It’s the end of the semester, which explains my terrible absence from updates, but it also brings up the subject for this blog. This time of year is one for listening to people give talks–at graduation, awards ceremonies, conferences, etc. I’ve had to sit through several of them recently, and I’ve noticed two things that are repeated over and over again: 1) We need to value everyone’s voice, regardless of their background or identity. 2) The modern world is getting all of its reading from the internet, and that’s a bad thing.
To me, I feel like these things have a certain amount of dissonance between them. In fact, I would argue that by putting down the “literature” available digitally is a continuation of classist/elitist attitudes that put us in the position to need to issue statements like Students’ Right to Their Own Language.
But before needing to go even that far, just a reminder that several prominent publications are online only.
- McSweeney’s Internet Tendency
- Slate Magazine
- Texas State’s own Front Porch Journal
- The Onion has a print version available, but is largely online-oriented.
Of course, I think the typical response would be “that’s not what I’m talking about!” The digital disparager will cite things like Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr as examples of things that might be dumbing down the reading of the young masses. But I think the truth is more complicated than that.
When I log onto Facebook, I usually see a slew of news articles from friends, family, professors, and classmates. These articles come from the New York Times, feminist blogs, foreign publications, and a slew of others. They are sources that I probably wouldn’t be reading if not for the internet connection into my home. I log onto Reddit and am part of a book club; we’re discussing Calvino’s If on a winter’s night a traveler and The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman this month. On Twitter, I find out what topics come up at conferences I can’t attend, and I learn about what events authors and publications I enjoy are taking part in.
And I also look at pictures of cats.
Again, the digital disparager might say, “that’s not what I’m talking about.” After all, the circles I travel in lean toward academia already, so it’s not fair to use them as representatives of the vast online world, is it?
But the truth of the matter is that the segment of the population who shies away from intellectual reading online are people who probably would be shying away from these things even if they weren’t online. The other truth in the matter is that there are some big literary/intellectual achievements out there, online, that are pretty far removed from the traditional, canonical world of ivory towers and leather-bound covers. Laugh if you’d like, but I would argue that things like The Book of Brodin, this dramatic recut of The Big Lebowski trailer (or, slightly more entertaining, this Gran Torino / Up mash-up), or this collection of movie still cinemagraphs are just as worthy of our critical and popular attention as book award finalists. Yes, their audience is different, and yes, their authorship is different, but in artistic terms, why would we even begin to consider them as somehow less than their pre-digital predecessors?
Henry James once said that “We work in the dark–we do what we can–we give what we have. Our doubt is our passion and our passion is our task. The rest of the madness is art.” To discredit the products of the digital world is to discredit the passions of a group of people solely because their lived experience and products are different from what you have come to expect of art.
Once again, do you see some parallels between this and the need for Students’ Right to Their Own Language?
Analyze the collage of Harry Potter scenes present in this musical YouTube mashup. For our next class, bring in a 3-4 page commentary on why these scenes might have been chosen, and what it achieves for the audience. You may also critique the use of autotune, especially as it varies between characters.
Lots going on right now.
- I had a piece published in the Indianapolis based mag Punchnel’s, which has a ton of smart stuff that you should be reading. Their site is here, my piece is here. It’s a short, humorous essay about iced tea, and looks satirically at the way we can be so judgmental about personal preference. I learned a few interesting things during the writing and publishing of it:
- I feel the need to constantly clarify that I adopted a persona for this piece when sharing it with people. It’s sort of ridiculous to assume that people wouldn’t know that at first blush, but I’m still insecure about someone thinking I’m serious in the denunciations of the piece. I got the idea while looking at a pitcher of lemonade and a pitcher of tea sitting in front of me at a buffet, and thinking about how hard it was to find some good iced tea in Aspen, Colorado.
- Less is more. I had a section in this essay about long island iced tea, which didn’t fit in with the other items in the list at all. I had put it in because I felt the piece was too short and so I stretched for more material, but the first thing the editor did was ask if they could remove it.
- Gifted Education news: Prepping for gifted identification is a big business. Of course, as long as we provide blanket, standardized ways to identify, this will come as a surprise to precisely no one. Also, if your child is interested in attending summer programming, the National Society for the Gifted and Talented has a few scholarships available.
- Current writing projects: Aspen is like a movie set, comparison to the uncanny valley of animation/robotics. Started this last summer, not happy with it, trying again. Also, I got the genealogy bug last summer, and I’ve been having a hard time explaining the appeal verbally to friends and family, so I’m trying in essay format. By the way, if your family is from western Kentucky, we’re probably related. Finally, polishing up an essay about David Foster Wallace’s essay “E Unibus Pluram“, in which he explains how dangerous television can be to the psyche. I use scholar Kenneth Burke to argue that Wallace is describing a very purposeful, rhetorical move on the part of television to captivate audiences by simultaneously making them feel like they are part of the TV world and that everything outside of the TV world is not good enough.
- TEDxAustin was February 9, and while some of the speakers were very much a miss, I highly recommend checking out the talks from UT’s Pennebaker (discussion of language on relationships and hierarchy) and idea men Ficklin and McDaniel (using suspended cable cars as a public transportation alternative for congested Austin).
- And, finally, I’ll a part of two different panels on university Writing Centers tomorrow. One is on the differences between small and large writing centers and how they can learn from each other, the other is on strategies for English Language Learner writing tutoring. In writing the piece for the ELL panel, I realized that there is a big similarity between the difficulty of describing effective ELL strategies and Gifted Education strategies–namely, that a “good” ELL or Gifted strategy will almost always apply to education as a whole. Broad concepts like being flexible, listening to the needs of the individual student, and building mutual respect are especially important for a student who might not be as comfortable in the peer/academic environment, but how could you argue that you shouldn’t practice those things at all times? You can’t, and it’s hard to verbalize, but the fact is as educators we can’t be all things at all times and we need to know when to emphasize what aspects of our pedagogy. I’m not sure how useful that is to think about.
What’s going on in your life? Here’s your outside content for today, David Lipsky being interviewed by Charlie Rose. Lipsky will be at the Aspen Summer Words Festival this year, which makes me much more hopeful about returning.