nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent
Re: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 Are Flagan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is why your readymade-for-teacher-conference aphorisms about educators who educate people to think for themselves stink of the implicit move toward intellectual narrowing and oppression that in turn invokes your frequent anti-intellectual charge. isn't the logic of this sentence a bit like saying that people who encourage free speechstink of the implicit move toward intellectual narrowing and oppression ? what is all this fear of thinking as a valid activity in itself? furious students are usually furious about being ripped off financially for a poor education in terms of production facilities, not enough knowledge, not enough teachers, poor teaching or teachers who could not think generously, or independently enough, to adjust their methods or knowledges to a specific constituency of either an individual student or group of students and their always changing agendas. teaching and learning is a discourse between people at different points in a constellation of exchange. a discourse shifts, mutates, allows for difference, invokes and revokes, gives up,starts again, challenges and shares. one students/teachers stance or passion can be respected and can even be illuminating to others whether subscribed to personally or not:- even if it's perceived as a minority or peculiar position. you might not always get what you want but sometimes you get what you need.isn't the possibility of the unprescribed opening towards an unexpected idea or approach one of the things that any educational discourse should have the potential to provide? How else do you get to know something you didn't know you could know? And how otherwise do non hegemonic knowledges,old or new, get into the official curriculum's discourse? If Are Flanagans angry mail was about an insensitivity to the restrictive conditions of teaching/learning as a commodity exchange wouldn't it more useful to get mad about that rather than attacking an individual who has a different critical perspective on its economically driven limitations? Should some forms of knowledge and knowing be censured if they're not currently fashionable or of immediate market value? Yes, some people are getting paid and others are paying - in some countries, including ones rich enough for it to be free to all. and some rich countries aggressively market their forms of education to students in non western countries at twice the price for their home students, making education a highly profitable business. Maybe the price of having, or not having, knowledge, never mind the restriction of its power through market economics, ironically known as consumer choice, is the issue that is distorting this contest about how and what should be available to know. Maybe the idea of educators who educate people to think for themselves is so sidelined by the economics of education that we 've been conveniently persuaded into thinking of it as a superfluous cult activity which shouldn't be encouraged? mr monica ross http://www.justfornow.net 07970 450514 [EMAIL PROTECTED] # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nettime Re: executed-coat-thief
Hiya, bring me the head of Oliver Cromwell the traitor (buried somewhwere in the precincts of a Cambridge college) The skull is kept in a wooden box in Sidney Sussex college - and supposedly can be seen on request. that I may relive my bowls within that most disapointing of craniums. The good moments in the English revolution like Leveller democracy can't be separated from the bad bits like Cromwell's dictatorship. These are the dialectical twins of a single revolutionary movement. More importantly, since we live in completely different historical circumstances, it is anachronistic for someone today to big up the programme of one particular faction within the Good Old Cause. Almost everything which was radical then has now become conservative. For instance, even though the Levellers were on the extreme-left in the mid-17th century, they did *not* advocate votes for all men let alone for women too. However much we admire their courage and determination, we must also remember that Leveller democracy was the democracy of male property-owners. Not even American neo-conservatives dare openly to support this position today. Rather than refighting ancient faction fights, it's more interesting to question why the English don't have their equivalent of the 14th July and 4th July holidays: an annual celebration of the modernising revolution. Even though it happened over three centuries ago, our ruling elite is still embarassed by this inspirational moment in our history. Apart from it being so cold in mid-winter, I like the suggestion that we should celebrate 30th January: the day in 1649 when the tyrant king was executed for his crimes against the people. If nothing else, this date would prevent the holiday's recuperation for an official ceremony which included the current royal family... Up the Republic!! Later, Richard --- Dr. Richard Barbrook Hypermedia Research Centre School of Media, Arts Design University of Westminster Watford Road Northwick Park HARROW HA1 3TP www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk landline: +44 (0)20 7911 5000 x 4590 mobile: 07879-441873 --- Plagiarism is necessary. Progress implies it. - Isidore Ducasse, Comte de Lautréamont. --- The HRC is involved in running regular cybersalons at the ICA in London. If you would like to be informed about forthcoming events, you can subscribe to a listserver on our website: www.cybersalon.org. # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent
monica ross wrote: Yes, some people are getting paid and others are paying - in some countries, including ones rich enough for it to be free to all. And in some countries, it *is* free for all. Funnily enough, in France for example, the idea of the 'student as consumer', dictating what he or she wants to be taught, seems to be practically nonexistent, and there is a great deal less anti-intellectualism. Ben # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent
the irony of this all is that most 'new media' programs -- as in the ones suffering from discontents (and they certainly do, in large part because their terrain is ageing 'in internet years') -- are more akin to polytechnic programs than humanities departments. as such, they *do* tend to be more practical than philosophical in their orientation. but many among their faculty were weaned on new-economy expectations about their own careers and therefore tend to see themselves in terms that are more philosophical than practical. as a result, i suspect that many of the discontents diagnosed stem not from students but, rather, from the teachers for whom the faithless description 'training HTML I think that Ted Byfield's quote above really hit the nail on the head. New Media depts. Suffer from the polytechnic field they are inevitably engulfed in. Many students have already decided that entering into this department is a career move and hardly have the patience to hear about esoteric intellectualism as they are quite convinced that it will have next to know applicability in their plan (which is generally an accurate statement.) I don't believe it is advisable for Trebor to generalize his experience to a demonization of American students vs the ever so valuable European will to learn. I mean lets face it, the US academic system is so vast and varied that it is inevitable that the student consumer approach will pervade. (not that I support such an approach necessarily). However, I do think that Trebor's concern over anti-intellectualism is very important to raise. With the Schwarzenneger victory over in California, we see yet another example of the working class millionaire. He may be rich but he plays everyday people in films and tv. Even when Bush Jr. was running for election, his PR team managed to present an image of a schlepping working class guy who managed a struggling oil company and down-and-out baseball team. While it seems absolutely insane for this to be believed: it is! He appeared far more working class than Gore let alone the stiff, consumer advocate Nader. Somehow, class tension tends to manifest in a skepticism towards stuffy intellectuals. Intellectuals (and I don't have nearly as much antipathy for them as Mr. Flagan) could really use a PR team. But what would that require? Possibly having things to say that are important to everyday people. Maybe having a visible platform to discuss ideas (Possessing some aspect of popular media might be nice.) Maybe being relevant and possessing humility. Looking into Alexis De-Tocqueville in his Democracy in America, you find a clear analysis of this dilemna. And I feel it is a dilemna. Currently, we are witness to the incredible advantage the right wing has in positioning themselves as the everyday people's party. It is used over and over again. Contract with America?? I don't particularly think those weened on October magazine and Critical Inquiry have even conceived of themselves as bowing down to a people's critical theory but it would be nice. Or not. I am not sure. Ok. Some intellectuals might be a waste of time. But for those that are not, alas, new strategies are in order! Generally I find the likes of Michael Moore who manages to popularly voice critique a signpost for radical strategies. For intellectuals. I suspect this issue is larger than the classroom. Tip top, nato -Original Message- From: monica ross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent Re: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 Are Flagan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is why your readymade-for-teacher-conference aphorisms about educators who educate people to think for themselves stink of the implicit move toward intellectual narrowing and oppression that in turn invokes your frequent anti-intellectual charge. isn't the logic of this sentence a bit like saying that people who encourage free speechstink of the implicit move toward intellectual narrowing and oppression ? what is all this fear of thinking as a valid activity in itself? furious students are usually furious about being ... # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nettime A Puff Piece on Wikipedia (Fwd)
Theory is necessary, but practice has a much greater ethical value than theory. It is your actions that determine which side you are really on. Ben btw the stained glass of notre dame were paid by different guild of paris as it seems so gratefull to sponsor zuch nice material for each publicly 'named' corporation (it was not ze same for the walls) the parisian diocese did a competitive examination based on such theory : holding an enquiry on the quality ov service done to the population ov paris. from the outset some 'activity' az butchery were juge not clean enuf for the challenge, but parisan prostitution then ? probleme was to judge ov quality ov service..the casuistry was so much touchy the case was send to rome only rome status that really not, guilde of prostitution cant remain in list, wonder which one ov theory or practice have ze last word here cause to go to rome coming back take a lot of time then, enuf i suppose for the diocese for not to much lost his time in begining his inquiry # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent
Nato Thompson wrote: (...) Intellectuals (and I don't have nearly as much antipathy for them as Mr. Flagan) could really use a PR team. But what would that require? Possibly having things to say that are important to everyday people. Maybe having a visible platform to discuss ideas (Possessing some aspect of popular media might be nice.) Maybe being relevant and possessing humility. I wonder - what would this discussion look like if instead of intellectuals it were to analyse say specialists and/or professionals. Who do you (plural) regard as intellectuals anyway? It seems such a vague term, and the definition of the group it actually refers to may vary much on the point of view and value system one choses to apply. But if we talk about professionals and/or specialists I may discuss the language they use, the auto-referenciality, the group dynamics, the mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion, and other topics possibly relative to how professionals and specialists operate and how they relate to the world. And that might actually result in one possible response to why do the so called people and masses distrust and misunderstand the specialists and the professionals (and vice versa, why do the professionals and specialists distrust the masses). I also wonder... Are politicians really intellectuals and/or professionals and/or specialists ? Are highschool teachers intellectuals and/or professionals and/or specialists ? Are lobbyists intellectuals and/or professionals and/or specialists (or non or all)? Does it depend on their motivation? Does it depend on their sincerity? Does it depend on the fact they do or not write their own speaches? Can persons who don`t write a single word they say in public be considered intellectuals or professionals or specialists (or non or all)? Can a public image possess humility? Who is everyday people? Looking into Alexis De-Tocqueville in his Democracy in America, you find a clear analysis of this dilemna. And I feel it is a dilemna. Currently, we are witness to the incredible advantage the right wing has in positioning themselves as the everyday people's party. It is used over and over again. Contract with America?? I don't particularly think those weened on October magazine and Critical Inquiry have even conceived of themselves as bowing down to a people's critical theory but it would be nice. Or not. I am not sure. Ok. Some intellectuals might be a waste of time. But for those that are not, alas, new strategies are in order! Generally I find the likes of Michael Moore who manages to popularly voice critique a signpost for radical strategies. For intellectuals. I suspect this issue is larger than the classroom. So the discussion of intellectuals is about left wing intellectuals, or am I missing something? So the right wing persons are not intellectuals, or am I missing something? As a student I see very little point in striving to become an intellectual, but I also see as little point in the so called anti-intellectualism. For, as I said, it is a term so highly sensitive to the value system and the point of view and even moods of the person who uses it, that it seems to me irrelevant. Yes, I understand the need to always sharpen ones skills (intellectual, emotional, artistic, scientific, ecc.) so that one can better understand the situations, act in relation to them and communicate to others. But the ways to do that are so varied in todays society of numerous specializations, instrumentalisations and commercializations that I prefere to see my own self-improvement or education or whetever you may call it as an open ended and continuous rather then goal-oriented research. It is not about convincing anyone I am or am not an intellectual, it is not about who I am, it is what am I considered, it is about what I learn, understand, and do each day that counts, in itself, to me. How I make money will probably be something apart from that and only in some way connected. Now that I look back at my teachers I realise at best they were links and linkers. And that is the most a teacher as far as I am concerned should strive for - to offer many and various links to information, to offer many and various possible interpretations of information, and tools for interpretation, and questions, and doubts, and a place (classroom) where all that and more can be tested and confronted. The teacher should, IMO, in a way, maybe, be just an older student, who has spent more time on a project and so can help along someone who is only starting. This is an attitude I sometimes encountered amongst SOME OF the people who study and develop information (and other) technologies (certainly not all). Thank you for your attention. NULL # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL
Re: nettime New Media Education and Its Discontent
Nato Thompson: For intellectuals. I suspect this issue is larger than the classroom. It is. For a full accounting of anti-intellectualism, I think we'd have to go back thousands of years. At least as far back as Plato, who in his dialogue Theatetus tells what was already an ancient story about Thales of Miletus, founder of Greek philosophy: Theodorus, a witty and attractive Thracian servant girl is said to have mocked Thales for falling into a well while he was observing the stars and gazing upwards; declaring that he was eager to know the things in the sky, but that what was behind him and just by his feet escaped his notice. The most basic reason for the anti-intellectualism of all periods and cultures is, I suppose, that intellectualism is nothing more than a relatively rare condition rooted in a physical and/or psychological abnormality. Intellectuals are often persecuted for the exactly same reason that albinos are often persecuted in Mali. For a vivid description of the principle involved here, see The Painted Bird by Jerzy Kosinski. It is true that those so afflicted are often considered in some cultures to be in contact with higher truths and pursuits, or touched by God in some way. But the same applies to mental deficients and the insane, and I think history shows that the common people have never quite been able to distinguish between these three categories. All of them are, to use an old American dialect word, tetched. I don't think it is possible to argue invincibly against this view that intellectuals are truly more creative than others, given that most intellectual production tends to be so utterly predictable. Tired cliches like fill in the blank and its Discontents are the norm, not The Exception insert the usual Agamben citation here. And every one of the thousands of times I have heard some pundit intone that the Chinese characters for crisis mean dangerous opportunity, I am tempted to respond with the equally valid observation that the Chinese word for nerd is written using characters that mean book idiot. In the rare instance that some intellectual does actually come up with something truly new, her professional colleagues usually attack with a ferocity that would have put Kosinski off his lunch. Examples are too numerous to be worth citing, but the first one that comes to my mind (perhaps because of Arnold Schwarzenegger) is the case of a now- famous geologist from Graz, Austria named Alfred Wegener. His radical new theory of continental drift got him banished from academia. If the United States of America is to be singled out for its anti- intellectualism, as it has been here, I would suggest the obvious reason that certainly did not escape de Tocqueville but that seems nevertheless to have escaped us so far: America, at least at the time de Tocqueville wrote, was a democracy. Democracy means, literally, rule by the common people, and the common people do not employ intellectuals any more than they employ court jesters. As I suggested recently in another post, intellectuals as a class are the product of patronage. Patronage is an affair of the élite. If their employees, the intellectuals, have higher prestige among the common people in Europe than they do in the USA, that is probably because titled nobility and aristocracy are still present there as they are not in the USA, which was in fact founded by a revolution against that sort of thing. But take heart, fellow intellectuals. The American counterrevolution is just about complete, and a hereditary dynasty of Georges is back on the throne. That long nightmare, the American Revolution, is just about over. Magazines like The Atlantic, which once published the likes of Mark Twain, are now praising time-honored institutions like nepotism and the British nanny, squeezed in between ads for Lockheed-Martin, wealth management services, and timesharing arrangements on Gulfstream jets. The market for other expensive toys, like American intellectuals, has clearly never been better. There may soon be opportunities in America even for a court jester or two. Kermit Snelson # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
