Forum 4: New technologies, positive or negative?

Once again, Néstor has proposed to us another opportune topic for debate. With his article On a Pessimist view he has already launched a discussion on new technologies and their potential risks. I would like to begin our first forum this year by expanding Néstor’s concerns beyond Facebook. Our leading questions are simple, though answers may not be so:

Are new technologies positive or negative? To what extent? What are we gaining from their use? What are we loosing?

Join the debate.

L&C IV - Class record 10

June, 4th – Néstor Cevasco

We discussed in Language and Culture IV  some aspects of  feudalism taking into accoount Fisher’s text. We explored the relationship between vassals and lords, the act of Homage, and the centralization of power in the case of William the Conqueror.

May 21st –Néstor Cevasco

We continued reading Beowulf till a passage describing the appearance of a second female monster in Herot, who is worst than the former Grendel. We also read Borges and discussed the use of kennings in Anglo-Saxon poetry.

May 20th - Néstor Cevasco

We read Beowulf and reached a passage describing Grendel’s defeat in Herot. We discussed on some elements of Anglo-Saxon poetry and alliteration.

May 14th – Daniela Duhalde

During this class, we talked a bit about our experience as teachers, having in mind that some of us have started with the observations for our Prácticas. Then, we started discussing about the new assignment. We gathered information and created our hypotheses.

May 13rd – Jésica Pereyra

At first, we compared a fragment (the first 20 lines) of the poem Beowulf in old English with a fragment of a new edition of the same poem. Then, we discussed a bit about the manuscript of the poem, and we also commented the main reasons why Beowulf is a very important poem. Later in the class, we made a few comments on the poem (from fit 3 to almost 9) and we talked about its origin and the role of Christianity in it.

May 7th –Néstor Cevasco

This Thursday 7th, we discussed on Anglosaxonism and several issues related to this. One of these was connected to the belief, popular or not, of relating Anglo-Saxonism to the idea of a superior race. We concluded that this feeling just takes part of a mere nationalistic feeling, and negative for this matter. In addition to this, we explored the originary myths of the English as a race stating two main theories. One is the Trojan, in other words, conceiving the English as descendants of Trojans. The other one is the the Anglo-Saxon. 

May 6th –Daniela Duhalde

During this class we discussed about the 1st assignment. 

Then, we started discussing the text Anglo-Saxonism and the Construction of Social Identity by Allen J. Frantzen and John D. Niles. We said that there are two meanings to the term Anglo-Saxonism.

Then, we mentioned that the Anglo-Saxon is considered an origin myth, that is to say, a myth that talks about the origin of the English identity. We mentioned that the Anglo-Saxon myth and the Trojan myth considered the origin of the English people.

April, 23rd – Jésica López

During this class we commented on the text A poetics to Postmodernism, by Hutcheon, Linda ( 1988). We read the First part: “Theorizing the postmodern; Toward a poetics.”

First of all, we commented on the term ‘poetics’ which has to do with the analysis of texts from an artistic point of view and the elements that make particular a text. After that, we began talking about certain characteristics that identify postmodernism. Some of them were: discontinuity, disruption, dislocation, decentring, indeterminacy and antitotalization. As regards the past, the author argues that postmodernism rethinks history in an ironic, critical and even contradictory way. As an example, we watched the film Brazil, which illustrated some of the concepts mentioned above.

April 22nd - Jésica Pereyra

We commented on the text “The leading facts of English history”,” Fourth Period”, “The coming of the Saxon, the battles of the tribes- British becomes England”, by Montgomery.

At first, we discussed on the battle between the Britors and the Picts and Scots (The Picts and Scots attacked the Britors from the north, who were also being attacked by the Saxons from the south). We also talked about King Arthur but we agreed that we are going to discuss this topic on our “Language and Culture Blog”. Another relevant topic we mentioned was Christianity and how it was introduced into the island, we made a few comments on its origins and on the political influence Christianity had, too. Then, we talked about the Danish and the reason why the Saxons were easily convinced to accept Christianity as a new religion.

April 15th - Daniela Duhalde

During this class, we discussed Montgomery’s Leading Facts of English History. Third Period. Roman Britain,55 b.C.; 43-410 A.D. A civilization which did not civilize. Taking into account the subtitle, we tried to discover the writer’s point of view on what he wrote: how a stable civilization could not civilize barbarics.

The author mentions Caesar’s campaigns to Britain and how the Romans did to establish there after several invations. He also mentioned the expedition against the Druids, kind of priests that were Britons’ religious image, and how the Romans introduced Crhistianity.

Other thing that Montgomery mentions in this text is how the Romans built roads to join the five important provinces they had divided the territory into; also they built up enormous walls to prevent invasions.

Finally, we discussed how and why the Romans abandoned Britain: there was a barbaric invasion, so the Roman emperor recalled their troops.

L&C III - Class record 10

Sorry, but we're not keeping a record of this class this year.

‘On A Pessimist View’ (By Néstor Cevasco)

As I know that many of you are habitual users of Facebook like me, I regarded interesting to share my personal point of view referred to an article from La Nación written by Richard Bernstein. Intelligently, by applying a rhetorical question in order to achieve a pragmatical effect on the reader like introducing the element of doubt and criticism, this writer wonders ‘Es posible que Facebook estupidice a los usuarios?’

Honestly, never had I spent my time in asking myself if Facebook users could possibly become stupid either for investing a considerable part of their precious time in sticking photos on the Internet to expose these to a wide social net of friends and relatives or just for making insignificant comments on their routines which they would like to share with the rest. I should say that I do not agree in the least degree with this writer, although I must humbly recognize that since I introduced myself in Facebook, I have been spending vast hours of my time in entertaining myself, time that could have been used in reading an interesting book or in hearing a serious debate on the Internet for instance.

I think there’s nothing wrong in getting banal with something new. Maybe banality is just a part of a natural process. There are plenty of examples showing that people generally get banal or entertained to the excess whenever they are faced with something new. For example, adolescents getting banal as soon as they get in love for the first time, a little boy that could possibly get banal because his/her father has recently bought a new play station. Constantly, people get banal whenever they are faced with something that attracts powerfully their attention. Sooner or later, this symptom changes either because one gets tired or because there’s a new entertainment ready to replace the previous one. Therefore, this symptom of ‘stupidity’, or in better words, of banality evidenced on people, as soon as it has easy come, must easy go.

Concluding, the idea that facebook can make its users ‘stupid’ is totally unjustifiable. On the contrary, sometimes this label of banality or triviality described by some pessimist, apocalyptic observers on people who naively entertain themselves is just a sign of a transitory symptom which does not last forever and naturally changes almost imperceptibly as soon as something different appears like a serious book, a change of habit or just a different life situations.   

The Real Power of the Press (by Hernán Ruiz)

      

Together with the three powers of the democratic system, legislative, executive and judicial, the press has gained a fourth place and it is widely known as the fourth power. Its force has developed considerably during the last century and it has even been able to impeach some presidents, after the disclosure of dirty affairs of political and even sexual connotations. Words are not just symbols or grouped sounds, they are powerful instruments of communication. In the press code of ethics, the use of these powerful symbols is measured by two principles, objectivity and independence being the most important ones. Objectivity when writing prevents subjective consideration of any situation in order not to influence the readers, and independence is crucial to avoid being controlled by others in the manner the news will be presented or, what is more, whether it will be presented at all. These two principles go hand in hand, and the deficiency of one would represent the lack of the other. And although the press is said to be an independent power, many pressures are put on it, which bias and influence the news report so as to comfort or please different interests coming from the government, private companies or advertisers. This sharing of power seems to put the press ethics at risk, thus, ruining its credibility.

Words are made up of two dimensions, “action” –transforming the world, and “reflection” upon that action (Paulo Freire, 1993). When people interact, they do so by relating their perceptions of reality, and they act upon the interpretation of common knowledge, the real state of things being reinforced by their respective sensing. The press has in its hands the responsibility to use the language appropriately, without privileging any side, for it is totally responsible for forming public opinion. The only way to achieve this is by following its basic precepts of objectivity and independence. These rules are a model through which newswriters can measure their performance. These moral rules have been agreed by in order to obtain the highest standards of professional conduct. The real function of newspapers is to verify, sieve and deliver unbiased facts to readers without personal influence from their writers. The need of the readers to rely on the objectivity of newspaper writers is paramount, for newspapers are a relevant source of information for business men, politicians and ordinary people to obtain fair information. Independence –freedom in the press domain from control or influence from others would mean in the case of the press that: “Newspapers should accept nothing of value from news sources or others outside the profession.” (Statement of Ethical Principles, 1999). Gifts and free or reduced-rate travel, entertainment, products and any other pressing present should not be accepted by newspapermen to avoid feeling any kind of pressure when it comes to writing something in favour of these institutions. But in our present day, this does not seem to be the rule, and this behaviour puts the print media ethics in danger.

As mentioned before, an element of relevance for the press is its autonomy. Only by being autonomous, will the printed media be able to fulfil its ethical principles of objectivity and independence. Judgement based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by personal emotions or external influences is a key element for any newspaper, for the press is responsible for the providing of reliable data. But many interests lie in the way to control what should or should not be written and even the mode it should be presented to the readers. Many times advertisers and the companies they represent -the ones who provide the biggest incomes to any newspaper, suggest what kind of articles could suit their products better, so that the advertisements should be placed more strategically within the paper, thus, pressing the editors to change and remove the articles which could damage their image. In many countries across the world, governments put pressure on the press by not advertising in their papers if they do not like the way they treat the information related to their decisions and policies, which represent a huge loss of money coming from that source. This notorious interference in the autonomy of the printed media erodes its elemental ethical precepts. The role of the press in any society is to act like a big eye which helps to preserve the moral basis of that society, providing the right to be well informed that any citizen has. The obligation of any newspaper is to be accurate, honest, fair responsible and decent. Truth should be its guiding principle. The press should serve as a constructive critic of all segments of society, reflecting in its coverage, its diverse constituents. It should expose duplicity or misuse of power, public or private. If the choice of the information to be presented and the way it is presented is influenced by economic or political forces in order to please their interests, its ethic will be under a serious risk.

The importance of the print media in the formation of public opinion has a remarkable power and influence in any modern society. Through the discovery and clarification of political and economic anomalies, the press has gained its prestige based on the credibility of its readers. Economic and political pressures on the press seem to deteriorate its independence while informing, and directly weaken its key ethical principle of objectivity. This disturbance in the normal development of this institution seems to put the real function of any newspaper –informing freely and without external intervention, at risk. Biased and influenced news reports are not helpful to any society, for they do not reflect the real state of affairs taking place in a certain time in history, and they only lead to confusion, misunderstanding and disbelief of the target readers.

Bibliography

·         What Power of the Press? http://www.theguardian.co.uk

·         Freire, Paulo (1993). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Penguin Books. London

·         (I do not remember the name of the book you lent me.)

·         Media Communication and Ethics. http://presscouncil.nic.in/speech

·         Journalism and Media Ethics. http://comslaw.org.au

 

On RFID Microchips and Big Brother (by Néstor Cevasco)

To my delight, one of the books I enjoyed the most in reading was ‘1984’, written by George Orwell in 1948. In this distopian, fictional novel Orwell creates a distinct world, a society whose totalitarian form of government depicts a sub world of party members who are followed by spies. What follows is a list of neologisms implemented by this author in ‘1984’:

Big Brother: an entity with absolute power capable of controlling the party members in the society of 1984 novel. In the Roget’s Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases, Big Brother is signalled either as a supreme authority or a tyrant. (Page 425 of the index).

Black white: The acceptance of what authorities say without questioning.

Thought crime: the crime to dare to even think that the authorities could be wrong in a way.

Face crime: (careful, it’s not face book) A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety that carries with it the suggestion of abnormality or of having something to hide.

Thinkpol: The though police whose role is to eliminate thought crime through spying and total surveillance.

Telescreen: an electronic device like a TV screen used to spy or monitor people in their homes or at workplace.

One of the common questions that comes to the reader’s mind after finishing this book is how close we are as a society to the Orwellian perspective of the world. As regards this, it is interesting to observe the spreading of rumours about RFID microchip implantations on humans in a distant future. Such a thing may lead one to believe that the future of our society does not seem to be so far from the paradigmatic vision proposed by Orwell in ‘1984.’

But, what is a RFID? It is a microchip whose acronym means Radio Frequency Identification Device. It is very tiny, as big as the size of a rice grain, and can be inserted underneath the skin of animals or hidden inside things. What is it used for? Technically speaking, it sends a radio frequency signal, or radio waves that can be traced by satellites. These send all the information collected to a PC in order to determine specific parameters such us identification or location. For the time being, such devices are used exclusively in industrial processes or by scientists to monitor groups of animals. However, in a not so distant future, as it is presently rumoured and debated on the Internet, such technology could be used on humans in the form of microchip implantations under the skin. This high technology could be implemented to collect from people valuable information such as insurance company, I.D number, name, and so on. In addition to this, there are those who suspect that such a new technology could possibly be used to monitor and spy people by security service enterprises in the future, exactly like it occurs in Orwell’s novel, but in a real context.

As a conclusion, provided that all these vague rumours of human micro chipping were true, then George Orwell’s vision, of a society of a supposed Big Brother watching all of us, would be very closer to the society to come in the future.

Cross-gender Conversation Difficulties (by Ronaldo Rodríquez)

Breakdowns, an overall lack of understanding and other difficulties in communication have often characterized the relationship between men and women. From a socio-linguistic perspective, Debora Tannen (1990) has shed light on this issue by observing that: “the minor and major frustrations that women and men encounter when they talk to each other lie in the different ways they use language.” Such distinction in the use of language, in addition, is said to be one of the many behavioural patterns society constructs for and expects from individuals of the opposite sex (Trudgill, 1972). In the light of these considerations, it seems reasonable to assess that misinterpretations between males and females can be accounted for by analyzing the distinctive way in which they perceive and produce language and in the differential expectations they have when addressing each other.

Sociolinguists have been able to show that from adolescence to adulthood, females produce more standard language than males. Based on the fact that hedges, tag-questions, adjectives and rising tones on statements are more frequent in women’s talk, it has been suggested that females are more uncertain than men. Males, on the contrary, are found to speak with more assertiveness, to be more interruptive, to tell more jokes and to produce more succinct utterances. As regards politeness, courtesy subjuncts (Quirk, 1976) and other well-bred forms occur more regularly among women, whereas an extended use of expletives and other bad-mannered formulas can be more commonly found among men.

Examples of difficultness in cross-gender communication abound. For instance, it is told that one Sunday, Calvin Coolidge, onetime president of the United States of America, returned home from church. After being greeted by his wife, he was asked: “What did the Priest speak about?” “Sin,” he replied. “And what did he say about it?” she insisted. Cooling made a silent pause and answered: “He said he was against it.” It could be suggested that incidents such as this are good representatives of several daily cross-gender conversations at home. They do not only show that females are by and large more eager to talk at home but also illustrate the fact that both speakers have different assumptions and expectations when engaging in conversation. Tannen further explains that while women’s talk seeks to establish and strengthen interpersonal connections (or rapport) men speak to preserve independence, negotiate status and display knowledge and skill. These behavioural patters explain the reason why when “trouble,” for example, arises as a topic within a cross-gender conversation, males have the tendency to provide a straightforward solution. Such demeanour normally puzzles and frustrates women because they simply want to talk about the problem and to be understood. Phrases such as “I know how you feel,” “It’s just as once happened to me,” or “Tell more about it” are the ones females yearn for when talking. This contention is rooted in the fact that little girls grow up in a world of intimacy, a world in which being a friend means sharing feelings and exchanging secrets. Little boys, conversely, acquire language in the context of making their way in larger, more competitive and hierarchical groups.

Thus, understanding both the different ways in which males and females produce and receive language and the expectation gap between them can enlighten the issue of cross-gender conversation and the difficulties thereof. Scholarly endeavour has also shown that an extended use of adjectives, referring tones, tag-questions and ambiguous remarks distinguish woman’s talk from men’s. The latter, on the contrary, seem to be more easily inclined to use assertions, the language of humour and less polite statements. Particularly at home, males are more likely to produce more concise utterances. It is on the basis of these differences that the conclusion that men are more confident than women is drawn. As far as expectations are concerned, women seem to value connection and rapport over other pragmatic intentions, whereas males are more concerned with status, practical solutions and power. In conclusion, an overall consideration of the phenomenon above described can not only help members of both sexes to know how their conversations may be improved but also ease the burden of not being understood.

Conclusions to Forum 3: Homosexuality in Children’s Literature

Better late than never, I will try to round-up this year’s last forum. The issue, again, revolved around the topic of homosexuality. This time the topic was inserted in the context of children’s literature. The idea was to ponder about whether it is right or wrong to include such controversial issue in stories for children. After considering your very valuable interventions, I think it is possible to reduce the different opinions to two main stances:

1) The first one could encompass those opinions expressing or implying the idea that children are not mature enough to cope with the idea of homosexuality. In a way, this position implies that homosexuality may be ‘confusing’ for children.

2) The second position would include those opinions expressing that it would be good for children to be in contact with the idea of homosexuality, since in this way they would learn to take it as something natural.

Although both positions admit a tolerant view towards homosexuality, those people adhering to the second stance make it explicit that, for them, homosexuality shouldn’t be condemned as a sexual deviation. This is important since everyone in the forum bestows an educative purpose to children’s literature. In consequence, it seems logical that, for a person who sees homosexuality as something normal, the insertion of this topic did not represent a risk in the education of children. Perhaps, unconsciously or not, those adhering to the first position may feel that facing children to the idea of homosexuality may ‘confuse’ them. But this potential ‘confusion’ can only take place if we admit that there is something wrong in homosexuality. If homosexuality were normal, then, what sort of confusion could we think of?

In reality, it is not the issue of homosexuality that is problematic in this discussion, but children’s literature itself. If we take so much passion in discussing such an issue, this is because, in a way, we perceive that children’s literature is a medium for cultural and social instruction. In consequence, no matter how naïve we think stories for children are, they always convey ideology. Although hidden or in disguise, genre roles, class struggles, sexuality, race and a long list of controversial topics have always been part of children’s literature. Why do princesses always await passively for their prince to rescue them? Why should any romance end up in a marriage? Why do marriages mean a happy ending? Why do we usually read about royal families and not about servants? Why most heroes are white, tall and smart? When we analyse stories for children from a critical perspective, it is not so difficult to identify the values, beliefs and principles that they convey. Perhaps, the important conclusion we can extract from this debate is that children’s literature is never innocent or apolitical. In a way, what we consider right or wrong for our children is the reflection of the world we believe in. If we believe that there is nothing wrong about homosexuality, then we wouldn’t find any problem in reading our children a book containing homosexual characters. If we don’t agree in reading our children such a thing, then this might be because, overtly or not, we find homosexuality objectionable.

Conclusions to Forum 2: Schism in the Anglican Church?

I don’t know why both last forum discussions and some of our later class debates ended up revolving around the issue of homosexuality. Apparently, this seems to be a topic that involves deeply rooted feelings and beliefs, all of which seem to easily move people towards debate and confrontation. Taking into account the potential violence that underlies such emotional discussions, I’d like to begin by acknowledging the respectful tone in which all these debates were carried out so far.

Everything started with our second Forum, which was meant do discuss the possible schism in the Anglican Church. Although the key point was the ambiguous proximity between Anglicanism and Catholicism, what seemed to have caught most of the attention was the acceptance of homosexual bishops by the English church. Among the positions expressed in the forum, there were two clear visions that prevailed:

• On the one hand, it is possible to identify a tendency to consider homosexuality as contrary to the Scripts, and thus to understand that accepting homosexual priests is an unavoidable contradiction for any Christian creed. According to this view, homosexuals cannot be integrated within Christianism, but should build themselves their own set of religious values.
  

• The other point of view prevailing in this forum was that, although one may accept homosexuality within Christianism, it’s not possible to introduce this radical change within an established church without creating something new. According to this view, we cannot go on talking about Anglicanism if we accept homosexual priests. For this view, then, schism is logical and expectable.
  

It called my attention that no clear opinion acknowledged the possibility of institutional evolution. Even within such a traditional field like religion, a historical perspective can bring to light the existence of constant change and transformation. As we mentioned in our last L&C III class, the Catholic Church is perhaps the clearer example of this constant transformative inertia that no institution can avoid. We could mention the radical changes that this church underwent in relation to wealth, forgiveness, witchcraft, heresy, slavery, education and even the interpretation of the Bible. To anyone, it is clear that the church that promoted the Inquisition was based on principles and beliefs that radically differ from those hold by the current Catholic Church. But this which is clear for the Roman church because of its long history and tremendously huge institutional apparatus is also clear for any religious institution provided that we look closely at their historical development.

This third point of view is a historical one, which in a way opposes to both views defended in the forum, since it acknowledges that religions can change, sometimes even radically, without necessarily turning into something new or without necessarily finding a problem in opposing to what they had been in the past. This is called evolution. Since religious institutions are at the same time social institutions, it seems logical that they evolve and adjust their values and principles to the changes and the evolution of the societies in which they are immersed.