RE: nettime New Media Education and Its Discontent

[Nato Thompson]

All these attacks on intellectualism seem to my partially valid, but
generally a little too easy. The same can be said for generalizations
about the American school system. The US higher education system is
extraordinarily vast and modulates depending on its structure. They are
not all career-building machines and they are not radical pedagogians.
But of course, we all know this deep down anyway.

I still would like to throw out there the hope that everyone isn't
absolutely cynical about the idea of the public intellectual.  I guess
I could say left intellectual for the sake of argument (although it's
not exactly what I have in mind). On that tip, I would call Edward Said
(rest in peace) a public intellectual. I would call Gayatri Spivak a
public intellectual. I would call Coco Fusco a public intellectual.
Chomsky of course as well. And maybe even some of you on the list. And I
do believe that many of these folks provide a great service in producing
criticality and thoughtful reflection on contemporary issues. Some have
more visibility than others, and this interests me. These are not just
flurries of rhetoric. I believe Said's contribution to the situation in
Palestine has had legitimate material affects. I do believe that
developing critical constructive dialogue is a key component of radical
democracy and an important part of radical social movements. I don't
find it particularly painful, nor humiliating to believe in the thoughts
of people who have thought carefully about issues. In my experience, I
have grown from such things and I believe other people do as well.

In that vein, I am always keen on figuring out what are the spaces for
these type of folks? Where can this type of speech happen? What are the
infrastructures necessary to support them? What type of legitimation and
distribution is necessary for a type of speech to have strategic
potential? 

Please don't re-iterate that the author is dead. That is just hogwash.
The author isn't dead. We can problematize it, sure. But lets not do so
at the point of negating a constructive discussion with material
consequences. These net inspired post modern desires have got to gain a
little pragmatism paleese! It isn't as though the Right wing believes in
such de-centered virtuosity. Folks like Clear Channel take a particular
interest in controlling the spaces for speech and are far more
successful.  

Chippy chip,
Nato

Art and life have finally merged. The only problem is Life sucks.
-Gregory Sholette

#  distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission
#  nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent

[Nato Thompson]

the irony of this all is that most 'new media' programs -- as in the
ones suffering from discontents (and they certainly do, in large part
because their terrain is ageing 'in internet years') -- are more akin to
polytechnic programs than humanities departments. as such, they
*do* tend to be more practical than philosophical in their orientation.
but many among their faculty were weaned on new-economy expectations
about their own careers and therefore tend to see themselves in terms
that are more philosophical than practical. as a result, i suspect that
many of the discontents diagnosed stem not from students but, rather,
from the teachers for whom the faithless description 'training HTML

I think that Ted Byfield's quote above really hit the nail on the head.
New Media depts. Suffer from the polytechnic field they are inevitably
engulfed in. Many students have already decided that entering into this
department is a career move and hardly have the patience to hear about
esoteric intellectualism as they are quite convinced that it will have
next to know applicability in their plan (which is generally an accurate
statement.) I don't believe it is advisable for Trebor to generalize his
experience to a demonization of American students vs the ever so
valuable European will to learn. I mean lets face it, the US academic
system is so vast and varied that it is inevitable that the student
consumer approach will pervade. (not that I support such an approach
necessarily).

However, I do think that Trebor's concern over anti-intellectualism is
very important to raise. With the Schwarzenneger victory over in
California, we see yet another example of the working class
millionaire. He may be rich but he plays everyday people in films and
tv. Even when Bush Jr. was running for election, his PR team managed to
present an image of a schlepping working class guy who managed a
struggling oil company and down-and-out baseball team. While it seems
absolutely insane for this to be believed: it is! He appeared far more
working class than Gore let alone the stiff, consumer advocate Nader.
Somehow, class tension tends to manifest in a skepticism towards stuffy
intellectuals. 

Intellectuals (and I don't have nearly as much antipathy for them as
Mr. Flagan) could really use a PR team. But what would that require?
Possibly having things to say that are important to everyday people.
Maybe having a visible platform to discuss ideas (Possessing some aspect
of popular media might be nice.) Maybe being relevant and possessing
humility. 

Looking into Alexis De-Tocqueville in his Democracy in America, you find
a clear analysis of this dilemna. And I feel it is a dilemna. Currently,
we are witness to the incredible advantage the right wing has in
positioning themselves as the everyday people's party. It is used over
and over again. Contract with America?? 

I don't particularly think those weened on October magazine and Critical
Inquiry have even conceived of themselves as bowing down to a people's
critical theory but it would be nice. Or not. I am not sure. Ok. Some
intellectuals might be a waste of time. But for those that are not,
alas, new strategies are in order! Generally I find the likes of Michael
Moore who manages to popularly voice critique a signpost for radical
strategies. For intellectuals. I suspect this issue is larger than the
classroom.

Tip top,
nato

-Original Message-
From: monica ross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: nettime : Re: New Media Education and Its Discontent

Re: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 Are Flagan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 This is why your
readymade-for-teacher-conference aphorisms about educators who educate

people to think for themselves stink of the implicit move toward 
intellectual narrowing and oppression that in turn invokes your 
frequent anti-intellectual charge.

isn't the logic of this sentence a bit like saying that people who
encourage free speechstink of the implicit move toward intellectual
narrowing and oppression ? what is all this fear of thinking as a valid
activity in itself? furious students are usually furious about being
 ...

#  distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission
#  nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]