The media graphic, part II

Taking a second look at this graphic allowed me to articulate some of the things I started to talk about the first time around. The theories discussed and questions raised in some of our readings helped provide better language to discuss these concepts, and seeing what other classmates did with their work in the course so far helped me settle some design decisions.  (I used a lot more text this time.)  I'm pleased with the clean look of this graphic.

Aside: The more I see of Prezi, the more I want to learn it.  I've been using Adobe InDesign mostly because I know just enough of it to be dangerous, but I don't use it regularly enough to be really good.  Everybody who has been using Prezi ends up with something really slick, even those who just tried it the first time.  cool.

Week in Review

I found this week's reading to be slow going and a little depressing. As Anne suggested, there were points of light in Debord's work, but they were faint, and well hidden. Compared to Benjamin and Adorno and Horkheimer, which offered critique of capitalist/consumerist culture and pointed a way forward, I found Debord's writing to be simply critical, and missing much of the "call to action" message that the other Marxist authors seemed to incorporate.  (Maybe it's a combination of too much bad news these days, and not enough sunshine, metaphorically and physically speaking.)  Reading it left me feeling a little grim. However, I do realize that we didn't read the entire work.

I'm curious to see what my classmates might be considering for their papers and I'm looking forward to hearing about all of those ideas. I haven't visited anybody else's blogs yet, as of writing this.

As far as the conversation about the structure and schedule for this class, I've been considering it through the theory we've been reading in the pedagogy class (English 706, if you like numbers) I'm also taking this semester. I've been able to identify some of the theory supporting certain instructional methods, such as group discussions and reflective writing.

I think my thoughts about this class are continuing to evolve as I read more pedagogical theory, but I do  agree with the assertions of some of the media theorists we've read here about the potential for media to isolate users. The bond of shared experience one might develop with classmates in a classroom is greatly altered by only seeing them online. I feel it's a more formal relationship, because my communications with them are more considered. Not that I speak without thinking as a rule, but the potential to chat with someone before class or on break isn't there. We might have those conversations online with someone we already know in-person, but they aren't as frequent and starting small talk chats with an unfamiliar person is unlikely. Probably Debord would have something to say about me missing small talk (which is superficial in the extreme)... Would he say that the philosophical and theoretical conversations we're having with each other in the online classroom are deeper and more real than the chance to talk about restaurants, movies and TV shows with people in person?

Semester paper ideas

I'm wondering about a couple of ideas for the semester paper. I'd like to work with some sort of food media, as it's a personal interest of mine.

1) I'm curious about the mediation of the "culture industry" getting ahold of a concept and adapting and changing it along the path to profit.  I remember reading the blog, the Julie/Julia Project, written by Julie Powell about her struggles to cook her way through Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking.  The blog gained popularity and Powell published a book. Then the book became a film, and mashing up Julia Child's autobiography, My Life in France.  (I've read Child's and Powell's books, but I haven't seen the film.)
It appears that Adorno and Horkheimer could be relevant to this analysis, with their critical analysis of the culture industry's methods. The modern perspectives in "Mass Media," "Communication," and "Memory" would probably also be involved. I'm sure other theory applies here, from other classes, and this one, but A&H stuck out right away.  I like that there would be several ways to approach the same story, because it's in several forms of media.  Maybe this is too narrow, or too shallow?

2) I had mentioned previously working with the Settlement Cookbook to analyze the role this media had in encouraging assimilation of young immigrant women into American consumer culture of the early 1900s. Cookbooks of the previous centuries often included a lot of information on household management, in addition to actual culinary instruction, and so greater potential to influence the way a reader lived and consumed than just the culinary philosophy that a celebrity cookbook author might preach.
I see potential for discussing the influence of consumer culture using Benjamin and Debord, certainly. "Sense," "Memory,""Communication" and probably "Image" would make a contribution to that discussion. This scenario uses just one piece of food lit, so I'm not sure if that's better suited, or lacks the comparison potential that the first option offered.

I'd be very interested to hear if Anne or fellow classmates had any additional reading suggestions for me with regard to these topic areas. Any reviewing or workshopping of the paper, once we get to a draft stage would be helpful to me. Perhaps we could post works in progress and provide electronic feedback to an assigned partner?

(Thanks for your thoughts on this, dear readers :)

Week in Review, Semester in Summary

I’m still not sure I’m sold on the idea of “the media is the message.” McLuhan’s words have been tossed about in various office places, as well as the ad department of my undergraduate institution, where it was quoted out of context. (In the office, McLuhan’s words were frequently misused to justify adopting a new technology in a half-hearted fashion. As though simply mentioning it in the strategic plan was going to be enough for the client.) I found, though, that reading the oft-quoted phrase, in context, still didn’t convince me of McLuhan’s argument.

I do agree with Anne’s statement in the overview about the criticisms of McLuhan. It does seem that he chooses to ignore social and cultural contexts in favor of incorporating everything into his concept of “media.” Therefore, everything is fair game for his judgments, and he doesn’t need to rely on anyone else’s theories to qualify, support or explain other factors at play. I’m not sure whether I find that stance to be incredibly useful, personally. I find that I rely heavily on context to assess a situation. Who sees a message, how might it affect them, and who sent the message and why are important variables.

However, I appreciate the ideas that many of the authors in the CTMS collection present, and I believe I’ll be able to reference them in other contexts. John Durham Peters’ summary of “Mass Media” defines the rhetorical stances assumed by using various forms of media. Bruce Clarke offers summary of some communication theory as well as references some theoretical philosophy that is often applied to communicative acts. I think the explorations of these aspects of media in historic, social or cultural contexts and the linguistic perspectives will be very useful. Further, the classics of the discipline that we have read, including Barthes, Benjamin, Adorno and Horkheimer and McLuhan are useful in establishing a theoretical base, and perhaps, pointing toward the next steps.

It seems that there isn’t so much a formal “canon” of works for media studies, outside of a handful of the classics, some of which we’ve read here, and some of which I’ve encountered in professional writing courses.  I’m curious to see what theories are going to be relevant, and how those might be able to be applied to situations in which media are involved.