In all fairness to Gaston Leroux, I will admit that I have been quite distracted in other parts of life while trying to make my way through this novel. That may explain some of my disappointment with the story, but certainly not all of it. Once again, I will try to keep this review relatively spoiler-free. Watching the Broadway production or the recent film production will not spoil too much of the book, as they deviated quite a bit from the source material. In fact, they told a much better, more cohesive story.
I understand that the author was trying to put together a "police report" case book, which is a clever idea on the surface of things. Sadly, it falls flat. Even though Leroux attempts to switch voices from one "witness" to another, there is very little distinction between the speakers. I very quickly lost track of who was telling their side of the story. I think it would have been better to drop the premise and give the reader a single, consistent, all-knowing storyteller.
My biggest problem with the story, however, was the same issue I had with The Invisible Man. That is, the characters were not very sympathetic. Towards the end, you get the feeling that you are meant to feel some sympathy for the Opera Ghost (he is only called a phantom once) because of his pathetic past. But then he opens his mouth or does something malicious, and he becomes a sociopath. At least we learn a little about how he came to be so wretched, unlike Griffin, but the quick-change duality makes it hard to want to understand his plight. Christine Daae and Raoul de Chagney are just as bad, as characters go. In one breath either of them is declaring their love or admiration for someone and in the next moment they are expressing fear or hatred for that same person. They are extremely childish in their actions and dialogue. In fact, I had a hard time finding any characters that consistently behaved like mature, rational adults. The story seemed populated by a bunch of children pretending to be adults. Only auxiliary characters seemed to be past adolescent immaturity, yet they did not do much to control the childish characters.
Aside from two deaths, there did not seem to be much to really terrorize the characters. I, myself, never really felt a sense of dread for anyone's safety. Perhaps it was due to the use of too much meandering detail, especially in the "torture chamber" chapters. Yes, two characters were trapped in a chamber for 2.5 chapters, which dragged on with so much wandering exposition that I must admit my own mind had a hard time focusing on their plight. There were many hints laid down about the mischief and evil deeds of which the "opera ghost" was capable, yet not much was actually committed by this phantom. If he terrorized the other characters, then I had a hard time feeling it as I read the book.
The idea of the story is a good one. It has been adapted well, especially in the Broadway production, so I will give Gaston Leroux credit for laying a decent foundation for others to build upon. Overall, that's how I see The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux. Perhaps if I gave it another read when I am less distracted I can appreciate it more. For now, I will give it 2.5 out of 5 stars.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Brevard Community College
I am incredibly grateful to the Liberal Arts Department at Brevard Community College. They were willing to take a chance on my as an adjunct instructor a little over eight years ago. I interviewed for an adjunct position in psychology a year after receiving my M.S. in I/O psychology. The department head must have seen something in me, or was desperate for instructors. Rather than hire me immediately, she gave me a sample syllabus and asked me to come up with my own for a standard General Psychology course. She called me back and offered me two classes the following spring--January 2004. The first class I ever taught was Human Development, at 8 a.m. on a Monday morning. I had a Human Adjustment course that same semester. These were both on the Melbourne campus. I had no idea what I was really doing, but I managed to wing it through my first semester. My daughter was turning 2, my husband was finishing up his M.S. in ocean engineering, and I was working on my M.B.A. Thinking back on it, I am amazed that I made it through that first semester. The following fall I got a call to teach at my alma mater, Florida Tech, in the School of Business (just after completing my M.B.A.). I also got called by the BCC Cocoa campus to teach a General Psychology course. I was teaching 4 classes, at 3 different campuses. I have managed to teach at least 1 class each year since that first semester. I don't know if I would be as confident to teach any psychology course thrown my way if BCC had not continued to offer me the opportunity to teach new subjects. I have taught general psychology I & II, human relations, human adjustment, and human development. These are all introductory courses, but not all adjuncts teach them. Most adjuncts teach one specific course (primarily general psychology) and are rarely asked to branch out beyond that. I'm a utility player, with apparently wide experience. I never thought I could be so adaptable, but Brevard Community College Liberal Arts Department gave me the opportunity that sent me on my current path.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Wax Paper
Yes, this is another odd post. If you've read many of my other posts, besides those dedicated to actual people, then you know that I am quite odd. I claim my pride in that. It is my right as a mental nomad. But I digress.
Wax paper is very versatile. As a baker (amateur/hobbyist, not professional), I like it for freezing. Placing wax paper between layers of pancakes or waffles before placing them in a freezer bag keeps the food from sticking together when you freeze them. This allows you to remove them more easily to reheat. Wax paper around cookie dough makes it easier to remove from its protective plastic covering as well. I have also found that meat, especially pre-made hamburgers, does a little better when wrapped in wax paper and then plastic prior to freezing, though butcher paper or freezer paper (yes, it exists) is admittedly better for this purpose.
What I really like best about wax paper, though, is its use for sewing. Yes, I use wax paper for my sewing. I draft my commercial patterns onto wax paper before I do any cutting. Because the paper is translucent (semi see-through), it is easy to trace the correct size for the pattern piece on to the wax paper. This preserves my commercial pattern paper, which is pretty fragile. It also allows me to use the same pattern for multiple sizes without having to cut up the pattern paper or buy a new pattern for each size needed. As I have a tendency to modify patterns to fit sizes that are not available on some commercial patterns (some great costume patterns only go up to a size 20 or a size 12, but they could look good on a larger size), I can use the base pattern and some mathematical gymnastics to draft a larger size that will still have the desired look of the original. I'm actually doing this now for both myself and my daughter for our costumes for Dragon*Con 2012.
I can "Frankenstein" pattern pieces with the wax paper, too. I had to do that for my husband's Star Wars uniform. The idea for the uniform existed, but the pattern itself did not. I had to modify (i.e. draw out) both the coat and the pants from a pre-existing commercial pattern in order to create the desired effect. I even created a couple new pieces to fit onto the costume with my wax paper. Lo and behold, my wax paper helped me draft, adjust, and even pre-size everything before I even made the first fabric cut. Besides the drafting qualities (use a permanent marker, such as a Sharpie, for best results) of the translucent material, wax paper is tougher than the cheaper tissue paper of most commercial patterns. I can reuse my wax paper patterns, all marked up with notations and sizing information, at least twice as many times as my commercial tissue paper patterns before I get irreparable tears. Folding the wax paper is easier, too, and it does well when rolled up for storage. If the garment pieces are wider than the wax paper, then I simply tape another piece next to it. Standard Scotch tape will hold the wax paper pieces together. The tape can also be repositioned on the wax paper without damaging it.
One of the best things about wax paper: it's price. If I want to make a garment or costume from a pattern more than once, I would usually have to shell out the cash for another copy of the pattern (averaging at least $10 per pattern, sometimes much more, unless I find a sale) because the tissue paper does not last through the folding and handling necessary when I have to move a project or put it aside to clear space or work on something else. On the other hand, I can draft a number of garment patterns onto a single roll of wax paper for under $3 and the paper usually survives my rougher handling, so I sometimes don't have to re-draft anything any way; I can reuse my first drafts.
Wax paper. It's definitely worth my investment. I probably would not sew nearly as much as I do if I did not figure out how to adapt it to my purposes.
Wax paper is very versatile. As a baker (amateur/hobbyist, not professional), I like it for freezing. Placing wax paper between layers of pancakes or waffles before placing them in a freezer bag keeps the food from sticking together when you freeze them. This allows you to remove them more easily to reheat. Wax paper around cookie dough makes it easier to remove from its protective plastic covering as well. I have also found that meat, especially pre-made hamburgers, does a little better when wrapped in wax paper and then plastic prior to freezing, though butcher paper or freezer paper (yes, it exists) is admittedly better for this purpose.
What I really like best about wax paper, though, is its use for sewing. Yes, I use wax paper for my sewing. I draft my commercial patterns onto wax paper before I do any cutting. Because the paper is translucent (semi see-through), it is easy to trace the correct size for the pattern piece on to the wax paper. This preserves my commercial pattern paper, which is pretty fragile. It also allows me to use the same pattern for multiple sizes without having to cut up the pattern paper or buy a new pattern for each size needed. As I have a tendency to modify patterns to fit sizes that are not available on some commercial patterns (some great costume patterns only go up to a size 20 or a size 12, but they could look good on a larger size), I can use the base pattern and some mathematical gymnastics to draft a larger size that will still have the desired look of the original. I'm actually doing this now for both myself and my daughter for our costumes for Dragon*Con 2012.
I can "Frankenstein" pattern pieces with the wax paper, too. I had to do that for my husband's Star Wars uniform. The idea for the uniform existed, but the pattern itself did not. I had to modify (i.e. draw out) both the coat and the pants from a pre-existing commercial pattern in order to create the desired effect. I even created a couple new pieces to fit onto the costume with my wax paper. Lo and behold, my wax paper helped me draft, adjust, and even pre-size everything before I even made the first fabric cut. Besides the drafting qualities (use a permanent marker, such as a Sharpie, for best results) of the translucent material, wax paper is tougher than the cheaper tissue paper of most commercial patterns. I can reuse my wax paper patterns, all marked up with notations and sizing information, at least twice as many times as my commercial tissue paper patterns before I get irreparable tears. Folding the wax paper is easier, too, and it does well when rolled up for storage. If the garment pieces are wider than the wax paper, then I simply tape another piece next to it. Standard Scotch tape will hold the wax paper pieces together. The tape can also be repositioned on the wax paper without damaging it.
One of the best things about wax paper: it's price. If I want to make a garment or costume from a pattern more than once, I would usually have to shell out the cash for another copy of the pattern (averaging at least $10 per pattern, sometimes much more, unless I find a sale) because the tissue paper does not last through the folding and handling necessary when I have to move a project or put it aside to clear space or work on something else. On the other hand, I can draft a number of garment patterns onto a single roll of wax paper for under $3 and the paper usually survives my rougher handling, so I sometimes don't have to re-draft anything any way; I can reuse my first drafts.
Wax paper. It's definitely worth my investment. I probably would not sew nearly as much as I do if I did not figure out how to adapt it to my purposes.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Safety Pins
Oh, those tiny metal objects that are so much under-appreciated! Yes, I am writing a blog post about the common safety pin. Aside from paperclips, I find it hard to think of a small object that is so versatile and yet so glossed over by many.
As a sewing hobbyist (I don't make money from it, so I'm reluctant to call myself a "seamstress"), I use my safety pins to pre-sew items. This helps me figure out complex instructions without wasting thread or damaging the fabric too much and helps in making sure the clothes fit the wearer correctly before I get too far with stitching. I also use the safety pin as a stitch remover in a pinch. The pointed tip is often sharper than my usual stitch remover, so it's easier to fit it under tighter stitches. I have used safety pins as emergency buttons (I bet you know many a mom or costumer who has done the same!) and as an emergency seam until I could get to a needle & thread. Last year my daughter used many safety pins to make wearable pins as part of Michael's Passport to Fun summer program. Do you remember making a pin "brooch" in school, perhaps for St. Patrick's Day or Mother's Day? I tend to use a safety pin or two to hold patches in place before I can sew them down. I also use safety pins to hold down the parts of clothes where a closure--button, hook & eye, zipper, etc.--will go in order to line everything up before I secure all the pieces. I even recently used a safety pin to fix my umbrella. One of the grommets that formed a joint fell out, so I slipped a safety pin into the holes and voila! a fully functioning umbrella once more. The main advantage of a safety pin over a straight pin, and thus the word "safety" in the name, is the fact that the sharp end is covered in the enclosure. I don't worry as much about folding up an in-progress sewing project with safety pins because no one will get pricked while moving it. And, unless I forget to close them, I'm not as worried about the damage that might be caused by a safety pin lying around.
I'm sure many people have used safety pins for many other things. These are just the few I remembered from more recent experiences. I would love to hear what others have done!
As a sewing hobbyist (I don't make money from it, so I'm reluctant to call myself a "seamstress"), I use my safety pins to pre-sew items. This helps me figure out complex instructions without wasting thread or damaging the fabric too much and helps in making sure the clothes fit the wearer correctly before I get too far with stitching. I also use the safety pin as a stitch remover in a pinch. The pointed tip is often sharper than my usual stitch remover, so it's easier to fit it under tighter stitches. I have used safety pins as emergency buttons (I bet you know many a mom or costumer who has done the same!) and as an emergency seam until I could get to a needle & thread. Last year my daughter used many safety pins to make wearable pins as part of Michael's Passport to Fun summer program. Do you remember making a pin "brooch" in school, perhaps for St. Patrick's Day or Mother's Day? I tend to use a safety pin or two to hold patches in place before I can sew them down. I also use safety pins to hold down the parts of clothes where a closure--button, hook & eye, zipper, etc.--will go in order to line everything up before I secure all the pieces. I even recently used a safety pin to fix my umbrella. One of the grommets that formed a joint fell out, so I slipped a safety pin into the holes and voila! a fully functioning umbrella once more. The main advantage of a safety pin over a straight pin, and thus the word "safety" in the name, is the fact that the sharp end is covered in the enclosure. I don't worry as much about folding up an in-progress sewing project with safety pins because no one will get pricked while moving it. And, unless I forget to close them, I'm not as worried about the damage that might be caused by a safety pin lying around.
I'm sure many people have used safety pins for many other things. These are just the few I remembered from more recent experiences. I would love to hear what others have done!
Saturday, July 28, 2012
July 28, 2012 Squirrel of the Month
Again by request from my daughter, the July 28, 2012 Squirrel of the Month is Scrat from the Ice Age movies.
What in the world could Scrat possibly teach us? Well, can you think of any character with such stubborn perseverance? He's been chasing his beloved acorn for 4 movies (and a few shorts)! He's given up love for the nut. Normally meek, Scrat turns on the major fighting moves any time his acorn is threatened. He is single-minded in his purpose to pursue his acorn and keep it safe from others. Of course, sometimes his obsession causes problems for the other characters in the Ice Age world, but that's a small price to pay, I'm sure.
So, thank you, Scrat, for teaching us that it is vital to fight for your goals and keep pushing beyond reality in the pursuit of happiness (or a good nut).
 |
| My daughter's drawing of Scrat, based on the McDonald's happy meal toys for Ice Age 4 |
So, thank you, Scrat, for teaching us that it is vital to fight for your goals and keep pushing beyond reality in the pursuit of happiness (or a good nut).
Friday, July 27, 2012
My [Seemingly Under-Appreciated] Husband
NOTE: This post may seem a bit rambling, as my mind is wandering a bit. It does not mean that my feelings on the subject are any less diminished.
I have known my husband longer than my daughter. (I'm pretty sure that in 99% of cases one tends to know the father of one's child longer than one knows the child.) Yet, I rarely mention him in this blog. I am not ungrateful to him. I don't set him out of my mind. I know it may seem that way, especially to people to know me, but part of that is just my typically solitary nature. Nonetheless, it's past time for me to include him amongst my list of gratitude-inducing phenomena.
I met him within my first month at Florida Tech, at a FITSSFF (FIT Society of Science Fiction and Fantasy) open game day. Honestly, I don't think he even took notice of me until our second semester there. We started to interact a little more, especially when I moved into the same dorm because a single room became available. I prefer my own room to sharing with a roommate, especially as I really never meshed well with roommates. He was pretty sweet, even though we were more casual acquaintances at the time. How many people would drive a girl they barely knew and her friend out to a job interview, about 1.5 hours each way? He did. And if he hadn't, then I would never have been able to work at Universal Studios the summer between my junior and senior years. I probably might not have ended up on the school paper, either. He told us all about working on the paper on our way back to campus. Initially I was sold on the idea of getting to move back into the dorms a week before everyone else so that I could avoid the chaos that is freshman orientation (for reference, this is in 1999, right after ending my junior year at FIT and before coming back for my senior year). No, before you start judging me, I did not befriend my future husband just because he had a car. True, I was without my own vehicle, but I did not see him as a resource to be used. He has always been a person to me. I saw him as a friendly acquaintance, then as a friend the more I got to know him. He introduced me to a few people who became friends as well, most of them through either FITSSFF or from The Crimson (FIT school paper) staff.
Throughout college I was always ahead of my [future] husband. I transferred in with two years of credits at the time that he was starting out as a freshman. We were both the same age, though, so I felt more advanced. I liked that thought. I even managed to stay ahead of him until we made our move to our current home. I graduated with my first master's degree when he got his bachelor's degree. And I finished my second master's degree a year before he finished his master's degree. I even got a semi-professional job, something that looked like the start of a potential career, while he was finishing up his degree. It felt great to be ahead of the game for a while. Things have turned around quite a bit, but that's to be expected with the natural progression of maturity. Before I get ahead of myself, I suppose the curious might be interested in how we moved from casual acquaintances to dating, etc. It's not a fantastic story filled with drama and redemption and moving moments, but it's mine to tell.
We started dating after a series of late-night Kubrick movie watching sessions. I would not necessarily recommend this method for attracting girls, by the way. I remember falling asleep during 2001: A Space Odyssey. I also remember missing the "plot" of most of the Kubrick movies because I couldn't keep my focus; it was usually after 1 a.m. when we watched them. I'll be honest, I can't even remember which movie we were watching when we shared our first kiss, but I do remember that it was afterwards we decided that our friendship was growing. Many of our friends at the paper wondered what took us so long to become a couple, as we spent so much time together. To be fair, a lot of that time was spent working on the paper itself. I guess I just didn't realize how much time we hung out beyond that, especially since we never had any classes together. I was studying psychology and he was working on ocean engineering.
Time moved forward. Details will not be filled in here. We became engaged in his junior year, my first year of grad school. A little over a year later we were married and our daughter was born. My parents loved him from the get-go. My dad said "I was wondering when you two would get together" after I told my parents about our dating. My in-laws took quite a few years to get used to me. I think they have since warmed up to me. For the record, I never saw my in-laws as the stereotypical evil people who hate anyone who steals their children away. They are people. They may think and do some things differently from what I was used to, but this provides me many opportunities to expand my horizons.
My husband's career has moved forward, while mine managed to stall [see "I Am Adjunct" post]. He has expanded my horizons. He took me on my first cruise, introduced me to Dragon*Con, helped me find and accept my inner geek. I know I can be annoying and frustrating to him. I know I test his patience with my lack of home-making skills. I know I seem to pour too much focus elsewhere. I know I don't always show my husband of 10 years all the love and attention he may need. Not showing the feelings does not preclude them from existing. He is a good father and a wonderful provider. There are times when our daughter feels like she doesn't get enough time with her daddy and times when I feel overwhelmed by my expected contributions to our family. Yet, he is always there to take some of the stress off my shoulders when I absolutely need it (like at the end of a semester when I go into hyper-grading mode and just need to be left alone to work). He is valued at work and even more valued at home. I thank God that he sent me a man who is sweet and understanding and still has the ability to bring me back down into the depths of reality when I need it. I love my husband. I can see myself with no one else. I may appreciate other men's attractive facades, but I will always come back to my husband. I'm pretty sure he loves me too, or he's at least comfortable enough with me to keep us together as a family.
I have known my husband longer than my daughter. (I'm pretty sure that in 99% of cases one tends to know the father of one's child longer than one knows the child.) Yet, I rarely mention him in this blog. I am not ungrateful to him. I don't set him out of my mind. I know it may seem that way, especially to people to know me, but part of that is just my typically solitary nature. Nonetheless, it's past time for me to include him amongst my list of gratitude-inducing phenomena.
I met him within my first month at Florida Tech, at a FITSSFF (FIT Society of Science Fiction and Fantasy) open game day. Honestly, I don't think he even took notice of me until our second semester there. We started to interact a little more, especially when I moved into the same dorm because a single room became available. I prefer my own room to sharing with a roommate, especially as I really never meshed well with roommates. He was pretty sweet, even though we were more casual acquaintances at the time. How many people would drive a girl they barely knew and her friend out to a job interview, about 1.5 hours each way? He did. And if he hadn't, then I would never have been able to work at Universal Studios the summer between my junior and senior years. I probably might not have ended up on the school paper, either. He told us all about working on the paper on our way back to campus. Initially I was sold on the idea of getting to move back into the dorms a week before everyone else so that I could avoid the chaos that is freshman orientation (for reference, this is in 1999, right after ending my junior year at FIT and before coming back for my senior year). No, before you start judging me, I did not befriend my future husband just because he had a car. True, I was without my own vehicle, but I did not see him as a resource to be used. He has always been a person to me. I saw him as a friendly acquaintance, then as a friend the more I got to know him. He introduced me to a few people who became friends as well, most of them through either FITSSFF or from The Crimson (FIT school paper) staff.
Throughout college I was always ahead of my [future] husband. I transferred in with two years of credits at the time that he was starting out as a freshman. We were both the same age, though, so I felt more advanced. I liked that thought. I even managed to stay ahead of him until we made our move to our current home. I graduated with my first master's degree when he got his bachelor's degree. And I finished my second master's degree a year before he finished his master's degree. I even got a semi-professional job, something that looked like the start of a potential career, while he was finishing up his degree. It felt great to be ahead of the game for a while. Things have turned around quite a bit, but that's to be expected with the natural progression of maturity. Before I get ahead of myself, I suppose the curious might be interested in how we moved from casual acquaintances to dating, etc. It's not a fantastic story filled with drama and redemption and moving moments, but it's mine to tell.
We started dating after a series of late-night Kubrick movie watching sessions. I would not necessarily recommend this method for attracting girls, by the way. I remember falling asleep during 2001: A Space Odyssey. I also remember missing the "plot" of most of the Kubrick movies because I couldn't keep my focus; it was usually after 1 a.m. when we watched them. I'll be honest, I can't even remember which movie we were watching when we shared our first kiss, but I do remember that it was afterwards we decided that our friendship was growing. Many of our friends at the paper wondered what took us so long to become a couple, as we spent so much time together. To be fair, a lot of that time was spent working on the paper itself. I guess I just didn't realize how much time we hung out beyond that, especially since we never had any classes together. I was studying psychology and he was working on ocean engineering.
Time moved forward. Details will not be filled in here. We became engaged in his junior year, my first year of grad school. A little over a year later we were married and our daughter was born. My parents loved him from the get-go. My dad said "I was wondering when you two would get together" after I told my parents about our dating. My in-laws took quite a few years to get used to me. I think they have since warmed up to me. For the record, I never saw my in-laws as the stereotypical evil people who hate anyone who steals their children away. They are people. They may think and do some things differently from what I was used to, but this provides me many opportunities to expand my horizons.
My husband's career has moved forward, while mine managed to stall [see "I Am Adjunct" post]. He has expanded my horizons. He took me on my first cruise, introduced me to Dragon*Con, helped me find and accept my inner geek. I know I can be annoying and frustrating to him. I know I test his patience with my lack of home-making skills. I know I seem to pour too much focus elsewhere. I know I don't always show my husband of 10 years all the love and attention he may need. Not showing the feelings does not preclude them from existing. He is a good father and a wonderful provider. There are times when our daughter feels like she doesn't get enough time with her daddy and times when I feel overwhelmed by my expected contributions to our family. Yet, he is always there to take some of the stress off my shoulders when I absolutely need it (like at the end of a semester when I go into hyper-grading mode and just need to be left alone to work). He is valued at work and even more valued at home. I thank God that he sent me a man who is sweet and understanding and still has the ability to bring me back down into the depths of reality when I need it. I love my husband. I can see myself with no one else. I may appreciate other men's attractive facades, but I will always come back to my husband. I'm pretty sure he loves me too, or he's at least comfortable enough with me to keep us together as a family.
Friday, July 20, 2012
Webster, Why Did We Ever Forget You?
I am sure that almost every American, and many other people around the world, have heard the name "Webster" at some point in their life. Webster's has even become synonymous with "dictionary" for many people. I am also sure that fewer people realize that Webster--Noah Webster, to be precise--was a real person living during the infancy of our nation. He made it his life's work to travel throughout the budding United States in order to gather information on all of the local languages spoken throughout the new nation. He noticed that, while the majority of residents spoke English, the versions of English spoken tended to have enough variations that is was sometimes difficult for people from one state to converse clearly with people from another state. Throughout his research he realized that our new country needed a unified language if we were to become stronger and work together to grow. So, he set out to create the first English dictionary based on "American" English. From his dictionary he created his speller.
Webster's Speller is a book, written by Noah Webster in the 1780s, with the last revision in 1824, that was used in schools around the country to teach children (and some adults) everything about the English language. The book was so exact, so complete, that it was used in all classrooms from first grade through high school. It is written in progressive lessons, beginning with the alphabet and each letter's sounds and ending in reading exercises for high school-level readers that include moral and citizenship lessons. Like most people who have ever opened a textbook, I thumbed through the book to find simple lessons to teach my daughter so that she could be brought up to speed. See, she was never properly taught phonics and, as she apparently has a minor speech issue, this has been holding her back significantly in her reading and writing and spelling. She does wonderfully in all her other subjects, but her spelling and reading scores were not up to par for her real level. Her comprehension is great, she just stumbles over words sometimes, often making some up as she goes because she doesn't recognize them. She never learned the tools for basic reading or the rules for combining sounds into real words. That's why I bought the Speller.
I decided that I would take my daughter through Webster's Speller from the very first lesson, even though she already learned the alphabet a few years ago, and go forward one lesson at a time until school started. I don't intend to stop until we start school. Even if we do not make it to her current grade level (she'll be starting 5th grade in August), I want to fill in as many gaps as I can. We began to make progress. I started with the first lessons/tables, which were handwriting lessons in cursive and print for each of the letters. We moved on to the tables of basic syllable sounds. I pronounced them, she repeated. Then we began single syllable words. I read them, she wrote them and spelled them out loud. Before we moved on to the next lesson--disyllabic words--I noticed that I made the same mistake most textbook readers make. I skipped over the "fluff" to what I thought was the "meat" of the book, in this case I was only concerned with the lessons. Yesterday I decided to actually read the "fluff" and I am extremely glad that I did.
Noah Webster wrote his book like a true lecture. It reads like a teacher attempting to educate his class in all of the preliminary nuances and rules of the language before you get into the lessons themselves. If you had a really good math teacher, then you learned the vocabulary of math (quotient, dividend, etc.) before you practiced that skill. It seems boring, but it is actually incredibly helpful in not only knowing HOW to do something, but also understanding WHY you do something. Understanding the WHY gives you the capacity to comprehend what exists and to build new things from these springboards. Yeah, it's fun to build a Lego set following the instructions and you feel proud of yourself because you could recreate the set as it was designed on the box. Yet, if you know why certain pieces work together then you can create new designs that are stable and artistic from the same set of bricks. The same thing goes for math and language. I am just saddened that it took me so long to figure this out.
My whole understanding of English, a language that I tend to struggle with even though it is my primary and almost exclusive language (except for a few words and phrases in other languages that I know), has suddenly grown exponentially. It was all because I decided to go back and read out the paragraphs preceding the lessons. I read the explanations of the sounds of each letter of the alphabet and the distinctions of the types of letters [bet you didn't know there were 3 types of letters, not just 2!] and why each letter fell into its respective category. For those of you who debated this, Y is always considered a vowel, but it can act like a consonant or diphthong. And I found out that the letters are not classified arbitrarily but, rather, based on the mouth movements and opening/closing of the vocal chords required to say their name. When I read this out to my daughter I could see the same light bulb go off in her brain as I felt in mine. For a very intelligent kid in speech therapy, this is a vitally important lesson if you ever expect progress to be made.
We now know why letters are pronounced certain ways in words based on their relative position to other types of letters. In fact, the only letter that Webster states you have to "just be sure to memorize" [quote is a paraphrase of actual wording, but they are used for emphasis] is the letter g because sometimes it doesn't play by its own rules. Every other letter has exact rules that are followed in American English words. Yes, the rules more complicated than Russian, for example, but that's because English uses fewer characters to convey more sounds. In the attempt to simplify the written part of language, English actually made it more complicated to decode. However, it CAN be decoded. The problem is that we stopped teaching people the basic decoding rules.
It's no wonder high school graduates have difficulty reading and spelling! They were never taught the fundamentals. Even phonics, which I have come to understand as a watered down memorization version of comprehensive language education, is no longer being taught in schools. Many education programs have moved on to "whole language," but this only teaches rote memorization of words. The human capacity for straight rote memorization is significantly limited. True understanding comes from comprehension of the rules and tools used to build more complex information. Rote memorization dumps the information into our semantic long-term memory. Skills, including rules for math and language formation, are stored in our implicit memory. We know that implicit memory almost never fades, yet semantic memory is subject to numerous recall failures. So why did we stop building implicit memory? Perhaps it was because it was seen as boring; people don't want to waste time learning when they can be spoon-fed answers. Comprehension is not regurgitation. It is adaptation. The human mind was designed for adaptation, not simply regurgitation.
Think of it another way. Some people can "cook" because they follow the recipe. Occasionally they may experiment and add some new spice because they are curious, but they don't understand why the new spice changes things. A true culinary genius, however, has learned the chemical reactions of different substances, understands how certain ingredients like yeast or baking soda function, so they are able to create novel dishes that not only taste well but that also don't explode or kill you. The same can be said of language. Okay, you can be literate. You can remember the sequences you were taught. You can read the words on the page because you remember the familiar symbols from your earlier education. But if you understand how and why the pieces go together the way they do, then you can recombine them in a new logical sequence and create something new that still works in the preexisting realm of the language.
Language and communication are so very important for our very existence. Don't believe me? Think of any major invention, philosophy, profession, art, etc. and communication was involved. Also imagine your world if you could not communicate at all, if you were 100% reliant upon yourself for absolutely everything and had to "reinvent the wheel" each and every day. I am baffled that we have become so lazy that we don't bother to really understand the fundamental rules of our language so that it will work more efficiently. I don't know why we removed Webster's Speller from schools. Maybe somebody's knickers got all tied into knots when they read the "moral" lessons at the end of the book and didn't want their little Johnny to think like that. For whatever reason, we need to bring it back. We need to have a new generation of thoroughly educated individuals, not just bubble fillers and "good testers" going through the motions. I am so glad I discovered this centuries old textbook. I just really wish others could share in its wisdom as well. I suppose I could find solace that, in a world of 7+ billion people, most of whom now speak English, there will now be a couple who actually understand English.
Webster's Speller is a book, written by Noah Webster in the 1780s, with the last revision in 1824, that was used in schools around the country to teach children (and some adults) everything about the English language. The book was so exact, so complete, that it was used in all classrooms from first grade through high school. It is written in progressive lessons, beginning with the alphabet and each letter's sounds and ending in reading exercises for high school-level readers that include moral and citizenship lessons. Like most people who have ever opened a textbook, I thumbed through the book to find simple lessons to teach my daughter so that she could be brought up to speed. See, she was never properly taught phonics and, as she apparently has a minor speech issue, this has been holding her back significantly in her reading and writing and spelling. She does wonderfully in all her other subjects, but her spelling and reading scores were not up to par for her real level. Her comprehension is great, she just stumbles over words sometimes, often making some up as she goes because she doesn't recognize them. She never learned the tools for basic reading or the rules for combining sounds into real words. That's why I bought the Speller.
I decided that I would take my daughter through Webster's Speller from the very first lesson, even though she already learned the alphabet a few years ago, and go forward one lesson at a time until school started. I don't intend to stop until we start school. Even if we do not make it to her current grade level (she'll be starting 5th grade in August), I want to fill in as many gaps as I can. We began to make progress. I started with the first lessons/tables, which were handwriting lessons in cursive and print for each of the letters. We moved on to the tables of basic syllable sounds. I pronounced them, she repeated. Then we began single syllable words. I read them, she wrote them and spelled them out loud. Before we moved on to the next lesson--disyllabic words--I noticed that I made the same mistake most textbook readers make. I skipped over the "fluff" to what I thought was the "meat" of the book, in this case I was only concerned with the lessons. Yesterday I decided to actually read the "fluff" and I am extremely glad that I did.
Noah Webster wrote his book like a true lecture. It reads like a teacher attempting to educate his class in all of the preliminary nuances and rules of the language before you get into the lessons themselves. If you had a really good math teacher, then you learned the vocabulary of math (quotient, dividend, etc.) before you practiced that skill. It seems boring, but it is actually incredibly helpful in not only knowing HOW to do something, but also understanding WHY you do something. Understanding the WHY gives you the capacity to comprehend what exists and to build new things from these springboards. Yeah, it's fun to build a Lego set following the instructions and you feel proud of yourself because you could recreate the set as it was designed on the box. Yet, if you know why certain pieces work together then you can create new designs that are stable and artistic from the same set of bricks. The same thing goes for math and language. I am just saddened that it took me so long to figure this out.
My whole understanding of English, a language that I tend to struggle with even though it is my primary and almost exclusive language (except for a few words and phrases in other languages that I know), has suddenly grown exponentially. It was all because I decided to go back and read out the paragraphs preceding the lessons. I read the explanations of the sounds of each letter of the alphabet and the distinctions of the types of letters [bet you didn't know there were 3 types of letters, not just 2!] and why each letter fell into its respective category. For those of you who debated this, Y is always considered a vowel, but it can act like a consonant or diphthong. And I found out that the letters are not classified arbitrarily but, rather, based on the mouth movements and opening/closing of the vocal chords required to say their name. When I read this out to my daughter I could see the same light bulb go off in her brain as I felt in mine. For a very intelligent kid in speech therapy, this is a vitally important lesson if you ever expect progress to be made.
We now know why letters are pronounced certain ways in words based on their relative position to other types of letters. In fact, the only letter that Webster states you have to "just be sure to memorize" [quote is a paraphrase of actual wording, but they are used for emphasis] is the letter g because sometimes it doesn't play by its own rules. Every other letter has exact rules that are followed in American English words. Yes, the rules more complicated than Russian, for example, but that's because English uses fewer characters to convey more sounds. In the attempt to simplify the written part of language, English actually made it more complicated to decode. However, it CAN be decoded. The problem is that we stopped teaching people the basic decoding rules.
It's no wonder high school graduates have difficulty reading and spelling! They were never taught the fundamentals. Even phonics, which I have come to understand as a watered down memorization version of comprehensive language education, is no longer being taught in schools. Many education programs have moved on to "whole language," but this only teaches rote memorization of words. The human capacity for straight rote memorization is significantly limited. True understanding comes from comprehension of the rules and tools used to build more complex information. Rote memorization dumps the information into our semantic long-term memory. Skills, including rules for math and language formation, are stored in our implicit memory. We know that implicit memory almost never fades, yet semantic memory is subject to numerous recall failures. So why did we stop building implicit memory? Perhaps it was because it was seen as boring; people don't want to waste time learning when they can be spoon-fed answers. Comprehension is not regurgitation. It is adaptation. The human mind was designed for adaptation, not simply regurgitation.
Think of it another way. Some people can "cook" because they follow the recipe. Occasionally they may experiment and add some new spice because they are curious, but they don't understand why the new spice changes things. A true culinary genius, however, has learned the chemical reactions of different substances, understands how certain ingredients like yeast or baking soda function, so they are able to create novel dishes that not only taste well but that also don't explode or kill you. The same can be said of language. Okay, you can be literate. You can remember the sequences you were taught. You can read the words on the page because you remember the familiar symbols from your earlier education. But if you understand how and why the pieces go together the way they do, then you can recombine them in a new logical sequence and create something new that still works in the preexisting realm of the language.
Language and communication are so very important for our very existence. Don't believe me? Think of any major invention, philosophy, profession, art, etc. and communication was involved. Also imagine your world if you could not communicate at all, if you were 100% reliant upon yourself for absolutely everything and had to "reinvent the wheel" each and every day. I am baffled that we have become so lazy that we don't bother to really understand the fundamental rules of our language so that it will work more efficiently. I don't know why we removed Webster's Speller from schools. Maybe somebody's knickers got all tied into knots when they read the "moral" lessons at the end of the book and didn't want their little Johnny to think like that. For whatever reason, we need to bring it back. We need to have a new generation of thoroughly educated individuals, not just bubble fillers and "good testers" going through the motions. I am so glad I discovered this centuries old textbook. I just really wish others could share in its wisdom as well. I suppose I could find solace that, in a world of 7+ billion people, most of whom now speak English, there will now be a couple who actually understand English.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)