When asked to define ourselves we often use broad brushstrokes. Without thinking we consult our internal list of "things that make me, ME" and find ourselves recalling words like "creative, outgoing, photography, guitar" before we've even had a chance to fully process the question. But how much does this internal list define us? I believed that my internal list was the best representation of myself until I read a quote by Annie Dillard that states: "How we spend our days, is of course, how we spend our lives". This quote hit me like a punch in the gut, it's blatant truth so indisputable; how I spent my days, regardless of what I told myself about myself, was ultimately who I was. Or at the very least would be how I had spent my life. This is why, when completing my self portrait, I decided to focus on the everyday. Within my self portrait I wanted to present the viewer with a familiar yet abstract sense of reality through which we get to see amalgamated glimpses of the everyday acts that define me, rather than a linear narrative or a simple re-telling of 'a day in the life'. Thus combining to create a picture of: my daily life, through an abstracted version of 'the everyday'. To create a sense of 'the day' or linear progression of time I segmented my video with four still images of the sky in various stages of daylight (morning, midday, afternoon, evening) that match the lighting seen in each concurrent video segment. The everyday acts that define me were presented in a series of short video segments that include scenes of me catching the tram, recording music and riding my bike. To disrupt the sense of linear narrative the visual segments are bluntly edited together, with nothing linking the sequential shots and a quite abrupt ending. I also attempted to create an overall sense of confounded time and space by overlaying audio from certain video segments onto others. Long, singular focus, handheld shots were also used to enhance the sense of voyeuristic glimpses. Question: Who is Annie Dillard? Options: - A great writer - not enough information - A poet - A novelist === The correct answer is
not enough information

I lost sight in one eye when in college, I had two preschool children at the time. I was walking through the house one morning and suddenly I could see NOTHING out of one eye. When I told my husband,who was right there when it happened, he assumed my eye was just blurry or something had gotten in the eye. He took me to the ophthalmologist who verified that I could not see out of the eye. Then we subsequently got the worse news that it was a neurological condition with a long name I do not remember that there was nothing he could do about. He said that I would either get my sight back or I you and all we could do was wait and see if it came back. This was right before finals that semester but he told me I absolutely could not be studying or using my good eye for reading or basically anything that would strain it or I could end up losing sight in that eye also. Needless to say, as a mom of two children ages 2 1/2 and 6 months,I could not afford to lose ALL of my sight! So, I had to wait. I could not drive like that either which made matters worse. Both my husband and I were in school fulltime (until then), fortunately it was the end of the semester, unfortunately it was BEFORE finals. My sight did come back but not for about 5 months. When it first started to come back I still couldn't drive because although I could see I did not have my peripheral vision, that did not fully come back for quite a while. I cannot imagine it a person who goes totally blind goes through, I just know for me it was not an easy to to go through. Question: What did the author's husband believe about her eye condition initially? Options: - he believed she was simply stressed - not enough information - he thought she was mistaken - he assumed it was temporary and that she would be fine soon === The correct answer is
he assumed it was temporary and that she would be fine soon

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA Final preparations are underway for Friday's historic third summit between the leaders of North and South Korea. In the morning, North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un will cross the military demarcation line that divides the two Koreas at the village of Panmunjom, the historic site where the Korean War armistice was signed in 1953. He will be met by South Korean President Moon Jae-in on the South Korean side of the heavily fortified demilitarized zone. This will be the third inter-Korean summit, but it will be the first time that a leader from the communist North will enter the democratic South. The summits in 2000 and 2007 were held in North Korea. Kim will travel with an official delegation that includes his sister, Kim Yo Jong, who led the North's delegation to the Winter Olympics in South Korea, Kim Yong Nam, the North's nominal head of state, and Kim Yong Chol. Kim Yong Chol was previously the head of the North's military intelligence agency and has been named by South Korea as being responsible for ordering the deadly 2010 sinking of the Cheonan, a South Korean navy vessel. It is unclear if Kim Jong Un's wife, Ri Sol-ju, will be part of the official delegation from the North. She recently traveled with Kim when he visited Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. South Korea will hold a welcoming ceremony for the North Korean leader that will include a military honor guard review. During past summits, North Korea also organized the same level of ceremonial guard used to underscore friendly relations with an important visiting head of state. The two leaders will pose together for pictures, and plant a pine tree in the DMZ to symbolize Korean reconciliation. The leaders from the North and South may also walk together along a historic footbridge called the "Bridge of No Return" that was used for prisoner exchanges at the end of the Korean War. Moon and Kim will hold direct talks in the Peace House conference hall, both in the morning and the afternoon, but the North Korean delegation will... Question: President Moon Jae-in probably believes that: Options: - Kim Jong Un will pose less of a threat after talks of peace - trade and commerce will now be easier - reconciliation would benefit both the North and the South - not enough information === The correct answer is
reconciliation would benefit both the North and the South