End of ACMA01
Hey guys...today I had my last ACMA01..As Sarah has sad, "this is a bitter sweet moment". I have really enjoyed the course, probably one of the best I've ever taken at UofT. Only got one exam left until this course is officially over. Would love to take one more of Sarah's classes if anymore are offered. Never thought university could get this interesting until I took this class.
Introduction and the Final Journal- Self Reflection
As a student majoring in economics and psychology, I have only taken mostly business related courses so far, and most of them are based heavily on math. Even though I am in my third year, I rarely had to write any essays for my first two years. This course has really equipped me with precious skills needed for my future studies in psychology and even for my future career.
My English, or
writing skills has improved a lot throughout the semester. I didn't really do
well in my first essay, but with the constructive comments that Sarah had given
me, it really helped me with improving my second and third essay. Hopefully I
will do better in my final research paper. Writing is hard to master, but with
more practice, it is not impossible.
Not only has this
course helped me in improving my writing skills, but it has also further
developed my intellectual thinking skills. Sarah made sure that during our two
hour tutorial, one hour would be dedicated to essay writing, and the other hour
would be a class discussion about different topics; Our class had covered
topics including: What is knowledge, history, ideology, discourse, technology,
text, art, gender, philosophy, and sound. During our weekly discussions, Sarah
really pushes students to think from different perspectives and she tries to
involve everyone in the class with her enthusiasm and energy. I have always
been this stubborn person who always stick with my own idea. I am not saying
that you should be swayed by other opinions easily, but you should always learn
to see from other perspectives. The in class discussions are really important
because during the discussions, every student gets a chance to voice out their
opinions and if you just listen carefully to what they have to say, you will
start to develop a way of thinking.
Intellectual skills
involve critical, analytical, and problem solving skills. Through the almost
weekly essays and journals that we have to hand in, I have made substantial
improvement in my intellectual skills. Before writing each journal or essay, we
are required to read through and analyze the course materials, and to apply
materials taught in class into our essays. Being able to think from
different perspectives is crucial for improving in intellectual skills.
Thinking from different angles is important because that is what a solid
argument is made up of; it makes your writing more persuasive. People would be
more willing to listen to your opinion if you have that ability, because they
know that you think about every possibility before stating your opinion.
The topics taught
in this class were also very interesting. For example, the idea of 'seeing
history from below' is something that I have never thought about. Had I not
taken this course, I would probably never have seen history this way; thinking
from the perspective of the people who were conquered instead of the victors.
You start to doubt and become more skeptical about what you are reading or
watching. Having this ability makes you less susceptible to outside influences
like the media. When you come to think about it, there are a lot of injustice
in the world, and this is precisely why we need people who have the ability to
think differently to make a change.
Overall, I really enjoyed
this class. As a matter of fact, this is probably one of the most interesting
and inspirational class that I have ever taken at UofT. I guess this course is
like a break from all of my other boring classes, like statistics, economics,
accounting, and finance.
DMG notes, reactions, discussions: You cannot kill what is already dead
Our class went to the Doris Mccarthy Gallery at UTSC today to see the "You cannot kill what is already dead" exhibition. This exhibition is going to be the topic of our final research paper. It was a kind of creepy gallery. One of the most interesting exhibit I saw was a dead pigeon with a light shining towards it. The pigeon was laying on its back, but its shadow was standing. There were also sounds created in the background of pigeon cries. Its mouth was moving when the sound started playing. I think this exhibit was probably showing how even though the bird is dead, its soul is still alive, and there are many sad stories that it wants to tell because its cries are quite depressing. The theme of this exhibition is zombies, so the pigeon was like a zombie pigeon. There are also a lot of other interesting art work.
Modes of Writing discussion (Dolce & Gabbana advertisement)
This is an ad from Dolce & Gabbana. During the class discussion, there were many different views in terms of what is happening in this picture. The name of this advertisement is "Fantasy Rape". What I see from this picture is that a woman is being held down by a man while 3 other men are watching. The woman's eyes are closed and her body is in a really awkward position for being raped. Usually when a woman is raped, their eyes would probably be open and would try to fight of the man, and that position seems like she is enjoying the company of the men. She was probably trying to seduce the men. The main item being advertised here is probably her shoes. Meaning that D&G was trying to convey the message of, "these shoes will make you very attractive." If she was really being gang raped, all the men would be on top of her. There were many different version of the story being said in class, some said she really was a victim of rape.
Semiotic analysis of People Magazine
Elton John and David Furnish are having a baby, and it made it on the front cover of the People Magazine. This is something that defies the social norm of heterosexuality. Homosexual men are rarely shown in the media. Lesbians however, are more common compared to gay men. One of the most popular pair of homosexual women are Ellen Degeneres and Portia de Rossi. The fact that they got the coverage like say for example, Beyonce, a heterosexual woman having a baby shows that our society is making an improvement in accepting homosexuals. The majority of homophobic are more afraid of homosexual men than women even though its basically the same thing. Everyone has the right to love whoever they want, and as long as they are happy, no one should be judging them. The magazine company is also using this news to increase their sales since both John and Furnish are well-known celebrities. Not only does this magazine show homosexuality, but it also challenges the norm of masculinity. Elton John is like the 'mother' of the baby; she is more feminine compared to Furnish. This really shows how there are many different kinds of people in this world, and people should just accept them for who they are.
PS: Everyone should have the right to love whoever they want.
Confronting Inequality by Paul Krugman: Income and Social Inequality
In paragraph 4 Krugman quotes someone whose views he does not agree with, but then uses those views to support his own argument. How do you know he is quoting a view that he disagrees with?
Below is the quote that Krugman was quoting:
"Income inequality tends to be swamped by even greater social equality...In all of our major cities, there is not a single restaurant where a CEO can lunch or dine with the absolute assurance that he will not run into his secretary. If you fly first class, who will be your traveling companions? You never know. If you go to Paris, you will be lost in a crowd of young people flashing their credit cards."
Krugman quoted this from an article published in the Wall Street Journal called "Income Inequality Without Class Conflict" written by Irving Kristol.
First of all, why did Krugman use this quote? Lets look at what he wrote after quoting Kristol.
"By claiming that income inequality doesn't matter because we have social equality, Kristol was in effect admitting that income inequality would be a problem if it led to social inequality."
Krugman was trying to make his book more well-rounded and reliable by not only looking from one perspective; his perspectives, and the side that he agrees with, but also from his opposing views. He then made a strong rebuttal to show how his opposition's view is illegitimate.
How did I know he is quoting a view that he disagrees with?
"Here's the thing: It does. Kristol's fantasy of a world in which the rich live just like you and me, and nobody feels socially inferior, bears no resemblance to the real America we live in."
It is obvious that Krugman does not agree with his views. It was demeaning enough to say that Kristol's world is a "fantasy". The word "fantasy" means something that is unreal, something that does not actually exist; an ideal world. Krugman was basically saying that Kristol lives in his own ideal world, so what he was saying are too idealistic.
Everything else that he says contradicts to what Kristol had to say. He emphasized on how Income inequality does in fact result in social inequality. For example, he backed up with statistical reports how the chances of low-income families' children getting into college is lower than high-income families, even though their children may have a higher IQ. He also said that lower-income families have worse health-care. There is no social equality; children do not have the same starting line.
The AXE Effect: The most degrading commercial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syqCMLa1sr0
"The AXE Effect" is probably one of the most stereotypical commercial that advertisers use for men's hygienic product. This commercial features a group of women gathering together from every corner of the world, running towards a man who had sprayed on AXE deodorant. Before reaching the man, the women had to first overcome different obstacles, like running through a forest, a desert, and swim across the ocean before reaching then man. The women were wearing bikinis and it is obvious that they are competing between one another to fight for the spot for getting the man first.
In the text, Having it his way: the construct of masculinity in fast-food TV advertising, Carrie Packwood Freeman and Debra Merskin viewed women as being animalized in fast food commercials directed towards men. In this commercial, women were running through the wild like savages, animals hunting for this one man. This scene is a pretty degrading scene; women are sexualized, wearing bikinis and notice how the camera is focused on female body parts.
Freeman and Merskin also said that the themes found in fast-food ads are "to seek freedom from personal and social constraints," and to "remain loyal to the (heterosexual) male group." This commercial is using the same technique as many other fast-food commercials. Take Burger King's commercial Hootie ad as an example. The commercial took place in a male fantasyland where a guy can get whatever he wants, including "sexually available females." This is exactly what this AXE commercial is trying to show; as long as men use this AXE deodorant, he will be able to attract as much women as he wants. This commercial is also limiting the possibilities, and reinforcing the social norms of men being masculine by being heterosexual.
To me, this was a disturbing commercial. Women are still being portrayed as mindless sex creatures that are made to fulfill men's desires instead of being smart, intellectual, and people with opinions. This also shows how men are suppose to be the one with authority, where women are on the submissive side. It shows that the man who used this deodorant has the power to choose any woman he wants, or women in this instant; leaving the women powerless, and no choice.
The Inner Feelings of Bissell- Extra Life: Why Video Games Matter
Bissell's started off his chapter with a self-mocking anecdote about him playing Fallout 3 during election day. By providing us with his little story, it really provides readers an insight of not only what he thinks about America, but also the world as a whole, and his attitude towards life. Through Bissell's depressing use of words, I feel a bit of helplessness and sadness in him. He also stated that he was once depressed at Oblivion, or video games in general served as "an extra live," and he was "grateful to have it."
Oblivion took place in Rome, and even though there were skeletons and monsters he had to battle off, that was not the main part of the game that he enjoyed. What he found most entertaining was the participation of the Roman's daily lives. "Oblivion is less a game than a world that best rewards full citizenship, and for a while I lived there and claimed it." There is a possibility that the satisfaction that Bissell achieves from playing Oblivion cannot be attained through his daily life. "It also gave me something with which to fill my days other than piranhic self-hatred." He probably does not have a lot of close friends or is not satisfied with his current lifestyle.
Through video games, he extracts himself from the normal life that he has to live and it was like an escape route for him. He was also disgusted by the political situation in the states, or the world as a whole, that's why he was apathetic about the election. "Oblivion is about as satirical as a colonoscopy, and the fighting in the game, while not unviolent, is often weirdly inert."The producer of Oblivion is also the producer of Fallout 3. Fallout 3 was based in the States. He was saying how the video game is like a satire, which is a way of mocking politicians or political issues. Colonoscopy is a medical instrument used to look into a person's intestine. What he is trying to say is the video game Fallout 3, is showing the real image of America, and being violent is normal. He had also said that the video game takes place in a "Large and disinterestedly functioning world," which shows how he dreadful he feels about the world, since Fallout 3 is a futuristic replication of America.
There are many more examples of how Bissell feels about politics, America, and life, but it will be too much to list them all. Bissell is a pretty pessimistic person.
Malcolm Gladwell vs. Dennis Baron: The Role of Social Media
Malcolm Gladwell and Dennis Baron both agreed on how the use
of social media can help create history. Baron stated, “It is possible that
without Facebook and Twitter, Honsi Mubarak might still be holed up in the
Presidential Palace, planning free and fair one-party elections in September.”
According to Gladwell, “With Facebook and Twitter and the like, the traditional
relationship between political authority and popular will has been upended,
making it easier for the powerless to collaborate, coordinate, and give voice
to their concerns.” Even though social network may provide a platform for
citizens to voice out their opinions and to organize, and to help publicize
their upcoming activities, but according to Gladwell and Baron, there are a few
drawbacks in using social networks.
From Baron’s perspective, the disadvantage with social media
is censorship. Coming from a communist country that was once a British Colony,
Hong Kong, and living in Canada, it allows me to understand both sides of the
world. In July 2012, there was a rally against the National Education course
being taught in grade school in Hong Kong. Parents, students, and a few
politicians argued that this course is a merely a tool to help the Chinese
government brainwash Hong Kong children in believing that China has the best
government and communism is the best form of governing their citizens. An
activist group called Scholarism created a Facebook page and organized a strike
through it. On July 2012, according to the organizers, more than 90000
protestors participated in the hunger strike. The course program was eventually
withdrawn from the curriculum. Had China wanted to pass on this curriculum,
this would never had happened; Facebook is blocked in China, all medias are
censored, so it will be hard for people to communicate through social network.
On the other hand, the government could have been able to use social network to
brainwash students and parents on how it is in fact beneficial to take that
course. Lets take Tiananmen Square as an example. I have talked to a few
friends from China who just came to Canada not long ago. They have never heard
of what happened at Tiananmen Square, and they think that Chairman Mao is their
hero. This is the dark side of media; if not used properly, it can be used as a
source for controlling citizens.
From Gladwell’s point of view, one of the disadvantages of
social media is its lack of hierarchy. Everyone who has joined the Facebook
page can easily comment or contribute to the event. There is no authority, and
no individual who specializes in a particular component. If there were to be
conflict within the group, there is no one individual who will be able to step
up and make decisions, and this would be a huge problem if they are organizing
a more complex event.
The second disadvantage that Gladwell started was people
within a Facebook or Twitter group have not physically met each other; they do
not know whom they are working with so they have weak bonds between one
another. Groups like that are more prone to outside pressure, since they are
not personally attached to each other and the only thing holding them together
is that single common goal; They are more likely to sell their people out when
necessary.
To summarize, social network is useful when trying to create
something not complicated and low risk. Organizing a strike for example is
fairly simple, all they have to do it to announce the date, time, and place.
When developing a plan on the other hand, should be done within organizations
that are not formed from just social networks.
My Dog- Beanie!!
Since my dog is so awesome and adorable, I think she deserves a few credit! lol...bonus mark maybe? Kidding..
Are the Benefits of Television Really Beneficial?
Steven Johnson stated how the quality of modern popular entertainment is improving and how it can actually help improve our cognitive abilities. He said that television shows nowadays are more challenging to understand compared to before because of its "multi-thread" component. Since there are many different plots being acted out, the audience have to be patient, watch carefully, and to think more in order to fully understand the whole story.
Even though the plots of movies and television series is becoming more complicated, but it does not mean that this is benefiting the audiences; there are still plenty of low-quality productions out there in the market. People who choose to watch these type of complicated productions are probably the people who are already average or above average in their intellectual abilities. Think about this, people would not watch something that they will not understand. If they watch an episode of Sopranos for example, and they do not understand it, they would not bother going on with the series. They would choose to watch something like Keeping Up With The Kardashians. The Kardashians series on the other hand, is more like reality TV, and it provides nothing beneficial whatsoever to their viewers
Television programs are just mere reflections of what people want you to think. They misguide viewers in every aspect of life; they help to create and reinforce social norms that are not necessarily beneficial. For example, every single protagonist in movies or television series are physically well built and unrealistically attractive. When people walk on the streets, they do not see Jessica Alba or Jennifer Lawrence at the corner of every street, yet people all aim to become like them; A lot of teenagers are trying to become like an Oscar winning actress or actor, sometimes at the expense of their health.
Watching television is highly addictive. The time used for watching television could have been used on something more productive and educational. When a person starts off an episode of a series, they would not be able to stop until they finish it. Meanwhile the time spent on watching it could be used for studying and preparing for exams so that they can earn a higher GPA, which is way more important for their future endeavors. Even though television is getting more and more sophisticated, but these types of knowledge and developing the ability to think, which is one of the main advantages that Johnson has stated, can be achieved through education. All undergraduate students know that what they have learnt in their program cannot really be applied to a real life situation unless they are taking accounting, engineering or some specialized skills. Take economics for example, perfect competition, monopoly, and oligopoly does not really exist in real life. What students are trying to get out of their four years of education is not how to think, intellectual skills, and improving on their cognitive abilities. If television does provide us that education, there is no point for students to spend four years and thousands of dollars on their university education.
Above are some points that could be used in argument against Johnson. Even though there are some great movies produced like the Life of Pi, which are comparatively challenging to understand, movies and TV series are not as beneficial as how Johnson said it. He was exaggerating the benefits of media.
Real Bad Arabs: Hollywood's Portrayal of Arabians
Since adolescence, children are brainwashed with stereotypes without even realizing it. Disney animations have been accompanying children throughout their childhood. I was stunned when I have finally realized after watching the video "Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People" that Disney's Aladdin, an innocent looking children's cartoon was in fact an accomplice in maintaining the Arabs stereotypes. Since children are young, and do not have the ability to think for themselves, they are more susceptible to believing in the social norms. When they grow up, rarely do they question the believes that were embedded into them. Disney cartoons, therefore, also plays a role in passing on the stereotypical believes to our younger generations.
Arabians often take parts of movies that have nothing to do with the middle east. Take the movie, Gladiator as an example; Arabs have nothing to do with gladiators, yet they played a role as a slave hunter in the movie. It has become a trend to introduce Arabs in movies as idiots, arrogant rich men, sex addicts who are obsessed with blonde Americans, terrorists, or thieves. Instead of reflecting how Arabs really are, it serves as an entertainment and target for audience to ridicule at.
The representation of Arabian in movies also serves as a propaganda. After 911, the bias towards them have heightened. Yes, the terrorists of 911 happened to be Arabians, but it does not mean that all Arabians are terrorists. It helps to make the killing or torturing of Arab prisoners easier; "its a slaughter, yes, but it's a righteous slaughter." This is basically like the reproduction of Nazism, except now the targets are Arabs instead of Jews, and the predators are Americans instead of Germans. During Nazism, the Germans were blaming all of their problems on the Jews, and now Americans are blaming everything on the Arabs.
These types of films is a way for Americans to support their positions as "heroes". Americans, or caucasians in the movies are always playing the part of a protagonist. It helps to maintain the hegemony of American superiority over other countries. Rarely do they show pictures of how their prisoners are tortured; the only scenes shown are Americans being killed, and another American hero avenging the victims.
In order to maintain peace between Arabs and Americans, the way that Arabs are presented in movies have to change. By showing Arabs killing Americans and not vice-versa will not make the situation any better. It's a vicious cycle; Arabs will keep hating Americans, and Americans will keep hating Arabs. Viewers also have to start to be more skeptical about what they are watching in movies; media are usually biased.
"What Is Water?" by David Foster Wallace: The Real Meaning of Adult Life
There are "whole parts of adult American life that nobody talks about in commencement speeches," or in the classrooms. This unspoken part of life includes the everyday job that a white collar worker has to go to, the long and tedious drive back home and to places, and the long and boring time spent in the grocery shop. Of course, there are many more repetitive things, but it would be too long to list them all. The reason why speakers do not give this kind of speeches is because it is easier to say something positive and inspiring. The goal of a typical commencement speech is to say something inspiring, and to ignite the spark in the students so they have a goal to reach for.
The reason why Wallace made this depressing speech was because he wanted the students to know what they will be getting into upon graduation. He wants to equip students with the power of thinking differently, and being less self-centered; instead of focusing on what pain you are going through, think about how other people are also suffering.
Wallace is diagnosed with depression, and that is probably the main reason why he wrote his speech in such a depressing way. He spoke of the life as full of darkness, nothing but tediousness and repetitiveness. A few days after his commencement speech, he committed suicide. Notice how even his examples of how to think positively are based on others' pain and suffering. For example, he said how he could think of "The Hummer that just cut me off is maybe being driven by a father whose little child is hurt or sick in the seat next to him, and he's trying to get this kid to the hospital, and he's in a bigger, more legitimate hurry than I am." The way that he thinks and the voice of his speech was really depressing. Since he is depressed, he is more susceptible to his own frustrations. Everyone must be frustrated about something, but frustration has a deeper impact on him compared to others.
Students should be made aware of what a typical adult life is made up of. Yes, even though life is full of repetitive and boring work, there must be some goals that they want to strive for. Wallace has probably lost his meaning in life, and goals. Goals are what make life interesting, and challenging; they are what make life fulfilling, and what makes an individual satisfied. He was too immersed into his own issues that he was not able to look from the positive side; he has probably lost his goal in life. Like the old saying, "things are easier said than done." It was easy for Wallace to say, be more positive, but in the end, he still ended up committing suicide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)