I took English 3 winter quarter of freshman year. It was the one requirement that I was really sure about wanting to get out of the way as soon as possible. A horrifying event in my life led to an almost complete dismissal of school, though I stupidly chose to stay enrolled. Two years later, I did a retroactive withdrawal of that quarter. It was as if that quarter never happened. My grades, the classes, etc. While it didn't help with the pain, my GPA (a number now so important to me) was raised a bit . After that though, I was pretty bad about staying on top of my graduation requirements. It has been a combination of my not checking in too often with letters and sciences, [amazing] procrastinating abilities, and overwhelming desire to stay as far away as possible from any class that strives to teach me which side of the paper my name goes on and shockingly, how many paragraphs actually make up a "good" essay. I've been writing a tremendous amount for four years now and am probably not going to want to do so meaninglessly on uninteresting and unimaginative topics.
I'm graduating soon though, realizing that I had to take both the lower and upper division English requirements before I receive my diploma. I reluctantly signed up for UWP 1, I chose it really because I liked the time and the building was pretty close to my apartment. To be perfectly honest, when I first read the syllabus, I was kind of intimidated. I've never written a blog and had always been weary of doing things online as my computer tends to well, suck. On top of that I wasn't sure how interested I'd be in delving into concepts of technology, especially in front of such an audience. I decided to attend class anyway, and I could not be happier that I did.
I don't know how many classes (let alone writting classes) I've enjoyed more than this one. The ubiquitous and seemingly simple subject matter has definitely furthered my ability and desire to look at and question the society in which we live. The class discussions have been wonderful, I thought the diversity of the group really added to them. I've never had an instructor take such interest in what her students had to say. Unlike many courses I've taken here, there were no ideologies imposed on us. We were asked to read further, dig deeper, understand how sociocultural and historical mechanisms are all intertwined. I do feel that my writing has improved over the course of this class, I have made sure to fill in the blanks. Not to present thoughts without really linking them or presenting another question. I've realized that I can always go a bit further, there are so many complex and unanswered questions yet to be explored and quite frankly I cannot wait to deal with them.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Keyword: Institution
The term Institution is derived from the Classical Latin institutionem, and the 1551 Old French institution, defined as an "established law or practice." The stem of the word in modern English is intitute, its definition revisited and revised throughout history and across societies from the early 1600s to today. The earliest definition deals with "purpose, design, plan, ordinance", while its later one (18th century) defines the term as "A society or organization intituted to promote some literacy, scientific, artistic, professional, or educational object." The OED has several definitions for the term Institution, the first being "The action of instituting or establishing; setting on foot or in operation; foundation; ordainment; the fact of being instituted." The second definition of the word is "The establishment or ordination of Sacrament of the Christian Church, esp. of the Eucharist, by Christ." As you move through the definitions we get a more "modern" explanation of the term: "The established order by which anything is regulated; system; constitution."
The constantly evolving term now encompasses a broader social context, but still has many of the implications it did in its origins. To institute, to create and maintain order through ideological definitions of it (it, being that order and organization). Ideologies are hegemonic ideas/beliefs utilized by very specific individuals to create the social frame in which we all live. An institution is the way in which those ideologies may be enforced to keep us from defying not only societal laws, rules, and regulations, but beliefs and expectations. Because we are social beings, we participate and interact in society each day throughout our lives. In these societies we consciously and unconsciously participate in various institutions. In fact, the term institution is used most commonly as social institution: the economic, educational, familial, medical, political, religious structures which "guide" our lives.
I will focus on the institution of education in America. In one definition, the OED cites education as "The systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young in preparation for the work of life." The "work of life"; the ability to live actively in ones particular society. Without the very basic education (development of language) one cannot interact with others. This education usually begins at home, it is the duty of a parent to introduce language to their child. With the basics being reinforced, that child can attend preschool ("pre" perhaps because the basic teachings include how/how not to act towards others). The lessons learned in these schools may be taught in the home but as we move "up", parents cannot necessarily replace teachers. Teachers are trained in the educational system and are hired by educational institutions to pass on their knowledge. It seems unquestionable that these instructors of "life" be recognized and compensated accordingly, yet they are still greatly undermined by the political institutions who support them financially. This may be a deterrent for many desiring going into education, which is a great problem considering the importance we as a society put on formal educational training.
Beginning with preschool (which includes three and four year olds), a school may be public or private. Because education is so highly valued in this country, the state provides it to citizens free of charge. Elementary schools are buildings with classrooms including desks, books, writing utensils, all paid for by the state; unless one attends private school. In this case, everything is paid for through donations by wealthy parents, family friends and companies. Thousands of dollars in tuition and a rigorous application process ensures not only a smaller, more intimate learning environment, but exposure to "superior" networks in the form of class homogeneity. Because of their class position, these students learn in finer facilities. Because of their parents class position, these students are often given other great advantages not available to those who cannot afford this form of education. As we move towards higher education (college, undergraduate and graduate), these inequalities become magnified because the state starts cutting its already shockingly low funding. Private schools are unattainable for many simply because of financial reasons. In many private schools, legacies are given priority, often overriding applicants' educational achievements.
Much like the economic principle of supply and demand, as education becomes more difficult to attain, its value goes up. The one who can afford college then, will be given priority over the one who cannot. In this way each societal institution is intertwined. In order to survive, we must participate in the economic system completely out of our control. And according to the American Dream, individuals control their own destinies. The harder one works, the more benefits they will see. Sadly, this philosophy is widely untrue. It is not simple meritocracy that governs our success, it is the strategic work of our country's institutions. If one cannot attain a "desirable" level of education for whatever reason, they are at a disadvantage.
The word institution has a root in the idea of regulation, control, instruction. As its definition expanded to include forms of public utility, it still remains that these systems maintain specific ideologies. Individuals will continue institutions unconsciously as they are all around us and so much a part of our socialization processes, and consciously (in the case of education) so as to be able to make money to survive and not be sanctioned against by the rest of society.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
The Restroom and Gender Identity
We encounter instructions each day. Instructions to remain law abiding by following quick, recognizable signs: "Stop", "Yield", "Don't smoke","Don't park", "Walk" "Don't Walk", etc. Specific colors, shapes and symbols are so commonly used to represent an action that they are automatically associated with that action (or refraining from it). Red automatically provokes a sort of danger: alerting an individual to stop for fear of an accident (or, at least that inevitable traffic ticket), be aware of high fire danger, and possibly the worst: the terrorists are coming! Yellow=yield. Be very aware. Move through the light with caution. Don't necessarily stop, but know that at any moment we may be at severe risk of terrorist attacks. Or someone may cross the street. Green seems to bring a bit of ease, we are good to go. It is safe to move forward.
I wondered for a while what I would explore for my semiotic analysis. I thought of street signs, advertisements, I noticed myself becoming hyper aware of signs I had not really questioned before our class discussions. Before I started my analysis though I had to continue the dreadful moving process. My apartment was finally ready, and so was I, to get all my things out of my boyfriends (very cluttered) room, kitchen, bathroom (etc). I went down to an equally cluttered leasing office thinking it would be a quick process including a sublease agreement a background check fee. I was so wrong. Tons of people flooded a kind of mean woman in a tiny room. I decided I would go in, take my form, and leave (for fear of getting yelled at). I saw my sign: the men and womens bathroom instantly caught my attention. I knew immediately that I wanted to explore these seemingly simple, yet actually immensely complex signs. Sadly, my camera and cord are still packed away with all other stuff. I thought I would have no trouble finding pictures of these signs online, we see them on almost every public bathroom door. I knew there were variations of the signs, but was surprised to find that pictures of the "standard" signs were actually not too common.
There are two bathrooms right next to each other in the leasing office. On each bathroom door are two blue placards with white writing. On the door to the left is a circular placard with a stick figure of a person wearing a dress in the middle of it. The word "women" is written in capital letters beneath the figure. Directly left of the door is a smaller rectangular placard. This one has a line down the middle of it, with the same stick figure on the left side, and a figure of a person in a wheel chair on the right. Like the circle, this placard had the word "women" written in capital letters underneath the figures. The other door has a triangular placard (tip facing upwards) with a stick figure of a person presumably wearing pants in the middle of it. The word "men" is written in capital letters beneath the figure. Like the first door, this one also has a smaller rectangular placard with a line down the middle of it. The man figure is on the left side of this line, while the wheelchair figure, identical to the one on the womens placard, is on the right. The word "men" is written underneath these figures.
I will begin with the colors in these signs. They are a pretty neutral (not neon, light, dark, or shiny) blue with plain white writing. I take the use of white and blue as a sort of direction. They are not using cautionary reds or yellows, or green which is recognized as a "go" color. They are simply distinguishing the gendered rooms for you, so that you will not walk into the "wrong" one. Initially, I wanted to say that these colors were not warnings but simply direction to the bathroom specifically designed for you and people of your same sex. In the mens bathroom you find urinals and stalls, and in the womens you only find stalls, as it is difficult for a woman to use a urinal. I noticed though that the colors used for bathrooms parallel those of handicap parking spots, which if ignored, entail a great fine. While there is no fine for using the "wrong" bathroom, there are definite social norms discouraging individuals from doing so. The simplicity and directory implication of the color have made it another that we take for granted, a law to follow so as to not get sanctioned by our peers.
Another, and perhaps not so blatant, gender "sign" is the shape of the placards. The womens bathroom is always signified by a circle, while the mens is a triangle. A woman's sign has no corners, while the man's has three sharp ones. Women are "softer", a continuous orbit rarely diverging from its usual path. Not to say that ciclical patterns are not complex, I actually think that the movement away from, but the inevitable return to the beginning all along creating a perfect path is fascinating. That perfect path though, is hard to achieve. It is very difficult to draw a perfect circle, let alone live a perfectly balanced life. Men (triangles) seem to have more power here. The corners may be where they command attention, where they may make their own rules. While triangles do always have three corners, their degrees vary and there are thousands of shapes and sizes that come about from them. It may seem to be "reading too much into it", but one would be surprised at the way we unconciously attach shapes and colors to each gender.
I began to think of the sex and gender implications of these signs. My initial concern is the lack of distinction between these two concepts. Sex is biological and gender is socially constructed. Over time, the physical differences (notably hormonal differences) between the two sexes have manifested themselves socioculturally into normative patterns of behavior distinguishing the two sexes. We have an incessant desire to identify and group individuals in clean cut social categories. That is gender. It is also race, and class. We use these socially constructed groups to understand people. By grouping the sexes, we can sanction against "bad" behavior. Women have children, wear dresses, cook and clean while men wear pants and act as the breadwinner, supporting his family given his "inherent" strength mentally and physically. Gender roles are "taught" almost as soon as one enters the world. Boys' rooms are made masculine with shades of blue while girls' rooms are pink and fluffy, assuming the "soft" nature of women. Throughout our lives gender differentiation is greatly encouraged. These differentiations are not biologically based, but like all social manifestations have been taken to be unquestionable truth. Those who do not adhere to traditional gender roles are discriminated against.
The distinction between the mens and womens rooms is one of the ways that gender is played out in our particular society. The words "men" and "women" are written on the door in English, which unlike the stick figure, is not universal. Those who cannot read the language simply look to the figures to see which bathroom is the right one for them. It is understood that the woman wears a dress, while the man wears pants. The problem here: many women do not wear dresses, many men do. Under "Gender", New Keywords discusses the conflict between gender identity and biological sex. Transsexuals are often said to feel as though they were "born in the wrong body". There is a disconnect between the definition of who they should be based on the socially assigned roles of their sex (gender), and how they feel they truly identify. Which bathroom should these individuals use? Physically, each sex can easily use either bathroom. It is the social implications that keep us from doing so. We are directed to one of two groups, if one cannot define themselves in such terms they are greatly discriminated against.
The last part of these signs I found interesting was the smaller, rectangular handicap sign next to each door. I found a third group here, the disabled individual. The rectangular shape appears identically beside each bathroom door. I wondered why this shape is not gendered, and began to think again about discrimination and movement from societal norms. Don't get me wrong, those signs are important, they announce that there is a stall easily accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. I wondered though, don't all bathrooms have that larger stall? If not, shouldn't they? If we can take the time to differentiate by putting urinals in one restroom and only toilets in another, shouldn't it be assumed that those rooms will accommodate to all individuals of that specific gender (at least)? I saw these signs as another way to divide and group "like" people in our endless attempt to understand (in a wildly stereotypical way) each and every individual.
I wondered for a while what I would explore for my semiotic analysis. I thought of street signs, advertisements, I noticed myself becoming hyper aware of signs I had not really questioned before our class discussions. Before I started my analysis though I had to continue the dreadful moving process. My apartment was finally ready, and so was I, to get all my things out of my boyfriends (very cluttered) room, kitchen, bathroom (etc). I went down to an equally cluttered leasing office thinking it would be a quick process including a sublease agreement a background check fee. I was so wrong. Tons of people flooded a kind of mean woman in a tiny room. I decided I would go in, take my form, and leave (for fear of getting yelled at). I saw my sign: the men and womens bathroom instantly caught my attention. I knew immediately that I wanted to explore these seemingly simple, yet actually immensely complex signs. Sadly, my camera and cord are still packed away with all other stuff. I thought I would have no trouble finding pictures of these signs online, we see them on almost every public bathroom door. I knew there were variations of the signs, but was surprised to find that pictures of the "standard" signs were actually not too common.
There are two bathrooms right next to each other in the leasing office. On each bathroom door are two blue placards with white writing. On the door to the left is a circular placard with a stick figure of a person wearing a dress in the middle of it. The word "women" is written in capital letters beneath the figure. Directly left of the door is a smaller rectangular placard. This one has a line down the middle of it, with the same stick figure on the left side, and a figure of a person in a wheel chair on the right. Like the circle, this placard had the word "women" written in capital letters underneath the figures. The other door has a triangular placard (tip facing upwards) with a stick figure of a person presumably wearing pants in the middle of it. The word "men" is written in capital letters beneath the figure. Like the first door, this one also has a smaller rectangular placard with a line down the middle of it. The man figure is on the left side of this line, while the wheelchair figure, identical to the one on the womens placard, is on the right. The word "men" is written underneath these figures.
I will begin with the colors in these signs. They are a pretty neutral (not neon, light, dark, or shiny) blue with plain white writing. I take the use of white and blue as a sort of direction. They are not using cautionary reds or yellows, or green which is recognized as a "go" color. They are simply distinguishing the gendered rooms for you, so that you will not walk into the "wrong" one. Initially, I wanted to say that these colors were not warnings but simply direction to the bathroom specifically designed for you and people of your same sex. In the mens bathroom you find urinals and stalls, and in the womens you only find stalls, as it is difficult for a woman to use a urinal. I noticed though that the colors used for bathrooms parallel those of handicap parking spots, which if ignored, entail a great fine. While there is no fine for using the "wrong" bathroom, there are definite social norms discouraging individuals from doing so. The simplicity and directory implication of the color have made it another that we take for granted, a law to follow so as to not get sanctioned by our peers.
Another, and perhaps not so blatant, gender "sign" is the shape of the placards. The womens bathroom is always signified by a circle, while the mens is a triangle. A woman's sign has no corners, while the man's has three sharp ones. Women are "softer", a continuous orbit rarely diverging from its usual path. Not to say that ciclical patterns are not complex, I actually think that the movement away from, but the inevitable return to the beginning all along creating a perfect path is fascinating. That perfect path though, is hard to achieve. It is very difficult to draw a perfect circle, let alone live a perfectly balanced life. Men (triangles) seem to have more power here. The corners may be where they command attention, where they may make their own rules. While triangles do always have three corners, their degrees vary and there are thousands of shapes and sizes that come about from them. It may seem to be "reading too much into it", but one would be surprised at the way we unconciously attach shapes and colors to each gender.
I began to think of the sex and gender implications of these signs. My initial concern is the lack of distinction between these two concepts. Sex is biological and gender is socially constructed. Over time, the physical differences (notably hormonal differences) between the two sexes have manifested themselves socioculturally into normative patterns of behavior distinguishing the two sexes. We have an incessant desire to identify and group individuals in clean cut social categories. That is gender. It is also race, and class. We use these socially constructed groups to understand people. By grouping the sexes, we can sanction against "bad" behavior. Women have children, wear dresses, cook and clean while men wear pants and act as the breadwinner, supporting his family given his "inherent" strength mentally and physically. Gender roles are "taught" almost as soon as one enters the world. Boys' rooms are made masculine with shades of blue while girls' rooms are pink and fluffy, assuming the "soft" nature of women. Throughout our lives gender differentiation is greatly encouraged. These differentiations are not biologically based, but like all social manifestations have been taken to be unquestionable truth. Those who do not adhere to traditional gender roles are discriminated against.
The distinction between the mens and womens rooms is one of the ways that gender is played out in our particular society. The words "men" and "women" are written on the door in English, which unlike the stick figure, is not universal. Those who cannot read the language simply look to the figures to see which bathroom is the right one for them. It is understood that the woman wears a dress, while the man wears pants. The problem here: many women do not wear dresses, many men do. Under "Gender", New Keywords discusses the conflict between gender identity and biological sex. Transsexuals are often said to feel as though they were "born in the wrong body". There is a disconnect between the definition of who they should be based on the socially assigned roles of their sex (gender), and how they feel they truly identify. Which bathroom should these individuals use? Physically, each sex can easily use either bathroom. It is the social implications that keep us from doing so. We are directed to one of two groups, if one cannot define themselves in such terms they are greatly discriminated against.
The last part of these signs I found interesting was the smaller, rectangular handicap sign next to each door. I found a third group here, the disabled individual. The rectangular shape appears identically beside each bathroom door. I wondered why this shape is not gendered, and began to think again about discrimination and movement from societal norms. Don't get me wrong, those signs are important, they announce that there is a stall easily accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. I wondered though, don't all bathrooms have that larger stall? If not, shouldn't they? If we can take the time to differentiate by putting urinals in one restroom and only toilets in another, shouldn't it be assumed that those rooms will accommodate to all individuals of that specific gender (at least)? I saw these signs as another way to divide and group "like" people in our endless attempt to understand (in a wildly stereotypical way) each and every individual.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Share your photos. Watch the world.
Welcome to Flickr: a Yahoo company, "almost certainly the best online photo management and sharing application in the world." With nearly 5,000 uploads in the last minute and 3.2 million things "geotagged" in the last month, Flickr seems to be the ultimate photo sharing website. Personally, I had never heard of Flickr and wondered how/if it differed from sites like Facebook and Myspace. So I took the Magical Feature Tour (yes, it's actually called that) and found it to be marketed as a bit more family oriented, a place to share your favorite photos with "the people who matter to you". Stay in touch, make albums, organize/edit pictures, make "stuff" including "sexy cards" and photo books.
We decided to use Flickr as our primary medium. We chose to focus on the keyword identity, and picked out some of our favorite pictures that came up when we entered the word in the search bar. We chose those pictures for specific reasons, we knew that we would be able to make some commentary about them in the context of our class, of other key words and concepts that we've been talking about in the past few weeks. We wondered though, how would the general public react to these pictures. Would they evoke the same ideas? Would people be able to recognize these as social commentary rather than simple, contextless photos?
Clearly, we could not get opinions representative of the "general public" (I still can't grasp any concept of statistics, help Crystal!) But we could chose an audience through various other media to get an idea of what at least a few people thought about the pictures.
We narrowed our photos down and decided on Youtube, Facebook, and several other sites (for the purposes of this post I will focus on these two because I am most exposed to them). Our intended audience then is internet users.
Youtube: "Broadcast Yourself." The famous website with millions of videos from the Obama speech at the Democratic National Convention to one of a cat playing with yarn. These videos are posted by anyone who has the free subscription to Youtube, and are accessible to anyone who has the internet. We made a video that included all of our pictures and posted it on Youtube. Though not all internet users utlize Youtube, there are a great number of people who do, the video would allow many people to comment on the photos. A concern here is that people may not bother to do so. There are so many videos out there, what if no one comes across ours? And if they do, again, will they take the time to comment? Because we could not use some statistical surveying method to ensure enough commentary to generalize about Youtube/internet users, we decided that we had to simply put, take the comments that we could get. Another consideration is that those people who did comment are ones who were interested in the photos and did have something to say. Those who did not comment may have not had anything to say.
Next we made our Facebook group where we posted each of the pictures and asked our friends to comment. Facebook: "a social utility that connects you with the people around you." One of the most popular sites on the internet, millions of people join to keep up with friends and family, share photos, even reconnect with old classmates. Our main audience now is our friends on Facebook.We were each in a position to "invite" others to the group, we hoped that most of the people who joined the group would help us by commenting on the photos. In my case, I invited several people, a few of whom I thought would actually participate. We have 68 members so far, five have made comments on the photos. I found it interesting that so many people joined, yet so little took the time to note what they thought of the pictures. I asked my sister if she had gotten my invitation, she said that she hadn't really paid attention because she gets so many "random" group invitations that she is not interested in. A concern again for this medium is that people will write the group off because there are so many other groups out there, this one may simply not catch their attention.
Again, we must take the comments that we do get and discuss those. Our audience for these two mediums are not as specific as for our forums that Crystal is working on (each of which has a majority of participants of the same gender with specific interests and ideas), but the idea is that for each of these we do include the entire internet population. Though people may not go to a website, join a forum, or a group, or take the time to make commentary about a few photos, they do have the option to do so. Our photos are out "there", they are accessible to anyone who can access the internet. Whether they will come across them, let alone participate, however, is a very different question.
We decided to use Flickr as our primary medium. We chose to focus on the keyword identity, and picked out some of our favorite pictures that came up when we entered the word in the search bar. We chose those pictures for specific reasons, we knew that we would be able to make some commentary about them in the context of our class, of other key words and concepts that we've been talking about in the past few weeks. We wondered though, how would the general public react to these pictures. Would they evoke the same ideas? Would people be able to recognize these as social commentary rather than simple, contextless photos?
Clearly, we could not get opinions representative of the "general public" (I still can't grasp any concept of statistics, help Crystal!) But we could chose an audience through various other media to get an idea of what at least a few people thought about the pictures.
We narrowed our photos down and decided on Youtube, Facebook, and several other sites (for the purposes of this post I will focus on these two because I am most exposed to them). Our intended audience then is internet users.
Youtube: "Broadcast Yourself." The famous website with millions of videos from the Obama speech at the Democratic National Convention to one of a cat playing with yarn. These videos are posted by anyone who has the free subscription to Youtube, and are accessible to anyone who has the internet. We made a video that included all of our pictures and posted it on Youtube. Though not all internet users utlize Youtube, there are a great number of people who do, the video would allow many people to comment on the photos. A concern here is that people may not bother to do so. There are so many videos out there, what if no one comes across ours? And if they do, again, will they take the time to comment? Because we could not use some statistical surveying method to ensure enough commentary to generalize about Youtube/internet users, we decided that we had to simply put, take the comments that we could get. Another consideration is that those people who did comment are ones who were interested in the photos and did have something to say. Those who did not comment may have not had anything to say.
Next we made our Facebook group where we posted each of the pictures and asked our friends to comment. Facebook: "a social utility that connects you with the people around you." One of the most popular sites on the internet, millions of people join to keep up with friends and family, share photos, even reconnect with old classmates. Our main audience now is our friends on Facebook.We were each in a position to "invite" others to the group, we hoped that most of the people who joined the group would help us by commenting on the photos. In my case, I invited several people, a few of whom I thought would actually participate. We have 68 members so far, five have made comments on the photos. I found it interesting that so many people joined, yet so little took the time to note what they thought of the pictures. I asked my sister if she had gotten my invitation, she said that she hadn't really paid attention because she gets so many "random" group invitations that she is not interested in. A concern again for this medium is that people will write the group off because there are so many other groups out there, this one may simply not catch their attention.
Again, we must take the comments that we do get and discuss those. Our audience for these two mediums are not as specific as for our forums that Crystal is working on (each of which has a majority of participants of the same gender with specific interests and ideas), but the idea is that for each of these we do include the entire internet population. Though people may not go to a website, join a forum, or a group, or take the time to make commentary about a few photos, they do have the option to do so. Our photos are out "there", they are accessible to anyone who can access the internet. Whether they will come across them, let alone participate, however, is a very different question.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
We were able to get a lot done today as far as planning and organizing our project. We had decided on several pictures (from Flickr) in class that we thought conveyed some of the complexities of the key word "Identity". We decided to narrow those down to five photos which we will post on some forums, asking the public for their response/reactions to them. As of now we will use Facebook, Naver, Youtube, (sorry Vicky and Crystal I didn't get the names of the sites you guys mentioned! Possibly a comment with those if you see this?). So far, we have our Youtube video (thanks Komal!), and have a general idea of individual tasks/how we will split up the work.
We thought it would be interesting and useful to get opinions from individuals outside of our group,the class, the state, even the country. We will compare those photo comments to our own ideas of what the photos may signify. We are hoping to get some new insights, and maybe some that greatly contrast our own. It will be interesting to see how responses vary based on the forum we use. Will we even get any responses? Will people have the attention span to sit through our 40 second (or so) Youtube video, let alone take the time to comment? There are some concerns and technical issues, but I think that this whole process is worth noting.
We will be making the Facebook group soon (which we will each be assigned to, allowing us to "invite" people to share opinions about the photos). We hope to meet again soon to talk about each individual picture and hopefully tie together some key concepts and ideas we have discussed in class.
We thought it would be interesting and useful to get opinions from individuals outside of our group,the class, the state, even the country. We will compare those photo comments to our own ideas of what the photos may signify. We are hoping to get some new insights, and maybe some that greatly contrast our own. It will be interesting to see how responses vary based on the forum we use. Will we even get any responses? Will people have the attention span to sit through our 40 second (or so) Youtube video, let alone take the time to comment? There are some concerns and technical issues, but I think that this whole process is worth noting.
We will be making the Facebook group soon (which we will each be assigned to, allowing us to "invite" people to share opinions about the photos). We hope to meet again soon to talk about each individual picture and hopefully tie together some key concepts and ideas we have discussed in class.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Dave, my mind is going...
It's all over the place! Like Carr, I strongly believe I've become increasingly unfocused and unable to submerge myself in and retain detailed information. The media is supplying my "stuff of thought" while simultaneously shaping my thought process. Google isn't making us stupid, its aiding in our development of Attention Deficit (sometimes Hyperactivity) Disorder.
Just as I sat down to write this blog I checked my email, The New York Times for a "quick" overview of world news, and Wikipedia to see what there was to be said about "culture". Each of these pages, filled with links to other pages, distracted me for far longer than I had anticipated. Ultimately, I suppose, allowing me to narrow my blog down to this: I am easily distracted and I don't think it's just "the way I am". My constant exposure to various forms of media have shaped and reshaped the way that I think. I would argue it is inescapable. "It" being the media- the various medium used to transfer information. If we are not bombarded by images through one medium, its another. Television, radio, magazines, newspapers, the internet, billboards. We are surrounded by these channels of information strategically produced to capture our attention. And yes, I do believe our attention must be "captured". Advertising specialists are aware that if one commercial does not achieve this, another will. The hope is that flashing lights, strong language, dramatic effects and funny slogans are the things we will ultimately pay attention to and commit to memory. So much are we affected by these techniques that lengthy, detailed, and difficult books and articles have become quite hard to focus on and often undesirable tasks to be completed.
I do not believe we are less knowledgeable. Our generation is not escaping information. As we become more technologically advanced, we have access to more than ever before. We are also at greater risk though. At risk of being misguided, deceived, of not recognizing propaganda, not looking to understand all "sides". We fall victim to the politics of fear, standards of beauty, gender expectations. If we are not critical of the constant media images and information we are exposed to, we are malleable "subjects" without opinions that are our own.
The ever changing techniques of the media have not made us"stupid", I would agree with Carr though that they have greatly effected the ways we receive and process that information.
Just as I sat down to write this blog I checked my email, The New York Times for a "quick" overview of world news, and Wikipedia to see what there was to be said about "culture". Each of these pages, filled with links to other pages, distracted me for far longer than I had anticipated. Ultimately, I suppose, allowing me to narrow my blog down to this: I am easily distracted and I don't think it's just "the way I am". My constant exposure to various forms of media have shaped and reshaped the way that I think. I would argue it is inescapable. "It" being the media- the various medium used to transfer information. If we are not bombarded by images through one medium, its another. Television, radio, magazines, newspapers, the internet, billboards. We are surrounded by these channels of information strategically produced to capture our attention. And yes, I do believe our attention must be "captured". Advertising specialists are aware that if one commercial does not achieve this, another will. The hope is that flashing lights, strong language, dramatic effects and funny slogans are the things we will ultimately pay attention to and commit to memory. So much are we affected by these techniques that lengthy, detailed, and difficult books and articles have become quite hard to focus on and often undesirable tasks to be completed.
I do not believe we are less knowledgeable. Our generation is not escaping information. As we become more technologically advanced, we have access to more than ever before. We are also at greater risk though. At risk of being misguided, deceived, of not recognizing propaganda, not looking to understand all "sides". We fall victim to the politics of fear, standards of beauty, gender expectations. If we are not critical of the constant media images and information we are exposed to, we are malleable "subjects" without opinions that are our own.
The ever changing techniques of the media have not made us"stupid", I would agree with Carr though that they have greatly effected the ways we receive and process that information.
Friday, August 8, 2008
"Not Reality.Actuality."
A slogan I never really thought twice about, except that it seemed a bit melodramatic. "truTV", a network with the "most": shocking, daring, dangerous and intense. A network with hours of footage on police chases and crime investigations outwardly rejects the notion of "reality" television. I think of the programs they (the wonderful people at truTV) may be referring to: "The Hills" (most notably for the "stars" it has produced), "Real World", "The Bachelor", the list really goes on forever. These self proclaimed "reality" series are now faced with criticism because of the sudden realization that an editing room may be involved, and that episode after episode of drama, backstabbing, tears may just be a result of some simple copy and paste technique by the network itself.
Someone in class asked the question of why we need so much reality. Simply put, but excellent questioning of our country's wide television audience. Why is it that "non scripted" programs have become so exponentially popular, a new one coming out each season? I was fascinated by "The Truman Show", it really was ahead of its time in it's predictions about entertainment. Could it be that Christof was right? Did we simply become too aware of the "phoniness" in acting? A show deemed reality seems to capture our attention more than ever before. Because there seems to be limited acting involved, we believe that the lives portrayed on these shows are real. They are not always going to be perfect, but at least they are honest. The little worlds shown to us on MTV are, in fact, just like ours. And just like ours, we want to keep up with all of the sex, fights, makeups and ruined friendships. It seems to be our way of distracting ourselves from our own situations. And once one show is over, we ask "what else is on?"
Someone in class asked the question of why we need so much reality. Simply put, but excellent questioning of our country's wide television audience. Why is it that "non scripted" programs have become so exponentially popular, a new one coming out each season? I was fascinated by "The Truman Show", it really was ahead of its time in it's predictions about entertainment. Could it be that Christof was right? Did we simply become too aware of the "phoniness" in acting? A show deemed reality seems to capture our attention more than ever before. Because there seems to be limited acting involved, we believe that the lives portrayed on these shows are real. They are not always going to be perfect, but at least they are honest. The little worlds shown to us on MTV are, in fact, just like ours. And just like ours, we want to keep up with all of the sex, fights, makeups and ruined friendships. It seems to be our way of distracting ourselves from our own situations. And once one show is over, we ask "what else is on?"
Monday, August 4, 2008
My very first blog
I have never written a blog before, though I've encountered several in the sort of classic journal entry form by friends traveling or studying abroad. While I enjoyed keeping up with those bloggers, I never considered writing my own. During the year I get so busy with midterm, research, and final papers, I am not sure I would consistently take the time to write my (unassigned) thoughts down. I am a bit hesitant to do so otherwise because of the wide audience. I am aware that the work may remain confidential, but I would rather not have such personal information accessible to strangers.
My relationship to writing has evolved greatly through my time at Davis. As I narrowed my major and minor down I have been able to take greater interest in (and often choose my own) paper topics, certainly making them "better" in quality than pieces in which I simply struggle to meet the word count. I am sure my writing reflects my Sociological discipline, though I've enjoyed several English classes as well. I have never written in this form but I think it is important to have variety in writing and am looking forward to trying something new.
My relationship to writing has evolved greatly through my time at Davis. As I narrowed my major and minor down I have been able to take greater interest in (and often choose my own) paper topics, certainly making them "better" in quality than pieces in which I simply struggle to meet the word count. I am sure my writing reflects my Sociological discipline, though I've enjoyed several English classes as well. I have never written in this form but I think it is important to have variety in writing and am looking forward to trying something new.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)