The quality of your comment was simply amazing.
But, to steal a quote: "I am impressed, but I am not surprised."
Let's say that you spoiled me with your smarts. I only wish this was a regular course, meeting once a week, where we could argue and discuss things until we got sick or each other (hyperbole, of course.)
While on the surface you argued back and forth about which text should come first, in reality you engaged on a theoretical discussion on what "discourse" means. Simply put: the order in which you approach a sequence of texts, changes your experience of the texts.
The issue of "ordering" has enormous consequences for all of us. For instance, when you subject yourself to a political poll, the sequence in which the questions are posed, will itself determine your answers. And your collective answers will be used to manipulate you.
EX:
A monk asked his abbot: "Is it OK if I smoke while I pray?'
The abbot said NO, of course.,
But later the monk asked the abbot: "Is it OK if I pray while I smoke?"
What do you think the abbot said?
All your comments and reply will count for credit, but don't discuss monks and abbots: discuss the notion of "discourse."
It is clear that in the case of the Abbot, he responded “Yes” to the second question. Prayer was put on a higher level than smoking because prayer was said first. In the first instance, smoking was said first, so the Abbot put it on a higher level than prayer, which he had to forbid. In regards to the texts of this class, I said before that the order was important, and that the order should be the book, then the film, then the slideshow. It is in this order that the material should have the most lasting impression. The book constructs a foundation for the film, and the slideshow is basically the roof of the house. You need to experience all three, but they are best experienced in a specific order.
ReplyDeleteIn all fields, the notion of discourse is important. Aside from there being a natural order to some texts, etc, there are instances where a specific order is imposed and necessary. I can think of two filmic phenomena which would not exist without the notion of a specific order, discourse. The first is the Kuleshov effect. This is an editing technique developed by Soviet filmmaker Lev Kuleshov in the early 20th century. It consists of editing in footage of an actor’s close up after an image that is meant to evoke a specific emotion. The same close up is shown after every image, but it appears as if the actor’s facial expression changes due to the emotions that the prior images evoke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gGl3LJ7vHc). In this instance, the ordering of images is crucial to the phenomenon. The second technique is the Soviet method of montage. Soviet montage is a specific type of editing where a collection of images is shown is a specific order to allude to an outcome that is not explicitly shown. This was used in many Soviet films, but it still continues to be used today all over the world. The most well known example of this is the shower scene in Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960). In this scene we see images leading up to the fatal stabbing of Marion (Janet Leigh) (i.e., Bates entering the bathroom, knife being thrust, screams, struggle, blood spatter, etc), but we never actually see her murder (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WtDmbr9xyY). It is this specifically ordered set of images that makes the scene work. These are just two filmic examples of how discourse is important.
The ordering of texts is always important in order to have a specific experience with the texts. If the order of texts changes, then the viewer’s experience changes as well.
The first time, I believe the Abbot would reject the notion of smoking and praying for it requires a clear mind and complete dedication to pray. The second time however, the Monk asked if he can pray while he's smoking, so how can the Abbot reject the notion of the Monk choosing to pray in his leisure (while he's smoking). By rearranging the question, the Monk alters the Abbots line of thinking.
ReplyDeleteI can relate this to the order of assignments by placing the slideshow of "The Way They Live," as the most important text/assignment we have done or will do. Instead of the book or film, the slideshow requires no imagination. By placing the slideshow first, students can grasp right away what life was like before the wrong idea gets stuck in their head from a hollywood film.
Being a fan of Politics, don't judge me, I see it all the time from polls I've taken myself. I'll give an example, there are questions about your opinion on President Obama's legacy, do you have a favorable opinion essentially. However, the line of questioning is all related to controversial events during his terms. What were your opinions of the Benghazi attack, how do you think the President handled the Ghadafi situation in Libya, what is your opinion of the IRS targeting select groups. Obviously not everyone supports or opposes him, but for the people in between, having just these events brought to your attention, your being manipulated into punching the box that say you disapprove of the Presidents job. And from there, the journalists get it and put it on the screen and in print for everyone to see. And from there, the poll will manipulate more people to side with the higher percent.
Not to mention the hundreds of polls being offered, targeted at specific people, looking for specific results.
DeleteI agree. He can even pull him into it this way and maybe slowly try to fade out the smoking (something that might be in his agenda). As for the "The Way They Live", I still hold to my position of reading the book first then watching the slideshow because I would like to imagine it first and also I think it was a great buildup.
DeleteI hope I understand this assignment correctly. Here's my shot.
ReplyDelete"the order in which you approach a sequence of texts, changes your experience of the texts."
There is no doubt this statement is true. A great movie that illustrates this example is 12 angry man. If you haven't seen the movie. You can read the plot here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Angry_Men_(1957_film)
Had all the jurors based their judgement one the first account of the story the poor innocent boy would have gone to jail. However, one man had doubts and with that doubt they all beguin to reconstruct the story of what happened with the evidence shown in court and witnesses stories. Once they begun piecing the story together, they found some conflicting information that led to the ultimate conclusion that the boy was innocent.
The order in which approach a series of text does change your perception and understanding and can be used to manipulate results.
Leslie, that's a great comparison to use to show the importance that order has. I fully agree that order changes your perception and understanding. In almost any scenario, a change in order can dramatically effect the way people are able to understand it. For example, if someone presents a something first that would've been better off presented last, it would effect the way everyone else understands and interprets it. And the example that you presented with the jury clearly indicates this.
Delete12 Angry Men (1957) does present an excellent example of how the order that texts (or in its case, information) are presented does have an impact on how they are interpreted. Many courtroom dramas use this same technique, like To Kill A Mockingbird (1962) and The Verdict (1982). A great example of this can be seen in My Cousin Vinny (1992). Throughout the movie, Mona Lisa Vito (Marisa Tomei) is taking pictures on her camera, and she has them developed towards the end of the film. Vinny (Joe Pesci) realizes that one of these pictures can solve the case and prove his client's innocence. This picture was the last piece of the puzzle, and the order of all the information he received was crucial in solving the case.
DeleteI believe that every Professor implements certain texts in a certain order to get their specific points across to the students. For example, many psychology or philosophy courses start with backgrounds on the subjects and the fathers of research in those areas of discipline. In this course, we began by learning about how America perceived Italian Immigrants and presented that model to the public through cartoons and other texts. Then we went on to learning how Italians perceived their own struggles and how they wished to portray themselves. In learning the material this way, we learned the myths of Italian Immigrants set up by the dominant American class and then broke down those myths with tangible evidence and texts from real Italian immigrants to America.
ReplyDeleteThe order of texts and their discourse help set up a narrative that is important to learning material in the best way possible. I believe the best evidence of discourse in our lives today is when watching President Obama's State of the Union addresses. In each of his SotU's, Obama always mentions individual responsibility to contributing to America in personal and private affairs as well as the workforce. He almost always segues off of this idea onto the topic of education and he addresses education through the personal responsibility of the youth of America. Instead of addressing the inequalities in educational systems throughout the states, he places the blame onto the individual and says that students should not drop out of school and should focus on STEM education and aspirations in the workforce. Obama does not mention what the government failed to provide for education-wise, but instead uses the discourse of individual responsibility to place the blame onto the individual American citizen. In this way, discourse is powerful because it sets up a neoliberalism structure that places structural inequalities onto the individual character.
Interesting analysis of neoliberalism. Its roots, as you certainly know, are in the theo/ideology of the Puritans, the most rigid interpreters of Calvin's doctrine of predestination. I wonder if Obama imports into neoliberalism elements of salvation theology and prophetic preaching that, although Protestant in nature, place an emphasis on faith and activism.
DeleteBut don't you think that an equally credible dismantling of stereotypes could have occurred if we had first looked at the way Italian-Americans were living and trying to represent themselves, and then the way that "native" Americans were representing It-Ams? (And ultimately, wasn't the "American Dream" the Italian-American immigrants were striving for a stereotype of life in the New World also?)
DeleteHere we enter a semantic mine field. The so-called "American Dream" the way it is presented today means a single-family house with a two-car garage, a supportive community, a decent job and solid income. Our projection is that a century ago immigrants wanted to make enough money to......? What? Actually, most ItAms wanted to make enough money to go back home, buy land and own their own farm. Or, be rich beyond belief. The American Dream was never to live and prosper in this country.
DeleteI know what you mean about professors ordering the texts. In some classes that I’ve taken, the professor has us read between three different books at the same time, sometimes from the last chapter of one, then the middle of the second, and then the beginning of the third – for good reason, of course. The ordering of how information is presented is definitely important, especially in certain classes.
DeleteI believe that something like this just happened to me in the last post. I would read what I wrote and then starting arguing it in my thoughts (asking myself if I read that right) and almost replied to myself but then realized I shouldn't reply to myself because then it would look weird and I would just be arguing with myself(or should I?). Instead, I somewhat altered my response as I changed my mind.
ReplyDeleteIn the monk and abbot case, if one puts praying first, it makes it seem like the priority or the main mission and the secondary action is just something like a bonus which will alter the answer but of course the abbot would not like that but if the main action is smoking and the secondary is praying, maybe the abbot would think that the monk should pray in order to get him to do it.
Adam, I find it very easy to contradict myself all the time as well. Especially when it comes to complex ideas and concepts like philosophy..etc. I catch myself too sometimes arguing something out in my head and I think this is a generally good way to find out your true position on a subject. I also agree that the order of certain things stresses priority. This is very similar to my example of the order of the class material imposing a perspective onto us.
DeleteI definitely agree with both of you that it is easy to have ones opinion questioned when confronted with new information. As i grew up, i was very staunch in my opinions even when i wasn't the most informed on any given subject, and would find my self either blustering through arguments or being made a fool when confronted with additional information i hadn't considered before. Now, i believe i have made the changes to not fall in to that trap, and its something you might want to consider as well. My rule is, never form an opinion without considerable research, and always be open to having your opinion change. If you are never definite about your opinion and being right about something, there is always room to grow and change within your own mind, and you will never be considered a fool.
DeleteI think that one of the major experiences of going through college is learning that your opinion and ideas on a topic can be changed and molded by others' thoughts. I think that helps us establish a wider knowledge base that we can argue from, and accept a wide range of opinions without being stubborn or ignorant of others' thoughts. I like hearing what other people argue their points strongly for the sole fact that I may be persuaded by their argument.
DeleteI think the Abbot would have said yes to the second question, because he wouldn't deny someone of praying while doing something else, but would advise someone to not do anything else while praying. It is confusing, but is very similar to the way information is given to us through the text and assignments. I think order matters in almost everything. This reminds me of the NY Lottery commercial for the Pick 4 game, where a man gets dressed first in the morning and then showers fully clothed, because the order of numbers matters in the lottery game. In this class I think order is very relevant as well to establish a perspective. Since we all are not experts in the field of Italian immigration, besides the Professor of course, it is very easy to sway our opinions through the material we are primarily shown. If the material was limited to a scope of ItAms representation in the media, we would probably believe to an extent that some of these representations were 100% true, such as the Black hand cartoons.
ReplyDeleteThe order of this class has been logical so far, giving us several examples of Italian American representation such as self-representation through Son of Italy, representation by the dominant class through the movies and cartoons, and historical representation through the images in The Way They Lived. By doing this our scope as a class wasn't limited and our ability to compare and discern the different representations has given us an understanding of the representation in society of Italian Americans as a whole, without being forced to make generalizations.
I personally believe that the abbot said yes the second time when the monk asked if it was okay to pray while he smokes. The 1st time he asked, the primary task was praying, while smoking would be the secondary one. In any religion, smoking while praying is most likely frowned upon. However, with the question switched the second time, smoking was the primary task while praying was accompanied with it to "busy oneself," perhaps. Hence, I think the abbot would be okay with this because praying is not the main task.
ReplyDeleteThis example shows that the order in which things are done ultimately effect the way that they are interpreted. In the example of the monk and the abbot, the order in which the monk asked the question, had an effect on the way the abbot interpreted it. In the same way, the order in which you presented the film and the book influenced the way that people were able to understand the treatment of Italian Americans. Discourse allows us to express our ideas freely and to agree to disagree on what should've come first (the film or book). At the end of the day, the order in which things are done effect the way we look at it.
I think that the abbot would say yes mostly because prayer was the more important act to the him. I realized the importance of discourse, as I became more aware of how I personally perceived and processed information, and how imagery and spoken language can change or influence you emotionally.
ReplyDeleteHowever, on an extremely serious note, I believe that the media has influenced public perception in demonizing Paula Deen for using racial slurs, some thirty years, while the movie "Django Unchained" managed to use the word nigger more time than I've ever heard in my life. Why is it ok for one group to use this word and not the other. So in terms of language discourse it is socially acceptable depending on who is using it and under what conditions it is used.
I remember reading lots of reviews that were very very uncomfortable with the Djiango's language (a film, as I stated, that I detested, and not just for the language but...... -- too long to explain.)
DeleteRe Paula Deen, I would recommend reading the article by Ta-Nehisi Coates, my personal idol when it comes to thinking and writing about racism. He taught me a completely new way to understand everything (and I mean it.) Here is the link to his piece on Paula Deen:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/the-guileless-accidental-racism-of-paula-deen/277153/
Thanks for the link. Thought of something else about the movie, that despite the contents and negative representation of slaves, that this movie makes a slave a hero. So although fictional changed the perspective of the movie for some.
DeleteI haven't seen the movie Django Unchained, however about Paula Dean I'm just shocked at the level of "willful ignorance" as Mr. Coates describes it. But somehow I am not surprised that racism is obviously pretty much still there.
DeleteHere is another very well written opinion piece about Paula Deen
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/opinion/bruni-paulas-worst-ingredients.html?hp
About Djiango? Nobody writes English better than Hendrik Herzberg of the "New Yorker."
Here is his review of the infamous flick:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/hendrikhertzberg/2013/03/djangled-nerves.html
The principle i saw in the example of the Monk and Abbot, was that many times it is not what you are doing, but rather how you say it. In the example the reason the Abbot would have said yes, was because of the way the monk phrased it. When he asked his question in reverse, he now wasn't denigrating prayer by smoking, but rather uplifting smoking by praying. The way one phrases their sentences can make all the difference in a conversation.
ReplyDeleteAs it relates to discourse, again, the way something is presented will have a large effect on the way an individual will process the question. If i looked at all of the slideshows with a teacher who was preaching Anti-Italianism, i very well might believe the propaganda contained within the cartoons. However, when looking at it with a teacher who presents it as being completely wrong and racist in the worst possible ways, i am now on the side of the Italian immigrant, and would try to help them because of the troubles they have gone through. It really depends on presentation and phrasing, and they really can change the way a person views a topic, or a discussion, or a person. Its not what you say, rather its how you say it.
I think that discourse ties in with a series of narratives filling in a greater metanarrative. (I guess a post-postmodern meaning since I am not aiming at Lyotard but I can't think of another word.) One arrives at any discourse with the sum of his prior knowledge and adds on further events to his chronological set of schema and based on what fits in and what doesn't either changes or re-asserts his views. This can also be applicable to the nature vs. nurture argument. For example, we could have had more details "shaded in" on our "working memory" regarding how Pascal's room with the 8 (?) guys looked by seeing "The way they lived" first or we could have used our own imagination by painting the picture for ourself and then afterward either confirming it with "The way they lived" or having a changed opinion from what we had originally thought.
ReplyDeleteIt is also a question of priorities. If the smoking is a priority then the monk is not going to allow it, but if the prayer is the priority than the monk will allow it. If the priority is to convey the suffering and hardship that the ItAms underwent then the screenings and texts will be ordered in an appropriate progression to convey a certain feeling. If the priority would have been to provide entertainment with no extra thought then the texts and screenings would have been haphazard. (thankfully they were not!)
Teaching is performing. Texts, not the subject matter, are the props.
DeleteLife is performing. If you are lucky you get to choose your own props, otherwise others will choose them for you. Some props work with a wide audience, some only extend to a small crowd - sometimes a crowd of one. (I recommend watching "American Splendor.")
What matters at the end is that you keep track of the way your ideas have changed over time. "All the rest is commentary" (there is a triple-entendre in this last quote.)
I'm going to go out on a limb and disagree with most people here: I think that discourse (i.e., ordering) is arbitrary. Two texts can produce a profound effect on the reader regardless of what order they are read in.
ReplyDeleteLet me use the abbot and monk scenario as an example. The abbot rejects the first question's proposal based on the fact that the monk should not be smoking (since doing so might make the monk lose control of his temptations). The second question should imply the same answer; if smoking itself is the objectionable factor, the answer should be "no."
I think that, when a real discourse emerges, order does not influence interpretation. Discourse (to me, at least) is an exchange of experiences and ideas (and these may be influenced by the interpretations and ordering of the texts), but all the while maintains a critical tone that analyzes and questions. When this is successfully achieved, the critical nature of discourse will eliminate the emotional and instinctive reactions (that arise from the ordering of the experiences), and give way to a more rational and holistic argument.