I can't believe nobody else on this entire website is interested in guacamole ...

yeah. i'm over you, durr. total yesterday's bullshit.

spanglish was really totally awesome last night. i have a new respect for adam sandler (and i'm grateful he has escaped from the happy madison rut).

in other news, here are my U of M essays:

Christopher Lee Best
At the University of Michigan, we are committed to building a superb educational community with students of diverse talents, experiences, opinions and cultural backgrounds. What would you as an individual bring to our campus community?

I, as an individual, would bring many talents and experiences, along with an eclectic set of interests, to the community at the University of Michigan. I enjoy many sports, whether I am a spectator or an active participant - sports such as soccer, hockey, and football. My biggest contribution would likely be in the form of music. I love listening to music, I enjoy playing music, and I have a serious passion for making music. Whether it is through my voice, drum, piano, guitar, or some instrument I have yet to learn, my thoughts and feelings are often best communicated and understood through music. And when I am able to share sweet sound with others who also appreciate its beauty, I experience a level of ecstasy I have yet to find anywhere else. In addition, I have a way with words, so to speak; meaning, I possess an extremely broad vocabulary and the lucidity to wield it commandingly. I am rather adept when it comes to mathematics as well, and also find myself exuberantly making various calculations. Although I am not always the most expedient, I am conscientious in all that I do, and have the focus, determination, and ability to lead others in creating a meaningfully crafted end product. I am a worthwhile addition to your campus community and learning environment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Lee Best
College of Literature, Science, and the Arts (LSA): What led you to choose the area(s) of academic interest that you have listed in your application to the University of Michigan? If you are undecided, what areas are you most interested in, and why?

On my application, I declared that I was undecided in my primary areas of interest. This indecision is derived from my consideration of two different variables: skill (ability), and curiosity (interest). I have so many skills, and am equivalently curious, in such a plethora of fields, that it is extremely difficult for me to decide on one, or even narrow it down to two. In no particular order, my interests include English, Film & Video Studies, Mathematics, and Music. If I were to choose English and Mathematics, I would most likely desire to pursue a degree in education, primarily based on past experiences that have proven those subjects to be the easiest for me to communicate to other people. However, if Film & Video Studies and Music were my preferences, then I would be likely to choose a more industrial profession. Regardless of my projected career, the reason I am most torn in this decision is because my overall talents and interests in each of these four areas are all very high. Therefore, I choose the option of allowing myself a little more time to state my final preference. I am not fully prepared to declare a particular affiliation due to the amount of weight with which this decision has been encumbered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Lee Best

[C] Some writers suggest that by tradition science is concerned with truth while art is concerned with beauty. How might these two endeavors be the same? How might they be irreconcilably different?

To make an initial clarification, writers are not infallible, as they are subject to bias and prejudice, just like the rest of us. Conversely, writers are not exempt from making accurate assessments and solid judgments from sound perspectives. So, perhaps the most honest reply is that they are an amalgamation of both cases - never to be fully trusted, nor to be callously disregarded. But those souls whose occupation is the manipulation of language are not terribly pertinent to the query with which we have been posed.
The current concern is the relationship between science and truth, in juxtaposition with that of art and beauty. Allowing, as ever, for extraneous incongruities, one could claim that science and art are unique and different interests, solely concerned with the equally distinct truth and beauty, respectively. Scientists have spent entire lifetimes seeking the true basis of life, the most sublime particle of matter, only to discover that as they learn more, the truth they find is that there is no such creature. From mol to molecule to atom to nucleus to proton & electron to quark & meson, the inevitable progression continues onward to infinitesimal minuteness. Artists have spent entire lifetimes trying to emulate and accentuate the most beautiful forms that can be found in nature. The human figure, the plants and animals, the ocean, the land – all that we can see – possesses beauty, a harmonious sort of aesthetic pleasure that we can somehow transfer into a medium through which that pleasure may be synthetically derived. My personal preference, regarding beauty, is toward nature’s symmetry, equality of direction and weight - the ultimate compromise. If it is true that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” then there is symmetry to the truth behind our physical makeup. The fact that all naturally occurring molecular structures achieve magnetic neutrality through the balance of equally opposite charged particles, which themselves are composed of even further equally opposing particles, leads me to believe that the chemistry of matter gives us a truth of duality that is extremely beautiful with its simplistic symmetry. This incongruous exception shows that the truth really can be beautiful, and beauty can really be true.
In keeping with that inherent dichotomy, there are also times when the contrast between truth and beauty is stark, and reconciliation between them cannot be achieved. Let us this time use a fictional example, where the crazed scientist Dr. Frankenstein so feared his own mortality, that he sought a scientific means of escaping death. In reality, those scientists who have striven to simply extend our life expectancy still have found that human mortality is inescapable, an unchangeable truth of our existence. Death is something that we all must face, and it is a truth that none but the most peculiar human minds can define as beautiful. Going in the opposite direction, some of the most beautiful art is found in its abstract form. Whether derived from aural or visual stimulation, abstract art is beautiful (deemed so once again by our mysterious ‘beholder’). But, however beautiful, the basis of abstract art is that it is portraying something that would not naturally occur, and is often not even plausible in the physical realm, thus necessitating the title ‘abstract’. Consequently, this beautiful abstract artwork is, in terms of reality, irreconcilably untrue.
--------------------------------------------------------


that was fun.

9 comments | feedback