tiprr 8

Recurrent Ideas #3:
“Language itself conditions, limits, and predetermines what we see.” Nothing is just “there” because we construct everything through a language. In media terms, everything is coded and interpreted by the writer and reader. Meaning is intended and implied by the author or unintended and inferred by the reader.

“Language doesn’t record reality, it shapes and creates it, so that the whole of our universe is textual”

Therefore an experience can’t be recreated, no matter the mode, without significant “problems.” But, I don’t think there are really problems per se. It is just interpretations. Some may value Realism over the Impressionism art movement because their values can be argued.

If we had a holodeck that could show us a perfect recreation of an event, would it replace all art? Of course not.

We tell the same stories over and over again, and not just the same theme, but also quite literally the same story. Is there a definitive Hamlet? Which actor is the best at portraying James Bond? I don’t think we would ever find the “best” one and then stop. But these are fictional characters.

Jesse James has been portrayed in a lot of film.
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0000001/

Here is an example of Joan of Arc.
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0027188/

What if it was a less romantic character?
Alyssa Milano, Drew Barrymore, and Noelle Parker are played Amy Fisher in TV movies 1992 or 1993. I think this would be really interesting to view the news coverage of this story and ask why we retold this story we all knew and how did the filmmakers do it differently? The results may be less artistic and more financial.

Who has played Adolf Hitler, C. S. Lewis, George Washington, Richard Nixon, Pablo Picasso, John Quincy Adams, and will play Alfred Hichcock in a film next year?

A Leavisite-style reading Sister Knowles’ “If I Were a Boy”
(Side note: Did anyone listen to the BC Jean version?)
This type of reading is driven by the moral convictions without taking form, structure, genre, etc. into consideration.

I wonder if we will read “I’m Glad I’m a Boy! I’m Glad I’m a Girl!” in class.
Beyoncé is saying that men should not be able to get away with behavior simply because it is typical of their sex. Who is letting loved ones get away with unacceptable behavior. Here is post from youtube under the video:

“soberbob0911
I think most attractive cops can't help it...they are always in positions that put them into meeting other attractive persons ...the cop's spouse should know what they're getting into, either sex. Just from what I've seen with cops I know.”

Are there a lot of attractive criminals? I really just wanted to post that because of one phrase he uses, which might be my most hated phrase: can’t help it. That is one of the major purposes of me being here on earth: to learn to help it. Stereotypes and gender roles should not limit us.
Why do we let ourselves off the hook with such a mentality as to suggest we can’t do anything other than the what is currently appealing?

I am way over the 500 words and I ‘m sorry. I’m sure we’ll discuss this is class.

TIPRR 8

In tenet 9 of the Ten Tenets, it states that “What is valued in literature is the ‘silent’ showing and demonstrating of something, rather than the explaining, or saying, of it.” In my English classes on creative writing back in high school, my English teacher pursued the necessity to clearly explain what is happening and never do the “telling” of that thing. We had to show what was happening, not tell what was happening in the story. What seems to be paramount in this tenet is that discussion of an idea as merely an idea is poor use of “literature” and therefore a disservice to the art form. Instead, literature should be “showing” what is happening and allowing the ideas to organically grow from the context of the action itself rather than the imposition, by the author, of meaning because of self-reflexive discussion or the mere words used to didactically imply a specific agenda. I would say in film this is possibly demonstrated by our recent watching in Film History of “M” and how the action was played out without the subtext of music helping us to feel a particular way but instead we are shown the story and derive our own meaning from the unfolding of events. This approach in our study of media would have use concentrating on what is “happening” in regard to the media act more so than a concentration on the idea agenda of the author. This could be useful if we are trying to understand the moral implications of the actions taken in-and-of-themselves rather than the stated purposes and objectives of the media authors. Such a separation would be useful in determining through analysis, however, if the author is necessarily meeting their prescribed agenda or not – a step to a full analysis of the media.

For me, from a Leavisite approach, the moral argument of the music video is a look at “commitment to the self” and “commitment to the other” and ultimately asks which commitment will bring lasting happiness. Of course, the disaster is that when you do take for granted the other and commit only to yourself, no one ends with happiness. The meaning is inherent in the lyrics, first of all, in the altered, reprised chorus, “You don’t care how it hurts / Until you lose the one you wanted / Cause you’re taking her for granted / And everything you had got destroyed.” This is displayed in the course of action as the female character in the “male role” as the police officer, despite the possible “improvement” that is alluded to that a girl would do a better job in being a boy (i.e. “a better man”) is subverted by her actions not being unlike those that could be expected of the man, as is also reflected in the lyrics which say merely that we (both sexes) believe that we would do a better job but are, in fact, different in our actions regardless of what we think. Of note is that she, in the male role, actually continues to approach the role from an inherently female perspective having the “come ons” from men when it would be expected that she, if truly fulfilling the male role, would be doing the predatory role that the men were portraying and doing the “coming on” to the men. Thus, a woman in the same position would still be a woman in her actions (more about acceptance of male flirtation) but would nonetheless be no different than the man if merely concerned with commitment to self over commitment to the other. The shift at the end between perspectives shows that it is possible for both to achieve the same moral grievance and emphasizes that if the individual (regardless of gender) is only concerned with themselves, everyone will be unhappy.

TIPPR 8

Prompt #1

As Barry explains it, Liberal Humanism contends that, " a literary text contains its own meaning within itself" and although context of the socio-political, literary/historical, or autobiographical background of a text is valuable, the information is not necessary to properly explicate the text. Applying this theory to my classroom means that although it might be nice for my students to know that Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote "Uncle Tom's Cabin" in an effort to rally others to the abolitionist cause the information is not necessary to examine the text and decipher its meaning.

This also has implications for media studies because we are now free to examine any text and evaluate it for meaning without knowing anything about the creator. I can watch District 9 and I don't need to know anything about the cultural background of the filmmaker to properly understand the movie. If it sounds like I'm being a little sarcastic it's because I find this idea completely ridiculous. I suppose it is possible to examine a text's aesthetics without knowing anything about the context in which it was created but I do not believe you can gain an understanding of the author's intent without knowing something about the context. I suppose a liberal humanist may argue that it doesn't matter what the author's intent was because the critic is not concerned with intended purpose only in what is present on the page but I can't help feeling that this lends itself to a very shallow understanding of most texts.

Prompt #2

First, I should say that I love Beyonce and am very familiar with a lot of her videos and music and I found it difficult to distance myself from that contextual knowledge for the purposes of this activity. With that said, in just listening to the song and reading the lyrics it seems that Beyonce was describing "boy" behavior as selfish, unfaithful, etc. and contrasting that with the behavior she would exhibit if she were a boy, understanding, sensitive etc. This seems like a fairly classic take on the battle of the sexes, men are brutes, women are long suffering and so on. It becomes more interesting when examining the lyrics in combination with the visual imagery of the video. In the lyrics Beyonce places herself in a dual role as both the insensitive jerk and the sensitive boy who understands the pain that he is capable of inflicting on his partner, yet the visual imagery shows Beyonce acting solely as the loutish jerk with no moments of sensitivity to alleviate the behavior. Perhaps then we are to understand that it doesn't matter if you are a boy or girl because both sexes are equally capable of misbehaving in a relationship despite the author's protestations that girls would act any differently from their male counterparts. The takeaway lesson here would be that we are all capable of acting poorly in a relationship and that we should all make an effort to be sensitive to our partners and treat them as we would like to be treated.

TIPRR 8 -- If You Liked It Then You Should Have Put a Theory On It

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.

TIPRR 8

Prompt 1/Reading:
As I looked through the "10 Tenants of Liberal Humanitarianism," it became very obvious to me why Sharon said that this stuff would ring pretty true with us; much of this certainly coincides with my own personal convictions regarding literature. Two, specifically, jumped out at me because I feel they go hand-in-hand and because these are things that I discuss with my students on a regular basis:

1-"Good literature is of timeless significance."
2-"Human nature is essentially unchanging."

There is one reason that I chose to teach English-the literature. I have always felt that when interacting with a text, one is able to learn about life. Why is this possible? Because good literature contains universal elements that transcend time and space. Because of these universal elements and because of the consistency of human nature (or at least some aspects), no matter where or when you are reading, good literature can apply to you in some way; you can learn from it. The specific example that I've been dealing with these past few weeks is that of The Scarlet Letter. Does it have timeless significance? I say yes, and here's why: while my students will never be adulterating Puritan Women living in the mid 1600s, there are still elements of the novel that directly connect to them, now. Do we still deal with issues of love, hate, jealousy, and hypocrisy? Yes we do. Do people still feel guilt when they do something wrong, and do they sometimes take the self-deprecation a bit too far when they have "messed up"? Of course they do. Why? Because human nature remains essentially unchanged, even though the setting does not.

So what does this mean for studying media? Well, I think that it means that, just as literature has become a means of transmitting meaning by accessing universal elements within humans, there will be other pieces of new media that will be able to do that very same thing. I think we're already seeing that with various films...there are some that just seem to speak to a very wide audience, allowing them to learn and grow through their interaction with the film. I also think that we're starting to see a "canon" of film develop, much like the literary canon. Eventually, I think, there will be at least one section of that canon labeled as "timeless" because it will move across time and space as something that is more than just entertaining.

Prompt 2/"Practical Criticism":
Beyonce's video, for me, examines the double standard regarding what is acceptable for men vs. women within a relationship, but I think that this take on it may a bit feminist. Practically, it is evident that the video addresses the universal nature of people by implying the question, "How would you like it if I acted that way?" By juxtaposing the girlfriend's day with the boyfriend's day, the lyrics of the song are illustrated until the climax, when the roles reverse. At this point, when the viewer realizes that the first half was really a reversed depiction of the couple's actual in the relationship, he/she is jarred into paying attention to the message-that treating your significant other in this way (ignoring them, flirting with others, making them look stupid at parties, etc.) is hurtful. In addition, the formatting of the video is also very organic when looked at with regards to the lyrics; it makes a lot of sense to have the couple swap places-it's very effective in conveying the moral.

TIPRR/Response Oct 20—Peter Barry, 1-35

Tuesday, October 20, 2009—Peter Barry, 1-35

TIPPR/response #8 -- Intro to Contemporary Theory and Critical Approaches to Viewing, Reading, Thinking and Writing (Barry 1-35) In his Introduction and first chapter, Barry has a great deal to say about his own experience as well as the history of British literature and criticism. Not all of it is equally valuable. Please focus your attention on pp. 1-7 and 12 to 25, with particular attention to 6, 16-20, and 31-35. (You’re looking for central scholars, points of view, and concepts. Try not to be put off by Barry’s extreme “Britishness” and his devotion to literature.)

Prompt 1/Reading: Select one of the “Ten Tenets of Liberal Humanism” (i.e., its half hidden curriculum or underlying assumptions) or “Recurrent Ideas of Theory.” Clearly summarize your understanding of the concept; give a possible example of how it might operate in literature, dramat or film; and speculate on what it might mean for studying media.

Prompt 2/Close Reading/'Practical Criticism" of Beyonce's If I Were a Boy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c0wqoj3lEM) After carefully considering what Barry says about Leavisite style reading and examining his Leavisite-style close reading of Edgar Allan Poe’s story, “The Oval Portrait, please do a similar close reading/practical criticism of Beyonce’s If I Were a Boy.
(The lyrics of If I Were a Boy, written by B J Jean, are included below. The music video was directed by Jake Nova, a British music video, advertising and feature film director.)

Response: Please comment on one of your colleague’s entries on either the reading or analysis of the music video.

(Since I'm new to this, if you have any questions, please e-mail me, sharon_swenson@byu.edu)


Lyrics “If I Were A Boy” by B.J. Jean

“Intimacy”
“Honesty”
“Commitment”
“You.”
“ Me.”

“If I were a boy
even just for a day
I'd roll out of bed in the morning
and throw on what I wanted and go

“Drink beer with the guys
and chase after girls
I'd kick it with who I wanted
and I'd never get confronted for it
cause they stick up for me

“If I were a boy
I think I could understand
How it feels to love a girl
I swear I'd be a better man
I'd listen to her
Cause I know how it hurts
When you lose the one you wanted
Cause he's taking you for granted
And everything you had got destroyed

“If I were a boy
I would turn off my phone
Tell everyone it's broken
so they'd think that I was sleeping alone

“I’d put myself first
and make the rules as I go
Cause I know that she’ll be faithful,
waiting for me to come home, to come home.

“If I were a boy
I think I could understand
How it feels to love a girl
I swear I'd be a better man
I'd listen to her
Cause I know how it hurts
When you lose the one you wanted
Cause he's taking you for granted
And everything you had got destroyed

“It's a little too late for you to come back
Say it's just a mistake,
think I'd forgive you like that
If you thought I would wait for you
you thought wrong

Him: “When you act like that, I don’t think you know how it makes me look. Or feel.”
Her: “Act like what? Why are you so jealous? It’s not like I’m sleeping with the guy.”
Him: “What?”
Her: “What?”
Him: “I”. . . . huh. . .laugh . . .”said,. . .I said, ‘Why are you so jealous?” “It ain’t like I’m sleeping with the girl.”

But you're just a boy
You don't understand
and you don't understand, ohhhh
How it feels to love a girl
Someday you wish you were a better man
You don't listen to her
You don't care how it hurts
Until you lose the one you wanted
Cause you're taking her for granted
And everything you had got destroyed

But you're just a boy