Culture: April 2006 Archive Page

Alloy's team craft the proposal, shape the plot and create characters. Even the writing of the book is often farmed out to a team of authors. The process is more similar to television writing than most readers' idea of the creation of a novel and the packaging closer to creating a boy band than promoting a new literary star.

Among Alloy's hit series are The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, recently made into a film, and the Sweet Valley High books, which became a TV series. This weekend Alloy had three books in the New York Times children's paperback bestseller list. It did not return calls for comment.

After Alloy's input, Opal was picked up by Little Brown, a division of media giant Time Warner. Little Brown, too, was unavailable for comment. --'Lit chick' debacle that damns the publishers (Times Online)

If this is true, then it may be true that Kaavya Viswanathan really didn't intend to plagiarize from Megan McCafferty's novels, since it's theoretically possible that a ghostwriter did the plagiarizing for her.

It was in Romania, while making a film about Ceausescu, that I first stumbled across the historical legacy of the communist joke. There I learned that a clerk from the Bucharest transport system, Calin Bogdan Stefanescu, had spent the last ten years of Ceausescu's regime collecting political jokes. He noted down which joke he heard and when, and analysed his total of over 900 jokes statistically. He measured the time gap between a political event and a joke about that event, and then drew up a graph measuring the varying velocity of Romanian communist jokes. He was also able to assert--somewhat tenuously--that there was a link between jokes and the fall of Ceausescu, since jokes about the leader doubled in the last three years of the regime. The story of Stefanescu, the statistician of jokes, was, ironically, much funnier than the jokes themselves. It seemed to capture the prosaic reality of the little man struggling against the communist universe. --Ben Lewis --Hammer & Tickle (Prospect)

The Connections class for fall 2006 is going to do a session on SHU etiquette centering around how students can appropriately present themselves to faculty and staff on campus. E-mail, phone, meetings, classroom, verbal encounters are all open for discussion.

With this in mind, will you please give your replies to the following so that we can relay to the students what SHU expects of them.

E-mail me your comments when done.

YOUR COMMENTS WILL BE ANONYMOUS!!!!

Thank You,

Lynda Sukolsky

Please share with others on campus that will have some comments to make on this subject


What is your best piece of advice on how to interact with faculty/staff appropriately?

What is your pet peeve in the classroom around student behavior?

How would you instruct a student to e-mail and/or phone you?

When meeting with a student, the student should....

Additional advice or "don't ever do this".

BONUS-- anyone have any real life stories they can share of what not to do? ALL PARTIES REMAIN ANONYMOUSWhat is your best piece of advice on how to interact with faculty/staff appropriately? (Seton Hill University -- Connections)

It's our obligation as members of an educational community to tell our students what behavior is appropriate, and to reinforce our expectations on a regular basis. Asking students to investigate the boundaries is a great opportunity to get them thinking about such expectations. This time of year, I'm sure plenty of SHU faculty and staff will share horror stories.

But I'm concerned that our contributions may contribute to the impression that we hate students, or that we think they aren't capable of improvement.

It's not only students who violate social norms. I've worked with professors or staff members who put girle pics on their screen savers (visible from the hallway), abused their positions of authority in the classroom during election season, mocked students behind their backs, misused university equipment (taking laptops home over the weekend so their teenagers could play games with it, then returning the laptop on Monday infested with a virus that incapacitated the software I was hired to use... I'm still bitter about that, in case you can't tell), hit "send" without thinking, and left telephone messages when they were too angry to see straight.

And while I have plenty examples of student missteps to contribute, every day I work with students who are better writers, more advanced thinkers, more socially conscious citizens, and simply better human beings than I was when I was an undergrad.

This world premiere will blend Rock, Tango, Jazz and Punk music with contemporary dance to re-imagine Karel Čapek's original 1921 classic, R.U.R (Rossum's Universal Robots). Čapek's play that started it all, introducing the word ROBOT into the world's lexicon and into our fantasies, is reexamined for the 21st Century. --R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal Robots): A Futurist Folk Opera (Adhesive Theater)

Thanks for the link, Rosemary. I love the play (R.U.R.). Wish I could be there.

Agent Marks and I were uncertain how to end it, but thankfully, our undercover agents came to our rescue. They mounted a joke insurgence and effectively re-took the NJZ. It started off with each undercover agent coming into the zone, one after another, telling jokes in a town-crier fashion. --Guerilla Improv: No Joking Zone (Improv-Abilities)

A great piece of activist anti-comedy.

If more people did this, we could just walk out on the streets for our amusement, and wouldn't be lashed to the TV set.

This week I am going to ask you to participate in a media fast for TV Turn-Off Week, as part of the Media Fasting Reflection due on May 3.

If you give up TV, but watch DVDs on your computer, are you really making any progress? If you turn off the TV, but turn up your iPod, are you really taking control of the technology that defines our lives?

Confession time:

While we don't have cable TV, we do have a fairly big library of kid videos. Sometimes I'll put on a video for them and sit on the couch with my laptop, answering e-mail, despamming my blog, marking a paper, or fiddling with my digital camera. If the movie ends and I'm not finished, I'll get them interested in the bloopers or deleted scenes. So my desire to spend time on the internet leads directly to their exposure to more TV.

I've tried to address that by creating "the book game," which involves Peter (8) picking out a book, Carolyn (4) picking out a book, and me picking out a book. Peter and Carolyn will sit on the couch, and Peter will read all the books to Carolyn. Yes, on one level this is very good, but I'm conscious that I use "the book game" when I want to see what's happening on the blogosphere.

I also sometimes use "the book game" to avoid playing with my daughter's Barbie. So while naturally as an English teacher and a parent I'm going to say that books are good, here I'm turning to media -- books -- when my daughter is asking me for one-on-one attention. (It's not the idea of playing dolls with my daughter that bothers me. Why, the other day I was playing with my daughter's pony castle, and I made an army of insect peasants rise up in rebellion against their pony overlords. They fought an epic battle, and our leaders -- a horned beetle and Pinky Pie (tm) agreed to settle this dispute in single combat, then had a tea party, had a bath together, and took a nap. But Barbie just kind of lies there staring up at me.) --Dennis G. Jerz --Introduction to Media Fasting (Introduction to Literary Study)

Don't think you're addicted to TV? Then why not prove it by going cold turkey for a week? You'd be surprised how difficult it can be to disconnect -- and what a profound week of self discovery it can be. --TV Turnoff Week April 24-30, 2006 (Adbusters.org)

I'm planning to ask my Intro to Literary Study students to participate in a media fast. (If they can't go cold turkey, they can at least exercise their self-control by being more selective about how they spend their time.)

You can like a poem before you understand it, and be moved by it, and in fact, that is a sign that you're starting to understand it, that you're reading the poem in a good way. Being moved by a poem -- laughing or feeling sad or full of longing -- or being excited by it, or feeling (maybe you don't know why) the "rightness" of the poem is a serious part of reading and liking poetry. You may find what you read to be beautiful, or be reminded of places and times, or find in it another way to look at things. All this can help you to understand the poem because it brings it closer to you, makes it a part of your experience. And the better you understand a good poem, the more you'll like it. --Kenneth Koch --Reading Poetry -- from Sleeping on the Wing (Random House)

I came across this passage out of context on another website, and recognized it as being from the introduction of a collection of poems I've taught from before.

Five, the television channel, denied it was disappointed that Diamond, a radio and TV presenter and outspoken Daily Star columnist, had decided against being crucified. No date has been set for the broadcast of the programme. If shown, it may have to change its original working title, Crucify Me. --Nico Hines --'God made me cancel my own crucifixion' (Times Online)

In my Intro to Literary Study class, I'm teaching Arthur Miller's Resurrection Blues -- a play about a TV commercial director hired to film the crucifixion of a rebel leader in a Central American country.

The saccharine sweet family shows of the 50s and 60s gave way to harder biting social commentaries like All in the Family. In 1967, the same year that CBS television ended a 17-year blacklisting of folksinger Pete Seeger, President Johnson signed legislation to establish the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), asserting that "we have only begun to grasp the great promise of the medium and noting that noncommercial television was reaching only "a fraction of its potential audience -- and a fraction of its potential worth. As part of the legislation, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was to launch major research on instructional television in the classroom. The $9 million investment in CPB in 1967 (about $47 million in today's dollars) has grown to over $300 million in annual funding today. Unlike television, the meteoric rise of computer and video games over the past decade has gone largely unnoticed except by the digiteratti and cultural anthropologists cruising web zines and blogs. This may be because games are not a technology per se, but applications that slip into our lives on the backs of existing technologies, from computers, to televisions and cell phones. They are less hardware and more software. Like many mass culture phenomena, games are understood more on the basis of prevailing myths than reality. Few people realize that the average gamer is 30 years old, that over 40 percent are female, and that most adult gamers have been playing games for 12 years.

One reason myths shape public perceptions is because few universities have seen computer games as worthy of serious academic study, robbing the discourse around games of robust data on their use characteristics, effects, and potential value. There is, of course, the annual Congressional attack on the game world and its denizens, calling for more control of violent games and, like our TV-addicted forebearers, warning of dire consequences to mind and family. Politicians have conveniently made computer games a target of derision rather than a pedagogical ally or tool for public engagement.

The best kept secret in the world of computer and video games is the rise of a movement ? now in the thousands -- of gamers dedicated to applying games to serious challenges such as education, training, medical treatment, or better government. The Serious Games movement is in many ways today's equivalent of yesterday's advocates for non-commercial, educational TV, who knew that the potential of the medium was unrealized and went far beyond pure entertainment. --David Rejeski --Why We Need a Corporation for Public Gaming (Serious Games Source)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. --The Bill of Rights: Amendment I

The First Amendment, among other things, prevents the government from arresting or silencing a citizen for expressing an unpopular or offensive opinion that powerful people may not want to hear.

It is also popularly misunderstood as a magical powerup that protects authors from the consequences of exercising free speech.

My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins. Or, as the Ninth Amendment puts it, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Thus, your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness takes precedence over my freedom of speech.

The owner of a theatre has a right and obligation to other patrons to eject someone who falsely shouts "fire," just as an airline has a right and obligation to single out for extra security screening someone who makes a joke about carrying a bomb.

If an employee makes a racist or otherwise insensitive remark, the employer has the right and obligation to discipline the employee. Even if that employee remark does not amount to libel, the livelihood of co-workers who are not responsible for the employee's remarks may be affected if customers see the company as permitting insensitive behavior.

If a football player insults an assistant coach, the head coach can order him to run laps. If the player isn't willing to do the punishment, then he's free to quit the team. The coach is free to order the team to wear pink tutus and ballet slippers, and the NFL is free to discipline the coach, or give him a raise if they want to. But whatever happens, it's not a First Amendment issue, because the laws of Congress have nothing to do with the matter.

The First Amendment does not require that a citizen be furnished with a platform from which to speak. Thus, if group X invites Sally to speak at a meeting, and Joe shows up with a bullhorn to interrupt Sally's speech, Joe's rights are not being violated if the police show up and escort him out of the building. The First Amendment is also not a shield behind which one can hide after publishing libel, defamation, or threats against specific individuals or small groups. It does not insist that owners of private property permit protestors to camp on their front lawns, or spray paint graffiti on their walls. It does not require that city authorities stand by idly while marchers tie up traffic. It does not prohibit schools from disciplining students who post vulgar or offensive MySpace entries.

There are many good arguments for why tolerance and open-mindedness are the best default practice, particularly in educational communities where people need to be free to make mistakes in order to learn from them. However, in no case does the First Amendment protect the speaker from the consequences of the choice to speak freely. Those consequences might range from losing an election to losing your job; from losing a friend to losing your good name.


It's purely a coincidence that I'm blogging on the First Amendment the day after some Seton Hill students launched a petition to cancel classes on the Monday after Easter. That calendar had been set over a year in advance -- almost two years, really. I know both the students who spearheaded the petition, and think of them both as upstanding citizens. I have no sense that the administration can, will, or even might respond with sanctions.

The First Amendment protects their right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances," but since the Seton Hill administration is not "the government," the First Amendment would have absolutely no relevance.

None.

But if those students had chosen to libel, harass, threaten, or make personal attacks, the university would be perfectly within its rights to respond with sanctions.*

If you want to say something that violates a contract with an employer, jeopardizes your enrollment with an educational institution, or flaunts the conditions of membership in the local treehouse club, the government won't arrest you. But your employer, your institution, and your clubhouse president are likewise free to apply whatever sanctions they feel are appropriate.

* Just in case any student is worried that I've gotten inkling of some administrative crackdown, let me repeat -- I'm not actually blogging this First Amendment piece out of concern that there was anything wrong with the petition. (I signed it, by the way, and told my class that as long as they do the work that's due Monday, and participate in a discussion via their blogs, that's fine with me.)

One of our administrators pointed out that she actually proposed the Friday/Monday plan that the students want, but was pressured to change that to Thursday/Friday because, as a Catholic college (so the argument went) we should be more sensitive to the liturgical significance of Holy Thursday (the day Jesus shared the Last Supper with his apostles) rather than the Monday after Easter (which is.. I don't know? the day the apostles showed up to work late because they didn't make it back from Jerusalem in time).

Michael Smith, professor in Temple University's College of Education and coauthor of Reading Don't Fix No Chevys, said the language of crisis was overblown but noted that the facts are plain: Boys read later than girls and lag them in both reading and writing across grades. They read fewer books, and value reading less.

"If you go to your local high school, the basic-track classes are dominated by boys, and the AP courses are dominated by girls," Smith said.

It's not that boys aren't reading, he said. It's just that the things they are reading - comic books, video game manuals, sports magazines - aren't valued by schools.

"We have to create the conditions that support the boys' areas of strengths," Smith said. --Gender Gap Greater in Reading (Philly.com)

Yes, you did read that right. And also, yes, this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

In response to these facts, a global warming devotee will chuckle and say "how silly to judge climate change over such a short period". Yet in the next breath, the same person will assure you that the 28-year-long period of warming which occurred between 1970 and 1998 constitutes a dangerous (and man-made) warming. Tosh. Our devotee will also pass by the curious additional facts that a period of similar warming occurred between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate.

Does something not strike you as odd here? --Bob Carter -- There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998 (Telegraph)

I'm not really sure what I think. Certainly recycling and avoiding waste are sensible, but when well-meaning activists use bad science to back up their claims, reason suffers.

My Students Impressed Me Today (Jerz's Literacy Weblog)

In my "Intro to Literary Study" class, I assigned Arthur Miller's recent play, Resurrection Blues. At the beginning of the class term, I told my students that it wouldn't be in the bookstore yet because Amazon.com said the book wouldn't be published until early February, just a few weeks after classes started.

When the book did arrive, I let them know it was in the bookstore. Because I know that the bookstore returns unsold copies shortly after midterms, I warned them in early March to pick up their books, or to order them online.

A week ago, I reminded them that the next book we were going to cover was the one that arrived in the bookstore late, and I asked who had already picked up a copy. Only one student's hand went up.

Then, the other day, one of the other students stopped me in the cafeteria and said, "The bookstore already returned that book, and there are about nine of us who don't have copies."

I tried to be pleasant, but I didn't say, "Oh, that's too bad, we'll have to reorganize the syllabus to account for your lack of planning."

This morning, fully expecting most of the students to show up unprepared, I collected their 200-word reflection papers (which is something I usually don't do, though I warned them at the beginning of the term that I might do it sometimes), and announced that I was reorganizing the syllabus.

I didn't go on to say "to account for your lack of planning," but that was only because I was sure it didn't need to be said. I was tsk-tsking at them and pointing out how I kind and magnanimous I was, since I wasn't giving them a pop quiz to slam their grades, that really affected the beginning of the class. But then I looked more closely, and saw that at least three students had copies of the book on their desks, and it turned out that most of the other students had managed to borrow whatever copies were available.

While a few students still weren't prepared, enough of them were that we could have had a decent discussion. I told them that I had come to class all prepared to be crabby and disappointed, and that I was sorry I had underestimated their responsibility.

In 1969 the US Senate had a hearing on funding the newly developed Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The proposed endowment was $20 million, but President Nixon wanted it cut in half because of the spending going on in the Vietnam War. This is an video clip of the exchange between Mr. Rogers and Senator Pastore, head of the hearing. Senator Pastore starts out very abrasive and by the time Mr. Rogers is done talking...
--Won't You Be My Neighbor? (YouTube.com)

While you wait for that 6-minute video to load (it took a long time, but it's worth it), you might want to check out "It's a Didactic Day in the Neighborhood" and "A Sudden Case of 'Routine Maintenance' in the Neighborhood of Make-Believe."

This clip is like a real-life "David and Goliath," except that Rogers, in his simple eagerness, doesn't defeat the powerful adversary. He does something even more heroic -- he wins him over.

O'Connor's depiction of humanity's struggle with surrender and submission touched me more deeply than most of the modern works I've read lately. At one point--when Hulga starts shushing the boy and trying to seduce him into atheism--I actually felt some kind of strong internal reaction and inexplicably threw the book across the room. I felt repulsed, furious, and horrified all at the same time. Very few stories have ever drilled that far into my core, and it was certainly a surprise to me. --Chris Ulicne --O'Connor, Good Country People: What is the meaning of this? (Below Zero)

For the past few weeks, in my American Lit class we've been reading A Good Man is Hard to Find, a collection of short stories by Flannery O'Connor. The students have responded very well to the stories, though Chris's reaction is unusually strong. I'm glad to know these works are having an effect on my students. I've been trying to get the students to discuss how O'Connor uses dark images and themes because without them, there's no way to emphasize light.