Monday, March 13, 2006

Here Comes the Story of the Hurricane...

Been just swamped with work and personal stuff (like condo-buying) and so I haven’t written much about class. Today we talked for about half the time about some of the “urban legends” to come out of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Mostly we focused on these photos. The other half we talked about illegal immigration. It was, to me, a thoughtful conversation but it probably didn’t take us where we needed to go as a class. Not that I know exactly what I mean by that. Clearly, issues like immigration are rife with language/power stuff, but without a text we could all examine, the conversation quickly got into other areas. And I pontificated—mostly because I like having political discussion—but now I’m uneasy with the extent to which I talked. And I worry that my plea for responses seemed ham-handed at best. Who wants to respond to a teacher who just made a point that clearly addressed his political positions? Just nod and get out.

I give the class credit for putting up with it. And perhaps there was a time when I would have thought that a class like today’s was good or beneficial. I don’t think it was bad by any means, but the more productive conversations by far have been those where my concerns take a back seat to the texts we can all share.

So Wednesday it’s back to Katrina, specifically to editorials and letters that address how people perceived the actions of New Orleans residents and the federal and local governments. Katrina places us at an interesting nexus of rhetoric and reality. What happens when our leaders’ words don’t match with what we can see on the TV? And how do our political biases shape our responses to these events?

These are the kinds of issues we need to get more into. And we need to get into theory. And we will, what with Foucault and Fairclough and Lakoff all coming up. One issue I see coming is prepping the students for the challenges these authors will present—and to assist them in linking the authors’ ideas to their own. The DAJs will have to play a significant role in this—and that role will have to be documented. We might see more specific DAJ assignments in the weeks to come, which may be something of a relief to the students. In general, it's time for the class to move on to more complicated, challenging things.

1 Comments:

At 10:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I agree that the immigration discussion that we deviated into may not have led us to the type of analysis that we should be making(discussing language in politics rather than just politics), I think that we ended up in an interesting place with the Sex and the City topic. In examining Katrina, we're aiming to observe what happens when a leader's words do not reflect what is seen on TV. We're getting there: We discussed how our society is politically moving towards the election of a female president, or, at least, we say we are. However, it was brought up how women seem to want to rise to power but also set themselves back at the same time.

While we claim to want to see a strong female figure develop out of her political leadership, we revere the women of Sex and the City who establish their stature of power through their sexuality and being "just fabulous".
This is not to say that a woman must sacrifice her feminity and act "like a man" in order to be a leader. A woman can set out to fight for the values of the people while still maintaining an eclectic shoe closet. The closest Carrie Bradshaw ever came to political involvement or even voting was when she dated a politician in season 5...Yes, I admit, I like the show too. I can't help it if the writing is clever.

Where I'm going with this is that I think we demonstrated through our discussion how often it is that the words we speak are not reflected, especially through television. I think we're going to develop this further with the coming Katrina discussions.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home