Monday, April 21, 2014

Communication: Bringing People Together from First Words

Mass media is an ever changing phenomena that has changed peoples lives over and over again. Mass media hasn't always been apart of human life. Mass media today is all electronic interface. When someone wants to spread information they put it on the internet where millions of people can see it. Mass media used to be spread through books, newspapers, and even plays. Print and performances where the interfaces for mass media but technology has changed that. Technology has allowed the media to reach even more people and change more lives. Mass media through technology has allowed the human race to break down the elite culture and create a community that everyone can be a part of.

Mass media and technology hasn't always been part of human life but communication has. People have communicated through speech and script for years before videos and other technological medium came to the public. Communication has many definitions but Mass Media Mass Culture defines communication as "a process involving the sorting, selecting, and sharing of symbols to help a receiver elicit from his or her own mind a meaning similar to that in the mind of the communicator" (Wilson-Wilson 12). Communication is a huge part of the human world and it is always changing. People have been talking forever. Before babies can even talk they communicate with facial expressions and as they grow up they become able to talk to more and more people. This exponential growth of communication has extended over the world now. Jeremy Rifkin brings up this point in his lecture. "With a forager/hunter societies communication only extended to the local tribe in shouting distance...When we went to the great hydraulic agricultural civilisation script allowed us to extend [communication]...We have gone from empathy in blood ties to empathy in religious association ties to empathy based on national identification..." (Rifkin, The Empathic Civilization). Mass media has made it possible to connect to people all over the world. The way we use mass media has helped as well. Communication using symbols has evolved too. In the early ages communication, if not done in person, was though books. "[Before the 14th century] most books were handwritten... In the 15th century the German printer Johannes Gutenberg invented the process of movable type" (Wilson-Wilson 22). In a few centuries books became more popular when the process for making them became easier. Since then, the world has come even further and invented a way to connect through technology.  "Television was invented as a potential replacement for the radio by adding pictures to sound" (Wilson-Wilson 29).  Technology has changed the way people communicate. It has also impacted peoples choices. When there is more information available people start to see controversial topics in a new light.

With the advanced of technological communication, elite culture is diminished. Elite culture is the idea that there are some arts or leisure activities that only a certain group of people can enjoy. Back in time, the elite culture was families with money. These families were able to afford to go to shows and buy art where the common folk might only have a folk story or two to pass down. Education used to be a big part of elite culture. Only the rich were able to get an education and everyone else worked. "But public education paid for from taxation, compulsory to everybody and free at the point of delivery - that was a revolutionary idea... [opposed people] said it's not possible for many street kids and working class children to benefit from public education, they're incapable of learning to read and write and why are we spending time on this?" (Robinson, Changing Paradigms). This gap has since been closed but for so long education belonged to the rich. The rich and poor were always on different ends of the spectrum but technology has allowed society to blend these two groups.  In Press Play Pause, Moby says "50 years ago, people didn't make things. People would go to photography exhibits. They would go to record fairs. They would watch movies. Now everyone is a photographer. Everyone is a musician. Anyone can make a film". Today people take more pictures with their Iphones than a camera. Movies can also be recorded on phones and a simple computer can make music. Almost everyone is equal. There is still a separation in some cultures where technology  is still reserved for the rich and the poor cannot afford it but most of the world is able to share art. This sharing not only eliminates the elite culture but makes way for a new community. A community where anyone can share their art and ideas with the rest of the world. Napster is a music sharing site that has played a part in making the music industry one large community. Sean Parker, co-creator of Napster, tells interviewers "the vision behind Napster, in the very early stages, was to just come up with a system that made sharing of mp3's so easy that a housewife or grandmother in Iowa could do it". Music is one of the biggest communities. People come together for concerts and now they can share music online. Technology made this sharing possible for local people and people miles away. It doesn't matter where the listener is, they can still connect with the music and others who like the same music.

The community created through mass communication and mass media is different than the community of the past. People today worry that this new community doesn't work and will separate people more than bring them together. In the documentary Craigslist Joe, Joseph Garner relays what people think about this community and sets out to prove them wrong. "Some say we have lost the sense of community that used to carry us through tough times" (Joseph Garner, Craigslist Joe). Joe spends the whole month of December relying on kindness from strangers he meets on Craigslist the website. He shows the world that there are still good people who want to help others. They help Joe survive a cold winter and make it back to his family safely. There is still room for improvement in the community but it is there. This community has become peoples identity. Slavoj Zizek says "but I claim in today's capitalism more and more the tendency is to bring the two dimensions together in one and the same cluster. So that when you buy something it is your anti-consumerist duty to do something for others for environment and so on, is already included onto it..." (Zizek, First as Tragedy, Then as Farce). Zizek is saying that the community doesn't extend to only consumers now. The consumers now want a charity or donation to be included in the price of their goods. That way they are helping themselves and their immediate economy as well as less fortunate people in other countries. It may not be the best solution but it connects people. Community is all about connects and the widespread media makes people want to help. The media advertises the problem and companies create products that people want and will give a small portion of the profit to the problem. It might not solve everything but it gets people thinking and involved even if it is the least amount possible. Media has began making connections all over the world. People connect over ideas projected over the internet. Roman Krznaric Believes these connections are just the beginning. "I think we need to be more adventurous in who we try to empathise with. I think we need to empathise with those in power [as well as the misfortunate]. We need to understand how those in power...think about the world and live their lives... Only then are we going to be able to develop effective strategies for social, political and economic transformation" (Krznaric, The Power of Outrospection). Mass media encourages people around the world to connect and try to understand each other. It is a challenge but it is where the world is headed.

Technology has helped the human race in more than one way but communicating is huge. The impact it has already made and the potential it has to change everything is making the world a bigger community. Mass media is just widespread communication. When people know what is happening they are more likely to empathize and do something to help or be involved. Communities in the past may have been close knit and helpful then but now the whole world can be connected. Technology gives people the missing piece. Before there was distance and language barriers between people but technology eliminates them. Online translators let people on opposite sides of the earth talk like they are in the same room. There is so much that has changed and so much that will change as technology and mass media grows. 

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Sympathy vs. Empathy

Sympathy and empathy are often thought to be the same emotion but they are incredibly different. Sympathy is feeling for someone else's loss whereas empathy is the ability to understand and share someone else's emotions. Empathy helps us connect to people where sympathy cannot. In Zizek's lecture, he talks about the idea of donating to less fortunate or buying something that is advertised to help someone. "You don't just buy a coffee in the consumer act. You buy your redemption from only being a consumer... you fulfill a series of ethical duties" (Zizek, First as Tragedy, Then as Farce) . This charity isn't a bad thing but it make people think they did their part and they are done. It's putting a bandage over a bullet wound. It is out of sight and you did something but the problem is still there. Charity comes out of sympathy instead of empathy. If people helped out of empathy they would have to experience what these other people are going through. They would have to go grow coffee beans grown under awful conditions. After they understand what these people go through they can help fix it. Krznaric's lecture on The Power of Outrospection explains how he believes this idea would help us connect with out fellow humans. "We need, for example, empathy museums. A place which is not about dusty exhibits... but an experiential and conversational public space. Where you walk in and in the first room there is a human library where you can borrow people for conversation" (Krznaric, The Power of Outrospection). These empathy museums would allow us to understand each other and connect on a different level. Someone who sees the world one way might hear a story from someone they have nothing in common with and it changes their whole perspective.


Everyone is able to experience empathy at some level. Rifkin studied babies and came up with the conclusion that we all have to experience empathy. "We are actually soft wired to actually experience an other's plights as if we are experiencing it ourselves" (Rifkin, The Empathic Civilzation). People are programed from birth to feel empathy. It is how people communicate before developing a common language. Non-verbal cues and facial expressions can carry whole conversations and convey complex emotions. Others are able to understand this through empathy. They are able to perceive the emotion, understand, and even feel it through empathy. This connects everyone even when people are constantly being separated into different categories. "We still educate children by batches; we put them through the system by age group... Why is there this assumption that the most important thing kids have in common is how old they are" (Robinson,Changing Education Paradigms). Age is not the only thing these kids have in common. The opposite could be true as well. Maybe age is the only thing these kids have in common. The point is that it doesn't matter how people are grouped. Everyone can share connections.

Sunday, March 30, 2014

Sharing Art

Art in all forms has been a way of bringing people together and invoking an emotion. Art will always be used for that, but the way people view art has been changing. There used to be an elite culture associated with arts. The artists were rich and the people who viewed art were too. In order to have the supplies to paint or make a film, someone would need a lot money. Then when the art was displayed in a gallery or in a concert hall, people would dress in their finest clothes and pay to go see it. In Presspauseplay, Moby says "50 years ago, people didn't make things. People would go to photography exhibits. They would go to record fairs. They would watch movies. Now everyone is a photographer. Everyone is a musician. Anyone can make a film". The elite culture has disappeared. Everyone has access to the tools to make a more or paint an amazing picture. And now everyone can see the art. Art is shared with everyone. Sean Parker, co-creator of Napster tells interviewers "the vision behind Napster, in the very early stages, was to just come with a system that made sharing of mp3's so easy that a housewife or grandmother in Iowa could do it". Music is illegally and legally downloaded everyday all over the world. We all have the means to do it and music can reach many more people.

Is this widespread access a bad thing? If everyone can make videos and posts them, how do we know which ones are good? Andrew Keen says "a you Hitchcock or young Scorsese wouldn't make into the movie business today. They'd slap up their films onto YouTube and it would get lost in the ocean of garbage". It may be harder to stand out but it doesn't make the art any less important. Every video means something to the person creating it even if it just a good memory now. Art is made to capture a moment or emotion and that is what all of the YouTube videos do. They are not all Golden Globe winners but they are art. Another debate in the advancing world is if a computer can be considered an instrument. Almost every imperfect sound recorded can be fixed with computer editing and many artist depend on that. Nick Sansano is a music producer and sees this happen more often than not. "Younger musicians and some older ones... rely too much on technology. They give a sub-par performance and expect the technology to compensate for it..." (Nick Sansano). I think it is still music. It is still an idea that people are choosing to share with the world. It is different but that doesn't make it bad. There is a lot to be said for those people who can play an instrument exceptionally well and produce record without any help. It is hard and they will always be admired for being able to do that. Those people who aren't that talented might have the same passion but are unable to express it. That is where technology helps. It allows people that are not as talented to still express themselves in the way they want. Human error is no longer our sole limitation.

Monday, March 17, 2014

PressPausePlay

I have never been a film person. I don't sit still long enough to really watch a whole movie let alone analyze it. That being said, I found the movie we started today, PressPausePlay, very interesting. It brought up a lot of good points that a lot of people are interested in. With everyone being able to make music on their computers today, how do producers stay in business. Recently there has been a hipster fad, where we are almost going back in time. Records are in and the classics are better than ever. People have always had respect for classic and timeless musicians but they listened to more current music. With this hipster era, producing music in a studio makes more sense. They want the 'old sound' instead of the more electronic new sound. I don't know where I fall in the debate. I like both the new and the old ways of making music. They can both create great music that can reach thousands of people.

It also gives people an overload of options. We are exposed to so many types of art, good and bad, through media. A terribly filmed video might go viral on YouTube while a great one is only viewed a handful of times. How do we as a society decide what is good and what is bad? There are personal preferences and it changes depending on the mood of that person. How are people able to stand out against everyone else? Today celebrities have to have a huge social media base to stay at their popularity level. If they hide from the media and don't constently promote themselves to their fans they will fade away. The attention span of society today has shrunk. We only watch something for as long as it entertains us. Then we move on to the next piece and forget we ever saw the first. The overload of artwork in various forms makes it a lot harder for people to stand on their own and get the worlds attention.

Monday, March 10, 2014

Finishing the Ceremony!

We finished Ceremony!! Some of my questions are answered but I still have so many. There are two parts that confuse me the most. The first is when Robert comes to visit Tayo. "'They want you to come home. They are worried about you. They think you might need the doctors again... Old man Ku'oosh and some of the others are wondering too why you haven't come. They thought maybe there might be something you should tell them...And Emo is has been saying things about you. He's been talking about how you went crazy and are alone out here. He talks bullshit about caves and animals'" (Silko 228). I started to question the reality of Tayo's situation. Robert is concerned about Tayo but he doesn't want to agree with Emo. Does he secretly agree with him? Is Tayo really imagining the spotted cattle? Most of the novel is through Tayo's perspective and there is no way to tell how reliable he is. There are points where he is more clear than others but I don't know if what he says is true or only what he believes is true. Tayo could be running around the open spaces chasing imaginary cattle and talking to himself. Maybe Emo is the more sane one of the two.

The other part that confused me was when Emo, Pinkie and Leroy attack Harley. The whole story that Tayo tells seems a little off. I understand that Emo is somewhat evil and doesn't like Tayo because he is a racist but would he go that far? They kidnapped and tied Harley up. "Pinkie held [Harley's] leg, and Leroy cut a whorl from the bottom of his big toe. Harley screamed hoarsely; the sound trailed off to a groan" (Silko 251). They were all friends!? How can someone do this to someone they were friends with? The they just laugh and leave. Tayo doesn't kill Emo because he can resist witchery and he is on the path to finishing his ceremony. I question the reality of the whole encounter. Tayo is dehydrated, exhausted and hasn't eaten in a day or so. Anyone can start to imagine things after being out in the desert all day.

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

The Spotted Cattle

In Ceremony  Tayo is represented by the spotted cattle. Josiah takes care of the cattle  in the beginning and he enlists Tayo to help care for them. Tayo has always been lost and alone and taking care of the cattle would help him find himself. By caring for the cattle, Tayo was caring for himself. When Tayo went to war with Rocky he lost himself again. His native ways didn't work with warfare. How were the Japanese any different than him? They were all beings on Earth from mother nature. They were all human. While Tayo was away the cattle ran off. They were as lost as Tayo. Tayo is sick and feels invisible when he returns. He lost himself and doesn't feel alive or human.


Tayo talks to Benito, a healer, and decides he needs to search for his lost cows. He headed out on his journey and found them. "The spotted cattle wouldn't be lost any more, scattered through his dreams, driven by his hesitation to admit they had been stolen, that the land - all of it - had been stolen from them" (SILKO 192). Tayo is realizing that he needs the cattle to be happy and cure himself. The cattle needs to be taken care of in order to feel better. Tayo is finally taking care of himself and trying to get better instead of letting the pain be dulled by alcohol. He has denied the pain for so long and tried to ignore it until it goes away. His pain won't go away and Tayo finally does something about it. The other veterans may be happy to drink their lives away but Tayo wants better and to get it he has to find himself. Not the man he was before the war but the man he is now. War and life changed him and the cattle grew with him. They were taken by a white rancher and had a new experience. Now they are back with Tayo who will care for them.  





Monday, February 24, 2014

A Marine Visit

Clay was different than I expected. He wasn't a normal guest speaker but what is normal? He didn't have a plan of what he wanted to say and he was clearly nervous. Not a lot of the presentation was about his tours and time in the military. Some of his training came up and it sounded incredible. I can't even imagine doing half of what he had to. He focused more of his talk on how to live. People like telling others what they can and can't do. Clay liked proving these people wrong. It is a great but hard way to live. I understand never giving up on what you want but proving everyone wrong is a hard task. I don't think that everything someone tells you you can't do has to be disproved. The ones that matter to the individual do. For example, if someone told me I couldn't rock climb to the top of a mountain I would agree with them. I have no desire to do it and I am terrified of rock climbing. If someone told me I could never run marathon or get into a specific college, however, I would prove them wrong. Those are things that I want. They may not be my deepest desires but I know if I tried I could reach them no matter what people say. I am stubborn that way and I think a lot of people are now. Today, so many people focus on following their own path instead of doing what others say. There are exceptions to the rule but from a young age we are trained to make our own decisions. Make our own path. I loved this point and think it is important for everyone to fight for what they believe in their own way. Clay went and fought in war but anyone can fight to prove something.

Clay also talked about PTSD. I thought he would have talked more about it because it is a large theme in Ceremony but he didn't. His story about the girl. I was talking to my table group after and we were all in awe. I completely understand why he questions what he did so much. I don't mean to say he made the wrong choice. He saved all of the strangers in the cafe and his fellow marines. It could have played out so differently if he never pulled the trigger. I don't know how I would live with myself if I was put in that situation. He said how if he had a do-over he would have gone and died with the girl. Sacrificing himself for the people in the cafe. Soldiers talk about losing part of themselves when they are forced to hurt or kill women and children. It may be the right call but they see someone they know in the person they killed. It might be their wife, son, daughter, cousin or anyone. To me this is what PTSD is. When something traumatic happens, like in war, you lose part of yourself.