TIPRR 13-Cultural Materialism Has Nothing To With Shopping...

I was really hoping that it would. But alas...

So, in looking at Cultural Materialism, as Barry mentions, it seems that the huge majority has dealt with Shakespearean texts. However, when looking at "What cultural materialists do," the very first thing listed is that:

"1. They read the literary text...in such a way as to enable us to 'recover its histories,' that is the context of exploitation from which it emerged.
2. At the same time, they foreground those elements in the work's present transmission and contextualising which caused those histories to be lost in the first place" (180).

So, if I understand correctly (and I accept that I may be off base here), the idea is to take a look at the context/histories of the text's origin and then examine the text, with that knowledge, in the context of the present, focusing specifically on why those histories have been lost.

When examining Chosen, I would assume that most of us feel the same: it's not so old that its "histories" have been lost. Yet, the use of the Tibetan child as the "chosen" one allows for some examination of the context of exploitation.

2001, the year The Hire series was released, marked the 50th anniversary of China's reoccupation of Tibet. In May of that year, President Bush met with the Dalai Lama in the Oval Office, resulting in strained relations with China.

Analyzing Chosen in light of this knowledge, we are able to "recover its history" and its "context of exploitation." By centering this advertisement on the Tibetan "chosen child" one could say that BMW was making a statement about the necessity of helping the oppressed Tibetan people, further putting the white car and the better driver on the side of "good." At the same time, one could say that BMW was exploiting the plight of the Tibetans in order to sell cars.

So, what does that mean in the context of today, eight years later? Why were these histories lost? Is it because the Tibetan plight has taken a backseat to more pressing matters, like Tiger Wood's extra-marital affair? Is is because as a nation, we are trying to improve our relationship with China and so we gloss over the situation? Is it because we no longer care?

Analyzing Chosen now, one is able to see that BMW's use of the Tibetan imagery emphasizes the "otherness" of the Tibetan culture and brings their plight again to the forefront. In looking at the corrupted monk in the end, could one possibly pull out a statement regarding some of the corrupted means of dealing with the Tibetans? Are there people who are being "bought off" in order to not aid these people? Do we need to be more like Mr. Owen in our endeavors to help the Tibetans? I certainly think that taking a lesson from Chosen would be a bit more worthwhile than examining the ins and outs of Tiger Wood's life.

TIPRR 12-The One after Thanksgiving Break

WARNING: Too much turkey inhibits analytical abilities.



So...Psychoanalytic or Feminist Criticism, eh? While both address very interesting ideas, I think that for this week, I will focus on the feminist lens.

I think that the concept that I found to be the most intriguing in the reading is the idea that prose writing "is essentially a male instrument fashioned for male purposes" (121). With Virginia Woolf's statement "That is a man's sentence," it necessarily follows that there is a "woman's sentence." The ecriture feminine is obviously a realm of much conflict, but the idea that "men's writing" and "women's writing" differ seems kind of like a "duh" concept to me. It's in Kristeva's examination of the symbolic and the semiotic that some of those differences are made explicit.

So, how does all of this relate to Chosen? Well, after watching it again, all I have to say is this: apparently women don't need to buy cars. Or at least, they are not the target audience for this particular advertisement; there's not a single depiction of a woman in the film. In fact, one could argue that this particular brand of filmmaking is very NON-ecriture feminine; it screams "MANLY" in every way, from the male characters to the car chase to the cowboy boots that we have discussed extensively. There are guns, a (brief) fistfight, and most importantly, a rockin' vehicle, all things that appear extensively in films created by men, for men. Is this particular "language" accessible to females? Sure; all it takes is one glance into the theatre on opening night of the new Bond film to see that women can "get it" (though there could be some argument that the item that is the most accessible to women is Daniel Craig himself).

So, how about an ecriture feminine for film? Much like the elements discussed in the text, I would assume that they would include much more "poetic" filmmaking-longer shots with softer lighting, more romance, and less fighting. What would Chosen look like from this angle? I'm guessing it be more reminiscent of a Jane Austen adaptation rather than a Bond film.

TIPRR 11-The One with the Disclaimer

I know this has happened to us all, but I really should stop reading others' responses before I post my own. I'd like to at least pretend that I have original thoughts. So, as a result, I am going focus one element that interested me in the reading: Althusser's idea of interpellation.

According to Barry, interpellation, as defined by Althusser, is "The 'trick' whereby we are made to feel that we are choosing when really we have no choice" (158). Althusser goes on further to assert that capitalism "thrives on this trick" my making "us feel like free agents ('You van have any colour you like...') while actually imposing things upon us ('...as long as it's black')" (158).

As I read through this description and thought about it, while I may not agree that this is true 100% of the time, I found myself exploring various situations in which this is the case in our capitalistic society. Most of the instances I could think of were highly manipulative, but still, they were there.

One specific thought I had in relationship to this was, "That follows along with Heather's dating philosophy." My friend Heather, before she got married, had very specific opinions regarding male/female dating relationships. And while this really has nothing to do with "class systems" and Althusser may roll over in his grade when I make this comparison, here it goes... Heather believes (or did, anyways-I think marriage has changed a few things for her) that all relationships are initiated, directed, and controlled by the woman. According to her, if a girl wants to date, she has to get out there, find the boy, and then do everything she can to convince him to fall in love with her. While this is all fine and dandy, the trick is this: while doing all of this, the woman must make sure that the boy is convinced that every step was HIS idea, that he chose her initially, that he was the one to make the first move, that he decided that he couldn't live without her and that she had absolutely nothing to do with that process (other than being her attractive, adorable self, of course). The connection, I feel, is in the idea that the boy does believe he has a choice, but the girl has made it very difficult to choose anything but her. Interpellation on a personal level. Tricky, tricky.

Now on to Chosen. As Jeff and Erika mentioned, and as we've discussed in class, it's a commercial. Many would say that commercials in and of themselves are tools of capitalism; Althusser, himself, lists the media as an ideological structure that is sympathetic to the state and the political or economic status quo. But even if you don't go quite that far, commercials are designed to sell stuff. They promote a specific product, in this case BMW.

Now, looking at this specific commercial from a Marxist perspective, I would venture to say that the very design of this film is to "maintain the economic status quo." After all, BMW is known to be a car for the upper class, the wealthy, and the advertising of this product is done in such a way that its meaning is accessible to this upper-echelon of people.

For example, the entire structure of the commercial series designed around the hire is very "high-brow," taking various directors and having them create mini films centered on this one specific brand of automobile. What is created is supposedly "art" rather than "advertising." Classifying the films as "art" already begins to differentiate the audience (and therefore the buyers). After all, it is only when basic needs are met that one is able to be concerned with art at all, thereby eliminating the lower-class from the pool of potential viewers.

In addition, in Chosen, the subject matter itself is another indication that this advertisement is focused on a very specific "class" of people. Who has the time and means to know/learn about the Tibetan culture and people? Certainly not those who are slaving away 14 hours a day at minimum wage just to make ends meet. And then to make the connection between Ang Lee and the Hulk band-aid? It's as if there's a secret code that flows throughout this films that says "if you understand this, then you belong with us and are worthy of purchasing this car." Starting out at somewhere around $40,000, it is clear that this is not a car that can be purchased by the "lower class" of "hard-working folk," and this advertisement does everything in its power to reinforce that fact.

**Disclaimer: After reading this over again, I'm not even sure if I agree with myself here. Maybe I'm just not that Marxist. I'll let you know on Tuesday. **

TIPRR 10

I remember when I was first introduced to literary theory at the ripe old age of 18, postcolonialism was emphasized so little that I honestly don't remember even studying it at all. However, when I took a class from Gloria Cronin 7 years later, postcolionalism had come so much to the forefront that it was the lens through which we examined all of the literature we studied. I've often wondered WHY this was the case, and it wasn't until reading Barry this week that I came to appreciate that this lens is a relatively new one in the repertoire of literary theory. I certainly think it's a good addition to the toolbox, and the philosophy of the theory interests me greatly. However, after reading Erika's post, I can simply say "Yeah," and leave it at that. So, I'm going to focus on postmodernism-something that's much less comfortable for me.

In the reading on postmodernism, I really appreciated the background on modernism and the attempt to clarify the differences between the two theories. As I read, one of the concepts that intrigued me was this postmodernist idea of the "loss of the real." Maybe it's because of my own personal experiences with losing tough of reality, but this really seemed like a plausible concept. The existence "hyperreality" where the lines between the real and imagined have been obscured? Just ask any 18-year-old-boy abut his relationship with his girlfriend, and I bet he'll be able to tell you a thing or two about not being able to live up to a "hyperreality"-- said girlfriend's "chick flick fantasies."

In relationship to this, Barry also discusses Baudrillard's "Simulacra and Simulations" and how signs have lost their "fullness," the state at which they are a "surface indication of an underlying depth or reality" (84). There are a series of steps in the "emptying" process, according to Baudrillard, as discussed by Barry, and it is within these steps that that I have examined Chosen this week.


According to Baudrillard, the steps in the creation of hyperreality through the loss of the real are as follows:
Step 1-The sign represents a basic reality.
Step 2-The sign misrepresents or distorts the reality behind it.
Step 3-The sign disguises the fact that there is no corresponding reality underneath.
Step 4-The sign bears no relation to any reality at all.

In thinking about how Barry distinguishes between the steps and about the paintings used to illustrate each category, I find that Chosen, as a text, falls most into the second step, with spill-over into the first and third at times. Here's why...

In the beginning, we see an artistic shot image of the dock, the boat, and the ice being broken up by the boat as the boat pulls in to the dock and the Tibetan man and child meet Clive Owen. The beauty of the image itself is a distortion of the reality behind it, because this is an romanticized representation of a dock at night. In addition, there would be more than two passengers simply standing on the deck-others are needed to "park" a boat safely, especially if there were ice on the water.

Then there's the car chase. This is where I feel that the sign does represent a basic reality, thereby falling into step 1, because there is in fact a BMW out there that looks and handles like this car. However, slipping back into step 2, the way in which the car chase is presented. One versus three, light versus dark, and then add the abilities of stunt drivers, the talents of cameramen, and the music...Bam you've now got a very inaccurate representation of what you, as a driver of the BMW, would ever be able to do. Plus, this car chase is highly romanticized in the favor of BMW in general (and why wouldn't it be-it's their commercial). After all, the car is shown in beautiful lighting, it doesn't get dirty, and the bullets seem to just bounce off leaving no holes. The one exception to this, the one bullet that does break through, is due solely to the fact that they are trapped, which is quickly remedied by ramming the other car out of the way, and even after ramming the other car, as Clive Owen drives away, the tail end doesn't seem to have been damaged. THAT is a romanticized version of the car. Does the car exist? Yes, but is it this incredible? Probably not. And that is why this text falls into Baudrillard's second step on the way to the loss of the real.

There is so much more to this "romanticization/misrepresentation" of reality within this text--neon pink poison and the ability to take out another man with one poorly-placed punch? However, I think I'll leave the rest of this discussion for class because I'm interested to hear what you guys think. Sorry about the length, yet again.

TIPRR 9--The one that's forever long...SORRY

It is so very interesting to me to see the difference between two theories that are so very closely named-it's obvious that the transition from one to the other was a bit more reactionary than it was progressive.

To be honest, when it comes to post-structuralism, I think that I'd feel more like a teacher who's looking for flaws in the author's tense, continuity, and pronoun agreement rather than a theorist who is unleashing the power of the text itself. Maybe I just haven't gotten my head around the "decentered" universe yet...I'm going to make some serious efforts in that area before my presentation on Tuesday, I promise.

Structuralism makes a bit more sense to me, but truthfully, it's a bit uncomfortable simply because as a lit teacher, I want to analyze the so-called egg! Taking a look at the chicken is great, but I REALLY like the egg and looking at it is so much more natural for me. So, here goes my attempt...feel free to correct and or mock.



In looking at a text from a structuralist point of view, there seem to be a variety of approaches one can pursue. Barthes identified five specific codes that can be used when examining a text: the proairetic code, the hermeneutic code, the cultural code, the semic code, and the symbolic code. These don't seem to be the only way of approaching a text using structuralism, however, and so in looking at Ang Lee's Chosen, I chose to be a bit more general, looking for the "underlying universal narrative structure" while still maintaining the conventions of a car commercial.

In examining Chosen, it is very clear that this is not your "typical" automobile advertisement-the length alone makes that obvious. In addition, you lack the typical "watch-the-car-go-as-the-voice-over-waxes-eloquent-about-its-many-fabulous-features" element. Rather, what you have is a film, and it's one that follows a very typical narrative structure in a very small amount of time.



Basic (VERY basic) narrative structure begins with an exposition, which sets up the characters and setting. In Chosen, once the credits have finished, the exposition takes all of about 23 seconds. Characters: boy and driver. Setting: stock/ship yard of some sort. In typical narrative structure, towards the end of the exposition you get a "call to action" which often introduces the main conflict of the narrative. In Chosen, the boy is handed over to the driver, thus intimating the call to action--get him where he needs to be safely, and the boy hands the driver a box stating that "It’s for later," indicating that what’s inside may be useful at a later time.

The next section, rising action, often consumes much of the rest of the text itself. It is in this section that the texts builds in suspense, the characters facing challenge after challenge, some of which move them toward the goal, and some of which are hindrances to progress. In Chosen, the rising action of the narrative consists of the car chase within the stockyard. The driver is able to maneuver his one (white) vehicle around the three (dark) vehicles of his opponents in his efforts to protect the boy. While they are shot at, it's not until they are completely trapped that one bullet is able to make it inside of the car. (But, he's able to anticipate the shot and tell the boy to duck just in time.) The challenge of being trapped gives the impression of being the ultimate climax, and the driver is able to conquer the opponent by using his BMW as a battering ram.

The climax of a typical narrative structure is the moment in which the culmination of events creates the peak of the conflict--it's the big battle between good and evil. The "I'm trapped; let's use my car as a battering ram" incident may initially seem to be the climax of Chosen, but it is not. This occurs when the driver arrives at the "safe house" to drop off the boy and the boy recognizes (from the black cowboy boots) that this man is not a good guy. So, yet again, the Driver must battle the bad guy--this time with fists, after scaling the outside wall and entering the room just as the boy is about to be shot with some neon pink liquid. THIS is the true climax of Chosen, the rescuing of the boy from the awful fate, in the nick of time.

Falling action shows the result of the climax, in this case, the spinning apparatus and the visual connection between the driver and the boy. And the denoument, or falling action, is the narrative's conclusion. In Chosen, this is done with the driver's return to the car and the box that is sitting in the passenger's seat. By opening the box and finding a bandage, the creator of this text is able to tie up the loose ends regarding the box's contents, as well as demonstrate just how close the driver came to meeting his own doom.

This text, in its limited time, follows the universal narrative structure, and thereby appeals to our sensibilities as consumers of stories. By doing this, Ang Lee and company are still able to sell us their product--the BMW. As you watch the film, it becomes clear that the driver has, by far, the superior vehicle. Not only is it white (a symbol for goodness) while the others are dark, but he is able to drive circles around them (literally), showing off the power of the car. By making the rising action of the narrative consist of mostly car chasing, BMW is able to show off their stuff, much like any other car commercial. Therefore, I, personally, think that while the structure is that of a narrative, this film still maintains advertising conventions. (And why wouldn't it? After all, isn't the ultimate point to sell cars?)

Okay--now I need your feedback...am I way off base on this structuralism thing, or am I on the right track? Again-so sorry for the length.

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 7

Reading Berg was a bit different this week, mostly because using unobtrusive research techniques seems so very different from the other types of research methodologies we’ve been examining. One thing I did appreciate, though, is that even though this type of research is more about “examining and assessing human traces,” Berg is still very insistent on the need to maintain and protect the privacy of the research subjects (268).

Throughout the reading, Berg uses various examples of research that has been done, through the use of various unobtrusive techniques as well as historiography, and to be honest, many of them sounded quite interesting. I mean, examining people’s garbage to determine alcohol use in a “dry” town? Using documents to look at the WKKK? Using oral history to illuminate the history of those who didn’t “win” in situations where the history is told by the victor? I find quite fascinating. I’m sure that there are other research studies done using these methods that I would find unbelievably boring, but because of his choice of examples, I found myself very engaged in the reading.

One question that I had, though, was in regards to visual ethnography. I went back and reviewed so that I could understand the difference between this and the photovoice technique discussed with action research last week, but now what I’m not sure about is how visual ethnography is unobtrusive. Berg uses two examples, one with Goffman’s research on gender in advertisements. This I can understand-advertisements are out there, documented in magazines, in newspapers, and on televisions everywhere. You wouldn’t have to bother/disturb anyone in the collection of the research materials here. But then he uses the example of Jackson’s Killing Time: Life in the Arkansas Penitentiary; this is the one I don’t understand. How is taking pictures of prisoners unobtrusive? Do the subjects not need to know that you’re photographing them? And if that is the case, aren’t there issues with using people’s images without their consent? Can anyone enlighten me here; what am I missing?

Just a couple of other things that I noticed/appreciated...

1-While it’s obviously important with all types of research, triangulation seems particularly vital in all of these types of research. You’ve GOT to have different lines of sight when you’re looking into the past, otherwise you can wind up with skewed data and conclusions.

2-The idea of examining physical erosion and accretion is quite intriguing, but it seems to be useful only in very specific situations, though I did find the idea of looking at the amount of dust on books to measure their popularity quite unique. (I probably would have chosen to first look at the library databases to see how often the books had been checked-out.)

3-I really like how much Berg stresses the fact that we need to make sure that, when we’re doing historical research, we don’t impose our modern understanding and cultural judgments on the time/culture we are researching. This goes back to the ever-present discussion of objectivity, I think. In this case, however, we can recognize that we are wearing a very specific set of lenses while examining our research, and we can even go out and try to develop the schema needed to better understand the data within its own historical/cultural context.

Okay, I’m getting a bit long-winded here, so I’ll just finish up by saying that while I think that these kinds of research can be immensely rewarding and very interesting, it’s going to take a bit more thinking on my part to see how I could use it in my day-to-day educational practice. I know that there are ways, but I’m so stinkin’ pragmatic that if I can’t see an immediate, practical, benefit I’d rather choose another method.

TIPRR 6

Hands on a Camera Stuff: (I'm not 100% sure if this is the kind of thing that we're looking for here.)

Problem Statement: Research proposes to examine BYU students' awareness of community in relationship to their participation in service learning.

Research Questions:
1-How do the BYU students feel about the Provo community in general? (Before the service learning experience)
2-How do the BYU students interact with the greater Provo community, outside of BYU? (Before, during, and after the service learning experience)
3-How do the students at the Hands on a Camera schools represent the community at large?
4-What are the BYU students' motivations for becoming involved in Hands on a Camera?

****************

I'm going to just take a second and talk about nothing related before I move into this week's reading. Please bear with me...

So, I'm currently sitting in Cedar City, chaperoning the High School Shakespeare competition, and this day has been nothing but a reminder of why I absolutely love my job. I have the chance to work with the most amazing people; these kids are just so wonderful, and they are such a blessing to me. I think that it's absolutely insane that there are teachers out there who don't appreciate the joy that can come from fully investing yourself in these people. Really, what's the point if that isn't it?

As I've been observing over the past few days, I have thought about this particular group of young people, and how interesting it would be to do an ethnography of children, ages 14-18, who choose to come to this thing. I mean, seriously, Shakespeare? For FUN? That's a very particular group, and it'd be interesting to take a closer look at it. But, that's more last week's reading...

This week, as I read, it made perfect sense to me why action research is of particular interest to those interested in teaching practices. I am of the opinion that if you are a good teacher, you are constantly striving to improve your pedagogy and find more effective and engaging ways to educate, and according to Berg, that seems to be at the core of action research-a desire to improve something.

Like the other research methods we've discussed, whether generally or specifically, this must be systematically planned out and executed and it must be reproducible. But unlike some of the other methods, I love that one of the main ingredients in your action research is the actual stakeholder. From the reading, it seems that with this research there's no real question of needing to "maintain a value-neutral position" or worrying about "becoming invisible" simply because everyone's in on it, and the ultimate goal is improvement. Did I interpret this correctly, or am I being naive here?

As I read about some of the basic information about action research, I kept thinking about something that has been going on at Lehi High for the past year or so--accreditation. Now, I know that the accreditation process probably isn't a full-blown action based research project, but every few years, schools are asked to gather data and compile information regarding various aspects of the school community in the effort to make improvements over the next few years. This is that progressive spiral of continuous improvement that shows up on page 23 of Glori Smith's thesis. Many of the underlying objectives are the same, I think.

And then there is research using case studies. I can see the value of case studies, especially in that it often opens up opportunities for discovery or the development of new theory. I can see how easy it would be, however, to make broad generalizations based on one specific case study, and I agree with Berg when he says that we need to be careful not to do just that. Can we make other hypotheses based on our findings? Sure. Berg makes the very valid point that "human behavior is predictable" and therefore, this type of research does have scientific value (330). But we can't make any conclusive decisions based on one person/situation.

Overall, I really do like both of these methodologies for research. I think that they would be highly interesting as well as informative, depending on the situation. As we learn about the different methodologies, it becomes more and more evident why we have to be so meticulous in our research design so as to be the most effective in meeting our objectives.

TIPRR 5

Well, I have to say I was totally excited to log on and see that Erika had already posted, because I thought, "Yea! An opportunity to 'critically discuss' the reading in relationship to her post!" Then I read it and said, "I totally agree." I know, lame, but if you note the time dated on this post, it's 12:24 pm. I'm home from work, sick-and there have been cold medications involved, so please cut me some slack for some of the randomness that may follow...

I actually quite enjoyed the reading on ethnography, and, like Erika, I was amazed to find that in reading Ben's paper, I am actually interested in ham radio. Who knew? I think that this is the incredibly appealing thing about ethnographic field research as presented by Berg...it's vastly interesting. As he discussed in last week's reading, we really can find research opportunities in everything, so why not choose something that we're into? In addition, as Erika mentioned as well, it is through the ethnographic style of researching that you are able to observe interactions and relationships, the things that make humans, well, humans.

I thought that Berg's discussion of methodology was a bit hard to follow in places, but much of what was said made a lot of sense, and I'm sure it will be helpful as we move into our own research processes. One particular section that I really appreciated was when he addressed the fact that many times, the researcher's mere presence can alter the research field. While discussing the various forms of invisibility within the research setting, I liked that positives and negatives of the different options are mentioned, and while Berg does say that these things need to be taken into account while planning the research process, he does not go so far as to point and say "this is the best way."

Another point that is discussed that I appreciated is this idea that researchers don't live in a vacuum, and so while we may try to "maintain a value-neutral position" it very rarely happens (200). He makes a good point in saying that even in the choice of research topic we are demonstrating a special interest/affinity for a specific topic/subject. I am of the opinion that because we, as human beings with human experiences, are the sum total of all of our experiences in life, we can never truly look at things through a "clear lens." (Is it EVER possible to be truly objective? This is a question I have wondered about for a while...)

I think that this is why I really the idea of subjective disclosure within the research publication. It allows you, as the researcher, to be human. While I read Ben's paper, I felt that he did a really good job of being a human researcher. He is up front regarding his place within the research, about his knowledge and interest going in to the project as well as his findings and the strengths and weaknesses of the research process itself. And regardless of the weaknesses, he was still able to come up with some really cool findings.

I like the idea of ethnography, and if someone were to ask me why, I think this is how I'd respond: I'm interested in people and their relationships and interactions. This is why I teach literature...it's not something that can be broken down into quantitative data. I think that ethnography provides a means for researching the non-quantifiable humanness that I love so much.

TIPRR 4

So, in honor of Jeff, I am trying something new this week. I'm going to 1-keep it short and 2-type directly into this text box, say what I think, and not obsess about it all too much. Be proud, this is a big step for me.

So, first off, did anyone else feel as though these first few chapters were written for their parents? I'm not trying to criticize, and I even appreciated the simplicity of some of the ideas and concepts presented, but when Berg went into depth explaining Wikipedia, I actually looked at the copyright date to see how old this text is. Are there really people out there (who are over 17 years old and college educated) who don't know to be wary of Wikipedia?


The other thing that seemed to be a bit archaic to me was the idea of using “The Two-Card Method” for data compilation. I remember the days of note cards, hundreds of them piled on my kitchen table as I wrote my very first research paper on “Man’s Inhumanity to Man” in 9th grade. (I think my dad helped me with the title.) But that was before everyone had a laptop on hand at all times. Are cards, even electronic ones, really still the way to go? I’m not sure.

On a more positive note, I teach research methods in my classes; it still seems to fall very heavily in the English department’s lap to make sure that students know how to do research. As I read this week’s reading, I was very happy to see that much of the methodology and advice given here is pretty much what I teach my students, in much a more simple manner of course. It’s nice to know I haven’t been teaching “false doctrine.” In addition, I think that for any kid/student/person who was initially taught how to research correctly, much of Berg’s instruction here will be much more intuitive.


In addition, I had an interesting experience this week. My little brother submitted his master’s thesis yesterday, and, as I am the English person in the family, he asked me to edit it for him before he sent it to be printed. Well, he’s in England, so I go the copy in the middle of the night Sunday/Monday and had to rush through the reading of it so that he could make his deadline. Oh how I wish I would have read Berg before Landon’s thesis. His “Literature Review” and “Methodology” sections would have made much more sense, and while I assumed that his use of “snowballing” did not, in fact, refer to the fluffy stuff that he’s often aimed at my head, I actually get it now. Too bad he submitted the thing today…though I’m not lamenting the fact that I don’t have to reread it.

Word Count: 474 :-)

TIPRR 3

As I began the reading this week, I really appreciated how well it dovetailed with our conversation in class, especially in regards to "becoming critical." In the very beginning of chapter 7, Buckingham warns us to be careful with regards to our students. He says, the "use of the term 'critical' can reflect a dangerous kind of arrogance. In demonstrating our ability to define the truly 'critical' approach, we are making a powerful claim for our own authority. And if we are 'critical', those who do not share our views are, by implication, either ignorant and misguided or actively engaged in an attempt to obscure the truth" (108). We discussed this very thing the other evening in reference to the questions that we ask our students and the way in which we limit their scope sometimes through our personal line of inquiry. Buckingham warns us against this because as he points out, when critically reading, we often run into situations where our reading is the only "truly critical" reading, and the kids begin to play "let's guess what the teacher is thinking." And let's be honest, this is about as effective as spoon-feeding them information and then asking them to regurgitate it. This is something that I know I need to pay closer attention to in my classroom, opening up the focus of readings and interpretations in order to validate many well thought out and articulate readings, even if they don't coincide with my own.

Making a completely abrupt change with absolutely no natural transition, there was another thing addressed by Buckingham that I found very interesting in relationship to my own life. In chapter 8, while discussing creative production, Buckingham talks about a study done by Jeong in 2001. In this specific case, she was examining the balance within group work and found that "male students' greater expertise in aspects of production resulted in a clear division of labour: while the boys made the 'creative' decisions, the girls were mainly responsible for the organizational 'housework'" (130). This was so fascinating to me, because this is exactly how my yearbook class runs. I'm not 100% convinced that gender is the main differentiators, but my co-teacher and I are a perfect example of this division of labor...he does all of the creative work, the photos, layouts, etc. while I am the one doing all of the organizational work. The same holds true with our students as well; it is often the boys who come through with the more "artistic" stuff while the girls are much more pragmatic. I wonder why this is?

And a final word about the last couple of chapters: I really appreciated some of the teaching ideas presented here. I LOVE that there is a final focus on the need for reflection, rather than simply working toward one huge final product and then calling it done. I firmly believe that any sort of real, meaningful learning does have a significant element of reflection. (Now, whether or not I actually incorporate that into my curriculum is another story...) I also really appreciated the acknowledgment that "the realities of classroom practice are inevitably much more 'messy' and contradictory than the well-ordered universe of educational theory" (153). Thank you, Buckingham! Sometimes, all I want to hear is that "Mr. So-and-so Big Shot Theorist/Researcher" does recognize that sometimes real life is a bit more difficult than working in the world of theory, and because of that recognition, I'm much more willing to go our an at least try to see what I can do.

TIPRR 2

During class on Tuesday, I began thinking over something Amy pointed out, and I haven’t been able to completely resolve the issue within myself. And Buckingham, of course, only exacerbated my internal debate…

As we presented our fictional proposals regarding media education to the “administration,” it became evident that, even if unintentional, we all gave off an air or impression of using media as a means of getting into the “real/actual” curriculum of English/History. As I sat and listened to the discussion that followed, I began to wonder, “Is that such a bad thing? So what if Media is being used to purport an ascribed core curriculum? At least we, as teachers, are trying to integrate the technology into the classroom.”

As I continued to mull over this idea, I began the reading, and discovered that much of Buckingham’s text this week was directed at this very thing; making sure that we’re not confusing “media education” with “instructional technology.” (Maybe it wasn’t, but that’s what I found because that’s what has been on my mind—how’s that for a lens?)

So, as anyone could have probably guessed, the section on “Media education in language and literature teaching” was of particular interest to me due to its complete relevance with my life; however, it is not because I was able to read and say “Hey, I’m doing okay here.” In fact, I think I most identified with the statement on page 95 where Buckingham says, “At best, media education is often seen as a motivational tool—as a means to lead students to conventional print literacy or as a covert means of introducing them to the literary canon.” Could there be a more accurate description of how I currently approach media in my classroom? I think not. It’s sad, but true.

Now, I know I’m not as bad as many other, more “old-school” teachers. I, at the very least, do value media as text, and I have made the conversion to the idea that perhaps the term “literature” needs to be a bit broader. (Maybe we should change Literature classes to Textual Analysis classes or something?) But, I still cling to the literary canon like it’s a small child that will get crushed by all of the quickly passing new ideas that keep coming our way. I don’t think English teachers will be able to let it go completely; after all, it’s usually the literature that motivates people to teach English in the first place.

It is for this reason that I appreciated what Buckingham expressed on several occasions throughout the reading—that media education should be seen as an element of all curricular subjects. Using media production as a “method of learning which can be applied in many situations” is the key to converting students and especially teachers, I think. Because students are so completely consumed with what’s already required, forcing them to take a separate media education course seems impractical. And teachers, as over-worked and under-paid as they often are, need practical, applicable options for adaptation into their existing curriculum if this thing is ever going to get off the ground. Is it the best way? Probably not; it would probably be better to start from scratch, integrating media education into the very structure of the curriculum, connecting it all to the core and making sure that you’re actually teaching media literacy rather than just creating fun “activities” for kids. But the fact of the matter is that no (“good”) teacher I know has the time to do all that at once. (And honestly, the “bad” ones wouldn’t care enough to bother.)

I don’t know. Do I believe that media education is worthwhile? Of course I do, otherwise I wouldn’t be here. And something that I really appreciated about this week’s reading was all of the possible applications and means of teaching various concepts. It’s just that it seems SO big. It feels as though the entire American educational paradigm would have to shift in order to have any permanent, positive effect, which would involve eliminating a lot of old, entrenched thought processes (often found within the teachers themselves). But then I think about the fact that, even if no one else is bothering, I can affect my students, and if even one of them benefits from this embracing of their media-saturated culture, it’s been a successful endeavor.

(After rereading this, I apologize for the fact that I’ve made it sound as though the world revolves around me.)

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.