Read 15-69 of Kluger's Still Alive. Stephanie (lecture) and Elim (book) will do the kickoff.
You and your partner(s) should post 10-12 lines of dialogue below for your assigned characters on the subject of "what is a community/city/family/nation/swaraj/etc?"
Sign up for a Friday prospectus conference here. Please do this a.s.a.p!
Random: A new article about Jane Jacobs. One about cell phone usage in contemporary India. A radio broadcast about the politics of naming. A summer job for students interested in political doing. And an excellent lecture at UCI on Tuesday afternoon about "Asian-American Rhetoric."
Research Prospectus (due Thursday night at 9pm):
Write your prospectus in paragraph form. These are guidelines for what you should try to accomplish in each paragraph, but they're not necessarily in order, and they don't necessarily require equal space. You may notice that the sample prospectus I gave you before does all of these things, but in a completely different order. The purpose of this exercise is simply to create a preview of your research project so that you and I both know what we're getting into. You might also consider this. Shoot for 1 to 1.5 pages single-spaced.
Paragraph 1
-your topic (one aspect of this might be clarifying what your topic ISN'T)
-how it relates to the theories we've studied in Core this year
-the key research questions you will answer
-your preliminary hypothesis for answering them
-you might include some kind of section outline (in my first section, I will focus on X, in my second section on Y, in my third section on Z, etc.)
Paragraph 2:
-Summarize existing research on the topic
-Focus in particular on your shovel(s), since you won't have read most of the rest
-Even without having read all of the sources, indicate which you think will be most useful
-It might be appropriate to use short quotations from the shovel(s) here
Paragraph 3:
-Gaps in existing research (you don't need to have read everything to get a sense of this)
-Flaws/mistakes in existing research
-Disagreements in existing research
-It might be appropriate to use short quotations here
-How your paper will address these gaps/flaws/disagreements (model: think about how Savarkar does this)
-Your general timetable and plan of action (what's next, etc.)
Paragraph 4:
-Why is your research timely or important?
-Why should anyone care about your research?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is just a reminder to myself.
ReplyDeletePlato vs. Davis (Mark, Lorena)
Alberti vs. Lenin (Sarah D, Christine)
Sophocles vs. Shakespeare (Ankita, Priya)
Dada vs. Aristotle (Marcee, Joanna)
Bauhaus vs. Vira (Ivan, Yen)
Austen vs. Hitler (Sarab B, Rosa)
Gladwell vs. Savarkar (Roselaine, Marko)
Kleist vs. Gandhi vs. Gershwin (Elim, Aubrey, Steve)
Morrison vs. Stalin (Stephanie, Monique)
Brecht vs. Jacobs (Kiyomi, Annie)
Stephanie and Monique :
ReplyDeleteStalin and Morrison are at Zot-n-Go sitting on benches and begin debating the definition of community. Both agree that community has to do with family but while Stalin sees family as a means to serve the nation, Morrisons thinks family is for the caring and nurturing each other.
Stalin: I believe that familial responsibility is for a mother and father to to work for the country and raise good Russian citizens who will also grow up to be hard workers.
Morrison: What about how they care for each other? Does that not matter? Just because they are good workers doesn't make them good parents.
Stalin: You're being to focused on the individual. A community should be about the group and not each individual family. How significant is it that each person is a good parent? The only duty of a parent is to realise hardworking future citizens.
Morrison: but even if you care about the state, you should care about how each individual is raised because it has an effect on the quality of people. Why would someone who doesn't love their parents want to work hard for them?
Stalin: Because the work is evenly distributed between husband and wife, the children will get enough love and care naturally.
MOrrison: But what of those who aren't blood relatives?
Stalin: We are all working for a common goal. To improve our Communist state by working hard and to stay warm in cold Siberian winters.
Morrison: Because I a wise woman, I will agree to disagree with you.
Stalin: You're not welcome in Russia.
This is a good model for the rest to follow. They have Stalin arguing for the family as an appendage of the all-important state community, and Morrison defending a more traditional notion of the family based on a quasi-Christian ethics of each individual being responsible to each other. One thing that could be added is that both S & M seem to reject the notion that a community must be made out of people with the same genome. Recall Soviet anti-racism, as well as Morrisson's own anti-racism and her ideas about surrogate family members.
ReplyDeleteChristine Alanis and Sarah Devine
ReplyDeleteAlberti and Lennin
Alberti: So during the 19th Century, I hear that Russians have created their own art work using Communist influence.
Lennin/Communist party: Yes, the artwork focuses on community life and collectivism for the country.
Alberti: So each piece of art has limited and a linear istoria?
Lennin/Communist party: A limited istoria? Why no. The istoria of each painting tells the many beauties that Communist Russia promotes and believes in. We believe highly of collectivism through the people and their communities that build their nation.
Alberti: Well what is a community in Communist Russia?
Lennin/ Communist party: A community is a collected group of people in a region working for each other and share each others’ fruits of labor.
Alberti: Is that all?
Lennin/Communist party: More or less. What are your thoughts?
Alberti: Well, a community can be a group of people living in a similar region, but have different occupations and interests. Perhaps a community can be based solely on a group of people coming together for a similar interest. People have different perceptions and thoughts of what a community is. Each community has own stories and thoughts.
Lennin/Communist party: There should only be one correct definition of a community.
Alberti: Perhaps you should go around and talk to others about this matter. It would definitely be better for Russia’s paintings if your painters did the same.
Alberti comes off a bit wishy washy about communities here. He would believe in a hierarchy of abilities (thus social classes). Not just "everyone's different." In other words he would believe some occupations are more important than others... that's where he would really differ from Lenin. That's a good point about his criticism of Society art, though. (Oh, and you mean 20th century... the Soviet revolution doesn't happen until 1917.)
ReplyDeletePlus Alberti seems to be primarily concerned with the city as a social unit. Lenin is leading a national movement with aspirations to being an international one.
ReplyDeleteWe tried real hard.
ReplyDeleteSavakar: India needs to be free from its British oppressors because that is the only way we can create our own community. Don't you agree Gladwell?
Gladwell: I don’t know what the big deal is? British presence in India can be beneficial, not to mention the opportunity two nations have to produce diversity in fashion and maybe even the new “cool”
Savakar: Cool hunting? How could you be talking about fashion at this time? I argue for self-rule which is necessary to make India’s people feel a sense of their community and nation state of
India.
Gladwell: I see where you are coming from but as my Jacobs-inspired article says, you are “isolating” people from other influences, which is bad because then there is no real interactions and interaction means relationships, relationships that bring meaning to the word "community".
Savakar: There could still be interactions, but only among the Indian people.
Gladwell: Think of it this way. When you seal off executives and high positioned workers in private offices, what kind of social connections and interactions will they have with other workers. You are essentially sealing India in an office by rejecting the possibility of British benefits to your nation. What kinds of international connections can India have if you attack all that is foreign?
Savarkar: I am not attacking what is foreign, I am protecting both my country and my religion, and I employ others to do the same in concordance with the principles of swaraj and swadharma.
Gladwell: Sometimes I think you fight in the name of religion because you know it’s persuasive and dare I say, “cool”, just like Kohlhaas. “Laggards” on the cool trends are generally thought of as the least in the fashion community’s eyes.
Savarkar: You called me Kohlhaas. And just like Kohlhaas, I am fighting against oppression, by attacking the oppressor. In order to be successful, India becomes a revolutionary community by taking it’s cue from history and, by any means possible, expelling the British out of India. I cannot agree that following a trend makes revolution lagging in cool if it ends in a community becoming the great nation the gods say it should be.
Gladwell: What would you do after the revolution? On the international level I find it hard to believe an isolated India can prevent itself from falling behind in accordance with the rest of the world without drawing from some form of foreign presence. It’s an abstract connection, but America and Japan for example, often fuse their latest fashion trends to produce something cool and modern. This increases the size of your community, think of all the interactions and acquaintances different countries can make.
Savarkar: We are detracting from the fact that the British are oppressors. A community is one that will form acquaintances among themselves while working toward a common end. In this case it is securing swaraj from the British with swadharma in mind. This is less about your ideas of diversity and equality in a community and more about justice.
Gladwell: Seems I have the last word. You certainly are firm in forming a revolutionary community for your cause. Just keep in mind that a community can be much larger than your army. A community formed by different nations, cities, and companies working together can build fashion industries that generate millions. Think of what that kind of teamwork can do for the political relationships of countries.
Marko & Roselaine
That last one is very good. You even managed to work in Kohlhaas. One of the interesting things about it is that India has actually become a place for coolhunting (and coolhunters) in the Gladwell mold, in the past 10-15 years. And on the other hand it still has Hindu nationalists. So that's actually one of the major conflicts in contemporary India.
ReplyDeleteThe one thing I'd change is that you have Gladwell arguing for larger communities at the end, when he should probably be arguing for smaller ones, and for crisscrossing and intersecting ones.
Kiyomi Iihara and Annie Ditta:
ReplyDeleteBertolt Brecht vs. Jane Jacobs Dialogue
Premise: Bertolt Brecht and Jane Jacobs are sitting on a sidewalk, watching the people go by. Nearby there is a park where no one seems to be going. Feeling like she is in her element, Jacobs addresses Brecht, questioning his views on cities as communities. Brecht argues that everyone in a city should work together, doing similar things to achieve equality for all, and no one should have more power than another. Jacobs counters this, asserting that people should interact and from this interaction, proper society and city life is generated.
Jacobs: Isn’t the sidewalk ballet just magnificent? It’s so wonderful to see people meeting with one another as they go about their daily business, no matter where they are from. This is what truly creates a community – the interactions between these differing people.
Brecht: I suppose this is true, but even as you watch them, don’t you see the different levels of power at work here? There are the hardworking families who go to work every day, and then there are the delinquents on the streets stirring up trouble. Don’t you think that everyone should be equal, with no one viewed as lesser than another simply because of income and status?
Jacobs: That is too idealistic of a world. Differences are good for a community, as it produces the life of cities. If everyone worked at the same type of thing every day, there would be no one out on the streets. The city would be as dead as the park over there – useless to the city and detrimental to the people.
Brecht: But if you let it get too far with differences, a gap becomes apparent. The rich become richer while the opportunities for the poor grow smaller. These differences then generate tension, and this cannot be good.
Jacobs: They are good, as long as people protect the children of the community, as they are the future. As a mother, I place high priority on protection of the weak, especially our fragile children.
Brecht: Then you should agree with me on this next point. Don’t you think that people with power can abuse it? What of communities in war situations, in which an individual with too much power sends the weaker individuals off to their pointless deaths? Not all people fall to this, but what of the few that do? Differences in this case cannot be good.
Jacobs: I suppose you are right, but it is not the city that generates these individuals. It is the interactions in public places such as this sidewalk that produce change.
Brecht: Right. So if it is these interactions that produce change, then shouldn’t everyone be doing the same thing so that these power differences never enter people’s minds?
Jacobs: Well, I guess that’s fine, just as long as people can still interact on the way to their same form of work.
Brecht: I’m glad that you could see things my way.
Gandhi: I want to tell you guys of communities. I think a community needs to be a set of people separated from outside rule. Do you see this?
ReplyDeleteKleist: I think a community should be ruled by people but not by corrupted government authorities. If there is a government, it needs to act fairly.
Gershwin: I believe a community is a group of people connected by a common religion and identity.
Gandhi: They are connected, yes, but the people also have to interact with each other peacefully and grow together through means of self-improvement.
Kleist: But it doesn’t seem possible for everyone to always interact with everyone else peacefully! How would things ever get done?
Gershwin: If the people work well with each other, it will be good and they can accomplish things together.
Gandhi: Well, everyone in the community should be accepting and understanding if they are improving themselves and being truthful.
Kleist: But then, people need to take matters into their own hands to get what they want if they know they are acting how they believe is morally right with integrity.
Gershwin: I know because there are those few that just might really stand out among a community or are opposed to you that you feel are doing wrong.
Gandhi: I wish for inclusiveness among all of them and living in harmony.
Kleist: I don’t see how there could ever be so much harmony among all people. Everyone is very different and want or need different things.
Gershwin: The differences will be there, but you can still get to know a lot of the people in your community and build your trust among each other; you can see yourselves as a family.
Gandhi: You should be treated like you would treat immediate family. When making sweets for your own children, consider making sweets for all the children in the village as well!
Kleist: I don’t know if that would be what I am really supposed to do.
Gershwin: If you’re strong in yourself and you know what is better that you need to do, at least you’ll keep from falling weak and doing something wrong or going back to your old ways.
Yen = Vira
ReplyDeleteIvan = Bauhaus
What is a community?
Vira: I would define a community as a network of people that have someone to rule over them, but preferably someone who has root and connection with it's people. What do you think a community is?
Bauhaus: A community is a society where each person learns an art/craft and interacts with one another. The community should be a modern community that strives for a utopia. There should be some superior rule in the community as well, preferably learned people. What do you feel about outsiders and the community?
Vira: I believe that foreign rule is worst of all. As a priest, I have established authority amongst the people, and am therefore more qualified than any foreign agents.
Bauhaus: Anyone can join our community. As long as everyone takes part in the work needed to make the community thrive, then they are welcome. Walter Gropius created the Bauhaus as an arts and crafts school, and that's what takes precedence in our community.
Vira: Also in a community, the people would unite and fight for their rights if they were ever to be threatened.
Bauhaus: In our community, we wouldn't need to fight because we just want unity and peace in a "futuristic" society of arts and architecture.
Vira: What do you think should happen to earnings within your community? Any earnings within a village should go to a leader that will think and make decisions on behalf of its people.
Bauhaus: I think that a community should have its own form of money. For example, in our community, we have bills for enormous amounts of value (such as 500,000 and 1,000,000 dollar bills). This money would be used and "recycled" within the community. Lastly, I would like to know what you think makes a community sound.
Vira: A community should be attuned with its god. What makes a sound community is its religious aspect.
Bauhaus: I believe differently; what makes a sound community isn't religion, but is instead the arts and crafts along with technology. Expressionism allows the individuals of the community and the community as a whole to express themselves, thus making a sound community (acceptance of others' ideals will create mutual peace).
Sophocles (Ankita) and Shakespeare (Priya) meet at the banquet that follows an International Authors Conference:
ReplyDeleteSoph: Greetings! My name is Sophocles and I am from Athens. I have written many books that are based on Greek myths. What is your name, Sir?
Shakes: My dear Sir, my name is William Shakespeare and I am from London. I too have written numerous plays and poetry.
Soph: Indeed! I have heard about you. You tend to put twists to common tales and present them interesting ways. However, the one that intrigues me the most is your play about the May Day. My memory fails me what was it called?
Shakes: A Midsummer Night’s Dream! I was on crack when I wrote it.
[Soph Laughs]
Soph: What did you think about the conference?
Shakes: I thought that the discussion about defining a community was interesting. At times my opinions regarding what makes up a community largely differed from yours.
Soph: Is that so? My opinion was solely based on how I have experienced government. You see, I come from Athens, which is a Direct Democracy. Our community makes up of citizens and elected officials. I feel that our system is tightly knit, as each person decides what laws are to be made through votes. A community, according to me, is where people have a system of checking the mistakes of others. There are no discrepancies in power. This community is where all men decide, with a vote, how the whole country will be run. No one man has more powers. In short, a community is made up of different people who are equal in standing, when it comes to making laws and enforcing them.
Shakes: That is indeed where our views differ. According to me, a community is made up of people, which are placed in different levels of power. The Queen is at the top level of the community, who has absolute say in every law that is made. The next come the Aristrocrats who, due to their status, can influence the laws that the Queen makes. The next level is made of commoners like me, who simply live adhere to those laws made by them.
Soph: Ah! So you come from a Monarchy, but that is a difference in government. How does your definition of community differ?
Shakes: The main difference is that we give equal preference to men AND women. As you may notice, a woman is the head of what makes up our country. In your definition, you did not mention women whatsoever. Although, I have to admit that the government does equally distribute power among all its subjects. The task of making and enforcing laws is given to a selected few and the commoner has no control over it. There are no votes!
Soph: I see. So the type of government plays an important role in the definition of community as laws bind its subjects together.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMark and Lorena
ReplyDeleteDavis: A community is an institution where people build barriers to be able to cope with each other and live next door to others and still feel safe.
Phaedrus: NO! a community is a form of brotherhood where the love between brothers is so powerful that it can overcome any endeavor thrown in its path.
Davis: but, don’t you know that it is natural for us to lead and live out our personal lives in private and not showcase it to the rest of the community? We have this need to separate our social and private lives to keep certain people away; not bring them closer like a brotherhood.
Phaedrus: The brotherhood is the most important aspect to a community; it brings the community together, closer so that we can all learn to cooperate with each other. If you have a brotherhood, there would be no reason to put up these barriers you speak of, because we would all be comfortable being around each other.
Davis: If you really think about this Phaedrus, each community tries to create bonds with each other by getting along, but we all still aim to keep our personal lives within the confines of the boundaries we create. If everyone loved each other, we wouldn’t be living in the world we live in today.
Phaedrus : What? You say that if we all loved each other, we would not exist?
Davis: That’s exactly what I’m saying…It makes the most sense. Its something that we all do naturally, we don’t expose everything to everyone.
Phaedrus: And that is why I said we should build brotherhoods, because if you had a brotherhood, you wouldn’t be afraid to expose your most inner personal thoughts and ideas to others. You would learn to love each other, you would learn to become a family, and build a better community.
Davis: I still don’t understand how you can build a brotherhood that incorporates everybody. Nothing can accomodate everybody, thats why we need separation.
Phaedrus: being in a brotherhood, family or community doesn’t mean you have to question another person’s intentions; you just have to learn to support them, and if you don’t think what they’re doing is correct, then you have to learn how to give them advice. And for you, my brother, I am advising you that the brotherhood is the best way to build a better community; and that is the most efficient form of this type of institution.
Davis: I understand what you’re trying to explain to me, but I do not agree with your idea. I just don’t believe that its possible to do, it doesn’t exactly make sense in my mind; but I guess if you can have your opinion, I can have mine.
Austen:...what a lovely dog, may I inquire as to the breed?
ReplyDeleteHitler: Ah, it is a German shepard, pure blood German shepard
Austen: really?
Hitler: Indeed, only PURE GERMAN is the best type of breed
Austen: But what is the significance of it being a pure german?
Hitler: you do not know the significance? Why, pure German, true Aryan, that's the master race, the race whose fate and destiny is to rule all
Austen: good breeding is important, but is it to only be for the greater good and temporary success in fortune, or is it to be a deeper connection.
Hitler: that Germany produce only pure Germans is for the greater good, the greater good of the motherland and the world. but it is not temporary like you say. the German Reich shall stand for a 1000 years!
Austen: then is merit not taken into consideration? Not just the qualities present at birth? Hitler: for the Aryan race, birth IS merit
Austen: but if merit is not considered then how is one to raise in his/her community's social hierarchy?
Hitler: social hierarchy of a community? why there is no such thing! in the motherland's perfect community all Germans are the same because there is nothing above being German, thus there is no raising up. they are all children of germany under the Nazi flag, under an intelligent and exceptional man.
Austen: I don’t quite understand your direct regement, and i do believe we will never agree on this subject
Hitler: you have just witnessed my oratory genius and you still don't agree with me? You must be Jewish then…
Aristotle: Well, men are political animals; we are social beings and we are naturally drawn to working with other people because we benefit more. And so, men are drawn to form communities in an effort to protect our individual rights.
ReplyDeleteDada: No. You are an animal. I am naturally drawn to benefiting myself. Therefore I am drawn to myself for I AM a community. Donuts. They are a real community. Similar and in a pink box.
Aristotle: What are donuts? Anyways, you can’t be a community all on your own. Jumping to such rash conclusions is anything but beneficial. Your actions fall toward an extreme extent, when you should be working towards the intermediate.
Dada: Your idea of a community is like a donut - it has a major hole. Yes donuts, they are amazing. You should buy one.
Aristotle: Assuming you are a community is illogical and absurd as you are only one person. Communities are important because they produce differing opinions. If you were on your own, there would be no contradictory opinion, and therefore, you by yourself cannot be a community.
Dada: I AM a community therefore I HAVE differing opinions. My idea of a community is a revolutionary union of all creative and intellectual men and women on the basis of radical Communism.
Aristotle: Which is exactly why you aren’t a community. You still desire a collective to achieve your goals. Your lack of reason is being driven by your anger with the conventional, and in doing so you are preventing yourself from achieving excellence. You should instead be relying on your intellect to keep your desires and passions in check.
Dada: Achieving excellence? I AM excellent. Excellence in my eyes pertains to dancing, having fun, making fun. A dancing, happy donut - now THAT is a model for a community. Now I want a donut.
Aristotle: No, your brash statements show that you completely lack excellence!
Dada: And I care because? You are the complete opposite of what I stand for – logic? reason? the sensible? AND you hate donuts? Good bye.
Brecht/Jacobs... certainly Jacobs is aware of inequities in social power or status, but I think it's a good point that Brecht is probably more radical in his desire to address them. I wonder if a socialist-minded thinker like Brecht might strike Jacobs as too much of a top-down planner.
ReplyDeleteGandhi/Kleist/Gershwin... I don't know about Kleist himself, but I agree that Kohlhaas wouldn't particularly care who was in charge, as long as justice was being done. Actually, neither would Gandhi, right? As for Gershwin, it's interesting that he turns out to be both a defender of ethnic subcultures (Catfish Row, perhaps his own Jewish community) but also of the interaction between those subcultures. Definitely a New Yorker.
Vira/Bauhaus... it makes sense that a Bauhaus member would define a community by what its members make. In a way, their idea is similar to that of a traditional community of Vira's type because they reject the extreme specialization of labor that characterizes modern society. And yes, they would be likely to disagree about religion.
Sophocles/Shakespeare... wouldn't it be cool to hang out at that conference? Shakespeare comes out sounding a lot like Aristotle, which sounds about right actually. But I wouldn't look to Elizabeth I's England as a model for gender equity... recall Shakespeare's deep anxiety about female power in Hamlet, Macbeth, and King Lear, where the villains are women who have "unnaturally" asserted political power.
ReplyDeleteDavis/Phaedrus... um, Mike Davis thinks that the "barriers" between communities that were increasingly built in 1990s-2000s Southern California are BAD. He thinks the obsession with privacy that characterizes the architecture of affluent neighborhoods is A FORM OF RACISM. Go back and read the essay again. It's o.k. to use Phaedrus, but as you can see, his idea is actually fairly simplistic and doesn't get you far in the dialogue. I think it could be said that he supports a more traditional order of things, perhaps an aristocracy. (A brotherhood need not be totally inclusive.) As does Plato himself... he just wants the aristocrats to be smart people instead of the cool jock crowd who are the traditional ruling families.
Hitler/Austen... Hitler did think that Britain was overrun by Jewish values... recall that this factored into his anti-capitalist rhetoric (which Kluger ridicules)... you have Austen resisting his racial form of nationalism on the basis of her interest in merit. Perhaps so, though it's hard to imagine her putting British jews on equal footing. I think for the exam, the more interesting dialogue would be Austen and one of the Indian thinkers. She seems pretty down with the British empire.
ReplyDeleteDada/Aristotle... this was the best one by FAR. You conveyed their differing ideas, but also their differing style. Aristotle presses the point that a community without logic is actually a community of ONE. The only place the Dadaist could go at that point is to turn communist like Heartfield and accuse Aristotle of using his political notion of cooperation as a way to candy coat an unequal power structure.