Friday, April 25, 2008
Thursday, April 24, 2008
More work on the project
Yesterday I met with my fabulous friend L. She lives in LA, so we met for coffee on my flying trip, and she spoke about the responsible persona she presents to the world and how she wants her reality to match that. She is young, but so wise in that she has realized she needs strict deadlines in order to accomplish tasks, and she prefers to work with people. While she calls herself a procrastinator, its clear that she what she values and what she wants to be are lining up. Her studies in urban planning and her passion for social justice are so beautiful. Looking at her face through the camera lense, I see pure beauty.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Work in progress
Yesterday was a busy day of interviewing and photographing.
It started with A, who came by the house. She spoke about establishing herself as a business woman and about helping other hispanic women. She said she's been a mother, a wife, and a housewife. She's got those roles down. Now it's time to move into a new role. My converstation with G later in the day was along similar lines. She said she's entering a new stage of her life. Now that she's given herself a firm physical foundation she's free to explore the interior her. It's like the pieces of the puzzle have all come together and now she can finish painting the picture. Her marriage is at a point where they've settled into communication and support, she's got two kids and doesn't plan for more, she's finished her education and has a job she likes. So now, it's time to focus on herself. She described herself first as a woman in her thirties.
I'm finding that identities are falling into two categories- either the women are coming to a new place in their lives- entering a new stage- or there is a conflict within them between various identities and they are choosing one.
I also met with AM to photograph her. Before we began we sat around chatting with her mother. When I finished taking As pictures, I realized I should has her mother to participate as well, since our conversation had been an interview. She spoke about her struggle with being a mother-in-law because of her daughter-in-law's perceptions of her. The joy is in her new son-in-law with whom she has a beautiful relationship. This is one woman, being perceived differently by two different people, a perfect example.
It started with A, who came by the house. She spoke about establishing herself as a business woman and about helping other hispanic women. She said she's been a mother, a wife, and a housewife. She's got those roles down. Now it's time to move into a new role. My converstation with G later in the day was along similar lines. She said she's entering a new stage of her life. Now that she's given herself a firm physical foundation she's free to explore the interior her. It's like the pieces of the puzzle have all come together and now she can finish painting the picture. Her marriage is at a point where they've settled into communication and support, she's got two kids and doesn't plan for more, she's finished her education and has a job she likes. So now, it's time to focus on herself. She described herself first as a woman in her thirties.
I'm finding that identities are falling into two categories- either the women are coming to a new place in their lives- entering a new stage- or there is a conflict within them between various identities and they are choosing one.
I also met with AM to photograph her. Before we began we sat around chatting with her mother. When I finished taking As pictures, I realized I should has her mother to participate as well, since our conversation had been an interview. She spoke about her struggle with being a mother-in-law because of her daughter-in-law's perceptions of her. The joy is in her new son-in-law with whom she has a beautiful relationship. This is one woman, being perceived differently by two different people, a perfect example.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Sage Publications
needs a new copy editor. Both of the books we read published by this company were rife were errors, which made reading difficult!
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Annotated Bibliography
Austin, J. L. "How to Do Things with Words." William James Lectures. Harvard University. 1955. Rpt. in How to Do Things with Words. Ed. J. O. Urmson and Marina Sbisa. 2nd. ed. N.p.: Harvard University Press, 1975.
Austin's book addresses the performative speech act. Through speaking we create what is real. In this project, the subject is given the authority to create her identity through the words that she speaks. Her utterances may be verdictive in that they are an acknowledgement or decision of who she is; commisive, in that they commit her to being this identity; expositive, in that they explain why she is this identity; exercitive, in that they influence her listeners/observers so that they see her in this way; or behabitive in that they express her attitude towards herself.
Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. 2000. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2003.
Barker's text presents a variety of theories of culture studies. This project was most influenced by Chapter 8, "Issues of Subjectivity and Identity," and Chapter 10, "Sex, Subjectivity, and Representation." Subjectivity is "how we are constituted as subjects and how we experience ourselves." Identity is a project always in progress, based on our past and present experiences and heading toward our future hopes. We also have social identities, constructed by our cultures, and taught to us by by society. (Giddens) As women, we cannot seperate ourselves from our material bodies. (Butler) We can, however, resist being "coat racks" on which cultural meanings are hung without our participation. When we become agents in our own subjectivity, we join the discourse that constructs our identities. This project acknowledges that there is no "universal identity of woman" and allows women the position of agent in their subjectivity, as well as acknowledging the social construct of identity by inviting the viewer into the discourse. The images attempt to stand in contrast to many of the stereotypical images present in the media. The women's attributes are not being contrasted with a male attribute, nor are they an attempt to say what a woman should be like. Although they are constructing subject positions, they allow for negotiation between the subject and the text, as well as the viwer and the text (subject).
Erving, Goffman. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. 1959. Woodstock, New York: Overlook Press, 1973.
Goffman's work deals with the ways that we present ourselves, as if we are perfomers on a stage. Our personas change frequently as we come into contact with different audiences. As more and more personas are added, the backstage becomes another stage. The demand for one persona or another is constant, and a woman must play the persona that is being demanded by that audience. This project gives women a space to choose the persona they would like to present, as opposed to having it chosen for them. In addition, it provides a space for them to more fully explore a persona that is being developed or has been pushed to one side.
Reese, Venus Opal. Lecture. Storytelling as Cultural Studies. University of Texas at Dallas. 31 Jan. 2008.
Our identities are created by a network of conversations. In this project, women are invited into a conversation with the photographer in order to create or explore an identity. In listening to a subject's story, the photographer finds an identity that speaks to who the woman is now, and, in futher conversation, explores that identity with the woman. A photograph is created and presented to the viewer, extending an invitation to join the conversation begun by the subject and photographer.
Saukko, Paula. Doing Research in Cultural Studies: An introduction to classical and new methedological approaches. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2003.
Saukko reviews a variety of research approaches and methodologies. This project mirrors her own interest in poststructuralist and multi-site research methods. It is also informed by the various case studies she uses to describe methods of research, such as Rapp's study on amnioscentesis, with its variety of perspectives and the tension inherent in these. Most importantly, the subject is not marginalized but given a position of power in the project by being a fully informed and interacting participant. This is explained in the Arendtian model which acknowledges the 'uniqueness' of the subject's voices, the compelling nature of storytelling, and the communal creation of the project.
Austin's book addresses the performative speech act. Through speaking we create what is real. In this project, the subject is given the authority to create her identity through the words that she speaks. Her utterances may be verdictive in that they are an acknowledgement or decision of who she is; commisive, in that they commit her to being this identity; expositive, in that they explain why she is this identity; exercitive, in that they influence her listeners/observers so that they see her in this way; or behabitive in that they express her attitude towards herself.
Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. 2000. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2003.
Barker's text presents a variety of theories of culture studies. This project was most influenced by Chapter 8, "Issues of Subjectivity and Identity," and Chapter 10, "Sex, Subjectivity, and Representation." Subjectivity is "how we are constituted as subjects and how we experience ourselves." Identity is a project always in progress, based on our past and present experiences and heading toward our future hopes. We also have social identities, constructed by our cultures, and taught to us by by society. (Giddens) As women, we cannot seperate ourselves from our material bodies. (Butler) We can, however, resist being "coat racks" on which cultural meanings are hung without our participation. When we become agents in our own subjectivity, we join the discourse that constructs our identities. This project acknowledges that there is no "universal identity of woman" and allows women the position of agent in their subjectivity, as well as acknowledging the social construct of identity by inviting the viewer into the discourse. The images attempt to stand in contrast to many of the stereotypical images present in the media. The women's attributes are not being contrasted with a male attribute, nor are they an attempt to say what a woman should be like. Although they are constructing subject positions, they allow for negotiation between the subject and the text, as well as the viwer and the text (subject).
Erving, Goffman. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. 1959. Woodstock, New York: Overlook Press, 1973.
Goffman's work deals with the ways that we present ourselves, as if we are perfomers on a stage. Our personas change frequently as we come into contact with different audiences. As more and more personas are added, the backstage becomes another stage. The demand for one persona or another is constant, and a woman must play the persona that is being demanded by that audience. This project gives women a space to choose the persona they would like to present, as opposed to having it chosen for them. In addition, it provides a space for them to more fully explore a persona that is being developed or has been pushed to one side.
Reese, Venus Opal. Lecture. Storytelling as Cultural Studies. University of Texas at Dallas. 31 Jan. 2008.
Our identities are created by a network of conversations. In this project, women are invited into a conversation with the photographer in order to create or explore an identity. In listening to a subject's story, the photographer finds an identity that speaks to who the woman is now, and, in futher conversation, explores that identity with the woman. A photograph is created and presented to the viewer, extending an invitation to join the conversation begun by the subject and photographer.
Saukko, Paula. Doing Research in Cultural Studies: An introduction to classical and new methedological approaches. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2003.
Saukko reviews a variety of research approaches and methodologies. This project mirrors her own interest in poststructuralist and multi-site research methods. It is also informed by the various case studies she uses to describe methods of research, such as Rapp's study on amnioscentesis, with its variety of perspectives and the tension inherent in these. Most importantly, the subject is not marginalized but given a position of power in the project by being a fully informed and interacting participant. This is explained in the Arendtian model which acknowledges the 'uniqueness' of the subject's voices, the compelling nature of storytelling, and the communal creation of the project.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Abstract
Refocusing the Lens
Images of women saturate our world- photographs of women grace magazine covers and centerfolds, images of women sell beer and books, and art works of women, naked, draped, or clothed, fill museums. These images, even if not created by men, are usually created for the male gaze. In an instant we can read which stereotype of a woman we are meant to understand- virgin, whore, mother, feminist. There is no dialogue between the viewer and the viewed.
In this project, I attempt to open a space for discourse in which women position themselves as subjects. The women become signs, signifying what they choose to signify. The male perspective that has dominated the photographic landscape, in particular the commercial, placing the female subject into an “unreal” position, is put aside. The typical cultural constructs of women, or stereotypes, which also do not reflect reality, disappear in the reality of the photograph. The subject of the photograph and the photographer enter into conversation in order to create an identity, focusing closely on those parts of the subject’s identity most in flux, in order to define this identity more fully. Values typically termed masculine as well as those categorized as feminine are acknowledged. The subject is stepping outside of the confines of her culture to define who she wants to be on this occasion.
The viewer is invited to step outside as well and join this conversation, negotiating her or his own meaning just as the subject of the photograph has negotiated her presentation to the viewer with herself and the photographer.
Images of women saturate our world- photographs of women grace magazine covers and centerfolds, images of women sell beer and books, and art works of women, naked, draped, or clothed, fill museums. These images, even if not created by men, are usually created for the male gaze. In an instant we can read which stereotype of a woman we are meant to understand- virgin, whore, mother, feminist. There is no dialogue between the viewer and the viewed.
In this project, I attempt to open a space for discourse in which women position themselves as subjects. The women become signs, signifying what they choose to signify. The male perspective that has dominated the photographic landscape, in particular the commercial, placing the female subject into an “unreal” position, is put aside. The typical cultural constructs of women, or stereotypes, which also do not reflect reality, disappear in the reality of the photograph. The subject of the photograph and the photographer enter into conversation in order to create an identity, focusing closely on those parts of the subject’s identity most in flux, in order to define this identity more fully. Values typically termed masculine as well as those categorized as feminine are acknowledged. The subject is stepping outside of the confines of her culture to define who she wants to be on this occasion.
The viewer is invited to step outside as well and join this conversation, negotiating her or his own meaning just as the subject of the photograph has negotiated her presentation to the viewer with herself and the photographer.
Swimming in a pool
Theory- once we've got it we can play around in it. Whether we ascribe to a theory or not, the freedom is there. It's like swimming in a pool. You can have your own, or a favorite, but still borrow someone else's for that experience.
Religion (or God beliefs, really) functions the same way. Once I truly get the love and grace of God, religion isn't restrictive, it's freeing. And it isn't rigid, but flexible. Thus, while I am attached to my beliefs, I am not defensive of them. People can criticize without it bothering me. Fundamentalists, both religious and theoretical, don't get this.
Religion (or God beliefs, really) functions the same way. Once I truly get the love and grace of God, religion isn't restrictive, it's freeing. And it isn't rigid, but flexible. Thus, while I am attached to my beliefs, I am not defensive of them. People can criticize without it bothering me. Fundamentalists, both religious and theoretical, don't get this.
Real post on becoming a mom
(I posted something last week, but this is what I really wrote.)
Before I had a baby, up through my pregnancy, I thought becoming a mother was automatic- something you felt the moment you gave birth. And then I pushed out my daughter and didn't feel it immediately. Oh, I was delighted with her, and happy, but I didn't feel "mother."
I still don't feel it all the time. Sometimes I want to look around for the real mother of these kids running around in my backyard. Once I saw this cute little baby that someone was holding a few rows ahead of me in church- "that looks like Ali," I thought. And then I realized it WAS Ali. I'd lent him to a friend for a few minutes and forgotten all about it.
I feel most like a mother now when Leila crawls into my bed at 5 am with a tummyache, and I have to make it go away. So, even though I want to roll over into sleep, I begin to rub her back. I choose, at that moment, to be a mother. And it's a choice I make over and over again (or not) when I choose not to yell, or not to turn away to my own desires, but to attend to hers.
Kind of religious, ain't it?
Before I had a baby, up through my pregnancy, I thought becoming a mother was automatic- something you felt the moment you gave birth. And then I pushed out my daughter and didn't feel it immediately. Oh, I was delighted with her, and happy, but I didn't feel "mother."
I still don't feel it all the time. Sometimes I want to look around for the real mother of these kids running around in my backyard. Once I saw this cute little baby that someone was holding a few rows ahead of me in church- "that looks like Ali," I thought. And then I realized it WAS Ali. I'd lent him to a friend for a few minutes and forgotten all about it.
I feel most like a mother now when Leila crawls into my bed at 5 am with a tummyache, and I have to make it go away. So, even though I want to roll over into sleep, I begin to rub her back. I choose, at that moment, to be a mother. And it's a choice I make over and over again (or not) when I choose not to yell, or not to turn away to my own desires, but to attend to hers.
Kind of religious, ain't it?
Monday, April 14, 2008
I'm in love
with all of these wonderful women that I'm listening to. H loves studying, and it shines in her eyes. S is newly on the brink of her professional career after finishing her studies- full of possibilities for the future. A is a butterfly, newly emerged from a dark cocoon. M is entering "older lady" hood, fighting aging by continuing to work and travel, but looking forward to the rest of retirement. C is a mother and a professional, walking the line between home and work.
Jingle
Listen. Do you want to hear a secret? Do you want to hear her say, what's unsaid?
Listen. To the voices she is speaking for.
Leave your agenda at the door, and
listen, to what's unspoken.
Just listen.
So she can tell the story that she didn't know was there.
Listen.
(To the tune of the Beatle's song, "Listen.")
Listen. To the voices she is speaking for.
Leave your agenda at the door, and
listen, to what's unspoken.
Just listen.
So she can tell the story that she didn't know was there.
Listen.
(To the tune of the Beatle's song, "Listen.")
Sunday, April 13, 2008
photography
Today I felt like a teenager again, going to fun places to photograph my friends. Today my friend was S, from my class. We have spent time talking over the semester and gotten to know certain aspects of each other quite well. The identity that I wanted to capture for her became evident as she told me about her search for a job, and the urgency she feels to have work after being a student and before she becomes a mother. It was such a privilege to listen to her, and then to photograph her. At the end of the session we sat in my car, out of the biting wind, talking some more and looking at the photographs. She told me that although various people have asked to take her picture, she's never felt comfortable with anyone other than her husband, and so always said no. However, she said yes to me, and she said she felt totally comfortable being photographed today. And she looked it. Yeah!
Earlier in the week H came to my house so that we could talk some more, and maybe take some pictures. As we were talking it she lit up as she began to talk about being a student. "I love studying," she said. "I could live on campus." And so, I photographed a student, full of life, in my backyard, and back in the living room. Again, H had expressed to me earlier that she didn't like many of the pictures taken of her, but when I showed her what we'd done, she was happy with them.
My whole modus operandi of photography is changing.
Earlier in the week H came to my house so that we could talk some more, and maybe take some pictures. As we were talking it she lit up as she began to talk about being a student. "I love studying," she said. "I could live on campus." And so, I photographed a student, full of life, in my backyard, and back in the living room. Again, H had expressed to me earlier that she didn't like many of the pictures taken of her, but when I showed her what we'd done, she was happy with them.
My whole modus operandi of photography is changing.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Self-Identity
Identity is an emotionally charged discursive description of ourselves-
I took on the role of mother physically when Leila was born (five years ago yesterday), but it is only part of who I am. The secretary at work, who knew me pre-, embraced this part of me and ignored the rest. It through me off. She was saying the wrong lines for the work stage, forcing me into playing a role for another stage.
It still isn't natural for me- sometimes I wonder who these children's mother is- because I step out of the mother role frequently. I thought it was automatic- the baby would be born and presto, I would feel like a mom. It hadn't happened during pregnancy, so I thought it must happen when I pushed the little tadpole out. I'm rarely around other moms as moms, and I don't really relate to other people that way. Perhaps being around other moms would create a discourse in which I would be recreated as mom.
We need friends who relate to us on a variety of levels, who see our entire spectrum to help create us as whole people. Integrity.
I took on the role of mother physically when Leila was born (five years ago yesterday), but it is only part of who I am. The secretary at work, who knew me pre-, embraced this part of me and ignored the rest. It through me off. She was saying the wrong lines for the work stage, forcing me into playing a role for another stage.
It still isn't natural for me- sometimes I wonder who these children's mother is- because I step out of the mother role frequently. I thought it was automatic- the baby would be born and presto, I would feel like a mom. It hadn't happened during pregnancy, so I thought it must happen when I pushed the little tadpole out. I'm rarely around other moms as moms, and I don't really relate to other people that way. Perhaps being around other moms would create a discourse in which I would be recreated as mom.
We need friends who relate to us on a variety of levels, who see our entire spectrum to help create us as whole people. Integrity.
April 3- Speaking For
We begin with Amy Winehouse. It seems like small talk, but Dr. R says that everything she talks about has theory in it. She plays a video of "Rehab" on her i-phone. I stand back, unable to see, (I'm not the only one), until Sharoon steps back to let me near. I step in for a minute, then step back again. I get called on it. Why do I always withdraw and stand back? I mull it over for a while. Is it that I'm not a full participant? No. I participate fully in discussions, but I don't press forward to grab viewing space.I think in America people don't stand super close to each other. I'm not the only one not pressing in, but I am on the outer edge. I don't want to block someone else's view, and I don't want to contort and twist my neck. I take turns.
Dr. R prepares us for Dr. Ozsuath. Our background and stuff influences how andwhat we hear. Nothing is true; however, things can be valid. Art- we can't read anything into it, but we can sync with it (a la Hall). "When people don't get heard, they stop talking. And then they leave. (I know this is true.) That is why we have divorce." "Be responsible for what you bring to the table. Know where you are coming from."
Dr. Ozsuath is an older lady with very coiffed hair, a straight skirt, and a rust colored blouse. She is a holocaust survivor. She begins by speaking about differences in culture that make it difficult to speak of her experience- the US is a "strength" culture. She comes from a culture that values the "weak." People who came here, who survive the holocaust were ashamed and didn't talk. People here couldn't understand why they didn't resist. They ask questions about things they know. A son-in-law admires his mother-in-law for being a survivor, for having a good life here despite losing her children to the ovens. There is a pain in not being able to mourn. She never spoke of it. "You an't speak of things that others have no idea about."
Dr. O got out of Budapest with her parents help, to join her husband in Germany after the war. She introduced herself to people with "I am Jewish." Then she came to Austin. She didn't talk about the war.
"I didn't have a story to tell. I was full of stories." She listenined to people's stories, made some recordings of her own, and then decided to quit telling stories. "After you have one story you are repeating that story. " She thought the story was immensly wide and complicated. Shrinking it to just one story did not do it justice. And people cannot tell the horror-the mundane details of the story undermined the horror, the actual experience. The shame, the inexpressibility of being completely at the mercy of other people- it is only possible to speak in terms of resistance, not victimization- there is a demand for resistance.
Now she chooses one story to tell out of many- creating a story line limits the larger story. She learned to live with her head held up high, just as her father told her they would do after the war. (but could not do in Soviet occupied Hungary, where people continued to disappear.)
We are all teary eyed. Theories we heard? Framing, self-experience. Speaking for the silenced, the ashamed. The unsayable is left unsaid, but becomes known through what is said. People can hear stories of miracles- these imply the horrors that require the miracles. (Is this saying the glass is half full? Is this minimizing the story? Derrida is here- signature and performativity.
The purity of our listening, Dr. R says, with no agenda, creates. Dr. O is able to tell something she has never told before. She puts into words the why she quit telling stories and why she has begun again. She wasn't attempting to speak for the universal expreience, but we could relate to her- not necessarily to her stories, but to her as an experiencer.
I understand more clearly now why I do not tell my stories. Apart from the instant flood of tears, there is too much unknown, too much background to explain. The story gets lost in the wonder of experiences. And also, when one lives the story, it is normalized. To tell it one must sensationalize, which doesn't always feel true. The sensational is there, but it is infrequent. The cotidian mundanities comprise the bulk of our experiences.
This is summed up in the question- "How does it feel to grow up/ experience _______?" Dr. O mentions this question- it stems from the speakers own inability to imagine the replier's everyday life. The answer is "Normal," because that's what it is or becomes.
Dr. R prepares us for Dr. Ozsuath. Our background and stuff influences how andwhat we hear. Nothing is true; however, things can be valid. Art- we can't read anything into it, but we can sync with it (a la Hall). "When people don't get heard, they stop talking. And then they leave. (I know this is true.) That is why we have divorce." "Be responsible for what you bring to the table. Know where you are coming from."
Dr. Ozsuath is an older lady with very coiffed hair, a straight skirt, and a rust colored blouse. She is a holocaust survivor. She begins by speaking about differences in culture that make it difficult to speak of her experience- the US is a "strength" culture. She comes from a culture that values the "weak." People who came here, who survive the holocaust were ashamed and didn't talk. People here couldn't understand why they didn't resist. They ask questions about things they know. A son-in-law admires his mother-in-law for being a survivor, for having a good life here despite losing her children to the ovens. There is a pain in not being able to mourn. She never spoke of it. "You an't speak of things that others have no idea about."
Dr. O got out of Budapest with her parents help, to join her husband in Germany after the war. She introduced herself to people with "I am Jewish." Then she came to Austin. She didn't talk about the war.
"I didn't have a story to tell. I was full of stories." She listenined to people's stories, made some recordings of her own, and then decided to quit telling stories. "After you have one story you are repeating that story. " She thought the story was immensly wide and complicated. Shrinking it to just one story did not do it justice. And people cannot tell the horror-the mundane details of the story undermined the horror, the actual experience. The shame, the inexpressibility of being completely at the mercy of other people- it is only possible to speak in terms of resistance, not victimization- there is a demand for resistance.
Now she chooses one story to tell out of many- creating a story line limits the larger story. She learned to live with her head held up high, just as her father told her they would do after the war. (but could not do in Soviet occupied Hungary, where people continued to disappear.)
We are all teary eyed. Theories we heard? Framing, self-experience. Speaking for the silenced, the ashamed. The unsayable is left unsaid, but becomes known through what is said. People can hear stories of miracles- these imply the horrors that require the miracles. (Is this saying the glass is half full? Is this minimizing the story? Derrida is here- signature and performativity.
The purity of our listening, Dr. R says, with no agenda, creates. Dr. O is able to tell something she has never told before. She puts into words the why she quit telling stories and why she has begun again. She wasn't attempting to speak for the universal expreience, but we could relate to her- not necessarily to her stories, but to her as an experiencer.
I understand more clearly now why I do not tell my stories. Apart from the instant flood of tears, there is too much unknown, too much background to explain. The story gets lost in the wonder of experiences. And also, when one lives the story, it is normalized. To tell it one must sensationalize, which doesn't always feel true. The sensational is there, but it is infrequent. The cotidian mundanities comprise the bulk of our experiences.
This is summed up in the question- "How does it feel to grow up/ experience _______?" Dr. O mentions this question- it stems from the speakers own inability to imagine the replier's everyday life. The answer is "Normal," because that's what it is or becomes.
March 27- Listening
"Getting heard is more (powerful) valuable than your ego."
"I'm not into reactions. I'm all about the future tense."
Listening to music and video
Keith- studying lived experience and resistance
Sharoon- contested spaces, lived experience- AIDs in Africa- women, resistance- age. The song asked for something to help. THe book was looking for postive outcomes from research.
Liz- "Tis a Gift"- about 12 different versions, each beautiful, each showing a new perspective on the same song.
Najendra- "What flower has bloomed in the riverbed? The entire riverbed is bright."
Anuja- What is orientalism if you are from the "orient?" Does it become something you play or something your audience hears? Or is it an expression of yourself?
Suzanne- drums (brave debut), trumpet, pop culture, orientalism and reverse, scapes and spaces.
Mandy- Me- lived experience, discourse. The different songs interacting with each other and with the listener. Naming, resistance, scapes.
"I'm not into reactions. I'm all about the future tense."
Listening to music and video
Keith- studying lived experience and resistance
Sharoon- contested spaces, lived experience- AIDs in Africa- women, resistance- age. The song asked for something to help. THe book was looking for postive outcomes from research.
Liz- "Tis a Gift"- about 12 different versions, each beautiful, each showing a new perspective on the same song.
Najendra- "What flower has bloomed in the riverbed? The entire riverbed is bright."
Anuja- What is orientalism if you are from the "orient?" Does it become something you play or something your audience hears? Or is it an expression of yourself?
Suzanne- drums (brave debut), trumpet, pop culture, orientalism and reverse, scapes and spaces.
Mandy- Me- lived experience, discourse. The different songs interacting with each other and with the listener. Naming, resistance, scapes.
March 20
"I want you to want what I have, so let me help you want what I have."
Currency- something used as a medium of exchange- a representation. Interpretation of currency, affect of currency, a PROMISE.
"Only in giving away does it have any power."
"Energy in motion"- like water and electricity. Currency flows.
Some things are more powerful than power- power itself is a currency. SELF-Identity- currency is sense of self. Sell yourself to that identiy. Agency has to have constraint, and that only happens in precondition.
Dr. Riccio
What am I listening for? Theories?
Learn to do in order to do. A theory's vlaue only comes through application. He wanted to do things well. "mafia of people trying to name things (people).
Worked in Alaska- realized that "western" style theater warmups weren't appropriate- they isolated the parts of the body. Alaskan natives about integration of body and nature- warmups needed to be reflective of this.
Speaking from: Passion ( only happens with good listening) /need to be heard.
"Grace, Mercy & Compassion for what it takes to be alive." Look for people's innocence or purpose and only speak to their goodness.
Currency- something used as a medium of exchange- a representation. Interpretation of currency, affect of currency, a PROMISE.
"Only in giving away does it have any power."
"Energy in motion"- like water and electricity. Currency flows.
Some things are more powerful than power- power itself is a currency. SELF-Identity- currency is sense of self. Sell yourself to that identiy. Agency has to have constraint, and that only happens in precondition.
Dr. Riccio
What am I listening for? Theories?
Learn to do in order to do. A theory's vlaue only comes through application. He wanted to do things well. "mafia of people trying to name things (people).
Worked in Alaska- realized that "western" style theater warmups weren't appropriate- they isolated the parts of the body. Alaskan natives about integration of body and nature- warmups needed to be reflective of this.
Speaking from: Passion ( only happens with good listening) /need to be heard.
"Grace, Mercy & Compassion for what it takes to be alive." Look for people's innocence or purpose and only speak to their goodness.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Community
The Nabuntu-Zulu say, "A person is a person through other people." And then they live it.
I was listening to BookTV- Jimmy Carter's grandson was talking about a book he wrote about being in the Peace Corps in South Africa. He described the above concept with a couple of stories- one was how the director of the school where he was working had just finished building a new house. An old, homeless man noticed this, and came to the door and asked for some food. They took him in and he lived with them until his death.
I was listening to BookTV- Jimmy Carter's grandson was talking about a book he wrote about being in the Peace Corps in South Africa. He described the above concept with a couple of stories- one was how the director of the school where he was working had just finished building a new house. An old, homeless man noticed this, and came to the door and asked for some food. They took him in and he lived with them until his death.
Monday, March 10, 2008
March 6- Listening For
This week was supposed to be "Speaking for" but we switched it around.
Consider the way you listen. That is what experiences are based on- where you are listening from. Actions and words line up to what you are listening for.
"Imagine what the world would look like if you could create what you are listening for." We did an exercise with a partner. Heidi spoke of a current irritation. I thought of what terms Dr. R had used the week before. Then I decided to just listen to Heidi. I made a few guessses. Then I said she was listening for approval, and she thought that was it! Then I spoke of the morning news- gang violence in LA, violence in Israel and Palestine, and my frustration that the gangs didn't wake up to the reality of violence in other places and how petty theirs is. Heidi made some guesses, I pushed her a little, and she said "hope." Ah, yes. That was what I was listening for.
However, a day later I started thinking about this. Heidi and I were working backwards. We were identifying what we wanted to hear, but now what we were actually listening for. Actually, I was listening for despair, and so that's what I was hearing. She was listening for disapproval, and so that is what she was hearing. While what we identified was helpful for us, it wasn't really what we were listening for.
One term that kept coming up was "Where are you listening from." But I don't think that was the point. I think the point is really to think about what you are hearing from the other. That is what you are listening for. If you want to change what you are hearing, change what you are listening for.
What's interesting about all of what we're learning is that I've been doing some of this at work in the past year.
"I create what I look for." This is why my students don't really make me angry with rude personal quesitons. I'm listening for learning- not disprespect. However, there are definitely some things I take as disrespect, and they may not mean it that way- speaking over other students, interupting, being noisy during tests, etc.
This makes me think about what I'm listening for with my children and my husband. Why does Leila frustrate me sometimes?
What am I listening for in my photography?
"Live your life as a speech act of creation. You say what is SO."
Dr. R. talked for a bit about paired opposites. There is no slave without a master, no maid without a mistress.
How come when people get married, then, the man stays a man and the woman becomes a wife?as in "I now pronounce you man and wife." What does that say about her position as subject? Or does it perhaps mean that he now becomes a man, but he wasn't before?
Consider the way you listen. That is what experiences are based on- where you are listening from. Actions and words line up to what you are listening for.
"Imagine what the world would look like if you could create what you are listening for." We did an exercise with a partner. Heidi spoke of a current irritation. I thought of what terms Dr. R had used the week before. Then I decided to just listen to Heidi. I made a few guessses. Then I said she was listening for approval, and she thought that was it! Then I spoke of the morning news- gang violence in LA, violence in Israel and Palestine, and my frustration that the gangs didn't wake up to the reality of violence in other places and how petty theirs is. Heidi made some guesses, I pushed her a little, and she said "hope." Ah, yes. That was what I was listening for.
However, a day later I started thinking about this. Heidi and I were working backwards. We were identifying what we wanted to hear, but now what we were actually listening for. Actually, I was listening for despair, and so that's what I was hearing. She was listening for disapproval, and so that is what she was hearing. While what we identified was helpful for us, it wasn't really what we were listening for.
One term that kept coming up was "Where are you listening from." But I don't think that was the point. I think the point is really to think about what you are hearing from the other. That is what you are listening for. If you want to change what you are hearing, change what you are listening for.
What's interesting about all of what we're learning is that I've been doing some of this at work in the past year.
"I create what I look for." This is why my students don't really make me angry with rude personal quesitons. I'm listening for learning- not disprespect. However, there are definitely some things I take as disrespect, and they may not mean it that way- speaking over other students, interupting, being noisy during tests, etc.
This makes me think about what I'm listening for with my children and my husband. Why does Leila frustrate me sometimes?
What am I listening for in my photography?
"Live your life as a speech act of creation. You say what is SO."
Dr. R. talked for a bit about paired opposites. There is no slave without a master, no maid without a mistress.
How come when people get married, then, the man stays a man and the woman becomes a wife?as in "I now pronounce you man and wife." What does that say about her position as subject? Or does it perhaps mean that he now becomes a man, but he wasn't before?
February 28 Recreation
What is recreation? Najendra says "assembling what is available and trying to go beyond." The difference between repetition and recreation? the first doesn't imply new direction or any thought.
Dr. R demonstrates:
"What makes you grumpy?" She asks Keith.
He talks about McD's and the children running around there like wild things.
Dr. R. listens, and speaks it back.
She apologizes as a human that he underwent that- making sure he knew she heard him.
She makes no judgement but speaks what he hasn't said- "languaging the unsaid"
"Wherever you are speaking from is where you are listening from," she says.
Najendra- "by recreating we say what is rendered unspeakable by existing grammar."
We are asked to describe what she has done. We try. She says she will show us again. Next up is intrepid Darcy.
"What are you grumpy about?"
"Lack of sleep."
"Can you tell me a particular incident?"
"This week."
"Say more."
Darcy speaks. When she stops, Dr. R asks if that is all, and waits. Darcy goes deeper. This happens several times. At the end Darcy is crying, but it is healing tears.
Dr. R tells her that she is wonderful. At this point, she steps out of the recreation to give Darcy some tools for making life bearable- make a list of all your problems so you can sleep, for example. "Writing something down gives your mind a place to put it." (This makes me wonder aobut illiterate people and cultures. Where do they get to put the things in their minds?)
I described this process as breakdown and buildup. Dr. R. had her go deep into what was going on. It was very therapuetic.
Dr. R outlined the process of Recreation for us.
1. Get permission- "May I?" "Would you be willing to say more?"
Make sure they know: You don't want anything from them, you are not a threat, there is no judgement.
2. Repeat back what they said, exactly the way they said it.
Give them permission go correct you. "GET their world."
3. Capture the emotional experience of that person.
"underneath anger is hurt". Listen and be there. Start to get their logic.
4. Background Commitment
What is this person's committment? (Keith's was that everyone was heard.) What is driving them? What makes this important in the first place?
Options: Clean things up if needed. Apologize. Ask if you can give an idea.
LEAVE THE PERSON WITH THE BEST OF THEMSELVES. (Himself or herself).
This was a very moving class. First, the courage of Keith and Darcy was immense. Darcy laid it all out for us, but I think there was a relief in knowing that we just cared about her.
I saw that I am quick to try to fix. I thought about a couple of weeks ago when someone came to talk to me about something that was bothering him, and I laid what I'd learned that week on him, but heavy. He should try treating that person in a new way, shifting his position so that she would have to shift hers. I could tell he didn't want to hear me. Then I felt like he was avoiding me. So after this class I called him and apologized that I hadn't just listened, that I had tried to fix.
Dr. R demonstrates:
"What makes you grumpy?" She asks Keith.
He talks about McD's and the children running around there like wild things.
Dr. R. listens, and speaks it back.
She apologizes as a human that he underwent that- making sure he knew she heard him.
She makes no judgement but speaks what he hasn't said- "languaging the unsaid"
"Wherever you are speaking from is where you are listening from," she says.
Najendra- "by recreating we say what is rendered unspeakable by existing grammar."
We are asked to describe what she has done. We try. She says she will show us again. Next up is intrepid Darcy.
"What are you grumpy about?"
"Lack of sleep."
"Can you tell me a particular incident?"
"This week."
"Say more."
Darcy speaks. When she stops, Dr. R asks if that is all, and waits. Darcy goes deeper. This happens several times. At the end Darcy is crying, but it is healing tears.
Dr. R tells her that she is wonderful. At this point, she steps out of the recreation to give Darcy some tools for making life bearable- make a list of all your problems so you can sleep, for example. "Writing something down gives your mind a place to put it." (This makes me wonder aobut illiterate people and cultures. Where do they get to put the things in their minds?)
I described this process as breakdown and buildup. Dr. R. had her go deep into what was going on. It was very therapuetic.
Dr. R outlined the process of Recreation for us.
1. Get permission- "May I?" "Would you be willing to say more?"
Make sure they know: You don't want anything from them, you are not a threat, there is no judgement.
2. Repeat back what they said, exactly the way they said it.
Give them permission go correct you. "GET their world."
3. Capture the emotional experience of that person.
"underneath anger is hurt". Listen and be there. Start to get their logic.
4. Background Commitment
What is this person's committment? (Keith's was that everyone was heard.) What is driving them? What makes this important in the first place?
Options: Clean things up if needed. Apologize. Ask if you can give an idea.
LEAVE THE PERSON WITH THE BEST OF THEMSELVES. (Himself or herself).
This was a very moving class. First, the courage of Keith and Darcy was immense. Darcy laid it all out for us, but I think there was a relief in knowing that we just cared about her.
I saw that I am quick to try to fix. I thought about a couple of weeks ago when someone came to talk to me about something that was bothering him, and I laid what I'd learned that week on him, but heavy. He should try treating that person in a new way, shifting his position so that she would have to shift hers. I could tell he didn't want to hear me. Then I felt like he was avoiding me. So after this class I called him and apologized that I hadn't just listened, that I had tried to fix.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Kristeva
On page 297
Kirsteva says that not only do women inhabit various subject positions, but "a new symobolic space and new subject position is open itself up for them." (Hmmm. Opening itself up? Or being opened by them. Agency!)
This new generation of feminists "seek to reconcile the linear time of history and politics with the cyclical gestation time of motherhood." They are trying to "intermingle motherhood (and difference) with the politics of equality and the symbolic order."
So, dissertation idea- get pregnant, and have a baby.
I'm already a mother, but in many ways I am not because I have to live within these two different spaces- professional woman and mother. While the first impedes often on the second (and is expected to) the second is not supposed to interfere with the first. However, some women do this by taking baby with them to professional arenas, breastfeeding in meetings, and the like.
My doctoral defence would require breastfeeding the child during the defense itself, or, at a minimum, bringing the child, in fact, all three children, with me to the defense.
Kirsteva says that not only do women inhabit various subject positions, but "a new symobolic space and new subject position is open itself up for them." (Hmmm. Opening itself up? Or being opened by them. Agency!)
This new generation of feminists "seek to reconcile the linear time of history and politics with the cyclical gestation time of motherhood." They are trying to "intermingle motherhood (and difference) with the politics of equality and the symbolic order."
So, dissertation idea- get pregnant, and have a baby.
I'm already a mother, but in many ways I am not because I have to live within these two different spaces- professional woman and mother. While the first impedes often on the second (and is expected to) the second is not supposed to interfere with the first. However, some women do this by taking baby with them to professional arenas, breastfeeding in meetings, and the like.
My doctoral defence would require breastfeeding the child during the defense itself, or, at a minimum, bringing the child, in fact, all three children, with me to the defense.
Foucalt and subjectivity
This is starting to make some sense.
In some cultures people deny that homosexuality exists, and, though they are aware of homosexual practices, they do not define the practioners (or at least one of them) as homosexual. (the other one may be "gay" or "a woman.")Other times it is simply ignored. This refusing to recognize homosexuals means that they have no ability "to be heard and to claim rights." (p. 291). They are not given "subject" status in the culture; therefore, they do not exist with the ability to perform actions. If only the subject can only be spoken by others (discourse production) than they are forever condemned to discursive limbo. However, if a subject has "agency" and can situate himself in the discourse, than he can create his own subjectivity. That is what has happened in the west, culminating in gay pride parades and the like, the ultimate in subjects seizing agency.
Some cultures do this with women, hiding them away from outside viewers, and not even speaking of them outside the home. The women may have the power to subjectize themselves inside the family unit and the home, but not in the outside arenas of politics and the labor market.
In some cultures people deny that homosexuality exists, and, though they are aware of homosexual practices, they do not define the practioners (or at least one of them) as homosexual. (the other one may be "gay" or "a woman.")Other times it is simply ignored. This refusing to recognize homosexuals means that they have no ability "to be heard and to claim rights." (p. 291). They are not given "subject" status in the culture; therefore, they do not exist with the ability to perform actions. If only the subject can only be spoken by others (discourse production) than they are forever condemned to discursive limbo. However, if a subject has "agency" and can situate himself in the discourse, than he can create his own subjectivity. That is what has happened in the west, culminating in gay pride parades and the like, the ultimate in subjects seizing agency.
Some cultures do this with women, hiding them away from outside viewers, and not even speaking of them outside the home. The women may have the power to subjectize themselves inside the family unit and the home, but not in the outside arenas of politics and the labor market.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Morality, Integrity, Ethics
I race to class from a conference, figuring that this will stand me in better stead than attending Salsa Dancing or how to be organized breakout sessions. I was right.
Today we tackle the the domains of morality, integrity, and ethics.
Morality= judgement/ ="something's wrong, I'm wrong," or "something's right, I'm right."
Integrity= workability
this is wholeness, but not just of me but that community I'm in. Our class has integrity- we all attend, we all contribute. If we're going to be absent we call or email. Dr. R uses the example of a bicyle wheel. When one spoke is taken away, it still works as a wheel, but the integrity is missing. When it hits a bump, the wheel crumples.
At my conference earlier, the people at my table worked together to build a bridge out of wire, styrofoam, wooden sticks, and marshmallows. One of the facilitators was so impressed that we were all participating, actively. Someone would throw out an idea, and we would run with it. None of us dug in our heels about what we wanted, so we didn't argue with each other; we listened and adapted our own ideas to fit with others. And we won a prize. Our integrity as a group produced a positive affect.
Ethics is releated to character, values. It works with morality.
If you get integrity- around you, people are never wrong. (and that draws them to you.)
Listen for where people are coming from.
Dr. Reese- "I listen for the inhales." (Aha moments)
Morality and Ethics are linked to our cultural values and ideals. Integrity floats free. I like the idea of integrity being wholeness. This echoes the Spanish meaning of integral. (Like whole wheat bread.) When something is integral in English, it's absolutely necessary. And integrity as a person leads to peace. When I know who I am, I am not threatened by who you are. I don't have to judge you, because you do not affect the wholeness of me.
Today we tackle the the domains of morality, integrity, and ethics.
Morality= judgement/ ="something's wrong, I'm wrong," or "something's right, I'm right."
Integrity= workability
this is wholeness, but not just of me but that community I'm in. Our class has integrity- we all attend, we all contribute. If we're going to be absent we call or email. Dr. R uses the example of a bicyle wheel. When one spoke is taken away, it still works as a wheel, but the integrity is missing. When it hits a bump, the wheel crumples.
At my conference earlier, the people at my table worked together to build a bridge out of wire, styrofoam, wooden sticks, and marshmallows. One of the facilitators was so impressed that we were all participating, actively. Someone would throw out an idea, and we would run with it. None of us dug in our heels about what we wanted, so we didn't argue with each other; we listened and adapted our own ideas to fit with others. And we won a prize. Our integrity as a group produced a positive affect.
Ethics is releated to character, values. It works with morality.
If you get integrity- around you, people are never wrong. (and that draws them to you.)
Listen for where people are coming from.
Dr. Reese- "I listen for the inhales." (Aha moments)
Morality and Ethics are linked to our cultural values and ideals. Integrity floats free. I like the idea of integrity being wholeness. This echoes the Spanish meaning of integral. (Like whole wheat bread.) When something is integral in English, it's absolutely necessary. And integrity as a person leads to peace. When I know who I am, I am not threatened by who you are. I don't have to judge you, because you do not affect the wholeness of me.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Kuhn
I've been reading Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions for another course, and thought it is speaking of science, it has much to say about what we are doing in cultural studies as well. Here's what I wrote for my other class:
In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn identifies paradigms as a key element in scientific discovery. According to this premise, it is not until a scientist has put forth a theory and it has been accepted by a sufficient number of his peers as reliable, that other scientists are able to progress in this field, solving problems posed by the paradigm, while keeping to the rules that this paradigm establishes. A paradigm is discovered when a crises point is reached; a scientist is unable to solve a critical mass of problems when using the old paradigm. By investigating these anomalies, a new paradigm is theorized and, once accepted, the cycle begins again. The old paradigm is not discarded until the new one is established, because without the rules set by the paradigm, science cannot be practiced. Indeed, Kuhn posits, paradigms are a prerequisite to perception. What we see is what we have been taught to see. This model holds true for the studies of humanities, as well. Once a scholar has learned a new theory, a new angle from which to consider her data, she is free to discard the old paradigm that has held her to its rules, and to view the world from a fresh perspective.
Kuhn's description of the scientific process echoes what we have been doing in class. These new paradigms (or theorys in cultural studies) are developed by thinkers when questions can't be answered following the old paradigms.As we begin to accept a new paradigm, we also begin to change our interaction with others.
In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn identifies paradigms as a key element in scientific discovery. According to this premise, it is not until a scientist has put forth a theory and it has been accepted by a sufficient number of his peers as reliable, that other scientists are able to progress in this field, solving problems posed by the paradigm, while keeping to the rules that this paradigm establishes. A paradigm is discovered when a crises point is reached; a scientist is unable to solve a critical mass of problems when using the old paradigm. By investigating these anomalies, a new paradigm is theorized and, once accepted, the cycle begins again. The old paradigm is not discarded until the new one is established, because without the rules set by the paradigm, science cannot be practiced. Indeed, Kuhn posits, paradigms are a prerequisite to perception. What we see is what we have been taught to see. This model holds true for the studies of humanities, as well. Once a scholar has learned a new theory, a new angle from which to consider her data, she is free to discard the old paradigm that has held her to its rules, and to view the world from a fresh perspective.
Kuhn's description of the scientific process echoes what we have been doing in class. These new paradigms (or theorys in cultural studies) are developed by thinkers when questions can't be answered following the old paradigms.As we begin to accept a new paradigm, we also begin to change our interaction with others.
How Do I Know Myself? (Week 6)
Isn't this the same question we've been asking all along? But within culture, this time.
It's all about connecting the dots. As we do this, here's what happens:
First, we become so practised in listening for a theory that we begin to see it and hear it in everything. (Raymond Williams- culture is created and changed.) An example of this is how, after I met H, I found references to Tunisia everywhere, including in grammar exercises I'd been teaching for years. It had been there all along, but once the country was made real to me, I recognized it.
Second, we become so grounded we can find the theory anywhere. (This is why people memorize their holy scriptures. They want to be grounded in it so that they can find what they need when they need it.)
Third, the theories begin to use you. (This is Marx- the site of production becomes you. And this is also the idea of hegemony. We don't even recognize established power hierarchies, so we are controlled by them. Or we do recognize them and allow the control.) An example of this for me is when I became aware of inclusive language and then recognized that I was excluded when people used exclusive language. I don't know if I had ever felt excluded before, but I was aware of feeling excluded after. The first step was a concious awareness, but this has now been internalized in me.
The exercise of trying to identify which theorist or school of theory relates to each level was challenging. I need to be able to identify easily and quickly:
Who the theory person is, and what their school of thought is. ____ is known for ________ theory. What is s/he reacting to? What is her/his contribution to the field?
This then helps me recognize what direction a speaker is coming from, or where their grounding is.
Lacan- language and emotion
Rorty- Truth is social commendation
Leavis- culture created in community
Structuralism- Building up of hierarchies
How can you use the theory through methodology of storytelling to create reality?
Personal point: My inquiry comes across as competitive and therefore agressive, instead of questing. I need to word my questions as creators rather than destroyers. Also, I need to avoid extraneous detail.
It's all about connecting the dots. As we do this, here's what happens:
First, we become so practised in listening for a theory that we begin to see it and hear it in everything. (Raymond Williams- culture is created and changed.) An example of this is how, after I met H, I found references to Tunisia everywhere, including in grammar exercises I'd been teaching for years. It had been there all along, but once the country was made real to me, I recognized it.
Second, we become so grounded we can find the theory anywhere. (This is why people memorize their holy scriptures. They want to be grounded in it so that they can find what they need when they need it.)
Third, the theories begin to use you. (This is Marx- the site of production becomes you. And this is also the idea of hegemony. We don't even recognize established power hierarchies, so we are controlled by them. Or we do recognize them and allow the control.) An example of this for me is when I became aware of inclusive language and then recognized that I was excluded when people used exclusive language. I don't know if I had ever felt excluded before, but I was aware of feeling excluded after. The first step was a concious awareness, but this has now been internalized in me.
The exercise of trying to identify which theorist or school of theory relates to each level was challenging. I need to be able to identify easily and quickly:
Who the theory person is, and what their school of thought is. ____ is known for ________ theory. What is s/he reacting to? What is her/his contribution to the field?
This then helps me recognize what direction a speaker is coming from, or where their grounding is.
Lacan- language and emotion
Rorty- Truth is social commendation
Leavis- culture created in community
Structuralism- Building up of hierarchies
How can you use the theory through methodology of storytelling to create reality?
Personal point: My inquiry comes across as competitive and therefore agressive, instead of questing. I need to word my questions as creators rather than destroyers. Also, I need to avoid extraneous detail.
Wittgenstein from someone else's perspective
My friend Mark is talking about Language and reality on this post. He connects it to God, which is what I tend to do, as well. I really like the comment about the 1:1 map.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Spoken Word
Culture with a Capital C
High Culture Low Culture
Everybody’s got culture
High Culture Low Culture
Everybody’s got culture
Everybody shares culture
With someone else
Find a culture where it happens
Who enacts it, what they do
Is it good? It doesn’t matter
Is it bad? We just can’t say
With someone else
Find a culture where it happens
Who enacts it, what they do
Is it good? It doesn’t matter
Is it bad? We just can’t say
Is it real or ideology?
Is hegemony here to stay?
Money doesn’t make culture
It’s not a thing to buy or sell
Voting doesn’t create culture
It just happens by ourselves
High Culture Low Culture
Everybody’s got culture
Everybody shares culture
With someone else
Cultural Studies asks hard questions
By whom, for whom, and for what?
Tries to draw a “map of meaning”
With the question “What’s your sign?”
Is hegemony here to stay?
Money doesn’t make culture
It’s not a thing to buy or sell
Voting doesn’t create culture
It just happens by ourselves
High Culture Low Culture
Everybody’s got culture
Everybody shares culture
With someone else
Cultural Studies asks hard questions
By whom, for whom, and for what?
Tries to draw a “map of meaning”
With the question “What’s your sign?”
Finds that Language holds the answer
Cause we’re talking all the time.
High Language Low Language
Everybody’s got language
Everybody shares language
With someone else
A cat’s a cat; it’s not a dog
Gato, chat, katous are cat,
not
composite
There’s a striking differánce
Words are fixed in their meanings
In the context where they’re used
Are they real? It doesn’t matter
Are they true? I cannot tell you
That is something you must say
Culture is a conversation
each of us has a part to play.
High Language Low Language
Everybody’s got language
Everybody shares language
With someone else
Cause we’re talking all the time.
High Language Low Language
Everybody’s got language
Everybody shares language
With someone else
A cat’s a cat; it’s not a dog
Gato, chat, katous are cat,
not
composite
There’s a striking differánce
Words are fixed in their meanings
In the context where they’re used
Are they real? It doesn’t matter
Are they true? I cannot tell you
That is something you must say
Culture is a conversation
each of us has a part to play.
High Language Low Language
Everybody’s got language
Everybody shares language
With someone else
(This won't let me put the formatting in that I want. This should look like a conversation. The lines go back and forth.)
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Still wrestling with Butler and discussing Superstition
So now I've read the whole of the Pyschic Life of Power by Butler. Most of it was in one eye and out the other. I didn't do anything with my collage, as I hadn't presented it the week before, and it fell flat in class, not suprisingly. It didn't help that the mobius strip had gotten crushed in my bag. Dr. Reese asked if I wanted a redo, and at first I said no. I could put in all the pictures that everyone else did, and just do something, but it wouldn't mean anything to me. Then she talked about how the redo is a chance to try to reach our audience in a different way. I agreed to try. But my problem is, I really have no idea of what Butler was about. I know I need to include gender, and power, and queer theory (inversion- which I thought I did) in the collage, but I'm not really sure what all she's saying about it. Dr. Reese says if we are having trouble with the text we are resisting it. That could be true, because Butler starts of with Freud and Foucalt and others, and I certainly resist Freud's ideas. But since I don't know what Butler is about, I can't really say I'm resisting her. If her whole point is the inversion of the status quo, thati is, queer theory, I can get that. But why write a whole book about it? As usual, Najendra helped illuminate things for me. He said that the book itself is a demonstration of queer theory in that Butler is inverting the ideas of all of the people who came before.
Our reading for this week was Barker- the first two chapters of Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. He couldn't resist all the big whigs that Butler mentions either, though his book brings her into it as well. For the most part, the class got this book, and our sonnets rocked.
In class we talked about Superstition- shared beliefs. The idea is that anything we believe is a superstition. I heard Dr. Reese saying two different things, but when I tried to clarify this, I got shut down. I think she said it becomes a superstition when we no longer believe it. But I think she also said it no longer is a superstition when we let go of it. Hmmm. I'm inclined to think that the person inside the superstition will not identify it as such, but only a person outside will use that term. However, I think she wanted us to go beyond that to see that everything that we believe is a superstition that chains us until we step out of our fervor and look at it from the outside. Supersitions aren't bad, but we need to see them.
The idea that God is a superstition was floated as an example, but Dr. Reese wouldn't commit to saying that it really is a superstition. But if all that we believe as part of a shared community is superstition, then doesn't even religious belief become superstition? That doesn't mean that it isn't correct or right- it means its a shared belief. (I know, correct and right are only determined by one's context.) THis all comes back to the networked community that uses language to create us. I, me and because are all superstitions. The "I" is a shared belief.
Something else she said - there is grace in being open to receive feedback that allows for the brilliant contributions of others. This is to encourage us to be honest with each other, and to invite that honesty in.
Our reading for this week was Barker- the first two chapters of Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. He couldn't resist all the big whigs that Butler mentions either, though his book brings her into it as well. For the most part, the class got this book, and our sonnets rocked.
In class we talked about Superstition- shared beliefs. The idea is that anything we believe is a superstition. I heard Dr. Reese saying two different things, but when I tried to clarify this, I got shut down. I think she said it becomes a superstition when we no longer believe it. But I think she also said it no longer is a superstition when we let go of it. Hmmm. I'm inclined to think that the person inside the superstition will not identify it as such, but only a person outside will use that term. However, I think she wanted us to go beyond that to see that everything that we believe is a superstition that chains us until we step out of our fervor and look at it from the outside. Supersitions aren't bad, but we need to see them.
The idea that God is a superstition was floated as an example, but Dr. Reese wouldn't commit to saying that it really is a superstition. But if all that we believe as part of a shared community is superstition, then doesn't even religious belief become superstition? That doesn't mean that it isn't correct or right- it means its a shared belief. (I know, correct and right are only determined by one's context.) THis all comes back to the networked community that uses language to create us. I, me and because are all superstitions. The "I" is a shared belief.
Something else she said - there is grace in being open to receive feedback that allows for the brilliant contributions of others. This is to encourage us to be honest with each other, and to invite that honesty in.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Co-creation, The Psychic Life of Power, by Butler
I cannot read this book before class. I dip into it, trying to understand, and read what others have to say. It doesn't help. The professor tells us to read anyway, and trust that we will absorb more than we know. If we don't like it, look to ourselves for why. "We read to expand the kinds of questions we ask." Reese We don't need answers.
Essentialism- "The only thing that makes something what it is. The primary quality of a thing." Najendra
We reveiw the class from last week. I understand deeper. Our network of conversations includes a self network- "the board of directors" or the voices in my head. What we hear from others doesn't influence us (psychology term); it constitutes us.
Sometimes we attach meaning to a person- "she's the grumpy one." This is false- that is her in relation to me- in other circumstances she is different. This is why we can't understand why are friends are married to the men they chose, sometimes. We don't know the man they know. (just as well, really. That would be rather awkward.)Try changing your circumstances. Practise constituting someone before you interact with him/her. (This could help at work.) Use grace, or willingness to consider- This is the Bishop in Les Mis- constituting Jean as a friend, not a thief, and giving him a new identity.
There is no essential self- we are created in the moment, through language. "You are a new creation in Christ." There is pure religion in this idea. If we aren't locking someone into a preconceived performance, we are allowing the possibility of a brilliant performance, just as Christ offers us. Salvation becomes a performative speech act of speaking our new self into being, possessing the self that the Christ conversation has identified us as. This may, of course, need frequent repetition.
This is one reason why gossip is so destructive- the conversation networks constitute the individual in a negative way- what would be the power of positive gossip?
Co-creation- Without the tension of the opposite, you cannot know that you exist. Thus, master cannot exist without slave, man without woman, etc. Because of this tension, you can change others by changing yourself. Foucalt- Power doesn't lie with the speaker but with the listner. Force is outside pressure; "power is the ability to produce results through language." MLK, Ghandi, etc. Force doesn't work, it leads to more force. When we are subjected to force, the best response is not to change the other, but ourself. (hmm. Sounds like martial arts!)
How do you say Art is right? The network of conversations that create this rightness?
Najendra- "A discipline creates what it studies. The body is created with biology's creation." (What does this mean?) The act of speaking "I" puts the speaker into the game, enmeshing her into the web.
Butler was instrumental in seperating the ideas of gender and sex. I, who have no idea, try to explain queer theory by riffing on something the prof. said- it "queers" or inverts something. Is that what queer theory is then? It turns an idea upside down to look at it?
Essentialism- "The only thing that makes something what it is. The primary quality of a thing." Najendra
We reveiw the class from last week. I understand deeper. Our network of conversations includes a self network- "the board of directors" or the voices in my head. What we hear from others doesn't influence us (psychology term); it constitutes us.
Sometimes we attach meaning to a person- "she's the grumpy one." This is false- that is her in relation to me- in other circumstances she is different. This is why we can't understand why are friends are married to the men they chose, sometimes. We don't know the man they know. (just as well, really. That would be rather awkward.)Try changing your circumstances. Practise constituting someone before you interact with him/her. (This could help at work.) Use grace, or willingness to consider- This is the Bishop in Les Mis- constituting Jean as a friend, not a thief, and giving him a new identity.
There is no essential self- we are created in the moment, through language. "You are a new creation in Christ." There is pure religion in this idea. If we aren't locking someone into a preconceived performance, we are allowing the possibility of a brilliant performance, just as Christ offers us. Salvation becomes a performative speech act of speaking our new self into being, possessing the self that the Christ conversation has identified us as. This may, of course, need frequent repetition.
This is one reason why gossip is so destructive- the conversation networks constitute the individual in a negative way- what would be the power of positive gossip?
Co-creation- Without the tension of the opposite, you cannot know that you exist. Thus, master cannot exist without slave, man without woman, etc. Because of this tension, you can change others by changing yourself. Foucalt- Power doesn't lie with the speaker but with the listner. Force is outside pressure; "power is the ability to produce results through language." MLK, Ghandi, etc. Force doesn't work, it leads to more force. When we are subjected to force, the best response is not to change the other, but ourself. (hmm. Sounds like martial arts!)
How do you say Art is right? The network of conversations that create this rightness?
Najendra- "A discipline creates what it studies. The body is created with biology's creation." (What does this mean?) The act of speaking "I" puts the speaker into the game, enmeshing her into the web.
Butler was instrumental in seperating the ideas of gender and sex. I, who have no idea, try to explain queer theory by riffing on something the prof. said- it "queers" or inverts something. Is that what queer theory is then? It turns an idea upside down to look at it?
Conversations- The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, by Goffman
I cannot understand when others say Goffman's name. It sounds like something else to me. Who? I ask.
We begin an inquiry- How do you know who you are?
We are who others say we are, using language. A network of conversations describe me- I react to these descriptions- accept or fight them- and thus fulfill them. "Absent language, there is no world" (Reese, 1/24/08). I cannot know who I am without the language to describe myself. Big L Language- little l language.
A child doesn't know she's a girl until she learns this. (Leila insists that girl's can have a penis. In a picture she has made, the figure is a girl, and the stick element is the thing she pees with, her penis. "Girls don't have a penis," I tell her. She disagrees.
My brief is "bad ass."
Goffman speaks of performers having different fronts for different audiences, and feeling a disconnect when audiences interact. One example, after I became a mother with L, Barbara at work related to me only as a mother. It jarred, because it was not the desired performance for me at that time. Another example, X's fear of birthday parties which brought all his audiences into contact because of the different fronts he presents to each one. This disparity is lessening as he becomes more open about who he is with family, and where he comes from with friends. I, however, have long been allowed backstage at all his events.
We begin an inquiry- How do you know who you are?
We are who others say we are, using language. A network of conversations describe me- I react to these descriptions- accept or fight them- and thus fulfill them. "Absent language, there is no world" (Reese, 1/24/08). I cannot know who I am without the language to describe myself. Big L Language- little l language.
A child doesn't know she's a girl until she learns this. (Leila insists that girl's can have a penis. In a picture she has made, the figure is a girl, and the stick element is the thing she pees with, her penis. "Girls don't have a penis," I tell her. She disagrees.
My brief is "bad ass."
Goffman speaks of performers having different fronts for different audiences, and feeling a disconnect when audiences interact. One example, after I became a mother with L, Barbara at work related to me only as a mother. It jarred, because it was not the desired performance for me at that time. Another example, X's fear of birthday parties which brought all his audiences into contact because of the different fronts he presents to each one. This disparity is lessening as he becomes more open about who he is with family, and where he comes from with friends. I, however, have long been allowed backstage at all his events.
Generative
We go around the room speaking how we want to be known. We are free to present ourselves as we like. Mandy has done this before, and gives a metaphor for herself, "silly putty." Some others use metaphors; other just describe. I am almost last, listening hard but trying to think of who I want to be. Coffee, I decide, without thinking it through. During break we are to share with a partner. Why coffee? I write down words- strong, flavorful, energizing, international, Colombian/Jamaican, fresh, process, varieties.
I am creating who I am with my performative utterance.
"The degree to which we are willing to be known yields our degree of creativity." "Class is a creative space."
Language has power to create- our words mean more than their sounds. The professor says we are all brilliant.
I am creating who I am with my performative utterance.
"The degree to which we are willing to be known yields our degree of creativity." "Class is a creative space."
Language has power to create- our words mean more than their sounds. The professor says we are all brilliant.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Translation, by Octavio Paz
Interesting point that Paz makes connects to the Storytelling class- People used to look for connections and similarities in other cultures, and find the "one substance" that was being communicated through "many languages". "Translation was not only a confirmation but also a guarantee of the existence of spiritual bonds." But in modern times, segun Paz, people "began to find it difficult to recongnize [themselves] in [others]" because of the immense variety of differences. Thus, translation and exploration have become abut finding differences instead of similarities. "Foreignness was no longer teh exception but the rule." "Translation had once served to reveal the preponderance of similarities over differences; from this time forward translation would serve to illustrate the irreconcilablility of differences, whether those stem from the foreignness of the savage of of our neighbor."
He speaks about all language being translation. In learning to speak we are learning to translate. I used to think that everyone thought in English, as I did, but spoke in Spanish, or Desano, or English.
He speaks about all language being translation. In learning to speak we are learning to translate. I used to think that everyone thought in English, as I did, but spoke in Spanish, or Desano, or English.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Day One- Filters
Dr. Reese is trying to shake us up. This is a way to keep track of the process.
Notes: I notice someone new is in the classroom. People are watching her, shifting in their seats. She's trying to set up the computer. She's dressed in workout clothes, tennis. I do a brain shift. She's obviously the teacher.
We watch a presentation- music with a strong beat sets the ryhthm. The pictures on the screen are snapshots, but powerful- the words are simple: More than 6 Billion People feel- Joy- Despair-Love-Hope. (How do you represent this in photos? Some must be staged.) Wise humans only connect. (How? Through our stories.)
We write and share.
She dances and speaks- birthing of self, raw, universal- parallel to other lives of other race, masculine.
She stops, we write and share. (Very cooperative learning.)
She dances and speaks- "differences are cultural- not innate" "what if I'm no different than you?" Interactive- with cultural differences. TRUST. Shaksperean- 'If you cut me, do I not bleed?' Voice breaks.
We write.
What do you see when you look at me?
performer, man/woman, comedy/serious, black
Methods of seeing:- Observation of what I said/did
Observation from my experience.
Observation from my own stereotypes.
"I beome the opportunity for her to see as she sees."
Breakthroughs:
People are signs- semiotics-sybols with different meanings to different people.
Breakdowns:
It's not important what your stereotypes are, but what you do with them. The idea is to understand yourself and your reaction to others.
Learning Moments:
What does this have to do with Storytelling? I guess we can't hear each other's stories until we can get past what we judge the other to be.
We have to clean our filters. But what about me? All this culture stuff is confusing to a TCK.
Notes: I notice someone new is in the classroom. People are watching her, shifting in their seats. She's trying to set up the computer. She's dressed in workout clothes, tennis. I do a brain shift. She's obviously the teacher.
We watch a presentation- music with a strong beat sets the ryhthm. The pictures on the screen are snapshots, but powerful- the words are simple: More than 6 Billion People feel- Joy- Despair-Love-Hope. (How do you represent this in photos? Some must be staged.) Wise humans only connect. (How? Through our stories.)
We write and share.
She dances and speaks- birthing of self, raw, universal- parallel to other lives of other race, masculine.
She stops, we write and share. (Very cooperative learning.)
She dances and speaks- "differences are cultural- not innate" "what if I'm no different than you?" Interactive- with cultural differences. TRUST. Shaksperean- 'If you cut me, do I not bleed?' Voice breaks.
We write.
What do you see when you look at me?
performer, man/woman, comedy/serious, black
Methods of seeing:- Observation of what I said/did
Observation from my experience.
Observation from my own stereotypes.
"I beome the opportunity for her to see as she sees."
Breakthroughs:
People are signs- semiotics-sybols with different meanings to different people.
Breakdowns:
It's not important what your stereotypes are, but what you do with them. The idea is to understand yourself and your reaction to others.
Learning Moments:
What does this have to do with Storytelling? I guess we can't hear each other's stories until we can get past what we judge the other to be.
We have to clean our filters. But what about me? All this culture stuff is confusing to a TCK.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)