TIPRR 1

Each year, I start my class with a unit on how to analyze and synthesize text. It’s a good place to start, because if you can’t closely examine literature and draw out universal concepts and applications, then there really is no point to a literature class.

During the course of this unit, as a class, we also address the issue of text, and what defines a text. Buckingham opens our reading by defining medium as “a substance or a channel through which effects or information can be transmitted” and the media texts as the “programmes, films, websites (and so on) that are carried by [modern communications media]” (3). This is exactly what I teach my kids. I absolutely love the idea that the text can be defined in a way that includes more than just novels, short stories, poetry, and articles of various sorts. In fact, we even do an assignment where we break down many different types of text, from art to film, none of which are actually written. It is through the analysis of these media texts that I am finally able to see various “light bulbs” start to flicker. Kids who have never been able to understand an actual written text are finally able to understand the analytical process by utilizing the same skill set on something with which they are familiar: the media. Not only is it a fun experience for students, but for me, this “[recognizing] and [building] upon…students’ everyday cultural experiences” has make a significant impact in my classroom, because once these skills are developed, the transfer of knowledge to literary text is actually quite simple (8). Based solely on their appeal to students, using media texts within a classroom is a smart idea, but when coupled with the idea that these texts can also make more “traditional” types of knowledge more accessible to students—I’m sold. The unfortunate thing is that often these texts are used improperly, thereby making all media a “lazy teacher’s crutch.” (For more of my feelings regarding this phenomenon, check out my response to Erika’s Aladdin anecdote.)

Another textual concept discussed that I found to be intriguing, especially within the English classroom is the idea of intertextuality. It used to be that the most connection you would get would be if authors used allusions within their work, and if you were familiar with the Bible or with Shakespeare’s writings, you had a pretty good chance of understanding underlying meanings and messages. In contemporary media, as pointed out by Buckingham, “texts are constantly referring to and drawing upon other texts,” assuming that their audiences will be aware of the other media being referenced, and not really bothering to make even important references blatantly obvious. In fact, seeing if you can “catch the references” has almost become a game within programs like The Simpsons and The Gilmore Girls, both of which are so much more entertaining if you are familiar with a myriad of movies, television shows, video games, and musical artists in addition to the more traditional authors and poets. (One of the most refreshing things about both of these programs is the fact that they do use “high culture” as well as “popular culture.” As a teacher of “the classics” I am even a bit grateful, because sometimes there is interest sparked in favor of a particular work of literature.) In connection with this idea, it would be interesting to me, as an English teacher, to teach two different classes on literary devices, one where I focused on the interconnectivity of “traditional” text through allusion, and another where I focused solely on this idea of intertextuality, using various genres of media text to study the same concepts. In the end, I’m sure the students in the second group would, at least initially, have less knowledge regarding “classic literature,” but that wouldn’t be the point. What I wonder is if the second group would have a better handle on the concepts and would then be able to connect their newfound knowledge to those same classic texts, eventually making up for “lost time” because they are able to comprehend more quickly. I have no idea how it would turn out, but I would venture that it’s worth a shot, at least.

Because I could go on about literacy forever and because I’m already waxing extremely long, I think I’ll save that discussion for class, and instead end with this: I am extremely intrigued by the idea of interactive media. The idea that the distinction between reader and writer is being eliminated is very interesting. As I read, I was reminded of the old Choose Your Own Adventure books. Could it really be that those who play video games are actually writing what amounts to the ultimate Choose Your Own Adventure? I absolutely loved those books, and so, if this is the case, I now have a schema for understanding the fascination with the video game. Hmmm…how can I incorporate this into my curriculum? Would it be that far of a stretch to imagine a Nintendo Wii game entitled Lord of the Flies or even The Crucible? And if they did exist, how many of my kids would become interested in the original novels? After all, there’s nothing like a “based on…” tag to inspire curiosity.