Original Quote #1:

Their radical ideas can be summed up in a thought experiment from Peter Singer which reads as follows: “Suppose you saw a child drowning in a pond: would you jump in and rescue her, even if you hadn’t pushed her in? Even if it meant ruining your clothes? It would be highly controversial to say ‘no’ – and yet most of us manage to ignore those of us dying of poverty and preventable disease all over the world, though we could easily help them.”

Revised:

Rhys Southan references a thought experiment by Peter Singer that sums of the ideas of Effective Altruism which reads, “Suppose you saw a child drowning in a pond: would you jump in and rescue her, even if you hadn’t pushed her in? Even if it meant ruining your clothes? It would be highly controversial to say ‘no’ – and yet most of us manage to ignore those of us dying of poverty and preventable disease all over the world, though we could easily help them.” In other words, it is our obligation to help others if we have the capability to.

Original Quote #2

Zander’s idea of success is much simpler; “I realized that my job was to awaken the possibility in other people. And, of course, I wanted to know whether I was doing that…If their eyes are shining, you know you’re doing it…I have a definition for success. For me it’s very simple. It’s not about wealth and fame and power. It’s about how many shiny eyes I have around me.”

Revised:

In his TED Talk, Zander discusses his views on success; “I realized that my job was to awaken the possibility in other people. And, of course, I wanted to know whether I was doing that…If their eyes are shining, you know you’re doing it…I have a definition for success. For me it’s very simple. It’s not about wealth and fame and power. It’s about how many shiny eyes I have around me.” This means that doing good can be as simple as making people feel more powerful and happy with themselves.

These are the paragraphs (the first two) from my essay that I chose to revise:   

     What if you were told that every piece of artwork made was useless unless it was contributing to the betterment of society? Members of Effective Altruism believe that creating artwork is a waste of time. They believe that the time and money spent creating art, music, movies, or other types of media could be used for making the world a better place. For example, in “Is Art a Waste of Time?,” Rhys Southan says that Effective Altruists don’t care about “beauty, knowledge, life or the environment for their own sake,” but rather they care about these things only as much as they contribute to wellbeing. Their focus is to end the suffering, hunger, and poverty of the world and to create global happiness. In the TED Radio Hour episode “How Art Changes Us” Benjamin Zander talks about his experience with conducting classical music. He believes that music has the power to “change us from within.” Music may not affect everyone in the same way but it conveys emotion that they might not have felt before. If the EA wants to bring happiness they use music and other artforms to help them? I think that the EA has good intentions to their work but they can’t exclude these large areas of creativity from which people draw so much happiness. I think that art is not a waste of time and that it can be used alongside altruism to do good in the world.

     In his essay, Southan references a thought experiment from Peter Singer which reads as follows: “Suppose you saw a child drowning in a pond: would you jump in and rescue her, even if you hadn’t pushed her in? Even if it meant ruining your clothes? It would be highly controversial to say ‘no’ – and yet most of us manage to ignore those of us dying of poverty and preventable disease all over the world, though we could easily help them.” I don’t think that is a fair comparison because saving a drowning child is a firsthand, small-scale issue. The person is witnessing it right up close and can easily remedy the problem. Ending poverty and disease is a much different issue because it is much more difficult to do and also, people tend to turn a blind-eye to problems when they are not up-close. It is unfair to assume that people should dedicate their lives and donate all of their money to the “greater good.” Acts of goodness can be performed on a small-scale. For example, in Zander’s TED talk, he explains that he played music for a group of 12-year-olds and the next day and told him how it had affected him. “He said ‘my brother was shot last year and I didn’t cry for him. But last night when you played that piece, he was the one I was thinking about. And I felt tears streaming down my face. And you know, it felt really good to cry for my brother.’” This piece of art had a positive impact on this young boy and even though this piece may not change the whole world, it still did an act of good.

After Revision:

What if you were told that every piece of artwork made was useless unless it was contributing to the betterment of society? This is a bold statement considering so many of us devote their lives to creating art. While we can all do more to better the world, we cannot flat-out say that art is a waste of time. In the TED Radio Hour episode “How Art Changes Us” Benjamin Zander talks about his experience with conducting classical music. He believes that music has the power to “change us from within.” Music may not affect everyone in the same way but it conveys emotion that they might not have felt before. In today’s world, it is imperative that we strive to do as much good as we can in any way we see fit. I believe that art is not a waste of time and that it can enhance the acts of good that we perform not only by letting people express their creativity and emotions but also to spread awareness of the bad that needs to be corrected.

In an essay by Rhys Southan entitled “Is Art a Waste of Time?” a group called Effective Altruism claims that it is. They believe that the time and money spent creating art, music, movies, or other types of media could be used for making the world a better place. Effective Altruism’s main objective is to end poverty and suffering, and create global happiness. They believe that art does not add to this “net positivity” because it does not directly bring about change or amass enough money to. Their radical ideas can be summed up in a thought experiment from Peter Singer which reads as follows: “Suppose you saw a child drowning in a pond: would you jump in and rescue her, even if you hadn’t pushed her in? Even if it meant ruining your clothes? It would be highly controversial to say ‘no’ – and yet most of us manage to ignore those of us dying of poverty and preventable disease all over the world, though we could easily help them.” I don’t think that is a fair comparison because saving a drowning child is a firsthand, small-scale issue. The person is witnessing it up close and can easily remedy the problem. Ending poverty and disease is a much different issue to solve because it is much more difficult and also, people tend to turn a blind-eye to problems when they are not up-close. It is unfair to assume that people should dedicate their lives and donate all of their money to the “greater good.”

The first thing I did was shorten my introduction paragraph by cutting out the introduction of Effective Altruism and put it in the introduction of my second paragraph to give the shallow pond analogy more context. I wanted the focus of my intro paragraph to be of my beliefs so I could then strengthen my thesis statement, which I did. These are the main changes I made to these paragraphs besides fine-tuning the language. I was inspired to do this because of the section W-4b from The Little Seagull. It helped me strengthen my claim. Also, section W-4c helped me make my paragraphs flow better. I did this by breaking up my second paragraph into two separate paragraphs and focusing it on the beliefs of Effective Altruism.

My first draft experience was pretty similar to Anne Lamott’s experience in the sense that the writing was not the quality I wanted and it was pretty much all over the place. I wasn’t quite so stressed as Lamott says she gets when writing a first draft. I was surprised at how hard she made writing a first draft out to be because I found it relatively easy  to get my ideas down on paper. My main struggle will be going through the feedback on my work and revising it so that everything makes sense. I was also surprised at how many writers struggle with their first draft.

My goal for my revision is to cultivate a second draft that makes more sense and more strongly articulates my ideas than the first. I will first read through the feedback I’ve received on my first draft and take note of what feedback makes the most sense for my writing and what I need to do to get my point across more clearly. The first thing I will address is my thesis statement, which needs to be strengthened to fit more closely with my arguments. Then I will re-read my essay and remove parts that don’t flow and add context to quotes that need it.  I will be sure to look for pieces of each paragraph that could potentially be more well-suited as a topic sentence. I think that my biggest challenge will be clearly explaining my ideas without adding fluff to my essay. I also think that becoming overwhelmed by which feedback to use and not having enough time to write a good quality essay will be a challenge for me. If any of these challenges arises I will take a step back and try to view my writing from a reader’s perspective and see what makes the most sense for my essay. I will also make sure to set aside time just to work on my essay so that I can better manage my time.

From reviewing my peer’s essays I have learned new skills on how to improve my own writing. One thing I learned is what I want to see in a thesis statement and it gave me an idea of how I can make mine stronger. Another thing I learned is how to insert background information around a quote to give it context and to make sure the reader understand what I’m trying to say.

The TED talk that I chose to compare to Rhys Southan’s “Is Art a Waste of Time?” is the with Benjamin Zander sharing his thoughts on classical music. After brainstorming and comparing the texts, I feel that art is not a waste of time. I agree with the beliefs and ideals of the Effective Altruists in the sense that they want to bring world happiness and end hunger/poverty, but I also think that this can happen alongside the creation of art. One connection that I found was that the EA wants to do as much good as they can and have world happiness while Zander’s thoughts on classical music are quite similar. Zander says that he “considers music to be a transformational experience” which leads me to believe that it can bring out deep emotion in people and help them through hard times. I think that the EA can work alongside art to achieve their goal.  One EA member even said that he wanted to see more artists involved in their organization to help spread the word of their cause. “I would love to have some artists. We really need visual designers. It would be great to have people think about how Effective Altruism could be promoted through art” says Robert Wiblin in Southan’s essay. Perhaps music could be a means of promoting Effective Altruism.

There is one quote from Zander’s TED talk that I decided to use in my essay and it reads “So when Benjamin Zander says music is transformational, he doesn’t necessarily mean it can change the world for the better but that it has the power to change us from within.” I think this could be used to change us for the better and to be more motivated to do good in the world. I have decided that the best way to bring change is to integrate many ideas into one and therefore I believe altruism can coincide with art.

My chosen TED talk is Benjamin Zander’s “How Does Music Transform Us?” In this TED talk, Zander talks about his years as a classical music conductor and how it has impacted people. The power discussed in this TED talk is that classical music can be a transformative experience. In the TED talk, Zander says “Mendelsohn said that music is a much more precise language than words. And when you think how easily we misunderstand words – and God knows there’s enough evidence of that at this time. But music speaks directly to the heart. It speaks through the molecules. And it’s irresistable.” People can hear a song without any words and know everything the composer wants to say. It can play with your emotions and make you feel things you never thought you could. Music can also allow people open up to feelings that they have kept inside for too long. One experience with this that Zander tells us about is after he once played a Chopin piece and a boy who had never listened to classical music in his life, heard the piece and cried for his late brother. He said that he didn’t cry for his brother when he died. This is the power that music can have.

Though there are few, this type of art can have limitations. Not everyone may be open to having such profound experiences with music. Like every other experience in our lives, we need to keep an open mind in order to learn and expand our minds. I think that not everyone will feel that this art form is truly transformative. But if they allow themselves the experience, it can be.

In my first reading of Rhys Southan’s “Is Art a Waste of Time?” I was mostly focused on comprehending the information he was presenting to me. I was not very focused on his opinion or what I thought of altruism. My main focus was to learn about what altruism is and ask questions. My second reading helped me better understand the ideas and morals of Effective Altruism. I noticed more contradictions in their logic and in Southan’s writing. For example, at one point in the essay, Southan is telling the reader how the EA doesn’t believe has any use and won’t do any good. “Like Hilton, most of them seemed doubtful that art had much power to alter the world for the better.” This seems to be the main argument throughout the essay. However, there was one altruist that claimed that he “would really love to have some artists” be part of the EA. He wanted them to use their skills to attract more people to the cause. This seems hypocritical to me because they believe that art is not a good use of time but also want to use artists for the benefit of the organization. Overall, I definitely looked at this piece through a more critical lens than the first time I read it.

Decoding the text helped me better understand the text by allowing me to understand words that I didn’t know. I looked up a few words using the Miriam Webster Dictionary and it helped me comprehend what Southan was writing about. Looking up words I didn’t know was the extent to which decoding the text helped me further understand the essay. Despite being more critical of the piece the second time, I got much more out of it.

In Rhys Southan’s “Is Art a Waste of Time,” there was a part that stood out to me when I was annotating. Southan is explaining the central goal of Effective Altruism and he says “Simply put, EAs want to reduce suffering and increase lifespan and happiness. That’s it; nothing else matters.” This made me wonder whether or not ending suffering all over the world is really possible. I think that even if you give every person on Earth everything they need to live and be happy, there will still be things that make us unhappy. People will still find ways to be unhappy. Also, if their goal is to make people happy, can art not do that? Everyone has different things that make them happy. Art could be used a secondary aid to happiness; after every person’s basic needs are met, they might be content but why not use art to enhance happiness? I agree that creating art instead of doing good deeds for humanity is not the best thing you could be doing with your time, but you can’t expect people to be selfless and to be contributing to society 100% of the time. Small acts can make a difference too.

Another part of Southan’s essay that I responded to was when the EA claimed that “the thing you most enjoy isn’t the most moral thing to do.” Why does everything we do have to contribute to society or the “greater good?” I believe it is important to help others and do good deeds but I also think it’s okay to take the time to do things that you enjoy as well. If some thing makes you happy and it isn’t hurting anyone then I think you should do it. I don’t disagree with putting others’ needs before your own but I also believe that you should take time for yourself.  Selflessness is an important virtue but you must also value your own life.