Here is something that is interesting to me: as I was reading the ten tenets of Liberal Humanism, I found myself agreeing with them because I found them logical. Barry is right; these are the things that we are familiar with. These are the sorts of things that we teach students in introductory classes: study a text, determine its meaning (decide on a theme?), and support it with examples from the text (demonstrating a fusion of form and content). However, as I was reading the five recurrent ideas in theory, I also found myself agreeing with them, even though many of them are IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION with the tenets of liberal humanism. How does that happen?
Case in point:
Theory idea number five basically states that theorists (I assume this means theorists in general, not in specifics) "distrust all totalising notions" (34). This denies the possibility of fixed notions such as "humanity" and "reality", and instead chalks these up to negotiation and renegotiation. Though certain theories tend to adopt the notion of fixed meanings (Marxism tells us that all art is created to perpetuate the domination of the ruling class...right? Am I remembering this right?), theory as a whole rejects any notion of fixed meanings. As our friend Einstein probably wouldn't say but will anyway in this cliched phrase, "It's all relative." So, when a TMA 114 class has a screening of Dr. Strangelove and I insist that it is a political satire but one of my students insists that it is a straight ahead portrayal of cold war realities, who is right? Theorists might argue that depending on which theory we were using, we might both be right (though let's be clear: I'm right.).
Liberal Humanism tenet number 4 stands in direct opposition to this notion: "Human nature is essentially unchanging" (16). It asserts that there are certain universal truths/values that transcend time and culture. Reality and humanity are NOT negotiable, but can be found as constant truths in all literature. So, in TMA 102 when we ask students to locate a theme in a film, we are essentially asking them to look for an unchanging lesson about human nature: love conquers all, pride leads to unhappiness, or my personal favorite dillusionist theme, the American Dream is a joke and/or a lie.
Initially, Barry seems to set up Liberal Humanism as the opposite of theory, but it seems to me that Liberal Humanism isn't an opposite, it's just another theory; another way of looking at the world and literature and their relationship to one another. The Sixth Core Principle of Media Literacy Education states that "Media Literacy Education affirms that people use their individual skills, beliefs and experiences to construct their own meanings from media messages." And, if my personal belief is that human nature is unchanging (which I sort of do...), then that constitutes my own set of theory glasses. However, when teaching any sort of media, we always need to be open to the option that our students will disagree with us about what a text means, and that's okay--maybe they're just using a different theory. Theories offer us interesting and different ways of engaging with texts and with the world, and it never hurts to try a few on before deciding which one we subscribe to. We do our students a disservice if we attempt to only offer them one view of literary theory, one way of deconstructing a text, because maybe they'll like the way the world looks through cat-eye glasses way more than those John Lennon specs.
Okay, moving on to our friend Beyonce (whose name, my spell check tells me, should be "Bey Once"), and I'm going to try to say something that isn't exactly what Timbre said. Also, Barry's Leavisite analysis is quite brief, so mine will be too.
A standard, intro to film type theme to emerge from this video might be: "treat others the way that you want to be treated." This is effectively illustrated by having the characters play both roles. Beyonce's behavior as the cop is unacceptable, and when you (mentally) play through the video imagining the roles reversed, the cop's behavior is still unacceptable. The video implies that both characters are equally capable of cheating, and throughout the song Beyonce keeps insists that if she were the boy, she would treat a girl the way that she wants to be treated. (I feel like I'm fumbling over my words like none other. I hope this makes sense). The choice to film the video in black and white illustrates the black and white nature of the issue; it is not okay to live a double standard, to expect complete commitment from someone while not remaining committed yourself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think you're on to something interesting with the idea that Liberal Humanism is just another theory or theoretical perspective. I think I agree with you that it is just a cultural lens, the thing that I find interesting in comparing Liberal Humanism and Theory is that while Liberal Humanism can be encompassed by theory as one way of looking at a text, Liberal Humanism is not capable of doing the same for theory. There is no room within the liberal humanist framework for other theoretical frameworks, because liberal humanism seeks to distance the critic and her personal experiences from the critique of the text.
Post a Comment