WELCOME

Welcome to our Eng 100 Blog “Conversation Beyond the Classroom”! The title of this blog refers to the community of active readers & collaborative learners we are creating by sharing our academic writing for Eng 100 with each other + a larger group of students, instructors, academics, and just about anybody who chooses to follow our blog! When you write and post your reader responses here (and, later, as you write your essays for the course), I encourage you to use this audience to conceptualize who you are writing for and, most important, how to communicate your ideas so that this group of academic readers and writers can easily follow your line of thinking. Think about it this way: What do you need to explain and articulate in order for the other bloggers to understand your response to the essays we’ve read in class? What does your audience need to know about those essays and the authors who wrote them? And how can you show your readers, in writing, which ideas you add to these “conversations” that take place in the texts we study?
As students of Eng 100, you will use this blog to begin conversations with other academic writers on campus (students and instructors alike). We become active readers of each other’s writing when we comment on posts here. And, best of all, we are using this space to share ideas! I encourage you to use this blog to further think through the topics and writing strategies you will be introduced to this quarter. As always, be sure to give credit to those people whose ideas you borrow for your own thinking and writing (you should do this in the blog by commenting on their post, but you will also be required to cite what you borrow from your peers/instructors if and when it winds up in your essays. More details on that later…).
Finally, keep in mind that writing to and for this audience is a good way to prepare for the panel of readers (faculty at WCC) who will be reading and assessing your writing portfolio at the end of the quarter. We hope that as a large group of active readers, we can better prepare each other for this experience. But, in the meantime, let’s have fun with it! I am really excited see how far we can take this together!


--Mary Hammerbeck, Instructor of Eng 100

Friday, February 18, 2011

On Readig a Video Text

What I believe that Robert Scholes, author of, “On Reading a Video Text”, was trying to say, was be questionable and analytical when watching visual media and everyday life. Scholes message could be compared to an Iceberg, that only a small part of an iceberg can be seen above the surface of water, while the rest is submerged. The finish video would be the exposed part of the Iceberg that everyone can see; while the hidden meanings and techniques used in making the video would be the submerged part of the iceberg and that bottom part needs to be analyzed. Scholes talks about different lighting techniques and filters that let us “see the world through jaundiced or rose-colored optics, coloring events with emotion” (par 1); along with, slow motion, close-ups, and music which lend to “visual fascination… [Which] is just one of the matrices of power and pleasure that are organized by video texts” (par2) which gives video text a certain power over viewers that gives, as Scholes puts it, “a defense against the ever-present threat of boredom” (par1). Video texts with all their ability to manipulate reality by using visual effects and other techniques, beats off boredom, by interacting with the viewer on an emotional level, which sends the viewer, hypothetically, into an alternate-universe. Where the viewer gets pulled into a video text on an emotional level, that the viewer creates a world and deeper story by filling in the blanks with their personal knowledge.


Scholes uses a Budweiser commercial as an example and deconstructs the commercial into categories that fall into racism, politic, and country pride. Video text play off of peoples emotions and cultural information, such as racism, politics and country pride, to construct a story and to get pleasure from that story. Scholes states that:
In processing a narrative text we actually construct the story, bringing a vast repertory of cultural knowledge to bear upon the text that we are contemplating. Our pleasure in the narrative is to some extent a constructive pleasure, based upon the sense of accomplishment we achieve by successfully completing this task. By "getting" the story, we prove our competence and demonstrate our membership in a cultural community” (par 4).
In a since, some video texts contains no story or meanings, just random scenes that lack context; the viewer, without realizing it, takes the random scenes and applies their own personal and cultural beliefs, to add context and meaning to the video text, to create a story. By connecting the dots, and creates a story with cultural meaning, the viewer then gets a sense of pride in their competence.


Scholes disputes critics who think Americans lack any culture. Scholes claims that, “many Americans are not without culture; they simply have a different culture… What they really lack, for the most part, is any way of analyzing and criticizing the power of a text” (par 8). What Scholes would like to see from more Americans, even taught in our schools, is critical analysis, which he believes is “necessary to have the tools for ideological criticism… [i]n this age of massive manipulation and disinformation, criticism is the only way we have of taking something seriously” (par 8-9). Scholes believes that greatest patriots will be the ones that question “our ideology critically, with particular attention to the gaps between mythology and practice. Above all, we must start with our most beloved icons, not the ones we profess allegiance to, but those that really have the power to move and shake us” (par9). Scholes wants people to question everything, that manipulation and disinformation lies behind every corner, but for some reason Scholes believes that Government should be excluded. I believe that even our icons that we “profess allegiance to”, Governments, should not be excluded from Scholes list of Icons to criticize. That if we are to criticize our culture, along with our belief systems and society, considering they are icons “that really have the power to move and shake us”, then Governments should be included into the list to question.

No comments:

Post a Comment