Author Archives: Max

About Max

A slightly mature-age student who has returned to study after working several years in TV, in the Script side of things. I'm always eager to learn and cross pollinate old knowledge with new knowledge (and vice-versa). My interests and hobbies include various forms of writing (screenwriting, travel writing), charting the contours of the unconscious (i.e. sleep), finding original personalities, travel, tropical cocktails, breaking out old breakdancing moves when the mood strikes, pointy Italian shoes and a well fitting pair of jeans and much, MUCH more.

Week 4 Symposium – Discussing literacy

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s forum discussed print and network literacies.  Often I’m left reflecting on the similarities between things rather than searching for clear-cut distinctions, particularly so concerning the commonality between technologies.  Literacy – be it print or network – gives us the means to connect in inherently social ways (ideas, narratives, discussion, etc.)  Of course social connection may be the product or byproduct of any given literacy; for example, mechanical (auto) literacy allows us to understand and engage in the workings of our car and not get duped by a dishonest mechanic, but this in itself is inherently social.

I’m also left contemplating on form versus content in various guises, which was certainly something which resonated in last week’s reading, where the ability to apprehend form and learn from it (e.g. how we learn) was explained as double-loop learning by Chris Argyris & Donald Schön.

Form influences content and content can lead to new form (e.g. imagining up a new piece of technology – which can be put into effect), so clearly the relationship is dynamic.  Specifically, I was considering how the form of digital technology (i.e. the internet) and network literacy has influenced our perception of print.

For example, internet and the ease of self-publishing online has seen the precipitous rise of citizen journalism – which brings with it the good, the bad, the bigoted, the uninformed, the weird, etc, etc, etc.  With that, we have come to realise the need to scrutinize the veracity and validity of the information we receive online, which was a focal point in today’s symposium.  Concurrently, we’ve seen the rise of alternative media and political websites and blogs (e.g. Huffington Post, Counter Punch, Dissident Voice, amongst many others) which draw us to the potential bias of corporate mainstream media.

As a result, I believe (I don’t have the empirical evidence to back it up right now… but watch this space!) that the public are generally more aware of the potential fallibility of mainstream newspaper reporting (even those considered more esteemed – the New York Times, and the recent flack the BBC has encountered over its coverage of the recent conflict in Gaza…)

Whenever a new technology is introduced, it seems to bring with it equal parts awe, excitement and suspicion, until it becomes part of normal, everyday life and culture.  For centuries, print was the dominant (only) literary form and print – the newspaper – was arguably deified as a source of veritable truth and expert opinion.  Certainly I think it’s still highly valid and highly respected by many, yet with a competitive or at least alternative news form on the scene – the internet – print has lost some of its prestige and mantle as the veritable mecca for quality news distribution and commentary… something about the decentralisation of things in our (sorry to use the word…) postmodern era?

References:

Chris Argyris: Theories of Action, Double-Loop Learning and Organizational Learning.” http://infed.org/mobi/chris-argyris-theories-of-action-double-loop-learning-and-organizational-learning/. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 July 2013.

Loops, models & learning

Posted on by
Reply

I had not been familiar with Chris Argyris and Donald Schön’s theories prior to reading this overview by Mark K. Smith, but what struck me was the general applicability and currency of their ideas regarding single- and double-loop

Oversight via (self-) reflexivity is the crucial component which distinguishes double-loop learning favourably from single-loop learning, with Argyis and Schön contending that it results in a more profound and substantial learning experience.  Put more simply, knowing how we learn is incredibly useful in guiding as to what we should be learning (and why).

While these theories and their applications were conceived for (professional) organisations – clearly these principles can be applied to individuals as well (as Smith points out).  Certainly this resonated with me as ‘double-loop’ learning, or what I might call ‘self-critique’, forms the cornerstone of psychoanalysis, which is an area I’m very interested in.

Thoughts on network literacy

Posted on by
Reply

Reading through this week’s chosen texts, I was reminded of one of Albert Einstein’s (many) famous quotes … “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.”

I try to practice what I preach whereever possible, as much as I do enjoy learning new words – and sometimes dropping them gratuitously into discussions, just for intellectual lols.  Perspicacity.

It’s also a profesional habit that I’ve had to adopt in the exercise of script editing, where we (editors) have been known to viciously cut, condense and clarify anything which remotely verges on verbosity.  It’s a mandate of the medium.  Mind you, not all such actions necessarily produce better drama, but in a format as rigid as television programming, time and budget are ever-present standover men that often get in the way of the desire to create something of substantial quality and truth.

Anyhow – getting back to this week’s readings.  I found Adrian’s overview of print vs. network literacy very helpful because I find that the way that I learn, before I become practically competent, I have to sufficiently digest the concepts underpinning its use (something of an existential bent…).  Above all, it explained these terms simply, which I appreciated.

More generally, I reflected on the notion of literacy and culture, and how we tend to learn through adopting agreed, socially established, practices.  The advent of print media is now so long behind us that it can be harder to appreciate the historical contexts under which it formed – for what reasons, purposes, etc, etc.  We’re in an interesting time now because we’re still experiencing the rapid evolution of digital media and can track the events (political, economic) which shape its evolution, as they occur.  I suppose that last sentence proves I’m not much of a technological determinist, although it might also be argued by some that much of the technology (as ‘machinery/hardware’) is already formed, and that simply its applications are diversifying.  Ahh… I could argue with myself all day long.

I suppose it’s natural that literacy would be socially-taught because literacy represents the fundamental skill that enables us to interact or engage in social context.  For instance, on the topic of adult illiteracy, issues such as isolation and social exclusion are common themes which arise.

Meanwhile, I found Paul Graham’s reflection on the essay anything but concise.  There are some interesting insights and contexts which are raised, no doubt, but by the time I got to his section on ‘Meander’ and his own confession that “sometimes I tend to meander…” I thought had witnessed a brilliant moment of personal reflection and connection with the author.  And it was at that point, I must admit, that I stopped reading!

Are blogs a means of rediscovering community in the 21st century?

Posted on by
Reply

I just read a terrific article published yesterday in The Guardian, by George Monbiot.

The article discusses the climate of social discordance and intense competition that pervades modern, first-world, civilised (and corporatised) societies. Monbiot sets out to debunk the myths of neoliberalism as a merit-based system which rewards hard work and innovation, and particularly the notion that neoliberalism creates equal opportunities for everyone who adheres to such industrious application.

What I found most interesting is the notion of the cultivation of the individual (as consumer) and how this notion of individual enterprise fundamentally distances us from our fellow citizens and makes us wary of each other.

While it represents a heavily corporate dominated environment (look at Google), the Internet – vis-a-vis blogs and other platforms for community exchange – do offer a popular contemporary platform for us to reconnect outside of the context of commerce or corporate-mediated space. I think this can only be a good thing, if you consider examples that WikiLeaks and most alternative political sites offer as necessary counterbalances to mainstream media (both of these sites much in common with the platform of blogging).

The article ties into much of my other reading at the moment, particularly the notion that neoliberal governance undermines the possibility for collective action, as discussed by Jeremy Gilbert in his book, Common Ground. This economic-centered view of things is also so apparent in much of mainstream reportage and its focus on the quantitive elements of various events (e.g. death tolls, budget forecasts, etc, etc.), which give only the most cursory glance at the affective elements of such events on us as humans. The article took a refreshing qualitative stance and it’s a bit of shame that it was relegated to the lower sections of the The Guardian’s homepage.

If you get the chance, check out the full article here:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/05/neoliberalism-mental-health-rich-poverty-economy

 

References:

Gilbert, J. (2014). Common Ground: Democracy and Collectivity in an Age of Individualism.

Brave, new world …?

Posted on by
Reply

All this blog business is a bit new to me… a little bit scary.

I think I’m an analogue guy at heart and I’ve kept my distance from immersing, or even familiarising, myself with anything apart from the most basic Web applications (I’m currently neck and neck with my grandfather… alright, he’s winning – but NOT by much).

I like wide-open spaces and tactile, tangible things.  Maps, schematics – anything to help me, a technologically averse buffoon, visualise.

Let me convey my current progress using a visual aid.  Here’s a map of the internet, created by Martin Vargic               map_of_the_internet_quadrant_1__by_the9988-d70bbyj

You can view this map in all its glory here: http://jaysimons.deviantart.com/art/Map-of-the-Internet-1-0-427143215

Currently I’m swept up in the Torrenz off the coast of Hastag Peninsula.  It’s murky waters, but I’m determined to find my way to the land they call Creative Commons.  The master of this land, Jimmy Wales, is said to contain some sage WikiAnswers.

If that were an adventure movie I’d watch it.  Something like Lord of the Rings, with a charming protagonist (me), in a battle against Worms and Trojans, with only my helpful and wisecracking sidekick Norton to help me navigate these murky waters (there was originally McAfee too, but he tried to kill Norton, so I had to banish him to the Isle of Spam).

How would you visualise such places?

It could make for an epic adventure…

Watch this space.

Week 1 Symposium

Posted on by
Reply

I thought Adrian touched on some salient points about the division between know what and know how.  Reflecting on my high-school experience, the emphasis was heavily on acquiring a lot of know what and only sometimes was light shed on the process in which we think or learn – and these tended to be the more enjoyable and memorable experiences – at least for me.  I remember excelling in Biology, which was all about know what and rote learning various names, species, standard and static definitions, and so on.  Your success was directly attributable to how much stuff you could cram in in the lead up to an exam.  After studying Biomedical Science at University for a year or so, I grew tired of more of the same; while the knowledge became increasingly specialised, the process was very monodisciplinary and gave very little room to move for a would-be creative mind.

While I use the example of biology, I think this applies to much of the way in which high-school education functions – where knowledge is hierarchial and there is very little way to personalise the way in which you learn as an individual.  I think this is why a lot of students coming straight from high school can find the adjustment to University a difficult one – the sudden freedom, and the imprimatur (particularly in a course like Media) to cultivate your own method for learning (while adhering to certain ‘best practices’).  Certainly this was the case for me.

Perhaps this is the way it must be – learning and unlearning and relearning, acquiring a certain requisite amount of knowledge (through high school) and then taking a step back and learning to become more critical(discerning?) of the knowledge ingested and how it is digested.

Week 1 reading – Blogs in Media Education

Posted on by
Reply

I found it interesting to consider blogs relative to older media (i.e. those existing prior to the advent of the internet) which were similarly designed to faciliate communal exchange; the newspaper comes to mind (classifieds or social pages – or even early examples of dating profiles) might serve as primitive examples of individuals being able to create and disseminate a public persona which is accessible to the general public.

For me, the notion of the audience is central.  A physical medium substantially limits the user’s ability to create and share a public persona, but the limitations of print also protect the individual from privacy issues.  Conversely, through the internet we can create sophisticated and elaborate personas but we’re also taking a greater risk by putting out this information into a slightly unknown arena, where the risk of being hacked or compromised exists.

Blogs also promote a greater level of self-reflexivity and consideration of what an individual might share (about themselves and/or their networks), given its completely transparent quality, as opposed to ‘private’ identities & communities which exist through social media such as Facebook & Twitter.