Musical Genre Powerpoint:
http://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dfv8576_0sqxwzpf7
Don’t Stop Believin’ – The Musical
She’s just a small town girl … living in a lonely world
A city boy born and raised in south Detroit meets a small town girl on a midnight train going anywhere and they sing a romantic duet about their life in a lonely world. Despite the smell of wine and cheap perfume, these two share a night that goes on and on and on and on, which leads to another song. Later, the city boy joins some street gamblers and shakes dice, and sings when he realizes some were born to win, some to lose, and he was born to sing the blues. In the face of such adversity, he finds encouragement in the smiling faces, well-choreographed dance moves, and chorus of voices of the people of south Detroit who tell him “Don’t stop believin’ …”
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Saturday, October 24, 2009
CI 5441: Course Readings-- Wk 8: Oct 27
When it comes to discussions on literature within the classroom, I never realized how many different strategies could be employed to create a meaningful conversation among students. I’m glad that this week’s readings provided us with a few strategies we can test out in the classroom. I love the concept of a literature circle, the profound ideology behind the Socratic Circle, and the new advances in technology that take the discussion out of the classroom.
The Daniels article on literature circles provided a great definition and outline for literature circles. What I thought was the most interesting, and perhaps important element to remember as a teacher, is the importance of choice. Daniels notes that “Student choice tops the list, because the deepest spirit of literature circles comes from independent reading” (18). The choice of text offered in the literature circle is compared to the choice given to children by their parents in what books to read before bed, or whenever. While this is something that would no doubt be limited in the classroom, I think Daniels is right when he says, “you can’t fall in love with books that someone stuffs down your throat. For reading to become a lifelong habit and deeply owned skill, it has to be voluntary, anchored in feelings of pleasure and power” (19). I want reading to become a pleasurable experience and passion for my students and I hope I can give them the autonomy that will further this hope along.
Overall, I think that the literature circle is a great idea and I believe Copeland is right when he links them with Socratic circles. I can easily imagine how it would be useful to use both of these techniques in the classroom as ways to promote student-driven learning. Copeland notes that through the Socratic circle students will learn “that all new understanding is linked to prior understanding, that thought itself is a continuous thread woven through our lives rather than isolated sets of questions and answers” (8)—while this might be a bit existential, I love it! I think this is a profound insight that will be helpful in teaching students the malleability and constant reshaping of thought as we add and expand our experiences to shape understanding. This connects with his later acknowledgement that the Socratic circle will help students, “quickly see critical thought as an ongoing, developing skill rather than some secretive society to which some students belong and others do not” (12).
He further adds, “A Socratic circle turns the vast majority over of the guidance of the conversation and the ownership of the material over to the students” (9). Similar to the literature circle, the idea it that when given the reins of their education, students will be more motivated to fully engage in the development and creation of that learning—a constructivist view that I fully support!
I think the main thing I will take away from these articles—and perhaps my favorite point—is that in using these strategies we are teaching students to take their reading and learning into their own hands. By giving them the ability to chose their own text, form their own hypothesis, take their own notes, and discuss their ideas with their peers and teachers on a more equal level, we are preparing students for the future. We are actively giving them the tools that they will use to navigate in the “real world.” Daniels says that, “Students must learn to take full responsibility for locating, selecting, and pursuing books, rather than always expecting teachers or other adults to choose for them” (20). By reducing student reliance on teachers, we open up a whole new realm of possibilities and responsibilities for students that will lead them into a more successful life beyond the reaches of the classroom. Awesome!
The Daniels article on literature circles provided a great definition and outline for literature circles. What I thought was the most interesting, and perhaps important element to remember as a teacher, is the importance of choice. Daniels notes that “Student choice tops the list, because the deepest spirit of literature circles comes from independent reading” (18). The choice of text offered in the literature circle is compared to the choice given to children by their parents in what books to read before bed, or whenever. While this is something that would no doubt be limited in the classroom, I think Daniels is right when he says, “you can’t fall in love with books that someone stuffs down your throat. For reading to become a lifelong habit and deeply owned skill, it has to be voluntary, anchored in feelings of pleasure and power” (19). I want reading to become a pleasurable experience and passion for my students and I hope I can give them the autonomy that will further this hope along.
Overall, I think that the literature circle is a great idea and I believe Copeland is right when he links them with Socratic circles. I can easily imagine how it would be useful to use both of these techniques in the classroom as ways to promote student-driven learning. Copeland notes that through the Socratic circle students will learn “that all new understanding is linked to prior understanding, that thought itself is a continuous thread woven through our lives rather than isolated sets of questions and answers” (8)—while this might be a bit existential, I love it! I think this is a profound insight that will be helpful in teaching students the malleability and constant reshaping of thought as we add and expand our experiences to shape understanding. This connects with his later acknowledgement that the Socratic circle will help students, “quickly see critical thought as an ongoing, developing skill rather than some secretive society to which some students belong and others do not” (12).
He further adds, “A Socratic circle turns the vast majority over of the guidance of the conversation and the ownership of the material over to the students” (9). Similar to the literature circle, the idea it that when given the reins of their education, students will be more motivated to fully engage in the development and creation of that learning—a constructivist view that I fully support!
I think the main thing I will take away from these articles—and perhaps my favorite point—is that in using these strategies we are teaching students to take their reading and learning into their own hands. By giving them the ability to chose their own text, form their own hypothesis, take their own notes, and discuss their ideas with their peers and teachers on a more equal level, we are preparing students for the future. We are actively giving them the tools that they will use to navigate in the “real world.” Daniels says that, “Students must learn to take full responsibility for locating, selecting, and pursuing books, rather than always expecting teachers or other adults to choose for them” (20). By reducing student reliance on teachers, we open up a whole new realm of possibilities and responsibilities for students that will lead them into a more successful life beyond the reaches of the classroom. Awesome!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
CI 5472: Fan Ethnography
Steelers Fan Ethnography:
This past weekend I observed several die-hard Steelers fans as they cheered on their team. The group I observed has very specific rituals that they perform every weekend when the Steelers play. Here are a few:
- Get out “Terrible Towels” and have them close at hand
- Put on Steelers Jersey’s
- Take Rouse’s jersey off its hanger and put it on him—Rouse is a dog
- Turn the TV to the appropriate channel
- Order Pizza
- Get out the beer
- Sit on the edge of the seat
- Chew fingernails—not really a ritual, but it happens nonetheless
Once these things have been done and the pizza arrives, it is game time. The group sits, literally, on the edge of their seats and watches the Steelers with great concentration. Kelly, clenches his hands and watches with wide eyes—biting his nails when the stress becomes too much. He wrenches his body from side to side every now and then as if he can influence the movements of the players. There is no talking during the game—unless it is a question about a call or a comment/criticism about the players and/or coaches. The only other sounds during the game are the loud and abrupt curse words that fly from Kelly’s mouth as he watches the game. While Kelly is a true fan, he will be the first person to provide negative beliefs about the future outcome of a game or to criticize the team after a loss or win.
Kelly’s wife, Eva, also gets into the spirit of things and her quiet attention contrasts the loud and physical reactions of her husband. Every now and then she will make a comment or pose a question about a call made by the coaches, players, or referees discussing bad plays and calls with her husband. She watches the game with her hands folded across her lap as she sits on the edge of her seat.
The third member of the group is visiting for the weekend and he is also decked out in his Pittsburgh gear. He makes jokes every now and then that Kelly responds to with only half of his attention—he is focused on the game. Nevertheless, Ryan is just as eager as Kelly to point out mistakes and bad calls on both sides of the field.
The eating and drinking, while going on during the game, is more of a habit than an actual relished meal. It is interesting to note the level of focus and interaction that is felt by the members of this small group. With every moment of the game, it is as if the people sitting in the room believe they have some say in the outcomeProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0
f the game. The way in which they talk to each other and the people physically involved in the game is remarkable. It is as if they think their words will make it to the ears of the coaches and players—even the refs.
For Kelly, his love of the Steelers never diminishes throughout the year; even when he is on vacation in Hawaii, he will watch the NFL draft to keep up to date with the new members of his favorite team—forgoing time he could be spending out in the sun, on the beach. He references the Steelers all year long and is known to ask people trivia questions about his favorite Steelers. I have heard him see a number and tell anyone who will listen whose number it is and why it is so great. And any other Steelers fan he meets is an instant friend. Just wearing the combination of black and gold will inspire him to comment on how nice the colors work together and ask the wearer if they are Steelers fans. This translates over to his wife who is equally addicted to the Steelers—although not in such an intense way, as far as I can tell.
The group gets together whenever possible and Kelly and Eva always watch the games either together or apart—which means they are on the phone together either during or right after the game. The purpose of the group is to actively participate and watch as “their” team battles its way to victory. They are similar people and their similarities are drawn into perspective during their intense watching of Pittsburgh football. Kelly is from North Dakota, Eva is from Sweden, and Ryan is from Wisconsin, so none of them are able to claim Pittsburgh as a place of origin, and yet, they still have a deep passion for cheering on their beloved Steelers. Kelly says that his love for the Steelers comes from his childhood in the 1970's when the Steelers dominated football--the "Steel Curtain" era. Eva's love comes from her relationship with Kelly as does Ryan's --he is a huge Packers fan as well. Whatever the reason may be, they will follow their team to the ends of the earth.
This past weekend I observed several die-hard Steelers fans as they cheered on their team. The group I observed has very specific rituals that they perform every weekend when the Steelers play. Here are a few:
- Get out “Terrible Towels” and have them close at hand
- Put on Steelers Jersey’s
- Take Rouse’s jersey off its hanger and put it on him—Rouse is a dog
- Turn the TV to the appropriate channel
- Order Pizza
- Get out the beer
- Sit on the edge of the seat
- Chew fingernails—not really a ritual, but it happens nonetheless
Once these things have been done and the pizza arrives, it is game time. The group sits, literally, on the edge of their seats and watches the Steelers with great concentration. Kelly, clenches his hands and watches with wide eyes—biting his nails when the stress becomes too much. He wrenches his body from side to side every now and then as if he can influence the movements of the players. There is no talking during the game—unless it is a question about a call or a comment/criticism about the players and/or coaches. The only other sounds during the game are the loud and abrupt curse words that fly from Kelly’s mouth as he watches the game. While Kelly is a true fan, he will be the first person to provide negative beliefs about the future outcome of a game or to criticize the team after a loss or win.
Kelly’s wife, Eva, also gets into the spirit of things and her quiet attention contrasts the loud and physical reactions of her husband. Every now and then she will make a comment or pose a question about a call made by the coaches, players, or referees discussing bad plays and calls with her husband. She watches the game with her hands folded across her lap as she sits on the edge of her seat.
The third member of the group is visiting for the weekend and he is also decked out in his Pittsburgh gear. He makes jokes every now and then that Kelly responds to with only half of his attention—he is focused on the game. Nevertheless, Ryan is just as eager as Kelly to point out mistakes and bad calls on both sides of the field.
The eating and drinking, while going on during the game, is more of a habit than an actual relished meal. It is interesting to note the level of focus and interaction that is felt by the members of this small group. With every moment of the game, it is as if the people sitting in the room believe they have some say in the outcomeProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0
f the game. The way in which they talk to each other and the people physically involved in the game is remarkable. It is as if they think their words will make it to the ears of the coaches and players—even the refs.
For Kelly, his love of the Steelers never diminishes throughout the year; even when he is on vacation in Hawaii, he will watch the NFL draft to keep up to date with the new members of his favorite team—forgoing time he could be spending out in the sun, on the beach. He references the Steelers all year long and is known to ask people trivia questions about his favorite Steelers. I have heard him see a number and tell anyone who will listen whose number it is and why it is so great. And any other Steelers fan he meets is an instant friend. Just wearing the combination of black and gold will inspire him to comment on how nice the colors work together and ask the wearer if they are Steelers fans. This translates over to his wife who is equally addicted to the Steelers—although not in such an intense way, as far as I can tell.
The group gets together whenever possible and Kelly and Eva always watch the games either together or apart—which means they are on the phone together either during or right after the game. The purpose of the group is to actively participate and watch as “their” team battles its way to victory. They are similar people and their similarities are drawn into perspective during their intense watching of Pittsburgh football. Kelly is from North Dakota, Eva is from Sweden, and Ryan is from Wisconsin, so none of them are able to claim Pittsburgh as a place of origin, and yet, they still have a deep passion for cheering on their beloved Steelers. Kelly says that his love for the Steelers comes from his childhood in the 1970's when the Steelers dominated football--the "Steel Curtain" era. Eva's love comes from her relationship with Kelly as does Ryan's --he is a huge Packers fan as well. Whatever the reason may be, they will follow their team to the ends of the earth.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
CI 5441: Course Readings-- Wk 7: Oct 20
I found the readings for this week to be both incredibly insightful and interesting, but at the same time a bit daunting. The different authors of our readings each expressed in their writings elements of the type of classroom I want to create, but now I find myself worried about being able to accomplish all that they have set out on the table.
I desperately want to create the type of social justice classroom that Christensen defines as a combination of belief, multiculturalism, empowerment, critique, and growth. It is extremely important that teachers believe in the abilities of their students and make these beliefs known. Christensen passionately claims, “Teachers must see the gifts that each student brings to class, not the deficits. The teacher must absolutely believe in the potential of the student, but even more essentially, the teacher must believe in the right of the student to have access to a rigorous education” (171). In doing this, students can overcome the damage down by other teachers and members of society who have told them otherwise. I loved the quote by one of Christensen’s students who asked, “Why figure out ahead of time for people what they’re going to do with their lives?” (170)—it is up to the individual to figure this out for themselves and to create the future they want without the doubt placed on them by society.
One of these prejudgments made by society concerns language—what is right and what is wrong. The readings emphasized the political aspects connected to language and how as teachers we can try and combat ideas of right and wrong. Christensen mentions her own torment in school over the correct pronunciation of “lawyer.” Myself, whenever I tell someone that I am an English major, they automatically reply, “Oh, better watch what I say around you!” implying that I will constantly be on the look-out for misuse of the English language. While I might occasionally help friends who are trying to learn English as a second language, I do not go around with my Standard English radar looking for people I can humiliate with my “superior” understanding of the “right” way to speak.
Christenbury and Chritensen’s pieces resonated with both speech and writing. I had never thought about how I would handle different Englishes in my classroom. Christensen’s idea of “correct and connect” is a great idea to start with (101). Christensen notes that, “Students need to know where to find help, and they need to understand what changes might be necessary, but they need to learn in a context that doesn’t say, ‘The way you said this is wrong’” (101). In creating this environment students can feel more able and comfortable in communicating their thoughts rather than worrying about avoiding errors. I know now that I need to come up with a grading system that will reflect these ideas while still trying to help students become more comfortable with the “power” language they are sure to encounter.
Christensen also emphasizes the need to ground lessons around the lives of our students. By carefully selecting texts and activities that illustrate the diverse backgrounds and experiences of our students we can create an environment that is multicultural and empowers students. When students can see that their own lives and experiences are the basis for their education, they can learn how to look at the real world in a different way and work together to try and make it a better place. This leads into the preparation for social critique that comes from reading, discussing, and reinventing issues found within literature. When students are given the tools to do this and asked to work together in their classroom community they will be all the more prepared to take on the world around them. The growth that this type of education creates in students is priceless. Not only does this form of curriculum give them the abilities they need, it gives them the necessary confidence to draw from.
They most troubling section for me was Delpit’s article about power in the classroom. I do not see myself as a strong authoritative figure and I know that I employ the indirect directives mentioned in the article. My eyes were definitely opened to the difficulties that might arise through these characteristics and I am not sure how I can combat them. It will take a great deal of attention and reflection on my part, but I hope this is something that I can keep in mind as I begin my teaching journey. I know one thing though, I mustn't let them see my fear!
I desperately want to create the type of social justice classroom that Christensen defines as a combination of belief, multiculturalism, empowerment, critique, and growth. It is extremely important that teachers believe in the abilities of their students and make these beliefs known. Christensen passionately claims, “Teachers must see the gifts that each student brings to class, not the deficits. The teacher must absolutely believe in the potential of the student, but even more essentially, the teacher must believe in the right of the student to have access to a rigorous education” (171). In doing this, students can overcome the damage down by other teachers and members of society who have told them otherwise. I loved the quote by one of Christensen’s students who asked, “Why figure out ahead of time for people what they’re going to do with their lives?” (170)—it is up to the individual to figure this out for themselves and to create the future they want without the doubt placed on them by society.
One of these prejudgments made by society concerns language—what is right and what is wrong. The readings emphasized the political aspects connected to language and how as teachers we can try and combat ideas of right and wrong. Christensen mentions her own torment in school over the correct pronunciation of “lawyer.” Myself, whenever I tell someone that I am an English major, they automatically reply, “Oh, better watch what I say around you!” implying that I will constantly be on the look-out for misuse of the English language. While I might occasionally help friends who are trying to learn English as a second language, I do not go around with my Standard English radar looking for people I can humiliate with my “superior” understanding of the “right” way to speak.
Christenbury and Chritensen’s pieces resonated with both speech and writing. I had never thought about how I would handle different Englishes in my classroom. Christensen’s idea of “correct and connect” is a great idea to start with (101). Christensen notes that, “Students need to know where to find help, and they need to understand what changes might be necessary, but they need to learn in a context that doesn’t say, ‘The way you said this is wrong’” (101). In creating this environment students can feel more able and comfortable in communicating their thoughts rather than worrying about avoiding errors. I know now that I need to come up with a grading system that will reflect these ideas while still trying to help students become more comfortable with the “power” language they are sure to encounter.
Christensen also emphasizes the need to ground lessons around the lives of our students. By carefully selecting texts and activities that illustrate the diverse backgrounds and experiences of our students we can create an environment that is multicultural and empowers students. When students can see that their own lives and experiences are the basis for their education, they can learn how to look at the real world in a different way and work together to try and make it a better place. This leads into the preparation for social critique that comes from reading, discussing, and reinventing issues found within literature. When students are given the tools to do this and asked to work together in their classroom community they will be all the more prepared to take on the world around them. The growth that this type of education creates in students is priceless. Not only does this form of curriculum give them the abilities they need, it gives them the necessary confidence to draw from.
They most troubling section for me was Delpit’s article about power in the classroom. I do not see myself as a strong authoritative figure and I know that I employ the indirect directives mentioned in the article. My eyes were definitely opened to the difficulties that might arise through these characteristics and I am not sure how I can combat them. It will take a great deal of attention and reflection on my part, but I hope this is something that I can keep in mind as I begin my teaching journey. I know one thing though, I mustn't let them see my fear!
Thursday, October 15, 2009
CI 5472: Media Assessment
I think you could have students analyze media representations by looking at the types of advertisements in magazines. You could start by taking different ads out of specific magazines and stock-piling the ads from each magazine in a numbered stack. You could put the students in groups and assign each group a stack. The groups would be asked to analyze the different ads and come up with a target audience for their selection of images. Then they could try and guess which from which magazine their images were pulled. As a group they could present their findings to the class--who their audience is-- and what their prediction is for the magazine the images appeared in. I think this would be a great way to illustrate the power of marketing and the differences in marketing strategies.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
CI 5441: Course Readings--Wk 6: Oct 13
Well, for last week we read our assigned chapters on critical theory and, lucky us, we were able to see Deb Appleman present information on her research, in person. Then is Rick’s class, we also looked into critical theory in analyzing media representations. One of the things that has really stuck with me is the idea of using critical lenses as a way to provide a safe environment for bringing up difficult issues and encouraging deeper discussions among students. Appleman notes in her text that through the use of the postcolonial lens creates a more “inclusive classroom” that “validates the experiences and perspectives of readers from outside the mainstream” (89). This is achieved by using the lens as a way to recognize, respect, and truly acknowledge the unique histories and cultures from all around the world. By giving students a chance to read literature written by non-Western voices, literature written by the people who have been oppressed, silenced, and neglected, students can feel more comfortable with their identities in and out of the classroom.
Another advantage to using the postcolonial lens, and some of the other lens as well, is that by using this lens teachers can establish a more empathetic classroom dialogue. Using different lenses in order to illustrate different ways of examining a text teaches students not only to question the world around them with a critical eye, it also puts them in someone else’s shoes; shoes that might belong to their fellow classmates. By using the postcolonial text, for example, white students might be able to empathize more with their minority classmates while those who are the minority can partake in discussion knowing that they are for once not the only ones to interpret a text in one specific way. This safe zone, in which students can share a viewpoint that might be drastically different from that of the mainstream population, will connect students in a way that forces them to open their eyes. Such discussions will open up avenues for teachers to really attack the tough issues brought up in a text without fear that some students might feel singled out, attacked, or simply uncomfortable with their reading of the text and class discussions.
All of this will help students become more critical observers and actors in the world around them. Appleman quotes a teacher who in order to move her students “outside their familiar patterns of thinking,” took it upon herself to ask them to reflect upon how they would handle being indoctrinated—“incapable of thinking collectively in any but the most inhuman ways” (91). Her point was to illustrate to her students the need to think of themselves as “public individuals” rather than brainwashed members of a community. They need to think beyond themselves and react to what they encounter in society from a variety of viewpoints in order to successfully participate in the world around them. As teachers it is our responsibility to give them the strategies and tools that will help them examine and analyze the world around them critically, today, in hope for a better tomorrow.
Another advantage to using the postcolonial lens, and some of the other lens as well, is that by using this lens teachers can establish a more empathetic classroom dialogue. Using different lenses in order to illustrate different ways of examining a text teaches students not only to question the world around them with a critical eye, it also puts them in someone else’s shoes; shoes that might belong to their fellow classmates. By using the postcolonial text, for example, white students might be able to empathize more with their minority classmates while those who are the minority can partake in discussion knowing that they are for once not the only ones to interpret a text in one specific way. This safe zone, in which students can share a viewpoint that might be drastically different from that of the mainstream population, will connect students in a way that forces them to open their eyes. Such discussions will open up avenues for teachers to really attack the tough issues brought up in a text without fear that some students might feel singled out, attacked, or simply uncomfortable with their reading of the text and class discussions.
All of this will help students become more critical observers and actors in the world around them. Appleman quotes a teacher who in order to move her students “outside their familiar patterns of thinking,” took it upon herself to ask them to reflect upon how they would handle being indoctrinated—“incapable of thinking collectively in any but the most inhuman ways” (91). Her point was to illustrate to her students the need to think of themselves as “public individuals” rather than brainwashed members of a community. They need to think beyond themselves and react to what they encounter in society from a variety of viewpoints in order to successfully participate in the world around them. As teachers it is our responsibility to give them the strategies and tools that will help them examine and analyze the world around them critically, today, in hope for a better tomorrow.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
CI 5472: Critical Lens Commercial Analysis
Little Boy
Okay, so I thought that this commercial fits well into the reader/audience-based/rhetorical lens. Clearly, this commercial is targeting a specific audience with specific goals in mind. The brand of condoms wants to highlight the possible outcomes of having unprotected sex and ending up with a monstrous, ill-behaved child. The commercial draws its audience to assume that a.) children throw tremendous tantrums, b.) they cannot be controlled, and c.) that by using a condom, you can prevent this from happening. While some of these assumptions might be true, there are also alternative views of children and parental control as well as other ways to prevent pregnancies. What is important to note in correlation with using this lens, is that nothing is explicitly stated in any way; the audience is left to make the connections and thus inferences on their own. One of my roommates watched the commercial with me and did not understand the connection between the screaming child and the condom company…it really is up to the viewer to correctly interpret the images presented in the video. My friend was bringing something to her viewing of the video that I was not and therefore she had a different reaction and understanding—or misunderstanding—of the commercial. The commercial is able to use the frightening image of life with children as a means to ensure that people associate their product with safe sex that will prevent pregnancies and lives bogged down by awful children. They also end the commercial by saying, “Zazoo Condoms. Fun. Sexy. Safe.” Again, this equates the condoms with these images in direct opposition of the grocery store tirade—final score fun: 0, hell: 1 (at least).
To correlate with this lens, I also looked at the commercial from a gender lens. I think it is interesting to note that the father is the one in the grocery store with the child. As is often portrayed, he does not appear to know how to deal with the child’s bad behavior as made apparent by his inability to control and end the never-ending tantrum and the disheartened look on his face throughout the commercial. This inability or lack of knowledge on how to care for children is a male stereotype that makes men seem incompetent in areas of child-rearing. I think the commercial can also lend the viewer to assume that the man has been tied down unwillingly by the child and this leads into the dominant perception that men are “trapped” by woman into relationships or marriage. The “ball and chain” metaphor can clearly apply to the man in this situation with his little boy. What’s more, the commercial is for a brand of condoms—condoms offering protection for men and women to engage in sex without “negative consequences” such as an unwanted pregnancy. Because the parent in the clip is a man, this could imply both the use of condoms to avoid children as well as permanent ties to a woman. The commercial places the responsibility for contraception on the male by presenting him as the one dealing with the grocery store situation. In general, I think men do receive much of the responsibility for providing contraceptives one because they are typically stereotyped as being more promiscuous and two, because they are also stereotyped as being driven by their sexual urges—leading to the more promiscuous behavior. It is almost as if the commercial is a warning for men to use a condom in order to further their days of freedom, their ability to “sow their wild oats” before being tied down. Because of these assumptions and the fact that he is the looks at the camera at the end of the commercial in despair and regret, it seems directed more at men than women. I think the commercial would take on an entirely different meaning if the parent in the clip were a female, perhaps suggesting that dangers of similar female stereotypes about having sex; it might turn into an abstinence commercial rather than a contraceptive commercial in our society.
I think that both of these lenses could be applied to other commercials that indirectly target their specific audiences with messages they can infer. Students could look at print media in various magazines and perhaps determine what those messages suggest about who the magazines audience is and what things have meaning to them; this could also be used with television commercials on various channels—how do the commercial on Lifetime differ from those on ESPN? This would be an interesting study to do and I think students would be amazed at how much they are targeted by the media and companies. Students could be assigned—or chose different channels/magazines/newspapers or even websites and asked to analyze the commercials or advertisements used within them. After this has been accomplished they could come back to the class and in small groups present their findings and compare their analyses. Then the entire class could discuss what each group came up with and how the media and producers use these lenses to shape how members of our society think. This could be a reflective practice as well in which students question their susceptibility to these advertisements. Overall, I think this would be a neat way to not only teach students how to use these lenses but also to force them to analyze what is presented to them in the media.
Okay, so I thought that this commercial fits well into the reader/audience-based/rhetorical lens. Clearly, this commercial is targeting a specific audience with specific goals in mind. The brand of condoms wants to highlight the possible outcomes of having unprotected sex and ending up with a monstrous, ill-behaved child. The commercial draws its audience to assume that a.) children throw tremendous tantrums, b.) they cannot be controlled, and c.) that by using a condom, you can prevent this from happening. While some of these assumptions might be true, there are also alternative views of children and parental control as well as other ways to prevent pregnancies. What is important to note in correlation with using this lens, is that nothing is explicitly stated in any way; the audience is left to make the connections and thus inferences on their own. One of my roommates watched the commercial with me and did not understand the connection between the screaming child and the condom company…it really is up to the viewer to correctly interpret the images presented in the video. My friend was bringing something to her viewing of the video that I was not and therefore she had a different reaction and understanding—or misunderstanding—of the commercial. The commercial is able to use the frightening image of life with children as a means to ensure that people associate their product with safe sex that will prevent pregnancies and lives bogged down by awful children. They also end the commercial by saying, “Zazoo Condoms. Fun. Sexy. Safe.” Again, this equates the condoms with these images in direct opposition of the grocery store tirade—final score fun: 0, hell: 1 (at least).
To correlate with this lens, I also looked at the commercial from a gender lens. I think it is interesting to note that the father is the one in the grocery store with the child. As is often portrayed, he does not appear to know how to deal with the child’s bad behavior as made apparent by his inability to control and end the never-ending tantrum and the disheartened look on his face throughout the commercial. This inability or lack of knowledge on how to care for children is a male stereotype that makes men seem incompetent in areas of child-rearing. I think the commercial can also lend the viewer to assume that the man has been tied down unwillingly by the child and this leads into the dominant perception that men are “trapped” by woman into relationships or marriage. The “ball and chain” metaphor can clearly apply to the man in this situation with his little boy. What’s more, the commercial is for a brand of condoms—condoms offering protection for men and women to engage in sex without “negative consequences” such as an unwanted pregnancy. Because the parent in the clip is a man, this could imply both the use of condoms to avoid children as well as permanent ties to a woman. The commercial places the responsibility for contraception on the male by presenting him as the one dealing with the grocery store situation. In general, I think men do receive much of the responsibility for providing contraceptives one because they are typically stereotyped as being more promiscuous and two, because they are also stereotyped as being driven by their sexual urges—leading to the more promiscuous behavior. It is almost as if the commercial is a warning for men to use a condom in order to further their days of freedom, their ability to “sow their wild oats” before being tied down. Because of these assumptions and the fact that he is the looks at the camera at the end of the commercial in despair and regret, it seems directed more at men than women. I think the commercial would take on an entirely different meaning if the parent in the clip were a female, perhaps suggesting that dangers of similar female stereotypes about having sex; it might turn into an abstinence commercial rather than a contraceptive commercial in our society.
I think that both of these lenses could be applied to other commercials that indirectly target their specific audiences with messages they can infer. Students could look at print media in various magazines and perhaps determine what those messages suggest about who the magazines audience is and what things have meaning to them; this could also be used with television commercials on various channels—how do the commercial on Lifetime differ from those on ESPN? This would be an interesting study to do and I think students would be amazed at how much they are targeted by the media and companies. Students could be assigned—or chose different channels/magazines/newspapers or even websites and asked to analyze the commercials or advertisements used within them. After this has been accomplished they could come back to the class and in small groups present their findings and compare their analyses. Then the entire class could discuss what each group came up with and how the media and producers use these lenses to shape how members of our society think. This could be a reflective practice as well in which students question their susceptibility to these advertisements. Overall, I think this would be a neat way to not only teach students how to use these lenses but also to force them to analyze what is presented to them in the media.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
CI 5472: Movie
Here is the movie I made on Windows Movie Maker, it is almost identical to the one I made on iMovie but it has some sound with it.
CI 5472: Film Activity
When it comes to designing a lesson that would incorporate film study, I think you could use film to bring pieces of literature into the classroom in a new way. While doing a lesson on Shakespeare, I think it would be neat to have students watch different versions of a Shakespeare play, say, 10 Things I Hate About You and The Taming of the Shrew or She’s the Man and Twelfth Night. After having read the plays, they could then analyze the ways in which Shakespeare's plays have been adapted on the screen. They could spend time comparing the two films to not only the original, but also to each other in order to see how modern filmmakers have updated the classic comedies. After this you could have them watch another close to the text movie version of a Shakespeare play, maybe Much Ado About Nothing, and create their own modern day interpretation through a script, story-board, class presentation, or mini-film. I think this lesson would provide both textual and film analysis in an enjoyable and creative way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)