also: feeling better. last night was weird. should’ve gone to bed earlier. note to self: use the tag coml more. and once again YEAH BADGERS WHOOP WHOOP BEST TEAM AROUND BABY

That joyful moment when you realize you and your crush wear the same color of shirts and for one insane moment, you actually allow yourself to believe that you are destined to be together forever.

Building On Leadership

In my search for graduate studies in Communication, I had just a few criteria. The institution has to be a well-established, accredited, quality, liberal arts school. A university with these boxes checked would automatically fulfill another criteria, that the institution have credibility (read: name recognition). I was searching for a robust communication department and curriculum. Last, but certainly not least, all of these boxes would only be considered if the program is offered online. Exclusively. Or as close to “exclusively” as possible.

In my quest I found the Masters of Communication and Leadership Studies (ComL) at Gonzaga University. Well-established? Check. Accredited? Of course. Quality? Definitely. Liberal arts? Uh huh. Street cred? Go Zags!  The curriculum is solid and diverse, rich in theory and practice. Online? Yes, except for one 3-day weekend seminar onthe beautiful Spokane, WA campus (whoa is me).

The score? The ComL program at Gonzaga University makes a clean sweep of my list or requirements. An attribute I was not looking for but comes as a bonus to the overall package) was a Communication degree with a focus on leadership. And not just leadership, but servant leadership. This is a perfect lock for my undergraduate work in Organizational Leadership (OL) from Eureka College.

The OL curriculum at Eureka includes two Communication courses, Small Group Communication and Organizational Communication. This is, of course, in addition to the required prerequisite communication courses taken prior to the OL program. 

All of this to say, the ComL program is a perfect fit, a logical next step on my journey of education. It was good enough for me to find a Communication degree program that filled all of the boxes on my checklist. However, I’m excited to be building on the foundation of leadership studies from Eureka College.

Week 7: "Even the Pope Shits"

Leo Tolstoy was ex-communicated by the Church for having his own ‘orthodox' (meaning right way). As a man who educated his servants, Tolstoy created his own ideal interpretation of the world on his estate. Like Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy had his own social justice agenda. As a “writer of the conscious,” his work can be called psychological realism; it is spiritual and metaphysical. It asks big questions that direct themselves at the meaning of life (opposite of kitsch). Tolstoy dealt with the philosophy of morality and ethics. Unlike radical leftists (socialists) who saw literary criticism as a medium for which to move towards nihilism, Tolstoy saw suffering, but rather than turning to socialism for its relief, he encouraged spirituality.

The Death of Ivan Ilych begins with a lens of a death of someone readers don’t yet know. This defamiliarization (остранение) makes it possible for the reader to experience a familiar scene in a new perspective, as it is atypical to start with a stranger’s funeral. In this first part, Tolstoy emphasizes the theme of expectation. There is a situation with awkward seating, bowing, and making the sign of the cross. Peter Ivanovich tries to figure out what one ought to be doing, as if the main issue is how he will be perceived. Furthermore, the characterization of Ivan’s wife from the start might have been intentional—it displays her selfishness and shallowness right away, so as to warn the reader to keep from empathizing with her.

Ivan Ilych’s life had been most simple and most ordinary and most terrible.

This is a classic Tolstoy line. It hints at the conformity established by the hierarchical nature of the social system that resulted (ironically) in Ivan’s downfall. Attending law school and marrying Praskovya Fedorovna turn out to be the two key moments in a his overall demise. This idea of playing a role, of fulfilling a duty, denotes the desire for what is easy, decorous, and proper (key word: decorum). Ivan Ilych is nothing more than a function: a role. He is part of a machine; this is the culture’s mechanism. Functions do not have souls: Ivan is about how things are—not what they are. He never has a purpose, never a reason for being; merely one duty after another.

"He [Ivan Ilych]…required…above all that propriety of external forms required by public opinion." p. 94

"When nothing was left to arrange it became rather dull and something seemed to be lacking, but then they were making acquaintances, forming habits, and life was growing fuller." p. 99

"But as soon as he had any unpleasantness with his wife, any lack of success in his official work, or held bad cards at bridge, he was at once acutely aware of his disease." p. 104

"There was nothing to defend." p. 126

The son of Ivan Ilych bares innocence and genuine sincerity. He is representative of cyclical nature. Tolstoy’s description of Gerasim, however, could denote that peasants are grown children, which is condescending in a way. He idealizes the Russian peasant and insinuates that physical work is a purifying force. Gerasim is described as clean and fresh—not adjectives that come to mind while thinking of peasants. Perhaps this is descriptive of his soul, rather than person. Gerasim is simple, uncorrupted, innocent, and more spiritually connected than these social role players in society’s construct, so far removed from god.

"Only Gerasim recognized it and pitied him. And so Ivan Ilych felt at ease only with him" p. 115

Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky

Tolstoy’s writing is significantly more sedate than Dostoy’s. While Dostoy’s is opaque and intrusive, Tolstoy’s is linear and concrete. In both, there is a concern about society’s stance. Both are seeking moral clarity, yet the way the go about it is a stylistic distinction. Dostoy makes emotions so intertwined with characters’ intelligence that there is much contradiction. Tolstoy, on the other hand, is very repetitive, almost as if he fears being misunderstood. While Tolstoy is subtle, Dostoy is paradoxical. Additionally, Tolstoy slowly pulls the reader into his world, then shows how things are not quite as they appear. Dostoy drags the reader in, head first, then goes through the experience as one, from within.

"Death which was the only reality, and always the same falsity. What were days, weeks, hours, in such a case?" p. 116

"A" mon

I must admit my surprise when I received my grade for the first class of my program, Theorizing Communication (COML508). You see, about 2 1/2 weeks into the class, I was beginning to wonder about the lack of interactivity with the class on the part of the instructor. It turns out, Dr. Casey was quite interactive, posting daily announcements with important guidance and extra little “to-do’s” along the way (in addition to the syllabus). She was on top of it. I was not seeing the stream of announcements. 

I spent the balance of the 5 weeks or so in a bit of a tailspin to catch up. At that point, I was just reaching for a grade, let alone a decent grade. Typically, I’m not a fan of settling for anything less than the best grade, but survival became the new best grade.

The grades were for the first class were posted today. I was not looking forward to clicking the link for the big reveal. To my astonishment, I earned an “A.” 

Honestly, if I can make it through that experience, I think I can make it through anything. And I have my family, especially my wife, Nicola, to thank!

Week 3: An Unidentified Flying Spirit

'Russian Soul' is the wind that encourages the water to hit the rock. Simultaneously, it is the determined, hard-working water while also the resilient, steadfast rock.

"Petersburg was conceived as a composition of natural elements - water, stone and sky" (Figes, 8).

St. Petersburg is very much representative of the Russian people. In the sense that it is beautiful as a whole, as one collective. Looking closer, its parts don’t quite add up (like impressionist art, in a way). I think part of the importance of the city’s establishment in one shot (a 50 year time period) was not necessarily due solely to the aesthetic factor of uniformity, but the of Peter’s recognition of the necessity to have one whole, consistent image presented. 

"Petersburg differs from all other European towns by being like them all." ~Alexander Herzen

The White Nights in the city made of white [lime] stone was a departure from the darkness and “backward customs of the Russian past in Moscow” (Figes, 10) forward into the enlightenment, chasing the sun to the West.

Petersburg is “the most abstract and intentional city in the whole round world.” ~Dostoyevsky

I think part of the hard, absolute nature of stone indicates to something more. The fact that tons of pound of rock was transported by thousands of men, forcing this unnatural creation into reality is indicative of the hard, absolute order decreed. For Petersburg to flourish, their needed to be a hard, absolute vision to be the solid foundation for a city on marshland.

Peter’s artificial creation propelled a yet unengaged enlightenment forward. He constructed the reality he desired—away from Moscow’s conservatism. Yet, this secular, free-thinking city was built on the graves of thousands of serfs. It’s white purity was besmirched. The only way to maintain the idealism of the city was to keep building. So Petersburg was founded on a community mausoleum. Rousseau’s ironic concept of forcing men to be free strongly pertains to Peter’s ambitions in the sense that he wanted to secularize Russia and import open-minded, enlightened thinking, yet his own actions indicate that he too much of a perfectionist (control freak) to truly support free thinking. As Peter found the police to be “the soul of citizenship" he truly must have trusted no one but himself (that and sending his wife to a nunnery and sending his son to die in prison).

I don’t believe that. There was clearly conflict within Peter’s personality, but I think that came from his astute realism. While maybe he didn’t trust the masses to succeed, he certainly went through all the hoops to make it as likely as possible for Russia to Westernize and progress. He must have had a great deal of hope and as a realist, he this hope didn’t conjure itself out of thin air, rather, it was a well-founded faith in the depth of the Russian Soul. He had calculated that winds would pick up, water would push the stone, but this immovable rock that had been moved into this place, once there would remain unmoved.

-nadie-importante- asked:

Ahora cada que leo la abreviación de Sensaciones Pasadas (S.P) No dejo de leerla coml Sentimientos Pasados... ¡Me Cagüentodo! D: ¿Cómo está querida Fanfi? ^^ Espero que bien :3 Pasa una linda noche buena!

Todos se confunden… bien <3 Espeor que entiendas que responda brevemente el ask porque estoyp ublicando cap MUAAJAJa

soyeltatanyquewea asked:

Pollo culiao nomas jajaj hno wom coml dicen que tenrr una hija es cagarse la vida si tener un hijo es la wea mas hermoso del mundo wom *0* te apuesto que el ctm que lo dice es un guaton lleno de espinilla kskfjaj que solo tiene a un pou de hijo jskfj

kldjsakljdklasjdkljasidajsklñdjiaowjdkñlasjdñkljaskldjksljfkldsjflsdñkfsdkljfksdfsa culiao aweonaoooooo po hermano XD me parce si, y nivel 1 mas encima el tontoculiao :/

The Catcher

What would Neil Postman say about blogs?  Having read Postman’s discourse of “The Improbable World” (Postman, 1992), a sweeping general assumption on my part would be that he would certainly not care for blogs.  Postman details how the printing press created a glut of information, which was then extended and hastened by the telegraph.  Combined, these two devices serve to inundate society with what Postman calls “information chaos.”  In the midst of the din, how could one know what to think and, more importantly, what to believe?  Postman goes so far as to indict fellow professors as being gullible, with his most unscientific experiment involving false findings published from major, reputable universities.  Ultimately “technopoly deprives us of the… bases for knowing what is beyond belief” (Postman, Chapter 4, para. 6).   


First, I must point out the irony in Postman’s work. Again, the critique is published, meaning Postman is passing judgment using the very technology and method he is judging.  He has expressed his thoughts in writing, compiled into a book, then duplicated via printing press. I purchased his book online, using the Internet, which, for all intents and purposes, is the new telegraph.  For me and, I would assume, most readers, the only route to Postman’s thoughts are through the information chaos that he criticizes. 


Second, that a college professor would fall prey to Postman’s “experiment” is not problematic.  Postman’s approach seems to suggest that he think himself quite clever by his tone and the use of the term “victim” to describe the unsuspecting professors.  His experiment is weak for a few reasons.  For one, a relationship is involved. If a friend or trusted colleague of mine suggested the same, that a major university published findings in a major periodical, even if the findings seemed absurd, for the sake of my relationship I would not lash out immediately with disbelief of the claims.  The other reason his experiment is weak is that in this age of science and discovery, it’s reasonable to be open to what could be.  I would suggest that his experiment would yield different results pre-Galileo.  However, post-Galileo, why would a mind be anything other than open, especially among the educated?


Finally, a sweeping generalization on my part, as mentioned in the second sentence of this essay, would be my mistake.  I believe Postman is too critical, even elitist with his statement that “information is dangerous when it has… no higher purpose that it serves” (Postman, Chapter 4, para. 17).  Is all information only worthy when it serves to educate?  For that matter, since information can also be passed verbally, are we to assume that people should only speak if it serves to educate?  If this is Postman’s view, I would enjoy taking a class with him, but certainly consider him a bore for any other of life’s activities.  Further, this view assumes the reader is passive, mindlessly processing published material.  As Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren point out in the book How To Read a Book, “the reader or listener is much more like the catcher in a game of baseball” (Adler, Chapter 1, para. 8).  If anything, the ball is passive, not the reader.  There is activity–and a responsibility–in the reading.  A responsible reader who is reading for understanding would not make the mistake of returning the ball to the pitcher with a simple, sweeping generalization. 


Adler, M., Van Doren, C. (2011). How to Read a Book [iBooks version]. Retrieved from

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology [Kindle DX version]. Retrieved from

So I was watching the NBA this morning because my brother was watching too and he was rooting for Miami and I just wanted to annoy him so I kept on cheering for Dallas. Miami won in the end, as we all know. So anyway, I realized that the Miami head coach looks like an older version of Matt.

Hehe. Made me miss our little book club more :)

Luego de todo este tiempo me volvi simplemente adicto a ella, tan solo sus ojos me hipnotizan, ver su cara me sonroja, saber que esta a mi lado me hace sonreir, tomar su mano me hace sentir calido, estoy enamorado de ella, se convirtio en mi droga y lo seguira siendo, oh vaya que la amo, vaya que la quiero, como deseo estar todo el dia a su lado, coml deseo consentirla en todo lo que ella quiera, por que despues de todo, la amo

Technology and Human Consciousness

From the start, I will concede that Ong’s work in Orality and Literacy (Ong, 1982) has convinced me that the introduction of writing has altered human consciousness.  Yes.  The lengths which Ong has gone, connecting the history of literacy to the impact on the human conscience, is sufficient to persuade.  

Early on in this passage, Ong makes a correlation between the writing and computing, that computing will likely make a similar, significant impact on human thought.  Certainly that has come to pass.  Computer technology, extended by the internet, has proliferated in my lifetime.  It would not require an Ong-like treatment of computer technology for me to arrive at the decision about whether computing has met this correlation.  It is clear that having the Internet service Google in my pocket (smartphone) at all times has changed the way I process information.  I no longer wonder about facts and details in day-to-day activities.  As questions or ideas present themselves, I have the confidence that I can resolve that thought within a few seconds.  That same confidence is such that I feel less responsible to retain certain information, especially trivial, pop culture information. 

Ong has not convinced me, however, that this altered consciousness is necessarily a negative impact.  Consider the textbook definition of technology, being “the diverse collection of processes and knowledge that people use to extend human abilities and to satisfy human needs and wants” (Thurlow, Lengel, & Tomic, p. 25).  The last bit, about human satisfaction, is important to note.  This, coupled with the history of known scripts leads to the idea that literacy, or some form of scripted communicating, was inevitable.  Ong identifies the Mesopotamian cuneiform, Egyptian hieroglyphics, Indus Valley Script, Minoan Linear B, Mayan script, Aztec script and the Semitic script, the basis for all existing (surviving) scripts.  It is clear from what is known about the number different types of scripts, dating back to 3500 B.C., that humans are compelled to record, to publish, to share their stories in some form more permanent than the spoken word.  Whether for want or need, it is obvious that this drive could be sustained long enough to develop complex alphabets and lingual structures.  

Sure, it is possible that some of the impact from this altered consciousness is negative. Burton’s judgment of writing is that it “produceth melancholy” (Burton, p. 2).  Sterne determined that reading caused “much grief of heart” (Sterne, p. 3).  Ong would not use the term “warning” when speaking of the correlation between literacy and computing if he didn’t view these technologies as having a negative impact. However, technology being an extension of human abilities, one could connect the overall indictment of these technologies to humans themselves, and not the technologies.  A gun shoots–a person kills.  Literacy records, but I would suggest it is people that ultimately “produceth melancholy.”


Ong, W. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: New York, Methuen.

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the Internet. London: SAGE.