READING QUESTIONS: I’ve learned that reading, more often than not, generates questions without answers.

In the interest of brevity, I’ll say this: Racism as a topic/concern/discussion/problem has been coming up over and over again as of late, in work, at school, in my pleasure reading, in my curriculum, in the hallways and faculty rooms at school, on my blog, and, alas, in my graduate school reading.  

This week’s readings included Color Monitors: The Black Face of Technology in America by Martin Kevorkian. Here, Kevorkian details and exemplifies his theory that media and film representations of both black men and technology seem to depict both black men and technology as arefears that are to be contained: Technology by the skills and cyber “slavery” of the black man and the black man by the distraction of the computer monitor and the inner workings of the modern machine.

I am, at once, torn between two DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT reactions:

1. IS HE SERIOUS? ARE FILM MAKERS AND ADVERTISERS SOMEHOW (EITHER CONSCIOUSLY OR SUBCONSCIOUSLY) SENDING THE MESSAGE THAT BLACK MEN NEED TO BE CONTAINED BY THE COMPUTER? IS MASS MEDIA SUGGESTING, SOMEHOW THAT FEARS OF TECHNOLOGY AND BLACK MEN RESULT IN A BLACK COMPUTER WORKFORCE WITH JOBS THAT SERVE AS A METAPHOR FOR SLAVERY? THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. Or, IS KEVORKIAN’S ASSERTION–that the media is casting black men in specific technological roles– OUTRAGEOUS? AFTER ALL, HE DOES PRESENT A PLETHORA OF EXAMPLES THAT SEEM TO SUPPORT HIS THEORIES. (But, I still can’t shake the feeling that he presents ONLY examples that support his theories and that there are equally as many examples that would weaken Kevorkian’s argument.)

So, for anyone who has read or will venture a read of Kevorkian’s Color Monitors, I have a few questions:

1. Is Kevorkian’s theory of mass media’s tendency towards a depiction of technological and black male containment legitimate or is Kevorkian’s book simply full of instances in which the author reaches and stretches to find seemingly racially motivated film producers, advertisements, companies, etc.?

2. Is the black actor as a technologically adept character an insult OR is it a compliment?

3. Is Color Monitors an entirely different book without its last chapter? Why did Kevorkian include a chapter that seems, in part, to refute a good part of his own assertions? Does the idea of white people being “blackened” by the “drudgery” of technology weaken or strengthen Kevorkian’s theory?

4. After having read all of Kevorkian’s film casting examples (black men as techno-nerds), would you say that racism abounds in Hollywood? In America? Does the book translate into reality?

5. What is wrong with, “…gloss[ing] over the casting decision as a well-intentioned attempt to give a black actor exposure in the most positive and talent-affirming supporting part”? (17) …other than the fact that Kevorkian wouldn’t have a book if he did that.

6. Kevorkian writes, “When people hear ‘digital divide,’ they tend to think in terms of black and white” (39), at which time he also mentions that people are stuck on this perception of the digital divide, despite the fact that “…the degree of technological access does correlate to a range of categories, including geography, income, and ethnicity.” To what do you attibute the digital divide?  What other groups are separated by the “digital divide”? I most associate a difference in age with the digital divide–a division between the old and young. What about… Rich and poor? Educated and uneducated? Fearful and fearless? Curious and indifferent? Male and female?

7. The last chapter includes an extensive discussion about technology and creativity, specifically that some see technology as a threat to individual creativity (151). Is technology a threat to individual creativity?

8. As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, racism as a topic and a concern has come to the forefront in so many aspects of my life as of late. I am searching my mind for a solution here, and the best that I can come up with is the idea of everybody treating people like people…the whole John Donne’s “No man is an island” thing…”therefore as not for whom the bells tolls, it tolls for thee” and all that jazz. Human beings are human beings and there it is. We are all alike in more ways than we are different. I am not suggesting permanently ignoring that which makes us different, but I think that if we are going to get to that point ever (the point at which we recognize, accept and celebrate differences), we need to start somewhere. It seems to me that to start with recognizing differences is a bit ass backwards. Maybe we should start by celebrating ourselves as a human race…by treating each other like brothers and sisters…all of us…

I don’t know. That ’s just one of my ideas to help combat racism. My idea is touched upon in the late pages of chapter 5 with the discussion of Ellison’s novel Invisible Man. Kevorkian writes, “In Invisible Man, when the narrator-protagonist makes his first social appearance at a meeting of the progressively minded Brotherhood, one of the white members commits the faux pas of asking him to sing. The politically correct leader of the party becomes furious, proscribing the invitation to the black man as an out-of-bounds stereotype: ‘The brother does not sing!’  But reflecting upon this exchange, the narrator finds that ’something disturbed me: Shouldn’t there be some way for us to be asked to sing?’” (150). And then, on page 151, “The Time of Our Singing offers at least two answers: (1) if he has chosen to pursue that skill; (2) what black man?” THIS IS NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION AS A SOLICITATION FOR COMMENTS/DISCUSSION.

I’ve learned that teaching, as a profession, is dis-articulating…but what are the implications of such a move?

So, I’m reading a book for graduate school called Multimodal Discourse,  and the book makes an interesting point about the dis-articulation of such professions as teaching: simply, that teaching is moving from a multimodal practice in which teachers design and implement curriculum, to a monomodal practice in which separate specialists create, design, and implement curriculum. Formerly (i.e. prior to curriculum design specialists getting a hold of our curriculum), teachers both designed and implemented their own curriculum. Teachers created freely, the way I prefer to do it. Now, though, more and more districts are dis-articulating, that is, moving towards a more mainstreamed curriculum, one that is prescribed for all teachers; the teachers implement the curriculum rather than create and implement the curriculum.

My question is this: Are we moving backwards as a profession? Why are teachers being disallowed to create curriculum? State tests maybe? Accountability? Competition? A need for a common knowledge base?

I think that a happy medium can be found in having teachers partner with curriculum specialists and district managers so that no curriculum is ever created without classroom practice and a real working knowledge of students taken into account. To dis-articulate without continuing to take the teachers’ knowlege and experiences into account seems counterproductive.

Of course I can see the value in a core curriculum, but let’s not forget the students and their practical education, okay?

Hands off my hypertext (3.0)!

In the last chapter of his book, Hypertext 3.0, Landow quotes a testimony that was given before a congressional committee regarding the protection of intellectual property. In his testimony, Steven W. Gilbert said, “‘It may soon be technically possible for any student, teacher, or researcher to heave immediate electronic access from any location to retrieve and manipulate the full text (including pictures) of any book, sound recording, or computer program ever published–and more.’”

For a public educator in such a disgustingly litigious society, the notion of anyone manipulating anything that I write, post, etc. (let’s not even get into the whole picture thing–scary!!!) is a absolutely horrifying! Along with manipulation of  my carefully crafted words and censored pictures could quite possibly come the loss of my job, ruination of my personal and professional reputations…heck, even legal and criminal implications.

So, although I can certainly appreciate all that Landow says about the enrichment of texts (He uses Milton’s Paradise Lost as an example of a text that could be made more accessible and meaningful through hyperlinked notes, etc.), I am truly in fear of the concept of somebody altering my hypertext, or any of my text for that matter. YIKES! Paranoid much?

Help with The Unknown

So, I’m reading a hypertext piece called The Unknown Hypertext. It’s my first time reading hypertext and I am literally feeling sick to my stomach. Call it option anxiety. Call it motion sickness. Call it cluelessness. I’m sick. First, I read the homepage. It’s about “the unknown” of all things. But when I began to search through links, I got nervous that there was no link back to the home page. I feel as if I want to explore each page and then each link of each page, or at least the links that intrigue me. I guess I’m looking for a more linear experience, but I so want to succeed at reading this hypertext; I hate being beat by anything.

 So, I ask: Are there rules to reading hypertext? If I click to go “back” is that cheating? Am I supposed to just sink deeper and deeper and deeper with each link and each page? Should I try to keep track of where I’ve been? Am I missing something if I leave a page and never explore its links? What about the little buttons on the bottom? What are they? Are they part of the “story”? Is there a story?

 Okay, gonna go. Have to try to beat this thing…or at least read without being sick.

Captain Obvious reflects on Fleck…

For my graduate course, Writing for Electronic Communities, we are asked to respond to the week’s reading(s) in our blogs. This week’s title: The Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact, by Ludwik Fleck. The book uses the development of  “facts” about syphilis, of all things, to bring forth the truth about how facts come to be accepted as, well, facts.

So, here is Mr. Fleck in a nutshell: “The explanation given to any relation can survive an develop within a given society only if this explanation is stylized in conformity with the prevailing thought style.” Reading to page 2 will tell you that a scientific explanation does not stand a chance of survival unless our culture is ready for such an explanation. Okay, then, Captain Obvious, tell us why we want to read a book about syphilis in order to arrive at what seems to be such a simple concept?

 I know, I know, who wants to read a book about syphilis? Why  not read about the discovery of a planet or the birth of a star…or genetics…or, I don’t know, maybe  a new species of frogs? Actually, there is a solid explanation as to why syphilis is one of the most perfect topics to treat when considering how facts develop and become accepted by society. Historically, morals, values, and religion have influenced whether or not certain scientific “discoveries”  or theories are ready to be “discovered” at all. That a discovery was made or a theory was developed based on experimentation or studies of any kind, regardless of how scientific and exact  such research was, only partially determines whether that particular discovery will thrive in a scientific community. Why? Because our cultural surroundings and thought patterns literally get in the way of some ideas; if we are not ready to accept an idea or discovery, then that idea or discovery will literally be disallowed to exist or prosper.

Now, maybe the ideas of cultural influence and stagnant patterns of thought (Fleck calls them thought styles) are obvious enemies of scientific advancement, especially in controversial areas of, say, sexually transmitted diseases. But, if we never read about, talk about, and acknowledge that we are getting in the way of our own futures, how will we ever overcome the obstacles of our own brains?

What I most appreciate about what Fleck is saying is that it takes a heretical thought or idea to eventually bring change, that what is at one time considered heresy has great potential to develop into fact, just not until the masses are ready. Perhaps Fleck explains this concept even better when he writes, “Heretics who do not share this collective mood and are rated as criminals by the collective will be burned at the stake until a different mood creates a different thought style and different valuation” (99).

I also dig the part about experiment and observation. In section 2 of chapter 4, Fleck brings up what I think is a valid point about experiments: “And when experiments become certain, precise, and reproducible at any time, they no longer are necessary for research purposes proper but function only for demonstration or ad hoc determination” (84). RIGHT! And that is precisely why I have always been so frustrated on lab days in science class: because the experiments were useless on the grounds that they were not experimental AT ALL if the teacher already knew what was going to happen. The experiments were demonstrations. UGH. So, if there are foregone conclusions, then why bother with a study at all?

 What does any of this have to do with syphilis? Well, while scientists were studying syphilis, its causes, its effects, and its close relatives, their so-called experiments and discoveries were more than muddled by thought styles, cultural influences, assumptions, etc., etc., etc., as is the case, according to Fleck, with the birth of any scientific fact.

Sure, we’ll catch up to science, but not until we’re good and ready!

Which makes me think….hmmm….I might be onto something. Maybe we read this book for a technology course because we have a lot of catching up to do with technology. Try this one on for size: Sure, we’ll catch up to technology, but not until we’re good and ready!

Oscar Mike

As my US Marine husband says, we’re Oscar Mike, which means “on the move” in his military speak. I’ve mentioned before that we’re in the process of relocating. Have to tighten up the house (clean, refresh, etc.), sell or rent the house, find a job, resign from my position, graduate from Rowan’s MAW program, find a place to live in VA, etc. etc. etc. (could go on forever with etcs.). In the midst of this craziness is possibly the craziest thing of all: I’m doing much of the legwork on my own, as my husband has already pretty much established himself in VA (albeit in temporary floating housing–our boat!).

 Every time I try to talk about moving, Gerry says, “First, you need to find a job in Virginia. We can’t do anything until you have a job down here.”

So, I’VE FOUND A JOB!!!!!!!!!!! Now, we’re officially Oscar Mike (on the move). This weekend is prepping the house (some more painting, a few new switchplates, and, most importantly a PROFESSIONAL PAINTER to fix the bathroom that I messed up painting–whoops!).

So many of my peers in graduate school, specifically those enrolled in ”THE PROGRAM” (That’s what we Rowan University grad students call Rowan’s Masters in the Art of Writing program) are either Oscar Mike or planning on a big move (if not geographically, then career wise). I would like to offer these words of encouragement: The hard work most certainly pays off! With credentials like the ones that we’re building RIGHT NOW as we work through our degrees…well, let’s just say that I was proud to present my CV in my latest interview and even more excited at the response that I got.

 Sure, it’s a jungle out there in the mean old job market. But, all of the hard work pays off…

Etienne Wenger’s communities of practice makes perfect.

I don’t know where we even heard this, but my sister and I used to have a joke that went something like this: “You know what I’m gonna do? I’m gonna tell you what I’m gonna do.” And that was it. For some reason, those words cracked us up every time.

 After having read Etinne Wenger’s Communities of Practice for my graduate course, this joke is not so funny. The organization of the book is the joke. In every chapter and section, Wenger spends pages upon pages telling us what he is going to do and then several more pages telling us what he has allegedly done. About three quarters of the way into the book, it dawned on me that the problem is not necessarily the constant repetition, recapping, outlining, looking back, and looking forward; the problem for me is the overall organization. Here’s why:

There are several key concepts presented in the book: community, reification, negotiation, enterprise, participation, meaning, identity, engagement, alignment (to name but a few). Each of these concepts comes up over and over and over again, but in relation to several of the others. The book reads more like an index than anything else. Now, I understand that Wenger has put his own spin on many of these concepts, but why not begin with a simple glossary type set-up and then delve into each concept in its own chapter? Why not fully discuss the implications of negotiation as it relates to all other concepts and then move on to an in-depth discussion of participation?

But, alas, I was able to negotiate my way through the book and come out with a few things to say about the actual content:

1. Is much of what Wenger is writing here common sense? Is there anybody out there who does not get the concept of communities of practice after having read the first few pages of Wenger’s book?

2. (This one is more content related.) Wenger’s closing comment on “The Dual Nature of Belonging” is this: “It is not impossible to be a feminist in a Catholic household and identify with both, but the level of negotiability will demand some work” (209). Yes, from a first-hand experience, YES. But, even more than the feminist/Catholic thing, I seem to have a few other “dual belongings” going on that don’t necessarily jive, conservative/public educator not being the least of them.  Then again, how would I negotiate anything other than conservative politics with my military affiliations/belonging? Negotiability is a nice word here. You go, Wenger!

3. (Do you really want to read another rant?) Regarding the trade-offs of alignment: My father often struggles with his conscience, his work ethic and his bosses/coworkers over the fundamental issue of “the clock.” For, in union work, you do what you can do until it is time to go home. That’s it. No staying late to finish the job, not unless you’ve been asked or told to work overtime. You work until the end of the day (3pm for my father), you put your tools down, and you walk away. BUT, my father thinks more of his work than that. He wants to stay and finish a job that will only take a few more minutes or, God forbid, an hour. He wants to do what’s right for the job, for the building, for the customer, for his conscience. If doing a job right means staying a bit longer, my father wants to put in a few extra minutes to get the job done, and done right. His ideals and work ethic are unpopular; that is to say that the rules of the trade do not align with my father’s work ethic. So, the trade-off (leaving when he is told to leave, dropping his tools even if the job is not done) leaves my father feeling “powerless.” As Wenger puts it, “It [alignment] can be a violation of our sense of self that crushes our identity” (181). Well said. Anyone else making trade-offs in the name of alignment?

On exhaustion…or, on being proud.

Okay, so I’m exhausted. I haven’t slept more than four hours a night for several days, I’m teaching full-time, coaching cheerleading, writing my thesis, freelancing (well, trying), keeping house, searching for a job, preparing to sell my house, and taking another graduate course. Eating, breathing and sleeping are all luxuries.

And, yet, when I put my head on the pillow at night, I can’t help but to be proud of all that I’m doing and the extent to which I’m keeping all of the balls in the air (a juggling metaphor, of course). I like being busy, but I love that I CAN do it all and I AM doing it all–not that I have much of a choice? I love that I have yet to completely lose my mind and that I am taking this all in stride. I love that a Neil Diamond song can still make me smile (crazy, I know) when I’m catatonic and that I can manage to say nice things to my husband when he wakes me up with a phonecall late at night. I love that when people ask me “What’s up?” I still answer with the words “All good things!” and generally mean it. And I love that, no matter how crazy things get, I am still sane and lucid enough to know when to say when…to give myself permission to simply collapse…like right now. Good night.

Shout out to my THESIS peeps!

Just submitted Chapter 2 via overnight mail. Paid over $30.00, but a deadline is a deadline, right? TIME TO START WRITING CHAPTER 3. I think this thesis writing thing would be so much easier if we didn’t have to do things like work, eat, sleep, breathe…you know, the little things. Anyway, I wanted to send out some words of encouragement so here they are: You can do ANYTHING for three months. Just think, in a few months, our masterpieces will be written and we’ll be setting out to begin our new lives, diplomas in hand. OR, we’ll be so exhausted that we won’t even be able to lift our heads long enough to genuflect at our diplomas as they hang on the wall. Either way, there is an end in sight…RIGHT?!?!?!?!

The Job Search

I’ve officially begun my job search with an online application to a place called Spotsylvania School District in Northern Virginia. My husband and I are relocating to Virginia within months–actually, he’s already there living on our boat during the week. I’ll be hitting the job market pretty hard, all the while writing my thesis, working on WEC courswork, selling our home, house shopping, and, of course, teaching my high school students. I should be worried, stressed, anxiety ridden, but I think I will step up instead of freaking out–the new me (Post-Combat Mils) chooses to address the bull by his horns rather than rock a fetal position in a dark corner. IT’S GO TIME!

But I digress. What I’m really trying to ask is, Does anybody have public or higher education connections in Northern Virginia?

Oh, and by the way: EDUCATION ROCKS! Filling out job applications is breezy with a beefy education. So, when you’re feeling bogged down and stressed out by coursework, remember our education is what enables us to write our own tickets. Go us!