Creating my own Myth, even though it was inspired by Dr. Baxter's book, only reiterated what I already knew about Myths and why I hate them so much: they are make believe stories used to control some aspect of our existence. Some worse than others. The trickster tales at least don't always purport to have some divine insight and claim of authority.
What gets me so upset is the grotesque violation that Myths make of the public educational mandate to uphold the Secular Humanist tradition and stay away from all metaphysical beliefs in a direct way.
Hence, are you a Wiccan, do it on your own time. Are you a Great Spirit believer and was raised in an Indian Tribe, practice it on your own time. Are you Jewish or Christian or Muslim, you've got all the synogogues, churches and mosques you can dream of.
These are all parts of History, no more, and oddities to discover the basis of social control in literature.
Public education is for Secular Humanist cognitive skill development, the requirements of ALL humans at ALL times no matter the belief.
To bring in this baggage from the past in a direct confrontation is to invite boredom and disaster. I believe strongly that this is the reason so many of the science majors and rational humans FLEE from the "language arts." This multicultural verbiage scares the wits out of them after leaving the safe, sane compounds of rational math, science, chemisty, physics and biology. They don't see a need for this, and they are right. When they dream of being a doctor, a research scientist or a computer engineer, they know intuitivly that this myth stuff is for the birds. And they are right.
No one dares to speak out for Fear.
Perhaps it's a bias on my part, perhaps I am wrong, dead wrong. Everyone loves tales that have absolutely no bearing on modern life, career and happiness.
So, I have learned a lot, and my passion has only cemented what has taken me a long time to put into words.
If any student says to me when I give them carte blanche to write an essay on any subject or text: "I want to write about the White Buffalo Calf Woman." I would say: "Great, have at it."
If the Department of Education wants to force this mystical mayhem and multicultural mythic nightmare on the public at large in the name of cultural equality, I say: "check your premises and your mandate to Secular Humanism and leave off." It is so clear to me now that, while All humans are equal, all cultures and their myths have been equally horrendous in their hegemonic control, the West leading the way!
Let's begin a new day, a new day of liberty and freedom for all. Let's fulfill our Constitutional mandate and not go back to the drug induced or mystic fogginess of fake reality and phony morality summed up in "death to the disbelievers!".
That is what I have learned by creating my Myth.
It's at times like this that I feel that becoming an English teacher is a wrong career choice for me, being forced to confront this kind of stuff would be torture.
What are the optional career paths for an English major?
Michael
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Writing Poetry vs. Writing About Poetry
Writing Poetry and Writing About Poetry are two opposite endeavors.
Creating or Writing poetry demands that an author have some goal or theme in mind sparked by some creative urge to put into words some high emotion, meaningful situation, important historical fact etc. Then, some form is brought forth, perhaps an old established form like the sonnet or a free style or something completely different. The poet then must submerge into thier subconsious for words and ideas and ponder how to group them together in order to concretize or represent the powerful emotions that caused the action and satisfy the theme.
This is, as the Romantics called it, a synthesizing process using the categories and the imagination put into free play by the poet.
Writing About Poetry is the opposite, for it is an analyzing art. The student essayist tries their best to isolate one or several of the synthesizing aspects of a poem and argue a perspective such as why the author chose a certain form, words, etc. More advanced essay writers, or critics, are looking to see if there are any intended or unintended linguistic power codes, sublimations, gender constructs etc. They analyze by isolating, separating and abstracting chosen key components of a poem and try to make meaning from them.
Because even poets aren't always in full control of their subconscious, there can be fierce debates about the arguements made to support or deny an essayists or critics thesis or assertions. One thing is for sure, an argument must be clear, concise and to the point while the poem itself can be anything. The flip side is, though a poem can be any group of words, it must have a certain something for an essay writer or critic to take the time writing about!
Writing the limited amount of poetry that I have written only confirms what I knew about the pressures of creating a linguistic form that is worthy of attention and fun to listen to. In addition, having a bit more experience at writing about literature (but not really a whole lot) only confirms the fact that analyzing and making clear my conclusions and assertions are an exacting process and an art in its own right.
I am glad to have the option of doing both though, however painful a process both might be.
The main thing that I have learned is that whether one is synthesizing something new and creating a poem, or analyzing an existing poem posing an argument, practice makes perfect. Yes, it is a cliche, but in this case it is obvious.
Thus, it looks like creating poetry, using all kinds of creative tricks (like beginning with a rush of free form content to generate ideas!), will be just as valuable a classroom experience as laboring over concise arguments, honed to drive home an unanswerable thesis!
Creating or Writing poetry demands that an author have some goal or theme in mind sparked by some creative urge to put into words some high emotion, meaningful situation, important historical fact etc. Then, some form is brought forth, perhaps an old established form like the sonnet or a free style or something completely different. The poet then must submerge into thier subconsious for words and ideas and ponder how to group them together in order to concretize or represent the powerful emotions that caused the action and satisfy the theme.
This is, as the Romantics called it, a synthesizing process using the categories and the imagination put into free play by the poet.
Writing About Poetry is the opposite, for it is an analyzing art. The student essayist tries their best to isolate one or several of the synthesizing aspects of a poem and argue a perspective such as why the author chose a certain form, words, etc. More advanced essay writers, or critics, are looking to see if there are any intended or unintended linguistic power codes, sublimations, gender constructs etc. They analyze by isolating, separating and abstracting chosen key components of a poem and try to make meaning from them.
Because even poets aren't always in full control of their subconscious, there can be fierce debates about the arguements made to support or deny an essayists or critics thesis or assertions. One thing is for sure, an argument must be clear, concise and to the point while the poem itself can be anything. The flip side is, though a poem can be any group of words, it must have a certain something for an essay writer or critic to take the time writing about!
Writing the limited amount of poetry that I have written only confirms what I knew about the pressures of creating a linguistic form that is worthy of attention and fun to listen to. In addition, having a bit more experience at writing about literature (but not really a whole lot) only confirms the fact that analyzing and making clear my conclusions and assertions are an exacting process and an art in its own right.
I am glad to have the option of doing both though, however painful a process both might be.
The main thing that I have learned is that whether one is synthesizing something new and creating a poem, or analyzing an existing poem posing an argument, practice makes perfect. Yes, it is a cliche, but in this case it is obvious.
Thus, it looks like creating poetry, using all kinds of creative tricks (like beginning with a rush of free form content to generate ideas!), will be just as valuable a classroom experience as laboring over concise arguments, honed to drive home an unanswerable thesis!
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Media Technology in Education
My name is Michael, and I am on a crash course to become a secondary level teacher in the Language Arts. I want to discuss the role of media technology in education. I am going to begin by limiting my comments to English Subject Matter for I am not being trained in the other disciplines. I want to begin by separating my comments into two categories: the media for delivering the text (the prime mover so to speak) into the classroom and the media for elucidating on the text.
The oldest and most tried and true media for delivering fiction and poetry into the classroom has been the book, and I am fine by that. I can see a shift to Kindle or the like--an electronic book-- onto which students can download fiction and poetry. Drama needs to be seen and is stale on the page without humans acting out the roles; a vcr, dvd player or the like would work just fine. That's it. Fiction is a conceptual medium and needs only a platform for words while drama needs only the most fundamental perceptual medium to deliver the goods.
Now, for what technology is needed to elucidate on the text. Going by my college experience no technology is needed at all. Professors speak; we listen; we talk; it works. A simple blackboard and a brainy professor can get me thinking about an idea for days.
At the high school level, I could see the need for a computer to research authors, eras, styles, word meanings etc. That's it. Oh, a pad of paper and pen for writing focused essays would be nice.
In today's atmosphere where so much emphasis is placed on technology for the sake of technology, I shutter at what kind of nonsense is going to be expected from teachers in order to titilate many students who are forced to be in school by big brother. Because it seems that it is never the student's non-motivation for low test scores, I fear the role of a teacher will become faking as many ways to use any kind of technology to keep bored children awake. This "fun" factor will increase as California sinks in the rankings of educational achievement.
If the love of literature isn't fun in and of itself--what could I do to motivate a mind of a child with free will and goals different from my own? Technology would only get in my way of those students who love conceptual thinking and the desire to grow in thier appreciation of English Subject Matter.
If anyone wants to challenge my views, I welcome the opportunity to expand my current perspective and learn new ways to improve my chosen career.
Thanks!
The oldest and most tried and true media for delivering fiction and poetry into the classroom has been the book, and I am fine by that. I can see a shift to Kindle or the like--an electronic book-- onto which students can download fiction and poetry. Drama needs to be seen and is stale on the page without humans acting out the roles; a vcr, dvd player or the like would work just fine. That's it. Fiction is a conceptual medium and needs only a platform for words while drama needs only the most fundamental perceptual medium to deliver the goods.
Now, for what technology is needed to elucidate on the text. Going by my college experience no technology is needed at all. Professors speak; we listen; we talk; it works. A simple blackboard and a brainy professor can get me thinking about an idea for days.
At the high school level, I could see the need for a computer to research authors, eras, styles, word meanings etc. That's it. Oh, a pad of paper and pen for writing focused essays would be nice.
In today's atmosphere where so much emphasis is placed on technology for the sake of technology, I shutter at what kind of nonsense is going to be expected from teachers in order to titilate many students who are forced to be in school by big brother. Because it seems that it is never the student's non-motivation for low test scores, I fear the role of a teacher will become faking as many ways to use any kind of technology to keep bored children awake. This "fun" factor will increase as California sinks in the rankings of educational achievement.
If the love of literature isn't fun in and of itself--what could I do to motivate a mind of a child with free will and goals different from my own? Technology would only get in my way of those students who love conceptual thinking and the desire to grow in thier appreciation of English Subject Matter.
If anyone wants to challenge my views, I welcome the opportunity to expand my current perspective and learn new ways to improve my chosen career.
Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)