Seminar in Liberal Studies, Essay 03, Final

Patrick Masson

Elaine Handley

Seminar in Liberal Studies (East)

December 15, 2008

She, Not We, Will Prevail: Feminism in Postmodern Technology

Today, we celebrate the first glorious anniversary of the Information Purification Directives. We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of pure ideology. Where each worker may bloom secure from the pests of contradictory and confusing truths. Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one people, with one will, one resolve, one cause. Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion. We shall prevail! (1984)

Seminar in Liberal Studies Essay #2, Final

Ambiguity in Meaning for Understanding

Who are you? The simplicity of these three words belies the complexity in understanding the sentence’s meaning, that is, the potential within the question and the possibilities for a response. This simple example illustrates the unappreciated relationships between the requester, the respondent, their shared environment, and even their separate histories. Each of these must be identified, interpreted and agreed upon in order to assign meaning, transfer knowledge and gain understanding. Again, consider “Who are you?” What ideas, concerns, or knowledge, could promote such an inquiry? Once the question is put forth, it is subject to interpretation by the respondent, from the literal, “I am Patrick Masson,” to the conceptual, “I am with you.” Beyond this initial exchange lies the potential, or, how the inquisitor, in return, may interpret any of the possible responses. Jonathon Culler, states, “communication depends on the basic convention that participants are cooperating with one another and that, therefore, what one person says to the other is likely to be relevant” (25). A relevant response to “Who are you?” cannot be provided unless one considers the context in which this question is asked. Where am I? What is my relationship to the person requesting the information? What will my response illicit in return? For example, upon entering a room I would not at all be surprised to hear, “Who are you?” from a person standing in front of others, especially if this where the first day of school and I had just entered a classroom. But what if, rather than a classroom, I had entered a bank with a robbery underway? How might I respond differently to that same person standing in front of others if I were a mere citizen, a uniformed police officer, or a psychiatrist? And going further, consider an alternate perspective, how might my response change if the question came from the bank robber, an injured victim or, perhaps a police officer? My interpretation of the question, the response I might give, and my expectations for the future—the meaning I attribute to the words, the knowledge passed and understanding derived—would surely vary in each of these scenarios. As interpersonal and cultural norms are established meaning and even context are assigned, often despite the literal translation of the words or the specific situation those in discussion may find themselves. To my point, consider another common question, “How are you?” Are we always as “fine” as we attest in response, or do we (have we come to) understand this question and its response as simply salutations?

Curious and Courageous: The Intellectual as an Activist

Edward Said provides compelling Representations of the Intellectual in his work of the same name. Within the text Said begins by presenting a goal, perhaps a criteria, for the intellectual: “The attempt to hold to a universal and single standard as a theme plays an important role in my account of the intellectual” (xiii). Said continues with his “characterizations of the intellectual” (xvi), providing a second criteria, “the intellectual tries to speak truth to power” (xvi). With this Said challenges the would-be intellectual with an underlying principle—universality—to ensure honesty and consistency in order to appeal to “as wide a public as possible” (xiii), and a simple, yet frightening, obligation—to confront authority—“to question patriotic nationalism, corporate thinking, and a sense of class, racial or gender privilege” (xiii). It is this duel responsibility, as both a thinker and as an activist, that defines the role of the intellectual, alone neither serves the individual or the community. Knowledge without action—to know but not act—and it’s opposite, action without knowledge—to act without understanding—not only hinders progress, but jeopardizes what has been achieved. The Intellectual must be both the curious investigator and the courageous instigator.

Subject for Essay: Exile or Truth?

I’ve been thinking a lot about my first writing assignment for Seminar, and was initially thinking about Edward Said’s role of the exile. I was wondering if the exile can still exist considering todays open communities. One of Said’s observations was that the exiled individual is removed from both the physical and metaphysical world. Most obvious is the physical exile, in that they can be physically removed, for example, from an organization and no longer able to attend functions, or from a country, unable to participate in government/society.

The Intellectual as an Exile

I am very interested in Said’s ideas around the exile. Looking at the quote, provided, “Insiders promote special interests, but intellectuals should be the ones to question patriotic nationalism, corporate thinking, and a sense of class, racial or gender privilege,” I am drawn to the result of this questioning: exile. Both Said and Du Bois provide accounts of those who have questioned accepted practices, resulting in exile–often from not only the groups they would hae expected, but those with whom they may have felt a closer relationship to. I am think of Du Bois account of the John.

In my paper I would like to explore if, considering todays gloabal connectivity, one can actually be an exile. That is, can a group shut out those that desent? And, can those who desent actaully affect a group who shuns them?

Seminar: First Essay, “What is an Intellectual?”

Well we have our first assignment: an essay of 2000 words (approximately eight double-spaced pages; please keep your paper as close to 2000 words as possible) that engages issues from DuBois, Said, and possibly Pratt.

Discuss the following quotation from Said’s introduction:

One task of the intellectual is the effort to break down the stereotypes and reductive categories that are so limiting to human thought and communication… .Insiders promote special interests, but intellectuals should be the ones to question patriotic nationalism, corporate thinking, and a sense of class, racial or gender privilege. (xi-xiii)

Explore similarities and differences between the authors, and analyze each author in terms of his/her historical and cultural context.

Arts of the Contact Zone, Mary Louise Pratt

Below is my brief essay for our orientation.

“BTW, FTP the PDF to IP 128.97.112.242, un: masson, pw: $t@nd@rD, or just CAPTCHA via SSL.”