Prior to the Joseph O’ Connor’s literary reading, I had never heard an author read his or her work. When I was in elementary school, I met Frank McCourt among others, but I never had the chance to listen to them read their own work. Did they have specific voices for each character? What tempo did they read at? Mostly, I was interested in how my readings differed from theirs. Joseph O’Connor gave me the opportunity to analyze this.

       The task of defining my ideal neighborhood proved to be difficult. Where I could see myself feeling at home was very different from my aspirations for the future. The conflict presented by these two ideas was something I needed to decide on before I took my picture. Growing up in Manhattan, I was sensitive to distinct neighborhood differences. The lower east side had a younger more bohemian vibe. The Upper East Side was snobby, but quaint. The Upper West Side was predominately Jewish and family oriented.

       The task of defining my ideal neighborhood proved to be difficult. Where I could see myself feeling at home was very different from my aspirations for the future. The conflict presented by these two ideas was something I needed to decide on before I took my picture. Growing up in Manhattan, I was sensitive to distinct neighborhood differences. The lower east side had a younger more bohemian vibe. The Upper East Side was snobby, but quaint. The Upper West Side was predominately Jewish and family oriented.

        In his essay, Richard Taruskin defines the poietic fallacy as, “the conviction that what matters most (or more strongly yet, that all that matters) in a work of art is the making of it, the maker’s input,” (10). Taruskin used this idea in exploring modern art, but the concept is certainly interesting in a different discussion of the definition of art. Here Taruskin asserts that all that matters in art is the maker and the effort he puts forth in his creation.