Response to the videos from Emily

I have to say I was not entertained or enthused by the skit with Jerry S about the history class. I see the whole thing as a very bad example of type. What I mean by type is that in works authors create a character that resembles a type, or a characteristic. Within that skit, there was only the one type. In class rooms, we are going to be having a wide variety of students in out class, and this was not depicted. However, I am quite biased, I have never like SNL or it's equivalents.

As for the other skit that I watched I could not help but be reminded of a brief article I once read a long, long time ago. It brought up the question "What do you do?" implying what is it that you do for a living, your occupation. The writer of that article went off much like the guy went off in the video. The author wrote that she does a lot of things and then provided to go into different aspects of her life. She then made the point at the end that a person isn't solely defined by what it is that they do as an occupation, but should be defined by what it is that they do with their whole life. The guy in the video made this point, just with a twist. People shouldn't be defined by what it is that they make in money, but what it is that they make happen in their lives and in other's lives. Also, he made that point that just because he may not make as much as a lawyer, it does not mean that his job is any less important, maybe even that it might be more important.

To bring the two together, I get a small feeling that the first skit with Jerry S. was written from the view point of those that the guy in the second skit is fighting since the author of the first has such a bleak outlook on teaching and students. It is almost as if the second is a reaction to the first.