The Horizons of our City

The horizons of our city are not just cosmetic.

They towered over the city. It was almost impossible to turn in any direction without seeing one of the metallic armatures in operation at various points throughout the area. The cranes took the horizon for themselves and began to raise the city to their own height. While they were ugly and offensive to the eye, they represented a booming economy that had been forced to expand skywards. These cranes showed us the potential of our city, where we could go, where we stood and what our limitations were.

While these cranes are less prevalent now, below them the streets of the city remain. The veins and arteries that give it life and in turn, give us life. These too exemplify the importance of height and depth within a city. From the centre of the city moving outwards streets are marked with the designations of 'lower' and 'upper'. The streets that are closest to the centre gain the suffix 'lower', while the streets further from the centre are given the suffix 'upper'. The centre then, is the 'lowest' point of the city. It is the foundation of the entire urban area and is an unshakable constant and clean slate. These streets of varying 'heights' also show us the potential of our city, where we could go, where we stood and what our limitations are.

We have seen shifting fortunes within the city and with this comes a shift in the way we work and live in the urban area. With these changes, the once numerous cranes have diminished and as such, caused much fear to those that recognised what they represented. Many felt that as the cranes disappeared, so did the potential of the city. But this is not true. This potential is intrinsically represented in the very layout of our city. The 'height' of our streets makes this obvious.

We should not fear the loss of the cranes. Instead, we should recognise that potential is still, and always has been, latent in the foundations of the city.

-The English Student

A Break in the Phonological Loop

It has become apparent quite recently that my memory is simply not what it used to be.

I very easily forget simple facts and details or information that I previously had a good grasp on. This is no more obvious than when I'm in conversation with my friends and want to specifically mention a certain person or event of public life. Of course, we are all susceptible to these kinds of slips. However, they are becoming more prevalent for me and worryingly have moved from forgetting trivial facts to forgetting important details.

I believe that there are many reasons for this lapse in memory. While I will only focus on one such reason here it is not through a perverse lack of memory that I omit the others! A friend basically pinpointed the main reason for my dipping memory recently. With easy access to the internet and the vast stores of information it contains, my memory no longer needs to do much work. It starts with simple things like trying to remember "what film that person was in" and of course, there is no harm in this. In fact, the internet has made us more educated in this regard. But it is at the expense of the faculties we need for more important memory work.

My mind has become lazy and dependent on technology. I now have something resembling an external artificial memory bank that I plug myself into for information retrieval. This cannot continue. I do not wish parts of my life to be a blank or opportunities to be missed due to my over reliance on the internet. So I will do memory exercises and force myself to dredge through the now hazy recesses of my mind when I need to recall an important fact or issue.

With this strategy I hope that my mind will regain it's former strength and I will regain my former humanity.

-The English Student

Hurt vs. Hurt

Song covers are frequently an insult to the original, but there is at least one exception.

I would generally prescribe to the idea that song covers will always be inferior to the original for very particular reasons. A cover song intrinsically suffers from inevitable comparisons to the song that inspired it. If a cover is too similar to the original it is un-creative and if it is too far from the original it loses its foundation. Additionally, a covering artist can never re-kindle the emotion or re-stage the situation that inspired the artistic impression. In short, you simply cannot be creative when covering.

There is only one example that I know of that an refute this theory. Trent Reznor's "Hurt" featured on "The Downward Spiral" and still stands as one of the most moving songs in the Nine Inch Nails back catalogue. This song was famously covered by the late Johnny Cash and as such, fans from each side have been strenuously debating about which version is 'better'. Close listening to both songs highlights many differences in tone, musical arrangement and some slight lyrical changes. These contrasts however, belie the appropriateness of the song for both artists.

The Nine Inch Nails version of this song builds quietly towards a final crashing finale. Reznor's final declaration creates a bitter-sweet moment of despair and resignation to this despair. The song has a consistently dark tone that underlines the consistent depression experienced by the writer. Rather than a conclusion, this song ends as an prelude to future artistic expression. Cash's version has a contrasting dynamic. This song builds and falls between verse and chorus, highlighting Cash's rise and fall throughout his life. His slow increase in popularity, eventual meteoric rise, drug addiction and fall are all encompassed in the arrangement of "Hurt". A conclusion is evident in this version and the resignation of the final line becomes acceptance for Cash. Amazingly, both of these versions work equally well for each artist, highlighting a singular connection between them.

Reznor put it best himself when he stated that the two are "different, but every bit as pure."

-The English Student

A Smaller World with Greater Distance

Terms like "The Global Village" get thrown around by IT experts these days but I must wonder if the world is becoming a smaller place.

In some respects the closing of distances in the world is very obvious. The internet has allowed people to make contact with others from every country in the world and at any time desired. Mobile phones have also allowed easy communication between every corner of the world. This coupled with the rise of "Web 2.0" and other media like Twitter equate to a very high level of access to information and other people.

But one thing that the IT revolution has not been able to replicate is the real nuances of human communication. These online methods can only really take second place next to actual contact. Of course, web cameras and microphones can simulate these interactions but no innovation has managed to bridge the physical gap caused by distance and time.

In fact, the tools of the "Global Village" actually increase the gap between people. When engaged in some kind of electronic communication with someone it is very easy to view the medium in contrast to physical contact. These media will always be compared to this physical contact and yet will never surpass it. Much like the advent of the telephone or fax, it is natural to assume that new methods of electronic communication will decrease the gap between people. While they do make certain forms of communication possible and certainly have huge advantages there is simply no replacement for physical contact with someone.

The absence of this contact has become more obvious and thus increased the distance between people.

-The English Student