“So What” may seem like a stupid question, however it really does make you think about the importance of things. Asking this question is vital when writing your autobiography because it gives meaning to your life. By doing so, it makes words appear on paper because you only have room for the important things. This gives reason for others to read it. Why would anyone want to read something with no purpose? Plain and simply put, they wouldn’t. In the end, asking the question “So What” when writing your autobiography is indeed very important because it condenses your experiences down to the major events that people will want to read.
Onboard the ship, Equiano loved his life as a sailor. Instead of being treated like a lower form of humanity, he was treated as an equal because every man on sea had to do their part. It was a matter of survival. Although at first Equiano was terrified of everything when he first became a sailor, eventually he became used to it. To him, it was all new and exciting(and frightening). Equiano’s attitude was very open-minded. So, in conclusion, Equiano’s attitude was open to new experiences, even though he was scared to death at first.
In order to write an accurate autobiography you need to take notes of your life, and to do that you must be very observant. Translate what you observe around yourself into words in your mind. Write down important events to you. Write when you are on fire. In doing so you preserve that moment in writing. Effective note taking does the same, it preserves that moment in writing. However, since you are note-taking, you should make sure your notes both accurately describe what is happening and leave room for flexibility. In conclusion, you should be observant, write when you are “on fire” and be flexible with your notes.
I think that homeshooling is something that heavily impacted me. If I had continued going to private school many friends that I have now would be strangers to me. There are good friends that I have known for almost nine years now because of my being homeschooled. What has homeschooling done to my education? It has opened up many doors and closed many too. Through it I am able to learn about things I am personally interested in more than if I had been in school. However because I am not in the school system I cannot do activities that schooled kids have the opportunity to.
I would personally spend more time writing about loons than ants. To me, they seemed more interesting than the exaggerated battle of ants in Thoreau’s autobiography. Where I live there are no loons, so naturally I would be more interested in them. However I cannot think of a place on earth without ants except Antarctica. When Thoreau started to write about the battle of black ants vs red, he completely lost my interest. Watching ants “battle,” is not very exciting. You have absolutely no idea why they are fighting, and the battle itself, if you can even call it a battle, is not interesting enough to watch just for that reason. So, I would spend more time writing about loons.
Plant a bunch of grass to distract the deer from your garden. Duh. How could I not see it? At first I was like, what the heck how am I supposed to know that? But then I looked at it again and I was like, “oh DUH.” See, probably deer were eating from my “garden” because there was nothing else to eat nearby. So, of course the deer eat my garden. Now, you could just scare them away, but that would be incredibly annoying because you would have to do it repeatedly. However, you could shoot and kill the deer, but that would probably have unforeseen repercussions. These are examples of top-bottom approaches, and they do not seem to be the best ways to solve the problem. Instead, you could use the bottom-top approach. Which means that you could either move elsewhere, or plant a bunch of grass on your property. Moving away is logical, but does not really solve the problem, instead you are avoiding it. So, planting grass on the undeveloped land would be the solution.
It is quite important to explain your philosophy on life early on in your autobiography, I would say. You want to tell your reader up front what you believe in so it explains WHY you do WHAT you do. If you do not tell readers what your philosophy of life is, it will be hard to figure you out. Doing so also gives your reader a sense of what is to come in your autobiography. It is your autobiography, so it should be about the whole of you. Do not leave anything about yourself out, especially your philosophy on life.
Well, the book is titled “Walden,” meaning that it is about Walden pond. What exactly does “better” appertain to? What, just so the reader can know what an idiot Thoreau was? Hypothetically, if Thoreau had given us more background, it would demean the book. Although, he does a pretty good job at that anyways. Walden was not really an autobiography, it was more like a diary of his thoughts. Or even his daydreams about Walden Pond. I know that this book has inspired millions of people, so do I really want to discredit him? Personally, I think Thoreau should have given us more history. It seems that people look up to him and admire him when in reality Thoreau seemed like a really self-righteous snob.
Thoreau was not dependent on his division of labor. Why? Well, his income came supposedly from his bean field. However, if you look at the math of how much money the field actually produced, you would see that there was no profit. Instead, it barely paid for itself. If I can recall correctly, the small bean field produced about eight dollars per year. Thoreau could not manage his finances. In fact, he relied mainly off of his mother. So in conclusion Henry David Thoreau was not dependent on his work, if he was able to get by on a bean field that did not profit.
The fact that he was in the capitol of America and yet Northup did not get justice is one example of how he used contrast. Also, the contrast between Epps and Ford is another. While Ford is a God-seeking kind man Epps is the exact opposite. Then there was the contrast between Northup’s response to being torn away from his family and Eliza’s response. By knowing that there was irony in some circumstances, Northup used that to his writing advantage. He used contrast to punch a point. I could do the same. When I see something where there are two opposites, I can use that by writing it in a distilled form to punch a point.