. New perspectives and all.
I remember ready the Cornell II one and thinking "hey, Buffy!". Heh, 'twould be cool. But I don't know whether I'd like the readings... and there seem to be a lot of readings for that one.
It looks like Cornell I might get the most first choices (again... but wait, did we ever find out which 2005 seminar was the most popular?), and I really don't see many people gravitating towards Austin. OK, so the past two Austin TASPs centered around writing, but while those of the past dealt more with stories and the creative process this one seems to be all about... the words. Meh.
I want to see the new brochure, but according to the website that could take another month. Gah!
5:24 PM, November 16, 2005
I agree with Emma. I wish I were a junior again, just so that I might take one of those seminars. They looked pretty sweet, and I confess that I was most interested in the Austin TASP.
Oh, TASP!
5:49 PM, November 16, 2005
Hah, I have a feeling that wanting to savor a new TASP will be a recurring theme in coming years, but indeed TASP is a onetime deal. Pah.
And yes, I meant Co'Relous. Cornell? Bah, thinking about college is warping my mind
6:15 PM, November 16, 2005
Cornell I and II look certain to be VERY popular.
If I were picking, I think I'd have to go:
Cornell II
Cornell I
Michigan
St. Louis
Austin (What are you reading? Words, words, words...)
7:58 PM, November 16, 2005
That in itself would be quite a sociology experiment: distribute warm puppies to the world's masses. Then again, I can think of a million ways that could go horribly wrong.
8:12 PM, November 16, 2005
I think I'll keep spelling it "Corellis," regardles of the actual *pah* spelling. :-D
9:04 PM, November 16, 2005
So Meredith, rememeber my plan to be factota together? It could happen in a few years...you better get working on your part of the deal.
10:18 PM, November 16, 2005
C'mon now guys, don't hate on Austin. Checking out a first edition of the Epic of Gilgamesh would be pretty sweet...
Yeah. Those are all some awfully fine topics in my opinion. Oh well, we had our run. And it was good. And so it goes.
Oh, Dylan-
What are we writing with?
Words, words, words...
Word.
Isaac
10:44 PM, November 16, 2005
Emma:
I'll get on that.
7:23 AM, November 17, 2005
About most popular TASP last year - I'm pretty certain it was Cornell II, legal implications of terror and genocide. If I remember correctly, most of you folk who didn't get your first choice had picked Cornell II. It was 2nd for me.
1:59 PM, November 17, 2005
I picked Cornell II as first choice.
Do you think the actual info is floating around somewhere? I'd like to see it.
2:46 PM, November 17, 2005
Hehe, I think I wrote that I didn't want to be in Cornell II...ah, well...I was young and knowledgeless, as opposed to the knowledgeful post-TASP version of myself. :-D
Jason, let's be factota together! That would be a paaaartaaay...and we could totally be mean to the TASPers...
Yeah, I know "knowledgeful" isn't a word. I made it up. Jealous?
;-)
I love you guys.
11:59 PM, November 17, 2005
I just realized that I use way too many emoticons. :-/
12:01 AM, November 18, 2005
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
12:25 AM, November 18, 2005
I've changed my mind; I think that emoticons have artistic validity. I mean, they allow the user to express emotion quickly and easily in a medium where tone of voice isn't a factor. You may say, "But can't one do that with the right words?" Yes, that is true. However, for visual learners, people who have difficulty reading situations, and people with lower vocabularies, emoticons are often a better choice than using even the most expressive of words. Also, it saves one from seeming pretentious and wordy in such a casual communication medium as aim. I've only scratched the surface of their practical function. Their aesthetic function is a completely different area. It is true that images are completely different from words. They can evoke different emotions, reactions, feelings, etc. Hue, shape, line...all elements of design have connotations that words cannot express in exactly the same way, which often may be unique to the conversants. Even emoticons (which, by the way, are being designed very creatively) may be able to express a person's feelings, emotions, etc. in a more effective way than ten of the most eloquent words. I am not arguing against using words...I know that words are sometimes the better choice. I am (trying to) say that emoticons are a valid, different way of expressing one's feelings on a different plane.
I take back my prior comment. I do not use too many emoticons; I simply interpret the situation, decide if they are appropriate, and use them if I decide they are the most suitable for what I am trying to express.
Any thoughts?
:-)
12:30 AM, November 18, 2005
Internet emotions, although I hate to admit it, should be acknowledged for their significant role in textual communication these days. I mean, what else is there? They are the closest thing the internet has got to revealing tone of voice, opinion, attitude, etc. It enhances the one-on-one conversation. However, they are overused. There are specific times when they are necessary, and when they are not. This leads me to my tangential question: Do the aesthetics of smiley emotions compensate for their often unnecessary usage?
I hope you all know that yes, I am aware that I am arguing with no one really. Lisa and I are only representing one side of this dialogical process. (hint)
1:35 AM, November 18, 2005
Hm...to what you have said, Henrik, I come up with this: I think the overuse of emoticons is comparable to the overuse of ridiculously complex words. Both are pretty annoying, but both are a personal choice. Also, are they really "overused" if someone is expressing him or herself? Who decides when they are "necessary"?I think that there is no right or wrong way to do that, since it is deeply personal. :-)
2:22 AM, November 18, 2005
Lisa, we could be all horrible and pick arbitrary favourites, sparking intense jealousy and rivalry amongst the TASPers. Haha, so much fun!
I'd make such a bad factotus. :P
I know it's several years too early to begin thinking, and of course plans change, but is anybody seriously considering being a factotum at some point? I'm probably not, actually.
8:29 AM, November 18, 2005
Was "factotus" a typo, Jason? It actually sounds kind of cool, in a weird, banal way.
I'm considering factotum-icking at some point in the future, but plans may change.
Oh, and I think it's kind of ironic to have a whole "dialogic process" about emoticons while using so few of them. Let's see the last four comments, done entirely in emoticons.
:)
12:14 PM, November 18, 2005
^.^
It's actually intentional. Matt Slayton and I had a little chat about it on some other forum. Apparently, -us is the suffix for masculine terms while -um is for neuter or feminine. :S
Factotus does have a nice ring to it.
:D
OK, now that probably was excessive emoticon-icking. Or emoticking? Nah...
3:19 PM, November 18, 2005
Well played, Sam. Now, for the vertical smiley!
^_^
3:21 PM, November 18, 2005
lol, ths convo is gtng soooo lk smrt! LOL!!1!111!!!oneone
Yea, this is where Matt's weird language modifier come into play
5:07 PM, November 18, 2005
Yeah, I never understood the point of 111one111oneoneone... use exclamation marks!
!
:D
6:33 PM, November 18, 2005
I don't think arguing for the validity of emoticons with little use of emoticons is ironic at all. I wasn't trying to say that emoticons can replace words; I think they represent a completely separate plane. I couldn't possibly redo a post completely in emoticons, because that wouldn't be what I wanted to express. I was arguing for their validity as a vehicle of self-expression.
Jason, in addition to picking favorites, I think we should tell them completely fake facts as if they were completely true...they'll go back home from TASP so much smarter...or so they think, bwahahahaha! >:-D
6:55 PM, November 18, 2005
The exclamation point one thing usually just indicates an inadequate grasp of the shift button. I don't think it's intentional.
10:24 AM, November 19, 2005
I was being facetious about doing a whole post in emoticons; I get your point, of course, and it's a valid. Still, there's a hint of irony in there somewhere . . .
6:11 PM, November 19, 2005
# 38. HAHA
2:33 AM, November 21, 2005
However, wouldn't overuse imply their unnecessary usage? For example, in Jason's blog, his smiley represents him saying "Yay! Let's use exclamation marks. I am smiling." However, is that what he really was trying to convey? Jason's confirmation will only help, but I may be totally wrong. Were you Jason, actually making a demand? Were you actually frustrated with confusion? How exactly did you feel? This will illuminate whether or not the emotion was misused.
Regardless of whether or not Jason did, emotions are commonly misused. Are smilies necessary for all the times they have been used in the comment box, or are they just there for arbitrariness or enhancement of aesthetics? Who knows, but that can question whether or not they are necessary.
Excuse my jargon, as Dylan would agree, it is quite fun, and that is the only reason why I use so much of it.
2:39 AM, November 21, 2005
Ahaha Henrik... let's see, the ":D" smiley in my last comment was meant to counteract the rather exasperated tone of my message. It was meant to show that I wasn't truly bothered by people going !!!111!!!oneone...
That was one case where smileys were justified, since the one I used conveyed the correct tone (which would otherwise probably have been misinterpreted).
Hey, do you think the 2006 Austin TASP is going to do a section on smileys?
Now that would be fun! :D ... And this smiley is meant to show that I'm not being sarcastic.
9:22 AM, November 21, 2005
if only i hadn't lent out my copy of Eats Shoots and Leaves (oh the irony of the missing commas in that title)! There's a great rant about emoticons in it. She thinks they're terrible and will fade out. Of course, they're obviously more than just a fad, but it's an articulate rave and so much fun to read.
2:25 PM, November 21, 2005
Oh...all right. I give in. :)
Just kidding! ;D
I guess that doesn't really work does it
10:34 PM, November 22, 2005
Okay, Henrik, here's my point of view on that: I do not think that internet talking, at least for me, is merely a translation of everyday talk. It is a completely different type of communication, and therefore warrants different ways of speaking and expressing. Also, I still believe that there is no right or wrong way to express oneself; to me, putting rules and limits on expression is opression of the worst sort.
2:48 AM, November 23, 2005
Post a Comment
<< Home