This is just a page to post anything we think is interesting

-- hopefully related to class, but certainly not required.

I guess this is the place to express my curiosity about the political "comfort" of people confronted by caucus man and the company he formerly kept on our front page. I wonder how comfortable conservatives are supposed to be with Critical Literacy, which at times is little more than very poorly coded liberal radicalism. I say this as a liberal with unimpeachable credentials (available upon request).  Should we be pushing a partisan agenda in the classroom just because we agree with it? And for that matter, I agree with Critical Literacy only as one lens among many other valid ones. I happen to adore Russian Formalists.

Dear above commentator,

I think that if you value a certain vein of criticism, and you can demonstrate that it provides valuable critical perspectives for your students to appropriate, then you should teach it!  Everyone that works as an educator needs to be cautious about the politics of what they teach, whether they be outright or implied.  That being said, I'm not sure I understand where exactly the connection between Caucus Man and Critical Literacy comes from.  Critical Literacy, if we may borrow from wikipedia, can be roughly defined as "an instructional approach that advocates the adoption of critical perspectives toward text."  Why does this necessitate politicization to you?  The idea that certain critical perspectives demand certain parallel political views, to me is an outright fallacy, and demostrates a general reactionary attitude towards free thought.  You can read Marx, talk about his works, and not BE a Marxist, or advocate Communism, Fascism, or Totalitarianism in any form.  Because individuals or governments themselves appropriate theorists, or because theorists may appropriate political movements or ideologies, regardless of how damaging or oppressive they may be, doesn't mean that we cannot or should not study them.  To hold Stalin, who appropriated Russian Formalism, by the by, up as a model for behavior would be immoral, unethical, and to me delusional.  This doesn't mean that Russian Formalism, just as an example, could not be introduced as a valuable critical perspective.  Critical literacy is not value-laden, it is simply conferring the ability to critically evaluate a text to the student.  Much as Luther believed that the bible shouldn't be solely interpreted by the Catholic church, critical literacy attempts to put power in the hands of those who may not have traditionally held it, i.e. learners. 

I'd also be interested in your perspectives on what specific traits of 'liberal radicalism' you see presented in critical literacy.  BTW, I also agree that the class wiki is not the most appropriate place for any kind of political soapboxing, for what it's worth.

Thanks, and I look forward to continuing the conversation with you.

Steve

.... albeit silly, I find this to be a good example of "appropriation" and "visual coherence," especially in terms of sticking to the Bollywood genre of films.  That said, it isn't a very flattering campaign video. 

Ahhh ... the joys of user-created media.  (Click here to see the video)

For starters, check out this amazing writing by Michael Chabon. 

Ignore the political statements if you must, but just try to imagine if poor Michael had been constrained by the five paragraph essay.

Or, for that matter, if he had been constrained by restrictive language rules and wasn't able to create his amazing new word...phobocracy!

You gotta admit Chabon desperately needed an editor for Summerland.

        I enjoyed the phobacracy piece (thanks to whomever posted it).  I also enjoyed the "Say Goodbye (#2)" piece by Robin Morgan. It really reveals the mysogyny

        happening in some of the media representations of these campaigns. Election 2008 is certain to be difficult for both republicans and democrats.

"Remember folks, voting is your civic duty!" ~Caucus Man

Click here to find out more about Caucus Man!

While I am a fan of Obama (and Hillary--they really both are great candidates), I'm not so much a fan of "Obama Girl." She does little to attract feminists to Obama's campaign, which Obama is really needing at this time. What do you think Caucus Man?

Dear Woman for Obama,

Thanks so much for your letter. I agree with you that Obama Girl does little to draw in feminists. This week I learned that the Obama Girl video was directed by two men. This fact alone greatly changes my perspective of the video. With this said, I think that the video was the beginning of an enormous amount of user created content in support of the Obama campaign. A better, more uniting, video was created by Will.i.am of Black Eyed Peas fame. Yes We Can got more than one million hits per day when it was first released on YouTube, and unlike the Obama Girl video, Yes We Can has been adopted by the Obama camp. As a whole, this presidential campaign has been greatly impacted by user created content and the internet. To learn more about it check out the Tech President Blog.

What do others think about Obama Girl and the new e-campaign trail?

Love and kisses,

Caucus Man

This just in . . .Caucus Man's alter-ego, one 'Nathan Meyer' was sighted last week engaging in partisan politics. Whatever are we, the uninfomed electorate, to do?