Media Literacy and Representations of Class

Alright, so one of my suitemates was "strongly encouraged" to attend the Media Literacy and Representations of Class with Dr. Dr.Pepi Leistyna because her History teacher was the coordinator. So, I went with her. I figured it might be interesting or at least provide me with some insight. Well, I don't really feel like either of these things occured. First of all, it was pretty hard to keep up with Dr. Leistyna because that man talks fast. And its not just like he's rambling, oh no no. He talks a mile a minute and it all makes sense. The problem is, by the time you figure out and catch up to what he just said, hes five minutes ahead of you. So, it wasn't bad. Then we watched his "documentary-esque" film, Class Dismissed. Well, I wasn't a fan. I did not enjoy Christensen's article and Dr. Leistyna's film was along the same lines. The film discussed how different TV shows express the working class on 5 different criteria such as poor work ethic, lack of intelligence, etc. Alright, that's all fine. But as my suitemate and I both noticed and discussed, the film that Dr. Leistyna showed was all based on white, sitcoms and only white sitcoms. He did not use any shows that are of a diverse nature nor did he use different media, even though he mentioned both of those in dialouge. He brought up The Cosby Show in discussion as well as how television is not the medium for finding this "portrayal" of working class America. We were discussing how to phrase this in a question but couldn't think of in an appropriate amount of time (we had to leave early to attend our 2:00 classes on time, considering I get locked out of mine if I am late). Its not like shows on television that focus on non white or non mainly white families do not also involve the working class. For example, Sister, Sister, George Lopez, The Cosby Show, The Jeffersons (including all spin offs of Maude), That's So Raven, Smart Guy, Everybody Hates Chris, etc. I realize these focus on African American families, with the exception of George Lopez, but like we have dicussed in class, there are not many television shows that focus on non white families, especially those of Latino or Asain race. I feel like he also limited himself in only using sitcoms. If we are to look outside the spectrum of sitcoms, we are presnted with other shows such as Gilmore Girls, Ugly Betty, Grey's Anatomy, Judging Amy, Smallville, Veronica Mars, etc. All of these shows discuss working class families (some are untraditional families, like Grey's) and all of them deal with a single, working parent...isn't this something you could have focused on Dr. Leistyna?

It also irritated me that people feel the need to interpret everything. There was an individual who made a comment about telelvision shows can give us "unrelaistic" aspects of life/goals. They used Gossip Girl as an example. Now, I am a fan of this show but I know it is just that. I know i have to work for what I get in life and I know the ewards of hard work. I understand that some people just have money but most have to work for it. But most of all, I know that it is fake! I know its a telelvision show and I move on with my life.

Dr. Leistyna also went off on crazy tangents, which made it hard to follow as well. I mean, he started talking about taxes, which was relevant partially but to me, I wished the discussion had been more geared to diversity and more about the portrayal of the working class.

The link below leads to a film review/synopsis of "Class Dismissed"

http://www.ilcaonline.org/ht/d/ArticleDetails/i/52798

Talking Points #4 (Christensen)

Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us
Linda Christensen

Christensen argues that media instills negative messages into our brain at an early age. She expresses how these messages filled with racism, sexism and other negative diversity stereotypes must be identified and “un-learned” so people do not live their wholes lives with the negative messages they received as a child.

“In this passage and others in her dialogue with Dorfman, Justine displayed discomfort with prying apart her identity and discovery where she received her ideas; yet she also grudgingly admitted how necessary this process was if she wanted to move beyond where she was at the time.”
This quote stuck out to me because I feel like everyone does this at their lives, whether it be small and minor reflections or large and life changing. Personally, I have gone through a large and life changing experience where I had to look at myself and determine various things. This process ended with me losing 4 out of 5 of my closest friends from high school over the span of two years because I did not conform to the “norm” and stuck to my opinions. This to me has been a decision that I have thought a lot about and even though I lost my closest friends over it, have never regretted. I feel like it has made me a stronger and better person. In those two years, I also underwent changes in a personal way and through my family, which have contributed to me becoming the person I am today. Again, I am thankful for those experience and even though they seemed impossible to get through when they were occurring, I know I would not be half the person I am today without them. Mainly, I am grateful I underwent such a “process” at an “early” age because it means I have more of my life to live with the outlook I have now and can make more of a difference then if it had happened latter in my life. Granted, it made me grow up a lot faster than I would have liked but regardless, I am still thankful.

“ ‘Look, Ursula the sea witch is ugly and smart. Hey, she’s kind of dark looking. The young, pretty ones only want to hook their man; the old pretty ones are mean because they are losing their looks.’ ”
Alright. First of all, this quote bothered me because The Little Mermaid was my favorite Disney movie as a child. Who knows how many times I’ve watched it but never once did I think of it in this context. The characters physical appearance did not trigger anything inside of me. I simply watched it because I liked the story, the songs and I loved to swim. Therefore, I loved the movie. I never, ever regarded anything I watched as sending off negative messages about any time of racism, sexism, etc. I watched the movies and enjoyed their stories. I mean, I watched Aladdin along with The Little Mermaid and regarded them as the same time of story. The skin color or portrayal of sexes did not come to my mind and have had no affect on me. I would like to think I am a very open person to diversity and I grew up on Disney movies. Obviously, the family environment is going to have an influence on your thoughts on diversity. By no means am I saying anything against anyone’s family environment but I know I was raised to treat everyone equally. Granted, I did not experience a diverse culture until I came to college, as my hometown is predominately white. Nonetheless, I am open to diversity; I do not treat people different to any factor (race, gender, religion, etc.). The only reason I would treat someone differently is if I have a personal issue with them and then it doesn’t matter if you are the most powerful person or the weakest. I mean, its not like I was naïve as a child. I knew that not everyone wasn’t like me but it just didn’t matter to me; a person was a person and we are all different so what did it matter if one of those differences was skin color, religion, gender, etc..

“Students have also said that what they now see in cartoons, they also see in advertising, on prime time TV, on the news, in school. Turning off the cartoons doesn’t stop the sexism and racism. They can’t escape, and now that they’ve started analyzing cartoons, they can’t stop analyzing the rest of the world. And sometimes they want to stop. Once a student asked me, ‘Don’t you ever get tired of analyzing everything?’”
Ok, I get it. Its like once you see a bumper sticker somewhere and find out what it means, you see it everywhere (I know, poor comparison) but you can choose to stop. Not everything in the world is made to be important nor diverse but simply made for enjoyment; things you don’t have to think about. I mean, how many stupid movies come out every year? And I totally understand how everything should be made to be diverse to promote diversity and express how important it is for everyone to be equal. I totally agree. But going to the extent of expressing how the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are “pointless” simply because it is about a bunch of talking, ninja fighting turtles is a bit extreme. Diversity aside, its made for pure enjoyment, like any for of media that we see. If these students found this cartoon to be “pointless” I can only imagine that they would find nearly every show on television pointless. I mean, why bother having a show about a fictional family who do not talk about diversity all the time on television? If we cut all the media that was “pointless” I’m sure we would just be left with the news, which to some/most people would also be considered “pointless.”

Ok, don’t get me wrong. I understand where Christensen is coming from and I think as many shows as possible can incorporate diversity. It should be effortless but meaningful. However, I think she takes this to the extreme. I personally have never had an affect of watching cartoons/Disney movies as a child. Then again, I am a white female from a middle class family so maybe because of those attributes I did not get a negative influence from those shows. The way I see it is that everything in moderation can’t hurt you. I didn’t watch excessive cartoons as a child so maybe that plays into the role as well. But I mean, it’s the same with how everything is all “organic” now. I work in a grocery store and literally, I have seen gluten free, sugar free and probably something else “free” Oreos. (I think they are called chocolate crisp crème cookies). Like…seriously? Call me old fashioned but sometimes nothing beats a good Oreo at the end of the day. I mean, I enjoy fruit and Luna bars as much as the next girl but at some point, I think again we just get too extreme. I think its great that they make gluten free and sugar free products because people are allergic to gluten or diabetic but simply getting them because you want to shield your child from “everything awful” in the world just doesn’t seem like it’s the only and best way to parent a child. Its not a horrible method but its sickening to me have these methods shoved in my face more and more. Who knows, by the time I have children maybe the trend will be to eat solely cardboard.
Ok…to move on from my huge rant, there was one other issue that bothered me with this article; the lack of positive diversity examples. Christensen provided the black Cinderella example but then it just kind of…subsided. If you want to get into extremes, I’m sure I can’t point out diversity in a Disney movie. I mean, in The Little Mermaid, a regular, non-merman human falls in love with a mermaid. Granted, they have the same skin color but they are from different world. In Beauty and the Beast, a regular human falls in love with, well a beast. Yes, these movies set up “false hopes” about life but its not like they are oblivious to the world in some way, shape or form. I mean, are we trying to say movies about talking cars or animals are better? Or, here’s a good one. Hannah Montana. Essentially, if you want to get particular, it is not teaching kids that its “ok” to lead two lives and not be true to who you are? (At least, that’s what I get from watching it with my cousin a few times) One cartoon I did think of was The Flintstones. Both Fred and Barney are “overweight” men and are married to attractive and skinny females. But is this mentioned in the article? I think not…

And I apologize for how long this is but I am in a car, on my way to Arlington to visit my brother so I was quite bored and just kept typing.

Youtube timeee

Sooo
I was on youtube...and wasn't looking for videos on diversity but they just kind of fell into my lap. They are quick, brief but I thought it was interesting. I tried to figure out how to put in my blog for like 2 minutes but I got frustrated and just stopped trying because it's probably wicked easy. So here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al5Euju-rOg

There are other videos too that go along with the IBM company. I saw links for ones for African Americans, women, Aboriginal, East and South Asian, people with disabilities, etc., Pretty interesting. They even have a religious accomadations video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nL-IBE5NZXA&feature=related ).

This is from the IBM website as well, discussing their diversity committment:
http://www-03.ibm.com/employment/us/diverse/?sa_campaign=message/aimm/all/aimm

Talking Points #3 (Carlson)

Gayness, Multicultural Education and Community
Dennis Carlson

Carlson argues that it is in the power of educators to teach students (and everyone for that matter) that individuality should be celebrated and not supressed. Everyone should learn about differences in society and learn to act with them and not against them.

"It is also a community with a less benign face, one that maintains a dominant culture through oppressive tactics used to keep Others 'in their places.'...refer to this as a community organized around the 'will to purify'..."
This quote originally stuck out to me because of the word choice. The word benign sticks out to me because I initially always relate it to cancer. So, when I was reading this sentence and came upon 'benign' my mind referred itself to cancer and I had to stop reading the sentence. It took me a few times to get threw the sentence without taking benign out of its current context but this sentence still stuck with me. So, I made a lose connection that the author could be referring to how "gayness" is the "benign" tumor on the body of society. Like...when its worded that way, for me, it really just makes me disgusted with how people think.
The other part of the quote (the fragment from the next sentence of the text) was what also popped into my mind when i read "benign." Again, I connected it to cancer but its like saying not matter how much radiation, chemo & other treatments we throw at this "stuff" it keeps coming back. Its like saying no matter how much we fight to have unequal rights remains for those who are gay, they still insist on being gay! I feel like that conversation takes place in a big room in Texas full of older, die hard conservative men, smoking cigars and talking about "the good old days."

"The commonsense perspective on language is that words refer to or stand for things, so that it does not really matter what you call these things. But words do not meraly stand in for 'things.' They emerge out of and take on meaning within particular discourses and practices."
First off, I thought it was great how he clarified his word usage before he really got deep into discussion. More so to the point, I feel like this quote is the epitome of our entire class. Just because there might be more than one word to describe a person does not mean you get to decide what they want to be called. This reminds me of that other article/poem we read in class, "For the white person who wants to know how to be my friend" as well as the video Dr. Bogad posted on her blog. Races often assign names to other races without knowing them. Its automatic judgement. And I really shouldn't limit that to races--everyone does it for their opposite. Whether thats skin color, gender, socio-economic class, culture, etc., So, like I said, I feel like this quote was almost written for our class. Every day we learn how to address individuals based on their prefernces as a person first, attributes second, not attributes first, person second.

"Straight women, because they have developed their own critique of patriarchy and because they can relate to marginalization, have generally been most supportive of the gay movement. The challenge is to engage straight men in a deconstructive analysis of how they understand 'being straight' in ways that involve treating women and gays as Others."
I really like this whole surronding section. I thought Carlson's analysis on why different genders "respond" to the gay atmosphere the way they do was interesting. I also think its interesting to think of how women are more supportive because they too had to earn (and still have to earn) their equality among men and therefore society. Its like the male gender is that one person who always tries to make you feel like you aren't worthy, like their problems are bigger than yours when in actuallity you are not only a better person but have actually overcome more obstacles in your life and have a better outloook than the person who has had evetything handed to them. Now, I'm not saying one gender/race/class/culture is better than any, I was just using an example. So, I will use another as well. Ok, so this also made me think of the show Exiled on MTV. Its the one where they "exile" the Super Sweet 16 girls off to poorer,more unfortunate countries to actually learn how to appreciate life. So I thought of that show because here you have citizens of a country who have to do anything they can to surive and have completely different customs then we do but they are still happy and are overjoyed just to be with their family. And then you have this bratty 18 year old girl who comes to your country in her Gucci outift and complains about a mterial object that the people she is living but have never even heard of. I know, its a stretch but its the villagers are the people who do not have equal rights (gays) and the girl who is exiled are the ones with the rights telling the villagers they cant have any rights (govt, society). I dont know...it just seems totally crazy to me.


I dont really know if I have any more feedback...I kind of just said everything I was feeling in my quotes. And I realized I said 'like' a lot and for that I apologize. I wasn't a big fan of Carlson's writing style but it wasn't too bad to get through it. The beginning felt like a lot of other articles we have read where it is addressing how the article will discuss how a groupf of people aren't getting treated equally. I thought it brought up some good points, mainly around the quotes I picked out but I'm sure there are a bunch of other ones that demonstate better or even clearer points. I guess to summarize this I would only be able to say what I have been thinking after every article we read. What is so difficult about treating everyone in the country equally? Im not saying make them un-individualistic by any means. Simply, appreciate everyone's differnces but don't turn around and use those differences against them, especially because its not a legit reason to. ( I don't think it is anyway)

Talking Points #2 (Rodriguez)

Aria


Richard Rodriguez



Rodriguez argues that language barriers in a classroom can end up taking over and breaking up a once close family. To take this out of the prespective of the article, issues and changes with one individual can often transpond over to other individuals, resulting in a "tremor" in a once fluid system.

"Without question, it would have pleased me to hear my teachers address me in Spanish when I entered the classroom. I would have felt much less afraid. I would have trusted them and responded with ease."

I picked this quote because I think everyone can feel this way, whether or not you do not speak the language of the majority. For example, like most older citizens, my grandparents have all had their fair share of medical setbacks. So when it comes down to me listening to a doctor ramble off his procedure that he is about to perform on someone I love, I don't feel comforted or confident. I feel scared, aloned and segregated. I feel like the doctors simply come out and talk to families because they have to not because it will help the family rest a little better or inform other citizens of the "wonders" of the medical world. Is this what teachers feel like in a classroom that has non english speakers in it? That they "have" to "try" to explain English to those who don't understand it and not help them because they want to improve their quality of education? And if I feel this way around doctors as a fairly well educated, middle class white girl, I can't even being to imagine how alone, terrified and helpless a young child of a different culture feels like in a prodominately English speaking classroom.


"In an instant, they agreed to give up the language (and sounds) that had revealed and accentuate our family's closeness."


I feel like this quote stuck out to me because it is basically saying the the majority race "demands" everyone else to give up what makes them different and their own person to conform to what is assumed to be a "better" race. (By better, I mean more prodominent and more accepted--I do not by any way mean that the white race is the best or bettet than any other race.)

"We remained a loving family, but one greatly changed. No longer so close; no longer bound tight by the pleasing and troubling knowledge of our public separateness."


This quote stuck out to me because I think it could be an example of "long term" effects of teaching in a non-Delpit style. To me, teaching in a non-Delpit style would be having every child in your classroom, regardless of anything, learn all the same ways. So, if you have a child do this (like force them to learn English and change their culture in doing so) I believe this to be non-Delpit. I think this could an effect of that teaching style as it would make the child (or children in this case) more like everyone else, which segregates them from their parents. Its like sending your kids off to school in the morning to find out that they have been "replaced" with just another white American child. It really seems to just strip a child of their individuality almost because the teacher just doesn't want to deal with their differences--this is something I hope never to intentionally do in my classroom.




Overall, I actually enjoyed this article. I thought it was interesting to see how separated a family becomes out of their use of language. But when its put into perspective, it all kind of made sense. You often seen families of other cultures that are closer together--even as a comnunity. But when you look at white families, you do not get that same impression. Yeah, they might know their neighbors but they don't interact as much as other cultures do. And within a "nuclear" family, there are those huge separations; children at school, who are involved in activities and clubs, parents who are constantly at their jobs or running errands. And, as the society becomes more and more based on money, whenever people are not at school or working, they are out spending their money. Its not like they save it and go on a family vacation and actually spend their time together--they probably go off and have their own activities. Its really unfortunate and I think everyone could see how separate their families are in reading this article. It also made me thankful for how close my family is but I know how hard we work to keep it that way as well considering my brother now lives in Arlington after 4 years of college in D.C. and I live at school. Granted, its half an hour away but I am really close to my parents so its still a big deal. One last point what that iwas interesting to see a family "broken up" by a language issue--usually you see this happen with drugs, drinking or just other forms of trouble. But then again, maybe those are more "white" based problems and families of different culture may also experiance these problems but much more complicated ones that can be cured with rehab or moving to a different town.


On a side note, I googled the word "aria" and found out it was a term used in music. It was often a way of a melody, usually in refrence to singing. However one alternate definition included: "to describe a self-contained piece for one voice usually with orchestral accompaniment" I feel like this connects to the article in that Richard's original voice, his native language, was that aria. It was self contained and alone but it completed the orchesta of all different voices. By "americanizing" himself, I feel like that orchestra is still complete but not nearly as interesting.

Talking Point #1 (Kozol)

Amazing Grace
The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation

Jonathan Kozol

Kozol argues that people living in the poorest oparts of the country still deserve to have quality lives (good hospitals, streets they can walk down without being asked to buy drugs, etc.) but do not get these lives. These people also get any shot of hope or freedom taken away from them either by disease or other hardships they face (welfare getting taken away).

"He doesn't answer me but smiles at the bears affectionately. 'I saw a boy shot in the head right over there,' he says, a moment later, in a voice that does not sound particularly sad, then looks up at me and asks politely, 'Would you like a chocolate chip cookie?' "
1.) I don't think I can verbally describe this quote but when I read it, it just stayed with me.

"A nurse who works there [Harlem Hospital], according to one press accountant, carries a card in her wallet with the message: 'Do not take me to Harlem Hospital in an emergency.' The relative merits if Brinx-Lebanon, however, do not offer Mrs. Washington much solace. 'It's the difference between terrible and worse than terrible.' "
1.) This quote is basically expressing the bottom line of how terrible the living conditions are in the place that Kozol is visiting. It appears that going to the hospital is worse than trying to take care of it yourself.

"I think they [drug dealers] hate you because you are not in their condition. 'I am in hell an you are not and so I hate you and I have to try to bring you down to where I am.' I feel pity for them and fear because they're lost."
1.) This quote gave me back hope after reading this article. It showed me that amid the mess that is described, there are still hopeful people in the world who literally have nothing to hope about it. It gave me back hope.

I felt that this article was easy to read. It was written well and the language was not complicated. I also felt like it kept my interest. Even though it was about 15 pages, it did not feel that long. As horrific as most of the details were, for some reason it just made me want to keep reading. I guess I was searching for the "hope" in the article.
I also felt it was hard to really describe the quote I picked. A lot of things stuck out to me in the article but to be able to write down what exactly it was about each quote that had such an influence on me was very difficult.
In addition, I am not used to reading about this type or material and literally felt like I was reading a script from a movie setting. Its not that I am naive or that I have never been to a part of the world that is like the places desecribe in the article. I guess a part of me just wants to hold on to that hope and not face the harsh reality that is described in the article. I guess I want to believe that even if life is horrible, that is some beacon of hope that gets people through their day.

On a separate note, when I started to read this article, I was prepared for a liberal lesson in the form of education reform. But I was suprised. As I read Goldberg's article first, I had a rough outline of how Kozol's article was going to read but it was not the case at all! Its almost difficult to see how Kozol could write the type or material Goldberg described when at the same time he produced this article.

Talking Point #1 (Goldberg)

110 People Who Are Screwing Up America

Bernard Goldberg



Goldberg argues that Jonathan Kozol is messing the minds of Americans by enforcing a more liberal approach be applied to the field of education. Goldberg states that Kozol's practices and beliefs in a liberal society are not only praised but placed into effect in school systems, who now turn out children who have recieved biased education.



"Yet, what be even worse, and in the end even more dnagerous, is that so many of today's schools are turning out "smart" kids with little understand of how precious their heritage is."

1.) I felt that this quote was important in conveying the vast diaster Goldberg feels that Kozol's beliefs are contributing to the edcuation system.



"He [Kozol] says teachers should talk to their students about the architect of the Holocaust, Adolf Eichmann, whose 'own preperation for obedient behavior...was recieved in German public schools' ---which produced 'good Germans, or good citizens, as we in the United States would say.' "

1.) This is important in that it shows an example of Kozol's thinking.

2.) This is also important in that you get to see how Kozol thinks. He obviously uses the influence of other cultures (like Cuba as well). He also feels like the effect of "good thinking" isn't that important if he uses Eichmann as a example of a "good" student.



"All the book's model lessons aim to teach little children to withstand America's state-sponsored brainwashing and to open them up to the self evident truths of feminism, enviornmentalism, and the Left's account of history."

1.) This quote is important as it states Kozol's direct ideas and goals.

2.) This quote also stuck out to me for another reason. If Kozol is so anxious to have education be solely based on Liberal fact, is he not creating the same enviornment that education is already in? He would be closing off education to any other ideas, which is what he argues already exsists! A better idea would be to integrate liberal ideas into the exsisting form of eduction but still keep it open as to get a well rounded group of ideas and not just from one source.


Overall, this wasn't my favorite article to read. When it comes to politics, my interests drain a bit. Don't get me wrong--I'm interested in the upcoming election and the canidates but when it gets down to the "boring" politics, I just can't focus on it. Therefore, when this article started quoting Sol Stern, my focus went right out the window. I had to read this part over a few times to fully grasp what they were talking about.
On a different aspect, I thought Goldberg's writing style was easy enough to follow and the section was short enough where I could keep an interest and get through the article with little to no hassle (excluding the Stern quote).