Archive for February, 2008

Down on the Down.

    “They’ll never rest until they’ve spoiled the earth.”                     

- Watership Down    

I’ll never rest until I’ve presented.     No, that isn’t true. I’m actually surprisingly calm and feel as though I’ll do well.

    I am ready to present! Sadly, our presentation date has been pushed from Friday to Monday and I must admit that I am highly disappointed. I was excited.

     I am also finished my first ISU novel; WaterShip Down. I loved it and watched the movie (it wasn’t as good), and have already thought of a thesis.

    So far it goes like…

    “The only reason why the tale of the rabbits lead to destruction was because the rabbits were personified as people”

     Or something along those lines…

    It will be worded better.

    Currently, I am working on gathering information and ideas to perfect my thesis.

    I’m thinking of reading another book, this time non-fiction, about a man’s observations of wild rabbits. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful profession? I love rabbits, and even have a rabbit of my own (his name is Wallace). I think that I’ll observe him and write a book about it.

     It was this work, “The Private Life of The Rabbit:” that inspired Richard Adams to write his novel in the first place. Reading it will help me to distinguish the true rabbit actions from those which were personified. That might sound stupid to some. Some would think that the rabbits talking is a personification, but I do not think that this is true. Rabbit do communicate, and it was simply written in English so that the reader could comprehend. What I must distinguish is which topics of conversation are genuinely animal and which are of human creation. I am going to read this second book over the weekend.

I’m excited to work on my ISU.

:]

Bonus Question: What do you think of my thesis? Suggestions?

Comments (2) »

Lesson Plant.

Post Modernism Presentation

The ever-growing lesson plant.

Objectives:

1. By the end of the lesson students will be able to formulate their own definitions of the term “post-modernism” using terms and ideas used throughout the lesson, and the newly learned comparisons between modernism and post modernism. This ability will be used during the lesson as they summarize what was learned and on tests or in assignments. 2. Students will be able to identify whether or not a literary work (or another form of media, such as films or music) is post-modern and deconstruct it using the key elements learned from the lesson. They will be able to do so in class and on a test.

3. Students will be able to describe the progression of post-modernism from it’s past to it’s present form using knowledge of it’s history and the philosophies of at least 3 post-modern philosophers mentioned in the presentation. They will do so in class and on any given test.

Resources:

  •   Materials needed by the Class:
    • hand out (to be used in the future as a study sheet, as it will have questions as well as notes)
  • Equipment needed by the presenters: 
    • Computer (to be provided by teacher)
    • Notes in power point presentation format (not to be copied by students, and provided by Jessica M.)
    • Projector (to be used so that the students can see what is on the computer)
    • Smart board (to be used for the in class analysis of Slaughter House Five. An alternative PowerPoint version of the activity could be prepared if this is unavailable).
    • Printed notes on cue cards.
    • Whistle and/or sling-shot to ensure attentive and quiet students (optional)
    • NOTE: Should the computer become unavailable or the electronic files non-functioning the presentation could run as a discussion with the presenters using prepared notes on cue cards and the students following along using their hand outs.

Methodology:

 Total Duration of class: 70 Minutes

Total Duration of Lesson: 40-50 minutes (allowing extra time for set-up, questions, discussion, and the input that Mr. Murray always has.)

1. Introduction (5-10 min)

-Rhetorical Question: What is post-modernism?

-Answer with statement that “We don’t know” and explain that the topic is so broad and undefined that there is no clear definition.

-Begin PowerPoint. Give two brief definitions of both modernism and post-modernism so that the class has a base to expand upon.

-The next few slides will show a couple of the principle ideas or concepts supported in post modernism.

-Ask question: What movies use these concepts?

2. Comparison (5 min)

- charts will be presented that contrast modern and post-modern ideas so that the students can clearly see the difference.

- Another chart will be presented comparing modern and postmodern words. The differences will be discussed.

- Question: Mention a word that is modern and ask the class to give a corresponding word that is post-modern.

3. History (5 min)

- history will be briefly covered and displayed in the form of a time line to allow students to visually understand the progression of the criticism. Will not be explored deeply.

4. Philosophers (10 min)

- slides will name a few important philosophers that contributed to post-modernism and their philosophies. The longest part of the presentation a few bits of interesting/quirky information will be thrown in to add interest.

5. Analysis (10 minutes)

- slides will describe the different literary elements of a literary work of post-modernism. Each slide will give examples from a variety of mediums such as children’s books, novels and film to allow for a better understanding.

- With all the necessary knowledge the class will now be given brief background knowledge into the novel “Slaughterhouse five”

- Exerts will then be displayed and the class will help to deconstruct the exert seeing which elements of it make it post-modern.

6. Conclusion (5 minutes)

- Class will be asked to come up with their own definitions for the word “post modern”

-If the class has any questions they may ask them at this point.

Evaluation:

- Students will aid in the analysis of a literary work to ensure that they can succeed in identifying it as post-modern and can notice what elements of the writing prove this.

- Students will be asked a variety of questions throughout the presentations (see methodology for examples) to ensure a basic understanding and to ensure they are involved.

- The final discussion question “What is port-modernism” will evaluate their understanding of the concept and prove whether or not they can utilize the information learned to create their own ideas.

Comments (2) »

Subterranean

Subterranean: Tales of the dark

Subterranean Press

Subterranean Magazine

Subterranean Records 

A few subtopics to dicusss. 

Hermeneutics, the science of textual interpretation, also plays a role in postmodern philosophy. Unlike deconstruction, which focuses upon the functional structures of a text, hermeneutics seeks to arrive at an agreement or consensus as to what the text means, or is about. Gianni Vattimo formulates a postmodern hermeneutics in The End of Modernity (English 1988), where he distinguishes himself from his Parisian counterparts by posing the question of post-modernity as a matter for ontological hermeneutics. Instead of calling for experimentation with counter-strategies and functional structures, he sees the heterogeneity and diversity in our experience of the world as a hermeneutical problem to be solved by developing a sense continuity between the present and the past. This continuity is to be a unity of meaning rather than the repetition of a functional structure, and the meaning is ontological. In this respect, Vattimo’s project is an extension of Heidegger’s inquiries into the meaning of being. However, where Heidegger situates Nietzsche within the limits of metaphysics, Vattimo joins Heidegger’s ontological hermeneutics with Nietzsche’s attempt to think beyond nihilism and historicism with his concept of eternal return. The result, says Vattimo, is a certain distortion of Heidegger’s reading of Nietzsche, allowing Heidegger and Nietzsche to be interpreted through one another (Vattimo 1988, 176). This is a significant point of difference between Vattimo and the French postmodernists, who read Nietzsche against Heidegger, and prefer Nietzsche’s textual strategies over Heidegger’s pursuit of the meaning of being. Hyperreality is closely related to the concept of the simulacrum: a copy or image without reference to an original. In postmodernism, hyperreality is the result of the technological mediation of experience, where what passes for reality is a network of images and signs without an external referent, such that what is represented is representation itself. In Symbolic Exchange and Death (1976) (English 1993), Jean Baudrillard uses Lacan’s concepts of the symbolic, the imaginary, and the real to develop this concept while attacking orthodoxies of the political Left, beginning with the assumed reality of power, production, desire, society, and political legitimacy. Baudrillard argues that all of these realities have become simulations, that is, signs without any referent, because the real and the imaginary have been absorbed into the symbolic.The term “deconstruction,” like “postmodernism,” has taken on many meanings in the popular imagination. However, in philosophy, it signifies certain strategies for reading and writing texts. The term was introduced into philosophical literature in 1967, with the publication of three texts by Jacques Derrida: Of Grammatology (English 1974), Writing and Difference (English 1978), and Speech and Phenomena (English 1973). This so-called “publication blitz” immediately established Derrida as a major figure in the new movement in philosophy and the human sciences centered in Paris, and brought the idiom “deconstruction” into its vocabulary. Derrida and deconstruction are routinely associated with postmodernism, although like Deleuze and Foucault, he does not use the term and would resist affiliation with “-isms” of any sort. Of the three books from 1967, Of Grammatology is the more comprehensive in laying out the background for deconstruction as a way of reading modern theories of language, especially structuralism, and Heidegger’s meditations on the non-presence of being. It also sets out Derrida’s difference with Heidegger over Nietzsche. Where Heidegger places Nietzsche within the metaphysics of presence, Derrida insists that “reading, and therefore writing, the text were for Nietzsche ‘originary’ operations,” (Derrida 1974, 19), and this puts him at the closure of metaphysics (not the end), a closure that liberates writing from the traditional logos, which takes writing to be a sign (a visible mark) for another sign (speech), whose “signified” is a fully present meaning. The concept of difference as a productive mechanism, rather than a negation of identity, is also a hallmark of postmodernism in philosophy. Gilles Deleuze deploys this concept throughout his work, beginning with Nietzsche and Philosophy (1962, English 1983), where he sets Nietzsche against the models of thinking at work in Kant and Hegel. Here, he proposes to think against reason in resistance to Kant’s assertion of the self-justifying authority of reason alone (Deleuze 1983b, 93). In a phrase echoed by Foucault, he states that the purpose of his critique of reason “is not justification but a different way of feeling: another sensibility” (Deleuze 1983b, 94). Philosophical critique, he declares, is an encounter between thought and what forces it into action: it is a matter of sensibility rather than a tribunal where reason judges itself by its own laws (see Kant 1964, 9). Furthermore, the critique of reason is not a method, but is achieved by “culture” in the Nietzschean sense: training, discipline, inventiveness, and a certain cruelty (see Nietzsche 1967b). Since thought cannot activate itself as thinking, Deleuze says it must suffer violence if it is to awaken and move. Art, science, and philosophy deploy such violence insofar as they are transformative and experimental.  The Nietzschean method of genealogy, in its application to modern subjectivity, is another facet of philosophical postmodernism. Michel Foucault’s application of genealogy to formative moments in modernity’s history and his exhortations to experiment with subjectivity place him within the scope of postmodern discourse. In the 1971 essay “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History,” Foucault spells out his adaptation of the genealogical method in his historical studies. First and foremost, he says, genealogy “opposes itself to the search for ‘origins’” (Foucault 1977, 141). That is, genealogy studies the accidents and contingencies that converge at crucial moments, giving rise to new epochs, concepts, and institutions. As Foucault remarks: “What is found at the historical beginning of things is not the inviolable identity of their origin; it is the dissension of other things. It is disparity” (Foucault 1977, 142). In Nietzschean fashion, Foucault exposes history conceived as the origin and development of an identical subject, e.g., “modernity,” as a fiction modern discourses invent after the fact. Underlying the fiction of modernity is a sense of temporality that excludes the elements of chance and contingency in play at every moment. In short, linear, progressive history covers up the discontinuities and interruptions that mark points of succession in historical time.

 Bonus Question: What does the work Subterranean make you think of?

No comment »

Post.Mod.Pres.Res.

 

Post Modernism – Research/BrainstormSection: Important Works/Critisms + Deconstructing a work with a post-moderism p.o.v. Key Works by the philosophers of post modernism

  • Foucault, Michel (1970) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Pantheon.

  • Lyotard, Jean-Francois (1984) The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

  • Marcus, George E. and Michael M. J. Fischer (1986) Anthropology as Cultural Critique. An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Norris, Christopher (1979) Deconstruction: Theory and Practice. New York: Routledge.

  • Tyler, Stephen (1986) Post-Modern Ethnography: From Document of the Occult To Occult Document. In Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, ed. James Clifford and George E. Marcus. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Vattimo, Gianni (1988) The End of Modernity: Nihilism and Hermeneutics. In Post-Modern Critique. London: Polity.

CritisismsRoy D’Andrade (1931-) In the article “Moral Models in Anthropology,” D’Andrade critiques postmodernism’s definition of objectivity and subjectivity by examining the moral nature of their models. He argues that these moral models are purely subjective. D’Andrade argues that despite the fact that utterly value-free objectivity is impossible, it is the goal of the anthropologist to get as close as possible to that ideal. He argues that there must be a separation between moral and objective models because “they are counterproductive in discovering how the world works.” (D’Andrade 1995: 402). From there he takes issue with the postmodernist attack on objectivity. He states that objectivity is in no way dehumanizing nor is objectivity impossible. He states, “Science works not because it produces unbiased accounts but because its accounts are objective enough to be proved or disproved no matter what anyone wants to be true.” (D’Andrade 1995: 404).Rosenau(1993)identifies seven contradictions in Postmodernism:
1. Its anti-theoretical position is essentially a theoretical stand.
2. While Postmodernism stresses the irrational, instruments of reason are freely employed to advance its perspective.
3. The Postmodern prescription to focus on the marginal is itself an evaluative emphasis of precisely the sort that it otherwise attacks.
4. Postmodernism stress intertextuality but often treats text in isolation.
5. By adamently rejecting modern criteria for assessing theory, Postmodernists cannot argue that there are no valid criteria for judgement.
6. Postmodernism criticizes the inconsistency of modernism, but refuses to be held to norms of consistency itself.
7. Postmodernists contradict themselves by relinquishing truth claims in their own writings.
Melford Spiro argues that postmodern anthropologists do not convincingly dismiss the scientific method. If anthropology turns away from the scientific method then anthropology will become the study of meanings not the discovering of causes which shape what it is to be human. Spiro further states that “the causal account of culture refers to ecological niches, modes of production, subsistence techniques, and so forth, just as a causal account of mind refers to the firing of neurons, the secretions of hormones, the action of neurotransmitters… .” Spiro critically addresses six interrelated propositions from John Searle’s 1993 work, “Rationality and Realism”:
1. Reality exists independently of human representations. If this is true then, contrary to postmodernism, this postulate supports the existence of “mind-independent external reality” which is called “metaphysical realism”.
2. Language communicates meanings but also refers to objects and situations in the world which exist independently of language. Contrary to postmodernism, this postulate supports the concept of language as have communicative and referential functions.
3. Statements are true or false depending on whether the objects and situations to which they refer correspond to a greater or lesser degree to the statements. This “correspondence theory” of truth is to some extent the theory of truth for postmodernists, but this concept is rejected by many postmodernists as “essentialist.”
4. Knowledge is objective. This signifies that the truth of a knowledge claim is independent of the motive, culture, or gender of the person who makes the claim. Knowledge depends on empirical support.
5. Logic and rationality provide a set of procedures and methods, which contrary to postmodernism, enables a researcher to assess competing knowledge claims through proof, validity, and reason.
6. Objective and intersubjective criteria judge the merit of statements, theories, interpretations, and all accounts. Spiro specifically assaults the assumption that the disciplines that study humanity, like anthropology, cannot be “scientific” because subjectivity renders observers incapable of discovering truth. Spiro agrees with postmodernists that the social sciences require very different techniques for the study of humanity than do the natural sciences, but “while insight and empathy are critical in the study of mind and culture…intellectual responsibility requires objective (scientific methods) in the social sciences. Without objective procedures ethnography is empirically dubious and intellectually irresponsible (Spiro 1996).” “The Postmodernist genre of ethnography has been criticized for fostering a self-indulgent subjectivity, and for exaggerating the esoteric and unique aspects of a culture at the expense of more prosiac but significant questions.” (Bishop 1996: 58) Christopher Norris believes that Lyotard, Foucault, and Baudrillard are too caught up in the idea of the primacy of moral judgments (Norris p.50). Also in reaction to the Postmodern movement Marshall Sahlins addresses several post-modern issues which includes the definition of power. “The current Foucauldian-Gramscian-Nietzschean obsession with power is the lastest incarnation of anthropology’s incurable functionalism…Now ‘power’ is the intellectual black hole into which all kinds of cultural contents get sucked, if before it was social solidarity or material advantage.” (Sahlins, 1993, p.15).
Principal Concepts
 “…is the platonic doctrine that universals or abstractions have being independently of mind” (Gellner 1980: 60). “Realism is a mode of writing that seeks to represent the reality of the whole world or form of life. Realist ethnographies are written to allude to a whole by means of parts or foci of analytical attention which can constantly evoke a social and cultural totality. (Marcus and Fischer 1986, p.23).Self-Reflexivity Reflexivity can be defined as “The scientific observer’s objectification of structure as well as strategy was seen as placing the actors in a framework not of their own making but one produced by the observer, “ (Bishop 1996: 1270). Self-Reflexivity leads to a consciousness of the process of knowledge creation (Bishop 1996: 995). It emphasizes the point of theoretical and practical questioning changing the ethnographers’ view of themselves and their work. There is an increased awareness of the collection of data and the limitation of methodological systems. This idea underlies the postmodernist affinity for studying the culture of anthropology and ethnography.Relativism Gellner writes about the relativistic-functionalist view of thought that goes back to the Enlightment: “The (unresolved) dilemma, which the thought of the Enlightenment faced, was between a relativistic-functionalist view of thought, and the absolutist claims of enlightened Reason. Viewing man as part of nature…requires (us) to see cognitive and evaluative activities as part of nature too, and hence varying from organism to organism and context to context. (Clifford & Marcus (eds), 1986, p.147). Anthropological theory of the 1960’s may be best understood as the heir of relativism. Contenporary interpretative anthropology is the essence of relativism as a mode of inquiry about communication in and between cultures (Marcus & Fischer, 1986, p.32).

-Apply Concepts to a sample work. Allow class to help w. second.Sample Work = Slaughterhouse five
Examples: Slaughterhouse Five – Kurt Vonnegut
                    - Use Sci-fi and post war conventions.
                    - non linear plot (jumps in both space and time)
                    - confuses Identity of author.
                  Ragtime – Doctorow
                  - unusual narrative p.o.v
                  - artificial line between historical narrative + fictional narrative.

Other Exp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_literature

B.B.Bonus Question: What movie character is depicted as a snowman in the image above?

Comments (1) »

The Art of Flying

“There is an art to flying, or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, that provides the difficulties.”

I do not feel as though I am flying. I feel as though I am swimming (which is odd seeing as I don’t know how to swim). When I swim my flolloping limbs can be compared to those of a mattress…if a mattress had limbs of course. Yet, for the moment, I am only swimming in deadlines and lists. There are many lists. List of books, lists of topics and perhaps even some lists of lists. However, all is good for I like reading. I am looking forward to working with these lists.

This leads to my problem. I am tired of reading. Not all reading, mind you, but all reading that is about you. No, not YOU you. You as in humans. I don’t want to read about people anymore because they are extremely irritating. If someone could recommend to me a possible ISU novel that does not have a human protagonist I would greatly appreciate it.

Enough hosh-posh. My accountability agreement:

Accountability Agreement

Focus: What do you want to accomplish in this class?

  1. Finding and reading an excellent novel that does not have a human protagonist.
  2. Receiving at least 90% on each essay handed in.
  3. Finally learning to work in a group, because even though I HATE it, apparently, we have to.

Contributions: What contributions will you make to this class this semester?

  1. Through blog comments I will contribute book recommendations, whit, and willingly edit any essay (I love editing).
  2. A blog that isn’t purely “the work that is to be handed in” that day. I will try to add book quotes, questions, and whatever else to make commenting it easier.
  3. My leadership qualities and creativity (in group work). I always try to make my group presentations different so that people will actually want to listen to them.

Accountabilities: For what behaviours will you be held responsible?

1.      Updating my blog before Sunday. This could prove to be difficult because, surprisingly, I actually do have a life.

2.      Taking peoples criticism into account (in terms of the work posted on my blog).

3.      Not doing all of the work when in a group by assigning due dates and tasks. In essence, reluctantly, trusting others and separating the work load.

Supports: What help and from whom will you need in order to achieve your accountabilities?

1.      My group members for any project. If they want to do more work, they need to speak up.

2.      I will need support from Kenny to allow me at least a few moments of time on the weekend to update my blog.

3.      My mom will need to support my blogging by pulling herself away from the computer for a few moments each weekend in order to allow me the time to write.

Measurements: How will you know what success looks like?

1.      My grade of at least 90%

2.      A blog that has been chosen as the blog of the week at least once.

3.      At least one positive comment on each essay posted.

Consequences: How should you be rewarded if you succeed? How should you be punished?

1.      My reward will be my grade of 90%.

2.      My punishment for not allowing any of my group members to participate will be a stern talking from one of them.

3.      My punishment for failing to meet my desired grade will be sadness and disappointment.

I fear that it will be difficult to find time to write a blog entry each week. This one alone was worked on both Friday and Saturday night before it was finally posted. Now that my eyes are heavy and my hands are stiff I can finally get some sleep. Goodnight.

 Bonus Points: What novel do I reference in today’s entry?

Comments (3) »