Henry Jenkins mentions a cartoon that “…captures some of the
contradictions surrounding the relations between Media Studies and the ways
that Literature is most often taught in American high schools (p. 104).” This
piece reviews ideas that we have already touched in this course, such as
incorporating multimedia to advanced learning and this notion of “remixing.” Jenkins frames remixing as a form of mash-up, using Herman Melville’s “Moby
Dick as the prime example. When he
described students’ process of “…remixing those elements, retooling that
language, and retelling those stories, they created something that felt fresh
and original to their readers,” I wondered if students were taking a step
beyond analyzing literature to produce creative writing? If so, I wondered how this unit was
imagined, whether digital tools were integrated, and how this mash-up analogy of blending and infusing
genres panned out for student writing.
This piece expanded our prior discussion of “remix” as a buy-in for
students, but was more theoretical and less guided for practical or practiced
examples.
Jenkins’ piece that I found more theoretical was less informative on how to integrate multimedia and digital practices in English curriculum and more insightful about definitions of creative expression, and how we might teach our students literary concepts like “allusion” in unconventional manners that might be more engaging to their daily engagements with technology (by comparing it to a remix). As Jenkin states: “seeing remix as another way into thinking about allusion suggests an answer to a question we often receive from teachers: How can you tell if a remix is good? How can you tell if an allusion is good? (p. 109).” Teaching literary concepts via media, particularly music is of interest to me because I have been examining relationships between rhetorical devices in poetry and how they are analogous to hip-hop music, which is widely consumed by our students in urban school settings.
A grand idea that Jenkins’ highlights is how the digital era has expanded and complicated notions of authorship:
“So, we are making two seemingly contradictory claims here: first, that the digital era has refocused our attention on the expressive potential of borrowing and remixing, expanding who gets to be an author and what counts as authorship, but second, that this new model of authorship is not that radical when read against a larger backdrop of human history… we need to help them to understand the growing centrality of remix practices to our contemporary conception of creative expression, and we need to help them to understand how modern remix relates to much older models of authorship (p. 109).”
Though I am still trying to unpack the complexity of these dual claims, I think it is helpful to help students in urban settings see connections between canonical texts and some of the media that they consume, whether it is hip-hop, contemporary television shows, etc. Rhetorical devices is one approach (literature/poetry and hip-hop), but looking at themes and human struggles could be another (literature/prose and television). For students to assume some sense of authorship (without plagiarizing), they have to assume some authority on the content, and what more convenient way to leverage this than to bring in media that we know speaks to them?
I’ve never implemented any sort of remixing-kind of unit this school year, but I conducted independent research that compared and contrasted the late Bay Area-based emcee Mac Dre and the Shakepearian Fool, Yorick, as he appeared in Hamlet. Mac Dre was at the height of his popularity for the hip-hop subgenre “hyphy music” when I was a high school senior, and if a teacher compared his clownish mannerisms and lyricism to Shakespeare’s “Fool” character trope that is prevalent in a number of his most famous plays, I would have definitely been more engaged in trying to understand and interpret Shakesperian work.
Jenkins’ piece that I found more theoretical was less informative on how to integrate multimedia and digital practices in English curriculum and more insightful about definitions of creative expression, and how we might teach our students literary concepts like “allusion” in unconventional manners that might be more engaging to their daily engagements with technology (by comparing it to a remix). As Jenkin states: “seeing remix as another way into thinking about allusion suggests an answer to a question we often receive from teachers: How can you tell if a remix is good? How can you tell if an allusion is good? (p. 109).” Teaching literary concepts via media, particularly music is of interest to me because I have been examining relationships between rhetorical devices in poetry and how they are analogous to hip-hop music, which is widely consumed by our students in urban school settings.
A grand idea that Jenkins’ highlights is how the digital era has expanded and complicated notions of authorship:
“So, we are making two seemingly contradictory claims here: first, that the digital era has refocused our attention on the expressive potential of borrowing and remixing, expanding who gets to be an author and what counts as authorship, but second, that this new model of authorship is not that radical when read against a larger backdrop of human history… we need to help them to understand the growing centrality of remix practices to our contemporary conception of creative expression, and we need to help them to understand how modern remix relates to much older models of authorship (p. 109).”
Though I am still trying to unpack the complexity of these dual claims, I think it is helpful to help students in urban settings see connections between canonical texts and some of the media that they consume, whether it is hip-hop, contemporary television shows, etc. Rhetorical devices is one approach (literature/poetry and hip-hop), but looking at themes and human struggles could be another (literature/prose and television). For students to assume some sense of authorship (without plagiarizing), they have to assume some authority on the content, and what more convenient way to leverage this than to bring in media that we know speaks to them?
I’ve never implemented any sort of remixing-kind of unit this school year, but I conducted independent research that compared and contrasted the late Bay Area-based emcee Mac Dre and the Shakepearian Fool, Yorick, as he appeared in Hamlet. Mac Dre was at the height of his popularity for the hip-hop subgenre “hyphy music” when I was a high school senior, and if a teacher compared his clownish mannerisms and lyricism to Shakespeare’s “Fool” character trope that is prevalent in a number of his most famous plays, I would have definitely been more engaged in trying to understand and interpret Shakesperian work.
ThoaaaiiiIIIyuh,
ReplyDeleteI was ALSO left quite curious as to the form taken by the work reported on. Though lovely things were said ABOUT the remixed works produced, what we read were intellectual interpretations. I couldn't help but wonder if Jenkins took used his academic background and linguistic capacity to generously interpret the actual work done by students--much like West's intriguing and questionable complication of the "tempered rebel" Evan's use of the webspeak colloquialism "wtf". Though the idea of the remix was made conceptually attractive by this piece, it was left somewhat disappointingly underdeveloped for an audience of teachers.
Also, part of the complexity of the "dual claims" you mention, I think, comes from some resistance Jenkins seemed to anticipate from students with regard to seeing remixes as valid creation. I don't know about you, but I can't much imagine experiencing that kind of resistance from my students. If I found it arose, perhaps, then I could launch into an explanation of former conceptions of creativity, but without resistance, I see very limited need for such talk.