Here is your fortune.

This is what happened.

– Steven King, The Mist

I don’t much mind this idea of Progress as I did last week.  Errol Morris clearly believes in it.  That’s about as good of an endorsement that I can conjure up these days.  Living in an age of Anti-Intellectualism, I find myself, even the staunch Anti- Anti-intellectualist, very very stringent with my own endorsements these days.  Must be the times.

But oh anyway, as I flipped through my copy of The Ashtray (being colorful with my word choice here, I have the ebook), and this man, God bless him, spends an inordinate amount of time fighting with the dreary and unimaginative perspective of Kuhn himself; his chosen idea that Progress does not exist, and that there is no linear timeline of history.  I don’t think this requires much debunking; there is a linearity to it all, and I think whether or not it has been a steadfast march to good is questionable, but regardless, it did happen.

Now, onto Robert Hughes, I watched The Future That Was, and I’ll admit now with considerable chagrin that I have only watched it once (compared to the several attempts I made of The Powers that Be), so my opinions may change.  Nonetheless, I found it compelling.

Hughes’ approach in examining the continual, and seemingly inevitable, commodification of the art world, for one, really spoke to me.  As yet one who intellectually opposes such commodification, but also has not really ever known anything but that in my waking life, it is a question that I think is both relevant to our time (I won’t spoil it, but it rhymes with “hate, rage, crapitalism”) and also to the much more precise and nuanced analysis of American Dharma.  Steve Bannon obviously, grifter that he is, is a fan of this commodification.  He used it many times; not only to sell his really, really sh*tty ideas, but also to sell an image of himself, maybe even to his own self.  His incessant need to qualify his own life and experiences through the lens of art is quite a human one, but the way that he crafts and bases his own person through his ideas of these films, 12 o’ Clock High, the Bridge on the River Kwai, etc. etc. ad nauseum, is something I find both uniquely Bannon-eque and narcissistic (terms not mutually exclusive).

But that all being said (and my contempt notwithstanding for the “Renaissance man” who may have indeed burned down the last of the Renaissance), what I find even more interesting than all of that is Hughes’ exploration of the death of Modernism.  Back when Hughes’ syndicated The Shock of the New in 1980, it was certainly a question up for debate, whether or not Modernism had at last laid in its watery Opheliac grave. I think even now, to this viewer in 2020, I am uncertain.  Certainly the momentous occasion of Modern art seems to have laid itself to rest as much as the Postmodern, but their formative ideologies remain deadlocked in a battle resembling those of the primordial gods of old.  I am not sure if I can clearly say, but what I can say is that Modernism, regardless of whether or not its artistic face continues to dominate artistic consciousness, I think it is clear that Modernism is heavily relevant to my focus, American Dharma.

Errol Morris himself has already laid the question of his Modernist or Postmodernist leanings to rest; he “won’t be calling up Baudrillard by the phone” anytime soon, and his constant avowal of an objective reality and therefore an objective truth is evidence enough, I think.  For Bannon, the other momentous force in the American Dharma film, this fate is more uncertain.

Bannon certainly thinks himself a Postmodernist, though maybe in the same way I might think myself Michelin-starred chef and reality TV sensation Gordon Ramsey whilst I chase my younger sister down the hallway yelling “where’s the lamb sauce!!” That is to say, it seems a bit disingenuous, or as the kids may say now, he’s “cosplaying” what he thinks a Postmodernist is.

At 3:44 in American Dharma, Bannon outright says “modernity is based on emotionalism,” that is to say, he thinks Modernism is destructive (how dreadfully ironic).  He believes steadfastly that people are unable to fulfill their own “destiny” (whatever that actually means) because of Modernism’s privileging of emotion.  It certainly sounds to me like Bannon wants to be a Postmodernist here, and even when Morris counters that all his ideas seem to be based in unfocused destruction, Bannon persists.  However, I wonder, what is it about Modernism that is so emotionally-motivated?  Maybe I don’t understand this as well as I think I do, but it seems to be the flaw of Postmodern ideology that subjectivity rules it, not rationalism or objective thinking?

I’m willing to just chalk this point up to Bannon being a soulless grifter (spoiler: he is), however, I just found it incredibly interesting.  Bannon certainly wants Modernism to be dead as Hughes considers, and I think that is both quite a bit disturbing but also unsurprising.  Certainly it adds a layer of darkness to the investigation Errol Morris is conducting.  Only time will tell if it was indeed an autopsy, and of what indeed.

Speaking of time, I quite like Hughes’ perspective.  Progress is a measure of the past as much as it is a theory of the future, and whilst I do indeed believe in it, Speculation makes fools of us all.  I think I disagree with him, and so I say to Robert Hughes, “call me a fool then, but at least, a self-aware one.”  I’d like to think that at the very least puts me a level or two higher than Steve Bannon (the whole reason I’m doing this, really).

My self-portrait.
Posted in Uncategorized


I think sometimes what I miss the most about being younger was the unceasing belief and idea that everything would turn out ‘good.’ Like many vestiges of youth, it really didn’t last for long in retrospect. As it became clear to me that my space in this world was not entirely spiritually-governed or even self-governed, but instead more of a unguided trek in unforgiving terrain, I amended my idea. Everything would turn out ‘fine.’ Not good, not bad, but slightly good enough. I could settle for that.

But this idea, the notion of settling on a prospective future is a strange one. ‘The future is never really yours’ and as of yet, it doesn’t exist. But the past does (or did), and I, like many Westerners, have often seen this linear delineation from past to present as one of Progress. A timed, incremental rise in the net good of the world, as opposed to the net bad. I don’t quite think this is true anymore, I suppose.

– From my first attempt.

I continue to struggle with the idea of how exactly I should be reflecting my thoughts (‘like a mirror, I’d suppose’). Every time I sit down to write, I find myself possessed by the intention to create, but the desire to write only of the heaviness in my heart. I still don’t quite know what to do with that, but here’s my third (hopefully final) attempt at cataloguing my thoughts on ‘The Powers That Be,’ in Robert Hughes’ The Shock of the New.

My favorite collage from the episode. Max Ernst’s ‘Murdering Airplane’

I suppose the thing that strikes me first, of which I will speak the least (I know we are all tired of hearing it), is how timely and relevant this particular episode on DADAism and art within 20th Century totalitarianism. For once, I won’t over-explain my point here. I think we can all read the writing on the wall. Still, I thought it was an interesting point.

Onto my next point, I thought it was so interesting how the wry voice of Hughes dedicates time to the way these DADAist aesthetics later became folded into the the frameworks of totalitarianism, much against their initial intent. This ‘solemn parody’ is undeniably fascinating to me, and reminiscent of a certain *ahem* individual we all know quite well from Errol Morris’ American Dharma. I think this is not really surprising. Stepping aside from The Shock of the New’s art history framework, fascism is and always has been rooted in aesthetics. That’s why, in my opinion, when questioned and analyzed in depth, fascist ideologies often fail to have consistent and effective conclusions that allow them to govern. Fascist societies rise quickly, but they also always fail, because to a fascist regime, the appearance of power is often equivalent in necessity to active power, and to have the former to its fullest breadth, sometimes you must sacrifice the latter.

But, moving back to the framework of art history, what I could not get out of my mind, watching “The Powers that Be” was the presence of this mosaic, almost ouroboric conception of it. Everything seems to repeat again and react again, in slightly different, almost parodic iterations, and consuming the one that came before. There is no Progress, only movement through time, and a truly delineating narrative is harder to piece together than perhaps I had realized.

I bring this up because something I think Hughes may have said (I wish I could find the time-stamp) during the Duchamp interview stuck with me; how in DADA there is an excess of interesting objects within our own world, and that an artist can merely choose of them, and this act is now parity to creation itself. This act of choice, versus creation, is endlessly fascinating because it is this paradoxical relationship that, to me, qualifies all the discourse of collage as an art form.

Not just discourse of the art form, but the art form’s characteristic discourse- the one that it generates by its mere presence. Because when you examine a successful collage, it is evidently a referential document, consisting of deliberately chosen media, but the effect it often has is often entirely new, characteristic of creation.

I don’t want to devalue my own efforts by insisting that nothing I’ve said is groundbreaking, but I feel as though I may have said much of this before. However, I think what I did find most helpful from The Shock of the New was the contextualization. The episode itself was chronologically nestled between the end of the Vietnam War and the Fall of the Berlin Wall, which was interesting to me, but the political context of DADAism was quite illuminating to me. I hadn’t realized prior to my viewing of it, the subsequent effect that the co-opting of these sorts of aesthetics by fascists had on modernity in general. In America especially, I feel we often have a tendency to divorce our knowledge of art from its political circumstances. I don’t know why exactly we tend to do this, but I’d wager to guess it probably has something to do with capitalism and how commodification is much easier when a movement is removed from its original context (see also: Punk and Grunge subculture in the United States).

But alas, I think that is the end of my reflection for now. Despite how I come across in person, I really do have a preference for the succinct, and when I don’t have much to say, I don’t like to pretend otherwise. All I’ll conclude with; I found this episode very interesting. I feel the gears turning in my admittedly a bit rusty mind. I think that is a profoundly good thing these days.

Until next time.

Posted in Uncategorized

Debate Haiku

I didn’t watch much of it, but what I saw of the debate quite reminded me of this haiku by Kobayashi Issa, and I cannot get it out of my mind.

Mosquito at my ear—
does he think
      I’m deaf?

On that note, I decided to write a couple of my own.


An Eldritch drama,
Or comedy? deems Satan.
“Will you shut up, man?”


Losing the battle,
Fatigue became our fatigues.
We stopped listening.

EDIT: revised to adhere to syllable counts.

Posted in Uncategorized


“Yes it’s me again,

And I’m back.”

Creep, TLC

i. On Reflection

I’ve not ever been particularly good at introductions, and perhaps even worse at reunions, but I’ll try to do my best here.  I am back, and here again are the little tidbits of writing I was able to force out of my brain on some of the things I read last week.  I suppose it’s a reflection of sorts, as it definitely reflects the decentralized mess that is my cognitive process.  For every thing I read, I find myself needing to write it into the phantom of a non-existent paper, so as to really understand myself.

I know it’s messy and the unifying principle is shaky at best.  It could benefit from more close-reading of Errol Morris and his work specifically.  But I am the Collage Lady, as you must know, and sometimes a collage makes no sense, or is haplessly experimental.  I suppose we will see on both fronts.

Whilst writing, I must admit, I’ve been haunted by the incessantly unhelpful spectre of Perfection, and so I am hoping for the last time, this can be my exorcism.

ii. On Truth

Exorcism, like many processes, is a religious ritual designed to expunge a corrupting spirit from inhabiting the person of another, and leave only the rightful owner.  I think this process actually is analogous to the way documentary film handles Truth… The way that, over the course of a film, the director, through the magic of editing and montage and ambience even, extricates a single (though often contradictory) Truth from a litany of evidence.

Though quite appealing an approach to me now, in writing this post, I originally took to a more Devin Orgeron-approach.  In his essay Visual Media and the Tyranny of the Real, he compares the process of critique to that of the seasoned photographer, “in the darkroom […] awaiting an explanation for the inexplicable, waiting for history itself to develop.” This idea really spoke to me, and told me that I was yet “waiting” for my insights to develop.  I stood waiting for the right ideas to strike me in my mind like lightning, but I realize while the photographer waits, I am not a photographer, but a writer, and so I must write the history before it exits my mind, and then do the work of the critic, and reveal the truth within my own words.  In realizing I was wrong, I admit I also felt a bit foolish.

So whom does one go to when they are contemplating both truth and their own foolish nature?

Friedrich Nietzche, obviously.

Nietzche is, well Nietzsche, and while his clear disdain for humanity is a bit… off-putting, to say the very least, I found his words in On Truth and Lying in a Nonmoral Sense, somehow inspiring even in their despairing emptiness.  Nietzsche writes,

“It is only by means of forgetfulness that man can ever reach the point of fancying himself to possess a “truth” of the grade just indicated. If he will not be satisfied with truth in the form of tautology, that is to say, if he will not be content with empty husks, then he will always exchange truths for illusions.”

Nietzshe offers that Truth is at odds with illusion, and that as human beings, we are prone (perhaps due to our errant stupidity or inherent madness), to choose illusion over Truth.  This kernel of an idea really incensed the inner workings of my mind, and for once, I felt the rusty gears begin to move at an introductory pace.  Not because Nietzsche is right (a very appealing perspective these days), but because of how much he is not.

I think it is entirely possible, within the medium of film most specifically, that Truth is not at odds by illusion, but rather often served by it.  Not to rely on my previous scholarship too heavily, I do believe that the major tenet of Collage theory as it appears in film, and most specifically in Errol Morris’ American Dharma, is that the collage process, when two media are juxtaposed in manner that is unnatural, that Truth can be revealed.  In this way, I think the collage process is somewhat illusory, for what it often depicts are things that could never occur in nature together, but when they are formed together by the artist, they reveal an otherwise incommunicable Truth.  In this way, Illusion serves Truth.

iii. On Hierarchy

But to imply that Illusion serves Truth, one would also have to contend with the idea that the opposite may exist.  And perhaps it does, in Mikhail Bakhtin’s theory of the carnivalesque.  As I’ve attempted to explore this idea of the carnivalesque and the unique challenging of attempting a comparison between this theory and Errol Morris’ American Dharma, this is so far what I have learned:

The carnival is the return to folkism, and in a similar way, this return and subversion is reflected in the alt-right ideology propagated by the likes of Steve Bannon.  In a similar way to Bakhtin’s theory of the carnival, he has responded to the current conditions of society by arguing for a complete reversal of social norms: the power now in the hands of the “common Man,” the revival of sexism, racism, the total destruction of “PC culture,” that has become largely mainstream.

Elizeta Gaufman writes in her paper, The Trump Carnival: Popular Appeal in the Age of Misinformation,

“The specific characteristics of carnival culture stem from the anti-hierarchal push of popular culture against the official. It is also intrinsically anti-elitist, which also makes it a populist phenomenon. While there are numerous definitions of populism, what most scholars agree on is that populist movements juxtapose the ‘pure people’ against the ‘corrupt elite’, which makes the carnival framework analysis especially poignant in the light of the current ‘populist Zeitgeist’. Even if it is supposed to be short lived, carnival is a power transfer to ‘the people’ from the established ruler. It is supposed to assuage the discontent in the population by creating an illusion of power of the masses and that it also makes carnival very suitable for analysis of the Trump campaign given that his persona is a quintessential simulacrum of a ‘popular’ candidate.”

I think this is a fascinating element to the comparison of the carnival to alt-right politics, and I think it is relevant to a discussion about American Dharma, the film, given its status as a story about Steve Bannon.  For even Bannon himself, a wealthy, Ivy League educated man, seeks this reversal of norms, cosplaying as a stylized image of what he no doubt perceives to be the ‘Common Man.’  In this way, viewing American Dharma and Bannon himself through a Bakhtin lens lays bare his hypocrisy; Bannon cares to only empower the Common Man if he can appropriate that identity for himself.

Much in the way Bakhtin advocates for the bodily grotesque in the carnival sphere, Bannon’s ideology is revealed to have an interesting subversion.  As opposed to a focus on the body as something gross and uniquely human, the body is a tool, a weapon, and the collective body of humanity can be wielded by the likes of Bannon as a revolutionary object.  Much like how Thor (a comparison Bannon would no-doubt appreciate, given how White supremacists love to misappropriate Norse mythos), wields his godly Hammer, Mjölnir, as a way to strike his enemies, so does Bannon seek to wield the collective body of humanity as a revolutionary object.

Mjölnir and Thor


Posted in Uncategorized

There Comes A Time When Silence Is Betrayal

Art Credit: @henniemonclair

I’m not sure if anyone still looks here but you never know if you’ll help someone. First and for most, I hope all of you are safe whether you reside in Richmond or have moved somewhere else now. I actually loved this class and I feel like all of us felt a certain way when it came to the injustices in society that are implemented on POC and especially Black lives. I wish I could protest but my immune system is trash due to having a certain disease, so the next best thing is to spread information where I can. Through the course of the few days that I’ve seen information circulating on social media, it’s in the form of Instagram stories so they’ll disappear in due time. So here is a more permanent post to search for information and I’ll continue to update when I can with more information. Stay safe guys and feel free to share this!

Bail Funds


Places To Donate


Instagram posts (will need to sign in on web browser to view these)

Black-owned cute small businesses (on instagram)

If you can’t view from web browser then here is all their @’s

  • @adornedbychi
  • @mossbadger
  • @bisoulovely
  • @e.l.g.y
  • @starposhop
  • @dollbeshop
  • @moshimelon
  • @magicalgirlme_official
  • @plushiikawaii
  • @sugartrampoline
  • @milkribbon.jpg
  • @dreamykyandi
  • @lilith_et_adalia
  • @misscandyholic (sells cute face maks if you need any!)
  • @tee.heart.tee
  • @pupcakescupcats
  • @sugarysymbiote
  • @otaqapparel

Black Owned Restaurants 




-have to go back to work but will update later tonight! If you guys happen to stumble on more information that you would like to be spread, just email me here at





Musings and Frank Sinatra – Requiem for a Diploma

The Temptation to just Post “the Best is Yet to Come” is Real.

And yet, we’re going to choose to be bigger than that. Big bois, bigger than Frank Sinatra and down for original musings. Writing, and writing, and writing our hearts out until the end of time. And the end of time does approach. In 48 hours this post will be obsolete in the way memories are; flowing in rivers always downstream sometimes with driftwood and smoothing stones into polished moments. You’ll find I don’t know how to end things, or start things, only how to do them when I am compelled to. It leads to bad introductions and a line in the middle of prose that is “killer”. I’m also bad at goodbyes. So then, to end this semester with a rhyme, I’ll do my best to recall all of your names.

To Dr.C

There is no end to the gratitude I have for your instruction and empathy. I cannot begin to understand the strength that it takes to, on no sleep, come give a lecture in the space of losing a family member and close friend. I can barely finish finals in the space of a distant death. And yet, you’ve powered through loss and the ongoing threat of Covid-19 in order to ensure that our Senior Seminar is the best class we’ve taken at VCU. I think I speak for all of us when I say thank you. Even with circumstances truly, fast, cheap, and out of control this has been the most meaningful educational experience of my lifetime. I truly hope that one day I can be as inspirational to my students as you are to me.

To Adam

Did you hear Nicholas Cage is Joe exotic? It’s off topic but I figure that fits. Adam, you’ve made me laugh in ways I genuinely appreciate. I’m a fairly dry person, I think, and I often come into lectures exhausted from people around people all day. You’re a real energizing force, even for an introvert like me. I sincerely wish we could have watched National Treasure if nothing else because I would have loved to hear your commentary. Course’ reducing your contributions to mere laughter would be irresponsible  – If I recall, you brought up the discussion that lead to a whole day of Bakhtin. Honestly, one of the best discussions of the semester. If there’s something to loved in the world, I suspect you’ll have a unique ability to find it. Maybe that thing is Nicholas Cage. Maybe it’s bad Zoom backgrounds. Unclear, but good luck. Bob’s my uncle.

To Zerri

We’ve been through a lot adjacent to each other, haven’t we? You’ve been an intellectual presence in my life since I decided Forensic Science wasn’t the call for me. We survived Pangallo’s ridiculously high expectations together, I think we took Lingold’s brilliant Caribbean Lit together, and now (of course) Errol Morris. I don’t know how to fully display my admiration for your particular perspective on literature; suffice to say I think you’re brilliant. I’ve given a lot of thought to your comments on Mr. Death especially and your insight has spawned many a discussion for me on what constitutes platforming. I think you’ve been on to something with that film. There’s a lack of the refined quality that makes later Morris interviews clearly tenable. I digress. It will be odd not having classes with you anymore. I think part of me expects you’ll just be at University of Wisconsin Milwaukee when I arrive. To say I’ll miss your insight is an understatement.

To Joe

Joe – you remember saying that you thought the Ashtray was poorly written in spots? I still disagree with you but you’re a fine person to disagree with. You bring a unique and intensely personal perspective to discussions and it’s refreshing. There’s an attribute you and Matt share that always surprises me. The Sad robot, an emergent symbol of our seminar (in my mind), is one of those things. I wouldn’t have ever even considered it. In fact, I took it for granted. But you shined a spotlight on it and I’m still thinking about it. What is the sad robot? Will we ever fully know? Also, and this is true, you have amazing hair. I don’t know why I’m putting that here, but it’s a good look for you.

To Jackie

You know, naked mole rats are cute. I don’t care what anyone says, you’re absolutely right. But O’possoms are nasty disgusting creatures. I don’t know what you think about them, maybe we agree. Jackie, I really appreciate a lot of things about you. Firstly that you kept the hello world post up on your rampages, bold move. Secondly, that your fascination with Fast Cheap and Out of Control is contagious. And by that I mean even just reviewing your blog posts makes me want to go watch it again, and pay detailed attention to the words themselves. You have a fullness of perspective when it comes to media that I don’t think I have. I think I focus on one leg of the chair in a way that’s obsessive – you seem to have a way of identifying a grander design. Your comments make me want to be a better English student. Honestly, that means a lot to me.

To Matt

There was a time when we argued on my Thin Blue Line post. We were blog rivals to romanticize it. I kid; discussions with you were always fruitful because I knew I’d have to defend myself. It was genuinely shocking to hear you didn’t know how I was using remediation until the presentation – I had constructed this version of “Matt” that knew everything I did and a vast amount more. I still contend that you know a fair bit more about all of this stuff than I do, and you’re ability to convey ideas is second to none. In that regard, I have a substantial respect for you. That made the chance to know that I had made something more understandable to you all the more fulfilling. You’ve taught me a lot, including not to over-engineer a haiku or a blog post. Good luck in graduate school, and if you ever need to argue with someone hit me up.

To Ashley

Speaking of Haikus, thank you for bringing the Errol Morris haiku to my attention, giving me the experience of hearing about Cicada 3301 in my undergrad, and blowing my mind with your collage theory. I was talking to Dr.C last week about how I feel as-though there’s something in your concept of collage lens that I absolutely need to understand if I want to work further with Morris and media forms. I’m actually thinking about proposing a CCCC 2021 presentation on Morris and Remediation as a form of objective correlative. I feel like Collage and object correlative have a sort of necessary association themselves. This is a long winded way of saying, let’s talk.

To Alex

We were going to throw a pizza party and look where it got us. It’s been brilliant to get to know you, try to play video games, and fail to have our schedules line up. You’re very soft spoken but I feel as though you speak with purpose in a way I don’t. I talk too much for it to be as meaningful, dilute words or something like that. Not to mention, your artistic ability and knowledge of skelletor are second to none. I’m genuinely glad I met you and got to experience your flashes of inspiring brilliance.

To Wiley

Wiley, you always had the best blog post name and excellent taste in music. It’s just a fact. Your posting of Errol Morris’s tweets brought levity in the hardest moments of this course. I definitely ended up following him on twitter but it’s not as fun to get your information from the source. I don’t know, is it weird to say I look up to your titles? You’re brilliant to titling things. It’s the hardest part, and yet everything you title is just resonant. It’s a good natural skill to have. Honestly, I wish we had talked more.

To Katie

I fully and completely appreciate anyone who brings House of Leaves to the table of any class. You are the only person who has done this in my entire time at VCU. I’m not crazy right, it’s the best book! You could teach a whole seminar on just that book! I also appreciate anyone who chooses the route of commenting on matters of hermanutics. I cannot. I know so little of religious meaning making. As with all I don’t know, it’s awe inspiring. Thank you for  bringing me to consider Morris in a way I would otherwise never venture to.

to Greg

Greg, let me give you a superlative. Most likely to get this damn degree? Best at taglines? No, something else. How about, most likely to do extra work in way that makes the final moments of a brilliant class even more brilliant. Your discussion of noir was deeply engaging, your application of film theory even more so. I really loved your post about Wormwood’s camera apparatus. If you ever make a film, I’d watch it. The best compliment I can give you is that you seem like a natural director. A natural visionary.

And so, We have Come to a Logical End.

In an ideal world, I would stay in touch with you all. Each of you have been the best of colleagues and dare I say friends. I have been moved by your thoughts for the better part of four months, and that’s a true honor. So, if you fancy, you can follow me on twitter @poemsandplay, add me discord The Trickster#4574, or send me an email at I’ll be at University of Wisconsin Milwaukee next year and freezing in the fall snow, so, your companionship and insight will be a thawing force. There’s a terrible amount more to say, but I want to let you all know that I appreciate you instead of babbling about my own next steps. Suffice to say this summer will be busy I’ll keep you in the loop.

-Yours Turly, Wren

The final, finally

Running a little late, aren’t you Wren

As things begin so they shall end. I came into my first English class with Dr. Pangallo late, you know. Seems I’m leaving my last class a little later than expected too. I won’t get into it in this post, or on this blog in fact. I feel that there are experiences I’d rather belay in another form. Things haven’t been easy, or simple, but they’ve been.  Stay tuned for a final goodbye in my next post. For now, read a paper if you want. It’s passable, I hope.

Errol Morris Seminar Final – Wren.


Last Post before the Last LAST Post

As the semester, and this Senior Seminar course winds down to a conclusion, I cannot help but think of the many actions, events, and moments that led me to select this particular specialized Errol Morris class. Truly, I had no idea who the guy was and when I told my family about him over winter break, they were pretty much clueless too.  So I came to this class blindly and willingly, and I could not feel more content in my decision. Dr. C,  you have truly outdone yourself in the production of this course as well as guiding your students through the strange and poetic world of Morris, for that, I am endlessly thankful. Before we had to transition over to Zoom, I really looked forward to attending this class every Tuesday and Thursday and hearing everyone’s thoughts and feelings on what we just binged. I would have to say that our group discussions are what definitely kept me motivated and intrigued throughout the semester.  Graduation is approaching fast and it is indeed true that everyone should take their Senior Seminar during the semester they graduate because it just seems like such a fitting way to close this journey. I can’t wait to talk about Errol Morris when the public opens again and find that one strange individual who knows wtf I’m talking about when I reference insurance fraud towns and dead pet cemeteries. AU REVOIR! (until we meet again for my last LAST post with my final paper attached).