I took a class that was about conditioning and learned. In this class we talked about how people learn, retain information, and react to stimulus. It reminded me a lot of chart showing how language works/travels/interacts with people on page 134. Learning, language, and memory can all be quantified to a point. Broken down into a simple diagram showing the basic workings of a concept. Yet, we all know it is not that easy.
I cannot give a person an engine without gas, air, and spark and expect them to get it work. How are we expected to understand language and communication looking at it in such a small clip?
Can't!!!
So, how are we suppose to view it on a grand scale is where I am stuck/
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Project
For this project, we decided to analyze a movie trailer for the film, The Royal Tennenbaums. In our initial discussion of movie trailers, we realized that films are often misrepresented as they are mediated by the trailer. The trailer, of necessity, must remediate the film in a much shorter time. Now, while there are time requirements that necessitate this remediation, there are also other factors at play having to do with some of the theoretical work we have been doing; in particular, trailers are positioned to sell a product. Accordingly, any mediation that occurs in a trailer will be focused on those economic considerations more than focusing on fidelity to the film—a film trailer is designed to draw in the crowd and, in so doing, maximize profits rather than provide a summary or accurate representation of the film’s narrative.
Before proceeding, it would be wise to look at the following two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Eg6yIwP2vs&feature=player_embedded
This is the trailer for The Royal Tennenbaums. Note the lighthearted, funny tone. Now, watch this business:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pyBB7y8fDU&feature=player_embedded#at=44
This particular clip from the movie (a more representative clip) shows that the film is not so very lighthearted after all. So, what’s up?
We first approached this trailer through the lens of Adorno and Horkheimer’s (A & H) work. First, we remarked upon how trailers in general must reconstruct movies in a short time period, and, by necessity, narrativity will be effected. In this particular trailer, however, there was a radical reconstruction of the film’s narrative to shift cinematic genres from drama (the film) to comedy (the trailer). According to A & H, one of the functions of the culture industry is to simplify human interactions and responses to human interactions to the point of reification: “The most intimate reactions of human beings have been so thoroughly reified that the idea of anything specific to themselves now persists only as an utterly abstract notion: personality scarcely signifies anything more than shining white teeth and freedom from body odour and emotions.” To locate this more firmly in the trailer, these actors, who tend to play comedic roles, are not presented as nuanced or occupying the dramatic roles that they, in fact, do; rather, they are pushed more towards slapstick in the mediation of the trailer. This calls to mind some of Drucker’s ideas on attention.
According to Drucker, “art is a way of paying attention.” The trailer, in a sense, forces the audience to pay attention to certain aspects of the film. Indeed, the very design of a trailer is focused on grasping an audience’s attention and piquing curiosity in just 2-3 minutes. Through the use of music, editing, character representation, and narrative representation (i.e., the trailer is not a reproduction of the narrative’s linearity of the film) the trailer’s creators capitalize on the audience’s sense of what to expect given the spaces these elements occupy and/or how these elements function in popular culture. Which begs the question, what sort of exchange is taking place if the mediation (the trailer) is so misrepresentative?
In our discussion, we realized that trailers are fundamentally places of exchange (following Peters). Now, since there is a fundamental misrepresentation that occurs when the film is remediated in the trailer, there seems to be a sizable power asymmetry: the film industry basically misrepresents what it will provide in exchange for the price of a ticket. In effect, there is a bait-and-switch because the audience is presented with all the elements of a comedy (they are shown a “comedy” that they will receive in exchange for their money and time). So, the exchange is, ultimately, farcical. What is ironic, and troubling, is that we know that trailers misrepresent films, yet we continue to be seduced by them…
All in all, our application of these theorists’ work has shown us that this is not merely an academic exercise. It is a reflection on our own culture and our place within in it.
Before proceeding, it would be wise to look at the following two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Eg6yIwP2vs&feature=player_embedded
This is the trailer for The Royal Tennenbaums. Note the lighthearted, funny tone. Now, watch this business:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pyBB7y8fDU&feature=player_embedded#at=44
This particular clip from the movie (a more representative clip) shows that the film is not so very lighthearted after all. So, what’s up?
We first approached this trailer through the lens of Adorno and Horkheimer’s (A & H) work. First, we remarked upon how trailers in general must reconstruct movies in a short time period, and, by necessity, narrativity will be effected. In this particular trailer, however, there was a radical reconstruction of the film’s narrative to shift cinematic genres from drama (the film) to comedy (the trailer). According to A & H, one of the functions of the culture industry is to simplify human interactions and responses to human interactions to the point of reification: “The most intimate reactions of human beings have been so thoroughly reified that the idea of anything specific to themselves now persists only as an utterly abstract notion: personality scarcely signifies anything more than shining white teeth and freedom from body odour and emotions.” To locate this more firmly in the trailer, these actors, who tend to play comedic roles, are not presented as nuanced or occupying the dramatic roles that they, in fact, do; rather, they are pushed more towards slapstick in the mediation of the trailer. This calls to mind some of Drucker’s ideas on attention.
According to Drucker, “art is a way of paying attention.” The trailer, in a sense, forces the audience to pay attention to certain aspects of the film. Indeed, the very design of a trailer is focused on grasping an audience’s attention and piquing curiosity in just 2-3 minutes. Through the use of music, editing, character representation, and narrative representation (i.e., the trailer is not a reproduction of the narrative’s linearity of the film) the trailer’s creators capitalize on the audience’s sense of what to expect given the spaces these elements occupy and/or how these elements function in popular culture. Which begs the question, what sort of exchange is taking place if the mediation (the trailer) is so misrepresentative?
In our discussion, we realized that trailers are fundamentally places of exchange (following Peters). Now, since there is a fundamental misrepresentation that occurs when the film is remediated in the trailer, there seems to be a sizable power asymmetry: the film industry basically misrepresents what it will provide in exchange for the price of a ticket. In effect, there is a bait-and-switch because the audience is presented with all the elements of a comedy (they are shown a “comedy” that they will receive in exchange for their money and time). So, the exchange is, ultimately, farcical. What is ironic, and troubling, is that we know that trailers misrepresent films, yet we continue to be seduced by them…
All in all, our application of these theorists’ work has shown us that this is not merely an academic exercise. It is a reflection on our own culture and our place within in it.
Reflection
What did you learn from composing your analysis? What difficulties faced you in doing analysis of your media object? How might the approaches you chose for performing your analysis carry over to other media objects? What more would you have liked to be able to discuss about your media object?
Well working with Adam was awesome. For once, I was not being the leader of a project and was able to be an aid to someone who had an idea and a plan already constructed. This also allowed me to view someone else write which is something I rarely get the chance to do. We discussed how we present ourselves in the discussion and through the blogs. I take a much more liberal approach to these items as to where Adam treats them as he were writing an academic paper for later research. Essentially, we have similar personalities which was helped a lot with the collaboration. However, the differences in which we approach this line of work are very different. That alone was enthralling. As I sit here writing this, I am able to look at what we created and look at the process in which we created it. There was a lot of witty banter, scribbling, rambling on my part, and fine wordsmithing on his part.
All in all, it was fun; however, it also raised questions for me. Mainly, what is the correct lens in which to view a media object?
Initially, we began viewing the trailer as a recreation of the narrative to skew the film to change its genre. Then it shifted to how the actors are presented in order to keep them in their stereotypical roles so the viewer could connect with the icons. After that, we shifted to an economic lens to see how these two different shifts would affect ticket sales. We made great use of the ideas presented by the theorist noted in the blog post.
I think if we are able to do this again, I can make great use if the waffling that occurred in our discourse. Find a point that works then turn it 90 degrees and see where that take you. Study, analyze, write, and repeat. Eventually, you will have to come to an end but where that ending may occur is uncertain.
H
ad my brain been fully functional yesterday, I would have liked to shred this film via Benjamin. There was talk about the cult and there are cult films. Are cult films disappearing because of the way trailer are mediated? How is the reproduction of the narrative into a trailer changing the movie going experience and the industry? Things like that appeal to me.
Well working with Adam was awesome. For once, I was not being the leader of a project and was able to be an aid to someone who had an idea and a plan already constructed. This also allowed me to view someone else write which is something I rarely get the chance to do. We discussed how we present ourselves in the discussion and through the blogs. I take a much more liberal approach to these items as to where Adam treats them as he were writing an academic paper for later research. Essentially, we have similar personalities which was helped a lot with the collaboration. However, the differences in which we approach this line of work are very different. That alone was enthralling. As I sit here writing this, I am able to look at what we created and look at the process in which we created it. There was a lot of witty banter, scribbling, rambling on my part, and fine wordsmithing on his part.
All in all, it was fun; however, it also raised questions for me. Mainly, what is the correct lens in which to view a media object?
Initially, we began viewing the trailer as a recreation of the narrative to skew the film to change its genre. Then it shifted to how the actors are presented in order to keep them in their stereotypical roles so the viewer could connect with the icons. After that, we shifted to an economic lens to see how these two different shifts would affect ticket sales. We made great use of the ideas presented by the theorist noted in the blog post.
I think if we are able to do this again, I can make great use if the waffling that occurred in our discourse. Find a point that works then turn it 90 degrees and see where that take you. Study, analyze, write, and repeat. Eventually, you will have to come to an end but where that ending may occur is uncertain.
H
ad my brain been fully functional yesterday, I would have liked to shred this film via Benjamin. There was talk about the cult and there are cult films. Are cult films disappearing because of the way trailer are mediated? How is the reproduction of the narrative into a trailer changing the movie going experience and the industry? Things like that appeal to me.
Hang ups
I posted my one big hang-up in the discussion forum. Now that I look back to my beginnings in the realm of English Studies, Barthes and his concept behind myth was something that I have been dealing with since English 101 with Sean Lewis. It came up again in 205 with Dahlia, Theory with Petro, LGBT with Kalter, last semester with you in experimental lit, and it is rearing its ugly head again. I feel though I have a solid grasp on it now that I have taken the time to look back. The best way I can summarize my understanding of it is to refer to Samuel Delany's "Tales of Neveryon" and the story of Old Venn.
In this chapter Venn is teaching writing and language to a child. The child states that she could write things down and ruin someone. Old Venn tells the child that language is powerful and if used improperly it can corrupt and destroy someone.
That is what I am getting from all of this. We are in a power struggle with something of our own creation that can lead us to our own demise faster than anything else. In the scope of modern media we can use it to make kings and bring to power someone unexpected. Our current president is a good example of this. Who was he before Oprah sponsored him? The media appeal and the language that she used to support Big O and his cause is uncanny.
I reflected even more so on my current position in life. Without a basic understanding of the myth, how to communicate, and language I would be nothing. It is weird. Then I looked to my upbringing in the south and kind of laughed. Not because of the educational system but because of how I speak. I say perbatim instead of verbatim. Which has nothing to do with my understanding of language, intelligence or knowledge; however, I am still criticized for the way I speak.
I am off on a bit of a tangent here and will come back to the other two readings later. I forgot my book at a different house.
In this chapter Venn is teaching writing and language to a child. The child states that she could write things down and ruin someone. Old Venn tells the child that language is powerful and if used improperly it can corrupt and destroy someone.
That is what I am getting from all of this. We are in a power struggle with something of our own creation that can lead us to our own demise faster than anything else. In the scope of modern media we can use it to make kings and bring to power someone unexpected. Our current president is a good example of this. Who was he before Oprah sponsored him? The media appeal and the language that she used to support Big O and his cause is uncanny.
I reflected even more so on my current position in life. Without a basic understanding of the myth, how to communicate, and language I would be nothing. It is weird. Then I looked to my upbringing in the south and kind of laughed. Not because of the educational system but because of how I speak. I say perbatim instead of verbatim. Which has nothing to do with my understanding of language, intelligence or knowledge; however, I am still criticized for the way I speak.
I am off on a bit of a tangent here and will come back to the other two readings later. I forgot my book at a different house.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Reflect
The last two weeks I have offered contextualization of both the Benjamin and the Adorno and Horkheimer readings; have those contextualizations been helpful? What else might I do to help you prepare to read?
I have really gotten a lot out of the reading prompts. A coupon for a free coffee would be nice.
Have the prompts and questions in the discussions (D2L and ning) been helpful for you?
Sometimes they are a bit confusing. It could just be me though. I am still acclimating to the new way for thinking. (By the way I will never complain about the nudging in the right direction) The Romance question prompt threw me for a loop...but it worked for other. ....it really depends on your perspective as the reader.
Am I setting rigorous enough expectations, and helping/encouraging you to read and think alertly and in depth?
I think I gave stopped thinking. Not in a bad way though. I guess I have just stopped worrying about right and wrong and focused on developing an idea in order to understand the text. So I guess that is a big check!
Is the overall tone of class conducive to your learning and thinking?
Everything is pretty straight forward so yes. I do wish there was a printer friendly syllabus!
Is there anything else about the structure and workings of class that could better support your learning?
I think maybe every three week we should try and read each others blogs. That way if we are really stuck on an idea we may find some help.
The last two weeks I have offered contextualization of both the Benjamin and the Adorno and Horkheimer readings; have those contextualizations been helpful? What else might I do to help you prepare to read?
I have really gotten a lot out of the reading prompts. A coupon for a free coffee would be nice.
Have the prompts and questions in the discussions (D2L and ning) been helpful for you?
Sometimes they are a bit confusing. It could just be me though. I am still acclimating to the new way for thinking. (By the way I will never complain about the nudging in the right direction) The Romance question prompt threw me for a loop...but it worked for other. ....it really depends on your perspective as the reader.
Am I setting rigorous enough expectations, and helping/encouraging you to read and think alertly and in depth?
I think I gave stopped thinking. Not in a bad way though. I guess I have just stopped worrying about right and wrong and focused on developing an idea in order to understand the text. So I guess that is a big check!
Is the overall tone of class conducive to your learning and thinking?
Everything is pretty straight forward so yes. I do wish there was a printer friendly syllabus!
Is there anything else about the structure and workings of class that could better support your learning?
I think maybe every three week we should try and read each others blogs. That way if we are really stuck on an idea we may find some help.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Mass Media & Exchange
Where to begin.
Mass Media
"The historical tendency of the past two centuries has been to push the speed of delivery to zero and size of audience to infinity."
The article discusses time and space relationships in corresponding to the viewer. However, the new purpose of mass media is to do what the quote above says. Regardless of the space the viewer inhabits or the time in which they are viewing such media. Everything, essentially is going to have to become digitized though in order to accomplish this goal. Once this occurs though the power structure of the world become threatened. People have access to anything, everywhere at any time; therefore, those who regulate and control the public will have to also manage the digital realm in order to keep power. That what I took from the article.
Exchange
The visual economy and giving worth to items that have no value other than being pretty. This is what the article discussed and it explained how this idea has evolved. It also discussed the blood bond and blood payment. What I took from this on was the arbitrary nature of the exchange and of money. Ron Paul is actually pushing for the gold standard again. http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/369835/january-04-2011/gold-faithful---ron-paul---david-leonhardt
Mass Media
"The historical tendency of the past two centuries has been to push the speed of delivery to zero and size of audience to infinity."
The article discusses time and space relationships in corresponding to the viewer. However, the new purpose of mass media is to do what the quote above says. Regardless of the space the viewer inhabits or the time in which they are viewing such media. Everything, essentially is going to have to become digitized though in order to accomplish this goal. Once this occurs though the power structure of the world become threatened. People have access to anything, everywhere at any time; therefore, those who regulate and control the public will have to also manage the digital realm in order to keep power. That what I took from the article.
Exchange
The visual economy and giving worth to items that have no value other than being pretty. This is what the article discussed and it explained how this idea has evolved. It also discussed the blood bond and blood payment. What I took from this on was the arbitrary nature of the exchange and of money. Ron Paul is actually pushing for the gold standard again. http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/369835/january-04-2011/gold-faithful---ron-paul---david-leonhardt
A&H
"Even today the culture industry dresses works of art like political slogans and forces them upon a resistant public at reduced prices; they are as accessible for public enjoyment as a park. But the disappearance of their genuine commodity character does not mean that they have been abolished in the life of a free society, but that the last defence against their reduction to culture goods has fallen. The abolition of educational privilege by the device of clearance sales does not open for the masses the spheres from which they were formerly excluded, but, given existing social conditions, contributes directly to the decay of education and the progress of barbaric meaninglessness"
I really enjoyed this statement. I am a consumer as we all are. I will spend time comparing and contrasting products to find the best deal and the one that will last the longest. I will wander around a store aimlessly just to get out of the house. I watch films rather than read books. I play video games and goof around on facebook. A life filled with distraction. This time could all be used towards better means which would elevate me in many standings. I am changing some habits and leaving some the same but overall we are creatures off comfort and products of the world in which we were raised. This is the point I think A&H are making.
We as a society crave distraction and the corporations and the government is happy to give it to us. It allows them to keep us under control and uninformed. The ....story A&H are telling is as old as the coliseums. The coliseums were the first spectacle, the first distraction, and the first form of mass media/entertainment. However, there use to be "fine art", art that required skills and a specific technique and it was revered. That has even changed. We used to require skilled actors for plays, then we needed pretty faces for film and now we looks for the most horrendous human beings we can find for reality T.V. in order to live our lives vicariously through them. Despite the fact, that the individual could possible accomplish this life themselves.
The article made me take a step back and self reflect, which is what is spawning these ideas. So mission accomplished A&H.
I really enjoyed this statement. I am a consumer as we all are. I will spend time comparing and contrasting products to find the best deal and the one that will last the longest. I will wander around a store aimlessly just to get out of the house. I watch films rather than read books. I play video games and goof around on facebook. A life filled with distraction. This time could all be used towards better means which would elevate me in many standings. I am changing some habits and leaving some the same but overall we are creatures off comfort and products of the world in which we were raised. This is the point I think A&H are making.
We as a society crave distraction and the corporations and the government is happy to give it to us. It allows them to keep us under control and uninformed. The ....story A&H are telling is as old as the coliseums. The coliseums were the first spectacle, the first distraction, and the first form of mass media/entertainment. However, there use to be "fine art", art that required skills and a specific technique and it was revered. That has even changed. We used to require skilled actors for plays, then we needed pretty faces for film and now we looks for the most horrendous human beings we can find for reality T.V. in order to live our lives vicariously through them. Despite the fact, that the individual could possible accomplish this life themselves.
The article made me take a step back and self reflect, which is what is spawning these ideas. So mission accomplished A&H.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Week 3
I am writing this early because I have a family event to attend. So I will be adding more once everyone posts and I can read them.
The biggest things I want to focus on in the upcoming weeks are the historical presence of technology and art. The concept of image was another item that we have come across that puzzles me. Many of the issue raised this week were about art and image, which go hand in hand with technology and technological development.
I have read Anne’s (your) responses to my posts and I need to also rethink some of my constructs when it comes to approaching art. I find it funny that I understand how an engine works but how the artistic community functions is still a mystery. Which make me think about how we learn and view the world. I have a very logic based way of thinking. The mechanical world is easy for me to understand. Yet, rather than pursue a job in the engineering field I came over to the English Dept….. Sometimes I wonder WTF was I thinking. I can never find a solid answer for anything and it drives me nuts. Yet, this is part of the artistic process for me…the design process. This made remember something about art and the construction of it.
I have fabricated and created parts for engines and other mechanical devices; yet, I would have never considered them works of art until this week. I had to fabricate a temporary flex coupling for an exhausts system one time. I shredded heat resistant fiber glass; I think it was fiber glass. I then cut a piece of wood to the shape I need and wrapped it in shrink wrap. After that I paper mached the fiber glass around the wood. Once it hardened I burnt the wood out.
Was it a work of art….maybe…..was the process artistic? Maybe….But I did create something that some may not be able to. So I will have to re-think my views on that note.
The biggest things I want to focus on in the upcoming weeks are the historical presence of technology and art. The concept of image was another item that we have come across that puzzles me. Many of the issue raised this week were about art and image, which go hand in hand with technology and technological development.
I have read Anne’s (your) responses to my posts and I need to also rethink some of my constructs when it comes to approaching art. I find it funny that I understand how an engine works but how the artistic community functions is still a mystery. Which make me think about how we learn and view the world. I have a very logic based way of thinking. The mechanical world is easy for me to understand. Yet, rather than pursue a job in the engineering field I came over to the English Dept….. Sometimes I wonder WTF was I thinking. I can never find a solid answer for anything and it drives me nuts. Yet, this is part of the artistic process for me…the design process. This made remember something about art and the construction of it.
I have fabricated and created parts for engines and other mechanical devices; yet, I would have never considered them works of art until this week. I had to fabricate a temporary flex coupling for an exhausts system one time. I shredded heat resistant fiber glass; I think it was fiber glass. I then cut a piece of wood to the shape I need and wrapped it in shrink wrap. After that I paper mached the fiber glass around the wood. Once it hardened I burnt the wood out.
Was it a work of art….maybe…..was the process artistic? Maybe….But I did create something that some may not be able to. So I will have to re-think my views on that note.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Image, Ben and Art
How, instead, is he hoping we'll understand both art but also how art functions, and how art is related to politics?
I have read this article 5 or six times now and still keep finding new things! It is exciting! The way I read it before though was in relation to spectator and art, how art has been perceived due to the medium, not art and politics. This time around the scope is political function.
Prior to mass production of media (books, photos, works of art) everything was controlled by high society. Benjamin refers to them as the cult(671). It used to be you had to travel in order to view a work of art, and you had to have a great amount of funding to commission art. Image and texts were items that allowed for the transfer of knowledge and by removing them from the lower classes the higher classes kept power in their realm. Once, texts and art was mass produced hey lost control over this. Part of the pillar that held them up gave way and the elitist fell down a bit. Once mass reproduction unfolded people were able to communicate quickly and easily, organize and transfer knowledge and power.
But also by controlling and regulating art, like they did with film in Germany and Russia, you can control the perception of society. Not just how they view the world but their position in the world. You can keep them blind and ignorant to their own misery.
So controlling art is just another way of social oppression and a way for politicians to keep power.
Reading “Art” and “Image” in Critical Terms for Media Studies
On your blog, summarize quickly what you see to be the main, overall, arguments of each of these pieces. You need not linger over the details of the arguments. (I may, in comments, push you on developing or supporting your summaries.)
Art was not as difficult as the concept of image. Art has turned into media and media has turned into art each on affecting the other over the course of time. I am over simplifying I know but the art article flowed pretty smoothly. The image article was far more complex. We view the image as art, and the image is captured on a medium, but the image itself is just smoke, a catalyst, and an interpretation from the mind’s eye communicated to and through the hand. The image is what has the power in art because of its ambivalence. In the art section they discussed Duchamp’s Fountain. I have seen pictures of this urinal and I have seen many urinals. They are made from a material, have weight, mass, and texture. There shape though is derived from an image that someone had in their mind, an idea that had no physical status in the world until it was shaped from the image and given physical properties. So we can touch the product and the urinal but we can never touch the image of the urinal is what I took from combining these two sections. …It hard to explain clearly but hopefully I will get there by the end of this week.
I have read this article 5 or six times now and still keep finding new things! It is exciting! The way I read it before though was in relation to spectator and art, how art has been perceived due to the medium, not art and politics. This time around the scope is political function.
Prior to mass production of media (books, photos, works of art) everything was controlled by high society. Benjamin refers to them as the cult(671). It used to be you had to travel in order to view a work of art, and you had to have a great amount of funding to commission art. Image and texts were items that allowed for the transfer of knowledge and by removing them from the lower classes the higher classes kept power in their realm. Once, texts and art was mass produced hey lost control over this. Part of the pillar that held them up gave way and the elitist fell down a bit. Once mass reproduction unfolded people were able to communicate quickly and easily, organize and transfer knowledge and power.
But also by controlling and regulating art, like they did with film in Germany and Russia, you can control the perception of society. Not just how they view the world but their position in the world. You can keep them blind and ignorant to their own misery.
So controlling art is just another way of social oppression and a way for politicians to keep power.
Reading “Art” and “Image” in Critical Terms for Media Studies
On your blog, summarize quickly what you see to be the main, overall, arguments of each of these pieces. You need not linger over the details of the arguments. (I may, in comments, push you on developing or supporting your summaries.)
Art was not as difficult as the concept of image. Art has turned into media and media has turned into art each on affecting the other over the course of time. I am over simplifying I know but the art article flowed pretty smoothly. The image article was far more complex. We view the image as art, and the image is captured on a medium, but the image itself is just smoke, a catalyst, and an interpretation from the mind’s eye communicated to and through the hand. The image is what has the power in art because of its ambivalence. In the art section they discussed Duchamp’s Fountain. I have seen pictures of this urinal and I have seen many urinals. They are made from a material, have weight, mass, and texture. There shape though is derived from an image that someone had in their mind, an idea that had no physical status in the world until it was shaped from the image and given physical properties. So we can touch the product and the urinal but we can never touch the image of the urinal is what I took from combining these two sections. …It hard to explain clearly but hopefully I will get there by the end of this week.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Week 2 Reflection
First, on your blog, address issues related to class "content":
Where do you currently stand in regard to definitions of "media culture" and the appropriate objects of its study?
I think most of us are still on shakey ground but formyself I belive:
Media Culture is the affect Media has on a society, or lack of media has on a society. It shapes and changes the world in which we live for better or for worse.
How would you describe methods appropriate to "media culture"?
I think any method is ok but I think ethics are a huge part of this field. You have to be ethical! Without Ethics the world is lost and our views are distorted.
Where do you see your own interests fitting into these approaches thus far (or not)?
I will keep what I learn he in mind when I move forward in my chosen career. I do not see myself becoming a scholar by any means.
Then address aspects of taking this class online:
How is working on the wiki going for you?
It is slow. I am still a bit gun shy since this is my first semester at the M.A. level. I am the first in my family to attempt such a feat so it is not like I have a whole lot of guidance when it comes to acedmia. So I am err;ing on the side of caution as for now.
How is course discussion going for you?
Like all other classes. People wait to the last minute and so I have to as well. Little vexing but I am use to it. The discourse is good though.
Where do you currently stand in regard to definitions of "media culture" and the appropriate objects of its study?
I think most of us are still on shakey ground but formyself I belive:
Media Culture is the affect Media has on a society, or lack of media has on a society. It shapes and changes the world in which we live for better or for worse.
How would you describe methods appropriate to "media culture"?
I think any method is ok but I think ethics are a huge part of this field. You have to be ethical! Without Ethics the world is lost and our views are distorted.
Where do you see your own interests fitting into these approaches thus far (or not)?
I will keep what I learn he in mind when I move forward in my chosen career. I do not see myself becoming a scholar by any means.
Then address aspects of taking this class online:
How is working on the wiki going for you?
It is slow. I am still a bit gun shy since this is my first semester at the M.A. level. I am the first in my family to attempt such a feat so it is not like I have a whole lot of guidance when it comes to acedmia. So I am err;ing on the side of caution as for now.
How is course discussion going for you?
Like all other classes. People wait to the last minute and so I have to as well. Little vexing but I am use to it. The discourse is good though.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Charts n what not
So after going reading the articles this week I feel like a bit of a dill. I never trusted charts as a form of media because I believe a lot of public media is corrupted because other countries show what we won’t on the new. But could they be showing what we won’t to incite fear? Control their people?
The implications made by my paranoia and distrust are due to my experience with the media and the media culture I grew up in. So I guess rather than be A typical and critical I need to be more open minded to the media I am producing. A lesson I should have learned from myself last semester.
The implications made by my paranoia and distrust are due to my experience with the media and the media culture I grew up in. So I guess rather than be A typical and critical I need to be more open minded to the media I am producing. A lesson I should have learned from myself last semester.
Readings For Week 2
Crogan (Tracing the Logics of Contemporary Culture)
Poster (Global Media and Culture)
Liebler (Media Culture: Cultural Studies Review)
Jongbloed (Global Indigenous Media Review)
In the articles I found a few words with interesting terms that I am going to try and weave into the
Wiki tonight or tomorrow.
Words of interest
Cosmopolitan
–adjective
1.free from local, provincial, or national ideas, prejudices, or attachments;
2.of or characteristic of a cosmopolite.
3.belonging to all the world; not limited to just one part of the world.
4.Botany, Zoology . widely distributed over the globe.
–noun
5.a person who is free from local, provincial, or national bias orattachment; citizen of the world; cosmopolite.
Node
–noun
1.a knot, protuberance, or knob.
2.a centering point of component parts.
3.Anatomy . a knotlike mass of tissue: lymph node.
4.Pathology . circumscribed swelling.
5.Botany.
a.a joint in a stem.
b.a part of a stem that normally bears a leaf.
6.Mathematics. knot ( def. 12 ) .
7.Geometry. a point on a curve or surface at which there canbe more than one tangent line or tangent plane.
8.Physics. a point, line, or region in a standing wave at whichthere is relatively little or no vibration.
9. Astronomy. either of the two points at which the orbit of a heavenly body intersects a plane, especially the plane of the ecliptic or of the celestial equator. Compare ascending node, descending node.
10.Linguistics . an element of a tree diagram that represents a constituent of a linguistic construction.
Poster uses the term cosmopolitan in his articles and it raised more questions for me while reading the article than not. To be cosmopolitan (free from prejudices in general) is incredibly complex to think about. Throughout the article Poster show how the internet is seemingly free space is under constant scrutiny and constraints by the government and/or the private corporations that have purchased sites such as You-Tube and MySpace. Poster seems to view media studies through a sociological criteria and how the government and privates spheres shape those societies. Poster also implies that technology is a runaway machine that cannot be stopped. Poster is all over the place though from politics, to culture , to everything in between. So poster seems to show the diversity of Media Studies and how it can be a universal lens to critique many different lines of culture and media.
Crogan’s article provided me with an anchor point for other ideas. I had a class the summer before last on the ethics on nuclear war. That explained how the development of the star wars program helped bring about nuclear treaties. So that was interesting to put next to Crogans article because it shows how much society has benefited from nuclear product, and not just nuclear power. This articles is also along my lines of thinking, and Mitchell/Hansen’s, it looks at the beginning source of technology and watches it come forward through time. It does focus on one singular source of technology though rather than media per say. The development of the Sage program is one of the things we do owe our current communication abilities to and directly shaped how media and different mediums developed.
I had trouble with the media reviews. The Jongloed seemed to argue alongside/for the book being reviewed as where Libler was working against the topics being proposed. What I really took away from these two pieces is that depending on the reviewers stand point they can change the way the book is presented. Either aiding in bring a discourse to the surface or negating it and trying to bury it because they do not believe it is just. It is a medium working against a medium that is distorting media cultural studies the same way Mitchell/Hansen see the narrow views of some scholars affecting it.
Poster (Global Media and Culture)
Liebler (Media Culture: Cultural Studies Review)
Jongbloed (Global Indigenous Media Review)
In the articles I found a few words with interesting terms that I am going to try and weave into the
Wiki tonight or tomorrow.
Words of interest
Cosmopolitan
–adjective
1.free from local, provincial, or national ideas, prejudices, or attachments;
2.of or characteristic of a cosmopolite.
3.belonging to all the world; not limited to just one part of the world.
4.Botany, Zoology . widely distributed over the globe.
–noun
5.a person who is free from local, provincial, or national bias orattachment; citizen of the world; cosmopolite.
Node
–noun
1.a knot, protuberance, or knob.
2.a centering point of component parts.
3.Anatomy . a knotlike mass of tissue: lymph node.
4.Pathology . circumscribed swelling.
5.Botany.
a.a joint in a stem.
b.a part of a stem that normally bears a leaf.
6.Mathematics. knot ( def. 12 ) .
7.Geometry. a point on a curve or surface at which there canbe more than one tangent line or tangent plane.
8.Physics. a point, line, or region in a standing wave at whichthere is relatively little or no vibration.
9. Astronomy. either of the two points at which the orbit of a heavenly body intersects a plane, especially the plane of the ecliptic or of the celestial equator. Compare ascending node, descending node.
10.Linguistics . an element of a tree diagram that represents a constituent of a linguistic construction.
Poster uses the term cosmopolitan in his articles and it raised more questions for me while reading the article than not. To be cosmopolitan (free from prejudices in general) is incredibly complex to think about. Throughout the article Poster show how the internet is seemingly free space is under constant scrutiny and constraints by the government and/or the private corporations that have purchased sites such as You-Tube and MySpace. Poster seems to view media studies through a sociological criteria and how the government and privates spheres shape those societies. Poster also implies that technology is a runaway machine that cannot be stopped. Poster is all over the place though from politics, to culture , to everything in between. So poster seems to show the diversity of Media Studies and how it can be a universal lens to critique many different lines of culture and media.
Crogan’s article provided me with an anchor point for other ideas. I had a class the summer before last on the ethics on nuclear war. That explained how the development of the star wars program helped bring about nuclear treaties. So that was interesting to put next to Crogans article because it shows how much society has benefited from nuclear product, and not just nuclear power. This articles is also along my lines of thinking, and Mitchell/Hansen’s, it looks at the beginning source of technology and watches it come forward through time. It does focus on one singular source of technology though rather than media per say. The development of the Sage program is one of the things we do owe our current communication abilities to and directly shaped how media and different mediums developed.
I had trouble with the media reviews. The Jongloed seemed to argue alongside/for the book being reviewed as where Libler was working against the topics being proposed. What I really took away from these two pieces is that depending on the reviewers stand point they can change the way the book is presented. Either aiding in bring a discourse to the surface or negating it and trying to bury it because they do not believe it is just. It is a medium working against a medium that is distorting media cultural studies the same way Mitchell/Hansen see the narrow views of some scholars affecting it.
Critical Terms
Questions:
Mitchell and Hansen are discussing "media studies" as opposed to "media culture." How do they define "media" and "media studies"? What matters for them in doing media studies? What do they hope we will attend to in doing media studies?
Notes:
“Media Studies” embraces researchers who study virtual reality environments, hypertext fiction, materialist anthropology and culture, the history of information theory, precinematic devices, the institution of print, and word frequency in Greek literature.” (VIII)
“It seems clear that media as collective singular noun is somehow tied to the emergence of mass media.”(xi)
“Following the morphing of medium into focus for itself: thus media studies can and should designate the study of our fundamental relationally.” (xii)
“one of the most conspicuous features of media studies, considered a singular field, has been its failure to communicate across the borders that divide the technophiles, the aesthete, and the sociopolitical theorist.”(xvi)
“Our aim is to take the field back beyond the “digital revolution” of the last twenty years to its deeper origins of antiquity and early modernity, and to think of media history as highly differentiated both spatially and temporally.” (xix)
Ideas/ Answers:
Media seems to have become a blanketing term to cover any and all mediums in which media is composed. No matter what device is used to present and image, an argument, or a text it still falls under the singular term Media. Yet, under this blanket term a complex world of studies exist that spread across a multitude of fields that may or may not intersect. Yet, given the current state of the world, the internet, and social interaction in general one would assume that these fields of study would have more interaction. This is not the case according to Mitchell and Hansen. As they state on xvi the sociopolitical theorist and the technophiles have nothing to do with each other; even though, the production of technology in itself has shaped the world of socio and bio politics.
By not looking at the work of those to the left and right of them would the researchers, scholar, or philosopher not be ignoring the same things that they are trying to study?
This is one of the points that Mitchell and Hansen want the reader to look at. The other is the development of media studies in general. They want to go back beyond the past twenty years and looks at the development of media studies and look at the history of media. Which is something I am very curious about because if a person and a society is a sum of all of its parts then media then media has played a huge part in the shaping of us as individuals and as society as a whole.
Mitchell and Hansen are discussing "media studies" as opposed to "media culture." How do they define "media" and "media studies"? What matters for them in doing media studies? What do they hope we will attend to in doing media studies?
Notes:
“Media Studies” embraces researchers who study virtual reality environments, hypertext fiction, materialist anthropology and culture, the history of information theory, precinematic devices, the institution of print, and word frequency in Greek literature.” (VIII)
“It seems clear that media as collective singular noun is somehow tied to the emergence of mass media.”(xi)
“Following the morphing of medium into focus for itself: thus media studies can and should designate the study of our fundamental relationally.” (xii)
“one of the most conspicuous features of media studies, considered a singular field, has been its failure to communicate across the borders that divide the technophiles, the aesthete, and the sociopolitical theorist.”(xvi)
“Our aim is to take the field back beyond the “digital revolution” of the last twenty years to its deeper origins of antiquity and early modernity, and to think of media history as highly differentiated both spatially and temporally.” (xix)
Ideas/ Answers:
Media seems to have become a blanketing term to cover any and all mediums in which media is composed. No matter what device is used to present and image, an argument, or a text it still falls under the singular term Media. Yet, under this blanket term a complex world of studies exist that spread across a multitude of fields that may or may not intersect. Yet, given the current state of the world, the internet, and social interaction in general one would assume that these fields of study would have more interaction. This is not the case according to Mitchell and Hansen. As they state on xvi the sociopolitical theorist and the technophiles have nothing to do with each other; even though, the production of technology in itself has shaped the world of socio and bio politics.
By not looking at the work of those to the left and right of them would the researchers, scholar, or philosopher not be ignoring the same things that they are trying to study?
This is one of the points that Mitchell and Hansen want the reader to look at. The other is the development of media studies in general. They want to go back beyond the past twenty years and looks at the development of media studies and look at the history of media. Which is something I am very curious about because if a person and a society is a sum of all of its parts then media then media has played a huge part in the shaping of us as individuals and as society as a whole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)