Saving the world: One tent at a time.

Picture yourself relaxing on the lake. It’s been a long, grueling week at the office; and you needed an escape to the forest to unwind. You pack your tent, GPS, and propane grill. Some traditionalist who are sleeping on the leaves nearby call you a pencil pusher for your technologically advanced equipment. Are you doing it wrong?

Camping is one of man’s favorite pastimes and with the help of technology it can finally become something everyone can enjoy. The camping community is divided among those who practice hard-core camping, and those who like to take it safe and relax. This causes controversy among the community and arguments arise such as wether or not one is “doing it right”. Although traditionalist argue that camping should contain no technology, I believe that technology opens the door to all and allows the community to grow beneficially.

Camping dates back longer than any of us can remember. Cavemen were experts at living in the wild off of sticks and stones. Cowboys camped in deserts and prairies when moving cattle from point A to point B. Today, men and women mimic their laid back, rough, and rugged lifestyles as an exciting hobby. Traditionalist claim that you aren’t a true camper unless you are sleeping with the bugs and finding your own food and water for survival. The classic camping gear that traditionalist carry with them are the following: tiny sleeping bag, knife, canteen, and rope. Most get the thrill out of having hardly anything at all to put their survival instincts to the test. Honestly: does this look entertaining to you?

It seems that technology has affected almost every aspect of the world, including one of the most primitive. Thanks to technology everyone can now experience camping in their own ways. The elderly, disabled, and young can all go camping and relax in the wide-open ranges according to their own comfort. Amazing tents, cookware, and recreational equipment have been produced with the help of technology. Tents today can fold into your back pocket, adjust to the outside temperature to keep you warm, and allow you to plug in your phone or laptop. Cookware innovations allow you to cook your favorite meals on a propane stove and serve to the entire family. Sleeping mats, such as my subzero Northface sleeping bag, adjusts to your body temperature to keep you comfortably warm. Everyone can now adjust to their own preferable comfort and relax however they want. Isn’t that was camping is really about?

Innovations in technology have exceeded the imagination when it comes to camping. My argument stands that technology creates a larger population among the camping community and can be beneficial to the environment. More campers means more National Parks. National Parks are defined as reserves or natural land that is set aside or created for the enjoyment of human recreation. National Parks serve as a wonderful learning experience for all to learn about wildlife and nature and how to beautifully preserve it. National Parks shelter hundreds of species of fish, birds, mammals, and trees. Trees, lakes, and grasslands are protected for human enjoyment and with the help of technology; a larger camping community can help keep these parks prospering. We all know that more lakes lead to more fish which means more food. More trees mean more oxygen which leads to a better atmosphere. More mammals lead to a better education and understanding, which causes a human-animal liberation that the world needs.

In conclusion: go explore the natural world and take along with you whatever you want. You can experience the rough-and-tumble aspect of exploration, or you can pack fun technological equipment to help you relax more. All in all, it will benefit the environment which is beneficial to you and me. No matter how you go about camping, just remember that you are adding to the community which is a great thing to our environment and understanding. Don’t listen to those hipster traditionalist, because if they honestly cared about their natural world, they wouldn’t mind sharing it with you if it meant saving it. So go camping and prosper, and bring your friends!

English Camping Trip

Training for the Couch Potato Games

In Hemphill’s article “Cybersport” he argues that video games should be considered a “sport” because they imitate the physical and mental characteristics of athletic sports. Dr. Dennis Hemphill is a Lecturer at the School of Human Movement at Victoria University in Melbourne Australia. I disagree with Hemphill’s claim that video games should be considered sports, because video games lack the face-to-face interaction sports provide.

According to random questioning, video games are defined as solely entertainment on a TV screen. The formal definition is electronically manipulating images produced by a computer program on a display screen. The first video game Tennis for Two”was invented solely for entertainment as well as every video game following to this day. From the Atari to the first Play Station, video games were created solely for entertainment in one’s home. Then, as the technology advanced the modern world, the gaming community followed. In the early millennium, technology spawned the invention of international gaming networks. A boy from Mississippi can now be on the same team with a boy from Japan in the widely popular Xbox game, Call of Duty. Gamers next wanted physical activity to be involved in their games. The Nintendo Corporation invented the Wii. The Wii is a revolutionary gaming system that involves the mimicry of athletic sports. Although the video gaming industry has taken a shift to more active and competitive games (as shown below at a Halo competition), this does not mean video games will be on ESPN any time soon as a sport. 

What does Hemphill actually define as a sport? He defines a sport as being  mentally stimulating, including a goal, focus, and risk. He claims that video games, under certain circumstances, can involve these characteristics. Thus, causing games to be under the same definition of a sport. According to Webster’s Dictionary, a sport is defined as an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which  an individual or team competes. There is an emphasis on the word “exertion” because it is defined as “the use of physical or perceived energy with the strenuous or costly effort related to physical work”. Some characteristics sports include are as followed: accuracy, courage, strength, power, training, speed, risk, tradition, etc... Every competitive sport contains an athlete. An athlete is one who trains and prepares for a certain sport against another athlete. Does Hemphill not realize that “gamers” are mainly sitting alone in their rooms fantasizing about Lara Croft in the game Tomb Raider, having no human interaction? It’s just not healthy for human development especially for a child. Below is the sad spawn of gaming. Gaming can cause social awkwardness and as Moody points out, loneliness. 

Hemphill claims that video games contain the same characteristics of competitive sports. How can this be true when you are sitting on your couch with a controller in hand and chips by your side? Hemphill adds the argument in his article made by Heim, that “computers migrate spirit from the body into a world of representation.”  He also admits that video games can lead to childhood obesity. Video games can affect families. Not everyone’s parents want to sit and cheer for their son to kill hookers on Grand Theft Auto. Competitive sports bring families together in ways such as: the thanksgiving family football game, the local professional sporting team, passing down the love of a certain team to generations to come. Sports bring unity socially to all types of people. Sports do not lock you in a bedroom in front of the TV hidden from the world. As Eric J. Moody points out in his article “Internet Use and It’s Relationship to Loneliness”, technology lacks the human interaction which can cripple one’s social behavior. 

In “Internet Use and It’s Relationship to Loneliness”, Moody points out that the non-physical interaction between friends or significant others can actually cause loneliness. Using technology as the only connector to others can cause you to miss that lacking physical feeling. When gamers are confined to their rooms, even though they may be talking with their friends and playing against them, they still lack that face-to-face contact. This could cause them to develop social problems and become lonely. Sports contain face-to-face contact and that social, emotional feeling that gaming cannot provide. 

Ultimately, Hemphill fails to think about the negative effects video games can have on people who take gaming to the extreme. By locking themselves in their room and avoiding human contact. Hemphill is not wrong about the fact that video games DO contain some characteristics as sports, but it does not technically make them a sport. The differences between sports and games is evident. Sports contain the national traditions and adrenaline rushes that games can never imitate. Today’s technology created many amazing games that mimic sports and virtual reality as closely as possible. Moody points out that despite the new technologies that cause us to see face-to-face (over the internet) still can cause us to grow lonely and miss that human interaction. Games aren’t evil. Everyone enjoys them (I’m a Super Mario Bros girl myself), however they should not be considered sports or substitute for them. It’s not bad to play, but do not allow yourself to grow lonely or grotesque like Moody warns and as shown below.

Is Danger Mouse that "dangerous"?

Phil Gunderson is a mystery man who discusses "digital communism" and the shunning of mash-up artists such as Brian Burton, a.k.a. "Danger Mouse". Danger Mouse is a mash-up artist who is responsible for mixing together The Grey Album: a mix between the Beatles "White Album" and Jay-Z's Black Album. Many found Danger Mouse's work (as well as all the mash-up artists) tasteless and untalented. Gunderson discusses in grave detail and with scholarly words that "...our smiles and laughter signify our liberation from an excessively restrictive horizon of musical expectations". Based upon this statement, I believe Gunderson applauds "bedroom producers" because he realizes that artists such as Danger Mouse require a certain talent to be able to bring together commonly known treasures of the music world, and mash them together along with his sense of humor to create a new type of genre: one everyone can laugh and dance to.

In Gunderson's article "Danger Mouse's Grey Album, Mash-Ups, and the Age of Composition", he uses a particular way to reach out to his audience. He uses large words perhaps to speak on the level of scholars who will most likely read his articles. I think he should have made it more universal and for others who don't have to read it with a dictionary near by. His article is obviously a music review. He is attempting to reach out and tell others about the on growing problem and how we should all get over the inevitability. 

Gunderson makes the argument that it takes a certain talent to be able to mix together an enjoyable beat created by several music sources that you can actually dance and feel a rhythm to. A song that anyone has the ear for and can be able to dance to it. Mash-up artists are usually damned and looked down upon for being talentless low-lifes who steal from "real" artists. He suggests that mash-up artists are simply taking from artists ideas and creating something unique and with their own ideas. For example, Takashi Murakami, a prestigious artists has a piece called And Then, And Then, And Then, And Then, And Then, Red which portrays lovable Disney character Mickey Mouse.

Is Murakami "stealing" Mickey Mouse? Or is he taking an idea used by Disney and creating his own unique character? Gunderson uses the same concept of Duchamp’s artwork that shows Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa with a goatee . These examples display the same concept of Danger Mouse's The Grey Album because Gunderson makes the point that Danger Mouse, as well as other mash-up artists, are being their own unique and creative producer without all of the cons of having a record label to exploit you. Murakami takes other ideas and makes his own, and there is no one to stop him.  I know from experience that it is much harder to “mash” up a bastard child of a song as these mash-up artists do. 

With this talent, comes a great gift. The gift of being able to divide the racial diversity that the music industry has created. Gunderson makes the claim that "radio bandwidth has been exploded into a stelliferous system of synchronic generic differences... and which interpellates a corresponding "type" of consumer, The Grey Album's juxtaposition of the Beatles and Jay-Z takes on the character of a musical contradiction". He is claiming that Danger Mouse's Grey Alubm is exactly what it is: a mixture between "white" and "black" music to make grey. The Grey Album represents the grey area that exists in the crowd whenever mash-up artists perform.  For instance, check out this crowd at one of Girl Talk's shows. Notice the diversity and the great time everyone is having!

Gunderson is outspoken against how mash-up artists are not given enough credit for what they are worth. He explains in his wordy article that bedroom producers experience much more pro's that real artists such as being able to produce in your own room rather than playing the record company's "games". Mash up artists are going to continue doing what they do. It is a hobby, talent, and gift to the world and everyone deserves "free music". Maybe it isn't fair, or even creative; but it sure is fun to dance to.

Reading Log 1: First response to "DangerMouse"

Tara Boren

Feb. 9

Billy Middleton

Phillip A. Gunderson shared his views with music lovers and scholars alike about mash-up artist, Danger Mouse. In Gunderson's article on Danger Mouse (Brian Burton) he criticized the artists mash-up of the Beatles and Jay-Z records. The use of large,educated words indicates that he is not intending to reach out to music lovers to express his opinion, but perhaps to scholars who could read the article and do something about the "illegal plundering of some of the most valuable property in the history of pop". 

Gunderson's article on the illegal use of bedroom composing was meant to inform others about the murderous offspring of the some of the world's greatest music. He did so by using an article sent out to the public composed of large, unnecessary words. Perhaps if he used words that could relate to everyone and weren't so critical, he may not have seemed so biased. 

The format and layout of the article makes it an easy read. He compares Danger Mouse's work with the senseless DIY ethos of punk rock. He addresses this situation as a very serious problem and one that needs to be fixed. However, it has gotten so common that it would be very difficult to be able to end it. He illustrates how copyright laws are supposed to work when it comes to artists by comparing it to Walt Disney and his Disney World copyright laws whenever he passed. 

Gunderson's article states that it is a very serious problem and needs to be addressed although it seems almost impossible. His article to a poor college music-lover, such as myself, will not be affective. Especially with the use of some of his wording. However, for the intended audience he does a nice job "rounding them up" in the beginning but at the end he reassures his audience that attempting to end this is futile.