I really liked the definition of humanity given in the Hansen and Mitchell reading. They seem to be very welcoming of all voices in a conversation, which I think gives graduate students a place to converse, unlike some of the other books I've read for other courses. I would like to think that by making "media culture" such an encompassing field that it is not just describing something, but also practicing an open attempt at honesty and acceptance of difference. Doing so opens up conversations and avoids binaries, which I dislike. I don't think I see any methods that aren't applicable to media culture.
My own interests are fairly broad. I am always interested in technology, but I'm also interested in pedagogy and the classroom, as well as how things (from culture to batteries powered by potatoes to whatever else) work.
The wiki is going less than well for me at the mo'. I struggle with paying attention at times (a shocker!) and I struggle with overstimulation, which I am afraid may be a side effect of this course. I will, however, power through. I find that I enjoy the class discussion a lot, but not in the way it works on D2L. I like that we can have asynchronous conversations, but I don't like the way they are threaded on D2L. I would take more initiative in the discussion if I had more time, but just reading all of the discussions takes hours.
I suppose I'm not encouraging participation much, but I could try to do so. The readings have helped me be analytic, as well as my conversations with my classmates both online and in person. So, since those conversations are participation, participation may be the next goal on my list of goals.
2 comments:
What in Mitchell and Hansen's definition of humanity -- and of Media Studies -- *requires* them to be more open to the range of conversations you describe, Anna? What in their definition requires them to seek triangularity and turn against binaries?
In your writing, I'd like to see you (as I noted in response to a post below) address the WHYs of the statements you make, really laying out why you like (or not) aspects of the readings or our practices in class.
(And, meanwhile, I hope that the ning site, if I can get it working tonight!, will be a more congenial discussion place for you.)
I don't think that I actually meant to use the word humanity. I'll have to see if I have an older copy of this saved on my computer or paper (I usually compose in Word first or on a legal pad) to see what I was actually going for.
Post a Comment